@Boosibri said:
Did Hansen consider skipping the modern stuff (i.e. the State Quarters set) to focus on classic issues?
This would be a great question for JB to respond. If are thinking that he is skipping the modern high end (1/0), I think you are right. Statehood Quarters may be a good example.
@Boosibri said:
Some of the responses in this thread truly shows the psychology of the registry playing out at the high end to distort logical decision making behavior.
Currin is correct in that the auction companies post the price one increment below the reserve.
However some companies, for lack of better words, try and confuse people. I have nothing against Stack's but since the link is above, I feel their language confusing changed. The current BID is NOT 220K. That is rarely the case. This is misleading and could be fraudulent. If the bid before this was posted was 100K then that was or is the current bid. You cannot say "current bid" if no one bid it.
That leads some people to believe that someone else thought the coin was worth 220K.
I prefer NO reserve auctions. You then see the true demand. HA in many cases charge the consignor if the coin does not
meet the reserve, Lastly it is interesting to note how many coins sell for the reserve with no other bids. To me that is NOT
an auction but a sale.
The 1830 is impossible to price. Too rare. Great coin.
Not sure if the Pogue 65 was CAC. If not, I call it a 64 and therefore it did not bring the true 65 price.
The registry does not distort things. It has been around for so many years that the buying behavior has become commonplace and to be expected. People pay prices to obtain a score. The problems as I noted before is that the scoring
needs a total revamp based on thirty years of pops.
DLH should be doing what many others do. If a coin is a higher grade, has better eye appeal and is of course CAC, take
the cost of it and the cost or approximate sales price of the one we already own. Use that to compute the net price
that is going to be paid for the upgrade.
@Boosibri said:
Did Hansen consider skipping the modern stuff (i.e. the State Quarters set) to focus on classic issues?
This would be a great question for JB to respond. If are thinking that he is skipping the modern high end (1/0), I think you are right. Statehood Quarters may be a good example.
Did Hansen consider skipping the modern sets entirely to focus only on the classic sets which would have been in scope for Eliasberg?
Given the choice to pursue the moderns, is he pursuing those with the same focus on top pops and condition rarities or is it more a focus on completion without the same regard for the registry?
The registry does not distort things. It has been around for so many years that the buying behavior has become commonplace and to be expected. People pay prices to obtain a score. The problems as I noted before is that the scoring
needs a total revamp based on thirty years of pops.
>
The registry distorts logical cost/benefit, risk/reward decision making; incentivizing people to pay exponentially more money for such small increments in quality that they themselves cannot actual perceive and often for coins which are simply mistakes and manipulations in plastic. The problem is not that the scoring needs a revamp, it is that old adage about fools and money...
Hansen should consider skipping the Jefferson nickel series as well since PCGS doesn't recognize the following coin as an essential collector's coin for any of the Registry sets. Without coins like this and others with 6 full steps, Mr Hanson, as many have failed before him, will not be able to build the greatest Jefferson nickel collection.
Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
@leothelyon said:
Hansen should consider skipping the Jefferson nickel series as well since PCGS doesn't recognize the following coin as an essential collector's coin for any of the Registry sets. Without coins like this and others with 6 full steps, Mr Hanson, as many have failed before him, will not be able to build the greatest Jefferson nickel collection.
Leo
Just because pcgs does not include it, does not mean he cant have this coin in his collection
Back to the registry. You are technically correct in that a half or a full grade may not be worth the pay jump.
But is not relevant. Why? Because people routinely pay it. So it is common and accepted.
If the coins are CAC and therefore accurately graded, when something happens all the times for years, regardless of its
merits, it is just the way it works. is a 67+ worth 10K in some coins, more than a 67. YES. only because people will pay it.
Inherently it is not. I sell Diamonds. Same thing. Is an E color for X more than an F?
Here is a good example. I am paying 25K for any CAC 67 Saint. A 67+ is worth 35K? Should it be? Who cares. That is
what they bring.
I do vary from this at times, I have MANY amazing lower graded coins. They have FAR more eye appeal than the coin that
is in my set, But you do not get much score for eye appeal. The specialist always rants to not fill a hole with a non gem coin.
I 100% agree with this. However if you are going for score you buy and keep the gem coin and put the other one in the set.
Sure you look to improve but it is not always possible.
DLH is going to face the same thing as he upgrades.
@Perfection said:
Back to the registry. You are technically correct in that a half or a full grade may not be worth the pay jump.
But is not relevant. Why? Because people routinely pay it. So it is common and accepted.
If the coins are CAC and therefore accurately graded, when something happens all the times for years, regardless of its
merits, it is just the way it works. is a 67+ worth 10K in some coins, more than a 67. YES. only because people will pay it.
Inherently it is not. I sell Diamonds. Same thing. Is an E color for X more than an F?
Here is a good example. I am paying 25K for any CAC 67 Saint. A 67+ is worth 35K? Should it be? Who cares. That is
what they bring.
I do vary from this at times, I have MANY amazing lower graded coins. They have FAR more eye appeal than the coin that
is in my set, But you do not get much score for eye appeal. The specialist always rants to not fill a hole with a non gem coin.
I 100% agree with this. However if you are going for score you buy and keep the gem coin and put the other one in the set.
Sure you look to improve but it is not always possible.
DLH is going to face the same thing as he upgrades.
But what must be true for that entire behavior algorithm to change? The value which was perceived based on past behavior can be lost in a moment. Anyways, back to Hansen, love your coins @Perfection , disagree with your philosophy of value. In the end buy what you enjoy, F the registry and another persons definition of what is the best. I am a non-conformist and define what I want by my standards and resent others defining it for me. If the registry defines that for you, good on ya.
I have a question for @Curry or anyone else for that matter. Since everyone is so hyped about CAC for the classics, should DLH then have a serious amount of QA check moderns in his set?
And if the answer is NO, then I would like an explanation.
Perfection, you keep comparing diamond pricing to coins. You are comparing apples to oranges.Diamonds are graded by GIA without taking eye appeal into consideration.
Diamonds are graded by color ,D - K , cut -round brilliant ,emerald, marquis etc., clarity
And cost. Proportions and finish are also taken into account
DLH is collecting coins primarily by the PCGS grade and the Set Registry. You have stated that you buy coins primarily by the PCGS grade and CAC. You stated you do not know how to grade
Coins.
Since you have collected so many top quality sets, how come you don’t learn how to grade ?
Personally, I think it would be good for DLH to learn how to grade. However he may just be doing this as his collection grows in quality.Just my observations
@tradedollarnut said:
Hey JB - the numero uno Eisenhower Dollar set is on eBay
Thanks, Bruce! Far be it from me to chase a modern set, no matter how nice it is...
John Brush President of David Lawrence Rare Coins www.davidlawrence.com email: John@davidlawrence.com 2022 ANA Dealer of the Year, Past Chair of NCBA (formerly ICTA), PNG Treasurer, Instructor at Witter Coin University, former Instructor/YN Chaperone ANA Summer Seminar, Coin World Most Influential, Curator of the D.L. Hansen Collection
@specialist said:
I turned down that 1830 at $275G at N.O. .... Its easy to ask anything. It never got justified to me. good luck. perfecto you need to learn coins better and values
It sure is nice! But we both passed on it there...
John Brush President of David Lawrence Rare Coins www.davidlawrence.com email: John@davidlawrence.com 2022 ANA Dealer of the Year, Past Chair of NCBA (formerly ICTA), PNG Treasurer, Instructor at Witter Coin University, former Instructor/YN Chaperone ANA Summer Seminar, Coin World Most Influential, Curator of the D.L. Hansen Collection
This would be a great question for JB to respond. If are thinking that he is skipping the modern high end (1/0), I think you are right. Statehood Quarters may be a good example.
Did Hansen consider skipping the modern sets entirely to focus only on the classic sets which would have been in scope for Eliasberg?
Given the choice to pursue the moderns, is he pursuing those with the same focus on top pops and condition rarities or is it more a focus on completion without the same regard for the registry?
This is a difficult question to answer...I'll do my best.
Moderns: If we define modern to be 1982-Present, I would say that we've done our best to buy the quality that makes sense within a reasonable price range. I've personally never been a believer in buying finest known (or similar) modern coins when millions have not been submitted for grading, for outrageous prices.
Pre-1980s material is slightly different, but completion with the best quality that makes sense is the overall goal there.
As far as completion goes: yes, the focus is the same. As far as quality: I think that this is a moving target due to grading events...
John Brush President of David Lawrence Rare Coins www.davidlawrence.com email: John@davidlawrence.com 2022 ANA Dealer of the Year, Past Chair of NCBA (formerly ICTA), PNG Treasurer, Instructor at Witter Coin University, former Instructor/YN Chaperone ANA Summer Seminar, Coin World Most Influential, Curator of the D.L. Hansen Collection
This would be a great question for JB to respond. If are thinking that he is skipping the modern high end (1/0), I think you are right. Statehood Quarters may be a good example.
Did Hansen consider skipping the modern sets entirely to focus only on the classic sets which would have been in scope for Eliasberg?
Given the choice to pursue the moderns, is he pursuing those with the same focus on top pops and condition rarities or is it more a focus on completion without the same regard for the registry?
This is a difficult question to answer...I'll do my best.
Moderns: If we define modern to be 1982-Present, I would say that we've done our best to buy the quality that makes sense within a reasonable price range. I've personally never been a believer in buying finest known (or similar) modern coins when millions have not been submitted for grading, for outrageous prices.
Pre-1980s material is slightly different, but completion with the best quality that makes sense is the overall goal there.
As far as completion goes: yes, the focus is the same. As far as quality: I think that this is a moving target due to grading events...
Why would you pick a year, consider everything after that date modern, and then simply not try on the basis that more will be graded? That would be like me saying anything pre 1909 is a classic, therefore it must be expensive and all have been discovered and graded.
Wouldn’t it make more sense for both modern and classic coins to judge each series and date on its own rarity and survival rate?
John, I think if someone on Mr. Hansen’s team did some studying on moderns you’d be surprised with what they find. I’m not at all saying that by buying all top pop moderns you’ll never see the pop increase. I think that if you know what to buy you’ll make out just fine.
Just imagine if someone told Col. Green not to touch “those funny 1913 lib nickels” simply because they we’re modern and more would be found.
I think Eliasberg collected coins from his current era. I applaud DLH for doing modems and agree on ther general strategy. Many modern series are collecting gold without spending gold. Collecting should be fun and I think it relates what Del is doing to an even broader collector audience.
Auction Update
Next week at this time, the bidding on this coin will be live. The current bid with one week to go is $3.8M. The reserved has been satisfied. Does anyone know if this bid include buyer fees or not. Are you surprised that it is already close to $4? Anyone have thoughts to share.
Stacks Bower Galleries August 2018 ANA - Session 3 - Rarities Night - Lot 1096
The Finest Known 1913 Liberty Head Nickel 1913 Liberty Head Nickel. Proof-66 (PCGS). CAC
PCGS Coin Guide Price: $4,500,000 Current Bid Total : 4,560,000
I have bought many coins like this. It makes me laugh to no end how people throw numbers around.
This is real money involved. Name a time when people just materialized and bought a big ticket coin? You can't. I have either bought most or been on most. NEVER seen it happen. Where are these mystery buyers who will spend so much??
Perfecto, you are out to lunch-unless you are willing to pay $5.9
@specialist said:
I have bought many coins like this. It makes me laugh to no end how people throw numbers around.
This is real money involved. Name a time when people just materialized and bought a big ticket coin? You can't. I have either bought most or been on most. NEVER seen it happen. Where are these mystery buyers who will spend so much??
Perfecto, you are out to lunch-unless you are willing to pay $5.9
@specialist said:
I have bought many coins like this. It makes me laugh to no end how people throw numbers around.
This is real money involved. Name a time when people just materialized and bought a big ticket coin? You can't. I have either bought most or been on most. NEVER seen it happen. Where are these mystery buyers who will spend so much??
Perfecto, you are out to lunch-unless you are willing to pay $5.9
But it has a sticker... It is the ONLY one to sticker. In your world and Perfection's world, doesn't that mean the other four really don't matter/exist and are merely expensive dreck? I am so confused. The coin gods have spoken and may intervene deus ex machina.
@tradedollarnut said:
I’d love to see $5.9M. Hoo baby - it would add several million to my 1804
How? Not to be sarcastic, but is there any empirical evidence linking the market performance of the 1913 Liberty Head nickel to the market performance of 1804 dollars? Also, not to be a jerk or snarky, but doesn't the sticker matter? Your coin is amazing, but it is still overgraded (by your own admission as all of the 1804 dollars are) and has been altered (the "D" etched into one of the clouds).
Ok, back to the Hansen Collection as we know today.
Two New Additions to the Seating Liberty Early Proof collection
It appears to me that DLH/JB is working on the early proof sets. The main focus may be on the Eliasberg Quest, but other parts of the collection, i.e. Major Varieties, Proofs, and Moderns are still getting action too. They just had added two very significant proof specimens. The early proofs could become the greatest challenge for the Hansen Collections. The collection still needs approx. 200 coins for completion of early proofs. Jeff Garrett (2013) describes early proofs this way: Pre-1858 United States Proof coinage is highly desirable and very rare. The mintages are tiny in comparison to the latter issues. Some years are represented by a single example. The standard issue of the Guide Book of United States Coins only lists Proof coins starting in 1858. Until recently, there was very little information available on the early Proof United States coinage. The only book on the subject was written by the late Walter Breen in the 1980s. The book is an excellent reference work, but filled with inaccurate information. Walter Breen was known to create much of his research work from memory, and this was not always a reliable source.
The first addition is from the Liberty Seated Half Dimes, Proof (1837-1857) set. This Hansen set is approx. 60% completed. According to the PCGS registry, the Number One Finest Set of All Time set was assembled by J.J. Pittman. The Pittman set was approx. 86% completed and required 22 coins total. He was missing 3 coins in his set: 1841, 1851, and 1853 Arrows. PCGS Registry describes Early Liberty Seated Half Dimes this way: This extremely challenging 22-coin date set is filled with rarities and distinctive type coins. The 1837 No Stars is a classic that many consider to be an artistic masterpiece as well as a numismatic treasure. Additional types in this series are the With Drapery and Arrows at Date pieces. The Proofs struck in 1854 and later are more readily available but are still considered to be quite rare. https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/half-dimes/liberty-seated-half-dimes-major-sets/liberty-seated-half-dimes-proof-1837-1857/alltimeset/155475
1850 H10C PCGS PR64 CAC EX PITTMAN
This specimen is 1/0 carries the CAC sticker. Legend Rare Coin Auctions offered the coin 7/26/2018 as Lot #267 in a Live Webcast Auction. The lot was passed. I am not absolutely sure the meaning, but I assume either no one bid, or it did not reach reserve. Legend describes the coin as: This is a remarkably RARE and of GEM quality coin! Boasting a classic look, as well as a classic pedigree, this 1850 Proof half dime has an incredibly awesome and original look! Both sides are have a bold flashy look to the fields. The sharply struck devices really do stand out with razor sharp definition. Shades of blue, teal, green, slate, and gold glow when rotated in a light. Both sides show heavy die polish lines are visible, showing the care taken to prepare the dies prior to striking the 7-10 Proofs. The present coin is among the FINEST known, of four graded by both services and it is quite possible that this one is also graded by NGC.
We do not know why the specimen was passed in a 7/26/2018 auction, and then appeared two weeks later in the Hansen collection. Still, I think it was a great purchased. The collection that DLH/JB is assembling needs specimens of this caliber and pedigree. PCGS values this coin at $30,000.
Provenance: PCGS grade. Ex. Bullowa Sale (1952). Sold by David Akers Numismatics Oct '97. Price realized $33,000. Pedigreed 5/1/18. (This coin sold for $33,000 in the October 1997 sale of the John Pittman Collection. He bought it in 1952 from David Bullowa. More recently as an NGC PR65, it sold for $57,500 as part of the Kaufman Collection of Early Proofs in the 2008 FUN auction. A different NGC PR65 sold in January 2009 for the same $57,500.)
1850 H10C PCGS PR64 CAC Cert 35488068
The second addition is from the Liberty Seated Quarters, Proof (1838-1857) set. This Hansen set is approx. 53% completed. Again, the man for the Early Liberty Proofs is J.J. Pittman. According to the PCGS registry, he has the Number One Finest Set of All Time set. The Pittman set was approx. 84% completed and required 19 coins total. He was missing 3 coins in his set: 1838 No Drapery, 1842, and 1852. PCGS Registry describes Early Liberty Seated Half Dimes this way: This set contains a number of rarities. PCGS has certified only one 1838 No Drapery, 1846 and 1850. No 1839 No Drapery, 1840 Drapery, 1842 Large Date, 1842 Small Date, 1843, 1844, and 1852 have been certified! The set also contains the ultra-rare Proof 1853 Arrows & Rays (a one-year type coin) and other major rarities. https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/quarters/liberty-seated-quarters-major-sets/liberty-seated-quarters-proof-1838-1857/alltimeset/157372
1847 25C PCGS PR66 CAC
Also, this specimen is 1/0 carries the CAC sticker. Legend Rare Coin Auctions offered the coin 7/26/2018 as Lot #287 in a Live Webcast Auction. This lot realized $64,625. Legend describes the coin as: Legend Rare Coin Auctions is proud to have been chosen to auction this FINEST KNOWN extremely rare Proof Seated Quarter. We consider this coin a real numismatic treasure. There is no question we rank it VERY high end. This is one of those coins where there are far more dings on the holder then the coin (they are not horrible at all). The mirrors are outstanding and are really deep. The mirrors also display incredible clarity and cleanliness. The flash is tremendous. When you twirl the coin, the mirrors look like a fresh sheet of ice glistening in the sun. We think the ONLY reason this coin is not a PR66+-there is a touch of slight irregular toning on the obverse. ALL the toning is 100% original. The obverse has shades of blue/gold/pale violet/deep tangerine while the reverse is more a greenish blue/gold color. We do not believe this coin has ever been messed with Miss Liberty and the details are frosty and are fully struck. There is some moderate contrast. The eye appeal is adorable!
This was another great addition for the Hansen Proof Collection. PCGS values this coin at $65,000; therefore the realized price is very close to the PCGS value.
Provenance: Coin Facts do not have pedigree for PCGS MS66. I assume this specimen is fairly new in grade. In addition, Legend Rare Coin Auctions did not offer a provenance. Coin Facts previously listed 3 MS65 specimens with none finer. There are only 2 listed presently, so PCGS upgrade is likely. There is at least one MS 66 NGC, therefore a crossover is possible. If anyone can help with the provenance of this specimen would be appreciated.
For the 1837-1857 Proof LS Half Dimes (the rare ones),
I feel the PCGS Set Registry comparison to historic collections is incomplete,
because it only includes the Pittman collection.
(Although the Pittman set is a good choice if you only have time to construct one list).
It is missing the Eliasberg, Kaufman, and Gardner sets.
So I made my own comparison, above.
I tried to extend all the examples to the most current slabbed grades.
It is a mix of PCGS and NGC grades, but the count is fairly clear.
If you exclude 1851, Hansen is tied with Eliasberg on the count.
He still has a ways to go to catch Kaufman, Gardner, and Pittman. But he has time.
He does have the only 1853 in a non-details holder, which the other 4 never had. It was auctioned in 2018-3 for $96 k. https://auctions.stacksbowers.com/lots/view/3-9I94O
Fun facts: the two highest prices paid at auction for proof LS Half Dimes were for 1838:
1. $182,125 2014-1 PR-66 * V-6 ex-Eliasberg, Kaufman
2. $129,250 2014-10 PR-67 V-10 ex-Pittman, Gardner
[Edited - added colors to show provenance from Pittman, Eliasberg, Kaufman and Gardner collections, add cam, dcam, *, +.]
@tradedollarnut said:
I’d love to see $5.9M. Hoo baby - it would add several million to my 1804
How? Not to be sarcastic, but is there any empirical evidence linking the market performance of the 1913 Liberty Head nickel to the market performance of 1804 dollars? Also, not to be a jerk or snarky, but doesn't the sticker matter? Your coin is amazing, but it is still overgraded (by your own admission as all of the 1804 dollars are) and has been altered (the "D" etched into one of the clouds).
Of course there is. Biggest evidence is selling the 1913 for $5M and offering $5M for the 1804$1 in the same year. And having the offer declined
@Currin,
Yes, I believe these are the top 4 historic sets (Liberty Seated Half Dime Proof 1837-1857).
The set of proof half dimes sold by David Bullowa in 1952 might be about the same, though.
This was just what I could do in 3 hours.
I do not believe this set has ever been completed.
I think PCGS does a fairly good job on the historic registry sets.
It takes time to construct them, and the incentive may be to not construct them, as it makes the current sets look better.
I think they get deleted at the owner's request sometimes, too.
Eliasberg's 1851 half dime, graded PR-66 in the sale of his collection,
was purchased by Eugene Gardner, and it was in a PCGS MS-67 holder when he sold it.
Eugene Gardner said in the youtube video linked upthread by @specialist that there were no Liberty Seated 1851 proofs (except for dollars).
Question---Hansen has been very transparent about his goal, his purchases and his holdings. Could he have gotten to the same place completely under the radar if that was his preference?
I’m sure a few dealers would have noticed JB buying everything in sight at major auctions but if there were a lot of private transactions among different people it would be a bit harder for others to figure it out. I don’t think he could escape whispers and suspicion but I’m sure he could hide it from being so public as to appear here.
I imagine the advantage of doing it publicly is that people will come to you with coins. The disadvantage is it may make certain ones more expensive (or out of reach) because another rich collector may decide they have only one shot to win some major rarity. Similarly, the owners of the few unique coins are in a fantastic position of leverage.
2018 August 14 - 19 ANA WFOM US Coins Signature Auction - Philadelphia
There is less than a week to go. The bid on the 1854-S half eagle is holding for now less than $2M. No one knows for sure what interest that Hansen may have in this coin. I would think if DLH/JB had their choice, this coin would not be the specimen they desire. The Pogue Specimen is the coin of choice. There may be many unknown factors to us that would play in the DLH/JB decision on how aggressive they should be. My take on this coin, there is no guarantee this opportunity will come again. The 54-S $5 was the only coin that Harry Bass was not able to obtain for his world class Liberty Head $5 gold collection. It would be interesting to know how many opportunities Bass had to purchase a 54-S. Pogue purchased the Eliasberg Specimen in 1982. Did Bass have a shot and missed? The coin has changed hands one time in in approx. 72 years. The Dupont Specimen was purchases in 1962. According to Bass’ bio, he seriously started collecting in 1965. It is a very good chance that Bass never had an opportunity on this specimen. The Dupont specimen was discovered in the thirties or forties, and only came on the market once in 1962. The coin was stolen in 1967 and maybe lost forever. The Lilly Specimen was sold by Sotheby’s in 1954, and Lilly donated to the Smithsonian in 1968. It also appeared only once on the market. Again, I doubt that Bass had an opportunity for this specimen. In 33 years Bass was building his collection, he may have had one opportunity to purchase a 1954-S $5 Specimen in 1982 .
Hansen now is facing that one opportunity. He may have other opportunities future, no one knows. With one coin lost, and the other off the market, this new specimen and the Pogue are all there is. Will the Pogue Specimen ever be sold? Maybe. Could the Pogue family keep it off the market for several decades…possible? Could they donate the coin to the Smithsonian… possible? Could this new find be sold and go off the market for several decades… possible? Could this be Hansen’s only opportunity… possible?
The discovery of a lifetime could also be the purchase of a lifetime. I am glad I don’t have to make this decision.
1854-S Five Dollar Liberty, XF45 Newly Discovered 19th Century Gold Rarity Only the Fourth Example Known to Collectors
PCGS Coin Guide Price: $1,750,000 Current Bid Total: $1,860,000
people here seem to be totally enamored with Delloy, there are other significant players out there who do NOT bang a drum. I am not a player on the 54S, but I think there is a collector out there who will just buy it (not Delloy). there is plenty of real and big money floating around.
Hard to believe but there are one or two "quiet" great $5 Lib sets out there. Take nothing away from their owners or the quality of those sets.
If I were in that league, there's no way I'd let that one get away.
The rarity combined with the time that it obviously spent in obscure circulation gives it an aura and mystery that far more famous coins don't even come close to.
@specialist said:
people here seem to be totally enamored with Delloy, there are other significant players out there who do NOT bang a drum. I am not a player on the 54S, but I think there is a collector out there who will just buy it (not Delloy). there is plenty of real and big money floating around.
Not "enamored," just recognize he is quite driven and has substantial resources that he's not afraid to use. That said, you know more about his competition than most of us commenting here...
You made the decision very clear. He must get this coin. If rich enough, upgrade if the better one comes along. There may be something we don't know. Suppose they are secretly negotiating for the better coin already. Most things have a price that cannot be refused unless personalities become involved.
Comments
Did Hansen consider skipping the modern stuff (i.e. the State Quarters set) to focus on classic issues?
Latin American Collection
This would be a great question for JB to respond. If are thinking that he is skipping the modern high end (1/0), I think you are right. Statehood Quarters may be a good example.
My 20th Century Gold Major Design Type Set ---started : 11/17/1997 ---- completed : 1/21/2004
Surely not. Say it ain’t so.
My 20th Century Gold Major Design Type Set ---started : 11/17/1997 ---- completed : 1/21/2004
Currin is correct in that the auction companies post the price one increment below the reserve.
However some companies, for lack of better words, try and confuse people. I have nothing against Stack's but since the link is above, I feel their language confusing changed. The current BID is NOT 220K. That is rarely the case. This is misleading and could be fraudulent. If the bid before this was posted was 100K then that was or is the current bid. You cannot say "current bid" if no one bid it.
That leads some people to believe that someone else thought the coin was worth 220K.
I prefer NO reserve auctions. You then see the true demand. HA in many cases charge the consignor if the coin does not
meet the reserve, Lastly it is interesting to note how many coins sell for the reserve with no other bids. To me that is NOT
an auction but a sale.
The 1830 is impossible to price. Too rare. Great coin.
Not sure if the Pogue 65 was CAC. If not, I call it a 64 and therefore it did not bring the true 65 price.
The registry does not distort things. It has been around for so many years that the buying behavior has become commonplace and to be expected. People pay prices to obtain a score. The problems as I noted before is that the scoring
needs a total revamp based on thirty years of pops.
DLH should be doing what many others do. If a coin is a higher grade, has better eye appeal and is of course CAC, take
the cost of it and the cost or approximate sales price of the one we already own. Use that to compute the net price
that is going to be paid for the upgrade.
I think it is a two part questions for @JBatDavidLawrence
Latin American Collection
>
The registry distorts logical cost/benefit, risk/reward decision making; incentivizing people to pay exponentially more money for such small increments in quality that they themselves cannot actual perceive and often for coins which are simply mistakes and manipulations in plastic. The problem is not that the scoring needs a revamp, it is that old adage about fools and money...
Latin American Collection
Hansen should consider skipping the Jefferson nickel series as well since PCGS doesn't recognize the following coin as an essential collector's coin for any of the Registry sets. Without coins like this and others with 6 full steps, Mr Hanson, as many have failed before him, will not be able to build the greatest Jefferson nickel collection.
Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
My Jefferson Nickel Collection
Just because pcgs does not include it, does not mean he cant have this coin in his collection
I vote Hansen should do nothing BUT moderns....
Back to the registry. You are technically correct in that a half or a full grade may not be worth the pay jump.
But is not relevant. Why? Because people routinely pay it. So it is common and accepted.
If the coins are CAC and therefore accurately graded, when something happens all the times for years, regardless of its
merits, it is just the way it works. is a 67+ worth 10K in some coins, more than a 67. YES. only because people will pay it.
Inherently it is not. I sell Diamonds. Same thing. Is an E color for X more than an F?
Here is a good example. I am paying 25K for any CAC 67 Saint. A 67+ is worth 35K? Should it be? Who cares. That is
what they bring.
I do vary from this at times, I have MANY amazing lower graded coins. They have FAR more eye appeal than the coin that
is in my set, But you do not get much score for eye appeal. The specialist always rants to not fill a hole with a non gem coin.
I 100% agree with this. However if you are going for score you buy and keep the gem coin and put the other one in the set.
Sure you look to improve but it is not always possible.
DLH is going to face the same thing as he upgrades.
But what must be true for that entire behavior algorithm to change? The value which was perceived based on past behavior can be lost in a moment. Anyways, back to Hansen, love your coins @Perfection , disagree with your philosophy of value. In the end buy what you enjoy, F the registry and another persons definition of what is the best. I am a non-conformist and define what I want by my standards and resent others defining it for me. If the registry defines that for you, good on ya.
Latin American Collection
I have a question for @Curry or anyone else for that matter. Since everyone is so hyped about CAC for the classics, should DLH then have a serious amount of QA check moderns in his set?
And if the answer is NO, then I would like an explanation.
Later, Paul.
Perfection, you keep comparing diamond pricing to coins. You are comparing apples to oranges.Diamonds are graded by GIA without taking eye appeal into consideration.
Diamonds are graded by color ,D - K , cut -round brilliant ,emerald, marquis etc., clarity
And cost. Proportions and finish are also taken into account
DLH is collecting coins primarily by the PCGS grade and the Set Registry. You have stated that you buy coins primarily by the PCGS grade and CAC. You stated you do not know how to grade
Coins.
Since you have collected so many top quality sets, how come you don’t learn how to grade ?
Personally, I think it would be good for DLH to learn how to grade. However he may just be doing this as his collection grows in quality.Just my observations
Thanks, Bruce! Far be it from me to chase a modern set, no matter how nice it is...
President of David Lawrence Rare Coins www.davidlawrence.com
email: John@davidlawrence.com
2022 ANA Dealer of the Year, Past Chair of NCBA (formerly ICTA), PNG Treasurer, Instructor at Witter Coin University, former Instructor/YN Chaperone ANA Summer Seminar, Coin World Most Influential, Curator of the D.L. Hansen Collection
It sure is nice! But we both passed on it there...
President of David Lawrence Rare Coins www.davidlawrence.com
email: John@davidlawrence.com
2022 ANA Dealer of the Year, Past Chair of NCBA (formerly ICTA), PNG Treasurer, Instructor at Witter Coin University, former Instructor/YN Chaperone ANA Summer Seminar, Coin World Most Influential, Curator of the D.L. Hansen Collection
This is a difficult question to answer...I'll do my best.
Moderns: If we define modern to be 1982-Present, I would say that we've done our best to buy the quality that makes sense within a reasonable price range. I've personally never been a believer in buying finest known (or similar) modern coins when millions have not been submitted for grading, for outrageous prices.
Pre-1980s material is slightly different, but completion with the best quality that makes sense is the overall goal there.
As far as completion goes: yes, the focus is the same. As far as quality: I think that this is a moving target due to grading events...
President of David Lawrence Rare Coins www.davidlawrence.com
email: John@davidlawrence.com
2022 ANA Dealer of the Year, Past Chair of NCBA (formerly ICTA), PNG Treasurer, Instructor at Witter Coin University, former Instructor/YN Chaperone ANA Summer Seminar, Coin World Most Influential, Curator of the D.L. Hansen Collection
JB, I sill vote for Delloy to ONLY concentrate on Moderns right now. NO
face!!!!
Hi John, is this set viewed as pre-1982? It appear you draw the line at 82, instead of 1965. Do you not find this set interesting?
My 20th Century Gold Major Design Type Set ---started : 11/17/1997 ---- completed : 1/21/2004
Why would you pick a year, consider everything after that date modern, and then simply not try on the basis that more will be graded? That would be like me saying anything pre 1909 is a classic, therefore it must be expensive and all have been discovered and graded.
Wouldn’t it make more sense for both modern and classic coins to judge each series and date on its own rarity and survival rate?
John, I think if someone on Mr. Hansen’s team did some studying on moderns you’d be surprised with what they find. I’m not at all saying that by buying all top pop moderns you’ll never see the pop increase. I think that if you know what to buy you’ll make out just fine.
Just imagine if someone told Col. Green not to touch “those funny 1913 lib nickels” simply because they we’re modern and more would be found.
I think Eliasberg collected coins from his current era. I applaud DLH for doing modems and agree on ther general strategy. Many modern series are collecting gold without spending gold. Collecting should be fun and I think it relates what Del is doing to an even broader collector audience.
Auction Update
Next week at this time, the bidding on this coin will be live. The current bid with one week to go is $3.8M. The reserved has been satisfied. Does anyone know if this bid include buyer fees or not. Are you surprised that it is already close to $4? Anyone have thoughts to share.
Stacks Bower Galleries
August 2018 ANA - Session 3 - Rarities Night - Lot 1096
The Finest Known 1913 Liberty Head Nickel
1913 Liberty Head Nickel. Proof-66 (PCGS). CAC
PCGS Coin Guide Price: $4,500,000
Current Bid Total : 4,560,000
Description
http://media.stacksbowers.com/VirtualCatalogs/2018/SBG_1913_Nickel_Supplement_LR.pdf
My 20th Century Gold Major Design Type Set ---started : 11/17/1997 ---- completed : 1/21/2004
$3.8 million does not include the buyers fee (it is $4,560,000 with). Next bid will be $4.8 million (with buyers fee)
Just my thoughts from July 23...
Agreed. I,will also,take the over with the BP.
6m today to,many people is nothing.
I think you may have your computer set to William Shatner mode
Latin American Collection
I have no idea what that means but I’m pretty sure his comma key is busted.
Yeah, basically I am reading, his posts in, a, Captain Kirk, voice.
Latin American Collection
Yes. Can’t figure out the comma issue with my iPad.
I predict over 5.9m with the bp
I have bought many coins like this. It makes me laugh to no end how people throw numbers around.
This is real money involved. Name a time when people just materialized and bought a big ticket coin? You can't. I have either bought most or been on most. NEVER seen it happen. Where are these mystery buyers who will spend so much??
Perfecto, you are out to lunch-unless you are willing to pay $5.9
I have $5.90.
Don't quote me on that.
I’d love to see $5.9M. Hoo baby - it would add several million to my 1804
But it has a sticker... It is the ONLY one to sticker. In your world and Perfection's world, doesn't that mean the other four really don't matter/exist and are merely expensive dreck? I am so confused. The coin gods have spoken and may intervene deus ex machina.
How? Not to be sarcastic, but is there any empirical evidence linking the market performance of the 1913 Liberty Head nickel to the market performance of 1804 dollars? Also, not to be a jerk or snarky, but doesn't the sticker matter? Your coin is amazing, but it is still overgraded (by your own admission as all of the 1804 dollars are) and has been altered (the "D" etched into one of the clouds).
Ok, back to the Hansen Collection as we know today.
Two New Additions to the Seating Liberty Early Proof collection
It appears to me that DLH/JB is working on the early proof sets. The main focus may be on the Eliasberg Quest, but other parts of the collection, i.e. Major Varieties, Proofs, and Moderns are still getting action too. They just had added two very significant proof specimens. The early proofs could become the greatest challenge for the Hansen Collections. The collection still needs approx. 200 coins for completion of early proofs. Jeff Garrett (2013) describes early proofs this way: Pre-1858 United States Proof coinage is highly desirable and very rare. The mintages are tiny in comparison to the latter issues. Some years are represented by a single example. The standard issue of the Guide Book of United States Coins only lists Proof coins starting in 1858. Until recently, there was very little information available on the early Proof United States coinage. The only book on the subject was written by the late Walter Breen in the 1980s. The book is an excellent reference work, but filled with inaccurate information. Walter Breen was known to create much of his research work from memory, and this was not always a reliable source.
The first addition is from the Liberty Seated Half Dimes, Proof (1837-1857) set. This Hansen set is approx. 60% completed. According to the PCGS registry, the Number One Finest Set of All Time set was assembled by J.J. Pittman. The Pittman set was approx. 86% completed and required 22 coins total. He was missing 3 coins in his set: 1841, 1851, and 1853 Arrows. PCGS Registry describes Early Liberty Seated Half Dimes this way: This extremely challenging 22-coin date set is filled with rarities and distinctive type coins. The 1837 No Stars is a classic that many consider to be an artistic masterpiece as well as a numismatic treasure. Additional types in this series are the With Drapery and Arrows at Date pieces. The Proofs struck in 1854 and later are more readily available but are still considered to be quite rare. https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/half-dimes/liberty-seated-half-dimes-major-sets/liberty-seated-half-dimes-proof-1837-1857/alltimeset/155475
1850 H10C PCGS PR64 CAC EX PITTMAN
This specimen is 1/0 carries the CAC sticker. Legend Rare Coin Auctions offered the coin 7/26/2018 as Lot #267 in a Live Webcast Auction. The lot was passed. I am not absolutely sure the meaning, but I assume either no one bid, or it did not reach reserve. Legend describes the coin as: This is a remarkably RARE and of GEM quality coin! Boasting a classic look, as well as a classic pedigree, this 1850 Proof half dime has an incredibly awesome and original look! Both sides are have a bold flashy look to the fields. The sharply struck devices really do stand out with razor sharp definition. Shades of blue, teal, green, slate, and gold glow when rotated in a light. Both sides show heavy die polish lines are visible, showing the care taken to prepare the dies prior to striking the 7-10 Proofs. The present coin is among the FINEST known, of four graded by both services and it is quite possible that this one is also graded by NGC.
We do not know why the specimen was passed in a 7/26/2018 auction, and then appeared two weeks later in the Hansen collection. Still, I think it was a great purchased. The collection that DLH/JB is assembling needs specimens of this caliber and pedigree. PCGS values this coin at $30,000.
Provenance: PCGS grade. Ex. Bullowa Sale (1952). Sold by David Akers Numismatics Oct '97. Price realized $33,000. Pedigreed 5/1/18. (This coin sold for $33,000 in the October 1997 sale of the John Pittman Collection. He bought it in 1952 from David Bullowa. More recently as an NGC PR65, it sold for $57,500 as part of the Kaufman Collection of Early Proofs in the 2008 FUN auction. A different NGC PR65 sold in January 2009 for the same $57,500.)
1850 H10C PCGS PR64 CAC Cert 35488068
The second addition is from the Liberty Seated Quarters, Proof (1838-1857) set. This Hansen set is approx. 53% completed. Again, the man for the Early Liberty Proofs is J.J. Pittman. According to the PCGS registry, he has the Number One Finest Set of All Time set. The Pittman set was approx. 84% completed and required 19 coins total. He was missing 3 coins in his set: 1838 No Drapery, 1842, and 1852. PCGS Registry describes Early Liberty Seated Half Dimes this way: This set contains a number of rarities. PCGS has certified only one 1838 No Drapery, 1846 and 1850. No 1839 No Drapery, 1840 Drapery, 1842 Large Date, 1842 Small Date, 1843, 1844, and 1852 have been certified! The set also contains the ultra-rare Proof 1853 Arrows & Rays (a one-year type coin) and other major rarities. https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/quarters/liberty-seated-quarters-major-sets/liberty-seated-quarters-proof-1838-1857/alltimeset/157372
1847 25C PCGS PR66 CAC
Also, this specimen is 1/0 carries the CAC sticker. Legend Rare Coin Auctions offered the coin 7/26/2018 as Lot #287 in a Live Webcast Auction. This lot realized $64,625. Legend describes the coin as: Legend Rare Coin Auctions is proud to have been chosen to auction this FINEST KNOWN extremely rare Proof Seated Quarter. We consider this coin a real numismatic treasure. There is no question we rank it VERY high end. This is one of those coins where there are far more dings on the holder then the coin (they are not horrible at all). The mirrors are outstanding and are really deep. The mirrors also display incredible clarity and cleanliness. The flash is tremendous. When you twirl the coin, the mirrors look like a fresh sheet of ice glistening in the sun. We think the ONLY reason this coin is not a PR66+-there is a touch of slight irregular toning on the obverse. ALL the toning is 100% original. The obverse has shades of blue/gold/pale violet/deep tangerine while the reverse is more a greenish blue/gold color. We do not believe this coin has ever been messed with Miss Liberty and the details are frosty and are fully struck. There is some moderate contrast. The eye appeal is adorable!
This was another great addition for the Hansen Proof Collection. PCGS values this coin at $65,000; therefore the realized price is very close to the PCGS value.
Provenance: Coin Facts do not have pedigree for PCGS MS66. I assume this specimen is fairly new in grade. In addition, Legend Rare Coin Auctions did not offer a provenance. Coin Facts previously listed 3 MS65 specimens with none finer. There are only 2 listed presently, so PCGS upgrade is likely. There is at least one MS 66 NGC, therefore a crossover is possible. If anyone can help with the provenance of this specimen would be appreciated.
1847 25C PCGS PR66 CAC Cert 35137064
My 20th Century Gold Major Design Type Set ---started : 11/17/1997 ---- completed : 1/21/2004
For the 1837-1857 Proof LS Half Dimes (the rare ones),
I feel the PCGS Set Registry comparison to historic collections is incomplete,
because it only includes the Pittman collection.
(Although the Pittman set is a good choice if you only have time to construct one list).
It is missing the Eliasberg, Kaufman, and Gardner sets.
So I made my own comparison, above.
I tried to extend all the examples to the most current slabbed grades.
It is a mix of PCGS and NGC grades, but the count is fairly clear.
If you exclude 1851, Hansen is tied with Eliasberg on the count.
He still has a ways to go to catch Kaufman, Gardner, and Pittman. But he has time.
He does have the only 1853 in a non-details holder, which the other 4 never had. It was auctioned in 2018-3 for $96 k.
https://auctions.stacksbowers.com/lots/view/3-9I94O
Fun facts: the two highest prices paid at auction for proof LS Half Dimes were for 1838:
1. $182,125 2014-1 PR-66 * V-6 ex-Eliasberg, Kaufman
2. $129,250 2014-10 PR-67 V-10 ex-Pittman, Gardner
[Edited - added colors to show provenance from Pittman, Eliasberg, Kaufman and Gardner collections, add cam, dcam, *, +.]
Great chart Yos. Do you believe these are the historic best 4 sets? Do you believe this set has ever been completed?
It is really a shamePCGS can not do a better job on the registery sets.
My 20th Century Gold Major Design Type Set ---started : 11/17/1997 ---- completed : 1/21/2004
Of course there is. Biggest evidence is selling the 1913 for $5M and offering $5M for the 1804$1 in the same year. And having the offer declined
@Currin,
Yes, I believe these are the top 4 historic sets (Liberty Seated Half Dime Proof 1837-1857).
The set of proof half dimes sold by David Bullowa in 1952 might be about the same, though.
This was just what I could do in 3 hours.
I do not believe this set has ever been completed.
I think PCGS does a fairly good job on the historic registry sets.
It takes time to construct them, and the incentive may be to not construct them, as it makes the current sets look better.
I think they get deleted at the owner's request sometimes, too.
Eliasberg's 1851 half dime, graded PR-66 in the sale of his collection,
was purchased by Eugene Gardner, and it was in a PCGS MS-67 holder when he sold it.
Eugene Gardner said in the youtube video linked upthread by @specialist that there were no Liberty Seated 1851 proofs (except for dollars).
Yos, thanks again for the chart. I really like the colors, I cant wait to see the quarter dollar chart.
My 20th Century Gold Major Design Type Set ---started : 11/17/1997 ---- completed : 1/21/2004
Question---Hansen has been very transparent about his goal, his purchases and his holdings. Could he have gotten to the same place completely under the radar if that was his preference?
I’m sure a few dealers would have noticed JB buying everything in sight at major auctions but if there were a lot of private transactions among different people it would be a bit harder for others to figure it out. I don’t think he could escape whispers and suspicion but I’m sure he could hide it from being so public as to appear here.
I imagine the advantage of doing it publicly is that people will come to you with coins. The disadvantage is it may make certain ones more expensive (or out of reach) because another rich collector may decide they have only one shot to win some major rarity. Similarly, the owners of the few unique coins are in a fantastic position of leverage.
2018 August 14 - 19 ANA WFOM US Coins Signature Auction - Philadelphia
There is less than a week to go. The bid on the 1854-S half eagle is holding for now less than $2M. No one knows for sure what interest that Hansen may have in this coin. I would think if DLH/JB had their choice, this coin would not be the specimen they desire. The Pogue Specimen is the coin of choice. There may be many unknown factors to us that would play in the DLH/JB decision on how aggressive they should be. My take on this coin, there is no guarantee this opportunity will come again. The 54-S $5 was the only coin that Harry Bass was not able to obtain for his world class Liberty Head $5 gold collection. It would be interesting to know how many opportunities Bass had to purchase a 54-S. Pogue purchased the Eliasberg Specimen in 1982. Did Bass have a shot and missed? The coin has changed hands one time in in approx. 72 years. The Dupont Specimen was purchases in 1962. According to Bass’ bio, he seriously started collecting in 1965. It is a very good chance that Bass never had an opportunity on this specimen. The Dupont specimen was discovered in the thirties or forties, and only came on the market once in 1962. The coin was stolen in 1967 and maybe lost forever. The Lilly Specimen was sold by Sotheby’s in 1954, and Lilly donated to the Smithsonian in 1968. It also appeared only once on the market. Again, I doubt that Bass had an opportunity for this specimen. In 33 years Bass was building his collection, he may have had one opportunity to purchase a 1954-S $5 Specimen in 1982 .
Hansen now is facing that one opportunity. He may have other opportunities future, no one knows. With one coin lost, and the other off the market, this new specimen and the Pogue are all there is. Will the Pogue Specimen ever be sold? Maybe. Could the Pogue family keep it off the market for several decades…possible? Could they donate the coin to the Smithsonian… possible? Could this new find be sold and go off the market for several decades… possible? Could this be Hansen’s only opportunity… possible?
The discovery of a lifetime could also be the purchase of a lifetime. I am glad I don’t have to make this decision.
1854-S Five Dollar Liberty, XF45
Newly Discovered 19th Century Gold Rarity
Only the Fourth Example Known to Collectors
PCGS Coin Guide Price: $1,750,000
Current Bid Total: $1,860,000
My 20th Century Gold Major Design Type Set ---started : 11/17/1997 ---- completed : 1/21/2004
I can't imagine why Hansen wouldn't buy the 54s.
better options we are not privy to?
Like the Pogue piece
Latin American Collection
people here seem to be totally enamored with Delloy, there are other significant players out there who do NOT bang a drum. I am not a player on the 54S, but I think there is a collector out there who will just buy it (not Delloy). there is plenty of real and big money floating around.
Hard to believe but there are one or two "quiet" great $5 Lib sets out there. Take nothing away from their owners or the quality of those sets.
If I were in that league, there's no way I'd let that one get away.
The rarity combined with the time that it obviously spent in obscure circulation gives it an aura and mystery that far more famous coins don't even come close to.
Not "enamored," just recognize he is quite driven and has substantial resources that he's not afraid to use. That said, you know more about his competition than most of us commenting here...
You made the decision very clear. He must get this coin. If rich enough, upgrade if the better one comes along. There may be something we don't know. Suppose they are secretly negotiating for the better coin already. Most things have a price that cannot be refused unless personalities become involved.