three coins under $1250. each for your collection---choose ONE only and WHY??

[michael]

you got your choice to obtain only one of three coins for you to keep long term in your collection and each is valued approximately the same

 

which ONE do you choose and WHY?

 

one----1870-cc seated dollar totally original dove grey with zero problems and great eye appeal choice vg++/fine pcgs/ngc certified approx. $1175.00

 

two----1859-O seated dollar au58+++ with totally original deep blue green toning and strong prooflike surfaces both sides with great eye appeal pcgs/ngc certified=== this is NOT from the treasury hoard found in the early 1960's these where white low ms grade all banged up and UGLY!! approx. $1200.00

 

 

three--- 1836 classic head five dollar gold piece choice xf++/au with thick original red gold surfaces and great eye appeal pcgs/ngc certified approx. $1150.00

 

pick one only for your collection and tell us why??

[moovyz]

This one is easier...

 

I still don't like gold, so 3 is out. And 1 is out... don't care for well-circulated pieces.

 

2 is the winner. I like luster and lots of it. In this case, the AU is the closest thing to UNC (not including the gold) that I have as a choice.

 

I would take a common date BU red Lincoln worth half the price of a 1914-D in fine (assumng it wasn't simply for making a profit). It's like the choice of owning a 1968 Camaro with a 396 in Mint for $35,000 or a Mercedes Benz 500SL with 100,000 miles for the same price... give me the mint state anyday!

[PerryHall]

Three---I like gold!!!

[WinstonWare]

#1 sounds the coolest to me

[MikeInFL]

I'd take #2, because a seated dollar in AU has been on my wantlist for three years now.

[cpm9ball]

Michael, in spite of the fact that this is just a casual survey, I think you must agree that there is one consistency which seems to stand out. That is that of all the responders, including those from your other survey, chose to ignore both the cost and potential for appreciation in value, and instead, made their choices based on their personal preferences. I think this is what coin-collecting is all about. It's emotional and it's fun. It's not always about dollars and cents.

 

That being said, I would opt for the 59-O seated $ because I love toning, and I prefer that my coins be in the best possible condition that I can afford.

 

Chris

[construct]

I'd take the half eagle. I don't have any classic head gold. So it would be a great addition to my type collection.

[bsshog40]

I would take the gold also as I don't have any!!

[Dwaine]

Well, #1 is tempting but I am not too keen on the condition so I will have to go with #2.

[okbustchaser]

Number 2...for the same reasons mentioned above.

[relicsncoins]

2, it would fit perfectly into my 7070, which is my latest endeavor.

 

JJ

[michael]

Michael, in spite of the fact that this is just a casual survey, I think you must agree that there is one consistency which seems to stand out. That is that of all the responders, including those from your other survey, chose to ignore both the cost and potential for appreciation in value, and instead, made their choices based on their personal preferences. I think this is what coin-collecting is all about. It's emotional and it's fun. It's not always about dollars and cent

 

Chris

 

 

(thumbs u (thumbs u

[MikeKing]

I'd take the 1836 Classic Head gold piece with that natural toning because I've just never been able to find one that way. Can I choose more than one?

[TomB]

I find this set of questions easier, too. The 1870-CC dollar sounds mighty attractive, but the series is very long with a number of better dates so the relative scarcity of the piece is diluted, in my opinion. The 1859-O dollar is quite cool in that it is stated to not be from the Treasury hoard, but the truth is that as soon as I saw the date the first thing I thought of was the Treasury hoard and this is a negative affiliation. To me, this coin suffers a similar fate as do original skinned, early MS Washington quarters when compared to the Omaha Bank Hoard (OBH) that produced inferior coins that appear to be overgraded on average. This leaves the half eagle as the choice.

[physics-fan3.14]

I think in this case, the choice is much easier. I would actually choose the gold. In teh previous survey, all three coins had a certain "wow" factor, and that made the choice hard. But here, the gold coin definitely has the wow factor. That being said, if that 1859 dollar had a little bit of red and orange in there as well, the choice might be a bit harder

[BillJones]

I'd take the 1836 Classic head $5 gold coin. I've always liked Andrew Jackson's "mint drops," and the only date I've owned is 1834. I've got an 1834 in NGC MS-61 that is "all there," at least by the best of today's standards, but a nice original Classic Head $5 gold of a different type would be great.

 

As the VG++ to Fine CC dollar, that coin does nothing for me. It just doesn't grab my interest.

 

I've already got the No Motto Seated Dollar type covered with an PR-64, so that one would not be at the top my list either.

[Conder101]

Once again the gold is immediately out of the running, I still don't like gold.

 

The other two both have things going for them but I think there are a lot more better grade 59-O dollars out there than 1870-CC dollars (Thanks to the Treasury hoard) and the 1870 being the first year of the CC mint and the first denomination struck there just gives it the history nod that puts it on top.

[Arizonadesertrat]

This is an easy choice---the Liberty Seated dollar, provided that it is really a good-looking AU58. This coin is a good buy for the future. Type collectors put pressure on nice EF-AU coins, because the next 'nice' grade (MS63) is too pricey for most collectors.

 

I have nice examples of both types of Liberty Seated dollars, so I would personally go with the half eagle.

[BillJones]

Michael, in spite of the fact that this is just a casual survey, I think you must agree that there is one consistency which seems to stand out. That is that of all the responders, including those from your other survey, chose to ignore both the cost and potential for appreciation in value, and instead, made their choices based on their personal preferences. I think this is what coin-collecting is all about. It's emotional and it's fun. It's not always about dollars and cent

 

Chris

 

 

(thumbs u (thumbs u

 

"Profits are a by-product of collecting coins. It's not the objective."

 

That pretty well sums the situation up for me. Sure, when you have to make the major investment that it takes these days to build a nice collection, you must market prices and values. But making money, outside of my business, is not a concern.