What's Hot, What's Not: The US Rare Gold Coin Market in 2015/2016

What's Hot, What's Not: The US Rare Gold Coin Market in 2015/2016

As is tradition at DWN, at the end of every year we summarize our experiences buying and selling choice and rare United States gold coins and attempt to predict what will be the “hot” and “not so hot” areas in the market. 

Read More

The Pogue Quarter Eagles: A Post-Auction Analysis

The Pogue Quarter Eagles: A Post-Auction Analysis

The first of the Pogue sessions was held in New York on May 19th and I was excited to attend. The auction was conducted at Sotheby’s and the last time I went to a coin sale on 72nd and York, I saw the record-breaking 1933 $20 take the numismatic world by storm.

Read More

CAC Populations and Appearance Rarity: An Analysis

CAC Populations and Appearance Rarity: An Analysis

As I wrote in an earlier article, CAC populations have created a new category of rarity: the appearance rarity, which is most akin to traditional condition rarity. A scan of the most recent CAC populations reveals a number of coins which are very surprising to me as appearance rarities.

Read More

A Dozen Undervalued United States Gold Coins Priced Below $7,500: The 2015 Edition

A Dozen Undervalued United States Gold Coins Priced Below $7,500: The 2015 Edition

It’s been quite a while since I wrote an article about the topic of affordable, undervalued 19th century U.S. gold coins, and I think it’s time to do a more current version of this article. I’m going to change things up ever so slightly this time and include some market overviews on each denomination, and make some suggestions which include multiple coins as opposed to “singles.”

Read More

What Does a Virtually "Perfect" 19th Century Gold Coin Look Like?

The majority of the coins I deal with are imperfect. They were struck by crude machinery, in often difficult circumstances, by often-times inexperienced mint personnel. If I had to guess, I’d say the average grade of the coins I sell is in the Extremely Fine-45 to About Uncirculated-55 range. I sell coins which are “gently used.”

But every now and then, I handle a coin that is not only “unused,” but it is superb quality. I recently handled a PCGS MS68+ 1884 gold dollar approved by CAC, which was as close to perfect as any 19th century American gold coin I’ve handled in some time. I’d like to share some thoughts about the appearance of this specific coin, discuss it within the context of the Type Three gold dollar series, and share some random thoughts on originality and eye appeal.

1884 $1.00 PCGS MS68+ CAC

The late-date Type Three dollars—those issues struck from 1880 through the end of this series in 1889—share a number of characteristics. They all have fairly low mintages but fairly high survival rates. These issues were not well-circulated and for many of these dates, examples below AU55 to AU58 are all but unheard of.

Of the ten late-date Type Three gold dollars, the rarest in terms of overall rarity is the 1884. It sells for just a small premium over a really common date like an 1888 or 1889 but it is actually much scarcer. Of the 5,230 struck, there are around 500 known with nearly all in the MS62 to MS64 range. In MS65 and even MS66, this date is not a big deal and PCGS has graded enough in MS67 (20 coins as of September 2014) that most any collector who wants one can find one. MS68’s are another story, and PCGS has graded only seven in this grade plus this one example in MS68+. NGC has graded an 1884 dollar in MS69, and I’m sure that coin is amazing, but I’m feeling pretty confident in saying right now that this PCGS MS68+ is the single finest known 1884 gold dollar.

What makes this coin an MS68+? Is it really better than an MS67; enough to justify it being worth close to four times what a nice PCGS/CAC MS67? If so, how, what and why?

I generally avoid buying common coins in uncommon grades, and if I were offered an 1888 or 1889 gold dollar in MS68+ I would likely pass. But I quickly pulled the trigger on this 1884. My decision was made easy by the coin’s appearance. It has eye appeal to spare; a result of its great surfaces, lovely color and the “look” which is hard to put into words but which speaks volumes to me. This coin didn’t have the appearance of a “typical” dipped high grade dollar of this era. It was dark and filmy and I mean “filmy” in a good way; more on this below.

Let’s look at the components of grading which combine to give this coin its Mint State rating and its eye appeal factor. First is strike. Strike shouldn’t be much of a factor on late date Type Three gold dollars as these tend to be extremely well-struck. This coin is no exception, and it is fully detailed at the centers and borders. The second factor is surface preservation. A close examination of the surfaces reveals a single light scrape on the upper obverse below ES in STATES. Other than this, the coin is perfect. The next factor is luster. This coin has amazing rich, thick frosty luster which is unbroken and which clearly has never been tampered with. This issue tends to have very good luster, but even by the standards of 1884 gold dollars, this piece has better than average luster. The fourth factor is coloration. You can see from the attached photo that this coin has very pronounced coppery-russet color, which is deeper at the borders than the centers. The color is “right” for the issue and it has a pattern and hues that is clearly natural.

One thing about this coin which is interesting is its “filmy” appearance. Generally, a coin which is filmy has negative connotations, and this film might be putty or some unnatural, applied chemical. But a number of Type Three gold dollars have what is known as “cellophane” toning from storage in old cellophane holders. These coins were often given as Christmas presents and stored for many years in these clear holders which impart a very recognizable “film” over the surfaces. If I saw this same sort of film on, say, an 1854-D gold dollar, I’d be suspicious. But knowing that this look is not uncommon on high-grade business strike gold dollars from the 1880’s, I regard it as another “plus” factor in this coin’s overall appearance.

As a collector, one of the things you should do is educate yourself as much as possible about the series you collect. Focus less on trying to learn what is the difference between an MS67, an MS68, and an MS69, and more on the characteristics which make a coin special for its respective issue. Learn about things like cellophane-style toning on the surfaces of Type Three gold dollars, and why this is a good thing. Most of all, find a visual “look” which appeals to you and try to stick to this as much as possible when you search for coins.

And whatever became of this 1884 gold dollar? I sold it to a prominent collector who is currently working on the finest-known set of gold dollars, and he is thrilled with his new acquisition.

Do you have questions or comments about this PCGS MS68+ gold dollar? If so, please free to comment below or ask me directly via email at dwn@ont.com.

Do you buy rare gold coins?

Do you have coins to sell?

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

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

Compromising When Coin Buying: When You Should and When You Shouldn't

Collectors often ask me about my thought process(es) when I make coin purchases. Why do I buy certain coins and pass on others? Why do I stretch for some coins, and make others based solely on a favorable price? These are great questions and I think they are worthy of a blog.

Most coin purchases involve some sort of compromise. Very few coins are “perfect” from an appearance standpoint. A coin may have been cleaned at one time or it may have some weakness of strike or more marks in prominent locations than you would hope for. When should you compromise your standards, and when should you hold fast and true?

A lot of the answers that I would give to these questions depend on what sort of coins you are buying and whether you collect by type or by date. If you are a type collector, it is much easier to, as an example, wait for the perfect AU55 Capped Bust Right Heraldic Eagle ten dollar gold piece than it is to wait for an 1804 eagle in AU55 which is well struck and which has natural color.

Let’s look at some specifics for compromise vs. non-compromise, and use some real world examples.

1. Very Rare Coins Should Be Held to Lower Standards than Common Coins

Intuitively, you would think that the exact opposite should be true in numismatics, but it’s not.

The rarest Dahlonega half eagle is the 1842-D Large Date. It’s the only issue in the series which is genuinely hard to find in EF and higher grades with really good eye appeal. I haven’t handled a truly nice one in years, and I have numerous want lists for this date in nearly any grade. If someone offered me a marginal quality in a 45 holder tomorrow, I would invariably buy it unless it was grossly overpriced or it had some flaw that I just couldn’t get past.

1842-D Large Date $5.00 NGC AU55

The most common Dahlonega half eagle is the 1854-D. It’s kind of a blah issue, but I seldom buy this date unless it is outstanding for the date for one of the following reasons: it's 100% original, it has great color, or it is exceptional eye appeal. In other words, I’m not going to buy an 1854-D (or any other very common Dahlonega half eagle) unless there is something really exceptional about it.

If I hold the 1842-D Large Date to the same standards that I hold the 1854-D to, I’m never going to buy an example. And this is a trap that many collectors fall into.

There are a number of very rare coins that just don’t come nice. A classic example is the 1870-CC double eagle. I’ve seen or owned probably half of the surviving examples and I can’t recall more than two or three that I would regard as “choice.”  The typical example is not only well-worn but it lacks original color and has numerous abrasions. As a buyer who loves original color and tends not to like abrasions, the 1870-CC is problematical for me. Which is why I hold it to an entirely different set of standards than, say, an issue like the 1890-CC double eagle, which I can easily locate with good eye appeal.

2. If You Don't Lower Your Standards on Certain Coins, You'll Never Buy Any

Around a year ago, I began selling coins to a new collector who decided that he wanted to specialize in rare to very rare Liberty Head eagles. His collecting background was with more modern issues such as Walking Liberty half dollars and he was used to big, bright, shiny coins which were just about perfect. I warned him that he would have to use an entirely different set of standards with a coin like an 1860-S eagle; an issue which is not only extremely rare but is one with which rigorous buying standards have to be thrown out the window.

The first two transactions I had with this gentleman were disasters. He returned one very scarce coin (in a PCGS holder and with CAC approval) for having a tiny “scratch” hidden on the reverse, and another rarer one for not being as “dark and dirty” as he thought the photo and description on my website indicated. I don’t have many coins returned due to quality issues, and two have two returned by the same individual in the space of a few weeks…well, let’s just say this doesn’t happen much at DWN.

We spoke on the phone and this is what I learned: since these coins were expensive (high four figures in one case and low five figures in another) he expected them to be superb. I tried to explain to him that what constitutes “superb” in the realm of rare date eagles is entirely different than what constitutes “superb” when looking at MS66 and MS67 late date Walkers. He was using a set of standards that were totally inapplicable to rare date 19th century gold coins that were both conditionally rare and which had very low survival rates. I think we parted friends, but to this day I have never sold him another coin and don’t think he is likely to buy anything from me.

This blog is not meant to be an apology for compromising your standards. In the field of rare date gold collecting there are many coins that you can take a firm stand and not waver from it.

3. When You Want One of Something, You Can Be Fussy

More dated gold collectors are collecting by a type or by “best available neat coin” strategy and wandering from the previous standards of collecting series by date.

Let’s say you’ve decided that you like Charlotte quarter eagles but you want just two examples: a Classic Head and a Liberty Head. You are more limited with the former as there are just two Classic Head issues; the Liberty Head series offers much more flexibility with 18 different issues to choose from.

You’ve saved up and have $3,500 to spend on a really nice quarter eagle. You are someone who really values good strikes and you hate coins which are made on inferior planchets. This automatically eliminates around half to two-thirds of the possible Liberty Head issues from this mint (due to budget constraints, strike problems, or poor method of manufacture) and you can focus on the issues which make sense. The chances are good that the “right” $3,500 coin will show up in a few months; a coin with excellent striking detail, nice surfaces and the original color and surfaces that collectors now crave. It might be a “common” issue such as an 1847-Cl or it might be a scarcer issue such as an 1840-C.

Or you can just buy assorted neat coins in your price range. Let’s say you love dirty, original coins and your price point is $2,500-5,000. It doesn’t theoretically matter if you buy a PCGS AU58 1857-S gold dollar or an NGC AU50 1846-D/D half eaglel as long as the coin has character and its eye appeal “speaks” to you.

4. Be Picky on the Keys (if you collect by date)

I’ve discussed this more than once but most collectors overbuy the common dates in their chosen set(s) and underbuy the keys.

Let me give you an example of the right way to form a set. A very good client of mine has been working on a Dahlonega quarter eagle set for five or six years now. His motivation to begin this set was when I had just bought a great collection of D mint quarter eagles and was breaking them up. It just so happened that the key 1855-D and 1856-D in this collection were wonderful quality for the date: comparatively high grade, nice and original, and well-pedigreed. He realized that by purchasing both coins, he would be off to a great start and that he might not have a chance to purchase such nice examples again.

1854-D $2.50 PCGS AU58 CAC

After buying these two key issues, this collector decided that the other rarities in the set (1840-D, 1841-D, 1842-D, and 1854-D) had to be special coins. And over the course of the next five years, I was able to purchase beautiful AU55 to AU58 examples of each.

As picky as he was on the keys, he was discriminating on the common dates in the set. He bought nice AU examples but resisted the temptation to spend $15,000 on a common 1843-D when he could own a perfectly presentable example for $4,000 and funnel the savings towards another key date, or two to three more nice commons.

5. Be Picky When You Have Options

Let’s say you are a collector for whom strike is a key factor in determining whether or not you buy a coin. On some issues, you are out of luck as all known examples are found with weakness of strike (an example of this would be the 1859-C and 1860-C half eagles). Other issues are found with varieties which are well struck or poorly struck, depending on the die state (examples of this include the 1844-D and 1848-C quarter eagles).

To be a good collector in the area of rare date gold, you have to learn about each issue’s appearance. This is why the books I have written explain factors such as typical strike in great detail.

You are surfing the web and you happen on a nice, crusty 1844-D quarter eagle in a PCGS AU55 holder. It has your “look” and is priced in your wheelhouse, but the strike is very poor. If you know the intricacies of this issue, you know that around 50% of all 1844-D quarter eagles show central weakness. This means that you still have a good chance to find a well-struck example and that you should probably pass on the coin, even if you need it for your date set.


Knowing when to be picky and when to compromise is an important part of the strategies used by sophisticated collectors of all coins; not just dated gold. Do you have any stories to share about being picky or not being picky when you bought a coin? Please share them in the comments section below.


Do you buy rare gold coins?

Do you have coins to sell?

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

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

Are 1870-CC Eagles Undervalued in Comparison to their Double Eagle Counterparts?

Without a lot of fanfare, we have seen the dispersal of one of the most amazing collecting of Western branch mint gold coins in the history of numismatics. So far in 2014, the various sales of the Bently/Nob Hill Collection(s) of US Gold Coinage has seen no less than six examples each of the rare 1870-CC eagle and double eagle with the promise of more to come.

The sale of this quantity of 1870-CC eagles and double eagles has made me reconsider the rarity and price structure of both issues. It has not only allowed me to get an excellent idea of exact valuations for both issues in a variety of grades, it has led me to ask an important question: is the 1870-CC eagle undervalued in comparison to its double eagle counterpart?

Before I attempt to answer this question, let’s take a quick look at both issues.

A total of 5,908 1870-CC eagles were struck. This is the rarest Carson City eagle (although the 1879-CC makes a strong claim to the rarest coin in the series) and there are an estimated 50-60 pieces known with most in the VG-VF range.

There were 3,789 1870-CC double eagles struck. It is the rarest CC gold coin of any denomination and I feel that there are 35-45 known in all grades; mostly in the VF-EF range.

Let’s look at the current PCGS population figures for each issue:

$10.00 G-VF : 23; EF: 18; AU: 10; UNC: 0; Total: 51

$20.00 G-VF : 6; EF: 22; AU: 5; UNC: 0; Total: 33

These numbers tell us a few things. First, as expected, the 1870-CC double eagle is around twice as rare as its counterpart the 1870-CC. Interestingly, the eagle is seen more often in lower grades (the average example grades VF) while the average grade for the double eagle is EF. Both issues are extremely rare in properly grade AU and are unknown in anything close to Mint State.

We might make the quick conclusion that based on rarity alone, the 1870-CC double eagle should be worth around 2x what an 1870-CC eagle is worth in VF, EF and AU grades.

Based on the sales of so many 1870-CC eagles and double eagles in 2014, I’d suggest the following valuations for each denomination:

1870-CC $10.00 PCGS EF45


  • VF: $25,000-40,000 (depends on grade/grading service)
  • EF40: NGC $40,000-45,000; PCGS $45,000-50,000
  • EF45: NGC $45,000-50,000; PCGS $50,000-55,000
  • AU50: NGC $60,000-65,000; PCGS $70,000-75,000
  • AU55: NGC $125,000-135,000; PCGS $150,000-175,000

1870-CC $20.00 PCGS EF45


  • VF: $175,000-225,000 (depends on grade/grading service)
  • EF40: NGC $235,000-250,000; PCGS $250,000-265,000
  • EF45: NGC $260,000-280,000; PCGS $275,000-290,000
  • AU50: NGC $285,000-295,000; PCGS $310,000-330,000
  • AU55: NGC $325,000-350,000; PCGS $400,000-425,000

Assuming that the price structure for the 1870-CC double eagle is “correct” (and I think it is, based on the number of coins which have sold over the last few years), why is the 1870-CC eagle not priced at around half the level of its counterpart?

I think there are a few answers to this. The 1870-CC double eagle is a more famous coin with a lower mintage. It is larger in size and it is part of a set (Carson City double eagles) which ranks as among the most avidly collected in all of upper-echelon American numismatics.

Double eagle rarities have multiple levels of demand, and the 1870-CC is a coin that often sells to a collector or investor who might not be a tried and true specialist.

I think we are beginning to see a strong shift in the eagle market and this denomination is now gaining in popularity and price. CC eagles aren’t as popular (yet) as double eagles, but the metrics for these series is clearly changing.

My conclusion is that the 1870-CC eagle is undervalued. If a nice quality EF45 1870-CC double eagle is worth in the $275,000-295,000 range, an 1870-CC eagle at $50,000-55,000 seems substantially undervalued. Given that the 1870-CC eagle in EF is pretty similar in rarity to the 1870-CC double eagle (see the chart above), it is hard to believe that it is worth only 1/5th as much. I can easily see the 1870-CC eagle in EF and AU grades doubling in price in the next five years; I’m not sure I can say the same for the 1870-CC double eagle.

What are your thoughts about the price and rarity of the 1870-CC eagle and double eagle? I would love for you to comment below.


Do you buy rare gold coins?

Do you have coins to sell?

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

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