The Great RYK/DWN Mashup Part Two: Twelve Overvalued United States Gold Coins

A few weeks ago, I published an article written by collector Robert Kanterman that discussed U.S. gold coins that he regarded as good values. Along with each of selections, I posted my comments. Some of them were in agreement with Robert, others were not. The response to this blog was exceptional and I believe it was among the most popular of the nearly 250 that I’ve written since I began this feature around two years ago.

Robert must have received a Big Box of Motivation for the holidays because he became inspired to write the natural counterpart to the last article: a feature on gold coins that he regards as being “overvalued.” Naturally, I am pleased to publish it and am responding with my comments for each of his selections.

One quick word before we begin. What does “overvalued” mean to the gold coin collector? There is no definite answer to this important question and I’m not 100% certain that if you asked this question to Robert and I independently if we’d agree. My perception is that an overvalued coin is an issue that has a pricing premium that, in the current market environment, is difficult to justify. This parameter is not indelible and it can change, given the conditions of the market and the circumstances of the individual collector.

And away we go....

RYK: Here are my 12 overvalued and/or overpriced rare date gold coins. I would only qualify this group of selections by saying that there is nothing inherently wrong with any of these coins (I have owned several in the past). I just do not agree with how the market values them.  I will be interested in reading DW's rebuttals.

1.  1854 and 1855 Philadelphia Type II Gold Dollars, Especially in MS-62 and Higher

This is actually one of my favorite designs across the U.S. gold series, but just because I like the coin, does not mean I like the value it offers. The MS coins are hardly scarce, yet they sell for several thousand dollars and up. I personally have trouble believing that there are that many people who "need" high grade examples for a type set. I would be happy to settle for a nice AU-58 for under $1000 and use the difference somewhere else.

DW: It’s hard not to agree with RYK on this one. I also love the Type Two gold dollar. I love the design, dig the history and like the fact that it is a short-lived issue. But I have a very hard time justifying the current price levels for examples graded MS62 and higher; even though these levels are significantly reduced from past highs. Currently, a common date Type Two gold dollar (i.e., an 1854 or an 1855) is worth $17,000 in MS64 and around $40,000 in MS65. The current PCGS population figures for Type Two gold dollars are 418 in MS64, 87 in MS65 and another 28 in MS66 and above. Unless there are significantly more collectors assembling high grade gold type sets than I’m aware of, these price levels seem inflated.   2.  1840-D, 1841-D, and 1842-D Quarter Eagles

After the 1855-D and 1856-D quarter eagles, this trio is next in line for scarcity, filling out the top five.  Perhaps unfairly, I tend to group these together when considering them, but I see them with about the same frequency as one another, and there is a significant rise in availability of Dahlonega quarter eagles after this date.  In AU-55, these are $12,000-20,000 coins, which seem like a lot for a series that has as limited an audience as this one does.

DW: I don’t totally agree with RYK on this selection. If you are a date collector of Dahlonega quarter eagles, these are important issues (if you are a type collector, these issues, I realize, are meaningless). Something that’s hurt the reputation of the 1840-D, 1841-D and 1842-D quarter eagles is that there are a lot of lousy examples in third-party holders. In properly graded EF and better, all three are genuinely scarce and in AU55 or better they are very rare. Given the value levels in this series, I don’t think that any of the three are overvalued.

3.  So-Called Better Date Quarter Eagles After 1885

When one looks at the Redbook, there is a string of quarter eagles with very low mintages in the later years of the series. I think that these are often sold to collectors as better dates, but the auction records and the frequency with which these are sold do not support this. With the exception of the 1881 and the 1885, it's probably best to put away the books and consider these as generics.

DW: I agree but not with a lot of enthusiasm. The dates that Robert refers to are a classic example of Market Premium Factor. In a good market, an issue like the 1886 or 1894 gets a significant premium due to its low mintage and relatively small PCGS/NGC population figure(s). In a weaker market, this MPF tends to evaporate and a coin that once sold for a 10-30% premium becomes obtainable at levels closer to common date status. Given the fact that very few people collect late date Liberty Head quarter eagles by date, most of these probably do not merit a premium. In higher grades, however, certain of these are genuinely rare and I would be happy to buy all of RYK’s 1894 quarter eagles in MS64 or MS65 for common date prices!

4.  1911-D $2.50

The 1911-D quarter eagle is the most overrated and overpriced dated gold coin in the US series, bar none. I understand the argument that it is the key date of the most collectible gold series, but I have a very hard time believing that there are enough collectors of the series to support the obscene price of the fairly common issue. (I was going to add that it is the 09-S VDB Cent of U.S. gold coins, but I think that it would give this coin more credibility than it deserves.)

DW: Ouch! Do you have the feeling that Robert isn’t going to be inviting a 1911-D quarter eagle to the prom? But who am I to argue, given the fact that I’ve already accused the 1911-D of being one of the leading Faux Rarities in all of American Numismatics. This is clearly one key date that is priced too high and I would not be surprised to see its price plummet in the coming months. At least until the next time the Indian Head quarter eagle series gets (re)promoted...

5.  1857-S $3   I must admit that I was struggling to pick a selection from the $3 gold series, not because these coins are all undervalued, but because so few stand out from the pack. I chose this issue because I felt that the premium attached to this issue for being a branch mint issue seems out of proportion to its actual scarcity. Stated more succinctly, it's twice as common as the historic 1865 $3 (one of the keys to the series), yet sells for about the same price in AU-55. Look yourself at the population spreads and accompanying prices on the PCGS site, and you will see exactly what I mean.

DW: Here’s another issue which I am in partial agreement with the Good Doctor. (I’ve always wanted to write the expression “the Good Doctor” in a blog!) When you compare it to the 1865, the 1857-S is an overvalued issue but this isn’t totally fair because the 1865 is probably the most undervalued coin in the whole Three Dollar series. Just as with the 1840-D/1841-D/1842-D quarter eagles, the population figures for the 1857-S don’t tell the complete story. Most every 1857-S I see in AU55 is (cough, cough) “enthusiastically graded” and choice, crusty examples in EF45 and higher are awfully scarce. If I had to pick an overvalued issue in the Three Dollar series, I’d select the 1854-O or the 1885. But that’s another story. Or another blog.


6. 1879 Flowing Hair Stella $4   This is a coin that I dreamed of owning as a young collector and one that owes its popularity and high price to its capricious inclusion in the Redbook. There are four offered in the upcoming FUN sale, and I have long said that you can't swing a dead cat at a major show without hitting at least a couple of these. These days, $150,000 buys an ugly, much-too-bright  Stella. So much for my dream coin.

DW: The 1879 Flowing Hair Stella was one of my primary “faux rarities” in my infamous blog of a few months ago, so no one is going to be surprised when I say that I agree fully with RYK on this one. Prices on this issue are going to drop in the coming months and it will be interesting to see where they settle. Maybe RYK will be able to afford his “dream coin” after all!

 
7. 1842-C Small Date $5

I think that Doug has commented on this in the past, and as a devotee of the southern branch mint $5's, this issue always stood out to me as one that was more common than believed and consistently overpriced. When I was active in C and D $5's, the ones that were on the market seemed to stay on the market a very long time (or jump from auction to auction), so I think that the collector market agrees with me.

DW: I still regard this as a rare date. The problem with the 1842-C Small Date, however, is the fact that not everyone regards it as essential for “completeness” in the Charlotte half eagle series. Another problem is that Trends values are way too high for the 1842-C Small Date. This is compounded by the fact that many of the AU examples in third-party holders are pretty gnarly. As a value buyer, I’d still give strong consideration to a crisp, crusty EF example but I’d pass on an AU until levels come down.

8. 1860-D $5   For some reason, the price guides have always treated this Dahlonega $5 as a better date.  Doug ranks it #16 out of 26 Dahlonega $5's in overall scarcity (I rank it 17th), and it warrants no premium over the "common" Dahlonega $5 (i.e. 44-D, 45-D, 47-D, etc.). There is no logical reason why this coin is priced as a better date among Dahlonega half eagles.

DW: I can’t argue with this choice. This issue somehow started selling for a premium a few years ago despite the fact it is no rarer than the 1858-D or 1859-D. I’m not sure that I’d single it out as one of Baker’s Dozen most overvalued U.S. coins but I do think it should be priced as a common date.

9. 1799 $10   This is the most common 18th century U.S. gold coin with large numbers in PCGS and NGC holders and large numbers in lower tier holders and raw (or raw equivalent). They are big and beautiful coins, but they are everywhere. $30,000 for an AU-55 seems like a lot of money when a considerably more scarce 1799 $5 is about half the price in the same grade.

DW: I strongly agree with this choice despite the fact that I really like everything about the 1799 (except its current market valuation). I can remember not so long ago when a nice fresh AU 1799 eagle was an easy coin to find at $13,000-15,000. Today, they are double this amount and the typical coin is apt to be processed and unappealing. If you really want to own a 1799 eagle (and I think a nice early ten is an integral part to any potential collection of U.S. gold) I’d probably wait a while and see if prices retreat back to the levels of five-seven years ago.


10. 1851-O and 1852-O $20   Several years ago, I thought these were really good values, when they could be purchased for a small premium over the majority of the Philadelphia Type I $20's. At $5,000 or so for an AU-50, when a more scarce Philly issue like an 1855 sells for about one-third of the price and a considerably more historic and scarce 54-S sells for about $3,000, the value of these two is no longer apparent.

DW: I have mixed feelings on this choice. Having very much helped to create the market for Type One New Orleans double eagles, I am pretty stunned to see nothing-special examples of the 1851-O and 1852-O selling for $5,000-10,000. This does seem like a lot of money for nothing all that special. In the defense of these two dates, remember that they are the most available double eagles from this popular mint and there is very strong collector demand for said coins. But I do agree with Robert that your $3,000 is better spent on a nice 1855.

11. High Relief Saint   The High Relief Saint is arguably the most beautiful U.S. coin (gold or otherwise) ever struck by the U.S. Mint. One can also make the argument that based on its availability that it is significantly overpriced. I would love to own one but not at these levels.

DW: Agreed. Next....


12. Hoarded 1920's Branch Mint Saints   I was discussing the possible auction purchase of a 1920's branch mint Saint with a wise coin dealer (who happens to be a specialist in rare date gold) when he turned  to me and said, "You have to be careful with these hoard dates—the ones from the 1920's that are being slowly released into the market."  He then rattled off a few of these dates. Sure enough, when one tracks the auction records for these, there appear to be several dates undergoing quiet distribution at prices that are not supported by their level of availability.

DW: I’m going to waffle a bit on my answer to this one, even though I am (I think...) the supposedly wise coin dealer who made the comment cited above. I do think you have to be careful buying many of the mintmarked Saints from the 1920’s. You have to be careful for three reasons. The first is that some dates do exist in hoard quantity and it’s important to pay careful attention to the PCGS/NGC population figures. Secondly, the quality of these coins is all over the map. I’ve seen 1926-S double eagles in MS65 holders that were true Gems and I’ve seen 1926-S double eagles in MS65 holders that I wouldn’t break out of an MS64 holder. Unless you are an expert grader, you need to work with an expert in this area. Finally, the market for dated Saints can change quickly based on the number of active collectors. What seems undervalued today can seem overvalued in a few months (and vice-versa) if the market loses (or gains) participants in the high-end arena.



Bonus:  Anything Overgraded, Especially XF coins, dipped and in AU Holders   It goes without saying that processed and/or overgraded coins are generally not a good buy, especially when they are premium priced. That said, I am going to be a bit of a contrarian. There may be opportunities that arise when the collector can recognize the overgraded coin and pay the appropriate price while others simply pass because the coin is overgraded. One of my best acquisitions was made precisely under these circumstances.

DW: I disagree with Robert here that “opportunities may arise” when it comes to buying overgraded coins and paying the appropriate price. I’m not sure why you’d ever want to buy an overgraded coin. But if a dealer will sell you an EF45 in an AU50 holder for an EF45 price, then I guess this makes sense (huh??)


Bonus II: Many Shipwreck Coins, Especially 1857-S SSCA $20's   For the sake of this discussion, let's limit our focus to the Brother Jonathon, the S.S. Central America, and the S.S. Republic coins. I am a big fan of shipwreck gold coins—I love the history, the exploration, the retrieval, and the science of conservation. I think that there is nothing more fascinating than holding a coin in your hand that sank to the bottom of the ocean in a storm 150 years ago, was found buried in sand in deep water 145 years later, and conserved to look like it did the day it left the Mint. However, the shipwreck premium, in many cases, is well beyond reason. I will concede that for some better dates, there is some logic to the shipwreck premium, but certainly not for the 1857-S $20 from the S.S. Central America. These are readily available in quantity in any major auction or coin show.

DW: In theory, Robert is right. What he doesn’t realize is that there are a number of large retailers who can sell the heck out of these shipwreck coins and that the demand is generally well in tune with the supply. While I agree with Robert that the price levels seem out-of-whack with the populations, what he needs to realize is that these shipwreck coins are, in a way, a distinct “mini-market” within the broader market. The history and neatness factor of these shipwreck double eagles makes them unfair to compare with other, less active segments of the coin market.

So there you have it: the Numismatic Dan Ackroyd and Jane Curtin of this generation (for those of you too young to get this reference, look it up online) have, I hope, given you plenty of numismagrist to chew on this holiday season.

An Amazing Gem 1869 Half Eagle

If you are a regular reader of my blogs, it’s a pretty safe assumption that you are interested in United States gold coins. And if you like U.S.gold, I don’t think I’m going too far out on a limb to state that you probably like to see photos of and read about special pieces. Well, I’ve got the skinny on one of the more amazing 19th century issues I’ve seen in some time; a one-of-a-kind coin that recently passed through the portals of Douglas Winter Numismatics. The coin in question, shown below, is an 1869 half eagle that has been graded MS64* by NGC. I’m going to start out by giving you some background about this issue, then about the specific coin and, finally, some thoughts as to how and why this remarkable coin exists.

I think the 1869 half eagle can best be described in two words: “forgotten rarity.” There were a scant 1,760 business strikes produced of which perhaps as many as four dozen are known. This issue is generally seen in the EF grades and it is rare in properly graded AU50 or better. I believe that there are around a dozen known in AU. PCGS has graded a total of thirty-three with the finest a single coin in AU58; NGC has graded a total of thirty-five with two different coins in Uncirculated: the present example and another, which grades MS64PL.

The present example was first offered at auction in the October 1999 Bass II sale where it brought $33,350 as Lot 1166. At the time, it was housed in a PCGS MS64 holder and according to my notes in the original catalog I called the coin “amazing!” Harry Bass had purchased the coin via private treaty from a source identified in the catalog as N.K.S. on June 8, 1971. He had kept his ownership of it a secret as it was unknown to both Breen and Akers when they wrote their books on, respectively, United States coins and half eagles.

The Bass 1869 half eagle next appeared for sale as Heritage 5/00: 7668 in an NGC MS64 holder where it brought $22,425. After this, it was sold into the Ashland City collection where it remained until it was offered as Heritage 1/03: 4815 (still in an NGC MS64 holder) realizing $28,750. I recently resubmitted the coin to NGC where it was given a star designation because of its exceptional eye appeal. I also had NGC delete the Ashland City pedigree and reinstate the Bass pedigree as I felt it was far more appropriate to a coin of this stature.

If you study the photo above, you will note that the quality shown by this 1869 half eagle is quite amazing. The surfaces are mostly prooflike with more than enough frost to clearly indicate that this piece was made for commercial usage. It is extremely well struck and attractively toned in light orange-gold hues. A few small scuffs can be seen in the left obverse field with the primary identifying mark being a tiny mint-made strike-through near the southeastern point of star four.

How does such a remarkable 1869 half eagle exist? There were no date collectors of business strike half eagles in 1869 and any well-heeled collector of this denomination in the 19th century would have preferred a Proof to a business strike. My theory is as follows.

Every year, the Assay Commission met in Philadelphia to examine a group of current coins to determine whether or not they conformed to legal requirements. Although I can’t prove this for a fact, my belief is that, from time to time, someone on the Assay Commission (of which there were approximately two dozen members) saw an interesting coin and decided to “keep it” as a souvenir. I am assuming that if a commissioner chose to, he could trade an older “used” half eagle for a brand new one. There are a small number of gold coins from the 1860’s and 1870’s that are just so much nicer than any other example from this date/denomination that it seems highly possible that they originate from the Assay Commission.

There is another possibility, although it is not as glamorous as the one posited above. It is possible that this 1869 half eagle might have somehow been “put away” by a Philadelphia area collector or non-collector in 1869 and through random chance been passed down through generations without having been melted, sold, cleaned or lost. I have handled spectacular gold coins that have been rediscovered by a family member after fifty or a hundred years and I know that these things happen from time to time.

The Bass 1869 half eagle is a beautiful and fascinating coin that deserves more attention than it has received in the past. I know that collecting Philadelphia half eagles by date is not “fashionable” but it seems hard to believe that this coin is worth about the same as a High Relief double eagle in the same grade range despite the latter coin being dirt common in comparison.

Is Collecting by Date a Thing of the Past?

Is the age of collecting by date or variety over? Have coins become so expensive and collecting so complex that it is inevitable that new collectors will focus solely on type coins? As a dealer who sells rare gold coins to both highly specialized date collectors and to sophisticated type collectors I think numismatics is definitely going through a change but that collecting by date remains (and will continue to be) very popular with a certain type of individual. To collect a series or a mint by date requires a type of mindset. I think of date collectors as being more patient than type collectors and probably a bit more research-oriented. To a generalized, type-oriented collector, there is no difference between an 1848-D and an 1858-D half eagle. To the date collector, there is a significant amount of difference between these two coins; be it strike, appearance, coloration, etc.

I don’t think there is a “right” or a “wrong” way to collect. I admire the highly specialized date collector who takes years to assemble a set of Charlotte half eagles or Liberty Head eagles. During the process, he is probably learning more about the specific series that he is collecting than most dealers. He “gets” the difference between the 1848-D half eagle and the 1858-D half eagle and does not have to have it explained to him.

But I can absolutely see the reason to collect by type as well. Not everyone has the patience to assemble a long set of coins and most series have one or two (or more) stoppers that make completing a set impossible. And there is clearly something cool about the fact that a type collector buys something different every time he makes a purchase. Anyone can tell the difference between an 1838 Classic Head half eagle and a 1910 Indian Head half eagle; most people see an 1848-D and 1858-D half eagle and they see essentially the same coin(s).

To the coin market gurus who emphatically state that collecting by date or variety is a dying endeavor, I would answer that this is not the case. To refute this, one need only look at the fact that in this golden era of numismatic publishing, there continues to be a run of titles that deal with specific series but virtually none that deal with type collecting. In the area of gold coins, in the last few years we’ve seen titles about gold dollars, 20th century issues, three dollar pieces, Charlotte and New Orleans issues, etc.

Not only is collecting by series alive and well, specialization seems to be doing just fine, thanks. In the recent Bowers and Merena Baltimore auction, the seventh known example of the 1795 Liberty Cap with Reeded Edge Cent brought an astonishing $402,500. What’s even more incredible about this figure is the fact that the coin is only graded Good-4 by PCGS and it clearly isn’t going to win any beauty contests. However, it is an extremely rare variety in an extremely popular series (early Large Cents by Sheldon variety). As we all know, it just takes two to tango and if two well-heeled collectors decide to butt heads on a coin that they know they might not get another chance to own, the final price realized is often jaw-dropping. Weak economy or not, many highly specialized collector series remain as strong as ever.

What does the future hold for date collecting? I see a few possible scenarios.

There are some series that are so long and so challenging that they will never attract more than a handful of date collectors. As an example, Liberty Head eagles are so tough that it is hard to imagine more than three to five people at one time competing against each other to form a set. But, on the flip side, when you have as many rare dates as the Liberty Head eagle series does, a sudden onslaught of demand would be untenable.

Other series that were once popular to collect by date are likely to become less popular due to the vicissitudes of taste. A century ago, virtually no one knew what a branch mint gold coin was, let alone collected them; today these are more popular than issues from Philadelphia. What is popular today could become forgotten a generation or two from now.

If well-written reference books on a formerly-overlooked series are released, date collecting can gain appeal. I’d like to think that the publication of my New Orleans gold coin book in 2006 spurred a number of people to collect by date. Newly released books on Colonials/Early American coins and Peace Dollars could have a huge impact in these two markets as well.

Something that we are likely to see in the future is a hybridization of collecting tastes. I wouldn’t be surprised if date and type collecting become more finely synthesized. As an example, someone might decide he doesn’t want to collect a full date set of Charlotte half eagles. But he likes the series enough that he wants to do more than collect the three types. He might become an “advanced dabbler” who doesn’t feel compelled to complete the series but who decides to own five or six or even seven different dates because he feels that Charlotte half eagles are really interesting.

One thing we are destined to see in many series if prices go down is the shrinking of the Market Premium Factor. In series that are not terribly popular, coins that formerly sold for a 10-30% premium over a common date are likely to lose this premium and retract down to a common type coin level. We are already seeing this in some of the 20th century series and I wouldn’t be totally shocked to see this in the early gold and Liberty Head gold markets.

Another point to address: how will key dates fair in series that become less popular with date collectors? The answer depends on whether or not there are multiple levels of demand for this coin. As an example, the 1873 three dollar gold piece is a key date but if the three dollar series becomes less popular, its level of demand will shrink. The 1854-D three dollar is likely to lose less value in a declining market because there are a broader range of collectors who want this coin: not only specialists in the series, but Dahlonega collectors and one-year type collectors as well.

The 1884 Three Dollar Gold Piece

One of the things that’s fun about being a coin dealer is the variety of interesting numismatic items that come across your desk. Just yesterday, within the span of an hour, I handled a cleaned Extremely Fine High Relief double eagle, an interesting group of Dahlonega quarter eagles, a rare date Seated Liberty quarter dollar and what I believe is among the finest known 1884 Three Dollar gold pieces. I have liked this date for many years and as recently as a few days ago, I listed it as one of my 12 Great Values in the Market Priced at Under $5,000 in my December 2008 featured article. But handling this superb 1884 Three Dollar gold piece, graded MS66 by PCGS, gave me the motivation to write about this date in greater detail.

There were just 1,000 business strikes produced and these were not made until December 13th. This very late date of issuance leads me to believe that there was essentially no demand for this denomination at this point other than for examples to be given as Christmas presents or to sell to collectors. And this belief is borne out by the fact that very few 1884 Three Dollar gold pieces are known in circulated grades. As of December 2008, PCGS had graded 92 examples of which 83 (or a whopping 90%) were in Uncirculated.

As with most of the later date Three Dollar gold pieces, the 1884 is a very well produced issue. The strike is typically very sharp with complete definition noted on the hair, the wreath and the denticles. A few show some minor weakness on the curls just to the left of Liberty’s ear. The surfaces are generally clean although the examples that grade MS63 and below tend to show light handling marks or hairlines from previous cleanings. The luster varies from Prooflike to very frosty. The coloration on uncleaned, original coins is often quite attractive with a range of hues seen: light rose, green-gold and orange-gold. This date generally has good eye appeal and there are some truly handsome examples known.

While available from time to time in MS63 and MS64, the 1884 becomes a rarity in Gem. PCGS has currently graded five in MS65 and two in MS66. NGC has graded four in MS65 and three in MS67. I am pretty certain that the NGC numbers are inflated by resubmissions. I do know for a fact that at least one coin exists in MS67 as I handled it a few years ago and sold it to a collector in South Texas. The other PCGS MS66 resides in the Great Lakes collection, which is the finest set of high grade Three Dollar gold pieces ever assembled.

The 1884 Three Dollar imaged above is one of the single most aesthetically attractive examples of this type that I have handled in many years. Unlike many of the high grade Threes that have thick, creamy luster (as seen on dates like the 1878 and 1888), this piece has a shimmering texture that can best be described as a blend between frosty and semi-prooflike. The coin has exquisite delicate green-gold and rose color and the surfaces approach perfection. The dealer who sent me this piece told me that it, literally, came “out of nowhere” and this is the first time it has ever been photographed or described.

One last thing before I close. How many 1884 Threes are known? In my book on this series (written with Q. David Bowers and published in 2005) I estimated that 55-75 were known in Uncirculated as well as another 25-35 in circulated grades for a total of around 80-110. I believe that this figure is a bit on the low side and I’ve recently revised my estimate upwards to 125-150. As I stated above, most are in the lower Uncirculated grades. The PCGS population in MS64 is highly inflated byresubmissions and properly graded examples in MS63 and above are quite rare. I would seriously doubt if there are more than five to seven Gems.

The Great RYK/DWN Mashup: Robert Kanterman’s Twelve Undervalued Gold Coins Priced Below $5,000

At the end of my last blog I said that I’d like to hear from collectors about which coins they believe qualify as undervalued sub-$5,000 U.S. gold coins. Robert Kanterman responded with this thoughtful list and I thought I’d publish it along with my comments (which are in italics at the end of each of his paragraphs). Without further ado, take it away RYK... Doug Winter has challenged me to identify 12 gold coins that are under $5,000 that are relatively good values. As a hobbyist, I am not nearly as knowledgeable and up-to-date in pricing, availability, and recent transactions, as Doug is. Most of my information is from sources like Heritage's auction archives, Coin Values, and the PCGS price guide and population reports. Each of these resources has its inherent flaws and weaknesses, yet each represents a sizable block of information, as well. I will also add that as a collector, I am often willing to dip down in grade level to a point that is lower than Doug typically does. This allows me access to some rare coins that I might otherwise not be able to afford. I would also stress that my selections below all are for coins that are original and attractive for the grade. On this website, that goes without saying.

1. 1854-S Gold Dollar in MS-62

I am always attracted to better date coins that have a historic or numismatic significance. The 1854-S dollar is important as it is the first year of operation of the San Francisco Mint, and it is the only SF mint gold coin that can be purchased in MS for under $5,000, with an MS-62 running in the $3,000-4000 range. This is definitely an issue that flies under the radar screen.

DW Comment: Nice choice. I had actually considered this for my list. This is a historically significant issue with a high “neatness” factor. I think a properly MS62 at $3,500-4,000 is a wonderful value. Just as an aside, I think all of the SF gold dollars are exceedingly good values and I have written previous articles on them which detail each issue.

2. 1857-D, 1858-D, or 1859-D Gold Dollar in AU-50 to 55

The combined mintage of these three issues is about 12,000 coins--yes, I said combined--and they can be had in AU-50 for $4,000 or less and a little more for choice AU. These are all charming, scarce, and historic. Within four years of the earliest of the trio, the Dahlonega Mint was overrun by the Confederates, who struck the gold dollars for the last and most famous issue of the series--the 1861-D. Of the three, the 1858-D gold dollar typically comes with the best strike.

DW Comment: Having owned dozens and dozens of each of these three dates I tend to overlook them but I think RYK has raised a good point. All three are scarce in the true meaning of the word. If I were able to choose just one date out of the trio, I would pick the 1857-D as I think it is considerably scarcer than the 1858-D and 1859-D. A caveat: many of the AU50 examples I see in holders are poor quality, so be patient and wait for the right example to come along.

3. 1839-C and 1839-D Quarter Eagles in XF-40+

I do not see much value in the classic head series, in general, but compared to the rest, the branch mint issues from Charlotte and Dahlonega seem to still have some value. Neither is especially rare, but with MS graded coins pushing into the high five figures, a dirty, original mid-circulated grade coin for $5,000, give or take a few, in a very popular series, seems like a pretty fair deal.

DW Comment: Nice choice, RYK. Even though properly graded EF examples of these two dates have probably doubled in price in the last few years, they are still good overall value. I’m not certain I would call them “undervalued” but the important thing to remember is that coins like this are in great demand and many collectors can’t afford the higher grade pieces that seem so readily available. I would personally choose the 1839-D over the 1839-C if I had to buy just one.

4. 1881 Quarter Eagle in AU-55

I hope I do not get bounced for saying this here, but after 1865 or so and with the exception of the 1875, the Liberty coronet $2.50 series becomes a long, boring series with few coins of interest to all but the diehards of the series. 641. What's that number? That's the original mintage of the 1881 quarter eagle for circulation strikes. If I were going to own one late date coronet quarter eagle, this would be the one.

DW Comment: At first I was going to heartily disagree with this choice but the more I got to thinking about it, the more I realized that at $3,500-4,000 for an AU50, this date is pretty good value after all. I do disagree with RYK that the post-1865 quarter eagles are a “long, boring series...” but you don’t expect me to agree with everything he says, do you?

5. 1864 Three Dollar in AU-55 or 58

The Civil War dates in many series are becoming the focus of collectors, and this is no exception for the $3 gold series. The 1865 $3 gets all of the credit for being low mintage (1,140), low pop, and one of the handful or so better dates of the entire series. The 1864 $3, however, has a mintage of 2,630, with a survivorship of a little under twice that of the 1865 and a price tag less than half of the 1865. Additionally, there is no apparent premium when compared to the higher mintage and more common 1861 through 1863 $3's. By all metrics, it is the best value among Civil war date $3's.

DW Comment: This is a really good choice. I probably see three 1861, 1862 or 1863 three dollar gold pieces for every 1864 despite the fact that the latter gets very little price premium in circulated grades. You have to like the history of any gold coin dated 1864 and most Philadelphia coins from this year were extensively melted.

6. Bust Right (or Bust Left) Early Half Eagles in XF-40

This is a personal favorite and may not be right for all collectors, but there is recent auction data to back this selection up. When AU coins are regularly selling for nearly $10,000, a nice original, piece with a bit more circulation in the $5,000-6,000 range seems like a better buy.

DW Comment: I love this choice except for one problem. Finding a crusty, original EF bust right or bust left half eagle is going to be a real chore as most of the real EF45 coins are now in AU50 or AU53 holders. When I do see EF examples they tend to be net graded AU’s—in other words, they have the details of an AU50 but have been cleaned at one time. That said, I agree with RYK that a crusty, attractive EF45 at $6,000 makes more sense for most collectors than a marginal, bright AU55 at $10,000.

7. Dahlonega Half Eagle Varieties in XF or AU

There are a number of scarce, easily recognizable varieties of Dahlonega half eagles (1840-D Small D, 1843-D Small D, 1848-D D/D, etc.) which can be purchased for little and often no premium to the more common variety. The grading services and astute collectors are only starting to recognize them, but they are well-documented and described in Doug's book, “Gold Coins of the Dahlonega Mint.” Instead of buying the common example for the date in which 150 pieces are known, it makes sense to seek the one in which only 15 or so are known.

DW Comment: On this choice, I believe that RYK was “overthinking.” While I love the concept of buying a very rare die variety for little or no premium over a common one, the problem with these is that only a handful of collectors care. The 1840-D Small D half eagle is, as an example, a truly rare coin but I doubt if more than half a dozen collectors would pay a premium for it. My feeling is that the collector should learn these varieties and try to cherrypick them if possible but that there are just a small handful of Dahlonega half eagle varieties (most notably the 1848-D/D) that (currently) merit a premium.

8. Pedigreed Coins Better Date Gold Coins Under $5,000

I am a big fan of pedigreed coins, and I know that Doug is, as well. When I talk about pedigreed coins, I am generally speaking of the Big Three (Eliasberg, Garrett, and Norweb), but for rare date gold, there are others of significance, including Bass, Milas, Dallas Bank, to name a few. I am not talking about hoards like Wells Fargo, shipwreck coins (because they tend to be overpriced), or dubious pedigrees like Rainy Day. Often, the best way to buy pedigreed coins is to rediscover them yourself. Failing this, dealers like Doug Winter will often sell these with little or no price premium. I have found that while I enjoy owning them, selling them is usually painless as there seems to be quite a few collectors out there who also desire these. I make sure that I do not compromise my standards for quality for the grade and still seek good value.

DW Comment: I love this choice but would change the Big Three to the Big Four as I consider the Bass pedigree to be every bit as important as Eliasberg, Garrett or Norweb. RYK makes a great point when he suggests that the best way to find coins from these sales is to do some leg work. If you collect quarter eagles, make sure you own all of the major quarter eagle sales. If a coin has a distinguishing mark it may be reasonably easy to pedigree it.

9. 1870-CC Half Eagle Up To VF-20

Here is a coin that Doug Winter would not typically purchase for inventory, but I think is good value for the money. 1870 was the first year of the Carson City Mint and the 1870 gold issues are all the rarest in their respective series. The 1870-CC $5 is the most common of the three gold denominations and the only one that can be purchased in any form that resembles a coin for under $10,000. VF-25's have recently sold publicly for $6,000 or so, so it might require a drop in grade to F-15 or VF-20 to acquire this popular, historic, and legitimately scarce coin.

DW Comment: Actually RYK is wrong about me not typically buying a nice VF 1870-CC half eagle (or eagle or double eagle, for that matter...) for my inventory. I have actually owned three or four 1870-CC half eagles in lower grades and have always found them to be popular and readily liquid. On a rare, historically significant issue like the 1870-CC, I know I am willing to compromise my standards a bit. This would be a great addition to any collection.

10. 1838 Eagle in VF

Here's another coin that might be a bit lower in grade than what Doug might purchase for inventory, but when you consider that these coins actually did circulate (like the 1870-CC $5), it make sense to buy one that did circulate. This is a legitimately scarce, first year of issue, with a somewhat different design from the rest of the long series, and the first eagle struck for circulation in 35 years. A crusty, older holder example sold earlier this year in VF-25 for $4,000, which seems like a pretty good deal to me.

DW Comment: I wasn’t planning on including this issue in Part Two of my article but I like this choice. I am generally a big fan of first-year-of-issue coins, especially if they are genuinely scarce like the 1838 eagle. I would warn the potential buyer of this issue that Trends and CDN Bid tend to be unrealistically low in all grades and there are not many that can be bought in the sub-$5,000 range.

11. Any With Motto 1860's Eagles (except 1868-P) in XF-40 Through AU-50

The Liberty $10 series is chock full of scarce dates that fall below the radar screen of most collectors, even those who are active in rare date gold. From 1866 through 1869, there are multiple legitimately scarce dates that can be had in XF to low AU for under $5,000, but they do not come available very often. Omit the 1868 Philadelphia issue, as it is the most common of the group.

DW Comment: I couldn’t agree more with this choice although I might not necessarily single out the 1868 as the one “do not buy” coin from this era. These dates all have low mintages and low survival rates. They tend to be extremely expensive in AU and higher grades bit are surprisingly affordable in VF and EF.

12. 1850 Double Eagle in AU

I generally have difficulty finding good value in the $20 gold series (Liberty and Saints). I chose the 1850 $20 among the 1850's Philadelphia issues because it is the first year of issue, and it often comes nice. If you like the value in this one, you would probably like the some of the other 1850's Philadelphia $20's because they are even less expensive. Big pieces of 150+ year old gold are impressive now and will remain so for the foreseeable future.

DW Comment: I’m going to disagree with RYK on this one. At one time, I was a huge advocate of this date and I even included it in an article I wrote about “A Dozen Cool U.S. Coins” a number of years ago. But that was before prices shot up and population figures in AU soared. While this date has the cachet of being the first collectible double eagle, I think dates like the 1855, 1856, 1857 and 1858 in nice AU55 to AU58 are much better values than the 1850.

I’d like to give a shout-out to Robert Kanterman for his exceptional list of undervalued coins and I hope I haven’t embarrassed him to the point that he’ll never participate in the new interactive raregoldcoins.com blog again. So, who is next??

ValueQuest 2009

I have the feeling that the Numismatic Buzzword for 2009 is going to be “value.” If you are like most collectors, your purchases in the coming year(s) are not going to be as extensive as they were in the past. If you are buying fewer coins, you’ll want to stretch your coin purchasing dollars and look for pieces that offer the biggest bang for the buck. I have a few suggestions, which are mainly conceptual in nature, to guide you along the Value Trail. Regardless of series, date or mint, coins that have a nice, original appearance are very rare. My definition of “original” is a coin that appears to not have been cleaned, dipped, processed or otherwise enhanced in recent generations. In many series, especially ones like early gold and southern branch mint gold, truly original coins probably represent less than 5% of the available population. If you don’t believe me, take a look sometime at a large auction that is held in conjunction with a major convention. Assuming that you know what you are looking for, my guess is that you’ll see coin after coin that is too bright or bleached out or bedecked with “unusual” coloration. In some sales there may be thirty or forty early gold coins and only a small handful that fit my criteria of originality.

It makes sense to me that if you are going to buy fewer coins in 2009 (or, who knows, maybe you won’t buy fewer coins, just less expensive ones...) you should be buying prettier, more aesthetically appealing ones. And one of the things that I am continually amazed about in the rare date gold market is that, when they are available, choice, original pieces tend to only bring a small percentage (10-20% at most) over the typical “schlock” that is usually offered.

Another important point to consider when purchasing coins with a newfound appreciation for value is current market price versus prices in 2002-2003. I use 2003 as the point in time that prices in many gold series began to rise significantly. As an example, many early gold coins that were worth $6,000-8,000 in 2002-2003 had been at that level for quite a few years. Today, these same coins may be worth $10,000-12,000 or even more in some cases.

If you own stocks, you are probably well aware of the fact that the drops in the market since early September have basically eroded all stock profits achieved in the last five years. While the coin market has, so far, held its value far better than I would have expected, it is certainly a possibility that today’s $10,000 coin could certainly drop to $6,000 in a fairly short period of time. By studying the past history of specific subsections of the market, the value- conscious collector should have a clearer idea of potential downside.

There are actually a number of rare date gold coins that are worth the same today as they were in 2002-2003. Examples include very high grade Charlotte and Dahlonega issues (in this case MS63 and above), many San Francisco issues from the 1850’s, 1860’s and 1870’s and even a number of New Orleans gold coins. The reasons for this range from the market being damaged by too many overgraded coins in holders (in the case of Charlotte and Dahlonega pieces) to collector indifference (in the case of the San Francisco coinage) to poor reporting of prices by Trends and CDN (in the case of New Orleans issues).

Just because a coin was worth $5,000 in 2003 and it is worth the same today does not mean that it offers the “best” value to a buyer in 2009. But, it is interesting to ponder if coins such as this might have less downside than areas of the market that have shot up considerably.

Which brings us to the third and final point to consider in our Valuequest 2009. Liquidity is likely to be a huge factor in the coin market in the coming year(s). This is probably no time to be “cute” when it comes to your coin purchases. My guess is that coins that had limited appeal and liquidity issues in the good market of 2003-2008 might have virtually no appeal and liquidity in the potentially-not-so-good market of 2009 and beyond. In other words, key dates may drop in price somewhat but they are still likely to have a lot of collector demand. And to use an analogy from the non-gold coin market, series such as Three Cent Nickels, Shield Nickels and Liberty Nickels have and will probably always be also-rans because they are just not especially interesting in the opinion of most collectors.

So, in summary, I believe that three of the key elements that will drive the market in 2009 are originality, current price levels versus pre-bull market prices and liquidity/popularity. These were obviously key elements in years past but with the market euphoria of the past not likely to be seen for awhile, I think they will be more important than ever.

Baltimore Show Report

I went to this the November 2008 Baltimore show with limited expectations. Having spoken with a number of dealers whose opinions I respect, I knew the buzz wasn’t exactly encouraging. I would say that my overall impression of the show was that it was a little better than I expected but had I gone with normal expectations I would have returned disappointed. You can’t fault Whitman for anything that went wrong as the show was very well run (as usual). But collector attendance was unquestionably lower than what I would have expected for the last major show of the year and many familiar faces were either absent or were speed-walking through the aisles trying not to be tempted by the coins in the cases.

What was most noticeable at the show was dealer uncertainty and a clear dichotomy in market savvy. While most dealers did want to purchase coins, they were extremely cautious with their purchases. If a coin was fairly priced, something out of the ordinary or appeared on a valid want list, it probably sold. If it was priced at summer levels, not especially attractive or rare and not terribly desirable, it might have been used as a Numismatic Frisbee.

I mentioned a “dichotomy” among dealers. What exactly does this mean? There are a number of dealers (currently around 20-30%) who understand that the economy is lousy and that coins are harder to sell and have adjusted their prices accordingly. But there are still many dealers who appear to be in denial and are either not willing to sell old inventory at lower prices (and take losses) or are pricing new coins based on what a comparable piece might have brought at auction earlier this year. These dealers will either learn the hard, cold realities of a new market or they will be supersizing your value meal by the spring.

How much is the market down since the heady days of late spring 2008? I’d say in many cases between 20% and 30% and in some cases a bit more. But not all coins are down. In fact, I think there are areas of the market that are just fine. As an example, I would be happy to purchase as many nice EF40 to AU50 No Motto New Orleans half eagles and eagles as I could find at levels comparable to what I was paying four or five months ago; as long as the coins are choice, attractive and dates that I consider to be desirable.

Clearly, the real test of the market is going to be the 2009 FUN show. It looks like a potential perfect storm where there are going to be a bazillion coins for sale at the various auctions, numerous cash flow issues with dealers, a clearly Recessionary economy, a new Presidential administration and a clear schism between those dealers who “get it” and those that do not.

My November Baltimore show was, as I mentioned above, not really all that bad. I was able to purchase some really exceptional coins, all of which are already posted on my website (www.raregoldcoins.com). My wholesale sales were lower than usual for a Baltimore show but I did sell three mid-five figure coins and have strong interest from dealers in two other relatively expensive pieces. I should also point out that I was extremely selective with which dealers I showed coins to as there are certain firms whose checks seem potentially bouncy to me and the last thing I want to do over the Thanksgiving week is explain to my banker why so-and-so’s check was returned for insufficient funds.

As I was flying back from the show, I read the New York Times. It’s probably a real sign of the times that we live in that instead of turning right to the sports section, I read the business section first. One story, in particular, made my neck hair stand-up: a report that the stock market is experiencing its worst year since 1931. Most blue chip stocks are down 40% and many have lost 60%, 70% or even 80% in value. This really makes me believe that collectors who have a little discretionary cash right now might do a whole lot worse than considering buying a few nifty coins. My guess is that the really neat stuff is going to remain hard to find and it won’t be a whole lot cheaper than it was a few months ago but the level of competition among buyers has certain dropped, creating an excellent opportunity.

Hopefully you have had a chance to check out all the new features of my improved new website. I would greatly appreciate your feedback and am always looking for ways to make your web experience with DWN more pleasant and user-friendly.

Have an excellent Thanksgiving holiday!

The New PCGS "Genuine" Holder and my Feelings on Damaged Coins

PCGS recently announced that they plan to begin encapsulating coins that would have formerly been “body bagged” in the past for reasons such as damage, cleaning, and artificial toning. How does this affect the day-to-day operations of my firm and inventory and what are my personal feelings about such coins? The new PCGS “genuine” holders will have zero impact on DWN. My orientation has always been towards choice, problem-free coins and it is highly unlikely that I will be selling coins in “genuine” holders or even recommending them to my clients. If any of my submissions to PCGS wind-up in such holders (and hopefully this will not occur very often!) such coins will either be consigned to auctions, wholesaled to other dealers or, in the case where I think PCGS was wrong, resubmitted.

How do I feel about PCGS deciding to offer this service to their customers? I am assuming they made this decision because of considerable feedback from collectors (and dealers) who felt that a genuine-only holder was important, especially given the success of such a product at NGC. My feelings about the holders are mixed. I feel that they slightly dilute the PCGS brand in terms of non-problem coins but I think they offer collectors a degree of safety regarding the authenticity of rare issues.

Will the PCGS genuine holders have an impact on the market? I believe that they will. Some of this impact will be good and some, I think, will be not so good.

The positive impact that the genuine holders will make is that they will help to quantify value on problem coins. Problem coins are exceedingly hard to ascribe value to and by having slabbed problem coins trade more regularly, collectors will get a better idea of what they are worth. As an example, if three 1795 half dollars in “genuine only” holders trade at auction for $3,500, $3,850 and $3,350 a collector can get a pretty good idea of the value range of a similar coin. The bad news here is that no-grade coins are not as readily quantifiable as problem-free coins. If a coin is no-graded because of “scratches” how do you value it versus the same coin that is no-graded because of a harsh cleaning?

The negative impact that the genuine holders will have on the market is that they will encourage collectors to think like bargain shoppers. I would look at a damaged 1795 half dollar as the “Wal-Mart” version of this issue. In other words, a collector will be attracted to such a coin because it is a cheap version of a non-damaged 1795. As I will explain a bit further into this blog, I am a big advocate of original coins and I think collectors are doing themselves a disservice if they buy a $3,850 scratched 1795 bust half dollar because it seems “cheap” in comparison to the same coin without scratches.

One unintended consequence of the genuine holder is that it will spawn a new class of “crackout” dealer: the person who sees a lightly scratched or mildly cleaned coin in a genuine holder and feels that it is actually no worse than a regular quality piece in a PCGS (or NGC) holder. I already know dealers who have had some big hits cracking coins out of NCS “cleaned” or “damaged” holders and getting them into regular NGC (or PCGS) holders. I have no doubt that this will happen with the PCGS genuine holders.

As I mentioned above, I do not personally like damaged coins and I try to stay away from them unless it is an issue that is so incredibly rare that I basically have no other choice. An example of this might be an extremely rare Colonial coin variety of which there are just three known. Am I going to pass on an example because it is on a pitted planchet or it has scratches or because it’s been harshly cleaned? Of course not. But for every instance like this, I can think of a dozen reasons why I would pass on the aforementioned 1795 half dollar with scratches at $3,850.

So what are some of the reasons that I dislike damaged coins? First and foremost, they tend to be ugly. Once I see a big scratch on a coin, I see it magnified every time I view it. Secondly, coins like this are hard to sell. If you don’t believe me, assemble a collection of PCGS (or NGC) genuine slab coins and take them to a coin show. My guess is that they aren’t going to generate much interest. Thirdly, they are the antithesis of what collecting is about, at least to me. I buy specific coins because they are rare, attractive and high quality; not because they are unattractive but a good deal relative to undamaged coins.

To me, the bottom line about collecting is this: if you are pursuing a series that is beyond your budget and you have to cut corners to participate than its time for a reality check. Look, there’s nothing wrong with owning up to the fact that you’ll never be able to afford a nice 1794 dollar. But I would contend that the $75,000++ it will take to purchase a problem-riddled example of one could be much, much better spent on choice, original coins; either within the Bust Dollar series or in another series where the key issues are within your budgetary restrictions.

I touched on one thing earlier in this blog that I do think is important about the PCGS genuine slab. The no-grade market right now is sort of like the Moroccan Bazaar of numismatics. A coin like a cleaned 1916-D dime with VF detail might or might not be genuine. The PCGS genuine holder will, at the very least, separate the real examples from the plentiful fakes and this is good for the collector (or dealer) who is unable to distinguish between the two.

The Liberty Cap Collection of Early U. S. Coins

Douglas Winter Numismatics is proud to announce that we have been chosen to sell yet another high quality collection of United States coins. This assemblage, formed by an astute specialist in Texas, is known as the Liberty Cap Collection of early United States coins. It features exactly twenty different coins (plus one early American medal) ranging in value from a few hundred dollars to over $50,000. The collection is being imaged and cataloged by DWN and is expected to be posted on the www.raregoldcoins.com website around November 18, 2008. The collection is known as the Liberty Cap Collection because of the fact that a number of the coins have designs that feature a prominent Liberty Cap. Examples of coins in this collection with a prominent Liberty Cap design include a rare 1783 Libertas Americana medal in Copper (Betts-615) graded MS62 by NGC, an 1836 Pattern Gold Dollar (Judd-67) graded PR66 Ultra Cameo and an extensive date run of branch mint Classic Head quarter eagles and half eagles.

There are many highlights in this collection but I’d like to focus on three that I think are especially worthy of attention. Please note that full descriptions and images of each will be available on my website within a few days.

1838-C Half Eagle, Graded MS60 by NGC. The 1838-C is the most historically significant half eagle from the Charlotte mint. It is the only Classic Head design for this denomination and it is the very first half eagle produced in Charlotte. It is not really a rarity from the standpoint of total known but it is very rare in the higher AU grades and excessively rare in Uncirculated. Only two or three are known in Uncirculated. The finest is the superb PCGS/NGC MS63 example formerly in the Bass collection and now owned by the Pogue family. The second finest known was the NGC MS62 coin formerly owned by Paul Dingler but this coin was improperly cleaned and is no longer in a Mint State holder. This leaves two 1838-C half eagles in Uncirculated holders: an NGC MS61 that I have never seen in person and the NGC MS60 in the Liberty Cap collection.

In addition to this impressive rarity, the collection also contains a choice, original NGC MS62 example of the rare but slightly less well-known one-year type: the 1839-C half eagle.

1824/1 Quarter Eagle, Graded MS62 by PCGS. The Capped Head Left quarter eagle type was made from just 1821 to 1827. Only five single issues are known and each is very scarce. The 1824/1 is among the rarest of these with an estimated 60-70 known from the original mintage of 2,600. In fact, PCGS has only recorded twenty-one in all grades including a single example in MS61 and just three better. The finest known business strike is a single MS64 at PCGS and it is unlikely that more than ten or so exist in the various Uncirculated grades. The coin in this collection is probably within the tail end of the Condition Census and it is one of the best that I have seen with excellent color, surfaces and luster.

I have long been an advocate of the early quarter eagles as I think they represent exceptional value in the arena of early United States gold coinage. The owner of the Liberty Cap collection agreed with me and purchased some exceptional pieces in his years of collecting. Also included in the collection (and available for sale) are an 1831 in NGC MS60, an 1832 in NGC AU58 and a choice NGC AU58 1833.

There aren’t many silver coins in this collection (just one that is being sold at the present time) but it’s a doozy: a lovely 1836 Gobrecht Dollar in PCGS PR63.

1836 Gobrecht Dollar Original, Graded PR63 by PCGS. The lovely and enigmatic Gobrecht dollar has been a favorite with collectors for over a century and with good reason. The design is among the most attractive ever created on a United States coin (especially the famous starless obverse of 1836) and the limited number of coins struck has always ensured a strong demand.

After many years of speculation, research has shown just which Gobrecht dollars were made as originals in 1836 and which were restruck. In my opinion, this has made the 400 Originals produced in late 1836 the most desirable of the Gobrecht dollars.

These Originals are easily detectable by the alignment of the dies (the head of Liberty is aligned opposite the O in DOLLAR) and the lack of a die scratch above the top wing on the reverse.

In my experience, Proof 1836 Gobrecht Dollars generally come one of two ways: either dipped-out and Impaired or well-preserved but with funky and/or unappealing coloration. The coin in the Liberty Cap Collection is remarkable in that it is exactly how you’d want a PR63 Gobrecht Dollar to look: fully reflective, attractively (and originally) toned and free of significant numismatic or non-numismatic impairments. The collector who assembled the Liberty Cap collection was extremely picky and particular when it came to acquiring a Gobrecht Dollar and his patience paid off when it came to this lovely piece.

If you’d like more information on the coins in the Liberty Cap Collection, please feel free to call me before the collection is posted on my website around November 18, 2008. I can be reached at (214) 675-9897.