Options
RYK's ranking of the existing populations of Dahlonega half eagles
RYK
Posts: 35,801 ✭✭✭✭✭
In this thread, I promised to reveal my early findings and analysis this week. This is preliminary work for an article planned for the Southern Gold Society newsletter. What I have done is taken data from Akers' 1979 half eagles book (yes, the one I was dissing last week 
), Heritage auction archives, and both PCGS and NGC population reports and used a proprietary technique to rank the population of extant coins in the Dahlonega half eagles series. Below are my rankings, with Doug Winter's rankings from his 2003 reference on the subject in parentheses:
1. 1861-D (1)
2. 1842-D LD (2)
3. 1840-D (8)
4. 1846-D (5)
5. 1855-D (10)
6. (tie) 1846-D/D (10 tie)
6. (tie 1856-D (4)
8. 1841-D (17)
9. 1857-D (7)
10. 1858-D (10 tie)
11. 1848-D (15)
12. 1859-D (8)
13. 1839-D (10 tie)
14. 1850-D (3)
15. 1849-D (10 tie)
16. 1851-D (6)
17. 1860-D (16)
18. 1847-D (19 tie)
19. 1842-D SD (18)
20. 1838-D (21)
21. 1844-D (19 tie)
22. 1843-D (23 tie)
23. 1852-D (22)
24. 1854-D (23 tie)
25. 1845-D (23 tie)
26. 1853-D (26)
Some conclusions:
1. My proprietary ranking index correlates very well with DW at the top end bottom of the rarity range but varies widely in the middle. Sampling error probably plays a significant role in this. The extant estimate population ranges from 65-75 total known for the 1861-D to over 300 for the 1853-D, small numbers when compared to Morgans, Saints, Walkers, etc.
2. I would group the half eagles into five tiers, for pricing purposes:
Tier I: 1861-D and 1842-D LD, the two keys to the series. These coins are priced strong relative to the rest, independent of each other and the other coins in the series, largely based on their small supply and high demand.
Tier II: 1838-D and 1839-D, the two one-year types, which are priced more in line for their status of one-year type coins than for their scarcity relative to the other coins in the series. The 1839-D, in particular, is a pretty scarce coin.
Tier III: The relatively scarce 1840-D, 1841-D, 1846-D, 1846-D/D, 1848-D, 1850-D, 1855-D, 1856-D, 1857-D, 1858-D, 1859-D are tougher coins that warrant a premium compared to the more common ones.
Tier IV: The more available 1849-D, 1851-D, 1860-D, which are still tough, but not nearly as difficult as Tier III.
Tier V: The most available Dahlonega $5's, 1842-D SD, 1843, 1844, 1845, 1847, 1852, 1853, and 1854, are relatively common and good coins for type purposes.
3. Additional conclusions, critiques, observations, etc. will be included in the SGS article.
), Heritage auction archives, and both PCGS and NGC population reports and used a proprietary technique to rank the population of extant coins in the Dahlonega half eagles series. Below are my rankings, with Doug Winter's rankings from his 2003 reference on the subject in parentheses:1. 1861-D (1)
2. 1842-D LD (2)
3. 1840-D (8)
4. 1846-D (5)
5. 1855-D (10)
6. (tie) 1846-D/D (10 tie)
6. (tie 1856-D (4)
8. 1841-D (17)
9. 1857-D (7)
10. 1858-D (10 tie)
11. 1848-D (15)
12. 1859-D (8)
13. 1839-D (10 tie)
14. 1850-D (3)
15. 1849-D (10 tie)
16. 1851-D (6)
17. 1860-D (16)
18. 1847-D (19 tie)
19. 1842-D SD (18)
20. 1838-D (21)
21. 1844-D (19 tie)
22. 1843-D (23 tie)
23. 1852-D (22)
24. 1854-D (23 tie)
25. 1845-D (23 tie)
26. 1853-D (26)
Some conclusions:
1. My proprietary ranking index correlates very well with DW at the top end bottom of the rarity range but varies widely in the middle. Sampling error probably plays a significant role in this. The extant estimate population ranges from 65-75 total known for the 1861-D to over 300 for the 1853-D, small numbers when compared to Morgans, Saints, Walkers, etc.
2. I would group the half eagles into five tiers, for pricing purposes:
Tier I: 1861-D and 1842-D LD, the two keys to the series. These coins are priced strong relative to the rest, independent of each other and the other coins in the series, largely based on their small supply and high demand.
Tier II: 1838-D and 1839-D, the two one-year types, which are priced more in line for their status of one-year type coins than for their scarcity relative to the other coins in the series. The 1839-D, in particular, is a pretty scarce coin.
Tier III: The relatively scarce 1840-D, 1841-D, 1846-D, 1846-D/D, 1848-D, 1850-D, 1855-D, 1856-D, 1857-D, 1858-D, 1859-D are tougher coins that warrant a premium compared to the more common ones.
Tier IV: The more available 1849-D, 1851-D, 1860-D, which are still tough, but not nearly as difficult as Tier III.
Tier V: The most available Dahlonega $5's, 1842-D SD, 1843, 1844, 1845, 1847, 1852, 1853, and 1854, are relatively common and good coins for type purposes.
3. Additional conclusions, critiques, observations, etc. will be included in the SGS article.
0
Comments
Can't wait for you to tell DW he got it wrong? Maybe you could tell him in Atlanta. I'd like to watch.
studied D half eagles as much as you have.
but it appears it is easy to determine the high end rarities
and it is easy to determine the low end easier to come by years.
so the few coins in the middle are known as tough and hard
to determine which is better.
only 26 coins.. it makes me think there is not much left
to figure out... so to argue if one should go up in the middle grouping
a rank, is not really a big deal.
so i think, you could have guessed this list in an hour and
been pretty darn close based on previous information!
It's pretty complicated. NOT!
Can't wait for you to tell DW he got it wrong? Maybe you could tell him in Atlanta. I'd like to watch.
It's really not a matter of right or wrong; it's just looking at things from a different perspective. Actually, some of my results are blatantly wrong (ie. 1850-D), and I am struggling to come to grips with it. Frankly, there is only so much you can do to study coins while sitting home in a chair (ie. me). You really have to get out, buy and sell the coins (ie. market maker
Anyway, I will email DW a link to the thread and report any worthwhile commentary.
Nice work.
That is a good point and question. Part of the proprietary
Didn't wanna get me no trade
Never want to be like papa
Working for the boss every night and day
--"Happy", by the Rolling Stones (1972)
The 1861D is the undisputed king it appears. I like how the are
grouped into 3 sections.
1861-D 8.00
1839-D 7.00
1840-D 7.00
1841-D 7.00
1849-D 7.00
1850-D 7.00
1851-D 7.00
1855-D 7.00
1857-D 7.00
1859-D 7.00
1856-D 6.00
1858-D 6.00
1860-D 6.00
1842-D 6.00
1843-D 6.00
1844-D 6.00
1845-D 6.00
1846-D 6.00
1847-D 6.00
1848-D 6.00
1852-D 6.00
1853-D 6.00
I think many will agree that a 1864S is much more desirable
than a 1861D.
But then both people would agree a 1854S is even cooler.
Hence, 1861D gets an 8. Which makes it one of the hardest
to aquire half eagles ever.
edited to add: I am just throwing out another way to look
at the series. Of course the weight has little meaning when
you are buying as a collector. Just a fun way to look at the data
in a simplistic fashion for discussion purposes.
i can imagine you at heritage's website with several pages
open showing how often certain coins appeared.
how much did heritage data bias your opinion?
I know there are some P and S half eagles that have been
at Heritage a handful of times, seven or eight.
While others were plentiful. Did this make you bump up certain
coins more than others?
what other online info did you use if i may ask?
as in, not what you have listed.. or is that what you consulted
and nothing else?
thanks.
"Actually I disagree with a few of your findings and agree with others. How
did you came up with your numbers? You have to take into consideration that
auction appearances and PCGS/NGC populations are seriously affected by
resubmissions. There are certain dates, like the 1851-D, that both services
have trouble grading because of their strike characteristics.
I think you are vastly overrating the 1840-D. I have handled ten of these
in the past two years, ranging from EF45 to MS61 and do not feel this is
the third rarest Dahlonega half eagle. Conversely, I think you are really
underrating the 1850-D. Its a very rare coin in AU55 or better, especially
if properly graded. On the 1856-D, you are not taking into account the
hoard that is overhanging the market nor are you considering the
availability of the 1841-D in higher grades (this date is actually easier
to find in AU58 to MS62 than it is in EF45 to AU55). The other date that I
think you are really underrating is the 1851-D. I have personally found it
to be very hard to locate in AU55 and better and would alert you to the
fact that a few overgraded MS coins have been bouncing around various
Heritage sales since Tommy Maddox was the starting QB for your Steelers.
I like how you placed the coins into various tiers. The 1838-D and the
1839-D sort of break the mold because they have strong EEEES (Easy
Explanation Equals Easy Sales) levels and you were smart to place them
above the less common but less desirable Tier III issues.
Good job. Now I dare you to write your own book on D mint gold ;--} "
I should add that some of the grading of Dahlonega gold is about as accurate as Tommy Maddox's passing this past season.
Thanks for the reply, DW.
<< <i>I like how you placed the coins into various tiers. The 1838-D and the
1839-D sort of break the mold because they have strong EEEES (Easy
Explanation Equals Easy Sales) levels and you were smart to place them
above the less common but less desirable Tier III issues. >>
RYK, Again, great post. Can you explain a bit better this paragraph, specifically what's the "easy explanation" which Doug refers to on these two coins? Thanks in advance...Mike
The EEEES theory of coin collecting/investing has proven to be remarkably successful in the past five years. And what exactly does this acronym mean? It stands for “Easy Explanation Equals Easy Sales.” Yes, I know it sounds like something from a bad marketing seminar but it makes a lot of sense if you analyze its meaning.
In the past five years, we have seen an influx of new collectors into the hobby. Many of these collectors have immediately started purchasing expensive, high end coins. But unlike their counterparts from past generations of numismatists, they had very little background, other than what they read on a few websites. For them, ease of understanding was critical in the decision to buy a specific coin.
And this is exactly why coins like High Reliefs and Stellas and $50 Panama-Pacific Rounds/Octagonals have become so popular in the past five years and risen dramatically in price. In a nutshell, coins like this are easily understood by both new buyers and new sellers. Putting it another way, if a coin can be easily explained by the new breed of Internet coin dealer, it is easy to sell. Because of EBay and the success of Internet coin auctions, many purchases have become impulsive. An impulsive coin purchase is much more likely to involve a coin that requires little analysis than one that takes a page of pontificating to explain.
Coin's for sale/trade.
Tom Pilitowski
US Rare Coin Investments
800-624-1870
1) 56-D after the hoard find falls into the list of 'common'. Note the good ol' boys that found these coins washed the mud off of them with a hose on the tailgate of their truck therefor most of these coins have scratches on one side. Most of the examples I have seen were NGC or PCGS 58's or 61's.
2) The 40-D is still scarce although I would place it around 7 or 8. But, to find a 40-D with the rotated reverse minted on June 10, 1840 is tough.
3) Remember the 50-D is doubly difficult because most want a clearly visible mintmark and many are the weak mintmark variety (ditto for the 51-D). So, I agree both are very underrated.
4) The 48-D (at least with a good obverse strike) is still probably underrated.
Aside...the last 60 piece set (all PCGS) Al Adams put together for a client the final coin found was a 58-D G$5...go figure.
The 1855-D G$1 is very tough to find. However, Carl and I disagree with some experts and we think the ratio of weak date to full date specimens is about 3:2. This based on our personal experience and a review of all our auction catalogues.
Note that RYK's learning curve is at least ten times faster than mine was...
a coin's rarity due to recent events that are FACT. the mention about
the good old boys finding a horde of 56-Ds for example is just
plain good research. knowledge is power.
but a lot of the experienced posters are really using past auction
data and their personal experiences over the years. this is not
very scientific as we all know, but heck, can it really get any better
without the introduction of technology made for that exact purpose
with dedicated collectors and dealers making it all work?
the weak versus strong mint mark comment was very smart.
i can imagine a collector sitting there thinking, no, i won't pay 5000
for that coin if I cannot see the darn mintmark without a loupe.
thus, this collector cancels out 1/3-1/2 of all known examples
for certain dates? making his search very difficult.
what i am finding out though after thinking about this, is that
i am happy knowing a date's general rarity. i do not care, exactly,
how many are left. Is it 25? 35? 75? 125?
I just like knowing, in general, that this half eagle is a much harder
find then this one. Sure, there are ties, and some mistakes, but all
in all, you get the jist of it.
but then a price guide, interpreted correctly can also generate
a list similair to the ones above.
I see where you and Doug Winter disagree about certain dates such as 1840-D, 1855-D, 1841-D, and to a lesser extent 1857-D vs. the 1850-D and 1851-D. In lower grades such as Fine 15 to Very Fine 35, the 1840-D, 1841-D, 1855-D and 1857-D are very hard to find, whereas the 1850-D and 1851-D are easier to find in these lower grades. I agree that properly graded high grade 1850-D and 1851-D coins are harder to find than the other dates. I presume that your method equally takes into consideration the lower grade coins vs. the higher grade coins.
Didn't wanna get me no trade
Never want to be like papa
Working for the boss every night and day
--"Happy", by the Rolling Stones (1972)
The basic model I suggested is a proprietary statistical model, first used by Exxon Production Research Company then later by Shell Oil in a different form-- The model compares how many of "X" come up for sale (oil fields found) in one decade time frame, to how many of "X" come up for sale (newer oil fields found) discovered in the following decade...and so on. Also this question was looked at buy the U.S. National Academy of Sciences in the 1980's and was found the best mathematical way to do things--(so you're not the only one struggling with this problem!!)--The results also use your "tier" type presentation, which is very helpful.
Winters' per. comm. as copied here hits at the issue " (your model is)...overrating the 40-D. I have handled over 10 of these in the past 2 years ranging from EF-45 to MS61"--- Basically he is also saying the same thing, in other words, he's estimating rarity based on appearances within a given time frame. A verbal survey of dealers by date and how many sold/ time frame is another less accurate way to get an answer. If you use these data with all auctions (removing dups)-it will get you there with some reasonable result--that won't mislead newer collectors. Good Luck
The basic model I suggested is a proprietary statistical model, first used by Exxon Production Research Company then later by Shell Oil in a different form-- The model compares how many of "X" come up for sale (oil fields found) in one decade time frame, to how many of "X" come up for sale (newer oil fields found) discovered in the following decade...and so on.
In a sense, the Heritage auction archives does just this, and over a long period of time, I would imagine that the pop reports also do the same. Sure, there are many resubmissions but over time, the submission rate in all grades should be proportional to the number of coins available to submit within the series...or not?
I am going to continue to add data over time and further attempt to refine my model. I will report any meaningful updates.
Robert