Whatever became of my old 1866 PF67 seated half? Found it.
roadrunner
Posts: 28,313 ✭✭✭✭✭
I always wondered what become of my former NGC 1866 50c PF67 CAM. It was one of the highest graded during the 7 yrs that I owned it. While it had a couple of very obvious obverse "3D" carbon flecks, it was otherwise absolutely wonderful, probably would have graded NGC PF68 or PCGS PF67 w/o the flecks. It didn't take me long to find later appearances on the Heritage auction archives. I sold it though Stacks-Bowers. It also didn't sticker when I submitted it as NGC PF67 which was no surprise.
What I would have expected was that this coin couldn't have possibly stickered with those crusty spots. I had an 1865 PF65 seated half not sticker because of a tiny dull spot in the mirrors on the reverse (ie env damage into the coin). It was so small I never saw it before...until CAC brought it to my attention. I would think thick carbon flecks are more of an issue.
The 1866 half dropped 20% in price from 2009 to 2013, no doubt due holder bias. Then it got a downgrade cross to PCGS PF 66 CAM. But it stickered. Sort of amazed that the Nov 2013 price was a 29% jump over the previous high price. I'd have not expected that. It doesn't appear from that photos that the those carbon flecks were lightened or thinned out. But, I'm not sure. I always wondered how the coin made a CAM designation since the outer 1/3 of the obv and rev were well toned, obscuring the cameo imo. Centers were pure white. Normally, such a coin would have to get dipped to show a full 100% cameo effect. Thankfully, that was never done. Another data point to chalk up to experience. More than one way to skin a cat and get the price upgrade.
Heritage May 2009 auction appearance 2 months after I sold it - same price $10,925
April 2013 appearance - $8812
November 2013 appearance - $14,100, a PCGS 66 brings 30% more than an NGC 67
Only the first auction link above captured the color correctly on the coin. The others made it look a lot darker. The coin appears to have have had at least 5 auction appearance from 2009-2013.
What I would have expected was that this coin couldn't have possibly stickered with those crusty spots. I had an 1865 PF65 seated half not sticker because of a tiny dull spot in the mirrors on the reverse (ie env damage into the coin). It was so small I never saw it before...until CAC brought it to my attention. I would think thick carbon flecks are more of an issue.
The 1866 half dropped 20% in price from 2009 to 2013, no doubt due holder bias. Then it got a downgrade cross to PCGS PF 66 CAM. But it stickered. Sort of amazed that the Nov 2013 price was a 29% jump over the previous high price. I'd have not expected that. It doesn't appear from that photos that the those carbon flecks were lightened or thinned out. But, I'm not sure. I always wondered how the coin made a CAM designation since the outer 1/3 of the obv and rev were well toned, obscuring the cameo imo. Centers were pure white. Normally, such a coin would have to get dipped to show a full 100% cameo effect. Thankfully, that was never done. Another data point to chalk up to experience. More than one way to skin a cat and get the price upgrade.
Heritage May 2009 auction appearance 2 months after I sold it - same price $10,925
April 2013 appearance - $8812
November 2013 appearance - $14,100, a PCGS 66 brings 30% more than an NGC 67
Only the first auction link above captured the color correctly on the coin. The others made it look a lot darker. The coin appears to have have had at least 5 auction appearance from 2009-2013.
0
Comments
Interesting recent history too.
"If I say something in the woods and my wife isn't there to hear it.....am I still wrong?"
My Washington Quarter Registry set...in progress
'Tis a beauty, no doubt.
Interesting recent history too.
How about it, poor thing can't find a home
'Tis a beauty, no doubt.
Interesting recent history too.
How about it, poor thing can't find a home
Permanent homes were hard to find from 2009-2013 without a "stickered" roof over them. Once stickered, it appears this one found a home. But, I'm still surprised it stickered. PCGS has 4 coins with higher grades/DCAM.
RR- What do you grade this coin?
mark
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......
It seems to be probably dressed now.
RR- What do you grade this coin?
mark
I like the "dressing" analogy.
The technical grade to me not including those obv carbon flecks was PF68...or otherwise unimprovable. There really wasn't a hairline on it that I could see. It would be the equal of most any other Motto half. So figure a 1-2 pt deduction for those flecks. Some will see them as ED. Others will see them as just dirt or stuff. Being an owner for 7 years, those flecks appeared to "grow" every time I saw the coin. And after a few years I wondered why I bought it. When I owned it I guess I felt it was overall a 66+ knowing that it was maxed out as an NGC PF67. I just bought it based on the overall quality and the price at that time. It's a 68 quality coin in most every respect (eye appeal, mirrors, marks, strike), except one, the flecks.
There are 5 coins graded 67 or 68 by NGC and PCGS....CAC hasn't stickered anything higher than 66. This is actually the only stickered 66 CAM or non CAM with none higher. There is a lone 66 DCAM CAC. So on the CAC scale, this is a pop 1, which probably explains the price boost once downgraded and stickered. Getting a CAC 67 on these early WM dates is tough.
mark
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......
That was a low risk high reward play for the seller. Crossing VERY nice coins at the same grade or one lower with a green light often leads to financial gain.
mark
Yeah. But, the "high risk" portion of that arbitrage had nothing to do with the usual gradable features of that coin...and everything to do with the 3 carbon flecks on the obverse. They were the size of ash particles. Who could possibly anticipate how JA would look at those 3 little blobs that sat on and above the surface of the coin? Frankly, I'm sort of surprised 1 or 2 of them couldn't have been successfully "flicked" off with a tooth pick or something....a play only a top notch conservator would attempt. A left-behind etched hole under that blob would be a worse issue.
I would have figured on a downgrade without a possible sticker. Env damage is still damage whether a 66 or 67. So either some very knowledgeable graders....or....they showed the coin to CAC and asked if this would/could sticker a grade lower? Or maybe they viewed it under a high-powered microscope to see if those flecks were dug in or not. That was not an option I considered back in 2009 when I didn't get a sticker at the 67 grade. A no sticker 66 for the last guy would have been a sizable loss. But, that coin once in a 66 holder, was certainly far easier and less risky to get the green light. Even more stunning, it's the only 66 CAM or non-CAM to get that green light.
I am seeing one left of the pole and a second between the legs.
Lighting angle was changed in 2013 and later, so that the spot between the legs is less prominent.
You'll dig into who what where when why how you bought something, and what your experience was when selling. I always learn from your posts.
Mike
PS, sweet coin!
Coin Club Benefit auctions ..... View the Lots
You know what I like about you Roadrunner? You don't mess around. You give out real, actual data and aren't shy about discussing actual pricing - win or lose.
You'll dig into who what where when why how you bought something, and what your experience was when selling. I always learn from your posts.
"To Be Esteemed Be Useful" - 1792 Birch Cent --- "I personally think we developed language because of our deep need to complain." - Lily Tomlin
It looks like the 3rd fleck, on the lower thigh, disappeared between 2009 and 2013?
I am seeing one left of the pole and a second between the legs.
Lighting angle was changed in 2013 and later, so that the spot between the legs is less prominent.
Yes, I had that feeling, but couldn't be sure. My recollection was that the spot in the lap was the worst. It doesn't seem that way now. But, if I were the owner in 2013, I would have sent it back to PCGS and see what they could tell me about spot removal or improvement. At the time I owned the coin it was graded only once and never sent back to any TPGs. My logic was that the spots made it moot. Why bother? And the NGC holder bias was only beginning to surge (ie 2009-2013).
I will note that this coin came out of a very nice 1000 coin collection of seated material back in 2002. But, the person I bought it from only bought the top half to top 2/3 of that collection (ie those other coins and this 1866 50c were the "rejects"). So I went back to the original dealer who had the remaining coins and scoured through them. There were a lot of dipped MS/PF66 and MS/PF67 seated halves I just didn't like. I suspect so many of them were fugly from decades of brown mottled toning and spotting that they had to be dipped to make them saleable. Only this 1866 spoke to me with the semi-monster target toning and cameo centers. I figured it would have cost me 20-40% more if those spots weren't there. Went in eyes wide open. It still wouldn't surprise me someday that some jamoke gets it in there head to dip the coin hoping for a PCGS 67/68 CAM or DCAM.
I bought a lot of neat seated coins in the 2002-2003 period. Most of those coins doubled, tripled and quadrupled in price into the 2007/2008 market peak. This 1866 went nowhere....as did a few other losers I purchased that while pretty or nice, had a single distraction either in minute spots or strike. An orig 1818/5 NGC MS65 bust quarter from a major name collection was just wonderful. MS66 qualities in all respect,....except for a bit of strike weakness typical for the date. It wouldn't sticker. I suspect the market 10 years later thought of that coin as MS64++. The irony will be that someday, it will reside in a PCGS MS65 holder, maybe even sticker. Timing is key. And I know that the timing of one's submission and the submitter play the swing role in how a coin grades/crosses....not so much the coin itself assuming it's generally worthy to begin with.
So earning 0% over 7 years was a huge net opportunity "loss" on that coin. Even common MS63 $20 Libs tripled, MS64 Saints nearly quadrupled, MS65 Saints tripled. If you bought most anything problem free and eye catching in non-generic coins, they did well. CAC was not a big player yet in March 2009 when I sold this coin. The thought NEVER crossed my mind to downgrade this stunning coin. It's likely it would have brought less money at that time...and certainly no more. But as someone said earlier, timing is everything. By 2013, it was now very possible, if not likely that a higher end PCGS66 CAC coin eclipsed an NGC MS67, especially if it moves to a pop top REG slot at PCGS.
To show that getting things into PCGS holders might not be the be all, end all: there's a scarce 19th century coin at auction at the moment that was upgraded from NGC MS62 to PCGS MS63. Yes, I know, perish the thought! All is lost. This is a Bizzarro world. I'll post on that come Monday. I won't be surprised if this coin brings more money in the 63 holder....but I also have to figure that every specialist in that series will know it upgraded. It honestly shouldn't bring any more money. It was not stickered at a 62, and it surely shouldn't be stickered as a 63. I sincerely hope the "real" market is smart enough to figure all that out. The kicker is that the MS63 photo makes the coin look solid for that grade....while the MS62 photo of the same coin makes it look low end for a 62 grade. Have fun with your stickers...and upgrades....and downgrades.. After all, that's what the market is about at the moment.
Well, I guess not. That 63 coin is already at a 110% premium to the NCG 62 price of just 1 year ago! It is apparently about the holder and assigning a fresh pedigree to the coin. It's close to the price some of the 64's have fetched. It had me fooled that it was a fresh coin, from a fresh collection.