612.5 Tonnes

The Netherland central bank, De Nederlandsche Bank, oversees all of the the Dutch national finances, including the country’s 612.5 tonnes of gold . The Dutch gold is currently worth over $20 billion .

765.2 Tonnes

Japan is ninth largest gold owner in the world, with 765.2 tonnes of gold that accounts for only2.1% of the nation’s total foreign reserves. On the open market, Japan’s gold reserves are worth approximately $25.4 billion and are managed by the Bank of Japan.

1040.1 Tonnes

The Swiss National Bank oversees the country’s 1,040.1 tonnes of gold. The gold is believed to be stored in huge underground vaults near the federal Parliament building in Berne, however the Swiss National Bank treats the location of the gold reserves as a secret. Switzerland’s stockpile is worth approximately $34.5 billion in today’s gold market.

1054 Tonnes

The world’s most populous country also has the world’s seventh largest gold reserve. With a population of 1,330,440,055 (A rough estimate as of July 2009), the country holds about $26 worth of gold per person, worth a total of almost $35 billion.

1120.6 Tonnes

Originally listed on the New York Stock Exchange in 2004, SPDR Gold Shares is one of the fastest growing ETFs in the world. All of the Trust’s gold is held by the Custodian, HSBC Bank, in their London vault.

2450.7 Tonnes

The Banque De France is responsible for France’s gold holdings, which have been reported at about 2,450.7 tonnes by the International Monetary Fund. With the fifth largest gold reserve in the world, France’s amount to about $81.3 billion.

2451.8 Tonnes

The Italian National Bank, Banca D’Italia, manages the country’s large gold holdings, with approximately 2,451.8 tonnes of gold in reserve, Italy’s holdings are very close to France’s and are also worth approximately $81.3 billion at current prices.

3217.3 Tonnes

The International Monetary Fund oversees the global financial system of its 185 member countries and was formed to stabilize international exchange rates and facilitate development, mainly to poorer countries.

3412.6 Tonnes

The Deutsche Bundesbank, Germany’s central bank, is one of the most influential member of the European System of Central Banks. With a hefty 3,412.6 tonnes of gold reserves, which are valued at about $113.2 billion at current prices.

8133.5Tonnes

The United States holds the largest gold reserve in the world. With 8,133.5 tonnes, the US gold holdings are worth approximately $269.67 billion. This massive gold reserve represents about .9436 an ounce for ever person living in the country. The majority of the American gold is reported to be held in the world famous United States Bullion Depository in Fort Knox, Kentucky, although no audit has been conducted in over 40 years. ]]> http://www.coinlink.com/Articles/gold-silver-bullion/who-owns-the-most-gold/feed/ 0 http://www.coinlink.com/Articles/us-coins/two-legged-buffaloes/ http://www.coinlink.com/Articles/us-coins/two-legged-buffaloes/#comments Tue, 14 Jul 2009 06:19:47 +0000 Len Ratzman - TCN http://www.coinlink.com/Articles/us-coins/two-legged-buffaloes/ by Len Ratzman – California Numismatist – Vol. 6 No.2 (Summer 2009)

When a mint error is first discovered, a predictably lengthy process is begun involving multiple recognized experts in the field to examine and scrutinize the coin’s authenticity under high magnification to separate a bona fide error from a manufactured counterfeit.

Ideally, after sufficient time and examinations have been made, the coin is either accepted or rejected by the numismatic community. But, in reality, there is a third possibility – unending disagreement among the experts. This outcome, of course, leaves many of us who are looking for definitive answers in relative limbo.

If decades go by and recognized, numismatic authorities still are conflicted as to the authenticity of the coin, what then? If, for instance, someone tried to buy or sell a specimen with this error to a dealer, another collector or at auction, how could they vouch for the legitimacy of the error and, in turn, ask a realistic price? This article is devoted to one such enigma that the author discovered by accident.

In a relatively recent attempt to determine if the Smithsonian Institute’s buffalo nickel collection was missing any specimens after all these years, an email inquiry was sent in early January to Mr. Richard Doty, the senior curator of numismatics for the Behring Center.

Sent from the American Museum of Natural History Behring Center where the coins are stored, Mr. Doty’s e-mail responded, “Your inquiry was passed to me. We do have a set of buffalo nickels, only lacking the 1934 two-legged and 1916 doubled die and 1918/7 varieties.”

Nineteen thirty-four, two-legged? When anyone specializes in one coin and finds (after decades devoted to researching that coin) that a variety exists unknown to that collector, it’s a very humbling experience.

A search of the Red Book, several Internet population reports, and reference books containing buffalo mint errors revealed many mint errors were listed but no mention of any two-legged varieties.

Determined to find one or more sources that mentioned the authenticity of the variety’s existence or debunked its legitimacy, a search was begun with e-mails and references in local libraries to provide sufficient data to pose this “discrepancy” to you readers for your evaluation.

Agreeing with the researched sources, Walter Breen discredits these varieties by acknowledging the 1937- D, three-legged variety but warning, “On the other hand, the 1935 and 1936 two-legs coins have lately been proved counterfeit, the 1936 unmintmarked and ‘S’ coins having the same obverse die. All are overweight despite apparent extreme wear, the blebs (or raised lumps) on surfaces of both dates, and the distortions of lettering, are inconsistent with mint technology of the period.”

The next obvious inquiry was to try to determine what sources Mr. Doty used from which he determined the Smithsonian’s collection was missing one or more, two-legged buffaloes. His prompt and helpful reply stated, “I found the coins mentioned in Bill Fivas and J.T. Stanton’s ‘Cherrypickers Guide” and Frank G. Spadone’s ‘Major Variety-Oddity Guide of United States Coins.”

Weeks later the second book mentioned (Spadone’s) arrived in the mail, ordered from Amazon.com, and sure enough, an alarming picture of a two-legged variety appears with both the right foreleg and right hind-leg missing. The quality of the photograph, unfortunately, wasn’t outstanding, but the “blank” area where the right hindleg should be is unmistakable.

The final piece to the puzzle, the Fivas/Stanton book, arrived later and “supported” the non-existence of the variety by its absence.

I wonder if they make prosthetic legs for Buffaloes?

I purchased an 1849 quarter in November of 2006 that I was, at the time, unable to attribute using Briggs’ “Comprehensive Encyclopedia of United States Seated Quarters” (Lima, OH 1991 ISBN 1-880731-05-3). A short article by John McCloskey in The Gobrecht Journal (Issue 98, pages 35-36) published the following March described in detail a coin from the same die pairing as the coin in my possession.

During the past two plus years I have examined every 1849 quarter that I could find, whether in auctions, at bourse tables, or on eBay (when photo quality permitted) in an effort to complete the puzzle. I now own four distinct business strike die marriages of the 1849 quarter and though there is not yet a definitive conclusion, I do have what I call a working hypothesis.

I believe that the “unknown” obverse is actually obverse 3 in the Briggs Encyclopedia and that there are a couple of typos in the description that have caused some confusion.

First, the date location of “just right of 5″ is in error and should read “6/7″. Note that date position is determined based on an imaginary line drawn along the right side of the upright portion of the “1″ in the date. The date position number then references where this line intersects the shield above with respect to the shield lines numbered from left to right.

Second, instead of “slopes up left to right” it should read “slopes down left to right.” I’ve noted that the distance measurements from digit to rock provided in the book read 0.5 – 0.5 – 0.5 – 0.6 indicating a downward slope from left to right, though the text says “up”. Figure 1 shows three dates of 1849 seated quarters, the top is obverse 2, the middle is obverse 3 (or the unlisted obverse if the hypothesis is proven wrong), and the bottom is the proof obverse (obverse 4, from the Heritage online archive, Lot 2390, Auction 1104, April 16, 2008).

It should be mentioned here for completeness that obverse 1 has a date that is much further to the left than any of those shown.

So the question remains, “Is the middle date pictured here Briggs’ obverse 3, or a new unlisted obverse (which incidentally is the obverse die of Briggs’ plate coin even though it does not appear to correspond to any of the four obverse dies described in the text)?”

Based on two years of not finding any obverse dies other than the three pictured (and obverse 1) I suspect that the date pictured in the middle is, in fact, obverse 3. However, the fact that I haven’t found another obverse die does not prove that another obverse does not exist. Can anyone produce an 1849 quarter with a date that slopes up left to right? Or that has a date position that is “just right of 5?” You can contact me at greg.johnson56@verizon.net.

The high only lasted a couple of hours.

It took only that long to find out that my friend’s 1795 Flowing Hair 3-leaf dollar in MS-55 (my estimate) that had been left to her by her greatgrandfather was, sadly, only a good counterfeit.

When Sarah called me from work that day, she didn’t even say hello. Her fi rst, excited words were, “Len, what do you know about old dollars?” I told her my thirty-plus years in numismatics coveting only buffalo nickels didn’t include silver dollars of any age. But, since she knew nothing about coins, she knew from 20 years of friendship that I could research the coin for her.

When she told me over the phone that the dollar was dated 1795, it didn’t take a specialist in the hobby to know instantly what potential value laid waiting to be realized.

I jumped into the car and made it to the restaurant where she worked in 11 minutes—normally a 20 minute drive. With my loupe already in hand, I said, “Hi,” and with indescribable anticipation asked her to show me the coin.

Although my grading skills only covered buffaloes from 30 years of studying them, I could still tell from the fi ne detail that, if genuine, the grading companies would probably register the dollar as an MS-55 or better. Cha-ching!

The next two hours were a blur of researching the Internet, visiting coinrelated Web sites, phone calls to local dealers and opening that latest Red Book to a section I hadn’t ever paid attention to.

But wait! A $30,000 coin just popping up out of nowhere? If it’s too good to be true, it usually isn’t. So, before I started making plans to send in the coin to be registered, I dug a little deeper and learned from a prominent expert on dollars that countless counterfeits from a foreign country had reached the states and there were two ways to tell a fake from the real thing:

1. The craftsmanship of the details were too rough and amateurish to be genuine.

2. When subjected to a magnet, a genuine coin wouldn’t be attracted to it.

Guess what happened when I nervously held one of my refrigerator magnets over the coin when I got it home? The coin leaped from the dining room table at least an inch into the air before it clanked onto the magnet, crushing my delusions of grandeur in an instant.

Not knowing anything about the coin or its imitators, I called the dollar expert back and asked him the fi rst question that popped into my mind when I realized I held a worthless souvenir in my hand. “Why would a counterfeiter expend the time, energy and expense of creating such a beautiful imitation and then choose to use a metal that would obviously expose it so readily as a counterfeit when held to a magnet”?

I was educated a little more that day when the expert told me that the coin was made as a souvenir and evidently not created to try to fool anyone. Who says an old dog can’t learn new tricks?

Morale of the story—learn as much as you can about a coin before you invest wasted time, energy and expense toward its sale or purchase. Assume it’s a counterfeit to begin with and then prove yourself wrong with exhaustive research.

One fantasy all numismatists have is coming across a coin in a yard sale, buried treasure, or miraculous fi nd, that reveals a coveted coin or collection of genuine coins. Just don’t hold your breath ‘til it happens to you. Anybody want to buy a 1795 dollar for a dollar?

Most new collectors make mistakes when they begin to assemble a collection of coins. Some of these are easily avoidable; others require a “heads up” from an expert. Here are some of the mistakes we see made most often and some practical suggestions on how to avoid them.

I. Buy Third Party Graded Coins
Unless you are purchasing inexpensive coins or bullion-related gold issues, you need to buy coins that have been professionally graded. It’s a virtual guarantee that the “raw” coins you buy are going to be overgraded at best or counterfeit/repaired at worst.

II. But…Buy the “Right” Third Party Graded Coins
When it comes down to it, there are only two grading services that, as of early 2001, are readily accepted in the market: PCGS and NGC. Coins graded by other services either trade at a discount or are absurdly overgraded. You can save yourself a lot of grief and aggravation by buying only PCGS and NGC coins.

III. And…Buy the Coin and Not The Holder
Not every PCGS or NGC coin is “high end” for the grade. Establishing a relationship with a dealer who can determine which coins are nice and which are average (or inferior) is essential.

IV. “I Can Do Everything Myself”
No you can’t. You need to have a close working relationship with one or two knowledgeable coin dealers. New collectors who think they can compete in the market against experienced dealers and collectors are a virtual certainty to have their heads handed to them. End of discussion.

V. Take Your Time
Most great coin collection are assembled over the course of decades; not months. Sure, you can complete a set of Indian Quarter eagles in thirty days. But rushing though a set is a good way to make mistakes; most of which will cost you in the long run.

VI. Learn about Coins
No matter what you collect, the more you learn the better your collection will be. Learn how to grade. Learn what nice coins look like. Learn about the coins you have decided to specialize in. Learn how the coin market works. If you don’t have the time to learn as much as you should, establish a relationship with a dealer who can teach you basic knowledge in a short period of time.

VII. Don’t Over-invest
When you buy coins remember this: they should be purchased for enjoyment not investment and they should be purchased for long term hold. Even if you buy good coins from a very reputable dealer, there is a good chance that if you have to sell them quickly, you’ll lose 10-30%. If you can’t afford this sort of market risk, either don’t buy coins or buy issues with smaller downside risk.

VIII. Deals That Are Too Good To Be True ARE Too Good To Be True
You hear about a coin that generally sells all day long for $1500 but is priced at $750. Sounds like a “great” deal, right? Wrong! When you see a coin advertised in Coin World or listed on eBay that seems like its just too good a deal…need I say more?

IX. Buy Quality Not Quantity
We look at coin collections to buy all the time. Some of them have hundreds (or even thousands) of cheap, low grade coins. Others have a small number of really nice (and not necessarily expensive) coins. Take a guess which collections excite us more. If you have an annual budget of $10,000, buy three or four really neat $2,500-3,500 coins; not thirty $300 space eaters.

X. Coins Are A Hobby!
If you view numismatics as a life and death endeavor, you won’t enjoy it. Coin collecting is a fun hobby with many obvious benefits. Learn to appreciate the positive attributes that come with coin collecting and leave the stress to others.

XI. Set Goals For Yourself
If your collection has a beginning, middle and end, the progress you make will be easier to measure. Make certain that your goals are realistic.

XII. Stretch For Truly Rare Coins
Don’t make the common mistake that you skimp on the rarest issues in your chosen set and splurge on the most common. The right way to collect is doing the exact opposite.

We’ve entered the last year of the popular modern commemorative quarter program. For better or worse, all fifty states have created designs and the final mintages will hit the nation’s cash registers during the remainder of the year. While I find these final five designs attractive, they (like their modern predecessors) lack the historical depth and symbolisms many of their classic commemorative cousins encompassed. And, as I look over the 2008 proof set that just crossed my desk, my mind goes back to the original commemorative quarter.

The 1893 Isabella Quarter, was created for the Columbian Exposition. $10,000 of the funds intended for the Board of Lady Mangers at the Expo was delivered in the form of forty thousand of these commemorative quarters. The board had been formed at the urging of woman’s rights activist Susan B. Anthony, who felt both genders should be represented in the managerial makeup of this great national project the expo had become. The inclusion of a coin to commemorate female contributions to industry seems almost trifling by today’s standards. But the Woman’s Suffrage movement was full steam ahead at the time. In fact, women didn’t legally win the right to vote until Colorado adapted an amendment to allow them to do so, during this year, 1893. A cause Anthony had championed over the previous two and a half decades. What seems like just a novel idea now, was a veritable coup at the time. The quarter served not only to raise money for the cause, but as a sort of name recognition ad for the woman’s rights movement. And it fueled the growing fires of suffrage. The coins were to be sold at the fair for $1 each. A premium over face that was obscene to some. For this and a variety of other reasons, thousands went unsold during the fair. The balance was slowly sold off to dealers during the coming decade.

The dies were prepared by Charles Barber, presumably from sketches done by Kenyon Cox. Later research has brought this into question. But regardless of where the original ideas came from, the coin is wrought with symbolism – especially the reverse. The use of a monarch on the obverse is somewhat controversial, but considering what event the coin was supposed to commemorate, it was a natural choice. Queen Isabella was the backing Christopher Columbus needed to fund his adventure. The reverse is simply described in most numismatic literature as a kneeling woman holding a distaff, the spool used to hold unspun cotton. This image is now reported to represent “woman in industry.” This may be the case but, Barber’s image would have meant a lot more to the people in his time.

First, the word distaff carried a more pertinent meaning in 1893. We understand it to be the spools used as part of the process in making wool and cotton thread. We therefore attribute its inclusion here to emphasize women’s part in industry or more specifically the textile industry. However, in 1893 the word distaff was used to describe a woman, a woman’s work or women collectively. This definition is lost to modern collectors.

During the turn of the last century, this synonym for woman in the workplace was a powerful image. But there’s more! Her body’s position on the reverse is an obvious play on an early hard times token promoting woman’s suffrage. That alone is interesting, but this particular kneeling woman was used for its visual likeness to a similar anti-slavery movement image. The Isabella Quarter’s image wasn’t well received and surely the connection with slavery (only a few decades from the Civil War) met with mixed emotions. Again, the slavery connection is lost to all but the best read modern collector.

In 1893, The American Journal of Numismatics unfavorably reviewed the design of this and the Columbian half dollar stating, “If these two coins really represent the highest achievements of our medalists and our mints, under the inspiration of an opportunity without restrictions, the like of which has never been presented hitherto in history of our national coinage, we might as well despair of its future.” What would this reviewer say about the modern Wyoming state quarter?

Many Isabella quarters went unsold during the fair, a fact that must be attributed to the poor reception and the lack of commitment by fair goers to the woman’s liberation movement. Other factors contributed, but coin sales were initially unfavorable. These early commemorative coins have now become collector favorites. And, as I look over the 50 State quarters complete collection, no design carries the weight that this the original commemorative quarter held. In today’s world of political correctness, our over zealous Mint will likely never produce the meaningful designs that this and many of the classic counterparts cleared the way for.

© Copyright 2008, Pinnacle Rarities, Inc. All rights reserved.
(800) 724-7642 | (360) 786-5721 | Fax: (360) 786-6045 | Email: expectmore@pinnacle-rarities.com

In the five years since I wrote the second edition of my book on Dahlonega gold coinage, a number of important coins have been sold and some significant changes are going to be have to be made when I release my third edition (which, if I had to guess, will be out in another year or so). I think it would be interesting to look at the ten rarest Dahlonega gold coins and see what important things have changed about them since 2003.

For each of these issues, I am going to focus on the following aspects:

-Changes (if any) in high grade rarity
-Changes (if any) in Condition Census
-New Finest Known coins or important new discoveries
-New price records at auction or via private treaty

Before we begin, I think a quick overview of the Dahlonega market is in order. If I had to summarize it in a paragraph I would say that the market is currently strong. The supply of Dahlonega coins—even schlocky ones—really seems to have dried up in the last two or three years. It was always hard to find choice, original Dahlonega coins; even in low grades. Now it seems hard to find even mediocre quality pieces. And the very rare Dahlonega issues—the coins which we will focus on in this article—have become exceptionally hard to locate. The last really important specialized collection to come on the market was the Duke’s Creek gold dollars and quarter eagles that Heritage auctioned in April 2006.

1855-D Gold Dollar: This remains the rarest Dahlonega gold dollar in high grades and it is the second rarest overall with fewer than 100 known. The rarity of this issue with a full date seems to have been exaggerated by me in the first two editions of my book. I would revise the number of 1855-D gold dollars with a full date upwards from “less than a dozen” to around double this amount.

While no new discoveries of note have been recorded, no less than three record prices were recorded between 2006 and 2007. In February 2007, the Goldberg: 2097 example, graded MS64 by NGC, sold for an incredible $149,500; it had sold earlier as Heritage 1/06: 3396 where it brought $109,250. The finest known 1855-D was purchased by a prominent Alabama collector in the Heritage April 2006 sale where it realized $132,250. This coin had previously been graded MS64 by NGC; now it is in a PCGS 64 holder. The only other Uncirculated 1855-D gold dollars, graded MS62 and MS61 by PCGS, sold for $56,350 and $46,000 respectively in the Heritage 2/04 auction. Remarkably, the four finest 1855-D gold dollars all sold at auction between 2004 and 2007(!)

1856-D Gold Dollar: In the second edition of my Dahlonega book, I estimated that 80-90 examples of the 1856-D gold dollar exist. I still believe that this is accurate. I also estimated that only four to five Uncirculated examples are known. By the magic of gradeflation, I think this number has climbed to around half dozen.

A world record price was set by the Heritage 1/04: 1009 coin (ex: Green Pond) that sold for $47,150 and another impressive price realized was the Heritage 4/06: 1488 coin (ex: Duke’s Creek) that brought $40,250. One of these two coins was upgraded to MS63 by NGC and it now is the highest graded 1856-D gold dollar. Two other high grade 1856-D gold dollars that have traded since the second edition of my book was published are a new PCGS MS62 that I sold via private treaty in 2007 to the Wexford Collection and the ANR 9/03: 425 coin that sold for $41,400, the second highest price ever realized by this date.

1861-D Gold Dollar: The 1861-D gold dollar has, arguably, become the most popular coin of any denomination produced at the Dahlonega mint. I can’t attribute this soaring degree of popularity to anything other than a high “coolness” factor and a multi-tiered level of demand that is not seen by other Dahlonega issues.

My estimate of 55-65 known may be a bit on the low side and I would probably raise this to 65-75 including a dozen or so in Uncirculated. A record price was set in January 2008 when the Heritage 1/08: 3050 example brought $149,500 (this is an exact tie with an MS64 1855-D for the highest price ever realized by any gold dollar from Dahlonega). This same coin had brought $138,000 in April 2006. The finest known 1861-D remains the Pierce/Ullmer coin, graded MS64 by PCGS, in a prominent Alabama collection. In my opinion, the second finest is the Green Pond coin, graded MS63 by PCGS, which sold for $86,250 in January 2004.

1840-D Quarter Eagle: Of the ten coins discussed in this article, I think the 1840-D is the least well-known. It is the third rarest Dahlonega quarter eagle and I now regard it as the second rarest in high grades after the 1856-D. I believe this date is unique in properly graded Uncirculated and the finest known example, known to collectors as the Bareford/Duke’s Creek coin, sold for a record $74,750 when it was auctioned by Heritage in April 2006. (This coin, by the way, still appears in the PCGS population figures as an MS61. The only Uncirculated 1840-D quarter graded Uncirculated by NGC (an MS61) is owned by a Kansas collector and it is ex: Superior 8/07: 659 ($31,050), Heritage 1/04: 1016 ($27,600). I still think that even in properly graded AU50, the 1840-D is genuinely rare and there are fewer than a dozen true AU’s known.

1855-D Quarter Eagle: The true rarity of the 1855-D quarter eagle has been distorted by the fact that virtually all of the higher grade examples that have appeared for sale are overgraded. This includes at least two coins in MS60 holders that have been recolored and another with damage on the surfaces. The all-time price record for the 1855-D was set in April 2006 when Heritage sold an NGC MS61 for $54,625.

I have previously stated that the 1855-D is the rarest Dahlonega quarter eagle in high grades and overall. I now believe it to be the second rarest, after the 1856-D. I still have never seen an encapsulated 1855-D quarter eagle that I believed to fully Uncirculated. There is an example in the Smithsonian’s collection that noted expert Jeff Garrett grades MS62.

1856-D Quarter Eagle: My respect for this issue has increased over time and I now regard it as not only the rarest Dahlonega quarter eagle but the rarest single issue of any denomination from this mint. Only 874 were struck and there are probably no more than 45-55 known.

Due to its crude strike, this is an extremely hard issue to grade and I’m not really sure exactly how many Uncirculated pieces exist. PCGS has only graded a single example in Uncirculated (Heritage 1/04: 1034, ex: Green Pond that sold for $69,000) while NGC shows one in MS60 and four in MS61 with none better. The only Uncirculated NGC coin that I have personally handled is Heritage 4/06: 1513 (MS61) that I paid a record price of $71,875. There is a PCGS AU58 that is owned by a prominent Alabama collector that I think is outstanding for the issue and I have handled two other PCGS AU58’s that I feel are accurately graded.

1854-D Three Dollar: This is the only one of the ten issues in this article that I believe is overrated by most non-specialists. However, as I have mentioned innumerable times, its status as a one-year issue make it exceedingly popular with a wide range of collectors. A nice 1854-D Three Dollar has become the “High Relief of Branch Mint Gold” (i.e., an expensive but extremely popular issue with exceptional liquidity).

An all-time record for this date was set in April 2006 when I purchased an NGC MS62 from the Duke’s Creek collection sale. This easily eclipsed the previous auction high of $92,000 that was set by the Green Pond: 1037 coin back in January 2004. The two finest 1854-D Threes remain the fantastic Bass coin (see www.hbrf.org to view an image of this special piece) and the PCGS MS62 in the Great Lakes collection.

As of July 2008, PCGS had graded four examples in Uncirculated: MS62-(2) MS61 and MS60 while NGC had graded nine: MS62-(5) MS61 and (3) MS60. I believe the actual number of Uncirculated 1854-D Threes is around four or five.

1838-D Half Eagle: The 1838-D is by far the most available issue in this group of ten coins and the major reason I decided to include it (and exclude much rarer coins such as the 1860-D gold dollar and 1841-D, 1842-D and 1854-D quarter eagles) is that it is extremely popular. I would have to rank it as one of the three or four most popular issues from this mint.

As I mentioned before, the 1838-D half eagle is a relatively common issue and I believe that there are somewhere north of 300 known including as many as eight to ten in Uncirculated. But what I find interesting about this issue is that the supply has really shriveled in the last few years, particularly in higher grades. The only really nice Uncirculated 1838-D that I have seen in the last few years is Heritage 2007 ANA: 1919 (PCGS MS62 @$37,375). An NGC MS63 (ex: Ashland City collection) bounced around from sale to sale in 2003-2006 and I have never particularly cared for it. I believe that if a really choice, fresh PCGS MS62 or better 1838-D half eagle were to appear on the market, it would command a record price as there seem to be many collectors waiting around for such a coin.

1842-D Large Date Half Eagle: Despite its status as the rarest Dahlonega half eagle in higher grades, this is another issue that is somewhat off the radar to nearly everyone except specialists. In terms of its overall rarity, I believe this variety is a bit more available than I claimed in the second edition of my book. In high grades, it remains a major rarity with just a single Uncirculated graded by PCGS (the Green Pond coin which is in an MS61 holder) and two in MS61 at NGC.

The all-time auction record for the 1842-D half eagle was set in January 2004 by Green Pond: 1043 which realized $41,400. The Duke’s Creek/Eliasberg coin, which was formerly in a PCGS AU58 holder, is now (deservedly) in an NGC MS61 holder. An exceptional new PCGS AU58 was sold by me around a year ago to the Wexford Collection. I am especially interested to see the newly discovered NGC MS61 that was found as part of the S.S. New York treasure in Louisiana. This coin will be sold at auction by Stack’s just prior to the 2008 ANA.

1861-D Half Eagle: Like its gold dollar counterpart, the 1861-D half eagle has become an issue whose demand transcends specialists. As a result, prices for both 1861-D issues have soared in recent years. Despite the fact that even low grade 1861-D half eagles are now commanding prices upwards of $10,000, few have come to market since the second edition of my book was released.

However, there has been quite a bit of activity in the upper end of the 1861-D half eagle market. The finest known example, graded MS63 by PCGS, sold for a record $207,000 in Heritage’s 2008 FUN auction. This was, as far as I know, the most money that any single Dahlonega coin has ever brought. The second finest known example, pedigreed to the Duke’s Creek and Eliasberg collection, was upgraded from MS63 at PCGS to MS64 at NGC. And another MS63 was “made” at PCGS when the Duke’s Creek coin (ex: Heritage 1/04: 1065 @ $74,750 as PCGS MS62) upgraded a point.

The current certified population figures for this date are clearly inflated. PCGS shows three coins in MS63 but there are only two. They also show four in MS62 but I believe that the correct number is also two. The NGC population figure of three in MS62 seems inflated as well.

As I mentioned at the beginning of this article, I plan to begin work soon on the revised third edition of my Dahlonega book and will incorporate all of the changes mentioned in this article. If you have pertinent new information about Dahlonega coins that you feel should be in the book, please email me at dwn@ont.com and I will make certain it is included.

For more information on Dahlonega or other United States gold coinage, please contact Douglas Winter at dwn@ont.com.  

Every coin tells a story. Coins can tell stories of love, greed, hate, and many other things. Anyone who collects coins can do a little research and bring these stories to light. Ancient coins tell especially amazing stories. The paragraphs below tell of two coins that I earned through the ANA’s David R. Cervin Ancient Coin Project and the story that they tell.

I recently acquired a Septimius Severus Silver Denarius through the ANA’s David R. Cervin Ancient Coin Project. I researched the coin recently and I found out many interesting things. The coin told a story that encompassed a whole era of Roman History.

In my research, I discovered that the emperor that is depicted on the obverse and the reverse of the coin, Septimius Severus, is one of the greatest Roman Emperors of all time. His full name is Imperator Caesar Lucius Septimius Severus Pertinax Augustus Arabicus, Adiabenicus, Pius, Parthicus Maximus, Britannicus Maximus.

These titles came from a variety of sources: “Arabicus”- Meaning Arab, refers to place of birth, “Adiabenicus”- referring to one of the peoples that Severus conquered, “Pius”- meaning humble, “Parthicus Maximus”- meaning greatest Parthian, “Britannicus Maximus”-meaning greatest Briton.

He ascended to the throne through the murder and defeat of his political rivals. This took some time, but when he succeeded, Severus held a fi rm grip on the empire and conquered many lands. He had two sons, Caracalla and Geta. Caracalla was notoriously cruel and was known for murdering his brother, wife, and father-in-law in A.D. 211. But aside from all this bloodshed, Caracalla also made his own contribution to numismatics. He instituted a new denomination of coins in the Roman Empire, the antoninianus.

This coin is believed to have been valued at twice that of a denarius, but its metal content at the time of its institution was only 1.5 times that of a denarius. To add to this, the metals were gradually debased after that to a point where the denarii were hoarded because the coins that were said by the government to be worth twice as much were actually worth less. The metal content of the antoninianus was debased because of the lack of silver and gold coming into Rome from its dominions. The government still needed to bankroll its large army and had to make more coins with a debased metal content to continue paying its troops, which were guarding the empire from invaders along the borders. When the general public found out about the debasement of the coins, a period of hyperinfl ation occurred. This continued until the monetary reforms of Diocletian, when the economy was stabilized. Diocletian completely reorganized the monetary system, creating new denominations and values for Roman Currency.

Diocletian had all the citizens of the empire turn in their old currency and exchange it for the new, reformed currency. This is similar to what happened in the early 1920’s in Germany when prices doubled every two days and people would burn their old currency in lieu of wood because it lasted longer than the amount of fi rewood that it could buy. The German government then reformed the currency system and stabilized the economy. They had all the citizens of Germany turn in their old, devalued marks in exchange for new ones at a rate of a trillion (1,000,000,000,000) to one. This near-collapse of the empire from within marked a new era in Roman history. This era would last until the military defeat of the empire and the sacking of Rome by Germanic tribesmen several centuries later.

The period of economic mayhem described above can be traced all the way to Caracalla and his institution of the antoninianus. I happened to acquire an antoninianus, also through the David R. Cervin project. It was issued by a rebel emperor in Gaul (modern day France.) This coin is also known as barbarous radiate because of the shape of the crown depicted and also the fact that the persons depicted on them were frowned upon by Roman citizens because they were attempting to overthrow the true emperor. This coin would have never been minted if it were not for Caracalla. Caracalla would have never become emperor if his father had not fought his way into becoming emperor. I wonder how this coin or the person depicted on it affected world history.

All coins tell a story. These stories can tell of greed or love, hatred and revolts, but all of these stories are refl ected through the coinage of the time. Those who are fortunate enough to own or to collect ancient coins, or any type of coins for that matter, can take a trip back in time to learn about history, economics, and our world as it was many years ago.

Cole Schenewerk will be submitting part 2 of his article to run in the next issue of TCN. Look for it! [GB]

The most gifted designer in the history of U.S. coinage never lived to see his magnificent $20 gold coins enter circulation. Augustus Saint-Gaudens died on August 3rd, 1907, three months before his first pieces were struck.

Saint-Gaudens’ pupil Henry Hering and President Theodore Roosevelt were the two people most directly responsible for the completion of Saint- Gaudens work. Roosevelt himself chose the standing liberty obverse and flying eagle reverse for the new $20 gold piece from a group of designs submitted by Saint- Gaudens.

Roosevelt also (amid extreme controversy over whether or not the motto “In God We Trust” should be included) ordered Mint Engraver Charles E. Barber to begin producing them.

The high relief Saint is considered the most beautiful of all U.S. coins. There are two varieties – the flat rim and knife rim, with the flat rim being rarer. Both have the Roman numerals MCMVII in place of an Arabic numerical date (1907) and both have concave surfaces. Although surviving populations are high, only 11,250 high reliefs were minted. It is the only Saint actually designed by Saint- Gaudens – all others were designed and engraved by Barber based on his interpretation of Saint-Gaudens original high relief.

Since PCGS and NGC started certifying them in 1986 and recording populations, there have been two revelations about the St. Gaudens double eagle series from a market standpoint. First, how common the common dates are. No one guessed that there were more than 200,000 Saints floating around in MS65 or higher condition. Or 350,000 MS64′s. Or 425,000 MS63′s. Market prices for common date Saints have adjusted accordingly over the past 20 years.

But the better dates are much scarcer than realized.

There are 52 dates in the series. 93% of the coins certified are one of 11 common dates, leaving only 7% of the coins to make up the other 41 dates. 80% of the dates are rare, yet because Saints are big, beautiful gold coins, many buyers overlook the numismatic potential inherent in better date Saints.

What follows is a breakdown of the St. Gaudens series into six categories of rarity, with recommendations. Prices listed are approximations of actual acquisition cost. Populations are combined PCGS and NGC figures from the October 2007 census reports.

Common dates

1908 no motto, 1923-D, 1924-P, 1925-P, 1926-P, 1927-P, 1928-P.

All are recommended only in grades MS66 or higher. The 1908-P, 1924-P, and 1927-P each has a current PCGS and NGC population of over 25,000 pieces in MS65 (54,569 for the 1924- P) and over 50,000 in MS64 – too many for them to be rare enough to sustain their own demand except as Type coins. MS66 samples of any of the above dates cost $3,000 to $3,300

Slightly Better Dates

1911-D, 1914-D, 1914-S, 1915-S, 1916-S. These dates are recommended in grades MS65 or higher. The 1911-D, 1914-S and 1915- S are about ten times rarer than dates in the preceding group. Each of these dates have PCGS and NGC combined populations in the 3,000 area and are all available for about $2,000 in MS65 condition.
The 1914-D and 1916-S are a bit tougher with a total PCGS and NGC population of 1,834 and 1,246 respectively. Either date runs $2,600 or so in MS65 and is twenty-five times rarer than a 1924-P or 1927-P. Four of theses dates I especially like in MS66. The 1914-D, 1914-S, 1915-S and 1916-S. All have PCGS and NGC combined populations of under 300 and the 1914-D is the toughest with just 73 coins graded MS66. It runs about $7,250 and the other three are running between $5,900 and $6,500 each.

On average these four dates are thirty-four times rarer than the three most common dates St. Gaudens yet are available for just over two times the price of a common date MS66. Better dates. 1907-P High Relief, 1907-P Arabic Numerals, 1908- D no motto, 1908-D with motto, 1909-S, 1910-P, 1910-D, 1910-S, 1911- S, 1912-P, 1913-D, 1914-P, 1920-P, 1922-P, 1923-P.

The three least expensive are the 1907-P Arabic, 1910-D and the 1922-P. 1907-P is not a low-pop. date but is a very popular first year of issue. It runs just under $2,000 in MS64 and $3,400 in MS65. 1910-D and 1922-P are around common date price in MS64 – about 1,350, but they are tougher in MS65 bringing about double common date MS65 prices.

The 1908-D with motto, 1909-S, 1911-S, 1913-D, and 1923-P, are relatively inexpensive in MS64 but jump considerably in MS65. The combined PCGS and NGC MS65 populations run 400 to 600 pieces on each of these dates except for the 1908-D which is 315. In MS64 condition, most are available in the $1,400 to $2,000 area. In MS65 the 1909-S and 1913-D run about $5,000 to $5,250, the 1908-D, 1911-S and 1923-P cost between $4,400 and $4,900.

The toughest of this better date group are the 1908- D no motto, 1910-P, 1910-S, and 1920-P. These four dates have MS64 populations between 800 and 1700. They run $1,500 to $2,200 in MS64, except for the 1920-P which goes for about $3,400. In MS65 they are hard to find especially the 1920-P with a PCGS and NGC MS65 population of just 8 coins. It would cost between $70,000 and $100,000 if you can find one. The other three – 1908-D no motto, 1910-P and 1910-S have MS65 populations between 200 and 225 and cost about $8,900, $7,300 and $7,500 respectively.

The most expensive of the group in all grades is the 1907-P HR. Even with a MS63 population of 1,654 coins it cost $23,500. MS64′s and MS65′s run about $31,000 and $50,000 respectively. It’s a very popular date because of its beauty, low mintage, high relief striking and first year issuance. A perpetual demand accounts for its higher price to population ratio.

Rare Dates

1908-P with motto, 1911-P, 1912-P, 1913-P, 1914-P, 1915-P, 1922-S, 1926-S. Not one of these dates has a PCGS and NGC combined MS65 population of more than 100. MS64 populations run just 475 to 550 pieces except for the 1911-P and 1912-P which are 630 and 703. And it’s not just the populations that are low. Three quarters of these dates have mintages of less than 200,000. For reference, note that the 1916-D mercury dime, produced at the same time as these issues, has a mintage of 264,000.
Coins in this group are scarce enough to be desirable in any grade MS64 or higher. The 1911-P is the least expensive of the bunch, costing only about $3,450 in MS64 and $16,000 in MS65. If you don’t think MS64 rare date Saints are underrated, consider that the 1911-P is more than 220 times as rare as the most common date – 1924-P – and at $3,450 costs less than three times the price.

The 1908-P with motto and 1912-P are similar in price, mintage and population. They run about $4,300 each in MS64 and $20,000 to $21,500 in MS65. Also similar are the 1914-P and 1915-P. They run $5,900 and $5,100 respectively in MS64 and about $23,500 in MS65. The 1913-P is a tough coin with just 25 coin graded MS65 by PCGS and NGC. It runs $6,600 in MS64 and $40,000 to $50,000 or more in MS65.

A 1922-S goes for about $7,000, and $40,000 in MS64 and MS65. With only 10 PCGS and 11 NGC MS65’s it might trade for even more. 1926-S is nearly as tough as the 1922-S. It’s rarer in all BU grades than the 1922-S but the services graded more 1926-S in MS64 and higher. It goes for nearly $8,500 in MS64 and about $31,500 in gem.

Very Rare Dates

1908-S, 1909-P, 1909/8-P, 1909-D, 1913-S, 1924- D, 1924-S, 1925-D, 1929-P. These Saints are rare enough so that MS63 samples are well sought after coins and the 1908-S, 1925-D and 1929-P are even sought after in MS60 and higher grades.

Yes, MS60. Don’t think that a coin has to be some arbitrary minimum grade to be a good piece. If it’s rare enough, it can be great buy in Good/VG. During the Eighties and early Nineties, dealers promoted the notion that a coin could not make a good investment if graded anything less than MS65. This notion isn’t as prevalent today and rightly so. It’s nonsense. Just as a very common coin can be a bad buy even graded MS67, a very rare issue can offer great potential graded MS62, MS61, or even circulated. A coin has appreciation potential if it is truly rare and in demand, regardless of grade.

Brilliant uncirculated MS60 to MS62 Saints are usually attractive coins and the 29-P is a good buy in any uncirculated grade as is the 1925-D in MS62 or higher condition because they’re that rare. The 1908-S is the next lowest mintage date after the 1907-P High Relief, just 22,000 made. With only 254 coins graded in all uncirculated grades it’s desirable in any grade MS60 and higher. It runs about $10,000 in MS60 and $23,000 in MS63.

The other six dates should be held in grades of MS63 or higher except for the 1913-S which I like in MS64 and higher grades. A far as price goes on this group they all cost over $30,000 in MS65 grades and the dates from the 1920′s will run closer to $100,000 or more. Yet in MS63 with the exception of the 1908-S, 1925-D and 1929-P they are all available for $9,000 or less. In MS64 the 1909-P, 1909-D, 1909/8 1924-D and 1924-S will cost between $8,200 and $15,500. The 1913-S with a mintage of just 34,000 coins, the third lowest mintage date in the series, is just $6,000 in MS64. The 1925-D in MS62 is about a $6,500 coin and in MS63 $12,000. The 1929-P in MS60 to MS61 will run $16,000 to $20,000 and about $27,000 to $30,000 in MS62. The 1925-D is around $22,000 and the 1929-P is about $51,000 in MS64.

Series Key Dates

1920-S, 1921-P, 1925-S, 1926-D, 1927-D, 1927-S, 1930-S, 1931-P, 1931-D, 1932-P. The monster dates. Take these in any grade you can get them. They trade too infrequently for you to be choosy. I can’t supply accurate prices, because they trade so rarely, but here is some PCGS and NGC population data and current Graysheet MS60, MS63, and MS65 bids, for reference only.

1920-S. 558,000 minted, but only 105 graded in all uncirculated grades combined. Four graded in MS65 and two MS66. Bid: MS60 $38,000; MS63 $58,000; MS65 $185,000.

1921-P. Only 88 certified in all uncirculated grades combined and only five in MS64 and three MS65′s. Bid: MS60 $85,000; MS63 $225,000; MS65 $800,000.

1925-S. Easy coin. PCGS and NGC population is 104 in MS63, 33 in MS64, and 3 in MS65, 2 in MS66 and yikes! 1 in MS68. Bid: MS60 $7,750; MS63 $17,750; MS65 $95,000.

1926-D. 61 MS63’s, 23 MS64’s, and 5 MS65’s and 2 MS66′s. Bid: MS60 $23,000; MS63 $37,500; MS65 $100,000. (MS65 bid went up 70% over the past 8 years.)

1927-D. The king of the series, toughest of them all and the real stopper to the complete date set. PCGS has certified only 7 uncirculated pieces and NGC population is just 5 coins 1 circulated and 4 uncs. Bid: MS60 $250,000; MS63 $1,100,000; MS65 $1,500,000. Up $800,000 in MS63 and nearly $1,000,000 in MS65 since 2000.

1927-S. 155 uncirculated pieces have been certified by PCGS and NGC. Just 22 in MS64 and 10 in MS65. Bid: MS60 $21,000; MS63 $46,000; MS65 $100,000.

1930-S. Makes the 27-S look easy. Just 56 uncirculated coins graded – most in MS63 to MS65 grades. There are 9 in MS63, 23 MS64’s and 13 MS65’s. Seems like quite a few, until you note that the total PCGS and NGC population from Good thru MS63 is just 15. Bid: MS60 $30,000; MS63 $94,500; MS65 $185,000.

1931-P. 113 certified in all uncirculated grades with just 2 in circulated grades. Not many, considering the 2.9 million mintage. Bid: MS60 $25,000; MS63 $56,000; MS65 $85,000.

1931-D. 134 in all uncirculated grades, with 34 in MS65. Actually possible to acquire one of these. Bid: MS60 $25,000; MS63 $75,000; MS65 $103,000.

1932-P. 133 in all uncirculated grades. Only 18 MS63’s and 36 MS65’s. No circulated pieces known. Bid: MS60 $21,000; MS63 $60,000; MS65 $89,000.

I did not include the 1933-P as part of the series because they are still illegal to own. Neither PCGS nor NGC consider it as part of the Saint- Gaudens set.

Of the 13 pieces known to exist one was allowed to trade in a public auction in 2002 and it brought $7,600,000. The NGC population report shows 12 graded in MS62 and the PCGS population is zero. Teddy Roosevelt authorized the series in 1907, and Franklin Roosevelt abolished it in 1933, when it became illegal to own gold in the U.S. The Great Recall and massive meltings caused the rarity of the dates 1927-1933

Most of the coins and pieces of paper money which will find their way under the Christmas tree or next to the Hanukkah menorah will not be the break-the-bank variety. Yet, some fortunate numismatists, perhaps in the Bill Gates or the Oprah Winfrey families, just might be surprised by an extremely valuable coin or two presented to them by a generous relative.

In the case of the less expensive category of numismatic fare, the concern over price versus value is not a major concern. This is not to say that purchasers of low-priced hobby items in the under–$100 range, for instance, welcome getting ripped off. After all, it’s only human nature to desire good deals during shopping experiences. No one would argue this point. But it understandably requires significantly more contemplation to decide if a coin priced at say, $50,000, offers good value, than it does to decide if a $50 coin is worth the money. Either way, the purchaser doesn’t want to overpay. But, the risk of this occurring obviously increases as costs rise.

Yet, before we even reach the point of decision when purchasing collectibles such as coins, we might ask how the values are determined in the first place. How are prices established and who is involved in this process? First, it must be pointed out that the dynamics involved are complicated and cannot be capsulized or put into a nutshell. As tangible as these collectible assets might appear, evaluating them requires many intangible considerations. Coins and other collectibles are not, for instance, similar to staples of life such as food and clothing. College marketing students, for example, quickly learn the fundamentals involved in producing, pricing, and promoting consumer goods. Established guidelines used to bring products to market are universally employed by businesses around the globe. It is a relatively simple task to calculate the costs of raw materials, manufacturing, and marketing, and add on a standard mark-up to determine the retail price of most consumer goods. But with coins, it’s not so straightforward.

In the first place, with the exception of modern gold, silver, and platinum issues tied to the spot price of precious metals, the cost of raw materials isn’t factored into the price of most coins. And obviously, there are no manufacturing costs involved, since the coins are already in existence. There are, however, marketing costs factored into the prices of rare coins, which can fluctuate from one seller to another. And, of course, acquisition costs are part of the equation, unless the seller received his coin or coins as a gift, that is. Yet, long before sellers determine what a fair rate of return would be for their holdings, price histories of their particular coins are usually reviewed. But what do these price histories reveal?

Well, in simplest terms, price histories are just what the term implies: a compilation of prices which collectors have paid in the past for the coins in question. Extending as far back in time as existing pricing data allows, we can trace the earliest prices paid for these coins. At one point in history even the rarest coins traded for prices very close to their face values. As unfathomable as this might seem to collectors in the early years of the twenty-first century, who have observed coins selling for hundreds of thousands or even millions of dollars, these mega-rarities once traded for fractions of the prices they sell for today.

Yet, regardless of whether a rare coin once sold for a mere double or triple its face value, or if it brings $1 million in 2007, someone, somewhere, had to set the price, and someone else?the buyer?had to agree with that price. But what criteria does the one who sets the price use in his evaluation of a coin? If we could crack this code we could perhaps remove much of the mystery surrounding the prices of rare coins.

Unfortunately, there are no set rules governing the dynamics of coin pricing. If there were, then buyers and sellers might possibly always agree, and price resistance would vanish.

Let’s examine the price history of one of the classic rarities in U.S. numismatics, the 1913 V nickel, to illustrate several ambiguities inherent in evaluating rare coins.

We are told that at least one employee at the Philadelphia Mint in late 1912 or early 1913 (perhaps Storekeeper-Clerk Samuel W. Brown or Chief Engraver Charles E. Barber, or both), arranged to have five 1913 V nickels struck, even though 1912 was the last year of issue for this design. Subsequently, in December of 1919, Samuel W. Brown, who had retired from the mint six years earlier, placed a series of ads offering to pay $500 for a 1913 V nickel. Of course, at that time he alone (perhaps there were co-conspirators) knew of the existence of these coins. To the rest of the collecting community the only nickels dated 1913 displayed the Indian and the bison. A few months later, Brown upped his offer to $600 per piece, and later that same year (1920) he exhibited one of his 1913 V nickels at a national coin convention.

Though not a single example of these mysterious coins had ever traded hands (at least to anyone’s knowledge), Brown had elevated their value from five cents to six hundred dollars?Their perceived value anyway. Yet even this value was not etched in stone. For in 1923 and 1924, a Philadelphia coin dealer named Augustus Wagner advertised the five nickels for sale, but apparently did not sell them for his reported asking price of between $400 and $500 apiece. At this time, another coin dealer, named Stephen K. Nagy, reported to have been involved with the nickels from the beginning, sold all five of them to Edward H. R. Green, the boorish, freewheeling son of the “Witch of Wall Street,” Hetty Green. Mr. Green (or Col. Green to some people) died in 1936 and noted collector Eric P. Newman subsequently purchased his five celebrated nickels in 1941 for an approximate average price of $400 apiece.

Did Mr. Newman pay a fair price for the nickels? No one could have known for sure since the coins had not exchanged hands often enough to gauge their market value. During the next few years Newman’s purchase prices for the nickels proved to be bargains, as one of the highest quality specimens traded for $900 in 1942, escalating to $3,750 in 1947. Another piece, considered to be inferior in quality compared to the finest specimens, sold for $1,000 (or $2,450 depending on the source) less than a year after Newman purchased it, and then for $3,750 around 1945.

These early transactions paled in stature compared with sales yet to transpire over the next six decades. After a rather lackluster period from 1945 through the mid 1950s, in which the price level for 1913 nickels struggled to break the $4,000 barrier, market exuberance catapulted the value first to $25,000, and then to the $40,000 to $50,000 mark by 1961.

Collectors apparently had difficulty in assimilating this sudden surge in value, however, as one of the more publicized examples failed to meet the consignor’s reserve price of $50,000 at an auction held in Los Angeles in March 1961. But, who really knew if this reserve price was too steep? It’s not as if someone could have looked up the price of 1913 V nickels in a coin values guide similar perhaps to the Kelly Blue Book for automobiles. Oh, there were price guides for coins to be sure; but none of them in 1961 ventured so much as an estimate as to how much a 1913 V nickel was worth. The only citations found in either of the two most popular price guides of that era informed readers that only five 1913 V nickels existed. So it was left up to numismatic experts and advanced collectors to determine the values of recognized rarities such as 1913 V nickels.

Six years after the unsuccessful auction attempt to sell one of the higher condition-rated 1913 V nickels, Nebraska coin dealer Aubrey Bebee chunked down $46,000 to purchase the poorest quality specimen. Two years later, in 1969, Bebee rejected an offer of $75,000 for his nickel. Three years after that, in 1972, the specimen which had failed to bring $50,000 in the 1961 auction, gained notoriety for being the first coin to ever sell for $100,000. Five years later, in 1977, this same piece sold for $200,000 and subsequently fetched $350,000 in 1985, $962,500 in 1993, $1.84 million in 2002, and a staggering $3 million in 2004.

Considering that ninety-one years earlier, the aggregate value of all 1913 V nickels in existence was twenty-five cents, the prices paid by collectors to own just one example over the past nine decades are incomprehensible, to say the least. I think it’s fair to say that no one, at any point along the way, could have predicted what these coins would eventually sell for. Although, credit must be given to World-Wide Coin Investments, Ltd., of Atlanta Georgia, the company that purchased the $100,000–specimen in 1972, for having prophesied way back then that 1913 V nickels would eventually bring $1 million. World-Wide Coin was just a little off in its projection of when this would occur, however, as it suggested that the million-dollar mark would be reached by 1980, when in fact, this did not happen until 1996 (It came close in 1993 with the $962,500 price realized).

Along the way, two 1913 V nickels were forever removed from the market; when the Norweb family donated their prized specimen to the Smithsonian Institution in 1978, and Aubrey and Adeline Bebee presented their piece, purchased for $46,000 in 1967, to the American Numismatic Association in 1989. The whereabouts of a third example, known as the Walton specimen, remained unknown for decades. And then, in 2003, in response to a massive media blitz focused on 1913 V nickels, the heirs brought this specimen out of hiding, triggering a fireworks explosion of publicity when it was displayed with the other four specimens at an ANA convention in Baltimore. As far as anyone knew, this was the first time the five nickels had been together in one place since 1942. Although hounded by auction companies, the heirs of this heretofore-missing specimen announced that it was not for sale. Even if it was, who could tell the heirs unequivocally what their coin was worth?

Throughout the long history of evaluating rare coins this has always been a challenge (Please keep in mind that we are talking here about truly rare coins, not those common issues passed off as rarities by home shopping networks, and by deceitful telemarketers). An incisive case in point can be illustrated by continuing the saga of 1913 V nickels.

During the latter half of 2006, the collector community buzzed with eager anticipation over the announcement that the finest known example of a 1913 V nickel would appear in an auction in early January 2007. This piece, reverently referred to for decades as the Eliasberg specimen, held the distinction of being the first coin to ever sell for $1 million, when an auction buyer paid $1.485 million for it in 1996. Within seven years it traded hands a couple times, more than doubling its value from 1996. Then, in 2005, it set yet another price record when Washington-state businessman Bruce Morelan acquired it for $4.15 million. After a year of ownership, Morelan felt it was time to pass it on to the next collector (He had previously owned the specimen which had failed to meet the consigner’s reserve of $50,000 in 1961. Morelan paid $1.84 in 2002 for that one.)

The question was, what kind of reserve would Morelan place on his prestigious consignment? Of foremost consideration was the $4.15 million investment he had in the coin. Knowing that by the time he received payment from the auction company he would have owned the nickel for one and a half years, he needed to calculate the time value of his money. At a simple six percent rate of interest over a period of eighteen months, $4.15 million would earn approximately $375,000, which would bring the break-even total to $4.525 million. Then, of course, Mr. Morelan expected to earn a profit above that amount, and in the rapidly evolving bull market in rare coins, this seemed like a no-brainer. A reserve price of $5 million was set, and no doubt the auction company (Stack’s) afforded Morelan other special-client comps for the privilege of handling such an illustrious coin.

No doubt, Morelan and Stack’s had their sights set on a much higher price realized anyway. The five-million-dollar reserve would serve only as a catalyst for loftier bids to transpire. It was not as if there were no precedents for numismatic items exceeding the $5-million barrier. After all, a 1933 $20 gold piece had sold for $7.59 million in 2002 and there were rumblings that certain coins could possibly bring $10 million to $15 million if offered on the market.

In some ways, the pre-sale hype focused on Mr. Morelan’s nickel, was reminiscent of the auctioneer’s publicity campaign for the 1913 V nickel that did not meet the consignor’s $50,000 reserve back in 1961. In that sale, the cataloguer declared that from all inclinations, the nickel would in all probability exceed the $50,000 mark. But, as you are now aware, the coin was not destined to break that barrier at that time.

With cameras rolling and news reporters standing by, Morelan’s nickel hit the auction block. Euphoria suddenly dissipated into disenchantment as the auctioneer closed the bidding, with not one person willing to raise his paddle for the $5 million reserve price (the total price would have actually been $5.75 million after the auction company’s 15 % commission was factored in). Once again, the coin market, as represented this time by auction participants, did not agree on the price asked for an unquestionable rarity. Would someone have paid $4.5 million (plus the buyer’s fee) for the nickel? Probably. How about $4.75 million? Maybe. But why not $5 million? Who knows? Who in that crowd of numismatic experts attending this auction could have emphatically declared that Morelan’s 1913 V nickel was not worth $5 million, or $5.75 million, or even $6 million?

These same questions are applicable for any rare coins, not just those of the million-dollar variety. Time after time, collectors have rejected a rare coin based on price resistance, only to regret their decisions later on when the coin is no longer available, or when the coin’s price rises high above the original asking price. This is not meant to imply that collectors should remove all restraints when faced with purchasing decisions. The 1913 V nickel offered at auction in 1961, for example, might not have been worth $100,000 at the time, but certainly $50,000 or even $60,000 seems reasonable, especially for well-heeled collectors who might have been interested. Of course, we have the advantage of hindsight when evaluating coin prices from the past which often makes us seem like experts, at least in our own minds.

Yet, regardless of what we might learn from evaluating price histories, there is one essential lesson that can be taught from reviewing collector experiences from the past. Ownership is key. In other words, those collectors that owned the choice rarities that we all drool over today, are the ones that reaped the dual rewards of pride of ownership and profiting from their passion. But ownership often requires stepping out and paying in excess of what everyone else is willing to pay. To reiterate, this only applies to the rarest, most desirable coins, the coins that are only offered infrequently, the ones that every collector would love to own. You need to make sure that you know which coins this refers to before you follow this advice.

Noted collectors from the past knew what these coins were and only the most resolute ones acquired them. Still, even the most successful numismatists have experienced lock-lobe at times, refusing to pay another dollar for a rarity which they so desperately desired. In the event that this happens and the collector gets a second chance, usually the mistake is not repeated, and he gladly pays whatever the cost.

The truth is, no one really knows what a truly rare coin is worth. You can speculate, you can perform mathematical analysis, you can compare price histories, you can consult an expert, and you can refer to price guides. Yet, regardless of which method you employ, in the end you will never get a clearer answer to the question regarding the value of a rare coin than this: A rare coin is worth whatever price a seller and a buyer agree on. What might seem like exorbitant prices today might cause collectors ten years from now to turn green with envy.

In light of all the choices from every category of collectibles which are available to hobbyists, few seem to offer more value than rare coins and paper money. Stamps, art, old comic books, old movie posters, old LPs, old dolls, old baseball cards, Old West memorabilia, old bottles, old firearms, and old casino chips all attract serious enthusiasts. Yet none of these fields appear to have the following that rare coins do. This trend seems destined to continue for as long as people have a passion to collect things and have money to purchase them.

This is one of the primary reasons why press releases about the sales of expensive coins will always find sufficient space in headlines, both in print and online, and will always receive adequate coverage on TV news broadcasts. Bruce Morelan is no stranger to such publicity. Witness for example the sensational coverage of his firm’s (Legend Numismatics) recent brokering of a $30,000,000 rare coin deal.

And, whatever became of his 1913 V nickel which failed to meet his reserve price in the January 2007 auction? Apparently, a Southern California collector, who may or may not have participated in the bidding, could not get the coin out of his mind and wound up paying $5 million for it three months after the auction in a private sale. So Morelan managed to sell the second 1913 V nickel pedigreed to him, recover the interest on his investment capital, and still earn a tidy little short-term profit. Curious observers will be eagerly waiting to see if he might buy one of his 1913 V nickels back in the future. And, the new owner of the rarest nickel in the world will be waiting to see if perhaps the next stop for the coin might be at the $10-million level.

Meanwhile, all of us bystanders will be trying to figure out what this coin is really worth. But will anyone other than its owner ever know its true value?

Author of this article: Rusty Goe
For more information about the rare coin market please contact Southgate Coins in Reno, Nevada, at (775) 322-4455. Ask for Marie or Amy. For information about the Carson City Coin Collectors of America club, please visit www.c4oa.blogspot.com.