Home U.S. Coin Forum

Hansen watch.

1707173757690

Comments

  • CatbertCatbert Posts: 7,131 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Let’s be careful please with our posts and not get this thread locked.

    Seated Half Society member #38
    "Got a flaming heart, can't get my fill"
  • CurrinCurrin Posts: 1,520 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Thanks Catbert for the comment and warning. Yes, let’s end this discussion with this post. I have plans to report a great new Simpson coin in this afternoon update. So everyone, please hold the comments or start a new thread. Thanks in advance.

    My 20th Century Type Set, With Type Variations---started : 9/22/1997 ---- completed : 1/7/2004

    My 20th Century Gold Major Design Type Set ---started : 11/17/1997 ---- completed : 1/21/2004
  • ironmanl63ironmanl63 Posts: 1,972 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @keyman64 said:
    For a number of reasons, I wasn't really a fan of the accumulation prior to the recent news. I tried to keep an open mind but the more I learned about the person and the collection, I realized it wasn't for me. In light of recent news, I'm really not a fan now. I can't be supportive like others are. I might be the only one that is outspoken about it but I (and others I know) can't support DLRC with business as long as there is a relationship with someone that has so many terrible allegations against them from so many different sources. At least I know the MLS (among others) feels the same way. I know Twitter was on fire with the news. Will the lack of my business and a few others be enough to impact DLRC? No, absolutely not. I'm sure the compensation and business from a billionaire is far greater. Greed is good for some. For me, some things are just more important than money. It will be a good day when this accumulation is sold. I feel that morals are far more important. As far as Currin's continued support, he is either well compensated or genuinely loves expensive coins that he does not own more than anyone else out there, regardless of any possible questionable morality. Since PCGS is a publicly traded company, it will be interesting to see how many articles they write about the accumulation moving forward or if they carefully distance themselves from the person.

    Virtue signal much!

  • AotearoaAotearoa Posts: 1,472 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I was going to make a general comment about gold dollars and then I remembered what my mother told me...

    Smitten with DBLCs.

  • GazesGazes Posts: 2,315 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited September 26, 2020 12:29PM

    Nice new addition. I enjoy gold dollars. They are gold, old, small mintages, often can be found in gem or better, great history, and you get alot of value.

  • BoosibriBoosibri Posts: 12,106 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Unlike the 61-D $5 which cannot be 100% confirmed to have been minted by the Confederates, the 1861-D $1 is most certainly a Confederate issue. One of my favorite US issues but so dang tiny!

  • ZoinsZoins Posts: 34,113 ✭✭✭✭✭
  • GazesGazes Posts: 2,315 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @Zoins said:
    It's great to see a top pop Duke Creek in the collection! I didn't know Simpson had these. How many Duke Creek coins did Simpson have?

    Here's the running upgrade list:

    My memory is that the Duke Creek coins were all NGC (im not 100% on this) so that may limit their inclusion in a pcgs registry set unless they cross

  • ZoinsZoins Posts: 34,113 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited September 26, 2020 5:12PM

    @Gazes said:

    @Zoins said:
    It's great to see a top pop Duke Creek in the collection! I didn't know Simpson had these. How many Duke Creek coins did Simpson have?

    Here's the running upgrade list:

    My memory is that the Duke Creek coins were all NGC (im not 100% on this) so that may limit their inclusion in a pcgs registry set unless they cross

    Yes, they were NGC and it seems like this coin lost the provenance when crossed to PCGS. It’s only via the Heritage description, not the PCGS cert, that we know it's a Duke Creek coin.

  • earlyAurumearlyAurum Posts: 723 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I think DLH upgraded his 1796 no stars to an AU58.

  • CurrinCurrin Posts: 1,520 ✭✭✭✭✭

    .
    .
    I know I confused this posting by calling the third coin “Bob Simpson Upgrade #3”. The coin is not an upgrade, rather a new addition. There was not a 1907 Liberty Half Eagle in The Collection. There were five coins purchased in Simpson #1 sale, four upgrades and one new addition. Sorry If I confused the posting.

    My 20th Century Type Set, With Type Variations---started : 9/22/1997 ---- completed : 1/7/2004

    My 20th Century Gold Major Design Type Set ---started : 11/17/1997 ---- completed : 1/21/2004
  • CurrinCurrin Posts: 1,520 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Early Quarter Eagle Upgrade

    @earlyAurum said:
    I think DLH upgraded his 1796 no stars to an AU58.

    You are correct, this coin has been upgraded. As for early quarter eagles, they don’t get any earlier than this one. Our friend Ron Guth had this to say: The 1796 Quarter Eagle with No Stars on the obverse is one of the most historic and important U.S. gold coins. The mintage is a mere 963 pieces, which is exceedingly small by any standard. Estimates of the number of surviving examples has ranged all over the place. David Akers claimed 30 to 40, refuting earlier claims of 15 to 20 known. The cataloger at Heritage estimated 80 to 100 in their January 2007 sale. PCGS experts estimate a surviving population of 100 to 125 pieces. To put a finer spin on things, we have images of 28 different examples, all in AU or better. Eleven of those examples are Mint State 60 or better. At the top of the condition census is the incredible PCGS MS65 (finest by two full points) that sold for $1,725,000 in January 2008. It is very difficult to locate a "perfect" 1796 No Stars Quarter Eagle. Many show lintmarks of various sizes. Some show adjustment marks, usually in the center of the obverse. The Bass:261 coin (now in an NGC MS60 holder) shows three different, mint-caused defects: a diagonal fissure running from the turban to Liberty's temple; vertical adjustment marks on the obverse; and a heavy lintmark on the right side of the reverse (yet, it is still a nice, six-figure coin). Though there are numerically finer examples, my personal favorite is Bob Simpson's PCGS MS62+ -- it is well-struck, has great color, and is free of any distracting problems.

    I am not sure of the status of the Bob Simpson's PCGS MS62+ Specimen. I did not see the coin being offered in his sales, so I wondering if he planning on holding on to the coin. The PCGS MS65 that sold for $1,725,000 is pedigreed to Lorin Parmelee Collection. This upgrade does not come close to reaching the status of these coins. The Hansen Collection previously had a very nice, but well circulated, 1796 No Stars, AU50 Certification #29531383. If you recall, I discussed this coin on a December 2019 feature that I called “Hansen-Eliasberg Challenge II – Part I”. The Eliasberg Specimen was a XF45, but by today’s grading standards, the coin could a few grades better. The existing coin POP 6/48 was last sold in Heritage’s 2017 Long Beach Expo US Coins Signature Auction. The coin was from The Faris Collection and realized $111,625. I am not sure of the future destination of this coin. It would make a nice coin for someone’s collection, but it does carry the Hansen pedigree and label.

    1796, No Stars, Quarter Eagle AU58

    This upgrade is from an AU50 to AU58 with a POP 14/7. The coin is the first year of issue for this denomination and a one-year type with just 963 struck. The coin was offered in mid-September on Tangible Investments, Inc. website. The coin was described as a “US Rare Coin“. The coin’s detail description: Outstanding, Super-Rarity 1796 $2.50 Gold Draped Bust Quarter Eagle, Type 1 No Stars graded PCGS AU58. The 1796 Draped Bust Quarter Eagle is one of the most important, if not the most important Quarter Eagle to exist in American history. This coin came from an exceptionally small mintage of only 963 coins, of which only 100 to 125 are known, and less than 8 existing in Mint State condition. However not being mint state, this 1796 $2.50 gold draped bust example features exceptional detail, original orange color and untouched luster residing under the slight wear making the coin an AU58. The obverse displays this wear, but the reverse is untouched and easily can be considered uncirculated. It should be noted that Mint State examples are unavailable under the range of $450,000, and ranging into the 7-figures for MS62 specimens. Furthermore, auction sales are few and far between, of which the last AU58 example sold over 6 years ago. An absolute masterpiece and duly noted example for a collector of American rarities. Comparable sales are hard to find, as an AU53 Sold for $150,000 in Stacks 2017 Sale Lot #10114, and an MS61 example sold for $396,000 in Heritage 2018 Long Beach Sale Lot #4094, giving the price of this PQ AU58 at $245,000.

    The coin was offered with an ask price of $245,000, also the coin was offered briefly on eBay. It does not appear the coin sold for the asking price. The coin was purchased from David Lawrence Rare Coins, so it is unknown what the coin actually sold for. This is a nice upgrade to the US early coinage portion of The Collection.

    Doug Winter's WOW Factor Coin #4
    1796, No Stars, Quarter Eagle AU58
    Certification #34023698, PCGS #7645
    PCGSGV: $225,000 / asked $245,000

    My 20th Century Type Set, With Type Variations---started : 9/22/1997 ---- completed : 1/7/2004

    My 20th Century Gold Major Design Type Set ---started : 11/17/1997 ---- completed : 1/21/2004
  • BoosibriBoosibri Posts: 12,106 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Doug Winter's WOW Factor Coin #4
    1796, No Stars, Quarter Eagle AU58
    Certification #34023698, PCGS #7645
    PCGSGV: $225,000 / asked $245,000

    Do you have a picture of the coin which was previously in the set? While completely appreciating the rarity of the issue, from the pictures the coin appears to be so processed it wouldn't grade if was a different issue.

  • earlyAurumearlyAurum Posts: 723 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I had forgotten about Simpson’s 1796 No Stars. Thanks to Currin for refreshing my memory. I’m surprised it isn’t in the upcoming auctions since it appears he is divesting his other quarter eagles including the 1796 with stars which is a more desirable and more expensive coin.

    The DLH upgrade is interesting.

  • CurrinCurrin Posts: 1,520 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @earlyAurum said:
    I had forgotten about Simpson’s 1796 No Stars. Thanks to Currin for refreshing my memory. I’m surprised it isn’t in the upcoming auctions since it appears he is divesting his other quarter eagles including the 1796 with stars which is a more desirable and more expensive coin.

    The DLH upgrade is interesting.

    .
    .

    The 1795 with stars is a monster coin that has a prooflike appeal. The coin is one of three or four million dollars coins in January 2021 Simpson sale at the FUN event. 1795 with stars would make a very nice upgrade to Hansen’s XF45+ specimen. The real coin to watch is the Early Proof Eagle. It is a real Kaiju.

    My 20th Century Type Set, With Type Variations---started : 9/22/1997 ---- completed : 1/7/2004

    My 20th Century Gold Major Design Type Set ---started : 11/17/1997 ---- completed : 1/21/2004
  • tradedollarnuttradedollarnut Posts: 20,162 ✭✭✭✭✭
  • BoosibriBoosibri Posts: 12,106 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Amazing $2.5

  • GazesGazes Posts: 2,315 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @Currin said:
    Proof Upgrade

    As many of you know, the U.S. Coins Complete Basic Set, Proof (1801-1964) has surpassed 75%. PCGS describes the set as: Every basic classic U.S. coin in Proof from 1801 through 1964, this set is one of the greatest challenges in the Registry. A collection of this size could take many years to assemble in high grade. As I have stated more than once, completing this set is more than the greatest challenge in the Registry. As a fact, the set is impossible to complete. There are a few coins that PCGS has never certified. There are coins required in the set where it’s doubtful the coins actually exist. Also, there are a few coins off the market and in the Smithsonian National Numismatic Collection and Harry Bass Foundation Collections, and others likewise; they will never appear for public sale. Presently, The D.L. Hansen Collection has 874 of the required 1145 coins. If my math is correct, approx. 20 new coins have been added in 2020. The set will really get interesting when the completion reaches about 90%. We can watch and see what happens.

    Gold Proof coins are really a class of their own. Since I am featuring a quarter eagle today, I will briefly discuss the series. Just assembling a set of quarter eagles would be challenging. The D.L. Hansen Collection is amazingly working on all series at once. PCGS described the 90 coin set as: A complete set of Proof Quarter Eagles is faced with the same problem all Proof denomination sets share; namely the extreme rarity of early (pre-1857) Proof issues. Numerous dates have yet to have a single example graded by PCGS, and nearly all others boast populations in the low single digits. Needless to say, this is not a set that will be attempted by many, if for no other reason than the prohibitive rarity of so many of the coins.

    The Collection replaced its 1876 PR65DC Specimen. This coin is not a hole filler! The POP 4/3 coin is a PCGS census specimen. This is a $50K coin, but as we know, if opportunity for an upgrade comes along, we often see the great coin is replaced with a better grade. That is exactly what we are seeing today. The PR65DC $50K coin is being replaced with a POP 1/0 $100K specimen. Sometimes I find it quite funny when comments are made about Hansen’s collection as a hole filler collection. A good laugh once a day is what I need.

    1876 Quarter Eagle, DCAM PR67DCAM

    The 1876 Quarter Eagle has a mintage 45, but where are they? In one of StacksBowers description: The Proof 1876 quarter eagle has the highest mintage in its series from 1868 through 1880. Even so, survivors from the mintage of 45 pieces are highly elusive and, discounting for the high probability of resubmissions among the third party certification totals, we believe that fewer than 25 coins are extant, perhaps no more than 20. This Superb Gem is the single finest certified example known to PCGS and NGC, the only Proof-67 in any category and is exceptionally attractive due to the Ultra Cameo finish. It is destined to serve as a highlight in an advanced collection of classic Proof gold coinage.

    I don’t always get this right, but I believe this PR67DCAM PCGS specimen is the same coin sold in Stacks Bowers November 2017 Rarities Night Auction in Baltimore. The coin holds the auction record at $66,000. It was sold in a Proof-67 Ultra Cameo (NGC) holder. The coin was described as “Finest Certified Proof 1876 Quarter Eagle”. The auctioneer stated: This breathtakingly beautiful 1876 Proof quarter eagle combines satiny devices with deeply mirrored fields, easily living up to its Ultra Cameo designation by NGC. The surfaces are silky smooth and virtually pristine. A full strike and bright golden yellow patina round out enhance the appeal of this remarkable condition rarity. The listing and 2017 sale does not provide any addition provenance.

    I watched this coin listed for sale by GreatCollections for several weeks. The coin was offered as a starting bid of $87,500. PCGS places the value at $120,000. I have no idea how they came up with price. It was a little surprising to me, the coin was sold with one bid of $87,500 and $98,437.50 with buyer fees. The coin sold on September 27th with a new Auction Record bid. I am not sure that PCGS will recognized this as a new record, being they are not recognizing GreatCollections sale results.

    Provenance: Rarities Night (StacksBowers 11/17), lot 10139, realized $66,000; (GreatCollections 9/27/2020) ID # 809950, realized $98,437.50, D. L. Hansen Collection.

    1876 Quarter Eagle, DCAM PR67DCAM PCGS
    Finest Certified Proof 1876 Quarter Eagle
    Certification #34939982, PCGS #97902
    PCGSGV: $120,000 / realized $98,437.50

    Gorgeous coin. I remain very impressed with what Hansen has been accomplishing with proof gold. As for your comment on the price, i would note that those who follow proof gold will notice that pcgs generally brings signifcantly more than ngc and cac approval also is an important factor in pricing proof gold. This date in deep cameo has 4 stickered coins (3 in 64 and 1 in 65). My hunch is the coin would have gone for far more than the record price with cac approval. That being said, to build a world class proof gold coin collection there will be times you just dont have the luxury to have all cac coins. Some coins are rarely available and some dates simply have few if any cac approvals. Great pick up for the Hansen collection.

  • PerfectionPerfection Posts: 180 ✭✭✭

    Good morning. Great coin! I do not exactly agree with: "some dates simply have few if any Cac approvals"
    Many do until they are cracked and upgraded. When I buy a coin like this I downgrade it and get the CAC sticker as the grade is usually one lower. DLH could do the same but chooses not to. In this case it should be done as there are no 66's and therefore this would still be a top pop. Yes it certainly would have sold for "far more" with CAC approval but CAC does not feel it is a 67.

  • earlyAurumearlyAurum Posts: 723 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @Perfection said:
    Good morning. Great coin! I do not exactly agree with: "some dates simply have few if any Cac approvals"
    Many do until they are cracked and upgraded. When I buy a coin like this I downgrade it and get the CAC sticker as the grade is usually one lower. DLH could do the same but chooses not to. In this case it should be done as there are no 66's and therefore this would still be a top pop. Yes it certainly would have sold for "far more" with CAC approval but CAC does not feel it is a 67.

    This is an interesting dilemma. if you are a registry player then the higher grade is more important. if you want to sell, perhaps the CAC sticker will bring more money (each case is individual as Perfection points out that this 1876 has no equal even at MS66). Lastly you might not care for either but just want the coin graded to your standards.

    This is a good problem to have if the coin will truly sticker at the lower grade...

  • MFeldMFeld Posts: 13,471 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @Perfection said:
    Good morning. Great coin! I do not exactly agree with: "some dates simply have few if any Cac approvals"
    Many do until they are cracked and upgraded. When I buy a coin like this I downgrade it and get the CAC sticker as the grade is usually one lower. DLH could do the same but chooses not to. In this case it should be done as there are no 66's and therefore this would still be a top pop. Yes it certainly would have sold for "far more" with CAC approval but CAC does not feel it is a 67.

    I don't understand how you can fail to agree, exactly with the statement "some dates simply have few if any Cac approvals".
    The fact that the number of CAC examples might change in the future, due to downgrades, crack-outs, etc., doesn't mean the comment was inaccurate at the time it was made.

    If I state that a coin with a PCGS population of zero has a PCGS population of zero, the statement is still accurate, whether or not the population increases over time.

    Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.

  • BoosibriBoosibri Posts: 12,106 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @earlyAurum said:

    @Perfection said:
    Good morning. Great coin! I do not exactly agree with: "some dates simply have few if any Cac approvals"
    Many do until they are cracked and upgraded. When I buy a coin like this I downgrade it and get the CAC sticker as the grade is usually one lower. DLH could do the same but chooses not to. In this case it should be done as there are no 66's and therefore this would still be a top pop. Yes it certainly would have sold for "far more" with CAC approval but CAC does not feel it is a 67.

    This is an interesting dilemma. if you are a registry player then the higher grade is more important. if you want to sell, perhaps the CAC sticker will bring more money (each case is individual as Perfection points out that this 1876 has no equal even at MS66). Lastly you might not care for either but just want the coin graded to your standards.

    This is a good problem to have if the coin will truly sticker at the lower grade...

    This point: This is a good problem to have if the coin will truly sticker at the lower grade...

    The key is in understand which coins will CAC at a point lower, vs. ones which will never CAC for one reason or another.

  • PerfectionPerfection Posts: 180 ✭✭✭

    This is not a forum to discuss over grading and the merits of CAC so this is my last comment.
    Collectors know that CAC is usually one grade lower than PCGS and perhaps two two for NGC. CAC buyers wanted to compete in the registry and not play the upgrade game. PCGS finally created a CAC registry to address this issue.
    It is extremely difficult to have a 100% CAC set be top in the regular registry. Regardless it is apple and oranges which has become more and more evident over the years. Gold especially. When people do not understand I tell them to look at the prices for CAC versus non for Saints. Lastly, some people say buy the coin and not the grade.
    That is mostly nonsense. MANY buyers/collectors cannot grade and cannot learn unless they are around many coins for many years. They want to be able to rely on experts, Grading services or dealers. I am now learning sport cards.
    Unless I handle thousands I have little clue. I have to learn how the grading service work with cards.
    Have a nice day.

  • PerfectionPerfection Posts: 180 ✭✭✭

    I don't understand how you can fail to agree, exactly with the statement "some dates simply have few if any Cac approvals".
    The fact that the number of CAC examples might change in the future, due to downgrades, crack-outs, etc., doesn't mean the comment was inaccurate at the time it was made.

    Ok, submit I agree, technically. Some dates have no CAC approval. if they have PCGS or NGC approvals, they can be
    changed to CAC approvals, usually at another grade.

  • This content has been removed.
  • CurrinCurrin Posts: 1,520 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited October 8, 2020 5:02PM

    @Currin said:
    Heritage Auction Upgrades

    I mentioned a few days ago about Heritage 2020 September 18 - 20 US Coins Signature Auction. I featured the 1798 $1 Large Eagle, MS64 PCGS, Ex: Eliasberg. This was not the only upgrade. There were several. I call these upgrades, improvements. None are significant alone, but as a group they are. The 1792 – 1964 portion of the Hall of Fame Basic set requires 2821 specimens. One by one, we are slowly seeing the set improved. On 9/28/2020, The Collection reached 63.00 GPA Weighted rating for this portion of the set. This is a great milestone. Let’s look at the percentages of a few categories.

    Sole Finest or Tied Finest: 39%
    Second Finest / Only One PCGS Graded Finer: 16%
    Condition Census / PCGS Graded TOP Five: 21%

    Amazingly, a little 75% of the 2821 piece 1792 – 1964 basic set is PCGS Condition Census. This means about 660 coins (23%) still need to be upgraded to reach a Condition Census quality set. Many of them are not ultra-rarities, rather coin that just need an opportunity to replace as being featured today. These are a few of the improvement coins that were purchase. Just note, a couple are Major Variety improvements and at least on is proof.

    1797 Draped Bust Cent, MS65 Brown, POP 10/3, PCGSPG: $37,500, realized $21,000
    1807 S-276 Cent, MS63 Brown, POP 5/2, PCGSPG: $16,500, realized $15,600
    1867 Indian Head Cent, MS66 Red, POP 4/0, PCGSPG $46,500, realized $18,000, Ex: Castle
    1924-D Buffalo Nickel, MS66, POP 15/0, PCGSPG: $18,750, realized $10,800
    1928-S Nickel, MS66+, POP 2/2, PCGSPG: $25,000, realized $16,800
    1941 Jefferson Nickel, PR68, POP 7/0, PCGSPG: $12,500, realized $11,400
    1854-C Quarter Eagle, MS62, POP 4/0, PCGSPG: $25,000, realized $15,600

    None of the improvements were high dollar value in the D.H. Hansen Collection. It is the continuous improved in which these coins will add overall value in the end. I will feature the 1854-C Quarter Eagle. It was not the most expensive of these improvement coins, but I just have a fondness to Charlotte Gold, and this is really cool old gold coin.

    1854-C Quarter Eagle MS62 PCGS

    The D.L. Hansen Collection is top of the All-Time registry for Charlotte Gold Basic Set, Circulation Strikes (1838-1861). The weighted Grade average is 60.38 and the set is followed by Harry W. Bass, Smithsonian National Numismatic Collection, Louis Eliasberg and rounding out the fifth place set is Southern Collection. This is a great example of continuous improvement.

    Expert Doug Winter described the coin as: After a one-year hiatus, production of quarter eagles at the Charlotte Mint resumed in 1854. Only 7,295 examples were produced, giving this date the fifth lowest mintage figure of any quarter eagle from this mint. Most often seen in the VF and EF range, the low mintage 1854-C quarter eagle is a scarce date in all grades. It is scarce in the lower AU grades and rare in properly graded AU55 to AU58. It is very rare in Uncirculated with approximately a half dozen or so known that qualify by today’s standards. The new addition is one of four MS62 specimens that have been certified by PCGS. The Heritage auctioneer added: Quarter eagle production resumed at the Charlotte Mint in 1854 with a mintage of 7,295 coins. Ranking 6th out of 20 C-mint quarter eagle issues as far as scarcity, Doug Winter describes the 1854-C as "very rare in Uncirculated with approximately a half dozen or so that qualify by today's standards." Only 105 to 145 examples survive in all.

    _Remove reference to 9/2020 Heritage Auction and provenance

    .
    .
    Correction:
    Thanks to Ron Guth’s help, I need to correct the provenance on this coin. The Heritage 9/2020:3695 is a different coin than I posted. I was confused because I think Hansen has two 1854-C Quarter Eagle MS62 PCGS Specimens. The Ashland City Specimen and the coin purchased in the recent Heritage sale. I had the provenance to Ashland City correct, but the coin was not from the Heritage Auction. I can not determine the place of purchase, but being the coin is pedigreed to Hansen, it has been in the collection for some time.

    Provenance: Ashland City Collection - Heritage 1/2003:4700 (as NGC MS62 1293449033), $17,250.00 - Goldbergs 9/2006:1800 (as NGC MS62), $20,988.00 - Goldbergs 5/2009:1206 (as NGC MS62 1293449033), $14,950.00 - Cherokee County Collection - Heritage 1/2012:4761 (as NGC MS62 1293449033), $14,950.00 - D.L. Hansen Collection (as PCGS MS62 28944864)


    .
    .
    This is the coin that was purchase in Sept 2020 Heritage Auction. It appear that the D.L. Hansen Collection now has two of the four top pop coins.

    Provenance: (StacksBowers 11/2011), lot 9242, realized $17,250; US Coins Signature, (Heritage 9/2020), lot 3695, realized $15,600, D. L. Hansen Collection

    I think I like the new one a little better.

    My 20th Century Type Set, With Type Variations---started : 9/22/1997 ---- completed : 1/7/2004

    My 20th Century Gold Major Design Type Set ---started : 11/17/1997 ---- completed : 1/21/2004
  • KindaNewishKindaNewish Posts: 827 ✭✭✭✭✭

    1854-C quarter eagle.
    Simply the fact that any of these exist at all in MS amazing. To have enough of the in your collection that Currin is not sure which is which is beyond words.

  • lavalava Posts: 3,286 ✭✭✭

    I can’t wait to see the 3rd acquisition from Bruce. I think the first two selections were great choices.

    I brake for ear bars.
  • ZoinsZoins Posts: 34,113 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited October 11, 2020 3:40PM

    Very nice pickups!

    It's great to see Hansen picking up pieces from Bruce and Simpson.

    It will be interesting to see if Bruce's other coins show up in other Registry Sets.

  • cameonut2011cameonut2011 Posts: 10,167 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @lava said:
    I can’t wait to see the 3rd acquisition from Bruce. I think the first two selections were great choices.

    It would be interesting in there was an after sale offer from Hansen on the 1794 SP66 or 1804 PCGS PF65 dollars. Then again, isn't the Childs PF68 1804 Dollar coming up soon? I haven't been keeping track of coin news lately.

  • BoosibriBoosibri Posts: 12,106 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Amazing coin.
    I too wonder why coins are offered on DLRC for months and then Hansen adds them. Seems like there is some intent to sell for a bigger profit and if not, Hansen backstops the coin and adds it for a presumably lesser price.

  • CatbertCatbert Posts: 7,131 ✭✭✭✭✭

    That coin has so many visual interest points! Beautiful!

    Seated Half Society member #38
    "Got a flaming heart, can't get my fill"
  • ZoinsZoins Posts: 34,113 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited October 15, 2020 5:14PM

    @Boosibri said:
    Amazing coin.
    I too wonder why coins are offered on DLRC for months and then Hansen adds them. Seems like there is some intent to sell for a bigger profit and if not, Hansen backstops the coin and adds it for a presumably lesser price.

    There could be other reasons. Perhaps it doesn't fit into Hansen's budget earlier?

  • CatbertCatbert Posts: 7,131 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Re risk of NGC crossover. Are there any targeted coin rarities in NGC slabs?

    Seated Half Society member #38
    "Got a flaming heart, can't get my fill"

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Emoji
Image
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file