When was the 1844 Seated Dime hoard dispersed?

Barry

In the ANR auction catalog that just arrived, under one of the 1844 "Orphan Annie" dimes listed, it's mentioned that prices are more reasonable now that the 600 coin hoard was dispersed. Last I heard, it didn't sell at auction (Heritage?) last year.

coinguy1

"This date was nicknamed "Little Orphan Annie" by Frank Ross of Kansas City, MO, who promoted this date as a rarity during the early 1930's. The purported rarity of this date has been attributed to the theft by Indians of $5,000 worth of 1844 Dimes on their way to California and to their destruction in the great Chicago fire. In reality, much of the "rarity" of this date can be attributed to a hoard of 612 pieces offered for sale by Heritage Numismatic Auctions as Lot 6543 in their Baltimore Signature Sale, July 26-28, 2003. The hoard contained grades ranging from Poor-1 to PCGS AU-53.

The finest Uncirculated examples graded by PCGS are 2 MS-65's.

The finest Proof example graded by PCGS is a single PR-65.

Sources and/or recommended reading:
"The PCGS Population Report, October 2003" by The Professional Coin Grading Service"

Catch22

I too thought the hoard did not meet reserve. In any event, an entirely overhyped and uninteresting date that commands way more attention than it deserves...at least in circulated grades. It simply isn't a rare date coin.

coinguy1

The article doesn't say the lot actually sold, so you guys might be right.

Barry

The lot did not sell w/Heritage. ANR says the hoard has been dispersed in their description of lot 568 in their upcoming auction.

airplanenut

<< <i>When was the 1844 Seated Dime hoard dispersed? >>

After 1844, I'd suppose

Coinosaurus

I'm not sure it's been dispersed, unless it was a private deal to one person. I kinda think we would have heard about it otherwise by now

DaveG

There's a brief article on the hoard in Issue 88 of The Gobrecht Journal by Mark Van Winkle. He doesn't say whether the lot sold.

Of the 612 coins, 101 were Poor-1 to AG-3, 118 were G-4 to G-6, 141 were VG-8 to VG-10, 117 were F-12 to F-15, 105 were VF-20 to VF-35, 25 were XF-40 to XF-45, and 5 were AU-50 to AU-53.

Van Winkle says all the coins were from the same die variety and that the lot contained some cleaned and damaged coins.

I do sort of wonder why all 612 coins were offered in one lot. I'd think that only a few of the largest dealers would bid on it, unless several dealers bid on it as a joint venture.

dorkkarl

there is more than 1 hoard of this coin, although that is the largest i'm aware of.

K S

roadrunner

The date has been widely recognized as overrated for decades. With well over 600 pieces known, this is COMMON by seated lib standards. Much cheaper dimes like 1840wd, 1842-0, 1847, 1848,
1849-0, 1850-0, 1851-0, 1852-0, 1853-0, 1858-0, etc. are tougher than the 1844 at about 10% of the money. This is just a short list.
The 1844 is priced on it's low mintage and "story." But an 1858-0 dime is at least 2x as rare and you can pick one up for $25.

The 1844 may get the prize of the most overpriced seated coin.
There are many seated dates among the various denominations with 250-500 pieces known in all grades, where the pricing is pretty low. 1858-0 and 59-0 quarters fall into this group for example.

roadrunner

OldUncleUhUh

Has anyone ever noticed how easy it is to accept accolades, but how horrible it is to swallow humble pie in public?"To err is human..." but to sacrifice the truth and accuracy for sake of a catalogue deadline is far from divine. I'm the culprit here, and believe it or not I do know about Frank Ross and the hoard that may or may not have been "sold" by Heritage. Anyway, if you read the description and go to the last word of the fifth sentence and substitute "why" for "where," (we all know the who-what-where-when about Annie, but to the best of my knowledge no one knows for certain the "why") then go to the seventh sentence and substitutue "offered" for "dispersed," why, the problem's fixed!All kidding aside, it is my duty to promote the truth accurately and, in this instance I failed to do so, even knowing better, which makes it even worse to me! On the other hand, I won't be losing any sleep over it, as it's done and I like to move on quickly. Other than that apparent gaffe, how was the rest of the dime section? The very next time I catalogue an Annie, I'll not only promote the truth and solid facts, but I'll mention the fact that I was called to task by the message boards for my sloppy failure on the lot in question!See ya', gang, back to work!

Barry

I wasn't implying an ANR error by my post. There's a LOT that goes on in numismatics that people don't bother to inform me about I presumed somebody bought the hoard (as dumb as that might be) outside of the Heritage auction and just wanted to find out the details.

I think it's a great catalog. There are plenty of mouth-watering dimes listed!

BTW, would you mind identifying yourself? Frank V.?

morgannut2

Oh my gosh a forthcoming straight shooting dealer!! Please say away from the currupting influence of Sleeze-Bay!

OldUncleUhUh

Lest I forget, Old Uncle Uh-Uh (my R&B deejay moniker at the ANA Summer Seminar) is my handle, Frank Van Valen. You can see by the amount of posts I've made that I'm a lurker and a reader, but not much of a poster. Also, I didn't feel any rancor or anger when my gaffe was pointed out, just wanted folks to know that I care about the quality I produce at ANR, and when I slip up I'm glad that there are solid collectors out there who notice...it's actually quite rewarding to know that my writing actually gets read! (Is that the proper way to end a sentence?)

JoyofCollecting

Frank:

Fantastic dime section! I've read the section several times and have enjoyed it every time.

By the way...I just assumed the dispersed meant that it was apparent the hoard has been made public and detailed....rather than just rumored. Whether it sold or not (I understood not), we now know the extent and grades of the "California" hoard.

Thanks again for a great dime section.