| Author |
Replies: 11 / Views: 1,613 |
|
|
Valued Member
United States
210 Posts |
What is the consensus on grading pre-1933 US gold coins?
I've got just a couple (purchased from a reputable dealer) that were described as AU+.
I'm not concerned so much about the grade as I am proving their authenticity when it comes time to sell (over my dead body!). Personally, I have no doubt they are genuine.
Is it generally a good idea to slab such coins (PCGS, since I'm already a member)?
|
|
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
36782 Posts |
Excellent idea as it makes them very easy to sell and puts your mind at rest as far as authenticity goes.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
759 Posts |
It depends, IMO. A $3 Princess? Yes. A common date AU half eagle bought for slightly above melt from a "reputable dealer" where the percentage of counterfeits is negligible? I personally don't see any reason to increase your cost, especially if you "have no doubt they are genuine."
|
|
Valued Member
 United States
210 Posts |
Well, so much for a consensus  What was I thinking? I'm leaning toward having them slabbed as I don't see counterfeiting becoming less of an issue moving forward.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
10982 Posts |
Common date, circulated (bullion) U.S. gold coins do not need to be slabbed. Certification adds no value and they are easily authenticated by weight and size.
Save your money and buy a couple ounces of silver.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
14454 Posts |
I agree with BH1964, if they are common date coins I see no reason they have to be slabbed in order to sell them. Its the rarer dates that should be slabbed if you want the most out of the coin because if you have more buyers interested then you have more bids which drives the price up. Having the rarer coins slabbed will give the new collector a level playing field with the experienced numismatist and they may all throw a bid at your coin. If its not slabbed and a rare date you may just have the experienced and the new collectors that are willing to take a chance, even then chances are that chance they are willing to take would be much less than they would bid on something they knew had a guarantee of being genuine
|
|
Valued Member
 United States
210 Posts |
The keep-'em-raw argument is gaining favor. These are common date coins with limited numismatic value (although PCGS claims that a $2.5 Indian gold is one of the most counterfeited coins they see). Thanks for everyone's input.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
Australia
21788 Posts |
I think it is worth slabbing double eagles to be sold into the U.S. market, if you think they maybe MS63 or above. Reason? They are a large coin, and gold is very soft, and the slab will protect them. At that grade or above, you cannot afford for them to acquire any more tiny nicks in them. I grade my common date example at MS62, but I will not be slabbing mine. Slabs are nowhere as near as much accepted in Australia as they are in the U.S., and the grade I have assigned to my coin would not justify the slabbing expense anyway. Where rarity is not in consideration, a screw capsule is perfectly OK. Such coins can be easily removed from the screw capsule. There is nothing like the psychological tactile they have in the hand. For smaller coins, you would need to consider what grade that your cois(s) may achieve with a TPG, with rarity also being taken into consideration.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
5854 Posts |
I agree that common circulated gold most likely will not need certification. Scarce/rare dates and types and MS gold could benefit from certification. Do watch out for counterfeits even on common dates. From what I read, many fakes are stuck counterfeits of common dates, usually one of the smaller denominations where the premiums over melt tend to be higher.
|
|
Moderator
 United States
23522 Posts |
I've mentioned this before, in a different context. The market for raw gold - aside sel_69l's very accurate comments regarding Double Eagles - is a broad and very well-educated one. I'd call it pre-1900-ish rather than pre-1933, but I would be as comfortable dealing raw in that type of gold as I would in pre-1830 copper.
|
|
Valued Member
United States
305 Posts |
I would  
|
|
Valued Member
United States
66 Posts |
I would not grade, unless its 63-4 or more.
|
| |
Replies: 11 / Views: 1,613 |
|