Prooflike $3 Gold 1 1

[scarp9603]

Is an 1874 $3 AU53 PL worth a premium over a straight graded AU53?

NGC has only graded one 1874 $3 as AU53 PL, and I can't find a price estimate for an AU53 PL in the NGC price guide

Edited March 7, 2021 by scarp9603
Typo

[Henri Charriere]

Ah... the price guide.  Since when is a compilation the go-to authority on all things coin-ish?

I have spent thousands on Roosters, and guess what? Not a one has appeared in any of the highly-vaunted price guides of TPGS.  It appears a symbiotic relationship exists between Heritage Auctions and N.G.C.

It wasn't until I stumbled onto a re-run of Pawn Stars that I inadvertently discovered why. An NGC expert (whose specific specialty is Ancients) Rick relies upon for advice made an off-hand remark to a customer who thought the coin he brought in for examination surely had to be worth much more than the range quoted by the expert who, without missing a beat, informed the disappointed customer, in substance, that Heritage Auctions attracts a world-wide audience which [presumably] makes the prices realized there a far better indicator of Fair Market Value. 

(If anyone wishes to clarify or refute this, do feel free to offer your take on this.)

[scarp9603]

[Henri Charriere]

50 minutes ago, scarp9603 said:

Is an 1874 $3 AU53 PL worth a premium over a straight graded AU53?

NGC has only graded one 1874 $3 as AU53 PL, and I can't find a price estimate for an AU53 PL in the NGC price guide

Why not speak to someone at Douglas Winter Numismatics (RareGoldCoins.com) or Stacks-Bowers Galleries (StacksBowers.com) on the West Coast (California) at 800.458.4646, or East Coast (New York) at 800.566.2580, or by e-mail at Info@StacksBowers.com, or StacksBowers.com

[J P M]

Wow that is like a piece of art.

[Henri Charriere]

That it is, but I would caution against attempting to abate the abrasions (until the art of conservation has progressed enough to inspire complete confidence). A real jewel, nevertheless.

[RWB]

The coin does not appear to be "AU" to me. The photos suggest a nice EF - it is certainly not AU in the classical sense of the term -- i.e. a trace of wear on highest point and/or slight disturbance in luster.

As for PL, I don't see enough to justify the designation - however, there are no standards, so it could be flat matte, and be called "PL" by someone.

Edited March 8, 2021 by RWB

[scarp9603]

Here's the deal.

I got it for the price an XF or AU that's not PL, would go for in recent Heritage auctions.

It's graded AU53 PL, but not by NGC.

I'm trying to decide whether it's worth the money to submit for crossover.

[RonnieR131]

It looks EF, maybe AU50. I'd leave it in the 53 holder. It looks like it has possibly been cleaned. I'd leave it as is. The 2 marks under the top right acorn looks like tool marks, but it's been graded, so they're not. Nice coin tho.

[RWB]

8 hours ago, Lancek said:

you see on their label at face value.

In coin collecting should that be "at obverse value"...?

Here's a PL 1874 from NGC for comparison. (Composite courtesy HA.com)

Edited March 8, 2021 by RWB

[Henri Charriere]

There ought to be a world of a difference between an 1874 $3 AU-53 PL, and one that has been adjudged and decreed to be an MS-61 PL.

While I can't put a finger on it, I am unable to dispense with the comment made by Lancek or the contribution made by RWB.

I am not at all concerned with the dots under the acorn as noted by ronnie stein, particularly when confronted, as here,  with the difficult-to-overlook abrasion on the obverse bottom which suggests glacial moraine that has critically injured the last A in AMERICA. But the MS-61 PL presents its own problems, mainly exterior rubbing which probably left the grader with no choice but to assign the coin a grade on the lower spectrum of the Mint State continuum.

Would I cross-grade? No. I am an accumulator who tires very quickly of having to defend a coin from constant praise "but for that problem." (choose one, or more.) I would sell it, as is, and take whatever loss that entails.  

This is a lovely coin but it isn't the only pebble on the beach. To quote my state motto: Excelsior (Ever Upward). Use whatever money you garner from this sale and use it to pursue a coin that can speak for itself and stand on its own feet.

[Woods020]

2 hours ago, Quintus Arrius said:

There ought to be a world of a difference between an 1874 $3 AU-53 PL, and one that has been adjudged and decreed to be an MS-61 PL.

While I can't put a finger on it, I am unable to dispense with the comment made by Lancek or the contribution made by RWB.

I am not at all concerned with the dots under the acorn as noted by ronnie stein, particularly when confronted, as here,  with the difficult-to-overlook abrasion on the obverse bottom which suggests glacial moraine that has critically injured the last A in AMERICA. But the MS-61 PL presents its own problems, mainly exterior rubbing which probably left the grader with no choice but to assign the coin a grade on the lower spectrum of the Mint State continuum.

Would I cross-grade? No. I am an accumulator who tires very quickly of having to defend a coin from constant praise "but for that problem." (choose one, or more.) I would sell it, as is, and take whatever loss that entails.  

This is a lovely coin but it isn't the only pebble on the beach. To quote my state motto: Excelsior (Ever Upward). Use whatever money you garner from this sale and use it to pursue a coin that can speak for itself and stand on its own feet.

Quintus what do you do for a living? It has to be something where you are paid by the word? Journalist?? 

[Henri Charriere]

26 minutes ago, Woods020 said:

Quintus what do you do for a living? It has to be something where you are paid by the word? Journalist?? 

Chiffonnier (ret'd)

[RWB]

Good to see a retired rag picker can prosper in America!

[Henri Charriere]

1 hour ago, RWB said:

Good to see a retired rag picker can prosper in America!

Thank you, sir!  Not just anyone can weave their way through a morass of loose threads and produce a finished product.  As always, you're on point. 😉