GoldFinger1969

On 2/27/2022 at 10:40 AM, RWB said:

Almost everything in RoAC could be considered an example. One of the clearest, and silliest BTW, was the notion that the low relief Peace dollar resulted from "Morgan hitting the high relief galvano with a board," or similar. This is from his Encyclopedia and was long accepted as gospel. None of it is correct.

Speaking of Peace Dollars....have you seen any uptick in your Peace Dollar book since the Mint released the new Peace Dollars ?

I have to think that the 2021 coins are causing people to look at classic Peace and Morgan dollars.  Prices are certainly up, especially for toned, PL, and DMPL Morgans < $500.

At least it wasn't Al Capon'e safe.....

On 2/26/2022 at 10:19 PM, RWB said:

As to "Why no one mentioned them earlier?" the reason is simple. No one looked. No one did the detailed research among coins and documents. Thus the pieces were scattered and unintelligible. I merely brought them together with an open mind and a desire to understand. Much the same for the entire 1905-1921 period; for multiple unknown gold patterns; for how MCMVII $20 were made; mechanical and equipment processes, and many other subjects. I do not "skimp" or "push deadlines" or accept some "magical revelations from the ancients." Good research uses all available sources both written, observed, physical, and manufacturing. These must be balanced and understood in historical context.

Very well said.  I should say this is also the key to good investment and financial research. 

On 2/26/2022 at 10:19 PM, RWB said:

As to "Why no one mentioned them earlier?" the reason is simple. No one looked. No one did the detailed research among coins and documents. Thus the pieces were scattered and unintelligible. I merely brought them together with an open mind and a desire to understand. Much the same for the entire 1905-1921 period; for multiple unknown gold patterns; for how MCMVII $20 were made; mechanical and equipment processes, and many other subjects. I do not "skimp" or "push deadlines" or accept some "magical revelations from the ancients."

Good research uses all available sources both written, observed, physical, and manufacturing. These must be balanced and understood in historical context.

Maybe an example can help....can you give an example from the Saints or RoAC books of some original research that you did that debunked something that had been accepted as fact which wasn't the case ?

On 2/26/2022 at 7:30 PM, VKurtB said:

It had NEVER occurred to ANYONE in that administration’s Treasury Dept. that you can’t do that due to the vastly different specific gravities. Their answer? Literally: “We’re the U.S. Mint; we’re pretty resourceful.” Outcome: they were either epically stupid or they lied. 

OK, that proves the CURRENT Mint workers don't know everything....I don't think that means you can't gather useful information from documents that are 100 years old or more.

On 2/26/2022 at 7:11 PM, VKurtB said:

My point is, sir, that only looking at the coins matters. Documents are written by people. They are subjective and prone to errors of many kinds, NOT THE LEAST OF WHICH is intentional lying. Mint employees and even their Superintendents do not have stellar honesty records. And worse yet, some are worse than dishonest; they’re stupid, including some VERY RECENT examples. (2016 anniversary gold issues chief among them)

I agree documents can have errors in them and maybe even an occasional deliberate mislead....but short of inventing a time-travelling machine and hovering over the people in real-time....I don't even think that observing the coins will be 100% fool-proof.

The point is to reasonably be certain -- 95% confidence level, something as a lawyer you should appreciate -- that things are as they appear to be and were claimed to be.

I think the documents that RWB uncovers are fascinating.  Not all of them interest me, but they are all chock full of information.  They provide SOME information -- sometimes definitive, sometimes not.

It depends on the coin and circumstances.

On 2/26/2022 at 6:25 PM, VKurtB said:

And THIS is precisely why I am sooooo dismissive of Roger’s method. Nobody, not me, not you, not Roger, not anyone else, can research this issue above from looking at documents in a NARA. You have to possess and examine the coins themselves. There is no documentation. Like Jane Goodall, you have to look the gorillas square in the eye, not read some dead guy’s writings. 

Well, I'll let him speak for himself but if finding coins to actually match documents takes YEARS than it delays the book a long time.  And sometimes the coins might be tough to track down.

I know Roger posted in the long Saints thread that he observed many of the coins for the sections on die varieties.

On 2/26/2022 at 5:50 PM, jtryka said:

I thought they got rid of the PMG message board.

Nope, alive and kicking, come on over !! 

PMG is the leader in currency grading, I believe, so it would be kind of weird if NGC (PMG's owner) got rid of the Boards here.

They are definitely less active than the coin section.

On 2/26/2022 at 5:05 PM, Alex in PA. said:

As usual; I have no idea what you are talking about.  

Roger explained it above, Alex, but in the book he has 3 different sections for various "No Motto" / Motto 1908 Saints.  Not paragraphs, but given the same status in the book as mintmarks or year strikings.

I myself wasn't aware of the Long vs. Short Rays dichotomy until I read his book.  Never saw it on a lable....a description...or any of the HA/GC commentaries.  And if it was mentioned in Akers or Bowers' books....it was a 1-line sentence that didn't stand out and I forgot about.

Roger's book really drills stuff into you.  Of course, you can get overloaded which is why a re-reading of the book a 2nd time is essential, IMO.  Or the smartphone version of the Commentaries which I hope to do this year.

On 2/26/2022 at 5:15 PM, RWB said:

The first 1908 DE used the same master dies as 1907. No motto on rev and mushy stars, short rays etc on obv.

The second 1908 version used a new master die with much sharper details and long rays, but the same no motto reverse. The third 1908 version used the improved 1908 long ray obverse, and a new reverse with motto.

Got it...so Hub Varieties is the same as types.   Thanks, Roger.

On 2/26/2022 at 4:56 PM, VKurtB said:

Prediction: some day, perhaps soon, the same will be proven about 1970-S cents. Not two varieties, but at LEAST three of them. Also just like 1972 Ikes. 

Are there variations in production, survival, or financial numbers ?

On 2/26/2022 at 12:16 PM, RWB said:

The three distinct hub varieties were first published in my DE book. Breen and others had mentioned long and short obv rays, but not looked more closely.

This is another reason why I really want the key Commentary sections on my smartphone if not the entire book...not only do I not have to go running back to my library/bookcase in another roon, but all the info. is at your finger-tips PLUS you can search for key stuff so much more easily. 

Also saves wear-and-tear on the book. 

On 2/26/2022 at 12:16 PM, RWB said:

The three distinct hub varieties were first published in my DE book. Breen and others had mentioned long and short obv rays, but not looked more closely.

That's where I got the types above.  Must have missed the hub descriptive, I will go back.  Thanks.

On 2/26/2022 at 8:59 AM, RWB said:

There are three distinct hub varieties of 1908 DE - one must be careful in checking earlier catalogs since only two were once recognized. (Again, thanks to Breen's incomplete research.)

The 3 types are the Short Rays No Motto, the Long Rays No Motto, and the Long Rays With Motto.....right ?  I just call them "types" didn't realize "hub variety" was the technical term.

When there were only 2 recognized, there was no distinction between Short and Long Rays I presume, hence just No Motto and Motto (the 2 types), right ?

1926-D vs. 1927-D:  Re-read the Commentary sections in the book regarding how these 2 coins "flipped" in the rarity rankings in the late-1950's.  It's an interesting story, and RWB does a great job of primary research to give readers the nitty-gritty.

The 1946 FCC Boyd Catalog by Kosoff & Kreisberg noted that at the time the 1926-D was #2 in the Saint series based on "....contacts with some of our finest cabinets."  Not a bad source of information at the time, but largely anectdotal and based on memories, albeit from experts presumably with no incentive to lie or give inaccurate information.  But no TPGs...no tabulated data on the internet....etc.  Just "informed opinion."

A 1949 sale of a 1926-D hit $2,500 -- if there are higher-priced sales of Saints up to that time, even the high-end expected for a 1933 Saint that never got off the ground -- I can't find it.  I'll keep looking in the book as it is voluminous.

But a few years later, once a few tiny hoards came back to the States from Europe, the price had fallen to about $500 for a top-quality 1926-D (The "Lima" Coin, MS-66+ CAC today).

Meanwhile, no more 1927-D's came back from Europe...other rarities kept seeing a few more here-and-there hoards from Europe or S/Central America....and then by the end of the decade more-or-less the 1927-D had moved to the top of the rarity rankings and the 1926-D and 1926-S (among others) had fallen a few rungs each.

FYI...as a general rule, Super Gem 1908 NM's (MS-67) and MS-66's seem to cost about 1/2 the price of other commons once they reach condition rarity of the MS-67/66 level.

On 2/25/2022 at 9:59 AM, Greenstang said:

You might get some results if you went on the NGC paper money forum instead of the coin forum.

pmgnotes.com

Is that over here or another totally entirely different website ?

I have the 2 main currency books for historical pricing.  But I find Ebay, Great Collections, and Heritage Auctions to be fine for current pricing, especially GC and HA.

More MS-66 and 67 Saints over at Heritage seeing active bidding on Thursday.  A couple of 1927 MS-67's went for $16,200 and $16,800, each with bp.  A 1928 MS-67 went for $16,200.

On 2/24/2022 at 12:54 AM, VKurtB said:

Are we (employing the Royal we here) unaware that the massive cheating in the Latin Monetary / Currency Union (an international gold standard featuring massive cheating by reducing fineness) led to the degradation of European international peace. Please tell me you’re aware of this. Please? 

No, something like that can never work longer-term.  It's fraud.  You might as well pass off gold paint-colored bars from City Slickers II as real gold bars.

I suspect that is one reason why American Double Eagles later became the gold standard (literally as well as figuratively ) and so many were used and trusted by Central and South Americans.

On 2/24/2022 at 12:54 AM, VKurtB said:

Also, the “Stella” was a misguided attempt to play ball in that dirty little ball yard. 

Not familiar with Stellas though I would like to maybe dabble in that area in the future and learn about them.

On 2/24/2022 at 12:54 AM, VKurtB said:

Quintus’ beloved Coq Marianne are a remnant of that failed piece of international foolishness. People have never been able to behave themselves in the presence of gold. Likely never will. 

Does anybody know why Quintus A. disappeared ?  I miss his grammatically ambiguous posts !! 

On 2/24/2022 at 12:54 AM, VKurtB said:

Chart when each nation went OFF their gold standard. Their economies INSTANTLY improved fairly immediately. Gold can be fairly said to CAUSE human misery, not by virtue of its chemistry, but rather its effect on BRAIN chemistry.  Heck, even Dan Fogelberg figured that one out. 

Not sure what Dan Fogelberg has to do with monetary policy....but the reason nation's economies improved when they went off the gold standard is because a Central Bank needs flexibility to deal with economic downturns and exogenous shocks.

You can solve a problem like that 2 ways:  an internal devaluations or an external devaluation.  The market adjustment mechanism MUST take place the key is which one.  A gold standard -- or a fixed currency regime like the Euro -- forces and internal adjustment via lower wages and prices.....very difficult, painful, and tough to endure.  An external valuation via inflation and a falling currency will cause problems with the price level and/or banking system, but it is easier overall on the economy as measured by nominal GDP.

Beware The Denominator Effect ! 

On 2/24/2022 at 2:50 AM, VKurtB said:

When I did my undergrad work at Franklin & Marshall, there was no such thing as a “minor” field of study, only “majors”. They instituted “minors” three years after I graduated. I took all the courses for an astronomy minor, as it came to be. When I went back for our 5 year reunion in 1982, several of my astronomy photos were STILL on the department bulletin board. I was a darkroom rat to end all darkroom rats.  But in astronomy, 1977 might as well be eons ago. 

Digital CCD imaging now.

On 2/24/2022 at 2:39 AM, VKurtB said:

The copper and silver U.S. coins were the material of #2 and #3, set fairly close together in the 96-97 range. I can’t get upstairs now, or I’d give you the exact dates. If memory serves, the line was the dimes, in the earlier one. Quarters and up, later one. I could be off. I THINK #3 was May of ‘97. 

Double Eagles/Saints were 1982.  That's when Duckor/Akers struck.

On 2/24/2022 at 2:21 AM, VKurtB said:

By the time the second and third Eliasberg sales happened, ALL coins had a TPGS grade. Big difference. It is claimed many got an “Eliasberg bump” in their grade. I’m inclined to agree. 

Eliasberg 1 was 1982....why were the others so much later ?  I believe one was 1996 or so, right ?

They waited 14 years to finish it ?  Assuming that was Part 3......wow.

On 2/24/2022 at 2:07 AM, VKurtB said:

The amazing thing to me is how an aluminum planchet got to Denver at all. Given that it’s Denver, maybe it was a fantasy date overstrike of a plain 1974 aluminum? Inquiring minds want to know. Maybe it was even struck on the same press Dan Carr now owns. How cool is that?! Tongue in cheek. 

Who is Dan Carr ?  I've seen that name a bit last week or so.....

And if a die was made....how does that explain any coins being struck ?  How does any regular-level employee have access to the die....have planchets....get to turn the machines on....and strike a few coins ?  

I mean, did he do it when everyone was at lunch or did he sneak in at 3 AM ?  

Would seem that higher-ups must have been involved, or been given the OK, to strike a few for whatever reasons from the top people at the Denver Mint or Washington, DC.

On 2/24/2022 at 2:17 AM, VKurtB said:

Some people count that as grade inflation. I do not. It’s “improved differentiation”. 

Grading was all over the map pre-TPGs.  I'm not sure who did the grading for Eliasberg '82 -- Bowers ? -- but either he graded very conservatively...OR....he knew it should probably be a Gem Uncirculated (MS-65) but the estate/auctioner told him to knock it down a bit.

It was a recession in 1982....stock market was in the toilet....they might have thought there wasn't a market for "pricey" coins at that level.  Dunno..........