1803 Cent - Large date with small or large fraction: why the huge difference in value?

As a collector of early coppers, one of the things that has always intrigued me is the large difference in value between the 1803 with Large date/Small fraction (Sheldon S-264), and the Large date/Large fraction variety (S-265).

The two share the same obverse. The reverse is different, namely the size of the fraction.

Rarity data:
S-264: Breen and CQR say R4+ with about 60-75 examples extant (Red Book spec.ed.)
S-265: Breen and CQR say R4 with about 120-160 examples extant.

In other words, there is not an extreme difference in surviving population; yet, the values for S-264 are many multiples of that achieved by S-265.

For example, VG7 values (per CQR):
S-264: $12500 - $20700
S-265: $400 - $650

At other grades the gap between the two is basically similar. Maybe not as large,
but still significant.

Can anyone explain why this is?

I have an example of S-265 - needless to say I do not own, and probably never will own
an S-264.

1803 S-265: Large date - Large Fraction



1803 S-264 Large Date - Small Fraction (HA Archives)

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Because when the varieties were first described in Early American Cents, and also in Penny Whimsy in 1958 the S-264 was not an R-4+, I believe it was an R-6+ or R-7. It became one of the "Big four" varieties of the Early date cents, the other three being the 1794 starred reverse, 1795 Reeded edge, and 1807 small 7/6. As such it had a lot of fame and a sky high price. Since 1958 some more starred rev, reeded edge and small 7/6 have been found. A lot more large date small fractions have been found. (the rarity of the 265 has not changed all that much.) But all of the big four still have very high premiums and the 7/6 and large date small fraction premiums are considerably higher than what their current rarity should justify.

 

As is usually the case with US coins.

 

I thought I found one of these once. I was wrong. Large date, small fractions sell for thousands in AG details.

 

Interesting thread and posts. Thank you for the education gentlemen.

 

Thank you for showing us your lovely S-265 and starting this fantastic discussion.

 

Yes I know, it is the only 1803 that I don't have, and it really bugs me that I will have to pay thousands for a coin that isn't really that rare. (Unless I can cherrypick one) Most R-4+ coins have very modest premiums, but the previous fame of this coin will cost me big time someday.

 

Thank you for your comments, and thank you Conder for your detailed explanation.
It is what I expected - historical (old and outdated ) rarity data artificially supporting current inflated prices.

I will probably also never own an S.264, unless I find one in the wild in Europe (have found one or two R-5's and even an R-5+ at modest prices).
I would never pay the asking price for an S-264.