1936 T1 sold for $88,000, $99,000 with BP

BaronVonBaugh

1936 Buffalo Nickel Type 1--Satin PCGS Proof-69 (Toned)
Sold for $99,000 with BP! I was sure if would go for 5 figures. Just didn’t think it would try to hit 6 figures. At least 2 people wanted it pretty badly! They left me in the dust quickly! Beautiful coin and top pop. Did someone here win it?

https://www.greatcollections.com/Coin/1047859/1936-Buffalo-Nickel-Type-1-Satin-PCGS-Proof-69-Toned

breakdown

I am sure it is beautiful in hand but neither the slab shot nor the TV are scintillating (which you would expect from a 69). These coins are very difficult to image.
I would guess we will know the new owner soon if you check the registry.

Joey29

@breakdown said:
I am sure it is beautiful in hand but neither the slab shot nor the TV are scintillating (which you would expect from a 69). These coins are very difficult to image.
I would guess we will know the new owner soon if you check the registry.

Great collections photos not good.

ElKevvo

Gorgeous coin....out of my price range also!

K

DelawareDoons

@Joey29 said:

@breakdown said:
I am sure it is beautiful in hand but neither the slab shot nor the TV are scintillating (which you would expect from a 69). These coins are very difficult to image.
I would guess we will know the new owner soon if you check the registry.

Great collections photos not good.

For as big of an operation as they are now, you'd think they would bring in some quality photographers.

BillJones

It is a very pretty coin, but for $86,000 more than than the price I paid for my PR-67, I'm happy to be where I am.

WAYNEAS

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
I am in love with this coin, but it is well out of my league.
Wayne

1Bufffan

What a Great looking Buff, would be a Great addition to any collection, congratulations to the Top Bidder!

291fifth

Absurd price.

breakdown

@BillJones said:
It is a very pretty coin, but for $86,000 more than than the price I paid for my PR-67, I'm happy to be where I am.

Well, I have a nice PR67 for this date as well - I have a Buffalo Proof registry set of all PR-67's that I haven't changed since 2010. But there are over 600 1937's graded in PR67 and only 2 that have ever been graded PR69. Mr Forsythe has one and now there is this one. They both look considerably flashier than my white 67. I think the bigger concern for the buyer is how many of those 68's and 68+'s and coins in high NGC holders have a shot to expand the population of PR69's.

ccmorgan

Too bad they don't have a "love" icon to click on, so I clicked like.

breakdown

Here's the Trueview of the PR69 that just sold:

Here's Mr. Forsythe's PR69 coin:

cameonut2011

@breakdown said:
Here's the Trueview of the PR69 that just sold:

Here's Mr. Forsythe's PR69 coin:

I’m not a fan of the second coin at all. It looks like the bison has a gaping flesh wound from being shot. I find it distracting.

MFeld

@breakdown said:

@BillJones said:
It is a very pretty coin, but for $86,000 more than than the price I paid for my PR-67, I'm happy to be where I am.

Well, I have a nice PR67 for this date as well - I have a Buffalo Proof registry set of all PR-67's that I haven't changed since 2010. But there are over 600 1937's graded in PR67 and only 2 that have ever been graded PR69. Mr Forsythe has one and now there is this one. They both look considerably flashier than my white 67. I think the bigger concern for the buyer is how many of those 68's and 68+'s and coins in high NGC holders have a shot to expand the population of PR69's.

But “this one” is a 1936 (Type 1/Satin), not a 1937.

TomB

@breakdown said:
Here's the Trueview of the PR69 that just sold:

Here's Mr. Forsythe's PR69 coin:

I think the top one is pretty, but the bottom one...well...I don't know if I could "un-see" that spot on the bison's flank. Either way, these coins aren't in my realm of potential purchases and I hope the folks who search for and acquire them appreciate the pieces, just as I hope each of us appreciates the pieces that speak to us and fall within our own comfort zones for acquisition.

breakdown

Thanks, Mark. What a mess I have made here confusing the two issues. Mr Forsythe has one of three PR69 Satin 1936s. Here it is:

To clean up what I said to Bill Jones earlier, there are over 300 36Satin's in PR67 and only 3 in PR69.

I actually like my PR67 36Satin quite a bit - the reverse is my icon. Bought it from Pinnacle in 2009.

skier07

JA didn’t think it was a 69.

MrEureka

@291fifth said:
Absurd price.

In comparison to the price of a 67 or 68? Yes, it seems so at first, but how would we know if it’s not the 67’s and 68’s that are absurdly cheap? Seriously, how would we know?

MFeld

@skier07 said:
JA didn’t think it was a 69.

Do you know for a fact that CAC assessed the coin? If, by chance, you know that, do you know that they didn’t think it was a “C” (though not a “B” or “A”) quality example? If not, please don’t state assumptions as facts.

skier07

@MFeld said:

@skier07 said:
JA didn’t think it was a 69.

Do you know for a fact that CAC assessed the coin? If, by chance, you know that, do you know that they didn’t think it was a “C” (though not a “B” or “A”) quality example? If not, please don’t state assumptions as facts.

I don’t know for a fact that it was assessed by CAC but I think there’s a high likelihood that it was based on the coins value.

MFeld

@skier07 said:

@MFeld said:

@skier07 said:
JA didn’t think it was a 69.

Do you know for a fact that CAC assessed the coin? If, by chance, you know that, do you know that they didn’t think it was a “C” (though not a “B” or “A”) quality example? If not, please don’t state assumptions as facts.

I don’t know for a fact that it was assessed by CAC but I think there’s a high likelihood that it was based on the coins value.

I think so, too. But your above comment is a far cry from “JA didn’t think it was a 69.”

7Jaguars

Please, give me a break. I know it is planchet prep but the lack of "strike out" on the mid hair braids is very distracting and this can not be taken away. IMO ridiculous and the fact that big money was paid for it does not excuse it.

skier07

@MFeld said:

@skier07 said:

@MFeld said:

@skier07 said:
JA didn’t think it was a 69.

Do you know for a fact that CAC assessed the coin? If, by chance, you know that, do you know that they didn’t think it was a “C” (though not a “B” or “A”) quality example? If not, please don’t state assumptions as facts.

I don’t know for a fact that it was assessed by CAC but I think there’s a high likelihood that it was based on the coins value.

I think so, too. But your above comment is a far cry from “JA didn’t think it was a 69.”

Your point is very well taken.

MFeld

@skier07 said:

@MFeld said:

@skier07 said:

@MFeld said:

@skier07 said:
JA didn’t think it was a 69.

Do you know for a fact that CAC assessed the coin? If, by chance, you know that, do you know that they didn’t think it was a “C” (though not a “B” or “A”) quality example? If not, please don’t state assumptions as facts.

I don’t know for a fact that it was assessed by CAC but I think there’s a high likelihood that it was based on the coins value.

I think so, too. But your above comment is a far cry from “JA didn’t think it was a 69.”

Your point is very well taken.

I appreciate your open mindedness.👍

cameonut2011

@MFeld said:

@skier07 said:

@MFeld said:

@skier07 said:
JA didn’t think it was a 69.

Do you know for a fact that CAC assessed the coin? If, by chance, you know that, do you know that they didn’t think it was a “C” (though not a “B” or “A”) quality example? If not, please don’t state assumptions as facts.

I don’t know for a fact that it was assessed by CAC but I think there’s a high likelihood that it was based on the coins value.

I think so, too. But your above comment is a far cry from “JA didn’t think it was a 69.”

I feel better. I thought you were implying the opposite. If it had a sticker I’m thinking it would have far exceeded the $99,000 closing price. Look at what happened to the Uber common date Mercury Dimes in 68 FB that Hansen paid more than $500k for the pair.

FlyingAl

@7Jaguars said:
Please, give me a break. I know it is planchet prep but the lack of "strike out" on the mid hair braids is very distracting and this can not be taken away. IMO ridiculous and the fact that big money was paid for it does not excuse it.

I may be taking your comment the wrong way, but that coin is absolutely hammered, even for a proof of this era.

I do agree with those saying that this is a kinda crazy price. It's a registry coin and nothing else, I doubt that many here would even be able to tell the difference between a high quality 67-68 and this coin. Obviously, those who worked for TPGs would, but the reality is that the differences in this series between the ultra gem grades are so minor it takes time to discern them and they certainly can't be distinguished by a glance at the coin.

Also, if the 1937 is truly a 69, I don't know if it really deserved the grade if the spot in the chest is really a carbon spot. If it's toning, I would still like the coin at a 68, it's really distracting.

Smudge

$100,000 for a nickel. Explain that to your wife.

Cameonut

I greatly prefer my $2500 example vs the $86,000 example.

MFeld

@Cameonut said:
I greatly prefer my $2500 example vs the $86,000 example.

Apples (Type 2) to oranges (Type 1).😉

BuffaloIronTail

@1Bufffan said:
What a Great looking Buff, would be a Great addition to any collection, congratulations to the Top Bidder!

Look at the sharp detail on the top feather!

WOW.

Just WOW!

Pete

Project Numismatics

Beautiful coin - I can see why it took off.

ike126

It is a beauty I agree on that but there is a lot of other things I would wanna get for 99k just saying....

Cameonut

@MFeld said:

Apples (Type 2) to oranges (Type 1).😉

My bad, but I still like my "apple"...

MFeld

@Cameonut said:

@MFeld said:

Apples (Type 2) to oranges (Type 1).😉

My bad, but I still like my "apple"...

I do too - it looks gorgeous.

BaronVonBaugh

@Cameonut said:
I greatly prefer my $2500 example vs the $86,000 example.

Beautiful coin!

7Jaguars

@FlyingAl - actually I know proofs very well and don't disagree with the "hammered" part even if I do not like the term. However the planchet still shows the changes I had discussed and therefore should deter from the grade.

FlyingAl

@7Jaguars Ok so then we are still on common ground. Please excuse my slang for extremely well struck lol.

I am with you that mint made defects (I assume you mean a planchet mark that was not fully struck out, I couldn’t really tell what you were talking about when you said strike out) should detract from a coin’s grade, but the TPGs generally don’t agree.

ricko

Gorgeous nickels.... Amazing price.... I will not be buying one.... (surprise, surprise).... But they sure are pretty to look at... even just pictures. Cheers, RickO