NGC Now Attributing Tomaska Die Varieties for Franklin and Kennedy Half Dollars
1 1

13 posts in this topic

If he wrote Red Books complete with price guides for varous grades, how will he justify paying a huge premium on his TV show for other coins ?  I'm sure his books say to be careful about price.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrator
7 hours ago, physics-fan3.14 said:

Do they have to come in those god awful holders, or can you get them in normal holders? 

Seriously, that is one of the worst eyesores I've ever seen y'all put out. Whose idea was that? 

The core and label show are not provided with the Variety Attribution. Some of our special labels and cores are available, typically for an additional fee, for applicable coins. Some cores and labels (I assume this one as well) may only be available on secondary markets as they may have been created and used by one dealer. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, GoldFinger1969 said:

If he wrote Red Books complete with price guides for varous grades, how will he justify paying a huge premium on his TV show for other coins ?  I'm sure his books say to be careful about price.

If he wrote the book, he can put whatever prices he wants in there! I haven't read his Red Books, I still have his original guide for Franklins. 

However, this press release is actually talking about a much, much older book: https://www.amazon.com/Cameo-Brilliant-Proof-Coinage-1950/dp/096285770X

As far as I know, it has been out of print for decades. I'm really curious why NGC is suddenly starting to designate these varieties. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, physics-fan3.14 said:

If he wrote the book, he can put whatever prices he wants in there! I haven't read his Red Books, I still have his original guide for Franklins. 

I meant his TV show, where the prices seem to be about 40% over FMV.  And I get it, he has costs...but I'd be interested in how he can be writing books, complete with price guides, which aim to create savvy and well-educated buyers....and then you pump stuff up at super-inflated prices.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, physics-fan3.14 said:

I'm really curious why NGC is suddenly starting to designate these varieties. 

There is presumably a limited market (and therefore grading fees) for this attribution.  Neither series has a particularly strong collector preference.  There isn't much die variety collecting for series after large cents.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is an earlier purchase from 2005. Rick used to issue RT letters with most purchases and my letter shows this one to be from die 5 (a top die from this year). So while I paid top dollar for this one I feel like I was lucky to get one that later got a CAC veriication.

Also I think these die varieties will be market accepted simply because no mint record of dies used have yet been found or published. It's also noteworthy that these few die pairs struck far to many coins in 1950 and little if any repolishing was done resulting in many coins not looking like proofs let alone deep mirrored cameo proofs. Incidentally there are some 1950 cameos with deeper mirrors and more contrast in Pf 65 Cameo that sell for 3 to 5 thousand dollars. This one not quite that much. :x

5_16_2020_10_37_41_AM.jpg

5_16_2020_10_38_11_AM.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

RG104 Entry 666

Bx 125   Treasury Savings Bonds Medals 1960-1965 parts 2-3

Medal Correspondence-D/M-Sketches 1/1/1952-8/14/1961

Galvanos & Dies

Dies Destroyed, Retained & # of pieces struck 1956-December 31, 1961 Philadelphia Mint part 1

Bx 126   Dies Destroyed, Retained & # of pieces struck 1956-December 31, 1961 Philadelphia Mint parts 2-3

Post Office Dies-April 10, 1915-December 15, 1920 parts 1-2

Additional files relating to proof coin dies from late 1950s-1960s are in NARA College Park, MD.

Edited by RWB
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, numisport said:

Here is an earlier purchase from 2005. Rick used to issue RT letters with most purchases and my letter shows this one to be from die 5 (a top die from this year). So while I paid top dollar for this one I feel like I was lucky to get one that later got a CAC veriication.

Also I think these die varieties will be market accepted simply because no mint record of dies used have yet been found or published. It's also noteworthy that these few die pairs struck far to many coins in 1950 and little if any repolishing was done resulting in many coins not looking like proofs let alone deep mirrored cameo proofs. Incidentally there are some 1950 cameos with deeper mirrors and more contrast in Pf 65 Cameo that sell for 3 to 5 thousand dollars. This one not quite that much. 

 

Nice coin in the image.

It depends definition of "market accepted".  I haven't heard of any Franklin half collecting by die variety, but based upon my assumption of the collector base (maybe somewhat over 50,000 out of my guesstimate of 2MM active US collectors), a very low proportion (maybe a few hundred) might pay some premium for it.  But I wouldn't count on it for proofs, as it appears to be an imperceptible fraction of the total regardless of the series.  In the example you used, I agree with you that the premium is paid because most 1950 don't meet today's quality standards but don't believe collectors do or will care which variety they have..

Financially, the challenge for any "meaningful" die variety premiums in this series is that it can add up to a lot of money real quick and most collectors would almost certainly rather spend their money elsewhere.  Going by the price level (Heritage archives) and TPG data, I'd guess a few hundred might have as much in the series as I do in my collection for both MS and proofs. I think that's a generous assumption and I'm hardly a big budget collector by US standards.

As with US moderns, I can see collectors "cherry picking" for submission but seldom paying for it.

Not knocking the series or those who collect it but realistically, it's peak preference is behind it.  It's all downhill from here.  It's almost certainly been losing "share of wallet" to (world) NCLT and will continue to do so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem is, WC, these "attributions" are for cameo and ultra cameo proofs. Anyone buying them is already paying a premium for the strength of the cameo. I find it really hard to believe that there is going to be a demand for these T attributions. A very strong cameo already gets a very strong price - no matter what die it came from. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, World Colonial said:

Nice coin in the image.

It depends definition of "market accepted".  I haven't heard of any Franklin half collecting by die variety, but based upon my assumption of the collector base (maybe somewhat over 50,000 out of my guesstimate of 2MM active US collectors), a very low proportion (maybe a few hundred) might pay some premium for it.  But I wouldn't count on it for proofs, as it appears to be an imperceptible fraction of the total regardless of the series.  In the example you used, I agree with you that the premium is paid because most 1950 don't meet today's quality standards but don't believe collectors do or will care which variety they have..

Financially, the challenge for any "meaningful" die variety premiums in this series is that it can add up to a lot of money real quick and most collectors would almost certainly rather spend their money elsewhere.  Going by the price level (Heritage archives) and TPG data, I'd guess a few hundred might have as much in the series as I do in my collection for both MS and proofs. I think that's a generous assumption and I'm hardly a big budget collector by US standards.

As with US moderns, I can see collectors "cherry picking" for submission but seldom paying for it.

Not knocking the series or those who collect it but realistically, it's peak preference is behind it.  It's all downhill from here.  It's almost certainly been losing "share of wallet" to (world) NCLT and will continue to do so.

Yes I too believe that very few collectors will pay premiums for die varieties or die pair designation on Franklins. That said I thought it interesting that my coin has a die pair designation from an expert 15 years ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, physics-fan3.14 said:

The problem is, WC, these "attributions" are for cameo and ultra cameo proofs. Anyone buying them is already paying a premium for the strength of the cameo. I find it really hard to believe that there is going to be a demand for these T attributions. A very strong cameo already gets a very strong price - no matter what die it came from. 

Thanks for the clarification.  I missed this key point.  I thought it was for the series generally.

I agree with you.  The premiums for the better cameos are already high, not that different for a 1950 versus many of the proof Barber or Liberty Seated halves in about the same grade (maybe one lower).  There is more demand for modern (1936 and later) US proofs but I suspect that many of these collectors aren't aware of what else they can buy for the same money.

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
1 1