Henri Charriere

True. Sounds way better than a hobo nickel.

Inherently bad form to even suggest this but an entirely legitimate query.

I do not know what kind of Journal you have in mind but I would avoid changing the name to The Wall Street Journal.

And the intact accent aigu over the lower-case e and well-defined dentil work -- and superb overall condition contribute to the desirability of your coin.

There are actually 13 NCG-graded MS67s and 27 PCGS-graded MS67s and two more graded 67+, one each from the above TPG fraternity that for reasons frowned upon by "the experts" remain unacknowledged. That's 42 gorgeous gems BUT not one from the period I tabbed 1899 to 1906, generally referred to as the originals. Imagine paying well over $1,000 for a legitimate coin one-half the investor community refuses to recognize, much less acknowledge, as evident in your response which is by no means uncommon. [If the Dino the Dinosaur guy is watching, how about some "perspective" on this?]

There is something to be said for a coin whose minting predates a country's existence.

The only error I see is mis-placement of the entry wound. Lincoln was shot, while seated, from behind.

Short set? Ha! Ha! Ha! I have two complete sets: one PCGS and a hybrid comprised of superseded PCGS coins, seven NGC, an ANACS, and five or six raw uncertified Mint State gems. Upgrading is ongoing. I learned the actual grading process inadvertently when I submitted two specimens for cross-grading, learned that both passed muster as MS66s and immediately received an overture from a company stating they had two coins which would fill the voids in one collection quite handsomely as they were the precise dates I had submitted. When I wrote Customer Service for an assurance this was an incredible coincidence and not my coins, I received a doctoral-like dissertation on the entire process meticulously adhered to in their hermetically-sealed assembly-line of consultations. The "short set" you refer to lacks one coin, matching the other seven in grade, leaving me with a Hobson's choice familiar to all Rooster collectors: squandering additional funds on a coin with the appropriate dress-slab; engaging in further mass cross-grading which is, at base, a totally unnecessary, superfluous, technical expenditure of funds -- or waiting for NGC to accept world "gold" coinage certified by other TPGs, as it is expected to do in due course, a long overdue, but economically wise move that should have been undertaken in the last millennium. One final thought: there is a difference between grabbing a bite to eat, and dining. If I were to secure Dino the Dinosaur's signed endorsement of the use of my sentimental, high-powered, half- century old loupe (in lieu of a microscope) would you be willing to let that matter lie or would you rather risk an abdominal aorta aneurism continuing to harp on a relatively minor matter akin to whether I should remove my hat when entering an elevator occupied by women or wearing pegged vs. fully-cuffed trousers? Grading, ideally, appears to be nothing more than Grade Point Average -- a consensus reached after a meeting of the minds.

You wouldn't understand. I am a collector; not an investor. A connoisseur of French 20-franc or coq Marianne. My 30X loupe was a gift from a jeweler I worked for at a Diamond District (NYC) storefront in 1971. I have a very handy, totally useless 6X glass which my wife now uses to read the daily paper. The fact that a mere rank amateur -- your professional diagnosis I am honored to accept -- managed to compile the # 1 ranked Rooster Roster on the West Coast will hopefully provide the needed motivation to inspire the handful of serious contenders out there to complete their respective collections to the best of their ability. I appreciate your input!

Ebay and the larger, well-known auctions houses are giant juggernauts which for the most part eschew discussion and negotiation. Two of the more notable responses I have received, both from highly regarded, long-time establishments are a curt reference to a coin's "Fair Market Value," and a gleefully snarky: "How badly do you want it?" (Both were evoked through exceedingly polite, well-reasoned texting on my part.) While I cannot argue with VKurtBs premise, I cannot help but recall that sequence in the movie Trading Places where Dan Ackroyd, down on his luck, is compelled to enumerate the various attributes of his "sculptured" $6,953 roche foucault wristwatch, functional to a depth of "three atmospheres," when the proprietor of a pawnshop cooly responds with, "Here in Philadelphia [your watch] is worth fifty bucks," effectively ending all negotiation. Last year when I called a well-regarded Florida dealer to complain that the MS66 Rooster he had sold me had a distinct thumb print on its reverse prompting me to examine it more closely with a 30X glass, I was told, "you should be using 7 magnification!" When I persisted, he offered to take it back, but I demurred as it was not he who had graded the coin but one of the TPGs. Would that same coin have been graded MS67 minus the 'print? Could I have used the "defect" as a bargaining chip [as VKurtB undoubtedly would have done]? Undoubtedly.

This query is deserving of a serious response. I submitted a number of raw French 20-franc gold roosters to a third-party grader absolutely confident that one would be the very first ever accorded a MS68 grade, minimum. (I own five graded MS67 so I know what excellence looks like and revel in the term, "none graded finer.") Imagine my disappointment when this impeccable coin, strongly struck, with sharp devices, dazzling eye appeal and original mint lustre and no observable defects was dismissed as a mere MS64+! Worse, it is not a part of my Set Registry rated # 1. Submit it for "reconsideration"? Out of the question. Like the teenager rebuffed for years after claiming he had found a 1943 copper Lincoln cent, I will keep it and never offer it for sale. I don't believe I have any Peace Dollars but am aware of their unique wear anomalies. Your specimen is what I would call suspect subjectivity, particularly since is has been "certified." The only saving grace is silver prices are rising. How does one draw the line between an coin that has not been cleaned -- and one with poor eye appeal? I sympathize with you completely.

This is a most regrettable, cringe-worthy question: I have something; what is it worth? The truth is only a third-party grader is qualified to make that determination (called a "certification" as opposed to "authentication") today, particularly in the Mint State range of 60 to 70. Fortunately, for you, the coin's gold "melt value" has risen considerably since the date of your post.

You bring up an interesting point which inadvertently explains the marked disparity between the quality of the so-called original roosters, 1899-1906, and the so-called restrikes, 1907-1914, minted decades later [a subject explored in detail on various European websites]. For the time being, having distributed my APBs and BOLOs, I will just have to sell off my excess inventory -- and monitor my electronic mail.

1. Bullion gold is expensive but five French 20-franc gold roosters do not even equal one American Gold Eagle [in AGW]. 2. Upgrading is a continual affair. You will always have a cache of superseded coins you no longer want which can be used to obtain what you need. I have never found it necessary to travel to develop my collection. If you have a cell and an innate curiosity, and are willing to take calculated risks, you're good. International transactions do not intimidate me. Time is of the essence; if you prefer to "sleep on a decision" overnight you will invariably discover your rare opportunity is gone, particularly with eBay. 3. There are many approaches to coin collecting. It is a shame the TPG Shotcallers are totally unaware of the peculiar conundrum faced by those handful of collectors who, for whatever reason, run into the walls and glass ceilings of assembling a quality grade collection. My Set Registry is # 1 [at PCGS] but is hardly the desirable collection it could and should be. What's really needed is an end to the East Coast-West Coast rivalry, a merger of all TPG, and the adoption of one universally accepted standard application of the best of all grading systems -- and an eventual leap forward to laser-grading. [We also need a return to the Golden Age of truly magnificent U.S. coinage and currency: devoid of clearly manufactured errors in coins and bleeding dyes in currency. The Lincoln cent, prettied up with a cosmetic composition is an embarrassment] and perhaps an annual heavily- publicized world-wide approach to enticing the non-collector to come in with their inherited finds as a public service to collectors. A glance at all the woefully incomplete French 20-franc gold rooster Set Registry compilations give one the impression the well-intentioned collector bit off more than they can chew, are in over their heads, and languish in silence. This must end. One final note: any suggestion there may be a correlation between a well put together collection assembled by a well-positioned collector, quickly, that reflects on its "desirability" is strictly in the eye of the beholder. Whole rare collections come on the auction block regularly and are swooped up instantly, its purchasers often cloaked in anonymity. This allows for the release of superfluous high-quality specimens if not held by a fanatic. And the cycle continues.

This is true. This particular coin is called a gold rooster but contains less than a fifth of a troy ounce of gold. It was my original intent to complete my collection, at a high-quality Mint State level in 90 days but going well into my 1st year I realize now that that was a pipe dream. I appreciate your clarification and thank you for taking the time to answer. The top tier coins are out there somewhere raw and unappreciated.

I believe it is time I come right out and state what I know, not think, but KNOW what the major impediment to upper tier grading is, and let the chips fall where they may. 1. A pronounced disinclination to assist the "collector" vs. the "investor" with the imposition of an unconscionably high fee schedule for membership and grading. 2. My pet peeve. It should be obvious to anyone attempting, e.g., to complete a set registry of Roosters that one TPG dominates Europe, where most of the earlier roosters lie, raw and uncertified, while the other has firmly established their bi-coastal footprint in the United States forcing "collectors" of this sub-species of coin to engage in prohibitively high membership fees and risky cross-grading. Ironically, NGC has for many years graded Roosters but will not (yet) accept gold World Coins along with those graded by other TPG in their Set Registry. Where does the the small "collector" fit into all this? Does anyone truly believe the sale of raw, uncertified coins via the internet is foolproof? There is a gentleman on eBay right now who believes mere "authentication" of his Rooster constitutes "certification" which he insists was made without his knowledge. I urge all "collectors" (those who enjoy collecting as a hobby, irrespective of spot price) to exercise due diligence.

I appreciate your interest and honesty. It's been said make no major decisions following major surgery. I mistakenly believed 16 coins ought to be a cinch and, regrettably, buoyed by painkillers, it hasn't been. 1. Gold is soft but we are talking, what, .18% gold composition and 21 mm., not double eagles. 2. I have dealt with all the highly-regarded coin emporiums whose wares (in France are priced in euros using their own quaint scale including FDC, or fleurs de coin, a range of from MS65-MS70.) I submitted it to a TPG here in the U.S. who pegged it at MS64+. Like a viewer pointed out, when you add all the ancillary expenses, insurance, and possible seizure by CBP, not to mention use of bank wires which some prefer, it is a harrowing experience. The outstanding coins lie raw in Europe because collectors do not want to invest in formal grading which may or may not pass muster and only a Duchess of Sussex can afford. 3. For reasons not entirely clear to me, Rooster set registrants do not feel comfortable discussing their obsession publicly. Recently, a veritable dump of 1907 mint state roosters appeared. Unspoken, was the thought that this one act served to devalue all existing slabs. Archaeological treasures in Kabul, Afghanistan survived many centuries of warlord-riven lands but I believe, I hope, the best of the best exist and time will bring them to light.

As the owner of the No.: 1 Registry Set of the above-titled matter [Rooster Roster] my question to collectors is why is it both TPG have produced the following glaringly disparate grading populations results for the following years, as follows: 1899-1906, Mint State-67 = Zero or None (unavailable at any price despite mintages well into the millions. By contrast, 1907-1914, Mint State-67 = 40 (pejoratively dismissed as re-strikes) My question posed to fellow rooster collectors who have been stymied in completing their quality compilations is why do you suppose that is?

The official NGC population reports remain unchanged: for the specific orginal non-restrike tabbed period, 1899-1906, not a single 20-franc gold rooster (or coq Marianne) has been graded MS-67, or higher. [The figures given for MS-66 and MS-65 are similarly scarce.] Why?

I am afraid this may be true for other TPG services, but not NGC from the stated 1899-1906 tabbed period. I repeat, NOT ONE! Why?

Would anyone care to venture a guess as to why of the 117 million minted not a single rooster has been graded MS-67, or higher by any TPG service?