@privaterarecoincollector said:
I personally dont like patterns, they are not real coins in my opinion.
They were not made for circulation.
They were not made for collectors either (with the exception of the Stellas and the UHR).
They were design recommendations to win to become a regular coin but didnt win.
Actually, a bunch were made for collectors, such as many of the off metals. They are known as fantasy pieces or pieces de caprice.
@privaterarecoincollector said:
I personally dont like patterns, they are not real coins in my opinion.
They were not made for circulation.
They were not made for collectors either (with the exception of the Stellas and the UHR).
They were design recommendations to win to become a regular coin but didnt win.
Actually, a bunch were made for collectors, such as many of the off metals. They are known as fantasy pieces or pieces de caprice.
There are many types of coins that get lumped into the broad category we call “patterns”. For a quick overview, check out this link:
While I wouldn’t suggest that they’re necessary for anyone’s private collection, there should be no doubt that many are among the rarest and most historically important coins ever produced. I’ve certainly bought, sold and collected my fair share of them over the years. Not just US issues, but from all over the world. And I still like them.
Andy Lustig
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
Me, I think we owe D.L. Hansen a vote of gratitude. He's assembling his collection at a time when it's been said that coins are in decline as a hobby.
That could well be, but when he and TDN make major purchases of terrific coins, it keeps me interested and involved even if at a lower altitude.
I don't much care if it's THE best collection ever. It's great and it's timely.
Good for the collectors at all levels.
@privaterarecoincollector said:
I personally dont like patterns, they are not real coins in my opinion.
They were not made for circulation.
They were not made for collectors either (with the exception of the Stellas and the UHR).
They were design recommendations to win to become a regular coin but didnt win.
Actually, a bunch were made for collectors, such as many of the off metals. They are known as fantasy pieces or pieces de caprice.
There are many types of coins that get lumped into the broad category we call “patterns”. For a quick overview, check out this link:
While I wouldn’t suggest that they’re necessary for anyone’s private collection, there should be no doubt that many are among the rarest and most historically important coins ever produced. I’ve certainly bought, sold and collected my fair share of them over the years. Not just US issues, but from all over the world. And I still like them.
Nice categorization by Saul Teichman. I did note that in that document, Saul doesn't use terms that appear in other places: "piece de caprice" and "numismatic delicacy".
The USPatterns.com Glossary indicates a "fantasy piece" is also a "piece de caprice", which the Harry W. Bass Jr. patterns website mentions is another term for "numismatic delicacy":
Fantasy piece - Piece de Caprice as Dr. Judd has referred: “Coins produced by Mint personnel using the Mint equipment and facility that were un-authorized.” Without exception, these coins were always rarities and when sold, commanded very substantial prices. They were made to be rare and they were made to enrich their maker.
U.S. Patterns, Experimental and Trial Pieces
[...]
Major categories include these:
Trial Pieces: Coins struck to test the dies, the coining process, or some other aspect of coinage production. There is some overlap between this category and experimental pieces. Also, certain trial pieces – indeed, most of them – were really made as numismatic delicacies. Such is the nomenclature with which specialists contend.
Experimental Pieces: Just as easily called experimental coins, these include those struck to test new concepts, such as different alloys of silver and copper, the feasibility of aluminum for coinage, the use of holes in the center of a coin to enlarge the diameter while retaining the same weight (experiments with holed coins were made in 1850-1851 and 1884-1885), etc.
Patterns: In the truest form, pattern coins illustrate new designs produced by Mint engravers (usually), different from those currently being used, or in some instances, proposals for forthcoming designs intended to replace those currently in use. Also, from time to time patterns were made to display variations in inscriptions such as the Motto IN GOD WE TRUST, which had as antecedents in pattern coinage such mottos as GOD AND COUNTRY and GOD OUR TRUST. Thus, such concepts as the 1858 “skinny eagle” used on certain cents, the 1859 “French Head” employed on half dollars, and the seated Indian Princess motifs of the late 1860s can be called patterns, as can be the Standard Silver issues of the 1869 era. Often, if a pattern proved to be of numismatic interest it was restruck, or combined with an irrelevant die, to create a restrike or numismatic delicacy, both of which are addressed below.
Numismatic Delicacies: Called pieces de caprice by numismatic historian Don Taxay, these comprise the largest category in the pattern series. These are pieces made not to illustrate unusual metallic compositions or new designs or some other forward-thinking concept of mintage, but instead, to provide rarities for sale to the collector trade. These coins include strikings of gold denomination dies and other metals such as copper and aluminum, the illogical combining of dies not intended for each other (such as a two-headed half dollar pattern of 1859), the extensive Standard Silver coinage of 1869 and later (which was made with plain edges and reeded edges, and in metals including silver, copper, and aluminum), etc.
Restrikes: Coins struck from pattern dies, but produced for collectors at a later date, such as Gobrecht silver dollars dated 1836, 1838, and 1839, restruck at the Mint circa 1859 and later; restrikes of 1836 2-cent patterns and gold dollars of the same date, etc.
Overall, I think one of the most confusing naming conventions in numismatics is that "patterns" are referred to as just one of several categories of "patterns"
I'm surprised it seems there hasn't been an effort to change this.
It’s also interesting to note that fantasy pieces are the largest category of patterns. Perhaps this has some effect on the interest in the entire series.
@privaterarecoincollector said:
[T]hey are not real coins in my opinion.
They were not made for circulation.
They were not made for collectors either (with the exception of the Stellas and the UHR).
They were design recommendations to win to become a regular coin.
@MrEureka said
Why bother "defending" Simpson's collection? I can't imagine he cares. If in his shoes, I know I wouldn't.
Fully agree. I don't understand the need to do that.
Because it really isn't about Simpson. It is about her and promoting her brand. How many times has she referenced a set or sets of his as "her" set? I also think there is envy that Hansen isn't seeking her advice, and she will be unable to claim what may very well end up being the finest collection of U.S. regular issue coins ever assembled. She always brags about how many top quality #1 registry sets she has built. If Hansen is successful, people in the future will shrug and say, "Yeah, but Hansen...."
It appear a few interesting coins will be offered in auctions later this summer. Stack’s Bowers sent an email yesterday announcing the offering of a PCGS MS65 1876-CC 20c piece. I was asked if I thought Hansen would pop on this coin. My thoughts, only if the coin hammers at a bargain. The coin is not one of the finest known. That is the first downer for Hansen. There are two higher graded PCGS MS66 specimens. They are presently in the PCGS Registry #1 and #2 sets. Stack’s Bower indicated there are two other PCGS MS65 specimens. I know one to be Eliasberg’s and the other unknown to me. In comparing this specimen with Eliasberg’s, I like the Stack’s Bower better. A more appealing coin than Eliasberg’s may be a plus for Hansen. Will that be enough to make Hansen interested? Maybe (at the right price). As stated, the third specimen is unknown.
We know if Hansen wants the coin, then it will be his. On the other hand, Hansen presently has a great looking 1876-CC 20c specimen. It is graded MS64 by PCGS and carry a CAC sticker. I don’t remember Hansen’s specifically commenting on this coin. I prefer the appealing aspect of Hansen’s MS64 CAC specimen over the other Top 5 except for maybe one of them. This leads me to believe that he may bid a few times, but will not reach for it.
Hansen’s Specimen 1876-CC Twenty Cents MS64 Certification #18397544, PCGS #5300, CAC PCGS Price Guide Value: $550,000 PCGS POP 5/6 – Note: numbers may be duplicated
.
.
Stack’s Bowers Specimen 1876-CC Twenty Cents MS65 (Gold Shield) Certification # 37861676, PCGS #5300 PCGS Price Guide Value: $650,000 PCGS POP 4/2 Ex: E. Horatio Morgan Collection
Comparing Hansen's 64 to the 65 up for auction makes me wonder if PCGS factors eye appeal very minimally in their grading. If I were Hansen I would pass on the 65........Registry points are not a good reason to "upgrade". I think Eliasberg would have resented the Sheldon grading standard. In his day eye appeal was at least 50% of the grade.
For this special day in our country, I will would keep it simple and show you a centennial coin. Hansen has a full set, and you just saw one of them a few days ago with the 1876-CC Twenty Cents MS64. The one that I will show today is a PCGS POP 1/0 gold beauty. This is one of hundreds of Hansen’s PCGS POP 1/0 coins that have not made this thread.
This is a brief PCGS description of the centennial coins. The nation's centennial Mint Set features one of the great rarities in U.S. Numismatics. The famous 1876-CC Twenty Cent piece exists today because a small group of approximately 20 pieces were saved for assay purposes when the original mintage of 10,000 was ordered destroyed. It remains one of the rarest regular issue US coins known. The appear infrequently to say the least, and command mid-six figure prices when they do. A second rarity from the "CC" mint that year was the Trade Dollar, and choice Mint State pieces are virtually unknown. The Philadelphia Eagle is the second lowest mintage Liberty Head, trailing only the ultra rare 1875 (100 minted). The 1876 (687 mintage) is nearly as rare as the super popular 1875 despite its nearly 7-fold striking edge – it is truly rare above AU. Of course, this is not the rarest coin found in this mint set, as that honor goes to the 1876-CC twenty cent piece, which likely exists only to the extent of the few coins saved from the Assay Commission. It is a legendary rarity and is the key to this mint set. The other two eagles are also rarities, the 1876-CC and 1876-S, especially in high grade. The half eagles (1876, 1876-CC, and 1876-S) are also rare, although a bit less so than the eagles. There are several other tough issues, including several among the silver ones, although none as difficult as the CC twenty cent piece.
Hansen has the All-Time finest 1876 Mint Set with Gold set. For the 29-coin set, Hansen’s GPA Weighted is 62.06. This is almost 4 points greater than Eliasberg in second place. His PCGS POP 1/0 coins are the 1876 Double Eagle and 1876-S Half Eagle MS60. There are five others that are tied for finest PCGS certified.
That's an interesting question. When comparing to Eliasberg, how many of his coins were actually graded by PCGS versus posting estimated grades. Since many, many Eliasberg coins have been graded by PCGS, i suspect a large portion of the Eliasberg coins are actually graded. Another derivative question is what percentage of Dell Loy's coins are actually from Eliasbergs collection. We know that they have a pipe in common now!
I know TDN was making a point about grade inflation and he was correct conceptually for sure. but how much grade inflation has occurred in Elisberg coins since 1997? I would guess on average between one and two points of upgrades. Might make for an interesting study for the thread. As i recall off the top of my head, in bust halves their are examples of 58 to 63 jumps but many coins are still graded the same or only one point higher than 1997.
The word difficulty does not do justice in describing the St. Gaudens Double Eagle series. The series is very tough to complete in registry grades. Dr. and Mrs. Steven L. Duckor shaped the gold standard for the series more than 15 years ago. I am not sure how the set did not make PCGS Hall of Fame at the time. The Duckor Barber Half Dollars made the HOF in 2003. I certainly believe their St. Gaudens Double Eagle should have been awarded the honor before retiring in 2005. This is the description of the Duckor set: This set is a phenomenal combination of Eliasberg, Carter and Akers coins taking 27 years to complete, making this collection original and breathtaking! The set includes the Eliasberg 1920-S in 66 and 1921 in 65, 1909-D and 1908-D WM both in 67. The 1924-D is ex.Carter in 66. Included in the set are the Akers 1925-S in 66 and the 1927-D ex-Auction '84 in 65. All the rare early "P" mints are gem. The ultra rare mintmarked 1920s are in 65 including 1922-S, 1925-D and 1927-S and the 1926-S in 66. Lastly, the High Relief is in 67 and the 1930-S in 65 with 1931, 1931-D and 1932 in 66.
In current PCGS registry world, Hansen is #4 All-Time, trailing two current sets and the retired Duckor set. I think it is safe to say that the St. Gaudens Double Eagle series have significant number of the PCGS Condition Census coins that reside outside of the registry. Hansen was able to find one and upgrade his collection. PCGS describes the series as: The $20 St. Gaudens - so called because the designer's name was Augustus St. Gaudens - was first introduced in 1907 with Roman numerals at the date and a high relief design. Later in 1907, the design was modified with the normal date (called an Arabic date) and much lower relief. Late in 1908 the motto "In God We Trust" was added to the reverse. The $20 St. Gaudens is one of the most popular coins in the world due to its beautiful design. Collectors who would never have the inclination (or the bankroll!) to build a complete set will inevitably buy at least one $20 "Saint." Private ownership of gold was outlawed in the 1930s and many coins that had not been released were melted. This created many great rarities within the series. The key issues include the 1907 High Relief (MCMVII), 1908-S, 1920-S, 1921, 1924-D, 1924-S, 1925-D, 1925-S, 1926-D, 1927-D (a major rarity), 1927-S, 1929, 1930-S, 1931, 1931-D, and 1932. The 1933 date is also a great rarity and controversy rages even today as to whether this issue is legal to own. Hansen has complete sets for the 51-piece and the 53-piece mint strikes. He is actively working on completing a proof set. He is 50% complete on the proof set.
Even though Hansen’s 53-piece mint strike set is #4 All-Time, I would not rate this set anywhere near the top for Hansen’s standard. I have been considering for some time on how should we view Hansen individual series. As you know, he is working on a massive series and cannot focus on one or two coins, or even one of two series. The reality is Hansen has already surpassed Eliasberg when you view the quality of the collections from top to bottom. I have concluded the best way to measure Hansen’s Sets is to measure them against his collection as a whole. I am opening this for discussion, I posted this not long ago, There are 1289 specimens in the 3676 piece set that are “Finest or Tied Finest”. This represents 35% of the set. Of the 1289 specimens, 273 specimens are PCGS Top Pop 1/0. This represents 7.4% of the overall set, or another to put it, for every 12 coins there is a PCGS Pop 1/0 specimen. This is not static, but is increasing due to upgrades. This is another nice fact: 2588 coins are Top 5 Condition Census specimens, or tied. The represents 70.4% of the set! If this is Hansen’s standard, then his St. Gaudens Double Eagle has more serious work to do. With this upgrade, it is a good start.
1909 Double Eagle MS66
The only coin finer is a single MS66+ specimen that is located in the current #2 All-Time finest set. A coin of this quality has not been publicly auctioned since 2013. Typically a coin as this one will find a home a stay there for a very long time. This coin does not have a public history. Hansen has paired with 1909/8 PCGS MS64, which will need some work on the future. The coins are described by expert David Akers this way: For years, the 1909 normal date was overshadowed by the popular 1909/8, but in the past decade or so the 1909 has come to be correctly recognized as the rarer of the two issues. Actually it is much more rare than the 1909/8 except possibly in gem condition where the two are of similar rarity. Unlike the 1909/8 which is often seen in VF or EF, the 1909 is normally available only in AU or Unc. This issue, along with the other early Philadelphia Mint issues from 1908 With Motto through 1915 (plus the 1920 as well), is very underrated in high grade. I have seen fewer Mint State examples of this issue than I have of any of the others, including the 1913, although there are a few more MS-64 or better quality examples in existence of this issue than there are of either the 1913 or the 1920. Nearly all of the known Mint State specimens of this issue are low quality, i.e. MS-60 to 62. Even in MS-63, the 1909 is a rarity, and above that level, especially in gem condition, the 1909 is one of the rarest issues of the entire series. A couple of superb quality Mint State pieces exist that are very nearly perfect, the nicest one I have seen trading hands in the 1980 bull market for a reported $30,000 plus. This specimen and the few others I have seen have a strong resemblance to a satin finish Proof, albeit with a bit less lustre. Dr. Thaine Price owns one of the nicest frosty ones I have seen, a solid MS-65 coin, and a prominent Eastern collector owns another of similar quality. The 1909 is always very sharply struck. Some specimens are frosty; others have a definite satiny texture. A few of the high-grade ones look very similar to the Proofs of this year. Lustre is nearly always very good, especially on the satiny ones, and the color is typically a light to medium yellow or greenish yellow gold. There are also some examples that have a very appealing light to medium orange gold color.
The PCGS price guide value for the coin is $90,000. We do not know how much was paid; due to it appear to have been a private transaction. It is very nice upgrade to the St. Gaudens Collection.
In comparison, The Eliasberg registry set describes his 1909 Double Eagle Specimen as assumed Gem Proof. Sold for $30,800 at the Bowers & Ruddy Oct '82 Eliasberg sale. Lot #1031. I am to believe he did not have a business strike coin.
St. Gaudens Double Eagle series have significant number of the PCGS Condition Census coins that reside outside of the >registry. Hansen was able to find one and upgrade his collection.
One of the reasons I really like what Hansen has been doing.
This is a solid 66 with only 2 ticks on the front & 1 hit on the reverse & very pleasant moderate toning.
And a nice new TrueView for us all to see.
Thanks Dell Loy!
The reality is Hansen has already surpassed Eliasberg when you view the quality of the collections from top to bottom.
Based upon what standard? Many of eliasberg’s gold coins have upgraded 2-3 grades since the sale...and silver 1-2 grades. You cannot go by the catalog grades, nor the Registry estimated grades
@tradedollarnut said: The reality is Hansen has already surpassed Eliasberg when you view the quality of the collections from top to bottom.
Based upon what standard? Many of eliasberg’s gold coins have upgraded 2-3 grades since the sale...and silver 1-2 grades. You cannot go by the catalog grades, nor the Registry estimated grades
It would be great to assemble all of the Eliasberg coins with their grades today.
The only coin finer is a single MS66+ specimen that is located in the current #2 All-Time finest set. A coin of this quality has not been publicly auctioned since 2013. Typically a coin as this one will find a home a stay there for a very long time. This coin does not have a public history.
[...]
It's a beautiful 6/1 coin.
What's the point of Cacking any of them when you get to under 10 pops?
I just looked at all 4 (the only 66 coins that I'm sure exist)
(#5 was a 66 A&A coin and is currently off radar)
Fox's should be a 67
Simpson's should be a 66+ along with midsouth
Hanson's is properly graded.
That took all of 5 minutes.
@tradedollarnut said: The reality is Hansen has already surpassed Eliasberg when you view the quality of the collections from top to bottom.
Based upon what standard? Many of eliasberg’s gold coins have upgraded 2-3 grades since the sale...and silver 1-2 grades. You cannot go by the catalog grades, nor the Registry estimated grades
This is the part I would find most annoying if I was Hansen. I'm sure the coins are also much more expensive as a result of the higher label grades.
@tradedollarnut said: The reality is Hansen has already surpassed Eliasberg when you view the quality of the collections from top to bottom.
Based upon what standard? Many of eliasberg’s gold coins have upgraded 2-3 grades since the sale...and silver 1-2 grades. You cannot go by the catalog grades, nor the Registry estimated grades
Because the Hansen collection is such a huge undertaking, any general statements are hard to respond. I think the best way to compare Eliasberg and Hansen collection is to initially look at the grades assigned to their coins. That is just a first step. After that one can take a deeper dive and start a direct comparison. Currin actually has done that for a number of posts and series and Hansen's collection held up well (actually exceeded the Eliasberg coins) when directly compared.
It is a fair issue to raise gradeflation but it is not fair to simply dismiss the quality of the entire Hansen collection by rasing the specter of gradeflation. I have been impressed overall at the quality of Hansen's coins when Currin discussed them in the Gazes challenge. Obvioulsy there are exceptions but also keep in mind that the collection continues to be upgraded almost constantly.
@drei3ree posted a nice coin above but I figured I'd add bit more info and and links. I've also included his 1885 MS coin below.
1885 Indian Head Cent PCGS PR67RD pop 4/0 - Hansen
The photos of this coin should be in CoinFacts but it's not currently there, either in the top listings or the Condition Census. In the top listing, the 3 featured coins are PR67RD, PR66+RD and PR66RD, so this PR67RD should definitely appear. The Condition Census lists 3 PR67RDs but no photos for any. The pop report notes there are 4 PR67RDs so the number of coins should be updated as well.
1885 Indian Head Cent PCGS MS66+RD pop 7/0 - Hansen
CoinFacts Condition Census lists just 3 MS66+RD with 2 using the same Hansen photo, one with Hansen's pedigree.
This coin has a CoinFacts photo but not a TrueView.
@DLHansen@JBatDavidLawrence - You can just ping @PCGSPhoto to add the TrueView background without taking a new photo since a photo already exists. Hopefully this would add the photo to CoinFacts as well.
Update: Phil was able to update the image to use the TrueView background which has been updated below:
@MattTheRiley said:
Imagine what this thread would look like if Hansen were to be employing Legend instead of DLRC as his main partner in building this collection?
Probably have a smaller but much nicer collection, might even own the 1913 nickel.
I don't know about that. There are certainly some areas where the collection could be stronger but there are others where the collection is very strong. I think he would still end up with many of the same coins. For instance, he owns TDN's old seated dollar set (many finest known, pop 1/0 coins) , Laura's trime set, and one of Perfection's sets (I forget which one at the moment). I do think he would have the 1913 Liberty Head Nickel. I agree with you that is the one area where I think he missed his opportunity at least for now. I also wouldn't have sold the 1854-s $5 that he owned an interest in.
Personally, I would have spent more time focusing on the tougher issues and less on the moderns, but I can understand the desire of extending the collection to the present. At this point, I'd spend my time and funds trying to pry away the PF68 Childs 1804 Dollar Class 1 Dollar and 1854-S $5 (both finest known) from Pogue and wait for the best 1913 Liberty Nickel that I could get my hands on.
@MattTheRiley said:
Imagine what this thread would look like if Hansen were to be employing Legend instead of DLRC as his main partner in building this collection?
I don't have anything against either dealer but it seems to me their are more than just a few dealers who could build the Hansen collection. I think I read somewhere that Hansen bought into the firm. If that is not true, I think Laura would have made a better partner EXCEPT for this: If she is building the best collections for more than one person it will be difficult to favor one over the other. Thus, better to sick with DL.
Hansen bought into the firm after he had already started building his set. I think it was early last year. As for building the set, it isn't hard for anyone to do if you have sufficient funds. Many of his coins come from major auctions so those are publicly available. Many of the others are in the top registry sets. Contact those and place ads for those and boom - you could have completed 90% of it on your own. It is true you would need to rely on specialist dealers for certain elusive coins that rarely appear as those individuals might know where the coins are, but there is no requirement that you go through them for the vast majority of the set. Of course having an expert (especially in auction representation) is useful. There are MANY individuals who can fill that role.
I have been away for awhile and I clicked on this link thinking it was about a wristwatch, maybe made from a coin.
Pleasantly surprised to see some utterly amazing coins instead. Coin imaging has really improved over the years.
@ReadyFireAim said:
Anybody else here ever talk to JB from DLRC?
I get the feeling he'd be quite pleasant to work with.
Not as a buyer, but I did reach out to him regarding a few coins that would have fit into a couple of Hansen's sets at the time. He was incredibly nice, down to earth, polite, and responsive. I have no doubt that he is an absolute asset to Hansen.
@MattTheRiley said:
Imagine what this thread would look like if Hansen were to be employing Legend instead of DLRC as his main partner in building this collection?
I am best suited to answer this question. The answer is the thread would not look like anything… because it would have never existed!
This thread is based on Mr. Hansen being one of the most open and transparent collectors (of his size) known. Most of the high-end registry sets do not get posted until they are completed. There are other high-end collections are not known to the public until they appear for sale. What we have been watching here for the last year, and in the registry even longer, is highly unusual. This is not a knock by any means toward Legend or their group of professionals. The reality is that probably 95% or more of the institutionalized professionals and specialists in the business would advise the same thing. Per their advice, The Hansen Collection would be something we hear about from time to time as other great collections, but for the most part, it would not be seen.
This leads me to this statement. We do not know what advice JB gives Mr. Hansen. I would tend to believe in most related matters, JB views may be similar to the other 95% of the professionals and specialists in the business. This leads me to my next statement, Hansen marches to his own drumbeat. He is the captain of his ship. I am sure he listens and appreciates JB’s input, but at the end of the day, the cash that is being spent is his. Hansen is the true Francis Albert Sinatra of coin collecting. His style would quickly clash if he worked with some of the other strong minded professionals in this business.
Lastly, I appreciate his building of this collection in the public. It is being done in a historic way. He is doing it under a lot of scrutiny. As you have seen, many of his coins are being picked apart for this or that. At the end of the day, I really feel like Hansen enjoys his collection and he is assembling the collection how he sees it should be. This is quite different from most of the other billionaires that are depending solely on someone else to make all the decisions for them.
I have a little more cleanup to post tomorrow. After that, let’s get back to the coins… OK?
Congratulations to Hansen on having the current finest set in the "TEN MOST FAMOUS UNITED STATES ULTRA RARITIES" registry category. He is currently #1 and #4 of all time (behind Eliasberg, Norweb, and the Smithsonian). He is missing the 1913 Liberty Head Nickel, 1894-S Barber Dime, and 1838-O Capped Bust Half. In light of passing on the Eliasberg nickel, is this set no longer a priority and will he seemingly ignore the two branch mint proof coins? Thoughts @currin?
It would be great to assemble all of the Eliasberg coins with their grades today.
It would be great to do, but I believe impossible to achieve. Many of Eliasberg’s finest and famous coins are identified and rightfully pedigreed. There is not one place to find them and it requires a lot of searching. The question has been asked in the past, how many are known, and I have not found anyone that can answer the question with any level of certainly.
Just one of the many major differences that I see with the two collections is that Hansen’s is trying to assemble his with the most PCGS Condition Census Top 5 specimens as possible. The last time that I looked, Hansen’s collection was about 70% Top 5 specimens. I can’t prove, but I don’t think Eliasberg was anywhere near that percentage. In his collection, you will find average mint state and proof coins between the years of 1932-1975. This not a large, but is a fairly good portion of his collection. There are many reasons why Eliasberg was not focus on the modern coins in his day. Some was in his control and some were not. It was a much different era before the TPG certification and registry.
As example, let’s look at the Roosevelt Series. Today, this series has a number of enthusiasts, but Roosies are still not as popular as some of the other modern series. I have found them to be very difficult and time consuming to collect in high FB grades. For Eliasberg, it does not appear he spent time or resources on the series. They were a must for a complete set, but not valued much more than that. When his collection was sold, the Roosies were sold as a lot. This is the description for Lot 1348. The lot realized $990.00
1348 Gem Roosevelt dime set 1946 to 1975-S. One from each date and mint. Average business strike grade is MS-63 or better with Proof dates grading Proof-65. The 1950 to 1964 Philadelphia Mint issues are Proof. The 1966 and the 1967 examples are from the Special Mint Sets. The San Francisco Mint issues from 1968 to the 1975 are Proof. Remainder grading average MS-63 or better. Many examples have light iridescent toning. Recently housed in a deluxe Dansco album to facilitate sale. (Total: 75 pieces)
The collection sounds pretty mediocre to me. I would like to think the Dansco album is still intact, but that may be wishful thinking. If so, it would be great to have certified. I know there are Roosie guys watching. Question, have you ever seen or own a Eliasberg pedigreed Roosie? It would nice to know if they exist.
As you know, Hansen has one of the nicest Roosevelt collections of all-time. Presently, the collection is ranked #2. I wonder what the value of Hansen’s Roosevelt’s would be. As stated before, I believe this will be significant factor when all is said and done. Time will tell who is on the right and wrong side of this debate.
To head the comment off, I know it may be said, so we now basing the quality of Hansen’s collection on Roosies dimes. No, that is not what I am saying. What I am saying, Let’s look at the collection comprehensively. Let’s look at what is in the collection now, and not focus so much on what is missing.
I have just cleaned up this thread, which is undeniably an exciting play by play of building what will be a historic collection. Let's keep comments positive and not compare dealers and/or other collectors.
Nice part is over
If someone tries to derail this thread back into negativity I will place them on a 24-hour temp ban. Thank you
Thanks for the post on Roosevelt dimes @Currin. I agree it's really interesting to look at these coins and this is what makes Hansen's set fun, that it has everything. I'm impressed by all the pop 1/0 and pop 2/0 coins in that screenshot, especially since they are all FB.
I wonder where the Eliasberg Roosevelt dimes are today and if they are still housed together in that Dansco album?
Here's the link for Hansen's circulation set which @Currin showed.
Hansen has the two most expensive MS coins according to the PCGS Price Guide:
1946 MS68FB $10,500 pop 4/0
1949 MS68FB $10,800 pop 2/0
There are more expensive proof and SMS coins, notably the 1975 No-S Proof with 2 known, valued at $349,600 for the MS68 and $200,000 for the MS66. Hansen doesn't have this coin yet.
Here's his 1946. His 1949 doesn't have a photo in his Registry Set.
1946 Roosevelt Dime PCGS MS68FB pop 4/0 - Hansen
This is the second most expensive coin in the set per the PCGS Price Guide. I like the color on this piece.
This coin is a pop 4/0 but not shown in the CoinFacts Condition Census, which only shows 2 for the grade.
I have just cleaned up this thread, which is undeniably an exciting play by play of building what will be a historic collection. Let's keep comments positive and not compare dealers and/or other collectors.
Nice part is over
If someone tries to derail this thread back into negativity I will place them on a 24-hour temp ban. Thank you
That was a lot of cleaning. Your fingers gotta be sore
m
Walker Proof Digital Album Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
@WaterSport said:
Hmmmm...Not sure what you exactly mean but there are Lincoln sets of his that are not public. There may be others.
I don't think this is close for a purpose. With more than 1200 sets, I don’t think it is possible to maintain with perfection. WS... If you would like to see this set, just send JB an IM and I bet he will open it up.
Laura, see Heather’s post, about six posts above yours.
I've come to the realization that her goal was to destroy this thread all along, and she was winning when we all engaged her and allowed her to make the thread about her. After seeing how much nicer the flow is with all of the extraneous text gone, I've decided to stop engaging and just start flagging the posts instead. If we all do this, Heather will take action (I think).
Comments
Actually, a bunch were made for collectors, such as many of the off metals. They are known as fantasy pieces or pieces de caprice.
There are many types of coins that get lumped into the broad category we call “patterns”. For a quick overview, check out this link:
http://uspatterns.com/whatarepatpi.html
While I wouldn’t suggest that they’re necessary for anyone’s private collection, there should be no doubt that many are among the rarest and most historically important coins ever produced. I’ve certainly bought, sold and collected my fair share of them over the years. Not just US issues, but from all over the world. And I still like them.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
Me, I think we owe D.L. Hansen a vote of gratitude. He's assembling his collection at a time when it's been said that coins are in decline as a hobby.
That could well be, but when he and TDN make major purchases of terrific coins, it keeps me interested and involved even if at a lower altitude.
I don't much care if it's THE best collection ever. It's great and it's timely.
Good for the collectors at all levels.
Nice categorization by Saul Teichman. I did note that in that document, Saul doesn't use terms that appear in other places: "piece de caprice" and "numismatic delicacy".
The USPatterns.com Glossary indicates a "fantasy piece" is also a "piece de caprice", which the Harry W. Bass Jr. patterns website mentions is another term for "numismatic delicacy":
Overall, I think one of the most confusing naming conventions in numismatics is that "patterns" are referred to as just one of several categories of "patterns"
I'm surprised it seems there hasn't been an effort to change this.
It’s also interesting to note that fantasy pieces are the largest category of patterns. Perhaps this has some effect on the interest in the entire series.
+1
Because it really isn't about Simpson. It is about her and promoting her brand. How many times has she referenced a set or sets of his as "her" set? I also think there is envy that Hansen isn't seeking her advice, and she will be unable to claim what may very well end up being the finest collection of U.S. regular issue coins ever assembled. She always brags about how many top quality #1 registry sets she has built. If Hansen is successful, people in the future will shrug and say, "Yeah, but Hansen...."
Yep...They sell them on the home shopping network along w/ Capodimonte lamps.
My Saint Set
Stack’s Bowers Preview
It appear a few interesting coins will be offered in auctions later this summer. Stack’s Bowers sent an email yesterday announcing the offering of a PCGS MS65 1876-CC 20c piece. I was asked if I thought Hansen would pop on this coin. My thoughts, only if the coin hammers at a bargain. The coin is not one of the finest known. That is the first downer for Hansen. There are two higher graded PCGS MS66 specimens. They are presently in the PCGS Registry #1 and #2 sets. Stack’s Bower indicated there are two other PCGS MS65 specimens. I know one to be Eliasberg’s and the other unknown to me. In comparing this specimen with Eliasberg’s, I like the Stack’s Bower better. A more appealing coin than Eliasberg’s may be a plus for Hansen. Will that be enough to make Hansen interested? Maybe (at the right price). As stated, the third specimen is unknown.
We know if Hansen wants the coin, then it will be his. On the other hand, Hansen presently has a great looking 1876-CC 20c specimen. It is graded MS64 by PCGS and carry a CAC sticker. I don’t remember Hansen’s specifically commenting on this coin. I prefer the appealing aspect of Hansen’s MS64 CAC specimen over the other Top 5 except for maybe one of them. This leads me to believe that he may bid a few times, but will not reach for it.
Hansen’s Specimen
1876-CC Twenty Cents MS64
Certification #18397544, PCGS #5300, CAC
PCGS Price Guide Value: $550,000
PCGS POP 5/6 – Note: numbers may be duplicated
.
.
Stack’s Bowers Specimen
1876-CC Twenty Cents MS65 (Gold Shield)
Certification # 37861676, PCGS #5300
PCGS Price Guide Value: $650,000
PCGS POP 4/2
Ex: E. Horatio Morgan Collection
My 20th Century Gold Major Design Type Set ---started : 11/17/1997 ---- completed : 1/21/2004
I will admit, I like delloys 76CC
Me too!
Comparing Hansen's 64 to the 65 up for auction makes me wonder if PCGS factors eye appeal very minimally in their grading. If I were Hansen I would pass on the 65........Registry points are not a good reason to "upgrade". I think Eliasberg would have resented the Sheldon grading standard. In his day eye appeal was at least 50% of the grade.
OINK
Happy Independence Day
For this special day in our country, I will would keep it simple and show you a centennial coin. Hansen has a full set, and you just saw one of them a few days ago with the 1876-CC Twenty Cents MS64. The one that I will show today is a PCGS POP 1/0 gold beauty. This is one of hundreds of Hansen’s PCGS POP 1/0 coins that have not made this thread.
This is a brief PCGS description of the centennial coins. The nation's centennial Mint Set features one of the great rarities in U.S. Numismatics. The famous 1876-CC Twenty Cent piece exists today because a small group of approximately 20 pieces were saved for assay purposes when the original mintage of 10,000 was ordered destroyed. It remains one of the rarest regular issue US coins known. The appear infrequently to say the least, and command mid-six figure prices when they do. A second rarity from the "CC" mint that year was the Trade Dollar, and choice Mint State pieces are virtually unknown. The Philadelphia Eagle is the second lowest mintage Liberty Head, trailing only the ultra rare 1875 (100 minted). The 1876 (687 mintage) is nearly as rare as the super popular 1875 despite its nearly 7-fold striking edge – it is truly rare above AU. Of course, this is not the rarest coin found in this mint set, as that honor goes to the 1876-CC twenty cent piece, which likely exists only to the extent of the few coins saved from the Assay Commission. It is a legendary rarity and is the key to this mint set. The other two eagles are also rarities, the 1876-CC and 1876-S, especially in high grade. The half eagles (1876, 1876-CC, and 1876-S) are also rare, although a bit less so than the eagles. There are several other tough issues, including several among the silver ones, although none as difficult as the CC twenty cent piece.
Hansen has the All-Time finest 1876 Mint Set with Gold set. For the 29-coin set, Hansen’s GPA Weighted is 62.06. This is almost 4 points greater than Eliasberg in second place. His PCGS POP 1/0 coins are the 1876 Double Eagle and 1876-S Half Eagle MS60. There are five others that are tied for finest PCGS certified.
1876 Double Eagle MS65 (Gold Shield)
Certification #81720686, PCGS #8976
PCGS Price Guide Value: $185,000
Hansen’s World Class Centennial Set
https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/u-s-coins/mint-sets/1876-mint-set-gold/alltimeset/187353
My 20th Century Gold Major Design Type Set ---started : 11/17/1997 ---- completed : 1/21/2004
That's an interesting question. When comparing to Eliasberg, how many of his coins were actually graded by PCGS versus posting estimated grades. Since many, many Eliasberg coins have been graded by PCGS, i suspect a large portion of the Eliasberg coins are actually graded. Another derivative question is what percentage of Dell Loy's coins are actually from Eliasbergs collection. We know that they have a pipe in common now!
I know TDN was making a point about grade inflation and he was correct conceptually for sure. but how much grade inflation has occurred in Elisberg coins since 1997? I would guess on average between one and two points of upgrades. Might make for an interesting study for the thread. As i recall off the top of my head, in bust halves their are examples of 58 to 63 jumps but many coins are still graded the same or only one point higher than 1997.
1885 Indian Head Cent PR67+BN (Gold Shield) pop 5/0
Certification #82609338, PCGS #2342
PCGS Price Guide Value: $4,500
Just ran across this top pop which is pedigreed to Larry Shepherd.
High grade, lots of color and few marks.
Hansen’s Indian Head Cents Complete Variety Set, Proof (1859-1909)
https://www.pcgs.com/SetRegistry/alltimeset/156450
^Now that's a beautiful TV! I'd like to see it in hand...I'm guessing the color is not near as vibrant.
Agreed. It looks stunning. I’d love to see this in hand as well.
You might be surprised. I have some vibrantly colored TrueViews and the coins are just as vibrant in hand.
Maybe this Hansen beauty?
St. Gaudens Upgrade
The word difficulty does not do justice in describing the St. Gaudens Double Eagle series. The series is very tough to complete in registry grades. Dr. and Mrs. Steven L. Duckor shaped the gold standard for the series more than 15 years ago. I am not sure how the set did not make PCGS Hall of Fame at the time. The Duckor Barber Half Dollars made the HOF in 2003. I certainly believe their St. Gaudens Double Eagle should have been awarded the honor before retiring in 2005. This is the description of the Duckor set: This set is a phenomenal combination of Eliasberg, Carter and Akers coins taking 27 years to complete, making this collection original and breathtaking! The set includes the Eliasberg 1920-S in 66 and 1921 in 65, 1909-D and 1908-D WM both in 67. The 1924-D is ex.Carter in 66. Included in the set are the Akers 1925-S in 66 and the 1927-D ex-Auction '84 in 65. All the rare early "P" mints are gem. The ultra rare mintmarked 1920s are in 65 including 1922-S, 1925-D and 1927-S and the 1926-S in 66. Lastly, the High Relief is in 67 and the 1930-S in 65 with 1931, 1931-D and 1932 in 66.
In current PCGS registry world, Hansen is #4 All-Time, trailing two current sets and the retired Duckor set. I think it is safe to say that the St. Gaudens Double Eagle series have significant number of the PCGS Condition Census coins that reside outside of the registry. Hansen was able to find one and upgrade his collection. PCGS describes the series as: The $20 St. Gaudens - so called because the designer's name was Augustus St. Gaudens - was first introduced in 1907 with Roman numerals at the date and a high relief design. Later in 1907, the design was modified with the normal date (called an Arabic date) and much lower relief. Late in 1908 the motto "In God We Trust" was added to the reverse. The $20 St. Gaudens is one of the most popular coins in the world due to its beautiful design. Collectors who would never have the inclination (or the bankroll!) to build a complete set will inevitably buy at least one $20 "Saint." Private ownership of gold was outlawed in the 1930s and many coins that had not been released were melted. This created many great rarities within the series. The key issues include the 1907 High Relief (MCMVII), 1908-S, 1920-S, 1921, 1924-D, 1924-S, 1925-D, 1925-S, 1926-D, 1927-D (a major rarity), 1927-S, 1929, 1930-S, 1931, 1931-D, and 1932. The 1933 date is also a great rarity and controversy rages even today as to whether this issue is legal to own. Hansen has complete sets for the 51-piece and the 53-piece mint strikes. He is actively working on completing a proof set. He is 50% complete on the proof set.
Even though Hansen’s 53-piece mint strike set is #4 All-Time, I would not rate this set anywhere near the top for Hansen’s standard. I have been considering for some time on how should we view Hansen individual series. As you know, he is working on a massive series and cannot focus on one or two coins, or even one of two series. The reality is Hansen has already surpassed Eliasberg when you view the quality of the collections from top to bottom. I have concluded the best way to measure Hansen’s Sets is to measure them against his collection as a whole. I am opening this for discussion, I posted this not long ago, There are 1289 specimens in the 3676 piece set that are “Finest or Tied Finest”. This represents 35% of the set. Of the 1289 specimens, 273 specimens are PCGS Top Pop 1/0. This represents 7.4% of the overall set, or another to put it, for every 12 coins there is a PCGS Pop 1/0 specimen. This is not static, but is increasing due to upgrades. This is another nice fact: 2588 coins are Top 5 Condition Census specimens, or tied. The represents 70.4% of the set! If this is Hansen’s standard, then his St. Gaudens Double Eagle has more serious work to do. With this upgrade, it is a good start.
1909 Double Eagle MS66
The only coin finer is a single MS66+ specimen that is located in the current #2 All-Time finest set. A coin of this quality has not been publicly auctioned since 2013. Typically a coin as this one will find a home a stay there for a very long time. This coin does not have a public history. Hansen has paired with 1909/8 PCGS MS64, which will need some work on the future. The coins are described by expert David Akers this way: For years, the 1909 normal date was overshadowed by the popular 1909/8, but in the past decade or so the 1909 has come to be correctly recognized as the rarer of the two issues. Actually it is much more rare than the 1909/8 except possibly in gem condition where the two are of similar rarity. Unlike the 1909/8 which is often seen in VF or EF, the 1909 is normally available only in AU or Unc. This issue, along with the other early Philadelphia Mint issues from 1908 With Motto through 1915 (plus the 1920 as well), is very underrated in high grade. I have seen fewer Mint State examples of this issue than I have of any of the others, including the 1913, although there are a few more MS-64 or better quality examples in existence of this issue than there are of either the 1913 or the 1920. Nearly all of the known Mint State specimens of this issue are low quality, i.e. MS-60 to 62. Even in MS-63, the 1909 is a rarity, and above that level, especially in gem condition, the 1909 is one of the rarest issues of the entire series. A couple of superb quality Mint State pieces exist that are very nearly perfect, the nicest one I have seen trading hands in the 1980 bull market for a reported $30,000 plus. This specimen and the few others I have seen have a strong resemblance to a satin finish Proof, albeit with a bit less lustre. Dr. Thaine Price owns one of the nicest frosty ones I have seen, a solid MS-65 coin, and a prominent Eastern collector owns another of similar quality. The 1909 is always very sharply struck. Some specimens are frosty; others have a definite satiny texture. A few of the high-grade ones look very similar to the Proofs of this year. Lustre is nearly always very good, especially on the satiny ones, and the color is typically a light to medium yellow or greenish yellow gold. There are also some examples that have a very appealing light to medium orange gold color.
The PCGS price guide value for the coin is $90,000. We do not know how much was paid; due to it appear to have been a private transaction. It is very nice upgrade to the St. Gaudens Collection.
In comparison, The Eliasberg registry set describes his 1909 Double Eagle Specimen as assumed Gem Proof. Sold for $30,800 at the Bowers & Ruddy Oct '82 Eliasberg sale. Lot #1031. I am to believe he did not have a business strike coin.
1909 Double Eagle MS66
MS66, Certification #37178213, PCGS #9150
PCGS POP 6/1 / PCGS Coin Guide Value: $90,000
My 20th Century Gold Major Design Type Set ---started : 11/17/1997 ---- completed : 1/21/2004
One of the reasons I really like what Hansen has been doing.
This is a solid 66 with only 2 ticks on the front & 1 hit on the reverse & very pleasant moderate toning.
And a nice new TrueView for us all to see.
Thanks Dell Loy!
My Saint Set
The reality is Hansen has already surpassed Eliasberg when you view the quality of the collections from top to bottom.
Based upon what standard? Many of eliasberg’s gold coins have upgraded 2-3 grades since the sale...and silver 1-2 grades. You cannot go by the catalog grades, nor the Registry estimated grades
It would be great to assemble all of the Eliasberg coins with their grades today.
The top ranked MS66+ is here:
It's a beautiful 6/1 coin.
What's the point of Cacking any of them when you get to under 10 pops?
I just looked at all 4 (the only 66 coins that I'm sure exist)
(#5 was a 66 A&A coin and is currently off radar)
Fox's should be a 67
Simpson's should be a 66+ along with midsouth
Hanson's is properly graded.
That took all of 5 minutes.
My Saint Set
This is the part I would find most annoying if I was Hansen. I'm sure the coins are also much more expensive as a result of the higher label grades.
Because the Hansen collection is such a huge undertaking, any general statements are hard to respond. I think the best way to compare Eliasberg and Hansen collection is to initially look at the grades assigned to their coins. That is just a first step. After that one can take a deeper dive and start a direct comparison. Currin actually has done that for a number of posts and series and Hansen's collection held up well (actually exceeded the Eliasberg coins) when directly compared.
It is a fair issue to raise gradeflation but it is not fair to simply dismiss the quality of the entire Hansen collection by rasing the specter of gradeflation. I have been impressed overall at the quality of Hansen's coins when Currin discussed them in the Gazes challenge. Obvioulsy there are exceptions but also keep in mind that the collection continues to be upgraded almost constantly.
Can't help myself!
MY COIN'S BETTER THAN YOUR COIN!
MY COIN'S BETTER THAN YOURS!
@drei3ree posted a nice coin above but I figured I'd add bit more info and and links. I've also included his 1885 MS coin below.
1885 Indian Head Cent PCGS PR67RD pop 4/0 - Hansen
The photos of this coin should be in CoinFacts but it's not currently there, either in the top listings or the Condition Census. In the top listing, the 3 featured coins are PR67RD, PR66+RD and PR66RD, so this PR67RD should definitely appear. The Condition Census lists 3 PR67RDs but no photos for any. The pop report notes there are 4 PR67RDs so the number of coins should be updated as well.
1885 Indian Head Cent PCGS MS66+RD pop 7/0 - Hansen
CoinFacts Condition Census lists just 3 MS66+RD with 2 using the same Hansen photo, one with Hansen's pedigree.
This coin has a CoinFacts photo but not a TrueView.
@DLHansen @JBatDavidLawrence - You can just ping @PCGSPhoto to add the TrueView background without taking a new photo since a photo already exists. Hopefully this would add the photo to CoinFacts as well.
Update: Phil was able to update the image to use the TrueView background which has been updated below:
Imagine what this thread would look like if Hansen were to be employing Legend instead of DLRC as his main partner in building this collection?
I don't know about that. There are certainly some areas where the collection could be stronger but there are others where the collection is very strong. I think he would still end up with many of the same coins. For instance, he owns TDN's old seated dollar set (many finest known, pop 1/0 coins) , Laura's trime set, and one of Perfection's sets (I forget which one at the moment). I do think he would have the 1913 Liberty Head Nickel. I agree with you that is the one area where I think he missed his opportunity at least for now. I also wouldn't have sold the 1854-s $5 that he owned an interest in.
Personally, I would have spent more time focusing on the tougher issues and less on the moderns, but I can understand the desire of extending the collection to the present. At this point, I'd spend my time and funds trying to pry away the PF68 Childs 1804 Dollar Class 1 Dollar and 1854-S $5 (both finest known) from Pogue and wait for the best 1913 Liberty Nickel that I could get my hands on.
Hansen bought into the firm after he had already started building his set. I think it was early last year. As for building the set, it isn't hard for anyone to do if you have sufficient funds. Many of his coins come from major auctions so those are publicly available. Many of the others are in the top registry sets. Contact those and place ads for those and boom - you could have completed 90% of it on your own. It is true you would need to rely on specialist dealers for certain elusive coins that rarely appear as those individuals might know where the coins are, but there is no requirement that you go through them for the vast majority of the set. Of course having an expert (especially in auction representation) is useful. There are MANY individuals who can fill that role.
I have been away for awhile and I clicked on this link thinking it was about a wristwatch, maybe made from a coin.
Pleasantly surprised to see some utterly amazing coins instead. Coin imaging has really improved over the years.
Anybody else here ever talk to JB from DLRC?
I get the feeling he'd be quite pleasant to work with.
My Saint Set
I don’t know John well, but I liked him as soon as I met him, and that hasn't changed since. He’s smart, pleasant and a hard worker.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Not as a buyer, but I did reach out to him regarding a few coins that would have fit into a couple of Hansen's sets at the time. He was incredibly nice, down to earth, polite, and responsive. I have no doubt that he is an absolute asset to Hansen.
I am best suited to answer this question. The answer is the thread would not look like anything… because it would have never existed!
This thread is based on Mr. Hansen being one of the most open and transparent collectors (of his size) known. Most of the high-end registry sets do not get posted until they are completed. There are other high-end collections are not known to the public until they appear for sale. What we have been watching here for the last year, and in the registry even longer, is highly unusual. This is not a knock by any means toward Legend or their group of professionals. The reality is that probably 95% or more of the institutionalized professionals and specialists in the business would advise the same thing. Per their advice, The Hansen Collection would be something we hear about from time to time as other great collections, but for the most part, it would not be seen.
This leads me to this statement. We do not know what advice JB gives Mr. Hansen. I would tend to believe in most related matters, JB views may be similar to the other 95% of the professionals and specialists in the business. This leads me to my next statement, Hansen marches to his own drumbeat. He is the captain of his ship. I am sure he listens and appreciates JB’s input, but at the end of the day, the cash that is being spent is his. Hansen is the true Francis Albert Sinatra of coin collecting. His style would quickly clash if he worked with some of the other strong minded professionals in this business.
Lastly, I appreciate his building of this collection in the public. It is being done in a historic way. He is doing it under a lot of scrutiny. As you have seen, many of his coins are being picked apart for this or that. At the end of the day, I really feel like Hansen enjoys his collection and he is assembling the collection how he sees it should be. This is quite different from most of the other billionaires that are depending solely on someone else to make all the decisions for them.
I have a little more cleanup to post tomorrow. After that, let’s get back to the coins… OK?
My 20th Century Gold Major Design Type Set ---started : 11/17/1997 ---- completed : 1/21/2004
Congratulations to Hansen on having the current finest set in the "TEN MOST FAMOUS UNITED STATES ULTRA RARITIES" registry category. He is currently #1 and #4 of all time (behind Eliasberg, Norweb, and the Smithsonian). He is missing the 1913 Liberty Head Nickel, 1894-S Barber Dime, and 1838-O Capped Bust Half. In light of passing on the Eliasberg nickel, is this set no longer a priority and will he seemingly ignore the two branch mint proof coins? Thoughts @currin?
It would be great to do, but I believe impossible to achieve. Many of Eliasberg’s finest and famous coins are identified and rightfully pedigreed. There is not one place to find them and it requires a lot of searching. The question has been asked in the past, how many are known, and I have not found anyone that can answer the question with any level of certainly.
Just one of the many major differences that I see with the two collections is that Hansen’s is trying to assemble his with the most PCGS Condition Census Top 5 specimens as possible. The last time that I looked, Hansen’s collection was about 70% Top 5 specimens. I can’t prove, but I don’t think Eliasberg was anywhere near that percentage. In his collection, you will find average mint state and proof coins between the years of 1932-1975. This not a large, but is a fairly good portion of his collection. There are many reasons why Eliasberg was not focus on the modern coins in his day. Some was in his control and some were not. It was a much different era before the TPG certification and registry.
As example, let’s look at the Roosevelt Series. Today, this series has a number of enthusiasts, but Roosies are still not as popular as some of the other modern series. I have found them to be very difficult and time consuming to collect in high FB grades. For Eliasberg, it does not appear he spent time or resources on the series. They were a must for a complete set, but not valued much more than that. When his collection was sold, the Roosies were sold as a lot. This is the description for Lot 1348. The lot realized $990.00
1348 Gem Roosevelt dime set 1946 to 1975-S. One from each date and mint. Average business strike grade is MS-63 or better with Proof dates grading Proof-65. The 1950 to 1964 Philadelphia Mint issues are Proof. The 1966 and the 1967 examples are from the Special Mint Sets. The San Francisco Mint issues from 1968 to the 1975 are Proof. Remainder grading average MS-63 or better. Many examples have light iridescent toning. Recently housed in a deluxe Dansco album to facilitate sale. (Total: 75 pieces)
The collection sounds pretty mediocre to me. I would like to think the Dansco album is still intact, but that may be wishful thinking. If so, it would be great to have certified. I know there are Roosie guys watching. Question, have you ever seen or own a Eliasberg pedigreed Roosie? It would nice to know if they exist.
As you know, Hansen has one of the nicest Roosevelt collections of all-time. Presently, the collection is ranked #2. I wonder what the value of Hansen’s Roosevelt’s would be. As stated before, I believe this will be significant factor when all is said and done. Time will tell who is on the right and wrong side of this debate.
To head the comment off, I know it may be said, so we now basing the quality of Hansen’s collection on Roosies dimes. No, that is not what I am saying. What I am saying, Let’s look at the collection comprehensively. Let’s look at what is in the collection now, and not focus so much on what is missing.
My 20th Century Gold Major Design Type Set ---started : 11/17/1997 ---- completed : 1/21/2004
Hello Everyone,
I have just cleaned up this thread, which is undeniably an exciting play by play of building what will be a historic collection. Let's keep comments positive and not compare dealers and/or other collectors.
Nice part is over
If someone tries to derail this thread back into negativity I will place them on a 24-hour temp ban. Thank you
Heather Boyd
PCGS Senior Director of Marketing
Thanks for the post on Roosevelt dimes @Currin. I agree it's really interesting to look at these coins and this is what makes Hansen's set fun, that it has everything. I'm impressed by all the pop 1/0 and pop 2/0 coins in that screenshot, especially since they are all FB.
I wonder where the Eliasberg Roosevelt dimes are today and if they are still housed together in that Dansco album?
Here's the link for Hansen's circulation set which @Currin showed.
Hansen has the two most expensive MS coins according to the PCGS Price Guide:
There are more expensive proof and SMS coins, notably the 1975 No-S Proof with 2 known, valued at $349,600 for the MS68 and $200,000 for the MS66. Hansen doesn't have this coin yet.
Here's his 1946. His 1949 doesn't have a photo in his Registry Set.
1946 Roosevelt Dime PCGS MS68FB pop 4/0 - Hansen
This is the second most expensive coin in the set per the PCGS Price Guide. I like the color on this piece.
This coin is a pop 4/0 but not shown in the CoinFacts Condition Census, which only shows 2 for the grade.
Hmmmm...Not sure what you exactly mean but there are Lincoln sets of his that are not public. There may be others.
That was a lot of cleaning. Your fingers gotta be sore
m
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
I'm guessing that could be an oversight, especially for the second one:
LINCOLN CENTS DATE SET, CIRCULATION STRIKES (1909-PRESENT) - Private
It doesn't really make sense to have a private set if you have an even larger pubic set:
LINCOLN CENTS COMPLETE VARIETY SET, CIRCULATION STRIKES (1909-PRESENT) - Public
I don't think this is close for a purpose. With more than 1200 sets, I don’t think it is possible to maintain with perfection. WS... If you would like to see this set, just send JB an IM and I bet he will open it up.
My 20th Century Gold Major Design Type Set ---started : 11/17/1997 ---- completed : 1/21/2004
rah, rah delloy.....
Laura, see Heather’s post, about six posts above yours.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
I've come to the realization that her goal was to destroy this thread all along, and she was winning when we all engaged her and allowed her to make the thread about her. After seeing how much nicer the flow is with all of the extraneous text gone, I've decided to stop engaging and just start flagging the posts instead. If we all do this, Heather will take action (I think).