My latest newp an 1865 10c from Great Collections and I mean Great! GTG!

Realone

Ian Russel of GreatCollectionsl sure knows what he is doing, he runs a fantastic Auction Co, can you believe I have zero complaints and a ton of accolades for him and his staff!

TomB

Red X.

TomB

I tried the URL that you had for one of the red x's and also came up with a blank page.

LanceNewmanOCC

.
talk about being left hanging!
.

lkeigwin

<< <i>.
talk about being left hanging!
. >>

Please...the new avatar is bad enough.
Lance.

LanceNewmanOCC

<< <i>

<< <i>.
talk about being left hanging!
. >>

Please...the new avatar is bad enough.
Lance. >>



.

Goldbully

Wow, is this the coin???

LanceNewmanOCC

fine i removed the stinkin' image!

LanceNewmanOCC

.
my wag is au55+
.

roadrunner

Great looking coin. I've owned a few seated dimes with a similar look and often got much lower grades out of PCGS. I learned real quick that they should be sent
elsewhere for grading. Not a look that is appreciated by today's hobbyists. 23 yrs ago this coin would have been considered "killer." A coin that PCGS could have
easily graded 64-65 back in the day. Just the way it was. I'd much rather have this one than a dipped out coin as many of these low mintage Philly gems are. The odd
blue and grey mottled toning will cause many to say the high points/fields have friction or are missing luster.

LanceNewmanOCC

<< <i>.my wag is au55+.
Wow first responder and he gets it >>


i have insider information
.

Goldbully

<< <i>

<< <i>.my wag is au55+.
Wow first responder and he gets it >>


i have insider information
. >>



I saw your post Lance ....to say the least, I would never have G'dTG.....I love the look of this coin.

blu62vette

That is a great coin, I either saw it in hand a while ago or Ian sent me the pics. Looked like a very cool piece.

jhdfla

Realone, that's one of the nicest coins I've seen you post here yet. There is no friction on that coin, and it is a superb gem, at least as much as I can garner from pics. Some may not like the very deep toning but I think the coin is wonderful. I'd call it a 66 or 67.

AuroraBorealis

Great coin Goldbully!... Just kidding very nice and a big congrats Realone...

AB

coinguy1989

I can't play guess the grade since I actually viewed the auction a few times while it was live. I will say that I like the coin, but I believe NGC was generous with the grade.

coinsarefun

<< <i>

<< <i>.
talk about being left hanging!
. >>

Please...the new avatar is bad enough.
Lance. >>





I was actually going to start a thread stating who wants Lance to change his avatar
Actually we should make it formal request.........

coinsarefun

<< <i>

<< <i>.
my wag is au55+
. >>




Wow first responder and he gets it >>








Just because he has a VERY unique taste in avatars......does not necessarily make him a bad judge in coins

johnny9434

wow, ive never seen color like that before. nice pickup

LanceNewmanOCC

breakdown

Great looking coin, Al. I would love to see it in hand.

roadrunner

I see the serial number -009 on that old NGC holder. The person who purchased that coin out of the auction was probably one of the larger players of that period
purchasing more than 9 similar quality coins out of that sale. If it had a serial number like -020 or -030 there could probably be only a couple guys of that era
that bought significant hunks out of each major sale. Never got the chance to see the Lovejoy dimes go off as the January 1990 James A. Stack sale was the last
major seated auction I attended of that period as the market only continued to weaken. Had this 1865 dime been in the James Stack January auction it probably would
have fetched closer to $15K-$20K (MS67 type coin bid at that time was $11,000). I also note that James Stack had none of these low Philly mintage dimes in choice
or gem unc condition (or even circ), prefering to go with the easier to find proofs. Most of the James Stack seated dimes ended up in NGC holders. I suspect that was the
case since NGC was much closer at that time (Parsippany, NJ) and tended to give out better grades for anything toned. I would guess most of the Lovejoy dimes went to
NGC as well. This 1865 is a great looking coin, even if a lot of people think it's an AU. ....and I'd bet dollars to donuts PCGS would have graded this 1865 no better than a
66 and possibly only a MS65 in late 1990. Just the way it was back then.

wondercoin

What did this dime sell for in the gc sale including bp?

wondercoin

$11000 spent on gold bullion in 1990 is worth about $50000 today. Yet this cool seated dime is worth $8500 now. Is it any wonder that a couple of my top classic coin customers have switched into low mintage modern bullion coins? Makes you stop and think... no? Comments roadrunner or anyone else?

wondercoin

Realone. I think your dime is great. I said so in my last post. Not to mention cac certified. But if I read your analysis correctly this dime sold 22 years ago for $11000? A pile of $11000 in simple gold bullion is worth about $50000 today. What do you disagree on?

ianrussell

<< <i>Realone. I think your dime is great. I said so in my last post. Not to mention cac certified. But if I read your analysis correctly this dime sold 22 years ago for $11000? A pile of $11000 in simple gold bullion is worth about $50000 today. What do you disagree on? >>



The previous owner paid much more than $8450 for this dime in the 1990s (on the flip-side, he also bought a rare pattern at the same time for c$7k (didn't get exact number) and we sold that in the same auction for $29,000).

The dime is nice - great color. I like that it's still in a fresh NGC fatty holder (Realone, did you notice that the holder was not overly marked?).

- Ian

MrEureka

I bought an NGC MS67 1865 Dime in 1988 or 1989 as part of an original proof set. (Apparently, the Mint ran out of proofs.) Although the coins were slabbed when I got them, the set came with an original presentation case with (IIRC) a birthday note inside the case. FWIW, I'm sure I figured the coin for far more than 11K at the time. The price made sense at the time. Keep in mind that PCGS and NGC had only been in business for a few years, pop reports were thinly populated, and most people had no idea how common most rare coins really are.

wondercoin

Ian. So that rare pattern actually kept pace with bullion gold. Ok... good to know. I am in the process of selling a couple dozen non core holding patterns from my personal collection and they have performed miserably relative to bullion gold over the past ten years. Realone.... thank you for that last comment. I love deep toned coins and have many in my silver quarter set. I can not get them in ms67 plus holders generally as that is not the look pcgs generally is accepting for the plus grade

rhedden

Given a choice between Realone's dime and an equal dollar amount of gold bullion coins, I'd feel a lot safer owning the dime over the next 10 yrs. Then again, I had no clue and didn't buy any gold when it was under $300 an ounce, so take it FWIW.

JustMe2

<< <i>Realone. I think your dime is great. I said so in my last post. Not to mention cac certified. But if I read your analysis correctly this dime sold 22 years ago for $11000? A pile of $11000 in simple gold bullion is worth about $50000 today. What do you disagree on? >>



I may have missed the investment post some ware in this thread but some of us are not in this for maximum profit or any profit at all. For me, good bad or indifferent, it's about filling the whole most of the time knowing that it will sell for the same or less some decade way in the future...

DIMEMAN

>>> A pile of $11000 in simple gold bullion is worth about $50000 today. What do you disagree on? <<<

Would take the awesome coin over bullion ANYDAY!!!

roadrunner

RR,
I am confused by your first 2 sentences. This was housed in the very same holder at the Lovejoy auction, are you aware of that fact? Or are you assuming it was purchased by a guy that bought 9 of similar quality at the sale and then sent them in, can't figure out which way you are going. Then later you wrote that most of the Lovejoy dimes also went to NGc but again this was in an old NGC holder at the time of the sale, one of the few that were in fact already holdered and by NGC. thanks.

It looks like I am the one that is confused. So few auctions in the 1989 and 1990 were slabbed auctions that I just assumed the Lovejoy collection was an all raw collection like the
James Stack dimes in Jan 1990. Since they were already slabbed, then my comments about NGC serial numbers is completely wrong. 22 yrs is taxing my memory. I keep the
James Stack dime catalog by the computer, but not the Lovejoy.

I would agree with Wondercoin that gold bullion will continue to outpace the vast majority of common and rare coins over the next 2-5 years. It's simply an issue of world wide demand
for bullion to balance the world's debt vs. collector/speculator demand from a very small community for rare US coins. While it's true that the very best US rare coins far outperformed
bullion from 1977-1980, I'm not so sure we get to see that kind of blow-off topping period ever again. On the flip side, if gold is at the same point in time as it was during the 1975-1976
consolidation, then the best years for gold and rare coins could still lie just ahead. I just have a hard time seeing rare coins doing well as this 120 yr economic cycle bottoms from
2013-2014. It will really come down to how the deflationary and inflationary components compare to one another during that phase. I don't have any doubts that gold will do fine over
the next 3-5 yrs, but can't say that about 95% of all rare coins.

roadrunner

Can't say that no one knew about how rare the 1867 dime was in gem/superb gem before pop reports. I knew. And certainly others did as well. That data was out there
to be mined via auction appearances, dealer fixed price lists, and other sources. To be honest, those low mintage Philly half dimes and dimes of the 1863-1867 period showed
up a lot more in choice and gem unc than their tiny mintages would have suggested. Yet it was the higher mintage S mints, and higher mintage pre-1852 Philly/N.O. mints, that tended
to almost never show up in gem condition. I made it a point back then to ignore the 1860's Philly dimes and go after more interesting Philly dates like 1840 wd, 1847, and 1848.
The O mints other than 57-0 and 59-0 also offered great potential as well as the pre-1873 S mint dimes. I also never liked the fact that most of those 1860's Philly dimes were
proof like and looked like proofs. The fact that 460-725 proofs for each date exist didn't help either.

The 1865-1867 dimes are very scarce to rare in circ condition, especially below AU. For some reason small hoards of these dates were saved in Unc. So despite the tiny mintages
they were saved in high enough quantity to be comparable to S mints of that period that have 10X-25X the mintage. The 1865-s dime is nearly unobtainable in choice to gem unc
yet had 175,000 minted vs. the 10,000 for the 1865 Philly. I'd bet there are dozens of choice/gem unc 1865 dimes out there. You can't go just by the mintages as it's survival rates that
matter. In lower circ grades 1865-P dimes are way rarer than 65-S dimes. I'd love to own a 1865-s dime looking like this 1865. And it doesn't help that nearly every 1865-S has a flat
head. An 1842-0 dime has over 2 million minted. Try and find a gem unc of that date. In the scheme of things, a gem 1865 dime has a lot of competition in the seated dimes. Still,
this MS67 1865 is a cool coin and could be a candidate for finest surviving original specimen. A lot of people do like the fact that the mintage is only 10,000 coins. But in my mind 500
proofs muddies the water a bit even if they are technically totally different from business strikes.

oreville

I also own a Milton Holmes 1853 w/a 10c PCGS MS-65 which was also sold at the same Stacks 1860 dime. They are great dimes.

It would please you to know that it has the same identical blue look as your dime.

I assumed it was because of the civil war!!!

But seeing your dime, I have to remind myself that the blue look was instead due to the Reconstruction period of the post civil war era!

roadrunner

I can't disagree with anything you are saying but try to find a nice ms 66-67 LSD from 1863-1867. I can understand if a small number of high grade specimens were saved but most are blast white, few have great eye appeal and fewer are original.

I agree with you. But the majority of our collecting community find the blast white, overdipped, cameo look to be far more attractive than mottled blues, greens, browns or whatever. Been fighting that fire for over 20 years and losing ground each and every year. It continually amazes me when I show a totally original and pristine toned gem MS seated coin to seasoned hobbyists who appreciate nice coins, and they instantly groan "ughh." They generally have huge problems with the toned stuff if they don't look like a Morgan toner or something that spent 50 yrs in a 1950's mint set or Wayte Raymond album. With this trend now firmly set over 20 years, I don't see it being easily reversed. The newer crop of collectors is being raised the same way. With only a couple guys at most building complete sets of gem seated dimes, it leaves an overabundance of ch/gem 1865 dimes to be used for other purposes (better date type sets, low mintage type sets, collectors driven by mintages). Wondercoin has already made the point about how MS67, 67+, and 68 Washington quarters have skyrocketed leaving many low pop gem seated coins in the dust.