Roger Burdette's Saint Gaudens Double Eagles Book
5 5

1,473 posts in this topic

On 7/27/2021 at 4:17 PM, Ross J said:

Sad but true... 

I was not aware of many Saint - Double Eagle counterfeits (other than the "omega" high reliefs.) until I got a copy of Bill Fivaz's 2005 "United States Gold Counterfeit Detection Guide"  

He has entries for 1907, 1910, 1910-D, 1913, 1915-S, 1921, 1922, 1924, 1925, 1926, 1927, 1927-D, 1929

Have any of you ever come across any of these? 

(Incidentally, gold plated so called copy "tribute" coins don't count, since they are so awful and could never be mistaken for a real coin...)

This is one of the truths that the in-person hobby knows well, but the ‘net denizens seem to be in denial. Chinese counterfeiters are a HUUUUUUUUUGE problem, counterfeiters of EVERYTHING, rare and common. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/27/2021 at 5:17 PM, Ross J said:

Incidentally, gold plated so called copy "tribute" coins don't count, since they are so awful and could never be mistaken for a real coin

Doesn't matter how "awful" they are. Anything in a "likeness or similitude" of a legal tender coin is a counterfeit and subject to the same 10-years room and board as if they were "perfect."

Counterfeits are known of all dates and mints, but some are seldom seen. These are usually of the rarest dates where potential buyers are expected to be very cautious and demand independent authentication.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@RWB  As long as VKurtB and Just Bob have presumably moseyed on along, I am going to bow deeply, genuflect, and ask you a plain question regarding BvH...

Would not the very fact that only six months' house arrest and a year of supervised release in the face of a maximum term of 10 years in Federal prison indicate to you that there must have been considerable mitigating circumstances involved in an era all but dominated by mandatory minimum terms of imprisonment, consideration of a prior criminal record as a 2d or 3d repeat felony offender -- and perhaps most important of all, recovery of a substantial amount of ill-gotten gains and the confiscation of assets and forfeitures?

(Are you aware Dr. Timothy Leary received a 10-year prison sentence by Federal authorities for "possessing" two (2) seeds of marijuana found in the ashtray of his car in Texas in the 1970's.)

The answer to your question can be ascertained by requesting a copy of the pre-sentence investigation [PSI] which is usually confidential absent a compelling reason.   🐓

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The sentence does not remove the crime or mitigate counterfeiting. You'll have to post the PSIR.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@RWB I am afraid simplyng going access to a confidential document is difficult (Some courthouses will have to recall it from the archives and insist you read it on the premises).  Publishing or posting the contents of one is out of the question and may very well be unlawful and illegal punishable by being drawn-and-quartered.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/27/2021 at 9:30 PM, Quintus Arrius said:

Are you aware Dr. Timothy Leary received a 10-year prison sentence by Federal authorities for "possessing" two (2) seeds of marijuana found in the ashtray of his car in Texas in the 1970's.)

I was entertaining Timothy Leary after he spoke at our college in the early-1980's.  Guy was drinking Tequilla until 2 AM at the local mall.  Uggh.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

1921 "Specimen" Saints:  Roger includes a special section covering the creation of two 1921 Double Eagles which employed a "Roman finish."  These coins were apparently created (according to the auction sales material, though doubted by RWB) by Mint Director Raymond Baker to honor his nephew, a member of the Ghirardelli chocolate family.  The son was later KIA in WW II.

This one goes up for sale soon:

https://www.ngccoin.com/news/article/9319/ngc-certified-1921-roman-finish-double-eagle-in-heritage-august-2021-sale/

I find it somewhat amusing -- and quite frankly, selfish -- that the owner of one of the two 1921 Specimen Proofs (the Baker/Ghirardelli coin, the one not up for sale) declined RWB's repeated request to see the coin, as documented in the book.  Like Roger was going to steal it ? xD

The coin up for sale was examined by Roger, BTW. (thumbsu

Edited by GoldFinger1969
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@GoldFinger1969

My first purchase on eBay, which come to think of it involved more money than I had subsequently spent on any 🐓, was totally sabotaged by a 14-year old kid employed in PayPal security in Nebraska who cited my bank as the problem and after the owner demanded payment and was informed by PayPal that it ran contrary to their logarithms blasted me in a personal call denouncing "people from my neighborhood as well-known scamsters" (rather doubtful since they are largely unsophisticated, impoverished and uneducated) and unilaterally voided my winning bid after I learned the seller was right here in New York City and offered to meet with him any pay him in cash. 

I believe the only way anyone would agree to meet with someone as distinguished as @RWBwould be in an attorney's office or some other secure location -- but the fact the owner would not accommodate a recognized, distinguished, published, professional numismatist (among the 100 most influential) is telling.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/30/2021 at 10:59 PM, Quintus Arrius said:

I believe the only way anyone would agree to meet with someone as distinguished as @RWBwould be in an attorney's office or some other secure location -- but the fact the owner would not accommodate a recognized, distinguished, published, professional numismatist (among the 100 most influential) is telling.

Assuming they know anything about Double Eagles and/or Saints, they should have to know about RWB (or their buyer/associate surely must).  To have such a unique and super-rare coin and not allow anybody to see it for professional authentication and research purposes is most unbecoming, IMO. :mad:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/31/2021 at 1:16 AM, GoldFinger1969 said:

Assuming they know anything about Double Eagles and/or Saints, they should have to know about RWB (or their buyer/associate surely must).  To have such a unique and super-rare coin and not allow anybody to see it for professional authentication and research purposes is most unbecoming, IMO. :mad:

everyone is entitled to their own boundaries n comfort zones.....distinguished, published, professional, recognized r very loose terms n can mean very diff things to diff people, n often nothing at all...entering one's inner circle on family or personal items is usually by invitation not by request...biased or pre-determined opinions can be big negatives for many persons...."expert" opinions can mean very little to many persons as well....so called "experts" r mostly self derived anyway...personally speaking, there r very few persons i would invite to view or inspect my collections...i dont view the owners decision as unbecoming nor telling in any manner.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@zadok. Oh, Great Zadok.  Your crankiness reminds me of the time U.S. military helicopters bearing much-needed disaster relief supplies arrived at Myanmar's great tributary at its southern-most point following damaging Monsoon flooding and were immediately challenged, in Burmese, by their country's military, loosely translated:  "Who are you?  Why are you here?" I guess unsolicited humanitarian aid is an unknown concept to them.

No, on this one, I am afraid I am going to have to disagree with you my friend.  When was the last time someone walked into Rick's Pawn Stars, presented an item Rick or his staff was unfamiliar with, asked politely if the customer would mind if an expert were called and was met with defiance?  Not any time I recall.  I do not believe you yourself making such a trek would not be interested in hearing what a consultant would have to say -- unless doing so would expose your prized relic as being a poor imitation or outright fraud.  (The majority of sellers have felt honored to learn as much as they can about a treasured heirloom and have an expert chime in.)

Note:  none of the foregoing should be taken as a sign that I have nothing but the utmost respect from you and would not genuflect before you, without hesitation, in your presence.    🐓

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/31/2021 at 10:11 AM, Quintus Arrius said:

@zadok. Oh, Great Zadok.  Your crankiness reminds me of the time U.S. military helicopters bearing much-needed disaster relief supplies arrived at Myanmar's great tributary at its southern-most point following damaging Monsoon flooding and were immediately challenged, in Burmese, by their country's military, loosely translated:  "Who are you?  Why are you here?" I guess unsolicited humanitarian aid is an unknown concept to them.

No, on this one, I am afraid I am going to have to disagree with you my friend.  When was the last time someone walked into Rick's Pawn Stars, presented an item Rick or his staff was unfamiliar with, asked politely if the customer would mind if an expert were called and was met with defiance?  Not any time I recall.  I do not believe you yourself making such a trek would not be interested in hearing what a consultant would have to say -- unless doing so would expose your prized relic as being a poor imitation or outright fraud.  (The majority of sellers have felt honored to learn as much as they can about a treasured heirloom and have an expert chime in.)

Note:  none of the foregoing should be taken as a sign that I have nothing but the utmost respect from you and would not genuflect before you, without hesitation, in your presence.    🐓

everyone establishes their own tolerance zones....i dont consider any of the aforementioned experts in anything...nor do i need reassurances on any of the items in my collections...i would reference the walton 1913 nickel as a prime example of "expert" involvement in numismatics......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/31/2021 at 8:40 AM, zadok said:

everyone is entitled to their own boundaries n comfort zones.....distinguished, published, professional, recognized r very loose terms n can mean very diff things to diff people, n often nothing at all...entering one's inner circle on family or personal items is usually by invitation not by request...biased or pre-determined opinions can be big negatives for many persons...."expert" opinions can mean very little to many persons as well....so called "experts" r mostly self derived anyway...personally speaking, there r very few persons i would invite to view or inspect my collections...i dont view the owners decision as unbecoming nor telling in any manner.....

The general public, yes.  But if you have such a rare coin and are asked by a well-known numismatist/researcher to look at the coin for a few seconds.....it just strikes me as closed-minded and elitist to say NO.

JMHO. (thumbsu

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/31/2021 at 10:00 AM, Alex in PA. said:

Keep it going.  This thread is very interesting and I would like to hear more about these 1933 DE coins.

I think there's more commentary on the 1933's WAY back in the thread besides what you just read in the July 2021 posts, Alex.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/31/2021 at 10:32 AM, zadok said:

i would reference the walton 1913 nickel as a prime example of "expert" involvement in numismatics......

What happened ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/30/2021 at 10:59 PM, Quintus Arrius said:

I believe the only way anyone would agree to meet with someone as distinguished as @RWBwould be in an attorney's office or some other secure location -- but the fact the owner would not accommodate a recognized, distinguished, published, professional numismatist (among the 100 most influential) is telling.

I give Stuart Weitzman a standing ovation for making the 1933 Double Eagle available to the general public when he owned it.

Yes, everybody can do what they want when they own something.  And I understand some people want their privacy respected and have security concerns, too.  Still, I think those needs could be accomodated to meet with 1 or 2 researchers/numismatists. 

The fact that we don't even know who owns the 1921 Speciman -- like some other famous/rare coins -- is frustrating.  People have no problem showing off $50 MM homes or a $20 MM piece of art, but a coin they want it all hush-hush. xD

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
On 7/31/2021 at 12:05 PM, RWB said:

I've examined one of the two 1921 DE. See the comments in my book.

Yup, I saw it. 

Did the owners reveal themselves or did a 3rd party show you the coin ?  And did you know who owns the Baker/Ghirardelli Coin or did a 3rd party communicate your desires there, too ?

Edited by GoldFinger1969
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/31/2021 at 12:08 PM, GoldFinger1969 said:

Yup, I saw it. 

Did the owners reveal themselves or did a 3rd party show you the coin ?  And did you know who owns the Bakere/Ghirardelli Coin or did a 3rd party communicate your desires there, too ?

Owners. My report is confidential to the owners, only.

Edited by RWB
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/31/2021 at 5:25 PM, RWB said:

Owners. My report is confidential to the owners, only.

Any idea why they wanted secrecy and confidentiality ?  Did they tell you and/or did you ask ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/1/2021 at 1:39 AM, GoldFinger1969 said:

Any idea why they wanted secrecy and confidentiality ?  Did they tell you and/or did you ask ?

Sure. They wanted objective information for their own use...whatever that use might be at the time or in the future. Similar to going to your physician.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/1/2021 at 10:30 AM, RWB said:

Sure. They wanted objective information for their own use...whatever that use might be at the time or in the future. Similar to going to your physician.  

Confused....when I go to a physician, the information is only relevant to ME.   

The coin information benefits the entire numismatic community (hopefully something the 1921 Specimen owners value) and by increasing the information and the discussion on the coins, it increases discussion and interest in the 1921 specifically, which helps them to monetize it in the future if they so desire.

So you are saying they agreed to meet with you only because they thought it would benefit themselves in the present or in the future ?  "Objective information" can be obtained from lots of sources, and I'm sure they knew something about the provenance of the 1921 Saint (not that talking to you didn't enhance their knowledge).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When you go to your physician the information is not public, unless specifically stated.

When I examine a specimen (not the physician's "specimen") at the owner's request the results are not public, unless specifically stated. This applies, also, to background or other information the owner might provide to me in context of the examination.

This approach is followed in all my books and articles. Credit lines and sources are always checked with the owner before publication. Typically, I will send a page mock-up for approval. Many collectors like to remain anonymous; some prefer a special name for their collection, others approve use of their name - it is the individual's choice.

Edited by RWB
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unsolicited Editorial Comment...

With the advent of the internet, the concepts of anonymity and confidentiality are dead.

*     *     *

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/31/2021 at 11:06 AM, GoldFinger1969 said:

What happened ?

An excruciatingly detailed account of the Walton "specimen" may be found in a Wikileaks summary headed:  1913 Liberty Head Nickels.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/1/2021 at 1:09 PM, Quintus Arrius said:

Unsolicited Editorial Comment...

With the advent of the internet, the concepts of anonymity and confidentiality are dead.

*     *     *

 

Not if we can effectively neuter the Internet, a cause to which I am fully committed. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
On 8/1/2021 at 2:09 PM, Quintus Arrius said:

Unsolicited Editorial Comment...With the advent of the internet, the concepts of anonymity and confidentiality are dead.

Eh....I dunno.....nobody tracked down Stuart Weitzman.  The consensus "guestimates" as to who bought the Farouk 1933 Saint turned out to be WAY off (i.e., a Wall Streeter, a hedge fund guy, one of the Koch Brothers, etc.).

Edited by GoldFinger1969
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/31/2021 at 12:01 PM, GoldFinger1969 said:

Yes, everybody can do what they want when they own something.  And I understand some people want their privacy respected and have security concerns, too.  Still, I think those needs could be accomodated to meet with 1 or 2 researchers/numismatists. 

The fact that we don't even know who owns the 1921 Speciman -- like some other famous/rare coins -- is frustrating.  People have no problem showing off $50 MM homes or a $20 MM piece of art, but a coin they want it all hush-hush. xD

I don't blame Mr (or Ms) 2021 for retaining their anonymity.  Mr. Weitzman didn't reveal himself as the owner until the coin was consigned for auction 19 years after he bought it.  It is nobody's business.  Let the current owner enjoy the coin in peace. I personally think it's a good rule of thumb not to blab about one's coin collection for any number of reasons.  You can probably tell I'm not a fan of "registry sets". If you want to see one, there are two at the Smithsonian, and the "Langbord 10" get shuttled around when the Mint feels like it.

The hype and excitement are greater when one of these ultra rarities comes out of hiding for another auction.    

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
On 8/1/2021 at 11:15 PM, Ross J said:

I don't blame Mr (or Ms) 2021 for retaining their anonymity.  Mr. Weitzman didn't reveal himself as the owner until the coin was consigned for auction 19 years after he bought it.  It is nobody's business.  Let the current owner enjoy the coin in peace. I personally think it's a good rule of thumb not to blab about one's coin collection for any number of reasons.  You can probably tell I'm not a fan of "registry sets". If you want to see one, there are two at the Smithsonian, and the "Langbord 10" get shuttled around when the Mint feels like it.

The hype and excitement are greater when one of these ultra rarities comes out of hiding for another auction.    

Ross, I could live with personal anonymity if the person so desires.   Especially if the person isn't an ultra-high net worth individual and somebody for whom security or the cost of security could be a concern.  I get it.

However, I see absolutely no harm in having a 3rd party see the coin for numismatist purposes, especially if it hasn't been seen or catalogued in decades (if ever).  Nothing wrong either with having updated pictures taken by a reputable firm like HA or NGC or PCGS or a numismatist like RWB....or them asking questions about the coin's provenance (the current party excepted).

To each his or her own, of course.  I just thought that one of the major perks of owning a rarity like the 1921 Specimen Saint probably means you get to put your own mark on owning it for a period of time.  Because chances are, it probably WON'T turn out to be a good investment.xD

Edited by GoldFinger1969
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
5 5