GoldFinger1969

Let's see some pics of both designs back-to-back......or front-to-front.

Nah, the 1933 debate is very interesting to me. We are probably regurgitating the same stuff and that includes me. I appreciate Kurt's POV even though I disagree with it and I obviously am in Roger's corner as I think his scenarios are not only plausible but have also uncovered errors in the fact timeline presented by the government since they demanded the coins in 2004 such that fairness dicatates a settlement. These errors include the day of 1st Striking of the 1933's....the presence of 1933's with 1932 coins....and the legality of exchanges. Note that the government's position is that the coins were STOLEN -- not "illegally exchanged" -- and the clown judge never allowed as to how coins could be stolen yet the total amount of gold was all present and accounted for. Even if McCann switched the coins in 1937, so what ? What if he had an understanding with the Mint Director that he could get some of the 1933's up to the time of their melting ? What if a few others also had that option ? Lots of Philly Mint personnel were selling coins on The Mainline, Park Avenue, and Beacon Hill for years making some nice profits. And RWB isn't the only numismatist who favored a settlement or the Langbord position. Q. David Bowers and R.W. Julian also spoke out against the coins' seizure. The ANA and PNG also opposed the government's position. On message boards, I'd say it was 90% for the Langbord's and 10% for the government. BTW, my position doesn't detract from the assertions that Israel Switt was a sneak, a gold bug, and willing to engage in underhanded deals. That said, if he was the scoundrel made out to be, I don't think the Philadelphia Mint would have let him have V.I.P. status through the 1960's. If he had truly "stolen" gold coins from the Mint, I would think he'd have been banned for life.

You had 43 1933 DE's that were mixed in with 1932's. You also had the 1st Striking of 1933's on March 2nd, 1933 and not March 15th as was generally accepted. Thank RWB for these clarifications. The fact that Tripp was blindsided by that March 7th memo allowing for exchanges tells me he had a predisposed bias (maybe out of loyalty to Sotheby's/Weitzman). How could you be a researcher and not be aware of a key memo on coin-for-coin exchanges ? The government knew of 1933 sales in the late 1930's. Only when the price moved up to $1,000 or thereabouts did they start clawing back. If the coins had sold for $35 each, they wouldn't have given a damn.

Show me the law that says that an EXCHANGE of gold coins involving the 1933's in 1937 was ILLEGAL for Mint personnel (who were always helping themselves to perks) or even the public at large (a bit stronger but still not an iron-clad prohibition). It wasn't the case formally up to April 6th 1933....and it wasn't explicitly prohibited afterwards. Why would the government be concerned with a date or mintmark if exchanged for gold as opposed to paper currency ?

If a coin was ILLEGALLY created -- and that requires multipe tasks and personnel as I understand it including creating a die -- then it is an illegal counterfeiting act. If a super had DISCRETION to create some patterns/coins or expected that the coin would be mass-circulated, that's a gray area. I haven't studied the history of the 1913 Liberty Nickel or the 1974-D Aluminum Cent so I don't know the details. I believe the latter were given to congressmen and leaked to the public. I see no problem if that happened.

Even if the 1933's came out in 1937, so what ? If the Philly Mint would have let their employees grab some in 1933 but instead somebody waited until 1937, how was the Mint or Treasury harmed ? Ed's wife, right ? I did like his enthusiasm for the Eagles even if I am a Jets fan.

Well, it wasn't me as I don't post at CU. But I agree with the sentiment. You should be aware that various government officials have said they have the right to confiscate other special coins like the 1913 Liberty Nickel. Respect for private property rights is the bedrock of the U.S. Constitution and the seizing and making illegal of gold holdings in 1933 was an abomination. Imagine AOC or other socialists today declaring that private land ownership was illegal and you couldn't sell your home or land for the market value.

I don't believe in narratives per se -- but I believe the FACTS as outlined by RWB are stronger than Tripp's. The government and Tripp's track record in record-keeping and facts with the 1933's is less than stellar. That said, I respect your right to go with whoever you think has a stronger argument, Kurt.

The government seized American's gold at $20.67 an ounce and then revalued it upwards to $35 an ounce. They prohibited ownership of gold. They confiscated hard-earned gold coins and bars. Switt had dozens of gold coins in a suitcase/briefcase seized (about $1,500 face value as I recall) and given no compensation. I think the gold collectors and gold bugs were justified in not trusting the government for a policy of dubious economic and constitutional justification. While it seems dubious that she didn't know, there's no proof she did. The family apparently only went into the SDB at that time because the bank had a flood and needed to cut into the SDBs. The fact that the government didn't contact the bank to confirm they didn't initiate the SDB visitation kinda confirms it. I don't personally believe they have any more coins. I think they should have only given 1 of the coins for testing, and held the rest. Joan Langbord's husband was very trusting of the U.S. government and believed they would do the right thing -- the opposite of his father-in-law. That was a mistake. The government lied about the status of the coins once they took possession and they also threatened Roy Langbord (her son), who oversaw the transfer, with arrest once the 10 coins had transferrred. They probably thought he worked in the pawn shop/jewelry shop (he had previously) and would be scared by their blowhard thug tactics. Unfortaunately, they didn't know he was a lawyer with a degree from NYU Law School and so when they started to read him his Miranda Rights and tell him he had the right to an attorney he cut them off and let them know he WAS an attorney. They backed off right away.

Yeah, I kinda picked that up.

I believe you might be describing the technical definition of luster....thousands of microscopic "ridges" reflecting light Though I am not sure you can see them individually (too small) but maybe you see the effects of large clusters in that "flow mark" in the fields.

Are we talking moderns ? If so, I think for the most part, NGC is on par or HIGHER than PCGS. Only for ultra-rare label-specific categories like a 2009 MS70 DMPL UHR First Strike does PCGS command a notable premium.

Yup, I kinda agree. If a few dozens Saints or Liberty's are held in European SDBs for a few dozen individuals, and they all pass on and are sold by heirs/estates at the same time, a single American dealer could get them and consider them a hoard. Conversely, you could have the same amount of coins owned by 1 person and that is closer to a "secret stash." That's more hoard-like. Easier to obtain, too, since you don't need multiple sales, deaths, etc....just 1 family or person. Even more so....if the new supply is large relative to the existing populations it stands out more as a "hoard." In my 2 examples above, imagine the impact if they are MS-65 1924 Saints....who cares, right ? But if you have 2 dozen newly found 1930-S's or 1931 Saints.....KA-CHING !! I believe that hoard was legitimate....El Savador was pretty much a classic 3rd-world non-transparent violence-strewn country. Not too hard to believe about $1 MM face value in coins was stashed away by some corrupt government official or some military junta leader. It did seem odd but I believe the coins and the couple were vetted by several outfits. If there was any skullduggery I think something would have come out. I do agree with you that the finding was a bit unusual. I think the storylines are much more definitive and known and ascertainable with the 1933's than the murkiness that we might give the benefit of the doubt in the Saddle Ridge Hoard. To the extent we can't fill-in-the-blanks on the 1933's and the Langboard Ten....fairness (IMO) should have dictated a resolution or split similar to the Farouk-Weitzman coin. Instead, the government lied, used heavy-handed tactics, smeared, and went judge-shopping to stack the deck against the owners of the coins.

This guy disagrees with you anti-gold people. He also has a pretty good line to a British guy :

One of the more amazing hoards or colletions that I didn't know about is the actor Adolph Menjou's collection of MCMVII High Reliefs. He apparently had close to 250 of the coins. He died in 1963 but apparently it took a while for his estate/coins to be sold and disbursed. He had earlier sales of parts of his coin collection sold by some of the bigwig dealers of the day as early as 1950 from what I have seen. He probably paid anywhere from $50 - $500 each for his coins, I guestimate.

I think I had a back-and-forth with someone regarding "hoards" here or on CT. To me....a hoard represented a large quantity or market-moving supply of NEW COINS that wasn't expected by the dealer community and/or the market. It's an exogenous shock, as we say in economics. The 1983 El Savador Hoard of 47,000 Double Eagles (most of them Saints) is at one extreme....at the other you could have the Spencer Marsh Hoard (he was a Newark bank executive) of 50 1932 Saints. Some people consider the continued drips-and-drabs of Saints/Liberty's coming from Europe to be "hoards" but to me they are just residual small quantities -- a few here, maybe a dozen or two accumulated over time at 1 or 2 European banks -- that hit the market in the U.S. all at once. Since they are usually from multiple individuals which are released usually as they die or their heris/estates get rid of them, I don't consider them true hoards myself, but to each his or her own.

That's because gold was the medium of exchange and the source of wealth during mercantilistic and barter times. If they could have, past societies would have fought over control of Milton Friedman's Monetary Rule if that was what wealth and banking and commerce were founded on.

That's it, Silver Meteor.

I took Amtrak (I think it was Acela) January 2020 to the last January FUN show.....had never taken a train ride that long, enjoyed it. Took about 20 hours as I recall. Might switch up the time I depart in the future so it's a bit scenic earlier and darker later on the trip. I left Newark about 3 or 4 PM....it was dark 2 hours later.....for most of the Eastern trip it was dark until morning when I woke up in Georgia. Maybe leaving late-morning would be more enjoyable.

Many immigrants voluntarily turned in their gold coins as an act of patriotism -- and also out of fear. My grandparents and great-grandparents gave back numerous coins. Believe it or not, I have reason to believe my grandfather or his family may have had a 1927-D Saint or similar valuable coin as he was told it would have been worth about $1,000 in the early-1950's when he bought a home for his family. My grandfather was in the Merchant Marine and was on a ship with many people from the West and it's possible that he had colleagues from the area that had a 1927-D. Not sure how he came into possesion of the coin or what specific gold coin it was (he died before I acquired knowledge of Saints and gold coins in general). I'm not sure if my grandfather knew about the coin at the time but by the 1960's he knew it was worth 25-50X the amount they got for it in 1933 or 1934. If I had the $$$, having a details or circulated High Relief to actually physically hold wouldn't be something I'd be against.

No, the Central American Hoard were coins found in El Savador in 1983, Ross....you are thinking of the SS Central America shipwreck.

And it was Jonathan Winters. Jackie Gleason was in the real-life movie THE HUSTLER with Paul Newman.

If you do get to sleep, I hope a nice French Gold Rooster awakens you at the crack of dawn.

It's funny but true: if the last things you study are right before you go to sleep, you DO tend to remember them strongest the next day. That's probably why people talked about putting books under their pillow. I used to study memorization all the time right before I went to bed. No miracle panacea but definitely helped rather than studying other stuff or watching TV for a while and then going to bed.

Thanks to folks like you, QA, Roger for writing the book and commenting very generously, and the folks at NGC for giving us this space ! It's amazing how much more I learn about Saints reading select sections again. I think I was so focused on just getting through the 600-plus pages the first time I didn't really concentrate on absorbing key facts and tidbits about the coins. This thread and re-reading the book have done that now.