Coins That I Never See With Good Eye Appeal Part Two: Quarter Eagles

In the first installment of this multi-part feature, I discussed some of the gold dollar issues that are rarely seen with good overall eye appeal. In this, the second part, I am going to look at quarter eagles that do not generally come with good eye appeal. Note that I said "good eye appeal." This doesn't mean that I'm focusing on the rarest dates in the series. Obviously, issues like the 1841 and the 1854-S are very rare in all grades and rarer still with good eye appeal. But that's not my emphasis here. Rather, I am interested in coins that while scarce or even rare based on their overall availability, are especially rare with choice, original surfaces.

As a rule, most pre-Classic Head quarter eagles are scarce to rare in all grades and harder still to find with good eye appeal. One issue that comes to mind as a coin that is just about never seen with good eye appeal is the 1796 With Stars. As you would suppose from a coin with just 432 struck, it is a rarity in all grades. But what most people do not realize is that nearly all survivors are either unoriginal and unappealing or they show multiple planchet imperfections as on many other of the gold issues produced during this year.

The last nice 1796 With Stars to be offered for sale was Stack's-Bowers 2011 ANA: 7593, graded MS63* by NGC, that sold for $287,500. It was earlier sold as Lot 1791 in the Stack's 5/99 auction and was part of the fabulous specialized collection of 1796 coinage assembled by John Whitney Walter. But the best 1796 With Stars of them all is the incredible Gem (NGC MS65) from the Byron Reed collection that was later sold for $1,006,250 in the Heritage 1/08 auction.

Other early date quarter eagles that I believe are very hard to find with good eye appeal include the 1797 and both varieties of 1806 (1806/4 and 1806/5).

The Classic Head quarter eagle that is hardest to find with good eye appeal is a date that will surprise you: the 1839. While not a really rare coin in terms of its overall number known, this issue is rare in properly graded About Uncirculated and very rare in Uncirculated. I have only seen three or four that I would call Uncirculated and none finer than MS62. The single best 1839 quarter eagle that I have seen was Bass II: 309, graded MS62 by PCGS, that sold for a reasonable $10,925.

In the long-lived Liberty Head quarter eagle series, there are numerous individual dates that are hard to find with good eye appeal. To make it a bit easier to analyze them, I'm going to break down the series into a mint-by-mint list.

There are many Philadelphia quarter eagles of this type that are hard to find with good eye appeal. The one that comes to mind as perhaps the most difficult is the 1842. With a mintage of just 2,823, you would expect this coin to have a strong degree of overall rarity. But it is far rarer in higher grades than most collectors realize. I can't recall having seen more than four or five in any grade that I thought were above-average quality and the finest of these, by a mile, is the Superior 9/99: 1863 coin, graded MS62 by PCGS, that I purchased out of this sale for $31,050. A few years later I handled this coin again and sold it to a Midwestern collector who still has it in his world-class set of quarter eagles.

Other dates from this mint that are very hard to find with good eye appeal include the 1844, 1848, 1864, 1865, 1869 and 1870.

There are a few Charlotte quarter eagles that stand out as being especially hard to locate with good eye appeal. In my experience, the ones that are the hardest to locate are due to being poorly made. These include the 1842-C (a date that is actually not poorly made but is, rather, generally seen well worn), 1844-C, 1846-C, 1852-C and 1856-C.

The 1842-C is one of my favorite Charlotte quarter eagles. It is reasonably well made but its lack of eye appeal tends to be as a result of the fact that it was an issue that was used extensively and not saved. There are two or three known in Uncirculated (the finest is the amazing Elrod MS65 coin that was last sold by Heritage in the 2/99 sale) and a small number in properly graded AU55 to AU58.

The other dates on this list are rare with good eye appeal because they were not well made. As an example, the 1856-C is nearly always seen on poor quality planchets and with grainy, unappealing surfaces. The 1846-C is another date in which is invariably the case although there are a few more decent-looking examples around than for the 1856-C.

Eye appeal is not as much of a problem with the quarter eagles from New Orleans is it is with the other branch mints. That said, there are still a few issues that are hard to locate with good appeal. One that comes to mind is the 1856-O.

This is a peculiar date. It is not rare from an absolute standpoint as there are as many as 200-300 known. For some reason, this issue is extremely hard to find with original color and surfaces and even a nice AU55 to AU58 is very hard to find. In Uncirculated, this date is extremely rare. There are at most four to five known and none are better than MS62. It has been years since an Uncirculated example has been available.

Other New Orleans quarter eagles that are hard to find with good eye appeal include the 1842-O, 1845-O and 1846-O.

There are a number of Dahlonega quarter eagles that are hard to find with good eye appeal. I would have to say, though, that one date is notorious for lacking eye appeal. In fact, this date is so rare with "eye appeal" that I'm not certain that a good-looking example exists. This date is the infamous 1865-D.

Only 874 examples were produced, making the 1856-D the only issue of any denomination from this mint with a mintage lower than 1,000. Due to improper preparation of this dies (and possibly the planchets as well) every known example of this date has an appearance that could be called--charitably--"odd." The strike is weak and blurry and the surfaces are often rough and full of raised defects. This makes the 1856-D an extremely hard issue to grade and a hard one for the non-specialist to appreciate.

Other Dahlonega quarter eagles that are very hard to locate with good eye appeal include the 1840-D, 1842-D, 1854-D, 1855-D and 1859-D.

The final mint that produced quarter eagles was San Francisco. The issues from this facility tend to be well made but there are a few that, for various reasons, are hard to locate with good eye appeal.

In my experience, the San Francisco quarter eagles that are hardest to locate with good eye appeal are the Civil War issues, especially the 1862-S and the 1863-S. There are a few plausible reasons for this. To begin with, they are low mintage coins. As with all gold coins of this era, they were melted in large quantities. And because of the fact that no quarter eagles were struck in San Francisco during 1864, the 1862-S and 1863-S seem to have circulated a little harder and a little longer than other dates of this era. Both of these dates are seldom found above AU55 and even when seen in comparatively high grades, the tend to exhibit bright, abraded surfaces. Choice, original pieces are rare.

Some of the other San Francisco quarter eagles that are not often seen with good eye appeal include the 1859-S, 1860-S and 1866-S.

There are dozens of date in the quarter eagle denomination that are hard to locate with good eye appeal. Not all of these are expensive and a few, the 1839 as an example, can be found in presentable grades for around $1,500.

For more information on quarter eagles with or without good eye appeal, please feel free to contact Doug Winter via email at dwn@ont.com.

When Is Deep Cameo/Ultra Cameo Proof Gold Worth a Premium?

Having recently handled a considerable number of impressive Proof gold coins, I've been thinking about when a specific coin is worth a premium because of is status as a Deep Cameo (PCGS' modifier) or Ultra Cameo (NGC's modifier). After a brief explanation of these terms, I'd like to use a few examples of the coins I've sold to illustrate scenarios in which I feel a premium is merited. Proof gold coins are struck specially for collectors in very limited numbers. They are made with care using specially prepared planchets and typically struck with multiple blows of the dies. One of the features of most pre-1900 American gold coins in Proof is that they show cameo-like contrast between the devices (which are frosted) and the fields (which are watery and reflective). Collectors appreciate this appearance; as well they should, as a gold coin with deep, strong cameo contrast can have wonderful eye appeal.

The question most collectors ask about cameo proof gold coins is when are such pieces worth a price premium.

Given the fact that most pre-1900 proof gold coins have very low mintage figures, we can assume that nearly every piece is going to show some degree of cameo. But there are a few coins for each year that have extreme cameo contrast. We can assume that these are either the very first pieces produced or they were coins that were made with extra care for their visual appeal.

Let's look at a proof gold coin with an original mintage figure of 30 coins as an example. The typical survival rate for a proof gold coin struck between 1860 and 1880 is around 50% (for large denominations such as eagles and double eagles this figure is probably more like 25-33%). Given this figure, let's say that fifteen or so are known.

Of these fifteen, there are probably at least a few that are either impaired or they have been cleaned and/or processed to the point that they do not have an original appearance. So let's say the number of pertinent coins is around ten. There might be seven or eight that have been graded by PCGS and/or NGC and given the designation "cameo." Then let's say that the other two or three coins have been designated as "ultra cameo" or "deep cameo." How much more are these coins worth?

In my opinion, if these coins have great eye appeal and are not overgraded, they are probably worth a 10-20% premium over a regular cameo example. This is making the assumption that they are significantly rarer than their regular cameo counterparts. In the case or large denominations, where eye appeal is so critical, this premium might even be a bit higher.

I'd like to use two specific coins to illustrate my theory about ultra cameo/deep cameo premiums. These are a pair of gold dollars that I recently sold.

The first coin is an 1862 gold dollar graded PR66 Deep Cameo by PCGS and awarded a sticker by CAC.

This Civil War issue has an original mintage figure of 35 coins of which slightly fewer than half survive. In my experience, the mint did an excellent job of producing proof gold coins in 1862 and the overall quality of most of the gold dollars I've seen has been above average. In other words, Proofs of this year are supposed to come with good contrast and there should be no premium whatsoever for a coin that is a regular cameo.

But if you take even a casual look at this specific coin, you'll see that it has incredible eye appeal. The appearance is "black and white" with the type of contrast that can literally be seen across the room. I felt that this was one of the best looking Proof gold dollars that I had ever viewed and this was a reason that I purchased the coin at the 2012 FUN show.

As I was figuring a value for this coin, I had to decide on what sort of a premium its beauty would compel me to pay. I certainly wouldn't have paid a 50% premium (although in certain silver series, a premium of this sort isn't uncommon) but I felt a 10-20% premium was certainly in keeping with its stunning appearance.

This was an instance where I wasn't so much paying a premium for an ultra cameo coin's rarity (there are a few other 1862 gold dollars known with a deep cameo/ultra cameo appearance) as I was for its beauty. What was even more appealing to me was the fact that this coin has a "natural" deep cameo appearance.

You almost never seen proof gold coins anymore with the old-time, deep, hazy look that you used to see when collections like Norweb, Pittman, Eliasberg or Childs were sold. In fact, I would venture to say that most collectors and dealers who have entered the hobby after 1990 have seen virtually no truly original Proof gold coins (a welcome exception to this was the amazing Henry Miller collection of Proof gold that Heritage sold at their FUN auction in January 2011. While not every coin in this group was original, some were just amazing and it was refreshing to see Proof gold coins that looked like this after so many years of character-free pieces being offered...).

What's even harder to find these days are "old time gem" proof gold coins that aren't so hazy or richly colored that they don't show deep cameo contrast. That's why a coin like this 1862 dollar is special, in my opinion, and it merits a strong premium. It was original yet it was commercially viable for those collectors who don't "get" originality.

The next coin I'd like to discuss is a PCGS PR65 Deep Cameo 1871 gold dollar also awarded approval by CAC. While this coin has a mintage which is close to the 1862 (a total of 30 versus 35 for the 1862) it is rarer due to the fact that it appears that a portion were melted after they went unsold in 1871. It is possible that as few as eight to ten are known and this is actually one of the single rarest Type Three dollars in proof.

One interesting fact about this date is that it is not a year that tends to come as well made as the 1862. In 1871, the amount of contrast wasn't as great and many survivors in all gold denominations show lintmarks or slight planchet irregularities. It is also a date that, as a Proof, tends to be a little rarer than the 1862 in higher grades. I believe that this 1871 is the second finest known, trailing just a single PR68 at NGC.

This coin has nice cameo contrast although not as much so as on the 1862. In the case of this coin, I think its premium is predicated more on rarity than on extreme eye appeal. It is the only PCGS example in PR65 or better to have been designated as a Deep Cameo and this fact, I believe, gives it at least a 10-15% premium over a regular cameo example in the same grade.

In summary, I feel that the two reasons to ascribe a strong premium to any proof gold coin due to its status as a deep cameo/ultra cameo are either extreme eye appeal (or beauty) and extreme rarity (status as the only example of an issue with this designation or else the single highest graded with this designation). Obviously, the best scenario is a proof gold coin that is both extremely rare and extremely beautiful. In this case, the premium could be very high; maybe as much as 25-50%.

The 2012 FUN Show: Some Observations

I can count on one hand the number of coin shows that, after close to three decades in the business, I still enjoy. The FUN show is one of them. It is well run, well-attended, and even when the market is just so-so, it tends to be an excellent show for me. I'd like to share a few observations about the recently-concluded 2012 FUN show. Unlike the ANA show(s), what I like best about FUN is that it is concise and to the point. No pre-shows, no PNG day...the doors open on Wednesday and I stay crazy busy until I close up on Friday night. For someone like myself, who views coin shows as a work environment and not a place to schmooze, this makes me happy. I start working and then, typically, I say to myself: "I'm hungry." I look at the clock and its already 2:15; I've worked six+ hours straight without a break. I like that.

I found it hard to buy nice coins at the show but not more so than at other recent conventions I've attended. I look back at a show like FUN ten years ago and marvel at the great coins I would be offered for sale or stumble upon as I combed the bourse. As a dealer, I have to rely on good connections and lots of hard work to find one nice coin here and another there. I talked to a few dealers who told me it was one of the driest shows they have ever attended. I didn't find this to be the case. There were coins to buy, but they were hidden and you had to work like a numismatic banshee to find them.

I met a number of serious new or relatively new collectors at the show. Combined with the high number of new collectors that are contacting me through my website, I have the feeling that numismatics is gaining a lot of new advocates. After the economy went bad in 2008, the number of new collectors seemed to drop appreciably. Even though I don't think the economy is robust, I do see a lot of new interest in coins. That seems like a good thing to me...

Two types of coins that I actively make a market in but which seem to have suddenly all but disappeared are Dahlonega gold (especially nice EF45 to AU58 collector-quality quarter eagles and half eagles) and better date Liberty Head eagles. This isn't exactly a new observation; both areas are popular and have been hard to locate at shows for at least a few years. But at the FUN show I think I bought a whopping four or five Dahlonega coins (all of which are already sold, by the way) and maybe three Liberty Head eagles.

The Heritage sale was a highlight of the FUN show and the second Platinum Night, featuring gold coinage, was of particular interest to me. The session began with the sale of Dr. Steve Duckor's St. Gaudens double eagles. Steve is a good friend of mine and I was rooting for him to hit a home run. The results of the sale were probably just a bit disappointing for him, mainly due to one or two of the expensive coins which didn't do as well as expected. This isn't a reflection on the coins, which I thought were magnificent. It's more a reflection on the fact that the Saint market isn't that strong right now and the Magic Billionaire that Heritage had hoped would develop a sudden need for rare Gem Saints didn't materialize.

For me, the highlight of the sale was a date run of fat Head half eagles including a few issues (1819, 1821, 1828, 1828/7 and both varieties of the 1829) that come up for sale on average of once or twice a decade. The quality of these coins ranged from so-so to superb but prices were very, very strong. To me, this is a validation of a point that I've been making for years: these coins are extremely rare and they have been overlooked and undervalued in the past. I expect price guides to reflect significant increases in this series and deservedly so.

I personally had an excellent show. I made it back to Portland late in the afternoon on Saturday and by Sunday I had posted close to forty new purchases. In the last few days more than half of them have sold and this includes a few of the "big" coins like a PR66 1862 gold dollar and a PR65 1871 gold dollar. The market seems healthy right now and there is no doubt in my mind that good coins, in a variety of price ranges, are selling.

2011 Heat Index: What's Hot and What's Not

A popular feature of the www.raregoldcoins.com blog is the "what's hot and what's not" article that I write at the end of every year. As its the very end of what's been an interesting and active year, let's take a look at what was in demand in 2011 and what you, literally, couldn't give away. We'll look at a number of areas in the market and determine a "heat index" based on my personal experience in the 2011 coin market. 1. Gold Dollars. This was a mixed market area but overall it was fairly strong and in some cases it was very strong. The segments of the gold dollar market that were strongest were superb, one-of-a-kind Type One and Type Three issues (especially "wonder coins" graded MS68 and MS69) and very high quality Dahlonega issues (especially better dates such as the 1855-D, 1856-D, 1860-D and 1861-D). Areas that remained flat or trended downwards in 2011 include mid-level Uncirculated New Orleans pieces and San Francisco issues. The weakest segments of the gold dollar market included Gem common date Type Two issues and MS65 through MS67 common dates from the 1880's.

2. Quarter Eagles. Early quarter eagles were a strong area in the market. This was especially true for attractive, original coins in the EF40 to MS63 range that were priced at $50,000 and below. A few nice 1796 No Stars quarter eagles sold in 2011 and these generally saw prices that were higher than in the previous couple of years. Early quarter eagles priced at $100,000 and up remained hard to sell, unless they were either very rare or very nice or, ideally, a combination of the two.

The Liberty Head series saw mixed results in 2011. Nice circulated Dahlonega pieces were good sellers and even Charlotte coins, at least those in the $2,000-5,000 range, sold well if they possessed good eye appeal. The very high end of the market was strong. Ultra rare issues such as the 1841, 1854-S and 1863 all saw strong price increases in 2011. The surprise "trendy date" of the year was the 1864 which, in a short period of time, saw explosive price growth as collectors realized how rare it was.

Most quarter eagles dated 1870 and later remained hard to sell, even those with low mintages. There were a few exceptions (the low mintage 1875 became popular in 2011) but this seems like an area in the market that offers good growth potential for collectors with a budget of $1,000-5,000 per coin.

3. Three Dollars. After a rough patch of five or so years, the Three Dollar market showed more strength than I can remember. Buyers were fussy and coins that were not high end were hard to sell. The most popular dates included the 1854-D, 1855-S, 1861-1864 and the low mintage issues from the 1880's. Dates that were hard to sell included the 1854-O, 1865 and 1877. The rare Proof-only 1875 was a good seller while the not-as-rare Proof 1876 was harder to sell.

Prices on better dates in MS63 to MS65 have dropped to levels that make them prime for a promotion in the coming years. There are enough nice to very nice coins available (not factoring in common issues such as the 1854, 1874, 1878 and 1889) that I would not be surprised to see prices for nice coins rise.

4. Half Eagles. The market for early half eagles was very quality conscious in 2011. As an example, a common date early five such as an 1803/2 in AU55 to AU58 was worth 5-10% more if it were CAC-quality as opposed to the typical washed-out, unappealing example. The grade range that really began to see price separation due to quality was MS63 to MS64. There are early half eagles in MS63 holders that are hard to sell at $25,000; the exact same issue in the same grade with a CAC sticker and real eye appeal can be an easy sale at $30,000+.

The market for very rare early half eagles was hard to gauge in 2011 due to so few pieces trading. But in the Heritage 2012 FUN sale there is a superb date run of rare half eagles including an 1819, 1821, 1825/1, 1826, 1828, 1828/7 and both varieties of 1829. I expect these coins to bring record prices and the "heat" that they generate is likely to spread to the rare but more more obtainable dates of this era.

The Liberty Head half eagle market was generally good in 2011. The areas that were strongest include collector quality Dahlonega pieces, rare Civil War dates and high quality New Orleans issues. Areas that began to show some tentative strength included No Motto Philadelphia issues in AU and Mint State grades and rare but formerly unpopular low-mintage dates from the 1860's and 1870's. The market for Carson City half eagles in 2011 was mixed. There were not many nice coins on the market and the better dates that did sell only brought solid prices if they were very choice.

5. Eagles. While not everyone realizes this, eagles were probably the strongest denomination in the gold coin market in 2011. Nearly all areas were as stronger or stronger than in 2010 with the exception of early eagles (1795-1804) which remained off their market highs of a few years ago. But this statement needs to be clarified. Most of the early eagles that are offered for sale are very low end for the grade. Nice early eagles sell for 10-20% premiums over their low-end counterparts.

The Liberty Head eagle series came into its own in 2009 and since then, prices have been strong for choice examples of rare and low mintage dates. In my opinion, prices of rare, low mintages issues such as the 1863, 1864, 1865, 1872, 1873, 1876 and 1877 are still very low in comparison to less rare but more popular double eagles from this era.

The Carson City eagle market was similar to that described above for the half eagles. If a coin was choice and rare, it sold for a strong price. If it were just so-so, the price ranged from decent to slightly above average. But if a real "pig" was offered (and some of the CC eagles in holders are grossly overgraded) it might bring a distortingly low price. Collectors are urged to work closely with an informed specialist and to learn how to distinguish a choice, original piece from an overgraded low-end example.

6. Double Eagles. For the last five years, the Liberty Head double eagle market has seen an inexorable march upwards in price. In the second half of 2011, this area of the market seemed to weaken a bit, probably due as much to the steep rise in bullion prices as a natural correction.

The always-popular Type One market softened a bit but remained strong. CAC approved coins brought good premiums, especially for issues like the rarer New Orleans mint coins where eye appeal was a real concern. Premiums for rare shipwreck coins remained very strong in 2011. If an S.S. Central America, Brother Jonathan or S.S. Republic coin that had a population of just a few coins was available at auction it brought many multiples of a non-shipwreck coin's price.

The Type Two market was a bit stronger than in the last past few years. The market for common dates in MS62 through MS64 dropped rather significantly but scarcer dates (such as the 1868, 1869, 1870 and 1871) rose in AU and Uncirculated.

The bullion-related Type Three issues and the condition rarity market declined in 2011 but the market for truly rare issues (1881-1886 and 1891 Philadelphia) was strong.

7. Proof Gold. This was a strong area of the market in 2011 and part of the reason was a greater supply of choice coins than in recent memory. Strong prices were seen at the Heritage 2011 FUN sale where the Henry Miller collection, which contained dozens of superb rare date Proofs, brought very strong prices. Coins that were in demand include very low mintage issues and virtually all pre-1880 half eagles, eagles and, especially double eagles.

8. 20th Century Gold. The various 20th century series saw a mixed year in 2011. Common date generic issues saw significant shrinking in premiums over spot and in some series, coins were trading for tiny premiums.

A series that was stagnant in 2011 but which is primed for attention is the St. Gaudens double eagle. The upcoming sale of the Dr. Steve Duckor collection, to be sold by Heritage next week in their FUN auction, includes many very choice, very rare issues which are likely to bring record prices. This may not necessarily impact lower quality examples of these dates but it will clearly bring a lot of attention to a series that has been flat since the Morse Collection sale of 2005.

A series that seemed to be quietly attracting collector and investor attention in 2011 was the Indian Head eagle. I only handled a few interesting Indian Head eagles in 2011 but the coins I did own sold quickly and generally to smart dealers.

All in all, I look at 2011 as being a good year for the rare gold coin market. Not a great year but certainly a stronger one than 2009 or 2010. It was a year that rarity and originality became more in vogue. It was a year that soaring bullion prices were a big story during the first three-quarters. My firm DWN had an excellent year in 2011 and I am personally excited about the coming year and what it will bring.

Coins I Never See With Good Eye Appeal Part One: Gold Dollars

As I was viewing auctions lots for Heritage's 2012 FUN sale in Dallas the other day, I got to thinking about a topic that I think most gold coin collectors will find interesting: which issues are really hard to find with good eye appeal. I've decided to begin a multi-part study of this and the first featured series is gold dollars. Eye appeal is a combination of factors that makes a coin visually pleasing. These factors include strike, luster, color and surface preservation. For some collectors, original color is the key component; for others it is a sharp strike. But no matter which component is deemed most important, most sophisticated collectors will be able to agree if a coin has good overall eye appeal or not.

The concept of eye appeal doesn't necessarily go hand in hand with rarity. You can have a rare or very rare coin that, when available, tends to come with good overall eye appeal (an example of this would be an 1828 half eagle). Or, you can have a coin that is merely scarce but which, for a variety of factors, is seldom seen with good eye appeal (an example of this is a 1796 eagle).

Let's take a look at some of the gold dollars that, in my experience, are very difficult to find with good appeal.

In the Type One issues (produced from 1849 through 1854) there are a number of coins that are seldom seen with good eye appeal. The first that comes to mind is the 1852-D. Due to die clashing, this issue is frequently seen with multiple clashmarks that develop into a very "busy" area in the left obverse field. In addition to this phenomenon of strike, most 1852-D gold dollars have been cleaned or processed. I can't recall having owned more than a handful of 1852-D dollars that were cosmetically appealing.

Another Dahlonega issue that is very hard to locate with good eye appeal is the 1854-D. In the case of this issue it is not so much strike as it seems that nearly all known examples have been cleaned or dipped. I would be surprised if as many as ten nice examples were known and I have seen just a few in the last decade.

The Charlotte and New Orleans Type One gold dollars are easier to locate with good eye appeal than their counterparts from Dahlonega. The hardest Type One dollar to locate from Charlotte with good eye appeal is the 1850-C. While relatively well struck and well made, it seems that nearly every piece that I see offered either has inferior luster, "chewy" surfaces and poor color from having been recently cleaned or dipped.

The New Orleans Type One dollars tend to be well made and boldly detailed. Locating examples of virtually all the dates isn't a problem although finding a choice, orignal 1850-O with very good eye appeal can be somewhat of a challenge.

While issued only from 1854 to 1856, the Type Two issues tend to be hard to locate with good eye appeal. This is more true for the branch mint pieces than for the Philadelphia coins.

The 1855-D is the rarest Type Two gold dollar from a rarity standpoint but I have actually seen more nice 1855-D dollars in all grades than I have the 1855-C. The 1855-C is typically found with numerous planchet imperfections, poor strike and bright surfaces from dipping. In the Heritage sale, I saw a nice PCGS AU58 example (which was, in fact, sort of the impetus for the theme of this series of blogs...) and it got me to to thinking how long its been since I'd seen a nice, crisp, wholesome example. I'm not certain I have the exact answer but I do know that the 1855-C dollar in any grade with truly good eye appeal is a rare coin indeed.

The Philadelphia coins of the final type of this denomination (known to collectors as the Type Three) are generally seen with good eye appeal. There are a few issues, though, that can prove to be tricky to find as such.

The 1863 is an issue that was melted extensively. When found in circulated grades, survivors almost always seem to have poor eye appeal. There are a small number of really superb pieces known (around a half dozen Gems that grade MS65 to MS67) but these are off the market in tightly held collections.

While not as well known or as highly valued as the 1863, the 1865 is another issue that is not readily encountered with good eye appeal. As with many of the smaller denomination gold issues of this era, the 1865 typically comes either really nice or really wretched and coins that fall into the latter category seem to be what's available to collectors these days.

The 1875 is a date that most collectors believe is very rare and, from the standpoint of availability (or lack of it) I couldn't argue. But this is an issue that tends to have good eye appeal when it is available. Due to its low mintage figure of just 400 business strikes, all 1875 dollars are seen with prooflike surfaces. If an 1875 dollar hasn't been harshly cleaned or mishandled, it will have great eye appeal due to the depth of its reflectiveness and bold details.

The hardest Type Three issues to find with good eye appeal are, as one would expect, the coins from Charlotte and Dahlonega.

Only two Charlotte gold dollars were struck during this era (the 1857-C and the 1859-C) but both are hard to find with good eye appeal. This is especially true for the former as this is an issue that is typically seen with planchet waviness, roughness as made and really bad overall eye appeal. I recently sold an NGC AU58 with CAC approval to a collector and, as I told him, it was just about the only really attractive example of this issue that I could recall having seen.

Nearly all of the Type Three gold dollars from Dahlonega are hard to find with good eye appeal but I think the two that are the hardest are the 1857-D and the 1860-D. The former is hard to find due to a combination of quirky strike and hard commercial use. The latter is a much scarcer coin but it is almost always found softly struck and with poor, unnatural coloration.

The San Francisco Type Three issues are short-lived but do not lack for difficultly to locate with good eye appeal. I personally find the 1857-S and 1858-S to be the two hardest dates to find with good eye appeal. Both are typically found with a fair amount of wear and seldom show good color. I haven't seen or handled a nice Uncirculated example of either date in years.

Unlike other series, there are no impossible coins to find in the gold dollar denomination (not counting, of course, the excessively rare 1849-C Open Wreath), there are a number of specific issues that are extremely hard to find with good eye appeal. I'd say that the five toughest to find, in chronological order, are as follows:

-1850-D -1852-D -1854-D -1857-C -1860-D

The next article in this series will focus on Liberty Head quarter eagles. Pre-1834 and Classic Head issues will be covered in another article that focuses on early gold in all denominations.

Any questions about eye appeal and gold dollars? I can be reached via email at dwn@ont.com

Blanchard Sells a Brasher Doubloon for $7.4 Million

While skimming Yahoo yesterday, an interesting coin story caught my eye. And, for once, it didn't involve a coin dealer being shut down by the Feds or a firm being blasted for overcharging its clients. The story involved the sale of a unique variant of the legendary Brasher Doubloon which was just sold by the New Orleans firm of Blanchard and Company for just a shade under $7.4 million dollars. As far as I know, this is the single highest price ever paid for a single United States coin via private treaty and it becomes the second most expensive coin ever sold after the 1933 double eagle that realized $7.59 million at auction in July 2002. The buyer of the coin is currently anonymous but I remember reading that it was a "Wall Street investment firm."

I think this is a very important transaction for a host of reasons, some of which I will discuss here. Before I forget, I'd like to congratulate Blanchard on a fantastic sale and John Albanese in particular for putting together this deal.

In no order of importance, here are some thoughts about the transaction.

1. This sale shows that there is really exceptional strength at the very top of the market. There are not many million dollar coins currently available but I'm willing to bet there are two, three or even four buyers for every seven figure coin that is either available now or potentially available soon. This appears to be the case is nearly all collectibles fields right now. The very best has never been more in demand than it is now and it never has been less available.

2. I find it interesting that the buyer appears to have bought the coin solely as an investment and not as a collector. We have read about Wall Street being interested again in rare coins for a few years now. While the sale was not mentioned as being part of a Wall Street rare coin fund, perhaps it is time to put some more credence in the rumor-driven world of impending (or existing) coin funds.

3. I'm sort of surprised that the final price wasn't set with the thought to eclipse the 1933 double eagle. If you pay $7.4 million for a coin, why not "stretch" a bit and go up to $7.6 million so that you can state that you just set a world record for any coin? Seems like a no-brainer for all sorts of publicity.

4. A Brasher Doubloon is a very esoteric coin despite its fame and I'm pretty surprised that this was the coin that set a record and not something like a 1913 Nickel or an 1804 Dollar. Perhaps the reason that the Brasher sold was that it was the only "big" coin available at a point in time that the client who bought it was looking for a mega-rarity.

5. If this Brasher Doubloon is worth $7.4 million dollars, imagine what some of the other mega-rarities are now, in theory, worth. I have always felt that the single most valuable United States coin was the unique J-1776 MCMVII Indian Head pattern double eagle. My gut feeling was that this coin was worth around $15 million. Now, I think it might be worth $20 million or even more. And the finest known 1804 Class I silver dollar that is owned by the Pogue family? This suddenly seems like a $15+ million dollar coin.

6. As a dealer, I'm now pretty convinced that the theory of "buy a few great coins, price them for moon money and wait until the ultimate client comes along" makes a lot of sense if you have very deep pockets. Its worked twice this year for the dealer who sold the Brasher Doubloon to John Albanese. This same dealer had another seven-figure payday when he sold his 1794 dollar earlier this year. (He and another dealer had bought the Brasher together out of a Heritage sale a few years ago for around $3 million).

7. It will be interesting to see what if any impact this sale will have on Wall Street awareness regarding coins. Will the buyer use it to promote coins as an investment or will it be quietly out away? Will it be shopped for a quick sale or held for years? Will it be motivation to put together a great portfolio (or collection) of coins or viewed as just another item in a pool of investments?

Again, my congratulations to all parties involved in this historic sale.

The Art Basel Fair Versus The FUN Show: An Analysis

I recently returned from a week long trip to Miami where I attended the Art Basel art fair. I went primarily to look at art and to purchase some pieces for my collection but I also went to closely observe what has become the most significant art fair(s) in the world. For a person like myself, who attends many coin shows each year and who had never been to Art Basel, I found the contrast to be both educational and totally fascinating. I thought it would be interesting to compare and contrast the annual Art Basel show with the upcoming FUN convention that will also be held in Florida. For those of you who aren't familiar with Art Basel, I think a little background information is in order. This was the 11th annual edition of Art Basel in Miami and this show is a spin-off of the original fair that is held each year in Switzerland. The main Art Basel show was held in the Miami Beach convention center and it featured virtually all of the leading dealers in the world. I believe there were in the area of 400-500 dealers and I saw booths hailing not only the United States but from all over Europe, Latin America, South America and the Far East.

I could go on and on about comparing/contrasting Art Basel with the FUN show but I will keep the points to a manageable number and try to be as relevant as possible.

*Art Basel is a far more international fair than any coin show I have ever attended. The FUN show is not an especially international show and a better comparison is the NY International show which, ironically, is held at exactly the same time as FUN and which, therefore, is now impossible for me to attend. At various times at the fair, I felt like English was a second language. It was an interesting polyglot of Spanish, Italian, Portuguese, Chinese, Russian and more. The international scope of the attendees and the material at the fair was really, really exciting.

*Art Basel has thematic dealer exhibits; something that is not typically done at a coin show. Because of the theme(s), some dealers at Art Basel had very challenging exhibits (bananas in cars, scattered boulders on the floor, odd video, etc). This was a definite contrast to the FUN show which is more straight-forward.

*A table at the FUN show for the average dealer costs around $1,500-2,500. At Art Basel, I was told that for most dealers, a table was upwards of $50,000 and that some of the prime tables were $250,000 and up. When you combine this along with the cost of attending the show, crating and uncrating the art, setting up and breaking down the booth and countless other expenses, the cost for a dealer to attend Art Basel is staggering. Thus, prices were reflective of this (more about this in a minute...)

*At Art Basel, if you weren't Puffy Combs, an A-list collector or introduced/escorted by a well-known dealer, forget it. I was ignored for three days at the main fair. At the FUN show, the average collector isn't ignored and if he is lucky, he can interact with such luminaries as Q. David Bowers, Mark Salzberg and David Hall. At Art Basel, dealers like Larry Gagosian or Edward Acquavella wouldn't have thrown water on my if I was ablaze (unless I was about to set one of their works on fire; then they would have sent an assistant to douse me).

*The iPad is clearly changing the way collectors and dealers buy and sell art. I noticed that most booths no longer had exhibit catalogs but now used an iPad to show collectors images of artists whose art wasn't on the walls or of paintings they might have had in stock but which they didn't bring. On at least two occasions, I searched for quick information about a specific artist I liked but wasn't familiar with on my iPad. You are starting to see iPads at coin shows but they seem to be more the province of dealers than collectors.

*I paid careful attention to which artists were common at the show and which were not; just like I do at a coin show. I noted an abundance of Leger, Miro, Dubuffet and Picasso. These are artists whose works typically sell for high six figures to well into seven figures. They are the art world's equivalent of High Reliefs or Stellas: expensive, beautiful and with a sexy back story but ultimately common and typically available except in the highest grades.

*Art Basel is a show that celebrates dealers and the relationship between the dealer and the collector. There are no auctions taking place during the show and it is not like FUN that sometimes seems like a huge Heritage auction with the bourse floor thrown-in as an afterthought. Art dealers have strange, conflicted relationships with auction houses and for good reasons. Sotheby's and Christie's are not only openly competing for clients but they also have retail departments, trust and estate planning services, consultation services and offer financing. This situation is a bit different in the coin markets where dealers tend to be able to co-exist, more or less, with the two major auction firms.

*I was surprised at how out-in-the-open deals were at Art Basel. I expected deals to be done in secret areas of each booth or, more likely over dinner but I saw collectors openly writing checks.

*I was also surprised at how poorly marked most booths were at the fair. I didn't expect most paintings or sculptures to have clearly marked price tags but I was very surprised at how few pieces had name tags. I was able to identify some paintings I saw but others, especially those that were from new artists or foreign painters, were unidentifiable. And there were definitely times that I didn't want to ask...

*It was hard to tell how well the art was selling. For whatever reason, many of the A-level dealers appear to think it is tacky to stick a red-dot (equating something is sold) on a $5 million dollar painting. I can certainly see their point but the dealer in me was hoping to have a vicarious thrill or two see a $5 million dollar painting with a red dot next to it.

*One of the major differences between Art Basel and the FUN show was the level of enthusiasm exhibited by collectors at the former. At a coin show, buyers seem excited to be there but at Art Basel the adrenaline level was palpable. Maybe Picassos are just sexier than Dahlonega quarter eagles or maybe I've been to so many coin shows that it's become hard for me to be excited but the buzz at Basel, especially as the week wore on, was great.

*To me, probably the most impressive thing about Art Basel was how it literally changed the entire city of Miami for a week. There were tens of thousands of people at the show and they were not bashful about booking the best rooms in the best hotels, the best tables at the best restaurants and generally pouring money into the local economy. I don't know what the impact of the FUN show is on Orlando but the average person at Art Basel, independent of his or her art purchases, was a lot more lavish than at FUN (where I have seen collectors who spend $25,000 on a coin balk at spending $250 on a nice room).

In case you can't tell, I came away very impressed with Art Basel. It was well-attended, very entertaining (unbeatable people watching!), extremely well promoted and it seemed flawlessly run. The FUN show, in my opinion, is about as good as it gets in the numismatic world but it seemed like a bake sale compared to the fair!

Are Gem Type Two Gold Dollars Underpriced or Overpriced?

I recently bought and sold a coin that I hadn't handled in quite a few years: a Gem Type Two gold dollar. For those of us of a certain age, this is an exciting coin and one that got me to thinking: is this a type that is underpriced or overpriced? My thoughts on this subject follow. Back in the 1980's, my mentor in the rare coin business, Paul Nugget, told me an interesting story about Type Two gold dollars. He said that in the 1970's, Type Two gold dollars were essentially unknown in Gem Uncirculated and were very hard to locate even in what, today, would represent the MS63 to MS64 grade range. I have always found it curious that this once-rare type became so much more available in the ensuing years; a subplot to this story that I'll touch on in a moment.

For those of you who are wondering "what is a Type Two gold dollar," it is a short-lived design type of gold dollar that was introduced in 1854 and replaced in 1856. It features a small Indian Princess portrait on the obverse and it is a type that is notorious for strike-related problems such as clashmarks and weakness at the centers as a result of a flawed design that made it nearly impossible to fully strike up.

The two issues of this design that are seen most often are the 1854 and 1855 Philadelphia dollars. When people refer to "Type Two dollars" as a specific type coin, it is likely that they are speaking about one of these. Type Two dollars were also made, for one year only, in Dahlonega (1855-D), Charlotte (1855-C), New Orleans (1855-O) and San Francisco (1856-S). The branch mint issues are scarce to rare and remain very popular with collectors.

When collecting gold coins by type was in its heyday, the Type Two dollar was the single rarest and most expensive member of the twelve-piece type set. I can remember Type Two gold dollars in MS65 trading for over $50,000; in some cases as much as $55,000 to $60,000.

Today, the same coin is worth $30,000 at most (if the coin is really nice, in a PCGS holder and CAC approved) and more likely around $27,500.

What happened?

As far as I can tell, there were at least four things that occurred, all of which conspired to really hurt this market. The first is gradeflation. When Type Two gold dollars were worth $50,000+, they were superb coins. Today, I see many (if not most) Type Two gold dollars graded MS65 and I go "meh..." The coins range from not-so-nice to decent but very few are what I feel are Gems. This lessening of standards has clearly hurt the market for this type.

The second factor is a change in collector taste. In the 1980's and 1990's, many rare coin firms encouraged new collectors and investors to assemble twelve coin gold type sets. When these sets were in vogue, the Type Two dollar was the key issue. But these firms have stopped selling Gem U.S. gold for type sets and the whole concept has, for all intents and purposes, fallen off the map. When no one is collecting gold type sets, the demand for Gem Type Two gold dollars drops appreciably.

The third factor is an inversion of the classic supply and demand ratio for these coins. A decade ago, there were always people looking for Type Two gold dollars in Gem for their sets but very few coins around. Today, there are few people looking for them but a reasonably large supply. As I write this article, PCGS and NGC have combined to grade 149 Type Two gold dollars in MS65. Even factoring in resubmissions, it is still likely that as many as 90-110 Gem Type Two gold dollars have been graded, not to mention another 37 combined by PCGS and NGC in MS66. Clearly there are not 100 collectors who want Gem Type Two gold dollars.

(Interestingly, the level of demand for branch mint Type Two gold dollars has soared in the last decade. By virtue of being scarce, interesting and numismatically significant due to theit status as one-year types, coins like 1855-C and 1855-D dollars have risen in value--dramatically in the case of the latter--and are far more in demand than high grade examples from the Philadelphia mint).

I think there is one more factor that has hurt the value of this type: its small size. Let's face it, coin collectors are not getting any younger and the typical demographic of collectors who can afford a $30,000 Type Two gold dollar is over 55 and unable to see a coin this small without strong magnification.

Before closing, I'd like to address one point I raised earlier in this article. I mentioned that there is an aura of mystery around Gem Type Two gold dollars. How did a type that was virtually unknown in Gem thirty years ago become a coin that is featured for sale in every major auction these days? Part of it is certainly gradeflation but I think the answer is deeper than this. I don't know for certain but I think there is/was a hoard of high quality Type Two dollars that was quietly and brilliantly released into the market, a few at a time, for years. I don't know the specifics about it but how else can you explain a coin going from virtually unknown to nearly ubiquitous?

So what's my conclusion? Are Gem Type Two gold dollar undervalued or overvalued? Given the current state of the market, I'd have to pick overvalued. At $30,000 or so for a real Gem, they just don't seem like a good buy to me. At $15,000 for an MS65 I am certainly a buyer and maybe even at $20,000 for the right coin. But at $30,000 I'd rather have a nice, well struck 1855-D dollar in Choice AU or a properly graded MS63 1855-O dollar.

Some Thoughts on Proof Gold Survival Rates

As someone who handles a decent amount of rare and interesting Proof gold coinage, I've been thinking about survival rates. I'd like to share some thoughts about typical survival rates and why certain issues don't comply with the "basic laws." First, a little background. The United States mint struck proof gold coins as far back as the 1820's, but production became more established by the 1858-1860 era; which neatly coincides with the beginning of coin collecting as a hobby in this country. Production of most proofs remained small until the early to mid-1880's, when collectors and dealers became more interested and a decent-sized mania for Proofs began to take hold.

For most United States Proof gold coins, I believe that the following survival rates are pretty consistent:

*Pre-1870 gold issues, with exceptions, appear to have a survival rate of around one-third of the original mintage.

*Issues from around 1870 to around 1890, with exceptions, appear to have survival rates of around half of the original mintage.

*Issues from 1890 until the end of the Liberty Head design (1907) typically have survival rates that range from one half to two-thirds of the original mintage.

Let's now take a look at some of the factors that influence survival rates of Proof gold coins. Please note that these are not listed in order of importance.

1. Original Mintage Figures. This seems pretty obvious but it is an important factor that needs to be discussed. A gold issue with a low mintage (say 25-50 coins) tends to be rarer than an issues with a relatively high mintage (100 or more).

However, there are some notable exceptions to this rule.

There are some years that mintage figures are incorrect. An example of this is the 1861 gold dollar with a reported mintage of 349. This figure has never made sense to me and given the small number of survivors (two to three dozen) and the unlikely scenario that nearly all of the supposed "349" struck were melted.

The opposite situation exists with Proof Three Dollar gold pieces dated 1875 and 1876. These are Proof-only issues; i.e, they were made only in a Proof format with none made for business strike purposes. The reported mintage figures for these two dates are 20 and 45, respectively.

But there are probably more than 20 and 45 known of these dates. As an example, looking at the PCGS and NGC population data for the 1876 three dollar, we see that eighty examples have been graded. Even if we discount, say, 30 of these as resubmissions, this still means that 50 examples may have been graded.

It is my belief that both the 1875 and 1876 three dollar gold pieces were restruck, in order to fill a demand among collectors, either later in the year(s) or, perhaps, a year or two later.

2. The Size of the Coin. Small sized Proof gold (i.e., gold dollars and quarter eagles) tends to have a higher survival rare than larger sized coins.

The reasons for this are fairly obvious. The face value of a small gold coin means that it was more likely to survive the Depression era where a number of larger Proofs were spent or melted by collectors because of their high face value and low numismatic value.

3. The Era in Which it Was Struck. I mentioned above that proof gold from the 1890's was saved with greater regularity than those issues from the 1860's.

In the 1890's, coin collecting was a well-developed hobby. But in the 1860's, there were far fewer collectors. It is a known fact that many Proofs struck in the 1860's and 1870's went unsold to collectors and were later melted by the mint. Even if the number melted was not great (say five or ten coins) with issues that mintages of just 25-50 coins, this small number becomes significant.

As far as we know, proofs were still melted up to the early 1900's but not as often as with earlier issues.

4. Economic Issues I mentioned meltings during the Depression in the second bullet point above. This is an important factor, worth repeating.

As remarkable as it seems today, a Proof double eagle in the early 1930's had very little numismatic premium. For some collectors, it made more sense to spend a Proof double eagle from the 1880's then it did to try and sell them to a coin dealer or place them in an auction. Many higher denomination proofs (specifically eagles and double eagles) were lost in this fashion. Some were melted while others circulated so much that they are barely recognizable as Proofs today.

There are other issues that were produced during years in which the economy suffered. The Panic of 1893, while not as well known as the Depression, was a short-lived but highly significant downturn in the economy. It is likely that proof gold coins from 1892-1894 were unsold and melted due to collectors suddenly not being able to afford luxuries such as coins.

5. Contemporary Hoarding Not unlike with today's modern coins, dealers and collectors speculated with smaller denomination proof gold in the 1880's and early 1890's. If you look at mintages for gold dollars, they increased dramatically in the 1880's: from a low of 36 in 1880 to a high of 1,779 in 1889. This was due to significant demand from hoarders and speculators; a situation not all that much different than what we see in 2011 with the hoarding of the 25th anniversary ASE sets!

These issues that were hoarded tend to have higher survival rates than earlier issues, due to the fact that they went into numismatic channels.

How exactly does a collector determine the survival rate of a proof gold issue he is contemplating buying? I think the best way is to study auction appearances over the years. A close study will often reveal interesting anomalies. An example: I recently bought an 1870 gold dollar in PR65. I did a little research and realized that I had only handled one example in twenty+ years and not an especially nice one at that. A study of auction records showed that only a few Gems have ever been sold and nothing better than PR65. My sort-of-cool coin suddenly seemed very cool, not to mention exceedingly rare.