Double Eagle Pics 1 1

[Adamas1971]

@GoldFinger1969 suggested I post these (if you're annoyed, you can blame him :-0 ), so I thought it would be interesting to get people input - so, feel free to offer any comments that come to mind, no matter what they are. :-) I think it's pretty obvious that the 1906 Liberty Head is less worn and would probably have a higher grade. 

[Adamas1971]

I'm just now realizing that it might be more appropriate to post this in the "Newbie Coin Collecting Questions." @Sandon Is this a good place for this, or should I move them? 

[Sandon]

    Either forum is fine for this topic.

    Your coins were both minted at the San Francisco mint, so the Liberty Head double eagle is identified as a 1906-S ("S" mintmark on reverse beneath eagle's tail), and the Saint Gaudens double eagle is identified as a 1910-S ("S" mintmark above the date). Based on the photos, both coins appear to be genuine, with the 1906-S in approximately About Uncirculated condition and the 1910-S in approximately Extremely Fine condition.  These are relatively common dates in the context of double eagles and in these grades are now considered to be "semi-numismatic" or bullion-related coins due to the high price of gold.  On the NGC Price Guide (retail), both the 1906-S are currently listed at between $2,550 and $2,600 in all Extremely Fine and About Uncirculated grades. These coins, at least unworn, were supposed to contain 0.9675 oz. of gold, worth $2,324.09 at today's gold price. In the early 2000's, when gold was $300-$400 an ounce, you could have bought such pieces for under $500 or in lower uncirculated grades for about $600 each. 

   My grandparents saved some half eagles ($5) and eagles ($10) from circulation before 1933. I have a topic about them on this forum:

 

[Adamas1971]

On 7/19/2024 at 11:18 AM, Sandon said:

. 

   My grandparents saved some half eagles ($5) and eagles ($10) from circulation before 1933. I have a topic about them on this forum:

 

Very interesting @Sandon Thank you. I was wondering about the issue of circulation, especially since most of my coins were minted in San Francisco. Regretfully, I never asked my grandfather how we came into possession of the coins. My mother says that the prevailing theory/story is that my grandfather's uncle (his mother's brother - the family was Volga Dutch and immigrated to the US in the early 1900's) picked up all of these items (as well as some jewelry) in Alaska while he worked there in the 50's and 60's. Being from the West, and knowing a bit of the cultural history, it would make sense (to me at least) that these would be used for general commerce even when other areas were transitioning away from them. 

On that note, here is a 1912 Indian Head Eagle, and I'd be curious what you think. 

Edited July 19 by Adamas1971

[Coinbuf]

Welcome to the forum and thanks for sharing your wonderful family heirloom coins.    The 1912-S is one of the more difficult to find nice issues of the entire Indian eagle series.   I would grade your coin as AU55, it has better than average eye appeal for this date/mm and I would not be surprised to see it grade higher at a TPG like NGC or PCGS.   Value is somewhere around $1,800 to $2,000.   Here is an excerpt from the PCGS coinfacts written by David Akers about the 12-S.

[Adamas1971]

Update: I took my collection to a local coin dealer that has a good reputation, and the moment we laid them out he said, "I can right away that they've been cleaned." So, it appears that they're numismatic value was pretty severely diminished as a result. Not good news. 

[GoldFinger1969]

Adamas, I'm reading the posts and Sandon's in-depth analysis and grading the coins and will post my thoughts in a separate post.....but did want to say right now you did a good job with the pics. 

Well done ! 

Edited July 20 by GoldFinger1969

[GoldFinger1969]

On 7/19/2024 at 2:18 PM, Sandon said:

Your coins were both minted at the San Francisco mint, so the Liberty Head double eagle is identified as a 1906-S ("S" mintmark on reverse beneath eagle's tail), and the Saint Gaudens double eagle is identified as a 1910-S ("S" mintmark above the date). Based on the photos, both coins appear to be genuine, with the 1906-S in approximately About Uncirculated condition and the 1910-S in approximately Extremely Fine condition. 

I had the Liberty Head DE at AU-53 and the Saint-Gaudens DE at AU-50 and maybe in the EF bucket.  You can clearly see lots of wear/rub on the high points and it isn't minute, either.  The Liberty Head 1906-S has wear on the obverse "LIBERTY" letters and the hair locks.  The reverse is actually prettey good and I'd grade it much higher than the obverse.

On the 1910-S Saint, the reverse has worn breast feathers on the eagle....the rim has wear.....the obverse has wear on the breast area and the face plus the rock and Capitol.

On 7/19/2024 at 3:12 PM, Adamas1971 said:

I was wondering about the issue of circulation, especially since most of my coins were minted in San Francisco. Regretfully, I never asked my grandfather how we came into possession of the coins. My mother says that the prevailing theory/story is that my grandfather's uncle (his mother's brother - the family was Volga Dutch and immigrated to the US in the early 1900's) picked up all of these items (as well as some jewelry) in Alaska while he worked there in the 50's and 60's. Being from the West, and knowing a bit of the cultural history, it would make sense (to me at least) that these would be used for general commerce even when other areas were transitioning away from them. 

Coins on the West Coast/California tended to circulate much more and see more action in commerce.  California actually had a law that prohibited the use of paper money in the 1850's which wasn't phased out for decades.  After the California Gold Rush, Double Eagles were minted en masse and were used not only by banks and other heavy hitters, but even lots of locals (the smaller denominations, too).  It was alot of money back then but the joint was jumping economically and a $20 coin could see plenty of action at gambling halls, bars, bordellos, retail places, etc. 

[GoldFinger1969]

On 7/19/2024 at 6:17 PM, Adamas1971 said:

Update: I took my collection to a local coin dealer that has a good reputation, and the moment we laid them out he said, "I can right away that they've been cleaned." So, it appears that they're numismatic value was pretty severely diminished as a result. Not good news. 

It happens, don't fret.  You still have some valuable gold pieces even if the numismatic value is diminished or eliminated.  It's not like the coins were selling at a 500% premium to gold, either, so don't lose too much sleep over it.

It's sometimes tough to tell if a coin has been cleaned from pictures on a website.  That's why we couldn't tell "right away" or even studying the pics if the coins were cleaned (maybe some of the grading experts here will study the coin pics in-depth and see if they can see the signs of cleaning).

For all we know, maybe your dealer is off though it doesn't appear likely. 

Edited July 20 by GoldFinger1969

[Coinbuf]

On 7/19/2024 at 3:17 PM, Adamas1971 said:

Update: I took my collection to a local coin dealer that has a good reputation, and the moment we laid them out he said, "I can right away that they've been cleaned." So, it appears that they're numismatic value was pretty severely diminished as a result. Not good news. 

That is unfortunate but not really the end of the world in this case.   Both the Liberty and the Saint are bullion coins once you get under the MS grade levels due to the high gold spot price.   At these levels of gold spot the numismatic premiums have evaporated for common coins under the MS64 grade levels, really you need gem grade MS65 or better to see any significant premium over spot.   But I also would not take the word of one dealer as gospel, if you have the chance you might want a second or third opinion.

What is important, and the real value for you, is the family connection you have to the coins and their story.   The sentimental value far outweighs what the numismatic premium would have been anyway.

On 7/19/2024 at 7:36 PM, GoldFinger1969 said:

It happens, don't fret.  You still have some valuable gold pieces even if the numismatic value is diminished or eliminated.  It's not like the coins were selling at a 500% premium to gold, either, so don't lose too much sleep over it.

It's sometimes tough to tell if a coin has been cleaned from pictures on a website.  That's why we couldn't tell "right away" or even studying the pics if the coins were cleaned (maybe some of the grading experts here will study the coin pics in-depth and see if they can see the signs of cleaning).

For all we know, maybe your dealer is off though it doesn't appear likely. 

I considered the possibility when I first replied, but as I explained above it didn't really seem to matter so I decided not to mention it.   But now that we are I will explain, the 1906 Liberty does have a cleaned or burnished look to it.   The halos around the stars, the color, and what appears to be some faint hairlines just in front of and onto the forehead area of the obv could be signs of the coin having been wiped.   That is not really unusual as many non collectors routinely wiped or cleaned old coins to make them look shiny or new again, as we go back in history it was even a common practice for collectors to use a horsehair brush and brush the coins they kept in coin cabinets in the 1800's.

The color of the Saint is also a bit off which could indicate an old wipe or cleaning.   I really don't see much on the eagle from these pics, the color looks better and I don't see any obvious signs of a cleaning.   I know that sometimes once a dealer spots a couple of cleaned coins the human thing to do is assume that all the coins are cleaned.   And of course in hand I might have a different opinion of any or all of the coins.

[RWB]

A couple of comments:

1) Neither of the two double eagles pictured grades above EF. Calling the 1906-S "AU" is a travesty of grading. However, at current gold market price it's a moot point.

2) Akers' comments on 1912-S Eagles are reasonable, but the coin shown has too many marks to be desirable as a collectors' piece. It might make AU grade for wear, but don't expect a premium above melt.

3) "Family" coins like these have often been cleaned or scrubbed with baking soda and a toothbrush to "make them like nice," This practice nearly always destroys the numismatic premium, but does not affect the bullion value of gold coins. If any buyer claims that cleaning reduces the bullion value, run away, and hide in a shrubbery until they've gone away.

Please don't evaluate coin color by the posted photos - they are almost never reliable.

[Sandon]

@RWB--Unfortunately, neither you nor I can control the grading standards that prevail nowadays. In the 1970s, when I was a young collector, the 1906-S would have likely been graded at best Choice Extremely Fine and the 1910-S Very Fine, but that's not how grading services (even CAC Grading from what I have seen) grade them now. When I provide an estimated grade to those who post on this forum based on the images they provide, I use what I see as the prevailing standards (though usually on the conservative side), as those of decades ago don't provide the poster with meaningful information, no matter how much more reasonable they may seem to us.

    I bought the 1899 Liberty Head double eagle shown below in 1987 and obtained an ANACS certificate for it that graded it AU 50 on each side. In 2023 NGC graded it AU 55. The topic author's 1906-S appears just slightly more worn and, I think, would likely get a grading service grade of AU 50 or AU 53 or "AU Details, Cleaned" if it shows evidence of "cleaning", which I can't determine from the photos.

[RWB]

I mention grades to alert readers that more exists that the inflated, greedy, aberrations stuck on some TPG slabs or promoted by tradesmen. Were I buying/selling coins I would use the same honest grades I mention here or anywhere else. I have done that in the few necessary research instances requiring purchase (or sale) and always received fair value for the coin as I graded it. The 1899-P DE pictured, shows more than a "trace of abrasion or disturbance to the fields," hence it cannot be "AU."

I fully realize that most coin dealers no longer can accurately grade coins, and depend on TPGs to manipulate condition labels for maximum profit.

I have not and will not participate in the deception, and will continue to call condition is it appears to be by consistent reliable standards. Not being part of the industry grindstone has advantages.

Edited July 21 by RWB

[GoldFinger1969]

Adamas, an update ?  Are you keeping the coins...selling them...adding other gold coins and/or Double Eagles ?  

[RWB]

On 7/20/2024 at 3:07 PM, Sandon said:

@RWB--Unfortunately, neither you nor I can control the grading standards that prevail nowadays.

Actually, you can, and so can others. Demand stability and consistency. That was part of the TPG "contract with collectors" when they opened up shop.

[Coinbuf]

On 8/31/2024 at 9:18 AM, RWB said:

Actually, you can, and so can others. Demand stability and consistency. That was part of the TPG "contract with collectors" when they opened up shop.

So how is that working for you.    You've been railing against the TPG's for how many years now and all it has gotten you is kicked off the PCGS site as far as I can tell.   I guess you can consider yourself lucky that NGC doesn't care, but the standards have not gotten any stricter that I can see, if anything grading has gotten looser.   The only company that is moving in the direction you want is CAC and you are a huge CAC hater, which is quite ironic.

[Henri Charriere]

On 7/19/2024 at 1:22 PM, Adamas1971 said:

@GoldFinger1969 suggested I post these (if you're annoyed, you can blame him :-0 ), ....

I fail to see how anyone can be offended by the posting of photos of one of America's loveliest coins.

[RWB]

On 8/31/2024 at 3:04 PM, Coinbuf said:

So how is that working for you.    You've been railing against the TPG's for how many years now and all it has gotten you is kicked off the PCGS site as far as I can tell.   I guess you can consider yourself lucky that NGC doesn't care, but the standards have not gotten any stricter that I can see, if anything grading has gotten looser.   The only company that is moving in the direction you want is CAC and you are a huge CAC hater, which is quite ironic.

RE: "... you are a huge CAC hater, which is quite ironic."

I don't "hate" their grading business or any other part of it. The sticker stuff was unnecessary and wasteful and was simply a gimmick to look at a lot of coins and make offers on the ones they could sell at substantial markups. (Never seen these statistics have you? They probably exist, but the perpetrators are not talking.) Now that they are independently "grading" coins, time will show if they are sincere or just part of the grab bag.

I have never bought or sold a coin based on the holder label for the last 30+ years. I use the same grading standards I learned from Frank Katen (Silver Spring, Md.) long ago, and they continue to work fairly for everyone involved. I can't extrapolate to full-time dealers, wholesalers, "friends of TPGs" or other assorted types. However, I have met many who cannot consistently grade coins by any so-called "standard," largely because they don't care.

I was kicked off PCGS because I exposed one of the "many" lies about an experimental piece. And at every examination of the coin or their "so-called research," my published information has been substantiated.

If others don't care that is up to them. But I choose, and will stick with, accuracy, honesty, and truthfulness.

[GoldFinger1969]

Spoiler

 

On 8/31/2024 at 3:04 PM, Coinbuf said:

So how is that working for you.    You've been railing against the TPG's for how many years now and all it has gotten you is kicked off the PCGS site as far as I can tell.   I guess you can consider yourself lucky that NGC doesn't care, but the standards have not gotten any stricter that I can see, if anything grading has gotten looser.   The only company that is moving in the direction you want is CAC and you are a huge CAC hater, which is quite ironic.

I think Roger is asking for CONSISTENCY which to me means just be consistent GOING FORWARD. 

We know that standards changed in the past but we can't go back and undo that.  And I do like CACG being the new "honesty enforcer" but even there you have the MS vs. AU dichotomy.  JA himself said that strict "consistent" grading during a period of soaring prices is unrealistic. 

It's going to take a few years to all shake out.

Edited September 7 by GoldFinger1969

[MarkFeld]

On 8/31/2024 at 6:16 PM, RWB said:

RE: "... you are a huge CAC hater, which is quite ironic."

I don't "hate" their grading business or any other part of it. The sticker stuff was unnecessary and wasteful and was simply a gimmick to look at a lot of coins and make offers on the ones they could sell at substantial markups. (Never seen these statistics have you? They probably exist, but the perpetrators are not talking.) Now that they are independently "grading" coins, time will show if they are sincere or just part of the grab bag.

I have never bought or sold a coin based on the holder label for the last 30+ years. I use the same grading standards I learned from Frank Katen (Silver Spring, Md.) long ago, and they continue to work fairly for everyone involved. I can't extrapolate to full-time dealers, wholesalers, "friends of TPGs" or other assorted types. However, I have met many who cannot consistently grade coins by any so-called "standard," largely because they don't care.

I was kicked off PCGS because I exposed one of the "many" lies about an experimental piece. And at every examination of the coin or their "so-called research," my published information has been substantiated.

If others don't care that is up to them. But I choose, and will stick with, accuracy, honesty, and truthfulness.

For someone who claims that they will "stick with accuracy, honesty and truthfulness" you certainly did a very poor job of it in your above post. 

You referred to CAC as "perpetrators", a word that often involves a harmful, illegal or immoral act.

You also wrote that CAC "was simply a gimmick to look at a lot of coins and make offers on the ones they could sell at substantial markups". I've seen quite a few examples of their markups and they're anything but "substantial". They're easily among the smallest in the industry. You accuse others of lying, while you do the same, yourself, by continuing to state opinions, speculation or (incorrect) guesses as facts.

[VKurtB]

On 9/7/2024 at 4:08 PM, MarkFeld said:

by continuing to state opinions, speculation or (incorrect) guesses as facts.

Amen to this. This defines Roger more succinctly than any other single phrase.

[Henri Charriere]

On 8/31/2024 at 7:16 PM, RWB said:

.... II was kicked off PCGS because I exposed one of the "many" lies about an experimental piece. And at every examination of the coin or their "so-called research," my published information has been substantiated.

If others don't care that is up to them. But I choose, and will stick with, accuracy, honesty, and truthfulness.

I am a bit bumfuzzled as to why anyone should feel obligated to defend himself when all he is espousing is The Truth. You've got convicted felons running for higher office. Big deal! What's wrong with being right?

If anything, the above ought to stand as a testament to where our Grand Master stands on one of the thornier issues of the day. Matter of fact, this very neatly encapsulates the Legacy of one who dared to speak Truth to Power.  Hardly anything to be ashamed of. The very least we can do if, as @GoldFinger1969 maintains, is an inability to go back and undo damage, is refuse to be complicit in any present-day shenanigans by spending our dollars elsewhere.

[Henri Charriere]

I believe Mark should recuse himself from any discussion of CAC because his friendship with its prime mover, JA, goes back decades.  The very same JA, if memory serves, you, VKB, would not hesitate to punch in the mouth if given the opportunity.  

Man, I love this place!  🤣

To all the haters out there, in your heart you know Roger's right.  A bit excitable at times, but who isn't?

[MarkFeld]

On 9/7/2024 at 6:41 PM, Henri Charriere said:

I believe Mark should recuse himself from any discussion of CAC because his friendship with its prime mover, JA, goes back decades.  The very same JA, if memory serves, you, VKB, would not hesitate to punch in the mouth if given the opportunity.  

Man, I love this place!  🤣

To all the haters out there, in your heart you know Roger's right.  A bit excitable at times, but who isn't?

Whether seriously or otherwise, you’re condoning Roger’s propensity to state his opinions (some of which are accompanied by false accusations) as facts. I don’t think that’s funny.

 

[Henri Charriere]

On 9/7/2024 at 8:19 PM, MarkFeld said:

Whether seriously or otherwise, you’re condoning Roger’s propensity to state his opinions (some of which are accompanied by false accusations) as facts. I don’t think that’s funny.

 

I live in NYC, Mark; nothing fazes me. There are certain things we must all resign to whether we like it or not.  Some of those things are complex: the makeup of an individual's personality, likes and dislikes, beliefs.  Nothing you or I can say will alter his position on things as he sees it.  Life is short.  The world is complex.  When you come right down to it, one man's opinion on a TPGS will not even register on the Richter scale.  It is refreshing to hear someone in the vaunted position of Numismatist of the Year speak his mind without fear or favor. Would you care to suggest for whom I should cast my ballot in November? These are minor matters in the grand scheme of things. Capiche?  Nice hearing from you!

[GoldFinger1969]

Quite frankly, I think at times we all get a bit too worked up about different standards, CAC, plusses and minuses, market values, fees, etc.

This hobby is alot like art:  one person loves something at a certain grade, another hates it.

Edited September 8 by GoldFinger1969

[Coinbuf]

On 9/7/2024 at 10:59 AM, GoldFinger1969 said:

  Reveal hidden contents

 

I think Roger is asking for CONSISTENCY which to me means just be consistent GOING FORWARD. 

We know that standards changed in the past but we can't go back and undo that.  And I do like CACG being the new "honesty enforcer" but even there you have the MS vs. AU dichotomy.  JA himself said that strict "consistent" grading during a period of soaring prices is unrealistic. 

It's going to take a few years to all shake out.

No the issue is that Roger wants everyone to grade the way he thinks is appropriate, and he bashes all the TPG companies every chance he gets.   Look at any guess the grade thread he has or will reply to, his guesses are so far from any sort of reality that its laughable.   He is not asking for consistency; he wants everyone to conform to his archaic ideas of grading.   Sure you could say that he is consistent in that regard,  but just as Mark pointed out, he is not being honest when he says he has not bashed CAC, he has before and did so again in his reply.

Bear in mind that I have no skin in the game, I'm not a partner or principle in anything CAC does.   I just find it highly ironic that someone that claims to want to turn back the clock on grading bashes the one company that actually is working to return to grading that is not so market biased.

Edited September 8 by Coinbuf

[RWB]

On 9/8/2024 at 2:20 PM, Coinbuf said:

No the issue is that Roger wants everyone to grade the way he thinks is appropriate, and he bashes all the TPG companies every chance he gets.   Look at any guess the grade thread he has or will reply to, his guesses are so far from any sort of reality that its laughable.   He is not asking for consistency; he wants everyone to conform to his archaic ideas of grading. 

Nope. I'm asking for consistency and adherence to STABLE (as in not where horses are stored) grade definitions. Since the present grading mess - largely the fault of TPGs greedy and unstable practices - is unstable, the I refer to the last consistently reliable definitions. Further, it is the coins' appearance, and only that, which expresses the "grade."

I use the old reliable standards, because they ARE reliable. If you doubt that, go look at your older and newer slabs and explain grade inflation.

Edited September 8 by RWB

[dcarr]

On 8/31/2024 at 5:16 PM, RWB said:

RE: "... you are a huge CAC hater, which is quite ironic."

I don't "hate" their grading business or any other part of it. The sticker stuff was unnecessary and wasteful and was simply a gimmick to look at a lot of coins and make offers on the ones they could sell at substantial markups. (Never seen these statistics have you? They probably exist, but the perpetrators are not talking.) Now that they are independently "grading" coins, time will show if they are sincere or just part of the grab bag.

I have never bought or sold a coin based on the holder label for the last 30+ years. I use the same grading standards I learned from Frank Katen (Silver Spring, Md.) long ago, and they continue to work fairly for everyone involved. I can't extrapolate to full-time dealers, wholesalers, "friends of TPGs" or other assorted types. However, I have met many who cannot consistently grade coins by any so-called "standard," largely because they don't care.

I was kicked off PCGS because I exposed one of the "many" lies about an experimental piece. And at every examination of the coin or their "so-called research," my published information has been substantiated.

If others don't care that is up to them. But I choose, and will stick with, accuracy, honesty, and truthfulness.

RWB seems to really hate it when anyone makes money in the coin business, and everyone who does so is a "perpetrator".

 

 

[GoldFinger1969]

On 9/8/2024 at 2:20 PM, Coinbuf said:

No the issue is that Roger wants everyone to grade the way he thinks is appropriate, and he bashes all the TPG companies every chance he gets.   Look at any guess the grade thread he has or will reply to, his guesses are so far from any sort of reality that its laughable.   He is not asking for consistency; he wants everyone to conform to his archaic ideas of grading.   Sure you could say that he is consistent in that regard,  but just as Mark pointed out, he is not being honest when he says he has not bashed CAC, he has before and did so again in his reply.

Well, as someone said here or on another forum (I think it WAS here):  if you hate the grading standards of the TPGs and/or market grading....you can't bash CAC.

And now with CAC Grading....you have someone really giving some agita to folks with MS-graded coins (less so overgradeds in the AU and lower buckets).  Between PCGS and NGC.....CAC stickering....CAC Grading....there has to be someone each of us can live with.

As for the "fluff" and marketing stuff (nonsense ?) that some of us detest and others are indifferent to....to each his own, I say.