1933 Saint-Gaudens Double Eagle Graded MS-65....no holder !! 2 2

[GoldFinger1969]

https://coinweek.com/us-coins/pcgs-certifies-ultra-rare-1933-saint-gaudens-double-eagle-gold-coin/

Coin will NOT be slabbed....buyer at June auction can have it secured in a holder if they wish.  Only 1 other coin has been allowed to be granted non-holder certification, the PR63 Walton Liberty Nickel.

Edited April 10, 2021 by GoldFinger1969

[Quintus Arrius]

I certainly was not aware of this.  But the coin is unique, in a sense, right?  The only one left that can be lawfully owned?  It ought to be encapsulated.  Maybe we all ought to take up a collection for the buyer who may very well turn out to be a non-collector.  😂

[GoldFinger1969]

10 minutes ago, Quintus Arrius said:

I certainly was not aware of this.  But the coin is unique, in a sense, right?  The only one left that can be lawfully owned?  It ought to be encapsulated.  Maybe we all ought to take up a collection for the buyer who may very well turn out to be a non-collector.  😂

For this special a coin, I guess they come out and grade it or whatever.  If I had a coin from my grandfather and sent it to PCGS or NGC (?) and asked them to grade it but send it back without a slab in the velvet pouch I sent it in, I'm not sure they do that for me.

For 7-figure coins, I guess they make an exception. 

This coin is so special -- and I suspect any coin that was graded but not slabbed would also qualify -- that any seller and buyer are aware of the coin's attributes and don't need any label to arrive at a future transaction.

Edited April 10, 2021 by GoldFinger1969

[Lem E]

I think it is kind of unreal that the coin was stored at the World Trade Center and removed just before 9/11. Almost unbelievable.

[GoldFinger1969]

52 minutes ago, Lem E said:

I think it is kind of unreal that the coin was stored at the World Trade Center and removed just before 9/11. Almost unbelievable.

Yup, adds to the storyline with the coin, good point Lem. 

[Just Bob]

I really don't understand the point of having this coin "certified." Everyone knows what it is. Why bother having PCGS (or anyone, for that matter) confirm something that is already known? I also don't understand the point of assigning a "grade." A number is not going to have any effect on the price that this coin brings.

[Alex in PA.]

4 hours ago, Just Bob said:

I really don't understand the point of having this coin "certified." Everyone knows what it is.

I agree Just Bob.  This one is so famous it doesn't need a slab advertisement.  What the future owner(s) decide maybe a different story.

[Fenntucky Mike]

It can't compete against itself in a registry set  so what's the point of having it slabbed. Leave it as is, I'm sure the new owner will be able to afford to give it a safe new home.

What would the advertising be worth if a TPG ever does slab it, should they be lined up outside the new owners door with sacks full of money to buy the rights to grade and slab it? Or how much did PCGS loose, if anything, by the coin not being slabbed? Is CAC the biggest looser in this?

Edited April 10, 2021 by Fenntucky Mike

[MarkFeld]

54 minutes ago, Fenntucky Mike said:

It can't compete against itself in a registry set  so what's the point of having it slabbed. Leave it as is, I'm sure the new owner will be able to afford to give it a safe new home.

What would the advertising be worth if a TPG ever does slab it, should they be lined up outside the new owners door with sacks full of money to buy the rights to grade and slab it? Or how much did PCGS loose, if anything, by the coin not being slabbed? Is CAC the biggest looser in this?

If someone wants to own a 1933 Saint legally, this is their only option. And that’s regardless of who grades it, what the assigned grade is and whether it has a CAC sticker. CAC loses nothing, other than a small fee to review it.

[Fenntucky Mike]

33 minutes ago, MarkFeld said:

If someone wants to own a 1933 Saint legally, this is their only option. And that’s regardless of who grades it, what the assigned grade is and whether it has a CAC sticker. CAC loses nothing, other than a small fee to review it.

In a scenario where this coin is slabbed the prestige of having your company's name on the label would have some value. The same goes if it was sent to CAC and was stickered, that would also have value to CAC. I believe the publicity of having a companies name attached to probably the most famous coin in the world has value and would help generate sales. Agreed, the grade does not matter. If the coin bounces between TPGs then all this becomes diminished. 

Edited April 10, 2021 by Fenntucky Mike
spelling

[GoldFinger1969]

7 hours ago, Just Bob said:

I really don't understand the point of having this coin "certified." Everyone knows what it is. Why bother having PCGS (or anyone, for that matter) confirm something that is already known? I also don't understand the point of assigning a "grade." A number is not going to have any effect on the price that this coin brings.

Historical knowledge for the TPGs.  I'm sure Weitzman was told it'd bring more $$$ if graded.

[GoldFinger1969]

29 minutes ago, MarkFeld said:

If someone wants to own a 1933 Saint legally, this is their only option. And that’s regardless of who grades it, what the assigned grade is and whether it has a CAC sticker. CAC loses nothing, other than a small fee to review it.

Mark, have you ever heard of high-end (or even lower-priced) coin owner having a coin resubmitted for a LOWER grade just so they could get a CAC sticker on it like an owner of a 1927-D Saint once did ?

[GoldFinger1969]

FYI...the Langbord 10 coins are slabbed (but not certified/graded) in NGC holders.   Or at least they were.

[GoldFinger1969]

28 minutes ago, Fenntucky Mike said:

In a scenario where this coin is slabbed the prestige of having your company's name on the label would have some value. The same goes if it was sent to CAC and was stickered, that would also have value to CAC. I believe the publicity of having a companies name attached to probably the most famous coin in the world has value and would help generate sales. Agreed, the grade does not matter. If the coin bounces between TPG's then all this becomes diminished. 

If the Langbord 10 and other 1933's (?) ever get pardoned, then the buyer of the Farouk-Weitzman coin at least knows where they stand in the grading game.

A colleague whose grading knowledge I respect says that the 2 deep gouges on Liberty's left leg are a problem....they do stand out.  He wonders if it should grade an MS63. 

I'm torn....anybody got any thoughts ?

Edited April 10, 2021 by GoldFinger1969

[zadok]

hypothetically, there was one scenario that suggested there could be 2-5 examples of the 1933 de that were never accounted for nor recovered....anything is possible even if not probable....if true any of those could be owned by a non-u.s. citizen in another country, especially if that country had less than friendly relations with the u.s......so i guess it is possible another one could show up in the future, it just couldnt be legally owned in the u.s.......

[Fenntucky Mike]

4 minutes ago, GoldFinger1969 said:

A friend ATS says that the 2 deep gouges on Liberty's left leg are a problem....they do stand out. 

So do the marks on the torch but I'll defer to the experts on this one. Hard to believe that professional opinions would vary much on this.

[MarkFeld]

25 minutes ago, GoldFinger1969 said:

Mark, have you ever heard of high-end (or even lower-priced) coin owner having a coin resubmitted for a LOWER grade just so they could get a CAC sticker on it like an owner of a 1927-D Saint once did ?

Yes.

[Quintus Arrius]

6 hours ago, Just Bob said:

I really don't understand the point of having this coin "certified." Everyone knows what it is. Why bother having PCGS (or anyone, for that matter) confirm something that is already known? I also don't understand the point of assigning a "grade." A number is not going to have any effect on the price that this coin brings.

I respectfully disagree. I feel like Henry Fonda did in "12 Angry Men." Everything I can think of militates squarely against not having this certified.

Does "everyone" know what it is? Did "everyone" also know who owned it and where it was kept and under what circumstances?  (That knock on the door is VKurtB.  He wants to see the coin up close and personally.)

The coin has already lost a few points on grading; coins do not get better with age. They stay the same or degrade.  Once the chain of custody is broken, all bets are off. 

Few true collectors are going to buy a coin solely on the strength of a paper. What happened to differing "opinions"?  What if it is submitted for cross-grading and declined? Grades matter.

Encapsulation is state-of-the-art protection, verification of authenticity, provenance, and state of preservation, attributes that are magnified in importance should this coin, once again, fall into the hands of a non-collector.  Foregoing encapsulation requires that the owner attempt preservation of a coin, maintain documentation, the integrity of the receptacle chosen and the environment it is stored in.

To me, encapsulation for a coin like this is mandatory and it would be especially helpful if also comes with a special presentation case and document briefly summarizing its history. My personal feeling is the successful bidder will be a speculator. If it is me, I will post the coin on the thread featuring your latest U.S. acquisition, sit back, and enjoy the commentary it evokes: Counterfeit!  Definitely a fake!  The color looks off.  Looks flat.  No way that's an MS65!  If it were real, you wouldn't be holding it like that.  That and $3 will get you on the subway, etc.  😉

[GoldFinger1969]

You guys can see the decent pics above (granted, not as good as having it in-hand).....do you agree with the MS65 grade or not ?

BTW, you can click on the pics 2 or 3 times to zoom-in (and now the Zoom-in feature doesn't work ).

 

Edited April 10, 2021 by GoldFinger1969

[Just Bob]

1 hour ago, GoldFinger1969 said:

 

A colleague whose grading knowledge I respect says that the 2 deep gouges on Liberty's left leg are a problem....they do stand out.  He wonders if it should grade an MS63. 

I'm torn....anybody got any thoughts ?

 

33 minutes ago, GoldFinger1969 said:

You guys can see the decent pics above (granted, not as good as having it in-hand).....do you agree with the MS65 grade or not ?

 

It's market graded. The coin is actually a 63, but the grader thought it was worth more, so he gave it a two point bump.  

Seriously, though, overgrading famous rare coins is not new. Bruce Morelan openly admitted that his 1804 Dollar was over graded, and said that, in his opinion, most of the other examples were, as well.

I will admit that I do not have enough experience with gold coins to know if allowances are made for the difference in hardness of the metal, as compared to copper/nickel, etc. I do recall Mark Feld stating in a post some time back that this may be the case. However,  I will say that, if this were a Morgan dollar, for example, I think 65 would be a stretch.

[Quintus Arrius]

1 hour ago, Just Bob said:

 

It's market graded. The coin is actually a 63, but the grader thought it was worth more, so he gave it a two point bump.  

 

Here we go again with market-vs technical-grading, a questionable two-point bump, and the coup de grace: goughing... deep gouging. Fast-forwarding to the future, am I to believe a bona-fide collector twenty years from now will accept a loose coin, certified but unencapsulated, without further inquiry or examination? The members here would hound him off the Forum, but not before suggesting he get it re-certified and encapsulated, unique or not.

[zadok]

15 minutes ago, Quintus Arrius said:

Here we go again with market-vs technical-grading, a questionable two-point bump, and the coup de grace: goughing... deep gouging. Fast-forwarding to the future, am I to believe a bona-fide collector twenty years from now will accept a loose coin, certified but unencapsulated, without further inquiry or examination? The members here would hound him off the Forum, but not before suggesting he get it re-certified and encapsulated, unique or not.

what makes u think that the owner of that coin would even talk with anyone on this forum in the first place......

[Fenntucky Mike]

5 hours ago, GoldFinger1969 said:

You guys can see the decent pics above (granted, not as good as having it in-hand).....do you agree with the MS65 grade or not ?

I'm not familiar with this series but I took a look over at HA and browsed the 65's across all dates, I don't think it's to far off when compared to those. Marks on the leg and torch are probably the worst place you could have them, I think, as they are prime focal areas to me. I can get on board with a 65 I guess, a low end 65. If this was a more common mintage I'd be holding out for a better example, but it's not.

I think the bigger problem is the TrueView, the coin doesn't look very detailed in it, seems soft. Maybe that's how it is. 

[Quintus Arrius]

2 hours ago, zadok said:

what makes u think that the owner of that coin would even talk with anyone on this forum in the first place......

You mean prospective new owner. Who in their right mind would turn down an unprecedented opportunity to engage the Great Zadok, bearer of moot points, on a public forum before a cast of millions?

I am sure the same could have been said of that other successful shoe designer, Steven Madden, before he became federal prisoner #49498-054.  Or for that matter: A. Alfred Taubman formerly of Sotheby's, #50444-054; Martha Stewart, #55170-054; Leona Helmsley, #15113-054 -- and Tommy Thompson  a principal in the recovery of massive amounts of gold from the S.S. Central America, and the shenanigans with investors' funds that earned him a brief stint in stir for contempt. The high and mighty are no different from you or me.  They are human, too.

 

[GoldFinger1969]

1 hour ago, Fenntucky Mike said:

I'm not familiar with this series but I took a look over at HA and browsed the 65's across all dates, I don't think it's to far off when compared to those. Marks on the leg and torch are probably the worst place you could have them, I think, as they are prime focal areas to me. I can get on board with a 65 I guess, a low end 65. If this was a more common mintage I'd be holding out for a better example, but it's not.  I think the bigger problem is the TrueView, the coin doesn't look very detailed in it, seems soft. Maybe that's how it is. 

Brilliantly said, Mike.....I agree with the points you made on the grade and the TV look.

[gmarguli]

What makes everyone think that PCGS didn't pay for the privilege of grading this coin? People assume the owner/auction house submitted the coin, but isn't it possible that the TPG would approach them and pay for the privilege of grading this coin as it is being used as an advertisement for them. (And I don't care what was written in the article)...

As for it being graded and not slabbed, I've had several coins graded and returned raw. They've ranged from too big/small, too fragile, we don't want this in one of our slabs (you know how long ago that was as the TPG will encapsulate any piece of garbage now), and some coins that missed the minimum grade, but came back with inserts. And on more than one occasion I've received coins back slabbed, but the TPG included a second insert with a different grade than what it was slabbed as. 

Edited April 10, 2021 by gmarguli

[Alex in PA.]

36 minutes ago, gmarguli said:

What makes everyone think that PCGS didn't pay for the privilege of grading this coin?

Yep!  

PCGS Certifies Ultra-Rare 1933 Saint-Gaudens Double Eagle Gold Coin

April 8, 2021

PCGS.com - coinweek.com - thedailycoin.org - greysheet.com - etc.

[GoldFinger1969]

1 hour ago, gmarguli said:

What makes everyone think that PCGS didn't pay for the privilege of grading this coin? People assume the owner/auction house submitted the coin, but isn't it possible that the TPG would approach them and pay for the privilege of grading this coin as it is being used as an advertisement for them. (And I don't care what was written in the article)...

Possible, but NGC graded the Langbord 10 and Sotheby's/Stacks-Bowers probably told Weitzman that if he wanted to maximize the return for his foundation, he needed to get it graded/certified. 

Remember, he is NOT a coin collector and didn't even have possesion of the coin -- he donated it to public viewing spaces.  He's not into the whole grading & labeling thing. 

Edited April 11, 2021 by GoldFinger1969

[GoldFinger1969]

25 minutes ago, Alex in PA. said:

Yep!  PCGS Certifies Ultra-Rare 1933 Saint-Gaudens Double Eagle Gold Coin April 8, 2021 PCGS.com - coinweek.com - thedailycoin.org - greysheet.com - etc.

They are celebrating the grading, just like NGC did the Langbord Ten, but that doesn't mean they PAID for the priviledge.

[MarkFeld]

10 minutes ago, GoldFinger1969 said:

They are celebrating the grading, just like NGC did the Langbord Ten, but that doesn't mean they PAID for the priviledge.

Agreed. While it’s possible that they paid to be able to grade the coin, publicizing the event certainly isn’t any sort of proof that they did so. For all we know, they charged a boat load to grade it.