@tradedollarnut said:
I have no interest in collecting coins where the grade on their holder is a huge factor in their value anymore, either. So label rarity, sticker rarity...and the sort.
I like your philosophy. I’m having problems thinking of 20 U.S. coins that meet that criteria. You’re off to a good start.
@tradedollarnut said:
I have no interest in collecting coins where the grade on their holder is a huge factor in their value anymore, either. So label rarity, sticker rarity...and the sort.
I like your philosophy. I’m having problems thinking of 20 U.S. coins that meet that criteria. You’re off to a good start.
I could have easily missed it. But did Bruce ever say he’d be going for 20 coins?
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Even if there are other 33s out there, it's safe to say they won't be legal to own for a long time, since the Treasury Dept. will drag it out as long as they possibly can.
@tradedollarnut said:
I have no interest in collecting coins where the grade on their holder is a huge factor in their value anymore, either. So label rarity, sticker rarity...and the sort.
I like your philosophy. I’m having problems thinking of 20 U.S. coins that meet that criteria. You’re off to a good start.
I could have easily missed it. But did Bruce ever say he’d be going for 20 coins?
I thought I read it was a Box of 20 (in one of his other recent threads), but I could be mistaken.
@tradedollarnut said:
I have no interest in collecting coins where the grade on their holder is a huge factor in their value anymore, either. So label rarity, sticker rarity...and the sort.
I like your philosophy. I’m having problems thinking of 20 U.S. coins that meet that criteria. You’re off to a good start.
I could have easily missed it. But did Bruce ever say he’d be going for 20 coins?
I thought I read it was a Box of 20 (in one of his other recent threads), but I could be mistaken.
He did say that.........But whether he finds 20 worthy coins or not is anyone's guess......
Sometimes, it’s better to be LUCKY than good. 🍀 🍺👍
@tradedollarnut said:
Let me expound - I have no interest in an artificial rarity. Just because the government deems only one legal to own doesn’t change the fact there are at least 13 [and most likely more] in existence. So to me it’s worth about what an 1894-S dime is worth.
Very interesting take I personally never thought of it this way
I fully agree with @tradedollarnut assessment of artificial or what I like to call "created rarity".
I collected Nolan Ryan baseball cards for 27 years. When they started making cards that were limited to 34 or 30 and there were actually a few 1 of 1's, I immediately stopped collecting his new stuff as it was "created rarity".
@Coinosaurus said:
Even if there are other 33s out there, it's safe to say they won't be legal to own for a long time, since the Treasury Dept. will drag it out as long as they possibly can.
I don't think the Treasury Department will drag it out. They will go to court and most likely win.
I do not think the 1933 $20 will do that well in this auction. It will underperform for the next few years but will do much better afterwards as buyers get used to the real legitimate rairity of the 1933 $20
@oreville said:
I do not think the 1933 $20 will do that well in this auction. It will underperform for the next few years but will do much better afterwards as buyers get used to the real legitimate rairity of the 1933 $20
This auction will be especially interesting to watch.
Here is my formation of Jennys - flying right-side-up as they should be
I picked this up in a collection of stamps I bought from a local coin shop.
The centering is about average, but the state of preservation is immaculate (including the original glue on the back).
The first printing of these sheets had the top selvage trimmed off, which would mean that none of those sheets would show a plate number - EXCEPT the one sheet with the vignette (blue) plate inverted and that plate's number appears upside-down on the bottom selvage of the sheet.
The second printing of the sheets had a blue "TOP" added to the vignette plate so as to aid the press operator in orienting it properly for printing and help prevent future errors from escaping.
The third printing also had a red "TOP" added to the frame plate, for the same reasons.
The coin maybe purchased by another non collector. It may also go to an anonymous one
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......
@oreville said:
I do not think the 1933 $20 will do that well in this auction. It will underperform for the next few years but will do much better afterwards as buyers get used to the real legitimate rairity of the 1933 $20
Robert, regardless of what you mean by “real legitimate rarity”, I think that buyers have already had plenty of time to get used to it.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
@tradedollarnut said:
Let me expound - I have no interest in an artificial rarity. Just because the government deems only one legal to own doesn’t change the fact there are at least 13 [and most likely more] in existence. So to me it’s worth about what an 1894-S dime is worth.
"Certainty" is worth alot in any field including investments. Whether fair or not, this is the only 1933 that legally can be owned and that counts for alot. A $20 st Gaudens with a census in teens will always be worth 7 figures. Could the others become legal to own---maybe? Is this one legal to be owned---100%. That is worth alot. Further, we deal with similar uncertainty with other series or dates---a shiprwreck hoard found; a hoard found in europe, etc.
The 1933 is the subject of books. It is the key coin in arguably the most desired series. The 1933 is ranked 4th in the 100 greatest coins book. Calling it an "artificial rarity" does not do it justice.
@tradedollarnut said:
Let me expound - I have no interest in an artificial rarity. Just because the government deems only one legal to own doesn’t change the fact there are at least 13 [and most likely more] in existence. So to me it’s worth about what an 1894-S dime is worth.
"Certainty" is worth alot in any field including investments. Whether fair or not, this is the only 1933 that legally can be owned and that counts for alot. A $20 st Gaudens with a census in teens will always be worth 7 figures. Could the others become legal to own---maybe? Is this one legal to be owned---100%. That is worth alot. Further, we deal with similar uncertainty with other series or dates---a shiprwreck hoard found; a hoard found in europe, etc.
The 1933 is the subject of books. It is the key coin in arguably the most desired series. The 1933 is ranked 4th in the 100 greatest coins book. Calling it an "artificial rarity" does not do it justice.
I'd label this specific example a "legally mandated ultra rarity".
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
It’s good to know that the 1933 double eagle was sold to a private citizen. I have long suspected that the government bought it.
Retired dealer and avid collector of U.S. type coins, 19th century presidential campaign medalets and selected medals. In recent years I have been working on a set of British coins - at least one coin from each king or queen who issued pieces that are collectible. I am also collecting at least one coin for each Roman emperor from Julius Caesar to ... ?
What makes the 1933 Double Eagle very interesting to me as a rarity is that it was struck as a regular issue and huge world events changed that. There's a huge historical context to this coin.
The events leading to the rarity of the 1933 Double Eagle are well known. The fact that others exist - though well hidden - is also known. This specific coin has the unique property of being declared legal - the only one. We watched the saga of the Langbord coins... and likely the same would occur to any other 1933 Double Eagle that emerges from the shadows. So this specimen becomes desirable. It also has a unique history beyond the 'gold' story in that it was gifted to a foreign head of state. What would truly make it unique would be if it were truly the 'only 1933 Double Eagle'. So anyone who owns this specimen would likely 'rat out' any others that he/she became aware of.... Should be fun to watch the continuing saga as it unfolds. Cheers, RickO
@PhillyJoe said:
The federal government allowed this one coin to be monetized (if that is the correct word) and sold at auction with the owner, Fenton, and the government splitting the proceeds. The buyer was assured no other 1933's would ever be monetized.
And we all know the government keeps its' promises....
@PhillyJoe said:
The federal government allowed this one coin to be monetized (if that is the correct word) and sold at auction with the owner, Fenton, and the government splitting the proceeds. The buyer was assured no other 1933's would ever be monetized.
And we all know the government keeps its' promises....
This IMO is the reason it will probably not break a world record . Not helpful that there are others unaccounted for out there
From what I've read, if I remember correctly, it sounds as if there might be approximately (edited) two to four others out there. However, whatever the actual number, I seriously doubt that anyone who plans to bid on this one will attempt to obtain a different example elsewhere.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
@tradedollarnut said:
Let me expound - I have no interest in an artificial rarity.
Does that include sticker rarity?
I have no interest in collecting coins where the grade on their holder is a huge factor in their value anymore, either. So label rarity, sticker rarity...and the sort.
You are making a lot of sense. I'm thinking I should follow your lead and work more on my box of 20.
How you proceed should depends on your goals. When i think of great collections they almost always involve a series, a type set, etc. Recently a thread discussed the wow factor of the Tyrant collection. Hansen's collection is spectacular. Drukor has put together many amazing series sets. Oliver Jung's type set. The Simpson collection. And on and on. When i think of great box of 20 collections, they are much more difficult to identify. There may be a reason for this.
At the end of the day you should do what brings you the most satisfaction.
This coin has to be very near the top as far as coins known to non-collectors. I also won't be surprised if it ended in the hands of a non-collector. I'm in the 10m+ category.
@TurtleCat said:
What is really interesting to me is that this finally debunks the myth that the mint was the anonymous buyer of the ‘33 in order to keep it out of private hands.
Yep. I was wrong in guessing that. Oh well!
Me too, but I would call it a reasonable hypothesis that turned out to be wrong vs a myth. The difference being a hypothesis you know could be wrong, it is a guess.
That would be an incredibly poor result which you will realize with a bit of research.
I agree with you that 10,000,000.01 would be a poor result, but what makes you say that? You don't seem to be a fan of the coin.
I presume the point that he was trying to make by adding the penny to $10M was that it would be the most expensive coin ever sold at auction. But the actual highest price ever realized is 10,016,875 so that exact bid wouldn’t accomplish what he was inferring.
I’m a fan of the coin but not it’s old perceived value.
@tradedollarnut said:
Let me expound - I have no interest in an artificial rarity.
Does that include sticker rarity?
I have no interest in collecting coins where the grade on their holder is a huge factor in their value anymore, either. So label rarity, sticker rarity...and the sort.
You are making a lot of sense. I'm thinking I should follow your lead and work more on my box of 20.
How you proceed should depends on your goals. When i think of great collections they almost always involve a series, a type set, etc. Recently a thread discussed the wow factor of the Tyrant collection. Hansen's collection is spectacular. Drukor has put together many amazing series sets. Oliver Jung's type set. The Simpson collection. And on and on. When i think of great box of 20 collections, they are much more difficult to identify. There may be a reason for this.
At the end of the day you should do what brings you the most satisfaction.
Your advice also makes a lot of sense. I struggle with the fact that for the cost of adding one coin to my box of 20, I can have the fun of searching for bidding on and buying 50 to 100 coins for my other collections.
Thanks again to TDN for initiating another fun and instructive thread.
As fascinating as the 1933 with its incorporated history is, it shares the exact same obverse and reverse as millions of other coins excepting the date.
@1northcoin said:
As fascinating as the 1933 with its incorporated history is, it shares the exact same obverse and reverse as millions of other coins excepting the date.
You mean it's like other top coins including the 1804 Draped Bust Dollar, 1822 Half Eagle, 1913 Liberty Head Nickel, 1894-S Barber dime, 1884/1885 Trade Dollars and others?
That would be an incredibly poor result which you will realize with a bit of research.
I agree with you that 10,000,000.01 would be a poor result, but what makes you say that? You don't seem to be a fan of the coin.
I presume the point that he was trying to make by adding the penny to $10M was that it would be the most expensive coin ever sold at auction. But the actual highest price ever realized is 10,016,875 so that exact bid wouldn’t accomplish what he was inferring.
I’m a fan of the coin but not it’s old perceived value.
Yes I was just having a tad bit of fun by adding the .01 as it was not a calculated estimate based on doing any sort of research.
To Err Is Human.... To Collect Err's Is Just Too Much Darn Tootin Fun!
On a tangentially-related note, Mr. Weitzman is giving a talk (via Zoom) at The Cooper Union in NYC (my alma mater). on 29 March. While the talk will be about Mr. Weitzman's career, and design, it might be interesting to some of you and perhaps you will get a chance to discuss the coin.
@tradedollarnut said:
Let me expound - I have no interest in an artificial rarity.
Does that include sticker rarity?
I have no interest in collecting coins where the grade on their holder is a huge factor in their value anymore, either. So label rarity, sticker rarity...and the sort.
Are you saying that you know longer want the highest graded but now prefer the finest known to your eye?
@tradedollarnut said:
Let me expound - I have no interest in an artificial rarity.
Does that include sticker rarity?
I have no interest in collecting coins where the grade on their holder is a huge factor in their value anymore, either. So label rarity, sticker rarity...and the sort.
Are you saying that you know longer want the highest graded but now prefer the finest known to your eye?
USAF (Ret) 1974 - 1994 - The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; the inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries. Remembering RickO, a brother in arms.
@tradedollarnut said:
Let me expound - I have no interest in an artificial rarity.
Does that include sticker rarity?
I have no interest in collecting coins where the grade on their holder is a huge factor in their value anymore, either. So label rarity, sticker rarity...and the sort.
Are you saying that you know longer want the highest graded but now prefer the finest known to your eye?
No, those two are roughly equivalent statements
So what are you saying then, I must have misunderstood?
@tradedollarnut said:
Let me expound - I have no interest in an artificial rarity.
Does that include sticker rarity?
I have no interest in collecting coins where the grade on their holder is a huge factor in their value anymore, either. So label rarity, sticker rarity...and the sort.
Are you saying that you know longer want the highest graded but now prefer the finest known to your eye?
No, those two are roughly equivalent statements
So what are you saying then, I must have misunderstood?
That I’m collecting true rarities, not condition rarities
Comments
I like your philosophy. I’m having problems thinking of 20 U.S. coins that meet that criteria. You’re off to a good start.
I could have easily missed it. But did Bruce ever say he’d be going for 20 coins?
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Even if there are other 33s out there, it's safe to say they won't be legal to own for a long time, since the Treasury Dept. will drag it out as long as they possibly can.
I thought I read it was a Box of 20 (in one of his other recent threads), but I could be mistaken.
He did say that.........But whether he finds 20 worthy coins or not is anyone's guess......
Sometimes, it’s better to be LUCKY than good. 🍀 🍺👍
My Full Walker Registry Set (1916-1947):
https://www.ngccoin.com/registry/competitive-sets/16292/
Sweet, I'm in!!
This is going to be very exciting.
I hope there's a TrueView and some videos of the coin made available.
I fully agree with @tradedollarnut assessment of artificial or what I like to call "created rarity".
I collected Nolan Ryan baseball cards for 27 years. When they started making cards that were limited to 34 or 30 and there were actually a few 1 of 1's, I immediately stopped collecting his new stuff as it was "created rarity".
Donato
Donato's Complete US Type Set ---- Donato's Dansco 7070 Modified Type Set ---- Donato's Basic U.S. Coin Design Set
Successful transactions: Shrub68 (Jim), MWallace (Mike)
I don't think the Treasury Department will drag it out. They will go to court and most likely win.
BHNC #248 … 130 and counting.
I do not think the 1933 $20 will do that well in this auction. It will underperform for the next few years but will do much better afterwards as buyers get used to the real legitimate rairity of the 1933 $20
This is a really good opportunity for someone.
This auction will be especially interesting to watch.
Here is my formation of Jennys - flying right-side-up as they should be
I picked this up in a collection of stamps I bought from a local coin shop.
The centering is about average, but the state of preservation is immaculate (including the original glue on the back).
The first printing of these sheets had the top selvage trimmed off, which would mean that none of those sheets would show a plate number - EXCEPT the one sheet with the vignette (blue) plate inverted and that plate's number appears upside-down on the bottom selvage of the sheet.
The second printing of the sheets had a blue "TOP" added to the vignette plate so as to aid the press operator in orienting it properly for printing and help prevent future errors from escaping.
The third printing also had a red "TOP" added to the frame plate, for the same reasons.
The coin maybe purchased by another non collector. It may also go to an anonymous one
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......
Has it been confirmed that the current owner is non-collector?
Robert, regardless of what you mean by “real legitimate rarity”, I think that buyers have already had plenty of time to get used to it.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
I'm sure there will be at least two people that want this coin.
Eliasberg had one. Enough said.
Bingo
"Certainty" is worth alot in any field including investments. Whether fair or not, this is the only 1933 that legally can be owned and that counts for alot. A $20 st Gaudens with a census in teens will always be worth 7 figures. Could the others become legal to own---maybe? Is this one legal to be owned---100%. That is worth alot. Further, we deal with similar uncertainty with other series or dates---a shiprwreck hoard found; a hoard found in europe, etc.
The 1933 is the subject of books. It is the key coin in arguably the most desired series. The 1933 is ranked 4th in the 100 greatest coins book. Calling it an "artificial rarity" does not do it justice.
I'd label this specific example a "legally mandated ultra rarity".
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
This is apparently worth $140 million....
If I had it, I'd trade even-up
I'd even throw in a potted plant & medium size house cat.
My Saint Set
It’s good to know that the 1933 double eagle was sold to a private citizen. I have long suspected that the government bought it.
What makes the 1933 Double Eagle very interesting to me as a rarity is that it was struck as a regular issue and huge world events changed that. There's a huge historical context to this coin.
I rather would have the Brasher Doubloon I was the underbidder on than the 1933, I think.
The events leading to the rarity of the 1933 Double Eagle are well known. The fact that others exist - though well hidden - is also known. This specific coin has the unique property of being declared legal - the only one. We watched the saga of the Langbord coins... and likely the same would occur to any other 1933 Double Eagle that emerges from the shadows. So this specimen becomes desirable. It also has a unique history beyond the 'gold' story in that it was gifted to a foreign head of state. What would truly make it unique would be if it were truly the 'only 1933 Double Eagle'. So anyone who owns this specimen would likely 'rat out' any others that he/she became aware of.... Should be fun to watch the continuing saga as it unfolds. Cheers, RickO
Well, the 1933 is Modern Junk™ compared to the Brasher
And we all know the government keeps its' promises....
From what I've read, if I remember correctly, it sounds as if there might be approximately (edited) two to four others out there. However, whatever the actual number, I seriously doubt that anyone who plans to bid on this one will attempt to obtain a different example elsewhere.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
The real question is: Do two VERY WEALTHY people want the coin.
How you proceed should depends on your goals. When i think of great collections they almost always involve a series, a type set, etc. Recently a thread discussed the wow factor of the Tyrant collection. Hansen's collection is spectacular. Drukor has put together many amazing series sets. Oliver Jung's type set. The Simpson collection. And on and on. When i think of great box of 20 collections, they are much more difficult to identify. There may be a reason for this.
At the end of the day you should do what brings you the most satisfaction.
This coin has to be very near the top as far as coins known to non-collectors. I also won't be surprised if it ended in the hands of a non-collector. I'm in the 10m+ category.
No doubt there are.
The question is what level the future underbidder is willing to go, assuming it is unreserved.
"To Be Esteemed Be Useful" - 1792 Birch Cent --- "I personally think we developed language because of our deep need to complain." - Lily Tomlin
Me too, but I would call it a reasonable hypothesis that turned out to be wrong vs a myth. The difference being a hypothesis you know could be wrong, it is a guess.
Join the fight against Minnesota's unjust coin dealer tax law.
I agree with you that 10,000,000.01 would be a poor result, but what makes you say that? You don't seem to be a fan of the coin.
Join the fight against Minnesota's unjust coin dealer tax law.
Bidding increments and house rounding to nearest increment
I presume the point that he was trying to make by adding the penny to $10M was that it would be the most expensive coin ever sold at auction. But the actual highest price ever realized is 10,016,875 so that exact bid wouldn’t accomplish what he was inferring.
I’m a fan of the coin but not it’s old perceived value.
Your advice also makes a lot of sense. I struggle with the fact that for the cost of adding one coin to my box of 20, I can have the fun of searching for bidding on and buying 50 to 100 coins for my other collections.
It will be interesting to see what happens.
And pretty amazing that these two top coins are being offered so close to each other.
Man I am soooo glad nobody stepped up at my minimum bid!
Thanks again to TDN for initiating another fun and instructive thread.
As fascinating as the 1933 with its incorporated history is, it shares the exact same obverse and reverse as millions of other coins excepting the date.
https://coinweek.com/us-coins/united-states-1933-double-eagle-20-gold-coin/
You mean it's like other top coins including the 1804 Draped Bust Dollar, 1822 Half Eagle, 1913 Liberty Head Nickel, 1894-S Barber dime, 1884/1885 Trade Dollars and others?
I was just having a bit of fun with ya
> @tradedollarnut said:
Yes I was just having a tad bit of fun by adding the .01 as it was not a calculated estimate based on doing any sort of research.
On a tangentially-related note, Mr. Weitzman is giving a talk (via Zoom) at The Cooper Union in NYC (my alma mater). on 29 March. While the talk will be about Mr. Weitzman's career, and design, it might be interesting to some of you and perhaps you will get a chance to discuss the coin.
PM me for the registration link.
I wonder if the guy with the barrels full of wheat cents is now heading for the Coinstar machine in order to raise money for this auction!
Are you saying that you know longer want the highest graded but now prefer the finest known to your eye?
No, those two are roughly equivalent statements
Plus a small premium...
USAF (Ret) 1974 - 1994 - The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; the inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries. Remembering RickO, a brother in arms.
So what are you saying then, I must have misunderstood?
That I’m collecting true rarities, not condition rarities