Home PCGS Set Registry Forum

Our first $20,000+ mint state Franklins....

A 1954-S PCGS MS 67 FBL and 1951-P MS 67 FBL. We paid $20,000+ for each coin! That's a record for R & I.
While both are pop 1, more importantly, both are superb. The 1954-S is struck like a 1954-D. The 1951-P has toning that looks like it was applied by Michaelangelo - couldn't be prettier. Both are also 67's from a technical standpoint.


«1

Comments

  • TomBTomB Posts: 20,697 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Would you happen to have images? They sound gorgeous.
    Thomas Bush Numismatics & Numismatic Photography

    In honor of the memory of Cpl. Michael E. Thompson

    image
  • I've got a couple 1999 SBA's I'm willing to sell. How about $10,000.00 per coin?
  • Tom B -
    I have yet to be able to get good images of color coins. If anyone has a technique they care to share, please let me know!

    We did take a picture of the 1951-P. In terms of eye-appeal, it is much flashier than the 1954-S. The 1951-P is really amazing. In terms of the combination of eye-appeal, rarity, and quality, perhaps the neatest mint state Franklin I've handled.
  • Modman -
    $10,000 per coin for the SBA's? Is that firm, or are you taking counter offers?image
  • Rick,

    Getting attractive toning to show in scans or pictures is really difficult. Still, would love to see these. Have you posted pics to your website yet?

    Thanks,
    Keith
    Keith ™

  • Rick, what are you going to be asking for them?
  • Rick,

    You da man, REALLY! Those are strong prices indeed, you certainly stepped up to the plate.

    Best Regards,

    Mike De Falco
    DE FALCO NUMISMATIC CONSULTING
    Visit Our Website @ www.numisvision.com
    Specializing in DMPL Dollars, MONSTER toners and other Premium Quality U.S. Coins

    *** Visit Mike De Falco's NEW Coin Talk Blog! ***
  • Keith -

    Here are a couple images. Again, the coin is covered in beautiful, subtle iridescent accents of lavender, golden-olive, etc. over 100% of the obverse and reverse. This does not come through in the picture at all.

    Mike - The 1951-P is the real deal! It is the neatest mint state Franklin I have handled that has offered the best possible combination of eye-appeal, quality, and rarity for a mint state Franklin.

    image
  • Rick,

    That's an awesome coin. I can definitely see why you jumped at the opportunity to grab it.

    Keith
    Keith ™

  • Rick, I'm currently awaiting delivery of this 62-D in PCGS-65. I'm curious as to what your thoughts are, if any. You kind of have to tilt it to get the effect, but the colors are there.

    image
  • dbldie55dbldie55 Posts: 7,717 ✭✭✭✭✭
    While I have never been a big fan of toned coins, that is one nice coin. I have a feeling it looks even better in person than the scan.
    Collector and Researcher of Liberty Head Nickels. ANA LM-6053
  • WOW -
    If the coin looks at all like the picture - FANTASTIC - especially for a late date Franklin! Really rare. We haven't ruled out the option of having a small color section in the 2nd edition of the Franklin Guide. That coin could be a welcome inclusion. Is it going in your set, or is it for sale?image
  • oops - my reply was to tonelover on his fabulous 1962-D.
  • wondercoinwondercoin Posts: 16,649 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Hi guys. It's normally not Rick's policy to state the price he paid me for a coin? But, I thought of Rick when I got in the 1954(s) Franklin! It was his kind of coin. The 51(p) looks neat too!

    Wondercoin.
    Please visit my website at www.wondercoins.com and my ebay auctions under my user name www.wondercoin.com.
  • Tonelover -
    Did you do the photography? If so, do you have any secrets on photographing color coins you care to share?
  • Rick, it's not going to be for sale for quite a long time, I can promise that! And when it does, the source has first shot. But as far as pictures, I just use a scanner. The trick with certain coins such is to rest one edge of the slab on something else so there is a very slight angle. The light will reflect better. Works better on some coins than others. Believe it or not, the brightness, contrast, hue, or anything else was not adjusted in that scan. But straight on it almost looks brown.
  • Rick:

    Instead of using a scanner, use a digital camera with a marco attachment. Secondly set up a set of color balanced tunsten lamps at a 45 degree angle on each side of the coin. If you have shadows use a white piece of cardboard in front of the camera for select fill, but you shouldn't need it if the lights are at the correct angle. The lamp set up can be bought any any good camera store. They normally are called copy boards, they even have a stand to mount your camera on. Hopes this helps.

    CJMBUFFALO
    Collector of all proofs 1950 and up plus mint and proof Ikes.
  • Rick,

    The 1951-P is truly one awesome Franklin half-dollar. Killer flash, eye appeal AND color! You done good...

    Best Regards,

    Mike De Falco
    DE FALCO NUMISMATIC CONSULTING
    Visit Our Website @ www.numisvision.com
    Specializing in DMPL Dollars, MONSTER toners and other Premium Quality U.S. Coins

    *** Visit Mike De Falco's NEW Coin Talk Blog! ***
  • braddickbraddick Posts: 22,995 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Good looking enough to almost make me want to start collecting this series. Almost.

    peacockcoins

  • Well I guess there has to be someone to spoil the pot and let that be me, The coin has some great color and toning this is true, but for a 20.000 dollar coin the edeges should have no brown and that coins rims are brown, fading to the color shown for a pop one coin did PCGS do you a favor for that grade or is it honestly that nice?, and even if it were MS 66 is 67 price difference worth the price of plastic? Setting records of prices paid whos favor is it in? yours or the next seller? we would soon see.....
  • wondercoinwondercoin Posts: 16,649 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Matt: There have been at least (5) $20k+ Mint State Franklins already, not including the 53(s) selling 2x. I have personally handled (2) of the (5) coins. No question, the jumps are large between grades and the future success of these coins greatly hinges on PCGS' ability to consistently apply as strict a standard on future submission pieces. Of course, this is for every series, but, in my opinion, Franklins already start out being the most vulnerable, as the typical pop -1- Wash Quarter may command 1/2 the Franklin price, the typical pop 1 Roosevelt Dime may command around 1/5 the Franklin price, the typical Jefferson nickel (even with the rising prices) around 1/4 and the typical Lincoln Cent around 1/4-1/2. Even the typical pop -1- Mercury Dime from the 1930's or 40's may command just slightly more than 1/2 the Franklin price. I'm not saying Franklins' don't deserve every bit of their price, but perhaps this is why serious collectors are also now considering some of the previously ignored series mentioned above. Wondercoin.
    Please visit my website at www.wondercoins.com and my ebay auctions under my user name www.wondercoin.com.
  • Bcsican -

    I've only made one MS 67 FBL myself - that was a few years ago. The price was my cost. As I mentioned in a previous email, the scan does not do justice. If I had used some of the techniques suggested earlier, I probably would have gotten better results. There is no brown on the coin. 100% of the obverse & reverse is covered in a rainbow of iridescent colors.
  • Wondercoin -
    My recommendation to my clients buying high grade, high priced mint state Franklins is that they place a premium on eye-appeal of the coin. There aren't too many rarer date mint state Franklins that are both very high grade and exceptionally toned, or fully brilliant. There are a lot of Franklin color coin collectors out there who can probably offer their own personal experiences trying to hunt down beautifully toned high grade Franklins. Same with collectors looking for brilliant MS 66 FBL Franklins.

    Look at the 1951-D pop. in PCGS MS 66 FBL - 13 coins, none higher. But most of those are fairly ugly. We are considering offering our own pedigree, with our own label on the back, for exceptional, eye-appealing Franklins. It will give the collector some protection when it comes time to resell, if the pedigree we place on the coin is recognized by collectors for maintaining a very high standard of quality.

    Anyway, if a coin is really nice, when it comes time to sell, the pops. are often irrelevant. The truly superb pieces are the kinds of coins that often bring runaway prices in auctions.

    I disagree with you in the comparison with other series. If anything, I think there is far more potential for high grade coins turning up in the mint state quarters, dimes, nickels, and cents. As I wrote on an earlier topic, attractive high grade mint state Franklins are more difficult to find now than ever. In terms of true quality, the trend has been the opposite of what we may be seeing in some of the other denominations in mint state. The pool of really superb high grade mint state Franklins has now been heavily harvested. The big fish are still out there, but the "catches" are few and far between.

  • wondercoinwondercoin Posts: 16,649 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Rick: Using 1951 as a date, try locating a nice 1951(p) Lincoln in PCGS-MS67RD, or a 1951(p) Jefferson in MS67FS, or a dime in MS68 or a quarter in MS68! Each of these coins is "near impossible" to locate (I've tried finding that 51(p) Lincoln in 67RD for 4 years now and that pop -2- coin is the easiest coin of the 4 in my opinion!)

    PCGS has graded AT LEAST 31 Franklins thus far in MS67FBL. Compare that to -4- regular issue pop -1- Washington Quarters in MS68 so far (the coin I was using to compare relative pricing)! Interestingly, PCGS graded those -4- MS68 coins out of 57,000+ slabbed Washingtons (10/01 pop report). PCGS has slabbed just under 54,000 Franklins thus far in slabbing the 31 MS67FBL pieces. As you see, no issue at all concerning PCGS not seeing enough quarters-they have graded more than 3,000 extra quarters so far as compared to Franklins! Again, I am not suggesting Franklins are "overvalued". I was merely pointing out that if they are not, there are other series which might be worth taking a very careful look at! Wondercoin.
    Please visit my website at www.wondercoins.com and my ebay auctions under my user name www.wondercoin.com.
  • Mitch -
    I'm too busy trying to find an MS 68 FBL Franklin! Or an MS 67 FBL Franklin in brilliant condition. To date, none have been graded by PCGS, for the entire series.

    I never wrote that the coins in these other series were easy to find. I love 'em! I am only more cautious concerning any rarity estimates. When I started writing the first cameo book, I had been heavily involved in the series for 7-8 years, but I still did not feel entirely comfortable estimating the rarity of the various issues in CAM and DCAM. There were still a lot of unknowns. For that reason, the rarity estimates I gave in the book were intentionally on the high side. I did not want the collector in a position of buying a cameo, and paying good money for it, and then finding out years later it was much more common than I thought it might be. The book is now 10 years old. The new book will have new estimates genermally much lower than the original estimates, now that more is known.

    There is generally (please note that word!) a bigger pool of candidate-coins for these other denominations. The fact that a few thousand more Washington quarters have been submitted than Franklins is more a testimony of the larger pool of candidate coins for the Washington series than the fact that that pool has been more heavily harvested.

    To the contrary, the popularity of the mint state Washington quarter series is relatively recent compared to the Franklins. Submissions for that series are now coming in at a much higher rate to PCGS.

    JANUARY 2000 PCGS POP:

    Total # of MS Franklins graded: 48,605
    Total # of MS Washingtons graded: 31,392
    Total # of MS Franklins graded in MS 67(non-FBL & FBL): 36
    Total # of MS Washingtons graded in MS 67/68: 681/1

    OCTOBER 2001 PCGS POP:

    Total # of MS Franklins graded: 53,666
    Total # of MS Washingtons graded: 57,055
    Total # of MS Franklins graded in MS 67(non-FBL & FBL): 47
    Total # of MS Washingtons graded in MS 67/68: 1585/5







  • wondercoinwondercoin Posts: 16,649 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Rick: We are definately on the "same page".

    My simple point was that the "big time" coins in other "modern" series (e.g. those -4- regular issue silver MS68 quarters - the 5th being an SMS coin), cost only a fraction of the Franklin price for a similar pop -1- coin and all -4- MS68 quarters are tucked away in collections (actually -2- were recently robbed from the collector and everyone should be on the lookout for the 1935(p) and 1940(s) PCGS-MS68 quarters if offered the stolen property).

    Again, we agree that many 20th century series look very interesting these days! Wondercoin.
    Please visit my website at www.wondercoins.com and my ebay auctions under my user name www.wondercoin.com.
  • Of course, other things being equal (which usually means you can safely ignore the rest of the statement!), a $30K Franklin has a lot further to fall than a $2K quarter, too.

    I will say this about condition rarity -- generally speaking, it seems to me that the closer you have to get to "70" to get "rare", the scarier it becomes. That is, the more you are relying on minute differences to maintain "rarity", and which differences are only substantially rewarded in the marketplace if in a PCGS holder.

    On one extreme... if the finest example of some rare coin is AU58, then being in a PCGS holder has little effect on its market value other than providing authentication.

    On the other extreme... if the finest example of a modern commemorative is MS70, you can bet that its value will absolutely plummet outside of a PCGS holder.

    The fact that my favorite series (Ikes) has several dates where a lowly MS66 is the highest graded of course has nothing to do with my opinion. image Actually there are other dates within Ikes (1972-S MS69, the various PR70DCAM) where the same caution would strongly apply as well.
  • Supercoin -

    Of course, a $200,000 MS 65 1886-O has farther to fall than a $30k Franklin! But if its a great example, it may be a pretty good deal. Mike D. knows more about that.

    If I'm going to offer a Franklin for $30k, which I have yet to do on a mint state Franklin, it had better have some other outstanding qualities to recommend it other than the fact it is "highest grade"! As you note, as we go up the grading scale, the minute differences make the subjectivity factor greater and greater. For me, that's where the eye-appeal factor is critical. Collectors understand paying $30k for a rare date Franklin if it looks like a $30k coin. There aren't too many rare date mint state Franklins with that kind of eye-appeal, that clean.

    By the way, you got any MS 67 clad Ikes? Or a 1972-P MS 66? I need a few for a client.
  • Mitch -
    It will be interesting! I see two primary challenges:

    1. The grading services need to maintain their standards as consistently as humanly possible. Otherwise, its a problem for everyone, no matter if its Morgan dollars, mint state Statehood quarters, or mint state Lincolns.

    2. Dealers who specialize in a series need to be a watchdog for those "strays" that escape the eye of the grading service, and resist the temptation to make big profits on a coin that they believe in their heart of hearts may be overgraded. In those cases, the coin should be sent back to the grading service for review.

  • Can't help you on the Ikes, sorry. I'll probably have some extras about the same time you fill your customer want list for 1950 DCAM Franks. image
  • WingsruleWingsrule Posts: 2,977 ✭✭✭✭
    Supercoin - better get looking! Rick has had TWO of the in the last 8 onths (OK, one was Ultra Cam, not DCAM)

    Mark
  • Wingsrule -

    Especially the PCGS DCAM's! Given the slightly different DCAM/ULTRA standard between PCGS and NGC, PCGS DCAM 1950's are virtually non-existent.

    Supercoin - Those clad Ikes in PCGS MS 67 are very, very tough. I've looked at enough to appreciate their rarity. But I think a fairer comparison would be a clad Ike in MS 68. None have been graded yet. But it was 10 years before PCGS graded their first 1950 Franklin in GEM DCAM.image
  • Mitch -
    Referring to your position written on 12/22:
    "My simple point was that "big time" coins in other "modern" series (the 4 regular issue silver MS 68 quarters) cost only a fraction of the Franklin price for a similar pop 1 coin....."

    Is it your position that MS 68 Washington quarters are a comparatively good value at current levels? Or is it your position that "big time" high grade/low pop. silver Washington quarters are a fraction of the price of "big time" high grade/low pop. FBL Franklins?

    As long as we're comparing apples to oranges (mint state quarters to halves), I think the more critical comparison for collectors of these fruits would be the latter - "big time" high grade/low pop. coins between the two series, and should include a wide spectrum of issues between the two series.

    After all, for most collectors the real issue is "what does it take to assemble a top quality mint state Franklin set vs. a top quality mint state silver Washington quarter set? That is what most collectors try to do - particularly those collectors interested in getting into the Set Registry.

    Approaching the issue from that perspective, a good case can be made that "big time" high grade mint state Washington quarters are often far more pricey than "big time" high grade FBL Franklins.

    In your brief comparison, you omitted all the other coins in the Washington quarter series in high and highest grade, some of which are pop. 1's, many others which aren't, which are selling for premiums comparable to, and some well beyond, high grade mint state Franklins.

    A couple specific examples -
    1934-D MS 65, pop. 144, 25 higher. I believe this coin usually trades between $1500 and $2500 in MS 65. And there are 25 higher!
    1934-D MS 66, pop. 25. Last I checked, a nice example was $4,000-$7,000.
    1936-D MS 66, pop. 47 - the last quote I got was around $3,000.
    1936-D MS 67, pop. 5 - the last quote I got was over $12,000.

    There are many other issues in MS 67 in the silver Washington quarter series that are selling from the $3,000-$4,000 range well into five figures.
    As far as pop. 1 coins - What's the going rate for the 1932-P MS 67 Washington quarter?

    I haven't touched the big daddy 1932-D Washington quarter in MS 65. Forget the lone MS 66 ($89,000?). Every time an MS 65 1932-D is on the market the quote is $18,000-$28,000. Maybe even higher. This is for a pop. 35 coin! Unfortunately anyone interested in assembling a top mint state Washington quarter set needs a 1932-D MS 65.

    The closest comparison to the 1932-D in the mint state Franklin series would be the key date 1953-S in MS 65 FBL - a pop. 15 coin, with I believe only 1 higher (the PCGS report says 2, but this is likely the same coin).

    The last several 1953-S MS 65 FBL Franklins I've sold were all priced between $12,000 and $15,000. I'm unwilling to pay more at this time.

    I wrote in a previous topic that I considered the 1953-S Franklin MS 66 FBL a $30,000-$40,000 coin. I still do. But if we're going to compare key date to key date, perhaps I should be valuing the 1953-S considerably higher! If the 1932-D pop. 35 in MS 65 is a $20,000+ coin, perhaps the 1953-S pop. 15 in MS 65 FBL should be a $50,000+ coin!

    While exceptional high grade mint state Franklins are setting new price records, and I am paying more than ever for superb, rare examples, at the same time many of the rarer MS 65 FBL dates are now more affordable than a year ago. At current levels, I can sell a client the 10 RAREST MS 65 FBL Franklin dates in the series for less than the price of 1 1932-D Washington MS 65! In order of rarity, the MS 65 FBL Franklins are: 1. 1953-S, 2. 1961-P, 3. 1962-P, 4. 1963-P, 5. 1952-S, 6. 1953-P, 7. 1961-D, 8. 1962-D, 9. 1951-S, and 10. 1949-D.

    As long as we're comparing apples to oranges, why not bring in some other fruits? How about pears? I can't wait to read what Supercoin has to say! Mint state Ikes can look very good in this comparison!

    image
  • wondercoinwondercoin Posts: 16,649 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Rick: Well written piece. Just a couple comments:

    1. I am not dodging your question on whether Wash Quarters are a good buy right now, but I never give "investment advice" on any coins. For the vast majority of collectors I deal with, this is a hobby first; for the minority of folks who may be doing this purely as investment, good luck. If my track record on stock picks carries through to anything I say on coins, expect to "lose your shirt" image Now, having said that, have I dedicated a significant portion of my personal assets on the acquisition of very high grade Wash quarters over the past several years-yes. Did I buy the super high grade Franklins when they were presented to me on consignment a couple years ago (and nearly 2/3 of the coins are still available)-no I did not. Do I love both Franklins and Wash Quarters as series-yes. I grew up with both of them as a kid and still have many of my original coins from decades ago, most of which are junk as you would expect them to be. But, why have I personally ignored the well-reasoned strategies of diversification and, instead, placed the vast majority of my personal capital into Mint State Washington Quarters-I'll share with you some of my thoughts below (and you picking Franklins and me picking quarters can just as easily be explained as why I like blondes and you like redheads I'm sure).

    2. A keen understanding of the quarter series addresses questions such as why does a pop 35 quarter 1932(d) command $18,000 while another coin with a lower pop command far less. My research suggests that no more than 15-20 1932(d) Wash Quarters exist in gem PCGS-MS65 or better grade. It is quite likely that the true figure is much closer to 15 than 20 as well! A significant portion of this pop is simply "regrade" coins in search for another $89,000 MS66 jewel. Regrades, regrades and more regrades. I try to buy every 1932(d) gem quarter that comes my way (I passed on one earlier this year for a particular reason but still regret my decision). I bought another one yesterday in fact. When I meet a collector who wants to build a top Wash quarter set, there is no alternative to a 1932(d) quarter in MS65, so I end up selling a double. Hence, I'm back to only owning (2) MS65 coins today even with my gameplan to buy all I could for the past several years!!

    3. Take a coin like the 1937(s) quarter in PCGS-MS67. A pop 4 coin and the last sale was less than $10,000. Lowest mintage in the entire silver quarter series other than 1932(d,s). Yet, this pop 4 coin commands less than $12,500 at the moment. Now, compare this coin to say a pop 7 or so 1919(d) Walker in PCGS-MS65 (with one graded even higher)!!! A $100,000 coin in MS65 grade as far as I know!!!!! Did you suggest these early date quarters were priced strong already?? "Pound for pound" if the 1919(d) half was $100,000 as a pop 7/1, would anyone be too shocked that a pop 4 1937(s) quarter was really a $20,000 coin? Geez, you could own all (4) 1937(s) coins for less than the cost of a single 1919(d) half in MS65!!!

    4. Now, you brought up the 1932(p) quarter in PCGS-MS67 (a picture of which can be seen on my website). Now, a 1951(p) Franklin with a mintage of 17M compared to the first year specimen of a 1932(p) quarter with a mintage of around 5.4M. Which one would most collectors want, especially when the "pop 1" first year "d" mint 1932 quarter realized $89,000? Assuming you believe the 1951(p) Franklin should command $25,000, placing a price above that figure for the pop 1 1932(p) quarter shouldn't be too difficult-should it?

    5. Coins such as 1955(d), 1961(d) quarters, etc. simply fail to come nice enough to achieve PCGS-MS67 grade (at least the ones I've seen for the past 20 years)!! There is great rarity in the set yet to be discovered by most collectors-I like that. You offer $10,000 for a 1950 Proof Franklin in PCGS-PR65DCAM (where the undergrade is likely worth around half of the 65DCAM grade). Yet, a 1961(d) quarter in MS66 is worth only a couple hundred dollars, yet-I would pay $10,000 in 1/02 (30 day offer to give everyone a chance to submit their coins) for the first person to deliver to me a pop 1 1961(d) quarter (not a mechanical error of course) in PCGS-MS67 grade!!! This coin books at just a few dollars in gem grade but I doubt seriously if anyone PM's me next month to claim my $10,000 for that first slabbed 1961(d) quarter in PCGS-MS67!!

    Conclusion: The MS Wash Quarter market I believe is young and most "old-time" dealers haven't a clue (you excluded) concerning the "sleeper" rarities in the set. If someone were to find my $10,000 prize, I wouldn't be surprised to hear it came from a dealer's 2x2 where the collector paid $5!! This opportunity for collectors, as Rick mentions, has already dried up in Franklins, as collectors need to "drill for oil 1000 miles into the ocean" to land a great Franklin deal these days. These, among other reasons, are why I personally love the mS Wash Quarter series. Wondercoin.




    Please visit my website at www.wondercoins.com and my ebay auctions under my user name www.wondercoin.com.
  • Great discussion.
    I like your example of having to drill 1000 miles deep for a killer (untapped, ungraded) raw GEM++ Franklin. That's true.
    Yet, there are those stunning Washingtons still out there in Dealer stock- just waiting for the astute collector to buy and make.

    Excellent points.

    I'm looking for 1961-D (PCGS potential) MS67's tomorrow!
  • Mitch -
    This has the potential to go on forever. I'm short on time today. Got lots of work to do (like taking care of clients). I'll give the shortest answers possible to your lengthy responses.

    1. You dodged the question almost entirely, whether you meant to or not. I was primarily addressing your statement "My simple point was that "big time" coins in other "modern" series (the 4 regular issue silver MS 68 quarters) cost only a fraction of the Franklin price for a similar pop. 1 coin......"

    My question was - "Is it your position that MS 68 Washington quarters are a comparatively good value at current levels? Or is it your position that "big time" high grade/low pop. silver Washington quarters are a fraction of the price of "big time" high grade/low pop.
    FBL Franklins?"

    My response addressed that last point, that if it was the latter, the Washington quarter mint state series is loaded with issues in high grade of comparable or possibly even lesser rarity than Franklin FBL issues that are quite expensive compared to those Franklins.

    2. I don't care how much research one does, there is NO WAY to scientifically verify there are only 15-20 1932-D Washington quarters in existence in MS 65. I've studied 1950-1970 cameo proofs intensively since 1981. Worked with many other dealers on the same mission. I'm not about to tell my clients there are only x number of DCAM (pick the date) Franklins or Lincoln cents in existence. And I would stack my research in this series against anyone's, in any series. The next book will give population estimates, as did the first, but they will still be cautious. I prefer to estimate on the high side rather than the low, so the collector does not end up buying a coin that turns out to be less rare than originally thought.

    Half the fun of numismatics is treasure hunting. THERE ARE ALWAYS SURPRISES! And there are certainly more major surprises on average in mint state hoard discoveries than in proof hoard discoveries.

    3. More apples to oranges comparisons. That's fine. It makes for an interesting debate. But my point was really not about this issue.

    4. Again - I was simply pointing out that, rarity for rarity in terms of pops., there are Washington quarters every bit as pricey, many even more so, than mint state Franklins!

    5. I will repeat that the $10,000 offer for a 1950 Franklin PR65DCAM was a SIGHT UNSEEN offer. If an example came along in PR65DCAM that was equal in contrast to the example that recently graded PR66DCAM, or to the PR64DCAM I recently handled, I would pay considerably more than $10,000.

    6. My drilling for oil analogy focused specifically on 1950-1967 cameo proof coins. There was no mention of mint state Franklins. I can still find nice high grade mint state Franklins, although not as easily as several years ago. Finding these opportunities certainly hasn't dried up for collectors! There may be collectors reading this who will concur. And - there are still finds in 1950-1967 cameo proofs. I just bought a stunning high grade 1951 Jefferson nickel with ultimate cameo contrast from a collector. New coin!

    The rest of this apples and oranges debate is endless. In the end, its "fruitless". While you claim not to give investment advice, you did broach the topic when you stated that "big time" coins in other modern series (Washington quarters?) cost only a fraction of the Franklin price for a similar pop 1 coin......." There is a very subtle suggestion there, wouldn't you admit?

    I do the same thing.


    image
  • wondercoinwondercoin Posts: 16,649 ✭✭✭✭✭
    "I don't care how much research one does, there is NO WAY to scientifically verify there are only 15-20 1932-D Washington quarters in existence in MS 65"

    Rick: Sure there is. Simply count the regrade inserts that were not returned to PCGS!! A very knowledgeable dealer (who you told me you like doing business with as well) told me, for example, of that one 1932(d) quarter that went in for regrade 5 times for the MS66 grade with tags not being returned. If I elect to rely on this dealer because I know he has no upside doing anything other than telling me the truth, is this "scientific" enough for you? Remember, I said 15-20 PCGS coins in existence in my opinion, not all coins. WE ARE TALKING HERE ABOUT PCGS COINS, AS THAT IS THE COIN YOU MENTIONED WITH YOUR #35. Of course, I have no clue how many still exist in original rolls, raw collections, etc. But, 79 years later, I am less concerned.

    I spent a page briefly discussing why I have personally bought so many silver Wash quarters. I guess it goes without saying that I addressed your questions on whether I like "big-time, low pop" Washington Quarters better than Franklins. But, to be perfectly clear, yes, I would take (2) pop 1 silver MS68 Wash Quarters any day to (1) pop 1 MS67FBL Franklin of equal relative rarity. But, after I covered the cost of (2) MS67FBL Franklins, I'd run out of purchasing options, BECAUSE I WOULD HAVE EXHAUSTED THE ENTIRE SUPPLY OF MS68 WASH QUARTERS IN EXISTENCE!! image Wondercoin.

    Please visit my website at www.wondercoins.com and my ebay auctions under my user name www.wondercoin.com.
  • Mitch
    Yes -
    You can verify how many 1932-D's exist that have already been graded by PCGS. The more important question is, "How many more might exist?"

    Doesn't matter if its 79 years later or 129 years later. There are always surprises in mint state coins when it comes to hoards.

    I like PCGS MS 68 Washington quarters also!

    But my primary point still goes back to #1. I'm not going to rewrite it again! (I don't know how to cut and paste.)

    image
  • Mitch and Rick:

    OK you big timers. I've been thinking about a serious reply, but am still working on it. So for now let me just ask how you both get 79 years from 1932 to 2001??

    Greg
  • Currently I use a Natural Light Lightbulb luminating the area where the coin is located. For a toned coin, I would use a white background. THe digital camera I use is a Nikon Cool Pix 995, it is a little pricey, but well worth it. Some more avvice. If you are taking pictures of DCAM coins, try black and white film. approx 90% of the time with the correct light, they look even better than color pics due to the fact that if there is a blemish on the coin it will show up a little better with black and white film. This Nikon 995 camera also takes pics in Black and white.
    Matt Allman
  • allmancoins -

    Thank you for the tips. I believe we are using the same camera! We will be experimenting with all the various lighting combinations for the color coins. Thanks again for your suggestions. Rick
  • GilbertGilbert Posts: 1,533 ✭✭✭
    I really like the toning on the '51(P), but, and I imagine it must just be me since I don't see any other such comments, but I would expect on a MS67FBL '51(P) that the split(s) in the sideburn and lines in the bell should be "razor" sharp. Yes, it's just a scanned image but everything else looks to be resonably clear in the image.

    It doesn't seem to meet the technical grade in my eyes, but don't expect to be buying any $20k or better coins anytime soon. That is what has me so frustrated with the grading services today. I truly hope that the supposed poll and inquiry the PNG is trying to head up can address THOSE kinds of issues, in addition to pointing out so-called services with very little track record or downright misrepresented track records.

    Lastly, and Mitch, please don't take offense as I mean no harm, and maybe this is what is expected or accepted in this forum, but besides the obvious, what positive(s) could I glean from this thread by you piping in as the source for these coins, or a least the '51(P). Should RT have given you the glory, or should you have allowed him to disclose that info at his discretion if he so chose? I want to be sure I understand the motivations as well as the "material" in the posts.
    Gilbert
  • wondercoinwondercoin Posts: 16,649 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Gilbert: And, also don't take this personally, but I didn't get a whole lot out of your thread. So, I guess we are even. Wondercoin.
    Please visit my website at www.wondercoins.com and my ebay auctions under my user name www.wondercoin.com.
  • Gilbert -

    You make some excellent points. When a dealer or collector acquires a significant coin from me, and chooses to publicize it, I wouldn't invite myself into the story, unless they gave me their permission. Its particularly interesting because the bulk of the payment did not go to wondercoin, but to the actual owner of the coin.
    The 1951-P was not from wondercoin. Of the two coins, the 1951-P is the real blockbuster. Again, the scan offers a poor representation of the coin. The strike is actually quite good. Excellent bell lines. I don't know if you have a copy of "The Complete Guide To Franklin Half Dollars", but I do address the striking characteristics of mint state and proof Franklins, that touches on your observations. To summarize, from 1948 through 1959, one master die was used by the mint to create all the working dies. With each passing year, the definition of the master die would exhibit some deterioration. As a result, the best struck Franklins of 1951 will not have the same design detail as the best struck Franklins of 1948.

    Hope that helps. Feel free to call or email if you have any further questions. Rick
  • wondercoinwondercoin Posts: 16,649 ✭✭✭✭✭
    "You make some excellent points. When a dealer or collector acquires a significant coin from me, and chooses to publicize it, I wouldn't invite myself into the story, unless they gave me their permission. Its particularly interesting because the bulk of the payment did not go to wondercoin, but to the actual owner of the coin."

    Rick: My consignor did not give you permission to publicize the sales price of that coin. In fact, he was not pleased when he discovered you did. Life goes on. Next time we will be crystal clear on who can say what about a private transaction we are engaged in. Wondercoin.
    Please visit my website at www.wondercoins.com and my ebay auctions under my user name www.wondercoin.com.
  • dbldie55dbldie55 Posts: 7,717 ✭✭✭✭✭
    I did not think the price was given, just a range. Was this transaction specifically said to be kept private? I would think a dealer can say what he pays for something unless somewhere upfront it is specifically agreed that it will not be brought out. I do not see where the name of the coins owner was given, so I do not see how they would be given any negative press with this.

    How many people here know who owned this coin? I am sure some of the Franklin people, but who else?

    Collector and Researcher of Liberty Head Nickels. ANA LM-6053
  • My view is that if you buy a coin, dealer or collector, you can say whatever you want, excepting an agreement to the contrary. The purchase gives you all rights to anything connected with it including the name of the seller, again excepting an agreement to the contrary. Is it smart to say all that? Maybe, maybe not, that's a decision for the buyer or for those who agree to something else. Note, that Rick never said if he sold the coin, for how much, or to who.

    Greg
  • Wondercoins, you sound like a real earnest person- God bless you for it- but no one is fooling anyone here. When it comes to Modern 1999 Lincoln Memorials in MS68 or clad State quarters in MS67, no one beats you.
    But, when it comes to REAL coins- coins like the Franklin series, it's probably best not to argue with the author of books on the series and a gentleman who has dealt with Franklins for the past 15+ years. Agreed?
    Trust me, when I need to update my date set of Sacawageas I'll turn to you.
    When I'm looking for that illusive PR67CAM 1959 Franklin, I'll turn to the expert.
  • Modman,

    Be nice. Mitch is a good source to help you find any rare coin from the 20th century. He doesn't limit himself to only coins that are circulating.

    Keith
    Keith ™

Sign In or Register to comment.