GoldFinger1969

All coins, not just proofs it seems, from the auction footnotes in the DE Red Book and also in your Saints book. I can't prove it....but I'll bet that if the price of those 1933 Saints in the early-1940's was closer to $35 instead of $350......the Feds don't care about their release. Instead, you had a bunch of anti-FDR, anti-gold confiscation bootleggers making 2x or 3x or 5x or 10x on coins that never had an "official" release. No wonder the Feds were a bit peeved. Yup, and the demographics of the Baby Boom and the post-WW II economic environment were big tailwinds to all coin prices.

I'm not..... An 1859 Proof Liberty DE in 2004 (from the Red Book) cost $22,500 in MS-60 and $250,000 in MS-65. I'm sure the prices are higher, wouldn't surprise me if the prices had doubled since then.

Modern coins and recent coins didn't appreciate. The auctions for Morgan Silver Dollars in the late-1800's and early-1900's were for $1.05 or $1.20 at most for coins with a face value and silver content of $1.00. The 1907 High Relief -- something of a frenzy back then like those San Francisco Enhanced ASEs of 2019 or the privy mark Gold/Silver 75th WW II coins -- sold for $25 and maybe $30 right out of the gate then fell back below $25 a year or two later. A decade or so later they were $21 or $22, tops.

That is one crappy-made coin, if legit.

Thanks, much appreciated. I know the 1st Edition is fewer pages but it might have bigger pages. Just go to 1 or 2 sections on the Saints (I'm really not into the Indian Head Gold Coins) and see how they compare for maybe the 1907 High Relief and/or the 1924 or another year. If they are essentially the same except for updated information or if the 1st Edition had more of Akers comments (which is what 1 or 2 people alluded to). Thanks, JT !

I hope this doesn't mean we have to end this thread now. When ? Now. When is now ? We just missed it.... When ? Now !!!

Deep or Ultra Cameo, Hog ?

Modern high relief coins would be concave....and have the devices above the field. Not a flat field with a device above it. It'd be a circulation disaster with friction and wear.

The Satin vs. Sandblast (Matte) Saint-Gaudens Proof back-and-forth was very interesting. When you are used to Proof coins being shiny and mirror-like, anything else being called a "proof" would have been confusing.

Does anybody have this book and possibly the 2nd Edition, too ? I've located a used copy of the 1st Edition but only wanted to buy it if there was material information that got dropped from the 2nd Edition softcover (which I have). It's not inexpensive. I've gotten conflicting information so far on whether the 1st Edition contains material information not included in the 2nd.

If they had cared about the numismatic community, they would have filled a few bags with all the various years and mint marks for Saints and Morgans before they were melted and saved them for posterity !

Nobody was looking at the coins from different Mints too closely like under a magnifying glass. As long as the major details were pretty clear and not "mushed" the higher-ups probably felt it was good enough for circulation and/or storage bags. It wasn't until decades later that enough people cared about strike quality and other quality control stuff.

Curious Gmarg....I know you rely on your grading skills, but does the year of certification -- the type of slab -- enter into your decision to resubmit and/or crackout a coin ? We know that certain slabs and labels were associated with -- correctly or not -- tighter or looser grading.

Collectors send in a certified coin to the same TPG that certified it -- and sometimes it gets a new, higher grade (with a new label and slab, I presume) ? Am I reading this correctly ?

Fascinating Roger, thanks .....will I read those details in FMTM ?

Roger or another veteran can pine in, but having just finished Bower's RED BOOK on Morgans (I'll finish the Double Eagle one tomorrow ) I can tell you: The striking quality of Morgans at the New Orleans (O) Mint were consistently lousy. Why they never got better over the years I have no idea. Clearly, they weren't reading this website. San Francisco Mint had usually the best-struck coins for Morgans. Philly and Denver (when they got in the act) were usually 1st or 2nd or 3rd for a particular year. From a collector/numismatic POV, strike quality and luster matter. From a minting perspective, the higher-ups at Treasury or Philly may have not given a hoot. They figured all the coins were either going to get worn in circulation or stay in bags -- who cares about luster or strike quality ? Anybody who complained could just go buy the proofs, if available, right ? Anyway, the lousy surface quality and strike quality for Morgans comng from New Orleans and the usually good quality from SanFran easily got drilled into my head from Bowers' RED BOOK. Not sure I got any Mint segmentation on quality from Bowers' DE RED BOOK (finishing up) or even from Roger's SAINTS magnus opus. The details are there, I just can't recall any particular pattern Mint-wise 8 months after reading the book.

Whoa, that is a HUGE jump in grade, from 65, let alone 64 and 63. You've had this happen many times ? What coins are you talking about here ? Pics would help.

I doubt you'll see anything with Covid on it. People just want to turn the page and forget. I know I do.

Yup, this is what I was referencing. But for some reason I thought folks were submitting a slabbed coin from TGP #1 to TPG #2 and figuring it either gets a higher grade in the new slab or gets returned. In other words, nothing to lose except maybe the submission fee. I can see now I was confused. Thanks Coinbuf and Mark.

Thanks Mark......If your last sentence is true (I have no reason to doubt you)...then I must have mis-read what folks were doing here and elsewhere.....it must be owners taking a risk by cracking out the coin themselves in the 1st TPG slab and re-submitting it to TPG #2 in the hopes of getting a higher grade.

Is IT the same coin ? I see that indentation in the left cheekbone in the toned coin and I don't see that in the 1st coin.

Can someone define what you are all saying by "failed to cross" ? Means that the 2nd TPG wouldn't take the coin out of the 1st TPG holder because they didn't see it as going up by a 1-grade increment ? Or maybe 1/2 grade ? Thanks....

As I've never submitted and the whole crossing thing is a bit cloudy to me, bear with me...... but you're implying (and I always assumed) that a CAC'ed coin from one TPG had a great chance to gain a 1-grade or 1/2-grade increment from the other TPG, right ? And this didn't happen ? Or it isn't happening now with increasing frequency ? I presume if you wanted to "cross" at the same grade they would have allowed that if you OK'd it, right ? I recall someone with a 1927-D Saint-Gaudens once wanted a LOWER grade so it would then qualify for a CAC sticker. Ah, the games people play.....

I'm just disappointed the bootleggers didn't hide some Saints in some hoards we can uncover 90+ years later.

Well, the alcohol problem had to have subsided a bit during the 1920's, right ? Prohibition.......