GoldFinger1969

Brilliant answers as always, Roger.  My comments to your comments follow:

"...I’ve seen no signs of contemporary internal speculation about the fate of Treasury coin holdings until late in 1933. The only goal was to save the economy from complete collapse, and stopping hoarding of gold and gold certificates was a part of that. A key to stopping the contagion affecting the US economy was to break the chain of transmission – and adherence to a circulating gold standard was a primary means of spreading the disease, much like a virus. (Sound familiar….?)"

I agree.  The priority wasn't "what's gonna happen to all the gold coins in mint vaults" or "what do we do with all all the 1933 Double Eagles" or even "Hey, did any of these 1933's get out ? ".....the focus was on 10-15 banks failing EVERY DAY.  By comparison, during the 1980's S&L Crisis, only 2 or 3 a WEEK failed.

I agree with all your statements in (2), (3), and (4), Roger.

20 hours ago, RWB said:

They are wrong. I've been told they will not designate any new examples.

Really ?  Wow....very interesting.

On 5/10/2020 at 8:59 PM, oceanbert said:

Go luck with reaching someone, I have sent three emails and gotten zero answers. 

They're short-handed, Ocean, cut them some slack. 

Thanks PF, WorldC....no I get that most Americans, especially in 1933, had more important things to worry about than the fate of gold coins in mint vaults.

But mint officials surely had to be thinking about their future.....Washington higher-ups...collectors (if you knew that lots of hard-to-get 1929-33 DE's were going to be destroyed, wouldn't you try and get them ASAP via mail-in before it was prohibited ?).  Again, the Philly Mint kept striking 1933 DE's for months after FDR's EO on gold...they couldn't have been thinking "Let's do a good job striking these coins, to put them in our vault, to take them out sometime in the future and melt them down."

Must be some articles or books on the attitude towards gold in early-1933 through early-1934, the key period. 

I see a few going for anywhere from $100 - $400:

https://coins.ha.com/itm/philippines/world-coins/philippines-usa-administration-philippine-assembly-bronze-medal-1907-/a/3031-29267.s?ic4=ListView-Thumbnail-071515

Not sure what condition yours is in, color, strike, etc. 

I've been thinking alot about the gold situation and FDR in March 1933 and 1933-37 lately (yeah, this virus has given me lots of free time  ):  when FDR issed his EO....and then we left the gold standard...what was the thinking at the Mint and the public and collectors regarding what was going to happen to all those coins that were in Mint vaults ?

Did they think they were all destined to be melted (was that a fate the Treasury Secretary had hinted at in early-1933)? 

Did they think they would just be saved in the vaults and maybe released once the prohibition on gold was lifted ?

The 1933's in particular still kept getting struck/minted after the April 1933 EO...why would you do that if you even suspected they might be melted and returned to gold ingots and pieces ?

I'll bet one of Roger's footnotes or bibliography sources in his book addresses this.  The book itself didn't go into the sentiments on the future of the coins, maybe he can elaborate further.

2 hours ago, Conder101 said:

They didn't need to put aside a bag they sent examples to the Smithsonian.  Representive specimens were all they needed.

For the public, coin collectors, multiple museums, etc.

I was thinking about this the other day:  if you knew the damn coins are all going to be melted, how about making it easier for coin collectors on the West Coast and/or Midwest to see them, rather than have to go to Washington, DC and the Smithsonian ?

Yeah, they saved 2 coins for each year, pretty much.  They could have made sure a few other museums around the country had them, too.  The Connecticut Library appears to have an extensive collection going back over a century, they would have appreciated the 1933's among others.

4 hours ago, kbbpll said:

It seems kind of pointless to complain about it.

I like to complain.  I have alot of the late Frank Costanza in me. 

1 minute ago, RWB said:

There are no "proof" MCMVII double eagles. All were made the same way. 

Right, but NGC calls them "proofs" -- I think you covered that in your book.  PCGS does not.

And the Mints never put aside 1 bag of each of the gold coins to save them for posterity.

On 4/2/2020 at 8:01 PM, 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.

My 1970 Red Book has the 1907 HR in "UNC" at $950.  I believe Uncirculated was equivalent to MS65, maybe MS63 for coins not plentiful in Mint State.  Proofs listed for $2,500.

Did Akers say gold dollars were his favorites ?  I would have thought Indian Heads or Saints.

Bigger coins.

Zebo, report back here or create new threads to discuss the book(s) and/or gold coins covered in them once you start reading them.

57 minutes ago, Conder101 said:

Actually proofs have no luster, they have smooth reflective surfaces

Yeah, reading Roger's book he said that luster was really caused by the "roughening" up at the microscopic level of the fields...caused by light reflecting off thousands of micron-sized ridges/imperfections/reflections....but I used to interpret luster as shineyness (is that a word ?  )...reflectivity.....etc.

I guess luster has a specific designation/meaning not associated with "smooth reflective surfaces."  I thought those fields were 100% luster but I guess I'm using the word incorrectly.

59 minutes ago, Zebo said:

That's nice to hear, I've pre-ordered Haynor's book. Can't wait to receive it. I'd like to see a good one on the $20 Libs, but saw that the Fuljenz book only covered the type III DEs. 

You've checked out Bower's Red Book on Double Eagles, right ?  Over half the book is on Liberty DE's.

Maybe I have to check the Newman Portal and check The Numimsatist for Saint-Gaudens and Double Eagle articles.  Might not be that many S-G books.

Roger, besides your book and Akers and Bower's Red Book, any other Saint-Gaudens books you're aware of or are they all out-of-date and relying on too-dated information ?

Not seeing anything from "Daryl Haynor" on Amazon. 

FWIW, I'm re-reading all of Akers again since your information is fresh in my mind (I'm not even sure I read all his Saint year-by-years) and I am still right at the Type III's in the 1870's in Bower's book.  So at least I have those to read having finished yours.

Tell you one thing....I picked them both up today....MAN, are they LIGHTER and easier to HOLD than your book !!  

32 minutes ago, erwindoc said:

Not to change the subject from one double eagle to another, but has anyone read the Double Eagles Type 3 1877-1907 by Mike Fuljenz?  I got a copy and I think it is very interesting.  Ive been considering doing a 20th century set so I thought it would be a good resource.   Once I finish with a couple of my registry sets, Ill probably get going!  

I hadn't, in fact, I wasn't aware of his books, thanks for letting me know about it.  I see his books are mostly about the earlier Type DE's and Indian Heads from the late-1800's through 1907.

Does he go through them year-by-year, Erwindoc ?  Are there non-yearly commentary or review sections ?

I don't have any Liberty DE's but hope to at some point.  

To Anybody Who PM'd Me....I never saw the Message Icon until today, so I just responded.  Apologize for missing the messages, quite frankly I couldn't see the icon without scrolling up. Sorry for the delays in responding.

Thanks, Roger.  Great answers as always.

I await the movie version of the book......

FINISHED !!    

Well, as you can tell from all my posts a throughly enjoyable book.  Glad I bought it NOW before I start buying more/expensive Saints (whenever that is) down the line.  I learned alot to look for and I am somewhat mollified that it appears I didn't make any disastrous purchases previously by buying poorly-struck or overgraded coins. 

This book really gives you tons more useful buying information than Bowers' or Akers' books so if you are contemplating buying Saints, unless you have years or decades of experience, you'll definitely benefit from Roger's magnus opus on Saints.

I have a few follow-up questions and points to make and will be re-reading a few sections here-and-there.  So hopefully more posts are coming.  But let's keep this thread alive for those who want to talk about Saint-Gaudens coins and/or the book itself.  And needless to say, I HEARTILY and STRONGLY recommend purchase.

Thanks to everybody who has and continues to chime in on this thread, including Roger for his numerous and direct answers to questions and points of interest. 

Coming into the homestretch.....Roger or anybody else can chime in on these questions:

(1)  If the presses 100+ years ago didn't have gauges (trial-and-error to get pressure right)....how do we know those figures we hear about on the 1907 UHR and then the High Relief and regular Saints are correct ?  Did they measure or guestimate decades later ?  I would have thought simple gauges were around in the early-1900's.

(2)  Roger or anybody else:  do you have a favorite (or maybe 2 or 3 favorite) "tells" to determine striking detail ?  Or maybe someone at Heritage shared a secret to look for.  I liked this section as I added the Torch/Flame and Liberty's Right Fingers to my list of items to look for when gauging strike detail.  I can post my complete list in a separate post if anybody wants to see it.

(3)  Luster...fascinating section.  I can't believe that luster is caused by microscopic shifting in the die crystalline structure, the steel....I thought it was an indication of a SMOOTHER surface.  In fact, when I think of today's DCAM and UCAM proofs, they are filled with luster....must be different today though, right, those super-luster coins can't be that way because the die is beginning to shift at the microscopic level ?  With better/harder steels today and polishing agents, today's proofs appear much shinier, more luster, and "blacker" (DCAM/UCAM) than a proof or proof-like Saint from 100+ years ago.

(4)  Copper Spots:  very interesting.  I was wondering for classic .900 gold coins like Saints how they insured that the ratio was maintained at the coin/planchett level.  If you mixed huge slugs of liquid/melted gold and copper in a 90/10 split, how did you not know it wouldn't separate like orange juice in your refridge ?    This section sort of answered it.  The problem with separation/segregation with silver and copper (because of the melting temperature differences) seems more pronounced.  Good job explaining this, Roger.

45 minutes ago, tobi mansfield said:

Thank you all so much for all of the information! Its wonderful to find such nice, helpful people. To clarify, this is a 1917 George V with no mint mark. I wanted to make sure it was real but alas it is not...The vice president of NGC looked at it and said it was a very good 1970's faked coin in 22K gold. I had taken it to a local coin dealer with 25 years of experience and he told me it was real but a Sidney mint. So I have been so confused...Perhaps this will help someone else

thanks again

Don't be discouraged, Tobi.  There are checks-and-balances today to avoid buying fakes or counterfeits.  And this Board is a good resource to help you.  There are others, too.

I take it the coin is at least solid real gold, right ?

Is this what you thought you had:

https://www.perthmint.com/catalogue/1917-king-george-v-perth-mint-gold-sovereign.aspx

Not to mention better steel, lower tolerance errors, digitalization and use of lasers, etc.  And that was what I know from the 2009 UHR booklet.