The RYK Retort: More on the 1892-CC Eagle

Editor’s note: The following reply was received by me this morning and it was written by well-known collector Robert Kanterman about the blog I published yesterday. It is unedited and, I think, an interesting insight into the mind of a sophisticated, well-focused collector. I was the lucky buyer, and I will address DW's points from the previous blog.

1. Underpriced? Perhaps a little bit, not too much — okay, I thought it was a screaming bargain! I would have been interested up to the $1200-1300 range. Maybe even $1500 if I really needed it for a date or type set.

As recently as a few months ago, the basal value of any old Liberty $10 was approaching $1000. Perhaps I am living in the past, but I still view $10 Libs as $1000 or so coins.

2. CC gold is extremely popular. More popular than ever. Just when I think that interest is starting to wane, it seems to gather more steam. Good luck trying to find me some CC $20's in OGHs.

3. I love OGHs, and I am not afraid to admit it. Graded years ago, under perhaps different standards, and untouched by human hands for 20+ years, what's not to love? Add to that the fact that many filthy gold coins from European hoards were slabbed in the OGH era (more below). I also believe that the green of the label and the gold of the coin complement one another in a way that even art enthusiasts like DW should appreciate.

A wise coin dealer friend told me earlier this year that the PCGS Reconsideration service marked the death knell of the OGH. I am not so sure. The OGH is dead. Long live the OGH!

4. DOGs (Dirty Original Gold coins) are The Bomb among serious collectors of 19th century circulated gold coin and other numismatic vagabonds. DWN has certainly educated collectors about originality, in his books, website, and in person, and made them popular, but RYK invented the "DOG" and used his big mouth (or noisy keyboard, anyway) to spread the gospel.

5. Liberty $10's are a great series, chock full of rarities and interesting dates. There are numerous logical ways to collect them that do not necessarily bust your coin budget (or require you to sell your home). There is also no question that David Hall's finest ever PCGS registry set and its well-publicized sale a few years back has raised the profile of these coins. Here's a confession — the first coin that I ever purchased from DWN was an 1849-O $10. The second coin was an 1883-CC $10. The last two were also Liberty $10's, both in OGHs. I really like Liberty $10's a lot.

And The Winner For Most Popular Coin Is....

I bought a ton of coins at the recent ANA. They ranged in price from under $1,000 to close to $100,000 and nearly all have been sold on my website in the two+ weeks since the end of the show. One coin garnered more attention than any other. It was ordered no less than eleven times (by different individuals) until I finally marked it "on hold." I would have never guessed, when I bought it, that this seemingly mundane coin would have become my Most Popular New Purchase for the 2013 ANA. And the winner for Mr. Popularity was (drumroll)......???

An 1892-CC eagle graded EF40 by PCGS (and approved by CAC) in an Old Green Label Holder.

Priced at a whopping $1,000, this coin connected with a wide range of people. It was ordered by two dealers and nine collectors running the gamut from beginners to seasoned vets.

What was it about this coin that made people go gaga?

I have a few theories. Let's explore them.

1. It Was Underpriced

As I mentioned in the description, by today's standards this coin grades more like AU50 to AU53 than EF40. This made it more likely to have a final value of $1,250 or so as opposed to the $1,000 it was listed for. At least eleven people spotted that this was a good deal, if not an actual bargain.

2. It Was An Affordable But Nice CC Gold Coin

If you don't have a huge budget but want to own a Carson City gold coin with a good overall appearance, you don't have a ton of choices. The typical CC double eagle now costs over $2,000 - and at the $1,000 price point any half eagle that's not dated 1891-CC tends to be kind of boring. I can't remember the last time I had an interesting CC eagle that was priced at $1,000.

3. The Lure of the OGH Is Strong...

Collectors love OGH PCGS coins and it isn't hard to understand why. The purist in me appreciates that a coin graded back in the late 1980's or early 1990's is going to look the same in another 20+ years as it does now. In other words, if PCGS had missed surface enhancement(s) on said 1892-CC eagle, the coin would have already turned in the holder. The fact that it was dark and dirty was a pretty sure sign that it was "as is" and wasn't going to turn.

4. Nice, Original Coins Are In Demand

This coin was dirty and original and coins with this sort of appearance are in demand. I'd like to think I had a little bit to do with this...

5. Liberty Head Eagles Are In Demand As Well.

As I've pointed out a number of times in the last few years, the Liberty Head eagle series has gone from mildly popular to very popular. This denomination will never be as popular as its big brother the double eagle but the number of people who dabble or specialize in this denomination has grown dramatically since 2008-2009. And an interesting Liberty Head eagle priced at a grand isn't easy to find.

I would have to guess that this perfect storm of desirability and appeal was what made this 1892-CC eagle so popular. To the collector whose email I received first and who is now the happy owner of Mr. Popularity...kudos. And to everyone else who tried and failed to buy the 1892-CC eagle...thanks and sorry. We will do another deal and soon, I hope!

The 1854-S Double Eagle: A Study

The 1854-S double eagle is one of the most interesting Liberty Head double eagles. It is widely acclaimed by collectors due to its status as the first double eagle from this mint, and the rarity of the quarter eagle and half eagle from this year makes it a famous coin as well. That said, it is an issue that is not well understood and one whose rarity profile has been made confusing by inconsistencies from NGC and PCGS.

The 1854-S has a high original mintage figure of 141,468 and one would expect it to be available in higher grades. This is not necessarily the case, despite what appears to be a decent number in Uncirculated as per the grading services’ current figures.

As of August 2013, NGC had graded a total of 48 in Uncirculated, including 23 in MS63 and another 10 in MS64. PCGS had graded a total of 55 in Uncirculated, including 17 in MS63 and another three in MS64. With a total of 103 graded in Uncirculated, we can conclude that the 1854-S is only a marginally scarce coin in higher grades and it seems more available in comparably high grades (i.e., MS63 and higher) than such contemporary non-shipwreck dates from this mint as the 1855-S, 1858-S and 1859-S.

However, this is not the case.

What the NGC and PCGS populations fail to address is the fact that virtually every Uncirculated 1854-S double eagle is a shipwreck coin. And what’s worse is that these are designated on the holder as being from a shipwreck - and both services seem wildly inconsistent with how this date is graded and why some blatantly “environmental damage” coins are in “normal” holders while others are not.

Essentially every high-grade 1854-S double eagle is from the S.S. Yankee Blade shipwreck which was found in 1977. This wreck contained approximately 200-300 coins. These were Uncirculated coins which must have been spectacular before the boat carrying them sank; the survivors tend to show very few marks but they have matte-like surfaces from exposure to seawater. Some examples have less etching in the surfaces than others; some are clearly salvaged and have oxidation as well as scratches from the process of removing crud from the surfaces.

What few collectors realize is that, as with the 1854-S eagle, the survival rate of high grade 1854-S double eagles with original surfaces is exceptionally low. I have seen exactly three with original surfaces which I grade Choice AU to Mint State by today’s standards. In comparison, I have probably owned 20 examples graded MS62 to MS64 but with “unoriginal” surfaces.

The choicest 1854-S double eagles I have seen with original surfaces include a PCGS 61 from the Bass collection (ex Bass III: 781 at $10,450; I later sold this coin to a collector on the East Coast), an NGC MS61 which I bought out of a Heritage sale around ten years ago (and can’t currently remember the exact pedigree), and a PCGS AU58 which I purchased from a New York dealer around four years ago and which was very choice for the grade. I believe that a few others are known but I can stately with reasonably strong conviction that none exist in grades higher than MS61.

There are certain diagnostics seen on the Yankee Blade coin which are not seen on the coins with original surfaces. Some of these are as follows:

1. The shipwreck coins always have an obverse die crack which runs up from a denticle at 6:00 on the obverse through the left side of the 5 in the date, terminating at the truncation.
2. The reverse has a total of three cracks. The first runs into the field (at the viewer’s left) from the base of the N in UNITED. The second crack begins between the denticles left of the first T in TWENTY up to the left tip of the letter. The third begins at the tip of the T in TWENTY and travels left into the field ending below the N in UNITED. On the late die state, these three cracks meet below the base of the right foot of the N in UNITED.
3. The shipwreck coins always show a broken crossbar in the A in STATES.

The original surface coins do not show these die cracks. They do have a similar mintmark, and all seem to have the broken crossbar. Interestingly, there are a number of small raised die dots on the obverse with two to the right of the 4 in the date, and three at the throat. There is also a small raised die dot on the neck.

I don’t believe that the original surface coins are from a different die pair than the seawater coins; just a different die state.

Breen lists four different die varieties for the 1854-S, but one of these is a Proof-only die (the unique coin in the Mint Collection) while another, described as having “extra thin numerals and letters,” is just a late state with lapped dies. He states that 8 pairs of dies were created and that the mintmark “usually…touches the tail; though on one it is free.” (He then states that on one it is “embedded.”). I have only seen one reverse and it always has a broken A in STATES and a mintmark which firmly touches the tail at its top.

There is, of course, another significant difference on the original surface coins and that is a different texture from a lack of exposure to seawater and sand.

Original surface 1854-S double eagles typically show a deep green-gold or orange-gold hue. The luster doesn’t tend to be as frosty as that seen on 1855-S or 1856-S double eagles. The overall look tends to be subdued with multiple abrasions from hard circulation.

There are two distinct looks for seawater 1854-S double eagles. The first is blatantly matte-like with heavy environmental damage; some of these are slabbed as “normal” coins by NGC and PCGS while others are “details only” or “genuine.” The more familiar look on the Yankee Blade coins is bright and slightly matte-like with rich yellow-gold color and a virtual absence of circulation marks on the surfaces.

The normal surface 1854-S double eagles should sell for a significant premium in all grades due to the scarcity. This date is seen from time to time in the EF40 to AU50 range, but it becomes very scarce in AU53 to AU55, and it is very rare in properly graded AU58. As I mentioned above, I have seen only three examples with original surfaces in Uncirculated and doubt if more than five or six exist.

For more information on Type One double eagles, I invite you to look through the blog and articles archive(s) on raregoldcoins.com or email me at dwn@ont.com with specific questions.

2013 ANA Show Report: 10 Observations

You know how I feel about show reports. They tend to be self-serving, inaccurate, biased as hell, and generally not very interesting. Which is why I stopped writing them a few years ago. But most readers of this blog want to know about my experiences at the ANA and my thoughts about the market so I’m going to do what I said I wouldn’t: I’m going to write about the 2013 ANA show but from a perspective that you might not have already heard before.

1. So how was the show?

The ANA summer show has been the Big Kahuna ever since I was a kid and although its impact has slightly waned over the years (for numerous reasons which I will discuss at another time) it’s such a significant show that if you are a dealer with even a reasonable amount of a clue on how to buy and sell coins, you are going to have decent results just on account of being there. On the Doug Winter Show Grading System (with 1 being a show cancelled by a nuclear accident and 10 being the show that a dude walks up to my table with a box of unopened 1873 Proof Sets) I would call the 2013 ANA a 7.5 to 8.0. I was very busy from the beginning to the end. I sold a ton and I bought some very cool numismatic items. More on this later in the blog.

2. Modern coins made huge inroads at the 2013 ANA show.

Chances are good that if you go to your local regional show, you will see moderns. But the ANA wasn’t a place I expected to see dealers like APMEX with the mack-daddy of all coin show tables. (If my hefty-sized table was Oklahoma, they were Texas…) The strong presence of modern and bullion-related dealers at this year’s show sends a clear message: more and more, the coin market is about alternatives to classic or vintage coins.

3. There seemed to be more foreign dealers at the show than usual.

I didn’t count the exact number of Brits, Brazilians, and Bolivians - but taking a stroll through the foreign/ancient section of the show was interesting and, for a coin show, downright cosmopolitan. For me, the ANA has an interesting social aspect. There are overseas dealers who I literally see once per year and my annual three minute "heyhowyadoin’" chat always occurs at the ANA.

4. The ANA remains an overwhelming logistics operation for a one or two-person operation.

I attended the pre-show (ANA Lite) and the regular ANA and committed to a full eight days and seven nights in the process. Even after deciding to blow-off the Stacks Bowers auctions due, frankly, to being overwhelmed, I still found it nearly impossible to accomplish even half of what I wanted to do at the show. I never made it to see the book dealers, missed the exhibits, and failed to talk to at least ten people I wanted to connect with. Being busy is a good thing (and on more than one day, I said to Jenna, “Hey, I’m hungry, let’s eat lunch!” only to look at my phone’s clock and see that it was already 1:47 in the afternoon) but being too busy can be kind of flustering.

5. What do you think about the location of the show, Doug?

I’m about as much of a city guy as anyone you know. I grew up in Manhattan, I vacation in big cities, and my house in Portland is in the heart of downtown. That said, I despise Rosemont and everything it represents. Would I ever spend a minute more in Rosemont than I had to? Of course not. But do I think it’s a good location for a convention? Yes, it’s actually a great location. Dead center of the country. Easy and cheap air access. Nice hotels within walking distance. A small but decent number of good dining options. (Although my Gibson’s overload factor went nearly off the charts this year. The seared crusted Ahi Tuna salad was a wonderful lunch but six days in a row?) If it were up to me, coin shows would be small, highly professional 100 dealer operations that lasted two days/nights at most, and were located in great cities like San Francisco, New York and Boston. But there aren’t so we make do with locations like Rosemont. For me it’s a true love/hate relationship, but when you realize analyze it, it makes sense.

6. Heartfelt congratulations to John Albanese for winning the Sol Kaplan award.

This is presented annually by PNG “for work in helping to fight fraud and thievery in numismatics.” John is one of the good guys in the coin business and he has done more for consumer protection and advocacy than nearly anyone I know. I’m happy to see him get some professional recognition from the PNG.

7. The coin show wasn’t all Rosemont/Gibson’s/Numismatics for me.

I took part of Saturday and most of Sunday off and stayed in downtown Chicago. The highlight of my trip was going to the Art Institute of Chicago. As you might know, I’m a bit of an Art Weenie and the AIC was on my shortlist of great American museums that I had yet to visit. It was worth the wait. It is spectacular and I highly recommend it. I mostly wanted to see this.

8. As you have no doubt read countless number of times in the past year(s), it is hard to buy nice coins now.

For a number of reasons, there are real issues with supply and this is across-the-board; whether you deal in Gem Proof gold or Conder Tokens, nice material is really in short supply. I actually was able to find some pretty neat coins at the show. (That surprised me.) I noticed a drop-off in coins around Wednesday afternoon and the reason for this was clear: PCGS was so slammed by submissions for walk-throughs that they shut off grading - and when I left the show on Friday, they still hadn’t returned coins. Had they done so, I would have had the appetite for more new purchases. And I’m sure so would have other dealers.

9.   In Observation #1 I mentioned that the ANA is the Big Kahuna of coin shows...

But for those of us old enough to remember back before, say, 2000, the ANA used to be a lot different. I can recall saving coins for three or four months to sell at the ANA. But that was before the internet made the coin market a 24/7 thing, and it was back when the only spring show of note was Central States, and the next show on the Coin Calendar was the Summer ANA. Back when people used to hold coins, you’d see some wild, wild stuff in dealers' cases. I remember how Dave Akers, Ed Milas, Paul Nugget, Mike Brownlee, and my other gold-coin-heroes would have crazy Territorials I had never seen before, insane early gold and groups of fresh branch mint coins (some of which I could actually buy for my fledgling business), and more. In 2013, the cupboard is pretty bare. Oh sure, I grooved on the Eric Newman silver coins. Legend’s 1894-S Dime was pretty neat, and the Proof 1921 Saint that a dealer friend of mine owns caught my attention. Ah, but for the Good ‘ol Days…

10. There were clear signs of what was hot and what wasn’t hot at the show.

The strongest areas included Carson City double eagles, Type One double eagles, virtually all interesting Liberty Head eagles, Dahlonega gold (I could have sold twenty half eagles had I found any for sale; where the heck are they?), and choice early gold with original color and surfaces.

To those of you who stopped by my table at the Throes in Rose(mont), thanks. And to everyone who has bought one or more of the new coins that I purchased at the show and listed on the website (www.raregoldcoins.com), double thanks.

12 Undervalued, Affordable 19th Century Liberty Head Gold Coins: Part I

It’s been a while since I’ve written a blog discussing specific undervalued, affordable gold coins. This is a topic which has proven popular in the past and, unless I’m mistaken, some of my suggested sleeper issues have grown dramatically in popularity—and price—in the last few years. Due to space limitations, I’m keeping this list down to a manageable number but it could easily be doubled—or even tripled—in size.

1. 1865 Gold Dollar

In the past, I have focused on various Civil War gold dollars, usually the 1863 which is the rarest of these issues. The 1863 has become well-known but the almost-as-rare 1865 remains an excellent value for the astute collector.

A total of 3,700 business strike examples were produced. This issue appears to have seen little circulation as it is almost never found in grades below MS60. As an example, PCGS has graded a total of 48 with 38 of these (over 79%) in Uncirculated grades. Interestingly, Uncirculated 1865 gold dollars are seen more often in Gem (MS65 and above) than in the lower grades (MS60 to MS62) and this suggests that a small hoard existed at one time.

The current Coin World Trends valuation for this date in AU55 is $900 and $1,100 in AU58. I’d contend that if you are able to find a PCGS or NGC AU55 or AU58 for anywhere near those kind of numbers, you have just stolen a coin and you can pat yourself on the back.

2. 1867 Gold Dollar

In 1867, the mintage of gold dollars “soared” to 5,200 business strikes. The 1867 is more available than the 1865 but not by much and it is less widely known or regarded.

The current population for this date at PCGS is just 64 coins in all grades with 46 of these (or 71.87%) grading MS60 and above. You can find the 1867 with more ease than the scarcer Civil War dates but what I like about this date is its current affordability. I have sold some nice higher end AU examples in the last year for around $1,000 and I have sold nice Uncirculated coins in the MS63 to MS64 range for $2,000-3,000.

This list is about “affordable” and, in my opinion, coins like the 1867 gold dollar check all the boxes: scarce in all grades, not terribly expensive even in higher grades, occasionally available and historically interesting.

3. 1844 Quarter Eagle

I’ve discussed this issue before so it’s not really a “secret date.” But the 1844 quarter eagle remains curiously undervalued. Of the 6,784 struck, there are under 100 known. PCGS has graded just 39 examples in all grades and this includes only three in Mint State.

So why is this date seemingly a permanently undervalued issue and why has it shown virtually no price appreciation in the past decade? I’d say the answer has a few components. Firstly, the 1844 quarter eagle doesn’t fit into any neat compartments. It doesn’t have a mintmark so it isn’t a branch mint coin. It doesn’t have any historical significance or anything else to give it a level of demand; let alone multiple levels of demand. What it does have going for it is its unquestionable value.

You can buy a very presentable AU 1844 quarter eagle for $2,000-3,000. The same coin with a C or D mintmark would easily be double the price. This fact, in and of itself, may be all the impetus this date needs to become better appreciated in the future.

4. 1846-D/D Quarter Eagle

I’m going to go out a limb here and add a variety to this list of undervalued 19th century gold coins. I know the reaction that some readers will have: “what, there aren’t enough overlooked regular issues? You have to get esoteric on us and add a variety? Seriously?”

The 1846-D/D quarter eagle is a well-established variety that has an important place within a very popular series. Although it is still not recognized by NGC or listed in the Redbook, it is well-known within the specialist community and recognized by PCGS. This has made it better-known than any of the other Dahlonega quarter eagles.

There are an estimated 40-50 pieces known with most in the EF40 to AU50 range. The 1846-D/D is not an inexpensive coin. You are looking at $4,000-6,000 for a nice AU, unless you are able to cherrypick an example. Put another way, the 1846-D/D is about as rare as the 1855-D quarter eagle from the standpoint of overall rarity but at a fraction of the price.

5. 1855-S Three Dollar Gold Piece

The 1855-S is an issue which should receive a lot more attention from non-specialists than it does. It is more of a Condition Rarity than nearly any issue in this group of undervalued issues and as many as 300-350 are known from the original mintage of 6,600 coins.

Here’s why I think the 1855-S is a good value and why it is underappreciated: like the 1854-D and 1854-O it is a first-year-of-issue within the three dollar series. But unlike these two issues, the 1855-S is not a “one and done” coin. In other words, the Dahlonega and New Orleans mints both made three dollar gold pieces for just a single year while the San Francisco mint made them again in 1856, 1857, 1860 and in (sort of…) 1870. Plus the two southern mint threes have the branch mint cachet which its Western counterpart lacks.

As I mentioned above, this is a very rare coin in higher grades. An accurately graded AU55 with good eye appeal is about as nice an example as you are going to find. Such a coin, if available would cost around $9,000-10,000. Back in the heyday of three dollar gold pieces (around 2005-2006) the same coin would have cost $13,000-15,000.

6. 1842 Large Letters Half Eagle

There are two varieties of half eagle dated 1842-P: the Small Letters and the Large Letters. Both are rare, both are undervalued and both probably deserve to be included in this list. But I’m going to go with the Large Letters which is rarer.

This is the fourth rarest Liberty Head double eagle from Philadelphia after the 1875, 1863 and 1865. There are around three dozen known including three in Uncirculated; the finest is a PCGS MS64.

Despite the unquestionable rarity of this issue, it is still very affordable. A nice quality EF 1842 Large Letters still can be found in the $2,000-2,500 range while an AU example would cost $4,000-5,000+. In my opinion, this is extremely good value in comparison to the branch mint issues of this era.

7. 1864 Half Eagle

It’s widely known that the Civil War half eagle from both Philadelphia and San Francisco are rare due to their low original mintages and their low survival rates. The 1864 is more available than the 1863 and 1865 but it is a scarce issue in its own right. There are an estimated 50-60 known from the original mintage of 4,170 business strikes. When seen, the typical 1864 half eagle is apt to grade in the EF40 to AU50 range.

I could have placed any one of at least ten other half eagles in this list of undervalued coins but I selected the 1864 due to its multiple levels of demand. Civil War gold coins have become very popular with collectors in the last few years and the 1864 half eagle is a relatively affordable issue in EF and even AU grades.

I sense the “affordable” aspect of this issue beginning to wane, though. As recently as a few years ago, it was possible to find a nice EF example for around $2,000-2,500 and an AU for a bit more than double this. Today, the collector will probably have to spend closer to $4,000-5,000 for a presentable 1864 but I still think this is reasonable for a coin with this degree of rarity and this much historic association.

Should You Buy Very Rare Coins in Low(er) Grades?

As recently as a few years ago, if you asked me "should I buy very rare United States gold coins in low(er) grades" I would have resoundingly answered "no!"  But, as with so many things in life, perspectives change and my answer to this question has as well.

A piece of advice I had often given new collectors is that you shouldn't buy gold coins that grade lower than EF40. That is still a cut-off grade for me and, for many issues, I still recommend sticking with EF and finer coins. But I now will sometimes buy certain very rare issues in grades as low as Good to Very Good. What exactly made me change my mind?

I came to a conclusion a few years ago that just because someone doesn't have a $5,000 or $10,000 per coin budget doesn't mean that they don't appreciate truly rare coins. Nor should they be shut out from the potential of buying a few coins, now and then, that can be genuinely tagged as "rare" or even "very rare." I'm a coin snob who is trying to become more inclusive, I guess...

A few coins that I recently sold on my website raregoldcoins.com illustrate this belief. In the past two months, I handled a pair of 1870-CC half eagles, graded Good 6; one encapsulated by PCGS and the other by NGC. These were coins that I probably wouldn't have bought a few years ago but the New Doug Winter bought them and was pleasantly surprised at how quickly they sold; not to mention how much attention they generated.

Here's my way of thinking about a coin like an 1870-CC half eagle in very low grades. This is an issue with strong Multiple Levels of Demand. It is rare in all grades, it is the rarest half eagle from this mint, it is a first year of issue and it is the only quasi-affordable gold coin dated 1870-CC. In other words, it is a coin that's "got it all." But it is very expensive in EF and AU grades and not every collector who is sophisticated enough to want one can plunk down the $25,000-50,000+ it takes to buy a nice one.

So what's wrong with a well-worn but very problem-free example of this date in a Good 6 holder? Actually nothing; a fact that was lost on me until recently.

When you think about it, a Good 6 1870-CC half eagle is a pretty darn cool coin; certainly one of those "if it could only talk imagine the stories it could tell" kind of coins and probably more so, in some ways, than the same date in EF45 or AU50.

By the same token, I don't automatically think every CC half eagle from the early 1870's in lower grades is a cool coin. In fact, the chances are good that if I were offered a decent quality 1872-CC half eagle in Good or Very Good I would pass. Why? It is clearly a rare coin but it doesn't have nearly the cool factor that the 1870-CC not does it have the strong multiple level of demand. My grade cut-off for the 1872-CC half eagle is more like EF40.

What are some of the parameters that I would employ when choosing to purchase a very rare coin in low(er) grades?

First, just as with a very rare coin in higher grades, I would avoid any piece which has been harshly cleaned or which has poor eye appeal. A coin in Good 6 doesn't necessarily have to be CAC-quality but make sure it has reasonably good overall eye appeal.

Second, I would look for coins which are not only very rare but whose high price point in higher grades eliminates a large pool of potential buyers. As an example, I recently sold a VG8 example of the very rare 1865-S/186 Inverted Date eagle. Not only was it a decent looking coin, it was priced at less than $3,000 which is tons cheaper than the next semi-available grade point (VF/EF) for this issue. From an economic standpoint, this coin made a lot of sense to me.

Third, I wouldn't go overboard with buying very low grade gold coins. In other words, you don't want a collection which features nothing but coins like 1870-CC half eagles in Good 6. A few coins like this are cool pieces to sprinkle in your set. A lot of coins like this are, well, a collection of very low grade coins...

Fourth and final, my sudden admiration for lower grade coins is, as I've tried to make clear, highly selective. Remember: 1870-CC half eagle in Good 6, si....  1872-CC half eagle in Very Good 8, non.....

For more information on how to put together a great collection of United States gold coins, with or without very rare coins in low(er) grades, please feel free to contact me by email at dwn@ont.com.

Collecting United States Gold Coins by Type

In the world of rare American gold coins there tends to be two distinct camps: date collectors and type collectors. I have traditionally been a date collector and tend to value scarce/rare issues as opposed to more common issues in higher grades. But I'm beginning to become more interested in the type collecting option and can see how, for a collector without the desire to become a date collector/specialist, collecting by type can be rewarding. Basically, a type collector buys one higher grade example of a specific design or variety as opposed to a date collectors who tries to complete a set of a specific design. There are some interesting ways to collect by type and I thought I would share a few with a particular emphasis on United States gold.

The most basic--and inexpensive--way to collect by type is to assemble a denomination set. This set would include one example of a gold dollar, quarter eagle, three dollar gold piece, half eagle, eagle and double eagle. Many of these denominations contain multiple types, which range from common to very rare. A basic denominational type set would focus on the most common types in a grade range which makes sense to the collector.

In this set, I would choose a Type Three gold dollar (struck from 1856 to 1889), a Liberty Head quarter eagle (struck from 1840 to 1907), a Three Dollar gold piece (struck from 1854 to 1889), a With Motto Liberty Head half eagle (struck from 1866 to 1908), a With Motto Liberty Head eagle (struck from 1866 to 1907) and a St. Gaudens double eagle (struck from 1907 to 1932). With the exception of the Three Dollar, all of these types are reasonably affordable in MS64 to MS65 grades and some are even available in MS66.  At the MS64 level, such a set could be completed for around $15,000; certainly within reach of most collectors. In MS65, the cost doubles.

A standard six coin gold type set is a bit boring, though. What are some of the things that can be done to spice up such a set? In many of these types, it is possible to purchase dates which are scarcer for little or no premium. When the market for MS64 and MS65 gold type is strong (which it currently is not) there are dates which can bring a 10%-30% premium. When the market cools off, many of these issues lose their market premium factor and can be bought for little or no premium. They may or may not regain this market premium factor in the future but when they can be bought as common dates, why not?

Or better yet, consider a legitimately scarcer date which makes sense. As an example, in the Type Three gold dollar series, all of the 1879-1889 issues are available in MS65 for around $2,000. For $3,500 or $4,000 you might be able to buy a very scarce gold dollar from the 1868-1878 range in this grade.

How important is it for all the coins in this set to have been graded by one service (NGC or PCGS) and to have CAC verification?

I believe that both NGC and PCGS do a good job grading MS64 and MS65 gold type. One service might be a little tighter than the other on small coins but, for the most part, there is not much value differential between the two when it comes to coins like a 1901-S Liberty Head eagle in MS65.

I would recommend CAC approved coins for most gold types. In the case of certain series like Type Three gold dollars in MS65, the premium is very small but probably worth it. In the case of a popular coin like a St. Gaudens double eagle in MS66, the premium is significant from a percentage basis but from what I've seen, a CAC-approved MS66 Saint tends to be a very high. By the same token, the standard of quality for CAC approved MS66 Saints is very high and these coins are generally far nicer than "standard" MS66 coins.

The standard gold type set consist of twelve coins: the Type One, Type Two and Type Three dollars, the Liberty Head and Indian Head quarter eagle, the Three Dollar, the Liberty Head and Indian Head half eagle, the Liberty Head and Indian Head eagle and the Liberty Head and St. Gaudens double eagle.

In this set, the key issue is the Type Two dollar and, for most collectors, this is usually the lowest grade coin included in a gold type set. As an example, the typical twelve piece type set contains coins in the MS63 to MS65 range (sometimes higher and sometimes lower) but due to cost prohibitions, the Type two tends to be at the lowest end of this range. I have always thought that this was an overvalued type in MS64 and MS65 as these pieces always seem to be available yet are priced in five figures. When gold type set collecting was more popular, Gem Type Two gold dollars traded (infrequently) for $50,000 and up. Today, coins graded MS65 tend to bring closer to $30,000. This is due partially to a diluting of grading standards but mostly due to reduced demand.

The other two coins in this 12 piece type set which are elusive in MS65 are the Three Dollar gold piece and the Indian Head half eagle. The former sells for $12,500-15,000 today, well off its former high of $20,000+. In MS64, the price drops to $7,500 or so, making a nice example within reach of most budgets.

The Indian Head half eagle is probably my single favorite individual type in the 12 coin set from the standpoint of potential appreciation. These have dropped in price in recent years down to $12,000 or so for a non-CAC coin and $15,000 or so for one with CAC approval. Not that many years ago, these coins were selling wholesale for $17,500-20,000. If a large marketing firm were to quietly buy 50 or 75 MS65 Indian Head half eagles and then run up prices, we could easily see levels back where they were a few years ago.

If you are assembling a 12 piece type set of U.S. gold, I think it is worth the premium you will have to pay to acquire high end CAC coins. In many cases, you are looking at paying an extra 25-35% but this appears to be money well spent when it is time to sell the coins.

Should you pay extra money for slightly scarcer dates? In this market, as I mentioned above, you can buy a scarcer coin in many series for little or no premium. I wouldn't suggest paying a small premium for a marginally interesting date. What I would suggest is doing the full 12 piece set with significantly better dates. Instead of choosing an 1878 in MS65 as your Three Dollar gold piece, choose an ultra-low mintage date from the 1880's. Study the population figures for Indian Head half eagles and you will quickly see which dates are far scarcer than the 1908 or 1909-D yet do not command a huge premium.

You can add a few more basic types to make the 12 piece set more complete and more challenging. Five which come to mind are the No Motto half eagle, the No Motto eagle and the Type One and Type Two Liberty Head and High Relief double eagles. These are quite rare and expensive in MS64 to MS65 but can be found in the MS60 to MS63 grades for less than $10,000 in many cases.

What if you have a limited budget and can only spend $2,000-2,500 at most. Is a type set a good option?

I think the collector on a limited budget has some great options. Let's take gold dollars as an example. I would suggest buying a nice MS63 or MS64 Type One  which will cost $1,000 to $1,500. For the Type Two, the smartest option might be a "super slider" AU58 which will cost $1,000 or so. For the Type Three, I'd go with an MS64 which will cost $1,000 to $1,250 depending on the date and the quality for the assigned grade.

The thing I like most about collecting by type is that every purchase you make for the set brings a whole new design and a whole new series to explore and research. If you are a true collector, you like to learn about new coins and the thought of studying about a new coin such as a Three Dollar gold piece is, in my opinion, pretty interesting.

It's funny how tastes change among coin collectors. In the 1980's and early 1990's, everyone wanted Gem Type. Today, people prefer rarity. Perhaps a combination of the two--type sets which contain scarce to rare issues--might be the collecting wave of the future.

Some Recent Trends in the Rare Coin Market

If you are a reasonably long-term participant in the rare coin market, you may not have recognized the fact that the market has changed in a huge way in the last five to ten years. Walking around the  floor at a show, you may not notice this (many of the same dealers are buying and selling coins) but the collectors and dealers who are really "in the know" are aware that things are irrefutably different.

How so?

Let's take a look at a few of the ways the rare coin market is far, far different in 2013 than it was in 2008 or 2003.

1.  CAC becomes a force. Five or ten years ago, CAC didn't exist and the major services didn't have someone "checking their work." This led to some sloppy grading and clearly the existence of CAC has tightened standards. Does this mean the services (or CAC) are perfect? Most clearly not but I think grading is more consistent now than in the past and this is evidenced that fewer dealers are making a living solely as "breakout" specialists.

I see a big change in the market from another CAC-related perspective as well. In some series, if a coin doesn't have a CAC sticker, this can mean the kiss of death. I think this is an unfortunate circumstance and I'm guessing this wasn't something that John Albanese had in mind when he established CAC. But as of the middle of 2013, we can look at auction prices and dealer sales and gauge that a CAC sticker clearly increases liquidity and in some cases it increases prices by a significant amount.

2.  Interesting coins outperform all others.  In the rare date gold market, the coins which are clearly in the highest level of demand are those which are interesting to multiple groups of collectors. As an example, a coin like an 1855-O gold dollar has multiple levels of demand because it is a distinct one-year type coin while an 1850-O gold dollar (which is three times as rare in Uncirculated but priced at about one-third to one-half as much) is of interest mostly to a smaller group of specialists.

This isn't to say that people deliberately sought "boring" coins before. But in 2013 (and beyond) it seems clear to me that people want coins with an interesting story behind them.

Some examples of interesting branch mint gold coins include 1855-D gold dollars, 1861-D gold dollars and half eagles, 1839-O quarter eagles, 1854-D three dollars, 1838-C and 1838-D half eagles, 1838 eagles, 1861-S Paquet double eagles. Coins like this have at least a few things in common: they are either one-year types or first year of issues or they have very interesting back stories which appeal to a wide variety of collectors. I call these coins "multiple level of demand" issues and they are clearly in vogue right now.

3.  Pricing Becomes Complicated.  A decade ago, rare coin pricing was fairly simple. You had a coin--let's say an 1885-CC double eagle--and it was graded AU58 by PCGS. You looked at the Greysheet and saw that Bid was $10,000. The coin was pretty decent, it was a popular, low-mintage CC issue and, therefore, it was worth 10% over Bid. You priced it at $11,000 and if it didn't sell quickly, you lowered the price to $10,500. Simple.

But today, there are countless variations of 1885-CC double eagles. It could be a PCGS coin or an NGC coin. It could have a CAC sticker or not have a sticker. It could have a "+" designation or a "*" designation (or even both). It could be in an old green label holder. The possibilities are literally endless.

Suddenly, many significant coins have four, five, six or even more potential variations and just as many possibilities when it comes to pricing. The 1885-CC double eagle in AU58 could be worth $20,000 or it could be worth $25,000 or it could even be worth $30,000. And that's not taking into consideration the possibility that it's an upgradable coin and it is worth $35,000 or more.

Unfortunately, the Greysheet has not kept up with this widening range of prices. Today's collector has to be very nimble or very well-connected to know the price differences between a PCGS/CAC and an NGC/non-CAC coin in his series; especially if he specializes in something like St. Gaudens double eagleswhere the variation(s) in prices can be dramatic.

4.  Every Picture Tells a Story.  As I have written about before, the advent of the internet has made numismatics an increasingly visual hobby. With most collectors making their purchases solely based on images from dealer or auction websites, the visual appeal of a coin has become paramount. Unless a coin is very rare, in today's market it is visual appeal which sells a coin more than almost anything else.

This tends to be less true in the branch mint gold area than in silver coins where superb color can mean staggering premiums. But, as I have noted in the past, how a coin will look on my website once it has been imaged is a major consideration in the process I use to determine if I will or won't buy a coin.

Which brings us to the next point.

5.  In Crust We Trust.  After years and years of beating the "buy original coins" drum, it looks like many collectors of branch mint and early gold have begun to listen to me. This has been reinforced by the emergence of CAC (see above) who tends to appreciate originality and rewards coins which have not been dipped or processed.

The change of taste towards "dirty original gold" has no been without consequence(s). The first I've noticed is that both PCGS and NGC now sometimes over-reward originality. How ironic is this? For years, the services tacitly endorsed the dipping of coins to make them bright so that they would achieve the highest possible grade. By now, so many coins have been ruined by this that when a nice original AU50 is sent in, the chances are good that it will grade AU55 or even AU58 just because it has original skin.

Another consequence is that collectors who want original surfaced coins typically mistake so-so or ugly coins with some color for nice coins with really nice color. This is understandable. Let me give you example. At a recent show, a collector showed me a group of coins which he had purchased through auctions in the last three years. He wanted me to verify that they were all "crusty and original." The coins ranged from not even remotely original to reasonably original but were not attractive. I thought they were clearly nicer than the bright, dipped out junque which he might have bought a few years ago but he still didn't fully "get" the concept of crust. And I'm not sure many collectors--or dealers--do. And this is what, in my opinion, makes the whole 'dirty original gold" craze somewhat ironic.

6.  True Rarity Becomes Appreciated.  Because of the preponderance of numismatic information, collectors are a lot smarter in 2013 than they were in 2003. Many collectors have access to information which, a decade ago, was only accessible to real students of the hobby.

One consequence of this is that you don't have to "convince" collectors that a certain issue is rare. You can prove how rare a coin is by how often it does--or doesn't-- appear at auction and how high--or low--the populations are at PCGS and NGC.

This has made tastes change in recent years. As an example, I just sold a very, very cool San Francisco eagle which was one of the two or three finest known for the date. Ten years ago, I would have bought this coin and my reaction would have been "cool item but who the heck am I going to sell this to?" Cut forward to 2013 and not only did I pay a very strong price for the coin with no hesitation but my reaction was "cool item; I better not put it on my website because so many people will want this that I'm going to anger the collectors I don't call about it."

I see this trend intensifying in the coin market in the coming years. Whether you are spending $1,500 or $15,000 do you want to own a coin  which is hard to find or one which is rare? And what if rarity can now be quantified due to the number of coins which have been graded by PCGS and NGC and the auction archives which Heritage and PCGS make readily available?

What are some of the recent trends in the coin market which you find interesting? Feel free to leave your comments about this topic in the space below or email me at dwn@ont.com to continue this discussion.

"Why Can't I Find Coins to Buy at a Coin Show?"

"Why can't I find coins to buy at a coin show?"

That was the exact question Collector X asked me, in a somewhat whiny manner, at the recent Central States coin show.  But you know something?  I can understand his disappointment. He had taken three days off from work, spent thousands of dollars on a plane ticket, hotel and meals, only to come home from the show empty-handed. He's a coin junkie and I'm sure he won't be boycotting this summer's ANA convention but his question got me to thinking...

Why has it become so hard to find the coins you want to buy at coin shows?

As I told Collector X as we spoke at CSNS, he's not the only one who is having this problem. I've been going to coin shows for three decades and I've noticed them becoming more and more dry in the last few years. Here are some theories of mine as to why.

1. Heritage: The 900 Pound Gorilla In The Room

All you have to do to see the reach of Heritage is to look and the size and scope of their major auctions. With thousands and thousands of lots worth tens of millions of dollars, these auctions are like vacuums that pull a tremendous amount of material of the bourse floor. Some of the coins in the Central States sale(s) were dealer retreads and some of the coins were low end but there were hundreds and hundreds of choice, high end pieces. This includes many fresh coins that, in the past, might have wound up entering the market through dealer's inventories instead of through auction.

You know that zombie movie when an army of hungry, brain eatin' dudes keeps coming and coming at the heroes? That's sort of like Heritage. Last time I checked they employed just a few zombies but they are extremely formidable competition for small dealers like me and a lot of the coins that formerly would be offered directly to me show up in Heritage sales. And I don't think I'm the only small dealer who has this perspective.

As Heritage has grown and grown it has created a strange reality in the market. At this point, the coin market is essentially a duopoly (Heritage and the various Spectrum organizations) with a huge degree of separation between the Big Two and nearly everyone else. Since neither of these firms is retail friendly, they use auctions as a way to sell coins directly to collectors.

2. The Coin Show Circuit is Diluted

There are way too many coin shows. I go to between 15 and 20 per year and this is nothing compared to the really hardcore wholesale guys who go to 30 or 40. At this point in my life, I'd rather be going to fewer shows and doing the bulk of my work in my office where its more comfortable and I'm three times more productive.

But its a Catch-22 situation for me. If I don't go to all of these shows, I become less competitive with the five or six sharp guys who I know are going to be in on every single coin that I'm not going to get offered if I'm not going to be at a show.

But I'm not writing this to gain sympathy from you. You want to know how this dilution of shows affects your ability to buy. Here's one way which I bet you don't know.

3. The Shadow Coin Show

Collector X was one of the first hundred people through the door when Central States opened to the public. Yet, unknown to him, a "shadow coin show" had been going on for at least two days before where many of the nicest, freshest coins traded hands.

Not only is the coin show circuit diluted, it puts unrealistic expectations on dealers. Let's take my schedule at Central States as an example. I arrived on Tuesday and started a frantic search for coins literally as soon as I arrived. But this was already a day later than some dealers. So if I had arrived on Monday (ugghhh...) it meant a full-week commitment to Central States. I'm OK with this amount of time for FUN and Summer ANA when there are fresh coins available to buy, but it's impossible for me to commit this much time ten to twelve times per year.

Back to the Shadow Coin Show theory. There are now many dealers who arrive two days before a show opens to the public and leave Thursday morning; just when many collectors are arriving. With these two different schedules going on, everyone in the long run suffers.

4.  Many Dealers Don't Show New Coins at Shows

Before I had an effective website, I would show many of my new purchases at a show. Today, I almost never show them. There are many reasons, good and bad, for this. I'm not alone in doing this.

• I spend a lot of time and money on my site and I find it to be a good way for me to sell.

• I have very limited amounts of time available at shows and it is more effective for me to use them to buy than it is to sell.

• I like Collector X and I value his business. A lot. I feel better knowing that he was able to buy a few coins as soon as I listed my new purchases.

One more thought. Many of the dealers who had tables at CSNS are not really "retailers" per se. They may have some coins laid out in their cases but they are primarily wholesalers who lack: a) time b) couth c) desire to sell to people like Collector X. As I walked around the floor at CSNS, a thought hit me: there really aren't a lot of tables at the show with nice coins on display.

Which brings me to my final point...

5.  If You Don't have a Relationship With a Dealer You Might Be Wasting Your Time at a Show

I must have seen Collector X walk by my table ten times during his time at CSNS and he must have stopped by three or four times asking me if I had anything new to show him. I felt kind of sorry for him as making the endless shuffle up and down the concrete floors (the Coin Walk of Shame?) couldn't have been all that much fun. And he was there to have fun, right?

If you don't have a tight relationship with a few dealers, you aren't going to see squat in the way of good coins at a show. There. I said it.

Let's say I buy an 1861-D half eagle in Extremely Fine. Unless Collector X is specifically looking for this coin (or it's one of the few shows in the year that I commit the time and resources to being able to invoice, process, and price my new coins) it's going to be hidden in a box in my safe or in my back case, and I'm not going to show it. To Collector X or Dealer Y. And I think this is the case with most other dealers.

Hopefully Central States wasn't a total waste for Collector X. He got to see the Newman coins (I told him to carefully study the patterns if only to see what true originality looked like), he schmoozed with a few of his numis-buddies, he got to breathe coins for a few days, and he probably learned that next year he'll skip Central States and keep his powder dry to the Summer ANA show. Or better yet, he'll let me do the heavy lifting and he'll find a few new items for his collection from my post-CSNS new purchase listings. (Shameless plug, I know...)