I personally dont like patterns, they are not real coins in my opinion.
They were not made for circulation.
They were design recommendations to win to become a regular coin but didnt win.
Some of them are fantasy > @JBatDavidLawrence said:
@tradedollarnut said:
Positive or insightful or not - at least some of her comments were valid and inspired discussion
There’s been a lot of discussion in the past on patterns. Can someone briefly explain what they are? I’m assuming they’re trial pieceses or designs that were officially struck by the US Mint for consideration but were rejected by the powers that be? Is that correct?
The below is copied, in part, from an article I found on the net. I first saw the DuBois quote many years ago and have always loved it.
“Open for me your cabinet of Patterns, and I open for you a record, which, but for these half-forgotten witnesses, would have disappeared under the finger of Time. ....Now, only these live to tell the tale of what might have been.” Those words of Mint Curator Patterson DuBois in the January 1883 American Journal of Numismatics still speak volumes about this often neglected area of U.S. numismatics. Even more than their intended-for-commerce brethren, patterns reflect the events, economics and personalities of their time. The status, origins, the very definition of these frequently enigmatic pieces have been a subject of fascination and debate ever since the little-known Mint products first came to the attention of collectors in the 1830s.
In his 1994 reference United States Patterns and Related Issues, numismatic researcher Andrew W. Pollock III defines a pattern as “an experimental piece which either illustrates a proposed coinage design, or which embodies a proposed innovation of composition, size, or shape.” Pollock acknowledges, however, that numismatists have traditionally employed a much broader definition of the word: experimental pieces, die trials, unofficial pieces and the often more nefarious restrikes and “pieces de caprice” made primarily for collectors also fall under this heading."
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
@MFeld Thank you, that helps! I thought it was something along those lines. I didn't realize so many other types have been scooped up under the umbrella of "Patterns" at this point.
Collector of randomness. Photographer at PCGS. Lover of Harry Potter.
Hansen has acquired a new pattern, 1870 25C J-922. The coin has Simpson’s Pedigree. This specimen is a PCGS POP 1/1. We can assume the Top POP Specimen is in Black Cat’s Collection, according to what we have been told that he is holding.
It isn't registered to any of his sets. In fact, the PF67 isn't registered to anyone not even as inventory FWIW.
@SiriusBlack said:
There’s been a lot of discussion in the past on patterns. Can someone briefly explain what they are? I’m assuming they’re trial pieceses or designs that were officially struck by the US Mint for consideration but were rejected by the powers that be? Is that correct?
I personally dont like patterns, they are not real coins in my opinion.
They were not made for circulation.
They were design recommendations to win to become a regular coin but didnt win.
Some of them are fantasy
As a collector/dealer in patterns for the past 45 years, I've given them a lot of thought. When I started, I loved them all. To me, they were all museum pieces, and the thought that I could own them was overwhelmingly cool to me. As time has progressed, and as I've become more sophisticated (and jaded), I now view patterns in three different categories. For the purpose of this thread only, I'm going to call them Class I, 2 and 3.
First, Class I. These are the pieces that were made for legitimate purposes, i.e., NOT solely as an opportunity for Mint employees to make things they could sell to their collector and dealer friends. These include experimental pieces, proposed issues that were actually being considered for circulation, and a small number of early regular dies trial pieces. Examples include 1792 Silver Center Cents, 1814 Half Dollars in Platinum, 1877 Morgan Half Dollars and the 1907 Indian Head $20. (PRCC: Did you really say you don't like patterns??? ) This class comprises perhaps 20-25% of the pieces listed in Judd. To my way of thinking, they are among the most interesting, desirable and historically important coins in existence.
Second, Class 2. These are the patterns that were made for "illegitimate" purposes, but which are so cool that I would collect them anyway, purely as an indulgence, a "guilty pleasure". Examples might include an 1879 Schoolgirl Dollar struck in Copper (because a "real" Schoolgirl Dollar should be silver), a proof 1885 $20 Lib struck in Aluminum (because there was no conceivable real need to produce it), and an 1863 With Motto Seated Dollar (because it was backdated and actually struck AFTER the design change of 1866).
Third, Class 3. These, like the Class 2's, served no legitimate purpose. But unlike the Class 2's, they're not cool enough to overlook that fault. Examples include Aluminum Standard Silver dimes (not only the wrong metal, but a common and boring design), most "mules" (which are coins that pair an obverse and reverse that don't belong together), and so on. Personally, I tend to avoid these unless I think I can flip them for a quick profit.
Naturally, some people will disagree on how some issues should be classified. No problem. But my point is that if you think a little harder about what each individual coin is and why they were produced, you might see the series a little differently.
Andy Lustig
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
@MrEureka Thank you! That helps a lot as well. I didn't realize there were so many possibilities in existence. Personally I guess I would find the "official" trial pieces the most interesting since they have a history backed by the government or mint as opposed to some employees messing around unofficially
Collector of randomness. Photographer at PCGS. Lover of Harry Potter.
I personally dont like patterns, they are not real coins in my opinion.
They were not made for circulation.
They were design recommendations to win to become a regular coin but didnt win.
Some of them are fantasy
As a collector/dealer in patterns for the past 45 years, I've given them a lot of thought. When I started, I loved them all. To me, they were all museum pieces, and the thought that I could own them was overwhelmingly cool to me. As time has progressed, and as I've become more sophisticated (and jaded), I now view patterns in three different categories. For the purpose of this thread only, I'm going to call them Class I, 2 and 3.
First, Class I. These are the pieces that were made for legitimate purposes, i.e., NOT solely as an opportunity for Mint employees to make things they could sell to their collector and dealer friends. These include experimental pieces, proposed issues that were actually being considered for circulation, and a small number of early regular dies trial pieces. Examples include 1792 Silver Center Cents, 1814 Half Dollars in Platinum, 1877 Morgan Half Dollars and the 1907 Indian Head $20. (PRCC: Did you really say you don't like patterns??? ) This class comprises perhaps 20-25% of the pieces listed in Judd. To my way of thinking, they are among the most interesting, desirable and historically important coins in existence.
Second, Class 2. These are the patterns that were made for "illegitimate" purposes, but which are so cool that I would collect them anyway, purely as an indulgence, a "guilty pleasure". Examples might include an 1879 Schoolgirl Dollar struck in Copper (because a "real" Schoolgirl Dollar should be silver), a proof 1885 $20 Lib struck in Aluminum (because there was no conceivable real need to produce it), and an 1863 With Motto Seated Dollar (because it was backdated and actually struck AFTER the design change of 1866).
Third, Class 3. These, like the Class 2's, served no legitimate purpose. But unlike the Class 2's, they're not cool enough to overlook that fault. Examples include Aluminum Standard Silver dimes (not only the wrong metal, but a common and boring design), most "mules" (which are coins that pair an obverse and reverse that don't belong together), and so on. Personally, I tend to avoid these unless I think I can flip them for a quick profit.
Naturally, some people will disagree on how some issues should be classified. No problem. But my point is that if you think a little harder about what each individual coin is and why they were produced, you might see the series a little differently. @MrEureka said:
I personally dont like patterns, they are not real coins in my opinion.
They were not made for circulation.
They were design recommendations to win to become a regular coin but didnt win.
Some of them are fantasy
As a collector/dealer in patterns for the past 45 years, I've given them a lot of thought. When I started, I loved them all. To me, they were all museum pieces, and the thought that I could own them was overwhelmingly cool to me. As time has progressed, and as I've become more sophisticated (and jaded), I now view patterns in three different categories. For the purpose of this thread only, I'm going to call them Class I, 2 and 3.
First, Class I. These are the pieces that were made for legitimate purposes, i.e., NOT solely as an opportunity for Mint employees to make things they could sell to their collector and dealer friends. These include experimental pieces, proposed issues that were actually being considered for circulation, and a small number of early regular dies trial pieces. Examples include 1792 Silver Center Cents, 1814 Half Dollars in Platinum, 1877 Morgan Half Dollars and the 1907 Indian Head $20. (PRCC: Did you really say you don't like patterns??? ) This class comprises perhaps 20-25% of the pieces listed in Judd. To my way of thinking, they are among the most interesting, desirable and historically important coins in existence.
Second, Class 2. These are the patterns that were made for "illegitimate" purposes, but which are so cool that I would collect them anyway, purely as an indulgence, a "guilty pleasure". Examples might include an 1879 Schoolgirl Dollar struck in Copper (because a "real" Schoolgirl Dollar should be silver), a proof 1885 $20 Lib struck in Aluminum (because there was no conceivable real need to produce it), and an 1863 With Motto Seated Dollar (because it was backdated and actually struck AFTER the design change of 1866).
Third, Class 3. These, like the Class 2's, served no legitimate purpose. But unlike the Class 2's, they're not cool enough to overlook that fault. Examples include Aluminum Standard Silver dimes (not only the wrong metal, but a common and boring design), most "mules" (which are coins that pair an obverse and reverse that don't belong together), and so on. Personally, I tend to avoid these unless I think I can flip them for a quick profit.
Naturally, some people will disagree on how some issues should be classified. No problem. But my point is that if you think a little harder about what each individual coin is and why they were produced, you might see the series a little differently.
That's an interesting way to classify them. PCGS should group its pattern registry categories like this too.
I personally dont like patterns, they are not real coins in my opinion.
They were not made for circulation.
They were design recommendations to win to become a regular coin but didnt win.
Some of them are fantasy
As a collector/dealer in patterns for the past 45 years, I've given them a lot of thought. When I started, I loved them all. To me, they were all museum pieces, and the thought that I could own them was overwhelmingly cool to me. As time has progressed, and as I've become more sophisticated (and jaded), I now view patterns in three different categories. For the purpose of this thread only, I'm going to call them Class I, 2 and 3.
First, Class I. These are the pieces that were made for legitimate purposes, i.e., NOT solely as an opportunity for Mint employees to make things they could sell to their collector and dealer friends. These include experimental pieces, proposed issues that were actually being considered for circulation, and a small number of early regular dies trial pieces. Examples include 1792 Silver Center Cents, 1814 Half Dollars in Platinum, 1877 Morgan Half Dollars and the 1907 Indian Head $20. (PRCC: Did you really say you don't like patterns??? ) This class comprises perhaps 20-25% of the pieces listed in Judd. To my way of thinking, they are among the most interesting, desirable and historically important coins in existence.
Second, Class 2. These are the patterns that were made for "illegitimate" purposes, but which are so cool that I would collect them anyway, purely as an indulgence, a "guilty pleasure". Examples might include an 1879 Schoolgirl Dollar struck in Copper (because a "real" Schoolgirl Dollar should be silver), a proof 1885 $20 Lib struck in Aluminum (because there was no conceivable real need to produce it), and an 1863 With Motto Seated Dollar (because it was backdated and actually struck AFTER the design change of 1866).
Third, Class 3. These, like the Class 2's, served no legitimate purpose. But unlike the Class 2's, they're not cool enough to overlook that fault. Examples include Aluminum Standard Silver dimes (not only the wrong metal, but a common and boring design), most "mules" (which are coins that pair an obverse and reverse that don't belong together), and so on. Personally, I tend to avoid these unless I think I can flip them for a quick profit.
Naturally, some people will disagree on how some issues should be classified. No problem. But my point is that if you think a little harder about what each individual coin is and why they were produced, you might see the series a little differently. @MrEureka said:
I personally dont like patterns, they are not real coins in my opinion.
They were not made for circulation.
They were design recommendations to win to become a regular coin but didnt win.
Some of them are fantasy
As a collector/dealer in patterns for the past 45 years, I've given them a lot of thought. When I started, I loved them all. To me, they were all museum pieces, and the thought that I could own them was overwhelmingly cool to me. As time has progressed, and as I've become more sophisticated (and jaded), I now view patterns in three different categories. For the purpose of this thread only, I'm going to call them Class I, 2 and 3.
First, Class I. These are the pieces that were made for legitimate purposes, i.e., NOT solely as an opportunity for Mint employees to make things they could sell to their collector and dealer friends. These include experimental pieces, proposed issues that were actually being considered for circulation, and a small number of early regular dies trial pieces. Examples include 1792 Silver Center Cents, 1814 Half Dollars in Platinum, 1877 Morgan Half Dollars and the 1907 Indian Head $20. (PRCC: Did you really say you don't like patterns??? ) This class comprises perhaps 20-25% of the pieces listed in Judd. To my way of thinking, they are among the most interesting, desirable and historically important coins in existence.
Second, Class 2. These are the patterns that were made for "illegitimate" purposes, but which are so cool that I would collect them anyway, purely as an indulgence, a "guilty pleasure". Examples might include an 1879 Schoolgirl Dollar struck in Copper (because a "real" Schoolgirl Dollar should be silver), a proof 1885 $20 Lib struck in Aluminum (because there was no conceivable real need to produce it), and an 1863 With Motto Seated Dollar (because it was backdated and actually struck AFTER the design change of 1866).
Third, Class 3. These, like the Class 2's, served no legitimate purpose. But unlike the Class 2's, they're not cool enough to overlook that fault. Examples include Aluminum Standard Silver dimes (not only the wrong metal, but a common and boring design), most "mules" (which are coins that pair an obverse and reverse that don't belong together), and so on. Personally, I tend to avoid these unless I think I can flip them for a quick profit.
Naturally, some people will disagree on how some issues should be classified. No problem. But my point is that if you think a little harder about what each individual coin is and why they were produced, you might see the series a little differently.
That's an interesting way to classify them. PCGS should group its pattern registry categories like this too.
Unfortunately, there are more than a few cases where it’s not clear if the issue had a legitimate purpose. Better to leave things as is for now, but consider my comments above when deciding which patterns belong in your collection.
Andy Lustig
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
Hansen has acquired a new pattern, 1870 25C J-922. The coin has Simpson’s Pedigree. This specimen is a PCGS POP 1/1. We can assume the Top POP Specimen is in Black Cat’s Collection, according to what we have been told that he is holding.
It isn't registered to any of his sets. In fact, the PF67 isn't registered to anyone not even as inventory FWIW.
True, but my stated assumption was based on a knowledgeable expert statement. We know Simpson does not have POP 1/0 in his pattern registry sets (he sold the 2/0), then we can assume the finest coin is in Black Cats unregistered collection. Right?
@specialist said:
There is no physical way Delloy will ever have anywhere near the great patterns that BC or Simspon have. Considering between them they own the finest individual pieces, how can any one ever compare?
Hansen has acquired a new pattern, 1870 25C J-922. The coin has Simpson’s Pedigree. This specimen is a PCGS POP 1/1. We can assume the Top POP Specimen is in Black Cat’s Collection, according to what we have been told that he is holding.
It isn't registered to any of his sets. In fact, the PF67 isn't registered to anyone not even as inventory FWIW.
True, but my stated assumption was based on a knowledgeable expert statement. We know Simpson does not have POP 1/0 in his pattern registry sets (he sold the 2/0), then we can assume the finest coin is in Black Cats unregistered collection. Right?
@specialist said:
There is no physical way Delloy will ever have anywhere near the great patterns that BC or Simspon have. Considering between them they own the finest individual pieces, how can any one ever compare?
But there are several pattern issues, and I interpreted Laura's comments to be of a general nature and not specific to any one issue or all issues. I would not infer anything here. Her statement could still be reasonable and make sense if the two own the vast majority of the top pieces for most issues and not necessarily all of the finest known/top pop coins for every issue. For instance, neither own the unique J-1776 double eagle pattern. I think we would be nitpicking her comments if we adopted a hyper literal interpretation though.
The term "finest" is also ambiguous. By finest does she mean the highest graded numerically or the best coins? The two aren't always the same. I think it is pretty much impossible to distinguish between a PF66+ and a PF67 based on images much less two images taken under drastically different lighting conditions. With this said, I concede that my method is hardly conclusive either as it assumes that registry users put all of their coins in their inventory even if not in their registry sets. That too is also a generalization and may not always hold true either.
I believe this may be the last Kennedy in the Major Variety Category that Hansen does not have. Stacks & Bowers is offering the coin in an upcoming auction. PCGS values at $150,000. Would you advise Hansen to pop on it?
Hansen has acquired a new pattern, 1870 25C J-922. The coin has Simpson’s Pedigree. This specimen is a PCGS POP 1/1. We can assume the Top POP Specimen is in Black Cat’s Collection, according to what we have been told that he is holding.
It isn't registered to any of his sets. In fact, the PF67 isn't registered to anyone not even as inventory FWIW.
True, but my stated assumption was based on a knowledgeable expert statement. We know Simpson does not have POP 1/0 in his pattern registry sets (he sold the 2/0), then we can assume the finest coin is in Black Cats unregistered collection. Right?
@specialist said:
There is no physical way Delloy will ever have anywhere near the great patterns that BC or Simspon have. Considering between them they own the finest individual pieces, how can any one ever compare?
But there are several pattern issues, and I interpreted Laura's comments to be of a general nature and not specific to any one issue or all issues. I would not infer anything here. Her statement could still be reasonable and make sense if the two own the vast majority of the top pieces for most issues and not necessarily all of the finest known/top pop coins for every issue. For instance, neither own the unique J-1776 double eagle pattern. I think we would be nitpicking her comments if we adopted a hyper literal interpretation though.
It's generally best to try to figure out what Laura means and not so much what she actually said.
And in that spirit, I think she meant that nobody can have a better collection of patterns than Simpson without him selling. I would have to agree with that, but I doubt that it will keep DLH up at night.
Andy Lustig
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
@Currin said:
I believe this may be the last Kennedy in the Major Variety Category that Hansen does not have. Stacks & Bowers is offering the coin in an upcoming auction. PCGS values at $150,000. Would you advise Hansen to pop on it?
The coin is a SP68, POP 5/1
I think the coin is in the Complete Variety Collection and not in the Major Variety Set. But I may be wrong.
To answer your question, if he likes the coin and he thinks it is worth the value then buy it otherwise pass.
@Currin said:
Would you advise Hansen to pop on it?
Personally I don't understand the valuation or logic for that coin at all. Hansen was said to have passed on the Eliasberg 1913 PF66 Liberty Head nickel because he didn't consider it a priority. If a coin like that isn't a priority, I can't imagine why a six figure Kennedy half would be. It isn't necessary for his Eliasberg quest either.
This past week Hansen posted eight updates from the recent retired HOF Jung Type Set. This is just the tip of the iceberg of many of the finest coins known from this spectacular type set. I am not sure if Hansen will purchase anymore upgrades from the Jung Collection. From what I have observed the availability by Jung coins to improve the Hansen Collection is very plentiful. From the information provided by Mr. Jung in public settings, he is planning to hold on to some of his finest early US issues. It will be interesting to watch and see what happens short and long term.
1838 No Drapery, Lg Stars, Seated Liberty Half Dime MS68+
This coin is one of the highlights of the purchase. This coin is graded at MS68+ and stands alone as the finest and only PCGS certified MS68+ Type 2, No Drapery, Seated Liberty Half Dime. In the entire Seated Liberty Half Dime series, only three other coins are PCGS graded MS68+. They are all Type 3, Stars on Obverse Types, and all are dated 1859. Hansen’s 1859 is a MS67+ and he has an 1853 MS68 for his Type set. The Jung set had one of these MS68+ specimens, but Hansen did not purchase. At least, he did not purchase in the first round.
Hansen has a pretty nice set of Seated Liberty Half Dimes. Of course, his collection is not comparable to the top set that contains the unique 1870-S specimen. The top set is almost two points ahead of Hansen. If Hansen can continue upgrading with the quality coins as this one, he can close the gap.
This coin represents the best of the best for the Type 2, No Drapery coins. This was a short run type of only three years. This new specimen by Hansen is mentioned in a description by Ron Guth: Mint engravers updated the design of the Half Dime in 1838 by adding stars to the obverse. By doing so, they matched the design with every other Seated Liberty design then in circulation with the exception of the Silver Dollar (which did not appear until 1840). Two major varieties appear in this year: the Large Stars and Small Stars. There is a marked difference in the sizes of the stars on the two varieties, and they can be seen best when the two varieties are laid side-by-side. Otherwise, an attribution guide, such as the images above, will be helpful. It is important to know the difference because the Small Stars is quite scarce in comparison to the Large Stars. The 1838 Large Stars No Drapery Half Dime is fairly common, including in Mint State grades, where hundreds of examples have been certified. The best example certified by PCGS is an amazingly colorful PCGS MS68, one of the finest early Seated Liberty Half Dimes of any date.
The coin has a pedigree that dates back to 2005 in a sale of the Lull Collection. It has been is three great collection since including Simpson, Jung and now Hansen. PCGS guide values the coin at $55,000. The last time the coin was sold in public auction was by Bowers & Merena in 2005 where the coin realized $34,500 as a PCGS MS68. Being the coin in a grouping that was purchased privately, we may never know the price Hansen offered for this coin. The auction record for this coin is $37,600 for an untoned MS68 specimen sold 5/2016 by Legends Rare Auctions. I can be very confident this coin would be valued at much more.
Provenance: James W. Lull Collection - Bowers & Merena 1/2005:661, $34,500 - Bob R. Simpson Collection - The Type Set Collection (Oliver Jung) (PCGS Set Registry) - D.L. Hansen Collection
In an Eliasberg comparison, the registry lists the Eliasberg Specimen as PCGS grade MS67, V-9, that was sold by Bowers & Merena May '96. The price realized $3,850. Lot #944. The Eliasberg specimen was pedigreed 11/3/05 by PCGS.
1838 No Drapery, Lg Stars, Seated Liberty H10C MS68+ (Gold Shield) PCGS POP for Coin: 1/0 / POP for Type: 1/0 Certification #29582777, PCGS #4317 PCGS Price Guide Value: $55,000 PCGS Pedigree: Simson
This very nice MS-68+ is a V-1, which is actually the "Small Stars" obverse.
It should probably be called the "Rusty Arm" instead.
You can tell from all the rust pits on the arm, and from the repunched stars 1 3 4 5 9 10 11 12.
The reverse has a die crack that splits D S (most visible in the leaves between D and H),
and a light crack at A2 (first A of AMERICA). It does not yet have the big clash.
This establishes it as an early die state V-1 (and not a V-2, which has an uncracked reverse die). https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/995123/1838-stars-half-dime
The use of the term "Small Stars", as I said in the above response, is very misleading, and can easily lead to an incorrect attribution of the 1838 V1 and V2 (Small Stars) because the small stars are a die state, rather than a die marriage, condition. That is, the small stars are only small in the later die states, after the obverse die was lapped; on the original obverse die of the V1 and V2, the stars were of normal size. The obverse die was heavily rusted, as seen on the Heritage coin referenced by Toyonakataro. Some coins were struck using this obverse die, but it was later determined to be unsightly, and the obverse die was lapped to remove the die rust, or spawling. On a die, the fields are the highest points on the die, and the devices are incuse, or below the surface of the die. Therefore, when the die was lapped, the fields were ground down, reducing the depth, and therefore the breadth, of the stars. Apparently the lapping was not uniform, as the stars on the left were more severely diminished than those on the right, and the lower stars on both sides were more severely diminished than the upper stars, making the lower left stars the most affected.
Attributing the 1838 "small stars", 1848 "large date", and the 1849 "9/6" overdates has long been a problem.
Mostly because they appear in the Red Book without much detail, and people seem to "make up" their own criteria for identifying them.
The 1992 Blythe book has the info to properly attribute all of these, although it's out of print.
We are finally straightening out the 1849 9/6 overdates (in terms of PCGS attribution). Hopefully the others will follow soon.
I wonder, has anyone come up with a ballpark value (or at least an acquisition cost) of the complete collection that Hansen is working on? Define value any way you like and define complete any way you like, since I'm asking about ballpark anyway.
I know there are some ultra rarities that are worth millions by themselves, but I figure the "typical" piece is probably under $10,000. With a bit over 6,000 entries in the largest Registry set, that works out to about $60 million for the complete collection. Even if I'm off by 3x, that's still under $200 million.
It appear to me the collection that Hansen is assembling will be well more than 6,000 coins that you mention. When you consider the silver and gold bullion, the complete set of commemoratives to present, the silver, gold, platinum eagles, odd and ends patterns, colonials, and territorial issues, the collection will be well above 10,000. This is not considering the speciality die variety sets and the duplicate sets.
It appear to me the collection that Hansen is assembling will be well more than 6,000 coins that you mention. When you consider the silver and gold bullion, the complete set of commemoratives to present, the silver, gold, platinum eagles, odd and ends patterns, colonials, and territorial issues, the collection will be well above 10,000. This is not considering the speciality die variety sets and the duplicate sets.
Speaking of duplicates, I am surprised he hasn't sold off all of his duplicate registry sets. It would free up capital for other coins.
It appear to me the collection that Hansen is assembling will be well more than 6,000 coins that you mention. When you consider the silver and gold bullion, the complete set of commemoratives to present, the silver, gold, platinum eagles, odd and ends patterns, colonials, and territorial issues, the collection will be well above 10,000. This is not considering the speciality die variety sets and the duplicate sets.
Speaking of duplicates, I am surprised he hasn't sold off all of his duplicate registry sets. It would free up capital for other coins.
he is a billionaire. He doesnt have to sell off his duplicates to raise capital.
It appear to me the collection that Hansen is assembling will be well more than 6,000 coins that you mention. When you consider the silver and gold bullion, the complete set of commemoratives to present, the silver, gold, platinum eagles, odd and ends patterns, colonials, and territorial issues, the collection will be well above 10,000. This is not considering the speciality die variety sets and the duplicate sets.
Speaking of duplicates, I am surprised he hasn't sold off all of his duplicate registry sets. It would free up capital for other coins.
he is a billionaire. He doesnt have to sell off his duplicates to raise capital.
It appear to me the collection that Hansen is assembling will be well more than 6,000 coins that you mention. When you consider the silver and gold bullion, the complete set of commemoratives to present, the silver, gold, platinum eagles, odd and ends patterns, colonials, and territorial issues, the collection will be well above 10,000. This is not considering the speciality die variety sets and the duplicate sets.
Speaking of duplicates, I am surprised he hasn't sold off all of his duplicate registry sets. It would free up capital for other coins.
he is a billionaire. He doesnt have to sell off his duplicates to raise capital.
He may be a billionaire, but much of his wealth is likely on paper and includes his vast real estate holdings. Hansen might not want to liquidate his real estate holdings or other paper assets to purchase more coins. The relevant question is not the value of his assets/net worth, but how much cash on hand he has and cash flow.
He may be a billionaire, but much of his wealth is likely on paper and includes his vast real estate holdings. Hansen might not want to liquidate his real estate holdings or other paper assets to purchase more coins. The relevant question is not the value of his assets/net worth, but how much cash on hand he has and cash flow.
In the unlikely event he is asset rich and cash poor I’m pretty certain he has a monstrous credit line at very favorable terms.
Now, I appreciate the question, but I don't think it would be wise for me to answer the question before the auction on any coin...
John Brush President of David Lawrence Rare Coins www.davidlawrence.com email: John@davidlawrence.com 2022 ANA Dealer of the Year, Past Chair of NCBA (formerly ICTA), PNG Treasurer, Instructor at Witter Coin University, former Instructor/YN Chaperone ANA Summer Seminar, Coin World Most Influential, Curator of the D.L. Hansen Collection
@jonathanb said:
I wonder, has anyone come up with a ballpark value (or at least an acquisition cost) of the complete collection that Hansen is working on? Define value any way you like and define complete any way you like, since I'm asking about ballpark anyway.
I know there are some ultra rarities that are worth millions by themselves, but I figure the "typical" piece is probably under $10,000. With a bit over 6,000 entries in the largest Registry set, that works out to about $60 million for the complete collection. Even if I'm off by 3x, that's still under $200 million.
Anyone want to suggest a different number?
Now this would make for a great new thread!
John Brush President of David Lawrence Rare Coins www.davidlawrence.com email: John@davidlawrence.com 2022 ANA Dealer of the Year, Past Chair of NCBA (formerly ICTA), PNG Treasurer, Instructor at Witter Coin University, former Instructor/YN Chaperone ANA Summer Seminar, Coin World Most Influential, Curator of the D.L. Hansen Collection
A couple days ago in a similar update, I posted a coin from the recent retired HOF Jung Type Set. It appears to me that Hansen purchased eight coins from this great collection. This is the second coin posted from the collection and the second coin that qualifies as the finest known PCGS certified coin for the type. The first coin that I posted was an impressive 1838 No Drapery, Lg Stars, Seated Liberty Half Dime MS68+ Specimen. This update for a Seated Liberty Half Dollar is just as impressive.
1874 Seated Liberty Half Dollar, Arrows, MS67+
This coin is only Type 6, With Motto, Arrows at Date Specimen that carries the PCGS MS67 or MS67+ grade. Next highest graded is a single MS66+ Specimen. This coin represents the best on the Condition Census charts for the Type 6, With Motto coins. This was only a two year coin type that ran in 1873 and 1874. This new specimen now own by Hansen is mentioned in a description by Ron Guth: This was the second (and last year) in which the government placed arrowheads on either side of the date of the Half Dollar, signifying a reduction in the stattpry weight. Though this is a common date, it is in high demand as a type coin, thus the values for any given grade are higher than if this was a normal Stars Obverse Half Dollar. Mint State examples of the 1874 With Arrows Half Dollar are semi-scarce and certainly more plentiful than the 1873. Recently (in 2015), PCGS certified a single MS67 example which represents the finest example of the date and type.
The coin can be traced back to the Heritage 2003, Orlando, FL. (FUN) Signature Sale, Lot #7186. The coin realized $37,950. The listing does not provide any additional information on history or origin. The Auction Record is $40,250 realized by a PCGS MS66 in a 2011 Heritage Auction.
Majestically Toned is the description given for this coin in 2003. Heritage goes onto describe the coin as: This coin was previously offered as lot 8153 in our July 2002 New York Signature Sale, where it was cataloged as: "A weight change during this and the preceding year brought back the Arrows design from two decades earlier. Although not particularly scarce in Mint State when compared to other issues in the series, the two Philadelphia Halves from these years are often sought out as a briefly minted type. We have been fortunate to offer several Choice or better examples during the past few years, but the appearance of this Superb Gem raises the bar substantially. The obverse is toned in mostly concentric shades of forest-green, rose-violet, and orange. These same colors reappear on the reverse, but leave a window of brilliance at its center. Under these vivid colorations, satiny, impeccably preserved surfaces have no trouble penetrating the depth of the toning. A truly one-of-a-kind type coin."
Provenance: Heritage 7/2002:8153 - Heritage 1/2003:7186, $37,950 - The Type Set Collection (Oliver Jung) (PCGS Set Registry) - D.L. Hansen Collection
In an Eliasberg comparison, the registry lists the Eliasberg Specimen as a Proof. Ex: J.M. Clapp Collection; John H. Clapp; Louis E. Eliasberg, Sr. Sold by Bowers & Merena Apr '97 price realized $3,300. Lot #2028.
1874 Seated Liberty Half Dollar, Arrows, MS67+ (Gold Shield) PCGS POP for Coin: 1/0 / POP for Type: 1/0 Certification #30773342, PCGS #6346 PCGS Price Guide Value: Unknown ($55,000 when certified as MS67)
Has Hansen stated what he will do with the coins after they pass to his heirs? Will they be returned to the public or held away in a numismatic trust of sorts?
If anyone go by the DLRC table at the show this week, get pictures of the Trade Dollar display. It would be nice to share for everyone to see.
Lastly, the fun announcement for this event is that we’ll be displaying the Hansen Proof Trade Dollar Set. The #1 All-Time PCGS Registry Set will be on display at our table. Not often do you get to see an 1884 or an 1885 Proof Trade Dollar, but when you get to see both examples that are the finest examples graded, it’s a special event. Please stop by and enjoy our display!
Thanks again for reading and we hope to see you next week!
The #1 All-Time PCGS Registry Set of Proof Trade Dollars with the finest graded 1884 and 1885 Trade Dollars.
And thrown in for fun is an 1829 $5 PCGS MS66+...
John Brush President of David Lawrence Rare Coins www.davidlawrence.com email: John@davidlawrence.com 2022 ANA Dealer of the Year, Past Chair of NCBA (formerly ICTA), PNG Treasurer, Instructor at Witter Coin University, former Instructor/YN Chaperone ANA Summer Seminar, Coin World Most Influential, Curator of the D.L. Hansen Collection
Speaking of duplicates, I am surprised he hasn't sold off all of his duplicate registry sets. It would free up capital for other coins.
I don’t know if you have looked at his duplicate sets, but he has some very impressive sets. I don’t really discuss them here, so unless you look for them, they are somewhat under the radar. There are a few registry sets that does not carry his name.
He is selling a few coins through the DLRC website, but the numbers are very small. If he did liquidate his duplicates as you suggested, it would be a really big event requiring multiple parts. Maybe even a couple years. For example, in a couple 1800s silver proof sets, he is two or three complete sets deep. Also, this does not account for the coins in the collection that are in NGC, etc. holders, and the raw ones. Really amazing if you think about it.
Lastly, some of the Major Collections, i.e. Eliasberg, were auctioned with duplicates. If I were to guess, Hansen have some duplicates that he would never sell until the collections is sold, auctioned, or preserved in a museum or similar.
Heritage ANA auction is starting now. I have have 13 coins on my Hansen watch list. It will be interesting to see if he wins any of them tonight.
@JBatDavidLawrence JB, tomorrow I'm gonna come by and let's get some photos of the set in it's entirety that way we can post it on the threat. What do you say?
@ilikemonsters said: @JBatDavidLawrence JB, tomorrow I'm gonna come by and let's get some photos of the set in it's entirety that way we can post it on the threat. What do you say?
Let's do it! I have an Anti-Counterfeiting Educational Foundation Breakfast at 7am (who schedules these things?), but I should be to the show by 9 and would love to do that!
John Brush President of David Lawrence Rare Coins www.davidlawrence.com email: John@davidlawrence.com 2022 ANA Dealer of the Year, Past Chair of NCBA (formerly ICTA), PNG Treasurer, Instructor at Witter Coin University, former Instructor/YN Chaperone ANA Summer Seminar, Coin World Most Influential, Curator of the D.L. Hansen Collection
Heritage ANA auction is starting now. I have have 13 coins on my Hansen watch list. It will be interesting to see if he wins any of them tonight.
How'd we do?
Actually, we're having some issues with some Registry Set updates, but David Talk is trying to get them fixed for us, so you'll see a few updates to the Eliasberg Set very soon (I hope!)
John Brush President of David Lawrence Rare Coins www.davidlawrence.com email: John@davidlawrence.com 2022 ANA Dealer of the Year, Past Chair of NCBA (formerly ICTA), PNG Treasurer, Instructor at Witter Coin University, former Instructor/YN Chaperone ANA Summer Seminar, Coin World Most Influential, Curator of the D.L. Hansen Collection
It has been a long wait. The last count down coin was posted February 21, 2019. Six Months! I hope Hansen is back on track to clip these off more frequently now. The collection is down to needing only 20 coins to exceed the Eliasberg Collection for US Issue for completeness. I say exceed, because Eliasberg did not own the 1870-S Half Dime. This coin is one of the remaining 20 coins. The last 20 is not an easy task. There are some expects that say it is impossible because of the unique coins. They may be right. Only time can tell.
This is a new addition to the Dahlonega Mint set. The 58 piece set requires one more coin, 1854-D Quarter Eagle. When completed, I believe the Hansen Dahlonega Mint set will be one of the finest and complete sets ever been assembled, maybe second only to the Harry W. Bass, Jr. Collection. The Smithsonian National Numismatic Collection is completed for this mint. Of course, Eliasberg had a complete set. Also, Newcomer and Pittman assembled completed Dahlonega Mint sets. In registry ratings, Hansen set has a little better grade than any of them. The Green Pond Collection appears to be finest by grade shown in the registry ratings. The Green Pond Collection is a set of high grade Dahlonega gold coins. Included in the set are coins from the collections of Harry W. Bass, Jr. Louis Eliasberg and John Jay Pittman. Individual highlights included two 1855-D gold dollars in mint state, one with a full date, an 1856-D dollar in MS-62, 1861-D dollar in MS-63, 1841-D quarter eagle in MS-63 and both the 55-D and 56-D quarter eagles in MS-60. The five dollar gold set has an 1841-D in MS-64, a 1842-D Large Date in MS-61, both the 1854-D and 1856-D in MS-64, the 1855-D in MS-63 and the 1861-D in MS-62. The Green Pond Collection is surely one of the finest collections of Southern gold ever assembled. According to the registry, the set was missing three coins. I cannot verify if that is true or not.
By any standard of measure, Hansen’s Dahlonega Mint Collection is a great accomplishment. This new addition is not a Condition Census coin, rather than a nice, appealing heavy worn old gold piece. For this date, there is only one mint grade coin, the PCGS MS61 specimen. There are maybe a dozen nice about uncirculated (AU) specimens. The survival estimate for all grades is approx. 65. David Akers comments: This is an extremely rare coin in all grades and, as far as I know, unknown in full mint state. I have, however, seen several AU pieces, the finest of which is in a Connecticut collection. Generally not as well struck as the 1840-C, but usually more sharply struck than the 1840. From the standpoint of number of auction appearances, this is one of the dozen rarest Liberty Head quarter eagles and it has actually appeared at auction fewer times than the highly regarded 1854-D and 1856-D.
1840-D Quarter Eagle VF20
As previously stated, this 1840-D Quarter Eagle is not in the condition census Top 5, but serves as a nice hole filler for now. It is not known where this coin was purchased. No information is online. The coin was updated to the Hansen’s set sometimes between late yesterday afternoon and late last night. Is it too much to imagine that Hansen made this find on the browse floor yesterday? If you noticed someone with a pipe checking out old southern gold coins, please let us know. Even if the coin was to be replaced one day, I would think this coin would remain in his collection for this interesting reason.
Provenance: unknown
In comparing to Eliasberg’s specimen, the registry describes his specimen as a 1840-D Quarter Eagle, PCGS grade XF45. Ex: Purchased by Louis Eliasberg when he acquired the John Clapp collection in 1942. Earlier from the Chapman Brothers in 1894. Purchased at the Bowers & Ruddy Oct '82 Eliasberg sale by Harry Bass for $4,400. Lot #114.
1840-D Quarter Eagle VF20 (Gold Shield) PCGS Coin #7719 / PCGS Serial 37550729 / POP 4/45
There are 20 remaining coins in the Eliasberg Quest. The 13 coins that are not listed in “complete registry set” are Bold below. Note: DLH was a partner in the purchase of the 1854-S XF45 Half Eagle being that he's a partner with DLRC, but after purchasing the coin, DLHC reported the specimen was sold to an undisclosed client.
Top 10 1870-S Half Dime (Unique Coin in Tom Bender PCGS Registry Collection) 1873-CC "No Arrows" Dime (Unique Coin in an anonymous collection) 1870-S Three Dollar Only (Unique Coin owned by the Bass Foundation displayed at the ANA) 1866 "No Motto" Dollar Proof Only (2 Minted, Unique Private Coin in Simpson Collection)
1822 Half Eagle (Survival 3, Unique Private Owned Coin in the Pogue Collection) 1933 Double Eagle (Known Survival 16, Unique Legally Owned Coin - anonymous collection)
1854-S Half Eagle (Survival 4, Two known in private: 1-Pogue AU58+; 2- XF45 sold July 2018)
1798 "Small Eagle" Half Eagle (Survival 7, Only 2 maybe 3 examples could be privately purchased) 1913 Liberty Head Nickel Proof Only (5 Minted, 3 private owned) 1838-0 Half Dollar BM Only (Survival 9, six known for private purchase)
Next 9 1880 Four Dollar Gold "Stella’s" (Coiled Hair) Proof Only (Survival 8) 1827 "Original" Quarter Dollar Proof Only (Survival 9) 1894-S Barber Dime BM Proof Only (Survival 13) 1841 Quarter Eagle (Survival for regular strikes 12, proofs 4)
1819 Half Eagle (Survival for “No Variety” 7, for “5D/50” 17) 1880 Four Dollar Gold "Stella’s" (Flowing Hair) Proof Only (Survival 24)
1933 Ten Dollar (Survival 40, rarest issue in series) 1839 Gobrecht Dollar (Survival 60-75)
1798 Quarter Eagle (Survival 80)
@Currin said: Count Down 20 – Dahlonega Mint Quarter Eagle
Only 20 left!
It has been a long wait. The last count down coin was posted February 21, 2019. Six Months! I hope Hansen is back on track to clip these off more frequently now. The collection is down to needing only 20 coins to exceed the Eliasberg Collection for US Issue for completeness. I say exceed, because Eliasberg did not own the 1870-S Half Dime. This coin is one of the remaining 20 coins.
Top 10 1870-S Half Dime (Unique Coin in Tom Bender PCGS Registry Collection) 1873-CC "No Arrows" Dime (Unique Coin in an anonymous collection) 1870-S Three Dollar Only (Unique Coin owned by the Bass Foundation displayed at the ANA) 1866 "No Motto" Dollar Proof Only (2 Minted, Unique Private Coin in Simpson Collection)
1822 Half Eagle (Survival 3, Unique Private Owned Coin in the Pogue Collection) 1933 Double Eagle (Known Survival 16, Unique Legally Owned Coin - anonymous collection)
1854-S Half Eagle (Survival 4, Two known in private: 1-Pogue AU58+; 2- XF45 sold July 2018)
1798 "Small Eagle" Half Eagle (Survival 7, Only 2 maybe 3 examples could be privately purchased) 1913 Liberty Head Nickel Proof Only (5 Minted, 3 private owned) 1838-0 Half Dollar BM Only (Survival 9, six known for private purchase)
Next 9 1880 Four Dollar Gold "Stella’s" (Coiled Hair) Proof Only (Survival 8) 1827 "Original" Quarter Dollar Proof Only (Survival 9) 1894-S Barber Dime BM Proof Only (Survival 13) 1841 Quarter Eagle (Survival for regular strikes 12, proofs 4)
1819 Half Eagle (Survival for “No Variety” 7, for “5D/50” 17) 1880 Four Dollar Gold "Stella’s" (Flowing Hair) Proof Only (Survival 24)
1933 Ten Dollar (Survival 40, rarest issue in series) 1839 Gobrecht Dollar Proof Only (Survival 60-75)
1798 Quarter Eagle (Survival 80)
Last 1
1854-D Quarter Eagle (Survival 75)
Other than the 1870-S H10c and the 1933 St. Gaudens $20, which of the others was Eliasberg missing?
Comments
ok:
I personally dont like patterns, they are not real coins in my opinion.
They were not made for circulation.
They were design recommendations to win to become a regular coin but didnt win.
Some of them are fantasy > @JBatDavidLawrence said:
I loved her comments, she was so refreshing....
@SiriusBlack said:
The below is copied, in part, from an article I found on the net. I first saw the DuBois quote many years ago and have always loved it.
“Open for me your cabinet of Patterns, and I open for you a record, which, but for these half-forgotten witnesses, would have disappeared under the finger of Time. ....Now, only these live to tell the tale of what might have been.” Those words of Mint Curator Patterson DuBois in the January 1883 American Journal of Numismatics still speak volumes about this often neglected area of U.S. numismatics. Even more than their intended-for-commerce brethren, patterns reflect the events, economics and personalities of their time. The status, origins, the very definition of these frequently enigmatic pieces have been a subject of fascination and debate ever since the little-known Mint products first came to the attention of collectors in the 1830s.
In his 1994 reference United States Patterns and Related Issues, numismatic researcher Andrew W. Pollock III defines a pattern as “an experimental piece which either illustrates a proposed coinage design, or which embodies a proposed innovation of composition, size, or shape.” Pollock acknowledges, however, that numismatists have traditionally employed a much broader definition of the word: experimental pieces, die trials, unofficial pieces and the often more nefarious restrikes and “pieces de caprice” made primarily for collectors also fall under this heading."
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
@MFeld Thank you, that helps! I thought it was something along those lines. I didn't realize so many other types have been scooped up under the umbrella of "Patterns" at this point.
Collector of randomness. Photographer at PCGS. Lover of Harry Potter.
It isn't registered to any of his sets. In fact, the PF67 isn't registered to anyone not even as inventory FWIW.
https://www.pcgs.com/cert/35343097
@privaterarecoincollector
I saw Hansen purchased approx 8 of your great top pop type coins. Is the negotiations over, or more to come. If you can’t say, I understand.
My 20th Century Gold Major Design Type Set ---started : 11/17/1997 ---- completed : 1/21/2004
hey PCGS, give us Laura back please > @Currin said:
the truth is I dont know, Joe is managing everything here.
This thread is a better place without voices of derision.
Link fixed:
https://uspatterns.stores.yahoo.net/whatarepatpi.html
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
Andy, I tried your link twice and it didn't work for me.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
As a collector/dealer in patterns for the past 45 years, I've given them a lot of thought. When I started, I loved them all. To me, they were all museum pieces, and the thought that I could own them was overwhelmingly cool to me. As time has progressed, and as I've become more sophisticated (and jaded), I now view patterns in three different categories. For the purpose of this thread only, I'm going to call them Class I, 2 and 3.
First, Class I. These are the pieces that were made for legitimate purposes, i.e., NOT solely as an opportunity for Mint employees to make things they could sell to their collector and dealer friends. These include experimental pieces, proposed issues that were actually being considered for circulation, and a small number of early regular dies trial pieces. Examples include 1792 Silver Center Cents, 1814 Half Dollars in Platinum, 1877 Morgan Half Dollars and the 1907 Indian Head $20. (PRCC: Did you really say you don't like patterns???
) This class comprises perhaps 20-25% of the pieces listed in Judd. To my way of thinking, they are among the most interesting, desirable and historically important coins in existence.
Second, Class 2. These are the patterns that were made for "illegitimate" purposes, but which are so cool that I would collect them anyway, purely as an indulgence, a "guilty pleasure". Examples might include an 1879 Schoolgirl Dollar struck in Copper (because a "real" Schoolgirl Dollar should be silver), a proof 1885 $20 Lib struck in Aluminum (because there was no conceivable real need to produce it), and an 1863 With Motto Seated Dollar (because it was backdated and actually struck AFTER the design change of 1866).
Third, Class 3. These, like the Class 2's, served no legitimate purpose. But unlike the Class 2's, they're not cool enough to overlook that fault. Examples include Aluminum Standard Silver dimes (not only the wrong metal, but a common and boring design), most "mules" (which are coins that pair an obverse and reverse that don't belong together), and so on. Personally, I tend to avoid these unless I think I can flip them for a quick profit.
Naturally, some people will disagree on how some issues should be classified. No problem. But my point is that if you think a little harder about what each individual coin is and why they were produced, you might see the series a little differently.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
Fixed it. Thanks!
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
@MrEureka Thank you! That helps a lot as well. I didn't realize there were so many possibilities in existence. Personally I guess I would find the "official" trial pieces the most interesting since they have a history backed by the government or mint as opposed to some employees messing around unofficially
Collector of randomness. Photographer at PCGS. Lover of Harry Potter.
That's an interesting way to classify them. PCGS should group its pattern registry categories like this too.
Unfortunately, there are more than a few cases where it’s not clear if the issue had a legitimate purpose. Better to leave things as is for now, but consider my comments above when deciding which patterns belong in your collection.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
True, but my stated assumption was based on a knowledgeable expert statement. We know Simpson does not have POP 1/0 in his pattern registry sets (he sold the 2/0), then we can assume the finest coin is in Black Cats unregistered collection. Right?
My 20th Century Gold Major Design Type Set ---started : 11/17/1997 ---- completed : 1/21/2004
But there are several pattern issues, and I interpreted Laura's comments to be of a general nature and not specific to any one issue or all issues. I would not infer anything here. Her statement could still be reasonable and make sense if the two own the vast majority of the top pieces for most issues and not necessarily all of the finest known/top pop coins for every issue. For instance, neither own the unique J-1776 double eagle pattern. I think we would be nitpicking her comments if we adopted a hyper literal interpretation though.
The term "finest" is also ambiguous. By finest does she mean the highest graded numerically or the best coins? The two aren't always the same. I think it is pretty much impossible to distinguish between a PF66+ and a PF67 based on images much less two images taken under drastically different lighting conditions. With this said, I concede that my method is hardly conclusive either as it assumes that registry users put all of their coins in their inventory even if not in their registry sets. That too is also a generalization and may not always hold true either.
I believe this may be the last Kennedy in the Major Variety Category that Hansen does not have. Stacks & Bowers is offering the coin in an upcoming auction. PCGS values at $150,000. Would you advise Hansen to pop on it?
The coin is a SP68, POP 5/1
My 20th Century Gold Major Design Type Set ---started : 11/17/1997 ---- completed : 1/21/2004
It's generally best to try to figure out what Laura means and not so much what she actually said.
And in that spirit, I think she meant that nobody can have a better collection of patterns than Simpson without him selling. I would have to agree with that, but I doubt that it will keep DLH up at night.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
I think the coin is in the Complete Variety Collection and not in the Major Variety Set. But I may be wrong.
To answer your question, if he likes the coin and he thinks it is worth the value then buy it otherwise pass.
Personally I don't understand the valuation or logic for that coin at all. Hansen was said to have passed on the Eliasberg 1913 PF66 Liberty Head nickel because he didn't consider it a priority. If a coin like that isn't a priority, I can't imagine why a six figure Kennedy half would be. It isn't necessary for his Eliasberg quest either.
You are correct. Hansen is complete with Kennedy Major Varieties. The 1964 SMS is needed for the Complete Variety Set. This is the last coin needed.
https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/half-dollars/kennedy-half-dollars-specialty-sets/kennedy-half-dollars-complete-variety-set-circulation-strikes-proof-1964-present/2038
My 20th Century Gold Major Design Type Set ---started : 11/17/1997 ---- completed : 1/21/2004
@JBatDavidLawrence is Hansen going after the 1975-No/S Dime?
Later, Paul.
Jung Type Set Upgrade
This past week Hansen posted eight updates from the recent retired HOF Jung Type Set. This is just the tip of the iceberg of many of the finest coins known from this spectacular type set. I am not sure if Hansen will purchase anymore upgrades from the Jung Collection. From what I have observed the availability by Jung coins to improve the Hansen Collection is very plentiful. From the information provided by Mr. Jung in public settings, he is planning to hold on to some of his finest early US issues. It will be interesting to watch and see what happens short and long term.
1838 No Drapery, Lg Stars, Seated Liberty Half Dime MS68+
This coin is one of the highlights of the purchase. This coin is graded at MS68+ and stands alone as the finest and only PCGS certified MS68+ Type 2, No Drapery, Seated Liberty Half Dime. In the entire Seated Liberty Half Dime series, only three other coins are PCGS graded MS68+. They are all Type 3, Stars on Obverse Types, and all are dated 1859. Hansen’s 1859 is a MS67+ and he has an 1853 MS68 for his Type set. The Jung set had one of these MS68+ specimens, but Hansen did not purchase. At least, he did not purchase in the first round.
Hansen has a pretty nice set of Seated Liberty Half Dimes. Of course, his collection is not comparable to the top set that contains the unique 1870-S specimen. The top set is almost two points ahead of Hansen. If Hansen can continue upgrading with the quality coins as this one, he can close the gap.
This coin represents the best of the best for the Type 2, No Drapery coins. This was a short run type of only three years. This new specimen by Hansen is mentioned in a description by Ron Guth: Mint engravers updated the design of the Half Dime in 1838 by adding stars to the obverse. By doing so, they matched the design with every other Seated Liberty design then in circulation with the exception of the Silver Dollar (which did not appear until 1840). Two major varieties appear in this year: the Large Stars and Small Stars. There is a marked difference in the sizes of the stars on the two varieties, and they can be seen best when the two varieties are laid side-by-side. Otherwise, an attribution guide, such as the images above, will be helpful. It is important to know the difference because the Small Stars is quite scarce in comparison to the Large Stars. The 1838 Large Stars No Drapery Half Dime is fairly common, including in Mint State grades, where hundreds of examples have been certified. The best example certified by PCGS is an amazingly colorful PCGS MS68, one of the finest early Seated Liberty Half Dimes of any date.
The coin has a pedigree that dates back to 2005 in a sale of the Lull Collection. It has been is three great collection since including Simpson, Jung and now Hansen. PCGS guide values the coin at $55,000. The last time the coin was sold in public auction was by Bowers & Merena in 2005 where the coin realized $34,500 as a PCGS MS68. Being the coin in a grouping that was purchased privately, we may never know the price Hansen offered for this coin. The auction record for this coin is $37,600 for an untoned MS68 specimen sold 5/2016 by Legends Rare Auctions. I can be very confident this coin would be valued at much more.
Provenance: James W. Lull Collection - Bowers & Merena 1/2005:661, $34,500 - Bob R. Simpson Collection - The Type Set Collection (Oliver Jung) (PCGS Set Registry) - D.L. Hansen Collection
In an Eliasberg comparison, the registry lists the Eliasberg Specimen as PCGS grade MS67, V-9, that was sold by Bowers & Merena May '96. The price realized $3,850. Lot #944. The Eliasberg specimen was pedigreed 11/3/05 by PCGS.
1838 No Drapery, Lg Stars, Seated Liberty H10C MS68+ (Gold Shield)
PCGS POP for Coin: 1/0 / POP for Type: 1/0
Certification #29582777, PCGS #4317
PCGS Price Guide Value: $55,000
PCGS Pedigree: Simson
My 20th Century Gold Major Design Type Set ---started : 11/17/1997 ---- completed : 1/21/2004
This very nice MS-68+ is a V-1, which is actually the "Small Stars" obverse.
It should probably be called the "Rusty Arm" instead.
You can tell from all the rust pits on the arm, and from the repunched stars 1 3 4 5 9 10 11 12.
The reverse has a die crack that splits D S (most visible in the leaves between D and H),
and a light crack at A2 (first A of AMERICA). It does not yet have the big clash.
This establishes it as an early die state V-1 (and not a V-2, which has an uncracked reverse die).
https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/995123/1838-stars-half-dime
@MrHalfDime provided this helpful post in 2006:
Attributing the 1838 "small stars", 1848 "large date", and the 1849 "9/6" overdates has long been a problem.
Mostly because they appear in the Red Book without much detail, and people seem to "make up" their own criteria for identifying them.
The 1992 Blythe book has the info to properly attribute all of these, although it's out of print.
We are finally straightening out the 1849 9/6 overdates (in terms of PCGS attribution). Hopefully the others will follow soon.
Thanks Yos for this additional information. Hansen Collection may one day become the encyclopedia of US Coins issues.
My 20th Century Gold Major Design Type Set ---started : 11/17/1997 ---- completed : 1/21/2004
I wonder, has anyone come up with a ballpark value (or at least an acquisition cost) of the complete collection that Hansen is working on? Define value any way you like and define complete any way you like, since I'm asking about ballpark anyway.
I know there are some ultra rarities that are worth millions by themselves, but I figure the "typical" piece is probably under $10,000. With a bit over 6,000 entries in the largest Registry set, that works out to about $60 million for the complete collection. Even if I'm off by 3x, that's still under $200 million.
Anyone want to suggest a different number?
It appear to me the collection that Hansen is assembling will be well more than 6,000 coins that you mention. When you consider the silver and gold bullion, the complete set of commemoratives to present, the silver, gold, platinum eagles, odd and ends patterns, colonials, and territorial issues, the collection will be well above 10,000. This is not considering the speciality die variety sets and the duplicate sets.
My 20th Century Gold Major Design Type Set ---started : 11/17/1997 ---- completed : 1/21/2004
Speaking of duplicates, I am surprised he hasn't sold off all of his duplicate registry sets. It would free up capital for other coins.
he is a billionaire. He doesnt have to sell off his duplicates to raise capital.
he is a billionaire. He doesnt have to sell off his duplicates to raise capital.
Heh.
He may be a billionaire, but much of his wealth is likely on paper and includes his vast real estate holdings. Hansen might not want to liquidate his real estate holdings or other paper assets to purchase more coins. The relevant question is not the value of his assets/net worth, but how much cash on hand he has and cash flow.
In the unlikely event he is asset rich and cash poor I’m pretty certain he has a monstrous credit line at very favorable terms.
Now, I appreciate the question, but I don't think it would be wise for me to answer the question before the auction on any coin...
President of David Lawrence Rare Coins www.davidlawrence.com
email: John@davidlawrence.com
2022 ANA Dealer of the Year, Past Chair of NCBA (formerly ICTA), PNG Treasurer, Instructor at Witter Coin University, former Instructor/YN Chaperone ANA Summer Seminar, Coin World Most Influential, Curator of the D.L. Hansen Collection
Now this would make for a great new thread!
President of David Lawrence Rare Coins www.davidlawrence.com
email: John@davidlawrence.com
2022 ANA Dealer of the Year, Past Chair of NCBA (formerly ICTA), PNG Treasurer, Instructor at Witter Coin University, former Instructor/YN Chaperone ANA Summer Seminar, Coin World Most Influential, Curator of the D.L. Hansen Collection
Jung Type Set Upgrade #2
A couple days ago in a similar update, I posted a coin from the recent retired HOF Jung Type Set. It appears to me that Hansen purchased eight coins from this great collection. This is the second coin posted from the collection and the second coin that qualifies as the finest known PCGS certified coin for the type. The first coin that I posted was an impressive 1838 No Drapery, Lg Stars, Seated Liberty Half Dime MS68+ Specimen. This update for a Seated Liberty Half Dollar is just as impressive.
1874 Seated Liberty Half Dollar, Arrows, MS67+
This coin is only Type 6, With Motto, Arrows at Date Specimen that carries the PCGS MS67 or MS67+ grade. Next highest graded is a single MS66+ Specimen. This coin represents the best on the Condition Census charts for the Type 6, With Motto coins. This was only a two year coin type that ran in 1873 and 1874. This new specimen now own by Hansen is mentioned in a description by Ron Guth: This was the second (and last year) in which the government placed arrowheads on either side of the date of the Half Dollar, signifying a reduction in the stattpry weight. Though this is a common date, it is in high demand as a type coin, thus the values for any given grade are higher than if this was a normal Stars Obverse Half Dollar. Mint State examples of the 1874 With Arrows Half Dollar are semi-scarce and certainly more plentiful than the 1873. Recently (in 2015), PCGS certified a single MS67 example which represents the finest example of the date and type.
The coin can be traced back to the Heritage 2003, Orlando, FL. (FUN) Signature Sale, Lot #7186. The coin realized $37,950. The listing does not provide any additional information on history or origin. The Auction Record is $40,250 realized by a PCGS MS66 in a 2011 Heritage Auction.
Majestically Toned is the description given for this coin in 2003. Heritage goes onto describe the coin as: This coin was previously offered as lot 8153 in our July 2002 New York Signature Sale, where it was cataloged as: "A weight change during this and the preceding year brought back the Arrows design from two decades earlier. Although not particularly scarce in Mint State when compared to other issues in the series, the two Philadelphia Halves from these years are often sought out as a briefly minted type. We have been fortunate to offer several Choice or better examples during the past few years, but the appearance of this Superb Gem raises the bar substantially. The obverse is toned in mostly concentric shades of forest-green, rose-violet, and orange. These same colors reappear on the reverse, but leave a window of brilliance at its center. Under these vivid colorations, satiny, impeccably preserved surfaces have no trouble penetrating the depth of the toning. A truly one-of-a-kind type coin."
Provenance: Heritage 7/2002:8153 - Heritage 1/2003:7186, $37,950 - The Type Set Collection (Oliver Jung) (PCGS Set Registry) - D.L. Hansen Collection
In an Eliasberg comparison, the registry lists the Eliasberg Specimen as a Proof. Ex: J.M. Clapp Collection; John H. Clapp; Louis E. Eliasberg, Sr. Sold by Bowers & Merena Apr '97 price realized $3,300. Lot #2028.
1874 Seated Liberty Half Dollar, Arrows, MS67+ (Gold Shield)
PCGS POP for Coin: 1/0 / POP for Type: 1/0
Certification #30773342, PCGS #6346
PCGS Price Guide Value: Unknown ($55,000 when certified as MS67)
My 20th Century Gold Major Design Type Set ---started : 11/17/1997 ---- completed : 1/21/2004
phenomenal eye appeal
Latin American Collection
Has Hansen stated what he will do with the coins after they pass to his heirs? Will they be returned to the public or held away in a numismatic trust of sorts?
Latin American Collection
That 1874 half is spectacular.
"Look up, old boy, and see what you get." -William Bonney.
If anyone go by the DLRC table at the show this week, get pictures of the Trade Dollar display. It would be nice to share for everyone to see.
Lastly, the fun announcement for this event is that we’ll be displaying the Hansen Proof Trade Dollar Set. The #1 All-Time PCGS Registry Set will be on display at our table. Not often do you get to see an 1884 or an 1885 Proof Trade Dollar, but when you get to see both examples that are the finest examples graded, it’s a special event. Please stop by and enjoy our display!
Thanks again for reading and we hope to see you next week!
Sincerely,
John Brush and Your Friends at DLRC
My 20th Century Gold Major Design Type Set ---started : 11/17/1997 ---- completed : 1/21/2004
What trade dollar display?
The #1 All-Time PCGS Registry Set of Proof Trade Dollars with the finest graded 1884 and 1885 Trade Dollars.
And thrown in for fun is an 1829 $5 PCGS MS66+...
President of David Lawrence Rare Coins www.davidlawrence.com
email: John@davidlawrence.com
2022 ANA Dealer of the Year, Past Chair of NCBA (formerly ICTA), PNG Treasurer, Instructor at Witter Coin University, former Instructor/YN Chaperone ANA Summer Seminar, Coin World Most Influential, Curator of the D.L. Hansen Collection
Pretty coin. It's a cover coin for a "tell-all" book. I won't be the one to write it.
I don’t know if you have looked at his duplicate sets, but he has some very impressive sets. I don’t really discuss them here, so unless you look for them, they are somewhat under the radar. There are a few registry sets that does not carry his name.
He is selling a few coins through the DLRC website, but the numbers are very small. If he did liquidate his duplicates as you suggested, it would be a really big event requiring multiple parts. Maybe even a couple years. For example, in a couple 1800s silver proof sets, he is two or three complete sets deep. Also, this does not account for the coins in the collection that are in NGC, etc. holders, and the raw ones. Really amazing if you think about it.
Lastly, some of the Major Collections, i.e. Eliasberg, were auctioned with duplicates. If I were to guess, Hansen have some duplicates that he would never sell until the collections is sold, auctioned, or preserved in a museum or similar.
Heritage ANA auction is starting now. I have have 13 coins on my Hansen watch list. It will be interesting to see if he wins any of them tonight.
My 20th Century Gold Major Design Type Set ---started : 11/17/1997 ---- completed : 1/21/2004
I've been tracking his "SSS" (secret saint set
) and David Lawrence but nothing seems to ever happen.
I even offered super premium money for one of his dups.
That sort of thing generally works on other people but not DLH.
What's an obsessed person to do
My Saint Set
@JBatDavidLawrence JB, tomorrow I'm gonna come by and let's get some photos of the set in it's entirety that way we can post it on the threat. What do you say?
Let's do it! I have an Anti-Counterfeiting Educational Foundation Breakfast at 7am (who schedules these things?), but I should be to the show by 9 and would love to do that!
President of David Lawrence Rare Coins www.davidlawrence.com
email: John@davidlawrence.com
2022 ANA Dealer of the Year, Past Chair of NCBA (formerly ICTA), PNG Treasurer, Instructor at Witter Coin University, former Instructor/YN Chaperone ANA Summer Seminar, Coin World Most Influential, Curator of the D.L. Hansen Collection
How'd we do?
Actually, we're having some issues with some Registry Set updates, but David Talk is trying to get them fixed for us, so you'll see a few updates to the Eliasberg Set very soon (I hope!)
President of David Lawrence Rare Coins www.davidlawrence.com
email: John@davidlawrence.com
2022 ANA Dealer of the Year, Past Chair of NCBA (formerly ICTA), PNG Treasurer, Instructor at Witter Coin University, former Instructor/YN Chaperone ANA Summer Seminar, Coin World Most Influential, Curator of the D.L. Hansen Collection
Count Down 20 – Dahlonega Mint Quarter Eagle
Only 20 left!
It has been a long wait. The last count down coin was posted February 21, 2019. Six Months! I hope Hansen is back on track to clip these off more frequently now. The collection is down to needing only 20 coins to exceed the Eliasberg Collection for US Issue for completeness. I say exceed, because Eliasberg did not own the 1870-S Half Dime. This coin is one of the remaining 20 coins. The last 20 is not an easy task. There are some expects that say it is impossible because of the unique coins. They may be right. Only time can tell.
This is a new addition to the Dahlonega Mint set. The 58 piece set requires one more coin, 1854-D Quarter Eagle. When completed, I believe the Hansen Dahlonega Mint set will be one of the finest and complete sets ever been assembled, maybe second only to the Harry W. Bass, Jr. Collection. The Smithsonian National Numismatic Collection is completed for this mint. Of course, Eliasberg had a complete set. Also, Newcomer and Pittman assembled completed Dahlonega Mint sets. In registry ratings, Hansen set has a little better grade than any of them. The Green Pond Collection appears to be finest by grade shown in the registry ratings. The Green Pond Collection is a set of high grade Dahlonega gold coins. Included in the set are coins from the collections of Harry W. Bass, Jr. Louis Eliasberg and John Jay Pittman. Individual highlights included two 1855-D gold dollars in mint state, one with a full date, an 1856-D dollar in MS-62, 1861-D dollar in MS-63, 1841-D quarter eagle in MS-63 and both the 55-D and 56-D quarter eagles in MS-60. The five dollar gold set has an 1841-D in MS-64, a 1842-D Large Date in MS-61, both the 1854-D and 1856-D in MS-64, the 1855-D in MS-63 and the 1861-D in MS-62. The Green Pond Collection is surely one of the finest collections of Southern gold ever assembled. According to the registry, the set was missing three coins. I cannot verify if that is true or not.
By any standard of measure, Hansen’s Dahlonega Mint Collection is a great accomplishment. This new addition is not a Condition Census coin, rather than a nice, appealing heavy worn old gold piece. For this date, there is only one mint grade coin, the PCGS MS61 specimen. There are maybe a dozen nice about uncirculated (AU) specimens. The survival estimate for all grades is approx. 65. David Akers comments: This is an extremely rare coin in all grades and, as far as I know, unknown in full mint state. I have, however, seen several AU pieces, the finest of which is in a Connecticut collection. Generally not as well struck as the 1840-C, but usually more sharply struck than the 1840. From the standpoint of number of auction appearances, this is one of the dozen rarest Liberty Head quarter eagles and it has actually appeared at auction fewer times than the highly regarded 1854-D and 1856-D.
1840-D Quarter Eagle VF20
As previously stated, this 1840-D Quarter Eagle is not in the condition census Top 5, but serves as a nice hole filler for now. It is not known where this coin was purchased. No information is online. The coin was updated to the Hansen’s set sometimes between late yesterday afternoon and late last night. Is it too much to imagine that Hansen made this find on the browse floor yesterday? If you noticed someone with a pipe checking out old southern gold coins, please let us know. Even if the coin was to be replaced one day, I would think this coin would remain in his collection for this interesting reason.
Provenance: unknown
In comparing to Eliasberg’s specimen, the registry describes his specimen as a 1840-D Quarter Eagle, PCGS grade XF45. Ex: Purchased by Louis Eliasberg when he acquired the John Clapp collection in 1942. Earlier from the Chapman Brothers in 1894. Purchased at the Bowers & Ruddy Oct '82 Eliasberg sale by Harry Bass for $4,400. Lot #114.
1840-D Quarter Eagle VF20 (Gold Shield)
PCGS Coin #7719 / PCGS Serial 37550729 / POP 4/45
There are 20 remaining coins in the Eliasberg Quest. The 13 coins that are not listed in “complete registry set” are Bold below. Note: DLH was a partner in the purchase of the 1854-S XF45 Half Eagle being that he's a partner with DLRC, but after purchasing the coin, DLHC reported the specimen was sold to an undisclosed client.
Top 10
1870-S Half Dime (Unique Coin in Tom Bender PCGS Registry Collection)
1873-CC "No Arrows" Dime (Unique Coin in an anonymous collection)
1870-S Three Dollar Only (Unique Coin owned by the Bass Foundation displayed at the ANA)
1866 "No Motto" Dollar Proof Only (2 Minted, Unique Private Coin in Simpson Collection)
1822 Half Eagle (Survival 3, Unique Private Owned Coin in the Pogue Collection)
1933 Double Eagle (Known Survival 16, Unique Legally Owned Coin - anonymous collection)
1854-S Half Eagle (Survival 4, Two known in private: 1-Pogue AU58+; 2- XF45 sold July 2018)
1798 "Small Eagle" Half Eagle (Survival 7, Only 2 maybe 3 examples could be privately purchased)
1913 Liberty Head Nickel Proof Only (5 Minted, 3 private owned)
1838-0 Half Dollar BM Only (Survival 9, six known for private purchase)
Next 9
1880 Four Dollar Gold "Stella’s" (Coiled Hair) Proof Only (Survival 8)
1827 "Original" Quarter Dollar Proof Only (Survival 9)
1894-S Barber Dime BM Proof Only (Survival 13)
1841 Quarter Eagle (Survival for regular strikes 12, proofs 4)
1819 Half Eagle (Survival for “No Variety” 7, for “5D/50” 17)
1880 Four Dollar Gold "Stella’s" (Flowing Hair) Proof Only (Survival 24)
1933 Ten Dollar (Survival 40, rarest issue in series)
1839 Gobrecht Dollar (Survival 60-75)
1798 Quarter Eagle (Survival 80)
Last 1
1854-D Quarter Eagle (Survival 75)
My 20th Century Gold Major Design Type Set ---started : 11/17/1997 ---- completed : 1/21/2004
Other than the 1870-S H10c and the 1933 St. Gaudens $20, which of the others was Eliasberg missing?