1909-O Barber Quarter- Rarer than the 01-S?

TahoeDale

This quarter is almost impossible to find nice. It is one of 3 66's at PCGS, with none finer. I suggest it is rarer and harder to locate in either Gem or AU versus the 01-S or 13-S.

What do you think?

jcping

Definitely, 09-O is very rare in any grade above EF.

tradedollarnut

PCGS has certified only 42 1909-O's for all grades combined! That compares to 298 1901-S's and 308 1913-S's. I'm certainly not going to argue with you, Dale.

Now, Mark - those totals you just provided are highly misleading [as I'm sure you know]. After all, what is the financial incentive to submit a circulated 1909-O?

tradedollarnut

Yes, but:

Jan 2003 pops

1901-S 60 circ coins submitted - now 80?
1913-S 100 circ coins submitted - now 120?
1909-O 4 circ coins submitted - now 5?

So by including the circ coins you skewed the numbers drastically. But I don't disagree with the point you are actually making - that many rare dates aren't necessarily rare in higher grades and that many so called less rare dates are rare in high grade. But....you are a naughty boy!

MFH

Before even trying to assemble my set of Barber quarters, I had Liz Coggan look for this coin for me in AU 55-58. It took her many months, as I remember, and she came up with a raw coin which had great eye appeal. Once the set was 99% complete, I sent all the raw coins into ANACS for grading. The 09-O came back as UNC details, net AU 50, Cleaned. Liz told me she didn't think the coin would holder at PCGS, and she was right. I have yet to see another AU 55 - 58 certified coin available. As far as I know, there is only one certified by PCGS in AU 58, and its in another Registry Set.

I read David Lawrence's Guide Book to Barber Quarters, and he mentioned that this coin is virtually impossible to locate in choice AU, and that he assembled quite a few sets of AU 55-58 Barber quarters and had to resort to filling the 09-O slot with a mint state coin.

roadrunner

I was looking for gem Barbers in the late 70's to mid-80's and the 1909-0 in gem came up for sale more often than the 1901-s did.
In fact the 98-0, 99-S, 99-0, 00-0, and 01-0 appeared less often than the 1909-0 and those were the ones I was after. The 1901-s appeared about as often as these other dates. But 20 years later, the frequency of appearance can certainly change, esp. since price drives availabilty. If a coin is underpriced, it will not show up as regularly on the market until it is fairly priced.

I don't feel that the 1909-O in gem is rarer than the 1901-s as numerous attempts have been made to upgrade 1901-s quarters.
Much more so than 1909-0. I know of one 1901-s that represents more than one coin at the 66 to 67 level. And it may be also a 68 today to boot. When each point is worth another $50-100K or more, you can bet attempts will be made.

But I'll be the first to admit that the difference in rarity of the other dates vs. the 1901-s is not that great in gem UNC. And the price differential between them is somewhat absurd.

roadrunner

bushmaster8

That is one sweet looking 09-0!

I got an ANACs AU50 for a song a couple years ago. Someone put it on ebay, and remarkably, it did not reach the reserve. But I was the high bidder and the guy emailed me that I could take it for my bid. I don't remember off the top of my head but I think it was either $275 or $375. When I got the coin I was elated as it is totally original with pretty toning. Talk about a great deal.

MFH

Bushmaster8: Nice pick up. I paid MS 60+ money for mine. I was fortunate to find one.

DrPete

Check out the 09-O quarter in the 2005 Heritage Platinum night FUN auction, from Hugon.

MFH

TTT

for my Hawaiian friend

USCGCraig

Mike,

You put thoughts of trying to complete the barber Quarter set in my head. That is a bad idea. Early commems are what I am telling myself now. Maybe the Barber Dimes in lower AU but not the quarters.

MFH

Craig,

Dimes are good and so are the V Nickels...but the quarters are my all time favorite due to the toners that are around. Of all my Barber sets, its the quarters which are the most spectacular.

Looks like I'll be adding something very special very soon. Images to follow once I have the coin in hand.

Casey

Mike, I'm on pins and needles! What did you get?

MFH

Soon...once the coin's in hand...I'll post the image.

TahoeDale

Mike,

You are right on about the numbers of toned Barbers in the quarters. I recently viewed both my halves and quarters and the quarters won easily- about 75% are toned originals. Only about half of the 50 centers are toned.

And yet, the pricing of the quarters are still lagging, except for the 3 keys, and a few special 67's.

MFH

Dale,

When are you going to have Superior image your quarter set ? They were nice enough to image the halves for you last year.

Or, are you planning on having PCGS do it for you on their True-View imaging service ?

Because of the one show-stopper, the 01-S, not many collectors venture into the quarter series; that I feel is a main reason the prices are lagging.

MFH

Although I posted this image in the US Coin Forums, I forgot that I mentioned that I'd post it here:

MFH

I never thought I'd be able to locate a nice 1909-O quarter, I now find myself with three of them.

If anyone is interested in my NGC 63 - from the February, 2006 B& M sale - I'd be happy to forward images.

Let my know your thoughts via a PM.

Thanks !!

Mike

Edited to add image link to the NGC 63:

roadrunner

Over the years I've run into a number of the "O" mints (1998-1909)
and didn't really want to buy them all. I still like the 98-0, and 00-0
the best. Frankly, there aren't all that many collectors to sop up all the MS pieces out there. Nice circs and superb gem uncs is probably where demand is the strongest.

Whether the 01-s or 09-0 is rarer is moot. The fact tha 75% of the seated quarter dates that preceded them are rarer than both (and often less pricey), is very interesting.

roadrunner

morgannut2

<< <i>PCGS has certified only 42 1909-O's for all grades combined! That compares to 298 1901-S's and 308 1913-S's. I'm certainly not going to argue with you, Dale.

Now, Mark - those totals you just provided are highly misleading [as I'm sure you know]. After all, what is the financial incentive to submit a circulated 1909-O? >>

---
-------------------
-------------------
All I'm sure of is TDN (knowing parly his taste--in winged creatures, and some coins. too)----I'd be astonished if a gouup of frieds; even own a hoard of say 10---MS key dates or eveb 20 VG;s+--- Now on the TDN later post:

(i agree mostly) --He could know a true MS69. Because he'd robbed by PCGS and it would be holderd MS67!!! (OK, it's TDN--maybe a "Cam" 68 was thrown in) ---- or in so MR. Dana Pt. money bags can bid more for his :client!!!!!. JUST IMHO>

QBert

QBert

The 1901-s is one of the most ridiculously priced coins out there. When you look at the pop reports, it certainly does not look anything out of the oridinary as compared to many other rare dates, but the price is much higher. Ridiculously nuch higher it seems. At least in the cirulated grades.

DrPete

QBert,

There's a real paradox about the 01-S quarter and the number graded. It is a rare coin and is worth a lot. Therefore, counterfeits exist and most coins extant get certified, even in the lower grades such as AG and G. Most other barber quarters are not worth very much in lower grades and the cost of getting one graded by PCGS costs more than the coin is worth, the coins are easy to grade, and counterfeits are not really a problem.

However, if one merely looks at the pop reports without knowing the background info as presented above, it looks like the 01-S is common. It is definitely not and I would not buy one that was not certified by PCGS, NGC, or ANACS.

Hopefully this is useful to you and you're not really pulling everyone's leg here.

MFH

Dale informed me that there's a 1901-S in the upcoming Heritage FUN Sale. Nice MS 65.
Still, I'd rather have an AU 55-58.

Alot of the MS POP's are misqued, due to resubmissions. The POP's of the lower circ's are
so high due to forgeries ( what Peter discussed ) and I also wouldn't consider buying a 1901-S
without it being certified by any of the top TPG's.

As my signiture line states...I'm still looking:

ARCO

I think the 09-O is overlooked because it is condition scarce in AU, but not so much in lower grades or in mint state. While a great coin find in VF or XF and even in lower MS grades, its overall population of coins is still too great to warrant the across the grade comparisons to the 01-S. Its MS numbers aren't all that high, and in AU it just might be the most difficult date of the twentieth century for regular issue dates, so if one is found, you have a true scarcity. I remember seeing a really nice MS62 on a coin web site and wondering if I should buy it just to wear it down to AU58. I passed, but I wish I would have bought it even as a mint state coin.

What about the unrrecognized 1898-S quarter in MS?

TahoeDale

You are right on about the 1898-S Barber quarter, being almost impossible to find in MS.

Only 2 at auction by Heritage in the last 2 years--7/05 and 1/05.

Before that, there were several NGC 65's and 66's sold in 2000 and 2001, but none since 2001.

Evidence of the difficulty is shown by the fact that Sunnywood has yet to find a Gem for his No. 1 set

DrPete

I have not tried putting together a higher grade set of barber quarters, but I know that the 97-S, 98-S, and 09-O are very difficult to find in grades above g or vg. These dates are easier to find in the barber halves, an unusual situation, particularly in mint state grades.

roadrunner

I'd bet that people are hoarding these dates based on the pops.
Why sell them now when the CDN monthly has them on the low side? Same is true for many seated better dates. I saw the same thing happen in the 1970's for underpriced seated coins...they were being hoarded and pulled off the market until price guides could catch up. When the published prices of 1909-O's finally catches up, specimens will show up to market. That's one reason why so many 1901-s's (and SLQ 1916's) are out there now.

roadrunner

bushmaster8

<< <i>I'd bet that people are hoarding these dates based on the pops.
Why sell them now when the CDN monthly has them on the low side? ... When the published prices of 1909-O's finally catches up, specimens will show up to market. roadrunner >>



Possibly, but the BCC's club survey supports the idea that they are just not out there.

Anyway, I will sell my gorgeously toned ANACS 1909-O AU55 to whomever is the first to wave $3K under my nose.

roadrunner

I recall talking to a leading dealer around 1992-93 and him having picked up a 1909-0 quarter in slabbed 64 for type coin money. At the time worth around $1200. That's how low better dates got at the last market bottom. He offered it to me at around $1400 and I passed because there was nowhere to go at the time. I still like the middle O's better (1898-04).

The LSCC club surveys show a compacting of better dates because club members tend to buy those and not commons. The data is at best skewed. And many members do not report for fear of hurting their position (hoards they may have).

roadrunner

Sunnywood

I think there is no question that the three traditionally noted keys to the set: 1896-S, 1901-S and 1913-S were typically harder to locate in all grades, particularly circulated grades, for many decades. Due to supply and demand, these three were and are accorded the highest values in all grades. As most collectors assemble albums with circulated specimens, the notoriety accorded these three dates was well deserved. However, collectors of circulated coins also know that there are many other very tough dates in the BQ series.

The values of the three keys in all grades definitely causes all sorts of skewing effects. First, many more examples have been submitted for certification in circulated grades than is the case for non-keys. Second, many have been cracked and resubmitted for potential financial gain, particularly in the MS grades. Third, by now, even higher MS pieces are more likely to have been submitted - don't think that there aren't stilll plenty of UNCERTIFIED uncirculated coins out there in the world. But the valuable keys are much more likely to have surfaced by now.

However, in support of Dale's argument (as he makes the case for a higher valuation of his coin ), let's point out that in MANY series, there are dates that are much rarer in gem (relative to other dates in the series) than they are in lower grades. Thus a set of all MS65 coins may have more, and different, keys than a set of XF/AU coins, or even a set of MS63 coins.

The David Lawrence book on the series ranked the 1909-O ninth in rarity for all mint state grades. Surprisingly, the 1913-S was ranked 21st, while the other two keys 1901-S and 1896-S were 1st and 3rd respectively. Thus the '13-S is less rare in MS (relative to other dates) than it is in lower grades. What date was ranked number two? 1898-S ... which gets my vote for "most underappreciated" date in the series.

The analysis by David Lawrence was based on the certified MS populations at NGC and PCGS. If you focus on MS63 and up, or MS65 and up, you will get different rankings. If you also adjust the three big keys by some correction factor (for resubmissions, and for the fact that they are most likely overall to have been certified), then again you get different rankings.

While I don't necessarily think that a 1909-O in MS65 or MS66 should have a valuation comparable to the three keys, I do believe that many dates in the series are undervalued, or at least underappreciated for their rarity. In gem, the most notable dates I can mention are 1895-O, 1896-O, 1898-S, 1909-O and 1911-D.

In any case, I think Dale's 1909-O PCGS MS66 is a beautiful coin that would be a highlight in any gem set of Barber quarters.

Best,
Sunnywood

roadrunner

While I don't necessarily think that a 1909-O in MS65 or MS66 should have a valuation comparable to the three keys, I do believe that many dates in the series are undervalued, or at least underappreciated for their rarity. In gem, the most notable dates I can mention are 1895-O, 1896-O, 1898-S, 1909-O and 1911-D.

I believe that there are very few points in time when surveys and data sources don't have large biases. I did my surveys in the early
1980's when very few cared about the difference between say a 1907-s vs an 1898-s quarter. David Hall published his own survey of experience around 1984 as I recall. We agreed on some and differed on others. I for one felt the 1907-D was more underrated than the 10-d or 11-d. The 1898-s was not quite as tough as the 1899-s in that period. The 1907-s also stuck out as a sleeper. And 95-0, 96-0, 09-0 did show up with more regularity than their prices suggested they should. I got tired of seeing gem 96-0 and 97-0 quarters for sale at large shows...yet the 98-0 to 01-0 coins showed up less. I'd imagine these price/availability curves flow and ebb from decade to decade. There is something to be said for the validity of surveys when less people care about different dates. It may actually be getting harder to figure out the rarity of some dates than the other way around. Just because someone writes a book doesn't automatically validate their survey data.

roadrunner

Sunnywood

RR, the nature of collecting is changing too. The Barbers, like seated coinage, have been for the most part type coins. Therefore nobody cared about dates, except for a small handful of elite collectors chasing high-end specimens. In Barbers, you also have a substantial number of collectors doing circulated sets in albums - moreso than for seated coinage, where there are too many stoppers even in circ grades. However, this is all changing, slowly but surely. First, certification, pop reports, online databases, and online auction archives have given us a wealth of data that were not available before. Yes, some of these data are skewed or corrupt, but nonetheless there is much more to work with than ever before. This tends to greatly increase interest in date collecting, as does the Registry phenomenon. Further, as the population increases, and the U.S. continues to be a mature wealthy economy, there are more collectors than ever with the resources to pursue more series. As prices are driven sky-high in some areas (early type and proof gold, for example), the demand will eventually filter down to less active areas such as dated Barber and seated coinage. It is a slow process, but I believe an inevitable one. The days when nobody cared about the difference between a 1907-S and an 1898-S quartere are pretty much over. In fact, as time goes by, coins are divided into ever finer distinctions. Once upon a time, mintmarks were ignored as being irrelevant, and proofs were consdered to be the same issues as their mint state counterparts. Thus you would only have needed one 1907-dated quarter, even if you were doing a "complete" set of Barbers. Now you would need 1907, 1907-D, 1907-O, 1907-S and 1907 proof quarters to have a "complete" set. In other areas, the interest in die varieties is a further extension of this phenomenon. Who would have believed what some VAMs can bring, for example.

Thus awareness of individual dates and varieties will conintue to increase across all series, and valuations will slowly adjust to reflect that fact. Registry sets will continue to breed greater numbers of date collectors, and our overall knowledge of relative rarities will continue to improve. Slowly but surely, rarer dated material will have its day in the sun.

Best,
Sunnywood

dogwood

It's been two years since the last post in this thread, and more importantly a full year* since the Heritage sale of the only 1909-o PCGS AU58 for over 4 grand, and I see that that lofty price has brought out of the woodwork a total of ZERO newly graded coins in AU. I think some of the conspiracy theories of sleeper hoards waiting for the prices to rise may have essentially been refuted by the evidence.

*my bookmark page to the auction is now putting the sale date as Dec. 08, but It sold in April 08 in my memory.

DrPete

I agree that the 09-O quarter is very elusive in most grades, and is very hard to find in nice AU grade.

illini420

I love the 1909-O quarter. Just saw a PCGS VF20 go for almost $500 on eBay recently!!! Still can't believe the AU58 went for $4k a few months ago. Glad I was able to find and buy my PCGS MS64 (which I love!!) off the BST here.



The 1909-O MS66 once owned by Dale Friend and truviewed in Sunnywood's retired set is so amazing. If that coin ever comes up for sale again I'll just have to bid on it!!!


edited to add my pic

Gobrechts99Grapevine

<< Because of the one show-stopper, the 01-S, not many collectors venture into the quarter series. >>

Oh, they’re not that hard to find. I got this PCGS VF25 1901-s about 9-10 months ago.



<< Dale informed me that there's a 1901-S in the upcoming Heritage FUN Sale. Nice MS 65.
Still, I'd rather have an AU 55-58... >>

And who can blame you?

<< It's been two years since the last post in this thread, and more importantly a full year* since the Heritage sale of the only 1909-o PCGS AU58 for over 4 grand, and I see that lofty price has brought out of the woodwork a total of ZERO newly graded coins in AU. >>

Well, there is that other 01-s that I picked up 2 months ago. Similarly, it is the only 1901-s PCGS has graded AU58.



<< The 1901-s is one of the most ridiculously priced coins out there. >>

For a 1901-s in PCGS AU58, tack a zero on that 4 grand and you’re about right there. Just one extra zero.

For those curious numismatists interested in the "rest" of the story, click on Gobrecht's Raisinet Collection, then scroll down to the Owner's Comments for the Barber quarter.

speety

G99G,

I was just wondering where you were, i hadn't seen you post in a while (maybe i just missed them?) It was great to look over your set again!

coinkat

The 1909-O is very tough in high end circulated grades... under example of a coin being ignored by mintage figures instead of the focus on surviving population.

The 1909-O is just one example- there are dates within theis series and other series that have this issue

MFH

I wondered who bought the 01-S in 58 - and if you
only paid $40K for it - you ripped it - IMHO.

The Friend-Sunnywood 1909-O quarter is one
of the nicest available - and as Sunnywood's
collection was sold "en bloc" - I'd love the chance
of examining it in person some day.

Dogwood was one fortunate collector to have
located a raw coin last year and had it holdered
at PCGS with a 55 grade. Bushmaster was the other
collector who located an 09-O in 55 in an ANACS 55
holder and had it crossed at PCGS as a 55 [ this coin
now resides in "labelman87" collection ]

This past January, at the FUN show's BCCS's meeting,
another collector had just picked up another 1909-O
in AU 55 but in raw state for $750; we as a group all
sat there dumbfounded. Would the collector who displayed
that raw 1909-O at the BCCS please post the image - and -
if you got it certified - what grade was assigned ?

bushmaster8

A local dealer has an XF 1909-O I could probably get for ~$350. But it's white, heavily dipped and may only GENUINE. Would that be a fair deal??

Sunnywood

Hmmm it seems I never posted pics in this thread. Well, since it's a comparison of the 1909-O and the 1901-S, here are the two MS66's from my set. Although the set has been sold, and approximately ten of the coins have since been replaced by even better examples, most of the set remains intact, including these two coins. The '01-S looks much better in hand; the surfaces are very smooth and lustrous, and the original toning, while very typical of "S" mint silver coins of this vintage, is nonetheless quite attractive. The '09-O is TahoeDale's specimen of course, but this is a much better pic than the one he posted at the top of this thread.

bushmaster8

The EF 09-O I saw today appeared to have a DDR. Has that been reported?

MFH

Okay Gents, I stumbled accross Dennis West's 1909-O quarter on the BST early this morning.

Its imaged on the BST - so - fair warning - buy it soon - or you may not get another chance for

A LONG - LONG TIME !!! If I hadn't already had mine in MS 64 - I'd be all over this coin.

--------------------------------------------------------

Bushmaster8 - am unaware of a DDR on the 09-O - maybe "Strike Doubling" ??

--------------------------------------------------------

Sunnywood - Thanks for posting your images - both great coins.

illini420

<< <i>Okay Gents, I stumbled accross Dennis West's 1909-O quarter on the BST early this morning.

Its imaged on the BST - so - fair warning - buy it soon - or you may not get another chance for

A LONG - LONG TIME !!! If I hadn't already had mine in MS 64 - I'd be all over this coin. >>



I was thinking the same thing, if I hadn't already had an MS64... seems like someone else realized the rarity/value of the coin too as it sold on eBay Buy It Now extremely quickly!!!



<< <i>Sunnywood - Thanks for posting your images - both great coins. >>

dogwood

...and from what I understand the eBay buyer is taking it to Central States if it arrives in time. So it may still be available.

Still waiting for my current submission to come back and find out the fate of my other 09-o.

Beautiful coins guys. Wow.

roadrunner

It's been two years since the last post in this thread, and more importantly a full year* since the Heritage sale of the only 1909-o PCGS AU58 for over 4 grand, and I see that that lofty price has brought out of the woodwork a total of ZERO newly graded coins in AU. I think some of the conspiracy theories of sleeper hoards waiting for the prices to rise may have essentially been refuted by the evidence

It would seem that there is an arbitrage opportunity to purchase MS61-64 1909-0 quarters and turn them into pocket pieces to lower their grade/increase their value.

roadrunner