Re: 1964 nickel with split collar
- I don't recall having seen a split collar this clear, this
unambiguous, and this large before, so I find it interesting. I
really should go back through my collection of collar cuds to see if
any could be cryptic split collars. Perhaps some of those I've been
categorizing as retained collar cuds could instead fall into this
--- In email@example.com, "Al C."
> Givern that it is a 1964, which we know anything could
> happen that year, I don't think it is that interesting
> but the split is kind of large.
> --- Mike Diamond <mdia1@...> wrote:
> > Here's an unusual collar break:
> > It's not a collar cud per se. The working face of
> > the collar is still
> > all there. Instead, the collar split in two and the
> > two sides spread
> > apart. No one met the reserve, so there's no
> > telling how much the
> > seller thinks it's worth.
> Need a vacation? Get great deals
> to amazing places on Yahoo! Travel.
- I did manage to find in my collection a modest example of a bilateral
split collar in a 1967 dime. I had mistakenly diagnosed it as a
retained collar cud. I'd still like to obtain a whopper like this 1964
nickel. If anybody has one and would be willing to part with it, I'd
be happy to buy or trade for it.
I'll be writing an article on collar cuds later this year, now that my
thinking is clearer concerning these errors.
--- In firstname.lastname@example.org, "Mike Diamond"
> Here's an unusual collar break:
> It's not a collar cud per se. The working face of the collar is
> all there. Instead, the collar split in two and the two sides spread
> apart. No one met the reserve, so there's no telling how much the
> seller thinks it's worth.