|
|
This page may contain links that result in small commissions to keep this free site up and running.
Welcome Guest! Need help? Got a question? Inherit some coins?
Our coin forum is completely free! Register Now!
NJcoppers's Last 20 Posts
| Very Disappointing Experience On My First Major (Near $7k) Auction Purchase - Advice Needed!
|
|
NJcoppers
Valued Member
United States
184 Posts |
 Posted 01/18/2025 9:51 pm
|
Thank you @adam126402 Have not hard back from HA and not expecting it anymore...quite unprofessional. At least they could have told me to pound sand and not promise to get back to me.
I am fine with the coin. I am thinking about sending the traced updates in regards to this variety to Siboni/Howes/Ish folks. Their 2024 supplement is not up to date as far as this variety. The coins I traced back can be identified 100% from their publicly available sales records and TPG photos. Their new grades significantly re-shuffles the top rankings. |
| | Forum: Main Coin Forum |
| |
| Very Disappointing Experience On My First Major (Near $7k) Auction Purchase - Advice Needed!
|
|
NJcoppers
Valued Member
United States
184 Posts |
Posted 12/11/2024 3:48 pm
|
Tracked down the provenance of this highest TPG graded 62-q MS63BN. Found it in the new 2024 SHI (Siboni/Howes/Ish) supplement. It was an "AU+" in its former life.
Zoomed photo: https://www.pcgs.com/coinfacts/coin...-q-bn/767840
Here is the PCGS MS63 that was identified as an "AU+" in the new 2024 SHI supplement. It was attributed to Wrubel and was the #3 highest coin on the supplement's list. Clearly, it's now a PCGS MS63.
I believe that this is the highest graded Maris 62-q TPG coin now, since the #1 (and currently only GEM listed specimen) attributed to Siboni/Parmellee/Bushnell is graded as NGC MS61.
Here are the identifying marks that confirm that this is the PCGS MS63BN coin. The entire top reverse is off center.
 |
| | Forum: Main Coin Forum |
| |
| Tips Or Links Appreciated On Provenance Of This NJ Copper PCGS MS-63 Coin
|
|
NJcoppers
Valued Member
United States
184 Posts |
Posted 12/11/2024 3:46 pm
|
Tracked down the provenance of this highest TPG graded 62-q MS63BN. Found it in the new 2024 SHI (Siboni/Howes/Ish) supplement. It was an "AU+" in its former life.
Zoomed photo: https://www.pcgs.com/coinfacts/coin...-q-bn/767840
Here is the PCGS MS63 that was identified as an "AU+" in the new 2024 SHI supplement. It was attributed to Wrubel and was the #3 highest coin on the supplement's list. Clearly, it's now a PCGS MS63.
I believe that this is the highest graded Maris 62-q TPG coin now, since the #1 (and currently only GEM listed specimen) attributed to Siboni/Parmellee/Bushnell is graded as NGC MS61.
Here are the identifying marks that confirm that this is the PCGS MS63BN coin. The entire top reverse is off center.
|
| | Forum: US Classic and Colonial Variety and Error Coins |
| |
| Very Disappointing Experience On My First Major (Near $7k) Auction Purchase - Advice Needed!
|
|
NJcoppers
Valued Member
United States
184 Posts |
Posted 12/07/2024 08:25 am
|
Quote:
Hello NJcoppers! Have you heard back from HA? Very curious to know their reply!
Have not heard back yet. Based on what I was able to dig up on this coin and coins of the same variety, I do not have high hopes of HA being shocked at their own lacking description. It seems to vary based on who is tasked to manage the coin from HA on their auction. Do not know if the seller submits the provenance and HA goes with that, or how much effort they put into it.
In my case, HA can verify 100% if my coin was sold by the same seller who purchased it in Aug 2024 on their auction. If yes, then that person is the one who broke out the slab and sold it re-graded in Nov 2024 on HA without disclosing.
I just purchased (shipped) the new 2024 SHI (SIboni/Howes/ish) NJ Coppers 440 pages supplement that updates their original 2103 ground-breaking award winning reference book to current stats. I wanted to see what their latest stats and provenance are for this Maris 62-q variety. I managed to trace back all three currently known (to me) 2024 MS61s to their 2013 reference book. Two of these were AUs previously. And hope to find out more about the "Anton" GEM sample and if that coin is the same coin as the highest graded sample for this variety, a PCGS MS63BN. |
| | Forum: Main Coin Forum |
| |
| Very Disappointing Experience On My First Major (Near $7k) Auction Purchase - Advice Needed!
|
|
NJcoppers
Valued Member
United States
184 Posts |
Posted 12/01/2024 9:14 pm
|
Quote:Found (the most?) recent sale for the The Donald G Partrick NGC MS-61BN (the left MS-61coin above) on 17 Mar 2021 at Heritage: https://coins.ha.com/itm/colonials/1330-15104.sThe provenance in this auction description:] Ex: Frederick B. Taylor (Bowers & Merena, 3/1987), lot 2258; Donald G. Partrick. The NGC verification link. It was encapsulated by NGC on 8 Jul 2020: https://www.ngccoin.com/certlookup/5746978-020/61/This same coin (99% sure) was sold as an AU back in The Frederick B. Taylor Collection, March 26-28, 1987 at the Bowers/Merena auction, and this same sale from 1987 was referenced by the SHI on page 448 as #3 right below the only two known (as of 2013) 62-q GEMs. So, in this auction in 2020, they did disclose the provenance as well, but not that it also was an AU coin. Assuming, it was an unslabbed AU coin. I do not see any way to confirm that 1987 sale since the Bowers archives only seem to go back to 1999. Short of the actual Bowers/Merena hard copy sales catalog from March 26-28,1987, (which itself seems to be a collectible item already), cannot confirm 100%. So maybe my coin with its not so complete provenance description is something that quite frequently happens, and seems to be the case more often then not.
After some luck, found the results and copy of the Bowers/Merena sales catalog from March 26-28,1987. This Ex: Frederick B. Taylor (Bowers & Merena, 3/1987), lot 2258; Donald G. Partrick NGC MS-61 coin was listed as MS-63 in 1987 and sold for $2860. It must have been a raw coin, as I do not see any reference to PCGS (founded in 1986) nor NGC (founded 1987).
Of course, this is before the 1994 discovery of the hidden "WM" initials in this variety, so was listed only as a 62-q R-1 vs the R-3 today.
https://ia802805.us.archive.org/29/..0000bowe.pdf
 |
| | Forum: Main Coin Forum |
| |
| Very Disappointing Experience On My First Major (Near $7k) Auction Purchase - Advice Needed!
|
|
NJcoppers
Valued Member
United States
184 Posts |
Posted 12/01/2024 7:46 pm
|
@Hunter611 Thank you for your input. I am o board with your thinking Yes, there is a balance between feeling "wronged" and the responsibility to live up to the agreed upon terms of the auction (even if not read with a fine tooth comb) . No doubt that it can leave a bad taste in the mouth while owning this coin into the future.
As this point, my sense of responsibility to pay is stronger than feeling "wronged". And the more I am researching and educating myself on this variety, the more I am feeling at peace with the purchase. I have until 4 Dec to pay HA in order to remain in good standing. HA Customer Service told me last week to standby as their "Coins section" looks into my "well-detailed" concerns about the incomplete provenance. If I do not hear back by 3 Dec, I will pay anyway. The rationale: the more I looked into this variety's top known (to me) specimens, the more I am at peace. Of course, I am very curious what they will say!
Of the only known existing GEMs in any TPG for the 62-q "hidden WM" variety are: one MS63 PCGS and three MS61s. The 2013 SHI reference book for the 62-q lists only two GEMs, and 5ea AUs...no exact grades cited for either. One of these two GEMs in the SHI book on pg 448 is the "Bushnell-Parmelee specimen". I traced back this coin to one of the three current MS61s, and last sold for $6,670 in Aug 2024. The other GEM on SHI pg 448, called the "Anton" GEM, I was not able to trace. But I wonder, if this coin is the PCGS MS-63BN which I was also not able to trace?
I also managed to trace back from the currently known only three MS61s that one other was also an AU grade in its prior life before slabbed by NGC in as MS61, like mine. A sale on that was $9000 in Mar 2021 and it was the "Donald G Partrick" (ex. Taylor 1987, Lot 2258) AU coin listed on pg 448 of the SHI book in 2013. So all three currently known MS-61s in this variety are accounted for: two of them crossed from AU into MS61, and one was a GEM in the first place.
Interestingly, the SHI has a 440 pages supplement that just came out this year to their 2013 original reference book. "It is not merely a second edition of the authors' previous book; rather, it contains original and largely updated condition census information for every New Jersey copper variety, with many never-before-seen photographs."
https://colonialcoins.org/c4-publications-2/
 |
| | Forum: Main Coin Forum |
| |
| Very Disappointing Experience On My First Major (Near $7k) Auction Purchase - Advice Needed!
|
|
NJcoppers
Valued Member
United States
184 Posts |
Posted 11/26/2024 7:41 pm
|
Found (the most?) recent sale for the The Donald G Partrick NGC MS-61BN (the left MS-61coin above) on 17 Mar 2021 at Heritage: https://coins.ha.com/itm/colonials/..1330-15104.s
The provenance in this auction description:]
Ex: Frederick B. Taylor (Bowers & Merena, 3/1987), lot 2258; Donald G. Partrick.
The NGC verification link. It was encapsulated by NGC on 8 Jul 2020:
https://www.ngccoin.com/certlookup/5746978-020/61/
This same coin (99% sure) was sold as an AU back in The Frederick B. Taylor Collection, March 26-28, 1987 at the Bowers/Merena auction, and this same sale from 1987 was referenced by the SHI on page 448 as #3 right below the only two known (as of 2013) 62-q GEMs.
So, in this auction in 2020, they did disclose the provenance as well, but not that it also was an AU coin. Assuming, it was an unslabbed AU coin. I do not see any way to confirm that 1987 sale since the Bowers archives only seem to go back to 1999. Short of the actual Bowers/Merena hard copy sales catalog from March 26-28,1987, (which itself seems to be a collectible item already), cannot confirm 100%.
So maybe my coin with its not so complete provenance description is something that quite frequently happens, and seems to be the case more often then not.
 |
| | Forum: Main Coin Forum |
| |
| Very Disappointing Experience On My First Major (Near $7k) Auction Purchase - Advice Needed!
|
|
NJcoppers
Valued Member
United States
184 Posts |
Posted 11/26/2024 6:12 pm
|
Quote:
Thank you for your detailed email and for sharing your concerns regarding your recent purchase. We appreciate the time you've taken to outline the issues, which helps us better understand your perspective.
Your email has been forwarded to our US Coins department for their review. They will follow up with you directly to address your questions and concerns. Given the depth of the information provided, we kindly ask for your patience as they thoroughly review the details to ensure a comprehensive response.
If there's anything else you'd like to add or if you have further questions in the meantime, please don't hesitate to let us know.
Thank you for your understanding.
Kind Regards,
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX (removed) | Client Services
Heritage replied, asked to stand by. I was not asking for bid cancelation, just for clarity what was supposed to have been disclosed in the description and who is responsible for its accuracy as it does affect the coin's perceived value.
|
| | Forum: Main Coin Forum |
| |
| NGC Gave These Three New Jersey 1/2p The Same Grade. What Would Be Your Grades?
|
|
NJcoppers
Valued Member
United States
184 Posts |
Posted 11/24/2024 8:24 pm
|
Thank you both, as it prompted me to read further more carefully in the SHI reference book. There is a photo of the reverse die states, but it is under another variety, the 63-q.
Here is the die state description for the 62-q (the coins above) and it is sending the reader for the reverse (q) die photo found under the 63-q variety.
And here is the reverse photo for the "q" die (found under 63-q).
It says that reverse ds3 and ds4 are only applicable to the 63-q and not the 62-q
So based on this, in my opinion:
Left coin Obverse: ds2+ Reverse: ds2
Middle coin Obverse: ds1 Reverse: ds1
Right coin Obverse: ds1+ or ds2- Reverse: ds2 |
| | Forum: US Classic and Colonial Coin Grading |
| |
| NGC Gave These Three New Jersey 1/2p The Same Grade. What Would Be Your Grades?
|
|
NJcoppers
Valued Member
United States
184 Posts |
Posted 11/24/2024 7:09 pm
|
Quote:
Although the die crack hasn't shown up yet in the right coin, the central device, the horsehead, seems to have deteriorated a great deal.
Yes, I also see if that way. The middle one (the best photo I could find because it's a 2004 auction) is certainly a ds1 obverse and a ds1 reverse.
The left coin seems like a ds2+, because of the pronounced die crack at 5pm that is also present on the reference book example middle and right coins. And it has a heavily worn off horse, along with a ds2 reverse.
The right coin does not exhibit the 5pm die crack that is attributed to the ds2 coins in the book, but it is certainly an advanced ds1+ as the horse looks like the horse in book's middle coin which is ds2. Or you may call it a ds2- ? (I am not that well versed in die states) And the reverse is a ds2 just like the left coin.
I wish the reference book would have shown the reverse of those three coins they used for the die state illustration.
. |
| | Forum: US Classic and Colonial Coin Grading |
|
| NGC Gave These Three New Jersey 1/2p The Same Grade. What Would Be Your Grades?
|
|
NJcoppers
Valued Member
United States
184 Posts |
Posted 11/24/2024 6:55 pm
|
Quote:
Perhaps one or both of you could talk a little bit more about how you can tell that the dies were deteriorating and therefore the central design didn't fully strike up (as opposed to this being just light circulation wear)
I am not that well versed about die states, so mainly relying on page 448 of the SHI (Siboni/Howes/Ish) "New Jesrey State Coppers" book. That is where the above die state example photo is from. In the prologue of the book, they state that in most cases where it was possible they had examined the coins they used for illustration in the book.
I am assuming that these three experts considered the high points of that particular variety and made a determination that the legends and letters around the rims would have also worn if the coin was in circulation. I assume that they discovered the same wear pattern on most of the coins, since a die wear, almost like a die crack, is like a finger-print of sort. While circulation wear is more random and affects a general area without die deterioration which can for example affect only the horse figure which must have been raised much higher in the new/fresh die than the rim lettering/details. As the die was used the horse figure started to wear and eventually the rim details/letterings became the highest point without any detectable circulation wear on them Just my assumptions |
| | Forum: US Classic and Colonial Coin Grading |
| |
| NGC Gave These Three New Jersey 1/2p The Same Grade. What Would Be Your Grades?
|
|
NJcoppers
Valued Member
United States
184 Posts |
Posted 11/24/2024 6:35 pm
|
Quote:
The center coin is ds1, the right coin is ds2+ with the reverse die deteriorating and the left coin is ds2- with both the obverse and reverse dies deteriorating.
Thank you for your input. Isn't the main difference between ds1 and ds2 (at least for the Obverse) that die crack that runs from the singletree bar vertically down to the ground line? It's present only on the left coin. So wouldn't that make the right coin a ds1+ (advanced die deterioration, but not yet a die crack?)
Also, I wonder if there may be an Obverse ds1 and a Reverse ds2 on the same coin? Using a fairly intact but worn ds1 die for the Obverse while using a much worn ds2 die for the Reverse on the same coin. |
| | Forum: US Classic and Colonial Coin Grading |
| |
| Very Disappointing Experience On My First Major (Near $7k) Auction Purchase - Advice Needed!
|
|
NJcoppers
Valued Member
United States
184 Posts |
Posted 11/22/2024 11:07 pm
|
Quote:
Your coin posted doesn't look like ms61 either. But I have to ask, do you want the coin? Do you think the price is fair? Are you happy with the price/look?
If yes then buy it and don't worry about the old grades.
If the answer is no, don't buy it and we are done.
I asked the moderators about posting a grading opinion request in the appropriate "US Classical and Colonial Grading" sub-forum. Will see what they say.
I think the price I paid, based on the coin's appearance and other coins between AU55-MS63 I reviewed, is fair. Is it an MS-61? In the realm of 237 year old colonial New Jersey coppers, TPGs seem to give a lot more leeway compared to early 20th century Morgan silver dollars.
Quote:
I don't think it's Heritages fault, they sold a coin at a specific grade, you made the bids.
I posted the relevant HA "Term and Conditions" and they are clear about that they do not have anything to do with slabbed grading, that is something to bring up with the TPGs .
I did not say HA's fault they sold a coin at a specific grade. Do you think that if the coin may be over-graded is that HA's or the seller's fault? I did not say that either. What I am saying is that the coin's true provenance was not disclosed, it was missing vital details. Details that the seller would know 100% if he was the buyer in Aug and was also the seller in the Nov auction. Details that HA should have known considering that both the Aug and the Nov auctions were HA auctions.
I am not a lawyer...and cars are not coins...but provenance is a major integral part of many higher value coins:
In the case of cars: "As is" means is that the seller is not liable if something breaks after you buy it, since there is no warranty. But they still must disclose everything wrong with the car that they know about at the time of the sale. If they did not disclose something material, then that is fraud or misrepresentation. One-owner car vs multiple prior owners, repairs after unreported accident, etc. all have a material impact on the value of the car. |
| | Forum: Main Coin Forum |
| |
| Very Disappointing Experience On My First Major (Near $7k) Auction Purchase - Advice Needed!
|
|
NJcoppers
Valued Member
United States
184 Posts |
Posted 11/22/2024 10:48 pm
|
Quote:
Forget about what the contract says about provenance. Misrepresentation voids any contract.
If HA (as a proxy) stated the incorrect provenance as part of the coin's listing - and you can prove otherwise (cracker same as seller) - that is a misrepresentation, period.
I think it's worth at least a try to contact HA and see what they say. They can confirm (I am sure they will not disclose it to me) if the HA seller of my coin was the same HA buyer who won on the Aug 2024 auction this same coin.
Before I do that I would like to ask for some grade opinions on the coin I bought.
Would like to ask the Moderator(s), if I should post in the appropriate grading sub-forum asking for grading inputs or just continue in this thread? I know many of the people who may opine are already in this thread, but I think in the proper sub-forum (i.e. US Classic Colonial and Grading) may get more responses as far as grading opinions. |
| | Forum: Main Coin Forum |
| |
|
| Coin Community Forum |
© 2005 - 2025 Coin Community Forums |
| It took 0.72 seconds to rattle this change. |
 |
|
