The official NGC 1.0, 2.0, and 2.1 Slab Population Census!! 197 2.1's listed!
coinkid855
Posts: 5,012 ✭✭✭
I was talking to Kurt (Kove) today at the FUN show, and we decided a census was much needed for the elusive 2.1 slabs. I will start us off at 10, which is the number that I have. So add yours here! Also, please post your slab numbers for research proposes! 
I just created a Google Doc with all of the known 2.1's in it. Please continue to post your finds here and I will add them to the census spreadsheet! As you can see, Drunner and I already have matched on two different submission numbers!
I added a section at the top of the census that shows the percentage of the coins that have either green or gold stickers!
Here's a 2.1. Note that the logo on the reverse is INSIDE the slab.
Again, Note that the logo on the reverse is on the INSIDE.
-Paul
Edited to add some cool facts from Oreville!
I asked to founder of NGC, John A., why NGC moved the logo from the inside to the outside of the plastic holder. I showed hime examples of both types of holders.
He replied that in 1987, after NGC went from the black to the all white holder, the plastic molding machine company who made the slabs for NGC complained that they were having great difficulty stamping the NGC logo onto the white core. Rejected white cores far outnumbered the acceptables ones. An emergency call to JA was made by the plastic molding company as to the serious problem. The company suggested moving the logo to the outside. John thought about it and said "why not?"
He admitted that in the early days, things were being done by the "seat of their pants" and they were still learing.
John Albanese remembered that the black slabs were in production for exactly 2 weeks (5 business days per week) @average 300 slabs per day. That meant 3000 black slabs wer made until they went to the all white slab with the gold foil logo on the inside of the outer shell. That lasted another 1 1/2 weeks or 7 days until the gold foil was moved to the outside of the slab. The production had increased to 500 slabs average per day with the gold foil on the inside of the slab times 7 days or 3500 slabs.
I just created a Google Doc with all of the known 2.1's in it. Please continue to post your finds here and I will add them to the census spreadsheet! As you can see, Drunner and I already have matched on two different submission numbers!
I added a section at the top of the census that shows the percentage of the coins that have either green or gold stickers!
Here's a 2.1. Note that the logo on the reverse is INSIDE the slab.
Again, Note that the logo on the reverse is on the INSIDE.
-Paul
Edited to add some cool facts from Oreville!
I asked to founder of NGC, John A., why NGC moved the logo from the inside to the outside of the plastic holder. I showed hime examples of both types of holders.
He replied that in 1987, after NGC went from the black to the all white holder, the plastic molding machine company who made the slabs for NGC complained that they were having great difficulty stamping the NGC logo onto the white core. Rejected white cores far outnumbered the acceptables ones. An emergency call to JA was made by the plastic molding company as to the serious problem. The company suggested moving the logo to the outside. John thought about it and said "why not?"
He admitted that in the early days, things were being done by the "seat of their pants" and they were still learing.
John Albanese remembered that the black slabs were in production for exactly 2 weeks (5 business days per week) @average 300 slabs per day. That meant 3000 black slabs wer made until they went to the all white slab with the gold foil logo on the inside of the outer shell. That lasted another 1 1/2 weeks or 7 days until the gold foil was moved to the outside of the slab. The production had increased to 500 slabs average per day with the gold foil on the inside of the slab times 7 days or 3500 slabs.
5
Comments
10c. 1941-D MS65FB 121818-019
50c. 1955 MS65 FL 121903-009
$1 1885-O MS64 121064-015
$1 1898-O MS64 123883-015
More as they come . .
Drunner
(Doily Slut)
Thanks!
peacockcoins
<< <i>Please show a photo of this slab so we know exactly what to look for.
Thanks! >>
I will update the first post later tonight with an image, and I will image my slabs once I'm home from school in a few weeks.
Here's my 9:
1882 S Morgan $1 NGC MS63 124203-002
1883 O Morgan $1 NGC MS64 123883-007
1924 P Huguenot NGC MS61 124618-011
1925 P Lexington NGC MS63 123500-008
1925 P Stone Mountain NGC MS65 127136-003
1935 S Texas NGC MS64 121596-007
1937 P Antietam NGC MS65 124874-004
1936 P Mercury 10c NGC MS65 121818-004
1949 P BTW Commem NGC MS64 121725-002
-Paul
Thanks Paul for the indepth discussion
on what to look for. Very interesting.
Having the 2.1 encapsulated by yet
another plastic tomb is just TOO funny !!!
~~~~~~~~~~~~
Coin collecting is not a hobby, it's an obsession !
New Barber Purchases
<< <i>Please show a photo of this slab so we know exactly what to look for.
Thanks! >>
-Paul
<< <i>50c. 1955 MS65 FL 121903-009 >>
You may want to recheck this one Drunner. NGC wasn't designating Franklins as FBL at this time.
Franklin-Lover's Forum
-old gold stenciled pre-1990 style holder (no bar, no hologram code fatty holder)
-lettering on the inside of the holder rather than the more commonly seen on the outside.
Franklin-Lover's Forum
<< <i>I have a feeling you're going to have some NGC 2s posted here eventually where someone doesn't know the difference. >>
Agreed. Hopefully they'll post pictures or contact me if they are unsure. It is very easy to tell the difference if they read the description!
-Paul
-Paul
<< <i>I have a feeling you're going to have some NGC 2s posted here eventually where someone doesn't know the difference. >>
I'm not so sure they are any less rare, honestly. Since I've been looking I've actually seen more 2.1 than 2.0. Go figure!
3CS 1859 MS 63 #121090-008
5C 1879 PF 64 #121871-005
5C 1909 MS 64 #121871-010
10C 1889 PF 64 #124636-005
10C 1944S MS 65 #121375-010
50C 1928 MS 64 #121323-005 Hawaiian
50C 1951 MS 64 #121725-009 BTW
S$1 1923D MS 64 #123434-010
S$1 1926D MS 64 #124166-021
Here's a nice one of mine (2.1 with internal embossing, no shadows)
<< <i>Finally got mine out of the vault:
3CS 1859 MS 63 #121090-008
5C 1879 PF 64 #121871-005
5C 1909 MS 64 #121871-010
10C 1889 PF 64 #124636-005
10C 1944S MS 65 #121375-010
50C 1928 MS 64 #121323-005 Hawaiian
50C 1951 MS 64 #121725-009 BTW
S$1 1923D MS 64 #123434-010
S$1 1926D MS 64 #124166-021
Here's a nice one of mine (2.1 with internal embossing, no shadows)
Thanks Kurt! I updated the excel file! A lot of your coins match with the ones Julian has on eBay right now, and your BTW matches with mine!
-Paul
-Paul
-Paul
<< <i>I am in Atlanta all week Paul so I will provide my numbers once I return. Did you win that 1884-O that I told you about on ebay? It sold for above my $225 bid and I wasnt paying higher for an MS63 morgan lol >>
Naw, I honestly didn't want to spend THAT much. Plus I didn't want to screw you over if you bid higher! Sounds good!
-Paul
Oh . . . it CAC-d Green.
My 1941-D Merc (2.1) and 1944-S Merc (2.0) went CAC-Gold.
Drunner
Doily Slut and 2.0/2.1 Poser
<< <i>I'll check the 1955 Frankie when it comes back from CAC tomorrow or Saturday. I show it in my records as FL, not sure why I would have put that if it wasn't, but my curiousity is aroused!!
Oh . . . it CAC-d Green.
My 1941-D Merc (2.1) and 1944-S Merc (2.0) went CAC-Gold.
Drunner
Doily Slut and 2.0/2.1 Poser >>
Well Drunner, I was way ahead of ya. Already had your coins in the census as CAC'd Green and Gold! I used CAC's search feature earlier today to look up the coins.
-Paul
<< <i>5 out of the 49 (so far) have gold CAC stickers, I wasn't expecting that. >>
Me either. And the ones that aren't stickered just haven't been sent in yet!
-Paul
I will submit a partial listing when I have a chance.
The logo on the pictured WLH is embossed on the outside, so is this a 2.2?
I have a 1924 Peace dollar in a 4 holder, somewhere. Plain white insert not sure if the logo is in or outside the holder.
I would say that the PCGS doily and the NGC 2.0 pops are about the same.
<< <i>I just picked this one up .
I just checked out the auction. This is a 2.0, not a 2.1, and I will have to remove it from the census. Please make sure to check that the embossed logo is on the INSIDE of the slab. There shouldn't be a shadow underneath it.
Here's another 2.1 of mine:
-Paul
-Paul
the more expensive ones were auctioned at Teletrade as I recall.
This grouping of NGC 2.1 was purchased by me from John Merz
1884 3CN PF-65 #121417-001 all are CAC green except where noted below:
1871 H10 MS-63 #121732-008
1931-S 05c MS-65 #121758-002
1916-D 25C MS-63 #121781-012
1943 50C MS-64 #121781-016
1925-D 2.5 MS-63 #124711-022
1927 $20 MS-61 #121196-005
1865 3CN MS-62 #121871-001 gold
1889 G$1 MS-61 #122401-025 gold
1942 10C PF-65 #124087-010
GREEN CAC STICKERED NGC 2.1 not purchased by me
1859 3CS MS-63 #121090-008
1909 05c MS-64 #121871-010
1916 05c PF-65 #121417-004
1869 10c PF-65 #121781-004
1889 10c PF-64 #124636-005
1906-S 10c MS-65 #121781-008
1920 25C MS-64 #121781-013
1908-S 50C MS-64 #121781-016
1882 T$1 PF-65 #121734-016
1904 S$1 PF-64 #121781-018
1928 H50c MS-64 #121323-005
GOLD CAC STICKERED NGC 2.1 not purchased by me
1879 05c PF-64 #121871-005
1896 10C MS-64 #121781-006
1906 10C PF-65 #121781-007
1906 $2.5 MS-63 #121855-011
I now recall that I did buy a few of them on TT as I was able to obtain the funds to buy some additional slabs later on.
It was too late for John to withdraw the lots from TT at that point even though there were no bids on them at that point.
Additional NGC 2.1 acquired over the years.
Additions posted 2/8/2012
1876 10c MS-65 #121870-025 green (already stickered from CRO)
1881-S S$1 MS-63 #124512-001 gold (already stickered purchased - private sale)
1884-O S$1 MS-63 #124464-004 gold (made sticker - looking up how acquired)
-Paul
I did not have unlimited funds and was focused on trying to obtain the least expensive NGC 2.1 slabs and not spend more than $1000 for each slab unless they were $20 double eagles (bullion related).
Some of these slabs were well over $2000 each and I tried to maximize buying as many different slabs as I could without running out of money. the trade dollar was very close to $10K and that was more money than the cost of all 25 of the slabs I bought from John Merz COMBINED.
Also once I had, purchased one commemorative or one type coin, I was satisfied type coin wise.
Additionally, John was starting to slow down, got very ill and communication became a problem between us. he thought I was not interested in any more of them when I was indeed interested in a few more of them. he gave me the TT information on the ones he was selling and I indeed buy a few more of them on TT, some at lower prices than I had offered him and others at higher prices.
I was not trying to buy them all up. My attitude was once I got to 20 of these slabs, I was satisfied. I think I ended up with around 30 possibly even 35 of them.
had I bought them all, then no one else would have any fun and I wouldn't be able to get coinkid to do all this wonderful charts he is doing!
Some of the 121781-0xx and 121871-0xx numbers are probably transposed and should be corrected. John and I had some difficulties in typing and proofreading them out.
I can double check them or anyone can double check them.
<< <i>Coinkid,
Some of the 121781-0xx and 121871-0xx numbers are probably transposed and should be corrected. John and I had some difficulties in typing and proofreading them out.
I can double check them or anyone can double check them. >>
I'll take a look, thanks!
-Paul
-Paul
<< <i>This sold on ebay yesterday for $279
Not a 2.1. Check out the back of the slab, and notice the embossed logo is on the OUTSIDE of the slab.
Thanks though!
-Paul
i've seen the google doc for the 2.1 but what about 2.0?
.
Cashback from Mr. Rebates
A lot of the "generations" are numbered that way and people are hesitant to rock the boat.
thanks for TTT this thread. i fergot boot it.
i'll go through the ones i have to see if any can be added.
.
<< <i>Something is unclear. Why are you calling the ones with the logo inside the the holder 2.1, if they came out first?? Shouldn't you call that 2.0, and the ones with the logo on the outside 2.1? >>
The numbering is based on the "standard" reference by Conder101. The challenge with creating a reference that sequentially numbers items in a chronological manner is when a new item is "discovered" and it is out of order. The new item must be added into numbering and unless the "author" is willing to renumber everything subsequent, the new item will remain "out of order."
See http://www.doubledimes.com for a free online reference for US twenty-cent pieces