GREAT JOB PCGS ON GETTING THE MULTIHOLDERS LISTED IN POP REPORT!!

wondercoin

A board member, who I assisted, is to thank for working with PCGS over the past 60 days to get PCGS to also list in the pop report the "pops" of the multiholder 2003 and 2004 MS Gold and Platinum sets, which are now up in the pop report. Great job PCGS in researching and backtracking to pull all the information necessary to list these figures.

The figures are (MS69/MS70/Total slabbed):

2004 Gold Gold Eagle Set 1024 23 1047
2003 Gold Gold Eagle Set 398 0 398
2003 Platinum Statue of Liberty Set 765 4 769
2004 Platinum Statue of Liberty Set 356 3 359

IMHO, this simply amplifies what has been discussed before with respect to MS Platinum Eagles and just how difficult the coins are to locate in PCGS perfect MS70 grade (and much of the MS70 Gold is super tough as well from what I have seen) .

Consider this:

1. The Mint reports the mintage on the 2003 $100 Platinum Eagles at a scant 7,500 coins (I believe there is research going on to determine if that figure is actually closer to 8,000).

2. PCGS has now graded 2,567 2003 MS Plat. $100 coins (1,798 single coins and 769 multiholder coins) - more than 1/3 of the ENTIRE mintage for the year.

3. 1/3 of the entire mintage at PCGS has yielded a total of just -10- PCGS perfect coins.

4. How many of the remaining 4,933 possible 2003 $100 Plat coins in the WORLD are scattered "one here and one there", as these coins have International appeal? Could they all be located to even try to submit for perfect 70? How many are mishandled by collectors around the world, happy to hold the Platinum Eagle in their hand, etc.?

What is interesting to me is that IMHO we have here in the case of the 2003 $100 Platinum Eagle a large enough sample (around 33% of entire mintage) to begin to potentially draw conclusions on roughly how many PCGS perfect coins may exist in the world of this coin. Of course, with the typical production levels of say millions of 1968-date proof sets, many folks simply suggest PCGS has not graded enough coins to draw any conclusions on the likely number of PR70's in existence of a particular coin when referring to the, say, 3,000 or 5,000 coins PCGS has graded thus far. On the other hand, a grading sample of roughly 1/3 of the entire mintage appears to me at least to be a potentially decent indicator of ROUGHLY how many perfect coins might exist out there.

Anyway, great job PCGS pulling together all this information and listing the Multi-holders separately in the Pop report - it really helps collectors and dealers analyze the estimated scarcity of the MS69 and MS70 coins.

Wondercoin

RegistryCoin

This is good news. Thanks for those who pushed for this info. to become accurate and public. It impacts greatly, the potential of certain years' production, and therefore the value(s). In the case of the latter years of plats, this is incredible information, as it proves the scarcity/rarity of the 70s.
Thanks for all the research done by forum/registry members, and to pcgs for "catching up" with the actual numbers.

dpoole

Mitch,

There obviously is such a thing as an early die specimen, and some of the 2003 Plat production is going to be better than others. My problem is what actrually constitutes the dividing line between the better 69s, and the 70s. Pricewise, it is the case that the dividing line--the designation by the PCGS grader and the verifier--is all-important, and that the difference in many of the actual coins is slight. So slight, one may say, that on another day the same coin designated a 70 would have ended in a 69 holder. As opposed to some grades in some series, can one really say of the Plats that one specimen is a 70 "all day long," and will almost always be a 70 no matter how many times it is submitted?

That's really my fear of going after modern 70s. It just would take much of a shift of standards and/or PCGS personnel to have specimens hoping back and forth across the 69/70 line, with significant impact on the prices.

I know this is an old discussion--but it is why I haven't been pursuing modern issues in 70s, and have been content with the 69s.

RegistryCoin

I believe there is somewhat of a rule, or practice, that resubmitting 69s for a shot at 70 will never work. So with a third of the coins graded, in the example, future individual submissions, and possible crack-out submissions, will also be met with the "less than one percent" challenge, to make it to a 70 holder. My opinion is that the 70s are real, the 69s are consistantly "not worthy" of a 70 holder, and the percentages of 70 coins made is even lower than expected, with relatively no chance of anymore bulk submissions. This is as "solid" a play as it gets in the 70 game, imho.

wondercoin

David: Your comments are noted (and well taken). However, isn't your concern the same concern MS Wash quarter collectors face when a 1934(d) quarter in MS67 is pop 0 for 15+ years and pop 3 just 6 months later? Or, Lincoln collectors face when the pop on the 1930(d) Lincoln cent in 67RD is pop 1 for 15 years+ and pop 6 just 60 days later? I frankly see no difference at all with your analysis vis a vis classic vs. modern coin top pops. Do you honestly believe those (9) 34(d) quarters and 30(d) Lincolns would grade MS67 every time through? And, by no means am I picking on my favorite series (Silver Wash quarters) or perhaps the most popular series (Lincoln Cents) - I am just using examples of series that David has personally pursued.

Wondercoin

dpoole

You're right of course, Mitch.

As I thought about why I feel different about the 69/70 difference, I guess it really does come down to whether I trust the "market" will find the difference as credible, and worthy of the price differential, over the long term as it seems to find the 66/67 differential in the Washington/Lincolns series. Perhaps for me, the 70's ("perfection") track record as a viable grade has yet to be established enough for me to be as confident.

This obviously has as much to do with emotion as anything else.

RegistryCoin

I have had the same "feelings" about the series where top coins, in the 66, 7, 8 range, are morphing to a 67, 8, 9 range.
This IS scary. The PO01's and the 70s, imho, provide "protection" from the mid-gem grade-flation concerns.

braddick

<< <i>I have had the same "feelings" about the series where top coins, in the 66, 7, 8 range, are morphing to a 67, 8, 9 range. This IS scary. The PO01's and the 70s, imho, provide "protection" from the mid-gem grade-flation concerns. >>

RegistryCoin

It is kinda wacky, but those who understand wack, can make coin...