With all the incredible coins coming up for sale, you might have to make a reservation just to view auction lots. I hope I get a chance to see as many of the coins as time will allow.
Michael - here's the auction lot. Deep cam modern Lincolns are the toughest coins to photograph but a PR70 should look cleaner than this even under the worst imaging conditions.
Hey you lightweigts, the coin is already 11K bid. Whoever said 5K tops, NEXT!! Should easily top my 15K level. Are you buying the coin or the plastic? Truth is you are buying both, and there is no point trying to separate the two. Michael, I think your estimate is a little high, but we will see. I would guess about 25K.
Here's another topic for discussion on this coin. The following is the lot description from the Heritage sale:
From a substantial proof mintage in excess of three million pieces, this specimen is the first and only example to achieve the highest possible grade assessment. Thick mint frost covers the devices and provides a strong contrast against the depth of mirrored reflectivity in the fields, and, of course, there are no handling marks or other flaws of any significance to be found. Deep cherry-red color characterizes this splendid coin--the finest certified by either of the major services
Now, in light of previous threads where many asserted that Heritage should have no return priviledge in the Signature Sales, I have to ask: Has the coin been recently dipped to remove the flaws so easily seen in the previously published pictures? If not, is this a fair auction description of the coin by Heritage?
I'd have to strongly assert that absent the dip it is not. Heritage is a professional numismatics firm of great repute. Don't they have a duty, as an expert, to point out any drawbacks to a coin they are auctioning - or at the very least provide a fair and balanced assessment of the coin? Is it really fair that the potential exists for an unknowledgable investor to purchase this coin based on Heritage's glowing description? And then not be able to return the coin?
'bargains' like that are out there, Mitch - it's just that most of them reside in ACG holders.....
Let's just leave it at this: If I got a coin looking like that coin looked with that glowing description and someone tried to charge me 5% to take it back.............
This coin has been a good thing for the hobby. It has shown a true demarcation between coin collectors and those who believe that the grade is the most important aspect of the hobby. In this case to err is human and to forgive might be very expensive in instead of devine.
<< <i>the coin is beginning to look like a "bargain" - heck a PR69DCAM 1959 Lincoln is already up to close to $17,000 with three weeks to go!!!!
Wondercoin >>
Spoken like a true lawyer. The 1959 has "NOTHING" to do with the 1963, but wonder slug will have you believe it does. God I hate some dealers, and most lawyers more.
Collector and Researcher of Liberty Head Nickels. ANA LM-6053
MANOFCOINS, why would my disposition change. I have always hated stupid comments that have nothing to do with the topic in question. This is how lawyers make a living. If you honestly believe that a 1959 Lincoln in PR69 has anything to do with this specific 1963 cent, please let us know. Otherwise, you may want to think first before you make yourself look like a fool.
Collector and Researcher of Liberty Head Nickels. ANA LM-6053
I think Wondercoin was trying to make the point that top pop Lincoln memorial proofs are starting to get very expensive. While a 59 is harder to make grade for grade than a 63, the fact is that a 63 in 70DCAM is harder to find than a 59 in 69DCAM. So, I believe it is a relevent comment, especially for a type collector looking for the best.
Greg
To all:
It seems that the real market doesn't care about our pontificating. This coin has been very well known since it's last auction. Any flaws or lack thereof are all very well known. Stop saying that those who are bidding in the 20K range don't know what they are doing. For those who said this coin would go for 5K to 10K, you were simply way off. Already, my 15K bid has been blown away. It's actually offensive that bidders like me are being told we are idiots. An early 70DCAM memorial is a major, major coin. If it does have flaws and PCGS downgrades it to 69, then I am sure they will honor their guarantee, especially now the the market price is clearer. I still am guessing a final price in the 25K range, but perhaps Michael will be closer.
Already, my 15K bid has been blown away. It's actually offensive that bidders like me are being told we are idiots. An early 70DCAM memorial is a major, major coin. If it does have flaws and PCGS downgrades it to 69, then I am sure they will honor their guarantee, especially now the the market price is clearer.
Greg: You are kidding, right?
Yes, an early 70 DCAM is a major coin - so what's that got to do with this monstrocity?
Now I understand why you started the other post. No offense intended, but are you saying that you just had to have that insert? It doesn't matter to you that a number of knowledgable numismatists state that the coin is no better than a 66 and thus worth $50? It doesn't matter to you that 69's are readily available for $200 or so and are of higher quality? Please, do enlighten us.
Are you truly saying that the grade on the insert caused you to bid $15,000????
Edited to add: My mistake, you didn't start the other post. But I am curious as to your thinking on this matter.....monsterman is preaching to buy the monsters - not the monstrocities!
TDN: I did grade the coin higher than the PR66 you referred to, as did a number of other dealers I spoke with. But, putting that aside, there is another interesting possible twist on this coin. Many of the "problems" with this coin might well be vastly improved with a professional (and successful) conservation. You alluded to that possibility yourself I believe. What if the surfaces were to "come out" virtually flawless again with a professional conservation, such that the coin might actually be accepted as a "squeeker" PR70DCAM? That would surely be an interesting twist on this whole thing, would it not
Wondercoin
Please visit my website at www.wondercoins.com and my ebay auctions under my user name www.wondercoin.com.
I simply said that at this point in time I would be happy to own the coin at 15K. I said that before the bidding even started. I also said I thought the coin would go higher, probably to 25K. I also said I thought I might be wrong and that it could go as high as Michael's guess (wasn't it 45K?). I also stated that I think an early memorial in 70DCAM is worth the price and more, as it would be a very desirable type coin as well as a centerpiece coin for Lincoln proof collectors.
Now concerning the grade. I am the foremost advocate of not paying 70DCAM money for proofs with flaws. I think they are not worth the price, as I ultimately believe that the coin holds the value. For a real 70DCAM, it is worth the money. Though a much lower priced 69 may only have a small flaw, it is not perfect, and I believe people will always pay for perfection.
Is the coin a 70DCAM? I am well aware that this is a controversial question. I know several have stated that the coin has flaws. However, in the image it looks fine, and Heritage seems to describe as perfect. The spots on last auction's image are no longer there. Perhaps the last image was flawed or maybe the coin has been dipped (in my view, light dipping does not harm a proof, as unlike a mint state coin, it does not have luster in the true sense of the word). Grading is subjective, perhaps the "experts" are wrong. Heritage is as much of an expert as anyone, and so is PCGS who graded it. I am very confident that PCGS would make it good if I or anyone who bought it found flaws and sent it for regrade. Finally, why is the last buyer selling it in auction if it has flaws. Why not just have it regraded to a lower grade and recover the purchase price that way. Putting a flawed coin in auction risks a low realized price against what could be recovered from PCGS if the grade was wrong.
Mitch, I was thinking the same thing. I saw this coin when it first hit the auction block and it definitely had a couple large spots and haze on it that I don't see anymore.
I can readily accept reasoning such as "I believe the coin will conserve nicely and then I've bought it on the cheap'. That's putting your money where your knowledge is and I respect it.
However, in the image it looks fine, and Heritage seems to describe as perfect.
Yes, they do don't they.....
I am very confident that PCGS would make it good if I or anyone who bought it found flaws and sent it for regrade.
So am I. But I strongly suspect you wouldn't like the market value they use...
Finally, why is the last buyer selling it in auction if it has flaws. Why not just have it regraded to a lower grade and recover the purchase price that way. Putting a flawed coin in auction risks a low realized price against what could be recovered from PCGS if the grade was wrong.
Because HRH has repeatedly stated that PCGS won't be held up for irrational auction exhuberance [sic]. The seller will realize the maximum amount by selling the insert at auction, despite the coin's apparent flaws.
Note: if it's been dipped and regraded 70DCAM, then fine. I guess PCGS is on the hook for the new value if it turns again.
TDN: I said a "professional" conservation - I'll be the first to admit I have no clue how to "professionally conserve" copper of the magnitude that coin needed IMHO. I can remove dirt from the rim of an MS cent though
Nick - Most of the problems I recall seeing on the coin when I viewed it the first time were not in the natture of carbon spots as I recall. I look forward to viewing it again next month. I think nearly everyone agrees here that a truly "PERFECT" PR70DCAM early Memorial cent, such as a 1963, is a "big" coin.
Wondercoin
Please visit my website at www.wondercoins.com and my ebay auctions under my user name www.wondercoin.com.
A truly perfect Proof 70 1963 Lincoln cent does not exist.None were minted but one was graded by PCGS.As I repeatedly said it is the insert that I am bidding on in this auction.
Mitch - What do you smoke to say this coin or any other Proof Memorial can be Professionally conserved to grade Proof 70 ? A 1963 graded Proof 70 is not a big coin.It is a big insert
Stewart: I do not disagree with you on this one. I would not be shocked, however, if I later learned the coin I personally saw in the PR70DCAM holder the first time it sold might be improveable by a professional conservation. There was talk of the coin having "turned" in the holder. Again, I can't wait to see it again in person next month.
Wondercoin
P.S. From the bidding history thus far, I honestly hope it looks better this time
Please visit my website at www.wondercoins.com and my ebay auctions under my user name www.wondercoin.com.
I believe that PCGS would assign a very high market value to this coin if it downgraded. While they should not cover irrational auction activity, they need to cover true value. With two auctions under its belt, the coin has demonstrated a 20K+ market value already, and maybe much higher depending on how this auction goes. I do not believe that when one considers true market activity in similar coins, that PCGS would argue a lower value. If one looks at the DHRC website, one frequently sees very high prices for pop 1 modern proofs.
Here is a question I haven't seen asked or answered here - Is this the same coin that was previously sold? Is it the same serial numbered holder as the prior coin?
I don't know the answer to those questions, so this is purely speculation, but what if the owner of that pop 1 coin, also owned a 69DCAM that looked even nicer. They could send both coins in for grade review and the old 70 becomes a 69, the old 69 becomes a 70.
Under that scenario, the owner of the coin is left unhurt as the new 70DCAM is still a pop 1 coin and PCGS digs it's way out of the embarassingly imperfect 70 coin.
solid if you go to see the coin at Heritage's website it shows you that it is the same coin. Just because a coin sells for 23K or 39k or 45k doesn't make it a pf 70. This coin is more about registry points then anything else no matter what spin anyone tries to put on it.
<< <i> This coin is more about registry points then anything else no matter what spin anyone tries to put on it. >>
I'm not convinced. Most of he registry people read these boards and would tend to avoid this coin because of the negatives and slamming. Perhaps it's outsiders who are attempting finest known sets. It's obvious that not all sets are registered and that there have been collectors seeking the finest specimens since we lived in caves. Today with third party grading and the internet it makes this kind of collecting easier than ever. Per- haps the insert is of no value whatsoever to some of the bidders and they may even plan to bust it out.
To me, and I have to rely on the information and opinions of those who have seen the coin because I haven't, I would have to agree with this statment...
<< <i>This coin is more about registry points then anything else no matter what spin anyone tries to put on it. >>
It defies logic why anyone would buy this coin in it's current state. When grading coins I thought 70 was perfect. Having seen images and heard talk from those that have seen the coin, leaves me totally dumbfounded how anyone could think this coin is a PR70, unless you're with the camp that believes it changed in the holder. That's a possibility.
I'm enjoying reading how one man's PR68DCAM is another man's PR70DCAM. I appreciate the opinions, insight, and thoughts.
The journalist in me prompted me to call Heritage to ask for a better description of the coin. These are quotes from the Heritage cataloguer I spoke with this morning:
There is "one carbon spot." And when I told him that there were people who said this was a flawed coin, he said "I can argue that they're right." The carbon spot is "in the field in front of the eyes." There is a "fly speck above Liberty but the coin has incredible frost. Spots are there on the coin."
When I asked why this was not in the auction description, there was "no comment." However, I was told "it's not our job to argue the grade on the holder."
<< <i>But if they dont start being more upfront with their decriptions it will only hurt them in the end. >>
Perhaps.
I haven't read Heritage's disclaimer but if it's like other auctions, you bid on a coin based on "your" opinion, not theirs, which is what they're giving, an opinion. Condsider too how many coins would not be sold by Heritage because they were "honest" in their discription. I'm not saying they're trying to be deceptive. Maybe they're just not giving you all the information and letting you decide if a coin is worthy of a bid.
IMO anyway.
Edited to add: I think your statement would certainly be true for online bidders who haven't had a chance to see the (a) coin and don't have a representative to look at it for them.
i see this slabbed coin has not moved in a higher bid in a day or two????????
does this mean??? this slabbed coin has rearched close to but still under its ????reserve??? does the coin have a reserve????? if the coin does have a reserve is this a true auction????????
my defination of an auction is something that is sold to the highest bidder with no reserve????????
also for this slabbed coin would any expert lincoln cent collectors on here who know tha market
Michael, I think the knowledge that the coin is an impaired proof knocks it out of any realistic pricing range. Frankly, there are many of us proof collectors (I, Washingtons) who would not touch an impaired proof. Sorry, but I would not "risk" owning such a coin. cheers, alan mendelson
Of course the value of this piece is the value of the coin plus the value of the holder (as you mentioned on the U.S. COin Forum). In this case, the holder has the main value, and that value is the grade guarantee. However, that is legitimate value. If you want the #1 set, you can buy this coin for 45K or whatever. Then when you want to dispose of it you can collect under the PCGS regrade program, assuming that it is not in fact a 70. So, in referring to this piece as the key proof, I am looking at the total value (coin + plastic).
Comments
coins as time will allow.
We'll use our hands and hearts and if we must we'll use our heads.
michael
Coin Junkie
cameoproofcoins.com
i see the coin is now at 7700.00
michael
There's nothing like watching the slow recovery of your investment and wondering when the music is going to stop.
michael
Don't you mean holder?
<< <i>i see the coin is currently at 10,700
Don't you mean holder?
Don't you mean EGO
09/07/2006
Greg
The insert is worth $.50 as well. That is the credit amount PCGS gives you for turning an insert in.
michael
From a substantial proof mintage in excess of three million pieces, this specimen is the first and only example to achieve the highest possible grade assessment. Thick mint frost covers the devices and provides a strong contrast against the depth of mirrored reflectivity in the fields, and, of course, there are no handling marks or other flaws of any significance to be found. Deep cherry-red color characterizes this splendid coin--the finest certified by either of the major services
Now, in light of previous threads where many asserted that Heritage should have no return priviledge in the Signature Sales, I have to ask: Has the coin been recently dipped to remove the flaws so easily seen in the previously published pictures? If not, is this a fair auction description of the coin by Heritage?
I'd have to strongly assert that absent the dip it is not. Heritage is a professional numismatics firm of great repute. Don't they have a duty, as an expert, to point out any drawbacks to a coin they are auctioning - or at the very least provide a fair and balanced assessment of the coin? Is it really fair that the potential exists for an unknowledgable investor to purchase this coin based on Heritage's glowing description? And then not be able to return the coin?
Wondercoin
'bargains' like that are out there, Mitch - it's just that most of them reside in ACG holders.....
Let's just leave it at this: If I got a coin looking like that coin looked with that glowing description and someone tried to charge me 5% to take it back.............
<< <i>the coin is beginning to look like a "bargain" - heck a PR69DCAM 1959 Lincoln is already up to close to $17,000 with three weeks to go!!!!
Wondercoin
Spoken like a true lawyer. The 1959 has "NOTHING" to do with the 1963, but wonder slug will have you believe it does. God I hate some dealers, and most lawyers more.
michael
DAH!
Wondercoin
I think Wondercoin was trying to make the point that top pop Lincoln memorial proofs are starting to get very expensive. While a 59 is harder to make grade for grade than a 63, the fact is that a 63 in 70DCAM is harder to find than a 59 in 69DCAM. So, I believe it is a relevent comment, especially for a type collector looking for the best.
Greg
To all:
It seems that the real market doesn't care about our pontificating. This coin has been very well known since it's last auction. Any flaws or lack thereof are all very well known. Stop saying that those who are bidding in the 20K range don't know what they are doing. For those who said this coin would go for 5K to 10K, you were simply way off. Already, my 15K bid has been blown away. It's actually offensive that bidders like me are being told we are idiots. An early 70DCAM memorial is a major, major coin. If it does have flaws and PCGS downgrades it to 69, then I am sure they will honor their guarantee, especially now the the market price is clearer. I still am guessing a final price in the 25K range, but perhaps Michael will be closer.
Greg
Greg: You are kidding, right?
Yes, an early 70 DCAM is a major coin - so what's that got to do with this monstrocity?
Now I understand why you started the other post. No offense intended, but are you saying that you just had to have that insert? It doesn't matter to you that a number of knowledgable numismatists state that the coin is no better than a 66 and thus worth $50? It doesn't matter to you that 69's are readily available for $200 or so and are of higher quality? Please, do enlighten us.
Are you truly saying that the grade on the insert caused you to bid $15,000????
Edited to add: My mistake, you didn't start the other post. But I am curious as to your thinking on this matter.....monsterman is preaching to buy the monsters - not the monstrocities!
TDN: I did grade the coin higher than the PR66 you referred to, as did a number of other dealers I spoke with. But, putting that aside, there is another interesting possible twist on this coin. Many of the "problems" with this coin might well be vastly improved with a professional (and successful) conservation. You alluded to that possibility yourself I believe. What if the surfaces were to "come out" virtually flawless again with a professional conservation, such that the coin might actually be accepted as a "squeeker" PR70DCAM? That would surely be an interesting twist on this whole thing, would it not
Wondercoin
When you figure out how to get rid of a carbon spot, I've got a trade dollar I'd like you to work on......
I simply said that at this point in time I would be happy to own the coin at 15K. I said that before the bidding even started. I also said I thought the coin would go higher, probably to 25K. I also said I thought I might be wrong and that it could go as high as Michael's guess (wasn't it 45K?). I also stated that I think an early memorial in 70DCAM is worth the price and more, as it would be a very desirable type coin as well as a centerpiece coin for Lincoln proof collectors.
Now concerning the grade. I am the foremost advocate of not paying 70DCAM money for proofs with flaws. I think they are not worth the price, as I ultimately believe that the coin holds the value. For a real 70DCAM, it is worth the money. Though a much lower priced 69 may only have a small flaw, it is not perfect, and I believe people will always pay for perfection.
Is the coin a 70DCAM? I am well aware that this is a controversial question. I know several have stated that the coin has flaws. However, in the image it looks fine, and Heritage seems to describe as perfect. The spots on last auction's image are no longer there. Perhaps the last image was flawed or maybe the coin has been dipped (in my view, light dipping does not harm a proof, as unlike a mint state coin, it does not have luster in the true sense of the word). Grading is subjective, perhaps the "experts" are wrong. Heritage is as much of an expert as anyone, and so is PCGS who graded it. I am very confident that PCGS would make it good if I or anyone who bought it found flaws and sent it for regrade. Finally, why is the last buyer selling it in auction if it has flaws. Why not just have it regraded to a lower grade and recover the purchase price that way. Putting a flawed coin in auction risks a low realized price against what could be recovered from PCGS if the grade was wrong.
Greg
it definitely had a couple large spots and haze on it that I don't see anymore.
However, in the image it looks fine, and Heritage seems to describe as perfect.
Yes, they do don't they.....
I am very confident that PCGS would make it good if I or anyone who bought it found flaws and sent it for regrade.
So am I. But I strongly suspect you wouldn't like the market value they use...
Finally, why is the last buyer selling it in auction if it has flaws. Why not just have it regraded to a lower grade and recover the purchase price that way. Putting a flawed coin in auction risks a low realized price against what could be recovered from PCGS if the grade was wrong.
Because HRH has repeatedly stated that PCGS won't be held up for irrational auction exhuberance [sic]. The seller will realize the maximum amount by selling the insert at auction, despite the coin's apparent flaws.
Note: if it's been dipped and regraded 70DCAM, then fine. I guess PCGS is on the hook for the new value if it turns again.
Nick - Most of the problems I recall seeing on the coin when I viewed it the first time were not in the natture of carbon spots as I recall. I look forward to viewing it again next month. I think nearly everyone agrees here that a truly "PERFECT" PR70DCAM early Memorial cent, such as a 1963, is a "big" coin.
Wondercoin
Hope it's stable....
A truly perfect Proof 70 1963 Lincoln cent does not exist.None were minted but one was graded by PCGS.As I repeatedly said it is the insert that I am bidding on in this auction.
Mitch - What do you smoke to say this coin or any other Proof Memorial can be Professionally conserved to grade Proof 70 ?
A 1963 graded Proof 70 is not a big coin.It is a big insert
stewart
Wondercoin
P.S. From the bidding history thus far, I honestly hope it looks better this time
I believe that PCGS would assign a very high market value to this coin if it downgraded. While they should not cover irrational auction activity, they need to cover true value. With two auctions under its belt, the coin has demonstrated a 20K+ market value already, and maybe much higher depending on how this auction goes. I do not believe that when one considers true market activity in similar coins, that PCGS would argue a lower value. If one looks at the DHRC website, one frequently sees very high prices for pop 1 modern proofs.
Greg
If one looks at the DHRC website, one frequently sees very high prices for pop 1 modern proofs.
Typetone,
I think you should edit that to "If one looks at the DHRC website, one frequently sees very high prices.
True, but it does go to proving a market value.
The coin is now $23K bid and climbing.
Greg
previously sold? Is it the same serial numbered holder as the prior coin?
I don't know the answer to those questions, so this is purely speculation, but what if
the owner of that pop 1 coin, also owned a 69DCAM that looked even nicer. They could
send both coins in for grade review and the old 70 becomes a 69, the old 69 becomes
a 70.
Under that scenario, the owner of the coin is left unhurt as the new 70DCAM is still a pop
1 coin and PCGS digs it's way out of the embarassingly imperfect 70 coin.
Possible?
Ken
Russ, NCNE
<< <i> This coin is more about registry points then anything else no matter what spin anyone tries to put on it. >>
I'm not convinced. Most of he registry people read these boards and would tend to
avoid this coin because of the negatives and slamming. Perhaps it's outsiders who are
attempting finest known sets. It's obvious that not all sets are registered and that there
have been collectors seeking the finest specimens since we lived in caves. Today with
third party grading and the internet it makes this kind of collecting easier than ever. Per-
haps the insert is of no value whatsoever to some of the bidders and they may even plan
to bust it out.
michael
<< <i>This coin is more about registry points then anything else no matter what spin anyone tries to put on it. >>
It defies logic why anyone would buy this coin in it's current state. When grading coins I thought 70 was perfect. Having seen images and heard talk from those that have seen the coin, leaves me totally dumbfounded how anyone could think this coin is a PR70, unless you're with the camp that believes it changed in the holder. That's a possibility.
I'm enjoying reading how one man's PR68DCAM is another man's PR70DCAM. I appreciate the opinions, insight, and thoughts.
There is "one carbon spot." And when I told him that there were people who said this was a flawed coin, he said "I can argue that they're right." The carbon spot is "in the field in front of the eyes." There is a "fly speck above Liberty but the coin has incredible frost. Spots are there on the coin."
When I asked why this was not in the auction description, there was "no comment." However, I was told "it's not our job to argue the grade on the holder."
cheers, alan mendelson
www.AlanBestBuys.com
www.VegasBestBuys.com
<< <i>But if they dont start being more upfront with their decriptions it will only hurt them in the end. >>
Perhaps.
I haven't read Heritage's disclaimer but if it's like other auctions, you bid on a coin based on "your" opinion, not theirs, which is what they're giving, an opinion. Condsider too how many coins would not be sold by Heritage because they were "honest" in their discription. I'm not saying they're trying to be deceptive. Maybe they're just not giving you all the information and letting you decide if a coin is worthy of a bid.
IMO anyway.
Edited to add: I think your statement would certainly be true for online bidders who haven't had a chance to see the (a) coin and don't have a representative to look at it for them.
does this mean??? this slabbed coin has rearched close to but still under its ????reserve??? does the coin have a reserve????? if the coin does have a reserve is this a true auction????????
my defination of an auction is something that is sold to the highest bidder with no reserve????????
also for this slabbed coin would any expert lincoln cent collectors on here who know tha market
please let me know their opinions on
what this slabbed coins value is??
what this slabbed coins worth is??
michael
www.AlanBestBuys.com
www.VegasBestBuys.com
Russ, NCNE
Greg
Hmmm - I'm tempted to ask if you meant to say 'insert'.............. but I won't.
But....how can a grade rarity with dozens of underpops that are technically finer be considered a key?
Greg