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.

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.