Original Double Mint Sets
toners
Posts: 403
I have had an infinity for orignal double mint sets for 3 or 4 years, (most I have cherry picked for the toning) does anybody know the history of how many sets were actually melted by the mint in the 50,s, I've been told by a few dealers that some dates had large quantities melted?, which with all the sets being busted for gem and toned coins for slabbing this doesnt' really leave many sets intact. Your opinion or good guess on the percentage of sets that are still intact today and will they one day as the number of collectors grow become a true rarity in orginal holders and envelopes. I know there is a good premium on them now and really think that they will double in price in the next few years. Wqhat are your feelings on this.
Thanks
Allen
Thanks
Allen
Love those TONED Coins, a true Addict!!!
Proud member of TCCS!
Proud member of TCCS!
0
Comments
and ttt it.
I've never heard of the mint destroying any mint sets from back in these days.
('81 mint sets were destroyed but because of changes in accounting practices
these were not included in the mintage totals) There are probably a few returns
each year which are destroyed and pre-'59 these would probably be included in
mintage totals. Most hobbiests did not recognize mint set coins as being spec-
ial in any way until recent years. so had no reason to pursue these sets. Those
assembling high grade denominational sets no doubt were aware of this, but
for the main part these sets have been ignored by most. While relatively large
numbers of people have been working on the coins of this era compared to the
later coins they were a tiny part of the market.
Some of these sets were no doubt melted in '79/'80 but they were already seldom
seen by this time and one couldn't melt what he didn't have. Probably a larger
factor in the attrition of these sets is the damage caused by corrosion. These sets
are frequently seen with very dark and unattractive toning and all these coins are
little more than pocket change or bullion when low grade. Occasionally one will see
a double set offered cheaply but these will be a set with all the original coins replaced
with more typical examples. When buying and selling these sets it is important to
remember that they are worth a combined total of the coins inside and that bid price
factors in some choice coins.
One rarely sees any of these sets and that's been true for many years.
Maybe getting this back to the top will get an expert to chime in.
I share your interest in the orgininal double mint sets. Unfortunately, I can not answer your questions on how many sets may have been melted.
I will say this, that I agree with your assessment that they are getting harder and harder to come by, unpicked, and with the original packaging. With people popping out the high end coins for slabbing a lot of the existing sets are disappearing. I recently just did this with a 58 set, and believe me, I felt kind of bad doing it. But, one coin alone in this instance was worth double the price of the current set.
I recently purchased a 57 set from a board member who does not collect American coins. He was selling them for his family and the set had been his Uncle's, purchased directly from the mint. To find sets like that, especially the ones you know were actually ordered and owned by the original owner, is just such a cool thing.
I have decided I am not going to pick them over for slabbing anymore. Any sets I buy from now on I want to keep and hold, making sure the coins stay together. With one set I have, I did take the coins from the cardboard and put them in plastic holders, to slow the toning process and protect them. I will keep all the original packaging for them.
I do agree with you though, in coming years, original sets will be very, very hard to find. And I sure don't think they will be available at today's levels.
Carl
Thanks'
Allen
Proud member of TCCS!
Carl
I think maybe you have to have that particular bent, that likes the old packaging, the toning, etc. etc.
For me being a collector of classic commems... the older mints sets were a logical branching out of my interests.
I still think the days are coming though, that if you offer an original, unpicked mint set with all the packaging, people are going to jump on it like ravenous wolves.
Carl
<< <i>
I still think the days are coming though, that if you offer an original, unpicked mint set with all the packaging, people are going to jump on it like ravenous wolves.
Carl >>
It would seem a certainty that at some point the total demand for mint sets and the coins in them
will exceed the number of surviving sets. At this point large percentages of the mint set mintage
will have already been destroyed. Any increase in demand at this time could make some collectors
very "hungry".
It is incredible that the mint was able to sell so many sets which have had so little demand. Most of
these have only been sought for about three years now and already there is a decrease in availability.
Yep, but if they're like me, that original, unpicked mint set will be broken up ASAP.
I admit, the thrill of finding a nice original mint set is great. However, this is a business and I can usually get more money breaking up the set and slabbing a few of the coins.
<< <i>Yep, but if they're like me, that original, unpicked mint set will be broken up ASAP. >>
Greg, your last post is the proof positive that these sets will increase in scarcity and value.
I'm in no way condemning what you are suggesting. I have done it myself. But, I am looking very keenly for the sets right now that have nice looking toned coins in them and the original packaging. And I am just going to put them away.
Carl
Oh yeah, we`re talking about a government beauracracy...
The problem is that I will pay a premium for them with the intention of breaking them up. Most people I know who purchase these also break them up. Let's face it, these sets that sell for $150-$200 have $30 in coins in them. The premium isn't for the original packaging or the scarcity of the sets, it is for the possibility of the high grade coins.
I agree they might go up in value, but only because they are a dwindling source of high grade coins, not because the packaging is scarce. I might be wrong. I've seen empty holders sell for $30 on eBay....
<< <i>franklin is FBL and beautifully toned. If anyone is interested, I'll post pics. >>
Drooooooooooooolll............... Duhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh......
I'm interested, I'm interested......................
Prrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr.......... Meow........
"Senorita HepKitty"
"I want a real cool Kitty from Hepcat City, to stay in step with me" - Bill Carter
<< <i>Let's face it, these sets that sell for $150-$200 have $30 in coins in them. The premium isn't for the original packaging or the scarcity of the sets, it is for the possibility of the high grade coins. >>
I agree with you, Greg. It's kind of like people buying "unopened" proof sets, or GSA dollars in an unopened box sometimes.
I have bought a couple mint sets from eBay that had horrible, small pictures of the coins... just wondering if, as you say, one of the coins in that set might be a find. And more than once, this has proven to be the case.
I posted about a 58 mint set I bought with a monster toned quarter in it. I just happened on it in a coin shop and the guy said he had just had it on eBay and didn't get any bids. I bought it, the quarter graded out 67 at PCGS. I went back and looked at his auction. You could barely tell they were coins, let alone if one had fantastic toning. These things can be a grab bag. It's fun.
Edit: I still believe the day is coming that the fact they are original sets will make the whole package scarce and worth a premium to the coins. Even if the coins are not that high of grade, or of super eye-appeal. They will be valued simply for being what they are.
Carl
DPOTD-3
'Emancipate yourselves from mental slavery'
CU #3245 B.N.A. #428
Don
DPOTD-3
'Emancipate yourselves from mental slavery'
CU #3245 B.N.A. #428
Don
I just received a 57 mint set today from ajaan. Truly beautiful set, Don! The toning is great, and some of the coins are FBL and FS. I couldn't be happier. And your Uncle kept it all looking good. The envelope and packaging is in great shape.
Don even included some darkside coins along with the mint set. They are very cool, actually. A great guy to work with. You have my thanks, Don.
Clankeye
<< <i>: I still believe the day is coming that the fact they are original sets will make the whole package scarce and worth a premium to the coins. Even if the coins are not that high of grade, or of super eye-appeal. They will be valued simply for being what they are. >>
Don't count on that happening any time soon. Unfortunately most of the buyers have no sense of history. How many original nineteenth century proof sets do you see? Not many. But when one DOES show up in a major auction it is normally broken up. I would really like to know what happened to the ORIGINAL CASED 1841 - 1843 proof sets that were in the Pitman collection. Are they still intact in their case or have they been broken up, slabbed, and sold? That was a case where only one or two original cased sets were known to exist, the others being in the ANS collection. And how about the King of Siam set? Great history there and the only one of its kind in the world! The coins have all been pulled out of the case now and slabbed. From a Nineteenth century diplomatic presentation case to a PCGS box. So far they are still together with the same owner, but for how long?
It is very difficult for those of us who see history to protect them from those who see dollar signs.
<< <i>
Don't count on that happening any time soon. Unfortunately most of the buyers have no sense of history. How many original nineteenth century proof sets do you see? Not many. But when one DOES show up in a major auction it is normally broken up. I would really like to know what happened to the ORIGINAL CASED 1841 - 1843 proof sets that were in the Pitman collection. Are they still intact in their case or have they been broken up, slabbed, and sold? That was a case where only one or two original cased sets were known to exist, the others being in the ANS collection. And how about the King of Siam set? Great history there and the only one of its kind in the world! The coins have all been pulled out of the case now and slabbed. From a Nineteenth century diplomatic presentation case to a PCGS box. So far they are still together with the same owner, but for how long?
It is very difficult for those of us who see history to protect them from those who see dollar signs. >>
You are no doubt correct that the sets are being disassembled for profit. Even though
the bid price assumes that a given set will have some premium coins in it, most sets
actually contain coins which are worth even more. While the collectors of 19th century
proof sets are few and far between because of specialization caused by high prices, there
are significant numbers of people who collect modern mint sets by date. As inceasing
numbers of these sets are destroyed by date/mm collectors there will come a time that
there are insufficient number of sets for any increase in the numbers of mint set collectors.
Any further demand at this point will cause a premium to be attached to original sets.
<< <i>As inceasing
numbers of these sets are destroyed by date/mm collectors there will come a time that
there are insufficient number of sets for any increase in the numbers of mint set collectors.
Any further demand at this point will cause a premium to be attached to original sets. >>
And the increasing premium on the sets results in a decreasing number of mint set collectors. Same reason why there are very few collectors of 19th century proof sets. As the prices continued to rise there are fewer collectors able or willing to pay the premium. Net result is that something that can't be sold as a group to one person becomes much more easily saleable individually to many people.
Actually, an NGC box, then a PCGS box, and now back to an NGC box.
It has gotten to the point that "common" sets are hard to find with original packaging. I inquired about some RCM packaging for an "anti-coin" set I was working on (similar to Conder's work, but in a much smaller scale). Canadian dealers told me the holders were so common that they didn't keep them. Supposedly they bought the coins at face, took the coins out of the holders and spent them. When one dealer who had told me how common they used to be finally got one, he charged me $15 for it.
Another dealer tells me how many proof and mint set holders Bowers & Ruddy used to throw away when he worked there. now the empty cases sell for $10 to $30 each!
Obscurum per obscurius
There was another thread not long ago talking about a new book that is out, or coming out, about mint and proof sets. I would be very interested to read it, if they do a good job.
Clankeye
Obscurum per obscurius
I totally agree with you. That would be a very interesting book. One that would take some good effort and insight to write.
I have seen a lot of 50's mint sets, where the stamped mailing date is a couple years after the date of the mint set. Meaning that people where still ordering them, and having their orders filled by the mint. I have had people question whether a certain mailing envelope was original to a set because it wasn't mailed in the year the coins were minted. I don't know, it may not interest others, buy I would love to have someone really delve into this stuff. I don't think there is a lot of definitive information on these sets readily available. If there is, I don't know where.
If this book that is coming out, isn't that in depth... what are you and and Condor101 doing after you finish your other books? Why don't you team up? You can be the Swiatek/Breen, Rogers and Hart/ Abbott and Costello... your coin collecting fraternity needs you!
Clankeye
The circumstances surrounding collecting coins has interested me for a while. I even bought a flyer from the 1935 California Pacific Expo just to get the ad for the half dollars on sale. One of these days I'm going to frame it with one of the coins.
Obscurum per obscurius
Obscurum per obscurius
Thanks, it has turned into an interesting thread, I have concluded after getting advice from a PM for tonlover(jon) that I will keep my dozen or so sets in the orginal holders and may after I get some expert opinons on a couple of halves and quarters with monster toning that may have the capability to grade out at 67 with one of the halves a 68 comparing it to a couple of pcgs 66FBL's I have, it may be to my advantage to slab just these coins and keep the others intact with some that have moderate toning with the right money colors now and let them keep cooking and in a few more years will be monsters themselves, but I will have to keep a close eye on them to make sure the toning doesnt turn to the bad side. Thanks to everybody that has responded, each has had some great advice to share.
Allen
Proud member of TCCS!
That was back when your trunk only had 40 rings.
Obscurum per obscurius
I think I've been insulted.
As for the Mint Sets - I am a collector of Mint Sets - and no I don't break them up and get the coins slabbed. EVER !!
I am working my way through slow & sure and hope to eventually get them all - each & every one. And whenever the opportunity presents itself for a year I need - I buy more than one. I don't break those out either. I do the same thing with Proof Sets. And if I need a particular individual coin for the series that I collect - I go elsewhere to find it. For my Mint & Proof sets are sacrosanct.
Believe it or not - I recently came across a series of proof sets - 56 thru 64 - unopened. But their open now !!
It was not a difficult task to find mint sets which contained such coins at that time. Dealers were more than glad to relieve themselves of these sets often without so much as a look inside to evaluate the quality of the coins. If they did, the price between a “choice” mint set and an “average” one was minimal. The quality in some of these original “unpicked” mint sets was sometimes astounding. I purchased a 1951 set which, 25 years later, had the following PCGS grades attributed to the Franklins in the set: 1951-P MS66 FBL, 1951-P MS66 FBL, 1951-D MS66 FBL, 1951-D MS66 FBL (the S mints did not make FBL). Yes, those are TWO EACH of 1951-P and 1951-D MS66 FBL Franklins.
I placed an ad for several weeks in COIN WORLD stating that I would pay 10% over ASK for mint sets with attractively toned Franklins. I also had a dealer friend go over the teletype coin buying network with a similar offer. The response was enormous as this offer was considerably above the wholesale market at the time. I received so many great 1956-1958 sets I had to put a stop to it, and pretty much then asked for only 1949 through 1954.
And yes, I admit, I was responsible for the break-up of hundreds of these original double mint sets as I removed the gem Franklins and eventually sold off the remaining coins or the set remnants to dealers. At one time I had over 1000 gem Franklins, but within the past few years I have certified and sold most to pay expenses. I still retain the best one’s of each date for my collection.
Compared to what was available years ago, original earlier double mint sets from 1948 to 1958 are much more limited in supply now. I might also mention tactics that developed when a significant premium was later attached to the gems within these sets. These included the practice of taking out the best coins from an original intact set and replacing them with other mint set coins from a similarly dated set (or substituting one of the mint marked cardboard sheets of coins) and then marketing this reconstituted item as an “original” double mint set, which it is not. Even the wrapper may not be the original mailing envelope. In fact, I began to receive inquires later from dealers for all my discarded mailing envelopes, a request which I was surprised by.
Although I was guilty, in the extreme, of breaking up these sets to get at the beautiful coins I was collecting, I did not resort to the above chicanery. However, from what I saw being done at that time, I suspect that some/ many of the earlier cardboard sets presently in existence are fabricated in this manner. You can often tell if you have an original set by observing the toning on each separate cardboard sheet. Not always, but usually the toning on the silver coins (especially the Franklins) is similar or at least “consistent” to the trained eye.
I suspect that your best chance of acquiring a beautiful “fresh” original mint set is directly from the Estate of an old time collector. It is hardly imaginable, given the extraordinary escalation in the price of gem FBL or incredibly toned coins (and even more recently Washington quarters), that many dealers today would not carefully inspect these sets before offering them for sale at the presently published bid and ask range for these items.
<< <i>I've seen empty holders sell for $30 on eBay.... >>
They sold to the people filing them up with odds and ends pieces, and selling them as original.
LSCC#1864
Ebay Stuff
Same goes for Roosies.
The original set does interest me, and I like to obtain them as such. I don't go out and hunt them down, but when I see them available, I'll inquire. Same reason why I purchased a Jefferson nickel die set from another board member a month or so ago. It's interesting, regardless of value.
Now, as soon as I get some sets in the mail that I just purchased from another board member, I'll be VERY happy.
LSCC#1864
Ebay Stuff
Good post. And it does shed light on one thing. When I first started picking up "original" mint sets, I got a few from dealers, and when you looked at them they certainly did look matched and original, but then looking at the coins on close inspection I would find it odd that out of the whole two card set, not one coin really amounted to much in the way of a high technical grade. I believe in a lot of cases, as you mentioned, the best coins were switched out, and replaced with coins from mint sets, that were a good match, but not original to the set, nonetheless.
How will you ever know? I would think in a lot of cases you just never will. Some people are blatant about the switched coins, they don't match at all, that's easy. But, others you never really could know. And like you said, the best way to be sure is if you can purchase a set that you know has been in the original owner's estate since they got it from the mint, or from an older dealer they worked with. And that is getting tougher and tougher to find.
Clankeye
So how many '53-S MS-66FBL's do you have stashed away?
Thanks for sharing your experience.
This isn't a great picture. I just got a digital camera yesterday and I am experimenting. But here is a photo of my keeper original 57 mint set, that I had a custom holder made for. I have kept the original packaging. Sorry the picture is so large. I have to figure that one out still.
Obscurum per obscurius
Mr. Bombay will be guarding mine most carefully.
Clankeye
To echo what other people said in your linked thread, yes, that set looks exactly like the way a lot of 57 sets come. Nice set.
The holder I had made by Capitol Plastics. It wasn't cheap. Came in right around $80. But I consider it well worth it as I sit here looking at the wonderfully toned coins shining against that white background. It works as good protection for the set, and protects the set from further interaction with the card board holders. I recommend it if you are so inclined.
Clankeye
Obscurum per obscurius
With regards to your inquiry as to how one can ever know if a mint set is completely original this can, as you suggest, be almost impossible with certainty. I can tell you a subtle hint, but I don't know if it helps with many (or any) sets in the marketplace today (although it may be very helpful if the set is located in an Estate or from a non-numismatist who may state it was handed down to them or acquired years ago by another means). Look at the BACK of each cardboard sheet. Observe the delicate paper which covers the round holes. If some of the coins have been popped out by a dealer to inspect their reverses, often there is a very shallow residual "bubbling" of the paper over these areas from the finger indentation needed to pop the coin out. On brand-spanking-untouched mint sets the paper is usually DEAD-FLAT as the mint employees probably plugged the coins down in the mint set against a flat hard surface and left them to snuggly reside there undisturbed. Remember, a non-numismatist would NOT normally see any need whatever to push or pop the coins out to inspect (or furthermore, inspect ONLY the potentially more valuable ones which is a dead give-away). Additionally, if their are any tears in the paper from an agressive finger push then that is a certain give-away as well in this respect. But please note that if minor bubbling is present the set can still be completely original as a numismatist may have plucked a few coins out to inspect and then carefully re-inserted. However, if everything is dead-flat without any finger markings or impressions in the back over the holes, the chances of totally undisturbed originality increase and, if coupled with a reliable provenance then you can be reasonably quite sure of complete originality.
PMH 1nic,
Referencing your question: I have only one coin that I believe is a 1953-S MS66 FBL but PCGS insisted on calling it MS66 (no FBL) on the first grading. In fact, I re-submitted it today for a regrade evaluation. If that coin was a 1956-P I do not have much doubt it would get that lofty grade, but I think the threshold for assigning an FBL on this date may now be set quite high given some relatively recent auction prices for this date, mint mark and grade. Incidently, I never found a truly well-struck mint set 1953-P with truly well defined bell lines and I consider an attractive mint set toned MS66 FBL (with clear, unblurry, and distinct bell lines) of that date and mint mark to be a rare coin.