@breakdown said:
The 1854-S half liberty PCGS XF 45 just went for $2.4 million. Which is two bids higher than it went for three years ago in an NGC XF45 holder. Maybe people are more comfortable that it's not the DuPont coin three years later. Maybe PCGS willing to slab it at same non-detailed grade has some effect. Anyway, it is interesting.
It may have helped that Mr. duPont signed a document stating that he would not pursue any legal action against the new owners(s).
@WinLoseWin said:
The 1794 $ MS-66+ CAC just brought $6,600,000.
Decent strength from its $4,993,750 auction price at the Sept 2015 Pogue sale.
Guess the $220,000 price in the 1985 Hayes type set auction was a good deal.
Even better was the approximate $11,400 price at the 1964 Oswald sale, now 578 times that price. (Did a little better than 1950-D Nickels have done since then.)
And $200k hammer better than the 1804 “MS68”. Very interesting.
It sounds like you’re not including the buyer’s premium on the Proof 68 1804.
Oh, I thought the $6.6 was without the juice. Still an interesting result for a condition rarity (but a mega-pristine one at that) out of 200 or so known examples vs. the top pop 1804 out of 15 known.
@Moonstone said:
Great history behind coin, but not especially attractive. If I was spending $6,000000 I would only buy an amazing looking coin no matter how rare
I guess beauty is in the eye of the b-"Holder."
Even a XF graded 1794 early dollar is a thing of beauty to my eye.
what!? from the fingers that criticizes 1804 overgrades!?
Criticizes? Nope. Acknowledges, yup
There’s enough of them that the relative grades matter. For this one it’s the great gem or the ratty unc. That being the case does it matter if the great gem is a 66, 67, 68 or 69?
If it's worth talking about grades for 1804 dollars, why not the Paquet?
Okkkkk. Maybe the pacquet is a 67+. Dunno - it does have the distraction on the rim that catches your eye. So it’s either 6 grades or 6.5 grades better than the other one…
That’s a far cry from every known example of a certain coin being 2+/- grades overgraded. It’s kinda notorious for that. Shrug
Thanks for the response. I posted earlier but wanted to make note on the rim at 10 o'clock on the obverse. I don't think this is the issue. For me, the larger distractions are the cheek and hair on the obverse, and the a few marks on the reverse like ED in UNITED and the area under the rays.
Comments
It may have helped that Mr. duPont signed a document stating that he would not pursue any legal action against the new owners(s).
The slab says Simpson on it, but for me, it would be amazing to say Strickland, perhaps Strickland-Simpson.
Buy the coin and one can have any writing they want put on the slab label?
Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.-Albert Einstein
If I was spending $6,000000 I would only buy an amazing looking coin no matter how rare
Please don't tell us that, if yours, you would crack the Simpson dollar and bright dip it to make it appear more amazing to you.
Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.-Albert Einstein
Oh, I thought the $6.6 was without the juice. Still an interesting result for a condition rarity (but a mega-pristine one at that) out of 200 or so known examples vs. the top pop 1804 out of 15 known.
I guess beauty is in the eye of the b-"Holder."
Even a XF graded 1794 early dollar is a thing of beauty to my eye.
I like the way it looks FWIW
My YouTube Channel
I do too - beautiful and original.
Thanks for the response. I posted earlier but wanted to make note on the rim at 10 o'clock on the obverse. I don't think this is the issue. For me, the larger distractions are the cheek and hair on the obverse, and the a few marks on the reverse like ED in UNITED and the area under the rays.
The reason I don't think it's the rim issue is that the PCGS grading scale can grade coins as high as 70 with flaws, as long as they don't impact eye appeal.
Here are two coins for comparison. The bottom coin with a rim issue at about 1:30 on the reverse is a PR70.