Home U.S. Coin Forum

PCGS Certifies Ultra-Rare 1933 Saint-Gaudens Double Eagle Gold Coin

PCGS_SocialMediaPCGS_SocialMedia Posts: 327 mod
edited April 8, 2021 11:30AM in U.S. Coin Forum

PCGS was selected by Sotheby’s in New York to officially certify and grade the 1933 Saint-Gaudens Double Eagle, a gold coin once owned by King Farouk of Egypt that will soon be offered for sale. PCGS has graded the gold coin MS65 and its current owner, shoe designer Stuart Weitzman, is offering it along with a handful of other exceptional rarities at a Sotheby’s auction to be held in New York on June 8, 2021.

“We are excited and proud to be given the opportunity to formally certify the 1933 Saint-Gaudens Double Eagle," says PCGS President Brett Charville. “This coin is a true gem! Breaking the world record in 2002 for being the most valuable coin ever sold, this specimen has a story unlike any other United States rarity.”

Due to the unique circumstances and rarity of the 1933 Saint-Gaudens Double Eagle, PCGS is taking the unusual step of, at the auctioneer’s request, grading and certifying, but not holdering this rarity in PCGS’ tamper-evident holder. The winning bidder of the coin may submit it to PCGS for holdering to provide state-of-the-art security at no additional charge.

Previously, PCGS has only reserved non-holder certification to just one other rarity, which is the Walton specimen of the 1913 Liberty Nickel graded PCGS PR63.

Read the full press release here: https://www.pcgs.com/news/pcgs-certifies-ultra-rare-1933-saint-gaudens-double-eagle-gold-coin

«134

Comments

  • This content has been removed.
  • 1northcoin1northcoin Posts: 4,266 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @291fifth said:
    If it isn't holdered then how can the grade be guaranteed? The coin could easily be damaged in storage or handling. My opinion: Not holdering the coin is a bad idea, rarity or not.

    Note, PCGS is offering to "holder" the coin for free, but says nothing about guaranteeing the grade. Obviously the auction house and others viewing/holding the coin assume some measure of risk.

  • WAYNEASWAYNEAS Posts: 6,675 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Only one that can be legally owned. Enough said.
    Personally, I would have it placed in a holder.
    Wayne

    Kennedys are my quest...

  • Samuel8Samuel8 Posts: 379 ✭✭✭

    There are other 10+ in Fed's hand, right?

  • LanceNewmanOCCLanceNewmanOCC Posts: 19,999 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @Samuel8 said:
    There are other 10+ in Fed's hand, right?

    .
    it seems like i recall something recently about them either being broken up as a group and some going to display (museum/shows) or something. should be easily found in recent archives and probably commentary about the possession of said coins.

    on another note

    i don't recall ever sitting down and viewing the full monster images of this coin and i must say i wasn't expecting that Satiny, Rose-gold, Frosty look that it has. would LOVE to hold that in-hand, raw.

    gratz to PCGS

    <--- look what's behind the mask! - cool link 1/NO ~ 2/NNP ~ 3/NNC ~ 4/CF ~ 5/PG ~ 6/Cert ~ 7/NGC 7a/NGC pop~ 8/NGCF ~ 9/HA archives ~ 10/PM ~ 11/NM ~ 12/ANACS cert ~ 13/ANACS pop - report fakes 1/ACEF ~ report fakes/thefts 1/NCIS - Numi-Classes SS ~ Bass ~ Transcribed Docs NNP - clashed coins - error training - V V mm styles -

  • Moose1913Moose1913 Posts: 402 ✭✭✭

    It looks like the auctioneer didn't want PCGS to photograph it either.

    Take a look at the TrueView Max.

    Yikes!

    I pick things up
    I am a collector
    And things, well things
    They tend to accumulate
  • ConnecticoinConnecticoin Posts: 12,812 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @Samuel8 said:
    There are other 10+ in Fed's hand, right?

    Yes, and one of them was graded MS66 by NGC.

  • This content has been removed.
  • ConnecticoinConnecticoin Posts: 12,812 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited April 8, 2021 1:24PM

    Interesting look on the True-View - the luster looks Matte-Proof-ish.

  • RB1026RB1026 Posts: 1,469 ✭✭✭✭

    Smart move by all parties, imo. Fantastic coin certified by the best in the business. Makes all the sense in the world to me. I'd like to see every great coin in a PCGS holder because I LOVE the TrueView images.

  • SwampboySwampboy Posts: 12,984 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Awesome bit of numismatic history
    What are the chances I can see it on display at a show in the near future?

    "Inspiration exists, but it has to find you working" Pablo Picasso

  • airplanenutairplanenut Posts: 22,141 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @Samuel8 said:
    There are other 10+ in Fed's hand, right?

    The Smithsonian has 2

    @DarkRage666 said:
    Wow... just wow... there aren't any words for how absolutely beautiful this coin is...

    Looks like all the others but with an expensive date. That said, an HR or UHR would look way better side-by-side.

    JK Coin Photography - eBay Consignments | High Quality Photos | LOW Prices | 20% of Consignment Proceeds Go to Pancreatic Cancer Research
  • SanctionIISanctionII Posts: 12,091 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited April 8, 2021 2:35PM

    I wonder how many high end collectors would pass on buying this coin unless and until it was submitted to CAC and received a green or a gold sticker (some collectors have exceedingly high standards and simply refuse to consider buying coins that do not have a CAC sticker because they do not want to have in their collection a coin that is "low end" for the grade)?

    :)

  • This content has been removed.
  • markelman1125markelman1125 Posts: 1,843 ✭✭✭✭✭

    So cool 😎

  • MsMorrisineMsMorrisine Posts: 32,984 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @DarkRage666 said:

    @SanctionII said:
    I wonder how many high end collectors would pass on buying this coin unless and until it was submitted to CAC and received a green or a gold sticker** (some collectors have exceeding high standard and simply refuse to consider buying coins that do not have a CAC sticker because they do not want to have in their collection a coin that is "low end" for the grade)**?

    :)

    It may be because I'm still a kid and have a very low spending budget but what's in bold above is very insulting to me... I know you're not saying it yourself, but the fact that some collectors do that is insulting to people who are trying to start up a collection (aka me and other YN)

    you need to lose that thought.

    it is a fact of collecting life that some collectors only want CAC stickered coins because the sticker is said to mean a quality coin for the grade. plain and simple.

    Current maintainer of Stone's Master List of Favorite Websites // My BST transactions
  • MsMorrisineMsMorrisine Posts: 32,984 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited April 8, 2021 1:14PM

    @DarkRage666 said:
    So why are these illegal to own compared to other gold eagles?

    some, like me, say they are legal to own.

    the 1933 DE were ordered melted. it is alleged that some were secretly removed from the mint via illegal means. for further reading read up on the 1933 double eagle story, the Farouk specimen and the Langbord lawsuits.

    Current maintainer of Stone's Master List of Favorite Websites // My BST transactions
  • This content has been removed.
  • MFeldMFeld Posts: 13,405 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @MsMorrisine said:

    @DarkRage666 said:
    So why are these illegal to own compared to other gold eagles?

    some, like me, say they are legal to own.

    the 1933 DE were ordered melted. it is alleged that some were secretly removed from the mint via illegal means. for further reading read up on the 1933 double eagle story, the Farouk specimen and the Langbord lawsuits.

    As much as you might want them to be legal to own - and so do I - saying that they are so would be incorrect. The legal system has spoken and all appeals have been exhausted.

    Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.

  • ConnecticoinConnecticoin Posts: 12,812 ✭✭✭✭✭

    If PCGS graded it, I wonder why it was not TrueViewed by Phil.

  • relicsncoinsrelicsncoins Posts: 7,905 ✭✭✭✭✭

    They had them on display at the ANA world fair of money in Denver some years back. It was pretty cool to look at them even through glass.

    Need a Barber Half with ANACS photo certificate. If you have one for sale please PM me. Current Ebay auctions
  • Samuel8Samuel8 Posts: 379 ✭✭✭

    @LanceNewmanOCC said:

    @Samuel8 said:
    There are other 10+ in Fed's hand, right?

    .
    it seems like i recall something recently about them either being broken up as a group and some going to display (museum/shows) or something. should be easily found in recent archives and probably commentary about the possession of said coins.

    "In 2005, ten more 1933 Double Eagles surfaced in the possession of the family of one of the prime suspects in the 1944 Secret Service investigation and another legal battle ensued. More than a decade later, after a jury trial and appeals (to as high as the Supreme Court) the 1933 Double Eagles were ruled the property of United States (another example was voluntarily surrendered following the litigation), and confirmed the government’s statement in 2002 that Stuart Weitzman’s 1933 Double Eagle is “the only example the United States Government has ever authorized, or ever intends to authorize, for private ownership.”"

  • Samuel8Samuel8 Posts: 379 ✭✭✭

    @Connecticoin said:

    @Samuel8 said:
    There are other 10+ in Fed's hand, right?

    Yes, and one of them was graded MS66 by NGC.

    "In 2005, ten more 1933 Double Eagles surfaced in the possession of the family of one of the prime suspects in the 1944 Secret Service investigation and another legal battle ensued. More than a decade later, after a jury trial and appeals (to as high as the Supreme Court) the 1933 Double Eagles were ruled the property of United States (another example was voluntarily surrendered following the litigation), and confirmed the government’s statement in 2002 that Stuart Weitzman’s 1933 Double Eagle is “the only example the United States Government has ever authorized, or ever intends to authorize, for private ownership.”"

  • SanctionIISanctionII Posts: 12,091 ✭✭✭✭✭

    DarkRage66.

    No insult intended by me in my reply to this thread.

    As others have stated, some collectors chose to only collect slabbed coins that have received a CAC sticker.

    Every collector (young, old, new to the hobby, seasoned veteran in the hobby, knowledgeable or not) finds a spot in the hobby that "works" for them. That makes the hobby so great. There is something the hobby that will be of interest to you that is not of interest to others.

    For this Ultra Rare coin that has been graded by our host, I am curious if the history behind same and its uniqueness (being the only 1933 Double Eagle that is legal to own in the private sector) would be sufficient to cause collectors who as a rule only collect CAC coins to make an exception for this coin.

    Further, I wonder what the results would be if this PCGS MS65 graded coin were submitted to CAC.

    Would it bean or not?

    Stay tuned to the continuing story of 1933 Double Eagles.

  • Samuel8Samuel8 Posts: 379 ✭✭✭

    The mint should re-strike this coin.

  • ConnecticoinConnecticoin Posts: 12,812 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @Samuel8 said:

    @Connecticoin said:

    @Samuel8 said:
    There are other 10+ in Fed's hand, right?

    Yes, and one of them was graded MS66 by NGC.

    "In 2005, ten more 1933 Double Eagles surfaced in the possession of the family of one of the prime suspects in the 1944 Secret Service investigation and another legal battle ensued. More than a decade later, after a jury trial and appeals (to as high as the Supreme Court) the 1933 Double Eagles were ruled the property of United States (another example was voluntarily surrendered following the litigation), and confirmed the government’s statement in 2002 that Stuart Weitzman’s 1933 Double Eagle is “the only example the United States Government has ever authorized, or ever intends to authorize, for private ownership.”"

    There is a thread on this forum from 2009 about the Treasury having all 10 Langboard Saints graded by NGC. Photos of the coins in the slabs were posted on the NGC website, but they were taken down a few months later.

  • clarkbar04clarkbar04 Posts: 4,936 ✭✭✭✭✭

    For a 1 of 1, does it really matter what the grade is? You either want the only one, or you don't.

    MS66 taste on an MS63 budget.
  • Samuel8Samuel8 Posts: 379 ✭✭✭

    @Connecticoin said:

    There is a thread on this forum from 2009 about the Treasury having all 10 Langboard Saints graded by NGC. Photos of the coins in the slabs were posted on the NGC website, but they were taken down a few months later.

    Found the thread. I wonder why government had them graded.
    https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/746887/wow-the-langboard-saints-have-now-been-graded-by-a-major-tpg-one-of-them-is-ms66/p1

  • cameonut2011cameonut2011 Posts: 10,162 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I’d call it a 63+ shot 64.

  • tradedollarnuttradedollarnut Posts: 20,162 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @cameonut2011 said:
    I’d call it a 63+ shot 64.

    Looked at any 1933 $10s?

  • BryceMBryceM Posts: 11,793 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I can appreciate it, find the history interesting enough, but wouldn't care to own it, even if I had the means to do so. It really rubs me the wrong way how things went down with the Langbords and it's even more disgusting how the government "spiked the football" shortly after seizing them by displaying all of them at a show. The theatrical "monetization" charade of the Farouk specimen only adds to the government's misdeed of picking winners and losers. I suppose all that history adds to the allure for some, but the fun spirit of collecting isn't in it for me.

    Kudos to PCGS for having been asked, and for making the call. Some say the grade doesn't matter, and maybe it doesn't to the price, but I think they got it right. Enlarge photos of most MS65 gold coins and they'll look like they went for a ride in a barrel full of nails.

  • cameonut2011cameonut2011 Posts: 10,162 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited April 8, 2021 3:42PM

    @tradedollarnut said:

    @cameonut2011 said:
    I’d call it a 63+ shot 64.

    Looked at any 1933 $10s?

    Point well taken, but these coins shouldn’t be given leniency because of the date. If it weren’t for Roosevelt’s executive order, the coins would be viewed no differently than any other date/mint mark for the series.

  • airplanenutairplanenut Posts: 22,141 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @DarkRage666 said:

    @SanctionII said:
    I wonder how many high end collectors would pass on buying this coin unless and until it was submitted to CAC and received a green or a gold sticker** (some collectors have exceeding high standard and simply refuse to consider buying coins that do not have a CAC sticker because they do not want to have in their collection a coin that is "low end" for the grade)**?

    :)

    It may be because I'm still a kid and have a very low spending budget but what's in bold above is very insulting to me... I know you're not saying it yourself, but the fact that some collectors do that is insulting to people who are trying to start up a collection (aka me and other YN)

    It need not be insulting. I don't play the sticker game (I'll consider a coin with or without a sticker), but I still strive to have the nicest coins I can get. For just about anything other than a mega rarity (like this one, where if you want it, it's the only one you can get) there are lots of examples from which you can choose. Whether your budget is $20 or $20,000, there's no reason not to strive for getting a solid coin for your money. Put a different way, unless you're getting a steep discount, it's often not worth paying for the coin that just barely made one grade if you could get a coin solid for the grade below it at a better price. Of course prices aren't fixed and grading is subjective, but that's my takeaway here: buy the best you can within your budget, and don't pay more for the higher number if the coin itself doesn't justify it.

    JK Coin Photography - eBay Consignments | High Quality Photos | LOW Prices | 20% of Consignment Proceeds Go to Pancreatic Cancer Research
  • silverpopsilverpop Posts: 6,674 ✭✭✭✭✭

    coin buying is a gamble but one has to be willing to take that gamble and hope the coin they buy will fit into their collection ideas

    Coins for sale at link below
    https://photos.app.goo.gl/hz9Sh46ePLrqxefi6

  • Moose1913Moose1913 Posts: 402 ✭✭✭

    :D

    I pick things up
    I am a collector
    And things, well things
    They tend to accumulate
  • 3keepSECRETif2rDEAD3keepSECRETif2rDEAD Posts: 4,285 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @MFeld said:

    @MsMorrisine said:

    @DarkRage666 said:
    So why are these illegal to own compared to other gold eagles?

    some, like me, say they are legal to own.

    the 1933 DE were ordered melted. it is alleged that some were secretly removed from the mint via illegal means. for further reading read up on the 1933 double eagle story, the Farouk specimen and the Langbord lawsuits.

    As much as you might want them to be legal to own - and so do I - saying that they are so would be incorrect. The legal system has spoken and all appeals have been exhausted.

    ...then it sounds like it’s time for Uncle Sam to put together an Express submission to our host ;)

  • CalifornianKingCalifornianKing Posts: 1,259 ✭✭✭✭

    @Moose1913 said:
    It looks like the auctioneer didn't want PCGS to photograph it either.

    Take a look at the TrueView Max.

    Yikes!

    Yup. Unfortunatly it does not seem to be a MS65. It looks like a 63/64. The damage on the right and left knees is extensive. There also seems to be some rubbing.

  • CalifornianKingCalifornianKing Posts: 1,259 ✭✭✭✭

    @MsMorrisine said:

    @DarkRage666 said:
    So why are these illegal to own compared to other gold eagles?

    some, like me, say they are legal to own.

    the 1933 DE were ordered melted. it is alleged that some were secretly removed from the mint via illegal means. for further reading read up on the 1933 double eagle story, the Farouk specimen and the Langbord lawsuits.

    QDB has suggested in his book about golden stories or smth like that, that they could have been obtained legally during the period before the EO. And that there is no proof that the Farouk specimen is actually the Farouk Specimen.

  • CalifornianKingCalifornianKing Posts: 1,259 ✭✭✭✭

    @MFeld said:

    @MsMorrisine said:

    @DarkRage666 said:
    So why are these illegal to own compared to other gold eagles?

    some, like me, say they are legal to own.

    the 1933 DE were ordered melted. it is alleged that some were secretly removed from the mint via illegal means. for further reading read up on the 1933 double eagle story, the Farouk specimen and the Langbord lawsuits.

    As much as you might want them to be legal to own - and so do I - saying that they are so would be incorrect. The legal system has spoken and all appeals have been exhausted.

    Unfortuantly that is correct. Hopefully in the future the laws will change. But it is illegal to own it in the US. If I ever have the means, I will attempt to purchase one of them and store it outside the US.

  • Moose1913Moose1913 Posts: 402 ✭✭✭

    @Connecticoin said:
    If PCGS graded it, I wonder why it was not TrueViewed by Phil.

    Because it is easier to use someone else's photographs?

    I pick things up
    I am a collector
    And things, well things
    They tend to accumulate
  • savitalesavitale Posts: 1,409 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Maybe they put it up for bid, and the TPG with the highest grade got the honors?

  • ConnecticoinConnecticoin Posts: 12,812 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @CalifornianKing said:

    @Moose1913 said:
    It looks like the auctioneer didn't want PCGS to photograph it either.

    Take a look at the TrueView Max.

    Yikes!

    Yup. Unfortunatly it does not seem to be a MS65. It looks like a 63/64. The damage on the right and left knees is extensive. There also seems to be some rubbing.

    The rest of the coin is fairly clean, so 65 does not seem out of whack to me. Take a look at the MS65 1931 Saints on Coinfacts - they make the Farouk coin look like a 66. These coins are not graded like Walking Liberty Half Dollars.

  • CalifornianKingCalifornianKing Posts: 1,259 ✭✭✭✭

    @Connecticoin said:

    @CalifornianKing said:

    @Moose1913 said:
    It looks like the auctioneer didn't want PCGS to photograph it either.

    Take a look at the TrueView Max.

    Yikes!

    Yup. Unfortunatly it does not seem to be a MS65. It looks like a 63/64. The damage on the right and left knees is extensive. There also seems to be some rubbing.

    The rest of the coin is fairly clean, so 65 does not seem out of whack to me. Take a look at the MS65 1931 Saints on Coinfacts - they make the Farouk coin look like a 66. These coins are not graded like Walking Liberty Half Dollars.

    Most of my grading experince (very little) comes from Morgans, seated ect. Very little with gold.

  • TwoSides2aCoinTwoSides2aCoin Posts: 44,264 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Cool. It's only ultra rare because....

    There is but One King.

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Emoji
Image
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file