Coin Monday: The Catalog Stands Alone

Dec. 14, 2009

Written by John Dale

It’s been a while since I last wrote about the coin cataloger’s perspective, so why not this week? (Don’t worry. You’ll get your coin fix closer to the end of this post. See hint at right.)

As a cataloger, I realize that my coin descriptions have two uses: the short-term and the long-term. In the short term, my lot descriptions have to sell the coins - that’s why I get paid - but finding a balance is tricky. Before the auction, if a consignor doesn’t like what I’ve written - doesn’t think it’s complimentary enough, or believes I’ve left out a Very Important Fact™ - and complains to the Consignment Director, I hear about it.

Then again, after an auction, if a buyer doesn’t like what I’ve written - see above, substituting “strict” for “complimentary” and “customer service department” for “Consignment Director” - I REALLY hear about it. So in selling the coin, I have to “sell” the lot description to two different audiences with wildly different expectations, making bidders say “It’s fair” and consignors say “It’s wonderful!”

While the department doesn’t have a 100% hit rate, considering the tens of thousands of coins the cataloging department describes each year, we come surprisingly close.

Once the auction has closed, the descriptions in the Heritage catalogs have a second life as reference material. While even the most basic photo-and-text description can help with tracking the provenance of an item, the greatest catalogs — usually single-collection catalogs focused on a specialty such as early copper or silver dollars — are treated with nearly the same reverence as scholarly books, and referenced nearly as often. A glance at our Catalog Orders page shows a number of catalogs that have attained this level of respect, such as the Lemus Collection of pattern coins, sold January 2009, and the Belzberg Collection of Canadian coinage, sold January 2003

(Conspicuously absent from the list is the Walter J. Husak Collection catalog, covering his impressive collection of large cents, which has completely sold out and now commands a strong price in secondhand numismatic literature circles. You might have heard about the Husak collection — maybe from the Washington Post or Ripley’s Believe It or Not! or even Saturday Night Live. Cue Seth Meyers: "A California man's collection of 301 rare American pennies [Bzzt! Never call a cent a “penny,” even if you’re Seth Meyers. – Noah] sold at auction this week for $10.7 million. Far exceeding my pre-auction estimate of three dollars and one cent.")

In January 2010, Heritage will hold two auctions with specialized catalogs that have every chance of becoming time-tested references. On the World Coins side, the Canadiana Collection will be auctioned in New York City. It’s one of the most jaw-dropping collections of Canadian coinage ever assembled—the legendary 1936 Dot cent is just one of many highlights.

On the U.S. side, the standalone collection leading the way in our Florida United Numismatists (FUN) auction has a distinct Floridian flavor: it’s called The Boca Collection, Part I. The collection contains a complete run of the 71 proof sets issued from 1856 to 1953, covering denominations up to one (silver) dollar.

The 1890 set has an added bonus: the four gold denominations, from two and a half dollars to $20, are also included in proof. Every one of those coins is a rare delight. Each year, Heritage auctions coins and collectibles from thousands of consignors. Every consignment is appreciated, but only a handful of these collections have the value and the strength to stand alone. While I treat each coin that comes across my desk with the respect it deserves, I invariably find myself giving extra attention to coins destined for stand-alone catalogs.

A stand-alone catalog means a great collection, and even if Heritage is going to sell it off one lot at a time, a collection that great deserves to last, if only in pages.

To leave a comment, click on the title of this post.

-John Dale Beety

Coin Monday: The Legend of the 1943 Bronze Cent

Dec. 7, 2009

Written by John Dale

Back in late October, I discussed wrong-planchet errors in the context of a Franklin half dollar that had been struck on a planchet designed for a quarter. (The results from Houston are in, and the piece sold for $1,150. Not bad for a Mint mistake!) At the end, I left a slightly cryptic clue to another wrong-planchet error I knew about: “Oh, but I did mention ‘wrong size or type,” didn’t I? Well, I’ll tell you about that later…”

It’s officially later, if later than I’d planned, so now it’s time to let you in on the secret. This is the good stuff. The really, really good stuff.

Click here.

For those of you who clicked and didn’t experience sudden coin euphoria, let me slip into my best Olmec impression and tell you The Legend of the 1943 Bronze Cent:

“Long ago, in the city of Philadelphia, there was a building called the U.S. Mint. In the early days of World War II, when copper was needed urgently for bullets and artillery shells, the Mint was using tons of copper to strike one cent coins, which were made out of bronze. To save that copper for the war effort, the Mint metallurgists experimented with other, different metals in search of a replacement. They even tried making cents out of plastic!

In 1943, for one year only, the Mint made cents out of zinc-coated steel, but a handful of 1943-dated cents were made in the old bronze alloy instead, and one of them made its way to the January 2010 FUN Auction!

Your quest is to outbid the rest of the room, retrieve the 1943 bronze cent, and add it to your collection.”

…yes, I watched Legends of the Hidden Temple way too much as a kid. To Viacom, Nickelodeon’s corporate parent: no box set? Seriously? Not even a “best-of” compilation on one DVD? But I want to give you money...

Where was I? Oh, yes, 1943 bronze cent. These wrong-metal rarities have been sources of intrigue ever since their discovery, and even today, tall tales about them flourish. To quote the 1943 bronze cent’s description in the catalog:

“Almost from the outset, the 1943 bronze cents were the subject of misinformation. Henry Ford, the automobile titan, supposedly offered a new car in exchange for a 1943 ‘copper’ cent, for example; this was not the first coin hoax centered around Ford. … Similarly, news dispatches in 1999 about a 1943 bronze cent supposedly spent as an ordinary coin overestimated its value; the original wire report claimed it was worth a quarter of a million dollars, a number that increased to a cool half-million as the story was retold!”

The legends made the 1943 bronze cent as special as it is. Generations have sought it, most finding nothing, some discovering a great love for coins. The best part of any legend, though, is its tiny center of truth, and that truth—3.11 grams of bronze, stamped by dies that never should have struck anything but steel—makes all the built-up hype seem irrelevant. It sits in the hand, sandwiched between layers of protective plastic, terribly ordinary-looking for such a prized relic. Yet it is the driving force, the dreamed-of ending for thousands of stories, true stories.

Come January, let the end be written.

To leave a comment, click on the title of this post.

-John Dale Beety

Coin Monday: Lucky 13 and the 1927-D Double Eagle

Nov. 23, 2009

Written by John Dale

Normally, I’d be talking about a coin in the upcoming December 2009 Houston U.S. Coin Auction in this space, but if I don’t get started on my preview/commentaries for the January 2010 FUN Auction , I know what’ll happen — it’ll be the day before the auction and I’ll still have half a dozen coins to write about. (That may happen anyway, though. Heritage’s FUN auctions are just that awesome.)

For the longest time I had to keep the secret that a certain coin is coming up for auction, as part of a remarkable set of Saint-Gaudens double eagles. With the mailers we’ve sent out, though, plus the Heritage Web site preview and the humongous advertisement in Coin World, I figure it’s safe to say…

We have a 1927-D! We have a 1927-D! (Insert video clip of me doing the Heritage Happy Dance of Coin Joy.) [Not happening. – Noah]

The 1927-D double eagle is rare, and I’m not talking garden-variety rare. When Heritage sold a Class III 1804 dollar earlier this year for $2.3 million, one of the big selling points, as has always been true in its history, is that there are only 15 known 1804 dollars out there.

In our census of 1927-D double eagles, part of an in-depth and potentially mind-bending catalog description in its final stages, Heritage has accounted for only 13 distinct examples. While 13 is seen by many as an unlucky number, it takes a mighty lucky (and wealthy!) numismatist to own one; moreover, since four of the 1927-D double eagles are in museum collections and thus as good as permanently impounded, that leaves just nine coins for collectors.

Just between us, there are a lot more than nine people who want this coin.

When Heritage offers a 1927-D double eagle, the results can be impressive. We offered this particular 1927-D $20 once before, when it was consigned by the Connecticut State Library; it brought $390,500 back on June 2, 1995. (For reference, I was still in fifth grade then. You may now feel old.)

In the Heritage Auction Hall of Fame’s Coins Wing, 17 of the 20 pieces listed sold for more than a million dollars total, and of the 17, two of the coins are 1927-D double eagles. In November 2005, we sold the MS67 Morse specimen for just under $1.9 million, while the MS65 example we offered in January 2006 went for slightly more than $1.3 million.

This coin is graded MS66, so it splits the difference, and it seems a fairly safe bet that this 1927-D $20, part of the Ralph P. Muller Collection, will be Heritage’s Million-Dollar Coin #18…unless it turns out to be Million-Dollar Coin #19, that is!

The story of that other seven-figure coin, however, will have to wait until next week, so stay tuned…

To leave a comment, click on the title of this post.

-John Dale Beety

Coin Monday: A dime worthy of Dali

June 1, 2009
Posted by John Dale

In past Coin Monday posts, I’ve made clear my love for error coins. They fascinate me, both for what they can teach about the minting process and for the mildly transgressive charm of their blatant imperfections (A coin-as-humorous-gift that I’ve been waiting to spring on someone is an inexpensive error coin, paired with a handwritten note that reads “Nobody’s perfect.”). I was cataloging recently for Heritage’s July Summer FUN auction when I came across a small batch of error coins. One in particular stood out: a 1918-dated dime brockage.

As dramatic as other errors might be, few are as surreal as the brockage; one side is perfectly normal, but the other side is a mirror image of the first, with the features sunk into the coin instead of raised and the lettering reversed. A brockage results from a glitch in striking. In the modern minting process, a blank planchet is fed between two dies, one lower die or anvil die that does not move, and one upper die or hammer die that is raised and lowered. (The terms anvil and hammer are holdovers from the time when coins were made by hand. A heated planchet was placed on the lower die, the upper die went on top of the planchet, and the broad top surface of the upper die was struck with a mallet or hammer.)

Normally, a planchet goes between the two dies, receives an impression, and then the newly minted coin is ejected to make room for the next planchet. Rarely, though, a newly minted coin sticks to one of the dies. When the next planchet comes in, instead of being struck by two dies, it gets its design from one die and one coin. The coin-as-die is in positive relief, so it gives the planchet a negative impression, and since the coin-as-die shows the side opposite that of the die to which it is stuck, the brockage side of the error mirrors the normal image.

In the case of this 1918 brockage dime, a coin stuck to the reverse die, and this piece was then struck with the obverse die, which created the normal impression, and the obverse of the coin-as-die, which is responsible for the mirror image. Both sides are well-centered and show sharp impressions of Miss Liberty but relatively weak letters and numbers; interestingly enough, the word LIBERTY and the date are more clearly defined on the brockage side. Though this dime is dated (twice!), the mintmark is missing, and where this error was made remains a mystery. Its absence, however, will hardly dampen error collectors’ enthusiasm for this double-headed treat. It’s just the beginning of what promises to be a great Summer FUN auction.

Click on the title of this post to leave a comment.

-John Dale Beety

Coin Friday: “Big Money”

May 29
Posted by John Dale

(Is it Friday already? What? Who am I? What am I doing here?... yes, it’s been one of those kinds of weeks, with the holiday at the beginning bringing it commensurate respite from labor that always has to be made up on the back end. It doesn’t get any more back end than Friday, so John Dale – always the valiant blogger – has volunteered to anchor the weekend with another of his coin posts… If he keeps this up I’ll just have to reserve Monday and Friday as coin days for our young numismatist… Today he tackles a rather humorous subject in terms of coins, and yes coins can be humorous. Just read on and you’ll see… and have a good weekend. My thanks to John Dale. – Noah Fleisher)

For more than 60 years, the highest denomination of U.S. currency printed has been the $100 bill, and despite the presence of larger notes in other denominations (such as the $500 note), the Treasury department has no plans to print anything higher. Interestingly, the largest coin struck by the United States also bears the $100 denomination: the one-ounce platinum American Eagle, represented by this 2007-dated proof specimen in our upcoming July 8-12 Summer FUN auction.

This status is subject to a couple of caveats: The first is the possibility that 2008 was the last year for the denomination. While all fractional platinum American Eagles and the uncirculated-finish one-ounce piece were discontinued after 2008, the proof one-ounce platinum American Eagle was spared, and though a release date has not been announced, I’ll mark $100 down as a “dead” coinage denomination only if I see an official statement about its cancellation or if none are minted before January 1, 2010. Until then, it counts!

Another potential quibble is that the one-ounce platinum American Eagles were never intended for circulation, from which the idea springs up that their $100 denomination shouldn’t count. It’s true that the coins were not meant to be spent; to quote from American Eagle Platinum Bullion Coins, a U.S. Mint brochure printed in March 2004, “Their face values are largely symbolic, because platinum’s market price … has historically been higher.”

The same brochure, however, emphasizes that the platinum American Eagles are real coins with the full backing of the U.S. government, specifically their “weight, content, and purity.” The standard term is non-circulating legal tender, abbreviated NCLT, but the Treasury emphasizes the legal tender aspect. (It’s worth noting that the American Eagles, like other bullion pieces struck by governments worldwide, are official coins to give them protection under anti-counterfeiting laws, in addition to other applicable statutes.)

The one-ounce platinum American Eagle may be the largest coin the United States has ever struck, but it’s hardly the largest-denomination coin ever produced. In 2004, the Austrian Mint created 15 examples of its popular Vienna Philharmonic coin in an oversized format containing 1000 troy ounces of pure gold in a .9999 fineness alloy, with a face value of €100,000.

Three years later, the Royal Canadian Mint claimed the world record. It produced a mammoth Maple Leaf bullion coin that contains an astounding 3215 troy ounces or 100 kilograms of .99999 fineness gold. Its official denomination: C$1,000,000. The Royal Canadian Mint has filled multiple orders for the million-dollar coin, though the publicity the coin has garnered has doubtless outweighed any actual profit made; as written on the Web site, “Why did the Royal Canadian Mint make the world's purest and largest gold bullion coin? Because we can.”

Until Heritage’s World Coin department gets one of those million-dollar Canadian coins in a consignment, our bidders will have to content themselves with something…smaller. Might I suggest an ounce of platinum?

Click on the title of this post to leave a comment.

-John Dale Beety