Truly nutty and amazing UNC seated half dollar prices at Heritage Long Beach
roadrunner
Posts: 28,313 ✭✭✭✭✭
Man, the same stuff that started at FUN and continued in March is still alive. Some of these gem quarter, half and dollar seated coins are fetching 2X and 3X what was previously thought to be sane.
A group of old holdered NGC and PCGS halves from 1990 and early brought monster squared prices.
1841-O half in NGC MS65 brought $40,250. including the juice, and the 1867 MS65 $27,600. w/ juice. Pretty album toned MS65 old holder '98-O barber Q went for 32,200. The 1869 half PCGS MS65 went for $51,750., the 1841 half in NGC MS64 $14,950., the 1840 quarter MS64 $34,500. The 1891-O 25c in MS65 Specimen/PL went for $161, 000. My old 1866-S 25c MS66 rattler that I sold for $18K in 1988 brought $97,750., 1840 rev 39 sm letters in 65OGH $12,650., 1849 half NGC MS64 which I was told was amazing brought $23,000., 1859-O half in PCGS MS66 brought $66,125.....a new high for a MS66 or even MS67 NGC/PCGS no motto common date half (only the two gem MS68 1859-s halves from Eliasberg have brought more money). The 1841-0 half looked very sweet from the photos. Those early dates are all tough in true gem condition....only the 1840 Philly half can be considered "available" and once of those is probably worth 2X to 3X what any price guide says its worth. Larger denomination gem seated coins of orig fabric and of some rarity as type coins or dates have gone absolutement bonkiers (out of this world).
I had bids of $15K and $12K on the 41-0 and 67 half respectively and obviously was 2X to 3X off on these. I bid them as PQ coins since I had agent bid on them for me. No doubt each coin is close to finest known status. No doubt these were bid as sure shot upgrade 66's as my agent felt either would look fine in a 66 holder. Most of these coins were PQ and off the market for almost 20 yrs. Now it makes me wonder why I am asking stupidly low prices to dealers on the bourse for similar coins that I own (and they are turning them down any ways). I think selling geat type/dated 1794-1916 dated silver coins on the bourse is a huge mistake at this time, esp underrated mint marks. The 1840 quarter that I owned in 1988 (MS63++) which upgraded to 64 back in the mid-1990's is now apparently is up 10X since then. I'm gonna have to refigure everything I own in better date gem seated quarters and halves. It's getting too hard to even follow. Throw out the CDN, Trends, and even PCGS Rare Coin Market report as none of them are even close to the prices above. It seems that any REAL gem rarer date seated quarter or half is now worth $20-30K.....when a year ago that same coin was $8-12K. The real game was not to sell them to those who were willing to wait it out. Since these coins never got their due during the REGISTRY craze, they are making up for lost time.
It's no longer even worth the trouble to enter bids if you need to crank up them up by 2X or 3X to win a lot. I gather there must be some ultra serious collector/speculators who have to have these coins for their sets or holdings. In my mind an 1869 half in any grade was never worth more than $15-25K, even in MS67. Heck, there was a 69-s in MS67 (decent white coin) making the rounds for a few years at $15-25K
and that's much rarer in gem. So today an old holdered 1869 in PCGS MS65 is worth $50,000? In MS68 it might be worth that. I'd be interested in any comments from those who watched the floor bidding as the who, what and why. Joe O'Connor often responds to posts of auction prices realized.
Thanks to Jhdfla who gave me those prices and some comments.
roadrunner
A group of old holdered NGC and PCGS halves from 1990 and early brought monster squared prices.
1841-O half in NGC MS65 brought $40,250. including the juice, and the 1867 MS65 $27,600. w/ juice. Pretty album toned MS65 old holder '98-O barber Q went for 32,200. The 1869 half PCGS MS65 went for $51,750., the 1841 half in NGC MS64 $14,950., the 1840 quarter MS64 $34,500. The 1891-O 25c in MS65 Specimen/PL went for $161, 000. My old 1866-S 25c MS66 rattler that I sold for $18K in 1988 brought $97,750., 1840 rev 39 sm letters in 65OGH $12,650., 1849 half NGC MS64 which I was told was amazing brought $23,000., 1859-O half in PCGS MS66 brought $66,125.....a new high for a MS66 or even MS67 NGC/PCGS no motto common date half (only the two gem MS68 1859-s halves from Eliasberg have brought more money). The 1841-0 half looked very sweet from the photos. Those early dates are all tough in true gem condition....only the 1840 Philly half can be considered "available" and once of those is probably worth 2X to 3X what any price guide says its worth. Larger denomination gem seated coins of orig fabric and of some rarity as type coins or dates have gone absolutement bonkiers (out of this world).
I had bids of $15K and $12K on the 41-0 and 67 half respectively and obviously was 2X to 3X off on these. I bid them as PQ coins since I had agent bid on them for me. No doubt each coin is close to finest known status. No doubt these were bid as sure shot upgrade 66's as my agent felt either would look fine in a 66 holder. Most of these coins were PQ and off the market for almost 20 yrs. Now it makes me wonder why I am asking stupidly low prices to dealers on the bourse for similar coins that I own (and they are turning them down any ways). I think selling geat type/dated 1794-1916 dated silver coins on the bourse is a huge mistake at this time, esp underrated mint marks. The 1840 quarter that I owned in 1988 (MS63++) which upgraded to 64 back in the mid-1990's is now apparently is up 10X since then. I'm gonna have to refigure everything I own in better date gem seated quarters and halves. It's getting too hard to even follow. Throw out the CDN, Trends, and even PCGS Rare Coin Market report as none of them are even close to the prices above. It seems that any REAL gem rarer date seated quarter or half is now worth $20-30K.....when a year ago that same coin was $8-12K. The real game was not to sell them to those who were willing to wait it out. Since these coins never got their due during the REGISTRY craze, they are making up for lost time.
It's no longer even worth the trouble to enter bids if you need to crank up them up by 2X or 3X to win a lot. I gather there must be some ultra serious collector/speculators who have to have these coins for their sets or holdings. In my mind an 1869 half in any grade was never worth more than $15-25K, even in MS67. Heck, there was a 69-s in MS67 (decent white coin) making the rounds for a few years at $15-25K
and that's much rarer in gem. So today an old holdered 1869 in PCGS MS65 is worth $50,000? In MS68 it might be worth that. I'd be interested in any comments from those who watched the floor bidding as the who, what and why. Joe O'Connor often responds to posts of auction prices realized.
Thanks to Jhdfla who gave me those prices and some comments.
roadrunner
0
Comments
The 1871-cc AU-58 brought $40k, a respectable amount but nothing atmospheric. Admitingly though, this coin was not exactly PQ or gorgeous imho.
Just my opinions,
Mark
I'm not surprised that nice circs are just staying even. Fast investor money is now looking for gem, gem, gem of anything neat. An AU 71-cc dollar no matter how perfect or nice will not attract them imo. What will attract them is TDN's gem 1873-cc dollar in MS65 or his 1848 and 1849 seated dollars. Coins like that could be approaching high 6 figures.
roadrunner
An authorized PCGS dealer, and a contributor to the Red Book.
In any case, the seated coins still have a ways to go to catch up to Cape's buffs.
Info from jhdfla's inside source was that the 1869 half was just a solid 65. So dreams of a $50K MS67 or MS68 are wishful. I just can't see paying tht for a coin that was worth $8K a year ago. I have a few MS65's in rarer date than 1869 where I couldn't have gotten $10K a year ago for them. Incredible.
roadrunner
BUT, I am glad to see these coins finally getting some great respect. Wish I could have been there to see the action.
It's called Inflation.
There's just more money around these days.
I remember about 10 years ago if I had $100.00 in my wallet, I felt like a king. Now I'm walking around with a lot more than that and it still doesn't feel the same.
I'm sure these collectors who can afford these items feel the same way, so it's easier for them to spend more and not think that they are spending more (I hope that makes sense?).
Of course, I don't want to belittle the fact that a lot of us are feeling the tough economic times out there.
Obviously, the winners of these coins must not be affected by this.
"“Those who sacrifice liberty for security/safety deserve neither.“(Benjamin Franklin)
"I only golf on days that end in 'Y'" (DE59)
<< <i>So Rich, who is bidding this stuff up? In the past guys like IBM Gene (via Nagle), Napolitano, Legend, Pinncale, Carter, O'Connor, RCNH, Charlie Brown, and others have been the buyers of top seated material. But something tells me they aren't the ones paying $50,000 for an MS65 1869 half. Those guys ruled from 2002-2007 but it appears a new marshall is in town.
In any case, the seated coins still have a ways to go to catch up to Cape's buffs.
roadrunner >>
I am guessing here, but it might be two (or a couple more) collectors going for very high/highest grade sets. The big numbers occur when two or more of them want the same coin.
An authorized PCGS dealer, and a contributor to the Red Book.
<< <i>So Rich, who is bidding this stuff up? In the past guys like IBM Gene (via Nagle), Napolitano, Legend, Pinncale, Carter, O'Connor, RCNH, Charlie Brown, and others have been the buyers of top seated material. But something tells me they aren't the ones paying $50,000 for an MS65 1869 half. Those guys ruled from 2002-2007 but it appears a new marshall is in town.
In any case, the seated coins still have a ways to go to catch up to Cape's buffs.
roadrunner >>
Amazing prices on these halves and seated quarters and a few of the barbers we discussed in PM's... don't count out the usual suspects tho. Many of these coins I understand were lock upgrades and rightfully so as so many have not been anywhere near a bourse floor or auction since they were holdered. The myth of all the upgradable old holder coins being gone was certainly shown to be false with these coins. Gene Edward's 1891-O which I figured at 5 figures sure blew me away at 161K... (it had to be the "other" Gene?) 1859-O seated half in 66 @$66,125... 1849 seated half in 64@$23,000... 1908-O barber quarter in 65@$32,200... 1840 seated quarter in 64 @$34,500. Blew all my bids away...
John
While the halves don't have a huge following, neither did the dollars until TDN jumped into the fray. It only takes a couple of people to alter a market. No different than Stewart and a couple of others in the top pop early Lincolns.
A 1908-0 common date barber quarter MS65 at $32,000 sheer folly imo. It's probably one of the most common New Orleans barber quarters. I sold a PQ MS65++ PCGS 1893-0 PCGS quarter for $2500 about 2 years ago and that took 2 yrs of trying on that coin to get PQ money. And the last gem 98-0 25c I owned I sold for $4,000. $30,000 seems a tad up there. Up until 2 yrs ago, gem mint marked barbers went begging, even rarer O mints. I don't think I'd pay $10,000 today for any gem O mint 25c of my pick (96-0, 97-0, 98-0, 99-0, 00-0, 01-0, etc). In fact I know I wouldn't pay $10K for a MS65....it would take a MS66+ for me to partake. I recall Rick Sear buying the Eliasberg MS68 1898-0 back in 1997 for around $14K as I recall. So is that worth $50K-100K today?
roadrunner
U.S. Type Set
John
I must admit, I am amazed at prices at the high end ... but it is simply supply and demand. The demand at the high end is intense. Recessions, fluctuations in the markets, and $80 to tank up your car doesn't mean anything to the growing plethora of CEO's, hedge fund managers, investment bankers, business owners, sports and entertainment figures, and others raking in staggering sums. When you're the CEO of a public company, and can pay yourself unlimited sums and give yourself free stock grants (while the Board of Directors looks the other way as the shareholders get robbed), then what do you care if that pop 1/0 quarter is $50,000 or $80,000 instead of $15,000 ?? I'm being facetious, but it proves the point - there is no dearth of buying power at the high end, and the competition continues to intensify in that segment of the market.
Best,
Sunnywood
Sunnywood's Rainbow-Toned Morgans (Retired)
Sunnywood's Barber Quarters (Retired)
As to gem level material- I think there is a new class of super collector that will pay any price and never miss the money. It's about winning and getting the coin - cost no object.
Somebody better tell these people that, they're making too much money investing in them.
<< <i>I'm not surprised that nice circs are just staying even. Fast investor money is now looking for gem, gem, gem of anything neat. An AU 71-cc dollar no matter how perfect or nice will not attract them imo. What will attract them is TDN's gem 1873-cc dollar in MS65 or his 1848 and 1849 seated dollars. Coins like that could be approaching high 6 figures. >>
Bingo, at the CSNS auction there were two coins that brought insane money imho. One of which TDN brought up on the forum (the 1855 NGC-64). Top Pop (or 2nd finest after TDNs coins...) seated dollars are going insane. Some great deals can still be made in the AU levels even with recent price increases imho.
<< <i>I noticed this too and seam to think the seated and trade dollars are at a disadvantage because thet go last. I was bidding Internet live and noticed how fast they blew through the seated dollars- they really didn't allow enough time for some of the lots, imo. Also, if one is bidding from the East , then it's like 3:00 AM ! I think seated dollars would do a little better if they went first.
As to gem level material- I think there is a new class of super collector that will pay any price and never miss the money. It's about winning and getting the coin - cost no object. >>
I think this had a large effect as well. The 72-cc in NGC-55 that we were able to pick up had no floor bids and was CAC'd and checked out by two dealers on our behalf. I tried staying up (I live in OH) but fell asleep well before the Seated dollars went off. I don't understand why west coast auctions either can't start at 3 PM instead of 6 PM, or go an extra day and shorten each day.
When I went after gem barber quarters in the mid-1980's their rarity rating is not much changed over 20 yrs. The 98-0 was always in my top 2 of underrated New Orleans mints (ahead of the more puffed up and costly 96-0 and 97-0). In jhdfla's post above he mentions a gem MS65 1908-0 at $32K. That's insane unless it's a typo for the 1898-0. Best 98-0 I'm aware of is the NGC MS68 Eliasberg. Not sure if that has ever been tried at PCGS. 98-0 dimes and halves are also great. As tri-series Barber dates go - 98-0 and 00-0 have always been my favorites....always underrated too.
roadrunner
Who is John Galt?
I have a collector friend in Russia that has purchased over $300k in gem Seated and Bust material these last few months, and he is buying at least that much coming up. He bids through proxy bidders, so if you see someone on the auction floor you don't recognize, it could be his guy.
A TON of really nice US stuff is going to overseas collectors, as they now have tons of disposable income and the US dollar is in the toliet.
i'll ask him if he purchased these, as my guess would be "yes" to a few.
From what I heard, the coins were very conservatively graded in general and many were lock upgrades.
It could be PVC, env damage, altered surfaces, etc.
In any case the prices realized on the coins above would require them to upgrade to be anything but outright burials. And even with upgrades of one point, and even 2, some are still burials. This leads me to recall back in late 1979 or early 1980 when I was hunting for gem Barbers and a superb gem 1899-s 25c was offered to me for $6000. That was one of the most underrated dates at that time I was dying to find one. But this one popped up as the market was starting to get very long in the tooth and $6000 seemed like a ton. I passed because it just felt wrong paying that much. It was a lucky decision since it probably took another 8 years for that coin to make it back to $6000. Buying near a peak in any market (or cyclical peak) can be expensive. The biggest mistakes in buying coins is buying inferior quality or buying near peaks. If you do anything but that, you can usually do pretty well.
roadrunner
<< <i>One thing I've learned about toned seated and old holders is that nothing is a lock upgrade, at least not for a nobody as myself submitting on my own account. I can't tell you how many perfectly fine looking ogh/rattler/early NGC coins came back in bags after being cracked out.
It could be PVC, env damage, altered surfaces, etc.
In any case the prices realized on the coins above would require them to upgrade to be anything but outright burials. And even with upgrades of one point, and even 2, some are still burials. This leads me to recall back in late 1979 or early 1980 when I was hunting for gem Barbers and a superb gem 1899-s 25c was offered to me for $6000. That was one of the most underrated dates at that time I was dying to find one. But this one popped up as the market was starting to get very long in the tooth and $6000 seemed like a ton. I passed because it just felt wrong paying that much. It was a lucky decision since it probably took another 8 years for that coin to make it back to
$6000. Buying near a peak in any market (or cyclical peak) can be expensive. The biggest mistakes in buying coins is buying inferior quality or buying near peaks. If you do anything but that, you can usually do pretty well.
roadrunner >>
Your OP indicated you thought the 41 O and 67 half were lock upgrades???
I give away money. I collect money.
I don’t love money . I do love the Lord God.
By definition, yes, today [or the date of the sale] the coin was "worth" what it sold for.
You seem to question whether it will continue to be "worth" that in the future.
good question.
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
<< <i>It's also been the case the circ mint marked seated has advanced a lot from 2004-2007, a REAL lot. In that same time we did not see gem examples of better dates change all that much. Then again, why update prices on coins that don't change hands all that often. How many gem 1841-0 halves have traded over the past 20 years (maybe a couple? I'm only aware of 2 true gems over the past 30 years). Could be that instead of just 1 real end buyer collector for coins like this that there are now 2-3 gem set collectors (or even 5 !!!!). That's all it would take to propel them upwards. Thing is, there was probably not even 2 who was consistently putting away all the gems from 1980 to 2000 (Pryor was the only one I was aware of and he was not just looking for gems). The problem for others was probably lack of cash and lack of availability. And the addition of Eliasberg's coins certainly didn't hurt. Many more great pieces finally showed up.
I'm not surprised that nice circs are just staying even. Fast investor money is now looking for gem, gem, gem of anything neat. An AU 71-cc dollar no matter how perfect or nice will not attract them imo. What will attract them is TDN's gem 1873-cc dollar in MS65 or his 1848 and 1849 seated dollars. Coins like that could be approaching high 6 figures.
roadrunner >>
Are you saying an $1/2 1852 PCGS 63 is much less desirable, at this time, than a $1/2 1843 PCGS 65?
The prices realized on some of those Unc seated halves reminds me of the Millenia sale which I did attend.
What they had in common were great coins that were fresh and had been off the market a long time.
That generates alot of interest.
I give away money. I collect money.
I don’t love money . I do love the Lord God.
the country is in a major recession.
Is my television set lying to me?
If rare coin prices are going through
the roof, is the country really in a recession?
Regards, Steve K.
It wasn't I who felt they were lock upgrades because I didn't see the coins in person. My agent saw them and called them high end and he would be ok if they were already in 66 holders....but of course wouldn't guarantee that and did not want me to formulate a bid based on that. I could have worded by OP a little better as it was the high bidder and underbidder who I KNEW would see these coins as "LOCK" upgrades in their minds. Invariably at an auction of this size and say 100 interested bidders on those 2 lots, the vast majority will see the coins as the same grade as the holder or maybe one point down. Maybe 10-30% would see them as PQ or PQ+ . Those thinking lock upgrade might only number 2-5% (it takes only 2 bidders). And since my agent felt they were PQ and his somewhat conservative, it only follows that even if the coins were just 65+ and no better, 2 potential bidders will see something (or MISS something) that everyone else did not. Hence a great price if only 2 bidders out of 100 see lock upgrades. And invariably, far less than 100% of said lock upgrades eventually end up in higher holders.
Are you saying an $1/2 1852 PCGS 63 is much less desirable, at this time, than a $1/2 1843 PCGS 65?
A MS63 1853 half is fairly available, even if most are dipped out today. A gem 1843 NM half has ALWAYS been a better coin than an 1853.
I haven't seen a decent gem 1841-1849 in a long time. While these are more available than the quarters in gem, they show up very infrequently. Only the 1840 shows up with any regularity in true gem. Any true orig gem of the 1841-1849 run is something to be quite proud of. Most of these are currently in 65 holders are not honest gems. This 41-0 apparently was. Most of those early dates are dipped and too chattered for my tastes. That's why this 1841-0 was probably a great coin and potential for finest known. Had I seen the coin in person and felt it was a "lock" upgrade I would have doubled my bid to $25K-$30K. But it still took a bid of $35K to take it home. Should the coin go MS67 or as a PQ MS66 (which I guess it could) then you're talking a bargain at net of $40K. Funny, it was only 4 years ago when I saw a gem 1857-s go for $30K or so at Stacks....that one went MS66 at PCGS. And I lost the coin because I only was willing to pay 65 money for it.
We had a recession throughout most of the 1970's. In case you were not aware, rare coin prices went up tremendously during the same time and while the oil embargo was in full swing. A brief bashing of gold from 1974-1976 slowed the coin market, but it went ballistic starting in 1977 and all the way to 1980..........recession and all (though a stagflationary period where hard assets went bullish).
roadrunner