@CaptHenway said:
In my Branch Mint Proof thread @MrEureka mentions an unquestionable Proof 1904-O Half Dollar, ex-Pittman.
The part I left out in the other thread is that I bought that coin in partnership with another dealer. It was deeply toned, and that’s probably why PCGS couldn’t quite gather the courage to call it a proof. Instead, they put it in a Regency holder as (I think) 67PL, which didn’t work for us. My partner then dipped the coin, with my permission, and the coin came out deadish gray-white. We then got the coin in an NGC SP62 holder, consigned it to an ANR (?) auction, and netted about 4K on our 30K (?) investment. Not one of my finer moments. Oh, and it got worse when my partner’s financial troubles prevented him from giving me the 2K he owed me for my half of the proceeds. All I got was a pretty Italian coin worth maybe half of the 2K, and an apology. As I write this, a hear Willie Nelson in my head, singing “Mamas, don’t let your babies grow up to be coin dealers”. Yeah, he has a point. LOL
Andy Lustig
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
@CaptHenway said:
We will have fun discussing the Proof status of the 1894-S Dimes when the time comes. This will not diminish any other piece here.
For whatever reason, it seems a little early in this thread to discuss the 1894-S dime, but seeing as Stacks is auctioning the Norweb example on Sep 1, it would be remiss to let that event pass without comment.
Admittedly, I haven’t studied this famous coin in much detail, so rather than opine on it as if I have, I’ll simply add links below to an article, the Stacks lot, and a photo and let others share their thoughts.
The auction listing includes a lengthy informative history and is worth a read. The current bid is $1,000,000.
I found this paragraph from the auction description to be particularly interesting, which I assume is what @CaptHenway was alluding to in his comment:
” Although all well preserved 1894-S dimes exhibit some qualities of traditional Proof coins - namely reflective surfaces and sharply struck design elements - there is no evidence that San Francisco Mint employees polished either the dies or planchets used to produce them. On the other hand, only a single die pair was used to strike all known examples, and the fresh state of those dies did impart a prooflike surface. In the end the facts speak for themselves: the reason that Acting Superintendent Robert Barnett gives for the production of these coins, and the eventual release of most examples into circulation, would not have required anything other than circulation strikes. Historically, however, the 1894-S has always been regarded as a Proof issue and, as confirmed below in our roster of known examples, PCGS and NGC certify all well preserved specimens as Proofs or Branch Mint Proofs.”
Look at the inside edge of the obverse from, say, 5 o'clock to 6 o'clock. Not fully struck.
Professional Numismatist, Retired. 55 year member ANA. Former ANA Senior Authenticator. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and ANA Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner of the PNG's 2026 Robert Friedberg Award for "The Enigmatic Lincoln Cents of 1922," Available now from Whitman or Amazon.
@CaptHenway Love the write up and the personal connection with the Benton Emory coins! I was very fortunate to acquire the Emory-Nichols-Duckor 1901-s half a while back from Joe O'Connor and it's one of the favorite Barbers I've ever owned. It's obvious that it was set aside and stored carefully all these years. Not a proof, but had to show it here. Beautiful detailed photo by @FlyingAl
Comments
The part I left out in the other thread is that I bought that coin in partnership with another dealer. It was deeply toned, and that’s probably why PCGS couldn’t quite gather the courage to call it a proof. Instead, they put it in a Regency holder as (I think) 67PL, which didn’t work for us. My partner then dipped the coin, with my permission, and the coin came out deadish gray-white. We then got the coin in an NGC SP62 holder, consigned it to an ANR (?) auction, and netted about 4K on our 30K (?) investment. Not one of my finer moments. Oh, and it got worse when my partner’s financial troubles prevented him from giving me the 2K he owed me for my half of the proceeds. All I got was a pretty Italian coin worth maybe half of the 2K, and an apology. As I write this, a hear Willie Nelson in my head, singing “Mamas, don’t let your babies grow up to be coin dealers”. Yeah, he has a point. LOL
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
For whatever reason, it seems a little early in this thread to discuss the 1894-S dime, but seeing as Stacks is auctioning the Norweb example on Sep 1, it would be remiss to let that event pass without comment.
Admittedly, I haven’t studied this famous coin in much detail, so rather than opine on it as if I have, I’ll simply add links below to an article, the Stacks lot, and a photo and let others share their thoughts.
The auction listing includes a lengthy informative history and is worth a read. The current bid is $1,000,000.
https://stacksbowers.com/the-1894-s-dime-that-made-dave-bowers-a-legend/
https://auctions.stacksbowers.com/lots/view/3-1UQ81J/1894-s-barber-dime-jd-1-rarity-7-proof-63-pcgs-cac-cmq
I found this paragraph from the auction description to be particularly interesting, which I assume is what @CaptHenway was alluding to in his comment:
” Although all well preserved 1894-S dimes exhibit some qualities of traditional Proof coins - namely reflective surfaces and sharply struck design elements - there is no evidence that San Francisco Mint employees polished either the dies or planchets used to produce them. On the other hand, only a single die pair was used to strike all known examples, and the fresh state of those dies did impart a prooflike surface. In the end the facts speak for themselves: the reason that Acting Superintendent Robert Barnett gives for the production of these coins, and the eventual release of most examples into circulation, would not have required anything other than circulation strikes. Historically, however, the 1894-S has always been regarded as a Proof issue and, as confirmed below in our roster of known examples, PCGS and NGC certify all well preserved specimens as Proofs or Branch Mint Proofs.”
Nothing is as expensive as free money.
Thank you for the links.
Look at the inside edge of the obverse from, say, 5 o'clock to 6 o'clock. Not fully struck.
@CaptHenway Love the write up and the personal connection with the Benton Emory coins! I was very fortunate to acquire the Emory-Nichols-Duckor 1901-s half a while back from Joe O'Connor and it's one of the favorite Barbers I've ever owned. It's obvious that it was set aside and stored carefully all these years. Not a proof, but had to show it here. Beautiful detailed photo by @FlyingAl