Heritage Seated Quarter Sold at FUN
Catbert
Posts: 7,657 ✭✭✭✭✭
Colorful Quarter
Just to satisfy my curiosity, I would like your opinion (limited as it can be from evaluating from photos) of this seated quarter that sold at auction at FUN. This was a coin I considered because I liked the toning and it appeared to have decent luster, but the price got too high (the color premium must have been a significant factor). I don't think I've ever purchased a coin without seeing it in hand first, and I'd like to hear your critique of this coin for my education!
Thanks.
Just to satisfy my curiosity, I would like your opinion (limited as it can be from evaluating from photos) of this seated quarter that sold at auction at FUN. This was a coin I considered because I liked the toning and it appeared to have decent luster, but the price got too high (the color premium must have been a significant factor). I don't think I've ever purchased a coin without seeing it in hand first, and I'd like to hear your critique of this coin for my education!
Thanks.
Seated Half Society member #38
"Got a flaming heart, can't get my fill"
"Got a flaming heart, can't get my fill"
0
Comments
"Got a flaming heart, can't get my fill"
Must be the toning was the cause for the $$$.
bob
<< <i>Was there anything in particular that made the coin "not so nice?" >>
Very common date.
Still, at >$900, it's already priced at 63+ money. A very high price imo and you were wise to let it go. Maybe somebody needed
this coin as the "ultimate" AU58 for their everyman set. You won't find very many, if any nicer AU58's. Of course you could find a
presentable and 10X rarer AU58 1857-0 with obvious wear for the same money. I don't think the toning was the reason this coin
sold for 3X to 4X catalog price. Maybe half of the reason though. There are much better values out there. If the same coin walked
into your local B&M raw you could probably buy it for $200-$300. But here's a case where the little guys are bidding strong against each
other for the best AU58's out there. Not too much different that the big boyz fighting over MS65 Chain cents and 1829 $5 proof64 gold.
It's definitely a strict AU58 coin but this is typically what gets market graded as 61-63. The obv high pt rubbing is fairly subtle. The luster
is basically full though fairly scuffed up in the fields. If this were a bust half no question it would be in a MS holder. The seated quarters
get held to a higher standard though. The rev toning is neutral to ugly and doesn't match the obv at all. May have been kept in an envelope
or face up to accelerate the obv toning. You'd expect more reverse color if it was envelope/album stored. Oddly, if this were a no rub MS63
holdered 1857, I don't think it would have realized much more than $700-$1200. The interest probably would have been much less. Go figure.
roadrunner
"Got a flaming heart, can't get my fill"
I paid $450 for mine in 63 not too long ago and I thought that was a tad high.
<< <i>That's a strong price for a very common date. Nice color but... a grand?
I paid $450 for mine in 63 not too long ago and I thought that was a tad high. >>
Unfortunately I did not have the opportunity to view this coin, as it was in the final session and not with the quarters in the main sale. Roadrunner already made some good points about the coin, but from the pics only I'd have to say that was strong money for a so-so coin. JMHO
There was a 1877 PL in N64 which I looked at, and ended up going for just shy of 2K w/ juice. I didn't care for the coin all that much, but I did like the reverse better than the obverse and the coin was CAC'd FWIW.
There was an outstanding 1858 again in an N holder graded 67 that was superb, both sides totally original and lovely.
The 1851 in PC64 CAC had a great reverse, but the obverse had far too many hits for me in that grade and as such I thought it at best a lower end 64, in spite of the date being fairly tough in the higher unc grades. The guys at CAC who know a lot more than I must have really liked the reverse.
The 1875 in an N67 holder was superb. It is the only one of that grade from either service that has the CAC sticker, but it didn't need it, the coin spoke for itself. Some crazy guy gave 8K w/juice for it
A common date 1861 in PC64 with no CAC brought about 1K w/juice. It was a really nice coin for the grade with original surfaces, and was much better in hand than the images.
Edited for grammar
In particular the 1859 MS66 and 1862 MS 66 halves. The 1846 TD 50c NGC MS66 sure likes like the MS65 I made back in early 1988 (unattributed back then
in the census as a TD). Paid around $4K for it as a raw 64+ out of a Stack's auction and sold it for about what I paid. The market stunk in early 1988.
It fetched over $25K last week. One of few MS seated coins in gem grade to have increased that much since 1989.
The '51-O in 65, the '65 in 66, did not sell, some pretty hefty reserves. The '59 had quite a bit of action on it, guess in this auction all it takes is a few guys locking horns. Apparently no one was enamored enough of the other two at those levels. The 10K reserve on the '59 was realistic at least, you know that consignor is smiling
I would buy that coin at about $150 (tops).
EAC 6024
This coin was AU58 of course, but he couldn't bear to part with it. Finally he found a well struck 1857 25c in MS65 (he said he was having a big problem finding a well struck MS 1857 25c with pretty toning; it took him several years to find one that suited him). He reluctantly sold us his downgrade. Can't remember who bought it. I remember all this because that collector was at our FUN show table and said that his old coin was in the sale. He bid on it, but was not the underbidder.
What this thread opened my eyes to was the fact that there are maybe 25 different Seated Quarter dates that one can buy in MS64 for around $1000 or less. I never noticed. THAT is what is really remarkable to me.
Edited for typo.
Coin Rarities Online
<< <i>Its now found its way to ebay link with a slight markup
At $2,220.00 the seller might have lost a few of his rare marbles
Looks like he's using the HA scans too as his pics
<< <i>I believe we handled that coin at one time. >>
We did - here is the old Mark Goodman pic for those interested:
EAC 6024
"Got a flaming heart, can't get my fill"
I did not view the coin either. Unlike Roadrunner and JHDfla, I am reluctant to put forth opinions about a coin, even tentative views, based upon an analysis of pictures.
CRO: <<What this thread opened my eyes to was the fact that there are maybe 25 different Seated Quarter dates that one can buy in MS64 for around $1000 or less. I never noticed. THAT is what is really remarkable to me.>>
IMO, Liberty Seated Quarters are good values for collectors at current market prices, given their scarcity, importance, and attractiveness.
Assembling Sets of Silver Coins, part 2, Quarters
Classic Silver Quarters sold on Platinum Night
Auction Results for Quarters in Baltimore
<< <i>I would not pay $2200 for it. I like the keyword spamming with "CAC", too.
I think he's saying not CAC approved?? As in rejected from the Bean factory.
<< <i>
<< <i>I would not pay $2200 for it. I like the keyword spamming with "CAC", too.
I think he's saying not CAC approved?? As in rejected from the Bean factory. >>
The allegation is that the ebayer is using the term CAC to attract potential buyers who search on that term. My guess that the coin would receive a gold bean if submitted (that coin is not a true 58). Thus, I do not believe the coin has been submitted and rejected nor, again, do I think that is what the ebay seller is conveying by mentioning CAC.
"Got a flaming heart, can't get my fill"
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>I would not pay $2200 for it. I like the keyword spamming with "CAC", too.
I think he's saying not CAC approved?? As in rejected from the Bean factory. >>
The allegation is that the ebayer is using the term CAC to attract potential buyers who search on that term. My guess that the coin would receive a gold bean if submitted (that coin is not a true 58). Thus, I do not believe the coin has been submitted and rejected nor, again, do I think that is what the ebay seller is conveying by mentioning CAC. >>
It is interesting in that our take on the seller's use of CAC in this listing varies considerably. The coin was sold long enough ago from the FUN auction, two weeks, that it is possible that it could have already been to CAC and back. Of course, it also may never have been to CAC. However, to write CAC in the description serves not only to spam ebay for those who use CAC as a search term, but also invites speculation as to why they would say that a CAC sticker is not required for this coin to tell it is a beauty. My personal opinion, based only upon Mark Goodman's images, the fact that it is in a holder that PCGS stopped using in late 2004 and that it has been owned or handled by at least five caretakers in that time period is that the coin is an AU58 that was rejected by CAC.
In honor of the memory of Cpl. Michael E. Thompson
EAC 6024
<< <i>
<< <i>Was there anything in particular that made the coin "not so nice?" >>
Very common date. >>
Yes it is, i wouldn't go hog-wild on that one.!
You Searched For Cert Number: 21624285
SORRY - Your search returned 0 results
This certification number is NOT in the CAC database.
EAC 6024
<< <i>As per CAC's cert # verification this coin based on it's current slab has not been awarded a sticker nor denied.
You Searched For Cert Number: 21624285
SORRY - Your search returned 0 results
This certification number is NOT in the CAC database. >>
I dont believe that CAC lets you search for coins that have been denied
<< <i>I dont believe that CAC lets you search for coins that have been denied >>
I believe they do just can't recall the last coin I checked that was denied
<< <i>
<< <i>I dont believe that CAC lets you search for coins that have been denied >>
I believe they do just can't recall the last coin I checked that was denied
That would be a fundamental change in JA's philosophy, so until proven I will continue to doubt it is so. If you wish to try a few, use the past few 1795 flowing hair ms65 dollars from Heritage - or my ms66 fingerprint 1799.
Furthermore, CAC wishes to protect the interest of an owner of a coin that has been reviewed by CAC but did not receive a sticker. Therefore, CAC does not want to compromise the value of such a coin by disclosing a negative review by CAC.
EAC 6024
In honor of the memory of Cpl. Michael E. Thompson
<< <i>Good point Tom. I wonder if CRO had sent this coin in at one time as their inventory seems to be mostly CAC'd. >>
We handled this quarter a number of years ago and I am 99% sure we never sent it to CAC. I do tend to agree with TomB's view, however, that in the interim period someone probably did.