GoldFinger1969

31 minutes ago, RWB said:

The articles I wrote for CW were published long before the trial and 6 months before I became associated with the case. The documents you mention were introduced in 2011 but not in 1947.

Got it....well, if the transcript of the court's decision is available, I would think the exhibits would be too.  I may need to ask someone familiar with Lexus-Nexis or whatever it's called.

Lying bastards........

So the Coin World article was incorrect in that neither of those pieces, even though they existed, were really introduced in that trial ?

Roger, I'm having trouble finding the 2 pieces referenced to you in Coin World in that portal.

Here's the 2 pieces I'm trying to find:

And even more important was a letter dated Sept. 26, 1945, from William Bartholomew, superintendent of the Coinage Department of the Philadelphia mint, indicating that production of the 1933 double eagle began on March 2, 1933, not on March 15 as generally believed and the government had long maintained. The March 2 date was believed to be a “smoking gun” because it was before President Franklin D. Roosevelt issued an executive order halting production of gold coins. Another document was cited that seemed to bolster the position. It was prepared prior to a trial in Memphis, Tenn., in June 1947, that focused on the “cashier’s daily statement” for the period of March 7 through April 12, 1933, indicating $3,180 in double eagles were paid out by the Philadelphia Mint cashier during the period.

I have a transcript of the trial (somewhere) but I don't recall the exhibits being part of the download so I couldn't see what the jurors and all of you in court were seeing.  I saw them referenced in the transcript but didn't visually see them.

I presume the 1947 evidence is in regard to the Barnard coin case.

2 minutes ago, Revenant said:

Not saying it is one I'm saying we're going to have one at some point. The Coronavirus is the pin that the bubble, it isn't the cause or the bubble itself. We may limp on after this and something else will get the blame later.

No doubt a non-leveraged, low-debt economy fares better but I don't know of any economic system that can withstand a 20-40% drop in real GDP for any length of time.

And a Reserve Currency nation can NOT not have functioning debt markets, which means liquid Government and Corporate debt markets -- and government and corporate debt. 

32 minutes ago, Revenant said:

I guess we'll all see who is right in the fullness of time. For what it's worth, I'd love for you to be right. WC and I don't want this to be a bubble. We don't want a collapse or systemic failure, but I think it will happen.

This isn't systemic failure.  It's a natural catastrophe -- like an asteroid hitting a city.  2008-09 was systemic.

Rev, you sound like the late Richard Russell of Dow Theory Letters or Geraldine Weiss of Investment Quality Trends when I used to read them in the 1980's !! 

You and WorldC's concerns on debt are noted, but other measures of the market (see below) are not as problematic.  And any "put" in the market was erased by the 35% drop in 1 month and the 2 bear markets in the 2000's that declined 45% and 57%, respectively.

Check out page 5 and subsequent pages:

https://am.jpmorgan.com/us/en/asset-management/gim/adv/insights/guide-to-the-markets/viewer

It's unlikely we ever see dividend yields on the DJIA at 6% or dirt-cheap valuations like 1932 or 1982 because the markets today are fundamentally more transparent and with much better information, so the equity risk premium is substantially lower than in the 1920's when you got information from your RCA radio.  Or even the 1980's when it was largely from The WSJ or Wall Street Week with Louis Rukeyser (miss him !).

Good post, WorldC, but my only quibble is there was no bubble at the market peak on Feb 19th or whenever it was.  Valuations were not cheap, but they were not anywhere near prior "bubble" levels.

Oh, trust me, I'm aware of the speed of the decline.  Been watching the markets 24/7 for 30 years. 

You could be right on the gold decline in 2008-09, I just glanced at the first chart that gave me a decent scale.  But the decline was bigger then and so far gold is holding up.  We'll have to see what happens going forward.  

Gold has held up much better than in 2008-09.  Then it declined 25% peak-to-trough.  So far, the decline was closer to 10% and it's bounced back to retrace most of those losses.

Darn...some guy on the CU boards posted that he found 3 HRs that someone uncovered in a SDB.....he submitted them for grading, but the thread ended with no reply on what the grades were. 

54 minutes ago, World Colonial said:

There is little if any analogy between now and the 1930's on this aspect.  1930's was predominantly collecting out of circulation at FV.  No noticeable proportion of the population who aren't collectors now are going to go out and start spending any of their predominantly limited discretionary income on coins.  If they do so at FV, it will do nothing to support the price level.  They have no affinity for collecting whatsoever which is why they aren't collectors and the number of recreational alternatives is a multiple of the 1930's.

Well-said.  The only knock-on effect I can envision is people getting into gold bullion (and maybe silver bullion) and then finding out about gold coins like Saints and Liberty DE's (and maybe if into silver taking up MSDs).

But you'd need a seismic change in attitudes and the investing environment for PMs like happened in the 1970's.

I see very few weak prices on Heritage (or Ebay or GC for that matter)....and yet....the PCGS 3000 index continues to languish.  Entire sets of classic American coins continue to stagnate, some 25-50% below prices of a few years ago.

The bidding on those sites is for a specific coin and a limited number (1) of them.  Plus you have the behind-the-scenes hanky panky which I am not an expert on but which others who are insist amounts to a form of bid-rigging.  I wouldn't go that far, but it's highly unusual to see VERY FEW coins or bills go for below recent sales prices or estimated prices. 

And I'm not dissing the sites, they make buying coins light-years easier than 20-30 years ago, and nobody puts a gun to my head.  But it is very strange to see prices in many/most auctions stay "high" when it seems overall the U.S. Coin market languishes.

Again, that's just an observation.  My coins aren't an investment -- they're a hobby.  Personally, if my coin prices fall for a few more quarters or years it'll allow me to buy more in the next 5-10 years before I probably start dwindling down my buying.

1 hour ago, Conder101 said:

The first reference I can find in the graysheet for a 1907 HR was in 1974, with a "Choice BU" (which the sheet equated to MS-65) with a bid price of $3,900 and Ask $4,200.

Thanks Conder....gold started off the 1974 year about $120 and finished closer to $190.  But given the premium, maybe the 1907 HR traded apart from bullion then.

Thanks Conder...I tried to LIKE your post but I used up my daily allotment. 

NGC Mods, what's with the LIKE quota ?  It's like it costs you $$$ or something.  Either make it unlimited or raise the numbers....not fair that on a busy day here we can't give proper thanks and credit to quality posts.

6 minutes ago, Conder101 said:

I don't believe it was the SS job to be on the lookout for Nazi saboteurs, that would have been the FBI's job.

I think the SS assisted the FBI on internal stuff back then. Regardless, I don't think worrying about "stolen" coins totalling $200 face value was what they should have been worrying about in 1944.  JMHO.

21 minutes ago, Conder101 said:

Another place you might check would be the NNP and look for auction catalogs from the 20's and 30's with prices realized.  That might give you some idea of the demand level for rare date pieces.  That would tell you something about the demand level.

I've never used it -- heck, just learned about it -- but it seems I should spend some time there.  Thanks, C101 !

2 hours ago, cladking said:

People are home and most of them have computers.   They are apparently buying a lot of coins so if you're looking for weakness you might have to wait until the stock market gets back to 30,000.  

Maybe...but the last thing I think you'll see is people not making a paycheck, or losing part of their paycheck, or worrying about their NEXT paycheck....and then saying that it's good to spend a few hundred (thousand ?) dollars on Ebay or HA on coins or currency.

When did it close permanently ?  I know you covered that in FMTM, but I forget.

You would think they would have saved some $$$ on minting costs from being so close to the Comstock Silver mines.  Not sure what drove up the minting costs....it's basically labor costs plus the transportation costs of silver (which should have been much lower than the other mints).

1 hour ago, RWB said:

The coins were supposed to be allocated with one bag (250 pieces) for each sub-Treasury, and from there to the correspondent banks. However, one document notes that Treasury employees intercepted nearly all of the coins, then offered them at a premium. The street price was about $30 per coin.

I recall that the price of a really nice MCMVII DE in 1960 was around $200, which was a lot of money back then..but Mr. Feld is better placed to investigate prices. (Check the ads in old copies oi The Numismatist.)

Sounds about right, Roger....I think I recall before the price of gold exploded in the mid-1970's that a BU 1907 HR was $500-$1,000.  That would be a tripling or so from the price in 1960.  Makes sense.

1 hour ago, kbbpll said:

Ah, Dimmick. If I remember right, the $30000 was never found. People tried to connect it to the Saddle Ridge Hoard, but the dates and denominations didn't make sense, among other things.

Yeah, you had a similar situation with the 1928 DE's from the Philly Mint.  The Mint Supervisor (Dessler ?) was personally liable and the Mint lobbyists got Congress to pass a law holding him blameless.  OK, I can live with that but....

I think that the theft of those 1928 DE's is the reason why the Mint has a hard-on for the 1933 DEs.  They were so upset at being caught asleep on the missing $5,000 in DE's that they decided that if somebody had the GALL to switch a measly $500 or even $200 in other DEs for the 1933 DE's....with NO LOSS to the Mint in terms of $$$ or gold....well, that's a high crime and misdemeanor.

How else to explain why the SS was hunting the 1933 DE in 1944 when they were supposed to be on the lookout for Nazi saboteurs ?  

Matt, no just wanted to re-visit and update and read ANY threads that had "1907 High Relief " in them.  I figured there had to be a few, even if the switchover lost the pre-2017 threads.  If not, there should be tons of them since the message boards go back years, right ?

46 minutes ago, MarkFeld said:

Thank you. 

Yes, “just tracking the general weakness in the U.S. coin and/or gold market the last few years”. The coins are not really “rare” and typically, there are more then enough available at most grade levels. They’d probably sell for much less, if they weren’t so beautifully designed and thus, so popular. 

In your experience, have you found many 1907 HR's in the hands of people who don't collect coins and might not have another coin at all in their possession ?  In other words, passed down as a family heirloom ?  Maybe not even knowing how much it is worth ?

Barring that, it's quite possible that when the 1st generation of post-WW II coin collectors got some $$$ in the 1960's and 1970's -- before the price of gold exploded -- they bought the 1907's at what today would be considered very low prices.

I can't find auction or references to sales prices for 1907 HR's in the 1960's and 1970's, but am still looking.  It's actually easier to see the prices in the early-1900's than 40-60 years ago.

Matt, illiquid items like coins and currency notes are not Treasuy bonds.  They don't trade that frequently and if anything, there WILL be weakness in a few months as the effects of the plunge in income and GDP filters through.

The U.S. Coin market has been falling for years and for all we know this could be another one of those boom-and-bust cycles with the emphasis on bust.  I don't expect a collapse, but I don't expect prices to be flat or strengthen, either.

That said, I am a buyer on weakness.

3 hours ago, MarkFeld said:

Weakening in prices has not been confined just to MS63 and lower grade examples.

Really, Mark ?  I thought I saw flat-or-rising prices when you hit the MS65 level.  I didn't write down the numbers or really lock in on then, because quite frankly that level is above my pay grade at this time.  I'll take your word for it.

Any thoughts on why they have been weakening -- just tracking the general weakness in the U.S. coin and/or gold market the last few years ?  Alot of collectors don't understand why the 1907 HR's are as "expensive" as they are....they think with the 1907 HR numbers out there, the price should be lower for some reason....I've always just thought that the coins were in "strong hands" over the years and that lots of people bought one/hold them who might not collect gold in general or DEs in particular.  Hence the greater demand for the coins over the years and maybe that is now reversing.

BTW, you did a good job correcting an auction description...I emailed HA and you were the one who responded a few weeks ago regarding one of those Mercanti Saint Gaudens silver 1 oz. pieces.  Good Job !

Fascinating, thanks....need to hit your book when it arrives next week.  Looking forward to it.  Hopefully Heritage ships it ASAP and 2-day or something.