Crossing Beaver Season
PeakRarities
Posts: 4,553 ✭✭✭✭✭
Some of you might remember this thread, a gtg post about my newly acquired Oregon Exchange $5 beaver. The guesses varied widely, but I was impressed with the forum’s responses. I bought the coin in an NGC AU-50 holder, no CAC sticker, though I recognized that it was slightly over-graded. With a coin like this, when the seller’s a knowledgeable enthusiast, the label’s grade matters little compared to a more available issue with consistent production quality. We sat and looked the coin , discussed public APR's and some private sales that we knew of, and I wrote a check . Despite my aversion to white plastic, I headed home with #2 on the hit list, with no buyer’s remorse to speak of.
This coin isn’t the most visually stunning in my collection, but the Oregon beaver is one of the most iconic and coveted privately minted coins . Finding an unaltered example is next to impossible due to the circumstances surrounding their time in circulation. Out of a 6,000-coin mintage, fewer than 50 survive today across all grades, and most are damaged, repaired, or otherwise compromised. Minted by early Oregon settlers shortly after its incorporation as an official U.S. Territory, in late 1848, these served a desperate need for a practical medium of exchange. Produced from March to September 1849 until both crucibles shattered, the manufacture of the $5 and even rarer $10 beaver (mintage around 3,000) actually predate any California-minted gold by a couple months. Made with unrefined California gold, about 86-88% pure with silver and trace metals, these were widely believed to contain 10% more gold than federal counterparts. I’m skeptical based on preliminary XRF results, but more on that later post & project.
As mentioned I thought the coin was over-graded as an AU-50, more like a solid XF-45, or maybe a 43/44, and I figured it’d sticker at any XF grade. I tried crossing it the next Winter FUN with a minimum grade of 45… and it didn’t cross. I was puzzled, since I knew it was over-graded, but thought it might’ve been bad timing at the show’s end. Hoping for better luck, I had someone submit it for me at Long Beach, figuring a West Coast show with less traffic might help. Nope, didn’t cross again. At this point, I’m thinking, Do they really want me to take a 10-point downgrade from base AU to base XF? I wasn’t thrilled with XF-40 for this coin. It stood up well against other XFs I’d seen, with no glaring defects or flaws that made it "non-choice" to these eyes. Then, surprisingly, I got my hands on an XF-45 CAC example owned by a friend for comparison purposes. It was in a newer holder with a fresh-looking CAC sticker, likely graded recently. I also knew of a VF piece that had gone through grading and was definitely more worn than either of these. My coin (top) and the XF-45 CAC (bottom) are very close in grade. If anything, I’d grade mine slightly higher, maybe by a few points or one grade level. I might prefer the bottom coin as a 40, but both are nice, original, and deserve some leeway given how these coins typically show up.
The rim flaws on both are as-struck, and mine edges out slightly in strike, detail, and surfaces. These two are likely the closest in appearance among the surviving population. Consider the price compression in this range.
Price guide figures are:
- VF-30: $72,500
- VF-35: $80,000
- XF-40: $95,000
- XF-45: $105,000
- XF-45+: $110,000
- AU-50: $125,000
Prices climb steeply after that, hitting $200,000 at AU-55 and $250,000 at AU-58, though a top-pop 62 sold for $336,000 in 2020. As we know, the world was ending in 2020 and many coins had poor performances at auction... 2020 comps are the subject of envy for many collectors. I also was aware of an amazing stickered AU-58 sold well above the published guides, a coin I desperately wanted but the price was multiples of my coin. While some guide figures lag for premium-quality examples, this issue just doesn’t trade like a commodity. Buyers are either well-versed or guided by experts who are well versed.
Sales are so rare that collectors seeking a detailed, problem-free, natural example might get only a handful of chances in a decade. The true rarity of a beanable beaver contributed to my confusion when PCGS refused to cross mine at 45. The price guide difference was almost non existent, so does the jump from 40 to 45 really need to be a hard line in the sand? Even though I had no plans of selling the coin anytime soon, I thought they’d want to cross coins like that out of the competition slabs and into theirs. It’s problem-free, original, and I haven’t seen an XF I liked better or thought was technically superior. Pricy to info about the other two aforementioned examples, I took a leap. I was tired of looking at the coin through the scratched NGC holder, and a sticker would ease my mind and remove any doubt that I missed something,
I submitted it at Summer fun a few weeks ago FUN to cross at any grade. I’d have cracked it if it weren’t so valuable, but I didn't want to play this game anymore and I decided to just go for it. And voila! It crossed… but I was floored.
I checked the coin again and found no surprises. I get that NGC can be looser, but a 15-point drop from AU to VF? I struggled to reconcile that. Could I ignore PCGS and move on? Sure, but there wasn't any good reason to because my other subs that day were mostly reasonable, with a couple of small upgrades. For example1860 CG $5 crossing successfully from an NGC 64 CAC fatty to a PCGS 64+. A bit of love lost for that old fatty with the perfect hologram, maybe worth a moment of silence....................................... 
But those results didn't scream that PCGS was overly strict ,or that NGC bias played a huge role. Still, I wondered if my beaver's prior submissions were remembered and that played a part in its grading. Either way, I was over it for the foreseeable future, and just wanted to get the coin to NJ and tuck it away for a while. I had quite a few others to get re stickered, so I got my submission forms ready and sent it off.
Overall, my submission as a whole didn't turn out the way I had expected. I had sent in some other very honorable mentions, and I pretty much struck out with exception of the over-achieving-beaver©. I suppose it's about the best single coin outcome I could have hoped for, so in case anyone was concerned, I'm not sulking 😉.
Now my interpretation of this all, and the implications of the gold sticker on this particular coin. As we know, a gold sticker requires a bare minimum of a coin that would sticker in the next whole grade upward, though it's much more nuanced than that in my experience. I believe the coin would have green stickered as either a 40 or 45, but If this coin had been holdered as a 40, I do not think it would have went gold. There mare many liner coins that would only green sticker at either grade, but to receive a gold, it needs some extra "oomph" from one or more of several criteria.
*Truly extraordinary color and/or originality for the series or issue
*Exceptional surfaces or luster or "pop"
*Being criminally under graded to the point that it looks silly, by possibly 2-3 grades
*Old holder (Rattler/Fatty/OGH is often involved and helps tremendously
*Inexpensive coin with price compression or very modest value
Having one or more of those attributes is key, and from what I've seen, and the grade range and value increase of the candidate is going play a large part, for better or worse.
You can find gold stickers most frequently on relatively affordable series, like mercury dimes or 38-d buffalo nickels. These coins were graded very strictly back in the OGH era, and some of them are hardly worth submitting to CAC unless they do gold sticker. In these cases, the slab and sticker represent the majority of the market value, so It's not very consequential for JA to be more generous when reviewing these coins. The same can be said for lower grade common saints in low MS, which, again, are almost invariably in an old holder from the 80's or 90's. Even if a 1927 saint in 62 gold beans in an NGC fatty, it's still only worth less than 10% over melt without the bells and whistles. The old holder already boosted the dmv by $100 or $200, and the gold CAC might add an additional $500 give or take, depending on the coin.
A nice score indeed, but not a lottery ticket. This is why we don't see many gold stickers on a saint in MS65, and virtually nonexistent on an MS-66 saint, considering what a CAC 67 brings these days. This is where more scrutiny is justified, deservedly so if you ask me. Sure, there are old hollered 65s out there that may very well sticker at 66, but I cant say I've seen many that were pushing 67, which is somewhat of an expectation with a gold sticker in the current market. There aren't a truckload of Saints that were even graded MS66 to begin with in those days, but I have seen some 65s sporting a GCAC and they seem to bring pretty impressive premiums when they are.
The old holder, in its own right, is almost a requirement if you ask me. I can count on both hands the number of gold cac blue shield holders I've seen on both hands. If you take a closer look when you do see one, its a coin with an old holder certificate number that was reholdered, likely due to damage or a collector's desire for a true view (valid, several years ago 😅). My take on this is that a gold sticker on a recently graded coin has a more impactful statement.... perhaps a form of mild needling or a "nudge", surely in a benevolent manner. If that were the case, I can certainly understand why it would be kept to a minimum. When it's an old holder, there's no risk of antagonism, as in many cases JA himself could have been the original grader of the coin...at either P or N... 40 years ago.
Not only that, but it's just that it's a common occurrence to get a bunk grade on a nice coin pn an attempted upgrade, and I presume he wouldn't want to dilute the meaning of a G-cac by handing them out left and right. This might be a touchier subject for some, but grading just isn't, and can never be that precise, by any human at any skill level. There will always be coins right on the line that could go either way, and coins that are silently netted for something that has a very subjective effect on the grade. This is why it's not difficult to find a coin that upgraded one level and subsequently green stickered again, and why some coins must be tried several times before they sticker or grade/crossover. Typically, these are not the coins that sport gold stickers.
And last but not least, a contentious and polarizing factor, where the value of the coin plays a critical role in the grading room. Like it or not, the higher the value the coin, and the differential between plausible grades, the higher the scrutiny level and amount of time spent grading that coin. Key dates, absolute rarities, and condition rarities are not going to "slip through" or squeak out an upgrade. Generic saints, common date Morgans up to 64/65, or other readily available coins are going to pass through with much less friction, and they're more likely to grade favorably. This is not merely my opinion by the way, this has been openly discussed the principal graders of all the TPG's, and even JA can be seen in interviews mentioning that the standards for grading a specific series had fluctuated because of volatile market considerations. Personally I'm rather unbothered by this, since the consequences are mainly limited to confusion and misunderstanding, but I think it should be contained to a minimum so that it doesn't get too convoluted.
As an example, a common seated dollar in AU looks to be choice original but it has a small wipe could easily be missed. It's like a 55/58 liner, but in one instance the graders hold it to 53. Same coin grades 55 upon crack out, and the other grading service gives it a 58. That coin might green sticker at each grade, but the jump between grades is around a 30% increase from 53 to 58. Theres an argument to be made for either, and while CAC might prefer the coin as a 55, it still received a sticker because it's a very attractive coin that has great surfaces and originality. Though it's technically a two grade level difference, many of the old guard think AU is split into too many (4) grades and 53 is not truly acknowledged as its own grade, so it wouldn't gold sticker in a modern 53 holder. Now if it were an AU-50 in an OGH, it might have a good shot.
This is not an uncommon situation for circulated classics that have the right "look"... from what I've observed the technical grade is far less important than the overall appearance and the original surfaces, and the coin would fetch a higher price as a CAC 53 than an unstickered 58, but stickered 58 wouldn't bring dramatically more than a stickered 53 or 55. If we were to change the subject coin to a 73-CC, the rationale and the outcome wouldn't even be remotely similar, since the jumps in grade. Some may not approve of the drastically different approach, but the former situation is a matter of hundreds of dollars, where the latter is tend of thousands, so I really don't mind.
The case of my Oregon Beaver more closely resembles the former than the latter. Even though the price guide figures are substantially more than an 1842 seated dollar, there really isn't that much of a spread difference between 35-45. As I had previously mentioned, I can say with certainty that a 35 would not get a gold sticker unless JA thought the coin was unquestionably XF.... and being that the coin isn't marvelously toned or visually breathtaking per se, and it's quite a valuable coin with a new holder & recent cert, this was a situation where it would sticker easily as either a 40 or 45. Especially when you reference my comparison collage with the other CAC 45 above, this one has no business in a 35 holder. To be honest, that other example makes it seem like NGC's grade really was a lot closer than I gave them credit for. The reverse of my coin does actually have some semi - pl reflectivity in the devices, and would probably be acceptable as an AU-50 reverse if the obverse was stronger.
So, to anyone who's still convinced that the coin is a VF..... you are correct.....according to 1/3 of the major services. To those that guessed 40 or 45, you are correct as well. I don't recall if anyone guessed AU, you're correct too, I guess. It's a shame Oprah couldn't make it, because there's alot of winners in this crowd 😛. The way I see it, It's more important to grade them in the correct ranking order, even if its on a curve, than to be so technically strict when they dont have nearly the same production quality as other series. Also considering that it's a one year type, it's not like you have 20 years of beavers, some years graded different than others. I see that as more of a potential issue with market grading. Yes, there is an ms62 with full detail, but that coin was likely one of the first struck and based on the equipment and resources on hand, I'd wager that theres quite a bit of variance between strikings.....especially when were talking beaver fur lines.
One thing I would caution against is for anyone to expect to go and crack out any nice coins and purposefully downgrade them in the hopes of attaining a gold sticker. JA is hip to the game, and seems like he doesn't like to give these out on downwards arbitrage, rightfully so. I believe this coin was a bit of a special case, because I made a true & honest effort trying to cross this coin into the holder where it belongs. It was a crossover that I never cracked out, and PCGS actually removed it from its holder and dropped it f15 points. Also it's not an issue that CACG currently accepts for grading, which likely also factored into this result. I have seen many a coin take brutal downgrades only to green again. It doesn't seem like seeking a gold through downwards arbitrage is an effective strategy to win a golden ticket. When I filled out the submission form, I was forthcoming about the coins previous holder, and how I had tried several times already. After having spent a couple grand in submission fees, and having to transport and ship a coin of this value several times, I just wanted to get a sticker on it and tuck it away for a while, having some reassurance that I at least have a clue with what I'm doing.
While having the only gold stickered Oregon Exchange example surely has some novelty value, buyers in this range typically wouldn't pay as much of a premium for there sticker itself. I paid strong XF money to acquire the coin, and if I ever even considered selling it, which I am not, the next buyer would have to step up and buy the coin like I did. The numerical grade on a coin like this is not nearly as important as it would be with other issues. CAC, either color bean, would be much more of a value consideration to signify originality and unmolested surfaces. Admittedly it does feel somewhat liberating to get my first gold on arguably the toughest coin in my set, despite that I was confident in the coin regardless. Thought it would be fun to share the experience here to illustrate, yet again, that there is really no such thing as a "correct" grade when all the smoke clears. Plastic is temporary, everyone's got their own opinion, but the Beaver season is fleeting, and if you can recognize a good beaver, you don't want to let it escape if it meets your criteria.
Best,
Dan
Comments
Absolutely fantastic post that was a pleasure to read. I had a hard time guessing which of your coins was going to gold based on your IG post. I would never have guessed this one .
The coin is of course absolutely spectacular and it looks absurd in a VF. I'm glad that you got some vindication from New Jersey.
chopmarkedtradedollars.com
Probably one of the best posts I've ever seen on this forum.
A very good look into how CAC thinks - I too have only ever seen two gold shield gold beans, and this is the second. The other was a 1942 cent in PR65RD that was a very obvious cameo. It's a testament to the fact that newer holders do have a stigma - and that if a coin is severely undergraded in those holders it may be on the buyer to fix said issue.
There's many instances of wild upgrades from newer holders, with green beans all along the way. I imagine this is a great example of the stigma at play - a coin that JA would buy at 65 may still be a coin he'd buy at 68, but he may not give the gold on that 65 holder.
The fact that the beaver got the gold says a lot about that PCGS grade, that's for sure. And based off the comparison to the 45 CAC, NGC may have been on to something.
I like to say I’m always learning when it comes to coins. This post is a good example.
Thanks for taking time to post it.
"Look up, old boy, and see what you get." -William Bonney.
Incredible post. Thank you for introducing me to the beaver world.
Thank you, I really enjoyed your post.
Excellent post Dan!!
Thanks for the detailed write up.
Incredible post Dan. I definitely like your coin better than the XF45. Congratulations on the +.
Two awesome coins.
A beautiful significant piece of American gold. Stellar thought process. Peace Roy
BST: endeavor1967, synchr, kliao, Outhaul, Donttellthewife, U1Chicago, ajaan, mCarney1173, SurfinHi, MWallace, Sandman70gt, mustanggt, Pittstate03, Lazybones, Walkerguy21D, coinandcurrency242 , thebigeng, Collectorcoins, JimTyler, USMarine6, Elkevvo, Coll3ctor, Yorkshireman, CUKevin, ranshdow, CoinHunter4, bennybravo, Centsearcher, braddick, Windycity, ZoidMeister, mirabela, JJM, RichURich, Bullsitter, jmski52, LukeMarshall, coinsarefun, MichaelDixon, NickPatton, ProfLiz, Twobitcollector,Jesbroken oih82w8, DCW
Wow.....That's some experience !
I liked your coin A LOT more than the XF 45 !
One of the longest posts here I’ve ready from start to finish and it was intriguing and informative the entire way through. Thanks so much!
NGC a bit high, PCGS on the low side, CAC opinion close. After reading your write-up, the Peak Grade of higher XF is probably nearest to being "correct".
Given your extensive knowledge of the series, you could offer an opinion service (something like Rick Snow's Eagle Eye Seal) but for pioneer gold.
I have wondered about the lack of gold stickers on newer holders as well. CAC is not just looking at the coin and the grade, but also the age of the holder when deciding to sticker gold.
Dan, your thoroughness is extraordinary. I’m going to start making a list of additional fields in which you can apply it for the good of the human race. But don’t worry - I’m not going to ask you to give up coins.😉
Edited to add:
In looking through the old thread, I see that I graded the coin XF 40. But I like it better than the PCGS XF45 CAC example.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
That's a real nice write up with great insight 👍
Wow amazing post Dan! That beaver has been on a wild ride. Thanks for the great read!
Collector
91 Positive BST transactions buying and selling with 56 members and counting!
instagram.com/klnumismatics
Thank you for sharing your insights Dan. This sort of post is, IMO, why forums were created and deserve our attention. It’s as if pioneer (and similar) coins deserve their own “grades”, something other than assigning a single numerical grade.
I enjoyed your post very much, and I found near the bottom what I had been wondering about.
When you submitted your coin to CAC, it sounds like you did not just "send it in" blind, you included some of the coin's history with it. And I think that was a critical decision in this case. As you say, grading maintains a human element, and more information can sometimes make a big difference.
My guess last September was 45 with the caveat thst I dont know how to grade these.
Successful BST with ad4400, Kccoin, lablover, pointfivezero, koynekwest, jwitten, coin22lover, HalfDimeDude, erwindoc, jyzskowsi, COINS MAKE CENTS, AlanSki, BryceM
Fascinating read. I am blessed with better than 90% reading retention but truly ran into information overload and will have to reread. james
Fabulous post Dan! Thank you.
My 1866 Philly Mint Set
Great post Dan and congrats on such an outstanding and beautiful coin.
My two cents:
Your Beaver looks ridiculous in a 35 holder. TPGs have no idea how to grade territorials but NGC was closer. PCGS has a lot of new graders. A new grader is much more likely to under grade a coin. If a coin is overgraded it’s too late.
I have a friend who was a grader at PCGS for several years. He told me he had never seen a Beaver before. It’s a coin that’s rarely seen so the grading is going to be all over the place within the same TPG and other TPGs. I doubt there are grading sets for Beavers.
Your coin is clearly nicer than the 45 with a sticker. Any idea if it was submitted raw?
It’s unfortunate that you had to incur multiple expensive grading fees and pay for shipping and insurance on a high value coin. I’m sure you may have had a few sleepless nights while your coin was in transit.
Edit “set” instead of chart.
Great post Brother Dan ... a fascinating look into the coin itself (it is a gorgeous example and an intriguing design and issue) as well as the nuances of the grading and stickering element we find ourselves in today (which, if history tells us anything, will change again).
“We are only their care-takers,” he posed, “if we take good care of them, then centuries from now they may still be here … ”
Todd - BHNC #242
A little off the main topic here, but it gives some context to the OP. Hopefully @PeakRarities won't mind.
Another poster reminded me of his 1911-D $5 I had imaged some time ago and forgot about, in a new PCGS AU58 holder which to me has the look of an MS63/4. Following that logic, this coin is 4 grades under.
.
.
I fully believe Dan's coin is a very nice XF45, if not AU50 (2-3 grades under, versus the 1 we usually see with OGH or fatty coins).
Bro wrote an entire doctoral thesis for a coin post
God comes first in everything I do. I’m dedicated to serving Him with my whole life. Coin collecting is just a hobby—but even in that, I seek to honor Him. ✝️
Kudos Dan - for your most informative post! Great read - thanks for sharing with us. See you in OKC!
Ken
“The thrill of the hunt never gets old”
PCGS Registry: Screaming Eagles
Copperindian
Retired sets: Soaring Eagles
Copperindian
Nickelodeon
The Sheldon scale is inadequate for this type of material. I believe the same in regard to most exonumia as well.
Colonials as well.
I wouldn’t consider a 63 vs 58 the same as a 50 vs 30 even though technically they both have a four point difference.
More like an Oscar contender to me. Way more thrills and chills!
There are 70 points on the grading scale, which is different from 70 grades. The grades of 50 vs 30 represent a difference of four grades but not 4 points. The point difference is 20.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Outstanding read. Thank you for posting.
I read most of what you posted. I intend to finish reading once I digest what I have read so far.
I myself could not handle to collect at that level.
Your honesty is evident. I just do not understand why or how PCGS comes up with that grade????
Student of numismatics and collector of Morgan dollars
Successful BST transactions with: Namvet Justindan Mattniss RWW olah_in_MA
Dantheman984 Toyz4geo SurfinxHI greencopper RWW bigjpst bretsan MWallace logger7
You’re of course correct but I think you knew what I was trying to say.
I completely agree with the VF-35 grade… when I first saw the beaver $5, I mentally graded it as VF-35.
While it is true that pioneer gold was often struck on poorly prepared gold planchets with dies unevenly hitting planchets, there’s been a many decades argument whether this requires a different
grading standard like the hobby applies to American colonial copper. I’m in the camp that there should not be different standards. Heavy wear, rim dents, excessive abrasions are to be considered in grading, period. Not disregarded due to more primitive mintage practices.
I distinctly recall when slabbing first surfaced around 1986, a choice Unc 1793 half cent was featured on 2 full catalogue pages. I had handled it previously “ raw “ and it had several prominent rim nicks which had clearly not been considered in grading nor visible in the new slab. I inquired with the highly respected cataloguer who responded essentially “ Who cares, you can't see the rim problems in the slab “.
Most experienced non- professionals believe the coin stands on its own, irrespective of the slab grade.
Unfortunately, the current coin imarket doesn't look at grading this way.
The Oregon beaver $5 is not that rare or difficult to find . The Oregon beaver $10 is. Most Oregon pioneer pieces, indeed most pioneer gold , is in the hands of older collectors and more and more of these will surface at auction in the next few years. Including Oregon beaver $5 and $10s
Old school, 68 years in this hobby
Sorry for making it so long guys, when the wheels start turning I get a bit carried away, but the aim is to answer most questions preemptively. I try to put myself in a laymen's shoes and give enough context and definitions so anyone could digest my line of thinking. I actually put this into grok to see if it could condense without removing too much substance, but I don't like the way it reads so I went with the "stream of consciousness".
One thing is that I must credit the source for much of my knowledge, David McCarthy, who's recent Pioneer reference book, "Americas Golden Age: Private & Pioneer Gold", really helped piece things together along with many bourse discussions and stories. Doug winter knows a ton about this issue as well, and he probably has more sentimental interest as an Oregon resident. Both considered to be authorities on this segment of the market, neither opined a VF grade to this coin.
It's very understandable that some graders may have never even seen one before, but this can be alleviated with modern photography. I don't see why every issue van't have its own "virtual grading set", and I wouldn't be surprised if something similar is already used, but to be accurate it requires quality photography...
Then compare to the true view of the other XF45 CAC. -
If one were using the true view to grade the coin, then I could definitely see how they would arrive at VF 35. But the photos I took were at the exact same time, with the exact same lighting, and no post processing whatsoever -
I realize there isn't much financial incentive for PCGS to invest resources into pioneer gold, since the volume will never amount to much. With that said, I did have to pay a 1% GP for the crossover, so the final submission where it crossed cost me about $1,000 for that one coin. I don't think it would be too much to ask to have a half decent TV, whatever lighting they used makes it look very flat, and diminished the remaining detail of the coin. Not every TV has been awful lately, but it sure is disappointing when it's one of the coins that cannot easily be transported. 🫤
Founder- Peak Rarities
Website
Instagram
Facebook
I thank you for the learned discussion, even though as a lifetime technical grader I do agree with the new grade.
Personally I think that if you like the coin you should not care what anybody else thinks about it, including me.
Happy collecting!
Question - if this coin is VF35, is the XF45 coin severely overgraded?
Great post Dan. I enjoy following you private and pioneer gold journey. Super detailed post and very educational.
Looking forward to seeing you Dan and winesteven in FL in December and January.
The coins I bought from you are now at CACG!
Awesome post but certainly not light reading! LOL.
Great commentary... I will just reiterate my prior commentary on your initial thread just adding emphasis as to the subjective nature of grading and that grade opinions can change. The holder and/or sticker does not change the coin you have. However, it can frame and shape the opinions others may have or develop. Rarity is different than condition rarity. There is significant room for the look of the coin to dictate and create the first impressions over the holder and sticker.
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
I finished my reread but I am not confident in my knowledge of these coins or pioneer coins in general to draw specific conclusions. At one point you mention the amount of detail on the beaver but i would be very curious to know what is considered the "required' detail for the different grades 35, 40 , 45 etc. I also understand that "strike' plays an important role but with most standard Federal coins if a coin lacks specific detail then that is taken into consideration when assigning a specific grade.
The last thing that puzzles me is that with Federal coins the amount of luster remaining plays a huge role in the determination of whether a coin should get a grade of 45 or higher. There are so few of these i can't help but wonder how anyone knows how much luster they should have.
@PeakRarities . If you ever revist this discussion I would be curious to hear what specific details you look for at the different grades. TPG's aside, all collectors make their own standards, that doesn't mean the rest of the world agrees. james
"Not that rare or difficult to find?" ..... Interesting perspective, I had no idea. Here I was under the assumption that a coin with <40 known examples was considered to be pretty rare, especially when there aren't any currently for sale and you typically won't be able to locate one at a show like FUN or ANA. Theres about 12 different examples I can identify on HA, half of them with issues that could easily prevent a straight grade if submitted again. A description of one of the better coins, an NGC XF45 CAC, reads:
1849 Oregon Exchange Co. Five Dollar, XF45
K-1, A Briefly Minted Territorial Rarity
1849 $5 Oregon Exchange Co. Five Dollar XF45 NGC. K-1, R.6. CAC. Previously rated R.5, we have upped the rarity factor for the Oregon five dollar to R.6 as only a couple of dozen pieces are known, and as such it is one of the great rarities in the Territorial series.
Who would have guessed that there were droves of them squirreled away by passionate, but elderly collectors, and the coins would be headed to auction any day now as soon as they started to cash in their chips. This issue has only been recognized as a rarity for a bit more than a century, so i'm sure theres plenty more waiting to surface 🥸.
Founder- Peak Rarities
Website
Instagram
Facebook
Absolutely, but the number on the holder does change the value of the coin. Maybe not so much to the expert who is able to identify an under graded coin but it most definitely does to the less sophisticated.
Peak Rarities is misconstruing my post. I did not say “ droves “ would surface “ any day”. I said other specimens will surface in the next few years as pioneer gold is collected largely by older and sophisticated collectors who will be naturally placing their holdings up for auction in the next several years. I distinctly recall the $5 Oregon readily appearing in Stacks auctions in the 1960-80 era.
And NO, I do not consider a pioneer gold coin of which “ <40 “ specimens exist as “ rare”. . I do not consider ANY US coin of which 40 or so exist as “ rare “ . Aside from the fact that I doubt there are 40 serious, well- financed collectors of pioneer gold in our hobby. Yes, there are somewhat more than 40 who may just want a single pioneer gold coin of any sort for type or history.
So pair the number known with the number of collectors who specifically want and can afford a $5 Oregon beaver and NO, it is not rare or really difficult to locate / acquire.
And yes, at an ANA ( perhaps not in Oklahoma ) or January FUN, I would expect a $5 beaver or two to surface for sale. “ Rare “ no. Scarce yes. “ Rarity “ is a factor of number known and the number of collectors seeking one which is known as “ supply and demand “ which used to be taught in high school. Used to be, at least.
A “ prideful “ acquisition - yes. But rare and difficult to acquire, decidedly no. All you need is the $ and a day or two in phone calls to major dealers ( known as “ contacts” ) and virtually any US coin can be acquired. Look at the elitecollector blog on what supreme rarities ( yes, real rarities ) have been acquired in just a few years, very recently posted !
The term “rare” perhaps deserves a poll. Certainly the term is used WAY too often. However, a coin that has a known population <40 is rare in my book. I would guess that the vast majority of collectors would agree with Dan. I would also point out that the population of attractive and original examples of scarce and rare coins may be much smaller than indicated by pop reports or those readily or frequently available.
Yeah, and of those approximately 40 examples, how many are nice and original?
Dan’s coin has killer color and is just a beautiful example, IMO.
There are only 10 in all grades that are CAC approved.
>
My guess when trying to find one of these, there would be several ‘details’ as well as scrubbed up examples to deal with.
I highly doubt there are many examples of his coin’s quality.
Perhaps a little rarer than the POPs might relay.
>
Just my .02 cents.
This post confuses me, especially since it contradicts itself. It is stated that a coin is not rare if: "All you need is the $ and a day or two in phone calls to major dealers ( known as “ contacts” ) and virtually any US coin can be acquired."
However, it is also stated that: "Look at the elitecollector blog on what supreme rarities ( yes, real rarities ) have been acquired in just a few years, very recently posted !"
Despite the fact that the "true rarities" assembled in that collection were assembled in exactly the way that would cease to make them rare.
FWIW, 2 beavers have surfaced publicly in the last 7 years, a very very far cry from the "beaver or two" that should have been surfacing at every major show.
Every time I see these Beavers it reminds me of this scene from The Naked Gun
(
http://https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wS3LWOTCW4A)
Collector of Capped Bust Halves, SLQ's, Commems, and random cool stuff! @davidv_numismatics on Instagram
Comparing the pop reports to PCGS Coin Facts is the best method I know.
To the point made in the above post, no amount of demand makes a coin scarce or rare. Scarcity is defined by supply. Otherwise, coins become more or less common as more or fewer want it. Besides for any coin like this one, there is always more demand than supply in the sense that the number who would like to own exceeds the number existing. Price is the equalizing factor.
With 40 as the actual number, somewhere between two and four might become available per year from all sources. That's using a holding period of 10 to 20 years. I doubt it's lower than 10 years on average but however long, I still expect it to be longer for this type of coin versus most others in the same price range or with similar supply if my inference that the owners have a higher preference for it is correct. It's a lot more distinctive than the overwhelming majority of coins.