Anyone care to guess how many
Set Registry awards Mr. Hansen will receive at this years Set Registry Luncheon ?
Is anyone bringing a wheelbarrow
to help him carry them away ?
@STEWARTBLAYNUMIS said:
Anyone care to guess how many
Set Registry awards Mr. Hansen will receive at this years Set Registry Luncheon ?
Is anyone bringing a wheelbarrow
to help him carry them away ?
We will find out soon enough. I could take the entire lunch to list all of them.
Collector and Researcher of Liberty Head Nickels. ANA LM-6053
Someone asked me a question during the turbulence yesterday. I think it was Cam, but not 100% sure. It was a great question that went something like this: What is your favorite coin that Hansen purchased the past six months, and why? It is a great question that should be asked to the community.
This is an easy question for me. It is the Eliasberg 1885 Proof Trade. It is the finest known to 99% of the community, very rare, record sale, great history, and lastly, highly desirable. Hansen broke several hearts with this purchase.
@Currin said:
Someone asked me a question during the turbulence yesterday. I think it was Cam, but not 100% sure. It was a great question that went something like this: What is your favorite coin that Hansen purchased the past six months, and why? It is a great question that should be asked to the community.
This is an easy question for me. It is the Eliasberg 1885 Proof Trade. It is the finest known to 99% of the community, very rare, record sale, great history, and lastly, highly desirable. Hansen broke several hearts with this purchase.
That sounds as if it was too easy for you. If you feel like it, I’d love to hear which one or two others come to mind after the 1885 TD?
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
@Currin said:
Someone asked me a question during the turbulence yesterday. I think it was Cam, but not 100% sure. It was a great question that went something like this: What is your favorite coin that Hansen purchased the past six months, and why? It is a great question that should be asked to the community.
This is an easy question for me. It is the Eliasberg 1885 Proof Trade. It is the finest known to 99% of the community, very rare, record sale, great history, and lastly, highly desirable. Hansen broke several hearts with this purchase.
Here's the coin.
1885 Trade Dollar - PCGS PR65+CAM (Gold Shield) pop 1/0 - Eliasberg-Hansen
Of note, this coin isn't listed in the CoinFacts Condition Census which only has the PR63+CAM and PR62CAM.
If we are talking about purchases last six months, I would say I like the purchase of early half-dimes from JRCSLM32 including the 1802, the third purchased was Perfection Liberty Seated Half Dollars.
@Currin said:
If we are talking about purchases last six months, I would say I like the purchase of early half-dimes from JRCSLM32 including the 1802, the third purchased was Perfection Liberty Seated Half Dollars.
Thank you.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
@Currin said:
This is an easy question for me. It is the Eliasberg 1885 Proof Trade. It is the finest known to 99% of the community, very rare, record sale, great history, and lastly, highly desirable. Hansen broke several hearts with this purchase.
This will definitely be one of his most memorable coins and one of the ones that will be weighed most heavily when evaluating his collection in the future. The next highest graded coin (either service) is two points lower than the current holder grade (and this previously resided in a NGC 66 holder which is probably why it isn't included in the PCGS condition census).
Of note, this coin isn't listed in the CoinFacts Condition Census which only has the PR63+CAM and PR62CAM.
It's at the top of the list on the CAM page you linked now.
Saying that 99% judge the Eliasberg to be the finest known seems wrong - 4 well known expert graders say it is not.
There's no way that 400 other people have held the top 2 coins in hand and are qualified to judge that the Eliasberg is the finest.
(raw). Johnson, Green, Hester, "Menjou", Stack, Baldenhofer, in a private collection for nearly 40 years.
TDN: "It’s equal or slightly finer [than the Eliasberg]".
Kevin Lipton, Jim Halperin and Laura Sperber judge it to be finer.
PCGS PR-65+ cam. Atwater, Eliasberg, Parrino, Morelan, Hansen.
TDN: "lightly hairlined and somewhat weakly struck with patches of funky toning but otherwise pristine."
PCGS PR-63+ cam. Idler, Hasletine, Granberg, Green, Johnson, Roe, Kern, Carter, Worrell, Simpson.
TDN: "The Carter coin has been gently mishandled but since nicely retoned."
PCGS PR-62 cam. Farouk, Norweb, Richmond.
TDN: "The Norweb coin is heavily hairlined and has been cigar smoked."
"estimated PR-60". Olsen, Young, French.
TDN: "the fifth specimen was reportedly seriously mishandled."
The Eliasberg is still a great coin.
But let's not get carried away with "highest graded". This does not always coincide with finest known.
(raw). Johnson, Green, Hester, "Menjou", Stack, Baldenhofer, in a private collection for nearly 40 years.
TDN: "It’s equal or slightly finer [than the Eliasberg]".
Kevin Lipton, Jim Halperin and Laura Sperber judge it to be finer.
TDN also indicated that this is the best specimen a few times, emphasis mine:
@tradedollarnut said:
I have also held four 1885s in my hand. The Norweb coin is heavily hairlined and has been cigar smoked. The Carter coin has been gently mishandled but since nicely retoned. The Eliasberg coin is lightly hairlined and somewhat weakly struck with patches of funky toning but otherwise pristine. The raw coin is the best of the bunch as the fifth specimen was reportedly seriously mishandled.
That being said, the raw coin really needs a TrueView
@Stooge said:
If I remember correctly, there is a member that has the Eliasberg Roosevelt Dimes in the original Dansco album and he couldn't sell them. He wanted a hefty price and said if they don't sell he would stick them back into the safe. I can't remember who it was, but he had them on the BST forum and that was about a yr of 2 ago.
Great info. I wonder if there's any way for PCGS to pedigree these to Eliasberg since they are in a Dansco? Are there good enough photos to match?
That's why I didn't buy them. They are basically run of the mill coins as Currin said and he wanted something like $700. Wasn't even sure about the pedigree otherwise I would've bought them. I'm sure if you did a search you could find the seller.
It would be nice to know if the set are still intact and can be verified. It would be really cool if Hansen purchased the set and displayed the Eliasberg set of Roosies along side of his. Just by mentioning this, I may have cause the value of the set to double or maybe triple. Hansen still may be interested. Just a cool thought.
@Stooge said:
If I remember correctly, there is a member that has the Eliasberg Roosevelt Dimes in the original Dansco album and he couldn't sell them. He wanted a hefty price and said if they don't sell he would stick them back into the safe. I can't remember who it was, but he had them on the BST forum and that was about a yr of 2 ago.
Great info. I wonder if there's any way for PCGS to pedigree these to Eliasberg since they are in a Dansco? Are there good enough photos to match?
That's why I didn't buy them. They are basically run of the mill coins as Currin said and he wanted something like $700. Wasn't even sure about the pedigree otherwise I would've bought them. I'm sure if you did a search you could find the seller.
It would be nice to know if the set are still intact and can be verified. It would be really cool if Hansen purchased the set and displayed the Eliasberg set of Roosies along side of his. Just by mentioning this, I may have cause the value of the set to double or maybe triple. Hansen still may be interested. Just a cool thought.
It would be interesting as a side item in a display much like Eliasberg's pipe.
@Coinstartled said:
Don't believe that i have posted to this thread. Quite interesting.
I did.....one time. I learned my lesson fast. Big fish only. No small frys. No dissenting. Toe the line.
Not anymore.
I understand where you're coming from Cameonut. But.....this thread is the third rail. I wouldn't touch it with a ten foot pole. I prefer to remain a member in good standing.
The Eliasberg is still a great coin.
But let's not get carried away with "highest graded". This does not always coincide with finest known.
I agree, but I must say that in many if not most, it actually does.
I often use the term community in my posting. What is the meaning? First, I am speaking of the people that watch, post, visit this thread. Secondly, you are member of the community if you are a novice, an expert or anything between. So in my book, you do not have to be an expert to have an opinion based on what you know or have read. So when I referenced community, I most certain were not speaking of experts only. I consider myself a novice. I am far from being an expert or a grader. I never purchased mint state coins before PCGS. I did not trust I could do so with being taken to the cleaners. I purchase my first PCGS graded coin 9/22/1997 from Bowers & Merena. The coin was a 1938-D MS65 Buffalo Nickel. Not, a very expensive coin, and I still have today. So, I have always had trust in PCGS. Without them, I would not have a collection today. Also, I enjoy studying and following the coin hobby as a pastime activity. I read and knew much of Eliasberg history before Hansen ever came on the scene. I remember when DLRC sent me the Richmond Books in 2004-2005. I remember reading and looking at the pictures in the books several times from cover to cover. I did not purchase a coin from the Richmond collection because none of them were PCGS certified. I cannot say that I represent the community, and with that, I don’t believe experts do.
As for the Eliasberg 1885 Trade Dollar, let me first say that for my time enjoying and studying the hobby (30+ years), I have always thought the coin to be the finest known. Also, until Hansen purchased the coin a couple months ago, I do not remember anyone challenging or disputing this ranking. I will try to say this without being negative, it appear to me with many of Hansen coins, as with the 1885, they lose a lot of their shine starting at the day Hansen makes the purchase. This may be a biased statement, but it is my observation. I may be the only one that has made that observation.
There appear to be some recent claims to the ranking status of Eiasberg’s 1885. There a hidden coin out there that now appears by some folks as superior. For it to be proven, the simple way would be by having PCGS certify it. Is this coin a cameo as Eiasberg’s? I think to make a claim without backing it up is not the best way to proceed.
Secondly, I don’t base my opinion by holding the coins in hand and comparing the grade. Like I said, I am not the expert. But I do base my opinion on what I have read over a long period of time. I know there a lot of re-writing history going on in many facets of our world. I guess numismatics is not much different in that aspect. History tells me that the 1885 Eliasberg Specimen is the finest. Let me share a couple examples.
This 1885 Trade dollar was described in lot 2354 of the Eliasberg Collection, Part II (Stack's/Bowers and Merena, 4/1997) in a four-page lot description titled "Incredible Gem 1885 Trade Dollar/Finest by Far of Just Five Known/Landmark American Rarity/A Highlight of the Eliasberg Collection." The lot realized $907,500, a remarkable price at the time, when only two coins, the Eliasberg 1913 Liberty nickel and the 1804 dollar from the same collection had sold for more than $1 million. This remarkable coin has changed hands a few times privately since the Eliasberg sale, the last time selling for $3.3 million in 2006, but it has never been publicly offered since. As I indicated before, the first certified coin that I purchased was from Bowers and Merena. I put a lot of trust in what they say and their business reputation for many years. If Q. David Bowers was to come on this forum and say, “I am sorry but we had it wrong”, then I would take notice.
More recently, the Eliasberg specimen was sold in a Heritage Auction for $3,960,000. This was the lot headline:
1885 Trade Dollar, PR66 Finest of Five Examples Known Ex: Atwater-Eliasberg
The physical description given by Heritage for the coin was as follows: Few coins can match the combination of extreme rarity, highest available technical quality, and tremendous visual appeal this coin possesses. As the finest of just five known examples, with an illustrious pedigree to some of the most famous collections of all time, this lot is one of the most important offerings in this, or any other sale. The cataloger of the Eliasberg description noted, "The present coin, a highlight of the Louis E. Eliasberg, Sr. Collection, is one of the most important offerings of our generation. Its next owner will have a fantastic treasure." Off the market for more than 20 years, this coin may not become available again in the collecting life of most numismatists reading this catalog. The discerning collector will bid accordingly. I have always thought Heritage Auctions has an outstanding business reputation. I am not sure about the rest of the community, but I am not about to change my opinion without more proof than I have seen so far.
As I stated before, I have enjoyed reading and studying numismatic history for a long time, and this is the first time that I ever remember seeing the Elaisberg specimen not the top spot of a 1885 Proof Trade Dollar roster, as I saw just a few days ago on this thread. I will readily acknowledge, I have not read or seen everything written on the 1885. I am just going by what I can remember and recognizing that I remember less and less every day.
I usually end by saying to the community, you be the judge, but not sure how you can do that in this case, because one of the coins is not available but to just a select few to see. In several ways, I am sadden by this and recent events we have seen lately in the numismatic arena. I know maybe in grand scheme this is not important, but maybe it is. I will end with a parody on the starting comment..
But let's not get carried away with jumping on a band wagon when the facts are not proven. This does not always coincides with history when unverified statements are taken as facts without proof.
1885 Proof Trade Dollar, PR65+ CA (aka PR66 NGC) PCGS Coin #87065 / PCGS Serial #36982251 / POP 1/0
Ex: Superintendent of the Philadelphia Mint Archibald Loudon Snowden in 1885; possibly William Woodin in 1910; William Cutler Atwater; Atwater Collection (B. Max Mehl, 6/1946), lot 378; Louis E. Eliasberg, Sr.; Eliasberg Collection, Part II (Bowers and Merena, 4/1997), lot 2354, realized $907,500; Jay Parrino; Bruce Morelan via Legend for $1.5 million in 1999; Bruce Morelan traded this coin and the Eliasberg 1884 Trade dollar in 2006-2007 to John Albanese; both the 1884 and 1885 Trade dollars were then sold to Heritage by John Albanese; the 1885 was sold privately by Heritage Auctions for $3.3 million in January 2006; (Heritage 2019 January 9 - 14 FUN US Coins Signature Auction - Orlando #1291: Lot 4553, realized $3,960,000), DL Hansen Collection
I still remember the night over at Kevin Lipton’s house when he told me that the raw one was finer. Didn’t quite believe it because of everything that you mention above. It was over a decade until I held the coin in my hand (funny, it’s in a bank about ten miles from here as I post).
It’s well struck, unhairlined with pleasing toning. Looks like any old PCGS 66. Oh, but the date....
@tradedollarnut said:
I still remember the night over at Kevin Lipton’s house when he told me that the raw one was finer. Didn’t quite believe it because of everything that you mention above. It was over a decade until I held the coin in my hand (funny, it’s in a bank about ten miles from here as I post).
It’s well struck, unhairlined with pleasing toning. Looks like any old PCGS 66. Oh, but the date....
that's certainly his choice but he should not be surprised when people dont consider his coin to be the finest.
I think what people say on forums, either way, best or not relevant, isn’t relevant to owners that prefer to keep their coins private. Of course, that doesn’t prevent others from arguing relevancy
In any event, Hansen’s coin is the best I’ve seen, if only through pics, so I have to say I like it
that's certainly his choice but he should not be surprised when people dont consider his coin to be the finest.
I think what people say on forums, either way, best or not relevant, isn’t relevant to owners that prefer to keep their coins private. Of course, that doesn’t prevent others from arguing relevancy
In any event, Hansen’s coin is the best I’ve seen, if only through pics, so I have to say I like it
I agree. It's absolutely his choice whether to keep his coin raw, pcgs, ngc , cac or non CAC----i just think it's a bit unfair for a coin that has long been considered the finest to be challenged by a coin that is not only non public but has not been reviewed by an independent unbiased third party. I understand that the owner apparently doesnt care about the recognition but we wouldnt be having this discussion if others didnt care.
What’s fairness got to do with anything? The coin is what it is. Anyone buying ANY coin has to be aware there is always the possibility that something else is out there.
@tradedollarnut said:
What’s fairness got to do with anything? The coin is what it is. Anyone buying ANY coin has to be aware there is always the possibility that something else is out there.
...this is why I love the approach Mr. Hansen is taking...why go for one square piece of bubblegum when you can have the Doublemint twins with every date?...I respect a true collector with such deep pockets as there really shouldn’t be any limit to his/her collection. I know if it were me I would be loading that pipe with cookies and buying coins 20 hours a day
that's certainly his choice but he should not be surprised when people dont consider his coin to be the finest.
I totally agree with TDN on this. I have seen plenty of coins at auction with the phrase “finest graded”. That is pure baloney. I know of plenty of raw colonial coins that far exceed those that have been slabbed. One needs to really be on top of the series that they are collecting.
I have and know of other collectors with plenty of raw coins that would blow away what is “finest graded”.
that's certainly his choice but he should not be surprised when people dont consider his coin to be the finest.
I totally agree with TDN on this. I have seen plenty of coins at auction with the phrase “finest graded”. That is pure baloney. I know of plenty of raw colonial coins that far exceed those that have been slabbed. One needs to really be on top of the series that they are collecting.
I have and know of other collectors with plenty of raw coins that would blow away what is “finest graded”.
I think that’s going a bit far. I think it’s fine to recognize nice, ungraded coins but I don’t see anything wrong with “finest graded”. It’s honest and clear in meaning.
@tradedollarnut said:
What’s fairness got to do with anything? The coin is what it is. Anyone buying ANY coin has to be aware there is always the possibility that something else is out there.
Why spend 7 or 8 figures on a 1933 double eagle, knowing that it could be possible there are 5,000 unknown examples in some govt vault.
I trust you that the raw coin is better, but it's also irrelevant considering it sounds like it's getting buried in 20-30 years.
that's certainly his choice but he should not be surprised when people dont consider his coin to be the finest.
I totally agree with TDN on this. I have seen plenty of coins at auction with the phrase “finest graded”. That is pure baloney. I know of plenty of raw colonial coins that far exceed those that have been slabbed. One needs to really be on top of the series that they are collecting.
I have and know of other collectors with plenty of raw coins that would blow away what is “finest graded”.
It’s not bologna if a coin is described as “finest graded” and it is the finest/highest graded. In that scenario, the condition of raw coins is irrelevant. But it might be bologna if the coin is described as “finest known” and there are raw coins which people think or know are finer.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
that's certainly his choice but he should not be surprised when people dont consider his coin to be the finest.
I totally agree with TDN on this. I have seen plenty of coins at auction with the phrase “finest graded”. That is pure baloney. I know of plenty of raw colonial coins that far exceed those that have been slabbed. One needs to really be on top of the series that they are collecting.
I have and know of other collectors with plenty of raw coins that would blow away what is “finest graded”.
I think that’s going a bit far. I think it’s fine to recognize nice, ungraded coins but I don’t see anything wrong with “finest graded”. It’s honest and clear in meaning.
“Finest graded” may indicate finest known to the uneducated collector.
that's certainly his choice but he should not be surprised when people dont consider his coin to be the finest.
I totally agree with TDN on this. I have seen plenty of coins at auction with the phrase “finest graded”. That is pure baloney. I know of plenty of raw colonial coins that far exceed those that have been slabbed. One needs to really be on top of the series that they are collecting.
I have and know of other collectors with plenty of raw coins that would blow away what is “finest graded”.
I think that’s going a bit far. I think it’s fine to recognize nice, ungraded coins but I don’t see anything wrong with “finest graded”. It’s honest and clear in meaning.
“Finest graded” may indicate finest known to the uneducated collector.
If it’s accurate, it’s not bologna, even if the uneducated collector takes it the wrong way. How would you note the population of a highest-graded coin?
Edited the add: For the record, I do prefer “highest graded” to “finest graded”.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
All I’m saying is that just because a coin is not slabbed doesn’t mean that it is not the finest known or at the very least finer that something that is slabbed.
that's certainly his choice but he should not be surprised when people dont consider his coin to be the finest.
I totally agree with TDN on this. I have seen plenty of coins at auction with the phrase “finest graded”. That is pure baloney. I know of plenty of raw colonial coins that far exceed those that have been slabbed. One needs to really be on top of the series that they are collecting.
I have and know of other collectors with plenty of raw coins that would blow away what is “finest graded”.
I think that’s going a bit far. I think it’s fine to recognize nice, ungraded coins but I don’t see anything wrong with “finest graded”. It’s honest and clear in meaning.
“Finest graded” may indicate finest known to the uneducated collector.
All that is indicating is that the uneducated collector needs to educate him or herself. The term is accurate.
Would you suggest no one use the term “finest known” since an uneducated collector could take that to mean the finest known to and graded by a TPG?
This is getting a little off track. The historic statement for the Eliasberg 1885 Trade is Finest by Far of Just Five Known. Period!
I believe statement at at the Eliasberg sale was for a MS65 raw coin. I not sure why TPG is being drawn into this discussion. It just confusing the discussion.
A TPG by PCGS could make the claim more legitimate, but that is the only value they could play in this discussion.
@Currin said:
The historic statement for the Eliasberg 1885 Trade is Finest by Far of Just Five Known. Period!
This is just auction description hype, not historic or really expected to be accurate.
Finest graded in a slab, sure.
But not finest known to the experts.
It's a part of the hobby that some collectors suppress information on the coins they own.
This does create challenges for the auction catalogers and those writing rosters.
It is more fun to study the coins when all the info is freely shared,
but sometimes we don't get that.
Also, until Hansen purchased the coin a couple months ago, I do not remember anyone challenging or disputing this ranking. I will try to say this without being negative, it appear to me with many of Hansen coins, as with the 1885, they lose a lot of their shine starting at the day Hansen makes the purchase. This may be a biased statement, but it is my observation. I may be the only one that has made that observation.
tradedollarnut Posts: 18,837 ✭✭✭✭✭ November 26, 2018 5:38PM
Used to own them both. Lovely coins - only issues are a fingerprint on the reverse of the 1884 and a flat strike and ‘moldy haze’ on the obverse of the 1885.
I’d be a buyer but I know where the better 1885 resides. It’s my dream coin.
And the auction closed 2019-01-10 .
Although it's true that sometimes @specialist posted after Hansen bought a coin that there was one she liked better (sometimes it was one he already had). She was mostly just sharing what she observed and judged when comparing the top coins.
P.S. I hope this does not feel negative to you.
I appreciate your great ongoing work on this thread.
Sometimes I will offer what I feel are corrections like this one, though.
That could also be added to auction results! Funny how people think they can reference a piece of crap compared to a nice coin with coin facts! I'm going through that now and there will be no sale!
that's certainly his choice but he should not be surprised when people dont consider his coin to be the finest.
I totally agree with TDN on this. I have seen plenty of coins at auction with the phrase “finest graded”. That is pure baloney. I know of plenty of raw colonial coins that far exceed those that have been slabbed. One needs to really be on top of the series that they are collecting.
I have and know of other collectors with plenty of raw coins that would blow away what is “finest graded”.
@Currin said:
The historic statement for the Eliasberg 1885 Trade is Finest by Far of Just Five Known. Period!
This is just auction description hype, not historic or really expected to be accurate.
Finest graded in a slab, sure.
But not finest known to the experts.
I wouldn’t say this is necessarily just auction hype.
It could certainly be the finest known to the cataloger. While a handful experts have seen a coin they deem finer, many have not. TDN didn't even see the finer one for over 10 years after hearing about it and not believing it. The finer, raw coin also isn't listed in the PCGS CoinFacts Condition Census.
Respectfully, if I were Mr Hansen I would offer to trade the Starr 1884 straight across for the Eliasberg 1884. There’s more value in the pair being together than there is in owning the finest graded. Both historical and monetary...
Comments
Anyone care to guess how many
Set Registry awards Mr. Hansen will receive at this years Set Registry Luncheon ?
Is anyone bringing a wheelbarrow
to help him carry them away ?
We will find out soon enough. I could take the entire lunch to list all of them.
Someone asked me a question during the turbulence yesterday. I think it was Cam, but not 100% sure. It was a great question that went something like this: What is your favorite coin that Hansen purchased the past six months, and why? It is a great question that should be asked to the community.
This is an easy question for me. It is the Eliasberg 1885 Proof Trade. It is the finest known to 99% of the community, very rare, record sale, great history, and lastly, highly desirable. Hansen broke several hearts with this purchase.
My 20th Century Gold Major Design Type Set ---started : 11/17/1997 ---- completed : 1/21/2004
That sounds as if it was too easy for you. If you feel like it, I’d love to hear which one or two others come to mind after the 1885 TD?
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Here's the coin.
1885 Trade Dollar - PCGS PR65+CAM (Gold Shield) pop 1/0 - Eliasberg-Hansen
Of note, this coin isn't listed in the CoinFacts Condition Census which only has the PR63+CAM and PR62CAM.
If we are talking about purchases last six months, I would say I like the purchase of early half-dimes from JRCSLM32 including the 1802, the third purchased was Perfection Liberty Seated Half Dollars.
What are yours?
My 20th Century Gold Major Design Type Set ---started : 11/17/1997 ---- completed : 1/21/2004
Thank you.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
This will definitely be one of his most memorable coins and one of the ones that will be weighed most heavily when evaluating his collection in the future. The next highest graded coin (either service) is two points lower than the current holder grade (and this previously resided in a NGC 66 holder which is probably why it isn't included in the PCGS condition census).
I’m not sure I had one specific favorite but I enjoyed looking at that group of Large Cents he added in March I think it was.
Collector of randomness. Photographer at PCGS. Lover of Harry Potter.
It's at the top of the list on the CAM page you linked now.
Saying that 99% judge the Eliasberg to be the finest known seems wrong - 4 well known expert graders say it is not.
There's no way that 400 other people have held the top 2 coins in hand and are qualified to judge that the Eliasberg is the finest.
Here is a roster based on what @tradedollarnut (who has held 4 of the 5 in hand) posted back when the Eliasberg was sold
https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/997819/hansen-watch/p31
(raw). Johnson, Green, Hester, "Menjou", Stack, Baldenhofer, in a private collection for nearly 40 years.
TDN: "It’s equal or slightly finer [than the Eliasberg]".
Kevin Lipton, Jim Halperin and Laura Sperber judge it to be finer.
PCGS PR-65+ cam. Atwater, Eliasberg, Parrino, Morelan, Hansen.
TDN: "lightly hairlined and somewhat weakly struck with patches of funky toning but otherwise pristine."
PCGS PR-63+ cam. Idler, Hasletine, Granberg, Green, Johnson, Roe, Kern, Carter, Worrell, Simpson.
TDN: "The Carter coin has been gently mishandled but since nicely retoned."
PCGS PR-62 cam. Farouk, Norweb, Richmond.
TDN: "The Norweb coin is heavily hairlined and has been cigar smoked."
"estimated PR-60". Olsen, Young, French.
TDN: "the fifth specimen was reportedly seriously mishandled."
The Eliasberg is still a great coin.
But let's not get carried away with "highest graded". This does not always coincide with finest known.
Very nice! One reason I post these is in the hopes that CoinFacts will get updated so it's exciting when it does.
TDN also indicated that this is the best specimen a few times, emphasis mine:
That being said, the raw coin really needs a TrueView
It would be nice to know if the set are still intact and can be verified. It would be really cool if Hansen purchased the set and displayed the Eliasberg set of Roosies along side of his. Just by mentioning this, I may have cause the value of the set to double or maybe triple. Hansen still may be interested. Just a cool thought.
My 20th Century Gold Major Design Type Set ---started : 11/17/1997 ---- completed : 1/21/2004
It would be interesting as a side item in a display much like Eliasberg's pipe.
Don't believe that i have posted to this thread. Quite interesting.
It would even be more interesting to see DL Hansen smoking from Eliasberg pipe .
Peace pipe would be a good idea around here.
I think that's what he's doing in the avatar from his last post a few pages ago...
I did.....one time. I learned my lesson fast. Big fish only. No small frys. No dissenting. Toe the line.
Not anymore.
I understand where you're coming from Cameonut. But.....this thread is the third rail. I wouldn't touch it with a ten foot pole. I prefer to remain a member in good standing.
Finest of Five Examples Known
I agree, but I must say that in many if not most, it actually does.
I often use the term community in my posting. What is the meaning? First, I am speaking of the people that watch, post, visit this thread. Secondly, you are member of the community if you are a novice, an expert or anything between. So in my book, you do not have to be an expert to have an opinion based on what you know or have read. So when I referenced community, I most certain were not speaking of experts only. I consider myself a novice. I am far from being an expert or a grader. I never purchased mint state coins before PCGS. I did not trust I could do so with being taken to the cleaners. I purchase my first PCGS graded coin 9/22/1997 from Bowers & Merena. The coin was a 1938-D MS65 Buffalo Nickel. Not, a very expensive coin, and I still have today. So, I have always had trust in PCGS. Without them, I would not have a collection today. Also, I enjoy studying and following the coin hobby as a pastime activity. I read and knew much of Eliasberg history before Hansen ever came on the scene. I remember when DLRC sent me the Richmond Books in 2004-2005. I remember reading and looking at the pictures in the books several times from cover to cover. I did not purchase a coin from the Richmond collection because none of them were PCGS certified. I cannot say that I represent the community, and with that, I don’t believe experts do.
As for the Eliasberg 1885 Trade Dollar, let me first say that for my time enjoying and studying the hobby (30+ years), I have always thought the coin to be the finest known. Also, until Hansen purchased the coin a couple months ago, I do not remember anyone challenging or disputing this ranking. I will try to say this without being negative, it appear to me with many of Hansen coins, as with the 1885, they lose a lot of their shine starting at the day Hansen makes the purchase. This may be a biased statement, but it is my observation. I may be the only one that has made that observation.
There appear to be some recent claims to the ranking status of Eiasberg’s 1885. There a hidden coin out there that now appears by some folks as superior. For it to be proven, the simple way would be by having PCGS certify it. Is this coin a cameo as Eiasberg’s? I think to make a claim without backing it up is not the best way to proceed.
Secondly, I don’t base my opinion by holding the coins in hand and comparing the grade. Like I said, I am not the expert. But I do base my opinion on what I have read over a long period of time. I know there a lot of re-writing history going on in many facets of our world. I guess numismatics is not much different in that aspect. History tells me that the 1885 Eliasberg Specimen is the finest. Let me share a couple examples.
This 1885 Trade dollar was described in lot 2354 of the Eliasberg Collection, Part II (Stack's/Bowers and Merena, 4/1997) in a four-page lot description titled "Incredible Gem 1885 Trade Dollar/Finest by Far of Just Five Known/Landmark American Rarity/A Highlight of the Eliasberg Collection." The lot realized $907,500, a remarkable price at the time, when only two coins, the Eliasberg 1913 Liberty nickel and the 1804 dollar from the same collection had sold for more than $1 million. This remarkable coin has changed hands a few times privately since the Eliasberg sale, the last time selling for $3.3 million in 2006, but it has never been publicly offered since. As I indicated before, the first certified coin that I purchased was from Bowers and Merena. I put a lot of trust in what they say and their business reputation for many years. If Q. David Bowers was to come on this forum and say, “I am sorry but we had it wrong”, then I would take notice.
More recently, the Eliasberg specimen was sold in a Heritage Auction for $3,960,000. This was the lot headline:
1885 Trade Dollar, PR66
Finest of Five Examples Known
Ex: Atwater-Eliasberg
The physical description given by Heritage for the coin was as follows: Few coins can match the combination of extreme rarity, highest available technical quality, and tremendous visual appeal this coin possesses. As the finest of just five known examples, with an illustrious pedigree to some of the most famous collections of all time, this lot is one of the most important offerings in this, or any other sale. The cataloger of the Eliasberg description noted, "The present coin, a highlight of the Louis E. Eliasberg, Sr. Collection, is one of the most important offerings of our generation. Its next owner will have a fantastic treasure." Off the market for more than 20 years, this coin may not become available again in the collecting life of most numismatists reading this catalog. The discerning collector will bid accordingly. I have always thought Heritage Auctions has an outstanding business reputation. I am not sure about the rest of the community, but I am not about to change my opinion without more proof than I have seen so far.
As I stated before, I have enjoyed reading and studying numismatic history for a long time, and this is the first time that I ever remember seeing the Elaisberg specimen not the top spot of a 1885 Proof Trade Dollar roster, as I saw just a few days ago on this thread. I will readily acknowledge, I have not read or seen everything written on the 1885. I am just going by what I can remember and recognizing that I remember less and less every day.
I usually end by saying to the community, you be the judge, but not sure how you can do that in this case, because one of the coins is not available but to just a select few to see. In several ways, I am sadden by this and recent events we have seen lately in the numismatic arena. I know maybe in grand scheme this is not important, but maybe it is. I will end with a parody on the starting comment..
But let's not get carried away with jumping on a band wagon when the facts are not proven. This does not always coincides with history when unverified statements are taken as facts without proof.
1885 Proof Trade Dollar, PR65+ CA (aka PR66 NGC)
PCGS Coin #87065 / PCGS Serial #36982251 / POP 1/0
Ex: Superintendent of the Philadelphia Mint Archibald Loudon Snowden in 1885; possibly William Woodin in 1910; William Cutler Atwater; Atwater Collection (B. Max Mehl, 6/1946), lot 378; Louis E. Eliasberg, Sr.; Eliasberg Collection, Part II (Bowers and Merena, 4/1997), lot 2354, realized $907,500; Jay Parrino; Bruce Morelan via Legend for $1.5 million in 1999; Bruce Morelan traded this coin and the Eliasberg 1884 Trade dollar in 2006-2007 to John Albanese; both the 1884 and 1885 Trade dollars were then sold to Heritage by John Albanese; the 1885 was sold privately by Heritage Auctions for $3.3 million in January 2006; (Heritage 2019 January 9 - 14 FUN US Coins Signature Auction - Orlando #1291: Lot 4553, realized $3,960,000), DL Hansen Collection
My 20th Century Gold Major Design Type Set ---started : 11/17/1997 ---- completed : 1/21/2004
I still remember the night over at Kevin Lipton’s house when he told me that the raw one was finer. Didn’t quite believe it because of everything that you mention above. It was over a decade until I held the coin in my hand (funny, it’s in a bank about ten miles from here as I post).
It’s well struck, unhairlined with pleasing toning. Looks like any old PCGS 66. Oh, but the date....
Why would the owner not have the coin graded? Thx
Because he doesn’t want to
that's certainly his choice but he should not be surprised when people dont consider his coin to be the finest.
I mean, you can choose to ignore raw coins, but they are still real and some are better than anything in plastic.
If the collector doesn’t want it graded, do you think they care how other people see the coin? I’m thinking no.
Pretty sure he couldn’t care less, and I can’t imagine why he should.
And FWIW, I have many raw coins in my collection and I don’t even think about how they might grade. It’s simply irrelevant.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
He doesn’t care
I think what people say on forums, either way, best or not relevant, isn’t relevant to owners that prefer to keep their coins private. Of course, that doesn’t prevent others from arguing relevancy
In any event, Hansen’s coin is the best I’ve seen, if only through pics, so I have to say I like it
I agree. It's absolutely his choice whether to keep his coin raw, pcgs, ngc , cac or non CAC----i just think it's a bit unfair for a coin that has long been considered the finest to be challenged by a coin that is not only non public but has not been reviewed by an independent unbiased third party. I understand that the owner apparently doesnt care about the recognition but we wouldnt be having this discussion if others didnt care.
What’s fairness got to do with anything? The coin is what it is. Anyone buying ANY coin has to be aware there is always the possibility that something else is out there.
...this is why I love the approach Mr. Hansen is taking...why go for one square piece of bubblegum when you can have the Doublemint twins with every date?...I respect a true collector with such deep pockets as there really shouldn’t be any limit to his/her collection. I know if it were me I would be loading that pipe with cookies and buying coins 20 hours a day
I totally agree with TDN on this. I have seen plenty of coins at auction with the phrase “finest graded”. That is pure baloney. I know of plenty of raw colonial coins that far exceed those that have been slabbed. One needs to really be on top of the series that they are collecting.
I have and know of other collectors with plenty of raw coins that would blow away what is “finest graded”.
I think that’s going a bit far. I think it’s fine to recognize nice, ungraded coins but I don’t see anything wrong with “finest graded”. It’s honest and clear in meaning.
Why spend 7 or 8 figures on a 1933 double eagle, knowing that it could be possible there are 5,000 unknown examples in some govt vault.
I trust you that the raw coin is better, but it's also irrelevant considering it sounds like it's getting buried in 20-30 years.
Hey - he says I’m in his will to buy it from his estate. If so, one day it will all be revealed
It’s not bologna if a coin is described as “finest graded” and it is the finest/highest graded. In that scenario, the condition of raw coins is irrelevant. But it might be bologna if the coin is described as “finest known” and there are raw coins which people think or know are finer.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Even with numbers on a holder, the debates continue.
I wonder how many coins that are true finest known are still raw (only considering non modern coins)? I would guess the percentage is miniscule.
“Finest graded” may indicate finest known to the uneducated collector.
If it’s accurate, it’s not bologna, even if the uneducated collector takes it the wrong way. How would you note the population of a highest-graded coin?
Edited the add: For the record, I do prefer “highest graded” to “finest graded”.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
All I’m saying is that just because a coin is not slabbed doesn’t mean that it is not the finest known or at the very least finer that something that is slabbed.
Back to the Hansen collection thread.
@Currin I missed it, but what does Hansen own with half cents?
All that is indicating is that the uneducated collector needs to educate him or herself. The term is accurate.
Would you suggest no one use the term “finest known” since an uneducated collector could take that to mean the finest known to and graded by a TPG?
This is getting a little off track. The historic statement for the Eliasberg 1885 Trade is Finest by Far of Just Five Known. Period!
I believe statement at at the Eliasberg sale was for a MS65 raw coin. I not sure why TPG is being drawn into this discussion. It just confusing the discussion.
A TPG by PCGS could make the claim more legitimate, but that is the only value they could play in this discussion.
My 20th Century Gold Major Design Type Set ---started : 11/17/1997 ---- completed : 1/21/2004
This is just auction description hype, not historic or really expected to be accurate.
Finest graded in a slab, sure.
But not finest known to the experts.
It's a part of the hobby that some collectors suppress information on the coins they own.
This does create challenges for the auction catalogers and those writing rosters.
It is more fun to study the coins when all the info is freely shared,
but sometimes we don't get that.
The quality of the Eliasberg 1885 T$1 relative to the raw coin was definitely discussed in the leadup to the auction.
Not simply after it sold.
Thread started 2018-11-26
https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/1009564/1885-and-1884-trade-dollars-at-auction-each-pr-66-ex-eliasberg/p1
@tradedollarnut posted later on the same day:
And the auction closed 2019-01-10 .
Although it's true that sometimes @specialist posted after Hansen bought a coin that there was one she liked better (sometimes it was one he already had). She was mostly just sharing what she observed and judged when comparing the top coins.
P.S. I hope this does not feel negative to you.
I appreciate your great ongoing work on this thread.
Sometimes I will offer what I feel are corrections like this one, though.
That could also be added to auction results! Funny how people think they can reference a piece of crap compared to a nice coin with coin facts! I'm going through that now and there will be no sale!
I wouldn’t say this is necessarily just auction hype.
It could certainly be the finest known to the cataloger. While a handful experts have seen a coin they deem finer, many have not. TDN didn't even see the finer one for over 10 years after hearing about it and not believing it. The finer, raw coin also isn't listed in the PCGS CoinFacts Condition Census.
The trick with "finest known" is known to whom?
I always thought "bologna" was lunchmeat and "baloney" was goofing around.
Respectfully, if I were Mr Hansen I would offer to trade the Starr 1884 straight across for the Eliasberg 1884. There’s more value in the pair being together than there is in owning the finest graded. Both historical and monetary...