Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

14326Re: Strange looking "incomplete punch" error

Expand Messages
  • alscoins
    Aug 1, 2006
      Lindy,

      Same coin & same holder.

      See my posting #14297. (Authentification of coins using pictures.)

      Allan
      http://www.alscoins.com

      --- In errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com, "mrlindy2000"
      <adkinstone@...> wrote:
      >
      > Error coins tend to be unique.
      >
      > I thought I recognized this 1901O $ from just a few months ago:
      >
      > Mike Byers had it for sale in his printed 2006 Catalogue of
      Errors...
      >
      > Page 73 top right, priced at just "$10,000"
      >
      > Please look at struck thru area above E in United for comparision,
      > if you have Byers 2006 catalogue.
      >
      > Looks identical to me, but I could be wrong? Neither the obverse
      or
      > reverse in the $10,000 pix illustrate the punch marks. But in your
      > $1,250 auction pics I do see something on the reverse, nothing on
      > the obverse.
      >
      > Is this Byers looking 1901O Dollar you just had at $1,250 for sale
      > and ByItNow for $1,750 the very same $10,000 Byers coin?
      >
      > With slabs I always wonder who sent it in for slab services, you
      > know for confirmation of that one submitter's claim that it was
      > an "Incomplete Punched Planchet" in the first place?
      >
      > I've only been collecting errors since 1979 so not forever. I've
      > never read that an incomplete punch is a one sided error. It's
      quite
      > possible there is a punch mark on the obverse. We've all discussed
      > that scans alone should not be used as proof.
      >
      > My incomplete clip error coins (3) all have punch marks on both
      > sides ,as they should. They are from 1964, 1966 and one is a 1c
      > planchet.
      >
      > Maybe the dealer or collector you recently bought it from can make
      > things right for you Al? If it's a consignment error coin then I'd
      > just return it to its owner.
      >
      > Lindy
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > --- In errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com, alscoins
      > <no_reply@> wrote:
      > >
      > > Mike,
      > >
      > > I asked for your experience in order to use you as an expert
      > witness
      > > if PCGS doesnot honor their buy back guarantee. Since your
      points
      > > listed are well accepted by the collector community (as verified
      > by
      > > others comments in this chatroom), I think your usefullness as
      an
      > > expert witness will come in handy to start a class action suit.
      > >
      > > I have contacted a few others that I know have examples of this
      > same
      > > error type which show these characteristics as my coin. They are
      > of
      > > the same era and of different denominations. Therefore, you can
      > help
      > > prove your points stated in your initial posting (see below).
      > >
      > > Other grading services that authenticated this error type can
      also
      > > be brought into the class action. There are known examples
      > available
      > > that meet this criteria.
      > >
      > > What do you think?
      > >
      > > Allan
      > > http://www.alscoins.com
      > >
      > > --- In errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com, "Mike
      > Diamond"
      > > <mdia1@> wrote:
      > > >
      > > > Since all the mid- to late 19th century curved clips I've seen
      > > have
      > > > the same basic characteristics as recent clips, it stands to
      > > reason
      > > > that the blanking procedure was essentially the same as today.
      > > >
      > > > While I have no personal experience with late 19th century
      > > incomplete
      > > > punch errors, I might ask the same question of you. How
      > extensive
      > > is
      > > > your experience? Do you know for a fact that the blanking
      > process
      > > > was radically different from recent decades? Does your
      > knowledge
      > > of
      > > > 19th century blanking processes account for an incomplete
      punch
      > > mark
      > > > that is widely at variance with recent punch marks?
      > > >
      > > > If the answer to all these questions is no, then you've backed
      > > > yourself into a logical trap. Basically you're saying that:
      > > >
      > > > 1. This incomplete punch is quite different from incomplete
      > > punches
      > > > that we're familiar is.
      > > >
      > > > 2. Our knowledge of incomplete punches in the late 19th
      century
      > is
      > > > poor.
      > > >
      > > > 3. Therefore, this silver dollar must have an incomplete punch.
      > > >
      > > > Such a conclusion is nonsensical, of course.
      > > >
      > > > Since you have not refuted any of the observations I made
      based
      > on
      > > > your photos, I can only conclude that these observations are
      > > accurate.
      > > >
      > > > --- In errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com, alscoins
      > > > <no_reply@> wrote:
      > > > >
      > > > > Can you please describe in detail how planchets were punched
      > > during
      > > > > the 19th century? How many incomplete punches have you
      > > > > handled/authenticated?
      > > > >
      > > > > YES! The pictures are not the best!
      > > > >
      > > > > Allan
      > > > > http://www.alscoins.com
      > > > >
      > > > > --- In errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com, "Mike
      > > Diamond"
      > > > > <mdia1@> wrote:
      > > > > >
      > > > > > While this has been slabbed by PCGS as an incomplete punch
      > > error,
      > > > > > there are a number of unexpected aspects that require
      closer
      > > > > scrutiny.
      > > > > >
      > > > > > http://tiny.bz/0lm/
      > > > > >
      > > > > > 1. An incomplete punch should be present on both faces.
      > This
      > > is
      > > > > only
      > > > > > seen on the reverse.
      > > > > >
      > > > > > 2. The alleged punch mark seems to fade in and out as it
      > > crosses
      > > > > the
      > > > > > coin. I've never seen this on any other incomplete punch
      > > error.
      > > > > > There should be no reason for this to occur.
      > > > > >
      > > > > > 3. The alleged punch mark seems to follow a slightly
      > irregular
      > > > > path.
      > > > > > A genuine punch mark show follow a smooth curve.
      > > > > >
      > > > > > 4. The punch mark appears to be absent on the design rim
      at
      > > both
      > > > > > ends. A punch mark should appear clearest in this area
      > since
      > > the
      > > > > > effective striking pressure is relatively low here and
      would
      > > have
      > > > > > less of a tendency to "close up" any incision in the
      coin's
      > > > > surface.
      > > > > >
      > > > > > 5. The absence of the punch mark on the design rim implies
      > > that
      > > > it
      > > > > is
      > > > > > also absent on the edge. A genuine incomplete punch
      should
      > be
      > > > > > visible on the edge.
      > > > > >
      > > > > > Perhaps this is, instead, some form of pre-strike damage.
      > > > > >
      > > > > > Comments are welcome.
      > > > > >
      > > > >
      > > >
      > >
      >
    • Show all 19 messages in this topic