Which Variety of 1798 Bust Dollar?

winesteven

I’ve owned my 1798 Bust Dollar for five years. I see in the PCGS Weekly Price Updates that Draped Bust Dollars were included in this weeks list of coin series that were updated, so I figured I’d see if the value of mine changed with this current update.

I now see there are nine Varieties for the 1798 Bust Dollar, with PCGS providing pricing for each of those nine Varieties. I’ve done most of the hard work identifying which Variety mine is, using Coin Facts. However, it meets TWO definitions of the nine. As I’m not knowledgeable about Varieties, how does one know which of those two separate Variety prices is applicable to my coin? Obviously it has to be one or the other - I cannot pick the one with the higher value, lol.

My coin appears to meet the criteria for EACH of the following two SEPARATE listings:

1. Pointed 9, 4 vertical lines/stripes.
2. Wide Date

As noted, my coin meets both of those Varieties. Guidance please?

Steve

EDIT: @fluffy155 ’s answer was moved just below this post from much lower down, as I indicated that his is the correct answer (in my opinion). Thank you!

fluffy155

I can't say what PCGS's rationalization is for having a separate listing for wide date, but your coin is listed under pointed 9 / 4 lines. In the price guide if you expand 40018 you'll see your variety listed at 40022.

jacrispies

Your coin appears to be the same marriage as the wide date. Once obvious characteristics are recognized like "wide date," you need to look closer at minute differences such as star placement, die defects, etc.

Lovely coin!

fluffy155

Looks like a BB-105 to me, pointed 9 wide date, second reverse. The 8 touching the bust and die defect on the reverse above the top right star are the easiest diagnostics of this marriage.

winesteven

OK, so when I look at the PCGS Price Guide, and they show one price for 1798’s with a pointed 9 and 4 lines/stripes, and a different listing (and different price) for a Wide Date, which one is the proper one to use, since this coin apparently meets both criteria? If you know, please explain the rationale in addition to the correct short answer.

Thanks.

Steve

jacrispies

I understand the question now. The variety number isn't listed on the "wide date" slot either, but it is under the pointed 9 4 lines category. Strange layout, not sure why the prices are different. Maybe if you are selling it to a type collector or variety collector.

winesteven

Thank you everyone, especially @fluffy155. In my next submission, I’ll be sending this in for variety attribution, since there’s a significant valuation difference between my coin and the “generic” 1798. I never knew this until tonight!

While admittedly this isn’t one of my strongest coins for the grade, it’s graded by PCGS as 58+, with a CAC (I recognize the CAC sticker means in CAC’s opinion it’s solid as a 58, not necessarily solid as a 58+).

Steve

1904vernacular

BTW beautiful Bustie, original and high enough grade to enjoy its eye appeal, great piece.

yosclimber

Here is a great tool for this, in case you are not familiar with it:
http://www.earlydollars.org/wizardhome.htm
1. Pointed 9
2. 8 touches bust
3. Stars arranged in curved arcs/Last star in second row low

Variety: BB-105, B-23, R-1

P.S. There are not just 9 die varieties for the 1798 Heraldic Eagle, there are 31.
PCGS might not have coin numbers for all 31, I have not checked.

For pricing, the PCGS Price Guide is not very helpful because they apparently do not identify all 31.
(Which is natural, since to price each of the 31, they would need to be attributed for each auction result that
is used in the price guide).

Instead, just remember this is an R-1 die variety, so it essentially has no rarity component in the price.
So price it by grade in the lowest pricing tier for 1798 bust/heraldic.
And you could simply look at Auction Prices Realized for AU-58/58+ .
https://www.pcgs.com/auctionprices/details/1798-large-eagle-ms/6873
For AU-58+, I see: 20k, 22, 40
For AU-58, I see: 13, 14, 14, 19, 10, 10, 9 (back to 2013, with 9k being the most recent)

Another implication of it being R-1 is that having the attribution on the holder should not help you get more money for it.

lilolme

When I read this I thought this is another one of those developing variety things (I have seen several). I will try to explain it and just hope it come out readable.

Going back to old pcgs population reports I can find that pre-2000 the 1798 LE was only listed as #6873 or just 1798.

Then they started listing a couple additional lines for 1798 (example #6876 10 arrows).

In 2004 I see listed #6873 through #6877 or the wide date (6877) is now shown (no mention of 4 lines).

In 2007 i see added #40008, 12, 16, 18 where the 40018 is the pointed 9, 4 lines.

So I believe some is this is due to how the various 1798 varieties were developed through time. That is they started recognizing the wide date. Then later decided to recognize the 400018. At some point the varieties like the noted 40022 were recognized but require special variety attribution. But the wide date already existed.

Now on pricing this can complicate things. That is because many of these sold under a non-variety pcgs number (example 6873) but were acknowledged in the auction as the variety. That is the pcgs coinfacts will not show any or few auction results for a variety number because the information is in the baseline coin number or the coin number it sold under.

Here is an example at HA.

https://coins.ha.com/itm/early-dollars/silver-and-related-dollars/1798-1-large-eagle-pointed-9-wide-date-b-23-bb-105-r3-au50-pcgs-pcgs-40022-/a/1348-4617.s?ic4=ListView-Thumbnail-071515

It is identified in the auction as:

1798 $1 Large Eagle, Pointed 9, Wide Date, B-23, BB-105, R.3, AU50 PCGS.

But the coin number is 6873.

winesteven

@yosclimber said:
Here is a great tool for this, in case you are not familiar with it:
http://www.earlydollars.org/wizardhome.htm
1. Pointed 9
2. 8 touches bust
3. Stars arranged in curved arcs/Last star in second row low

Variety: BB-105, B-23, R-1

P.S. There are not just 9 die varieties for the 1798 Heraldic Eagle, there are 31.
PCGS might not have coin numbers for all 31, I have not checked.

For pricing, the PCGS Price Guide is not very helpful because they apparently do not identify all 31.
(Which is natural, since to price each of the 31, they would need to be attributed for each auction result that
is used in the price guide).

Instead, just remember this is an R-1 die variety, so it essentially has no rarity component in the price.
So price it by grade in the lowest pricing tier for 1798 bust/heraldic.
And you could simply look at Auction Prices Realized for AU-58/58+ .
https://www.pcgs.com/auctionprices/details/1798-large-eagle-ms/6873
For AU-58+, I see: 20k, 22, 40
For AU-58, I see: 13, 14, 14, 19, 10, 10, 9 (back to 2013, with 9k being the most recent)

Another implication of it being R-1 is that having the attribution on the holder should not help you get more money for it.

Thank you. However, the PCGS Price Guide has the BB-105, B-23 (coin #40022, as per @fluffy155) as R2, and has that guide price $7,500 higher than the "no rarity" component guide price. I fully recognize guides are only guides, and the price realized in an auction is based entirely on what people are willing to pay. Thank you.

Steve

lilolme

This PCGS #6877 Wide Date is somewhat perplexing. Maybe some of the early dollar people can decipher.

This is on the coinfacts page for #6877 Wide Date

However, when I check some of the auctions I find these below which do not appear to agree with the above wide date guide. Not sure exactly what all varieties were slabbed as #6877 Wide Date.

https://coins.ha.com/itm/a/1231-4223.s

1798 $1 Large Eagle, Pointed 9, Wide Date, B-20, BB-102, R.5, VF25 PCGS Secure..

https://coins.ha.com/itm/early-dollars/silver-and-related-dollars/1798-1-large-eagle-pointed-9-b-24-bb-124-r2-vf35-pcgs-pcgs-40041-/a/1347-3790.s?ic4=ListView-ShortDescription-071515

1798 $1 Large Eagle, Pointed 9, B-24, BB-124, R.2, VF35 PCGS

https://coins.ha.com/itm/early-dollars/silver-and-related-dollars/1798-1-large-eagle-wide-date-pointed-9-vf35-pcgs-cac-pcgs-population-23-35-ngc-census-0-0-/a/131810-21886.s?ic4=ListView-ShortDescription-071515

1798 $1 Large Eagle, Wide Date, Pointed 9 VF35 PCGS

.
.
On the pricing. Here is the price guide history for the #40018 in AU58+. It is seen that since June 2022 the price moved up from 22500 to 32500. Going back 1 year it was at 17500. Coinfacts does not show any auction information. However, the PCGS price guide can move based on other "data" and sometimes due to relative or related data. Example - dealer data can move the guide. Maybe this is what occurred here?

.

"The prices listed in the PCGS Price Guide are average dealer asking prices for PCGS-graded coins. The prices are compiled from various sources including dealer ads in trade papers, dealer fixed price lists and website offerings, significant auctions, and activity at major coin shows. Dealer specialists and expert collectors provide pricing input. "

winesteven

@lilolme , I agree with you that this is as clear as mud, lol.

At the end of January, when I send in my other submissions to PCGS, I will indeed be sending in my 1798 Dollar for Variety attribution. When the time comes for me (or my heirs) to sell, whatever happens, happens.

Thanks.

Steve

LanceNewmanOCC

@winesteven said:

.
i skimmed the thread a couple times and didn't see a grade and while it doesn't seem to be part of the intent of the thread, i'm curious if this lil lady made it to some level of AU?

nice coin.

it really is difficult to not like meaty busties.

winesteven

@LanceNewmanOCC - While admittedly this isn’t one of my strongest coins for the grade, it’s graded by PCGS as 58+, with a CAC (I recognize the CAC sticker means in CAC’s opinion it’s solid as a 58, not necessarily solid as a 58+).

Steve

LanceNewmanOCC

@winesteven said:
@LanceNewmanOCC - While admittedly this isn’t one of my strongest coins for the grade, it’s graded by PCGS as 58+, with a CAC (I recognize the CAC sticker means in CAC’s opinion it’s solid as a 58, not necessarily solid as a 58+).

Steve

ty so much for the response. i was flirting with the possibility of low unc, so i appreciate your confirming my knowledge of grading these is still good enough, even if just enough to get me in over my head.

flirting with low unc because so many coins of this era at one time or another rattled around in some tray or box or whatever just enough to take on the infamous "cabinet friction" look, which basically means, mishandled/stored unc.