PCGS Certifies Ultra-Rare 1933 Saint-Gaudens Double Eagle Gold Coin

We should start a petition to get the goverment to allow 1933 double eagles, and 1964 silver dollars!

Years ago there was a collector on the forum that collected Saints. His handle on the forum had Saint in the name. What happened to that guy? If I remember, he had an extensive Saint collection.

@Zoins said:

@relicsncoins said:
Years ago there was a collector on the forum that collected Saints. His handle on the forum had Saint in the name. What happened to that guy? If I remember, he had an extensive Saint collection.

I believe you mean @saintguru

Yes, that's him.

If this were a common date Saint and in a 65 slab, would JA sticker it? I wouldn't think so.

My opinion - grade is irrelevant for a coin like this. It's awesome that PCGS got to grade it and put truviews up so that we can get such

@BrettPCGS said:

This coin is a true gem! Breaking the world record in 2002 for being the most valuable coin ever sold, this specimen has a story unlike any other United States rarity.

Very true.

Due to the unique circumstances and rarity of the 1933 Saint-Gaudens Double Eagle, PCGS is taking the unusual step of, at the auctioneer’s request, grading and certifying, but not holdering this rarity in PCGS’ tamper-evident holder. The winning bidder of the coin may submit it to PCGS for holdering to provide state-of-the-art security at no additional charge.

Previously, PCGS has only reserved non-holder certification to just one other rarity, which is the Walton specimen of the 1913 Liberty Nickel graded PCGS PR63.

Amazing that these two coins were certified but not holdered.

Has it been sent to CAC yet?

Alotta chatter on the surfaces. Plus IIRC, alot of the Farouk coins were cleaned?

Great pictures of a unique gold coin. Has more dings than I expected, but the reverse is very clean. I do agree with the grade though... the extreme magnification makes it look worse than it would be in hand. Cheers, RickO

Yes there is chatter from unfortunate handling. Still, Wow!
btw the owners of the other 1933 saints never should have giving the coins to the Government to have a look.
My opinion and stick'n to it.

Grading her is an insult.
I'd put it in a PCGS holder with a insert that said...
1933 $20
Farouk Weitzman

Couldn't they come up with a better cert#?
00193300?

Look at those rims...She never spent any time in a bag.

@ricko said:
@MFeld... I did mean 'unique' as in the only 'legal to own' status.... I will try to be more precise in the future. Cheers, RickO

I knew what you meant, as would many/most other posters. But not everyone would. Edited: And when possible, I think it’s important to avoid possible misunderstandings of that nature.

@ReadyFireAim said:
Grading her is an insult.
I'd put it in a PCGS holder with a insert that said...
1933 $20
Farouk Weitzman

Couldn't they come up with a better cert#?
00193300?

Look at those rims...She never spent any time in a bag.

That’s quite some speculation, considering how such coins were typically stored, that large quantities of Saints have very clean rims and the marks on the coin.

For anyone wondering. I made a petition to unban the 1933 double eagle.
http://chng.it/z9V426GVtK

@matt_dac said:
The CAC snipes don't belong in this thread.

What do you mean by snipe? I asked a legitimate question in the rare coin market. Has it been to CAC? I would want to know.

@spacehayduke said:

@matt_dac said:
The CAC snipes don't belong in this thread.

What do you mean by snipe? I asked a legitimate question in the rare coin market. Has it been to CAC? I would want to know.

Because of the obvious, tiresome agenda of throwing a CAC grenade into a thread which has absolutely nothing to do with CAC. I was referring to this as the kick off:

I wonder how many high end collectors would pass on buying this coin unless and until it was submitted to CAC and received a green or a gold sticker (some collectors have exceedingly high standards and simply refuse to consider buying coins that do not have a CAC sticker because they do not want to have in their collection a coin that is "low end" for the grade)?<

@Samuel8 said:
The mint should re-strike this coin.

I hope to one day buy modern US gold and enjoy the design.

Until then, maples and krugs I guess.

@steveben said:
awesome coin. weird they did not holder it.

It's actually not that surprising to me if you consider the presentation in the link below. In this setting, I'm guessing some may feel a slab may detract from the specialness of the coin and that the audience may not be limited to coin collectors that are used to seeing a slab.

Sotheby's presentation of the Stuart Weitzman Collection is just phenomenal

@LanceNewmanOCC said:

@MFeld said:

@metalmeister said:
Yes there is chatter from unfortunate handling. Still, Wow!
btw the owners of the other 1933 saints never should have giving the coins to the Government to have a look.
My opinion and stick'n to it.

What would you have advised them to do? On a practical basis, if they didn’t want to risk doing something illegal, their options were very limited.

interesting. i was under the impression from the extensive langboard thread that it wasn't an option. i thought they were "acquired" from a tpg?

See here: https://www.coinworld.com/news/precious-metals/roy-langbord-divulges-details-on-1933-double-eagles.html

It's a feather in PCGS hat to have graded such a coin, but I think, slabbed, unslabbed, CAC'd or Not CAC'd have very little influence on the value of such a coin.

@cameonut2011 said:

@Zoins said:
Yawn on the CAC discussion. Even TDN collects coins that don’t CAC.

I don’t consider Bruce an extremist on CAC. He is generally fairly reasonable although we disagree on the grading of ultra rarities. He views the grades as a relative ranking rather than a strict representation of condition. In that case we should stop grading all together and just start stating where the coins fall in the condition census (like class rank).

You don't agree with Bruce's view?

@Zoins said:
You don't agree with Bruce's view?

The next sentence of that post expresses my view. I think his position reflects actual market practices although it creates a bizarre special grading scale for ultra rarities and strips the numeric grades of meaning (or at least it creates confusion - MS65 for other issues should approximate MS65 for the 1933s).

@Zoins said:

@cameonut2011 said:

@Zoins said:
You don't agree with Bruce's view?

The next sentence of that post expresses my view. I think his position reflects actual market practices although it creates a bizarre special grading scale for ultra rarities and strips the numeric grades of meaning (or at least it creates confusion - MS65 for other issues should approximate MS65 for the 1933s).

Is it really Bruce's particular view then, or is it just what exists?

I think he has pretty much acquiesced to it.

@cameonut2011 said:

@Zoins said:

@cameonut2011 said:

@Zoins said:
You don't agree with Bruce's view?

The next sentence of that post expresses my view. I think his position reflects actual market practices although it creates a bizarre special grading scale for ultra rarities and strips the numeric grades of meaning (or at least it creates confusion - MS65 for other issues should approximate MS65 for the 1933s).

Is it really Bruce's particular view then, or is it just what exists?

I think he has pretty much acquiesced to it.

It’s been that way for as long as I can remember, which is admittedly not as long as some.

If you want to change it, go for it

Would they throw in an air-tite ?

@MsMorrisine said:
Would they throw in an air-tite ?

From the video, it looks like it has a Capital Plastics holder.

@matt_dac said:

@spacehayduke said:

@matt_dac said:
The CAC snipes don't belong in this thread.

What do you mean by snipe? I asked a legitimate question in the rare coin market. Has it been to CAC? I would want to know.

Because of the obvious, tiresome agenda of throwing a CAC grenade into a thread which has absolutely nothing to do with CAC. I was referring to this as the kick off:

I wonder how many high end collectors would pass on buying this coin unless and until it was submitted to CAC and received a green or a gold sticker (some collectors have exceedingly high standards and simply refuse to consider buying coins that do not have a CAC sticker because they do not want to have in their collection a coin that is "low end" for the grade)?<

Au contraire, getting a bean or not will tell you something about the quality of the surfaces. Rarity or not, who wants to pay millions for a coin with questionable surfaces. Hence a legit question. If you think this is a 'tiresome agenda', I guess you don't care about surface quality of a coin. I do. Hence my question.

SH