collectSPACE: Messages - Reply to Topic

Space News
space history and artifacts articles

Messages
space history discussion forums

Sightings
worldwide astronaut appearances

Resources
selected space history documents

Forum:	Coins & Medallions
Topic:	Apollo 11 vs. Apollo 17 Robbins medals

Want to register?

Who Can Post?	Any registered users may post a reply.
About Registration	You must be registered in order to post a topic or reply in this forum.
Your UserName:
Your Password:	Forget your password?
Your Reply: HTML is ON UBB Code is ON Smilies Legend
Options	Disable Smilies in This Post. Show Signature: include your profile signature. Only registered users may have signatures.
*If HTML and/or UBB Code are enabled, this means you can use HTML and/or UBB Code in your message.

If you have previously registered, but forgotten your password, click here.

<table border=0 cellpadding=0 cellspacing=0 width="600"><TR><td bgcolor="#000000"><TABLE BORDER=0 cellpadding=4 border=0 cellspacing=1 WIDTH="100%"><TR bgcolor="#660000"><TD COLSPAN=2><CENTER>T O P I C     R E V I E W</CENTER></TD></TR><TR bgcolor="#494949"><TD valign=top>drifting to the right</TD><TD>From Howard Weinberger's first Robbins medallions guide: <BLOCKQUOTE>It seems doubtful that an Apollo 17 medallion would sell for more than an Apollo 11 medallion, even though less Apollo 17 medals exist.</BLOCKQUOTE> Now that this has occurred in the Farthest Reaches Ed Gibson Robbins sale, is this a lasting relative price inversion? Has it happened before?</TD></TR><TR bgcolor="#333333"><TD valign=top>lunareagle</TD><TD>My comment, made back in 1999, was a deduction based upon my perception of the Robbins Medal market then, and in the context of helping to provide some insight into the considerations that collectors would have to take into account as the market for Robbins medals expanded. The first book came out not long after a silver Apollo 11 Robbins sold at Christie's for about $12,000, an unheard of amount at the time. Since then, a number of collectors have endeavored to complete a collection of the eleven Apollo Robbins medals. In addition, I know of a collector who has concentrated on just two missions, one of which is Apollo 17. I believe these factors have put the extra pressure on the Apollo 17 prices for now. The question is, what will happen when these collections are complete? Will new collectors enter the market attempting to do the same, thereby pushing prices even higher? Or, will the completed collections come to market before new collectors begin the chase, thereby having a stabilizing effect on prices, or possibly even bring prices lower? It is pure speculation trying to figure which will happen. Over the last few years, there has been a steady flow of Apollo 11 silver Robbins medals, and the market has been in a fairly predictable price range of $5500 - $7500 depending on whose collection it comes from. But, this range is far below the high dollar fetched in 1999. So, can the Apollo 17 Robbins settle back from here? I believe it all goes back to why the medals are being bought. Does the buyer of the Apollo 17 medal for $12,000 care what he paid today if his time frame is 20 years from now? Probably not. If he bought it to flip though, he may face some headwinds from this level at this time. Collectors should buy for the right reasons. Buy what you like, buy what you need, buy the best.</TD></TR><TR bgcolor="#494949"><TD valign=top>Leon Ford</TD><TD>I do find it interesting that there is such a price difference between the Apollo 17 medallions and the Apollo 16 medallions. I don't have the book in front of me, but it seems that I remember that there are only 18 more flown Apollo 16 medallions than there are flown Apollo 17. Of course, everyone is always wants the Apollo 17 to complete the set, but you are going to need those 16s to complete the set also! There are not that many of them!</TD></TR><TR bgcolor="#333333"><TD valign=top>SRB</TD><TD>I think a good part of the current difference in values between Apollo 16 and Apollo 17 Robbins medallions is the appearance of several Apollo 16 medallions without any number. These may not have been flown, but some have been sold as flown - and maybe they were. This lack of clarity about the Apollo 16 medallions has, I think, hurt their value right now.</TD></TR><TR bgcolor="#494949"><TD valign=top>divemaster</TD><TD>Steve, thank you for pointing out the Apollo 16/17 scenario. I never thought of it that way. As someone who does not collect Robbins medallions, I always wondered about the value difference between Apollo 16 and Apollo 17.And as Larry said in another thread, you rarely see flown Apollo 17 medals come up for sale.</TD></TR><TR bgcolor="#333333"><TD valign=top>drifting to the right</TD><TD>Howard, thanks for your insight. Can you give us any info regarding flown but un-numbered Robbins? </TD></TR><TR bgcolor="#494949"><TD valign=top>mconway</TD><TD>Over the last ten-years or so, I have often wondered why Apollo-era Robbins medallions didn't sustain in appreciation compared to other parts of the numismatic market. My view has evolved to the notion that about one-half of those alive today weren't alive when the "Space Race" was underway. Moreover, there is no marketing of new product as exists with the commemorative and new issue gold/platinum coins. Therefore, demand is limited and supply stable. The recent price of $12K paid for an Apollo 17 Robbins medallion is fair, and market-based. Medallions with provenances from other, world renowned original recipients will likely trade at higher levels... One man's opinion, folks.</TD></TR><TR bgcolor="#333333"><TD valign=top>Tom</TD><TD>I noticed on these flown medallions that the number does not appear (on the back or the front) from Apollo 14 through Apollo 17.Where, if at all, does the coin number appear?</TD></TR><TR bgcolor="#494949"><TD valign=top>lunareagle</TD><TD>There are 98 flown Apollo 16 silver and 80 flown Apollo 17 silver Robbins medals. Leon's point is valid about both missions having very few flown ones, so why can an Apollo 16 flown silver be had for $4000 or so? I go back to my comment about the availability of either at a time when collectors have been actively pursuing them. Apollo 16 medals have been available and Apollo 17 medals have not. That could change if even just 5 to 10 astronauts, their families, collectors, etc. decided to sell theirs. All of a sudden there would be supply like the Apollo 16s. However, I disagree with Steve about the unnumbered Apollo 16 medals. Although it is not known for certain how many unnumbered ones exist, I believe that they are very limited and can be somewhat accounted for as follows: <OL TYPE=1><LI>Most were found from the estate of a cleaning/maintenance woman who worked at the Cape during the Apollo years. It is believed that there were approximately 10 of them.<LI>A few astronaut collections have also come up with an odd lame one here and there without a number. Very few though, so I attribute that to a sloppy shift at Robbins during their production. Remember, it only takes one shift to have the medals returned to the incorrect stack, etc. to have a few slip through without a number.<LI>That said. I would never pay any serious money for a blank one. I would treat a blank as I would an unflown. I have spoken with enough crewmembers to know that they really were not focused on the specifics of the medals at the time. Some have been surprised today that their collections contained one without a number, or that they had both flown and unflown medals. So, even with a letter, I believe that a no number medal will always carry baggage, and should be treated as an unflown.</OL> The last comment on the price performance of Robbins medals as compared to the numismatic or exonumia (medals) market over the last 10 years needs some further comment. I am also a very active participant in the numismatic and historical exonumia market. I travel to many of the major coin and medal conventions and have shown Robbins medals to the major dealers and have distributed my books to them over the years. The general response is that they never knew such a thing existed. Remember, these were private items. It has been a slow find. The members of our Space collecting community have just been privy to their existence for so long now that we take it them for granted. If you go back to Mike Orenstein's first catalogues from the mid 1990s, you will see that a flown silver Apollo 11 sold for $500, so I would say that their prices have still performed quite well.I believe the times they are a changing for the Robbins medals. I cannot understate the effect and potential impact of the fact that NGC (Numismatic Guaranty Corp) is now certifying, adding pedigree and holdering the medals. The response now, when I show the medals to the same dealers at the coin shows, with them in the NGC holders, is WOW, and how much? The comment about promotion is valid. The entire coin and medal business is all about promotion, from the US Mint to an ad in CoinWorld magazine. The Robbins medals will have their day. I don't expect them to trade like US Mint sets because the quantity of them does not exist. But, I do expect that the finest coin and medal collections will begin to acquire one here and there, and they will have them certified by NGC. The numbers of how many collectors that will be coming is humbling. Currently, in the Space collecting hobby, there are many hundreds of collectors that would love to acquire a Robbins Medal, especially a flown one. But, cost is an issue. I estimate that there are really less than 100 people in our community that are shelling out what seems to be the big dollars for these medals right now. They have been the seeds. Keep in mind though, that the number of coin and medal collectors is in the hundreds of thousands, possibly millions. These folks just don't know anything yet about the Robbins medals.I have been a collector and dealer in rare coins and medals and have an understanding of what constitutes a proven rarity. A proven rarity is a coin or medal that withstands time. The market for proven coin and medal rarities is tremendous. Collectors in this venue don't even blink at spending tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars for a key piece. It just takes time to evolve. In fact, the medals market is really just finding the mass following now. In the last two years I have seen prices on medals go to levels never heard of before. I believe it is just an awakening. The rare coin market has been flourishing for years, and with the introduction of the state quarters, that hobby has exploded. We are now witnessing an overflow from that excitement. People start with the quarters and naturally branch out. I know that I am preaching to the choir telling you all that the Apollo, ASTP, Skylab and early shuttles will withstand time, and in fact, become recognized as among the most important endeavors of mankind.</TD></TR><TR bgcolor="#333333"><TD valign=top>SRB</TD><TD>Howard, it is hard to know from your post what you disagree with in my comments. You seem to agree that we don't know how many no number Apollo 16 Robbins medallions are out there since there about ten (?) from a woman's estate, there are a few (of unknown number) from astronauts' collections, and some have been represented and sold as flown (with COAs) in the last few years. To me this adds up to a lack of clarity for Apollo 16 compared with Apollo 17 medallions., which should affect their value. Or maybe you just disagree with my market assessment and you think Apollo 17 medallions will also sell for not much more than Apollo 16 medals if five or 10 come on the market in the next year or two, and the uncertainties about Apollo 16 we agree on have no affect on their value.</TD></TR><TR bgcolor="#494949"><TD valign=top>Leon Ford</TD><TD>I didn't mean to open a can of worms here with my comments on the Apollo 16 medallions. A friend and I were talking about it the other night and he brought up some points that I thought were interesting. I didn't realize that any of the un-numbered Apollo 16 coins had been sold or been advertised as flown. I have one of the coins and I have never thought it was flown. To me, if you get the coin from an astronaut and get the certification from him that it was flown or not flown, that is as good as it gets. I don't think the certification from NGC means a whole lot when you are dealing with these Robbins medallions in our hobby. For coin collectors I can see where the certification may mean something.Anyway, thanks for the information.</TD></TR><TR bgcolor="#333333"><TD valign=top>lunareagle</TD><TD> <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by SRB: It is hard to know from your post what you disagree with in my comments.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Steve - I wasn't clear and didn't mean to demean your comment. I misunderstood your point. In my mind, it is clear that all Apollo 16 medals that are numbered 1-98 are flown. We don't know if any of those 98 flown medals are blank. We probably will never know. A full accounting would be next to impossible. So, any blanks or unnumbered medals have to be assumed to be part of the 202 Apollo 16 medals that were unflown. The fact that a couple of blanks were sold as flown is unfortunate, in my opinion, but it shouldn't muddy the waters too much. Yes, I think if all of a sudden, 5-10 Apollo 17s came to market, we could see some equalizing in value to the others. Cheers!</TD></TR><TR bgcolor="#494949"><TD valign=top>lunareagle</TD><TD> <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Leon Ford: I didn't mean to open a can of worms here with my comments on the Apollo 16 medallions.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Leon - No can of worms opened. A letter of certification should indeed stop the debate. However, a letter written from someone who legitimately believed it was flown, as opposed to being deceptive might be an issue. Because of this, I would prefer to only acquire a silver medal that was numbered. My opinion only. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>I don't think the certification from NGC means a whole lot when you are dealing with these Robbins medallions in our hobby.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> You are correct that the NGC certification does not mean a whole lot to our hobby right now. My point is that it does mean a great deal to the wider coin and medal collecting community, to the collectors that do not want to spend the time to become expert, the people that want a trophy piece, and one that does NOT need explanation when showing it off. Right or wrong, the certification process has had tremendous influence on the more matured coin and medals market. I expect that certification will eventually have an effect on the Robbins medals. If in no other way, the effect will be on prices because of more collectors desiring one.</TD></TR><TR bgcolor="#333333"><TD valign=top>drifting to the right</TD><TD> <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Tom: Where, if at all, does the coin number appear?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Tom, it is on the edge. This may be a drawback to some in regards to the NGC encapsulation which obscures same.</TD></TR><TR bgcolor="#494949"><TD valign=top>Leon Ford</TD><TD>I agree 100% Howard. I would prefer to acquire the numbered medallions. I was not aware that any of the Apollo 16 unnumbered medallions had been sold as flown or possibly flown.Any information, from anyone, on where and when these unnumbered medallions were offered for sale as possibly flown?</TD></TR><TR bgcolor="#333333"><TD valign=top>lunareagle</TD><TD> <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Leon Ford: I was not aware that any of the Apollo 16 unnumbered medallions had been sold as flown or possibly flown.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Frankly Leon - I wasn't up on that fact either, but Steve is normally on top of things, so he must have seen at least one.</TD></TR><TR bgcolor="#494949"><TD valign=top>lunareagle</TD><TD> <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by driftingtotheright: This may be a drawback to some in regards to the NGC encapsulation which obscures same.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Jerry - NGC displays the serial number on the bar coded label. They verify the number before labeling. The holdering does obscure the edge, but I don't think that is the beautiful thing about the medals. As long as I know the serial number is there and has been verified, I am OK with that. One real benefit of encapsulation is the ability to view both sides of the medal without taking it out of the storage boxes and subjecting it to damage, fingerprints, inexperienced handling, etc. Also, having the pedigree on the label is nice in case the certification letter is ever lost or destroyed. NGC will only pedigree a Robbins with a copy of the certification letter submitted.Believe me, the debate about encapsulation will go on forever. The coin and medal hobby still have some that complain about it. </TD></TR><TR bgcolor="#333333"><TD valign=top>drifting to the right</TD><TD>Howard, the NGC encapsulated Apollo 11 Robbins I acquired from you last year is a jewel in my collection. As you indicate, it is beautifully displayed, yet practically bulletproof. Many thanks.</TD></TR><TR bgcolor="#494949"><TD valign=top>SRB</TD><TD>Leon, Howard, a quick check turns up two un-numbered Apollo 16 Robbins medallions sold as flown in less than three years. <UL TYPE=SQUARE><LI>Aurora Oct 2, 2004 lot 495 sold for $4,500 plus commission, from the Overmyer estate<LI>Swann April 2, 2005 lot 250 sold for $3,200 plus commission, with a Gordon Cooper COA</UL> Others were sold before these dates as flown, but I have not gone back any further than 2004. Also, Aurora October 21, 2006 lot 904 was listed in catalog as flown, but later changed by floor announcement as not flown.Farthest Reaches has on its web site an Apollo 16 un-numbered medallion listed as unflown. With the number of Apollo 16 un-numbered medallions around it makes me wonder how many there are out there and if they are all included in the total of 300 Apollo 16 medallions.</TD></TR><TR bgcolor="#333333"><TD valign=top>TRS</TD><TD>An uninformed question form an uninfomed collector on the general quesiton of Robbins.I noted on the Apollo 13 that was up in the Ed Gibson sale that it only had date bars for Launch and Landing - not for lunar landing. Obviously I know that they didn't achieve this, but I had always believed the flown medallions were cast with the date bars left blank and then they were stamped on return. On that basis I would have expected an Apollo 13 medallion to have an empty date bar for the lunar landing, not no bar at all.Was my understanding incorrect or did something else happen here?</TD></TR><TR bgcolor="#494949"><TD valign=top>rchappel</TD><TD>Craig, I'm no expert on this, but in general, the Apollo 13 Robbins medallions were all melted down and recast upon landing back on Earth and the blank lunar landing space was removed in the new casting. So, none of the Apollo 13 medallions were really "flown" in the same sense as the other flown Apollo Robbins medallions were.</TD></TR><TR bgcolor="#333333"><TD valign=top>davidcwagner</TD><TD>I had heard that some of the 80 flown medallions were stolen from Gene Cernan in the 1970's and have never appeared on the market. If the thief did not know what they were the stolen medallions may have been melted down during the $50/oz silver craze (1980s?).If true then less than 80 flown medallions may exist. Have any come from Ron Evans or Jack Schmitt? Any one have some info?</TD></TR><TR bgcolor="#494949"><TD valign=top>lunareagle</TD><TD>It is true that Mr. Cernan had his home burglarized years ago. When, I don't know, but he would probably confirm if asked. I don't believe he would know all that was taken, but he likely had a mix of flown and unflown medals from Apollo 17, as well as medals from other missions, and many other things. Your speculation could have merit but we will never know.It makes me wonder about how many Robbins medals may be sitting in a drawer or old box or even thrown away that were given to friends or contributors who have passed away and their children have or had no idea what they were? After recently cleaning out parents accumulations of 50 years I found myself getting numb looking through everything and trying to decide what might have value or not. At some point you just throw it in a pile to get rid of or have it melted as scrap, and if silver, most people don't scrap it because it is still relatively inexpensive and not worth the effort unless you have lots of it.</TD></TR></TABLE></td></tr></table>

Contact Us | The Source for Space History & Artifacts