Beautiful! I'll take some of those Texas commems off your hands anyday
."It's a dangerous business... going out your door. You step onto the road, and if you don't keep your feet, there's no knowing where you might be swept off to" -JRR Tolkien_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________Outstanding BST transactions as a seller, buyer and trader with: ----- mustanggt, Kliao, claudewill87, MWallace, paesan, mpbuck82, moursund, basetsb, lordmarcovan, JWP, Coin hunter 4, COINS MAKE CENTS, PerryHall, Aspie_Rocco, Braddick, DBSTrader2, SanctionII, Histman, The_Dinosaur_Man, jesbroken, CentSearcher ------ANA Member #3214817
Congrats on the submission. Gettysburg in 68 -- wow! That one took over as the Coin Facts cover girl, too. I would have expected a couple more QTs (Robinson?), but maybe there were enough given out to the blue coins that they felt the rest were legit toning. Who knows?
WTG, although I do feel a few QT's straight graded. Yet I'm seeing that happen more with all the third party grading services. I guess venturing toward old fart status in this series remembering what examples pulled from cardboard tab holders looked like when example first started to be entombed in plastic in the 1980's has it's benefits. Oh and the Rhode Island should have gotten a PL designation.
To Err Is Human.... To Collect Err's Is Just Too Much Darn Tootin Fun!
Also, I missed the original pictures, if @dcarr could re-post those, I would be interested in seeing them.
In addition, if I were the OP I would keep the original cards/packaging with the coins - I think the cards would be worth more with the coins than sold separately, and enhance the historical value of these museum-quality coins.
But I gotta say, I have less confidence in PCGS distinguishing QC from straight than I ever have before. JMHO but several more of those should have bagged, especially with blatant AT's in the group. That, for me as a grader, would have me doubling back through the rest of the sub to check my work.
"It's like God, Family, Country, except Sticker, Plastic, Coin."
Fantastic assortment of coins with original documents.
A really spectacular outcome with the grades too. Congratulations and thank you for the follow up!
Happy, humble, honored and proud recipient of the “You Suck” award 10/22/2014
@messydesk said:
Congrats on the submission. Gettysburg in 68 -- wow! That one took over as the Coin Facts cover girl, too. I would have expected a couple more QTs (Robinson?), but maybe there were enough given out to the blue coins that they felt the rest were legit toning. Who knows?
And rightly so - way more spectacular than the one that fetched $48k in 2015.
But I gotta say, I have less confidence in PCGS distinguishing QC from straight than I ever have before. JMHO but several more of those should have bagged, especially with blatant AT's in the group. That, for me as a grader, would have me doubling back through the rest of the sub to check my work.
I think they caught the blatantly QT ones (like the 37-D Oregon), and it appears he got the benefit of the doubt on the borderline ones, probably because there were so many outstanding ones, like the Gettysburg.
Curious why the original owner did not get the popular commems. such as a Pan Pac at the same time that are missing from the group? You probably scored a big profit on the group.
I don't understand how they can call some of them AT with the background you have on them.
@logger7 said:
Curious why the original owner did not get the popular commems. such as a Pan Pac at the same time that are missing from the group? You probably scored a 10X profit on the group.
Given all of the series varieties and the original postmarked letters to the original purchaser, it seems like they ordered them directly for whatever reason, but wasn't necessarily collecting them, or at least not a type set collection. Separately from that , @dcarr did mention that he added some additional coins into the mix that weren't with the original lot.
I'm guessing, looking at the dates of the dupes, that the original collector ordered some in 1936-37 and that was it. A lot of the other keys/semi-keys were issued well before this. But just speculation so who knows,,,
The ones I added to the original group submission were all of the 1939 Oregons and one of the 1925 Stone Mountain.
The question was asked how I was able to buy the collection.
A descendant of the original purchaser had offered the collection to a couple people, but had not sold them yet. As a stroke of pure luck, I happened to walk into a local coin shop shortly after the current owner of the coins had also arrived there. The staff at the shop was looking at the coins. The owner of the coins had a specific dollar amount in mind that she wanted for the lot. I don't know how or where she came up with that price, but I was very eager to buy them if I could. The owner of the coin shop was away for a few days. Apparently, as I understand it, the staff was not given the authority to pay more than a certain amount for non-bullion collector coins unless the shop owner was able to personally inspect such coins first. Also, the shop employee felt that based on the past history of the shop owner, the shop owner wasn't likely to buy them for the price asked. The shop owner wasn't there and the lady who owned the coins was leaving town the next day before the shop owner would return. So any deal had to be done on the spot. So me, being friends with a staff member, was offered the collection and the price was very favorable so I bought it, of course.
@logger7 said:
Curious why the original owner did not get the popular commems. such as a Pan Pac at the same time that are missing from the group? You probably scored a big profit on the group.
I don't understand how they can call some of them AT with the background you have on them.
It can be a slippery slope if or when a grading company is provided "background" information regarding coin submissions. For example, on one hand, it sounds like it would be good to know that a group of classic silver commemoratives was acquired from someone who had ordered them at the time of issue. On the other, what if the information provided is incorrect? I have no doubts about Mr. Carr's veracity. But either accidentally or intentionally, someone else might provide incorrect/faulty information.
Should submitters be allowed to provide "information" in order to make a case for the originality of their submissions?
Would it be fair for two essentially identical looking coins to receive very different grading results (such as "AT" and "NT"), merely because one was accompanied with "background information" and the other one wasn't?
Should grading companies evaluate coins in a vacuum, without knowledge regarding where the coins come from and/or what they might have brought in a private sale or an auction? Or should such "information" be allowed and considered?
Personally, I'm undecided on this issue.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
@FranklinHalfAddict said:
The Oregon was the ONLY one to get QC?!?!
I see nine others that are extremely questionable. Look like they came from one of the eBay doctors.
Out of 60 coins submitted, one was "cleaned" and six were "questionable color". Note that I did not submit some of the ones shown in the original post. Those not submitted were some that were obviously funky color (and the Arkansas what was "white" but not high enough grade to justify the grading cost).
What a super pickup, find! Talk about your lucky stars being in alignment. Would have thought opportunity purchase nice set like that something expired ages ago.
"Interest rates, the price of money, are the most important market. And, perversely, they’re the market that’s most manipulated by the Fed." - Doug Casey
@derryb said:
note to self - do not submit blue coins
Yes, no love for blue coins. At first I was going to only submit about half the coins (and none of the blue ones), but I kept adding more until I had the round number of 60. In the end, basically, I submitted all the coins that I liked and not the ones I didn't like that much. I knew the odds were low on a few of them, but I just had to take a chance on some, especially this one:
@FranklinHalfAddict said:
The Oregon was the ONLY one to get QC?!?!
I see nine others that are extremely questionable. Look like they came from one of the eBay doctors.
Out of 60 coins submitted, one was "cleaned" and six were "questionable color". Note that I did not submit some of the ones shown in the original post. Those not submitted were some that were obviously funky color (and the Arkansas what was "white" but not high enough grade to justify the grading cost).
@dcarr said:
I finally got around to imaging the packaging.
Not all the coins in this collection came with packaging.
Here is everything that was included:
NOTE: Old thread resurrected.
I had a recent request for these images, but they are no longer available where originally posted.
So here they are again:
There are so many awesome coins in there. That Gettysburg is amazing. I like the Antietams a lot also. I think this Norfolk is probably my favorite of the group.
Amusing to see how many self-styled experts in this thread offered definitive declarations that up to 90% of the set were unquestionably AT. Apparently the folks at PCGS know better.
I have two Oregon's that got BB'd back in the day for questionable color. I know for a fact that they are original. I wonder if that issue has some alloy difference, different paper it was stored under or something other commems did not get exposed to.
Like the world’s absolute greatest starter kit for a world class collection of early commemoratives. A lifetime dream collection of coins all on their own.
Having fun while switching things up and focusing on a next level PCGS slabbed 1950+ type set, while still looking for great examples for the 7070.
Comments
Beautiful! I'll take some of those Texas commems off your hands anyday
."It's a dangerous business... going out your door. You step onto the road, and if you don't keep your feet, there's no knowing where you might be swept off to" -JRR Tolkien_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________Outstanding BST transactions as a seller, buyer and trader with: ----- mustanggt, Kliao, claudewill87, MWallace, paesan, mpbuck82, moursund, basetsb, lordmarcovan, JWP, Coin hunter 4, COINS MAKE CENTS, PerryHall, Aspie_Rocco, Braddick, DBSTrader2, SanctionII, Histman, The_Dinosaur_Man, jesbroken, CentSearcher ------ANA Member #3214817
Commemorative coins weren’t ordered from the mint back then. You had to order by mail through the organization that had sponsored the coins.
Sweet coins, sweet grades!
Congrats on the submission. Gettysburg in 68 -- wow! That one took over as the Coin Facts cover girl, too. I would have expected a couple more QTs (Robinson?), but maybe there were enough given out to the blue coins that they felt the rest were legit toning. Who knows?
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution
WTG, although I do feel a few QT's straight graded. Yet I'm seeing that happen more with all the third party grading services. I guess venturing toward old fart status in this series remembering what examples pulled from cardboard tab holders looked like when example first started to be entombed in plastic in the 1980's has it's benefits. Oh and the Rhode Island should have gotten a PL designation.
Wow: what a find.
I think I'll send the folks at Gettysburg $3.30 and taking them up on their offer for 2 additional coins.
That Texas in 68 I saw before I went to the grade page and I said to myself "That's a beauty" and PCGS agreed!
Coin Photographer.
Those Gettysburg's are amazing.
thanks for ttt the thread dan!
what a fantastic opportunity to buy. i bet that was a VERY interesting conversation(s)!
Holy crap, so many 68's and 67+'s - congrats!
Also, I missed the original pictures, if @dcarr could re-post those, I would be interested in seeing them.
In addition, if I were the OP I would keep the original cards/packaging with the coins - I think the cards would be worth more with the coins than sold separately, and enhance the historical value of these museum-quality coins.
Absolutely Fantastic! Congratulations on the results.
Pretty darn nice haul Dan!
Disclaimer: I'm not a dealer, trader, grader, investor or professional numismatist. I'm just a hobbyist. (To protect me but mostly you! 🤣 )
Congrats on the grades...
But I gotta say, I have less confidence in PCGS distinguishing QC from straight than I ever have before. JMHO but several more of those should have bagged, especially with blatant AT's in the group. That, for me as a grader, would have me doubling back through the rest of the sub to check my work.
"It's like God, Family, Country, except Sticker, Plastic, Coin."
That Roanoke is amazing.
Fantastic assortment of coins with original documents.
A really spectacular outcome with the grades too. Congratulations and thank you for the follow up!
Happy, humble, honored and proud recipient of the “You Suck” award 10/22/2014
And rightly so - way more spectacular than the one that fetched $48k in 2015.
@dcarr - what are you going to do with these? Enquiring minds want to know.
And, can you share anymore details about how you came to acquire the set?
Congrats on some great results!
My current "Box of 20"
Wow, some amazing beauties in there. Love that red Oregon.
Many successful BST transactions with dozens of board members, references on request.
Very impressive coins with very impressive grades! And original packaging to boot! Not common to find this. I’d say you did very well! Congrats!
I think they caught the blatantly QT ones (like the 37-D Oregon), and it appears he got the benefit of the doubt on the borderline ones, probably because there were so many outstanding ones, like the Gettysburg.
Curious why the original owner did not get the popular commems. such as a Pan Pac at the same time that are missing from the group? You probably scored a big profit on the group.
I don't understand how they can call some of them AT with the background you have on them.
Given all of the series varieties and the original postmarked letters to the original purchaser, it seems like they ordered them directly for whatever reason, but wasn't necessarily collecting them, or at least not a type set collection. Separately from that , @dcarr did mention that he added some additional coins into the mix that weren't with the original lot.
I'm guessing, looking at the dates of the dupes, that the original collector ordered some in 1936-37 and that was it. A lot of the other keys/semi-keys were issued well before this. But just speculation so who knows,,,
Chopmarked Trade Dollar Registry Set --- US & World Gold Showcase --- World Chopmark Showcase
The ones I added to the original group submission were all of the 1939 Oregons and one of the 1925 Stone Mountain.
The question was asked how I was able to buy the collection.
A descendant of the original purchaser had offered the collection to a couple people, but had not sold them yet. As a stroke of pure luck, I happened to walk into a local coin shop shortly after the current owner of the coins had also arrived there. The staff at the shop was looking at the coins. The owner of the coins had a specific dollar amount in mind that she wanted for the lot. I don't know how or where she came up with that price, but I was very eager to buy them if I could. The owner of the coin shop was away for a few days. Apparently, as I understand it, the staff was not given the authority to pay more than a certain amount for non-bullion collector coins unless the shop owner was able to personally inspect such coins first. Also, the shop employee felt that based on the past history of the shop owner, the shop owner wasn't likely to buy them for the price asked. The shop owner wasn't there and the lady who owned the coins was leaving town the next day before the shop owner would return. So any deal had to be done on the spot. So me, being friends with a staff member, was offered the collection and the price was very favorable so I bought it, of course.
The Oregon was the ONLY one to get QC?!?!
I see nine others that are extremely questionable. Look like they came from one of the eBay doctors.
It can be a slippery slope if or when a grading company is provided "background" information regarding coin submissions. For example, on one hand, it sounds like it would be good to know that a group of classic silver commemoratives was acquired from someone who had ordered them at the time of issue. On the other, what if the information provided is incorrect? I have no doubts about Mr. Carr's veracity. But either accidentally or intentionally, someone else might provide incorrect/faulty information.
Should submitters be allowed to provide "information" in order to make a case for the originality of their submissions?
Would it be fair for two essentially identical looking coins to receive very different grading results (such as "AT" and "NT"), merely because one was accompanied with "background information" and the other one wasn't?
Should grading companies evaluate coins in a vacuum, without knowledge regarding where the coins come from and/or what they might have brought in a private sale or an auction? Or should such "information" be allowed and considered?
Personally, I'm undecided on this issue.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Out of 60 coins submitted, one was "cleaned" and six were "questionable color". Note that I did not submit some of the ones shown in the original post. Those not submitted were some that were obviously funky color (and the Arkansas what was "white" but not high enough grade to justify the grading cost).
You can go to this link to see what was actually submitted, and the results:
https://pcgs.com/shared-orders/order-details/22600297
.
Really Nice coins. Absolutely stunning!
What a super pickup, find! Talk about your lucky stars being in alignment. Would have thought opportunity purchase nice set like that something expired ages ago.
I just audibly gasped when opening this thread and gazing at the photos.
peacockcoins
Appreciate the reply. Thank you. "Chance favors the prepared mind."
My current "Box of 20"
note to self - do not submit blue coins
"Interest rates, the price of money, are the most important market. And, perversely, they’re the market that’s most manipulated by the Fed." - Doug Casey
Yes, no love for blue coins. At first I was going to only submit about half the coins (and none of the blue ones), but I kept adding more until I had the round number of 60. In the end, basically, I submitted all the coins that I liked and not the ones I didn't like that much. I knew the odds were low on a few of them, but I just had to take a chance on some, especially this one:
Ohhh ok. Thanks for the clarification!
Incredible set of commems. Some of those grades are just jaw dropping. Congratulations on a nice addition to your collection.
NOTE: Old thread resurrected.
I had a recent request for these images, but they are no longer available where originally posted.
So here they are again:
1936 Robinson / Arkansas:
1936 Bridgeport:
1936 Rhode Island:
1936 Wisconsin:
1936 Delaware:
1936 Great Lakes / Cleveland (A):
1936 Great Lakes / Cleveland (B):
1936 York County Maine:
1935-S San Diego / California Pacific Expo:
1936-D San Diego / California Pacific Expo:
1936 Daniel Boone:
1936 Long Island:
1937 Texas:
1936 Oakland Bay Bridge (A):
1936 Oakland Bay Bridge (B):
1936 Norfolk Virginia:
1936 Columbia South Carolina:
1937-1938 Oregon Trail:
1936 Gettysburg:
1937 Antietam:
1937 Roanoke North Carolina:
The original envelopes are fantastic.
I found it interesting that for some of the time (1936-1938) the owner of the coins was living in a room at the YMCA in South Dakota.
Don’t know how I missed this the first time around. Nice stuff there Dan.
Martin
+1, very nice coins and the original packaging is very cool.
My Collection of Old Holders
Never a slave to one plastic brand will I ever be.
MS68 - WOW
There are so many awesome coins in there. That Gettysburg is amazing. I like the Antietams a lot also. I think this Norfolk is probably my favorite of the group.
Chopmarked Trade Dollar Registry Set --- US & World Gold Showcase --- World Chopmark Showcase
6 1/2 to 9 cents in postage on many envelopes. First time I've seen a 7 cent stamp. Good stuff DC.
fka renman95, Sep 2005, 7,000 posts
Although the economy was improving in 1936-38, the depression was not yet over. Probably a very economical place to live.
Amusing to see how many self-styled experts in this thread offered definitive declarations that up to 90% of the set were unquestionably AT. Apparently the folks at PCGS know better.
I have two Oregon's that got BB'd back in the day for questionable color. I know for a fact that they are original. I wonder if that issue has some alloy difference, different paper it was stored under or something other commems did not get exposed to.
Like the world’s absolute greatest starter kit for a world class collection of early commemoratives. A lifetime dream collection of coins all on their own.
Having fun while switching things up and focusing on a next level PCGS slabbed 1950+ type set, while still looking for great examples for the 7070.