1844 New Orleans Proof Gold at ANA

Interesting pieces for sure. I guess CAC looked at the $10 and said: "Nope, we wouldn't buy that sight unseen as a 65".
GC Promotion:
1
Interesting pieces for sure. I guess CAC looked at the $10 and said: "Nope, we wouldn't buy that sight unseen as a 65".
GC Promotion:
Comments
Nice set, will bring a lot of money.
Great coin!
EDIT: I looked a bit closer. I think there was some big abrasion near/on star 3 that scraped off the star and made the ding near it. That is my guess for why no CAC approval.
chopmarkedtradedollars.com
I believe that is as-made.
These coins are part of the "100 Greatest US Coins" registry set, presented by their current owner in an amazing thread in May.
https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/comment/13909490/#Comment_13909490
It's cool they are up for display to the public at the show.
Looks like a planchet void that is below the surface, so it didn't get polished like the rest of the fields.
I couldn't make up my mind and edited several times. I certainly have no problem being corrected. Don't really see things like that on proofs very often.
chopmarkedtradedollars.com
There is a similar effect on star 10 which should discount the scrape theory. I don't believe a planchet void was the culprit either - this is a proof coin, after all. I am of the opinion that there was grease in the die, but even that should've been avoided for a coin of this caliber. I guess it just goes to show that there is no "perfect" early branch mint gold.
Young Numismatist • My Toned Coins
Life is roadblocks. Don't let nothing stop you, 'cause we ain't stopping. - DJ Khaled
Since it didn't CAC, I think I'll pass and wait for a better example.
Just curious.
Searched the pricing on PCGS and see there are only 1 of each minted.
Why only mint 1 ?
Why with a mint mark of New Orleans ?
Wouldn't the time and effort of producing a master die make reason to mint more than 1 ?
When were they actually minted ? In 1844 ? or closer to 1890 ?
Truly what is the history of these 2 pieces ?
Chris
The mintage on the vast majority of pre-1858 proofs is unrecorded. When PCGS says the mintage is 1, they mean that one is example is known.
Gobrecht's Engraved Mature Head Large Cent Model
https://www.instagram.com/rexrarities/?hl=en
Not for sale
I recommend going with this PCGS Proof-64 1844-O Eagle from 1999. It's every bit as nice as the 65.
(Watch the shiny gold coin swinging back and forth - to the grading services - and keep repeating "There's no such thing as gradeflation" "There's no such thing as gradeflation". You will be back home in Kansas in no time.)
.
.
https://coins.ha.com/itm/proof-liberty-eagles/1844-o-10-pr-64-pcgs-ex-parmelee-the-discovery-of-gold-in-lower-appalachia-in-the-early-19th-century-set-in-motion-a-chain-of-events/a/211-6120.s?ic4=ListView-ShortDescription-071515
"To Be Esteemed Be Useful" - 1792 Birch Cent --- "I personally think we developed language because of our deep need to complain." - Lily Tomlin