Post An Overrated Coin And An Underrated One In The Same Series

Great idea!

Seated Liberty Dimes:

Overrated: 1844 in low grades (many are available, they are just highly priced because of some stories behind them. Not as overrated as SVDB and 16-D Merc though)
Underrated: 1843-O in any grade (much harder to obtain than the 1844 with only about 200ish in existence)

Seated Liberty half dimes:

Overrated: Is there one?
Underrated: Probably the entire series (1852-O in particular, but there are many others)

Seated Liberty quarters:

Overrated: The later dates (high survival rates, but low mintages)
Underrated: S-mint coins from the 1850s and 60s

3 cent nickels:
Overrated: Hard to say
Underrated: 1888 and 1889

Morgans:
Overrated: 1893-S, 1882-1885 CC (sorry Cascade)
Underrated: 1892-S, 1896-S

The answer to this question is that the 1885 was struck in Philadelphia. Collectors there were more likely to order a Proof example instead of a business strike. This means that the 1885 simply circulated for years and years.

The 1912-S was the first nickel struck in San Francisco despite its modest mintage, citizens/collectors saved examples.

Liberty Head Half Eagles (No Motto).

Overrated - "C" and "D" mints. Examples abound, but for a substantial premium.

Underrated - 1840-O "Broad Mill". Only 4,620 were struck using the 1839 collars. They are a distinct, rare variety of Half Eagle at a fraction of the cost of a Charlotte or Dahlonega coin in similar grade.

Overrated Charlotte Half Eagle:

1842-C Small Date - certainly a more elusive date from the series, but not nearly as rare as some people like to make it out to be. I can find 3-5 for sale in various dealer inventories at any given time. Usually, its price tag exceeds its availability.




Underated: 1846 Charlotte Half Eagle - a rare date, and dare I say even rarer than the '42-C Small Date, but it sells (when available) at 1/2 or even multiple times less the price than what I consider to be the more available '42-C Small Date- just try to find a decent one. The one pictured below was in my collection, graded AU-55. I purchased it as an NGC XF-45 back in 1998, cracked it out & resubmitted, and came back in an AU-55 holder. I never thought the coin was that attractive though... it was bit too baggy and had obviously been dipped, being void of a majority of its original skin and luster, although it did display some attractive orange coloration. Nice for what it was, but just not a good fit for me. I sold it a few years ago for a nice profit, but then found myself again (and still) searching for that "right" one.



ET

You have to be careful not to tie value up with scarcity as a direct correlation, however. Obviously, there are far fewer 1881 Philly Eagles out there than 1889-CC Morgan dollars. However, the value of the gold coin is more closely tied to the price of gold than it is to numismatic scarcity. There are a far GREATER number of collectors putting together complete sets of CC mint Morgans, or Morgans in general, meaning that the value for an 1889-CC is driven as much by collector demand as it is by numismatic scarcity. If gold were to somehow plunge to $300 an ounce next month, many common-date circulated gold coins would see sudden major value drops, despite very low mintages, especially when compared to the lowest-mintage Morgans. Sure, collectors would come in to complete their type sets or fill in a few gaps, and that would provide a bottom for the market, but even at $300 an ounce I doubt you'd see a sudden rush to start set-building Liberty Head Gold Eagles, not least because there are many key rarities that are bank-breakers for a majority of collectors.

I think a more apropos comparison would be, say, the coins of 1919 in quarter and half-dollar from the three mints. Let's do a quick check using ebay ANACS, NGC, and PCGS certified coins and no qualifiers such as FH, with PCGS Numismatic Rarity in all grades, and number of listings.

1919 25c - mintage 11.3m - PCGS R3 - 21 listings - an MS63 will set you back $250 (non-FH NGC and attractive)
1919-D 25c - mintage 1.94m - PCGS R4 - 17 listings - an MS63 will set you back $2,500 (non-FH PCGS with really ugly toning)
1919-S 25c - mintage 1.83m - PCGS R4 - 19 listings - an MS62 (closest) will set you back $2,500 (ANACS OWH with Eagle Beak clash and very nice)

1919 50c - mintage 962k - PCGS R2.5 - 9 listings - an MS64 will set you back $4.2k to $5.4k, both PCGS, one toned, the other blast white
1919-D 50c - mintage 1.16m - PCGS R2.4 - 10 listings - an MS64 will set you back $26.3k (PCGS with spotty black toning)
1919-S 50c - mintage 1.55m - PCGS R2.2 - 20 listings - an MS64 will set you back $12.6k (PCGS with a CAC green bean)

Despite the Walkers being less "scarce" numismatically (according to PCGS) and having more "survivors" they seem to carry substantially higher values than their respective date SLQ's.

I would advance the theory that this is because a set of Walking Liberty half dollars in CIRCULATED condition is within the budget of many collectors, whereas the large number of expensive-in-ANY-grade coins in the SLQ series makes putting together a full set somewhat more challenging for collectors without substantial financial means.

In addition, there are simply more MS64 and better 1919-dated Walkers out there to buy "right now" than 1919-dated MS64 SLQ's, meaning that buyers have an outlet for their dollars, whereas those MS64 and better 1919-dated SLQ's are few and far between and sell for princely sums on their rare appearances.

As a result, pressure from set collectors (and Registry set owners, et al.) pushes values upwards for 1919-dated Walking Liberty halves, while allowing prices to remain somewhat lower for 1919-dated SLQ's despite similar mintages and scarcities (excepting the 1919-P SLQ.)

Both coin series are usually considered as having outstanding designs, which is why I picked those two series, to take "good coin/ugly coin" out of the equation.

JMHO.

I know what you mean and agree in many ways; I just don't see anything happening at the moment that is likely to create significant upward pressure on values in the series. In terms of cost vs. scarcity, I definitely think classic type gold is strongly underrated, just as you do. Look at the bright side: more great deals for you since you have much less competition. :)