Parmelee Eliasberg Farouk 1825/4/1 half Eagle PCGS PR67 CAC — Welcome to the CAC Educational Forum
›

Parmelee Eliasberg Farouk 1825/4/1 half Eagle PCGS PR67 CAC

breakdownbreakdown
in Gold Coins


I lot viewed the Stacks August auctions a few weeks ago. After looking at the humble coins I was interested in buying, I asked to look at this monster and it is as beautiful as advertised. It gets auctioned tomorrow and is already at $2.3 million hammer. How high will it go?

Comments

  • LegendLegend
    This coin was a monster. I can see it upwards of $4 million all in. It's a masterpiece for sure that any trophy hunting numismatists would want to own!
  • earlyAurumearlyAurum
    Wow! what a coin. I believe it is a 1 sided proof though both look to be proof with the obverse CAM/DCAM.
  • StevieStevie
    earlyAurum said:
    Wow! what a coin. I believe it is a 1 sided proof though both look to be proof with the obverse CAM/DCAM.
    Would be great if the reverse matched the obverse in eye appeal.
  • MarkFeldMarkFeld
    Stevie said:


    earlyAurum said:

    Wow! what a coin. I believe it is a 1 sided proof though both look to be proof with the obverse CAM/DCAM.

    Would be great if the reverse matched the obverse in eye appeal.

    That nit pick strikes me as ironic, considering some of the coins you’ve raved about.
  • breakdownbreakdown
    I think the disparity between obverse and reverse in the Trueview is at least partially a product of how the coin is tilted. Here is Stacks' photo of the reverse. In hand, I didn't get the impression that the coin's reverse paled compared to the obverse although I may have been too stunned to notice. And PCGS did designate the coin CAM. Someone that knows far more about proofs than me could correct me but I don't think PCGs and CAC would say CAM if the reverse didn't have some CAMEO reflectivity:


  • MarkFeldMarkFeld
    breakdown said:

    I think the disparity between obverse and reverse in the Trueview is at least partially a product of how the coin is tilted. Here is Stacks' photo of the reverse. In hand, I didn't get the impression that the coin's reverse paled compared to the obverse although I may have been too stunned to notice. And PCGS did designate the coin CAM. Someone that knows far more about proofs than me could correct me but I don't think PCGs and CAC would say CAM if the reverse didn't have some CAMEO reflectivity:


    In theory, at least, a Proof coin needs to be Cameo on both sides in order to receive the designation. And while I haven’t seen this coin in hand, that image makes the reverse look like an easy qualifier.
  • breakdownbreakdown
    $4.08 Million with the juice. Good estimate, Laura.
Sign In or Register to comment.