Gold & Silver Forum (http://goldismoney.info/forums/index.php)
- Gold - Silver - Coins - Numismatics (http://goldismoney.info/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=51)
- - Are these legitimate reasons to doubt pre 1933 coins as investments? (http://goldismoney.info/forums/showthread.php?t=454964)

mojo1 | 03-10-2010 10:14 PM
Are these legitimate reasons to doubt pre 1933 coins as investments? This article is primarily concerned with questions about possible future gold confiscation but it puts a very negative light on pre 1933 gold coins as investments. A lot of it seems to be speculation concerning how many pre 33 coins are being held in foreign banks. I had never heard any of this before. http://www.cmi-gold-silver.com/gold-...tion-1933.html Some pieced together quotes from the article. Quote:
It is generally believed that all the gold coins surrendered under Roosevelt's call-in were melted or refined into .999 fine bullion bars. That was not the case. It was to the government's advantage to give the foreigners gold coins instead of bullion bars. With the official price of gold at $35 an ounce, a foreign bank presenting $35 million paper dollars received 1,000,000 ounces if the Treasury delivered gold bullion. However, when the Treasury delivered gold coins with a face value of $35 million, it delivered only 967,500 ounces, saving 32,500 ounces. Each $20 Liberty and St. Gaudens (Double Eagles) contains .9675 ounce of gold. The smaller coins contain the same proportions. Therefore, it was to the Treasury Department's advantage to give out U.S. gold coins instead of bullion bars. Additionally, before Roosevelt's call-in, millions of old U.S. gold coins already had made their way to Europe. Are old U.S. gold coins "rare and unusual" today? Not hardly. Between 1850 and 1907, U.S. mints turned out over 100 million $20 Libertys. Between 1908 and 1933, they coined some 65 million $20 St. Gaudens. Today, no one knows how many have survived, but the number is undoubtedly in the tens of millions, with the bulk of them residing in European bank vaults. Because of all the old U.S. gold coins in Europe and because of the huge premiums they carry, old U.S. coins are dangerous investments. As gold moves higher, European banks may become sellers, causing old U.S. gold coins to fall in price while gold goes up. Since 1989, PCGS and NGC, the two major grading services, have "slabbed" over two million coins rated MS-60 or higher. Now, the two services are grading 200,000 to 300,000 coins a month. Millions of lower-grade coins (VF through BU) do not even warrant being submitted. Yet, they are sold as "non-confiscateable" semi-numismatic coins. Low-grade coins that have no real collector value are called semi-numismatic. VF/XF common-date Double Eagles are definitely semi-numismatic coins. Add in the uncounted smaller denomination old gold coins ($10 Eagles, $5 Half Eagles, etc.) and the number of available old U.S. gold coins grows even bigger. There is no way the old U.S. gold coins being promoted as "non-confiscateable" have a "recognized special value to collectors of rare and unusual coins.

WilliamC | 03-10-2010 10:58 PM
Re: Are these legitimate reasons to doubt pre 1933 coins as investments? As someone who doesn't collect them I've also heard that they are prone to counterfitting as well. I'll take my gold as bullion thank you very much!

Jekyll7 | 03-11-2010 12:04 AM
Re: Are these legitimate reasons to doubt pre 1933 coins as investments? They aren't scarce, but like anything else, condition rarity is a factor. "Each $20 Liberty and St. Gaudens (Double Eagles) contains .9675 ounce of gold" $35 in St. Gaudens face would be 1.693 ounces of gold...did I miss something here? How is that cheaper than selling an ounce at $35? The only way the article would make sense was if the double eagle had a face value of $35.

mojo1 | 03-11-2010 10:39 AM
Re: Are these legitimate reasons to doubt pre 1933 coins as investments? Quote:
Originally Posted by Jekyll7 (Post 2221120) They aren't scarce, but like anything else, condition rarity is a factor. "Each $20 Liberty and St. Gaudens (Double Eagles) contains .9675 ounce of gold" $35 in St. Gaudens face would be 1.693 ounces of gold...did I miss something here? How is that cheaper than selling an ounce at $35? The only way the article would make sense was if the double eagle had a face value of $35.
The more I read it the more I realise that it is confusing and poorly written because they are referring to both before and after the 1933 gold call-in in the same paragraph? and it only makes sense if it is referring to prior to the call in when gold was $20oz. Quote:
It is generally believed that all the gold coins surrendered under Roosevelt's call-in were melted or refined into .999 fine bullion bars. That was not the case. It was to the government's advantage to give the foreigners gold coins instead of bullion bars
Your right. It should read $20 face and $20 an ounce to make sense. After the 1933 call in (until 1974?) gold was officially $35oz but they are referring to prior to the 1933 call in when it was $20 face/$20oz too? Quote:
Additionally, before Roosevelt's call-in, millions of old U.S. gold coins already had made their way to Europe.
I don't know if any countries were exchanging (as they claim) large quantities of gold for dollars prior to the 1933 gold call in when it would have benifited the US to pay in Double Eagles. This seems to be another paragraph (below) in the article that doesn't make sense to me. Quote:
Or, the European banks may decide to hold their gold but convert their high-premium old U.S. coins into bullion, thereby increasing their gold holdings. Such a move, of course, would put downward pressure on old U.S. gold coin prices. (For a further discussion about why old U.S. gold coins are overpriced, visit our page on Old U.S. Gold Coins.)
Seems to me if they decided to convert their old US coins to bullion it would put upward pressure on old U.S. gold coin prices.

HistoryStudent | 03-11-2010 11:17 AM
Re: Are these legitimate reasons to doubt pre 1933 coins as investments? Because of BIG BROTHER and privacy issues COMING- will, in the future that will make these coins rather popular - especially slabbed ones from PCGS NGC ANACS ICG. Like $2,000 dollar to $10,000 dollar hard currency BILLS! IMVHO...:ok: sadly...

silverwood | 03-11-2010 12:26 PM
Re: Are these legitimate reasons to doubt pre 1933 coins as investments? Back in the late 70s to early 80s I was interested in $20 St. Gaudens for a long term holdings. I was told by the dealer I was using to buy these coins that they were coming from Europe. So IMO this fact has been out there for quite some time and rarity numbers have had many years to be measured. After being a holder of these coins for many years in retrospect it wasn't ALL THAT GOOD OF AN INVESTMENT! I like the lower mintage GAE in the different denominations as a potential solid long term holdings. Just my two cents worth...:15_1_70v:

HistoryStudent | 03-11-2010 03:43 PM
Re: Are these legitimate reasons to doubt pre 1933 coins as investments? Quote:
Originally Posted by silverwood (Post 2221834) Back in the late 70s to early 80s I was interested in $20 St. Gaudens for a long term holdings. I was told by the dealer I was using to buy these coins that they were coming from Europe. So IMO this fact has been out there for quite some time and rarity numbers have had many years to be measured. After being a holder of these coins for many years in retrospect it wasn't ALL THAT GOOD OF AN INVESTMENT! I like the lower mintage GAE in the different denominations as a potential solid long term holdings. Just my two cents worth...:15_1_70v:
both are good - different baskets - better to have 7 to 20 different baskets - esp. http://www.libertycoinservice.com/currentnews.pdf silver JUNK COINS to buy bread & milk! :36_1_32v:

Saul Mine | 03-11-2010 09:25 PM
Re: Are these legitimate reasons to doubt pre 1933 coins as investments? Gold is not an investment. An investment is when you put some money into something that is going to make a profit and you get a portion of the profit. Gold is savings, gold is insurance, gold is a lot of things, but not an investment.

HistoryStudent | 03-11-2010 10:06 PM
Re: Are these legitimate reasons to doubt pre 1933 coins as investments? Quote:
Originally Posted by Saul Mine (Post 2222619) Gold is not an investment. An investment is when you put some money into something that is going to make a profit and you get a portion of the profit. Gold is savings, gold is insurance, gold is a lot of things, but not an investment.
yep read my BOTTOM LINE(S) & click the PAINE puppy...:bull-smile:

mojo1 | 03-12-2010 12:39 AM
Re: Are these legitimate reasons to doubt pre 1933 coins as investments? Quote:
Originally Posted by Saul Mine (Post 2222619) Gold is not an investment. An investment is when you put some money into something that is going to make a profit and you get a portion of the profit. Gold is savings, gold is insurance, gold is a lot of things, but not an investment.
I always appreciate and respect your old school opinions Saul. As far as gold not being an investment I see it as semantics. I buy semi numismatic modern coins as an investment. An investment in the sense that I buy them because I expect them to appreciate at a greater rate than my bullion but possibly with more risk of loss. I see that conforming to one definition of investment. Most of the members here including you have been doing this much longer than I so I have a lot to learn regarding PMs and investing both. It may be naive but I believe because of the times we're living in gold, silver and platinum in any form will end up being the best insurance, savings, wealth preservation and possibly even investment.

Master_Ho | 03-12-2010 12:54 AM
Re: Are these legitimate reasons to doubt pre 1933 coins as investments? Quote:
Originally Posted by mojo1 (Post 2222900) I always appreciate and respect your old school opinions Saul. As far as gold not being an investment I see it as semantics. I buy semi numismatic modern coins as an investment. An investment in the sense that I buy them because I expect them to appreciate at a greater rate than my bullion but possibly with more risk of loss. I see that conforming to one definition of investment. Most of the members here including you have been doing this much longer than I so I have a lot to learn regarding PMs and investing both. It may be naive but I believe because of the times we're living in gold, silver and platinum in any form will end up being the best insurance, savings, wealth preservation and possibly even investment.
VERY NICELY PUT!!! :23_28_100s:

Curmudgeonista | 03-12-2010 01:07 AM
Re: Are these legitimate reasons to doubt pre 1933 coins as investments? Quote:
Originally Posted by silverwood (Post 2221834) Back in the late 70s to early 80s I was interested in $20 St. Gaudens for a long term holdings. I was told by the dealer I was using to buy these coins that they were coming from Europe. So IMO this fact has been out there for quite some time and rarity numbers have had many years to be measured...
I seem to recall reading that there were huge untold quantities of US gold coins still collecting dust in European vaults. If that's true then rarity numbers out there are far from realistic, and farther still from rare. Nevertheless, you hold something like that in your hand and it's hard not to want some.

esoteric | 03-12-2010 09:56 AM
Re: Are these legitimate reasons to doubt pre 1933 coins as investments? this is why you buy coins which only few were EVER minted

HistoryStudent | 03-12-2010 11:02 AM
Re: Are these legitimate reasons to doubt pre 1933 coins as investments? Quote:
Originally Posted by esoteric (Post 2223228) this is why you buy coins which only few were EVER minted
Yep, and FDR (Obama's white house role model) melted down TONNES of them! :signs14::111:

diversified2 | 03-12-2010 12:33 PM
Re: Are these legitimate reasons to doubt pre 1933 coins as investments? Quote:
Originally Posted by HistoryStudent (Post 2222182) http://www.libertycoinservice.com/currentnews.pdf silver JUNK COINS to buy bread & milk! :36_1_32v:
I really should go check out their shop...it's only 75 miles from me:ok:bancha

HistoryStudent | 03-12-2010 02:08 PM
Re: Are these legitimate reasons to doubt pre 1933 coins as investments? Quote:
Originally Posted by diversified2 (Post 2223457) I really should go check out their shop...it's only 75 miles from me:ok:bancha
Call first and make a friend. I really think the author HELLER I believe - is rather "world class" and would follow his lead "if it made common sense also.":yes:

latemetal | 03-12-2010 04:36 PM
A Double Thank You due... Just about anything you EVER wanted to know about American Arts Medalions in second article at link, well worth a read and saving for future references.:bull-smile: Quote:
Originally Posted by HistoryStudent (Post 2222182) both are good - different baskets - better to have 7 to 20 different baskets - esp. http://www.libertycoinservice.com/currentnews.pdf silver JUNK COINS to buy bread & milk! :36_1_32v:

HistoryStudent | 03-13-2010 07:24 PM
Re: Are these legitimate reasons to doubt pre 1933 coins as investments? Just did a MINOR GUESSTIMATE study and NGC has graded an additional 35,000 SAINTS (1907 to 1933) in the last few months. This was added to the the 790,000 thousand they graded all the years prior. IMVHO somebody somewhere somehow is getting ready for the BIG push because I really suspect that PCGS (ANACS & ICG too for that matter) are all doing the same thing-O! The secret currency of KINGS and PAUPERS (slabbed eagles and double eagles) will be handy in the upcoming future. The RAW coins are OUT and the slabbed MOTHERS of all breakout are in... Have ENOUGH? :bulride::bulride::bulride::bulride: ride 'em COWBOYS! ************************************************** ***************************** On the other hand... it's really L@@KING good too... ************************************************** ******************************* Dollar Bulls Beware (Y2K) Mar 13, 19:02 By Peter Schiff By late 2009, as the U.S. dollar flirted with multi-year lows against most foreign currencies, big investment players crowded into trades that shorted the greenback. Commentators noted that the anti-dollar momentum had taken on a life of its own and that the trade had become too crowded. It is true that markets have a nasty tendency to move against the crowd. When a lot of traders agree on a particular trade, it's more likely that in the short-run the opposite trade will be a winner. The 2008 "flight to safety" rally of the U.S. dollar was a once in a lifetime event that presented huge opportunities for aggressive currency traders. By December 2008, after rallying 25% over the previous five months, the dollar topped out. However, there were many speculators who had come somewhat late to the party, as well as many others who had ridden the dollar up and were thus sitting on huge unrealized gains. Those technical reasons, combined with the re-emergence of strong growth in emerging markets and solid earnings from overseas companies, redirected investment flows away from the dollar. 2009 became a year of dollar weakness, with the buck giving back nearly all of its gains. At that point, most people made the reasonable conclusion that the decline would continue. As is often the case, an unforeseen event came along that made mincemeat out of the consensus' well-conceived strategy. Once some fiscal squabbling grabbed headlines in the eurozone, the negative sentiment that had built up on the dollar was suddenly diverted to the euro. Catalyzed by the Greek debt crisis, the greenback surged by about 8% in six weeks. From a technical standpoint, the short dollar trade of late 2009 was too crowded; but from a fundamental standpoint, I don't think it was crowded enough. As with stocks, there can be no long-term substitute to examining a government's fundamentals to determine its currency's worth. Based on the fundamentals, far too many investors remain far too confident about the greenback's underlying viability. In fact, I do not think I have ever seen so rapid a change in sentiment in my career. The crowd had completely switched sides, with most now betting on the demise of the euro rather than the dollar. This is looking like July 2008 all over again, with the dollar poised to put in over-sized gains. It also presents a good opportunity for those who keep their heads. In my opinion, the market is now perfectly positioned for a massive dollar sell-off. The fundamentals for the dollar in 2010 are so much worse than they were in 2008 that it is hard to imagine a reason for people to keep buying once a modicum of political and monetary stability can be restored in Europe. In fact, the euro has recently stabilized. My gut is that the dollar sell-off will be sharp and swift. Once the dollar decisively breaks below last year's lows, many of the traders who jumped ship in the recent rally will look to re-establish their positions. This will accelerate the dollar's descent and refocus everyone's attention back on the financial train-wreck unfolding in the United States. Any doubts about the future of the U.S. dollar should be laid to rest by today's announcement that San Francisco Federal Reserve President Janet Yellen has been nominated to be Vice Chair of the Fed's Board of Governors, and thereby a voter on the interest rate-setting, seven-member Open Markets Committee. Ms. Yellen has earned a reputation for being one of the biggest inflation doves among the Fed's top players. Looking for an ally to paper over the administration's gaping fiscal holes, it is not surprising that president Obama made this selection. Yellen has consistently downplayed the dangers of inflation and has made statements that indicate she views the Fed as an extension of the Labor Department, rather than a guardian of our currency. Last month, in discussing what she saw as the Fed's obligation to promote employment, she said, "If it were possible to take interest rates into negative territory, I would be voting for that." She may very well make Chairman Bernanke look like a tightwad by comparison. It is anyone's guess which sparks will be responsible for igniting the falling dollar powder keg. From a trader's perspective, a sharp reversal in the dollar will catch many investors completely off guard. Those who stepped off the short-dollar train will be stuck on the platform as it speeds away. Those who refused to give up their seats are in for a hell of a ride. Peter Schiff The guy running for CONGRESS! President of Euro Pacific Capital

Master_Ho | 03-13-2010 07:35 PM
Re: Are these legitimate reasons to doubt pre 1933 coins as investments? Quote:
Originally Posted by HistoryStudent (Post 2225132) The secret currency of KINGS and PAUPERS (slabbed eagles and double eagles) will be handy in the upcoming future. The RAW coins are OUT and the slabbed MOTHERS of all breakout are in... Have ENOUGH?
Who knows how much enough is?? DOes ANYONE think they have enough.........but I broke my gold roughly 50-50 raw - slabbed

HistoryStudent | 03-13-2010 08:03 PM
Re: Are these legitimate reasons to doubt pre 1933 coins as investments? Quote:
Originally Posted by Master_Ho (Post 2225140) Who knows how much enough is?? DOes ANYONE think they have enough.........but I broke my gold roughly 50-50 raw - slabbed
Don't worry the question is one of double checking. If I had your "stash" i'd be in :4_8_4v: (the picture above the bed!) :ok: PS read this and really relax... for your eyes ONLY... NOBODY else's... http://www.gold-eagle.com/editorials...les031110.html

Master_Ho | 03-13-2010 08:14 PM
Re: Are these legitimate reasons to doubt pre 1933 coins as investments? Quote:
Originally Posted by HistoryStudent (Post 2225180) Don't worry the question is one of double checking. If I had your "stash" i'd be in :4_8_4v: (the picture above the bed!) :ok: PS read this and really relax... for your eyes ONLY... NOBODY else's... http://www.gold-eagle.com/editorials...les031110.html
MY STASH???? I have dust compared to you! :rofl:

HistoryStudent | 03-14-2010 11:59 AM
Re: Are these legitimate reasons to doubt pre 1933 coins as investments? Quote:
Originally Posted by Master_Ho (Post 2225193) MY STASH???? I have dust compared to you! :rofl:
Yep, ONE tonne of dust... GOLD DUST! I'll take a handful with a wet hand....:36_1_34::504: (lil' green smilie!)

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:39 PM. |

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2010, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright = None use it and Link to GIM