Roger Burdette's Saint Gaudens Double Eagles Book
6 6

2,042 posts in this topic

Posted (edited)

BTW, Roger, I know you tried to get the details on the 1983 El Salvador Hoard from MTB but the records were destroyed. 

I presume you know that they partnered with Stack's on those coins, and they might have some information that was also only privvy to MTB.  I didn't know Stack's was MTB's partner until I found a dated NY Times or other article mentioning it a few weeks ago.

Edited by GoldFinger1969
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes. Stacks had nothing and claimed to know nothing. MTB said they were the "originator" (or some such term). Just another example of the hearsay and original anecdotal sources dying off without writing down what happened and why. With the routine business documents lost in Hurricane Sandy, we have almost nothing except questionable pubic claims and sales bologna.

Edited by RWB
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
On 3/19/2022 at 12:50 PM, RWB said:

MTB said they were the "originator" (or some such term). 

On Stack's own website or the article I cut-and-pasted, Stack's claims the foreign bank contacted them and the volume of coins was so big that they reached out to MTB and brought them in:

"...Stack's was contacted by a foreign bank to see if we would be interested in acquiring a large holding of United States gold coins, primarily Saint-Gaudens double eagles. We learned that this was among the major banks that received U.S. gold coins as part of government payments.  The size of the inventory (the exact number still remains a secret) was so great that we decided that for such a large hoard we would partner with one of our New York colleagues, Manfra, Tordella and Brooks (MTB) to finance and sell this great find nationwide."

 

Edited by GoldFinger1969
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/19/2022 at 2:37 PM, RWB said:

You'll have to ask Stacks. My source was a MTB employee who was involved. I think he's dead now.

Fascinating stuff.  That's why it's so important these guys tell their stories in writing or orally or better yet on tape before they pass on.  The information they have (assuming it's verifiable or flows from common sense) is invaluable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Backed up another 5 pages of this thread, from Pages 51-55. 

Just a public service reminder for those of you who have your favorite threads or articles.  xD  (thumbsu

Edited by GoldFinger1969
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Page 603 Table:  Roger, how do you reconcile the estimated survivors figures from the table below vs. what you stated at the end of Page 612 where you said 2,996,565 Saints survive in all states of preservation ?  I can't get that figure from the numbers below.

Also, re-reading this chapter, I think it's logical to assume that the TPA number below (39 MM) is certainly reduced by Nazi Germany and other country melting down of Saints and other American gold coins from 1907-1950, for which there are no surviving documents to confirm it but certainly we know it took place.  Hoards still possible, but almost certainly a small fraction of that 39 million.

Page 603:

  • Total Saint-Gaudens Coins Minted..................70,290,930
  • Known Melted Coins........................................26,951,006 (from 1921 and 1929-33)
  •      TOTAL POTENTIALLY AVAILABLE.........43,339,924 
  • Estimated Survivors..............................................591,665  (1907-1933, excludes the next 2 lines)                    
  • Estimated Survivors...........................................2,028,000 (1908 Type 1 & 1922-1928 Philly Mint)
  • Estimated Survivors...........................................1,088,310 (Europe, South America)
  •       TOTAL ESTIMATED SURVIVORS.............3,707,975
  •       MISSING/POTENTIALLY AVAILABLE......39,631,949
Edited by GoldFinger1969
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Estimate for Europe, SA is very rough -- a "possible back-of-the-vault bag-or-two" quantity. The first two rows are  in line with the 2.9 million estimate because the source number are better.

The Nazis (German ones) only melted gold when they wanted to conceal its origin. Otherwise it was re-bagged into $25,000 units to facilitate handling. Sweden did much the same thing to hide German stolen gold.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/25/2022 at 3:35 PM, RWB said:

Estimate for Europe, SA is very rough -- a "possible back-of-the-vault bag-or-two" quantity. The first two rows are  in line with the 2.9 million estimate because the source number are better.

Got it, different estimates from using different assumptions.  3.1 MM vs. 3.0 MM (rounded).  

Thx. (thumbsu

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey guys. Extremely interested thread! I'm the owner of the 1933 DE, the Eliasberg 1927-D, and the Green/Bell/Simpson UHR.

I thoroughly enjoyed the debate about the 1933 and the legality of the 10 Langbord coins. To no one's surprise, I have the same opinion as @VKurtB. Except for the 2 1933 DEs at the Smithsonian, every other 1933 DE made it out of the mint illegally. And the only reason why the Farouk 1933 DE is legal today is because of the export license that was given by mistake. But I'm biased, but then again I wouldn't have bid that much for this coin if I thought otherwise or that the government would change their minds about these 10 Langbord coins.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/9/2022 at 5:06 PM, Elite Collection said:

Hey guys. Extremely interested thread! I'm the owner of the 1933 DE, the Eliasberg 1927-D, and the Green/Bell/Simpson UHR.

I thoroughly enjoyed the debate about the 1933 and the legality of the 10 Langbord coins. To no one's surprise, I have the same opinion as @VKurtB. Except for the 2 1933 DEs at the Smithsonian, every other 1933 DE made it out of the mint illegally. And the only reason why the Farouk 1933 DE is legal today is because of the export license that was given by mistake. But I'm biased, but then again I wouldn't have bid that much for this coin if I thought otherwise or that the government would change their minds about these 10 Langbord coins.

Gee, the bank account to support a purchase like that and brilliant, too. You ARE a unicorn, aren’t you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
On 5/9/2022 at 6:06 PM, Elite Collection said:

Hey guys. Extremely interested thread! I'm the owner of the 1933 DE, the Eliasberg 1927-D, and the Green/Bell/Simpson UHR.

Repeat your name for us, again.....xD

On 5/9/2022 at 6:06 PM, Elite Collection said:

I thoroughly enjoyed the debate about the 1933 and the legality of the 10 Langbord coins. To no one's surprise, I have the same opinion as @VKurtB. Except for the 2 1933 DEs at the Smithsonian, every other 1933 DE made it out of the mint illegally. And the only reason why the Farouk 1933 DE is legal today is because of the export license that was given by mistake. But I'm biased, but then again I wouldn't have bid that much for this coin if I thought otherwise or that the government would change their minds about these 10 Langbord coins.

Well, I trust you are wealthy enough that if the coins ever were released (and all you need is a numismatist judge or someone in the Executive Branch to alter the facts-in-evidence), that the hit wouldn't hurt you.xD  Hopefully, you've been short the market the last few weeks to hedge any losses. (thumbsu

On a more serious note, are you attempting to collect ALL Saint-Gaudens DEs or just some trophy pieces ?  I'm not a registry follower so I wouldn't know anything about your "Elite Collection" though your coins listed certainly are.

Edited by GoldFinger1969
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
On 5/9/2022 at 6:06 PM, Elite Collection said:

Except for the 2 1933 DEs at the Smithsonian, every other 1933 DE made it out of the mint illegally. And the only reason why the Farouk 1933 DE is legal today is because of the export license that was given by mistake. 

You are correct in your general opinions here, EC.  But just as the Export License turned an "illegal" 1933 into a "legal" one, there may be evidence not yet found that legitimizes all the other 1933's including the Langbord Ten.  Even if no such evidence exists or is found, my opinion (as you may have found here) is that a "tie should go to the runner" and with no gold missing the coins should have been allowed to trade. 

There is no such evidence to the contrary that "every other 1933 made it out of the mint illegally."  Quite frankly, there's not much HARD evidence either way, but certainly most numismatists believe they should have been legal to trade.

And before the Export License was found, the government was running sting operations to nail coin collectors with both civil AND criminal charges.  Maybe if they had spend half the time looking for the EL (found by Fenton's lawyer), they would have actually been productive.

The government in the 1940's didn't want anti-FDR "gold bugs" flipping coins for $2,500 that cost $30 only a few years before the War.:o

Edited by GoldFinger1969
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
On 5/9/2022 at 7:38 PM, GoldFinger1969 said:

"tie should go to the runner"

Unfortunately, in this case tie goes to the government. The 1933 coin was never released to the public. If it was, it was either a mistake or illegally. So I take that back about every 1933 being illegal. If it was a mistake, the government can correct that mistake. They should have exchanged the coin for another DE. Just like if the IRS made a mistake and gave me a bigger tax refund, they can ask for it back. Anyways, you are right, there's not enough evidence either way. So we all have our take on what is right.

On 5/9/2022 at 7:38 PM, GoldFinger1969 said:

certainly most numismatists believe they should have been legal to trade

Probably true but that's the same as "most people want to pay less tax". Numismatists of course want to be able to get their hands on more 1933 DEs. What I can tell you is that I thought the government was justified to confiscate the 1933 DEs. That was my opinion even before I purchased the Farouk one. 

On 5/9/2022 at 6:01 PM, GoldFinger1969 said:

Repeat your name for us, again.....xD

Elite Collection will be just fine. xD

On 5/9/2022 at 6:01 PM, GoldFinger1969 said:

I'm not a registry follower so I wouldn't know anything about your "Elite Collection" though your coins listed certainly are.

Here you go: https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/gold/20-gold-major-sets/st-gaudens-20-gold-major-varieties-1933-patterns-1907/360

Edited by Elite Collection
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Amazing thread!!  👍🏻  👍🏻

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/9/2022 at 10:56 PM, tj96 said:

Amazing thread!!  👍🏻  👍🏻

Yup, we have some great bait (RWB) and now we landed a Big Fish (EC). (thumbsu

Meanwhile, I'm the owner of this thread/pond...and in the words of the immortal George Costanza...."I'm still getting nothing !!!" xD

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/9/2022 at 6:01 PM, GoldFinger1969 said:

Well, I trust you are wealthy enough that if the coins ever were released (and all you need is a numismatist judge or someone in the Executive Branch to alter the facts-in-evidence), that the hit wouldn't hurt you.

I'm not looking to turn around and sell the coin anytime soon, so I'm not that concerned. If indeed that happens, this coin still has a unique history. And this certificate of monetization says it's the only 1933 lawfully issued by the US Mint. That's got to be worth something, right? :grin:

Screen Shot 2022-05-09 at 8.09.13 PM.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/9/2022 at 10:54 PM, Elite Collection said:

Very impressive !!  (thumbsu The UHR is probably my favorite Saint, I appreciate the rarity of the 1927-D and mythology surrounding the 1933, but let's be honest:  they're pretty blah-looking compared to some of the other coins in the series.

Not sure why the Registry says there are 59 coins in the set -- is that including proofs ?  I guess it's 54 coins since you have the 1933....including an UHR, MCMVII, and the 1909/08.  5 additional coins for proofs to make 54 coins 59 ?

I'd check with RWB's book but it's sitting high on a shelf and I can't reach it in my current condition. :(

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/9/2022 at 11:12 PM, Elite Collection said:

I'm not looking to turn around and sell the coin anytime soon, so I'm not that concerned. If indeed that happens, this coin still has a unique history. And this certificate of monetization says it's the only 1933 lawfully issued by the US Mint. That's got to be worth something, right? :grin:

Yup !! (thumbsu

The whole monetization thing ticks some people off more than the debate on the legality of the 1933's (not sure we debated it here that much, I can't recall).  I know it was a HUGE debate over on the PCGS Forums.

Million dollar coins confiscated.....no problem.  $20 to legitimize a gold coin.....them's fighting words !!  xD

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No 1933 DE were ever reported or accounted as missing, neither was their any shortage of melt weight. Hence, there was no reason to check this or any other authentic gold coins made in 1933 or before.

The Farouk export request was handled exactly the same way as previous export requests. It was only the coincidence of the inquiry and the date the Farouk 1933 left the country that it became "a mistake" after the fact.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
On 5/9/2022 at 8:39 PM, RWB said:

No 1933 DE were ever reported or accounted as missing, neither was their any shortage of melt weight. Hence, there was no reason to check this or any other authentic gold coins made in 1933 or before.

So it was likely a coin for coin exchange, either (A) illegally by a mint employee maybe even right before a bag of 1933 coins were melted or (B) over the counter and accidentally exchanged. One can argue whether or not the coins should be legal if (B). The government can still claim it was a mistake and want to correct it. But as @VKurtBsaid, all 1933 coins passed through the hands of Swift, so that makes (B) highly unlikely. Occam's razor suggests that the simplest answer is A, which makes these 1933 DEs illegal.

Anyways, no need to rehash this same argument. I'm not going to convince you guys and you're not going to convince me. Agree to disagree? xD

Edited by Elite Collection
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
On 5/9/2022 at 10:49 PM, Elite Collection said:

So it was likely a coin for coin exchange, either (A) illegally by a mint employee maybe even right before a bag of 1933 coins were melted or (B) over the counter and accidentally exchanged. One can argue whether or not the coins should be legal if (B). The government can still claim it was a mistake and want to correct it. But as @VKurtBsaid, all 1933 coins passed through the hands of Swift, so that makes (B) highly unlikely. Occam's razor suggests that the simplest answer is A, which makes these 1933 DEs illegal.

Anyways, no need to rehash this same argument. I'm not going to convince you guys and you're not going to convince me. Agree to disagree? xD

Well, I can promise you they’ll be disagreeable. You can pretty much count on that. 
Based on the entirety of the circumstances, the most likely date the Switt handled specimens left the Mint was summer of 1937, and not before then. 

Edited by VKurtB
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/9/2022 at 8:14 PM, GoldFinger1969 said:

The UHR is probably my favorite Saint, I appreciate the rarity of the 1927-D and mythology surrounding the 1933, but let's be honest:  they're pretty blah-looking compared to some of the other coins in the series.

Yup, that's pretty much true for a lot of other ultra rarities, the 1913 liberty nickel looks just like every other liberty nickel except for the date, but it's 10,000x the price of the same grade 1912 liberty nickel. Same goes for the 1804 dollar or the 1894-S dime. (shrug)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/9/2022 at 10:57 PM, Elite Collection said:

Yup, that's pretty much true for a lot of other ultra rarities, the 1913 liberty nickel looks just like every other liberty nickel except for the date, but it's 10,000x the price of the same grade 1912 liberty nickel. Same goes for the 1804 dollar or the 1894-S dime. (shrug)

The Eliasberg 1913 Liberty Nickel is clearly a “superior specimen” in any sense of the word. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/9/2022 at 11:49 PM, Elite Collection said:

Anyways, no need to rehash this same argument. I'm not going to convince you guys and you're not going to convince me. Agree to disagree? xD

Sure, that's how we learn AND it's fun. (thumbsu

If you purchased/read RWB's book that this thread is based on, he has some new ideas on the 1933's.  Regardless of one's position, it's good reading.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/9/2022 at 11:01 PM, GoldFinger1969 said:

Sure, that's how we learn AND it's fun. (thumbsu

If you purchased/read RWB's book that this thread is based on, he has some new ideas on the 1933's.  Regardless of one's position, it's good reading.

After all, he was caught “ATS” offering to testify to almost anything for the right witness fee. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/9/2022 at 11:49 PM, Elite Collection said:

So it was likely a coin for coin exchange, either (A) illegally by a mint employee maybe even right before a bag of 1933 coins were melted or (B) over the counter and accidentally exchanged. One can argue whether or not the coins should be legal if (B). The government can still claim it was a mistake and want to correct it. But as @VKurtBsaid, all 1933 coins passed through the hands of Swift, so that makes (B) highly unlikely. Occam's razor suggests that the simplest answer is A, which makes these 1933 DEs illegal.

I have no proof....RWB and others insist there is no linkage...and maybe I'm just wondering why they busted their asses over 25 (?) 1933's while a whole bag of 1928's went missing....but I still wonder if the theft -- REAL THEFT !! -- of an entire bag (250 count) of 1928 DE's was somehow tied to an exchange of 1933's.

Yeah, no proof but fun to speculate. :) Be fascinating to just even find some of those 250 coins and locate them today.  Now, THOSE were stolen -- I wonder if the government would confiscate or if the legality of tens of thousands of thousands of other 1928 DEs makes "proving" a 1928 direct's lineage to the Stolen 250 impossible ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/10/2022 at 12:05 AM, VKurtB said:

After all, he was caught “ATS” offering to testify to almost anything for the right witness fee. 

Bar talk.  I heard someone say the other day he wanted to kick Joe B's in with this inflation, but I didn't call the Secret Service with a legitimate threat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/9/2022 at 11:06 PM, GoldFinger1969 said:

I have no proof....RWB and others insist there is no linkage...and maybe I'm just wondering why they busted their asses over 25 (?) 1933's while a whole bag of 1928's went missing....but I still wonder if the theft -- REAL THEFT !! -- of an entire bag (250 count) of 1928 DE's was somehow tied to an exchange of 1933's.

Yeah, no proof but fun to speculate. :) Be fascinating to just even find some of those 250 coins and locate them today.  Now, THOSE were stolen -- I wonder if the government would confiscate or if the legality of tens of thousands of thousands of other 1928 DEs makes "proving" a 1928 direct's lineage to the Stolen 250 impossible ?

Geez, MORE “whataboutism”?!?!?!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
6 6