I'll update when all come in and are here I have a couple more to add I just got going and connections started that I couldn't stop, but wow, is it fun!
I'll send a PM when all arrive .
Have fun search for cool plastic!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Too bad I didn't know about this census! Before I moved 6 months ago, the local coin store had 2 commems in doilies. One was a Texas commem and the other I cannot remember. I asked a member here who was into commems if they wanted me to get them for their commem collection and they said no so I forgot all about it.
Successful Buying and Selling transactions with:
Many members on this forum that now it cannot fit in my signature. Please ask for entire list.
Also some interesting facts about the Doily Census:
Currently the most valuable coin on the Doily Census is a 1907 $10 piece with Wire Rim. Certified as an MS63, auctioned at Heritage 2010 August Boston, MA Signature & Platinum Night ANA Coin Auction #1143 for $46,000 (PCGS Value $46,500.)
The least valuable coin (as far as I can tell) in a Doily holder thus recorded is a proof Jefferson Nickel, 1960 PR64, valued at $8 by PCGS price guide.
The most common coin type to be found in a doily holder is the Morgan Dollar.
There are many coin types that have not yet been seen in a doily holder. I have yet to see a half cent, three cent, gold dollar, or 2 cent piece, double dime, etc
A SAMPLE Roosevelt dime---1958-D MS64, #7000023. It arrived without the outer ring but wondering if any samples actually came that way? Just looks like it was a prototype Doily label in a basic Rattler . . . any ideas from Oreville or the slab gurus?
The other was an 1879-S Morgan MS65 # 5125890. Nice basic MS65. No undergrading, but a nice basic golden rim toning.
<< <i>Hey Drunner I was going to post that a sample slab just sold on ebay...and I see you got it!
BTW, John Albanese said that the very early old green holders, like the doily, came with the detachable outer plastic ring. >>
Yes, there are a lot of those but they don't command a premium. Too bad the outer ring can't be used to replace the ones missing from some of the doilies.
Interesting to hear that the outer ring on the sample slabs was removable. Drunner and I were discussing whether they came with or without. I thought they came with outer rings, he wasn't so sure...turns out it's a bit of both. Removable frames....Who knew!!!
Interesting on the Albanese comment, but I wonder if that also meant the Doilies???
I have 2 without the outer ring . .the sample (Roosie), and the Wash-Carv. in the Census. They both look the same and I have a sneaking suspicion they were just damaged and the outer ring is missing. I'd love some further information, but I think the ones out there I have seen have just lost the outer ring. I'd love it if I had a rare Doily though!!! (Well, rarer than usual, anyway.)
BTW, neither Doily I bought missing the outer ring even mentioned it in the auction, but from the pix, you could tell, so I didn't go into it blindly. My opinion was that they were less than perfect, and I bid accordingly. My ultimate goal will be a display of the Doilies, and those two will just be examples of what the Doily looked like without the outer ring, as a sort of transition from the rattler.
The outer frame is very fragile, and much more prone to breakage than any subsequent slab, not actually being a part of the part that actually holds the coin. I've only owned two that were pristine, and I sold them both at FUN year before last, both were common date Franklin proofs in 66 holders. It doesn't take much to damage them, and with the careless way slabs are handled it's surprising that there are even that many left that are intact.
I bought a couple through word of mouth on the board. Both were said to have the outer ring, but upon arrival neither one did. I eventually sold them and recovered my investment.
Interesting on the Albanese comment, but I wonder if that also meant the Doilies???
I have 2 without the outer ring . .the sample (Roosie), and the Wash-Carv. in the Census. They both look the same and I have a sneaking suspicion they were just damaged and the outer ring is missing. I'd love some further information, but I think the ones out there I have seen have just lost the outer ring. I'd love it if I had a rare Doily though!!! (Well, rarer than usual, anyway.)
Having fun with this. Cool history . . .
Drunner >>
That would be akin to the AT/NT thingy; no way to tell intent. I doubt that there were any doilies let out without the outer ring. Otherwise you would have ringed and unringed and there would be no way to differentiate intentionally unringed from accidentally unringed.
Here is an example of a common double holder from the doily era. Any premium was due to the coin. It is a 3.5 holder.
Here is another double holder with no premium for the holder.
I agree that the outer shell is fragile, which is likely why it was discontinued eventually for a one-piece slab. Those puppies are have some sharp edges too! I wonder if anyone has ever cut themselves .
Just sent a PM to Tom and also thought I'd post this here . .
I truly wonder if there were ever any Doilies released without the outer ring. It just doesn't make sense. Sure, I'll hunt down John Albanese at the next show I ever get to and report back, but I am of the opinion the Doilies without the outer ring are damaged . . . missing the shell due to mishandling. I have two of them . . .and many more with chips or chunks missing where they hit the bourse floor at high velocity after being fumbled by some coin nerd . . .
I must have missed this thread. I have an 1805 Draped bust quarter in a PCGS AU-50 holder. Someone mentioned that the holders are fragile, and mine sure is beat up. I got the coin at a Bowers & Merena auction in Baltimore a few years ago.
Course I gotta chime in with a 97 one, 1897-S MS-64 Morgan #7303235. And a Sample Slab, 1964-D MS-64 Dime #7000023. Conder101, the original collector of plastic rather than the coin inside, hahaha and 3rd party slab expert calls these slabs with the fragile outer ring the PCGS 3. This is the 2nd and last slab design to have this added stacking ring as an individual component, the next style of PCGS slabs had the stacking frame molded into the slab body. It was the first slab to actually have the letters "PCGS" on the paper insert. Available information indicates this style slab was used only in Dec 1989. Hope this helps.
Change that we can believe in is that change which is 90% silver.
FWIW in looking thru the pics in the doily census thread today, I see that there are varying degrees of position of the bar code with respect to the cert number line and vice versa for the doily label itself. Makes me wonder if that 3.5 holder really is unique or just a fluke due to carelessness. There seem to be an awful lot of the 4 pinners with the cert number left of the bar code [and having PCGS on the insert] than could be consistent with such a short time of use.
Bajjerfan has a very interesting point. According to the Conder101 thread (very useful by the way) on PCGS "Generations", the 3.5 was a holder that was as rare (or RARER) than the Doily, but check out eBay . . .or Teletrade . . . or ANY coin site of note, and the 3.5 seems to be so plentiful I wonder why I grabbed a few at the outset. They are at every show in droves . . . but never a Doily (???). I wonder if his assessment of just careless positioning of the barcode v. cert. number might account for the 3.5???
The 3.5 is a 3 slab with a different insert. It was probably considered scarce at the time because few collectors were noticing the subtle differences between slab styles. The info in that thread was last updated 4 years ago, kinda old.
Change that we can believe in is that change which is 90% silver.
Interesting on the Albanese comment, but I wonder if that also meant the Doilies???
I have 2 without the outer ring . .the sample (Roosie), and the Wash-Carv. in the Census. They both look the same and I have a sneaking suspicion they were just damaged and the outer ring is missing. I'd love some further information, but I think the ones out there I have seen have just lost the outer ring. I'd love it if I had a rare Doily though!!! (Well, rarer than usual, anyway.)
Having fun with this. Cool history . . .
Drunner >>
That would be akin to the AT/NT thingy; no way to tell intent. I doubt that there were any doilies let out without the outer ring. Otherwise you would have ringed and unringed and there would be no way to differentiate intentionally unringed from accidentally unringed.
Here is an example of a common double holder from the doily era. Any premium was due to the coin. It is a 3.5 holder.
Here is another double holder with no premium for the holder.
And one more with no premium for the holder.
>>
Not ALL non-Doily 'ringed' holders are worth no premium.....read this from oreville. from 2 years ago......and I am the owner of the PCGS 2.5 now, along with a PCGS 3.5 housing a '38-D Buffalo Nick graded MS66. As oreville states the likely surviving examples, I now own a slab variety with 100-200 in existence, as well as one with "probably way under 50" (and that was 2 years ago). So, the slabs with the outer rings, besides the Doilies, aren't ALWAYS worth no premium for the slab. If conder was interested in that 2.5, that says alot.......and oreville is on top of the slab game himself. I suspect it's not subtle differences. The first number of the cert # is on top of the first line in the bar code (on my 3.5). I'll image both tomorrow and post them to the thread.
Comments
Franklin-Lover's Forum
Also got the gracious additions (thanks!!!) of :
1893 Columbian MS64 6248362,
and
1936 Bay Bridge MS64 5110439
Both Commems are now in the Drunner Doily Collection, along with the 1942 Merc!
Keep those DOILIES coming !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Drunner
It is already included in the census.
and they're cold.
I don't want nobody to shoot me in the foxhole."
Mary
Best Franklin Website
Wow has it been a wild week for the Doilies!
I'll update when all come in and are here I have a couple more to add I just got going and connections started that I couldn't stop, but wow, is it fun!
I'll send a PM when all arrive .
Have fun search for cool plastic!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Jeff
Jeff
1907 Wire Rim $10
<< <i>Not mine, but I remember seeing this at auction:
1907 Wire Rim $10 >>
That's one serious coin! I daresay we found the most valuable coin in a doily holder! WOW!!!
---Updated.
Successful Trades: Swampboy,
Many members on this forum that now it cannot fit in my signature. Please ask for entire list.
Also some interesting facts about the Doily Census:
Currently the most valuable coin on the Doily Census is a 1907 $10 piece with Wire Rim. Certified as an MS63, auctioned at Heritage 2010 August Boston, MA Signature & Platinum Night ANA Coin Auction #1143 for $46,000 (PCGS Value $46,500.)
The least valuable coin (as far as I can tell) in a Doily holder thus recorded is a proof Jefferson Nickel, 1960 PR64, valued at $8 by PCGS price guide.
The most common coin type to be found in a doily holder is the Morgan Dollar.
There are many coin types that have not yet been seen in a doily holder. I have yet to see a half cent, three cent, gold dollar, or 2 cent piece, double dime, etc
#1 1879-S MS64 cert # 8180703 purchased off ebay a year or so ago..the listing called it an "odd holder" and when I saw the doily, I bid and won.
#2 1884-O MS63 cert # 7307207 purchased at a local show about 1 1/2 yrs ago
I will try to post pics later
George
My War Nickels https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/nickels/jefferson-nickels-specialty-sets/jefferson-nickels-fs-basic-war-set-circulation-strikes-1942-1945/publishedset/94452
A SAMPLE Roosevelt dime---1958-D MS64, #7000023. It arrived without the outer ring but wondering if any samples actually came that way? Just looks like it was a prototype Doily label in a basic Rattler . . . any ideas from Oreville or the slab gurus?
The other was an 1879-S Morgan MS65 # 5125890. Nice basic MS65. No undergrading, but a nice basic golden rim toning.
Should be a couple more on the way!
GO DOILIES !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Drunner
6236367. A nice lightly toned specimen, and so far, the only NC Liberty Nickel in the census (business strike).
Thanks fivecents, and it will be a treasured addition to the Doily Census.
Still on the Doily Hunt !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Drunner
9/27/10
BTW, John Albanese said that the very early old green holders, like the doily, came with the detachable outer plastic ring.
<< <i>Hey Drunner I was going to post that a sample slab just sold on ebay...and I see you got it!
BTW, John Albanese said that the very early old green holders, like the doily, came with the detachable outer plastic ring. >>
Yes, there are a lot of those but they don't command a premium. Too bad the outer ring can't be used to replace the ones missing from some of the doilies.
Interesting to hear that the outer ring on the sample slabs was removable. Drunner and I were discussing whether they came with or without. I thought they came with outer rings, he wasn't so sure...turns out it's a bit of both. Removable frames....Who knew!!!
Herb
Interesting on the Albanese comment, but I wonder if that also meant the Doilies???
I have 2 without the outer ring . .the sample (Roosie), and the Wash-Carv. in the Census. They both look the same and I have a sneaking suspicion they were just damaged and the outer ring is missing. I'd love some further information, but I think the ones out there I have seen have just lost the outer ring. I'd love it if I had a rare Doily though!!! (Well, rarer than usual, anyway.)
BTW, neither Doily I bought missing the outer ring even mentioned it in the auction, but from the pix, you could tell, so I didn't go into it blindly. My opinion was that they were less than perfect, and I bid accordingly. My ultimate goal will be a display of the Doilies, and those two will just be examples of what the Doily looked like without the outer ring, as a sort of transition from the rattler.
Having fun with this. Cool history . . .
Drunner
The one picture with ring, I have one without a ring and 1 that the ring is cracked but still in place,
Herb
<< <i>Reading the posts above . . .
Interesting on the Albanese comment, but I wonder if that also meant the Doilies???
I have 2 without the outer ring . .the sample (Roosie), and the Wash-Carv. in the Census. They both look the same and I have a sneaking suspicion they were just damaged and the outer ring is missing. I'd love some further information, but I think the ones out there I have seen have just lost the outer ring. I'd love it if I had a rare Doily though!!! (Well, rarer than usual, anyway.)
Having fun with this. Cool history . . .
Drunner >>
That would be akin to the AT/NT thingy; no way to tell intent. I doubt that there were any doilies let out without the outer ring. Otherwise you would have ringed and unringed and there would be no way to differentiate intentionally unringed from accidentally unringed.
Here is an example of a common double holder from the doily era. Any premium was due to the coin. It is a 3.5 holder.
Here is another double holder with no premium for the holder.
And one more with no premium for the holder.
I really like that 1888-O. Nice looker!
I agree that the outer shell is fragile, which is likely why it was discontinued eventually for a one-piece slab. Those puppies are have some sharp edges too! I wonder if anyone has ever cut themselves
Thanks for the effort everyone.
I truly wonder if there were ever any Doilies released without the outer ring. It just doesn't make sense. Sure, I'll hunt down John Albanese at the next show I ever get to and report back, but I am of the opinion the Doilies without the outer ring are damaged . . . missing the shell due to mishandling. I have two of them . . .and many more with chips or chunks missing where they hit the bourse floor at high velocity after being fumbled by some coin nerd . . .
Drunner
The trip to the safe did generate other rewards, though. I found a handful of GSA CC Morgans that I never know were in there
-Paul
And a Sample Slab, 1964-D MS-64 Dime #7000023.
Conder101, the original collector of plastic rather than the coin inside, hahaha and 3rd party slab expert calls these slabs with the fragile outer ring the PCGS 3. This is the 2nd and last slab design to have this added stacking ring as an individual component, the next style of PCGS slabs had the stacking frame molded into the slab body. It was the first slab to actually have the letters "PCGS" on the paper insert. Available information indicates this style slab was used only in Dec 1989.
Hope this helps.
Good subject for further discussion . . .
Drunner
<< <i>
<< <i>Reading the posts above . . .
Interesting on the Albanese comment, but I wonder if that also meant the Doilies???
I have 2 without the outer ring . .the sample (Roosie), and the Wash-Carv. in the Census. They both look the same and I have a sneaking suspicion they were just damaged and the outer ring is missing. I'd love some further information, but I think the ones out there I have seen have just lost the outer ring. I'd love it if I had a rare Doily though!!! (Well, rarer than usual, anyway.)
Having fun with this. Cool history . . .
Drunner >>
That would be akin to the AT/NT thingy; no way to tell intent. I doubt that there were any doilies let out without the outer ring. Otherwise you would have ringed and unringed and there would be no way to differentiate intentionally unringed from accidentally unringed.
Here is an example of a common double holder from the doily era. Any premium was due to the coin. It is a 3.5 holder.
Here is another double holder with no premium for the holder.
And one more with no premium for the holder.
Not ALL non-Doily 'ringed' holders are worth no premium.....read this from oreville. from 2 years ago......and I am the owner of the PCGS 2.5 now, along with a PCGS 3.5 housing a '38-D Buffalo Nick graded MS66. As oreville states the likely surviving examples, I now own a slab variety with 100-200 in existence, as well as one with "probably way under 50" (and that was 2 years ago). So, the slabs with the outer rings, besides the Doilies, aren't ALWAYS worth no premium for the slab. If conder was interested in that 2.5, that says alot.......and oreville is on top of the slab game himself. I suspect it's not subtle differences. The first number of the cert # is on top of the first line in the bar code (on my 3.5). I'll image both tomorrow and post them to the thread.
Did you doily fans check ebay recently? I looked last night and there were like a half dozen doiley slabs on there. Mostly morgan dollars. (of course)
Some interesting discussions here. It would be nice to get some info from the source. I wonder of Dave Hall would care to chime in?
<< <i>UPDATED.
Some interesting discussions here. It would be nice to get some info from the source. I wonder of Dave Hall would care to chime in? >>
He did say that he thought they were kind of ugly.
doily #1
doily #2
Not my auctions!
snman