Can Coin Dealers be Coin Collectors?

A recent question from a client got me thinking: is it possible for a coin dealer to be a coin collector? My answer short and sweet: certainly yes — but with a large asterisk.

In most collectibles fields, many of the greatest collections ever formed were by dealers. This is especially true in the art world where the line between what is a “collection” and what is “inventory” is blurry; certainly far more so than in the world of coins.

Focusing on coins, I’d say that you want to buy from someone who is a coin weenie; someone who loves coins every bit as much as you do. I know I admire those dealers who really love coins more than those for whom numismatics is just a business, and who don’t really care that one 1845-O quarter eagle is choice and original while another is abraded and processed.

In the 19^th and early 20^th century, many of the most prominent U.S. dealers were collectors as well. Lyman Low, John Haseltine, David Proskey, Ed. Frossard, M.H. Bolender, Al Overton, and others assembled great specialized collections which were sold during their lifetimes and for which they are remembered even today.

Numismatics has evolved from an esoteric hobby into a big multi-national business since World War II, and for every post-war dealer like John Ford or David Akers who owned great coins, there are dealers who either do not care to collect or who do not want to be placed in a position where they are competing with their clients.

Let me give you an example. I recently bought a beautiful PCGS AU58 1846-O half eagle. This is exactly the type of coin I’d put away if I were a collector. So here was my predicament: do I keep the coin or sell it to any one of the dozen or so collectors who I work with on Liberty Head half eagle or New Orleans gold collections? I agonized for a second or two and quickly decided to sell the coin to a good collector. It was a simple; I’m a coin dealer not a coin collector. And here is another conundrum: if I were putting together a set of Liberty Head half eagles and I needed an 1846-O, why would I sell such a coin as perfect as the aforementioned example to a “competitor?”

But I still want to collect, and I’m not going to be relegated to something totally out of numismatics in order to escape potential conflicts of interest. My solution is pretty simple: I collect paper money, coin books, cool numismatic knick-knacks, and silver coins that do not typically appear in my inventory. Once or twice a year I do buy a gold coin for myself that is so unusual (from the standpoint of appearance) or so undervalued that I put it away. Such coins usually stay in my safe deposit box for a year or two until I have a client who I feel will appreciate the coin (and will sell it back to me when he tires of it) or if the market has risen enough to motivate me to take my profit (in the case of a Civil War eagle I recently sold).

So that’s my answer. A coin dealer should be a coin collector, just not in the area in which he specializes. Your thoughts?

Do you buy rare gold coins?

Do you have coins to sell?

Would you like to have the world’s leading expert with you assembling a set of coins?

Contact me, Doug Winter, directly at (214) 675-9897 or by email at dwn@ont.com.

Some FUN-based Market Observations

The FUN show is clearly one of the two major market indicators. Symbolically, it is the beginning of a New Coin Year but it is, most of all, a huge economic event with hundreds of millions of dollars changing hands. For me, a good FUN show is a clear indicator that the first quarter—if not half—of the coin year will be strong.

This was one of the strangest FUN shows I can recall. I was constantly busy and there were people at my table from the beginning of dealer set-up on Wednesday until I was packing up to go home on Friday afternoon. It was one of the easiest selling shows I can ever recall having, and my wholesale numbers were well above average. But it was also a hugely difficult show at which to buy. If, like me, you were a dealer who buys choice, cool, rare coins there were slim pickings at best. I was able to buy a number of great coins (some of which are now posted on my website; others never made it back from Orlando) but I knew as early as Thursday morning that I was going to fall well short of my numeric goals in terms of coins bought.

Clearly, one of the facts of life about major coin shows (FUN and ANA in particular) is that the huge auctions that surround them have a profound and significant impact. I talked to numerous well-heeled collectors who roamed the floor but stated that they were “waiting until after the auction” to make purchasing decisions. Considering that the major segment of the auction was Thursday night, this left a short window of opportunity for them to buy coins.

Heritage should be credited for producing one of the all-time great FUN auctions, and although I don’t know exactly what their final numbers were, I am assuming the FUN sale set an all-time record, given that Platinum Night alone did north of $50 million dollars.

I spent a lot of money at the Heritage auction(s) but didn’t buy a lot of coins; at least not in terms of useful, “bread and butter” coins that I could turn around and immediately place into inventory. Some of the dates that I will always try to purchase were represented by coins I just didn’t like, while other areas of the market seem to have quickly jumped to new levels with which I’m not yet comfortable.

Some observations from the auction are in order:

1. Rarity is clearly in vogue right now and even off-quality examples of truly rare issues are commanding huge premiums. As an example, an NGC EF45 1864-S brought just a shade under $100,000. And other seldom-seen eagles such as the 1863, 1873, and 1876 brought what I thought were enormous prices based on their actual quality.
2. There were a number of really exceptional coins in the auction and they brought exceptional prices, as they should have. My two personal favorites were David Akers’ personal 1826 half eagle graded MS66 by PCGS which brought $763,750 (a price which I thought was strong but not at all outrageous), and the Eliasberg Proof 1889 double eagle, graded PR65 by PCGS but in an old green holder and looking more like a PR67 Deep Cameo by today’s standards, which sold for an extremely strong $352,500.
3. Speaking of exceptional, the market for Liberty Head double eagles continues to rage on. The FUN sale had a deep offering with coins ranging from off-quality and very choice for the grade and issue. But it almost didn’t matter what the coin looked like as prices were strong across the board. Type One O mints? Very strong. CC’s? Very strong, although the nice PCGS AU50 1870-CC at $329,000 seemed like a much better value than the really unappealing PCGS EF45 at $282,000. Civil War dates? Crazy strong including a record-for-the-grade prices on the 1861-S in PCGS MS62, the 1863 in PCGS AU58, and the PCGS MS62 1864. I was taken aback by prices for the Big Five late date Type Three issues. An 1881 in PCGS AU58 sold for $111,625, an 1882 in NGC AU58 realized $94,000 and perhaps most incredibly, a tooled no grade 1886—the ultimate “what a shame” coin—brought a staggering $129,250. No grades in general did very well in this sale, by the way, but that’s another story.
4. The best values in the 19^th century series are clearly in the Liberty Head half eagle series. Prices on double eagles have made this series the playground of the 1%, and the eagle series has gone from neglected to flavor of the year (smart buys still can be made in this series but proceed with caution!). Even though there were some price records set in the FUN sale for finally-recognized date rarities such as the 1863 and 1865, there are still many dates in the $2,500-15,000 range which seem very fairly priced relative to their rarity. Given the great prices that schlocky rare date coins brought in the auction, I’d like to think that DWN-quality examples are even better values.

A few other non-auction observations, based on looking at dealer’s inventories: nice quality early gold is still in very short supply, Dahlonega gold is literally nowhere to be seen (I’m embarrassed to admit this but I came home with exactly two new D mint coins…two! From the FUN show!!! How is this possible?!?), CAC premiums are really noticeable - especially from sellers who don’t typically handle nice coins, and if I had listened to myself and bought Civil War gold coins when I predicted they’d be the Next Big Thing I’d have made myself a tidy little profit.

Do you buy rare gold coins?

Do you have coins to sell?

Would you like to have the world's leading expert with you assembling a set of coins?

Contact Doug Winter at (214) 675-9897 or by email at dwn@ont.com.

Some Thoughts on Rarity

Having just published a blog about coin rarity based on grade distribution, I’ve been thinking more about the many concepts of rarity and how they apply to coin collecting. Let’s take a look at a few and discuss them. Rarity is probably one of the two or three most misused terms in all of numismatics, especially from the selling side. I consistently see coins referred to as “rare” which most definitely are not.

Collectors need to remember that rarity is a relative concept. A coin like an 1895 Morgan Dollar is always termed a “rare” coin. Within the context of the Morgan Dollar series, it is rare. But one needs to remember that there are hundreds of examples known in grades up to and including PR67 and, if compared to a coin like an 1867-S quarter eagle (which is priced at a tiny fraction of the 1895 dollar) it is common. What always needs to be remembered when analyzing rarity is context. There are, in theory, hundreds if not thousands of serious Morgan dollar collectors and this makes a coin like an 1895 contextually rare. On the other hand, there are probably less than two to three dozen serious collectors of Liberty Head quarter eagles and an issue like an 1867-S exists in enough quantity that anyone who wants a decent example should be able to find one. In other words, there are basically enough to go around; at least for now.

Rarity is both relative and series specific. It is difficult to compare absolute rarity from one series to another. As I mentioned above, a coin with 20 known in all grades can be a great rarity in a popular series, or it can be a “sleeper” if it is in a series which has the potential of being more intensely collected in the future. There are also numerous esoteric coins that have 20 known but the number of collectors is so few that 20 coins is the equivalent to hundreds of pieces known in a more popular series.

There are essentially two types of rarity. The first is overall rarity. This refers to a coin which is rare in all grades and whose rarity is not solely predicated on its grade. A coin which is rare in all grades is also called fundamentally rare.  As a dealer, these are the types of coins I like to buy and what I specialize in.

A coin can be fundamentally rare for a number of reasons. A Proof 1878 gold dollar is fundamentally rare because of its original mintage figure (a scant 20 coins). An 1828/7 half eagle is fundamentally rare because virtually every known example was melted in 1834 when the weight was changed for gold coins and old tenor half eagles were worth more than face value. An 1865 half eagle is rare not only because of a low original mintage figure (1,270 business strikes) but because of the fact that it is a well-used Civil War issue that not only saw active use in circulation was later melted.

In the area of branch mint gold, few issues are fundamentally rare. Most exist in quantities of 150-200 in all grades. But nearly all branch mint coins are grade rarities.

In nearly all series of American coins, grade rarity has become more significant to collectors than condition rarity. An 1843-D half eagle in Very Fine is a relatively available coin and within the context of Dahlonega issues it is common. But this same date in, say, Mint State-63 is very rare and it is described as a grade rarity.

But the real grade rarities in American numismatics tend to be in 20th century series. An average quality MS64 1912 St. Gaudens double eagle is worth around $5,000 in MS64 and $25,000 or more in properly graded MS65. The disparity can be far, far greater with coins from the 1940’s, 1950’s and 1960’s. As an example (and I selected this totally randomly) a 1942-S quarter is worth $300 in PCGS MS66, $2,500 in PCGS MS67 and close to $20,000—maybe more—in PCGS MS68. That’s a big difference in quality for a difference in appearance that might not be readily recognizable to more than a handful of dealers and specialized collectors.

The difference between the 1843-D half eagle and the 1942-S quarter is that the former has a reasonably significant degree of value in all grades. Even a cleaned, no-grade 1843-D is worth around $1,000; an average quality circulated 1942-S might not fetch six bucks at your local coin shop.

To my way of thinking the “best” coins are what I call dual rarities. This is a coin that is not only rare from an overall standpoint (i.e., it might have a total number known of 40-50) and it is among the best known for that particular issue. Going back to a  coin I mentioned earlier in this blog, the 1865 half eagle, a nice AU55 example would be a dual rarity as it would be among the finest known examples of a coin which is rare in all grades.

The newest category of rarity, one that dates from the 1970’s but which is probably at its height right now, is what I refer to as appearance rarity. Appearance rarity can be related to strike (Full Bands for Mercury dimes, Full Head for Standing Liberty quarters) or it can be related to coloration (Red and Brown or Red for Lincoln Cents). The newest categories of appearance rarity relate to the actual finish of a Proof coin (Deep Cameo/Ultra Cameo) or for business strikes (Prooflike or Deep Mirror Prooflike).

I have mixed feelings about appearance rarity. If I was collecting Lincoln Cents by date, would I spend $100,000+ for a PCGS Red MS65 1926-S or $5,000+ for a mostly red MS65 Red and Brown? Easy answer for me (without a doubt I’m in for the Red and Brown coin) but, then again, I’m a fundamental rarity guy and not a condition rarity so the concepts of appearance rarity seems totally wacky to me. But there are instances I will and do pay a premium for appearance; an example would be a better date Type Three double eagle in MS63 designated as Deep Mirror Prooflike or a rare date Proof Liberty Head half eagle designated as Deep Cameo.

One of the oldest subcategories of rarity is also one of the hardest for the layman to figure. Certain series, like Large Cents and Capped Bust half dollars are avidly collected by die variety. There might not be more a few dozen very serious collectors in these two areas but they tend to be extremely passionate and often very well-heeled. For a non-specialist like me, I am often amazed at the huge prices certain early cents bring but I can appreciate them. My only caveat for a variety collector is to avoid paying premiums in series which are not avidly collected by die variety. You may collect Trade Dollars by variety but if you do you are one of probably ten or fewer collectors who do. Paying a large premium for a seemingly rare variety might not prove financially prudent down the road.

In closing, I’d like to quickly address a question which I am often asked by new collectors: how can you tell if a coin is truly rare? I think frequency of appearance at auction is an excellent guide.

• If a coin appears for sale at virtually all major sales, it is common. An example of this would be a 1901-S eagle in MS64.
• If a coin appears a few times a year at auction (say three or four times), it is at the very least scarce. An example of this would be an 1849-D half eagle in AU50.
• If a coin appears less than once per year at auction, it is rare. This is true from both an in-grade and overall rarity perspective.
• And if a coin appears at auction once every three to five years? That, in my opinion, is a coin which is very rare or even extremely rare.

Do you buy rare gold coins?

Do you have coins to sell?

Would you like to have the world’s leading expert with you assembling a set of coins?

Contact me, Doug Winter, directly at (214) 675-9897 or by email at dwn@ont.com.

Grade Distribution of Branch Mint Gold Coinage

It is interesting to study the grade distribution patterns for various branch mint gold issues. By this, I am referring to what percentage of a certain issue’s survivors exist in a specific grade range. In order to apply this to a practical numismatic situation, I am going to use the Dahlonega quarter eagle series as my lab experiment. Any assumption that I make in this blog is series specific.

By this, I mean that what applies to Dahlonega quarter eagles doesn’t apply to New Orleans half eagles or San Francisco eagles. And within the Dahlonega quarter eagle series there are differences; as an example the issues from the 1840’s are likely to have different grade distribution patterns than those from the 1850’s due to a number of factors. In the case of Dahlonega quarter eagles, the primary consideration is that of usage: these coins circulated differently in the 1840’s than they did in the 1850’s.

I think the best “base line” Dahlonega quarter eagle to use in our brief study is the 1843-D Small D. This is the most common date in this series both in terms of overall and high grade rarity. It has the highest mintage figure of any quarter eagle from this mint, and with over 500 examples known, it can be found in a variety of grades.

According to the most recent data from PCGS, there have been a total of 243 coins graded. This number, of course, is inflated by resubmissions, but it gives a good indication of the grade distribution for this issue. According to PCGS, the grade distribution is as follows:

• VF and lower: 58 coins (23.86%)
• EF: 77 coins (31.68%)
• AU: 97 coins (39.91%)
• Uncirculated: 11 coins (4.52%)

Before analyzing this, there are a few things to remember. First, there are probably more raw low grade 1843-D quarter eagles than there are high grade ones, meaning that the number at the low end of the grading scale could easily inflate if these were ever submitted. Secondly, the number of coins in very high grades (in this case AU58 and Mint State) is clearly inflated on account of the financial incentive to upgrade a coin. An upgrade from VF25 to VF30 is pretty meaningless, but an upgrade from AU55 to MS60 translates to a not inconsiderable amount of money. And lastly, the grade range that has seen the most gradeflation in the last decade is AU, meaning that a significant number of coins graded AU50 or even AU53 by PCGS would not necessarily qualify as such if broken out and submitted again.

Taking all of these caveats into consideration, this grade distribution makes sense to me. I expected at least 60-70% of all 1843-D quarter eagles to grade EF45 and below, and according to PCGS’s figures, the current percentage is 55.54%. If we were able to dismiss all the superfluous AU submissions included in the numbers above, and punt all the marginal AU50 coins that are actually EF’s, this figure might well be close to 70%.

I think that the actual number of 1843-D quarter eagles which grade AU is more likely in the 25-30% range; not all that far off from the 39.91% figure shown.

By any stretch of the imagination, Uncirculated 1843-D quarter eagles are rare. My best estimate is that 15-20 are known, and many are marginal MS60 to MS61 examples. In MS62 and MS63 there are likely no more than four to six and none finer.

The grade distribution for the 1843-D Small D quarter eagle is reasonably similar to that seen for the 1844-D, 1845-D, 1846-D, 1847-D, and 1848-D. These are six of the most available quarter eagles from this mint and they represent the Golden Age, if you will, of commercial use for this denomination in the antebellum south. Beginning in 1848, gold discoveries in California made the Dahlonega (and Charlotte) mint redundant, and by 1854, mintage figures of all C and D mint denominations except half eagles were cursory at best.

There is a Dahlonega quarter eagle whose grade distribution is complete different than the 1843-D; enough so to be a complete anomaly within the series. This is the 1857-D; let’s look at the PCGS figures.

A total of 70 1857-D quarter eagles have been graded by PCGS. The by-grade breakdown is as follows:

• VF and lower: 4 coins (5.71%)
• EF: 6 coins (8.57%)
• AU: 45 coins (64.28%)
• Uncirculated: 15 coins (21.42%)

The 1857-D is the second to last quarter eagle from this mint with an original mintage of only 2,364 with an estimated 125-150 known. As long as I have specialized in Dahlonega coins, I’ve noted that the 1857-D is almost never seen in VF or EF grades, and most of the survivors are in the AU53 to AU58 range.

What is most interesting about this date is that so many of the survivors have a similar look. The typical example in AU55 to AU58 has an “Unc-ish” appearance with many of the hallmarks of a Mint State coin but with either light friction or soft hairlines suggestive or a gentle old cleaning. And, on most of the high grade coins, the color and quality of luster are similar.

These facts combined with the PCGS grade distribution lead me to believe that the 1857-D is a hoard coin. I can’t prove this—and even if it is true I know nothing specific about the so-called hoard. But the fact that 85% of all 1857-D quarter eagles graded by PCGS are AU or Uncirculated is interesting and is completely different in pattern than for any other date in this series.

There is one final Dahlonega quarter eagle with a grade distribution pattern which varies from the norm but for a different reason: the 1856-D.

The 1856-D is not only the rarest quarter eagle from this mint; it is the rarest single issue of any denomination. Only 874 were struck and around 45-55 are known in all grades.

The distribution by grade is very interesting; let’s take a quick peek at how the PCGS has graded the 35 they have recorded:

• VF and lower: 5 (14.28%)
• EF: 8 (22.85%)
• AU: 21 (60%)
• Uncirculated: 1 (2.85%)

There are many interesting things about these numbers, but two points need to be mentioned first. The 1856-D is an extremely poorly produced coin which is exceptionally hard to grade. I have seen 1856-D quarter eagles which could be graded VF30 just as easily as they could be graded AU50. It is also important to remember that as a rarity within the series, PCGS (and NGC as well) tend to push the grade on the 1856-D quarter eagle. Because it is such a rare coin, a nice EF45 example is typically graded AU50 or AU53 with little complaint from specialists.

I think the PCGS grade distribution for the 1856-D is skewed way too far towards AU and I very, very seriously doubt if “60%” of all known examples grade AU50 to AU58. But given the difficulty of grading this issue, I can understand how this is the case.

As I mentioned at the beginning of this blog, the grade distribution for each series depends on a number of factors. Age and the original mintage figure are obvious and important, but there are less subtle factors at play such as perceived rarity, appearance of the coin, whether or not a hoard exist(ed), and if examples were expatriated to Europe and are now returning to the American market.

Do you buy rare gold coins?

Do you have coins to sell?

Would you like to have the world’s leading expert with you assembling a set of coins?

Contact Doug Winter at (214) 675-9897 or by email at dwn@ont.com.

The 1863 Eagle: An Unheralded Rarity

One of my favorite American coins is the 1863 eagle. I had a lovely NGC EF45 pass through my hands recently and it inspired me to write a blog about what I think is one of the absolute rarest Liberty Head eagles. Production of this issue was limited to a scant 1,218 business strikes, and I rate the 1863 as the third rarest Liberty Head eagle after the 1875 and the 1864-S. There are probably fewer than 30 known in all grades, with most in the EF40 to AU50 range. There are very likely as few as six or seven known in AU grades and two in Uncirculated; more about these a little further down the page.

A quick search of auction records shows that no problem-free 1863 eagles have sold since October 2010, and only seven records exist for problem-free coins in the last decade. My records show that I have handled exactly two pieces in the last five years: an NGC EF45 and a PCGS AU53.

When available, the 1863 tends to be bright from having been cleaned or dipped and it is invariably very heavily abraded. This piece shown above is one of the very few circulated pieces that I have seen with natural color. There are a few small abrasions on the surfaces, but they are much cleaner than usual.

There are two high-grade 1863 eagles known. The finest is the Bass IV: 683 coin which sold for $52,900 in 2000; a price which, at the time, I thought represented possibly the single biggest bargain all of the three Bass sales which featured gold coins. Bass had, through an agent, bought this exact coin in August 1991 for $104,500. Harry didn't lose money on many coins but he got spanked — and good — on this one; all the more remarkable considering that it is the finest known example of a truly rare issue and it is exceptional for the grade. Today, it would bring considerably more than in either of its previous auction appearances.

The other Uncirculated 1863 eagle is an MS62 that was found as part of the S.S. Republic treasure. I have never personally seen this coin, but it is in the collection of a western specialist along with many other finest known or Condition Census pieces from this shipwreck.

Civil War gold coins have been very popular in recent years as a result of the sesquicentennial of the war plus promotions/popularization by dealers such as myself. While it is not well-known outside of the specialist community, it is my belief that there are currently many collectors who would appreciate a nice 1863 eagle in their holdings.

Do you buy rare gold coins?

Do you have coins to sell?

Would you like to have the world's leading expert with you assembling a set of coins?

Contact Doug Winter at (214) 675-9897 or by email at dwn@ont.com.

A Letter from a Collector Regarding the Newman Sale

I recently received a really thoughtful email from a reader of this blog - and with his permission am reproducing it in full. November 16, 2013

An Open Letter to Doug Winter

Hi Doug,

On the day following the Eric Newman Part II early silver auction, I wanted to take the time to thank you for all you’ve done for the hobby over these years. In internet parlance, I’ve been a lurker, someone who follows a blog for some time without contributing. Truth be told, I’ve never even done business with you, despite calling you some years back regarding a branch mint coin. Back to the story, I read your recent blog regarding your experience with the Newman preview and was inspired to view it. Engineering a trip to NYC earlier this week, I had the pleasure of previewing the auction which you had described as “one of the most pleasurable coin-related experiences [you’d] had in years”. Not being a collector of early silver, I’ve always been intrigued by its beauty and historical significance. Add the beautiful toning from the Wayte Raymond albums’ sulfur to what was already a gorgeous assembly of high-grade coins and you were certainly right that this was an historic opportunity.

Like most collectors, I don’t have unlimited resources to commit to coins. Since I have historically concentrated upon territorial and gold-rush period shipwreck coins, I’ve typically felt that a dollar spent on non-territorial, moves me away from my specialty. Frankly, after viewing the magnificent Newman collection, I felt like the proverbial fellow at the dance who keeps falling in love with the last girl he danced with (read “the last coin he viewed”) as I went through box after box. After attending on-line and reviewing the results of last night’s Signature auction, I could hear in my head many of the lessons you’ve written about over the years. To loosely paraphrase you, here are a few:

• fresh material that’s been off the market for years brings spirited bidding

• with the really good coins, don’t be surprised that today’s price that seems a stretch will look like a bargain in retrospect

• superior eye appeal can transcend traditional grading values and pricing

• a good (in this case, great) collection is worth more than the sum of its parts

• use of a knowledgeable, honest, good-hearted dealer (readers of your blog know you resemble that remark) can add tremendous value

To make a long story short, I fell in love with many of the coins, and was prepared to buy a few based on pre-auction bid prices. I had done my due diligence as best I could by viewing comparables on the auction websites and reviewing population data. Note to self, many coins were so appealing there were few visible “comparables” to judge fair pricing. As the bidding developed, I quickly saw that factors 1) thru 4) above were at work, bringing prices multiples of what I had determined were already solid prices. Not having significant experience with early silver, nor the time to consult a knowledgeable dealer, I was on my own.

I passed on most lots I had identified as their prices went to levels way beyond my estimates, although they may very well look like bargains later. Truth be told, I bought only one coin, solely because I thought it was cool on multiple factors. The coin is the 1817 over 3 bust half dollar in MS-64, Lot 33447. The factors:

1. a big, bold, well-struck coin with great Wayte Raymond toning and almost cameo-like eye appeal

2. a very visible error with the 7 looming over much of a 3; magnification not necessary to enjoy and much more prominent than the 1815/2 error which goes for big money

3. interesting vivid clash marks on both sides, very visible given the strike and toning

4. proof-like features so prominent that they were noted by Eric Newman and Walter Breen and the subject of considerable discussion

5. well-nestled in the condition census by grade, only 11 of 70 Heritage auction appearances were uncirculated, with few near gems, and frankly, none I liked more

6. provenance before Eric Newman was “Colonel” Green, son of Hetty Green, known as the witch of Wall Street; interesting history and connection to two great collections

7. I’m not sure if the Newman envelope that accompanies the coin reflects his acquisition or offer price, but he paid or valued it at $100 many years ago, far more than many of the other coins in this auction. I know it’s not scientific, but buying it for $28,200 seems a bargain when many other coins annotated by Newman for much less than $100 sold for a quarter million dollars or more.

It wasn’t quite graded a gem and it doesn’t have the CAC bean. It may not have the PCGS look. As a traditionally gold coin guy, I have trouble appreciating and viewing the somewhat muted toned “original” look much early silver exhibits; I like the flash. Perhaps I overpaid or knowledgeable folks could find fault, but it literally jumped out of the box during my preview. It turned me on for the above reasons and shall proudly sit in my cabinet to remind me of this historic sale for years to come!

Closing the loop, I wanted to thank you again for what you do for the hobby. Keep on dealing and writing. I’ve read and enjoyed all your branch mint books and I visit your website often to view your inventory and gain perspective. Your enthusiasm is contagious and your eye for the right look in a coin is superb. Don’t ever think that because you don’t get feedback on a particular piece you write or a sale from every interaction you have with a collector, you are not making an impact. It is folks like you (and Eric Newman, thru his generosity) that knowingly or not mentor, develop, and inspire the future collectors that keep our hobby vibrant. Developing future generations of collectors should be a goal of us all.

Please feel free to publish this article if you see fit, but withhold my name for privacy reasons. I hope this gives you some material, so you can have a well-deserved break from the excellent writing. Thank you.

Our writer also attached a wonderful photo of himself, with his 4-month old daughter, bidding on the 1817/3 bust half. He plans to give it to her when she’s old enough to understand. Thank you to our ghost-writer for sharing!

Do you buy rare gold coins?

Do you have gold coins to sell?

Would you like to have the world’s leading expert working directly with you when assembling a set?

Contact Doug Winter at 214.675.9897 or by email at dwn@ont.com.

When the "Best" Coin isn't the "Better" Coin

In many series, collectors are slaves to the holder. By this, I mean, they make purchases which aren’t always prudent based on what a PCGS or NGC holder says. This is most prevalent in Registry-oriented 20^th century series such as Lincoln Cents and Washington Quarters (amongst others) - series in which a single grading point can inflate the value of a coin by 5, 10 or even 20 times.

This tends not to be the case with classic 19^th century gold coins, but every now and then a situation arises in which a coin which is theoretically the highest graded may not be the best purchase for an advanced collector.

A situation involving this scenario emerged at the recent Baltimore Stacks Bowers auction and I’d like to share my thoughts.

Please note that this is not meant to be a negative rant about the following coin, and the buyer of this coin is, no doubt, happy with his or her purchase.

The 1876-S eagle has long been a favorite issue of mine. It has a small mintage of just 5,000 coins, and I think five or six dozen exist, with most in the VF to EF grade range. I have never seen an 1876-S which grades higher than AU53 to AU55, and my best estimate is that there are around six or seven properly graded AU examples known. Until recently it was an unloved and generally undervalued coin.

In the recent Stacks Bowers Baltimore show, a newly graded PCGS AU55 example of this date was offered. In theory, this is the “finest known” example as it is a population one, none finer, coin. It sold for $22,325. I examined the coin and, in my opinion, it was sub-par for the grade. (Had it been a very choice coin for the grade, I think it would have brought closer to $30,000).

While $10 Libs are not a typical Registry Set series, there are a few advanced, deep-pocketed collectors who are specializing in these coins. And the opportunity to acquire a PCGS finest known coin—with the “points” this would add to such a set—is an unusual opportunity to say the least.

But what if a cheaper example of this same date was actually a “better” coin? What if an 1876-S eagle graded AU50 by PCGS were more original, more appealing (in my opinion), and a fraction of the price?

Back in their 2011 ANA auction, Stacks Bowers sold a PCGS AU50 example of an 1876-S eagle. I didn’t buy it even though, in retrospect, I probably should have.

Take a look at this coin:

I think it compares favorably to the PCGS AU55 shown above. It is a bit less “meaty” but it is more original, less “baggy,” and has comparable—if not better—overall eye appeal.

Most intriguingly, it sold for just $6,325 - or around a quarter of what the AU55 brought.

Here is an instance where Registry-mania caused a so-so coin to sell for a lot of money but didn’t have an impact on a nice, slightly lower grade coin because it wasn’t “the finest known.”

Examples like this are becoming more and more prevalent in the area of 19^th century United States gold coins.

The moral of the story? Don’t always trust the plastic you buy to equate with the best value in your series. There is no substitute for knowledge and, in many cases, this knowledge will save you money and provide you with a better overall collection.

Do you buy rare gold coins?

Do you have gold coins to sell?

Would you like to have the world’s leading expert working directly with you when assembling a set?

Contact Doug Winter at 214.675.9897 or by email at dwn@ont.com.

First Impressions of the Newman Sale

I’m freshly returned from Dallas, where I attended a spectacular coin dealer wedding, and combined the nuptials with viewing the remarkable silver coins that are being sold on behalf of Eric P. Newman. I spent close to two full days viewing, and it was one of the most pleasurable coin-related experiences I’ve had in a long time.

I’ll be writing more blogs on the Newman sale as I think it is one of the most important numismatic events which will occur in many years to come. But I’d like to share a few impressions about the coins — namely the appearance and surface preservation.

In a nutshell there were basically three types of coins in the sale:

1. Coins which were spectacular before they were stored long term, and which were carefully handled in the ensuing 50-75+ years.
2. Coins which were average quality before they were stored, but which have toned superbly and which now appear “better” than they might actually be.
3. Coins which may (or may not) have been nice, but which were not well-stored and now are dull or drab. These are coins that almost certainly will be dipped if they are purchased by dealers. In some instances I believe that this dipping will significantly improve the coins.

Let’s look at an example of each of these three categories and briefly discuss the impact of how they were stored.

Hands down, my favorite group of coins in the sale was a date run of Large Size Bust Quarters, struck from 1796 to 1828. Viewed as a type, these are among the most difficult silver designs to find in high grades. The Newman collection had a number of Gems; far more than I can recall having ever seen in one place — even more than Eliasberg or Norweb.

Possibly my favorite early quarter, from a technical standpoint, was Lot 33334, an 1807 graded MS66* by NGC.

Close examination of this coin revealed nearly flawless surfaces with wonderful luster and no signs of hairlines or past attempts of “improvement.” I don’t know what this coin looked like 75 years ago, when it was probably lightly toned or even white,  but the color it has acquired from storage was simply breathtaking. This coin, along with a number of the Bust Quarters and Bust Half Dollars in the collection, had been placed in old Wayte Raymond albums. These contain paper with high sulfur content and this tends to impart superb color with rainbow hues in instantly-recognizable concentric patterns.

The next classification of coin is one that wasn’t as nice as category #1 but which was beautifully toned from storage in a Wayte Raymond or another high sulfur source.

Lot 33321 was an 1840 With Drapery dime graded MS64* by NGC. In my opinion, this looked like a coin which had been cleaned many years ago and there were a decent number of hairlines on the surfaces. However, these were easy to overlook on account of the superb color shown on the obverse and reverse. I counted a number of coins in the sale which were clearly given a significant bump in grade due to exceptional second-generation color.

The third and final category are coins whose actual appearance is difficult to determine due to storage issues; probably in old 2x2 brown paper envelopes which imparted a lot of toning but not in the spectacular manner as seen on the two coins displayed above.

On his inexpensive coins, Mr. Newman clearly placed less of a premium on careful long-term storage. This is clearly easy to understand given that some of these cost of just a few dollars when they were purchased. An example of this is Lot 33883, an 1875-S Trade Dollar graded MS62 by NGC. It is hard to say what this coin looked like when it was first placed in the brown envelope it had been stored in for decades. Today, it was very deeply toned with somewhat impaired luster as a result.

Will this coin look better if it is dipped? Possibly yes, possibly no. One of the interesting things in this sale is trying to imagine what the category 3 coins look like without 75+ years of dirt, grime, and monochrome color.

The dealers who are best at determining which coins will dip well will be fascinated by this sale, and I have no doubt that they will be active participants. As I said above, this is not necessarily a bad thing. No one is going to dip a coin like the amazing multi-hued 1807 quarter shown above. And I doubt that any of the category 2 coins will be dipped either; nor should they. Ah, but the category 3 coins…here is an interesting subtext to the Newman Sale!

If you need representation at this sale, please feel free to contact me via email at dwn@ont.com.

What Can CAC Population Figures Tell Collectors About Quality and Rarity?

Now that CAC has become an integral part of the rare date gold market, there are certain things that their database of coins that have been approved can tell collectors. This wasn’t necessarily true as recently as a year to a year and a half ago, but I believe that enough coins have been seen by CAC that their numbers have gained a degree of legitimacy. This is especially true for expensive and/or truly rare coins.

One thing that CAC data can tell a savvy collector is how rare a coin is with good eye appeal. In other words, if the combined PCGS/NGC population of a certain date/mintmark is 15 coins in EF, how many of these are choice and original?

How do these figures look in a series which is notorious for having numerous condition rarities? I decided to analyze the increasingly popular Liberty Head eagle series using CAC population data from their most recent report (September 2013) and compare it to research which I published a few years ago.

In 2008 I published an article entitled The Ten Rarest Ten Libs. I based this research on my 25+ years of specializing in this denomination, consulting auction records from the past two decades, and looking at current PCGS and NGC population data. My Top Ten list was concerned more with absolute rarity (i.e., the total number of coins known in all grades) versus condition rarity (the number of coins known in higher grades).

 According to my research, here are the ten rarest Liberty Head eagles:

1. 1875

2. 1864-S

3. 1873

4. 1863

5. 1865-S Normal Date

6. 1860-S

7. 1883-O

8. 1844

9. 1839, Head of 1840

10. (tie) 1858, 1859-S, 1864, 1866-S With Motto, 1876, 1877

Looking back on this list five years later (!), I basically still agree with it - except for one glaring omission: the 1855-S. I’m not sure why I didn’t include this date in my Top Ten; I very possibly might have forgotten it. Today, I would certainly include it and place it as high as #8 on the list. I would also eliminate the 1858 from the #10 grouping, and quite possibly the 1859-S and 1864 as well.

Before I delve into the CAC populations, there are a few caveats which I think are important to better understand this blog.

Firstly, we are assuming that at this point in time a good number of rare date gold coins get sent to CAC. However, I happen to know at least four major collections of Liberty Head eagles which have never been seen by CAC, and which contain many coins currently “unbeaned” by CAC which should be nice enough to qualify if and when they are sent in.

Secondly, we are making an assumption that “CAC quality” coins really are nice for the date and grade. I personally don’t think that is a stretch, but I clearly have seen some better date Liberty Head eagles with CAC stickers that weren’t all that nice and, conversely, have sent some coins to CAC which I thought were very nice and, for whatever reason(s), didn’t get blessed.

Thirdly, I think making assumptions about the rarity of coins like Liberty Head eagles based solely on CAC data would be a mistake. Instead, I would view the CAC data as a component of determining high grade rarity.

Let’s look at the Liberty Head eagles which, as of October 2013, have yet to see a single example approved by CAC:

• 1844

• 1863

• 1864

• 1865

• 1865-S Normal Date

• 1866

• 1866-S No Motto and 1866-S With Motto

• 1872

• 1873

• 1875

• 1876-S

There are no huge surprises here. This group of 12 coins is well represented on my Top Ten rarest list. The 1864 is a bit of surprise as I have handled a few nice pieces in the last few years and the same is true with the 1866-P and the 1866-S No Motto.

Now, how about the dates in this series with only 1 coin approved by CAC. Along with the dates, I’m going to list the grade of the sole CAC-approved coin.

• 1839 Head of 1840 (EF40)

• 1858-S (AU50)

• 1859-S (AU50)

• 1867-S (AU55)

• 1870-CC (EF45)

• 1877 (AU55)

This is an interesting group. All five are rare, and at least one (the 1839 Head of 1840) is on the Top Ten rarest list. The other four are dates which are a bit more available but which seldom come with nice surfaces and natural color; two elements which are rewarded by CAC. In this instance, the CAC results hold pretty true to form; more so than what I expect from NGC or PCGS results.

As a final list, let’s look at the dates in this series with just 2 coins approved by CAC. Again, along with the dates I’m going to list the grades in which CAC has approved these.

• 1855-S (EF45, AU55)

• 1859-O (EF45, AU53)

• 1860-S (VG8, AU55)

• 1862-S (EF45, AU55)

• 1864-S (VF30, EF45)

• 1870 (AU50, AU55)

• 1871 (AU55, AU58)

• 1876  (AU53, AU55)

• 1895-S (EF45, AU53)

To me, this is the most interesting list, for two reasons. The first is the dates (1859-O, 1862-S, 1864-S) which I didn’t expect to see two of, let alone one. The second is the presence of the 1895-S, a date which gets little respect from even the most ardent specialist and which only two reasonably low grade pieces have been approved by CAC to date. Sleeper alert!!

I’m going to revisit this topic in the near future, as I think it is a good way of determining the true rarity of certain coins in high-end “PQ” grades. By the same token, it also has relevance for lower grade coins like VF and EF when it comes to determining how nice a really rare coin is for its respective grade.

For more information on CAC and on Liberty Head eagles—with or without CAC approval—please feel free to contact me by email at dwn@ont.com.