'94 and the two '96's? Any two of the three could total $5,000,000. But the auction would have to go STRONG
These coins will not be surprises to us starf@@kers.
However, many coins with $75,000 estimates will bring over $250,000, $35,000 -> $100,000, $17,500 -> $50,000, etc and the real collectors will be buying their wives new kitchens and be thrilled to have gotten off so cheaply.
The 1811 estimate is $200,000..... Watch.......
"People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf." - Geo. Orwell
<< <i>I cannot believe the prices being paid for genuine details coins in this collection.
I don't care how scarce of a variety it is.... >>
The mind set of those who collect early copper is different from most of us. They are also do place as much store in the opinions of third party graders. You should also take into account that some of the early copper coins that have gotten grades from the major graders got those "no problem" grades because of the rarity of the piece. If that coin had been a common variety in the same state of preservation, it would not have gotten a grade.
Having "been there" and "done that" I can tell you that early copper is a different world.
Retired dealer and avid collector of U.S. type coins, 19th century presidential campaign medalets and selected medals. In recent years I have been working on a set of British coins - at least one coin from each king or queen who issued pieces that are collectible. I am also collecting at least one coin for each Roman emperor from Julius Caesar to ... ?
<< <i>I cannot believe the prices being paid for genuine details coins in this collection.
I don't care how scarce of a variety it is.... >>
The mind set of those who collect early copper is different from most of us. They are also do place as much store in the opinions of third party graders. You should also take into account that some of the early copper coins that have gotten grades from the major graders got those "no problem" grades because of the rarity of the piece. If that coin had been a common variety in the same state of preservation, it would not have gotten a grade.
Having "been there" and "done that" I can tell you that early copper is a different world. >>
Early copper must be a different world....... Variety bust dollars ( which are not heavily collected) must really be undervalued then......
I manage money. I earn money. I save money . I give away money. I collect money. I don’t love money . I do love the Lord God.
They are through the 1804s and up to $9M hammer. Staggering - think about it, the whole Newman II was $20M and change and just the half cents are up to $9M.
<< <i>They are through the 1804s and up to $9M hammer. Staggering - think about it, the whole Newman II was $20M and change and just the half cents are up to $9M. >>
Yes, but you tend to run out of gas in the half cent series once you get past the early 1800s. I doubt that the sale total will beat Newman II, but I could be wrong. The rare dates in 1830s and '40s are valuable, but you are not looking at 100s of thousands of dollars per coin.
But this is "Super Bowl" of half cent sales, you will not see something like this again in our lifetimes for half cents.
Retired dealer and avid collector of U.S. type coins, 19th century presidential campaign medalets and selected medals. In recent years I have been working on a set of British coins - at least one coin from each king or queen who issued pieces that are collectible. I am also collecting at least one coin for each Roman emperor from Julius Caesar to ... ?
<< <i>They are through the 1804s and up to $9M hammer. Staggering - think about it, the whole Newman II was $20M and change and just the half cents are up to $9M. >>
Yes, but you tend to run out of gas in the half cent series once you get past the early 1800s. I doubt that the sale total will beat Newman II, but I could be wrong. The rare dates in 1830s and '40s are valuable, but you are not looking at 100s of thousands of dollars per coin.
But this is "Super Bowl" of half cent sales, you will not see something like this again in our lifetimes for half cents. >>
The MS 65's and 66 1809, 1810 and 1811 coins went for BIG bucks !!
I manage money. I earn money. I save money . I give away money. I collect money. I don’t love money . I do love the Lord God.
I also have a 1828 c-3 also PCGS OGH MS-64RB that just sold at the auction for 10,000 + - only difference I paid 1/8th of that a few years ago - guess Tetts name is worth quite a bit
<< <i>I also have a 1828 c-3 also PCGS OGH MS-64RB that just sold at the auction for 10,000 + - only difference I paid 1/8th of that a few years ago - guess Tetts name is worth quite a bit >>
I think your coin is worth quite a bit more.....
I manage money. I earn money. I save money . I give away money. I collect money. I don’t love money . I do love the Lord God.
I have a great view, right behind "Tet" and his family. I made a video of the No pole 1796 selling, but is rather boring, given the low hammer price. It sold wholesale for $775K plus the juice.
<< <i>Variety bust dollars ( which are not heavily collected) must really be undervalued then...... >>
When you compare them to early copper, they are.
But early dollars don't have the aray of early coins like Chain Cents, Wreath cents and Pole to Cap coins. Yes they have a few, but the number of varieties is much lower. Also the 1794 silver dollar is beyond the reach of most collectors and has been for a long. Back in the 1980s dealers wanted $30,000 for very average examples. The Chain Cents were more affordable back then.
And perhaps early copper carries a romance with it that early silver and even gold can't match. You might read Dr. Sheldon's book to get a sense of that.
As me, well I found years ago that I could not be a truly successful early copper collector. I didn't have the money or the patience to wait for the older guys to sell their coins. And given the prices we see in this sale, I still don't have funds that are necessary. So I went with my first loves - history and type coins.
Retired dealer and avid collector of U.S. type coins, 19th century presidential campaign medalets and selected medals. In recent years I have been working on a set of British coins - at least one coin from each king or queen who issued pieces that are collectible. I am also collecting at least one coin for each Roman emperor from Julius Caesar to ... ?
While I wasn't able to meet TDN's challenge to name that tune in less than three notes, I didn't know someone was going to "save" $750,000 on a coin. Or two. ? .
Medicinal quality?
I'm satisfied with my more moderate 5 highest prices $4.4M against my $4.8M benchmark of aggregate auction house estimates.
Total prices 18M against my $20M guess.
As in a thread this past Spring about the Quint, I would have happily paid $500,000 plus my left pinky toe for the 1811 H1c MS66RB CAC. They brought about the same as the '94, as I guessed at over a million.
It's so easy when you don't have skin in the game. . . .
"People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf." - Geo. Orwell
No... BP was 15% for Missouri Cabinet. !7.5% for the balance of the regular sale. Thanks everyone who bid and attended. We hope you had fun! Lyle
Numismatic Photographer for Superior/Ira & Larry Goldberg since 1990, Photographer of THE TYRANT COLLECTION one of the greatest collection ever formed.
I figured out very early that I wouldn't be getting any of these. And I agree that bust dollars are undervalued, but they are up many times over what they were in the early 90's.
<< <i>With a distinctive and incredible coin like that, why get an irrelevant CAC review? >>
The MS65 CAC sold for about $719,000. The MS65 non CAC sold for about $378,000. Both coins were brown and R3 in rarity.
Seems like that $20 sticker was well worth it. >>
Are you inferring that the CAC sticker was the sole reason for a difference of nearly $350,000 or is it possible ... just possible ... that the CAC coin was actually a nicer coin and worth the asking price? Not all MS-65, brown, R3 coins are equal.
Numismatist Ordinaire See http://www.doubledimes.com for a free online reference for US twenty-cent pieces
Maybe the sticker alone was worth the price difference? Surely you can't be serious (yeah, I know, don't call you surely ) Perhaps the nicer coin was just that ... a nicer coin and worth the premium. As astonishing as it may sound, in the dark ages before CAC, coins with the same grade did trade at different prices.
Numismatist Ordinaire See http://www.doubledimes.com for a free online reference for US twenty-cent pieces
Nice coins generaly get recognized in competitive venues like this. Sure the CAC sticker helps. But there were plenty of times pre-CAC (and even now) that two coins in the same holder at the same assigned grade brought vastly different prices. Astute buyers will recognize nice coins, whether in flips, in holders, or otherwise.
"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." -- Aristotle
For a large selection of U.S. Coins & Currency, visit The Reeded Edge's online webstore at the link below.
<< <i>Nice coins generaly get recognized in competitive venues like this. Sure the CAC sticker helps. But there were plenty of times pre-CAC (and even now) that two coins in the same holder at the same assigned grade brought vastly different prices. Astute buyers will recognize nice coins, whether in flips, in holders, or otherwise. >>
Robbie, while agree, that is truly idealistic in this world of gradeflation. If I was looking at spending this large amount of money on a coin in this auction, specifically on of the 1793 Half Cents graded MS65, this is what I would consider:
1. Obviously all of the coins in this collection were sent to CAC. 2. Why did this one example not sticker? Overgrading? A problem? If it is overgraded, what grade is it, and what is it worth? 3. The example that did pass CAC is obviously properly graded, and is problem free.
I would compare it to other examples graded MS64/65/66 to get an idea of how these are graded. Frankly, I don't think many of us have experience in grading high grade 1793 cents. With varying die varieties and quality of copper planchets, it may be hard to tell what is mint made or is post mint. Just my thoughts as to why there was such a wide price difference.
All coins kept in bank vaults. PCGS Registries Box of 20 SeaEagleCoins: 11/14/54-4/5/12. Miss you Larry!
I agree that CAC certainly helps make the distinction, and have great respect for JA's eye. Certainly, many/most of the CAC coins in the sale really stood out.
My point is that, even in the Pre-CAC days, I bet you would have seen a large price discrepancy between the two MS-65 BN examples. Astute buyers can recognize quality regardless of whose holder the coins is in, whether or not it's stickered, or even if it's in a flip and ungraded.
CAC does a great job in helping to validate the differences in coin quality for those who cannot necessarily tell the difference between coins of the same numerical grade (which are probably 95% of collectors and dealers).
"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." -- Aristotle
For a large selection of U.S. Coins & Currency, visit The Reeded Edge's online webstore at the link below.
I agree that CAC certainly helps make the distinction, and have great respect for JA's eye. Certainly, many/most of the CAC coins in the sale really stood out.
My point is that, even in the Pre-CAC days, I bet you would have seen a large price discrepancy between the two MS-65 BN examples. Astute buyers can recognize quality regardless of whose holder the coins is in, whether or not it's stickered, or even if it's in a flip and ungraded.
CAC does a great job in helping to validate the differences in coin quality for those who cannot necessarily tell the difference between coins of the same numerical grade (which are probably 95% of collectors and dealers). >>
Robbie, I agree that there would be a large discrepancy even in sales before CAC came into existence. I am curious though, do you think the gap would be just as big, or smaller?
All coins kept in bank vaults. PCGS Registries Box of 20 SeaEagleCoins: 11/14/54-4/5/12. Miss you Larry!
<< <i>I am not sure CAC meant squat in this auction. With all do respect, these coins were just incredible. >>
I agree. At the level, and rarity, of many of these 1/2c coins, knowledgeable people probably did a lot more of "buying the coin" than "buying the sticker". I have the green/gold stickers on many of my coins as well, but if one didn't get the sticker, and there was a solid reason for that, many people probably saw that on their own.
BillJones: Having "been there" and "done that" I can tell you that early copper is a different world.
Yes and no, some of the bidders are assembling type sets or PCGS registry sets of half cents. My research suggests that most of the serious bidders were focusing upon PCGS-CAC grades and not EAC grades. I am not implying that all these serious bidders were necessarily in agreement with each assigned PCGS grade. My point is rather that the PCGS grades, not EAC grades, were the focus.
MaxCrim: 1832 C-2 R7 (as a proof). PCGS graded Proof 66+ Red & Brown at $185,000 hammer.
Although I did not carefully examine this specific coin and thus will not comment upon its price, I do emphasize that many of the Proofs brought very strong prices. I cite Jim McGuigan in this regard, who is a leading expert in half cents.
(edited by Analyst Ankur: The MS65 CAC 1793 sold for about $718,750. The MS65 non CAC sold for about $379,500. Both (die varieties) were brown and R3 in rarity. ... Seems like that $20 sticker was well worth it. >>
Astrorat: Are you inferring that the CAC sticker was the sole reason for a difference of nearly $350,000 or is it possible ... just possible ... that the CAC coin was actually a nicer coin and worth the asking price? Not all MS-65, brown, R3 coins are equal.
The 1793s are discussed in detail in my review. The successful bidder for the 719k 1793 is quoted regarding the reasons why that one was chosen. Please read more and then draw your own conclusions. Thanks
After the article came out, I went back and looked at each coin's images. The MS66 appears to be clearly finer than the MS65. I see several comments have been added supporting this assessment.
The usual caveat of not having personally seen the coins applies.
I can't grade from pictures. But the 1811 looked nice. .
When later date (1800+) coins in 5RB or 5BN are selling for double and triple and 10 times any sensible guess, the hysteria for CAC-kosherized copper seems apparent. EAC devotees lack that enthusiasm for later gems, preferring damaged rarities. .
"People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf." - Geo. Orwell
<< <i>...When later date (1800+) coins in 5RB or 5BN are selling for double and triple and 10 times any sensible guess, the hysteria for CAC-kosherized copper seems apparent. EAC devotees lack that enthusiasm for later gems, preferring damaged rarities. . >>
Umm....ouch.
Member: EAC, NBS, C4, CWTS, ANA
RMR: 'Wer, wenn ich schriee, hörte mich denn aus der Engel Ordnungen?'
<< <i>The 1793s are discussed in detail in my review. The successful bidder for the 719k 1793 is quoted regarding the reasons why that one was chosen. Please read more and then draw your own conclusions. Thanks >>
Having examined both the $718K (MS65) 1793 half cent and the $920K (MS66) 1793 half cent very carefully with 16x magnification, I can say that the production quality and surface preservation of the MS66 coin were noticeably superior to the MS65 coin, and so deserving of a higher numeric grade from a purely technical viewpoint.
That being said, the MS66 coin was entirely brown and not quite as lustrous as the MS65 coin. The superb luster and the ample mint red highlights on the MS65 coin did give that one outstanding eye appeal, far beyond the typical MS65BN coin, so I can understand how that one ended up realizing a price closer to the $920K of the MS66BN than to the $379K of the MS65 coin that appeared in Lot 1. Think of it as comparing the value of an MS65RB to an MS66BN -- the values are much closer than between an MS65BN and an MS66BN.
If the MS66 coin possessed the same red highlights and luster of the MS65 coin, it would surely have realized well over $1 million!
Perhaps an appreciation for history, rarity, varieties, and die states of "damaged rarities" supercedes the CAC shiny metal syndrome. I believe five post-1800 HC's went for more than a quarter million - some semblance of appreciation.
Comments
These coins will not be surprises to us starf@@kers.
However, many coins with $75,000 estimates will bring over $250,000, $35,000 -> $100,000, $17,500 -> $50,000, etc and the real collectors will be buying their wives new kitchens and be thrilled to have gotten off so cheaply.
The 1811 estimate is $200,000..... Watch.......
I don't care how scarce of a variety it is....
I give away money. I collect money.
I don’t love money . I do love the Lord God.
Though it was fun to see someone jump the bid from $500,000 to $750k and then lose at $775k
<< <i>neither no pole broke the $1mm.
Though it was fun to see someone jump the bid from $500,000 to $750k and then lose at $775k >>
Sometimes the nuclear option works, sometimes it doesn't.
<< <i>
<< <i>neither no pole broke the $1mm.
Though it was fun to see someone jump the bid from $500,000 to $750k and then lose at $775k >>
Sometimes the nuclear option works, sometimes it doesn't.[/q
It definitely made everyone double take again.
<< <i>I cannot believe the prices being paid for genuine details coins in this collection.
I don't care how scarce of a variety it is.... >>
The mind set of those who collect early copper is different from most of us. They are also do place as much store in the opinions of third party graders. You should also take into account that some of the early copper coins that have gotten grades from the major graders got those "no problem" grades because of the rarity of the piece. If that coin had been a common variety in the same state of preservation, it would not have gotten a grade.
Having "been there" and "done that" I can tell you that early copper is a different world.
<< <i>
<< <i>I cannot believe the prices being paid for genuine details coins in this collection.
I don't care how scarce of a variety it is.... >>
The mind set of those who collect early copper is different from most of us. They are also do place as much store in the opinions of third party graders. You should also take into account that some of the early copper coins that have gotten grades from the major graders got those "no problem" grades because of the rarity of the piece. If that coin had been a common variety in the same state of preservation, it would not have gotten a grade.
Having "been there" and "done that" I can tell you that early copper is a different world. >>
Early copper must be a different world.......
Variety bust dollars ( which are not heavily collected) must really be undervalued then......
I give away money. I collect money.
I don’t love money . I do love the Lord God.
<< <i>They are through the 1804s and up to $9M hammer. Staggering - think about it, the whole Newman II was $20M and change and just the half cents are up to $9M. >>
Yes, but you tend to run out of gas in the half cent series once you get past the early 1800s. I doubt that the sale total will beat Newman II, but I could be wrong. The rare dates in 1830s and '40s are valuable, but you are not looking at 100s of thousands of dollars per coin.
But this is "Super Bowl" of half cent sales, you will not see something like this again in our lifetimes for half cents.
<< <i>
<< <i>They are through the 1804s and up to $9M hammer. Staggering - think about it, the whole Newman II was $20M and change and just the half cents are up to $9M. >>
Yes, but you tend to run out of gas in the half cent series once you get past the early 1800s. I doubt that the sale total will beat Newman II, but I could be wrong. The rare dates in 1830s and '40s are valuable, but you are not looking at 100s of thousands of dollars per coin.
But this is "Super Bowl" of half cent sales, you will not see something like this again in our lifetimes for half cents. >>
The MS 65's and 66 1809, 1810 and 1811 coins went for BIG bucks !!
I give away money. I collect money.
I don’t love money . I do love the Lord God.
paid 1/8th of that a few years ago - guess Tetts name is worth quite a bit
<< <i>I also have a 1828 c-3 also PCGS OGH MS-64RB that just sold at the auction for 10,000 + - only difference I
paid 1/8th of that a few years ago - guess Tetts name is worth quite a bit >>
I think your coin is worth quite a bit more.....
I give away money. I collect money.
I don’t love money . I do love the Lord God.
It's in a P65 CAC holder.
PCGS Registries
Box of 20
SeaEagleCoins: 11/14/54-4/5/12. Miss you Larry!
<< <i>Variety bust dollars ( which are not heavily collected) must really be undervalued then...... >>
When you compare them to early copper, they are.
But early dollars don't have the aray of early coins like Chain Cents, Wreath cents and Pole to Cap coins. Yes they have a few, but the number of varieties is much lower. Also the 1794 silver dollar is beyond the reach of most collectors and has been for a long. Back in the 1980s dealers wanted $30,000 for very average examples. The Chain Cents were more affordable back then.
And perhaps early copper carries a romance with it that early silver and even gold can't match. You might read Dr. Sheldon's book to get a sense of that.
As me, well I found years ago that I could not be a truly successful early copper collector. I didn't have the money or the patience to wait for the older guys to sell their coins. And given the prices we see in this sale, I still don't have funds that are necessary. So I went with my first loves - history and type coins.
$15,888,375
and with the 15% buyers premium.
$18,271,631
And to think, this was $1.14 face value.
and the 200-odd HC's went for 18.1 million !!!!!!!!!
While I wasn't able to meet TDN's challenge to name that tune in less than three notes, I didn't know someone was going to "save" $750,000 on a coin. Or two. ? .
Medicinal quality?
I'm satisfied with my more moderate 5 highest prices $4.4M against my $4.8M benchmark of aggregate auction house estimates.
Total prices 18M against my $20M guess.
As in a thread this past Spring about the Quint, I would have happily paid $500,000 plus my left pinky toe for the 1811 H1c MS66RB CAC. They brought about the same as the '94, as I guessed at over a million.
It's so easy when you don't have skin in the game. .
<< <i>If I did my adding correct, the total for the sale was: (before buyers premium)
$15,888,375
and with the 15% buyers premium.
$18,271,631
And to think, this was $1.14 face value. >>
BP was 17.5% for this sale.
PCGS Registries
Box of 20
SeaEagleCoins: 11/14/54-4/5/12. Miss you Larry!
Thanks everyone who bid and attended. We hope you had fun!
Lyle
<< <i>BP was 17.5% for this sale. >>
nothing i've calculated has yielded that BP. it is 15%.
i'm linking this other thread since there is a lot of rollover.
.
<< <i>With a distinctive and incredible coin like that, why get an irrelevant CAC review? >>
The MS65 CAC sold for about $719,000.
The MS65 non CAC sold for about $378,000.
Both coins were brown and R3 in rarity.
Seems like that $20 sticker was well worth it.
PCGS Registries
Box of 20
SeaEagleCoins: 11/14/54-4/5/12. Miss you Larry!
<< <i>
<< <i>With a distinctive and incredible coin like that, why get an irrelevant CAC review? >>
The MS65 CAC sold for about $719,000.
The MS65 non CAC sold for about $378,000.
Both coins were brown and R3 in rarity.
Seems like that $20 sticker was well worth it. >>
Are you inferring that the CAC sticker was the sole reason for a difference of nearly $350,000 or is it possible ... just possible ... that the CAC coin was actually a nicer coin and worth the asking price? Not all MS-65, brown, R3 coins are equal.
See http://www.doubledimes.com for a free online reference for US twenty-cent pieces
PCGS Registries
Box of 20
SeaEagleCoins: 11/14/54-4/5/12. Miss you Larry!
<< <i>Maybe. Or maybe only one was a 65. >>
Maybe the sticker alone was worth the price difference? Surely you can't be serious (yeah, I know, don't call you surely
See http://www.doubledimes.com for a free online reference for US twenty-cent pieces
For a large selection of U.S. Coins & Currency, visit The Reeded Edge's online webstore at the link below.
The Reeded Edge
<< <i>Nice coins generaly get recognized in competitive venues like this. Sure the CAC sticker helps. But there were plenty of times pre-CAC (and even now) that two coins in the same holder at the same assigned grade brought vastly different prices. Astute buyers will recognize nice coins, whether in flips, in holders, or otherwise. >>
Robbie, while agree, that is truly idealistic in this world of gradeflation.
If I was looking at spending this large amount of money on a coin in this auction, specifically on of the 1793 Half Cents graded MS65, this is what I would consider:
1. Obviously all of the coins in this collection were sent to CAC.
2. Why did this one example not sticker? Overgrading? A problem? If it is overgraded, what grade is it, and what is it worth?
3. The example that did pass CAC is obviously properly graded, and is problem free.
I would compare it to other examples graded MS64/65/66 to get an idea of how these are graded. Frankly, I don't think many of us have experience in grading high grade 1793 cents. With varying die varieties and quality of copper planchets, it may be hard to tell what is mint made or is post mint.
Just my thoughts as to why there was such a wide price difference.
PCGS Registries
Box of 20
SeaEagleCoins: 11/14/54-4/5/12. Miss you Larry!
I agree that CAC certainly helps make the distinction, and have great respect for JA's eye. Certainly, many/most of the CAC coins in the sale really stood out.
My point is that, even in the Pre-CAC days, I bet you would have seen a large price discrepancy between the two MS-65 BN examples. Astute buyers can recognize quality regardless of whose holder the coins is in, whether or not it's stickered, or even if it's in a flip and ungraded.
CAC does a great job in helping to validate the differences in coin quality for those who cannot necessarily tell the difference between coins of the same numerical grade (which are probably 95% of collectors and dealers).
For a large selection of U.S. Coins & Currency, visit The Reeded Edge's online webstore at the link below.
The Reeded Edge
Prices-realized sticker-shock Uno. .
<< <i>Ankur,
I agree that CAC certainly helps make the distinction, and have great respect for JA's eye. Certainly, many/most of the CAC coins in the sale really stood out.
My point is that, even in the Pre-CAC days, I bet you would have seen a large price discrepancy between the two MS-65 BN examples. Astute buyers can recognize quality regardless of whose holder the coins is in, whether or not it's stickered, or even if it's in a flip and ungraded.
CAC does a great job in helping to validate the differences in coin quality for those who cannot necessarily tell the difference between coins of the same numerical grade (which are probably 95% of collectors and dealers). >>
Robbie, I agree that there would be a large discrepancy even in sales before CAC came into existence. I am curious though, do you think the gap would be just as big, or smaller?
PCGS Registries
Box of 20
SeaEagleCoins: 11/14/54-4/5/12. Miss you Larry!
<< <i>Say goodbye to this thread.
Prices-realized sticker-shock Uno. .
it was good while it lasted!
<< <i>I am not sure CAC meant squat in this auction. With all do respect, these coins were just incredible. >>
I agree. At the level, and rarity, of many of these 1/2c coins, knowledgeable people probably did a lot more of "buying the coin" than "buying the sticker".
I have the green/gold stickers on many of my coins as well, but if one didn't get the sticker, and there was a solid reason for that, many people probably saw that on their own.
I've been told I tolerate fools poorly...that may explain things if I have a problem with you. Current ebay items - Nothing at the moment
TDN: Admittedly not my series, but some of the top coins went a bit weak IMO
Valente151: Some extremely hot prices on typically $3-10K coins.
As I explain in my analytical coverage, post-1800 half cents brought much stronger prices than pre-1800 half cents.
The Missouri Half Cent Coin Collection, Part III: Astonishing $18.26 Million for Tettenhorst Set!
BillJones: Having "been there" and "done that" I can tell you that early copper is a different world.
Yes and no, some of the bidders are assembling type sets or PCGS registry sets of half cents. My research suggests that most of the serious bidders were focusing upon PCGS-CAC grades and not EAC grades. I am not implying that all these serious bidders were necessarily in agreement with each assigned PCGS grade. My point is rather that the PCGS grades, not EAC grades, were the focus.
MaxCrim: 1832 C-2 R7 (as a proof). PCGS graded Proof 66+ Red & Brown at $185,000 hammer.
Although I did not carefully examine this specific coin and thus will not comment upon its price, I do emphasize that many of the Proofs brought very strong prices. I cite Jim McGuigan in this regard, who is a leading expert in half cents.
(edited by Analyst
The MS65 non CAC sold for about $379,500. Both (die varieties) were brown and R3 in rarity. ... Seems like that $20 sticker was well worth it. >>
Astrorat: Are you inferring that the CAC sticker was the sole reason for a difference of nearly $350,000 or is it possible ... just possible ... that the CAC coin was actually a nicer coin and worth the asking price? Not all MS-65, brown, R3 coins are equal.
The 1793s are discussed in detail in my review. The successful bidder for the 719k 1793 is quoted regarding the reasons why that one was chosen. Please read more and then draw your own conclusions. Thanks
The Missouri Half Cent Coin Collection, Part III: Astonishing $18.26 Million for Tettenhorst Set!
The usual caveat of not having personally seen the coins applies.
When later date (1800+) coins in 5RB or 5BN are selling for double and triple and 10 times any sensible guess, the hysteria for CAC-kosherized copper seems apparent. EAC devotees lack that enthusiasm for later gems, preferring damaged rarities. .
<< <i>...When later date (1800+) coins in 5RB or 5BN are selling for double and triple and 10 times any sensible guess, the hysteria for CAC-kosherized copper seems apparent. EAC devotees lack that enthusiasm for later gems, preferring damaged rarities. .
Umm....ouch.
RMR: 'Wer, wenn ich schriee, hörte mich denn aus der Engel Ordnungen?'
CJ: 'No one!' [Ain't no angels in the coin biz]
``https://ebay.us/m/KxolR5
<< <i>The 1793s are discussed in detail in my review. The successful bidder for the 719k 1793 is quoted regarding the reasons why that one was chosen. Please read more and then draw your own conclusions. Thanks >>
Having examined both the $718K (MS65) 1793 half cent and the $920K (MS66) 1793 half cent very carefully with 16x magnification, I can say that the production quality and surface preservation of the MS66 coin were noticeably superior to the MS65 coin, and so deserving of a higher numeric grade from a purely technical viewpoint.
That being said, the MS66 coin was entirely brown and not quite as lustrous as the MS65 coin. The superb luster and the ample mint red highlights on the MS65 coin did give that one outstanding eye appeal, far beyond the typical MS65BN coin, so I can understand how that one ended up realizing a price closer to the $920K of the MS66BN than to the $379K of the MS65 coin that appeared in Lot 1. Think of it as comparing the value of an MS65RB to an MS66BN -- the values are much closer than between an MS65BN and an MS66BN.
If the MS66 coin possessed the same red highlights and luster of the MS65 coin, it would surely have realized well over $1 million!
I believe five post-1800 HC's went for more than a quarter million - some semblance of appreciation.
Check out my "The Numismatist" Auction News column from a couple of years ago about the fun and value in no-grade coins like ESD and CBH varieties.