What's in a name? Doug Winter's take on the importance of pedigrees
Longacre
Posts: 16,717 ✭✭✭
Here is the most recent Doug Winter blog. I have the following comments:
(1) Am I reading this correctly-- are there three types of Bass pedigree slabs: a) Harry W. Bass Collection (PCGS), b) Bass Collection (PCGS), and c) Bass Collection (NGC)? This is interesting because I always thought that there was only one Bass pedigree type of coin.
(2) Are the grading services doing collectors a disservice by reslabbing a coin that has been broken out of its holder with the same pedigree? Maybe I am reading this wrong, but how are the grading services supposed to know if a raw coin submitted for grading, has really been cracked out of an old Bass holder? What is the process that they go through?
(3) What is the Pinnacle Collection?
************************************
August 22, 2006
Now, more than ever, people are beginning to realize the importance of a good pedigree when it comes to collecting coins. And the reason why people are paying big premiums for good pedigrees is surprising. Read on and I’ll give you my take on why well-pedigreed coins are suddenly selling for big bucks.
As I have pointed out time after time, most of the coins that I see these days are not very nice. They have generally been scrubbed or conserved and very few are original. Which is exactly why people love coins from the great old collections like Bass, Eliasberg or Norweb.
If you know where a coin has been for the last ten or thirty or even fifty+ years (as is the case with most of the coins from the three aforementioned collections) you can state, at least some of the time, that the coin is original and that it has not been doctored. Thus, the Bass or Norweb or Eliasberg pedigree acts as a sort of semi-official “blessing” that the coin is original.
Now, it is obviously not the case that every coin with a Bass, Norweb or Eliasberg pedigree is automatically “good.” I have seen a number of coins with Bass pedigrees that clearly have had their appearance changed since they were originally sold.
If you are offered a coin from one of these sales, one of the most obvious things you should do is look at the original catalog and compare the coin to the photographic image. This may be a problem as far as the Eliasberg gold coins go since the images in this sale (which was held in 1982) are poor-quality halftones that show little detail. But the quality of the images in the Norweb and Bass catalogs are generally good enough to use for comparative purposes.
There is one “dirty little secret” about Bass pedigreed coins that many collectors do not know. When the coins were originally graded and slabbed by PCGS, they were designated as being from the Harry W. Bass Collection. If a Bass coin was broken out of the holder and regraded it would lose this designation at PCGS. That’s why some Bass coins are designated simply as being from the “Bass Collection.” These second-generation Bass coins are generally not viewed with the same enthusiasm as the coins with the original designation. The same holds true for Bass coins in NGC holders that were upgraded from the original Bass sales.
Certain pedigrees may be well known to specialists within certain collecting categories but have little significance outside of these boundaries. As an example, if you collect New Orleans gold coins you are familiar with the Pinnacle collection and would pay a premium for this pedigree. But if you collect 20th century gold, a pedigree that has greater significance to you might be the Duckor or Morse collections. One of the reasons that collectors value the Bass, Norweb and Eliasberg pedigrees so highly is that these are three of the few collections sold during the modern era that had impressive runs of coins across the board.
In the art world, the issue of pedigree has been very significant for years. Smart new collectors realize that if a painting had been in the collection of a prominent collector, it is generally a “safer” purchase that if it has been bouncing around between dealers or auctions. The same is true with coins. If , for example, a 1908-S double eagle with a Duckor pedigree is available for sale, I would generally feel that this is going to be a nicer coin than one with no prior pedigree.
Doug Winter
8/22/06
(1) Am I reading this correctly-- are there three types of Bass pedigree slabs: a) Harry W. Bass Collection (PCGS), b) Bass Collection (PCGS), and c) Bass Collection (NGC)? This is interesting because I always thought that there was only one Bass pedigree type of coin.
(2) Are the grading services doing collectors a disservice by reslabbing a coin that has been broken out of its holder with the same pedigree? Maybe I am reading this wrong, but how are the grading services supposed to know if a raw coin submitted for grading, has really been cracked out of an old Bass holder? What is the process that they go through?
(3) What is the Pinnacle Collection?
************************************
August 22, 2006
Now, more than ever, people are beginning to realize the importance of a good pedigree when it comes to collecting coins. And the reason why people are paying big premiums for good pedigrees is surprising. Read on and I’ll give you my take on why well-pedigreed coins are suddenly selling for big bucks.
As I have pointed out time after time, most of the coins that I see these days are not very nice. They have generally been scrubbed or conserved and very few are original. Which is exactly why people love coins from the great old collections like Bass, Eliasberg or Norweb.
If you know where a coin has been for the last ten or thirty or even fifty+ years (as is the case with most of the coins from the three aforementioned collections) you can state, at least some of the time, that the coin is original and that it has not been doctored. Thus, the Bass or Norweb or Eliasberg pedigree acts as a sort of semi-official “blessing” that the coin is original.
Now, it is obviously not the case that every coin with a Bass, Norweb or Eliasberg pedigree is automatically “good.” I have seen a number of coins with Bass pedigrees that clearly have had their appearance changed since they were originally sold.
If you are offered a coin from one of these sales, one of the most obvious things you should do is look at the original catalog and compare the coin to the photographic image. This may be a problem as far as the Eliasberg gold coins go since the images in this sale (which was held in 1982) are poor-quality halftones that show little detail. But the quality of the images in the Norweb and Bass catalogs are generally good enough to use for comparative purposes.
There is one “dirty little secret” about Bass pedigreed coins that many collectors do not know. When the coins were originally graded and slabbed by PCGS, they were designated as being from the Harry W. Bass Collection. If a Bass coin was broken out of the holder and regraded it would lose this designation at PCGS. That’s why some Bass coins are designated simply as being from the “Bass Collection.” These second-generation Bass coins are generally not viewed with the same enthusiasm as the coins with the original designation. The same holds true for Bass coins in NGC holders that were upgraded from the original Bass sales.
Certain pedigrees may be well known to specialists within certain collecting categories but have little significance outside of these boundaries. As an example, if you collect New Orleans gold coins you are familiar with the Pinnacle collection and would pay a premium for this pedigree. But if you collect 20th century gold, a pedigree that has greater significance to you might be the Duckor or Morse collections. One of the reasons that collectors value the Bass, Norweb and Eliasberg pedigrees so highly is that these are three of the few collections sold during the modern era that had impressive runs of coins across the board.
In the art world, the issue of pedigree has been very significant for years. Smart new collectors realize that if a painting had been in the collection of a prominent collector, it is generally a “safer” purchase that if it has been bouncing around between dealers or auctions. The same is true with coins. If , for example, a 1908-S double eagle with a Duckor pedigree is available for sale, I would generally feel that this is going to be a nicer coin than one with no prior pedigree.
Doug Winter
8/22/06
Always took candy from strangers
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)
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)
0
Comments
Edited to add: Coins are not art. The pedigree in the art world has taken on additional meaning since the end of WWII due to the actions of the Nazis.
We have had this discussion before, and I disagree. Many numismatists are interested in the heritage and history of coin collecting, and the pedigree is part of this coin's past. Not everyone appreciates pedigrees, just like not everyone appreciates Morgans or Gold Buffalos or clad quarters or...
(1) Am I reading this correctly-- are there three types of Bass pedigree slabs: a) Harry W. Bass Collection (PCGS), b) Bass Collection (PCGS), and c) Bass Collection (NGC)? This is interesting because I always thought that there was only one Bass pedigree type of coin.
The original Bass slabs had something like "HW Bass Collection" on them, while the reslabbed ones, and those at NGC, simply have "Bass" printed on the label.
<< <i>Pedigrees are marketing hype. The coin is what it is. If a collector can't judge originality themselves they shouldn't be buying. >>
I respectfully but vehemently (respectehemently) disagree.
<< <i>(respectehemently) >>
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)
.1850 $20 gold piece attributed to Dr. C.W. Green
nullPhoto of 1850 $20 "Proof" attributed to Green
The vanity pedigrees that the TPGs put on holders are nothing but marketing tools that stroke the egos of high volume TPG customers. I could care less if a coin was once in the registry set of Mister No Name who collected a bunch of so-called condition rarity coins from a series that is basically dirt common.
I can remember seeing a collector name on a bunch of Mercury dimes in MS-65 from the 1940s several years ago. Who cares, except Mister No Name? All you need is some money and you can buy this stuff by the roll if you want it. There is no distinction in owning it, except that you get your name on a holder. It's sort of like a dog lifting his leg on a tree.
There is an interesting dichotomy between the types of individuals who put their names on slabs (ie. Morse) and those who prefer their anonymity (ie. Legend), but I am not ready to make any generalizations at this time.
It seems obvious to me that provenance is important and adds value in any area of collectibles, yet whenever this topic comes up someone like 291fifth craps all over it. Which is not to suggest that there isn't a reasonable opposing view to be articulated here - there is, and it goes something like this:
Provenance is important and it does add value in other areas of collecitbles or antiquities, but typically it refers to a chain of ownership back to the person(s) who owned or actually used the artifact indisputibly linking it to a specific historical context or some important event.
In the context of numismatics, one could argue that a coin which can be proven to have once been in the possession of Benjamin Franklin, for example, and which he used to purchase a kite, some string and a key would be significant and would add value to the coin, while a coin which was merely in some famous collector's Dansco doesn't mean squat.
<< <i>Which is not to suggest that there isn't a reasonable opposing view to be articulated here - there is, and it goes something like this:
Provenance is important and it does add value in other areas of collecitbles or antiquities, but typically it refers to a chain of ownership back to the person(s) who owned or actually used the artifact indisputibly linking it to a specific historical context or some important event. >>
I would agree, but in terms of numismatics, I would also consider the building of an *extremely* prominent and noteworthy collection as important "numismatic history." I'm not talking about any schlock, but about collections like Bass, Norweb and Eliasberg as mentioned before.
I think the "cool" factor in owning a coin that was once part of a truly great collection is often worth a little bit of a premium. Not generally a lot, mind you, but if two coins were similar and one had a cool provenance, I'd probably pay another 10% for it in most cases, and maybe more depending on the cost of the coin.
Looking for Denmark 1874 20-Kroner. Please offer.
I give away money. I collect money.
I don’t love money . I do love the Lord God.
It's like designer name clothing. People [esp. my wife] throw crazy money for a designer handbag when a no name, made just as well handbag sells for a fraction. How does this happen? Marketing, conditioning buyers, hype.
If you have a "PittEliasTromp" PR69 First Strike 1921 Saint, do you think the buyer will care or pay more for the coin if the pedigree means nothing to him/her?
Buy coins not meaningless pedigrees.
I can cite example of many coins which have been offered in recent years, and which are in nice TPG holders, and which sold for good money in auctions, but which have been expertly and materially altered, enhanced or conserved through the years.
I would say you should ignore your coins' past at your peril.
<< <i>Those who say that the past ownership of their coins doesn't matter may feel differently when and if they discover that some of their MS coins were last sold as AUs in a previous appearance. Or have had expert repairs. Or have otherwise been altered in recent years. Of course all of this doesn't matter as long as you find someone else who doesn't care about provenance to buy them from you.
I can cite example of many coins which have been offered in recent years, and which are in nice TPG holders, and which sold for good money in auctions, but which have been expertly and materially altered, enhanced or conserved through the years.
I would say you should ignore your coins' past at your peril. >>
CCU-- I understand what you're saying, but for 99% of collectors, do you think that pedigrees are an issue or even relevant?
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)
<< <i>CCU-- I understand what you're saying, but for 99% of collectors, do you think that pedigrees are an issue or even relevant? >>
But by the same token, do you think Doug Winter's commentary is aimed more at that 99% or the other 1%?
<< <i>CCU-- I understand what you're saying, but for 99% of collectors, do you think that pedigrees are an issue or even relevant? >>
I guess if you are collecting relatively inexpensive items or modern coins, then it is not relevant. In such cases tracking provenance would be nearly impossible anyway.
It is relevant, IMO, for any coin over a couple of thousand dollars, including all such colonial or early US coins and every signficantly rare and expensive item of any era. Including all of the coins in your own collection.
<< <i>
<< <i>CCU-- I understand what you're saying, but for 99% of collectors, do you think that pedigrees are an issue or even relevant? >>
But by the same token, do you think Doug Winter's commentary is aimed more at that 99% or the other 1%? >>
Good point. DW probaby tracks my movements on his site and chuckes about the fact that that bozo Longacre cannot afford the coins that he is always looking at in the inventory section.
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)
<< <i>
<< <i>CCU-- I understand what you're saying, but for 99% of collectors, do you think that pedigrees are an issue or even relevant? >>
I guess if you are collecting relatively inexpensive items or modern coins, then it is not relevant. In such cases tracking provenance would be nearly impossible anyway.
It is relevant, IMO, for any coin over a couple of thousand dollars, including all such colonial or early US coins and every signficantly rare and expensive item of any era. Including all of the coins in your own collection. >>
Provenance is relevant for extremely common items as well. IIRC, Eliasberg had a roll of 1883 no cents nickels and they routinely trade for multiples of a non pedigreed example.
<< <i>
<< <i>CCU-- I understand what you're saying, but for 99% of collectors, do you think that pedigrees are an issue or even relevant? >>
I guess if you are collecting relatively inexpensive items or modern coins, then it is not relevant. In such cases tracking provenance would be nearly impossible anyway.
It is relevant, IMO, for any coin over a couple of thousand dollars, including all such colonial or early US coins and every signficantly rare and expensive item of any era. Including all of the coins in your own collection. >>
Interesting point. For a goof, let me see if I can track on of my rarer coins and see what I can come up with. It has a distinctive cud on the reverse, so that might make it easier!
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)
<< <i>Provenance is relevant for extremely common items as well. IIRC, Eliasberg had a roll of 1883 no cents nickels and they routinely trade for multiples of a non pedigreed example. >>
Just because someone is willing to pay a premium for it - and I acknowledge that some do - I wouldn't advise anyone to pay more for, or necessarily care about, a coin pedigreed to Eliasberg which was 1) unplated in the catalog, 2) part of a roll or rolls, and 3) impossible to prove was actually his.
Same here, but I imagine my success rate is significantly lowerthan yours. in the past two years, I have rediscovered the Eliasberg pedigree for two coins (sadly, not my coins) and the Norweb connection for a coin I previously owned. I am currently reviewing the Bass catalogs to see if any of my coins were once part of that collection. If you collect rare date gold coins, there is a pretty good chance one or more of your coins are ex-Bass.
Russ, NCNE
To a limited extend, this has been done with the $20 extremely high relief pieces since we now know the first owners of more than 2/3 of the extant pieces. (The problem here is that we don’t know who the second owners were, so the chain of ownership is broken.)
Connections to the Godard collection and Mitchelson collections could help resolve the so-called "Zerbe proof" hype, also.
<< <i>Provenance is relevant for extremely common items as well. IIRC, Eliasberg had a roll of 1883 no cents nickels and they routinely trade for multiples of a non pedigreed example. >>
I agree with CCU as to the value of pedigrees for rare coins. But for 1883 No Cents nickels, pedigrees add no value for me (but they might for others).
An authorized PCGS dealer, and a contributor to the Red Book.
I've seen plenty of other pedigreed coins that tried to bite me when I tried to view them. I mean, for the grade, they made Janet Reno look attractive. One in particular, was baked, and a few others looked like they were left in an unflushed toilet for too long.
"Seu cabra da peste,
"Sou Mangueira......."
<< <i>If it's a world class pedigree, 999 out of 1,000 collectors can't afford it, so the issue is a moot point for me.
I've seen plenty of other pedigreed coins that tried to bite me when I tried to view them. I mean, for the grade, they made Janet Reno look attractive. One in particular, was baked, and a few others looked like they were left in an unflushed toilet for too long. >>
Sure, not all are beauts. But the opportunity to find and buy affordable, nice coins pedigreed to famous collection but not labelled as such exists in nearly every auction - and they routinely sell for no premium at all.
And Laura is 100% correct. Any ex-athlete or someone with money who jumps in and buys five figure coins for a couple years can get his own pedigree, which is a big ego stroke but meaningless to lots of us.
NSDR - Life Member
SSDC - Life Member
ANA - Pay As I Go Member
<< <i>TDN now has The Jethro Bodine Collection. >>
Anyone have a coin traced to the sale of the Buddy Ebsen (Uncle Jed) collection? He's always the celebrity coin collector that comes to mind for me.
NSDR - Life Member
SSDC - Life Member
ANA - Pay As I Go Member
As a matter of fact, I do: an 1857 half dime in AU-58.
<< <i>Anyone have a coin traced to the sale of the Buddy Ebsen (Uncle Jed) collection? He's always the celebrity coin collector that comes to mind for me.
As a matter of fact, I do: an 1857 half dime in AU-58. >>
Very neat. I wonder if it is true that the half dimes or dimes in that one Beverly Hillbillies episode were his. I would think that would be the case. Funny thing is that I don't recall the episode myself but it was in a short discussion in a recent enough forum thread.
NSDR - Life Member
SSDC - Life Member
ANA - Pay As I Go Member
<< <i>
<< <i>Anyone have a coin traced to the sale of the Buddy Ebsen (Uncle Jed) collection? He's always the celebrity coin collector that comes to mind for me.
As a matter of fact, I do: an 1857 half dime in AU-58. >>
Very neat. I wonder if it is true that the half dimes or dimes in that one Beverly Hillbillies episode were his. I would think that would be the case. Funny thing is that I don't recall the episode myself but it was in a short discussion in a recent enough forum thread. >>
I don't remember that episode, but I'm sure it was a hoot.
<< <i>
<< <i>TDN now has The Jethro Bodine Collection. >>
Anyone have a coin traced to the sale of the Buddy Ebsen (Uncle Jed) collection? He's always the celebrity coin collector that comes to mind for me. >>
Yes:
Buddy Ebsen is a good pedigree. Coins from that sale as well as Heifetz and others in the 1988-1989 period were quite memorable.
roadrunner
Of course it is always good to have a rare coin with a trail-Makes it much more saleable. I would pay a lot more for a coin if it was from the Mickley collection, for instance, for i am an ancestor. However other than the 1804 silver dollar i don't know if any of them are traceable thesedays. It also accounts for genuineness as in the case of the 1913 V-nickels--everyone knows where they all are at all times-NO fakes no matter how real they look will ever be mistaken for a pedigree coin.
Is it hype? It is hype only if you pay too much for the coin relative to the quality of the coin!!!
See below for just a single example:
1853 Liberty Seated Dime, with Arrows
MS65 [PCGS]
An original gem example of this popular type coin, toned in a pretty combination of steel blue, golden-brown, and light purple.
This coin traces its pedigree to Stack's 1960 sale of the Milton A. Holmes collection, where it was described succinctly as 'Uncirculated, steel blue. A Gem!'.
The dealer (Coin Rarities Online said the following):
<< <i>We like coins with history and take particular note of an original example such as this that was considered exceptional 46 years ago and was described as a gem in an era when that phrase was sparingly used.
A lovely little coin.
Ex-Stack's October, 1960 sale of the Milton A Homes collection, as noted, lot #2749, with the original lot ticket accompanying this piece. >>
I received this fabulous little coin and was instantly won over!! I could have afforded a higher graded 1853 with arrows dime but then why?????????????
in PCGS MS-67!!!
The copper spot in the obverse field didn't bother me as it apparently did others. This coin had layers of
luster dripping off it (unlike so many of the other Morse $20's.) As my eyes scanned the entire case of the
Morse $20 Saints at HRCA table in St. Louis (2005 CSNS), they would always come back to the 27-S.
My point? When someone mentions the Morse PEDIGREE $20 Saints my mind will be drawn back to that
27-S. This is the "power" of pedigree when discussion of memorable specimens within a particular series.
<< <i>I like the IPOTAD™ pedigree.
Russ, NCNE >>
OK, Russ, you got me on this one. What does IPOTAD mean?
An authorized PCGS dealer, and a contributor to the Red Book.
<< <i> I would pay a lot more for a coin if it was from the Mickley collection, for instance, for i am an ancestor. >>
I hope you are a descendent of Mickley, not an ancestor. If you were an ancestor, you'd be real real old!
An authorized PCGS dealer, and a contributor to the Red Book.
<< <i>For what its worth (fwiw), my favorite coin among the Philip Morse $20 St. Gaudens set was the 1927-S
in PCGS MS-67!!!
The copper spot in the obverse field didn't bother me as it apparently did others. This coin had layers of
luster dripping off it (unlike so many of the other Morse $20's.) As my eyes scanned the entire case of the
Morse $20 Saints at HRCA table in St. Louis (2005 CSNS), they would always come back to the 27-S.
My point? When someone mentions the Morse PEDIGREE $20 Saints my mind will be drawn back to that
27-S. This is the "power" of pedigree when discussion of memorable specimens within a particular series. >>
How ironic that the coin didn't sell. Heritage owns it, and it's still for sale. I loved that coin...second to maybe 5 others...like the 25-S MS67 that Miss Sperbs bought and the 1913-S POP1 MS66 that Tood bought. (also the 1921 MS66, 1924-S MS65, 1926-D MS66 were phenomenal coins.)
I like copper on Saints, however I think that being the only MS67 and having a copper "moon" right above the date was not what a potential buyer wanted to see on the Finest Known. If it was in my league, I'd own it in a heartbeat. It's a spectacular coin!
That said...the MORSE pedigree is not going to play all that well over time, and I own 4 of them (I have yet to put the name on the holders, but for one coin). Morse was not a collector in the classic sense of the hobby. He did not know coins, he was led by the wallet by a few unscupulous dealers, and his set was considered to be "maxxed out" grade-wise. There were many spectacular coins, no doubt, but there were many coins that a shrewd collector with a good eye would not have owned. That's one example of a "gang" of coins that do not equate to what Pedigree is supposed to represent.
I had a guy come up to my table with some pedigree coins - I offered the same I would for any other. He said "but these are pedigree and worth 20% more." I told him "maybe you should go find someone who will pay that. Show me in your grey sheet where CDN bid is more for a pedigree coin." He walked off in a huff. Don't pay more money for a coin because of pedigree, buy the coin not the hype. If there is really a basis for pedigree coins being worth more then why aren't they in the grey-sheet?
<< <i>I had a guy come up to my table with some pedigree coins - I offered the same I would for any other. He said "but these are pedigree and worth 20% more." I told him "maybe you should go find someone who will pay that. Show me in your grey sheet where CDN bid is more for a pedigree coin." He walked off in a huff. Don't pay more money for a coin because of pedigree, buy the coin not the hype. If there is really a basis for pedigree coins being worth more then why aren't they in the grey-sheet? >>
The pedigree coins might just have been worth 20% more if they were (1) high end for the assigned grade, (2) accurately graded in a very old slab especially red copper coins, (3) coins that might normally sell for $100 to $300 plus or minus, so that the additional 20% permium might only be $20 to $60 per coin, (4) absolutely spectacular looking while being accurately graded in its current slab, (5) in an unusual slab such as a PCGS doiley holder, or an NGC black slab, or a PCGS Regency holder, etc.
To blanket statement that pedigree are not worth more because they are not in the grey-sheet is absolute nonsense. Example; MS-68 graded slabbed coins of the early 20th century and 19th century are not listed in the grey-sheet either. That does not mean they are not worth more.