An analysis based on multiple mint sources from 1933-34 suggests that 34 were unaccounted for and that 12 remain "at large." The work will be published in 2010, after additional corroboration is collected.
The OP coin pictured looks like it has significant friction on the high points of the breast and leg.... THAT'S a 66? No wonder NGC slabs trade at lower levels...
The so called Farouk coin is not in a PCGS holder - they just came out and said they'd grade it a 65 if it were submitted. And if it's a 65, then no one can quibble about that one Langbord coin being a 66!
Once again you have made a very astute observation,TDN.
Does anyone know if the 66 had any tape,debris,or gunk removed from it prior to encapsulation?
“I believe in intuitions and inspirations. I sometimes feel that I am right. I do not know that I am. When two expeditions of scientists, financed by the Royal Academy, went forth to test my theory of relativity, I was convinced that their conclusions would tally with my hypothesis. I was not surprised when the eclipse of May 29, 1919, confirmed my intuitions. I would have been surprised if I had been wrong.”
“Then you trust more to your imagination than to your knowledge?”
“I am enough of the artist to draw freely upon my imagination. Imagination is more important than knowledge. Knowledge is limited. Imagination encircles the world.”
Albert Einstein- quoted in Saturday Evening Post interview (1929)
I wonder which grader or graders at NGC graded the ten double eagles; whether there was any peer review (or consensus grading) fo the grades assigned by the grader(s) and if the grades assigned by the grader(s) were, through peer review (or consensus grading) changed to the grades set forth on the slabs?
I bet the grader(s) who participated in the grading of the ten double eagles will be very pleased to be able to place his/her grading the the Langbord 1933 double eagles on his/her CV.
<< <i>I wonder which grader or graders at NGC graded the ten double eagles; whether there was any peer review (or consensus grading) fo the grades assigned by the grader(s) and if the grades assigned by the grader(s) were, through peer review (or consensus grading) changed to the grades set forth on the slabs?
I bet the grader(s) who participated in the grading of the ten double eagles will be very pleased to be able to place his/her grading the the Langbord 1933 double eagles on his/her CV. >>
I would have to believe that "management" would be involved with the grading of such rarities. It's a high profile situation with a lot of dollars and reputation at stake should a mistake be made.
If he used that one coin as a pocket piece I wonder what he keeps in his safe
Walker Proof Digital Album Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
I agree that "management" would be involved in grading the ten 1933 double eagles. Lots of people desire glory and fame. Associating oneself with these double eagles would shine the spotlight on you, no doubt.
Reputation would be at stake if a mistake were made.
However I do not know if dollars (direct dollars anyway, as opposed to indirect dollars from increased or decreased revenue from greater or lesser submissions) would be at stake if a mistake were made with respect to the assigned grade. In general one can not make a mistake (that would carry legal liability with it) with respect to an "opinion" about the grade of a coin, since an opinion is subjective. It is not a fact (which is objective).
That is surprising to me that they would take the time and effort to get them slabbed. I'm wondering if this process was started by NGC approaching the gov. with alterior motives but giving the reason for protection from accidental damage.
<< <i> If it was done without their knowledge or consent, that is quite presumptuous on the part of the government. >>
I noticed that there is a Smithsonian logo in the lower right corner of the holders. Another US Gov't presumption? >>
Where do you see a Smithsonian logo on the 1933 $20 holders?
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
Where do you see a Smithsonian logo on the 1933 $20 holders?
I couldn't find the logo either.I guess the people are just going to have to settle for "UNITED STATES OF AMERICA" that appears on each of these coins.
“I believe in intuitions and inspirations. I sometimes feel that I am right. I do not know that I am. When two expeditions of scientists, financed by the Royal Academy, went forth to test my theory of relativity, I was convinced that their conclusions would tally with my hypothesis. I was not surprised when the eclipse of May 29, 1919, confirmed my intuitions. I would have been surprised if I had been wrong.”
“Then you trust more to your imagination than to your knowledge?”
“I am enough of the artist to draw freely upon my imagination. Imagination is more important than knowledge. Knowledge is limited. Imagination encircles the world.”
Albert Einstein- quoted in Saturday Evening Post interview (1929)
"hope they did not get carried away by the passion of the moment and carve their initials into the coins...."
I agree.Initials woud be way uncool.
How would you feel about "property of" right before UNITED STATES OF AMERICA?"
“I believe in intuitions and inspirations. I sometimes feel that I am right. I do not know that I am. When two expeditions of scientists, financed by the Royal Academy, went forth to test my theory of relativity, I was convinced that their conclusions would tally with my hypothesis. I was not surprised when the eclipse of May 29, 1919, confirmed my intuitions. I would have been surprised if I had been wrong.”
“Then you trust more to your imagination than to your knowledge?”
“I am enough of the artist to draw freely upon my imagination. Imagination is more important than knowledge. Knowledge is limited. Imagination encircles the world.”
Albert Einstein- quoted in Saturday Evening Post interview (1929)
Encapsulating the coins was a wise move just on the preservation aspect.
I wonder how the owner of the PCGS MS65 feels knowing he has a coin tied for the 2nd finest known?? As a good faith gesture maybe the govt and Langfords give them the opportunity to trade for any of their 10.
I find it very interesting that this whole event took place with the key hobby people keeping completely secret until the news release today. Obviously, a few dozen people had to know the grading was going on. I'm sure we will all read the details of this "grading event" in Coin World and Numismatic News in the next couple of weeks. Hopefully Beth and David will ask all the questions that have been posed on this thread and get all the answers we want to hear about. JMHO. Steve
<< <i> If it was done without their knowledge or consent, that is quite presumptuous on the part of the government. >>
I noticed that there is a Smithsonian logo in the lower right corner of the holders. Another US Gov't presumption? >>
Where do you see a Smithsonian logo on the 1933 $20 holders? >>
On the lower right of the holder, there is a small translucent circle with the Smithsonian "sun" logo in it.
>>
I still don't see it. TD
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
<< <i>They seem to have been part of a much larger submission. I wonder what else was sent in with them. >>
Assuming that they did submit a bunch of stuff along with these, wouldn't you run them in consecutive order on one of the submission sheets?
TD
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
My '24 is a 68 now.So all I have to do is sell it for the 80K its listed at and.......
darn,I'd still be short 20K...
do you think one of the problem pieces for $80K would be a good buy?
“I believe in intuitions and inspirations. I sometimes feel that I am right. I do not know that I am. When two expeditions of scientists, financed by the Royal Academy, went forth to test my theory of relativity, I was convinced that their conclusions would tally with my hypothesis. I was not surprised when the eclipse of May 29, 1919, confirmed my intuitions. I would have been surprised if I had been wrong.”
“Then you trust more to your imagination than to your knowledge?”
“I am enough of the artist to draw freely upon my imagination. Imagination is more important than knowledge. Knowledge is limited. Imagination encircles the world.”
Albert Einstein- quoted in Saturday Evening Post interview (1929)
"No coin was found matching that certification number."
And I was just starting to settle down about the balloon boy incident....
Really,I'm surprised that the news about these coins being slabbed is out this early. Seems like a premature release of information to me.
Any matches found for the other numbers?
“I believe in intuitions and inspirations. I sometimes feel that I am right. I do not know that I am. When two expeditions of scientists, financed by the Royal Academy, went forth to test my theory of relativity, I was convinced that their conclusions would tally with my hypothesis. I was not surprised when the eclipse of May 29, 1919, confirmed my intuitions. I would have been surprised if I had been wrong.”
“Then you trust more to your imagination than to your knowledge?”
“I am enough of the artist to draw freely upon my imagination. Imagination is more important than knowledge. Knowledge is limited. Imagination encircles the world.”
Albert Einstein- quoted in Saturday Evening Post interview (1929)
<< <i>Guess I was wrong with my prediction about when the post count on this thread would break 100
Oh well. It will make it their eventually. >>
We are doing our best. >>
I'm hoping for a quick death since alot of folks here and abroad have little or no faith in their coin grading abilities. But then, again, this post may upset a few lingering believers.
Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
<< <i>This is completely preposterous on all counts.
I really wish I owned the Farouk-Fenton-Sotheby's/Stack's coin so that I could sue everyone !! >>
On what basis? The government made only the promise that would be the only coin monetized [whatever the heck that actually means since it's undefined anywhere] - so far I see none other monetized!
<< <i>This is completely preposterous on all counts.
I really wish I owned the Farouk-Fenton-Sotheby's/Stack's coin so that I could sue everyone !! >>
On what basis? The government made only the promise that would be the only coin monetized [whatever the heck that actually means since it's undefined anywhere] - so far I see none other monetized! >>
What a mess. I think basically the government made a commitment that they can't keep. Actionable? Who knows. In the end the attorneys are the only sure winners.
<< <i>This is completely preposterous on all counts.
I really wish I owned the Farouk-Fenton-Sotheby's/Stack's coin so that I could sue everyone !! >>
On what basis? The government made only the promise that would be the only coin monetized [whatever the heck that actually means since it's undefined anywhere] - so far I see none other monetized! >>
The Government previously made the argument that without monetization, the round objects are "mere chattel" and are not United States double eagle coins. They also made the statement that the ONE coin would be the only one legal to own. Yet the Government just paid NGC to certify the coins as 1933 U.S. $20 gold pieces ... clearly contradicting their earlier position that these would NOT be U.S. gold coins, but rather mere stamped round pieces of metal. They clearly induced bidders in the Sotheby's auction to value the coin based on the notion that no others would called 1933 double eagles, nor be allowed in the sphere of private ownership. I could definitely find grounds to sue everyone including NGC, which I would argue has no right to certify the coins as U.S. 1933 $20 based on the Government's earlier pronouncements. Trust me, if I owned the ONE coin, I would have some very smart lawyers constructing every argument imaginable. I would do it on principle, not to mention to preserve or recover the value of the ONE coin. I would already have sued in a court of equity to enjoin the Government from referring to the round pieces of metal as United States double eagles (which they did repeatedly as they displayed them around the country at coin shows).
OK I'm going to sleep, so no debating this ... anyway lawyers can ALWAYS construct arguments on both sides of any question, so no reason to bother arguing the other side, as we've heard it all by now !!
They also made the statement that the ONE coin would be the only one legal to own.
I don't remember this being in the catalog, but I do agree with you regarding the mere chattel assertion - they've definitely screwed the pooch on that one!
On the one hand, I see a MS-66 coin which does not really appeal to me. The high spots look shiny or dark or something. Terrible photo. Hides as much as it shows.
On the other hand...
And it chokes me up...
This is the LAST gold coin the United States made. The last one. Gold would never again be currency. No more gold coins. This gold coin was even struck when the economy was in a terrible state.
At the time of the Fenton settlement and thereafter up to and including the auction of the Fenton coin to the buyer who paid $7+ million for the coin, it was public knowledge (very well known in fact) that other 1933 double eagles were supsected to exist and that they could surface in the future.
Even if the government did make a representation (written, verbal or implied by conduct, implied by body language, implied by winks of the eye, implied by nods of the head, or implied by tea leaves) that the Fenton coin would be "the only one legal to own":
1. the government was foolish to make any such representation; and
2. the buyer of the Fenton coin was even more foolish to rely on such government representation in making his/her decision to bid on the coin and his/her decision on how much to bid.
It may come as a surprise to some people, but just because the government says something is true (or will be true) does not mean that it is so.
Government (local, state or federal) make mistakes and errors all of the time and sometimes are held liable for big bucks for the damages they cause to others from said mistakes.
People have rights that government must acknowledge, respect and not interfere with, including "property rights". The right to "private property" is one of the foundations of the USA and the high standard of living we enjoy.
This right to "private property" extends its protections not only to owners of property, but also to persons who are in possession of property (including, though some here on the forums do not like it, the Langbord family and its possession of the ten 1933 double eagles).
Bottom line, neither the government nor the Fenton buyer can say, with a straight face, that one or both of them could, in July 2002, legitimately believe that simply because the government represented that the Fenton coin would be "the only one legal to own" that it is true.
<< <i>The grade distribution of the ten coins is as follows: one example, which is believed to have been a pocket piece, grades NGC UNC Details, Improperly Cleaned >>
Unc details on a pocket piece? >>
That's what I was thinking as well. NGC knows full and well that the coin was never cleaned. Bastages. >>
Of course they know but they just can't let even one multiple coin submission through without at least one "improperly cleaned" coin in the batch.
<< <i>Even if the government loses, what's to force them to monetize the coins? >>
Were all previous Saints monetized? Anyone? >>
Absolutely, positively not. The Federal Reserve wasn't created until 1913 but Saints were minted earlier. Supposedly, monetization occurs when the coins are turned over to the FR for release into circulation, although to my knowledge this process is not described in any regulation or law.
<< <i>Seriously, what is the purpose of getting these coin slabbed?
And for SanctionII-- was any special permission needed by the court to have these coins slabbed, if ownership was in question? >>
It does seem strange the mint has been running around with these coins and now having them slabbed. I wonder if they sent the bill to the Langbords attorney? Looks like this is just another misstep on the mints part. Flanting the coins after failing to follow the rules.
Mark NGC registry V-Nickel proof #6!!!! working on proof shield nickels # 8 with a bullet!!!!
Has anyone thought that the government had these professionally graded with the idea to keep track of them?
Maybe the government will make a statement (if these are released) that ANY 1933 double eagle NOT in the "approved" NGC certified numbers will be subject to investigation and seizure.
That would put a damper on the ole crack out game! Do you think PCGS would offer to include the NGC label on the reverse of the PCGS label/slab under those restrictions for crossovers?
These, as you know, are museum holders. See the clear edge on the left and right side? See the little crescent grooves? They are for your finger-nails. You stick your finger-nail in there and literally 'pop' the holder open. As such these are not sealed, as such there is no grade guarantee. The coins were most-likely graded while still in US Government custody (and on their property) and then the holders and labels were sent back, most likely with someone to put them into the holders for them. I believe the numbering system here is also a special one and, as such, will not be a search-able feature on the NGC website. The numbering probably resumes any-time they do a special-order like this.
Because to Err is Human. I specialize in Errors, Minting, Counterfeit Detection & Grading. Computer-aided grading, counterfeit detection, recognition and imaging.
<< <i>This is completely preposterous on all counts.
I really wish I owned the Farouk-Fenton-Sotheby's/Stack's coin so that I could sue everyone !! >>
On what basis? The government made only the promise that would be the only coin monetized [whatever the heck that actually means since it's undefined anywhere] - so far I see none other monetized! >>
The Government previously made the argument that without monetization, the round objects are "mere chattel" and are not United States double eagle coins. They also made the statement that the ONE coin would be the only one legal to own. Yet the Government just paid NGC to certify the coins as 1933 U.S. $20 gold pieces ... clearly contradicting their earlier position that these would NOT be U.S. gold coins, but rather mere stamped round pieces of metal. They clearly induced bidders in the Sotheby's auction to value the coin based on the notion that no others would called 1933 double eagles, nor be allowed in the sphere of private ownership. I could definitely find grounds to sue everyone including NGC, which I would argue has no right to certify the coins as U.S. 1933 $20 based on the Government's earlier pronouncements. Trust me, if I owned the ONE coin, I would have some very smart lawyers constructing every argument imaginable. I would do it on principle, not to mention to preserve or recover the value of the ONE coin. I would already have sued in a court of equity to enjoin the Government from referring to the round pieces of metal as United States double eagles (which they did repeatedly as they displayed them around the country at coin shows).
OK I'm going to sleep, so no debating this ... anyway lawyers can ALWAYS construct arguments on both sides of any question, so no reason to bother arguing the other side, as we've heard it all by now !! >>
Sunnywood: You mentioned above that the Government paid to have these graded. Not excactly.... More like 'We the people' paid for it. Your tax dollars at work!
<< <i>Even if the government loses, what's to force them to monetize the coins? >>
Once they enter the market place, will anyone really care if they are monetized or not and wouldn't their entering the market place actually amount to de facto monetization?
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
Comments
RIP Mom- 1932-2012
Once again you have made a very astute observation,TDN.
Does anyone know if the 66 had any tape,debris,or gunk removed from it prior to encapsulation?
“I believe in intuitions and inspirations. I sometimes feel that I am right. I do not know that I am. When two expeditions of scientists, financed by the Royal Academy, went forth to test my theory of relativity, I was convinced that their conclusions would tally with my hypothesis. I was not surprised when the eclipse of May 29, 1919, confirmed my intuitions. I would have been surprised if I had been wrong.”
“Then you trust more to your imagination than to your knowledge?”
“I am enough of the artist to draw freely upon my imagination. Imagination is more important than knowledge. Knowledge is limited. Imagination encircles the world.”
Albert Einstein- quoted in Saturday Evening Post interview (1929)
I bet the grader(s) who participated in the grading of the ten double eagles will be very pleased to be able to place his/her grading the the Langbord 1933 double eagles on his/her CV.
<< <i>I wonder which grader or graders at NGC graded the ten double eagles; whether there was any peer review (or consensus grading) fo the grades assigned by the grader(s) and if the grades assigned by the grader(s) were, through peer review (or consensus grading) changed to the grades set forth on the slabs?
I bet the grader(s) who participated in the grading of the ten double eagles will be very pleased to be able to place his/her grading the the Langbord 1933 double eagles on his/her CV. >>
I would have to believe that "management" would be involved with the grading of such rarities.
It's a high profile situation with a lot of dollars and reputation at stake should a mistake be made.
<< <i>I hope they did not get carried away by the passion of the moment and carve their initials into the coins.... >>
That would make for one helluva Love Token!
Visit my son's caringbridge page @ Runner's Caringbridge Page
"To Give Anything Less than Your Best, Is to Sacrifice the Gift" - Steve Prefontaine
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
I agree that "management" would be involved in grading the ten 1933 double eagles. Lots of people desire glory and fame. Associating oneself with these double eagles would shine the spotlight on you, no doubt.
Reputation would be at stake if a mistake were made.
However I do not know if dollars (direct dollars anyway, as opposed to indirect dollars from increased or decreased revenue from greater or lesser submissions) would be at stake if a mistake were made with respect to the assigned grade. In general one can not make a mistake (that would carry legal liability with it) with respect to an "opinion" about the grade of a coin, since an opinion is subjective. It is not a fact (which is objective).
"Keep your malarkey filter in good operating order" -Walter Breen
I'm sure NGC did this pro bono.
<< <i>"NGC’s re-closeable museum holder"
wow I didnt know NGC had holders that were "re-closeable" >>
No kidding, I thought that was those ANACS holders
<< <i>
<< <i> If it was done without their knowledge or consent, that is quite presumptuous on the part of the government. >>
I noticed that there is a Smithsonian logo in the lower right corner of the holders. Another US Gov't presumption? >>
Where do you see a Smithsonian logo on the 1933 $20 holders?
I couldn't find the logo either.I guess the people are just going to have to settle for "UNITED STATES OF AMERICA" that appears on each of these coins.
“I believe in intuitions and inspirations. I sometimes feel that I am right. I do not know that I am. When two expeditions of scientists, financed by the Royal Academy, went forth to test my theory of relativity, I was convinced that their conclusions would tally with my hypothesis. I was not surprised when the eclipse of May 29, 1919, confirmed my intuitions. I would have been surprised if I had been wrong.”
“Then you trust more to your imagination than to your knowledge?”
“I am enough of the artist to draw freely upon my imagination. Imagination is more important than knowledge. Knowledge is limited. Imagination encircles the world.”
Albert Einstein- quoted in Saturday Evening Post interview (1929)
I agree.Initials woud be way uncool.
How would you feel about "property of" right before UNITED STATES OF AMERICA?"
“I believe in intuitions and inspirations. I sometimes feel that I am right. I do not know that I am. When two expeditions of scientists, financed by the Royal Academy, went forth to test my theory of relativity, I was convinced that their conclusions would tally with my hypothesis. I was not surprised when the eclipse of May 29, 1919, confirmed my intuitions. I would have been surprised if I had been wrong.”
“Then you trust more to your imagination than to your knowledge?”
“I am enough of the artist to draw freely upon my imagination. Imagination is more important than knowledge. Knowledge is limited. Imagination encircles the world.”
Albert Einstein- quoted in Saturday Evening Post interview (1929)
I wonder how the owner of the PCGS MS65 feels knowing he has a coin tied for the 2nd finest known?? As a good faith gesture maybe the govt and Langfords give them the opportunity to trade for any of their 10.
roadrunner
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i> If it was done without their knowledge or consent, that is quite presumptuous on the part of the government. >>
I noticed that there is a Smithsonian logo in the lower right corner of the holders. Another US Gov't presumption? >>
Where do you see a Smithsonian logo on the 1933 $20 holders? >>
On the lower right of the holder, there is a small translucent circle with the Smithsonian "sun" logo in it.
My Complete PROOF Lincoln Cent with Major Varieties(1909-2015)Set Registry
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i> If it was done without their knowledge or consent, that is quite presumptuous on the part of the government. >>
I noticed that there is a Smithsonian logo in the lower right corner of the holders. Another US Gov't presumption? >>
Where do you see a Smithsonian logo on the 1933 $20 holders? >>
On the lower right of the holder, there is a small translucent circle with the Smithsonian "sun" logo in it.
I still don't see it.
TD
<< <i>They seem to have been part of a much larger submission. I wonder what else was sent in with them. >>
Assuming that they did submit a bunch of stuff along with these, wouldn't you run them in consecutive order on one of the submission sheets?
TD
I would too.I'd be trying to flip it,though.
My '24 is a 68 now.So all I have to do is sell it for the 80K its listed at and.......
darn,I'd still be short 20K...
do you think one of the problem pieces for $80K would be a good buy?
“I believe in intuitions and inspirations. I sometimes feel that I am right. I do not know that I am. When two expeditions of scientists, financed by the Royal Academy, went forth to test my theory of relativity, I was convinced that their conclusions would tally with my hypothesis. I was not surprised when the eclipse of May 29, 1919, confirmed my intuitions. I would have been surprised if I had been wrong.”
“Then you trust more to your imagination than to your knowledge?”
“I am enough of the artist to draw freely upon my imagination. Imagination is more important than knowledge. Knowledge is limited. Imagination encircles the world.”
Albert Einstein- quoted in Saturday Evening Post interview (1929)
Oh well. It will make it their eventually.
coin cert does register at NGC->
No coin was found matching that certification number.
<< <i>that already is a picture of a fake slab
coin cert does register at NGC->
No coin was found matching that certification number. >>
My guess is it's because they were very recently graded.
<< <i>Guess I was wrong with my prediction about when the post count on this thread would break 100
Oh well. It will make it their eventually. >>
We are doing our best.
And I was just starting to settle down about the balloon boy incident....
Really,I'm surprised that the news about these coins being slabbed is out this early. Seems like a premature release of information to me.
Any matches found for the other numbers?
“I believe in intuitions and inspirations. I sometimes feel that I am right. I do not know that I am. When two expeditions of scientists, financed by the Royal Academy, went forth to test my theory of relativity, I was convinced that their conclusions would tally with my hypothesis. I was not surprised when the eclipse of May 29, 1919, confirmed my intuitions. I would have been surprised if I had been wrong.”
“Then you trust more to your imagination than to your knowledge?”
“I am enough of the artist to draw freely upon my imagination. Imagination is more important than knowledge. Knowledge is limited. Imagination encircles the world.”
Albert Einstein- quoted in Saturday Evening Post interview (1929)
<< <i>I still don't see it.
TD >>
I'll be damned -- someone photoshopped it out!!
I really wish I owned the Farouk-Fenton-Sotheby's/Stack's coin so that I could sue everyone !!
Sunnywood's Rainbow-Toned Morgans (Retired)
Sunnywood's Barber Quarters (Retired)
<< <i>
<< <i>Guess I was wrong with my prediction about when the post count on this thread would break 100
Oh well. It will make it their eventually. >>
We are doing our best.
I'm hoping for a quick death since alot of folks here and abroad have little or no faith in their coin grading abilities. But then, again, this post may upset a few lingering believers.
Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
My Jefferson Nickel Collection
<< <i>This is completely preposterous on all counts.
I really wish I owned the Farouk-Fenton-Sotheby's/Stack's coin so that I could sue everyone !! >>
On what basis? The government made only the promise that would be the only coin monetized [whatever the heck that actually means since it's undefined anywhere] - so far I see none other monetized!
<< <i>
<< <i>This is completely preposterous on all counts.
I really wish I owned the Farouk-Fenton-Sotheby's/Stack's coin so that I could sue everyone !! >>
On what basis? The government made only the promise that would be the only coin monetized [whatever the heck that actually means since it's undefined anywhere] - so far I see none other monetized! >>
What a mess. I think basically the government made a commitment that they can't keep. Actionable? Who knows. In the end the attorneys are the only sure winners.
<< <i>
<< <i>This is completely preposterous on all counts.
I really wish I owned the Farouk-Fenton-Sotheby's/Stack's coin so that I could sue everyone !! >>
On what basis? The government made only the promise that would be the only coin monetized [whatever the heck that actually means since it's undefined anywhere] - so far I see none other monetized! >>
The Government previously made the argument that without monetization, the round objects are "mere chattel" and are not United States double eagle coins. They also made the statement that the ONE coin would be the only one legal to own. Yet the Government just paid NGC to certify the coins as 1933 U.S. $20 gold pieces ... clearly contradicting their earlier position that these would NOT be U.S. gold coins, but rather mere stamped round pieces of metal. They clearly induced bidders in the Sotheby's auction to value the coin based on the notion that no others would called 1933 double eagles, nor be allowed in the sphere of private ownership. I could definitely find grounds to sue everyone including NGC, which I would argue has no right to certify the coins as U.S. 1933 $20 based on the Government's earlier pronouncements. Trust me, if I owned the ONE coin, I would have some very smart lawyers constructing every argument imaginable. I would do it on principle, not to mention to preserve or recover the value of the ONE coin. I would already have sued in a court of equity to enjoin the Government from referring to the round pieces of metal as United States double eagles (which they did repeatedly as they displayed them around the country at coin shows).
OK I'm going to sleep, so no debating this ... anyway lawyers can ALWAYS construct arguments on both sides of any question, so no reason to bother arguing the other side, as we've heard it all by now !!
Sunnywood's Rainbow-Toned Morgans (Retired)
Sunnywood's Barber Quarters (Retired)
I don't remember this being in the catalog, but I do agree with you regarding the mere chattel assertion - they've definitely screwed the pooch on that one!
Terrible photo. Hides as much as it shows.
On the other hand...
And it chokes me up...
This is the LAST gold coin the United States made. The last one. Gold would never again be currency.
No more gold coins.
This gold coin was even struck when the economy was in a terrible state.
Feelings of loss.
Tears welling up.
Remorse.
At the time of the Fenton settlement and thereafter up to and including the auction of the Fenton coin to the buyer who paid $7+ million for the coin, it was public knowledge (very well known in fact) that other 1933 double eagles were supsected to exist and that they could surface in the future.
Even if the government did make a representation (written, verbal or implied by conduct, implied by body language, implied by winks of the eye, implied by nods of the head, or implied by tea leaves) that the Fenton coin would be "the only one legal to own":
1. the government was foolish to make any such representation; and
2. the buyer of the Fenton coin was even more foolish to rely on such government representation in making his/her decision to bid on the coin and his/her decision on how much to bid.
It may come as a surprise to some people, but just because the government says something is true (or will be true) does not mean that it is so.
Government (local, state or federal) make mistakes and errors all of the time and sometimes are held liable for big bucks for the damages they cause to others from said mistakes.
People have rights that government must acknowledge, respect and not interfere with, including "property rights". The right to "private property" is one of the foundations of the USA and the high standard of living we enjoy.
This right to "private property" extends its protections not only to owners of property, but also to persons who are in possession of property (including, though some here on the forums do not like it, the Langbord family and its possession of the ten 1933 double eagles).
Bottom line, neither the government nor the Fenton buyer can say, with a straight face, that one or both of them could, in July 2002, legitimately believe that simply because the government represented that the Fenton coin would be "the only one legal to own" that it is true.
<< <i>
<< <i>From the article:
<< <i>The grade distribution of the ten coins is as follows: one example, which is believed to have been a pocket piece, grades NGC UNC Details, Improperly Cleaned >>
Unc details on a pocket piece?
That's what I was thinking as well. NGC knows full and well that the coin was never cleaned. Bastages. >>
Of course they know but they just can't let even one multiple coin submission through without at least one "improperly cleaned" coin in the batch.
<< <i>Even if the government loses, what's to force them to monetize the coins?
Were all previous Saints monetized? Anyone?
<< <i>
<< <i>Even if the government loses, what's to force them to monetize the coins?
Were all previous Saints monetized? Anyone? >>
Absolutely, positively not. The Federal Reserve wasn't created until 1913 but Saints were minted earlier. Supposedly, monetization occurs when the coins are turned over to the FR for release into circulation, although to my knowledge this process is not described in any regulation or law.
<< <i>Seriously, what is the purpose of getting these coin slabbed?
And for SanctionII-- was any special permission needed by the court to have these coins slabbed, if ownership was in question? >>
It does seem strange the mint has been running around with these coins and now having them slabbed. I wonder if they sent the bill to the Langbords attorney? Looks like this is just another misstep on the mints part. Flanting the coins after failing to follow the rules.
NGC registry V-Nickel proof #6!!!!
working on proof shield nickels # 8 with a bullet!!!!
RIP "BEAR"
what a waste IMHO i would have liked to see em in PCGS holders....
Maybe the government will make a statement (if these are released) that ANY 1933 double eagle NOT in the "approved" NGC certified numbers will be subject to investigation and seizure.
That would put a damper on the ole crack out game! Do you think PCGS would offer to include the NGC label on the reverse of the PCGS label/slab under those restrictions for crossovers?
Just a thought, now let the discussions continue.
These, as you know, are museum holders. See the clear edge on the left and right side? See the little crescent grooves?
They are for your finger-nails. You stick your finger-nail in there and literally 'pop' the holder open.
As such these are not sealed, as such there is no grade guarantee. The coins were most-likely graded while still in US Government custody (and on their property) and then the holders and labels were sent back, most likely with someone to put them into the holders for them.
I believe the numbering system here is also a special one and, as such, will not be a search-able feature on the NGC website. The numbering probably resumes any-time they do a special-order like this.
I specialize in Errors, Minting, Counterfeit Detection & Grading.
Computer-aided grading, counterfeit detection, recognition and imaging.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>This is completely preposterous on all counts.
I really wish I owned the Farouk-Fenton-Sotheby's/Stack's coin so that I could sue everyone !! >>
On what basis? The government made only the promise that would be the only coin monetized [whatever the heck that actually means since it's undefined anywhere] - so far I see none other monetized! >>
The Government previously made the argument that without monetization, the round objects are "mere chattel" and are not United States double eagle coins. They also made the statement that the ONE coin would be the only one legal to own. Yet the Government just paid NGC to certify the coins as 1933 U.S. $20 gold pieces ... clearly contradicting their earlier position that these would NOT be U.S. gold coins, but rather mere stamped round pieces of metal. They clearly induced bidders in the Sotheby's auction to value the coin based on the notion that no others would called 1933 double eagles, nor be allowed in the sphere of private ownership. I could definitely find grounds to sue everyone including NGC, which I would argue has no right to certify the coins as U.S. 1933 $20 based on the Government's earlier pronouncements. Trust me, if I owned the ONE coin, I would have some very smart lawyers constructing every argument imaginable. I would do it on principle, not to mention to preserve or recover the value of the ONE coin. I would already have sued in a court of equity to enjoin the Government from referring to the round pieces of metal as United States double eagles (which they did repeatedly as they displayed them around the country at coin shows).
OK I'm going to sleep, so no debating this ... anyway lawyers can ALWAYS construct arguments on both sides of any question, so no reason to bother arguing the other side, as we've heard it all by now !! >>
Sunnywood: You mentioned above that the Government paid to have these graded. Not excactly.... More like 'We the people' paid for it. Your tax dollars at work!
<< <i>Even if the government loses, what's to force them to monetize the coins?
Once they enter the market place, will anyone really care if they are monetized or not and wouldn't their entering the market place actually amount to de facto monetization?
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
I would write out my check today but......