I just received my 2007 Jefferson First Spouse gold coin

[BillJones]

My 2007 Jefferson First Spouse coin arrived yesterday. The coin and it capsule were in good shape although it was rattling around in the box when I opened it.

 

The best about this coin is the reproduction of the Draped Bust design which was specifically copied from the Draped Bust half cents that was issued from 1800 to 1808. The reproduction of the Draped Bust is well done on the coin although it does not have as much fine hair detail as the original piece.

 

 

 

The rest of the design for the coin is pretty pedestrian IMO. It has too many words, and the only device other than the Draped Bust is a graveyard obelisk, which is hardly an eye catching item.

 

 

One of the posts over in the numismatic tangents area made the comment that the boxes for these coins are tacky. I reserved judgment on that until I actually had the coin in hand. (I did not buy the first coins in this series.)

 

 

I think that the box is quite attractive. It is made of polished wood, and nicely lined with velvet. It also has a velvet pad on the bottom. It’s such a nice presentation, that I was almost sorry that I’m not buying the whole series, but I’m not. It’s just too expensive. And any rate I imagine that most of these coins have been slabbed, and their boxes have gone to the trash heap. It’s a shame, but if one were to want to buy these coins in the original boxes, the number of coins available is probably limited.

 

Which leads me to a final question. Are there any true collectors for these coins, or are they all being flipped to speculators? Those who invest a lot of money in these coins had better hope that these coins do get a collector following. If they don’t, your only hope will be for continued increases in the price of gold bullion. That will be only thing that will make these coins decent investments.

 

[ant]

i just baught this one! not any others.i have a roomate that doesnt collect at all and the first thing he said about them was" thats alot of writing on the back". i do like it cause it is from a 1800 design

[jtryka]

I bought one of each, and to be honest I really like the boxes. They remind me of the old cherry boxes that 6-coin commem sets used to come in, my only complaint is that there is no infer indentation to remove the coin, so I had a heck of a time trying to get my unc coin out of there! As for collecting, I will not collect this series, but I will endeavor to get all of the Liberty designed coins, since I've just got a thing for mint throwback designs. And by the way, all my commems are in orignal boxes with paperwork, no slabs allowed!

[RGT]

I bought one of each, and to be honest I really like the boxes. They remind me of the old cherry boxes that 6-coin commem sets used to come in, my only complaint is that there is no infer indentation to remove the coin, so I had a heck of a time trying to get my unc coin out of there! As for collecting, I will not collect this series, but I will endeavor to get all of the Liberty designed coins, since I've just got a thing for mint throwback designs. And by the way, all my commems are in orignal boxes with paperwork, no slabs allowed!

 

I had the same problem with my MS coin. The proof was loose in the box when I opened it. It wasn't until I had managed to remove the unc that I noticed the recessed area under the coin. If you push down on the coin near the rim at 6:00 it will tilt up allowing you to remove it easily.

[bsshog40]

It is a nice looking coin tho'. You're right, too much stuff on the back. That is a nice display box also!!

[TomB]

I also agree that the boxes are terrific. The text, aside from the engraver's initials, within the central portion of the reverse matches the text that is on the grave obelisk, I believe.

[jtryka]

Thanks for that info RGT! I didn't even think of it, I guess that was just designed by an MIT grad and not ideal for us Hoosier simpletons!

[astrostu]

Yep, I'm buying the Liberty ones and keeping them in the original boxes. Me no-like-e plastic, and I think the gold contrasts nicely with the red of the Mint box.

 

The other thing they modified, though, besides the hair detail, is they gave her breast reduction surgery! At least that's how it looks, I haven't actually measured it exactly (since I don't have an original example from 200 years ago).

[EZ_E]

Draped Bust Comparison:

[DirtyGoldMan]

I purchased one proof to keep. I did not care for it, so I sold it. I am now finished with this series.

 

[ich-migration]

What's with you people? You're all going goo-goo, or not, over the box. Big deal.

 

Doesn't ANYONE see the gawdawful brown stain right in the middle of this coin?

 

 

 

[MorganMan]

I assume you mean the circled area? I saw that too, but just thought it was an artifact of the photo. Mine does not have that spot.

 

 

 

One other thing that I am amazed about is the price difference on E-bay between the PF70 NGC and PCGS. The PCGS is going for about double the price.

 

 

MM

[ich-migration]

yessir, that's it. Mine was that way, too. I've heard of several other buyers with badly stained TJ spouse coins and dust filled capsules.

 

The mint has many people too scared to return their TJ spouse coins. No one thinks they'll get a replacement since quantity limits of 1 each were placed on these TJ coins by the mint and there's still a waiting list, evidently.

 

What pathetic quality control.

[BillJones]

As the owner I can tell you that the mark is not a stain. It is a circular medal flow spot that I have seen on other Proof gold coins. The reverse of the Columbus $5 commemoartive piece comes to mind.

 

The color of the metal at that spot matches perfectly with the rest of the coin. It's a matter of how the metal flow plays with the light. In this photo it looks much bigger then it is. It doesn't bother me and is only visible at certain angles.

[jtryka]

Here are mine, I don't notice the same metal flow, but maybe it's the angle of the photo.

[astrostu]

What's with you people? You're all going goo-goo, or not, over the box. Big deal.

 

It's not nearly as big a deal as the coin, obviously, but most people (everyone?) wants a nice way to display their investment. For example, compare it with the display for the proof SBA of 1999. Or the way the Pres $1s proof holder looks.

 

It's just nice that finally the Mint has some decent packaging for such an expensive coin.

[Zoins]

The boxes do look nice and are selling on the bay without coins. Thankfully they aren't going to the landfill.

 

I think it would be nice to have custom inserts for them so you could have them hold more and/or different coins. If you could fit in both a Proof and UNC spouse in one box or a 4 coin Presidential Dollar proof set, that would be nice presentation IMO.

[BillJones]

What's with you people? You're all going goo-goo, or not, over the box. Big deal.

 

I hope that there is more to the numismatic hobby than buying "limited editions" from the mint during an a poorly run Internet frenzy and flipping the coins for big profits.

[ich-migration]

not to knock BJ's taste in coins at all, only the poor QC at the mint and the fact everyone was commenting about a box instead of the coin

 

[BillJones]

It's not a matter of taste.

 

This coin has a die polishing or strike mark in the center of it. The color of the coin is uniform, but that spot, which reflects the light a little differently at certain angles, is there. It probably means the coin will never grade PR-70, and frankly I don't give a rat's tail about that.

 

The coin is “as struck” and undamaged. Sending it back would be the act of the whining child who didn’t get a PR-70 from Santa Claus so that he could sell it to the tooth fairy for a big profit. Aside from my business, I’m not looking for profits primarily. I’m looking for fun. A return in this instance is unwarranted IMO.

 

Have I returned coins to the “Fulfillment Center?” You bet. I’ve send back Proof sets had had finger prints on them, and I returned this Sackie dollar. The coin might have brought a premium as mint error, but the lamination made it ugly as sin. The trouble with returns is that the you have to pay the postage, and that can take out any profit that might be made from a mint purchase, at least for Proof sets and the like.

 

 

The market for so-called “perfect” coins is over blown and silly. It is driven by the registries and personal egos. The price premiums for many of these items are ridiculous. Life is too short and there too much fun to be had from this hobby to mess with that market and mess with the foolishness you have to put up with from the grading services. I'll stick to mint products in their original holders and coins that have already been slabbed. I'll submit stuff only when I have to.

 

 

[jtryka]

FYI-- the mint will refund your return postage, all you need to do is call and ask for it.

[BillJones]

FYI-- the mint will refund your return postage, all you need to do is call and ask for it.

 

I didn't know that. I'll have to try that the next time they send me a piece of junk. As you can see, I have gotten junk in the past ...

[jtryka]

I hear ya! I think I ended up sending back my SF Old Mint half eagle three times!