Collecting 'Transitional' Coins

Throughout the history of gold coin production in the United States there have been a number of instances where two different designs were produced simultaneously, or at least within the same year. I call these “transitional” coins and I think they would make for a very interesting collecting focus for the gold coin specialist.In the gold dollar denomination, the most obvious transitional issue occurred in 1854 when both the Type I and the Type II issues were produced. Both of these are relatively common although the Type Two becomes scarce in the higher grades and rare in MS64 or better. In 1856 two designs were produced: the Type Two and the Type Three. Since the Type Two was only made in San Francisco this year and there are no 1856-S Type Three gold dollars this isn’t a transitional issue in the sense of the 1854. There are some very interesting transitional issues in the quarter eagle denomination. In 1796 both No Stars and With Stars designs were produced. Both of these are rare in all grades and because of price constraints they would be considered one of the stoppers of a transitional set. The next transitional issue occurred in 1834 when both the Capped Bust and the Classic Head quarter eagles were struck at the Philadelphia mint. The former is an extremely rare coin in all grades while the latter is common in grades up to and including MS63.

More transitional issues exist in the early half eagles than in virtually all other denominations combined. The reason for these transitional issues tends to be different than, say, for the 1854 Type One and Type Two dollar when the design was changed to facilitate improved striking.

There are two types of half eagle dated 1795: the Small Eagle reverse and the Large Eagle reverse. The former was actually produced in 1795 and it is relatively common. The latter was struck in either 1797 or early 1798 using a backdated obverse die. Only 1,000 or so 1795 Large Eagle half eagles were made and this clearly would be one of the stoppers to a transitional set.

A similar circumstance exists with 1797 half eagles. Small Eagle reverse coins from this year are known with both fifteen and sixteen stars on the obverse. These are very rare but not impossible to locate. There are also 1797/5 half eagles with the Large Eagle reverse. These are extremely rare and include two die varieties that are presently unique and housed in the Smithsonian.

Another transitional year occurs in 1798. A small number of half eagles (probably no more than 400-500) were made using the Small Eagle reverse. This is a very rare coin today with only seven or eight examples known. The more common 1798 half eagles have the Large Eagle reverse. These are moderately scarce in terms of overall rarity but they can certainly be found with much greater ease than their Small Eagle counterparts from this year.

Yet another transitional year for half eagles occurred in 1807. This is a direct result of a design change. The first issues struck this year had the Heraldic Eagle reverse while the latter issue employed the new Capped Bust obverse and John Reich’s new reverse. Both of these issues are relatively common in all grades up to MS63.

1834 saw another design change in the half eagle denomination and the transitional collector has two issues to focus on: the rare Capped Bust (or “Fat Head”) and the more common Classic Head. The Capped Head is found with two varieties (the Plain 4 and the Crosslet 4) as is the Classic Head. Interestingly, on both design types the Crosslet 4 is significantly rarer.

The next transitional half eagle occurs in 1866 when the San Francisco mint produced coins with and without the motto IN GOD WE TRUST on the reverse. Despite having a much lower mintage, the No Motto coin is actually comparable in overall rarity to the With Motto issue. Both are very rare in the higher AU grades and virtually non-existent in Uncirculated.

The final transitional issue in the half eagle denomination occurred in 1908 when the design changed from the old Liberty Head to Bela Lyon Pratt’s new Indian Head design. Both of these issues are very common and the transitional collector with a virtually unlimited budget could aim as high as MS66.

In the early eagles there is only a single transitional year: 1797. The first 1797 eagles used the Small Eagle reverse. Only 3,615 were struck and around five to six dozen are known. This issue is typically seen in circulated grades and it becomes extremely rare in anything approaching Mint State.

Later in the year, the new Heraldic Eagle design was first used on this denomination. Slightly over 10,000 examples were produced and this is a relatively available coin, although it is very rare in grades above MS61 to MS62.

One of my favorite pair of transitional eagles are the two types of 1839. The first, also known as the Type of 1838, is easily distinguished by Liberty’s neck being very curved and ending over the right side of the final star. It is the more common of the two and while relatively available in most circulated grades, it is very scarce in AU55 and better and rare in Uncirculated. The second variety is known as the Type of 1840. On this issue, Liberty’s neck is less curved and it ends well before the final star. It is very scarce in all grades and rare in AU.

In 1866, the San Francisco mint was not informed of the changeover to the With Motto reverse until they had struck 8,500 pieces with no motto. The 1866-S No Motto eagle is a rare coin in all grades today. The With Motto variety is also rare although it is a bit more obtainable in the AU grade range. Both are unknown in Uncirculated.

1907 saw a changeover from the Liberty head design to the new Indian Head design. The transitional collector has some difficult decisions about which coins to include in his collection as three major variations of the Indian Head eagle from 1907 exist: the rare Wire Edge, the very rare Rolled Edge and the common No Motto.

In 1908 there are no less than two transitional Indian Head eagles. The Philadelphia and Denver mints both struck No Motto and With Motto coins. Luckily for transitional collectors, all four of these are relatively common except in Gem Uncirculated. The 1908-D No Motto is the rarest of the four and this issue is extremely rare in properly graded MS65.

The United States twenty dollar gold coinage contains more interesting transitional coins for the specialist. The first of these is the 1866-S No Motto and With Motto. The former is a very scarce coin in all grades and it remains unknown in Uncirculated. The latter is fairly common in circulated grades and scarce in Uncirculated with nearly all of the two to three dozen known in Uncirculated grading MS60 to MS61.

The termination of the Liberty Head design in 1907 meant that an interesting group of transitional coins from this year are available. The 1907 Liberty Head issues were produced at the Philadelphia, Denver and San Francisco mints and all three are common in grades up to MS63. The 1907-S is very rare and underrated in Gem Uncirculated.

Augustus St. Gaudens’ redesign of the double eagle was introduced in 1907. Most transitional collections would include one High Relief from this year as well as a 1907 No Motto. Both issues are readily available in Uncirculated grades and the latter is abundant even in MS65 to MS66.

To assemble a complete set of the various Transitional coins that I discussed above would be an amazing accomplishment, given the rarity and prohibitive cost of many of the issues. That said, I think this would be a great set that would be a fun challenge for the collector who is up to it.

The Dilemma of the Placeholder

If you collect a set (or sets) and are competing in the Set Registry, the chances are good that you’ve struggled with the Dilemma of the Placeholder. Let’s examine the Pros and Cons of buying a placeholder coin and try to decide whether this is a smart collecting strategy or not. First off, let’s define what a “placeholder coin” is. I view a placeholder coin as one that you buy as a stop gap. As an example, say that you are assembling a set of Indian Head eagles. One of the few dates that you are missing is a 1911-D. One comes up for sale at auction in a grade lower than what you really want. You decide to buy it anyway because of the fact that it a) fills a gaping hole in your set and b) gives you a sufficient number of Registry Set points that you move up a notch and pass Collector X. Was this is a smart purchase or not?

Let’s look at the pros of buying a placeholder coin. The first is the measure of satisfaction that filling a really nagging hole can give. There is nothing more frustrating for our hypothetical collector than seeing a big ol’ ugly blank every time he looks at his set inventory - especially if he has a nice date run before and after the missing coin. Coin collecting is a very emotional hobby and the Karmic Value of filling a hole is hard to put a value on.

Another pro is the fact that a placeholder coin might grow in appeal on the owner. I’m going to assume that as a collector you are smart enough to not buy something truly hideous and to at least hold out for a moderately attractive placeholder. You might learn that your placeholder is actually so rare that it represents the only coin that you are likely to have a shot to buy.

For some collectors a placeholder coin represents a practical decision. Let’s say for example that you are assembling a gold type set from the 19th and 20th centuries and that you don’t have the ability to spend $100,000+ on a nice 1808 quarter eagle. In this case, a decent looking coin in, say, an NCS holder with EF sharpness but with signs of an old cleaning at $40,000-50,000 might be a savvy purchase; especially given the fact that an uncleaned 1808 quarter eagle in this price range might take years and years to locate.

For every pro there is a con, so now let’s look at the cons of buying placeholder coins. To my way of thinking, the biggest con about a placeholder coin is the fact that you know you are going to have to replace it. Unless the market goes up in your series, you are probably going to lose money on it when you sell it. Let’s say, for example, that Collector Z buys the mythical 1911-D eagle we discussed above. He purchases one for $10,500 that’s decent but not really a great looking coin due to the presence of some marks on the obverse. A year later he finds the right coin and it’s going to cost him $27,500. Unless Collector Z has a buyback or “trade up” agreement with the dealer he bought it from he’s probably going to take a 10-15% hit on the coin. Let’s say he’s sells it at auction and nets $9,250; a loss of $1,250. This brings the actual cost of his new coin to $28,750.

Another con about collectors buying placeholder coins is that it teaches them bad collecting habits. I’m a big believer in buying the right coin the first time. I’ve seen some collectors “self-churn” themselves as they buy a 1911-D eagle first in MS61, then upgrade to an MS62 then upgrade to an MS63 and so on. As I just mentioned above, there are transaction costs that will hit you in the wallet every time you upgrade. It also flies in the face of something that I try to teach new collectors: be patient and wait for the right coin. The Coin Gods like to play games with impatient collectors and I can’t tell you the number of times I’ve seen a collector settle on an inferior coin only to have the absolutely perfect coin come along a week, a month or a year later.

So, the bottom line: placeholder coins, yes or no? I’d say in the majority of cases “no”. The exception would be if you are buying something that is so readily liquid and has a tight enough buy/sell spread (a coin like a $50 Pan-Pac Round) that even a short-term hold isn’t likely to have negative impact on its value.

2008 Central States Show Review

In my last blog, I predicted that the Central States show in Rosemont would be active. How did the show turn out and what are my current impressions of the market? Read on for all the answers...and more. After a lack of shows for over a month I knew that there would be a strong demand for nice coins and I was right. Every dealer I spoke to at the beginning of the show told me that they literally had to be three places at once to get a shot at the fresh coins that were available. For someone like myself who does coin shows without assistants, partners, lackeys or go-fers it can be very frustrating to try and buy coins, view auction lots, answer emails, make phone calls and more - often all at once. I can’t ever remember a time when I’ve had to work harder to buy!

I arrived in Chicago on Tuesday and began buying literally as soon as my plane touched the ground. Wednesday was PNG Day which meant that only a limited number of the table holders could set up. I got to wear some spiffy clothes and I got to focus exclusively on wholesale business which, for better or worse, is what shows are really about right now (I’ll explain a little bit more about this statement in a second).

There were a few very interesting deals that broke at the show. I was able to buy some nice early gold coins from an outstanding collection of pre-1834 gold that a West Coast dealer was selling. This was the sort of deal that usually sells at auction (all the coins were in old holders and many were significantly undergraded) and I believe that virtually the entire deal sold to the first three or four people who viewed it. I also heard about a neat collection of Bust Quarters by die variety that sold (I was able to buy a few leftovers from the dealers who handled it) and I was impressed that the collector who owned it didn’t place it in auction.

After lots of running around, I was able to assess what I had purchased and I was pretty impressed. I thought this Central States was the best buying show that I have had since last year’s ANA and I was able to purchase over fifty new coins and I spent north of $1 million in a few hours of frenzied buying. I have already listed many of my new purchases for sale on my website and some of the highlights are as follows:

• A choice 1861-C $5.00 in PCGS AU58
• A nice group of New Orleans eagles ranging in price from under $1,000 to over $10,000
• A superb 1799 half eagle in NGC MS61
• An 1812 half eagle in PCGS MS64
• The Garrett 1886 $3.00 in NGC PR63CAM

I was also able to buy a couple of excessively rare coins (that I can’t mention here) for long-term clients whose want lists I have. I admit that I’m not as great at working want lists as I should be (again, this goes back to not having enough help at coin shows) but I will say this: if I know that you are looking for a special coin and we have a good relationship, the chances are a lot better that you will get a shot at this coin than if I have no idea what you are looking for (or who you are).

Thursday was a day that began with me focusing on selling some of the older coins that I had in inventory. I took a group of twenty or so coins around in a box, showed them to three dealers and sold 85% of the group with relatively effort; in many cases for the same amount of money that I had been quoting collectors on my website. My take on selling? It was very easy if you had nice coins.

I thought that the retail aspect of this year’s CSNS show was pretty disappointing. Granted, I didn’t have a great table location and I was away from the table 75% of the time as I was out buying coins. But it seemed that there wasn’t a great “retail buzz” and I only met a few new potential clients.

As I mentioned above, I am noticing that coin shows are more and more about buying and wholesale business. In a market like this when it is hard to buy and easy to sell, a coin show is a brutally competitive environment for specialist dealers. I don’t have the luxury of the mega-dealer who just sits at this table and wades through boxes of other dealer’s coins. And I don’t have the desire to spend four or five days at a show like I did a few years ago. Shows are now extremely intense two or three day affairs for me and I find it hard to spare fifteen minutes out of my limited time to schmooze with a collector who wants to view a coin. I would much rather sell coins to collectors from the saner environment of my office where I do actually have the time to discuss things. The one exception is at the larger shows like ANA and FUN where I am committed to staying for the entire week and don’t have to do four things at once for two days.

I’m sure you’re wondering what was hot at the show and I’m sure that my answer won’t surprise you. There were a number of dealers looking for early gold and Proof gold, particularly coins that were choice or rare. I sold a number of interesting double eagles at the show and that market seems as robust as ever (with the exception of generic Saints which you can’t give away right now..) I also noticed a renewed interest in Three Dollar gold pieces and I was surprised to sell a few Charlotte coins that had been languishing in my inventory for a while. The areas of the market that seemed slow included generic gold, commemorative gold and nearly anything that is ugly or has been recycled through thirty dealers in the past year.

Interestingly, there are no more shows for close to a month and most dealers will be staying at home until Long Beach at the end of May and Baltimore at the start of June. It will be interesting to see how this lull in the action affects the market.

2008 Central States Show Preview

The 69th annual Central States Numismatic Society convention will be held in Rosemont, Illinois next week. What’s the buzz surrounding this show and are coin dealers excited about attending it? I regard the Central States show as one of the better coin conventions of the year. It’s not quite at the Summer ANA or FUN levels in terms of attendance or importance but I’d rank it up in the second tier along with the Baltimore shows, Long Beach and one or two others. Most dealers I know like this show and approach it with a good degree of enthusiasm.

I think this will be a good CSNS show for a variety of reasons. The first is the location. Chicago is traditionally a good coin show town and the convenience factor of Rosemont (which is about five minutes from O’Hare airport by cab) makes this a much better venue than some of the more recent Central States shows. Secondly, most coin dealers have not been to a major show since Baltimore in early March. Being home for over a month means that there will be a good deal of pent-up demand for coins. The third reason is that the coin market remains strong and this includes a better precious metals market than at any Central States show since the early 1980’s.

I go to coin shows primarily to buy and, as usual, I’m hoping that I can uncover a few interesting coins on the bourse floor at Central States. I’ve spoken with many of my suppliers and while no one is holding a collection of Carson City eagles in first generation PCGS holders for me, I think a few neat items may come out of the woodwork.

What will be in strong demand at this year’s Central States? I’m sure you’ll be absolutely shocked to hear me say this but most coin dealers at Central States are going to be scouring the bourse floor looking for nice coins. If you were to walk into the show with a group of choice, fresh, attractive coins and price them “right”, the chances are good that you would sell most—if not all—of your coins within an hour.

To be more specific, I think some of the areas that will experience strong demand include Proof gold, early gold, 19th century type coins and anything that is genuinely rare.

In my opinion, the CSNS auctions are interesting but they lack the impressive array of gold coins that have been included in past sales. I am quite interested to see Heritage sell the David Quellar specimen of the 1804 dollar. This exact coin last sold for $475,000 in 1993 and my best guess is that it will bring about ten times this amount today. If you are attending the show in person I’d strongly recommend that you watch the sale of the 1804 dollar but given the fact that the actual buyer is likely to not be in attendance I can’t vouch for how “exciting” the sale will be.

After Central States is over, there are no other major shows until Long Beach at the end of May; another reason why dealers are excited about Central States and hopeful that they will be able to spend some coin in Rosemont.

Bass Collection Dirty Little Secret

If you ask ten United States gold coin experts what the most important pedigrees are, you are certain to have the Bass collection mentioned nearly every time. Clearly, the Bass collection was among the greatest collections of United States gold ever assembled. But I’ve learned a dirty little secret about some of the Bass coins that I’d like to share with you. Harry Bass was a pretty compulsive buyer and many of his coins came from the major auctions of the 1960’s and 1970’s. When these coins were shipped to Harry, they were enclosed in the clear plastic "flips" that were popular during this era. What we now know is that these flips were made with polyvinylchloride (or PVC) which is an oil-based chemical that imparts a residue on coins.

I don’t know this for a fact but I believe that many of the Bass coins were stored in PVC flips for many years; in some cases as long as two or even three decades. During this period, a lot of PVC "grime" got onto the surfaces of the Bass coins.

So how can you tell if a Bass coin has PVC grime on it? Generally, gold coins with this residue develop a sort of cloudy whitish film that seems to become thicker with the passing of time.

The coins that appear to have the most noticeable residue are in PCGS holders and have "original" Bass pedigrees. If a Bass coin was removed from its original holder but resubmitted later to PCGS (in an attempt to upgrade it) it was still given a Bass pedigree but to distinguish it, it was designated as "Bass" on the insert by PCGS. Coins that are in their original "first generation" Bass holder have a pedigree on the insert that states "Harry W. Bass Collection." There are also NGC coins that have Bass pedigrees. These were in the Bass collection but were cracked out of their original holders. Ironically, I have never seen an NGC Bass gold coin with any PVC grime on its surfaces.

How serious of a problem is this PVC? I am not a chemist and would defer the chemistry-related issues inherent to this question to someone else. From what I do know about gold, it is a very inert metal and one that is far more forgiving than, say, silver or copper. If the Bass collection had been copper coins and they had been stored in PVC flips for years, I think the coins would have been at considerable risk. Being gold coins, I think they were at far less risk. I’m not certain if the residue from these plastic flips did any long term damage but in the instances that I have seen coins on which the residue was removed, the underlying surfaces seemed just fine.

For me, the biggest problem with these coins is aesthetics. Some of the Bass coins in their original holders that I have seen with this PVC grime simply aren’t very attractive. If you purchased coins from the Bass sales in 1999-2000 and you haven’t inspected them recently, I’d suggest you take a quick peek and see how they look.

Eliasberg 1842-C Large Date

Most collectors (and dealers) have never seen a Gem Uncirculated Charlotte half eagle. I recently had the pleasure of handling one of the finest known Charlotte half eagles of any date—the Eliasberg 1842-C Large Date—and thought it would be interesting to readers of this blog. This 1842-C Large Date half eagle has been graded MS65 by NGC. It is one of just a small handful of Charlotte half eagles of any date that have ever been graded MS65 (or better) by the services. In fact, as of March 2008, PCGS had only graded a single Charlotte half eagle in MS65 (1847-C) while NGC had graded four individual coins including this one in MS65 (the others are an 1846-C, 1852-C, 1855-C and 1857-C) plus a single coin in MS66 (1849-C).

Before we discuss the specifics of this coin, let’s look at some of the background about the date. The 1842-C Large Date has an original mintage of 23,589. An estimated 90-110 are known including as many as seven to nine in Uncirculated. The present coin is, obviously, the finest. There are also two graded MS64 by NGC and a pair graded MS63 by PCGS. I rank the 1842-C Large Date as the fifth rarest of 24 Charlotte half eagles in overall rarity and the seventh rarest in high grades.

This particular coin has a long and illustrious pedigree. It last appeared at public auction in Stack’s 1995 Milas Collection sale where it brought $44,000 in an NGC MS64 holder. Prior to being in the Milas collection, it was Lot 421 in the October 1982 Eliasberg sale where it brought $17,600. It has been acquired by Eliasberg from the Clapp collection in 1942 and before this it was sold to John Clapp, Sr. by the dealer Elmer Sears in 1920.

The first question any smart collector should ask about this coin is "is it really an MS65?" Despite the fact that it once resided in an MS64 holder (albeit way back in 1995...) I would resoundingly say "yes, it is unquestionably a Gem by today’s standards."

When you look at the photo of this coin, there are a few things that immediately stand out. The first is this coin’s exceptional luster. Yes, I realize that you can not accurately capture the true essence of luster in an image but on a coin like this-that is literally dripping with original mint luster-you can get a pretty decent idea of it. The second thing that is apparent is this coin’s amazing color. Both the obverse and the reverse have fabulous intense yellow gold hues that are accentuated by the full, unbroken frost. Even from an image, you can detect that this coin is original and has never been dipped or "improved."

Some collectors might look at this coin and say that it can’t possibly grade MS65 because it has marks visible in the obverse fields. I would respond to this as follows. First, the current standards of the MS65 grade do not imply that such a coin is perfect. An MS65 will show some light, unobtrusive marks; primarily in the most open part(s) of a coin design. Secondly, some allowance must be made for the fact that this is a branch mint coin from the 1840’s. Sophisticated graders of coins realize that you can’t take the standards of a Philadelphia half eagle from, say, the 1890’s and apply it to a Charlotte coin from 1842. But that said, I honestly believe that even if this exact coin was a common Liberty Head half eagle it would still be assigned an MS65 grade.

The most important thing about grading a coin like this is to consider its overall eye appeal. This 1842-C Large Date half eagle is absolutely beautiful with great detail, superb luster, splendid color and very nice surfaces. These individual factors make it far too nice to assign an MS64 grade to it. Another way of looking at this coin is to ask the question, "would I sell this in an MS64 holder?" If an exact twin of this coin came up to my table at a coin show in an MS64 holder (and it was priced like an MS64) I would write a check in about five seconds and have it cracked out and ready for regrading in about fifteen seconds. And if it didn’t grade MS65 right away, I would continue to try to get this grade.

In my opinion, the Eliasberg 1842-C Large Date is among the best No Motto half eagles of any date that I have seen in many years and it is certainly among the best half dozen half eagles known from this mint. Even a Jaded Dealer such as me gets a tingle out of coins like these and I’m sure it will be a long time before I handle another Gem Charlotte half eagle.

Gaping Holes in Gold Coin Literature

A few years ago, I wrote a blog about coin books that needed to be written for United States gold coin collectors. A few of what I considered to be the gaping holes in gold coin literature have been filled but others remain. Here, again, are some of my “dream books” and the reasons why I think they would be important. 1. A Collector’s Guide to Classic Head gold coinage. It’s been rumored for years that John McCloskey was going to be producing a book on this subject and I have seen references to his die variety numbering system as far back as the Bass II catalog from 1999. But there is still no collector’s guide to this series.

I personally think that Classic Head gold coinage is one of the most collector-friendly series. The quarter eagles and half eagles from 1834 to 1838 have a charming design, are very short-lived and lack the extreme rarities (and ultra-expensive issues) found in the Liberty Head series. And, as Dr. McCloskey has shown, there are a number of extremely interesting naked-eye varieties.

A few of the topics that I’d really liked to see covered in a future Classic Head book would include die characteristics of Proofs (it can be extremely difficult to tell a true Proof from a Prooflike business strike), a detailed history behind the establishment and abolishment of this design (this period in American coinage history remains under-researched and not well understood), a detailed explanation as to why these coins tend to show poor strikes and a date-by-date analysis as to the rarity and collectability of the Classic Head quarter eagles and half eagles.

This wouldn’t be a very long book (I’m guessing 125-150 pages tops) and it probably wouldn’t be a best-seller but it would stimulate what I think is one of the most interesting United States gold coin series.

2. An Encyclopedia of Proof Gold Coinage. The knowledge that most collectors have about Proof gold is sketchy at best. The Breen Encyclopedia and the Akers books contain population estimates about many Proof gold issues but the numbers are typically at odds with each other.

Here’s what I’d like the definitive book on Proof gold to contain. First, I’d like pictures of all the known Proof issues. Secondly, I’d like diagnostic criteria for all proof gold coins. Thirdly, I’d like Condition Census information (where possible). Fourth, I’d like an explanation of the manufacturing process of Proof gold and some detailed information on things like why Three Dollar gold pieces tend to show intense orange-peel texture or why certain issues come with heavy cameo contrast and others do not and to mention, once and for all, accurate information on the Matte Proof manufacturing process.

The problem with such a book is that it would be very expensive to produce (especially with attractive pictures) and I can’t imagine more than a few hundred copies would ever be sold.

3. A high quality “coffee table” book about collecting United States gold coins by type. This topic has sort of been covered by the Garrett/Guth gold coin book and the new book on gold coin collecting by type written by Jeff Ambio. What I’d like to see is a book that takes the design and the scope of the former and weds it with the depth and clarity of the latter.

As more and more new collectors decide to focus on gold coin collecting by type, I think the importance of producing a well-written, easy to use and superbly illustrated book on every major United States gold type becomes more and more critical.

I’d like this book to have information about the how’s and why’s of type collecting, suggestions of what dates work best for type collecting, etc. I’d also like to see really good color photos of every major design type.

This is a book that I can actually see selling quite a few copies and I could imagine the format being spun-off to encompass silver and copper as well.

4. A book on San Francisco gold coinage. If you think about it, there is no real reason for San Francisco gold being less popular than the Southern branch mints other than the fact that there is (currently) no standard reference available to collectors. It has been proven, time and time again, that previously unpopular areas of the market invariably get a shot in the arm when a good book is published.

The reason that I have never written a book about San Francisco gold coins isn’t that I don’t care about the subject; I actually like San Francisco gold quite a lot. My biggest drawback has always been the fact that there are an awful lot of individual issues from this mint and that many of the post-1880 coins just aren’t all that interesting.

If I could ever find the right person to help me with this project, I would consider getting involved.

5. An in-depth collector’s guide to early gold coinage. The recent Dannreuther book on early gold is a fantastic reference for advanced collectors and for collectors who are focused on die varieties. But it lacks basic information for newer collectors that I’d like to see in a book on early gold coinage.

I’d like to see this book in a similar format to the one that I use for branch mint gold, with information about strike, surfaces, luster, color and eye appeal for each issue as well as important die characteristics, rudimentary die variety information, auction price information, a roster of finest known coins, etc.

And I know exactly the right person to write this book. So if you are reading this blog, Paul Nugget, write the book on early gold that could be your legacy and prove to everyone (other than me who already knows it...) that you are the world’s greatest expert on early gold!

1857-S Gold Dollar

One of my favorite under-the-radar U.S. gold issues is the 1857-S gold dollar. This is a coin that is really hard to find yet nice examples can still be purchased for less than $2,000. Read on for some “need to know” information about this interesting issue.

San Francisco only produced gold dollars for a total of seven years. The 1856-S is probably the best known of these issues due to its being a popular one-year type but, ironically, it is probably the most common gold dollar from this mint. The 1870-S is the rarest of these in terms of its overall availability but it is actually more obtainable in Uncirculated than generally realized. The dates that are the hardest to locate in higher grades are the 1857-S, 1858-S and 1859-S and it is my belief that the 1857-S may be the toughest of the three.

A total of 10,000 1857-S gold dollars were struck of which I would estimate that 150-200 are known. This date is seldom found below EF40; this is due to the fact that the small size of the gold dollar did not make it a coin that could easily circulate for many years and subsequently become heavily worn. Most of the survivors are in the EF45 to AU55 range. The 1857-S becomes scarce in properly graded AU55 to AU58 and it is quite rare in Uncirculated.

As of March 2008, PCGS has graded seven 1857-S’s in Uncirculated including one in MS64, two each in MS63 and MS62 and another two in MS61. NGC has graded sixteen in Uncirculated with one each in MS64 and MS63, two in MS62, nine in MS61 and one in MS60. I believe the NGC figures are inflated by resubmissions and I also believe that the NGC MS64 and PCGS MS64 are the same coin. In my best estimation, there are around ten to fifteen truly Uncirculated 1857-S gold dollars with most of these in the MS60 to MS62 range. I know of only two really choice pieces:

      -Bowers and Merena Bass II: 121 (10/99) @ $16,100. This coin was graded MS63 by PCGS in the Bass sale and I believe it may be in an MS64 holder today.

      -David Akers Pittman I: 880 (10/97) @ $13,200. I purchased this coin in the Pittman sale and it graded MS62 at PCGS; I believe that this coin is in an MS63 holder today.

The 1857-S is generally a well struck date, as are all of the San Francisco gold dollars. There are some pieces known that show weakness on the curls below LIB in LIBERTY and the date can occasionally show light weakness on the tops of the 85.

The quality of the surfaces for this issue tends to be somewhat below average. I have seen a number with mint-made lintmarks and others that show die deterioration at the NI in UNITED and/or the C in AMERICA that weakened these areas.

The luster is most often satiny with a slightly grainy texture. A few are known with semi-prooflike luster but this tends to be on circulated coins with abrasions, resulting in sub-standard eye appeal.

The natural coloration ranges from rose-gold to orange-gold and I have seen some 1857-S gold dollars with very attractive color. As one might expect, such coins are becoming harder and harder to find as more are being dipped and/or brightened.

As I mentioned above, I feel that this is a considerably undervalued coin. In fact, I think all of the Type Three gold dollars from this mint are great value in comparison to Charlotte and Dahlonega gold dollars. As an example, I recently sold a nice PCGS AU55 1857-S gold dollar (the coin imaged above) for less than $2,000; the same price level I would have gotten for a far more common 1851-C in a lower grade.

Uncirculated examples of this date are remarkable good value in my opinion. An MS61 is likely to trade in the $5,000-6,000 range while an MS62 would bring around $7,000-8,000 if available. Again, in comparison to the more popular C & D mint gold dollars of this era, the 1857-S seems like really good value to me.

MPF For St. Gaudens Double Eagles

One of the consequences of the soaring gold market is the evaporation of the Market Premium Factor (or "MPF") for certain semi-scarce dates in the St. Gaudens double eagle series. This scenario presents the savvy collector with what appears to be an interesting short-term opportunity. The term Market Premium Factor was invented, as far as I can tell, by my friend the newsletter writer/publisher Maurice Rosen. It refers to the premium that a better date coin sells for versus a common date. If a common date in a series is worth $1,000 and a slightly better date sells for $1,200 it has an MPF or 20%.

In the wake of the Great Saint Malaise, some dates that were formerly accorded market premium factors of 10-30% are suddenly selling for generic prices or just a bit more. There are a number of reasons why the generic double eagle market is currently as weak as it has been in recent memory. With gold blasting through the $1,000 mark, the gold content of a $20 Lib. or a Saint is enough that it becomes a sizable outlay of cash for the typical collector or investor; especially if being purchased in bulk quantities. Many new collectors and investors who are purchasing gold are buying modern U.S. mint products and eschewing older American gold. And many of the large-scale marketers who sold vast quantities of $20’s in the past are turning their focus to areas of the market where the profit margins are greater. These are the coins that, it seems to me, are good value right now.

Let me give you some examples of semi-better date Saints that are selling for the same price as generics but which are a lot scarcer (and, by the way, just in case you think I happen to have a double row box of these sitting in the back of my safe, I don’t...)

The 1910 is a date that I’ve always thought was pretty tough to find in properly graded MS64 and it is genuinely scarce in MS65. According to the most recent PCGS population figures, there are 1,057 graded in MS64 and 158 in MS65. Compare this to the common 1924 that has a current population of 60,451 in MS64 with 38,752 in MS65. In theory, the 1910 is 57 times scarcer in MS64 than the 1924. I’m not saying that the 1910 should sell for an enormous premium over the 1924. But in stronger markets, I can remember getting a decent premium for this date in grades as low as MS62.

Some of the other semi-better dates that have had good MPF’s in the past but which are currently selling for generic price levels (or close to generic levels) include the 1907 No Motto, 1908-D No Motto (in MS63 and below), 1909-S, 1910-D, 1912 and 1913 (in the lower Uncirculated grades) and 1920 (again, in MS63 and below).

Before you run out and buy a bunch of these, I have a caveat for you. One of the reasons that the MPF has evaporated many Saints is because of loose grading. I’m guessing that if you can find CAC approved 1910 double eagles in MS64, they ARE going to sell for a premium; as well they should. If you look at the price structure for many of the more common Saints graded between MS61 and MS64 you’ll note very small price spreads. One of the major reasons for this is that there is often very little difference in quality between these grades (!).

That said, I still like the idea of buying a group of 1910 Saints in PCGS MS64 for common date prices if you have the opportunity. At these levels, you have very little downside other than the price of gold dropping and with the current state of the United States economy I don’t foresee this happening anytime soon.