Yes, she had a set that was sold to Dell Loy. I'm not sure if she still collects.
It's the only set I've heard of her talking about as a collector.
Here it is. You can see the 2nd All-Time set is the Legend set from Laura, which was acquired by Dell Loy. Dell Loy's old album cover is below. Laura's name has since been removed.
The Linda Gail Collection of PCGS Franklin Half Dollars – Part II
This series is both challenging and affordable, it has become one of the most popular of all U. S. coins sets to assemble. PCGS Registry
In this update, we will look closer at Hansen’s Franklin Half Dollars FBL Basic Circulation Strikes Set (1948-1963). With the 14 updates from the Linda Gail Collection adding to Hansen’s previous 16 specimens tied for finest, the collection is now #1 in the Franklin Half Dollar Leaderboard.
Actually, if the Linda Gail Collection had been properly retire and still published for public view, the two sets would current be tied for #1. As a side note, I really am sad to see leaderboard sets being removed rather than retired. I am not sure why we are seeing so many of late. We saw the top Morelan Bust Dollar set lost. Several of Bob Simpson’s top award winning sets were ruined or lost. Now we see this top set from Linda Gail Collection of PCGS Franklin Half Dollars removed from the Registry. I am not sure what should be done, but PCCS Registry should make an effort to encourage the preservation their award winning sets. If the set wins an award, it should become historic. I am not suggesting how that should be done.
Off my soapbox and back to business. The Hansen set is now on top of the leaderboard and setting alone in that position. There are two other active sets on the leaderboard; one of them is the past award winning LOR Collection. The set was the best in Registry from 2015 to 2019 before the Linda Gail Collection moved into first place. The other active set is #4 spot by jstoebner Collection.
PCGS describes the set as: Mintages are irrelevant when gauging the rarity of a Franklin issue in MS 65 or MS 65 FBL (or higher grade). Original BU rolls of Franklin half dollars rarely contain even a single MS 65 coin. Because this series is both challenging and affordable, it has become one of the most popular of all U. S. coins sets to assemble. As this is being written only twenty sets can be put together in MS65FBL, and one set is possible in MS66FBL! Most collectors assemble this set with as many FBL pieces as possible, then fill in the holes with non-FBL specimens until the right coins come along.
The Hansen set has four sole finest specimens and 25 others tied for finest. This leaves only six coins (total 14 specimens) that can be used to improve. They are as follows:
1951-S MS67FBL CAC, Certification #39471931, only one PCGS certified finer.
1. MS67+ FBL, Certification #25319826, POP 1/0 currently resides in the LOR Collection.
1957 MS67FBL Certification # 81954239, only one PCGS certified finer.
1. FBL MS67+ FBL Certification #29882858, POP 1/0 currently resides in the LOR Collection.
1960-D MS66+ FBL, Certification #36118377, only one PCGS certified finer.
1. MS67FBL, Certification #30512427, POP 1/0 currently resides in the LOR Collection.
1952-S MS66+ FBL CAC, Certification #39821548, only three PCGS certified finer
1. MS67FBL Certification #25380148, POP 3/0 currently resides in the LOR Collection.
2. MS67FBL Certification #33562827, POP 3/0 currently resides in Sourdough's Collection.
3. MS67FBL Certification #25254601, POP 3/0 currently not in Registry, unknown.
1953-S MS65+ FBL, Certification #41057194, only three PCGS certified finer, sole finest MS66+ FBL
1. MS66FBL, Certification #30997165, POP 2/1 currently resides in the LOR Collection.
2. MS66FBL, Certification #10002659, POP 2/1 currently resides in the JFS/1 Collection.
3. MS67FBL, Certification # unknown, POP 1/0 current location unknown.
1954-D MS66+ FBL, Certification #36851459, only five PCGS certified finer
1. MS67FBL Certification #25003954, POP 5/0 currently resides in the LOR Collection.
2. MS67FBL Certification #06596096, POP 5/0 currently resides in the JFS/1 Collection.
3. MS67FBL Certification #90005097, POP 5/0 currently resides in the JFS/2 Collection
4. MS67FBL, Certification # unknown, POP 5/0 current location unknown.
5. MS67FBL, Certification # unknown, POP 5/0 current location unknown.
If we considered there are no duplicates in PCGS Population Report, and the coins currently in Registry sets are unavailable, then there are only four examples that can improve the Hansen Collection. These coins could be in dealer inventories or unavailable in unpublished sets. The coin with the most upgrade potential is the two unknown 1954-D MS67FBL specimens, if they actually exist. There may be one 1952-S MS67 specimen available somewhere. The most interesting coin which is not in the Hansen Collection is the key date 1953-S MS67 sole finest specimen. Of the eight sole finest specimens, the Hansen Collection has four and the LOR Collection has three. The 1953-S MS67 is only sole finest Franklin Half Dollar that is not in the registry. If appeared in auction, it could be most valuable legitimate Franklin Half Dollar. It would be interesting to see.
1949 Franklin Half Dollars, MS67+ FBL, CAC, Ex: Linda Gail Collection
When you are confronted with fourteen upgrades, it is not easy to pick one to feature. Today, I will go with the 1949 Franklin Half Dollars, MS67+ FBL, CAC example for no other reason that it is a very appealing sole finest certified specimen by PCGS. Expert Jaime Hernandez Comment: This is the second year in which the Franklin Half Dollar was struck. It also has somewhat of a low mintage compared to other issues in the same series, especially since some coins in this series have a mintage of over 20 million. The 1949-P Franklin Half Dollar is common in all circulated grades. In uncirculated grades it also easily obtainable with thousands of examples still available. In MS65 condition it becomes a little scarcer but yet there are still a few thousand examples available. In MS66 condition it becomes scarce with probably less than 500 examples available and less than a handful known higher.
For the1949 Franklin half dollar, there is not a large group of PCGS MS67FBL specimens. The PCGS Population Report indicates only seven. The new Hansen MS67+FBL coin has never appeared in auction that I can trace. The MS67FBL examples have appeared in four auction times in the past 20 years, with the best sale realizing an auction record of $14,950 for a MS67 Full Bell Lines NGC certified. At the time of the sale, the coin was the finest certified. This occurred in Heritage’s 2008 US Coin Signature Auction in Baltimore, MD.
As you have seen in today’s discussion, the D.L. Hansen Collection has the top set of Franklins Half Dollars. If Mr. Hansen purchased the Linda Gail Collection of Franklin Half Dollars to improve and upgrade, then mission accomplished. In this mega collection, it can be hard to realize how significant 14 coins can be. After all, the Hall of Fame basic set requires 3741, so can 14 coins make any difference? In GPA, I would say not much. As an historic accomplishment, I would say greatly. I will plan to discuss a little more in depth in the next and last Linda Gail update.
1949 Franklin Half Dollars, MS67+ FBL PCGS POP 1/0, CAC Approved Certification #41057180, PCGS # 86653 PCGS Price Guide unknown (est. $45,000) / Purchased as part of a 35-piece set Ex: Linda Gail Collection
@Currin said:
Actually, if the Linda Gail Collection had been properly retire and still published for public view, the two sets would current be tied for #1. As a side note, I really am sad to see leaderboard sets being removed rather than retired. I am not sure why we are seeing so many of late. We saw the top Morelan Bust Dollar set lost. Several of Bob Simpson’s top award winning sets were ruined or lost. Now we see this top set from Linda Gail Collection of PCGS Franklin Half Dollars removed from the Registry. I am not sure what should be done, but PCCS Registry should make an effort to encourage the preservation their award winning sets. If the set wins an award, it should become historic. I am not suggesting how that should be done.
I agree. Laura's trime set I posted above is still in the All-Time Rankings. Not sure why Linda’s set wasn't preserved.
I think DLH purchased five sets from me. Three Barbers, PR Trade dollars, and maybe MS Seated Halves.
Ask JB, he can give you a list of all the sets that were purchased complete. Buying top sets, especially CAC seems to be a smart move. It seems impossible to ever beat a top CAC set unless you use non CAC coins which is really cheating. There are a handful of current top sets that DLH should sooner or later buy. My two top sets, are the PR Morgan's and the PR Seated, (not for sale). He should also look to build the top CAC sets as they actually score higher than the non CAC.
@Perfection said:
I think DLH purchased five sets from me. Three Barbers, PR Trade dollars, and maybe MS Seated Halves.
Ask JB, he can give you a list of all the sets that were purchased complete. Buying top sets, especially CAC seems to be a smart move. It seems impossible to ever beat a top CAC set unless you use non CAC coins which is really cheating. There are a handful of current top sets that DLH should sooner or later buy. My two top sets, are the PR Morgan's and the PR Seated, (not for sale).
Great info. Glad your former coins have a good home now and you still have some great coins!
He should also look to build the top CAC sets as they actually score higher than the non CAC.
Are you saying CAC coins score higher than non-CAC of the same PCGS grade in a PCGS non-CAC Registry Set?
@Perfection said:
....The majority of people cannot grade, dealers included....
Evident by the large number of CAC advocates
I don't agree with JA's opinion on saints, particularly MS65-66
I hope he’ll be able to recover from the jolt and embarrassment that YOU have a different opinion from his.
So if you were a CAC advocate, that would indicate that you couldn’t grade. But you’re not one and you “don't agree with JA's opinion on saints, particularly MS65-66”. So that means you can grade. Got it.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Cac saints are almost always much nicer than the same grade non cac.
Our opinions are irrelevant. Mr Market confirms this. Cac Saints of generic dates sells for substantially more than non cac. People want them!
Also non cac coins trade for half to a full grade less money wise. Not always but in many of not most cases. So what does this tell you? NGC even less.
@Perfection said:
Also non cac coins trade for half to a full grade less money wise. Not always but in many of not most cases. So what does this tell you? NGC even less.
It tells me that the majority of people cannot grade, dealers included.
@Perfection said:
Also non cac coins trade for half to a full grade less money wise. Not always but in many of not most cases. So what does this tell you? NGC even less.
This is not even close to true. In the cases where it is, it’s usually only because the spread between grades is so small that the CAC premium overwhelms it (e.g common Saints below 66).
Getting back to Mr. Hansen which is what this is about. One would think that someone is his position would want the top coins in all areas and would have the patience to wait for them to become available. Sure if they are extremely rare, non CAC is the only option. However if there are two coins both graded 67 and one is CAC why own the other one? It obviously has a hairline, a scratch, some wear or something that stopped it from being CAC. Even if one does not agree with CAC so what. Buy the best and forget the rest. Forget ego and registry score!
Yeah, but once one starts making exceptions for coins of stature that one loves, it’s easier to come to grips with making exceptions for pop 2 condition rarities as well...
@Perfection said:
we all make exceptions! ☺ But I do not think you would use not CAC coins to increase the score of a set if you were still in the set game!
Shrug. Several of my early dollars weren’t CAC. I liked the coins for the grade and they were the finest that I could find for the set. So...been there, done that
JA has his idiosyncrasies and pet peeve’s that don’t always align with my own. Just as one shouldn’t be rabid anti-CAC neither should one ignore any coin that’s not CAC. As long as one understands and accepts his reasoning then one should feel free to ignore it if they wish.
The Linda Gail Collection of PCGS Franklin Half Dollars – Part III
If you ain't first you're last”” Ricky Bobby 2006
This posting will be a wrap for the Linda Gail updates. In closing, I will say that I will miss this collector and his/her collections. I am not sure the name of the collector, but the sets are registered under user name benholm. Does that stand for Ben Holm, Mr. Benholm or something entirely different, I am not sure? The collector participated in forum discussions in 2002-2005 timeframe. The name Joshua was used.
I have been watching this fabulous collection for more than twenty years. The first time that I recall was the Green Pond Collection of Dahlonega Gold. This was a time when I was intrigued and was studying the southern branch mint gold, and the Green Pond set was the top at that time. The set still has the all-time highest PCGS GPA which is 61.72 for Dahlonega Gold. There has never been a set before or after that has broken the GPA-60 mark.
Who can forget the Joshua sets? Especially, the set that earned the HOF Award. In 2002 at the time of the award, the set was describes as: This is the finest set of Mercury dimes ever assembled. Virtually every coin is a Pop Top. The late dates feature MS68FBs galore and the early power dates are spectacular. This is one of the most important 20th Century series and the Joshua II collection is the ultimate representative. This was long before all the Mercury Madness that we see today.
In more recent times, there are several sets that were named Lilly Nicole which I believe to have been in honor of his granddaughter. It appears most of the Lilly Nicole sets have been deleted or unpublished. There were other named sets, including Ali, Ally, Walsh, and J&A. There may have been a few more. The collection only has a couple of proof sets left representing Barber and Mercury Dimes. Is this collector done, or will we see more Registry sets? I am guessing, time will tell.
The significance of this purchase of the Linda Gail Collection of PCGS Franklin Half Dollars
I mention a few days ago that I will have a brief discussion on significance. I wrote: The 14 Linda Gail Franklins were purchased to upgrade Hansen Great Collection of Half Dollars. In this mega collection, it can be hard to realize how significant 14 coins can be. After all, the Hall of Fame basic set requires 3741, so can 14 coins make any difference? In GPA, I would say not much. To really understand the true dynamics of what is slowly taking place, the mega set has to be broken down in bit size pieces. In doing so, I took a stab at taking a closer look by denomination (or groups) and then even more granular by series (Registry sets). At this point, what I am going to share is something that I don’t believe to be a Hansen goal. We have been told which I believe to be true, that Mr. Hansen is just having fun with his collection. He is hunting for coins to improve the sets and collection. He enjoys building sets. The results from having fun are phenomenal.
Just take a look at what has happen with the Half Dollar Basic Collection. I broke out 439 coins of the 3741-piece Hall of Fame set and form the Half Dollar Collection. Then let’s take a deeper look at this 439-piece collection. I broke the half dollars into seven basic series that represent the Half Dollars from 1796 to present. I hope this gives you a better feel of just what has materialize with the 14 coin Linda Gail purchase. For half dollars, the Hansen Collection current has the all-time finest sets in four of the seven series. I believe this to be the first time ever for the Hansen Collection to have this many top sets for one denomination. We should recognize that the two early sets need a little more improvement. It is not realistic that Mr. Hansen can build or buy every top set for all series. It may be realistic that at some point in future if you breakdown the 3741-piece Hall of Fame set, that all the sets will be on the PCGS All-Time Top Five Leaderboard. Naturally, the Hansen Collection is not quite there yet. The Walking Liberty Half Dollars is in the All-Time Top Five. The two early sets still have work to do. I do believe they will get there.
1963 Franklin Half Dollars, MS66+ FBL, Ex: Linda Gail Collection
I will complete this series of updates with maybe the most valuable Franklin Half Dollar in the series. The coin is valued by PCGS Price Guide at $85,000. The coin was sold in a 2019 Legend Auction of 85,187.50. The reason this coin is that expensive, I not sure I can put my finger on it. Let’s see what the expert has to say. Jaime Hernandez Comment: The 1963-P circulation strike Franklin Half Dollar has a significantly large mintage compared to most coins in the series. It's mintage of over 22 million coins makes it a common issue in the series. And it is common in all circulated grades up to MS63 condition. In MS64 to MS65 condition there are still tens of thousands of examples available and not scarce by any means. But examples in MS64 to MS65 do tend to carry a premium of at least double their melt values. In MS66 condition it now becomes really scarce with about 50 coins known and none being finer.
There is not a large group of PCGS MS67FBL specimens. The PCGS Population Report indicates only seven, and there are two MS67+FBL. The new Hansen coin has been in auction only once, and that was the 2019 Legend Auction. In the sale, the total population was give as PCGS 1 and NGC 1. Then a rather interesting statement was made: Neither one of these have ever sold in auction. We are also pretty certain that based on the current Populations in MS66 FBL, the odds that another 66+ FBL being made is very slim. Unpriced in the PCGS Price Guide, regular MS66 FBLs have sold for as much as $28,200! We anticipate very strong bidding for this one, good luck! Well, we know now by playing Monday morning QB, the odds for the second MS67+FBL is more that slim. Does that change the current $85,000 value?
As for rarity, Legends suggested: The 1963 Franklin half dollar is a notoriously difficult date to locate in GEM quality with full split bell lines. The present coin is the SOLE FINEST certified at PCGS and is a very important opportunity for the collectors vying for the absolute top spot for their sets on the Registry. Well, that was what the owner of the Linda Gail Collection and what Mr. Hansen is currently doing. As for appearance, the coin does not have the CAC Approved sticker. That point was not addressed in the Legend Auction and the coin was described as: Bright, brilliant satiny luster glows vibrantly in the fields. Untoned surfaces are a very pleasing silver white. Sharply struck up throughout and the surfaces are smooth, with more mint made die lines than any other kind of marks anywhere. The eye appeal is better than decent and will find itself at home in the #1 PCGS Registry Set of Franklins. This was a great prophecy. The coin was in the home of the #1 Linda Gail Collection and now is in the home of the #1 D.L. Hansen Collection.
I have really enjoyed researching the Franklin Half Dollars the past few days. I purchased one of Brett Pogue’s Franklin Half Dollars to represent in my birth year set. I have never found the Franklin Half Dollars to have a supper appearance by designed, but they are needed to represent the US Half Dollars for from 1948 to 1963. The series was cut short by the event in November, 1963. With the help and purchase of the Linda Gail Collection, the D.L. Hansen Collection of PCGS Franklin Half Dollars may remain on the top of the Leaderboard for many years to come. Although, I am not sure you can count the LOR Collection down and out yet. I think this is a deal made with Larry Shapiro that Mr. Hansen will not regret.
1963 Franklin Half Dollars, MS66+ FBL PCGS POP 2/0 Certification #41057217, PCGS #86684 PCGS Price Guide $85,000 / Purchased as part of a 35-piece set Ex: Linda Gail Collection
Our resident expert Ron Guth: Called the "King of Morgan Dollars", the 1895 is one of the most desirable and sought-after dates in the series. Although Mint records indicate a mintage of 12,000 circulation strikes, experts believe that only 880 Proofs were made in 1895. The existence of several circulated examples confuses the issue, but those are believed to have been Proofs that were spent inadvertently. Ownership of this popular rarity is the true measure of completeness for a collection of Morgan Dollars - the 1895 Proof is the only real "stopper" in the series. Presumably, Proofs can be told apart from potential circulation strikes by the number of edge "reeds" (the raised "bumps" on the edge of the coin). Proofs will have 179 "reeds", whereas circulation strikes will have some other number. PCGS has graded more Proofs of this date than any other, although the number may be inflated due to re-submissions. A surprising percentage of the coins examined by PCGS have been "spent" Proofs - 87 coins have been certified below Proof-60 (as of June 23, 2010), including one in Proof-06!
We had a lengthy discussion on Morgan Dollars back in the fall of last year. If you recall, The D.L. Hansen Collection purchased a large portion of the Larry Miller Collection of high end mint state coins. At that time, I asked the question if 1895 Proof the King of Morgan’s. This tongue in cheek comment was based on value more than anything else. Mr. Hansen’s most valuable Morgan is the 1884-S $1 MS68 CERT #07455496 valued at $900,000. There several other Morgan’s in the collection that probably valued more than the 1895. The Auction Record is a PR67+DCAM (POP 1/1) that realized $269,500 in a 2020 David Lawrence Rare Coins Auction. In a rather odd twist, the coin was not purchased by Mr. Hansen. The monster finest known PR68+DCAM has not appeared in current graded. The last appearance was 2003 Heritage Auction where the PR68DCAM coin realized $120,700. The finest known coin is currently in the Duke Collection. PCGS Price Guide values the coin at $350,000.
So, as you can see in price, the 1895 Proof definitely not the King of the Morgan’s. Ron Guth describes the coin as only real "stopper" in the series. This is where the name comes from. In looking at the Hansen sets, the collection currently has at least three of these show stoppers. Prior to this purchase, the #2 Hansen Morgan Proof Set contained a PR664+CAM, Cert# 84094137. The Top Set has a PR67DCAM (POP 6/2), Cert# 28286123. As stated, Mr. Hansen could have upgraded the coin from the company that he is a partner in, but chose not to.
His long term strategy could be something that we don’t know. The top two sets in the registry is owned by Mr. Perfection. He recently stated My two top sets, are the PR Morgan's and the PR Seated, (not for sale). It appear the Mr. Hansen interest at this time is to move the #2 set which is number six in the registry up in the ranking. It appear to me this six figure coin was purchased for that purpose.
1895 Morgan Dollar, PR67CAM, CAC Approved
This coin comes into the collection knowing it will never make the big show set. At least if you are hired as a #2 quarterback, there is a shot one day of making the starting lineup. In this case, it is very doubtful. The coin was purchased in Heritage’s 2021 US Coins Signature Auction in February. The auctioneer describes the 1895 history as: An unremarkable mintage of 880 proof Morgan dollars was accomplished at the Philadelphia Mint in 1895, with the coins delivered in four batches throughout the year. Deliveries of 290 examples in March, 180 specimens in May, 90 pieces in September, and 320 coins in December are recorded, following a common pattern of collector demand, with most orders coming at the beginning and end of the year. Records show a tiny business-strike mintage of 12,000 examples was also produced, but no regular-issue coins have ever turned up in any collection.
Heritage describes the coin’s appearance as: The present coin is a spectacular Superb Gem proof that exhibits sharply detailed design elements and deeply mirrored fields that contrast boldly with the frosty devices. The impeccably preserved surfaces are free of mentionable distractions and the overall eye appeal is terrific. The coin realized $150,000. The PCGS Price Guide is $150,000. For the coin to be CAC Approved, the price may not be so bad.
Provenance: U.S. Coins Signature, (Heritage 2/2021) lot 3721, realized $50,000, D.L. Hansen Collection (Set #2)
The FF coin is amazing, unreal. I saw it at the Fun show a few years ago. FF has some incredible coins .
It is unlikely that DLH can ever get to #2. I have a few coins to replace the current ones if he gets too close. I have an unbelievable third set except for two coins. Five are not Cac. This set is not based on grade but beauty.
Not sure why DLH. bought the 1895. DLRC has the toned Road Runner which is a plus. He could have used that.
While the FF coin is one of a kind the 1895 in my set one is probably the nicest looking toned example that exists by far. It is hard to believe that an 1895 could tone that way. I think it came from the collection of Mark Salzburg the owner of NGC. I bought it years ago and it is one of my favorite coins.
DLRC sold a 67+DCAM. last June for 270k. looked amazing. That is the coin DLH should have bought. I liked it but do not need it.
I have a 66+DCAM in set two which is incredibly toned. When I buy a third one I want it toned.
There are only ten CAC 1895's in 67 or higher. The others at least to me don't count.
@Perfection said:
The FF coin is amazing, unreal. I saw it at the Fun show a few years ago. FF has some incredible coins .
It is unlikely that DLH can ever get to #2. I have a few coins to replace the current ones if he gets too close. I have an unbelievable third set except for two coins. Five are not Cac. This set is not based on grade but beauty.
Not sure why DLH. bought the 1895. DLRC has the toned Road Runner which is a plus. He could have used that.
While the FF coin is one of a kind the 1895 in my set one is probably the nicest looking toned example that exists by far. It is hard to believe that an 1895 could tone that way. I think it came from the collection of Mark Salzburg the owner of NGC. I bought it years ago and it is one of my favorite coins.
We do love our proof Morgans don’t we? Your set(s) are spectacular, and it was a real thrill to see your top set in its entirety at that show- thank you for sharing them!
Many prices are totally off base for the highest graded coins. They make NO sense in relation to the pop of of the coins. The 1895 PR Morgan is just one example. It it not rare at all compared to many other dates. The prices of many of these high grades coins are only high because they always have been.
Another example is the 1901 S Barber Quarter. There are 3 in MS67. The price of it is absurd compared to many other MS 67 coins in the series. Yes it might be rare overall in all grades combined but that should be irrelevant.
In MS67:
1894 O (1), !894 S (2), 1895 S (1), 1896 O (2), 1904 (2), 1905 O (1), 1911 D (1). and others. These should be worth as much as he 01 S but they are not even close. PCGS could do wonders to change this but they won't.
I suggested what to do and also to help but I was ignored.
What they need to do is to change the registry scoring and have more than one rarity point for most coins.
So the coins listed above MUST score more than the 1901-s.
This can be done programmatically. The scoring would change as the pops change. In the past I was told that
one a year two people would sit and make some changes. That is absurd. It should be done automatically as pops change.
This would dramatically change the registry scoring BUT it would make it correct.
Currently many scores have little to do with the rarity of the coin.
The 1901 S quarter might be far rarer in vg, xf and au grades than all the coins above but not nearly as rare in
67. Registry scoring in antiquated and needs to reflect the actual stats.
I became knowledgeable and shocked by the pops versus the prices when I was building sets.
Looking at the 1895 PRCAM in 67, There are NINE.
Just a few other examples 1884 (4), 1885 (4), 1886 (3), 1887 (3), 1888 (1) 1889 (3) 1898 (1).
The 1895 in 67CAM is NOT rare. All of these dates above are MUCH rarer and should be worth more but they are
not even close. Dumb. The 1895 is not the King at all.
The 1895 67DCAM is even worse. It is a JOKE. There are seven 1895 in 67DCAM. There are NINTEEN other dates that have less than seven or even ZERO, yet they are not worth even close the the 1895. Makes no sense.
@Perfection said:
Many prices are totally off base for the highest graded coins. They make NO sense in relation to the pop of of the coins. The 1895 PR Morgan is just one example. It it not rare at all compared to many other dates. The prices of many of these high grades coins are only high because they always have been.
Another example is the 1901 S Barber Quarter. There are 3 in MS67. The price of it is absurd compared to many other MS 67 coins in the series. Yes it might be rare overall in all grades combined but that should be irrelevant.
In MS67:
1894 O (1), !894 S (2), 1895 S (1), 1896 O (2), 1904 (2), 1905 O (1), 1911 D (1). and others. These should be worth as much as he 01 S but they are not even close. PCGS could do wonders to change this but they won't.
I suggested what to do and also to help but I was ignored.
What they need to do is to change the registry scoring and have more than one rarity point for most coins.
So the coins listed above MUST score more than the 1901-s.
This can be done programmatically. The scoring would change as the pops change. In the past I was told that
one a year two people would sit and make some changes. That is absurd. It should be done automatically as pops change.
This would dramatically change the registry scoring BUT it would make it correct.
Currently many scores have little to do with the rarity of the coin.
The 1901 S quarter might be far rarer in vg, xf and au grades than all the coins above but not nearly as rare in
67. Registry scoring in antiquated and needs to reflect the actual stats.
This is a great idea, but PCGS may have more pressing needs for their developers.
I knew a Google PhD who had to do manual data entry for his projects because a developer could not be spared.
No way. Changing the scoring to make it accurate should be a PCGS TOP project.
The registry is HUGE and was never looked at in today's world by the previous people.
They were old school. It is not that difficult. It would however take a lot of thought and testing.
Initially we would start with maybe three sets. Once the new queries were in place we would run it using the
current registry sets and see how they would change.
Brett Charville is younger smart and aggressive. He should want to fix the registry to reflect the correct rarity of the coins.
There needs to be lots of discussion involving a certain group of people.
In the end though statistics need to rule. Key dates that have been said to be key dates will change and many
dramatically. The MS 1901 S quarter and the PR 1895 Morgan are NOT key dates. (in the highest grades)
How do we explain this after 100 years of coin collecting. EASY!
Before the 35 years of grading services many things that were assumed have been found to no longer be true.
A 1895 PR Morgan is 66-67 is NOT rare at all. However a XF 1901 S Quarter might get a higher registry score than the 67 based on the pops and compared to the other coins in the series.
It is common sense and math. There is no guess work. The pops tell the truth about rarity.
According the PCGS there are 593, 1895 PR Morgan's in all grades. Not rare at all.
@Perfection: then is it your assertion that only a foolish collector would want to assemble a complete date/mint set of Morgans? It is not “legitimized” by the registry, but it does not seem less reasonable than any of our collecting goals.
From this perspective, the dynamics of the 1895 Morgan and the 1901-s Barber are quite different.
I never said that any set is foolish, My point was that the registry point scale is outdated and needs to be changed
based on the pops of the coins.
ALL pops are inaccurate, even the top ones. There is not much that can done about that. I believe there are hundreds of thousands of resubmissions in the reports. Say you have three crack out people who in total submit 100K coins a year. How many of the original grade cards are sent back to be removed? Even at 80% that means 20K pops that should not be in there. If PCGS were smart they would not count the pops coins by certain submitters.
The same holds true for CAC submissions. Many people do not want others to know that they crack out coins.
I was looking for the 1895 Philadelphia circulating strike Morgan's, How many of those were made relative to proofs? Its of course rhetorical. If you want a complete date and mint set. Rarity is related to demand as well of course. Let's not throw your fellow blogger under the bus too soon. I'm guessing the ratio of Morgan date and mint mark collectors is quite high relative to Morgan proof set collectors. Working hard and delligently the date and mintmark Morgan collector nearly complete his set, but for the pesky 1895 proof and voila, demand! Just because PCGS for the most part began to separate the two (proofs and circs), doesn't define how collectors collect always. Let's think of a parallel example. The 1827/3 original proof quarter is the most common large size proof quarter by far, but felt to be the most valuable by far for it being the only 1827 to complete a full date set. Its a classic rarity, while the 1818 proof with only one known, is a distant second fiddle Even to the point that the mint struck restrikes for collector demand.
So there are more 1895 proof Morgan's, but what's the demand compared to all the other proof morgan? 10x? , 50x, 100x? How rare is the 1909s VDB? How many mint state examples known?
Saw some of his collections (like trade dollars) up for sale at Great Collections. Is he retiring the sets and liquidating?
Hansen has 2 complete Trade Dollar sets in the registry, (He just also listed his 3rd complete Liberty Nickel set in the registry)
Do you even know what this is: https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/leaderboard. I am #31 and if I had the rest of the Apollo set when I started this I would still be in the top 5. Does not have much to do with what Hansen is doing.
Collector and Researcher of Liberty Head Nickels. ANA LM-6053
Saw some of his collections (like trade dollars) up for sale at Great Collections. Is he retiring the sets and liquidating?
Hansen has 2 complete Trade Dollar sets in the registry, (He just also listed his 3rd complete Liberty Nickel set in the registry)
Do you even know what this is: https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/leaderboard. I am #31 and if I had the rest of the Apollo set when I started this I would still be in the top 5. Does not have much to do with what Hansen is doing.
Hence the query as to why the chart does not reflect his actual standing at the top of the order.
@Perfection said:
I never said that any set is foolish, My point was that the registry point scale is outdated and needs to be changed
based on the pops of the coins.
ALL pops are inaccurate, even the top ones. There is not much that can done about that. I believe there are hundreds of thousands of resubmissions in the reports. Say you have three crack out people who in total submit 100K coins a year. How many of the original grade cards are sent back to be removed? Even at 80% that means 20K pops that should not be in there. If PCGS were smart they would not count the pops coins by certain submitters.
The same holds true for CAC submissions. Many people do not want others to know that they crack out coins.
You could post a thread with your solution so we don't derail this thread. I don't see how a registry based upon inaccurate pop reports would be an improvement.
Seated Half Society member #38 "Got a flaming heart, can't get my fill"
@Perfection said:
...
The 1901 S quarter might be far rarer in vg, xf and au grades than all the coins above but not nearly as rare in
67. Registry scoring in antiquated and needs to reflect the actual stats.
Regarding VG - the "Pop Above" is what is relevant; not the Pop in the category. (Note: Pop Above for sets limited to AU-58 should be defined to only include AU-58+ and not MS).
In principle, I agree that the points should be related to true rarity, but as others have stated, official Pops are not a perfect measure of this.
Points should also reflect demand. So I think basing the points on Auction Prices Realized is probably best.
Comments
Oops, I didn't see this 80th page and @Currin already posted what I was going to say....
Yes, she had a set that was sold to Dell Loy. I'm not sure if she still collects.
It's the only set I've heard of her talking about as a collector.
Here it is. You can see the 2nd All-Time set is the Legend set from Laura, which was acquired by Dell Loy. Dell Loy's old album cover is below. Laura's name has since been removed.
https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/two-three-cents/three-cent-silvers-major-sets/three-cent-silvers-major-varieties-1851-proof-1873/5117
I tend to focus more on collections with people's names attached to them. Something I'm working on getting over
Laura has always loved 3 cent silvers
To evaluate 3C silver you must have a very good eye........or microscope.
The Linda Gail Collection of PCGS Franklin Half Dollars – Part II
This series is both challenging and affordable, it has become one of the most popular of all U. S. coins sets to assemble. PCGS Registry
In this update, we will look closer at Hansen’s Franklin Half Dollars FBL Basic Circulation Strikes Set (1948-1963). With the 14 updates from the Linda Gail Collection adding to Hansen’s previous 16 specimens tied for finest, the collection is now #1 in the Franklin Half Dollar Leaderboard.
Actually, if the Linda Gail Collection had been properly retire and still published for public view, the two sets would current be tied for #1. As a side note, I really am sad to see leaderboard sets being removed rather than retired. I am not sure why we are seeing so many of late. We saw the top Morelan Bust Dollar set lost. Several of Bob Simpson’s top award winning sets were ruined or lost. Now we see this top set from Linda Gail Collection of PCGS Franklin Half Dollars removed from the Registry. I am not sure what should be done, but PCCS Registry should make an effort to encourage the preservation their award winning sets. If the set wins an award, it should become historic. I am not suggesting how that should be done.
Off my soapbox and back to business. The Hansen set is now on top of the leaderboard and setting alone in that position. There are two other active sets on the leaderboard; one of them is the past award winning LOR Collection. The set was the best in Registry from 2015 to 2019 before the Linda Gail Collection moved into first place. The other active set is #4 spot by jstoebner Collection.
PCGS describes the set as: Mintages are irrelevant when gauging the rarity of a Franklin issue in MS 65 or MS 65 FBL (or higher grade). Original BU rolls of Franklin half dollars rarely contain even a single MS 65 coin. Because this series is both challenging and affordable, it has become one of the most popular of all U. S. coins sets to assemble. As this is being written only twenty sets can be put together in MS65FBL, and one set is possible in MS66FBL! Most collectors assemble this set with as many FBL pieces as possible, then fill in the holes with non-FBL specimens until the right coins come along.
The Hansen set has four sole finest specimens and 25 others tied for finest. This leaves only six coins (total 14 specimens) that can be used to improve. They are as follows:
1951-S MS67FBL CAC, Certification #39471931, only one PCGS certified finer.
1. MS67+ FBL, Certification #25319826, POP 1/0 currently resides in the LOR Collection.
1957 MS67FBL Certification # 81954239, only one PCGS certified finer.
1. FBL MS67+ FBL Certification #29882858, POP 1/0 currently resides in the LOR Collection.
1960-D MS66+ FBL, Certification #36118377, only one PCGS certified finer.
1. MS67FBL, Certification #30512427, POP 1/0 currently resides in the LOR Collection.
1952-S MS66+ FBL CAC, Certification #39821548, only three PCGS certified finer
1. MS67FBL Certification #25380148, POP 3/0 currently resides in the LOR Collection.
2. MS67FBL Certification #33562827, POP 3/0 currently resides in Sourdough's Collection.
3. MS67FBL Certification #25254601, POP 3/0 currently not in Registry, unknown.
1953-S MS65+ FBL, Certification #41057194, only three PCGS certified finer, sole finest MS66+ FBL
1. MS66FBL, Certification #30997165, POP 2/1 currently resides in the LOR Collection.
2. MS66FBL, Certification #10002659, POP 2/1 currently resides in the JFS/1 Collection.
3. MS67FBL, Certification # unknown, POP 1/0 current location unknown.
1954-D MS66+ FBL, Certification #36851459, only five PCGS certified finer
1. MS67FBL Certification #25003954, POP 5/0 currently resides in the LOR Collection.
2. MS67FBL Certification #06596096, POP 5/0 currently resides in the JFS/1 Collection.
3. MS67FBL Certification #90005097, POP 5/0 currently resides in the JFS/2 Collection
4. MS67FBL, Certification # unknown, POP 5/0 current location unknown.
5. MS67FBL, Certification # unknown, POP 5/0 current location unknown.
If we considered there are no duplicates in PCGS Population Report, and the coins currently in Registry sets are unavailable, then there are only four examples that can improve the Hansen Collection. These coins could be in dealer inventories or unavailable in unpublished sets. The coin with the most upgrade potential is the two unknown 1954-D MS67FBL specimens, if they actually exist. There may be one 1952-S MS67 specimen available somewhere. The most interesting coin which is not in the Hansen Collection is the key date 1953-S MS67 sole finest specimen. Of the eight sole finest specimens, the Hansen Collection has four and the LOR Collection has three. The 1953-S MS67 is only sole finest Franklin Half Dollar that is not in the registry. If appeared in auction, it could be most valuable legitimate Franklin Half Dollar. It would be interesting to see.
1949 Franklin Half Dollars, MS67+ FBL, CAC, Ex: Linda Gail Collection
When you are confronted with fourteen upgrades, it is not easy to pick one to feature. Today, I will go with the 1949 Franklin Half Dollars, MS67+ FBL, CAC example for no other reason that it is a very appealing sole finest certified specimen by PCGS. Expert Jaime Hernandez Comment: This is the second year in which the Franklin Half Dollar was struck. It also has somewhat of a low mintage compared to other issues in the same series, especially since some coins in this series have a mintage of over 20 million. The 1949-P Franklin Half Dollar is common in all circulated grades. In uncirculated grades it also easily obtainable with thousands of examples still available. In MS65 condition it becomes a little scarcer but yet there are still a few thousand examples available. In MS66 condition it becomes scarce with probably less than 500 examples available and less than a handful known higher.
For the1949 Franklin half dollar, there is not a large group of PCGS MS67FBL specimens. The PCGS Population Report indicates only seven. The new Hansen MS67+FBL coin has never appeared in auction that I can trace. The MS67FBL examples have appeared in four auction times in the past 20 years, with the best sale realizing an auction record of $14,950 for a MS67 Full Bell Lines NGC certified. At the time of the sale, the coin was the finest certified. This occurred in Heritage’s 2008 US Coin Signature Auction in Baltimore, MD.
As you have seen in today’s discussion, the D.L. Hansen Collection has the top set of Franklins Half Dollars. If Mr. Hansen purchased the Linda Gail Collection of Franklin Half Dollars to improve and upgrade, then mission accomplished. In this mega collection, it can be hard to realize how significant 14 coins can be. After all, the Hall of Fame basic set requires 3741, so can 14 coins make any difference? In GPA, I would say not much. As an historic accomplishment, I would say greatly. I will plan to discuss a little more in depth in the next and last Linda Gail update.
1949 Franklin Half Dollars, MS67+ FBL
PCGS POP 1/0, CAC Approved
Certification #41057180, PCGS # 86653
PCGS Price Guide unknown (est. $45,000) / Purchased as part of a 35-piece set
Ex: Linda Gail Collection
My 20th Century Gold Major Design Type Set ---started : 11/17/1997 ---- completed : 1/21/2004
I agree. Laura's trime set I posted above is still in the All-Time Rankings. Not sure why Linda’s set wasn't preserved.
I think DLH purchased five sets from me. Three Barbers, PR Trade dollars, and maybe MS Seated Halves.
Ask JB, he can give you a list of all the sets that were purchased complete. Buying top sets, especially CAC seems to be a smart move. It seems impossible to ever beat a top CAC set unless you use non CAC coins which is really cheating. There are a handful of current top sets that DLH should sooner or later buy. My two top sets, are the PR Morgan's and the PR Seated, (not for sale). He should also look to build the top CAC sets as they actually score higher than the non CAC.
Great info. Glad your former coins have a good home now and you still have some great coins!
Are you saying CAC coins score higher than non-CAC of the same PCGS grade in a PCGS non-CAC Registry Set?
Evident by the large number of CAC advocates
I don't agree with JA's opinion on saints, particularly MS65-66
My Saint Set
I hope he’ll be able to recover from the jolt and embarrassment that YOU have a different opinion from his.
So if you were a CAC advocate, that would indicate that you couldn’t grade. But you’re not one and you “don't agree with JA's opinion on saints, particularly MS65-66”. So that means you can grade. Got it.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Cac saints are almost always much nicer than the same grade non cac.
Our opinions are irrelevant. Mr Market confirms this. Cac Saints of generic dates sells for substantially more than non cac. People want them!
Also non cac coins trade for half to a full grade less money wise. Not always but in many of not most cases. So what does this tell you? NGC even less.
It tells me that the majority of people cannot grade, dealers included.
My Saint Set
This is not even close to true. In the cases where it is, it’s usually only because the spread between grades is so small that the CAC premium overwhelms it (e.g common Saints below 66).
Getting back to Mr. Hansen which is what this is about. One would think that someone is his position would want the top coins in all areas and would have the patience to wait for them to become available. Sure if they are extremely rare, non CAC is the only option. However if there are two coins both graded 67 and one is CAC why own the other one? It obviously has a hairline, a scratch, some wear or something that stopped it from being CAC. Even if one does not agree with CAC so what. Buy the best and forget the rest. Forget ego and registry score!
Eh. If the coin’s quality as you perceive it matches the price you have to pay, what’s wrong with owning the second finest?
Yes you are 100% correct. But people like you and I would downgrade it, add the CAC and be happy with it. ☺
Perhaps. I’m pretty happy owning the 1804 knowing the grade is wrong and that it will never sticker.
Yep Not the same That coin is amazing! The best! Love it.
Yeah, but once one starts making exceptions for coins of stature that one loves, it’s easier to come to grips with making exceptions for pop 2 condition rarities as well...
we all make exceptions! ☺ But I do not think you would use not CAC coins to increase the score of a set if you were still in the set game!
Shrug. Several of my early dollars weren’t CAC. I liked the coins for the grade and they were the finest that I could find for the set. So...been there, done that
JA has his idiosyncrasies and pet peeve’s that don’t always align with my own. Just as one shouldn’t be rabid anti-CAC neither should one ignore any coin that’s not CAC. As long as one understands and accepts his reasoning then one should feel free to ignore it if they wish.
The Linda Gail Collection of PCGS Franklin Half Dollars – Part III
If you ain't first you're last”” Ricky Bobby 2006
This posting will be a wrap for the Linda Gail updates. In closing, I will say that I will miss this collector and his/her collections. I am not sure the name of the collector, but the sets are registered under user name benholm. Does that stand for Ben Holm, Mr. Benholm or something entirely different, I am not sure? The collector participated in forum discussions in 2002-2005 timeframe. The name Joshua was used.
I have been watching this fabulous collection for more than twenty years. The first time that I recall was the Green Pond Collection of Dahlonega Gold. This was a time when I was intrigued and was studying the southern branch mint gold, and the Green Pond set was the top at that time. The set still has the all-time highest PCGS GPA which is 61.72 for Dahlonega Gold. There has never been a set before or after that has broken the GPA-60 mark.
Who can forget the Joshua sets? Especially, the set that earned the HOF Award. In 2002 at the time of the award, the set was describes as: This is the finest set of Mercury dimes ever assembled. Virtually every coin is a Pop Top. The late dates feature MS68FBs galore and the early power dates are spectacular. This is one of the most important 20th Century series and the Joshua II collection is the ultimate representative. This was long before all the Mercury Madness that we see today.
In more recent times, there are several sets that were named Lilly Nicole which I believe to have been in honor of his granddaughter. It appears most of the Lilly Nicole sets have been deleted or unpublished. There were other named sets, including Ali, Ally, Walsh, and J&A. There may have been a few more. The collection only has a couple of proof sets left representing Barber and Mercury Dimes. Is this collector done, or will we see more Registry sets? I am guessing, time will tell.
The significance of this purchase of the Linda Gail Collection of PCGS Franklin Half Dollars
I mention a few days ago that I will have a brief discussion on significance. I wrote: The 14 Linda Gail Franklins were purchased to upgrade Hansen Great Collection of Half Dollars. In this mega collection, it can be hard to realize how significant 14 coins can be. After all, the Hall of Fame basic set requires 3741, so can 14 coins make any difference? In GPA, I would say not much. To really understand the true dynamics of what is slowly taking place, the mega set has to be broken down in bit size pieces. In doing so, I took a stab at taking a closer look by denomination (or groups) and then even more granular by series (Registry sets). At this point, what I am going to share is something that I don’t believe to be a Hansen goal. We have been told which I believe to be true, that Mr. Hansen is just having fun with his collection. He is hunting for coins to improve the sets and collection. He enjoys building sets. The results from having fun are phenomenal.
Just take a look at what has happen with the Half Dollar Basic Collection. I broke out 439 coins of the 3741-piece Hall of Fame set and form the Half Dollar Collection. Then let’s take a deeper look at this 439-piece collection. I broke the half dollars into seven basic series that represent the Half Dollars from 1796 to present. I hope this gives you a better feel of just what has materialize with the 14 coin Linda Gail purchase. For half dollars, the Hansen Collection current has the all-time finest sets in four of the seven series. I believe this to be the first time ever for the Hansen Collection to have this many top sets for one denomination. We should recognize that the two early sets need a little more improvement. It is not realistic that Mr. Hansen can build or buy every top set for all series. It may be realistic that at some point in future if you breakdown the 3741-piece Hall of Fame set, that all the sets will be on the PCGS All-Time Top Five Leaderboard. Naturally, the Hansen Collection is not quite there yet. The Walking Liberty Half Dollars is in the All-Time Top Five. The two early sets still have work to do. I do believe they will get there.
1963 Franklin Half Dollars, MS66+ FBL, Ex: Linda Gail Collection
I will complete this series of updates with maybe the most valuable Franklin Half Dollar in the series. The coin is valued by PCGS Price Guide at $85,000. The coin was sold in a 2019 Legend Auction of 85,187.50. The reason this coin is that expensive, I not sure I can put my finger on it. Let’s see what the expert has to say. Jaime Hernandez Comment: The 1963-P circulation strike Franklin Half Dollar has a significantly large mintage compared to most coins in the series. It's mintage of over 22 million coins makes it a common issue in the series. And it is common in all circulated grades up to MS63 condition. In MS64 to MS65 condition there are still tens of thousands of examples available and not scarce by any means. But examples in MS64 to MS65 do tend to carry a premium of at least double their melt values. In MS66 condition it now becomes really scarce with about 50 coins known and none being finer.
There is not a large group of PCGS MS67FBL specimens. The PCGS Population Report indicates only seven, and there are two MS67+FBL. The new Hansen coin has been in auction only once, and that was the 2019 Legend Auction. In the sale, the total population was give as PCGS 1 and NGC 1. Then a rather interesting statement was made: Neither one of these have ever sold in auction. We are also pretty certain that based on the current Populations in MS66 FBL, the odds that another 66+ FBL being made is very slim. Unpriced in the PCGS Price Guide, regular MS66 FBLs have sold for as much as $28,200! We anticipate very strong bidding for this one, good luck! Well, we know now by playing Monday morning QB, the odds for the second MS67+FBL is more that slim. Does that change the current $85,000 value?
As for rarity, Legends suggested: The 1963 Franklin half dollar is a notoriously difficult date to locate in GEM quality with full split bell lines. The present coin is the SOLE FINEST certified at PCGS and is a very important opportunity for the collectors vying for the absolute top spot for their sets on the Registry. Well, that was what the owner of the Linda Gail Collection and what Mr. Hansen is currently doing. As for appearance, the coin does not have the CAC Approved sticker. That point was not addressed in the Legend Auction and the coin was described as: Bright, brilliant satiny luster glows vibrantly in the fields. Untoned surfaces are a very pleasing silver white. Sharply struck up throughout and the surfaces are smooth, with more mint made die lines than any other kind of marks anywhere. The eye appeal is better than decent and will find itself at home in the #1 PCGS Registry Set of Franklins. This was a great prophecy. The coin was in the home of the #1 Linda Gail Collection and now is in the home of the #1 D.L. Hansen Collection.
I have really enjoyed researching the Franklin Half Dollars the past few days. I purchased one of Brett Pogue’s Franklin Half Dollars to represent in my birth year set. I have never found the Franklin Half Dollars to have a supper appearance by designed, but they are needed to represent the US Half Dollars for from 1948 to 1963. The series was cut short by the event in November, 1963. With the help and purchase of the Linda Gail Collection, the D.L. Hansen Collection of PCGS Franklin Half Dollars may remain on the top of the Leaderboard for many years to come. Although, I am not sure you can count the LOR Collection down and out yet. I think this is a deal made with Larry Shapiro that Mr. Hansen will not regret.
1963 Franklin Half Dollars, MS66+ FBL
PCGS POP 2/0
Certification #41057217, PCGS #86684
PCGS Price Guide $85,000 / Purchased as part of a 35-piece set
Ex: Linda Gail Collection
My 20th Century Gold Major Design Type Set ---started : 11/17/1997 ---- completed : 1/21/2004
Now that we've seen @DLHansen collecting territorial gold, I wonder if he'll add this $16 Moffat gold bar to his Eliasberg quest
https://www.icollector.com/item.aspx?i=27907200
King of Morgan Dollars
Our resident expert Ron Guth: Called the "King of Morgan Dollars", the 1895 is one of the most desirable and sought-after dates in the series. Although Mint records indicate a mintage of 12,000 circulation strikes, experts believe that only 880 Proofs were made in 1895. The existence of several circulated examples confuses the issue, but those are believed to have been Proofs that were spent inadvertently. Ownership of this popular rarity is the true measure of completeness for a collection of Morgan Dollars - the 1895 Proof is the only real "stopper" in the series. Presumably, Proofs can be told apart from potential circulation strikes by the number of edge "reeds" (the raised "bumps" on the edge of the coin). Proofs will have 179 "reeds", whereas circulation strikes will have some other number. PCGS has graded more Proofs of this date than any other, although the number may be inflated due to re-submissions. A surprising percentage of the coins examined by PCGS have been "spent" Proofs - 87 coins have been certified below Proof-60 (as of June 23, 2010), including one in Proof-06!
We had a lengthy discussion on Morgan Dollars back in the fall of last year. If you recall, The D.L. Hansen Collection purchased a large portion of the Larry Miller Collection of high end mint state coins. At that time, I asked the question if 1895 Proof the King of Morgan’s. This tongue in cheek comment was based on value more than anything else. Mr. Hansen’s most valuable Morgan is the 1884-S $1 MS68 CERT #07455496 valued at $900,000. There several other Morgan’s in the collection that probably valued more than the 1895. The Auction Record is a PR67+DCAM (POP 1/1) that realized $269,500 in a 2020 David Lawrence Rare Coins Auction. In a rather odd twist, the coin was not purchased by Mr. Hansen. The monster finest known PR68+DCAM has not appeared in current graded. The last appearance was 2003 Heritage Auction where the PR68DCAM coin realized $120,700. The finest known coin is currently in the Duke Collection. PCGS Price Guide values the coin at $350,000.
So, as you can see in price, the 1895 Proof definitely not the King of the Morgan’s. Ron Guth describes the coin as only real "stopper" in the series. This is where the name comes from. In looking at the Hansen sets, the collection currently has at least three of these show stoppers. Prior to this purchase, the #2 Hansen Morgan Proof Set contained a PR664+CAM, Cert# 84094137. The Top Set has a PR67DCAM (POP 6/2), Cert# 28286123. As stated, Mr. Hansen could have upgraded the coin from the company that he is a partner in, but chose not to.
His long term strategy could be something that we don’t know. The top two sets in the registry is owned by Mr. Perfection. He recently stated My two top sets, are the PR Morgan's and the PR Seated, (not for sale). It appear the Mr. Hansen interest at this time is to move the #2 set which is number six in the registry up in the ranking. It appear to me this six figure coin was purchased for that purpose.
1895 Morgan Dollar, PR67CAM, CAC Approved
This coin comes into the collection knowing it will never make the big show set. At least if you are hired as a #2 quarterback, there is a shot one day of making the starting lineup. In this case, it is very doubtful. The coin was purchased in Heritage’s 2021 US Coins Signature Auction in February. The auctioneer describes the 1895 history as: An unremarkable mintage of 880 proof Morgan dollars was accomplished at the Philadelphia Mint in 1895, with the coins delivered in four batches throughout the year. Deliveries of 290 examples in March, 180 specimens in May, 90 pieces in September, and 320 coins in December are recorded, following a common pattern of collector demand, with most orders coming at the beginning and end of the year. Records show a tiny business-strike mintage of 12,000 examples was also produced, but no regular-issue coins have ever turned up in any collection.
Heritage describes the coin’s appearance as: The present coin is a spectacular Superb Gem proof that exhibits sharply detailed design elements and deeply mirrored fields that contrast boldly with the frosty devices. The impeccably preserved surfaces are free of mentionable distractions and the overall eye appeal is terrific. The coin realized $150,000. The PCGS Price Guide is $150,000. For the coin to be CAC Approved, the price may not be so bad.
Provenance: U.S. Coins Signature, (Heritage 2/2021) lot 3721, realized $50,000, D.L. Hansen Collection (Set #2)
1895 Morgan Dollar, PR67CAM
PCGS POP 7/4, CAC Approved
Certification #40264901, PCGS #87330
PCGS Coin Guide Value: $150,000 / Realized $150,000
My 20th Century Gold Major Design Type Set ---started : 11/17/1997 ---- completed : 1/21/2004
Here’s the 68+DCAM CAC
And it is spectacular in hand
The FF coin is amazing, unreal. I saw it at the Fun show a few years ago. FF has some incredible coins .
It is unlikely that DLH can ever get to #2. I have a few coins to replace the current ones if he gets too close. I have an unbelievable third set except for two coins. Five are not Cac. This set is not based on grade but beauty.
Not sure why DLH. bought the 1895. DLRC has the toned Road Runner which is a plus. He could have used that.
While the FF coin is one of a kind the 1895 in my set one is probably the nicest looking toned example that exists by far. It is hard to believe that an 1895 could tone that way. I think it came from the collection of Mark Salzburg the owner of NGC. I bought it years ago and it is one of my favorite coins.
DLRC sold a 67+DCAM. last June for 270k. looked amazing. That is the coin DLH should have bought. I liked it but do not need it.
I have a 66+DCAM in set two which is incredibly toned. When I buy a third one I want it toned.
There are only ten CAC 1895's in 67 or higher. The others at least to me don't count.
We do love our proof Morgans don’t we? Your set(s) are spectacular, and it was a real thrill to see your top set in its entirety at that show- thank you for sharing them!
FFL that's one truly fantastic 1895 King of Kings Morgan!
Sorry, have to disagree. Just another common proof date.
A common date with uncommonly high demand, for obvious and completely justifiable reasons. But you knew that already.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
>
Alas it is a conditional rarity, so here’s a true rarity for you- less than 50 made, less than 10 survive- the rarest Philadelphia proof Morgan
Ok, a very popular common proof date.
In many ways, the popular “common” coins, like the 1909s VDB, are still the lifeblood of the hobby.
That’s OK, I think?
Many prices are totally off base for the highest graded coins. They make NO sense in relation to the pop of of the coins. The 1895 PR Morgan is just one example. It it not rare at all compared to many other dates. The prices of many of these high grades coins are only high because they always have been.
Another example is the 1901 S Barber Quarter. There are 3 in MS67. The price of it is absurd compared to many other MS 67 coins in the series. Yes it might be rare overall in all grades combined but that should be irrelevant.
In MS67:
1894 O (1), !894 S (2), 1895 S (1), 1896 O (2), 1904 (2), 1905 O (1), 1911 D (1). and others. These should be worth as much as he 01 S but they are not even close. PCGS could do wonders to change this but they won't.
I suggested what to do and also to help but I was ignored.
What they need to do is to change the registry scoring and have more than one rarity point for most coins.
So the coins listed above MUST score more than the 1901-s.
This can be done programmatically. The scoring would change as the pops change. In the past I was told that
one a year two people would sit and make some changes. That is absurd. It should be done automatically as pops change.
This would dramatically change the registry scoring BUT it would make it correct.
Currently many scores have little to do with the rarity of the coin.
The 1901 S quarter might be far rarer in vg, xf and au grades than all the coins above but not nearly as rare in
67. Registry scoring in antiquated and needs to reflect the actual stats.
I became knowledgeable and shocked by the pops versus the prices when I was building sets.
Looking at the 1895 PRCAM in 67, There are NINE.
Just a few other examples 1884 (4), 1885 (4), 1886 (3), 1887 (3), 1888 (1) 1889 (3) 1898 (1).
The 1895 in 67CAM is NOT rare. All of these dates above are MUCH rarer and should be worth more but they are
not even close. Dumb. The 1895 is not the King at all.
The 1895 67DCAM is even worse. It is a JOKE. There are seven 1895 in 67DCAM. There are NINTEEN other dates that have less than seven or even ZERO, yet they are not worth even close the the 1895. Makes no sense.
This is a great idea, but PCGS may have more pressing needs for their developers.
I knew a Google PhD who had to do manual data entry for his projects because a developer could not be spared.
No way. Changing the scoring to make it accurate should be a PCGS TOP project.
The registry is HUGE and was never looked at in today's world by the previous people.
They were old school. It is not that difficult. It would however take a lot of thought and testing.
Initially we would start with maybe three sets. Once the new queries were in place we would run it using the
current registry sets and see how they would change.
Brett Charville is younger smart and aggressive. He should want to fix the registry to reflect the correct rarity of the coins.
There needs to be lots of discussion involving a certain group of people.
In the end though statistics need to rule. Key dates that have been said to be key dates will change and many
dramatically. The MS 1901 S quarter and the PR 1895 Morgan are NOT key dates. (in the highest grades)
How do we explain this after 100 years of coin collecting. EASY!
Before the 35 years of grading services many things that were assumed have been found to no longer be true.
A 1895 PR Morgan is 66-67 is NOT rare at all. However a XF 1901 S Quarter might get a higher registry score than the 67 based on the pops and compared to the other coins in the series.
It is common sense and math. There is no guess work. The pops tell the truth about rarity.
According the PCGS there are 593, 1895 PR Morgan's in all grades. Not rare at all.
@Perfection: then is it your assertion that only a foolish collector would want to assemble a complete date/mint set of Morgans? It is not “legitimized” by the registry, but it does not seem less reasonable than any of our collecting goals.
From this perspective, the dynamics of the 1895 Morgan and the 1901-s Barber are quite different.
@Perfection You realize that the pop reports are inaccurate for grades less than top pops?
"Got a flaming heart, can't get my fill"
I never said that any set is foolish, My point was that the registry point scale is outdated and needs to be changed
based on the pops of the coins.
ALL pops are inaccurate, even the top ones. There is not much that can done about that. I believe there are hundreds of thousands of resubmissions in the reports. Say you have three crack out people who in total submit 100K coins a year. How many of the original grade cards are sent back to be removed? Even at 80% that means 20K pops that should not be in there. If PCGS were smart they would not count the pops coins by certain submitters.
The same holds true for CAC submissions. Many people do not want others to know that they crack out coins.
I was looking for the 1895 Philadelphia circulating strike Morgan's, How many of those were made relative to proofs? Its of course rhetorical. If you want a complete date and mint set. Rarity is related to demand as well of course. Let's not throw your fellow blogger under the bus too soon. I'm guessing the ratio of Morgan date and mint mark collectors is quite high relative to Morgan proof set collectors. Working hard and delligently the date and mintmark Morgan collector nearly complete his set, but for the pesky 1895 proof and voila, demand! Just because PCGS for the most part began to separate the two (proofs and circs), doesn't define how collectors collect always. Let's think of a parallel example. The 1827/3 original proof quarter is the most common large size proof quarter by far, but felt to be the most valuable by far for it being the only 1827 to complete a full date set. Its a classic rarity, while the 1818 proof with only one known, is a distant second fiddle Even to the point that the mint struck restrikes for collector demand.
So there are more 1895 proof Morgan's, but what's the demand compared to all the other proof morgan? 10x? , 50x, 100x? How rare is the 1909s VDB? How many mint state examples known?
Ok so let me have it.
Just want to clarify a doubt that has been on my mind for past two weeks.
I was wondering as to why D L Hansen's name does not show up on the top of the leaderboard https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/leaderboard at PCGS.
Saw some of his collections (like trade dollars) up for sale at Great Collections. Is he retiring the sets and liquidating?
https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/u-s-coins/quarters/PCGS-2020-quarter-quest/album/247091
Hansen has 2 complete Trade Dollar sets in the registry, (He just also listed his 3rd complete Liberty Nickel set in the registry)
Do you even know what this is: https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/leaderboard. I am #31 and if I had the rest of the Apollo set when I started this I would still be in the top 5. Does not have much to do with what Hansen is doing.
Hence the query as to why the chart does not reflect his actual standing at the top of the order.
https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/u-s-coins/quarters/PCGS-2020-quarter-quest/album/247091
You could post a thread with your solution so we don't derail this thread. I don't see how a registry based upon inaccurate pop reports would be an improvement.
"Got a flaming heart, can't get my fill"
1858 seated dollar is a great example