The Coronet coins were in many instances astounding.
I'm in no way privy to why the 1893-S was withheld from auction when the rest of the set was sold, nor if the current consignor is "Coronet".
This is the Vermeule coin. Now the ultimate 93-S. I've documented numerous times in which Legend entities have failed, both through lack of research and the deliberate withholding of provenance, to place much else ahead of their own need for a stamp of historical cachet as being more important than some better-grounded and better-informed numismatists might.
Vermeule-Jack Lee doesn't need a Jack Lee 1 and Jack Lee 2 in it.
It's not blast white, but neither was the Norweb. The surfaces on this coin IIRC are a bit silkier than the Norweb's softer frost. Either @cnncoins or myself could have done far less and gotten far more done using diluted E-Z-Est on the Norweb coin.
The Vermeule isn't gorgeous, but it's damned pretty. If it were a 93-S 25c in 67 CAC, you'd be ooh-ing and aah-ing. But you'd be an S-Mint aficianado, not a Morgan geek. I'll invite Chris to correct or adjust any technical mis-appraisals I might have mis-remembered. He likely knows the pair better than anyone else.
The Vermeule has never appeared at auction before and it's far finer than whatever else has been presented both before and since the Norweb was runied. Last week a darkish MS60 sold for $180,000. There is no reasonable price level on this date other than how much more you might have to stretch to finally get your Precious.
While not R-10, let's call this the Paquet $20 of the Morgans.
You might say I'm a fan.
There was the very uninspiring Miller 65 "B-" CAC at $600K (2020) and the whiter ho-hum Sotheby's 65 "B" CAC at $735K (2018). FWIW, 1893-S is likely the least flashy of all the S-Mint Morgans of the decade.
The Vermeule is a flashy 67 "A-". It is out-of-synch with the "white is right, toned gets boned" paradigm for Morgans.
Starting early, and very confident any potential buyer will be guided by my irrationality, I'm taking the over at $1.7M hammer. There's a 20% too much doesn't seem so stupid right now zeitgiest operating right now.
"People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf." - Geo. Orwell
I recall, the original sale was delayed due to 9/11. My local dealer was an under bidder on this coin when it did go to auction later and considered it the finest.
Collector and Researcher of Liberty Head Nickels. ANA LM-6053
This 1893-S Morgan was offerered by Legend at auction on 10-26-2017 where it did not meet the reserve. Think it may have been discussed here before that auction.
They noted the Vermeule-Jack Lee-Coronet info and went more in-depth on the Vermeule history.
It also stated "While we sold the rest of the Coronet Collection in 2015, this coin was being offered for direct sale, with an asking price of $2,000,000. The Coronet Collector has decided that now is the time to sell the coin."
They also had photos showing an additional perspective that has a bit more of the luster showing through the toning. Everybody's has their own opinions, but for me I suspect that I would prefer the current toning to just another bright dollar.
The 2001 auction it was in had been scheduled at New York for September 11th and 12th. It was postponed to November or December I think. It still brought a then stunning (at least for those of us who hadn't seen it) $414,000 as a raw coin in those uncertain times.
Here are a couple of pages in the 2001 catalog about Cornelius Clarkson Vermeule III, the grandson of Cornelius Vermeule I, who acquired the 1893-S coin among others:
@dbldie55 said:
I recall, the original sale was delayed due to 9/11. My local dealer was an under bidder on this coin when it did go to auction later and considered it the finest.
When the plane hit the second Tower, my car was in the parking lot of the diner where I was finishing breakfast 30 minutes from the George Washington Bridge into NYC. Most of the profession's auction-attending technical top guns were stranded in NYC for the week.
Was your local bidder perhaps from Utah?
The reason why I asked is there's a smart-ass dealer from Utah who owes me $100 bucks because he bet me, a few years after the sale, that the coin brought under $400K all-in. It was $360K+15% for $414,000
I mentioned earlier that, by chance, I walked into Stacks and saw the coin in-hand. Some classicists will be amused that Harvey was chatting with myself and Tony Terranova (apex Colonial and Early Federal dealer) when he put the flip with the 93-S on the counter and viewing went to raw-on-velvet.
What 99% of dealers would not know under any circumstances, and what but a few might imagine, was that Martin Paul and myself bought a 92-S out of a pre-LB Superior sale for IIRC $55K and that Tony was our third partner. That was likely a Tuesday. It became the first 1892-S $1 PCGS MS67 by Saturday.
Someone like @BustDMs might chuckle. EAC guys might cackle. Tony, like Harry Chapin in Taxi, just stuck the bill in his shirt.
Harvey's very proud of the coin. He's proud and happy that his long-time personal friend and professional colleague has so much exquisite virtuosity to share. He also knows I'm a grader, in fact, he personally extended me several exceptional professional courtesies when I was helping set up NGC. He shows the coin to Tony first, and Tony's actually hesitating to pick the coin up off the velvet. That's a gem... graded by vocal tone rather than numerically, Yup, that's sure a gem.
A head nod to Tony and he picks it up. All the way down at the far end of the counter away from the door there's an incandescent that can dispel the fluorescent fog Stacks used to pump out of their ceiling. Tony passes it to me and I don't have to hide my smile. I must admit I used my loupe, but not for at least 30 seconds. I was in very good stead with the Stacks credit-wise. I think I was the buyer on about $580K in the four sessions of Auction '88 and while less than half of it was from their session, they vouched for me from all. That was a straight 30 days. So I look up at Harvey and I bat my baby-blues and say "Harvey, I know you're not a bank, but I'd put up collateral for 90 day terms at $300K and pay the rest the day after the sale". Harvey, who's surely more practiced at not getting over-excited than I, took a half-second hesitation when he heard my number and then genially and empathically agreed with my empathy about his lack of a banking license.
The punchline, or at least the irony here, is that Jack Lee owned a bank but Stacks regular Danny Ratner was the paddle holder. Harvey might have never heard of him. When Harvey asked me about the 2001 @cnncoins, I told him he should want Chris' check more than mine. I think Chris has bought me dinner at least twice on that story. So I'm batting about 20%.
edited to add: @WinLoseWin's post above corrects some facts I missed. The whole of above was from memory and I jumped over the previous post (or perhaps it was posted while this one was in composition. I didn't recall the 2017 non-sale or the $2M retail offering. I owe Legend an apology for missing that specific Vermeule recognition. As I remarked to a Legend cataloguer recently, no auction company has a half-decent institutional memory any more.
"People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf." - Geo. Orwell
@scubafuel said:
I'm curious about the "1000% original" comment because that seems like pretty classic post-dip toning to me. But I guess if there's a very old pic of it looking the same way that could point toward originality.
+1
Sometimes, it’s better to be LUCKY than good. 🍀 🍺👍
Both 93-S's were absolute gems but with a different "look" to them. The Norweb coin, as the Colonel knows, had a slightly subdued luster with just an overlay of silky off white color. I suspect the reason it did not "conserve" very well at NGC
back then was that it did not have that hard, booming "S" mint luster. It certainly had no marks or hits to speak of.
The Vermeule coin was just as nice with better luster. It simply had a different look to it. Regardless, it is a great coin and will bring strong money in today's market.
@Walkerfan said: @scubafuel said:
I'm curious about the "1000% original" comment because that seems like pretty classic post-dip toning to me. But I guess if there's a very old pic of it looking the same way that could point toward originality.
+1
That "1000% original" comment was made by @tradedollarnut. Consider it a given that I'm predisposed to disagree with him on some topics.
I'm 1001% agreeing with him on this one.
The GCView is more off than on.
The TruView is more on than off - 85%
The LegendView is 97% or more. I'm not sure what 5% brighter looks like.
This coin has been documented here as having been preserved for decades by a fine arts specialist. It's not at all a post-dip look in terms any particular noxious pattern, and those semi-translucent pastels directly contraindicate secondary toning.
Jeez
"People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf." - Geo. Orwell
Does anyone have an image of the Pre-NCS'd Norweb coin? I tried to find it in an old thread but the photo links were not active anymore. Here is the Post-NCS'd Norweb 1893-S tragedy:
@scubafuel said:
I'm curious about the "1000% original" comment because that seems like pretty classic post-dip toning to me. But I guess if there's a very old pic of it looking the same way that could point toward originality.
+1
That "1000% original" comment was made by @tradedollarnut. Consider it a given that I'm predisposed to disagree with him on some topics.
I'm 1001% agreeing with him on this one.
The GCView is more off than on.
The TruView is more on than off - 85%
The LegendView is 97% or more. I'm not sure what 5% brighter looks like.
This coin has been documented here as having been preserved for decades by a fine arts specialist. It's not at all a post-dip look in terms any particular noxious pattern, and those semi-translucent pastels directly contraindicate secondary toning.
Jeez
I may be wrong (heck, it wouldn't be the first time) but I believe the 97% accurate Legend image is simply a cropped version of the 85% accurate TrueView image with reduced resolution.
@scubafuel said:
I'm curious about the "1000% original" comment because that seems like pretty classic post-dip toning to me. But I guess if there's a very old pic of it looking the same way that could point toward originality.
+1
That "1000% original" comment was made by @tradedollarnut. Consider it a given that I'm predisposed to disagree with him on some topics.
I'm 1001% agreeing with him on this one.
The GCView is more off than on.
The TruView is more on than off - 85%
The LegendView is 97% or more. I'm not sure what 5% brighter looks like.
This coin has been documented here as having been preserved for decades by a fine arts specialist. It's not at all a post-dip look in terms any particular noxious pattern, and those semi-translucent pastels directly contraindicate secondary toning.
Jeez
I may be wrong (heck, it wouldn't be the first time) but I believe the 97% accurate Legend image is simply a cropped version of the 85% accurate TrueView image with reduced resolution.
Thank God they cropped the 12% that wasn't accurate.
What a coin. You had me at Jack Lee. One of short list of my numismatic heroes
m
Walker Proof Digital Album Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
@TomB said:
...
I may be wrong (heck, it wouldn't be the first time) but I believe the 97% accurate Legend image is simply a cropped version of the 85% accurate TrueView image with reduced resolution.
That's what I thought might be the case at first.
But the obverse is lighter at 3 to 5 o'clock showing the color and luster a bit better along with a similar area on the reverse. Also, the reverse is lighter at 12 to 1 o'clock and near 8 o'clock.
Not sure if Legend took the photos or if it is an earlier TrueView.
Below are Legends photos from 2017 and then the current TrueView.
@scubafuel said:
I'm curious about the "1000% original" comment because that seems like pretty classic post-dip toning to me. But I guess if there's a very old pic of it looking the same way that could point toward originality.
+1
That "1000% original" comment was made by @tradedollarnut. Consider it a given that I'm predisposed to disagree with him on some topics.
I'm 1001% agreeing with him on this one.
The GCView is more off than on.
The TruView is more on than off - 85%
The LegendView is 97% or more. I'm not sure what 5% brighter looks like.
This coin has been documented here as having been preserved for decades by a fine arts specialist. It's not at all a post-dip look in terms any particular noxious pattern, and those semi-translucent pastels directly contraindicate secondary toning.
Jeez
I may be wrong (heck, it wouldn't be the first time) but I believe the 97% accurate Legend image is simply a cropped version of the 85% accurate TrueView image with reduced resolution.
@scubafuel said:
I'm curious about the "1000% original" comment because that seems like pretty classic post-dip toning to me. But I guess if there's a very old pic of it looking the same way that could point toward originality.
+1
That "1000% original" comment was made by @tradedollarnut. Consider it a given that I'm predisposed to disagree with him on some topics.
I'm 1001% agreeing with him on this one.
The GCView is more off than on.
The TruView is more on than off - 85%
The LegendView is 97% or more. I'm not sure what 5% brighter looks like.
This coin has been documented here as having been preserved for decades by a fine arts specialist. It's not at all a post-dip look in terms any particular noxious pattern, and those semi-translucent pastels directly contraindicate secondary toning.
Jeez
I may be wrong (heck, it wouldn't be the first time) but I believe the 97% accurate Legend image is simply a cropped version of the 85% accurate TrueView image with reduced resolution.
Thank God they cropped the 12% that wasn't accurate.
Shep and Mo are here.. Where's Curly?
Moi?
Jeez
"People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf." - Geo. Orwell
@scubafuel said:
I'm curious about the "1000% original" comment because that seems like pretty classic post-dip toning to me. But I guess if there's a very old pic of it looking the same way that could point toward originality.
+1
That "1000% original" comment was made by @tradedollarnut. Consider it a given that I'm predisposed to disagree with him on some topics.
I'm 1001% agreeing with him on this one.
The GCView is more off than on.
The TruView is more on than off - 85%
The LegendView is 97% or more. I'm not sure what 5% brighter looks like.
This coin has been documented here as having been preserved for decades by a fine arts specialist. It's not at all a post-dip look in terms any particular noxious pattern, and those semi-translucent pastels directly contraindicate secondary toning.
Jeez
I may be wrong (heck, it wouldn't be the first time) but I believe the 97% accurate Legend image is simply a cropped version of the 85% accurate TrueView image with reduced resolution.
@scubafuel said:
I'm curious about the "1000% original" comment because that seems like pretty classic post-dip toning to me. But I guess if there's a very old pic of it looking the same way that could point toward originality.
+1
That "1000% original" comment was made by @tradedollarnut. Consider it a given that I'm predisposed to disagree with him on some topics.
I'm 1001% agreeing with him on this one.
The GCView is more off than on.
The TruView is more on than off - 85%
The LegendView is 97% or more. I'm not sure what 5% brighter looks like.
This coin has been documented here as having been preserved for decades by a fine arts specialist. It's not at all a post-dip look in terms any particular noxious pattern, and those semi-translucent pastels directly contraindicate secondary toning.
Jeez
I may be wrong (heck, it wouldn't be the first time) but I believe the 97% accurate Legend image is simply a cropped version of the 85% accurate TrueView image with reduced resolution.
Thank God they cropped the 12% that wasn't accurate.
Curly wants to know how many lumens it takes to make a dark, ugly coin just ugly?
The longer I live the more convincing proofs I see of this truth, that God governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without His notice is it possible for an empire to rise without His aid? Benjamin Franklin
@Connecticoin said:
Does anyone have an image of the Pre-NCS'd Norweb coin? I tried to find it in an old thread but the photo links were not active anymore. Here is the Post-NCS'd Norweb 1893-S tragedy:
Thanks for sharing not only one of the greatest Morgans in existence, but all the stories about the history of the great 93-S coins. I could only dream what folks here have experienced. I wanted to know more about the history of these great coins.
The question I have is that I have the John Highfill Encyclopedia of US Silver Dollars book and he shows a PCGS MS67 in an old green holder # 8905460 from the Wayne Miller collection as the greatest known 93-S. The PCGS POP #s from 89 - 91 only lists 1 MS67 (that coin), no MS66, and 3 MS65 that he lists the owners, i.e. Amon Carter. NGC had no MS67 or 66 either. The Wayne Miller coin is not the OP coin (there does not appear to be a die crack through the stars on the right) and that PCGS # is no longer in existence. Since today's POP #s are almost the same as 91, amazing, where did this MS67 come from and what happened to Wayne Miller's coin?
The PCGS MS67 was not the Wayne Miller coin, but the Norweb example. After it was cracked out for NGC's NCS processing, the numbered cert insert was returned by the owner and it was taken off the pop report.
IIRC Wayne's coin graded PCGS MS65, but I haven't seen it in hand since his coins were sold raw and have but a vague recollection that it had an semi-objectionable mark at that level. Maybe NNP has images from that sale. Superior 1986
edited to add: the Miller coin was also the Stacks Amon Carter coin from a year and a half before. No useful images for either in NNP
"People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf." - Geo. Orwell
@ColonelJessup said:
The PCGS MS67 was not the Wayne Miller coin, but the Norweb example. After it was cracked out for NGC's NCS processing, the numbered cert insert was returned by the owner and it was taken off the pop report.
IIRC Wayne's coin graded PCGS MS65, but I haven't seen it in hand since his coins were sold raw and have but a vague recollection that it had an semi-objectionable mark at that level. Maybe NNP has images from that sale. Superior 1986
edited to add: the Miller coin was also the Stacks Amon Carter coin from a year and a half before. No useful images for either in NNP
Thanks for the clarification. So this MS67+ coin was raw in the late 80's early 90's and off the POP charts, interesting.
@ColonelJessup said:
The PCGS MS67 was not the Wayne Miller coin, but the Norweb example. After it was cracked out for NGC's NCS processing, the numbered cert insert was returned by the owner and it was taken off the pop report.
IIRC Wayne's coin graded PCGS MS65, but I haven't seen it in hand since his coins were sold raw and have but a vague recollection that it had an semi-objectionable mark at that level. Maybe NNP has images from that sale. Superior 1986
edited to add: the Miller coin was also the Stacks Amon Carter coin from a year and a half before. No useful images for either in NNP
Thanks for the clarification. So this MS67+ coin was raw in the late 80's early 90's and off the POP charts, interesting.
What "MS67+" coin?
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
That was the Norweb example that was cracked out, dipped and trashed, then graded by NGC. Last time it came up for auction it sold relatively cheap, if I am remembering correctly, and rightly so. It looks terrible.
A real stain on numismatic history in my opinion.
Here it is pre-dip.
"It's like God, Family, Country, except Sticker, Plastic, Coin."
@ColonelJessup said:
The PCGS MS67 was not the Wayne Miller coin, but the Norweb example. After it was cracked out for NGC's NCS processing, the numbered cert insert was returned by the owner and it was taken off the pop report.
IIRC Wayne's coin graded PCGS MS65, but I haven't seen it in hand since his coins were sold raw and have but a vague recollection that it had an semi-objectionable mark at that level. Maybe NNP has images from that sale. Superior 1986
edited to add: the Miller coin was also the Stacks Amon Carter coin from a year and a half before. No useful images for either in NNP
Thanks for the clarification. So this MS67+ coin was raw in the late 80's early 90's and off the POP charts, interesting.
@DelawareDoons said:
That was the Norweb example that was cracked out, dipped and trashed, then graded by NGC. Last time it came up for auction it sold relatively cheap, if I am remembering correctly, and rightly so. It looks terrible.
A real stain on numismatic history in my opinion.
Here it is pre-dip.
That looks like an enlarged photo of the coin in the Highfill book. What a shame.
@cnncoins said:
DelawareDoons, This doesn't look like the Norweb Coin? Where's this image from?
Rick, does this look like the Norweb coin before conservation?
I just checked on NNP and that is a color-accurate quote of the Norweb color plate.
The image in the specific lot description isn't color and is somewhat lighter.
I never though of that coin as having but the lightest dove-gray. That image makes it look literally cruddy
@ColonelJessup said:
The Norweb coin was two shades (or more) brighter in-hand. See @cnncoins' post above
Jeez
This is surreal
Typical coin dealer. As long as my checks kept clearing, I thought I was in touch with reality.
"People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf." - Geo. Orwell
@coinkat said:
Apologies for the off the cuff remark but it really lacks depth and simply does not leave an impression of craftsmanship in a tradition sense.
Found a pre-dip photo of the Norweb 1893-S $ in a 1999 fixed price list by Jay Parrino's The Mint. Mine notes that it was an insert for Numismatic News.
It is in color, but could almost be mistaken for black and white. Some other coins in this particular printing don't show the colors quite as well as other photos of the same coins.
Though not a great photo, it might be the best color one available outside the Norweb auction catalog which was not that sharp as DelawareDoons posted earlier.
Also posting the Norweb lot description which has a large black and white photo. Noticed that the description says "...nearly full original mint brilliance, overlaid with delicate light brownish gold toning."
The Parrino photo almost looks like a faint milky haze in places. Wonder if that was thought to be easily removed by a dip but it stuck around a bit leading to the overdipped look.
.
.
Parrino PCGS-67 1999 pre dip color photo:
.
.
Parrino full description:
.
.
Norweb 1988 auction full description (brought $357,500 - about 4 times previous Morgan auction record) :
Probably NGC was trying to remove all remnants of those 2 small toning blotches on the reverse and over-dipped the whole coin instead of limiting and focusing the 'extra' conservation to those small areas ??? They are totally gone in the post photos but so was all the luster and originality.
@coastaljerseyguy said:
Probably NGC was trying to remove all remnants of those 2 small toning blotches on the reverse and over-dipped the whole coin instead of limiting and focusing the 'extra' conservation to those small areas ??? They are totally gone in the post photos but so was all the luster and originality.
I'm guessing what happened to it was that they tried to just brighten it up a bit and pull off some light haze, however a lighter, diluted dip couldn't remove the haze, but stripped the color off, and at that point, you might as well commit and give it a stronger dip to pull off the haze... But I think the haze was probably tougher to get off than they thought and to get rid of it, they essentially had to strip the coin. Problem is, from NGC's standpoint, once they start on that conservation with a stated goal, it's easier to finish the conservation, strip the coin, put it back into a 7 holder, and claim it was a success, than stop halfway in, accept that it was a failure, forfeit the large fees that were probably involved, and expose themselves to legal issues as well as damaging the brand of their conservation services.
I am sure whomever was conserving it had an "Oh shit, uh oh" moment and stopped to consult management/legal, before deciding on a course of action, or perhaps the potential courses of actions based on a range of results was mapped out beforehand, and their oh shit moment led to a course being taken that resulted in this.
This is all my opinion from lots of experimentation on dipping Morgans and the things I've seen happen during that process, and isn't an accounting of what happened to the Norweb specimen, so your mileage may vary.
"It's like God, Family, Country, except Sticker, Plastic, Coin."
@Broadstruck said:
I'd also much rather have the ex: Sunnywood MS65 as the Jack Lee MS67 doesn't have the same swoon factor.
Personally I would not commit to that without seeing both coins in hand.
I do not value coins only from technical purist criteria, but photos will not reveal all ticks and scratches. Lighting angles matter.
There’s some lines on the cheek…otherwise an amazing gem.
Small aligned grouping of minor marks transecting the back-most portion of the upper jaw, but yeah, a killer and likely the liveliest of the survivors.
@broadstruck - I'm surprised at your continued misbegotten characterizations of the "Sunnywood" and "Jack Lee" provenances as having more relevance than the Eliasberg and Vermeule "fountainhead" ownerships. Jack Lee did NOT call it the Jack Lee coin. As @Justacommeman notes, his provenance does carry world-class and hobby-wide cachet ("juice")
Doug's a great guy, but this reminds me of when I would caricaturize my ownership of @Floridafacelifter's 1804 $1 as
"my old 1804 $1 (formerly known as the Garrett coin).
Sunnywood or Eliasberg.... ? .. Is there a spitting emoji to show my contempt for your contempt of numismatic history.
Late-breaking news - "Sunnywood" is for PCGS chatroom chimps- "Eliasberg" is for anyone who has the vaguest aspirations towards numismatic scholarship.
Crap on a cracker!
"People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf." - Geo. Orwell
Comments
I admit I'm crusty but I ain't that upper crusty...........
Pete
The Coronet coins were in many instances astounding.
I'm in no way privy to why the 1893-S was withheld from auction when the rest of the set was sold, nor if the current consignor is "Coronet".
This is the Vermeule coin. Now the ultimate 93-S. I've documented numerous times in which Legend entities have failed, both through lack of research and the deliberate withholding of provenance, to place much else ahead of their own need for a stamp of historical cachet as being more important than some better-grounded and better-informed numismatists might.
Vermeule-Jack Lee doesn't need a Jack Lee 1 and Jack Lee 2 in it.
It's not blast white, but neither was the Norweb. The surfaces on this coin IIRC are a bit silkier than the Norweb's softer frost. Either @cnncoins or myself could have done far less and gotten far more done using diluted E-Z-Est on the Norweb coin.
The Vermeule isn't gorgeous, but it's damned pretty. If it were a 93-S 25c in 67 CAC, you'd be ooh-ing and aah-ing. But you'd be an S-Mint aficianado, not a Morgan geek. I'll invite Chris to correct or adjust any technical mis-appraisals I might have mis-remembered. He likely knows the pair better than anyone else.
The Vermeule has never appeared at auction before and it's far finer than whatever else has been presented both before and since the Norweb was runied. Last week a darkish MS60 sold for $180,000. There is no reasonable price level on this date other than how much more you might have to stretch to finally get your Precious.
While not R-10, let's call this the Paquet $20 of the Morgans.
You might say I'm a fan.
There was the very uninspiring Miller 65 "B-" CAC at $600K (2020) and the whiter ho-hum Sotheby's 65 "B" CAC at $735K (2018). FWIW, 1893-S is likely the least flashy of all the S-Mint Morgans of the decade.
The Vermeule is a flashy 67 "A-". It is out-of-synch with the "white is right, toned gets boned" paradigm for Morgans.
Starting early, and very confident any potential buyer will be guided by my irrationality, I'm taking the over at $1.7M hammer. There's a 20% too much doesn't seem so stupid right now zeitgiest operating right now.
I recall, the original sale was delayed due to 9/11. My local dealer was an under bidder on this coin when it did go to auction later and considered it the finest.
This 1893-S Morgan was offerered by Legend at auction on 10-26-2017 where it did not meet the reserve. Think it may have been discussed here before that auction.
https://legendauctions.hibid.com/lot/34785123/-1-1893-s-pcgs-ms67-cac/?q=&cat=true&SortOrder=0&ref=lot-list
They noted the Vermeule-Jack Lee-Coronet info and went more in-depth on the Vermeule history.
It also stated "While we sold the rest of the Coronet Collection in 2015, this coin was being offered for direct sale, with an asking price of $2,000,000. The Coronet Collector has decided that now is the time to sell the coin."
They also had photos showing an additional perspective that has a bit more of the luster showing through the toning. Everybody's has their own opinions, but for me I suspect that I would prefer the current toning to just another bright dollar.
The 2001 auction it was in had been scheduled at New York for September 11th and 12th. It was postponed to November or December I think. It still brought a then stunning (at least for those of us who hadn't seen it) $414,000 as a raw coin in those uncertain times.
.
.
Here is a link to the 2001 lot listing:
https://archive.org/details/unitedstatesgold2001stac/page/62/mode/2up
Here are a couple of pages in the 2001 catalog about Cornelius Clarkson Vermeule III, the grandson of Cornelius Vermeule I, who acquired the 1893-S coin among others:
https://archive.org/details/unitedstatesgold2001stac/page/n7/mode/2up
.
.
Link to Legend's 2017 lot listing which has some decent photos when enlarged:
https://legendauctions.hibid.com/lot/34785123/-1-1893-s-pcgs-ms67-cac/?q=&cat=true&SortOrder=0&ref=lot-list
.
.
"To Be Esteemed Be Useful" - 1792 Birch Cent --- "I personally think we developed language because of our deep need to complain." - Lily Tomlin
When the plane hit the second Tower, my car was in the parking lot of the diner where I was finishing breakfast 30 minutes from the George Washington Bridge into NYC. Most of the profession's auction-attending technical top guns were stranded in NYC for the week.
Was your local bidder perhaps from Utah?
The reason why I asked is there's a smart-ass dealer from Utah who owes me $100 bucks because he bet me, a few years after the sale, that the coin brought under $400K all-in. It was $360K+15% for $414,000
I mentioned earlier that, by chance, I walked into Stacks and saw the coin in-hand. Some classicists will be amused that Harvey was chatting with myself and Tony Terranova (apex Colonial and Early Federal dealer) when he put the flip with the 93-S on the counter and viewing went to raw-on-velvet.
What 99% of dealers would not know under any circumstances, and what but a few might imagine, was that Martin Paul and myself bought a 92-S out of a pre-LB Superior sale for IIRC $55K and that Tony was our third partner. That was likely a Tuesday. It became the first 1892-S $1 PCGS MS67 by Saturday.
Someone like @BustDMs might chuckle. EAC guys might cackle. Tony, like Harry Chapin in Taxi, just stuck the bill in his shirt.
Harvey's very proud of the coin. He's proud and happy that his long-time personal friend and professional colleague has so much exquisite virtuosity to share. He also knows I'm a grader, in fact, he personally extended me several exceptional professional courtesies when I was helping set up NGC. He shows the coin to Tony first, and Tony's actually hesitating to pick the coin up off the velvet. That's a gem... graded by vocal tone rather than numerically, Yup, that's sure a gem.
A head nod to Tony and he picks it up. All the way down at the far end of the counter away from the door there's an incandescent that can dispel the fluorescent fog Stacks used to pump out of their ceiling. Tony passes it to me and I don't have to hide my smile. I must admit I used my loupe, but not for at least 30 seconds. I was in very good stead with the Stacks credit-wise. I think I was the buyer on about $580K in the four sessions of Auction '88 and while less than half of it was from their session, they vouched for me from all. That was a straight 30 days. So I look up at Harvey and I bat my baby-blues and say "Harvey, I know you're not a bank, but I'd put up collateral for 90 day terms at $300K and pay the rest the day after the sale". Harvey, who's surely more practiced at not getting over-excited than I, took a half-second hesitation when he heard my number and then genially and empathically agreed with my empathy about his lack of a banking license.
The punchline, or at least the irony here, is that Jack Lee owned a bank but Stacks regular Danny Ratner was the paddle holder. Harvey might have never heard of him. When Harvey asked me about the 2001 @cnncoins, I told him he should want Chris' check more than mine. I think Chris has bought me dinner at least twice on that story. So I'm batting about 20%.
edited to add: @WinLoseWin's post above corrects some facts I missed. The whole of above was from memory and I jumped over the previous post (or perhaps it was posted while this one was in composition. I didn't recall the 2017 non-sale or the $2M retail offering. I owe Legend an apology for missing that specific Vermeule recognition. As I remarked to a Legend cataloguer recently, no auction company has a half-decent institutional memory any more.
BEST IMAGE CURRENTLY ONLINE
This image is very accurate.
Who was Jack Lee? Apparently he was a very dedicated coin collector: https://www.numismaticnews.net/archive/collector-jack-lee-dies-at-76
Wasn't there a coin a part of his collection that got dipped?
Is it more lustrous in person? It seems somewhat subdued in all the photos.
+1
Sometimes, it’s better to be LUCKY than good. 🍀 🍺👍
My Full Walker Registry Set (1916-1947):
https://www.ngccoin.com/registry/competitive-sets/16292/
Both 93-S's were absolute gems but with a different "look" to them. The Norweb coin, as the Colonel knows, had a slightly subdued luster with just an overlay of silky off white color. I suspect the reason it did not "conserve" very well at NGC
back then was that it did not have that hard, booming "S" mint luster. It certainly had no marks or hits to speak of.
The Vermeule coin was just as nice with better luster. It simply had a different look to it. Regardless, it is a great coin and will bring strong money in today's market.
That "1000% original" comment was made by @tradedollarnut. Consider it a given that I'm predisposed to disagree with him on some topics.
I'm 1001% agreeing with him on this one.
The GCView is more off than on.
The TruView is more on than off - 85%
The LegendView is 97% or more. I'm not sure what 5% brighter looks like.
This coin has been documented here as having been preserved for decades by a fine arts specialist. It's not at all a post-dip look in terms any particular noxious pattern, and those semi-translucent pastels directly contraindicate secondary toning.
Jeez
Does anyone have an image of the Pre-NCS'd Norweb coin? I tried to find it in an old thread but the photo links were not active anymore. Here is the Post-NCS'd Norweb 1893-S tragedy:
I may be wrong (heck, it wouldn't be the first time) but I believe the 97% accurate Legend image is simply a cropped version of the 85% accurate TrueView image with reduced resolution.
In honor of the memory of Cpl. Michael E. Thompson
Thank God they cropped the 12% that wasn't accurate.
What a coin. You had me at Jack Lee. One of short list of my numismatic heroes
m
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
That's what I thought might be the case at first.
But the obverse is lighter at 3 to 5 o'clock showing the color and luster a bit better along with a similar area on the reverse. Also, the reverse is lighter at 12 to 1 o'clock and near 8 o'clock.
Not sure if Legend took the photos or if it is an earlier TrueView.
Below are Legends photos from 2017 and then the current TrueView.
https://legendauctions.hibid.com/lot/34785123/-1-1893-s-pcgs-ms67-cac/?q=&cat=true&SortOrder=0&ref=lot-list
.
.
"To Be Esteemed Be Useful" - 1792 Birch Cent --- "I personally think we developed language because of our deep need to complain." - Lily Tomlin
Dream coin for me. Will never own it, but its nice to think about at least getting to hold it someday.
"It's like God, Family, Country, except Sticker, Plastic, Coin."
Shep and Mo are here..
Where's Curly? 
Moi?
Jeez
With Larry.
Curly wants to know how many lumens it takes to make a dark, ugly coin just ugly?
Looks almost as good as this one
Thanks for sharing not only one of the greatest Morgans in existence, but all the stories about the history of the great 93-S coins. I could only dream what folks here have experienced. I wanted to know more about the history of these great coins.
The question I have is that I have the John Highfill Encyclopedia of US Silver Dollars book and he shows a PCGS MS67 in an old green holder # 8905460 from the Wayne Miller collection as the greatest known 93-S. The PCGS POP #s from 89 - 91 only lists 1 MS67 (that coin), no MS66, and 3 MS65 that he lists the owners, i.e. Amon Carter. NGC had no MS67 or 66 either. The Wayne Miller coin is not the OP coin (there does not appear to be a die crack through the stars on the right) and that PCGS # is no longer in existence. Since today's POP #s are almost the same as 91, amazing, where did this MS67 come from and what happened to Wayne Miller's coin?
Thanks for sharing.
The PCGS MS67 was not the Wayne Miller coin, but the Norweb example. After it was cracked out for NGC's NCS processing, the numbered cert insert was returned by the owner and it was taken off the pop report.
IIRC Wayne's coin graded PCGS MS65, but I haven't seen it in hand since his coins were sold raw and have but a vague recollection that it had an semi-objectionable mark at that level. Maybe NNP has images from that sale. Superior 1986
edited to add: the Miller coin was also the Stacks Amon Carter coin from a year and a half before. No useful images for either in NNP
I'd post the pictures I took of it at the ANA show, but alas, I neglected the borrow the coin from Ian.
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution
I saved an image of the Norweb
1893-S MS 67 before it was conserved
I know It’s in my files
Will find it- if no else posts an image
Thanks for the clarification. So this MS67+ coin was raw in the late 80's early 90's and off the POP charts, interesting.
What "MS67+" coin?
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
That was the Norweb example that was cracked out, dipped and trashed, then graded by NGC. Last time it came up for auction it sold relatively cheap, if I am remembering correctly, and rightly so. It looks terrible.
A real stain on numismatic history in my opinion.
Here it is pre-dip.
"It's like God, Family, Country, except Sticker, Plastic, Coin."
My mistake. Meant the OP coin with the CAC.
That looks like an enlarged photo of the coin in the Highfill book. What a shame.
The Norweb coin was two shades (or more) brighter in-hand. See @cnncoins' post above
Jeez
DelawareDoons, This doesn't look like the Norweb Coin? Where's this image from?
Rick, does this look like the Norweb coin before conservation?
I hope the 2021 Morgan looks better in hand
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
if it doesn't I'm getting mine conserved.
Apologies for the off the cuff remark but it really lacks depth and simply does not leave an impression of craftsmanship in a tradition sense.
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
I just checked on NNP and that is a color-accurate quote of the Norweb color plate.
The image in the specific lot description isn't color and is somewhat lighter.
I never though of that coin as having but the lightest dove-gray. That image makes it look literally cruddy
This is surreal
Typical coin dealer. As long as my checks kept clearing, I thought I was in touch with reality.
Your checks still clear??
Do you know something I don't?
Beyond the obvious
That's NOT a picture.
Found a pre-dip photo of the Norweb 1893-S $ in a 1999 fixed price list by Jay Parrino's The Mint. Mine notes that it was an insert for Numismatic News.
It is in color, but could almost be mistaken for black and white. Some other coins in this particular printing don't show the colors quite as well as other photos of the same coins.
Though not a great photo, it might be the best color one available outside the Norweb auction catalog which was not that sharp as DelawareDoons posted earlier.
Also posting the Norweb lot description which has a large black and white photo. Noticed that the description says "...nearly full original mint brilliance, overlaid with delicate light brownish gold toning."
The Parrino photo almost looks like a faint milky haze in places. Wonder if that was thought to be easily removed by a dip but it stuck around a bit leading to the overdipped look.
.
.
Parrino PCGS-67 1999 pre dip color photo:
.
.
Parrino full description:
.
.
Norweb 1988 auction full description (brought $357,500 - about 4 times previous Morgan auction record) :
https://archive.org/details/norwebcollection1988bowe/page/356/mode/2up
"To Be Esteemed Be Useful" - 1792 Birch Cent --- "I personally think we developed language because of our deep need to complain." - Lily Tomlin
Wow, it was not even that dark - why would someone mess with it?
Probably NGC was trying to remove all remnants of those 2 small toning blotches on the reverse and over-dipped the whole coin instead of limiting and focusing the 'extra' conservation to those small areas ??? They are totally gone in the post photos but so was all the luster and originality.
I'd also much rather have the ex: Sunnywood MS65 as the Jack Lee MS67 doesn't have the same swoon factor.
I'm guessing what happened to it was that they tried to just brighten it up a bit and pull off some light haze, however a lighter, diluted dip couldn't remove the haze, but stripped the color off, and at that point, you might as well commit and give it a stronger dip to pull off the haze... But I think the haze was probably tougher to get off than they thought and to get rid of it, they essentially had to strip the coin. Problem is, from NGC's standpoint, once they start on that conservation with a stated goal, it's easier to finish the conservation, strip the coin, put it back into a 7 holder, and claim it was a success, than stop halfway in, accept that it was a failure, forfeit the large fees that were probably involved, and expose themselves to legal issues as well as damaging the brand of their conservation services.
I am sure whomever was conserving it had an "Oh shit, uh oh" moment and stopped to consult management/legal, before deciding on a course of action, or perhaps the potential courses of actions based on a range of results was mapped out beforehand, and their oh shit moment led to a course being taken that resulted in this.
This is all my opinion from lots of experimentation on dipping Morgans and the things I've seen happen during that process, and isn't an accounting of what happened to the Norweb specimen, so your mileage may vary.
"It's like God, Family, Country, except Sticker, Plastic, Coin."
I agree wholeheartedly, from what I've seen that is my second favorite 93-S.
"It's like God, Family, Country, except Sticker, Plastic, Coin."
@jmlanzaf
Okay its not a picture... but is that the dark chocolate or milk chocolate variety?
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
Personally I would not commit to that without seeing both coins in hand.
I do not value coins only from technical purist criteria, but photos will not reveal all ticks and scratches. Lighting angles matter.
There’s some lines on the cheek…otherwise an amazing gem.
Small aligned grouping of minor marks transecting the back-most portion of the upper jaw, but yeah, a killer and likely the liveliest of the survivors.
@broadstruck - I'm surprised at your continued misbegotten characterizations of the "Sunnywood" and "Jack Lee" provenances as having more relevance than the Eliasberg and Vermeule "fountainhead" ownerships. Jack Lee did NOT call it the Jack Lee coin. As @Justacommeman notes, his provenance does carry world-class and hobby-wide cachet ("juice")
Doug's a great guy, but this reminds me of when I would caricaturize my ownership of @Floridafacelifter's 1804 $1 as
"my old 1804 $1 (formerly known as the Garrett coin).
Sunnywood or Eliasberg.... ? .. Is there a spitting emoji to show my contempt for your contempt of numismatic history.
Late-breaking news - "Sunnywood" is for PCGS chatroom chimps- "Eliasberg" is for anyone who has the vaguest aspirations towards numismatic scholarship.
Crap on a cracker!
100!