GoldFinger1969

I think the variety that Ross found on one of the Saint-Gaudens coins is going to be listed in the new edition, right ?

People here claim to have used the book to find some valuable coins in otherwise junk change.

Saint-Gaudens Auctions: Wow, lots of useful datapoints tonight from a busy Sunday night @ GC. Winning bids without/with bp. below: A 1908 NM MS-66+CAC went for $5,100/$5,738. Low bidding activity, though. A 1927 MS-67 went for $16,643/$18,723. Very active bidding. A 1928 MS-66+CAC went for $7,500/$8,438. Only 1 bidder. A 1928 MS-67 went for $15,005/$16,881. Very active bidding. A 1928 MS-66 went for $4,225/$4,753. Active bidding.

I don't know why that impacted your decision to not give us details or post pics. Nobody here would have done anything to undermine your sale, if anything people would have been happy to help. In any event, glad it worked out for you.

Pics, before and after ?

I'm considering a 1950 Menjou and 1982 Eliasberg catalog. Apparently, there were other Eliasberg catalogs in the 1990's.

Just to clarify...it was Kurt, and not me, that made the quote below. I think Roger cut-and-pasted and inadvertently attributed it to me even though later in his post he referenced Kurt. Kurt's post regarding U.S. jurisdiction and criminality is above. Just wanted that to be clear. Since it is impossibly to place a precise quantity of 1964-D dollars struck or destroyed, the situation cannot be resolved. However, it is clear than none were officially released for circulation or other purposes.

I thought somebody had one and he relinguqueshed it after being offered a nice 6-figure sum for it ?

Each ?

What did the 6 coins sell for direct from the Mint ?

This sounds solid.....

My understanding was that in the case of Saints -- which I was referencing -- that it is very difficult to replicate a die crack. I've never heard of that before, counterfeiters going to such extremes to mimic a minor defect. But I'll let RWB chime in since he's the expert on Saint dies. With other "tells" and marks, my understanding is that the die crack (even if replicated, which I've never heard of) would not mislead on authentication.

For Saints, the die cracks establish authenticity and add to the value.

$166,202 (ex-bp) for that beautiful MCMVII High Relief MS-66+ from the "Half Dome Collection" (anybody ever hear of it ?) over at GC this past Sunday. 23 total bidders including about 10 who were still there onc it crossed 6-figures. Surprised a 1928 MS-66+ only went for $4,368/$4,914 and a 1924 MS-66+ went for $3,701/$4,164. Thought both might be higher since MS-67's for each go closer to $12-$14K. Another 1924 MS-66+ went for $4,100/$4,613. A 1914 PF-55 went for $17,944/$20,187 with plenty of bidders for these rare proofs. Definitely seeing HIGHER but no-where near BUBBLE pricing for Saints, even when higher prices should be dragging up the rear. They're higher...but not absurdly so.

Just angle the coin by putting it up against something at a 30-40 degree position.

1933..... These were key. Both Roy Langbord and the CoinWeek (?) reporter who covered the trial said these decisions, while not sexy or headline-grabbing, were going to determine how evidence was presented, what evidence, etc. That's important. There were no official release "dates" for coins, gold or otherwise, to be released. It was generally made at the Mint Superintendent level and depending on the cashier's stash, you could get a "jump" on any unofficial release date. I'm sure if a bigwig VIP from NYC went on a tour of the Philly Mint on a Wednesday and a coin was being released at the windows on Friday, that they'd accomodate that person before they took the train back to NY that day. Or something like that. That's where I think most people stand. Both sides are unprovable. So reach a compromise, which the U.S. Government accepted with the Farouk Coin (but only after the Export/Import Letter was found; before that they wanted civil AND criminal sanctions). I saw this same government arrogance in the early-1990's with the FIRREA S&L cases, where the government worked out a deal with banks and then tried to renege on the deals. I'm all ears......

Maybe an AU-58 ? Not as nice as the 64, but maybe better-looking than MCMVII's in the low-60's.

Litton or Littleton ?

Until Congress or an EO says otherwise. Maybe we'll get a coin collector as House Speaker, Senate Majority Leader, or President in the future.

What was the penalty according to federal law for possesion of a 1933 Double Eagle ? Are you 100% positive that Philly Mint insiders could not get access to coins before or after semi-official deadlines ? The government cared about the amount of gold, not years or mintmarks. It's not the 1933's that upset them.....it's WHO GOT THEM that upset them. Namely, gold bugs and anti-FDR hard money types. Also, people who think it's wrong to pay people $20.67/oz. for their possesions and then say it is worth $35/oz.

But there were reports of the coins circulating and being offered as early as mid-1936. You had ads in numismatic periodicals and no attempt was made to inquire about or steal the coins. By 1944 the coins had appreciated to $800 - $2,000 (or so it was thought), and Leland Howard stepped in.

But it seems you DID fight City Hall....and thanks to Sen. Toomey, you won ?!!

I wasn't aware of Roger's position on the coins until long after the trial. I was familiar with Bowers (who also testified) and Julian's (not sure if he testified) support for keeping the coins away from the feds. You keep stating that only Roger and the Langbord's backed their position. Their position had the support of every top numismatic researcher as far as I can tell (all the famous ones, at least).....the ANA, the PNG, and other numismatic organizations....plus I would say close to or over 90% of the coin collecting hobbyists, judging by an informal survey of forum views. That doesn't make it legal or even right, I agree, Kurt. But the notion that only RWB, the Langbord's, and a few cranks like me supported returning the coins to the Langbord's -- or at least pursuing an honest settlement/split (where almost 75% of the value would go to the government if you include taxes) -- is totally ridiculous.

The Sotheby's Catalog is not "a source", Kurt. RWB, QDB, and R.W. Julian all agree that coins were legally allowed to be released through various means. None supported the government's confiscation of the coins and I think all are well-established as being among our most thorough and accomplished numismatic researchers. The ANA and PNG also opposed the government's confiscation of the coins.

Maybe, maybe not. But exactly what perks were allowed insiders at the Philly Mint is a bit difficult to say. If someone asked to "reserve" 10 DEs but didn't have the gold or money to exchange/buy them at that time, it's quite possible a mint superior allowed them to be transacted at a later date. Philly Mint employees knew that there was high demand for new-released gold coins from Philly, Boston, and NY collectors. That is well-established. This entire fiasco was because the government, not missing any gold, decided after the fact (i.e., after the coins had appreciated) that none should have left the Philly Mint as if they were U.S. War Department Civil Defense plans. The illegal THEFT (confiscation + revaluation upwards to $35/oz.) of American' citizen's gold was the real crime, not the questionable exchange of 25 (?) pre-1933 Saints for 25 1933's at a then windfall of maybe $500 for the entire stash of 25 (?) coins. It's clear you and those of us who disagree with the treatment of the 1933's since 1944 are never going to agree. What makes your position unique is you are honest and upfront that you don't care if the coins existed, were confiscated, or even destroyed. Fair enough, but since we feel otherwise, that's why we are glad they were exchanged out of the Philly Mint, regardless of the timeframe and whether a Philly Mint took some liberties to release a few coins sought after by coin collectors.