GoldFinger1969

It might have exaggerated the move up in silver, and maybe the move down, but longer-term silver still went from $1/oz. in 1969 to $20/oz. in early-1980 on its own. And the Hunts had no positions in the gold futures market.

5% a year...you would think buying the only 1933 Saint-Gaudens would have generated a better return. But as many of us have posted here, that is the exception. And historical returns for most coins going back 50 or 60 or 70 or more years.....are absolutely useless because of the 1-time rise in precious metals in the 1970's and the entire monetary and exchange rate revolution we saw. The per-annual return just matches that for the MS-67 1908-S Norweb Double Eagle, considered one of the most beautiful Saints existing today.

The commission structure might have been fair and par for the market 25 or 40 years ago, when all you had were auctions or individual dealer sales. But with the Internet and online auctions (even the Duckor 1927-D Saint could be bid on at FUN or online), you would have thought commissions/buyer's premiums would have faded a bit, much like fixed NYSE commissions did after 1975 leading to the current zero commission trading we've seen since online took off about 1999.

Well, you had Collector's Universe public for a while. If the private equity owners decide to re-list via an IPO in a few years, we'll have some nice data points.

Maybe from time-to-time depending on who the auction house is, but when I saw the Duckor 1927-D Saint sold at FUN 2020 the winning bid was $1.8 MM and the total cost was $2,160,000 -- 20% mark-up. No discount on a trophy coin and publicity generator at all. Now assuming that coin went off on GC with the same bidders and bidding.....total cost would be $2,025,000 so the buyer would save $135,000. Or maybe the bidders would go a bit higher since the total cost (with bp) is what they focus on. Which would mean a few more bucks for the seller.

Indeed, RWB's Saint-Gaudens book relied heavily on the HA archives and there is so much great information on coins in the archives, too. You can cut-and-paste it and save it on your PC or smartphone as I've elected to do with all the Saint information.

Very true...but he did at that time he decided to sell it, kudos to him. And he also very generously made it available to the public previously so I have NO PROBLEM whatsoever with SW's custodianship of the 1933 Saint from 2002-2021 whatsoever.

Ross, I could live with personal anonymity if the person so desires. Especially if the person isn't an ultra-high net worth individual and somebody for whom security or the cost of security could be a concern. I get it. However, I see absolutely no harm in having a 3rd party see the coin for numismatist purposes, especially if it hasn't been seen or catalogued in decades (if ever). Nothing wrong either with having updated pictures taken by a reputable firm like HA or NGC or PCGS or a numismatist like RWB....or them asking questions about the coin's provenance (the current party excepted). To each his or her own, of course. I just thought that one of the major perks of owning a rarity like the 1921 Specimen Saint probably means you get to put your own mark on owning it for a period of time. Because chances are, it probably WON'T turn out to be a good investment.

(1) Are we talking MS70 or PF70 (with or without DCAM) with the ASEs here ? (2) What does this "friction" look like -- just rub between coins that were shipped in rolls ? Wouldn't the Proof coins at least (if not any speciallly segregated MS70's) be INDIVIDUALLY shipped/wrapped to the dealers/TPGs so they don't lose their pristine quality ? If today's modern production methods can produce so many nearly-pristine perfect coins...seems weird to have them marred by simple shipping in rolls where they bang and clang as they touch one another. Felt or velvet between them would work.

Eh....I dunno.....nobody tracked down Stuart Weitzman. The consensus "guestimates" as to who bought the Farouk 1933 Saint turned out to be WAY off (i.e., a Wall Streeter, a hedge fund guy, one of the Koch Brothers, etc.).

Confused....when I go to a physician, the information is only relevant to ME. The coin information benefits the entire numismatic community (hopefully something the 1921 Specimen owners value) and by increasing the information and the discussion on the coins, it increases discussion and interest in the 1921 specifically, which helps them to monetize it in the future if they so desire. So you are saying they agreed to meet with you only because they thought it would benefit themselves in the present or in the future ? "Objective information" can be obtained from lots of sources, and I'm sure they knew something about the provenance of the 1921 Saint (not that talking to you didn't enhance their knowledge).

I guess alot of heavy-hitters don't know one another and they think that the proverbial and promised "bidding war" will lead to higher net proceeds even after paying a 12-20% commission. I think the auction houses provide great services and I believe in paying-up for quality (access to lots of buyers/sellers, historical archives, write-ups on coins, historical research, etc.). I realize all that doesn't cost nothing, so someone has to pay for it. But I think commissions can come down a bit with more competition as we are seeing with GC.

Any idea why they wanted secrecy and confidentiality ? Did they tell you and/or did you ask ?

What other production steps are considered AFTER the striking steps ? The coin goes on a converyor belt of some kind....gets dropped into a bin....bagged and counted. Plenty of opportunities to get dinged in those steps, even if bag marks are discounted.

Yup, I saw it. Did the owners reveal themselves or did a 3rd party show you the coin ? And did you know who owns the Baker/Ghirardelli Coin or did a 3rd party communicate your desires there, too ?

I give Stuart Weitzman a standing ovation for making the 1933 Double Eagle available to the general public when he owned it. Yes, everybody can do what they want when they own something. And I understand some people want their privacy respected and have security concerns, too. Still, I think those needs could be accomodated to meet with 1 or 2 researchers/numismatists. The fact that we don't even know who owns the 1921 Speciman -- like some other famous/rare coins -- is frustrating. People have no problem showing off $50 MM homes or a $20 MM piece of art, but a coin they want it all hush-hush.

What happened ?

I think there's more commentary on the 1933's WAY back in the thread besides what you just read in the July 2021 posts, Alex.

The general public, yes. But if you have such a rare coin and are asked by a well-known numismatist/researcher to look at the coin for a few seconds.....it just strikes me as closed-minded and elitist to say NO. JMHO.

Assuming they know anything about Double Eagles and/or Saints, they should have to know about RWB (or their buyer/associate surely must). To have such a unique and super-rare coin and not allow anybody to see it for professional authentication and research purposes is most unbecoming, IMO.

1921 "Specimen" Saints: Roger includes a special section covering the creation of two 1921 Double Eagles which employed a "Roman finish." These coins were apparently created (according to the auction sales material, though doubted by RWB) by Mint Director Raymond Baker to honor his nephew, a member of the Ghirardelli chocolate family. The son was later KIA in WW II. This one goes up for sale soon: https://www.ngccoin.com/news/article/9319/ngc-certified-1921-roman-finish-double-eagle-in-heritage-august-2021-sale/ I find it somewhat amusing -- and quite frankly, selfish -- that the owner of one of the two 1921 Specimen Proofs (the Baker/Ghirardelli coin, the one not up for sale) declined RWB's repeated request to see the coin, as documented in the book. Like Roger was going to steal it ? The coin up for sale was examined by Roger, BTW.

Jeff Garrett always makes for some good reading but I have 2 quibbles with his commentary: First, he says that during his last FUN auction he only had $5 MM in sales. For a 3-4 day event, that's not bad at all for a 1-man shop (or however many people his dealership employs). Heritage's sales figures cited employ hundreds of people and have multiple sales/auctions going on for close to 90 days during the quarter. So $5 MM during a few days of a convention going back 35 years isn't bad at all. Second, “the aggregate prices realized for U.S. rare coins sold at major public auctions in 2020 totaled nearly $369 million. The aggregate total was $325 million in 2019; $345 million in 2018; and $316 million in 2017.” I don't know what "major public auctions" indicates and it might not include regular sales, either. If the Heritage figures are correct, and if you strip out non-U.S. coins, the bulk of their sales must be U.S. rare coins and I would think with Ebay and other online firms that the figures cited above should be HIGHER. Thoughts ?

Not all dealers. And it's pretty easy to verify things nowadays compared to 20 or 40 years ago.

Aside from your book, not many new books on U.S. gold coins in recent years, including updates. Less so Double Eagle books. Akers/Ambio last updated in 2008 and Bowers Whitman Red Double Eagle book in 2004.

Anything new beyond your Heritage write-up ?