GoldFinger1969

On 2/19/2023 at 3:08 AM, olympicsos said:

A big problem with gold especially. How many Saints and Indian head gold coins graded MS or even as high as MS 65 are truly MS? 

At that level, probably most though some could have signs of wear and they are "making it up" with minimal bag marks and/or outstanding luster.  There are some veterans posters I've read who insist that the entire Market vs. Technical grading situation since the late-1990's has resulted in the entire MS category being bastardized with many/most coins not really being truly MS.  

Are (lots of) bag marks signs of "wear" even if different than circulation wear?  If coins "rub" against one another inside the bag is that the same as "rub" from circulation ?  These are from before my time.

The real problem is determining AU coins vs. low-60's MS coins (MS60-62).

On 2/13/2023 at 8:15 AM, RWB said:

It is possible that most of the coins you are looking at are EF, and not really 'AU." 

I'm looking at my 7th Edition ANA Grading Standards.  The big differene I see between the AU grades and the EF grades is that when dealing with luster you have "much of the mint luster still present" (AU-55) or "some of the mint luster" (AU-50) whereas for EF you have "part of the mint luster may be present" (EF-45) and for EF-40 there is no luster description so I presume after the EF-45 amount there could be none by the time you get down to this level.

On 2/16/2023 at 1:09 AM, powermad5000 said:

I am not a fan of ANY cleaning of coins.

In the case of pre-1933 gold, I think any black or copper spots are part of the history of the making of these coins metallic composition and the methods employed at the time.

I certainly would be careful about buying with any minor imperfections on a coin with a big premium to bullion value.  But for modest premiums or bullion substitutes it's probably not a big thing.  MS-66 and above for commons, 63ish for semi-rares, those would be my general threshold limits for tolerating any spotting.

On 2/13/2023 at 10:56 AM, Katerina1997 said:

It's a good idea for you to shoot a video and put it on the Internet, I think people will be very interested. I believe that in the first place someone would advertise your channel and when people come in and watch you, I personally did this)))

You watched a YouTube video on coins...you joined 4 days ago....you've posted 2 times....and 1/2 of those posts were congratulating someone for producing a video of the type or kind that brought you here.  Do I have that right ?

How come I can't get a stray Saint-Gaudens or Double Eagle collector to stroll in here....?

It's funny.....we've had a small runup in gold prices the last few months (though we backed off the last few weeks)....and apparently all the gold coin sellers (including Saints and Liberty Heads) are front-running what they think will be a straight-line run to $2,500/oz. 

I see folks complaining about "bubble" pricing in gold coins and I'm like, unreal...what would they say about a doubling or tripling in gold coin prices in 18 months with gold FLAT in price ?? 

Please get The Red Book.  

On 2/16/2023 at 9:19 PM, lcourtney123 said:

Thanks everyone I didn't think so but scared to make any decision. I am going to get all together and just ask, and always in doubt! Then I am going to go get the melt value at least I will get something. I have bought a couple and will show when I get them.

You need to segment the coins....find out what the coin types are....then which ones are worn and not worth much (make sure it's not an ultra-rare coin that is still valuable in a low grade; this is unlikely but you never know)....which coins are in decent shape and worth a slight premium to metal content...and which coins have big numismatic value (coin in great shape and/or it's a rare, valuable coin).

If you have lot of silver (maybe some gold ?) coins and are going to get spot silver or a bit less and then use the proceeds for a NICE coin to start your collection, we can offer suggestions.

CB, thanks for a really informative and useful response.  Much appreciated. 

On 2/16/2023 at 11:14 AM, Coinbuf said:

There is no denying the fact that often PCGS graded coins do sell for more than the identical grade coins in NGC holders even when both have CAC beans.

THAT is very interesting, I never thought about it.  CAC is basically saying that both coins are properly graded and strong for the grade and yet domestic U.S. coins via PCGS command a premium for the same grade, and from what I have read ancients/foreign coins in NGC holders get one, too. 

On 2/16/2023 at 11:14 AM, Coinbuf said:

 If you talk to any of the crackout specialists, they will tell you it is far more advantageous to crack and send a coin in raw if you really feel the coin is deserving of a higher grade vs the crossover route.

I get that...and yet....if a grader (especially a newer, less-experienced grader) sees a coin in a holder that is MS-63 he probably subconsciously (or consciously) knows that the coin is AT LEAST a 63 and it's most likely a 63 or 64.   Send that same coin in raw and you would think that the grader may feel at first glance it's anywhere from an MS62-64, a wider range since he's going in blind.

But from what you said, it actually happens that a coin in a TPG holder with a grade doesn't cross but send it in raw and it gets a higher grade.  Fascinating....

One thing....all the coin doctoring we read about and the skew in the ranks of low-pop coins would indicate that many people -- maybe mostly dealers -- are playing the "Crackout Game" and trying to get 1-2 grade increments.  Lots of coins that had low-pops of 1 or 2 or 10 coins 10-15 years ago....suddenly have 5 or 10 or 15 coins today. 

On 2/16/2023 at 10:48 AM, RWB said:

Luster is a result of mechanical stress of steel under fore of repeated impact.

I know steel alloys have improved over the last 100-150 years...but do you know if they have considered using alternative metals that might have stronger tensile or other strengths, like aluminum or tungsten ?

This was interesting:

https://www.thyssenkrupp-materials.co.uk/strongest-metals

On 2/16/2023 at 2:50 PM, VKurtB said:

Yes, allegedly. Oddly enough, many of the counterfeits are alloy correct - the right gold content. The main diagnostic is soft details. 

Soft details seems to be the tell.  It's not cheap to buy quality striking equipment that can strike with 50-150 tons of pressure PSI.

On 2/16/2023 at 1:52 PM, VKurtB said:

As an aside, I once shared an ANA banquet table with a renowned specialist in smaller U.S. gold coins. He said that the 3 dollar denomination has a higher percentage of counterfeits than any other U.S. coin. He estimates that counterfeits are over 70% of all 3 dollar pieces out there. Daunting, isn’t it?

Are they quality fakes or crappy ones ?  If crappy, all the more reason to buy only certified coins (I assume the TPGs can spot the fakes no problem).

Fascinating information, thanks Roger. 

On 2/16/2023 at 8:58 AM, NickiO CS said:

Keeping that in mind, while rare, it possible that if given the opportunity to grade the coin raw and out of the holder, that the coin will grade at the same grade or higher. 

Thanks Nicki, that clears things up a bit.  Does viewing a coin in-hand out of the holder REALLY make a difference in determining if it will grade higher (or at least the same) if you view it in a holder ?

I would think being able to see it in-person (as opposed to from pics) is the important thing, that being in the holder shouldn't matter that much. 

But I guess I'm wrong. 

On 2/15/2023 at 5:31 PM, RWB said:

Hope this does not sound boastful (I don't want it to be...) -- the information has been there for a long time, just nobody looked -- or maybe bothered to challenge the "Experts," or maybe I was just lucky.

Not at all, I for one appreciate your expert opinion and factual analysis. 

But I'm a bit confused....we've determined that these small $3 pieces have average to poor luster overall.....I don't read about Liberty Head DEs having great luster before the late-1800's (if that)....and we know Saints and Eagles after 1907 had lots of coins with great luster.

I guess I'm confused on what is causing and not causing the luster.  I pretty much had defaulted to your definition in your Saints book that luster was light reflecting off thousands of microscopic ridges caused by the deformations of the crystalline structure as a result of the great force hitting the planchet/gold from the dies (with anywhere from 50-150 tons of pressure). 

The presses from 1850-1890 were probably much less in tonnage strength, I'll wager.  Could that account for less luster and whatever luster was created was more easily "erased" upon handling ?

On 2/13/2023 at 5:46 PM, RWB said:

To make sure we're all using the same meaning -- a "luster break" is an abrupt change in the original surface often caused by light handling of a coin.

"Light handling" is going to rub the miscroscopic deformations off the coin ?  I would have thought it would take something a little harsher.  I realize fingers are huge relative to the surface composition of (soft) gold, but I thought it took bag marks or other friction to KO luster.

On 2/13/2023 at 5:46 PM, RWB said:

Early strikes off new dies will have little or no luster

Really ?  Why is that...based on your definition of luster in your Saints book, I would think the age of the dies would be irrelevant (unless they were old and/or failing).  The crystalline structure....the tremendous force applied...how does a new or old die figure into those compositions of luster ?

And annealing on the MCMVII UHRs (now those dies were early !!) certainly brought out the luster on those coins, right ?

Is the composition of luster on these (small) $3 coins different than for later (larger) gold coins ?  Striking and minting technology improved alot from 1854 to the 1920's (to use Saints, as an example).  I don't read much about Liberty Head DEs having great luster from the 1850's, 1860's, etc., either  Of course, coin collecting preservation wasn't as developed as 60-70 years later.

Fred, what did you think this coin was worth ?  Didn't you find it unusual that you would be lucky enough to have a valuable coin ?

How long have you been collecting coins or showing an interest in them ?  Or was this all just a few unique coins that  you happened to find ?

On 2/15/2023 at 6:14 PM, Coinbuf said:

I have read and heard countless stories of coins that graded the same or higher when cracked out even though those coins failed to cross, and that is for both P to N or N to P. 

I'm a bit lost and having never submitted a coin and not sure I understand cracking-out completely and crossing completly.....please bear with me. 

Isn't the purpose of crossing a coin to submit it to the other TPG and get a HIGHER grade?  So why would "coins that graded the same or higher when cracked out" fail to cross ?  If they graded HIGHER (maybe not if the same), why wouldn't they cross ?   You got the higher grade, right ?

I have a PCGS MS-63...I send it to NGC....they say it's an MS-64....they put it in an NGC holder.  It crossed, right ?

Am I getting this right or wrong, folks ?

Reading about the 1952 steel mill seizures, it's very surprising that SCOTUS was so emphatic in allowing the confiscation of gold (without compensation !!) following an EO by FDR in the 1930's.

It appears that by 1952 if SCOTUS or the Courts were going to be so defferential, they'd want a Congressional action passed, not just an EO on the whim of 1 person (the president).  I believe the Youngstown Steel case (6-3 decision) pretty much said that.  You wonder how that same SC would have ruled 15 years earlier about the confiscation of individually-owned gold with no compensation. 

Considering that the Constitution explicitly says that private property can NOT be confiscated for public use (did you even have "public use" by taking someone's gold ?) except when fair compensation is given, it's kind of surprising that the EO wasn't struck down or compensation wasn't ordered.

On 2/15/2023 at 5:42 PM, RWB said:

Hoover and FDR policies both came down hard on hoarders - not ordinary people. It was Hoover who started tracking gold withdrawals and deposits and taking names of those making withdrawals -- FDR's people did not do that, although they made limited use of the Hoover "hit lists."

What's interesting is that it appears that the Spencer Marsh Hoard of 1932's was traced back to him and he was forced to surrender all or most of those coins.  He purchased 50 coins; nothing about George Dieterle of Cincy's 9 coins being traced by the Secret Service, though.

On 2/15/2023 at 12:36 PM, RWB said:

There's nothing especially exciting that isn't already known. The main "take away" is that Philadelphia Mint Officers knew much more than was presented in the 1947 trial, and made no effort to release everything to Counsel. The Coiner in 1945, Bartholomew, was Coiner in 1933 and knew exactly what was done in manufacturing the coins.

Care to speculate about what "more" they knew about in 1947 ?

And would Bartholomew be aware of or instructed others to insert the 43 1933's into the 1932 count ?

On 2/15/2023 at 12:36 PM, RWB said:

The real "black hole" is who removed the coins from the Mint and when. Mr. Switt had no access.

Yup, that's why I think they kept using the words "stolen" because it's so much worse than "exchanged."  I also note that there was no specific law that made it a crime to exchange common coins for valuable ones so long as the gold content was the same.

The personal and political animus of the FDR crowd against "gold bugs" like Israel Switt and all these coin collectors (I doubt many FDR supporters among them) can't be overstated.

And yes...I continue to be amazed at the volume of investigations and questioning of everybody inolved in handling a 1933 DE....but hardly ANYTHING about an entire bag (250 coins) of STOLEN (and missing !!) 1928 Saints.

Hey this friend of yours...he wouldn't be George Santos by any chance, would he ? 

"Held primarily in the National Archives, the cache of documents relating to 1933 Double Eagles may be one of the largest single archival holdings devoted to a single US coin’s production and subsequent history."

How does someone access these NA documents ?  Can you do it online ?  Are they in the Newman Portal ?

On 2/14/2023 at 1:51 PM, FrederickMorris said:

US Coin 30th anniversary walking liberty with double lettering on the edge - this may have been address at one point but I hadn't viewed those replies and am wondering if anyone has seen this before?

Are you talking about ASEs ?

You need to write in COMPLETE sentences and give more details....we can't guess on stuff this specific. 

On 2/14/2023 at 2:02 PM, FrederickMorris said:

Is this forum always so rude, if so, it's no wonder collecting is dying. I am trying to interest a small group of 20 year olds but these replies would not enlighten them, educate them or inspire them.  I will pull the 1953 from the safe and get it under the scope, it is by no means lint.

Rev MOrris

We are a very helpful group with STRONG opinions.  If somebody is a novice or beginner, we will NOT ridicule them -- in fact, we'll go out of our way to help them.

But likes and dislikes here are often strongly and emphatically stated.  As an example, I am a gold coin afficionado and love collecting, reading, and researching about Double Eagles (1850-1933) but some on this site not only don't like them but they dislike gold as a metal per se and are not shy about expressing it.

Some people here might disagree with you....others might agree with you.  And either group might show up and post that -- or not.

Lately, we have many new members here who are "1-and-dones" -- they post about a supposedly rare or valuable coin that they have and want to know how much it is worth and can we verify it.  99.9% of the time, it's worth face value or less. 

Looks like someone tried to melt a penny, nothing more.