GoldFinger1969

Question For Those Over Age 50.....when the 1983 Central America Hoard was found, did it make big headlines ? I can't find stuff about it on the web.

You realize there was no "The FDIC Stands Behind You at $250,000 per account" sign at the banks at that time, right Kurt ?

Actually, in the aftermath of such a disaster, you'd think people would want their $$$ in their home in large bills and gold coins and not with a bank that could get leveled.

Mintage numbers probably weren't that readily available. Would have been tough except for astute collectors and readers of early numismatic newsletters to be aware of that year's low mintage. Also, back then they tended to not focus on mintmarks but total for the year (1908) which would have been in the millions.

Not at all, I like the back-and-forth that's how I learn. Look....no 2 coins from the same type let alone year and mintmark look exactly alike.....there are differences in the metal given to each on the surface and sub-atomic level....the strike and press of the old coin presses....etc. Things got worn over time 100 years ago that today don't happen and if something is off by 0.000001% today, an alarm goes off. Back then, they kept striking and minting until something broke and it stopped.

Very interesting....I always wondered how they made sure the 90/10 alloy was properly "mixed" so as not to have a concentration of copper in one area of the coin, like at the top. The UHRs have that special gold sheen look on the obverse because of the annealing procedure. So pure gold on the surface has its strengths in addition to copper doing the toning bit.

I think some people -- I used to be one before I read your book -- confuse scatter of light with reflectivity. That 1908-S really has nice scatter and color but it is clearly not a mirrored coin or proof.

Could be.....just thought it stood out. But made a long time ago or recently (granted, he passed in 2012) it would still be interesting/unique. My guess is there were some anectdotal quotes or references to Double Eagles in the early-1900's on the West Coast and he and others generalized (exaggerated ?) to the current quote.

Circulation Use Of Saint-Gaudens DE: For the 1908-S Saint, this comment from Akers stuck out: "...Unlike almost all of the double eagle issues minted after World War I, the 1908-S issue was intended and used for general circulation." Is that just because 15-20 years later paper currency was just more accepted ? Is that a generalization applicable to West Coast/San Francisco gold coin usage before WW I ? Mintage was only 22,000 so they couldn't have expected much commercial use.

Could be because of the relationship between mirrored fields and luster.....maybe mirrors have no luster or perfect luster....or both......sort of like what is the weight and size of a singularity at the center of a Black Hole. Or....how many licks does it take to get to the center of a Tootsie Roll Pop. The world may never know......

But no 2 alloys are exactly the same, right ? So that difference from alloy-to-alloy and the source of the gold (Nevada vs. California) has to play a part in appearance.....die differences.....mechanical differences in the presses.

So what do you think causes the differences between those 1908-S's I posted above....and a pretty bland 1924 Saint ?

Could you repost that link here ? Thanks !

But presumably all coins are at an equal-disadvantage being photographed through the plastic, right ?

Some other 1908-S's had older pics in the HA archives from 2005 or thereabouts and were of no use. But this one recently sold once again shows that lustrous bright copper red color.

Agreed, but that 1908-S stands out apart from any other Saint-Gaudens DE I've seen with the exception of the UHRs. Always cautious on pictures -- I've been shown how lighting can dramatically change the appearance -- but assuming lighting isn't being manipulated, top-notch Hi-Def pics like those at HA can show differences in coin's appearances much much better than pics from 20 or 30 years ago. I'm curious as to how other top-graded 1908-S's look. With low mintage, good chance I'll find coins struck with the same dies and/or at the same time. I'll do some looking and see how good they look. Also will re-read the chapter in Roger's book.

The 1908-S above has unique COLOR and shows LUSTER to me -- so I think it's a combination of all those factors, right ?

And costs mucho dinero......

Yes, I found your explanation of "luster" in the book fascinating. I always thought it was an indication of smoothness, and in fact it's microscopically rough surfaces that allow light to reflect.

That 1908-S....that color just BLAZES out at you. Even someone who only has experience with pocket change can see the luster and shine on that baby.

It's not the variance in gold or copper/silver that led to luster/shine/gold color......it was the dies and the strike, right ? This isn't lighting I believe, it's the coin and the gold. Best-looking Saint I have seen via pics.

I was thinking more of coins like the Reverse Enhanced Silver Eagles of a few years ago.....NGC graded many of them (great job, BTW ! )....they say "SP".....maybe that stands for Special Proof ?

Isn't "SP" a designation that is quite common today on modern coins ? I didn't know there were any/many classic coins with that designation outside of special coins like the one Mark linked to.

I just did a simple CAGR annual rate from $20 to $18.9 MM and $7.59 MM to $18.9 MM. Total sales price was $18,872,250 with the BP so I'm comparing apples-to-apples by including buyers premiums for each price (except the 1933 price).

1933 Saint-Gaudens Double Eagle: In honor of the record sale ($18.9 MM) for the Farouk-Weitzman Saint, some interesting factoids from Roger's book about the 1933 Saint: Total mintage was 445,543 including 43 1933's that were mixed in with 1932's to balance a bag and were possibly available with the coiner for release prior to April 12th,1933 and FDR's edict. Ernest Kehr (1911-1986), who inquired about the sale of the 1933 Saint in the Flanagan sale at Stack Brothers, was a stamp and coin columnist for the New York World-Telegram in 1935, and then stamp news editor of the New York Herald Tribune from 1939 until the newspaper closed in 1966. He continued as stamp columnist for Newsday (Long Island, NY) until his death. Over a forty year period, Kehr presented more than 2,000 radio and television programs promoting stamps. He wrote several popular books of which The Romance of Stamp Collecting (1947) was a philatelic bestseller, and was the hobby’s standard for new collectors for decades. In other words, a stupid stamp collector caused all the problems between the Mint and 1933 Saint collectors over the years. Mint miser Leland Howard, who made the determination that the coins were illegal, had a long career at the U.S. Mint and Treasury Department. His obituary is here: https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/local/1991/06/26/obituaries/6bd28f98-cfc6-47b4-80c4-803df612ef51/ RWB uncovered a note from Coiner Bartholomew that the 1933's were struck starting March 2nd, 1933 and not March 15th as commonly assumed. The additional gold weight added from the confiscated 1933's was never accounted for. The "stolen" coins were not showing in a shortage of gold bullion so the government somehow reaped a profit once they confiscated the 1933's in the 1940's and 1950's. The Langbord Ten coins are graded MS66 (1), MS65 (2), MS64 (6), and Details No Grade (1). The 1933 Saint returned just under 5% a year from 2002 to 2021. If you could have gotten one in 1933 for $20, it would have returned 17% a year from 1933-2021. Pics of Leland Howard (big) and Ernest Kehr (small insert), see below.