2 different Milton Holmes ( Stacks circa 1961)1796 quarters half million $’s apart?

mellado

Great Collections just announced they purchased 1796 MS 66 quarter for $2.35M, Ex Milton Holmes ( Stacks, circa 1961 ) colln ( then sold for $3K to NYC collector Wm Wild) . But Heritage just auctioned the Simpson 1796 quarter also MS66 for $1.77M also Ex Milt Holmes. Holmes, whose sale I attended, only owned one 1796 quarter. I like the Simpson coin with NO planchet carbon streaks and much nicer toning much better than GC’s coin. Did someone pay a half million dollars too much ?
Sorry, I don’t know how to “drag” images from other websites to this forum. Perhaps someone else can post the two images ?

Also Abe Kosoff in his Coin World memoirs
once wrote of a major dealer ( think it was FCC Boyd) unwrapping a paper bindle to reveal 20 or 25 “ gem proof” 1796 quarters to show Abe. Is it really that rare in top MS condition?

ptolemyII

The original Stacks Pogue slab images are but a mini-micro shade less bright that that of the GC images.
The Simpson image barely suggests the deep adjustment marks through the hair going backwards. A zoomed-in view on the HA site is necessary to gauge their impact. YMMV but if I'm thinking damage I don't care, in the Mint or afterwards, who's to blame. It's conceivable that the depth of the mirrors could overwhelm that distraction.
In some ways, I can find the Newman NGC MS64+ CAC preferable. Simpson is at most 4th best and less than 4th prettiest.

I've been looking at '96 quarters since 1973. Stacks auctions were thepremier learning venue throughout the 70's and 80's. As I recall it, less than 25% ratable (55 and up) had at best a semi-PL surface, and true PL's were very infrequently encountered. @TheCoinHound went to the same sales and I'd happily defer to his opinions (when the NYINC is over)

oreville

I really enjoy searching out and purchasing the Milton Homes pedigreed dimes with the original Stacks flips and envelopes.

I never understood why other collectors re-name the holders

Legend

I like the Simpson coin too-but CAC did not unfortunatly. When I placed it it was a 65. Simpson should have kept it at that and it could have beaned. He still would have made money. We paid like $550G for it.

I never liked the grease marks on the Pouge coin. But it was pretty. The price paid was ridiculous and was a pure example of the crypto gang buying and paying a disruptive premium. I hope they have a serious long term holding plan.

ptolemyII

GC certainly has been on a tear recently. While their opinion of the best seems (inevitably) to differ from some others, It's likely "best practice" to applaud others who's buying philosophy on behalf of its clients is "Buy the best and pay for it" Always worked for Legend,; lately it seems, at least in public, to be working out very well for GC.

Disruptively overpaying? From someone who bid $50,000 for a raw Texas PDS set? Credit is due for stopping below $100K on that MS68+ Heritage Walker

Poisoning the well is bad for everyone. Because we all, all, all of us, have to drink from it.
All of us.
Insults rarely illuminate more than the negativity and fear of the critic.
I may regret saying that

TheCoinHound

I dunno. $2 million seems like an awful lot for ANY 1796 Quarter. (Even the Norman Stack coin, which is probably my favorite.) I must be a dinosaur.

MarkFeld

TheCoinHound said:

I dunno. $2 million seems like an awful lot for ANY 1796 Quarter. (Even the Norman Stack coin, which is probably my favorite.) I must be a dinosaur.

I don't know which example Norman Stack owned, but I think the coin pictured below is the one I got to see many years ago and if so, it's my favorite.

ptolemyII

@TheCoinHound has a great story to tell about Norman's Type Set and how the deal ($7M+ IIRC) was affected by his grade on Norman's quarter