Funny I literally just read NGC’s press release on the sale of this coin
Q for Bruce. Can you have PCGS render a crossover grade in advance? In this case did DH already in fact know what the result would be? I assume so
m
Walker Proof Digital Album Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
Question ONLY for folks who have actually owned or examined the coin:
I have not seen this coin in hand. Why is the coin graded 65? Do you agree with the grade? What do you think prevented it from grading PR-66 or PR-67 that may not be visible in the image?
If they would just put "Finest Known" on the label, the grade wouldn't matter!
Except it’s not. How about ‘Finest Graded’?
in all fairness, Hansen's 1885 is the finest known since it has been graded by both NGC and PCGS (unbiased third parties) and has been viewed and researched by many collectors. The ungraded coin you refer to has been kept under wraps apparently for decades. You are certainly an expert but your opinion is biased since apparently you have a deal to purchase it. Until this ungraded coin is made public, the Hansen coin should be considered the finest known.
All kidding aside, congrats to DLH in acquiring a very cool coin.
"My friends who see my collection sometimes ask what something costs. I tell them and they are in awe at my stupidity." (Baccaruda, 12/03).I find it hard to believe that he (Trump) rushed to some hotel to meet girls of loose morals, although ours are undoubtedly the best in the world. (Putin 1/17) Gone but not forgotten. IGWT, Speedy, Bear, BigE, HokieFore, John Burns, Russ, TahoeDale, Dahlonega, Astrorat, Stewart Blay, Oldhoopster, Broadstruck, Ricko.
@1peter1223 said:
Which one could best Eliasberg ?
In all the rosters i have seen Eliasberg has always been called the Finest known ?
The 1885 Specimens are as follows .......
PCGS PR65+ Cameo ( Eliasberg )
PCGS PR63+ Cameo ( Simpson )
NGC PR62 ( Farouk )
The ungraded coins are .....
Adolphe Menjou Called "Brilliant Proof " .Traded hands in Early 1970's ?
Olsen called " Brilliant Proof " . Traded hands in 1992
It's not like these ungraded coins have not been seen for 70 years or more. Could one of them grade 66 or 67 ?
Th Olsen coin ( number 5 ) was called " Badly Cleaned " by Walter Breen so doubt that is the coin being referred to as better than Eliasberg . It also sold for only $16,250 in Auction 84 ( lot number 1810 )
So obviously the coin being referred to is the Menjou ( number 4 ) coin?
Your list is a little incomplete. There is a PCGS PR62 that is presently in The Driftwood Collection. I am not sure which specimen is Driftwood’s. Also, there are 4 listed in PCGS POP report. I think one of them could be a duplicate.
@Justacommeman said:
Funny I literally just read NGC’s press release on the sale of this coin
Q for Bruce. Can you have PCGS render a crossover grade in advance? In this case did DH already in fact know what the result would be? I assume so
m
Not to answer for TDN, but I can answer for the buyers.
This coin had been inspected by predecessors of the current leadership at PCGS at some point previously.
However, the current leadership and graders had not viewed the coin.
Did we know for sure what the grading result would be? No. Too many changes have occurred, but we strongly believed that the coin would/should grade in the 65/66 range. The grade technically didn't really matter as to the numeric part as it was the finest graded and there was no doubt of that. For what it's worth, I still think that the coin could easily have graded 66, but the obverse was clearly Cameo. Thus the grade is fine for what it is.
John Brush President of David Lawrence Rare Coins www.davidlawrence.com email: John@davidlawrence.com 2022 ANA Dealer of the Year, Past Chair of NCBA (formerly ICTA), PNG Treasurer, Instructor at Witter Coin University, former Instructor/YN Chaperone ANA Summer Seminar, Coin World Most Influential, Curator of the D.L. Hansen Collection
@Insider2 said:
Question ONLY for folks who have actually owned or examined the coin:
I have not seen this coin in hand. Why is the coin graded 65? Do you agree with the grade? What do you think prevented it from grading PR-66 or PR-67 that may not be visible in the image?
I examined it again this morning...Man, I love my job!
The grade technically didn't really matter as to the numeric part as it was the finest graded and there was no doubt of that. For what it's worth, I still think that the coin could easily have graded 66, but the obverse was clearly Cameo. Thus the grade is fine for what it is. It's not a Proof 67. I wish I could explain why it's not a Proof 67, but that's why I quit helping teach the ANA Summer Seminar Grading Class. It's far easier to grade than it is to explain the grade!
John Brush President of David Lawrence Rare Coins www.davidlawrence.com email: John@davidlawrence.com 2022 ANA Dealer of the Year, Past Chair of NCBA (formerly ICTA), PNG Treasurer, Instructor at Witter Coin University, former Instructor/YN Chaperone ANA Summer Seminar, Coin World Most Influential, Curator of the D.L. Hansen Collection
Light multitude of circular hairlines particularly on the obverse. Slightly negative patches of ‘moldy’ looking toning on the obverse. Balanced by great mirrors and nice cameo effect
@Justacommeman said:
Funny I literally just read NGC’s press release on the sale of this coin
Q for Bruce. Can you have PCGS render a crossover grade in advance? In this case did DH already in fact know what the result would be? I assume so
m
Not to answer for TDN, but I can answer for the buyers.
This coin had been inspected by predecessors of the current leadership at PCGS at some point previously.
However, the current leadership and graders had not viewed the coin.
Did we know for sure what the grading result would be? No. Too many changes have occurred, but we strongly believed that the coin would/should grade in the 65/66 range. The grade technically didn't really matter as to the numeric part as it was the finest graded and there was no doubt of that. For what it's worth, I still think that the coin could easily have graded 66, but the obverse was clearly Cameo. Thus the grade is fine for what it is.
Thanks John
m
Walker Proof Digital Album Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
I remember getting a nice brochure in the mail from New England Rare Coins advertising the Adams coin, #2 on the roster above. Must have been about 1974. (I would have been 13 or 14 at the time!) Unfortunately, I did not save it. Does anyone here have a copy they can post here? I'll bet there was a pretty good picture of the coin in there.
Andy Lustig
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
@tradedollarnut said:
Light multitude of circular hairlines particularly on the obverse. Slightly negative patches of ‘moldy’ looking toning on the obverse. Balanced by great mirrors and nice cameo effect
TD, with that statement you are promoted to Master 'Coin Sommalier'. 👍
@Insider2 said:
Question ONLY for folks who have actually owned or examined the coin:
I have not seen this coin in hand. Why is the coin graded 65? Do you agree with the grade? What do you think prevented it from grading PR-66 or PR-67 that may not be visible in the image?
I examined it again this morning...Man, I love my job!
The grade technically didn't really matter as to the numeric part as it was the finest graded and there was no doubt of that. For what it's worth, I still think that the coin could easily have graded 66, but the obverse was clearly Cameo. Thus the grade is fine for what it is. It's not a Proof 67. I wish I could explain why it's not a Proof 67, but that's why I quit helping teach the ANA Summer Seminar Grading Class. It's far easier to grade than it is to explain the grade!
Hmm, I mean no disrespect however I'm really scratching my head on this not being able to explain the difference between gem and superb gem proof grades coming from someone who taught a ANA summer grading seminar?!? Beyond contact marks we are just talking about fingerprint smudges and the amount of whimsy hairlines. So I could have understood just not wanting to critique your clients new purchase.
To Err Is Human.... To Collect Err's Is Just Too Much Darn Tootin Fun!
@Insider2 said:
Question ONLY for folks who have actually owned or examined the coin:
I have not seen this coin in hand. Why is the coin graded 65? Do you agree with the grade? What do you think prevented it from grading PR-66 or PR-67 that may not be visible in the image?
I examined it again this morning...Man, I love my job!
The grade technically didn't really matter as to the numeric part as it was the finest graded and there was no doubt of that. For what it's worth, I still think that the coin could easily have graded 66, but the obverse was clearly Cameo. Thus the grade is fine for what it is. It's not a Proof 67. I wish I could explain why it's not a Proof 67, but that's why I quit helping teach the ANA Summer Seminar Grading Class. It's far easier to grade than it is to explain the grade!
With all due respect and you certainly know more about... Never mind. I'm going to send you a PM. I don't think we have ever been introduced. I may be mistaken in my assessment.
I will say this. ** Some folks who are very knowledgeable are unable to teach.**
@MrEureka said:
I remember getting a nice brochure in the mail from New England Rare Coins advertising the Adams coin, #2 on the roster above. Must have been about 1974. (I would have been 13 or 14 at the time!) Unfortunately, I did not save it. Does anyone here have a copy they can post here? I'll bet there was a pretty good picture of the coin in there.
No surprise, the NNP has a fair amount of NERCG material. Here's one of their house organs from 1974; it's got the 1885 trade in it, tho I doubt it's the brochure you're thinking about.
@MrEureka said:
I remember getting a nice brochure in the mail from New England Rare Coins advertising the Adams coin, #2 on the roster above. Must have been about 1974. (I would have been 13 or 14 at the time!) Unfortunately, I did not save it. Does anyone here have a copy they can post here? I'll bet there was a pretty good picture of the coin in there.
No surprise, the NNP has a fair amount of NERCG material. Here's one of their house organs from 1974; it's got the 1885 trade in it, tho I doubt it's the brochure you're thinking about.
Amazing!
m
Walker Proof Digital Album Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
@MrEureka said:
I remember getting a nice brochure in the mail from New England Rare Coins advertising the Adams coin, #2 on the roster above. Must have been about 1974. (I would have been 13 or 14 at the time!) Unfortunately, I did not save it. Does anyone here have a copy they can post here? I'll bet there was a pretty good picture of the coin in there.
No surprise, the NNP has a fair amount of NERCG material. Here's one of their house organs from 1974; it's got the 1885 trade in it, tho I doubt it's the brochure you're thinking about.
Comments
Do you think it deserved the downgrade?
Great coin! No other reason to cross other than the registry competition.
Why no D.L. Hansen label?
End Systemic Elitism - It Takes All Of Us
Bah....66 or 65+.
If they would just put "Finest Known" on the label, the grade wouldn't matter!
Beautiful rarity!
Except it’s not. How about ‘Finest Graded’?
PCGS has been quite consistent for two decades that they would only holder it at the appropriate grade. I agree with the certificate and so will CAC.
That didn't take long. I think TDN had the coin at PCGS before and they were willing to cross at 65+CAM at that time.
Great Coin!
Plus and Cam didn’t exist then...but essentially correct
So rare and beautiful
man.. that is what a 65 is supposed to look like. stunning!
I'm just reading the link. I believe everything I read.
Funny I literally just read NGC’s press release on the sale of this coin
Q for Bruce. Can you have PCGS render a crossover grade in advance? In this case did DH already in fact know what the result would be? I assume so
m
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
You used the '#' sign as the first character. Makes text bold.
"If I say something in the woods and my wife isn't there to hear it.....am I still wrong?"
My Washington Quarter Registry set...in progress
Question ONLY for folks who have actually owned or examined the coin:
I have not seen this coin in hand. Why is the coin graded 65? Do you agree with the grade? What do you think prevented it from grading PR-66 or PR-67 that may not be visible in the image?
in all fairness, Hansen's 1885 is the finest known since it has been graded by both NGC and PCGS (unbiased third parties) and has been viewed and researched by many collectors. The ungraded coin you refer to has been kept under wraps apparently for decades. You are certainly an expert but your opinion is biased since apparently you have a deal to purchase it. Until this ungraded coin is made public, the Hansen coin should be considered the finest known.
Did it deserve the designation upgrade?
PF66 to PF65+ CAMEO
Not bad - I prefer the Doily holder.
All kidding aside, congrats to DLH in acquiring a very cool coin.
Your list is a little incomplete. There is a PCGS PR62 that is presently in The Driftwood Collection. I am not sure which specimen is Driftwood’s. Also, there are 4 listed in PCGS POP report. I think one of them could be a duplicate.
My 20th Century Gold Major Design Type Set ---started : 11/17/1997 ---- completed : 1/21/2004
I had the special edition hardbound Adolphe Menjou catalogue with the prices realized handy.
Surprised nothing was mentioned as to condition in the lot description nor that it managed to fetch even red book value.
U.S. Inflation Rate - $1,350 in 1950 is equivalent in purchasing power to $14,073.22 in 2019.
Breen wasn't much for hygiene, so I wouldn't place too much faith in his mentioning a level of cleaning.
Your welcome!
I was curious if it was plated?
The cataloger did get the investment part right as it sold for 1/2 the price of a new car in 1950.
Beyond the 84 & 85 proof Trade dollars the series in general had very limited interest at that point in time.
An amazing coin with excellent provenance regardless of the holder designation.
Check out my current listings: https://ebay.com/sch/khunt/m.html?_ipg=200&_sop=12&_rdc=1
Not to answer for TDN, but I can answer for the buyers.
This coin had been inspected by predecessors of the current leadership at PCGS at some point previously.
However, the current leadership and graders had not viewed the coin.
Did we know for sure what the grading result would be? No. Too many changes have occurred, but we strongly believed that the coin would/should grade in the 65/66 range. The grade technically didn't really matter as to the numeric part as it was the finest graded and there was no doubt of that. For what it's worth, I still think that the coin could easily have graded 66, but the obverse was clearly Cameo. Thus the grade is fine for what it is.
President of David Lawrence Rare Coins www.davidlawrence.com
email: John@davidlawrence.com
2022 ANA Dealer of the Year, Past Chair of NCBA (formerly ICTA), PNG Treasurer, Instructor at Witter Coin University, former Instructor/YN Chaperone ANA Summer Seminar, Coin World Most Influential, Curator of the D.L. Hansen Collection
I examined it again this morning...Man, I love my job!
The grade technically didn't really matter as to the numeric part as it was the finest graded and there was no doubt of that. For what it's worth, I still think that the coin could easily have graded 66, but the obverse was clearly Cameo. Thus the grade is fine for what it is. It's not a Proof 67. I wish I could explain why it's not a Proof 67, but that's why I quit helping teach the ANA Summer Seminar Grading Class. It's far easier to grade than it is to explain the grade!
President of David Lawrence Rare Coins www.davidlawrence.com
email: John@davidlawrence.com
2022 ANA Dealer of the Year, Past Chair of NCBA (formerly ICTA), PNG Treasurer, Instructor at Witter Coin University, former Instructor/YN Chaperone ANA Summer Seminar, Coin World Most Influential, Curator of the D.L. Hansen Collection
Light multitude of circular hairlines particularly on the obverse. Slightly negative patches of ‘moldy’ looking toning on the obverse. Balanced by great mirrors and nice cameo effect
An attempt to make a more complete roster:
(Right-click and "open in new tab" to make the text readable.)
Sources:
1. PCGS CoinFacts (Ron Guth, P. Scott Rubin) https://www.pcgs.com/coinfacts/coin/1885-trade/7065
2. Heritage (January 2019) https://coins.ha.com/itm/proof-trade-dollars/1885-t-1-pr66-ngc/a/1291-4553.s
3. Greg Reynolds "Million Dollar Coins Part 2" https://coinweek.com/us-coins/us-silver-dollars/million-dollar-coins-part-2-u-s-silver-dollars-trade-dollars/
Thanks John
m
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
I remember getting a nice brochure in the mail from New England Rare Coins advertising the Adams coin, #2 on the roster above. Must have been about 1974. (I would have been 13 or 14 at the time!) Unfortunately, I did not save it. Does anyone here have a copy they can post here? I'll bet there was a pretty good picture of the coin in there.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
TD, with that statement you are promoted to Master 'Coin Sommalier'. 👍
Hmm, I mean no disrespect however I'm really scratching my head on this not being able to explain the difference between gem and superb gem proof grades coming from someone who taught a ANA summer grading seminar?!? Beyond contact marks we are just talking about fingerprint smudges and the amount of whimsy hairlines. So I could have understood just not wanting to critique your clients new purchase.
With all due respect and you certainly know more about... Never mind. I'm going to send you a PM. I don't think we have ever been introduced. I may be mistaken in my assessment.
I
will say this. ** Some folks who are very knowledgeable are unable to teach.** 
I'm anxiously waiting for some input from ColJessup.
"Everything is on its way to somewhere. Everything." - George Malley, Phenomenon
http://www.americanlegacycoins.com
No surprise, the NNP has a fair amount of NERCG material. Here's one of their house organs from 1974; it's got the 1885 trade in it, tho I doubt it's the brochure you're thinking about.
Ed. S.
(EJS)
Amazing!
m
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
Jim’s hair?