@PeakRarities said:
Here’s the PCGS photograde example of a Saint in MS-63.
You know, in a few years (?) you're going to be able to digitally scan these coins....ID and measure every single blemish that deviates from perfection...tally/sum them all up....and calculate a number for every nick, gouge, mark, blemish, bagmark, etc. on the devices and fields.
Gonna be the difference betwen an X-Ray in the 1950's and an MRI/Pet/CAT scan today.
@ProofCollection said:
I'm not sure if it's that concentrated. The gouges on the knee are fairly severe and her face is mauled. These are the >more significant marks I see and I'm not sure how concentrated they are - they seem pretty spread out but you do >have some pristine areas.
We know intuitively that the 1933 did not circulate....so it's Mint State....but looking at it without seeing 1933.... if it was any other dated Saint, what would tell you that the high-point marks and/or discoloration are NOT evidence of circulation and hence deserving of an AU grade ?
No, those marks can easily come from being stacked and handled. You'll see a lot of MS Morgans and Peace with similar things going on but it's not wear.
@MFeld said:
It sounds like you were talking about "market grading" not "net grading".
I think I did mis-type, thanks Mark. Yeah, market grading....but in this case "net grading" the coin because maybe without that knee gash the coin is in such great condition and has great luster that it otherwise would be an MS-67 ? 67+ ? 68 ?
So....whereas the knee gash might justify a 64 or 64+ based strictly on technical by-the-book grading, it gets the 65 (and CAC) with a bit of market grading of a Pop 1 coin helping ther grade.
BTW....for those of you saying "if this were any other coin...." -- but it's NOT !! So given a pop of 1 (one), it's considered differently than 1924 Saints or 1932 Saints. There's only 1....it's got a knee gash that many of you cite that should merit a lower grade (1 increment lower) and probably would if there were a much larger population, IMO.
I haven’t seen the coin in hand so I’m not going to offer an opinion as to grade. However, no coin should grade higher than it otherwise would just because it has a low population.
I agree with you in principle Mark, and I completely understand your reservations to offer a grading opinion. For the sake of conversation, lets assume that you saw it in hand and you would opine that it was a 64+. Would a 65 grade bother you?
I would be bothered if I thought the coin was a 63, or a 58. I was slightly perturbed with the grade awrded to the 1870-s $3, but again the argument can be made that it's unique, so it's rather irrelevant. I'd even agree that most, if not all of the 1804 dollars are overgraded. The general consensus seems to be that "at least theyre in order", which, if true (I haven't done enough research to opine on that), honestly is the most important factor. Despite dampening our appreciation because of the overgrade, I'd admit that it's a victimless "crime" because the market values are all where they should be. As long as the overgrading is consistenly applied, no one gets hurt.
For me, the problem arises when any TPG wants to flip flop between market and technical grading. I'll elect not to go into detail, but it's is something I've observed fairly recently. For a long stretch of time, a rare (R5-R6) issue/series of coin is market graded, or given a lot of leeway in the grading room. Then, all of the sudden, it appears that this approach is no longer applied, technical standards enter the room again. This is the most damaging form of market grading, in my opinion. The market-graded eamples of yesteryear would not grade the same if submitted raw today, and current submissions are held to a much tighter standard. There are significant financial implications for both the current day submitters, and the future buyers of the yesteryear graded coins.
Dan, if I thought the coin was a 64+ and it was graded 65, it wouldn’t bother me as long as a good number of highly proficient graders thought the grade of 65 was deserved. On the other hand, if most of them graded the coin less than 65, it would bother me. In other words, my option is just one of many, and I realize that many others count as much as, if not a lot more than mine.
By the way, grading the 1804 dollars “in order” isn’t nearly good enough, as far as I’m concerned. They should be graded honestly and accurately, no matter how rare or famous they are.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
@ProofCollection said:
No, those marks can easily come from being stacked and handled. You'll see a lot of MS Morgans and Peace with >similar things going on but it's not wear.
@ProofCollection said:
No, those marks can easily come from being stacked and handled. You'll see a lot of MS Morgans and Peace with >similar things going on but it's not wear.
Would that merit an AU grade ?
Your question, which led to the reply above was “We know intuitively that the 1933 did not circulate....so it's Mint State....but looking at it without seeing 1933.... if it was any other dated Saint, what would tell you that the high-point marks and/or discoloration are NOT evidence of circulation and hence deserving of an AU grade ?”
And his answer was:
“No, those marks can easily come from being stacked and handled. You'll see a lot of MS Morgans and Peace with >similar things going on but it's not wear.”
So why are you asking again, if the marks from the coins being stacked and handled, would merit an AU grade?
As they say in court “Objection, your honor, asked and answered”.😉
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
@ProofCollection said:
No, those marks can easily come from being stacked and handled. You'll see a lot of MS Morgans and Peace with >similar things going on but it's not wear.
Would that merit an AU grade ?
Handling it not wear. If you have coins going down a conveyor belt plopping into a bin hitting each other, or a bunch of coins put in a bag and transported that's handling, not wear.
@MFeld said:
It sounds like you were talking about "market grading" not "net grading".
I think I did mis-type, thanks Mark. Yeah, market grading....but in this case "net grading" the coin because maybe without that knee gash the coin is in such great condition and has great luster that it otherwise would be an MS-67 ? 67+ ? 68 ?
So....whereas the knee gash might justify a 64 or 64+ based strictly on technical by-the-book grading, it gets the 65 (and CAC) with a bit of market grading of a Pop 1 coin helping ther grade.
BTW....for those of you saying "if this were any other coin...." -- but it's NOT !! So given a pop of 1 (one), it's considered differently than 1924 Saints or 1932 Saints. There's only 1....it's got a knee gash that many of you cite that should merit a lower grade (1 increment lower) and probably would if there were a much larger population, IMO.
I haven’t seen the coin in hand so I’m not going to offer an opinion as to grade. However, no coin should grade higher than it otherwise would just because it has a low population.
I agree. The ANA Grading Guide says NOTHING about “Rarity Points!”
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
@PeakRarities said:
Here’s the PCGS photograde example of a Saint in MS-63.
GACK!!!
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
@MFeld said:
It sounds like you were talking about "market grading" not "net grading".
I think I did mis-type, thanks Mark. Yeah, market grading....but in this case "net grading" the coin because maybe without that knee gash the coin is in such great condition and has great luster that it otherwise would be an MS-67 ? 67+ ? 68 ?
So....whereas the knee gash might justify a 64 or 64+ based strictly on technical by-the-book grading, it gets the 65 (and CAC) with a bit of market grading of a Pop 1 coin helping ther grade.
BTW....for those of you saying "if this were any other coin...." -- but it's NOT !! So given a pop of 1 (one), it's considered differently than 1924 Saints or 1932 Saints. There's only 1....it's got a knee gash that many of you cite that should merit a lower grade (1 increment lower) and probably would if there were a much larger population, IMO.
I respectfully disagree. Grading standards are written for the “TYPE,” not for the “DATE.” This coin SHOULD be graded the same as a 1924, or otherwise all grades are worthless.
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
@MFeld said:
As they say in court “Objection, your honor, asked and answered”.😉
As Felix Unger once told a judge...."Objection sustained."
Seriously, he said the marks COULD come from being stacked and handled. I'm OK with that -- we're all speculating -- but if we knew DEFINITIVELY that it was those factors (stacked & handled) then that wouldn't count as "wear" and move it to the AU bucket, right ?
I just want to make sure if we knew for sure or just assumed....if stacked and handled (his conditions) allow for an MS grade. I believe it should, just wondering how we can tell it from other factors that move a coin to AU.
@ProofCollection said:
Handling it not wear. If you have coins going down a conveyor belt plopping into a bin hitting each other, or a >bunch of coins put in a bag and transported that's handling, not wear.
OK, no argument. Just want to know what the tell-tale signs of "stacking and handling" are that distinguish it from AU wear or circulation. I am pretty sure I can ID bagmarks, but "S&H" I'm curious about.
@MFeld said:
As they say in court “Objection, your honor, asked and answered”.😉
As Felix Unger once told a judge...."Objection sustained."
Seriously, he said the marks COULD come from being stacked and handled. I'm OK with that -- we're all speculating -- but if we knew DEFINITIVELY that it was those factors (stacked & handled) then that wouldn't count as "wear" and move it to the AU bucket, right ?
I just want to make sure if we knew for sure or just assumed....if stacked and handled (his conditions) allow for an MS grade. I believe it should, just wondering how we can tell it from other factors that move a coin to AU.
@MFeld said:
As they say in court “Objection, your honor, asked and answered”.😉
As Felix Unger once told a judge...."Objection sustained."
Seriously, he said the marks COULD come from being stacked and handled. I'm OK with that -- we're all speculating -- but if we knew DEFINITIVELY that it was those factors (stacked & handled) then that wouldn't count as "wear" and move it to the AU bucket, right ?
I just want to make sure if we knew for sure or just assumed....if stacked and handled (his conditions) allow for an MS grade. I believe it should, just wondering how we can tell it from other factors that move a coin to AU.
Wanting to know "for sure" is something that I think we should and can strive for, but which is often impossible to achieve.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
I’m no expert Saint grader … and the thing I personally want the most is a clean face.
At the moment, don’t you agree that the grade is irrelevant since it is the only legal one to own? However, I will say is still meaningful in light of the other dozen the government has in its possession. I viewed them at a coin show (in the case of course) and tried to see if any looked better than the Farouk example. From a short distance and without a loupe, I couldn’t make out one that was better. Maybe someone here has been allowed to see them all up close in person.
I'm not going to comment about the current grade of the coin since I'm definitely not an expert in this area. What I question is the uniqueness of the coin. Doesn't the government possess 10 other 1933 DEs confiscated from the Israel Switt stolen coins? What is to prevent the GSA from selling these at auction? It would not be the first time the GSA has auctioned collectible coins.
@sm_delta said:
I'm not going to comment about the current grade of the coin since I'm definitely not an expert in this area. What I question is the uniqueness of the coin. Doesn't the government possess 10 other 1933 DEs confiscated from the Israel Swift stolen coins? What is to prevent the GSA from selling these at auction? It would not be the first time the GSA has auctioned collectible coins.
What's unique about it is that it's the only one that's legal to own. And in order for any of the 10 others to be made available for sale there would need to be 1) a 180 degree shift in policy and 2) a win in what I believe would be an inevitable lawsuit brought by whomever owned the Farouk/Elite coin at that time.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Thanks Mark for your comments. I agree both are likely conditions. I'm not sure how much of a barrier these might be, especially if the government changes its mind. I guess time will tell.
This is what the Sotheby's auction description says. I bid on this coin knowing that the government will not monetize another one in the future. You can bet there will be a lawsuit if they decide to monetize another 1933 DE.
@EliteCollection said:
This is what the Sotheby's auction description says. I bid on this coin knowing that the government will not monetize another one in the future. You can bet there will be a lawsuit if they decide to monetize another 1933 DE.")
Elite, I certainly appreciate you and envy you on another level. But, lawyers will be lawyers …
@EliteCollection said:
This is what the Sotheby's auction description says. I bid on this coin knowing that the government will not monetize another one in the future. You can bet there will be a lawsuit if they decide to monetize another 1933 DE.
I can appreciate government intentions, but they can change very quickly when someone else takes charge. Make a large contribution to the right candidate and perhaps this policy would change.
Suspect, but don't have solid proof, the Double Eagle may also have significant historical importance in addition to numismatic. Not sure if you have already researched that.
Export license was issued on February, 29, 1944.
At the beginning of 1944 there was a diplomatic dispute pending with Farouk......
The Minister in Egypt (Kirk) to the Secretary of State
Cairo, February 2, 1944—6 p.m.
[Received February 3—9:32 a.m.]
New budget provision for 15% export duty effective February 1st is significant in connection with Petroleum Reserves Corp.plans for Alexandria refinery.... and petroleum exploration programs of American companies in Egypt.
American companies here express grave concern over their ability to develop Egyptian wells and export petroleum at competitive prices after paying 15% mining royalties to Egyptian Government, import duties on machinery and equipment, various local taxes and the new export duty. British interests are in a more favorable position because a very large proportion of their production is marketed in Egypt and they are not dependent upon export business.
It would appear that if the proposed oil projects in Egypt and especially the refinery in Alexandria were not exempted from the burden of the new export duty they would operate at a considerable disadvantage in comparison with Middle Eastern wells and refineries outside Egypt.
Kirk
After the export license for the DE was issued on February 29, 1944, things seemed to happily resolve:
The Minister in Egypt (Kirk) to the Secretary of State
Cairo, March 24, 1944—noon.
[Received 7:46 p.m.]
My 499, March 3 and previous. Today’s press reports that Minister of Finance interview granted to Egyptian Gazette announced removal of 15 percent export duty as of March 22.
While Legation is unable to obtain official confirmation of foregoing today due to Moslem holiday and while removal could not be considered definite until publication of decree in official Gazette the report bears out recent informed statement to Legation by Minister of Finance to effect that he had definitely decided to remove tax and that official action would be taken “within a week”.
Local representatives of interested American oil companies have called Legation to express their satisfaction at abolition of tax.
Legation will inform Department as soon as duty removal is officially promulgated.
Kirk
@EliteCollection said:
This is what the Sotheby's auction description says. I bid on this coin knowing that the government will not monetize another one in the future. You can bet there will be a lawsuit if they decide to monetize another 1933 DE.
I could certainly sympathize with that from a collector, political, and property rights POV.
At the same time, it's somewhat ironic: the U.S. government basically abrogated similar protections for Gold Clauses in bonds and other contracts in 1933 and 1934. And by a 5-4 decision, the SCOTUS upheld their right to do so.
@sm_delta said:
I'm not going to comment about the current grade of the coin since I'm definitely not an expert in this area. What I question is the uniqueness of the coin. Doesn't the government possess 10 other 1933 DEs confiscated from the Israel Swift stolen coins? What is to prevent the GSA from selling these at auction? It would not be the first time the GSA has auctioned collectible coins.
What's unique about it is that it's the only one that's legal to own. And in order for any of the 10 others to be made available for sale there would need to be 1) a 180 degree shift in policy and 2) a win in what I believe would be an inevitable lawsuit brought by whomever owned the Farouk/Elite coin at that time.
Excellent point, but I suspect many of us were surprised that the fact there "are [now confirmed to be] at least 10 others out there" failed to put downward pressure on the price of the Farouk coin.
@1northcoin said:
Excellent point, but I suspect many of us were surprised that the fact there "are [now confirmed to be] at least 10 >others out there" failed to put downward pressure on the price of the Farouk coin.
I'm not. They're not available so for all practical intent, they don't exist.
@EliteCollection said:
This is what the Sotheby's auction description says. I bid on this coin knowing that the government will not monetize another one in the future. You can bet there will be a lawsuit if they decide to monetize another 1933 DE.
I apologize for continuing this discussion, but I'm still learning about the background. If my posting on this is not of interest, let me know, and I'll stop.
I found this 22 year old news item from the US Mint regarding the Farouk coin. It looks like the US government netted 3 million from Sotheby's auction of the coin. I was unaware of this fact.
Auction Of Rare 1933 Double Eagle Gold Coin Nets $3 Million–Plus For U.S. Government
August 2, 2002
Treasury to Receive Nearly Half of Record $7.6 Million Sale
Washington, D.C., August 2, 2002 — The United States Mint announced today that Tuesday’s sale of the much–publicized 1933 Double Eagle gold coin will generate more than $3 million for the United States Treasury.
The coin, auctioned by Sotheby’s in New York City during the American Numismatic Association annual convention, sold for $6.6 million to an anonymous bidder. An additional 15 percent auction fee brought the sales price to $7.59 million and an additional $20 was needed to “monetize” the face value of the coin so it would be legal to own, bringing the final sales price to $7,590,020. It is believed to be the most ever paid for a coin at auction.
“We are very pleased with the sale,” said Henrietta Holsman Fore, Director of the United States Mint. “This coin, once worth only $20, should reinforce the notion that there is tremendous value in coin collecting. It is not only an enjoyable hobby, but also an interesting and historically rich pursuit marked by exciting occasions such as this one.”
Once the sale is finalized, the United States Mint’s Public Enterprise Fund (PEF) will receive the entire amount. The PEF will then disburse a portion to Sotheby’s to pay for the services it rendered to the United States Mint in marketing and auctioning the coin. The PEF also will deduct the United States Mint’s expenses in administering the contract and protecting the coin, and then will retain half the proceeds under an out–of–court settlement — expected to be slightly more than $3 million, which will be transferred to the United States Treasury as a miscellaneous receipt.
Though it will be several weeks before the United States Mint can determine the exact earnings to the Nation’s taxpayers from this historic sale, the coin is the most expensive and profitable numismatic product that the United States Mint has ever sold.
The 1933 Double Eagle features a liberty figure reminiscent of a Greek goddess, known as “Walking Liberty,” designed by famed sculptor Augustus Saint–Gaudens. The other side features a majestic eagle.
About the 1933 Double Eagle
The United States Mint has struck gold coins in various denominations since 1795. The first $20 Double Eagle coin was minted in 1849. After the 1933 Double Eagle was struck, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt took the United States off the gold standard. The newly–minted but un–issued gold coins were destroyed because they were not legal tender.
The recently–auctioned coin is one of only a few 1933 Double Eagles to have survived destruction. Two were given to the Smithsonian Institution for historic safekeeping. Several others — all of which were stolen — were believed to be either spirited away or smuggled out of the United States. One of these coins reappeared in 1996 when British coin dealer Stephen Fenton tried selling it to undercover Secret Service agents in New York. An out–of–court settlement between the Justice Department and Mr. Fenton in 2001 set the stage for the auction
@sm_delta said:
I apologize for continuing this discussion, but I'm still learning about the background. If my posting on this is not of interest, let me know, and I'll stop.
You're a bit behind, but welcome to contribute. This was from the sale in 2002 and since then that owner (Stuart Weitzman) has sold it for $18.9 million to our very own "Elite Collection" who is currently in possession.
There's alot more about the 1933 Double Eagle here on the Forums and also ATS.
“We are very pleased with the sale,” said Henrietta Holsman Fore, Director of the United States Mint. “This coin, once worth only $20, should reinforce the notion that there is tremendous value in coin collecting. It is not only an enjoyable hobby, but also an interesting and historically rich pursuit marked by exciting occasions such as this one.”
That's idiotic, which I guess coming from the government is par for the course.
To extrapolate from 1 coin...and to stress the monetary investing aspects of coin collecting (when the record shows in the aggregate for most individuals it does NOT generate either absolute or even market-beating returns) is really deceptive.
And the U.S. government jacked up the price by confiscating and/or destroying other 1933's.
@sm_delta The other examples are generally referred to as the Langbord coins. There are some detailed thread in the forum on them if you search for Langbord 1933, including several threads by an attorney who was tracking the case and giving us updates with every filing. (SanctionII)
I don’t recall the exact details, but someone on this board was able to extrapolate that there may have been as many as 40 coins that escaped destruction. We know the whereabouts of approximately 15 of them, which would leave up to 25 potentially floating around. Ultimately, without the government’s blessing, these will always have black market valuations and have to remain secret. I don’t know the details of the Farouk examples monetization, nor do I know if the government is contractually obligated to preserve that status for only one example. I do feel that if they found a way to make considerable revenue from any of the remaining examples, that swift attempt to weasel out of whatever contracts they’ve entered in would be made.
@PeakRarities said:
I don’t recall the exact details, but someone on this board was able to extrapolate that there may have been as many as 40 coins that escaped destruction. We know the whereabouts of approximately 15 of them, which would leave up to 25 potentially floating around. Ultimately, without the government’s blessing, these will always have black market valuations and have to remain secret. I don’t know the details of the Farouk examples monetization, nor do I know if the government is contractually obligated to preserve that status for only one example. I do feel that if they found a way to make considerable revenue from any of the remaining examples, that swift attempt to weasel out of whatever contracts they’ve entered in would be made.
I don’t remember seeing a number nearly that high for how many examples might have escaped destruction. I was thinking it was approximately 20, not 40, and that therefore, there might be a handful remaining in hiding. However, if you happen to find the extrapolation you’re thinking of, please post an update.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
@PeakRarities said:
I don’t recall the exact details, but someone on this board was able to extrapolate that there may have been as many as 40 coins that escaped destruction. We know the whereabouts of approximately 15 of them, which would leave up to 25 potentially floating around. Ultimately, without the government’s blessing, these will always have black market valuations and have to remain secret. I don’t know the details of the Farouk examples monetization, nor do I know if the government is contractually obligated to preserve that status for only one example. I do feel that if they found a way to make considerable revenue from any of the remaining examples, that swift attempt to weasel out of whatever contracts they’ve entered in would be made.
I don’t remember seeing a number nearly that high for how many examples might have escaped destruction. I was thinking it was approximately 20, not 40, and that therefore, there might be a handful remaining in hiding. However, if you happen to find the extrapolation you’re thinking of, please post an update.
Mark - Dan is referring to my research. Here were my early thoughts when I first was formulating it, in the format of a PM to another member:
"Was just going through a book on $20 Saints - looks like in the end of 1932 there was a shortage of 43 double eagles to complete a bag. This shortage was likely carried over until 1933 where 43 1933 $20s were put in that bag to fill up the difference. I'd assume that bag was the first bag paid out for 1933, so logically 43 1933 $20s are out there. 18 have been confiscated by the government, Elite has one, and there are 24 unaccounted for. I think we can agree Mr. Connecticut has one, and DLH might as well.
@PeakRarities said:
I don’t recall the exact details, but someone on this board was able to extrapolate that there may have been as many as 40 coins that escaped destruction. We know the whereabouts of approximately 15 of them, which would leave up to 25 potentially floating around. Ultimately, without the government’s blessing, these will always have black market valuations and have to remain secret. I don’t know the details of the Farouk examples monetization, nor do I know if the government is contractually obligated to preserve that status for only one example. I do feel that if they found a way to make considerable revenue from any of the remaining examples, that swift attempt to weasel out of whatever contracts they’ve entered in would be made.
I don’t remember seeing a number nearly that high for how many examples might have escaped destruction. I was thinking it was approximately 20, not 40, and that therefore, there might be a handful remaining in hiding. However, if you happen to find the extrapolation you’re thinking of, please post an update.
Mark - Dan is referring to my research. Here were my early thoughts when I first was formulating it, in the format of a PM to another member:
"Was just going through a book on $20 Saints - looks like in the end of 1932 there was a shortage of 43 double eagles to complete a bag. This shortage was likely carried over until 1933 where 43 1933 $20s were put in that bag to fill up the difference. I'd assume that bag was the first bag paid out for 1933, so logically 43 1933 $20s are out there. 18 have been confiscated by the government, Elite has one, and there are 24 unaccounted for. I think we can agree Mr. Connecticut has one, and DLH might as well.
Very interesting to me."
Thanks, Alex.
That guesstimate is dependent on a number of different assumptions and differs from all of the other estimates I’ve read over the years, as well as statements from the government. While that doesn’t necessarily make it wrong, it’s very difficult for me to fathom.
I can’t agree that Mr. Connecticut has one and I’d be very surprised if Mr. Hansen does, either.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
@PeakRarities said:
I don’t recall the exact details, but someone on this board was able to extrapolate that there may have been as many as 40 coins that escaped destruction. We know the whereabouts of approximately 15 of them, which would leave up to 25 potentially floating around. Ultimately, without the government’s blessing, these will always have black market valuations and have to remain secret. I don’t know the details of the Farouk examples monetization, nor do I know if the government is contractually obligated to preserve that status for only one example. I do feel that if they found a way to make considerable revenue from any of the remaining examples, that swift attempt to weasel out of whatever contracts they’ve entered in would be made.
I don’t remember seeing a number nearly that high for how many examples might have escaped destruction. I was thinking it was approximately 20, not 40, and that therefore, there might be a handful remaining in hiding. However, if you happen to find the extrapolation you’re thinking of, please post an update.
Mark - Dan is referring to my research. Here were my early thoughts when I first was formulating it, in the format of a PM to another member:
"Was just going through a book on $20 Saints - looks like in the end of 1932 there was a shortage of 43 double eagles to complete a bag. This shortage was likely carried over until 1933 where 43 1933 $20s were put in that bag to fill up the difference. I'd assume that bag was the first bag paid out for 1933, so logically 43 1933 $20s are out there. 18 have been confiscated by the government, Elite has one, and there are 24 unaccounted for. I think we can agree Mr. Connecticut hashad one, and DLH might as well.
Very interesting to me."
Thanks for chiming in Alex, I made one tiny change for accuracy but I appreciate the time you spent on that.
@PeakRarities said:
I don’t recall the exact details, but someone on this board was able to extrapolate that there may have been as many as 40 coins that escaped destruction. We know the whereabouts of approximately 15 of them, which would leave up to 25 potentially floating around. Ultimately, without the government’s blessing, these will always have black market valuations and have to remain secret. I don’t know the details of the Farouk examples monetization, nor do I know if the government is contractually obligated to preserve that status for only one example. I do feel that if they found a way to make considerable revenue from any of the remaining examples, that swift attempt to weasel out of whatever contracts they’ve entered in would be made.
I don’t remember seeing a number nearly that high for how many examples might have escaped destruction. I was thinking it was approximately 20, not 40, and that therefore, there might be a handful remaining in hiding. However, if you happen to find the extrapolation you’re thinking of, please post an update.
Mark - Dan is referring to my research. Here were my early thoughts when I first was formulating it, in the format of a PM to another member:
"Was just going through a book on $20 Saints - looks like in the end of 1932 there was a shortage of 43 double eagles to complete a bag. This shortage was likely carried over until 1933 where 43 1933 $20s were put in that bag to fill up the difference. I'd assume that bag was the first bag paid out for 1933, so logically 43 1933 $20s are out there. 18 have been confiscated by the government, Elite has one, and there are 24 unaccounted for. I think we can agree Mr. Connecticut has one, and DLH might as well.
Very interesting to me."
Thanks, Alex.
That guesstimate is dependent on a number of different assumptions and differs from all of the other estimates I’ve read over the years, as well as statements from the government. While that doesn’t necessarily make it wrong, it’s very difficult for me to fathom.
I can’t agree that Mr. Connecticut has one and I’d be very surprised if Mr. Hansen does, either.
The funny thing here Mark is that if we assume no one broke the law (either broke into the mint or walked out with several ounces in gold) to acquire the 1933s, which seems quite probable, the only way that this story makes sense is via the “filled in the leftover bag” argument. If that’s how it happened, there were 43 1933s out there. The Langbord coins took a while to surface too, if I remember correctly.
@PeakRarities said:
I don’t recall the exact details, but someone on this board was able to extrapolate that there may have been as many as 40 coins that escaped destruction. We know the whereabouts of approximately 15 of them, which would leave up to 25 potentially floating around. Ultimately, without the government’s blessing, these will always have black market valuations and have to remain secret. I don’t know the details of the Farouk examples monetization, nor do I know if the government is contractually obligated to preserve that status for only one example. I do feel that if they found a way to make considerable revenue from any of the remaining examples, that swift attempt to weasel out of whatever contracts they’ve entered in would be made.
I don’t remember seeing a number nearly that high for how many examples might have escaped destruction. I was thinking it was approximately 20, not 40, and that therefore, there might be a handful remaining in hiding. However, if you happen to find the extrapolation you’re thinking of, please post an update.
Mark - Dan is referring to my research. Here were my early thoughts when I first was formulating it, in the format of a PM to another member:
"Was just going through a book on $20 Saints - looks like in the end of 1932 there was a shortage of 43 double eagles to complete a bag. This shortage was likely carried over until 1933 where 43 1933 $20s were put in that bag to fill up the difference. I'd assume that bag was the first bag paid out for 1933, so logically 43 1933 $20s are out there. 18 have been confiscated by the government, Elite has one, and there are 24 unaccounted for. I think we can agree Mr. Connecticut has one, and DLH might as well.
Very interesting to me."
Thanks, Alex.
That guesstimate is dependent on a number of different assumptions and differs from all of the other estimates I’ve read over the years, as well as statements from the government. While that doesn’t necessarily make it wrong, it’s very difficult for me to fathom.
I can’t agree that Mr. Connecticut has one and I’d be very surprised if Mr. Hansen does, either.
The funny thing here Mark is that if we assume no one broke the law (either broke into the mint or walked out with several ounces in gold) to acquire the 1933s, which seems quite probable, the only way that this story makes sense is via the “filled in the leftover bag” argument. If that’s how it happened, there were 43 1933s out there. The Langbord coins took a while to surface too, if I remember correctly.
Perhaps it’s time for a new research project 😂.
Alex, why would the coins used to fill the bag have to be dated (edited) any specific year? I sure wish I could easily find some of the posts I think I remember having read.
I love your idea for a new research project. Go for it! 😉
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
@PeakRarities said:
I don’t recall the exact details, but someone on this board was able to extrapolate that there may have been as many as 40 coins that escaped destruction. We know the whereabouts of approximately 15 of them, which would leave up to 25 potentially floating around. Ultimately, without the government’s blessing, these will always have black market valuations and have to remain secret. I don’t know the details of the Farouk examples monetization, nor do I know if the government is contractually obligated to preserve that status for only one example. I do feel that if they found a way to make considerable revenue from any of the remaining examples, that swift attempt to weasel out of whatever contracts they’ve entered in would be made.
I think that 25 was a good, solid, round number that would have cost old Izzy about $500 even if no premium paid.
Unless a few dozen are super-well hidden, the rumours of hidden or clandestine 1933's seems to jibe with about 20-25, not anything near 40.
@FlyingAl said:
"Was just going through a book on $20 Saints - looks like in the end of 1932 there was a shortage of 43 double eagles to complete a bag. This shortage was likely carried over until 1933 where 43 1933 $20s were put in that bag to fill up the difference. I'd assume that bag was the first bag paid out for 1933, so logically 43 1933 $20s are out there. 18 have been confiscated by the government, Elite has one, and there are 24 unaccounted for. I think we can agree Mr. Connecticut has one, and DLH might as well.
That analysis is from Roger Burdette, in-depth commentary of which took place in his 2018 SAINTS book. He wasn't allowed to introduce part of this information in the trial in Philly.
@FlyingAl said:
The funny thing here Mark is that if we assume no one broke the law (either broke into the mint or walked out with several ounces in gold) to acquire the 1933s, which seems quite probable, the only way that this story makes sense is via the “filled in the leftover bag” argument. If that’s how it happened, there were 43 1933s out there. The Langbord coins took a while to surface too, if I remember correctly.
Or....the bag with both 1932's and 1933's could have been deposited in Vault F...and all the coins melted down.
Some of them may have also been taken out by the Cashier. The Mint records simply don't say, so we are all speculating and guessing.
@MFeld said:
Alex, why would the coins used to fill the bag have to be dated 1933?
Mark, the bag would have been labled 1932s since 457 of the 500 coins would have been dated 1932.
From CoinWorld, 2011. The reference to 458.1 ounces of gold must reference 457 coins (excess gold, I guess):
"....Burdette expressed his opinion that 1933 double eagles could have left the Mint through proper and legitimate channels based on historic practice, the fact that gold coins went out March 7 to April 12, 1933, the fact that the cashier had a quantity of 1933 double eagles, and that the “Mint wasn’t doing anything different” and the fundamental operations of the Mint stayed the same during the time period.
Perhaps at the core of Burdette’s testimony was a 1945 memo between coiner William Bartholomew and Helen Moore, the assistant superintendent of the Philadelphia Mint, which Burdette interpreted to show that 43 1933 coins were substituted for 1932 coins and used to balance the books with regards to 458.1 ounces of gold.These 43 1933 double eagles were allegedly comingled with 1932 double eagles on March 4, 1933, and went to the cashier. At this point, Burdette speculated, the pieces lost their distinction as 1933 double eagles and could have been given out.
Many of the issues of the prior week were addressed, including the fact that just four 1933 $10 eagles were released, yet 20 to 30 are freely available to collectors today, along with the ongoing issues of “counter cash” and the absence of certain records which would aid in researching the issues. "
@MFeld said:
Alex, why would the coins used to fill the bag have to be dated 1933?
Mark, the bag would have been labled 1932s since 457 of the 500 coins would have been dated 1932.
From CoinWorld, 2011. The reference to 458.1 ounces of gold must reference 457 coins (excess gold, I guess):
"....Burdette expressed his opinion that 1933 double eagles could have left the Mint through proper and legitimate channels based on historic practice, the fact that gold coins went out March 7 to April 12, 1933, the fact that the cashier had a quantity of 1933 double eagles, and that the “Mint wasn’t doing anything different” and the fundamental operations of the Mint stayed the same during the time period.
Perhaps at the core of Burdette’s testimony was a 1945 memo between coiner William Bartholomew and Helen Moore, the assistant superintendent of the Philadelphia Mint, which Burdette interpreted to show that 43 1933 coins were substituted for 1932 coins and used to balance the books with regards to 458.1 ounces of gold.These 43 1933 double eagles were allegedly comingled with 1932 double eagles on March 4, 1933, and went to the cashier. At this point, Burdette speculated, the pieces lost their distinction as 1933 double eagles and could have been given out.
Many of the issues of the prior week were addressed, including the fact that just four 1933 $10 eagles were released, yet 20 to 30 are freely available to collectors today, along with the ongoing issues of “counter cash” and the absence of certain records which would aid in researching the issues. "
Even if in order to balance the books, 1933 Saints were commingled with 1932’s, that wouldn’t have any bearing on how many 1933’s later escaped the Mint. You’ve reminded me that based on what I’ve read, 25 seems to be a good estimate of that number. Thank you for that.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Would be wary of relying on secondary sources or limiting research to discovery documents or experts in Langbord. Secondary sources are mostly popular accounts, lack academic rigor, and stack inferences upon inferences. Documents produced in discovery -- as I understand it-- were limited to records produced from the National Archives, and were inconclusive.
Anyone aware whether the 1945 memo between Bartholomew and Moore is available in full online?
It is quite plausible that 43 1933-dated $20's were used to make a bag of 1932 $20's complete. The Mint liked nice, even bags of coins because it simplified their bookkeeping, both by dollar amounts and by weights of precious metals delivered to their Cashiers. A solid bag is a known commodity of each.
It has been reliably reported (long ago) that an original bag of 1892-S Dollars when opened was found to contain approximately 20 original BU 1893-S Dollars, the only known Uncirculated 1893-S Dollars. That was certainly more economical for the San Francisco Mint to do than to scrap out and remelt 980 or so perfectly acceptable 1892-S coins just because they did not have a full bag of them. I would not be surprised if something similar happened at many Mints in many years with many denominations. The mixed coins simply ended up in circulation and nobody cared.
That said, there is no reason to think that that mixed bag of 1932 and 1933 $20's ever left the Mint. If it had, the 1932's would be much more common then they are. The logical assumption is that the mixed bag simply sat in a vault with the rest of the 1932's until everything in that vault was destroyed. See "Occam's Razor."
And, even if the mixed bag of 1932 and 1933 coins had miraculously left the Mint during that very narrow window in 1933, it might have been clawed back. As I have reported elsewhere, I once had a nice chat with Abe Kosoff about coin dealing during the Great Depression. He was working for a major dealer in New York during 1932-33, and one of the things he said was that his company offered a service to both American and European clients whereby the clients could give his company bag multiples of Gold Certificates, and for a fee the company would redeem the Gold Certificates for bags of $20's and deliver them to an agent in Europe who would either deliver the coins to the clients or arrange storage of them. They had a deal with some express company to securely handle the trans-Atlantic shipment. I got the impression that they did many bags of gold coins this way.
Then, some time after the Treasury stopped paying out gold coins, the company was visited by one or more Treasury Agents who presented them with bank records of every bag that the company had withdrawn in the six months prior to the gold freeze, and the Agent(s) told the company "We want this gold returned." The company pointed out that most of the gold had already been shipped to Europe, and the Agent(s) replied basically that they did not care, and that they wanted the gold back now.
The company felt intimidated enough that they did ask all of the clients to return the gold, and some of it was returned and surrendered to the Treasury.
I choose to believe that the story about a Mint employee smuggling 1933 $20's and 1933 $10's and 1932 $20's and god knows what else out of the vaults circa 1936-1937 is true, and that the person who did this substituted equal face values of common date coins of the appropriate denominations when he did so. I strongly suspect that he did $500 face of everything he swapped, which would be 50 of the $10's which is not that far off from the current reported population, and 25 of the $20's, which is about right for the pieces sold to collectors in the 1930's and 40's and then recovered and destroyed (except for the Farouk coin) in the 1940's and 50's; plus the Langbord 10 pieces and the other piece surrendered in recent years, with a few unaccounted for.
TD
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
@JCH22 said:
Would be wary of relying on secondary sources or limiting research to discovery documents or experts in Langbord. Secondary sources are mostly popular accounts, lack academic rigor, and stack inferences upon inferences. Documents produced in discovery -- as I understand it-- were limited to records produced from the National Archives, and were inconclusive.
RW Julian and RWB both say tons of documents were destroyed in the late-1970's.
Anyone aware whether the 1945 memo between Bartholomew and Moore is available in full online?
I know I have it SOMEWHERE, I've seen it. If nobody beats me to it, I'll try and look after the Giants and Mets games.
May be more to the Farouk story than the common explanation of an "inadvertent export license'" being issued......
If you have facts, please share them.
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
Comments
You know, in a few years (?) you're going to be able to digitally scan these coins....ID and measure every single blemish that deviates from perfection...tally/sum them all up....and calculate a number for every nick, gouge, mark, blemish, bagmark, etc. on the devices and fields.
Gonna be the difference betwen an X-Ray in the 1950's and an MRI/Pet/CAT scan today.
No, those marks can easily come from being stacked and handled. You'll see a lot of MS Morgans and Peace with similar things going on but it's not wear.
Dan, if I thought the coin was a 64+ and it was graded 65, it wouldn’t bother me as long as a good number of highly proficient graders thought the grade of 65 was deserved. On the other hand, if most of them graded the coin less than 65, it would bother me. In other words, my option is just one of many, and I realize that many others count as much as, if not a lot more than mine.
By the way, grading the 1804 dollars “in order” isn’t nearly good enough, as far as I’m concerned. They should be graded honestly and accurately, no matter how rare or famous they are.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
I’m a fan of CAC. But what is the point of cluttering this coin up with a sticker? The coin is a unicorn.
Would that merit an AU grade ?
Your question, which led to the reply above was “We know intuitively that the 1933 did not circulate....so it's Mint State....but looking at it without seeing 1933.... if it was any other dated Saint, what would tell you that the high-point marks and/or discoloration are NOT evidence of circulation and hence deserving of an AU grade ?”
And his answer was:
“No, those marks can easily come from being stacked and handled. You'll see a lot of MS Morgans and Peace with >similar things going on but it's not wear.”
So why are you asking again, if the marks from the coins being stacked and handled, would merit an AU grade?
As they say in court “Objection, your honor, asked and answered”.😉
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Handling it not wear. If you have coins going down a conveyor belt plopping into a bin hitting each other, or a bunch of coins put in a bag and transported that's handling, not wear.
Same reason a race car driver has an STP logo on his uniform.
I agree. The ANA Grading Guide says NOTHING about “Rarity Points!”
GACK!!!
I respectfully disagree. Grading standards are written for the “TYPE,” not for the “DATE.” This coin SHOULD be graded the same as a 1924, or otherwise all grades are worthless.
As Felix Unger once told a judge...."Objection sustained."
Seriously, he said the marks COULD come from being stacked and handled. I'm OK with that -- we're all speculating -- but if we knew DEFINITIVELY that it was those factors (stacked & handled) then that wouldn't count as "wear" and move it to the AU bucket, right ?
I just want to make sure if we knew for sure or just assumed....if stacked and handled (his conditions) allow for an MS grade. I believe it should, just wondering how we can tell it from other factors that move a coin to AU.
OK, no argument. Just want to know what the tell-tale signs of "stacking and handling" are that distinguish it from AU wear or circulation. I am pretty sure I can ID bagmarks, but "S&H" I'm curious about.
Thanks !
You're mixing wear and damage.
Wanting to know "for sure" is something that I think we should and can strive for, but which is often impossible to achieve.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
I’m no expert Saint grader … and the thing I personally want the most is a clean face.
At the moment, don’t you agree that the grade is irrelevant since it is the only legal one to own? However, I will say is still meaningful in light of the other dozen the government has in its possession. I viewed them at a coin show (in the case of course) and tried to see if any looked better than the Farouk example. From a short distance and without a loupe, I couldn’t make out one that was better. Maybe someone here has been allowed to see them all up close in person.
I'm not going to comment about the current grade of the coin since I'm definitely not an expert in this area. What I question is the uniqueness of the coin. Doesn't the government possess 10 other 1933 DEs confiscated from the Israel Switt stolen coins? What is to prevent the GSA from selling these at auction? It would not be the first time the GSA has auctioned collectible coins.
What's unique about it is that it's the only one that's legal to own. And in order for any of the 10 others to be made available for sale there would need to be 1) a 180 degree shift in policy and 2) a win in what I believe would be an inevitable lawsuit brought by whomever owned the Farouk/Elite coin at that time.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Thanks Mark for your comments. I agree both are likely conditions. I'm not sure how much of a barrier these might be, especially if the government changes its mind. I guess time will tell.
This is what the Sotheby's auction description says. I bid on this coin knowing that the government will not monetize another one in the future. You can bet there will be a lawsuit if they decide to monetize another 1933 DE.
Follow me on MyCollect!
Elite, I certainly appreciate you and envy you on another level. But, lawyers will be lawyers …
I can appreciate government intentions, but they can change very quickly when someone else takes charge. Make a large contribution to the right candidate and perhaps this policy would change.
Suspect, but don't have solid proof, the Double Eagle may also have significant historical importance in addition to numismatic. Not sure if you have already researched that.
Export license was issued on February, 29, 1944.
At the beginning of 1944 there was a diplomatic dispute pending with Farouk......
The Minister in Egypt (Kirk) to the Secretary of State
Cairo, February 2, 1944—6 p.m.
[Received February 3—9:32 a.m.]
New budget provision for 15% export duty effective February 1st is significant in connection with Petroleum Reserves Corp.plans for Alexandria refinery.... and petroleum exploration programs of American companies in Egypt.
American companies here express grave concern over their ability to develop Egyptian wells and export petroleum at competitive prices after paying 15% mining royalties to Egyptian Government, import duties on machinery and equipment, various local taxes and the new export duty. British interests are in a more favorable position because a very large proportion of their production is marketed in Egypt and they are not dependent upon export business.
It would appear that if the proposed oil projects in Egypt and especially the refinery in Alexandria were not exempted from the burden of the new export duty they would operate at a considerable disadvantage in comparison with Middle Eastern wells and refineries outside Egypt.
Kirk
After the export license for the DE was issued on February 29, 1944, things seemed to happily resolve:
The Minister in Egypt (Kirk) to the Secretary of State
Cairo, March 24, 1944—noon.
[Received 7:46 p.m.]
My 499, March 3 and previous. Today’s press reports that Minister of Finance interview granted to Egyptian Gazette announced removal of 15 percent export duty as of March 22.
While Legation is unable to obtain official confirmation of foregoing today due to Moslem holiday and while removal could not be considered definite until publication of decree in official Gazette the report bears out recent informed statement to Legation by Minister of Finance to effect that he had definitely decided to remove tax and that official action would be taken “within a week”.
Local representatives of interested American oil companies have called Legation to express their satisfaction at abolition of tax.
Legation will inform Department as soon as duty removal is officially promulgated.
Kirk
Could all just be a happy coincidence....
I could certainly sympathize with that from a collector, political, and property rights POV.
At the same time, it's somewhat ironic: the U.S. government basically abrogated similar protections for Gold Clauses in bonds and other contracts in 1933 and 1934. And by a 5-4 decision, the SCOTUS upheld their right to do so.
Excellent point, but I suspect many of us were surprised that the fact there "are [now confirmed to be] at least 10 others out there" failed to put downward pressure on the price of the Farouk coin.
I'm not. They're not available so for all practical intent, they don't exist.
Maybe have a US Mint lottery. Five million silver eagles at $100 each and ten winners get a 33 Saint.
From the gift that keeps on giving to this thread that keeps on going!
“The thrill of the hunt never gets old”
PCGS Registry: Screaming Eagles
Copperindian
Retired sets: Soaring Eagles
Copperindian
I apologize for continuing this discussion, but I'm still learning about the background. If my posting on this is not of interest, let me know, and I'll stop.
I found this 22 year old news item from the US Mint regarding the Farouk coin. It looks like the US government netted 3 million from Sotheby's auction of the coin. I was unaware of this fact.
https://www.usmint.gov/news/press-releases/20020802-auction-of-rare-1933-double-eagle-gold-coin-nets-3-millionplus-for-u-s-government
Auction Of Rare 1933 Double Eagle Gold Coin Nets $3 Million–Plus For U.S. Government
August 2, 2002
Treasury to Receive Nearly Half of Record $7.6 Million Sale
Washington, D.C., August 2, 2002 — The United States Mint announced today that Tuesday’s sale of the much–publicized 1933 Double Eagle gold coin will generate more than $3 million for the United States Treasury.
The coin, auctioned by Sotheby’s in New York City during the American Numismatic Association annual convention, sold for $6.6 million to an anonymous bidder. An additional 15 percent auction fee brought the sales price to $7.59 million and an additional $20 was needed to “monetize” the face value of the coin so it would be legal to own, bringing the final sales price to $7,590,020. It is believed to be the most ever paid for a coin at auction.
“We are very pleased with the sale,” said Henrietta Holsman Fore, Director of the United States Mint. “This coin, once worth only $20, should reinforce the notion that there is tremendous value in coin collecting. It is not only an enjoyable hobby, but also an interesting and historically rich pursuit marked by exciting occasions such as this one.”
Once the sale is finalized, the United States Mint’s Public Enterprise Fund (PEF) will receive the entire amount. The PEF will then disburse a portion to Sotheby’s to pay for the services it rendered to the United States Mint in marketing and auctioning the coin. The PEF also will deduct the United States Mint’s expenses in administering the contract and protecting the coin, and then will retain half the proceeds under an out–of–court settlement — expected to be slightly more than $3 million, which will be transferred to the United States Treasury as a miscellaneous receipt.
Though it will be several weeks before the United States Mint can determine the exact earnings to the Nation’s taxpayers from this historic sale, the coin is the most expensive and profitable numismatic product that the United States Mint has ever sold.
The 1933 Double Eagle features a liberty figure reminiscent of a Greek goddess, known as “Walking Liberty,” designed by famed sculptor Augustus Saint–Gaudens. The other side features a majestic eagle.
About the 1933 Double Eagle
The United States Mint has struck gold coins in various denominations since 1795. The first $20 Double Eagle coin was minted in 1849. After the 1933 Double Eagle was struck, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt took the United States off the gold standard. The newly–minted but un–issued gold coins were destroyed because they were not legal tender.
The recently–auctioned coin is one of only a few 1933 Double Eagles to have survived destruction. Two were given to the Smithsonian Institution for historic safekeeping. Several others — all of which were stolen — were believed to be either spirited away or smuggled out of the United States. One of these coins reappeared in 1996 when British coin dealer Stephen Fenton tried selling it to undercover Secret Service agents in New York. An out–of–court settlement between the Justice Department and Mr. Fenton in 2001 set the stage for the auction
You're a bit behind, but welcome to contribute. This was from the sale in 2002 and since then that owner (Stuart Weitzman) has sold it for $18.9 million to our very own "Elite Collection" who is currently in possession.
There's alot more about the 1933 Double Eagle here on the Forums and also ATS.
That's idiotic, which I guess coming from the government is par for the course.
To extrapolate from 1 coin...and to stress the monetary investing aspects of coin collecting (when the record shows in the aggregate for most individuals it does NOT generate either absolute or even market-beating returns) is really deceptive.
And the U.S. government jacked up the price by confiscating and/or destroying other 1933's.
@sm_delta The other examples are generally referred to as the Langbord coins. There are some detailed thread in the forum on them if you search for Langbord 1933, including several threads by an attorney who was tracking the case and giving us updates with every filing. (SanctionII)
https://coinweek.com/coin-rarities-related-topics-the-jury-verdict-in-the-case-of-the-langbord-1933-double-eagles-20-gold-coins/
200 post threads are the best.
I don’t recall the exact details, but someone on this board was able to extrapolate that there may have been as many as 40 coins that escaped destruction. We know the whereabouts of approximately 15 of them, which would leave up to 25 potentially floating around. Ultimately, without the government’s blessing, these will always have black market valuations and have to remain secret. I don’t know the details of the Farouk examples monetization, nor do I know if the government is contractually obligated to preserve that status for only one example. I do feel that if they found a way to make considerable revenue from any of the remaining examples, that swift attempt to weasel out of whatever contracts they’ve entered in would be made.
Founder- Peak Rarities
Website
Instagram
Facebook
I don’t remember seeing a number nearly that high for how many examples might have escaped destruction. I was thinking it was approximately 20, not 40, and that therefore, there might be a handful remaining in hiding. However, if you happen to find the extrapolation you’re thinking of, please post an update.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Mark - Dan is referring to my research. Here were my early thoughts when I first was formulating it, in the format of a PM to another member:
"Was just going through a book on $20 Saints - looks like in the end of 1932 there was a shortage of 43 double eagles to complete a bag. This shortage was likely carried over until 1933 where 43 1933 $20s were put in that bag to fill up the difference. I'd assume that bag was the first bag paid out for 1933, so logically 43 1933 $20s are out there. 18 have been confiscated by the government, Elite has one, and there are 24 unaccounted for. I think we can agree Mr. Connecticut has one, and DLH might as well.
Very interesting to me."
Coin Photographer.
Thanks, Alex.
That guesstimate is dependent on a number of different assumptions and differs from all of the other estimates I’ve read over the years, as well as statements from the government. While that doesn’t necessarily make it wrong, it’s very difficult for me to fathom.
I can’t agree that Mr. Connecticut has one and I’d be very surprised if Mr. Hansen does, either.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Thanks for chiming in Alex, I made one tiny change for accuracy but I appreciate the time you spent on that.
Founder- Peak Rarities
Website
Instagram
Facebook
The funny thing here Mark is that if we assume no one broke the law (either broke into the mint or walked out with several ounces in gold) to acquire the 1933s, which seems quite probable, the only way that this story makes sense is via the “filled in the leftover bag” argument. If that’s how it happened, there were 43 1933s out there. The Langbord coins took a while to surface too, if I remember correctly.
Perhaps it’s time for a new research project 😂.
Coin Photographer.
Alex, why would the coins used to fill the bag have to be dated (edited) any specific year? I sure wish I could easily find some of the posts I think I remember having read.
I love your idea for a new research project. Go for it! 😉
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
I think that 25 was a good, solid, round number that would have cost old Izzy about $500 even if no premium paid.
Unless a few dozen are super-well hidden, the rumours of hidden or clandestine 1933's seems to jibe with about 20-25, not anything near 40.
But you never know....
That analysis is from Roger Burdette, in-depth commentary of which took place in his 2018 SAINTS book. He wasn't allowed to introduce part of this information in the trial in Philly.
Or....the bag with both 1932's and 1933's could have been deposited in Vault F...and all the coins melted down.
Some of them may have also been taken out by the Cashier. The Mint records simply don't say, so we are all speculating and guessing.
Mark, the bag would have been labled 1932s since 457 of the 500 coins would have been dated 1932.
From CoinWorld, 2011. The reference to 458.1 ounces of gold must reference 457 coins (excess gold, I guess):
"....Burdette expressed his opinion that 1933 double eagles could have left the Mint through proper and legitimate channels based on historic practice, the fact that gold coins went out March 7 to April 12, 1933, the fact that the cashier had a quantity of 1933 double eagles, and that the “Mint wasn’t doing anything different” and the fundamental operations of the Mint stayed the same during the time period.
Perhaps at the core of Burdette’s testimony was a 1945 memo between coiner William Bartholomew and Helen Moore, the assistant superintendent of the Philadelphia Mint, which Burdette interpreted to show that 43 1933 coins were substituted for 1932 coins and used to balance the books with regards to 458.1 ounces of gold.These 43 1933 double eagles were allegedly comingled with 1932 double eagles on March 4, 1933, and went to the cashier. At this point, Burdette speculated, the pieces lost their distinction as 1933 double eagles and could have been given out.
Many of the issues of the prior week were addressed, including the fact that just four 1933 $10 eagles were released, yet 20 to 30 are freely available to collectors today, along with the ongoing issues of “counter cash” and the absence of certain records which would aid in researching the issues. "
Even if in order to balance the books, 1933 Saints were commingled with 1932’s, that wouldn’t have any bearing on how many 1933’s later escaped the Mint. You’ve reminded me that based on what I’ve read, 25 seems to be a good estimate of that number. Thank you for that.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Would be wary of relying on secondary sources or limiting research to discovery documents or experts in Langbord. Secondary sources are mostly popular accounts, lack academic rigor, and stack inferences upon inferences. Documents produced in discovery -- as I understand it-- were limited to records produced from the National Archives, and were inconclusive.
Anyone aware whether the 1945 memo between Bartholomew and Moore is available in full online?
It is quite plausible that 43 1933-dated $20's were used to make a bag of 1932 $20's complete. The Mint liked nice, even bags of coins because it simplified their bookkeeping, both by dollar amounts and by weights of precious metals delivered to their Cashiers. A solid bag is a known commodity of each.
It has been reliably reported (long ago) that an original bag of 1892-S Dollars when opened was found to contain approximately 20 original BU 1893-S Dollars, the only known Uncirculated 1893-S Dollars. That was certainly more economical for the San Francisco Mint to do than to scrap out and remelt 980 or so perfectly acceptable 1892-S coins just because they did not have a full bag of them. I would not be surprised if something similar happened at many Mints in many years with many denominations. The mixed coins simply ended up in circulation and nobody cared.
That said, there is no reason to think that that mixed bag of 1932 and 1933 $20's ever left the Mint. If it had, the 1932's would be much more common then they are. The logical assumption is that the mixed bag simply sat in a vault with the rest of the 1932's until everything in that vault was destroyed. See "Occam's Razor."
And, even if the mixed bag of 1932 and 1933 coins had miraculously left the Mint during that very narrow window in 1933, it might have been clawed back. As I have reported elsewhere, I once had a nice chat with Abe Kosoff about coin dealing during the Great Depression. He was working for a major dealer in New York during 1932-33, and one of the things he said was that his company offered a service to both American and European clients whereby the clients could give his company bag multiples of Gold Certificates, and for a fee the company would redeem the Gold Certificates for bags of $20's and deliver them to an agent in Europe who would either deliver the coins to the clients or arrange storage of them. They had a deal with some express company to securely handle the trans-Atlantic shipment. I got the impression that they did many bags of gold coins this way.
Then, some time after the Treasury stopped paying out gold coins, the company was visited by one or more Treasury Agents who presented them with bank records of every bag that the company had withdrawn in the six months prior to the gold freeze, and the Agent(s) told the company "We want this gold returned." The company pointed out that most of the gold had already been shipped to Europe, and the Agent(s) replied basically that they did not care, and that they wanted the gold back now.
The company felt intimidated enough that they did ask all of the clients to return the gold, and some of it was returned and surrendered to the Treasury.
I choose to believe that the story about a Mint employee smuggling 1933 $20's and 1933 $10's and 1932 $20's and god knows what else out of the vaults circa 1936-1937 is true, and that the person who did this substituted equal face values of common date coins of the appropriate denominations when he did so. I strongly suspect that he did $500 face of everything he swapped, which would be 50 of the $10's which is not that far off from the current reported population, and 25 of the $20's, which is about right for the pieces sold to collectors in the 1930's and 40's and then recovered and destroyed (except for the Farouk coin) in the 1940's and 50's; plus the Langbord 10 pieces and the other piece surrendered in recent years, with a few unaccounted for.
TD
RW Julian and RWB both say tons of documents were destroyed in the late-1970's.
I know I have it SOMEWHERE, I've seen it. If nobody beats me to it, I'll try and look after the Giants and Mets games.
,,,, (except for the Farouk coin)........
May be more to the Farouk story than the common explanation of an "inadvertent export license'" being issued......
If you have facts, please share them.