That pesky 1831 Capped Bust Quarter

[keithdagen]

Instead of reviving the old, decided to start a new thread:

 

Went down to Heritage today (I live less than 15 minutes away) and looked at 21 auction lots for the Central States Signature Sale. One of the 21 was that Capped Bust Quarter that TomB brought up.

 

The coin was obviously artificially toned at some point, and because of Tom's research, we know that it was in the past two years. Coin has nice luster, and looks pretty good, except for some neon blue and neon purple colors on the denticles at the rims. So, yes, Virginia, it's AT. However, PCGS, the premier grading service, didn't care. They slabbed it as MS-64 anyway.

 

Now, those other 20 coins were Type coins, ranging from half cents to gold eagles, running the gamut of coins, with current bid prices totaling almost $300,000. The kicker: most of them have been worked on in one way or another, with very few being original. Both major services.

 

Tradedollarnut brought up an extremely important point, that should not be lost on any collector in the other thread, that I want to reiterate here:

 

This coin serves as an example why collectors MUST have a dealer prescreen auction lots for them until they know exactly what they are looking at......

 

It doesn't matter if you are looking at a MS-69 State Quarter or a 1797 Half Dollar in XF, you must know what you are looking for, and how to grade. You must have opinions from knowledgable dealers on these coins. Of the coins I saw, I felt that one of the 21 was graded fairly, attractive, original, and worthy of a bid. All the other 20 failed in my opinion. That's not to say that there weren't a few nice coins in the bunch, but finding honest original coins that have been fairly graded is difficult at best.

 

 

[Hoot]

I felt that one of the 21 was graded fairly, attractive, original, and worthy of a bid. All the other 20 failed in my opinion.

 

That's one frightening statement Keith.

 

Similarly, I have been lucky to see a few buffalo nickels in high grade in recent PCGS holders. Some have stunning but questionable toning. When the blues start to dominate strongly on nickels, it's time to think AT.

 

Hoot

[TomB]

I appreciate your looking at the coin and am saddened at the analysis that you came up with regarding eye appeal, accurate grading and originality. It gives me a bad feeling for the continued expansion of the market.

[CarlWohlforth]

Hey, that's no fair! You get to look at all the coins before every major Heritage auction! I only get to see the ones at the few shows I make it to.

 

Well it sure is worth something to have somebody you trust check out the coins in person.

 

Next time you are going, please let me know. I'll PM you a few lot numbers and you can send me a bill for your apprasial fee

[BankNote1]

Someone told me not long ago that very few Bust coins haven't been fooled with at some point. Both PCGS and NGC will slab early coins that have a light cleaning. I also know that they will pass along toning if it isn't hiding, some retooling or polishing, or some other repairs or defects. This isn't news! What about red copper? If all the doctored stuff was to be pulled off of the market there would be little left to collect. I am sure all major dealers know this. As far as getting a dealer to look at the coins before you bid, that is a good idea. Now finding a dealer that knows what he is looking at, that is even harder than finding an "original" coin.

[Leothelion]

Keithdagen

You'd be an answer to my prayers if you could give me your opinion of the following

auction lot. Heritage auction. From the picture, the reverse appears to fall short of a cameo. But this is of no importance to me as I would be very happy with a deep mirrored, moderate frosted 1939 proof.

 

Leo

[Weidel Legacy Collection]

That's a very sharp looking Jeff!

 

Hoot, what do you think?

[Leothelion]

Well crapola! Yesterday the bid was at $360, now it's over a thousand so I'm out.

Looks like I'll need to come up with another reason to make the CSNS show.

 

Leo

[Elcontador]

A couple of things.

 

1) To be fair, I saw what to me was clearly an AT'd Capped Bust Quarter in an NGC 4 holder late last year in a Bowers Auction, so this sort of thing does get by both services from time to time. I didn't like the 'original' quarter, because the rim toning appeared to be dull, contrasting with the coin's centers.

 

2) If you know some dealers, you'll realize that each has a slightly different niche.

Ie., I think Gus Tiso knows quite a bit about Morgans, Jay Cline re SLQs, etc. However, I'd only ask a dealer to check out a lot for me if I had an ongoing relationship with him. I would never ask someone from whom I had not bought a coin to preview a lot for me; that's downright rude.

 

3) If you know a "coin person" at one of the major auction houses, you can also get some honest answers. I sincerely hope that Frank Van Halen is on the radar screen again, because when he was describing a coin to me, he was as honest as the day is long. Thanks to his enthusiastic endorsement of a coin for which no image was provided, I am a happy owner of an 1861 O No Motto Half graded MS 65 by the guys across the street.

 

4) Never buy anything sight unseen without a no questions asked return policy.

[gmarguli]

The reverse looks more like haze than cameo. I hate to be slab biased, but if this coin were a true cameo it would be in an NGC/PCG$ slab. I've see ICG DCAM coins that wouldn't make CAM at any of the other services.

 

I know what you mean about the prices shooting up. Two days ago a coin I had a strong interest in was under $800. Today it is $1500 which is practically my limit for it.

[keithdagen]

Hoot,

 

To expand a little, 18 of the 21 coins were dated from 1793 to 1831. I also looked at a piece I plan to bid on so will not elaborate on, a gem Barber half with a slightly weak strike, clean cheek, but the toning did nothing for me, and a PCGS MS-69 state quarter with 3 or 4 marks in the reverse field that should merit no better than a MS-67 in my opinion.

 

Coins from this early era seem to be notorious for having work done. Copper gets tweaked to even out the color or remove carbon, both services allow cleanings (especially for date rarities) on silver, and the color of gold is traditionally tweaked to remove copper spots or even out the color and luster.

 

In several cases, the coins passed the original test and the fair grade test, but were not as attractive as I would like. In some cases, the coins had obviously had some work, but were still attractive and would be something I would be willing to purchase for a set. In most cases, I saw light cleanings or dipping that I didn't like.

[keithdagen]

I appreciate your looking at the coin and am saddened at the analysis that you came up with regarding eye appeal, accurate grading and originality. It gives me a bad feeling for the continued expansion of the market.

 

Tom,

 

There's a lot of stuff out there, it just seems to go in cycles. The last several auctions that I have looked at high dollar material, nothing has really stuck out as great. We may be in a market period where there is a lot of B-grade material moving around, and may not get some truly fresh stuff for some time.

[Leothelion]

Hi Greg

I've seen a number of these 39 proofs and I've only seen one that looked cameo both sides. I almost owned the thing but returned it due to a c spot. Here's my

present 1939.

[Hoot]

Hi RWW! A 39 Jeff with any significant CAM contrast is a rare bear, and the way that the coin is scanned makes it look like there's decent contrast on the obv. and weak contrast on the rev. Still, ANY contrast on the rev is a good find for that year. But would NGC or PCGS give this coin the CAM designation? I doubt it. I agree with Greg, and I also think the coin has probably passed through the hands of NGC and PCGS for just that.

 

In person, I'll bet the coin is great looking and probably a PR66. I'd also bet that the cameo contrast shows up less in person than in the scan, as scans have a way of emphasizing that. As for what it's worth, I suppose what will be paid for it. I'd think the coin deserves bids on the order of $400 (high for a 66), but only because it shows more cameo contrast than other coins and is probably a solid 66.

 

As for the reverse of 38, that's what interests me more than anything, as the Philadelphia Mint was the primary minter of reverse of 40 coins in the year 1939. I would expect more proof coins to bear the 1940 reverse (although I could very well be wrong) and I'd expect those coins to have a greater likelihood of having been manufactured better, simply because of the attention to detail that was being given the reverse of 40. Go figure.

 

I'd love to see the coin in person, as I'll bet the step count is 5-5-5-5.

 

Just some ideas.

 

Let us know Keith and thanks for the post!!!

 

Hoot

[Leothelion]

Hey Hoot

Here's a 1939 Rev. of 1940 proof with moderate frosting. Paid $900 via internet from last Jan. FUN Florida show.

 

Leo

[BillJones]

It's been my experience that PCGS and NGC are pretty easy on early silver and gold, but can be murder on copper.

 

This coin, which is an S-139, is listed in Breen's Large cent book as an AU-50 and is rated in the top ten of the condition census. Yet it flunked at both PCGS and NGC.

 

What really irritates me is that I see very, very poor copper in holders that has far worse and far more sins than this piece. And yet there they are in the holder, and this piece is not.

 

I wish I had a picture of a 1798 large cent I saw last Sunday in an NGC EF-45 holder. It would really illustrate my point. The coin was badly scratched all over the obverse and had very poor eye appeal. It has had corrosion removed from the reverse. Yet there it was in a holder!

 

[Wihlborg]

Hi Bill,

 

First let me say that I like the coin a lot, although I don't care for the red spots on the reverse. From the photo I cannot see any problems other than those red spots. Could they have been the problem? Did either NGC or PCGS give a reason for body bagging the coin?

 

John

 

[CarlWohlforth]

Nice coins are popping up in this thread! Nice Cent Bill.

 

I never even noticed that '39 Jeff. It looks good on the obverse. I just missed a one sided cameo '39 by screwing up my bids! The one I was looking at had a completely brilliant reverse, not even as close as the coin listed here. But it wasn't hazey either. It went for %20 of the current bid of the ICG coin.

[keithdagen]

Let us know Keith and thanks for the post!!!

 

Unfortunately, won't be able to look at any more lots this go around. Yesterday was the last day before they pack them up and get them ready for the show.

[Hoot]

Hi Leo! I'd suppose that you and Carl have seen (and paid for) many more proof Jeffs than I have . No doubt that those in the years 1938-42 can be pretty pricey with some degree of cameo contrast in the devices, especially if it affects the reverse. I would never guess, however, that one of those would carry more than a 200% premium for the high end of a given grade. The problem I see with the one currently at Heritage is that it does not appear to be a PF67 to me; thus my guess at $400, as I see the Heritage coin as a PF66. Too bad Keith! won't be able to check it out and let us know, Rats.

 

I did just check Trends for a PF66 price and they have it at $370, so I suppose I'd be a little low in my initial guess. They have a PF67 listed at $2415.00!!! Ouch! I personally think that's nuts and would gladly settle for a 66!!! As for this ICG graded Jeff, there's no way .

 

Hoot

[BillJones]

1797 cent was body bagged as "cleaned." That' s all I got for over $50 in grading fees.

 

The red spots on the reverse are a couple patches on inactive corrosion. Although most copper corrosion is green there is also this red variety. It is totally inactive. I've owned the coin since 1976, and it has not changed at all.

 

What ever is wrong with coin is alot less than what I have seen on other copper coins in slabs. It's also had less work done on it than many of the certified gold and silver coins that I see.

 

Whatever PCGS and NGC' game is, it's very irritating one because their approach is arbitrary and capricious. If the unattractive and worked on coins that I see in holders were not out there, I would not be complaining. But they are out there, and their actions in this case were unjustified.

 

Here is another coin that NGC refused to grade, which came back "cleaned." This one came from the Ruby collection circa 1980. Anyone who has shopped for Classic Head large cents knows how tough it is find this type with this degree of sharpness.

 

Body bags are for counterfeits and rip-offs. Niether of these coins are that so far as I am concerned.

[gmarguli]

The 1797 cent look very nice.

 

I can understand the 1814 being bagged. The obverse looks cleaned and retoned. It's got that lusterless pink look.

[BankNote1]

Here is one time I agree with GMarguli, the 1814 has a funny color. Prob. cleaned and re-toned, would be my guess as well. The color of the cent just doesn't look like classic copper cents i have seen. If the two coins were mine I would send them to NCS!

[BillJones]

Send them to NCS?

 

What good would that do? NCS doesn't fix copper like this. All they would want to do is put them in their holders that only say the coins are genuine and have problems. NCS holders do nothing for me. I'd sooner send them to ANACS and get a net grade.