VAMWorld 2.0

Two rules to buy coins by (there are many): If a genuine coin has been sufficiently abused to make people question its authenticity, you probably don't want it in your collection. If at first you don't like a coin you buy, you never will. I'd return this if you can and put the money toward a wholeso...

demetri wrote: ↑

Mon Dec 11, 2023 7:04 am

I dont have it in hand but Im going to look at it next week and take a close look see, Strikes me as odd wanted some input b4 I see it.

It's fake.

Andy Hansen wrote: ↑

Mon Dec 04, 2023 8:38 pm

...
Many Morgans hammer price was $10. and under, ouch.

Heritage is not the place to sell inexpensive coins. A $10 bid is $39 after buyer's fee and north of $50 after you add shipping if it's the only coin you end up getting.

Good to see Leroy is still actively writing.

Yes, VAM 3. A little acetone might take off some of the crud and make it a more presentable coin. Not much downside considering what you paid. Even though the VAM 3 is common, buying it as a 79-P is a nice pick!

If he has a bunch of 86-Os, it may be best to have him put together a "research" submission of those after I return his other stuff, and then coordinate with you for your coin. I'd like to minimize the number of corrections I need to make.

It seems to be graded correctly, which is more than one can say for most fakes. The holder looks fine.

That said, I don't like the coin. It is cleaned, recolored, and banged up pretty bad. I would hold out for a problem free XF if that's the grade you want.

Albannach wrote: ↑

Fri Dec 01, 2023 7:15 pm

...
That series seems ripe for study

Given the report of 44 obverse and reverse dies used by NO in 1886 that Roger just posted today, I would agree with you.

OK, so I see far date, O set slightly right. Not a match to a VAM 14 verified by LVA (on which far date is a stretch), mint mark is in a different place from VAM 17, and no other far dates listed, so I'd be inclined to call it something new and use the lines in the upper tail feathers as die markers...

Calendars are in and ready to ship.

The pictures make the coloring look like a fake, but stuff like the date and mint mark look OK. What's it grade? Does PCGS have a photo?

Can you return it if you don't like it? A real coin bought cheap because of problems will end up being sold cheap because of them later.

Those tell me that I should check the date and mint mark first.

Michael Fey now has the rights to the VAM book, but the issue is as Alan says. Permission was never granted to reproduce those photos here.

So one of the questions this begs is what causes a clash. Not the simple "no planchet between the dies" answer, but more of a root cause analysis. I can come up with four, and they're fairly straightforward. Dies come together during setup before the coin is intended to be struck. Dies come together...

Yeah, that's a genuine "you suck" moment. Congrats!

I'm continuing my tradition of offering nice wall calendars with some photos I've taken over the years. I've been making these since 2009. Heavy card stock, A4-size pages with a spiral binding. I should be ready to ship within the next week or two. $25 each shipped in the US. Let me know if you're i...

DHalladay wrote: ↑

Sun Nov 19, 2023 8:21 pm

John:
Just sent you 18 coins this morning.

Thanks! That should fill out the order, I think.

I have received all the coins in question. Will probably eliminate VAM 1BR and re-specify 13, 13A, and 13B.

Larry Briggs sold SEGS and is no longer involved with the company as far as I know. CACG's grading fees are in line with PCGS and NGC.

They're quite common for those dates. Cracked planchets can also be a result of a vein of impurities in the strip. Depending on size and how they're oriented within the strip they can manifest as laminations, cracked planchets, clamshells, or blowholes.