@ernie11 said:
Interesting. The article quoted $19,509,750.
The revised story says that Sotheby's originally sent out the $19.5+ million figure, which Coin World duly reported. CW is now reporting the corrected figure.
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
@tradedollarnut said:
And the discrepancy raises a question: did Sotheby’s cut a deal to the eventual winner thus giving him an advantage in the bidding?
Reading the buyer's fees structure they use made my brain hurt in the first place...
John Brush President of David Lawrence Rare Coins www.davidlawrence.com email: John@davidlawrence.com 2022 ANA Dealer of the Year, Past Chair of NCBA (formerly ICTA), PNG Treasurer, Instructor at Witter Coin University, former Instructor/YN Chaperone ANA Summer Seminar, Coin World Most Influential, Curator of the D.L. Hansen Collection
@tradedollarnut said:
And the discrepancy raises a question: did Sotheby’s cut a deal to the eventual winner thus giving him an advantage in the bidding?
They wouldn't have been so blatant, would they?
I have no idea what’s allowed or not. All I know is I have never seen a buyers fee recalculated after the fact. And if this is indeed the case, ironically the under bidder was willing to pay more with his losing bid than the winner did with his winning bid
@ernie11 said:
Interesting. The article quoted $19,509,750.
The revised story says that Sotheby's originally sent out the $19.5+ million figure, which Coin World duly reported. CW is now reporting the corrected figure.
@tradedollarnut said:
And the discrepancy raises a question: did Sotheby’s cut a deal to the eventual winner thus giving him an advantage in the bidding?
They wouldn't have been so blatant, would they?
I have no idea what’s allowed or not. All I know is I have never seen a buyers fee recalculated after the fact. And if this is indeed the case, ironically the under bidder was willing to pay more with his losing bid than the winner did with his winning bid
That’s only if bidders were calculating the BP incorrectly.
@ernie11 said:
Interesting. The article quoted $19,509,750.
The revised story says that Sotheby's originally sent out the $19.5+ million figure, which Coin World duly reported. CW is now reporting the corrected figure.
Frequent buyer shipping discount?
S & H Green Stamps!
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
“Lots with this symbol indicate that a party has
provided Sotheby’s with an irrevocable bid on the
lot that will be executed during the sale at a value
that ensures that the lot will sell. The irrevocable
bidder, who may bid in excess of the irrevocable
bid, may be compensated for providing the
irrevocable bid by receiving a contingent fee, a
fixed fee or both. From time to time, a Sotheby’s
shareholder may be an irrevocable bidder. If the
irrevocable bidder is the successful bidder, any
contingent fee, fixed fee or both (as applicable)
for providing the irrevocable bid may be netted
against the irrevocable bidder’s obligation to
pay the full purchase price for the lot and the
purchase price reported for the lot shall be net of
any such fees.”
And there you have it. There was indeed an irrevocable bid announcement on this coin. Ironic, isn’t it that the underbidder was willing to pay appx $19,200,000 all in. [btw - that was my exact prediction]
@tradedollarnut said:
“Lots with this symbol indicate that a party has
provided Sotheby’s with an irrevocable bid on the
lot that will be executed during the sale at a value
that ensures that the lot will sell. The irrevocable
bidder, who may bid in excess of the irrevocable
bid, may be compensated for providing the
irrevocable bid by receiving a contingent fee, a
fixed fee or both. From time to time, a Sotheby’s
shareholder may be an irrevocable bidder. If the
irrevocable bidder is the successful bidder, any
contingent fee, fixed fee or both (as applicable)
for providing the irrevocable bid may be netted
against the irrevocable bidder’s obligation to
pay the full purchase price for the lot and the
purchase price reported for the lot shall be net of
any such fees.”
And there you have it. There was indeed an irrevocable bid announcement on this coin. Ironic, isn’t it that the underbidder was willing to pay appx $19,200,000 all in. [btw - that was my exact prediction]
When I read that, It seems like the buyer did pay $19,509,750, it's just that $637,500 was previously invoiced as a contingent or fixed fee?
If I was the underbidder, I’d be royally pissed off to see a price realized under my bid.
Why wouldn't you just worry about the price the winner paid?
If the winner paid $19.5, does it matter how the accounting is done?
That would depend on whether or not the underbidder is experienced enough to understand the nuance of what happened. In a worst case scenario, he throws his hands up in disgust and leaves coin collecting forever
@tradedollarnut said:
“Lots with this symbol indicate that a party has
provided Sotheby’s with an irrevocable bid on the
lot that will be executed during the sale at a value
that ensures that the lot will sell. The irrevocable
bidder, who may bid in excess of the irrevocable
bid, may be compensated for providing the
irrevocable bid by receiving a contingent fee, a
fixed fee or both. From time to time, a Sotheby’s
shareholder may be an irrevocable bidder. If the
irrevocable bidder is the successful bidder, any
contingent fee, fixed fee or both (as applicable)
for providing the irrevocable bid may be netted
against the irrevocable bidder’s obligation to
pay the full purchase price for the lot and the
purchase price reported for the lot shall be net of
any such fees.”
And there you have it. There was indeed an irrevocable bid announcement on this coin. Ironic, isn’t it that the underbidder was willing to pay appx $19,200,000 all in. [btw - that was my exact prediction]
Ok that made my hair hurt
m
Walker Proof Digital Album Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
If I was the underbidder, I’d be royally pissed off to see a price realized under my bid.
Why wouldn't you just worry about the price the winner paid?
If the winner paid $19.5, does it matter how the accounting is done?
That would depend on whether or not the underbidder is experienced enough to understand the nuance of what happened. In a worst case scenario, he throws his hands up in disgust and leaves coin collecting forever
Some people who complain about the BP are told to grin and bear it.
How many have given up bidding in auctions with BPs?
To me, it’s a similar situation.
Here, the bidder may just know what hammer price he or she bid and not understand the BP at all.
Perhaps the underbidder would have received the same smooch, and his net payment would have been less than the winner's net payment.
That said, this is a hell of a way to run a railroad!
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
If I was the underbidder, I’d be royally pissed off to see a price realized under my bid.
Why wouldn't you just worry about the price the winner paid?
If the winner paid $19.5, does it matter how the accounting is done?
That would depend on whether or not the underbidder is experienced enough to understand the nuance of what happened. In a worst case scenario, he throws his hands up in disgust and leaves coin collecting forever
Anyone who provided Sotheby's with a guaranty on an auction lot knew exactly what he was doing, and how the price would be reported.
And FWIW, yes, I understand why he might not like that part of the arrangement, but it has to be that way. Otherwise, it would be way too easy to manipulate auction records in a really big way.
Andy Lustig
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
If I was the underbidder, I’d be royally pissed off to see a price realized under my bid.
Why wouldn't you just worry about the price the winner paid?
If the winner paid $19.5, does it matter how the accounting is done?
That would depend on whether or not the underbidder is experienced enough to understand the nuance of what happened. In a worst case scenario, he throws his hands up in disgust and leaves coin collecting forever
Anyone who provided Sotheby's with a guaranty on an auction lot knew exactly what he was doing, and how the price would be reported.
And FWIW, yes, I understand why he might not like that part of the arrangement, but it has to be that way. Otherwise, it would be way too easy to manipulate auction records in a really big way.
I’m talking about the underbidder- there’s no evidence that he provided any sort of guaranty.
Can someone explain what exactly an irrevocable bid is? I know what the word irrevocable means, but I can't figure out what it means in the broader auction context. After some googling, I'm just as confused as when I started.
Our bulletin posted Sotheby's initial quoted price for the coin, which the firm then changed a little after we published the results. It took us some time to update the article, which took longer than usual due to technical difficulties at our end.
William T. Gibbs
Coin World
ernie11
Posts: 1,908 ✭✭✭✭✭
Comments
Or a bit less. Shrug
Interesting. The article quoted $19,509,750.
I think that we need a new guess the final price to see who can figure out the price with the commission structure and overhead premium.
Why are different final prices being quoted? What did it actually sell for with all commissions, fees and charges included?
The Coin World article was under breaking news and had no details, maybe they got it a bit wrong.
Don’t forget the taxes, depending on where the person lives I guess. It could be over $20Mil total.
Looking for Top Pop Mercury Dime Varieties & High Grade Mercury Dime Toners.
Coin World has changed it now
wow double the previous hobby High
11.5$ Southern Dollars, The little “Big Easy” set
It's the coin to have. It transcends the hobby.
I wonder if it was picked up by a coin collector?
I updated the thread title, thanks.
Rumor is not a coin collector
Congrats to the hobby and the new owner.
Good to know.
I wouldn't be surprised if it was purchased by someone whose other hobbies have items costing even more.
Any idea if buyer was US citizen?
My guess is no .
Maybe a Middle Eastern Prince ?
This coin has A LOT of PR value that comes with purchase . I am sure they can monetize it.
They did pick up the Davinci for $450M .
I wonder if it will be public or if it will disappear again, like previously.
Either way, I’m glad there’s a TrueView now
"Davinci". It's of questionable origins lol
Professional Numismatist. "It's like God, Family, Country, except Sticker, Plastic, Coin."
Yes it is .
So are many uber rare/expensive ancient coins , and others .
What did the stamps sell for?
The revised story says that Sotheby's originally sent out the $19.5+ million figure, which Coin World duly reported. CW is now reporting the corrected figure.
From the other thread.
If the coin’s realized price was wrong in that screenshot then maybe the stamps are also?
The incorrect reporting of the price realized for such an important item mystifies me. Not a confidence builder.
I wonder if the stamp prices are also incorrect?
And the discrepancy raises a question: did Sotheby’s cut a deal to the eventual winner thus giving him an advantage in the bidding?
They wouldn't have been so blatant, would they?
Reading the buyer's fees structure they use made my brain hurt in the first place...
President of David Lawrence Rare Coins www.davidlawrence.com
email: John@davidlawrence.com
2022 ANA Dealer of the Year, Past Chair of NCBA (formerly ICTA), PNG Treasurer, Instructor at Witter Coin University, former Instructor/YN Chaperone ANA Summer Seminar, Coin World Most Influential, Curator of the D.L. Hansen Collection
I have no idea what’s allowed or not. All I know is I have never seen a buyers fee recalculated after the fact. And if this is indeed the case, ironically the under bidder was willing to pay more with his losing bid than the winner did with his winning bid
Frequent buyer shipping discount?
That’s only if bidders were calculating the BP incorrectly.
S & H Green Stamps!
“Lots with this symbol indicate that a party has
provided Sotheby’s with an irrevocable bid on the
lot that will be executed during the sale at a value
that ensures that the lot will sell. The irrevocable
bidder, who may bid in excess of the irrevocable
bid, may be compensated for providing the
irrevocable bid by receiving a contingent fee, a
fixed fee or both. From time to time, a Sotheby’s
shareholder may be an irrevocable bidder. If the
irrevocable bidder is the successful bidder, any
contingent fee, fixed fee or both (as applicable)
for providing the irrevocable bid may be netted
against the irrevocable bidder’s obligation to
pay the full purchase price for the lot and the
purchase price reported for the lot shall be net of
any such fees.”
And there you have it. There was indeed an irrevocable bid announcement on this coin. Ironic, isn’t it that the underbidder was willing to pay appx $19,200,000 all in. [btw - that was my exact prediction]
is that without juice?
Not a collector?...Hmmm.......he is now. His collection worth is in a rarified atmosphere.
Interesting, but I don't know why this is good for the hobby. That coin is so far out of my and virtually all coin collectors' worlds.
When I read that, It seems like the buyer did pay $19,509,750, it's just that $637,500 was previously invoiced as a contingent or fixed fee?
Is that not the way to read it?
People keep telling me calculating BP is easy
Agreed.
If I was the underbidder, I’d be royally pissed off to see a price realized under my bid.
Why wouldn't you just worry about the price the winner paid?
If the winner paid $19.5, does it matter how the accounting is done?
It's the trickle down theory: rising tide lifts all boats, though boats have been being lifted throughout the Covid-era already.
That would depend on whether or not the underbidder is experienced enough to understand the nuance of what happened. In a worst case scenario, he throws his hands up in disgust and leaves coin collecting forever
Ok that made my hair hurt
m
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
Some people who complain about the BP are told to grin and bear it.
How many have given up bidding in auctions with BPs?
To me, it’s a similar situation.
Here, the bidder may just know what hammer price he or she bid and not understand the BP at all.
It's time to dump Buyer's Premium and return to a straight commission rate that is always paid for by the consignor.
This won't happen but I wish it would.
Perhaps the underbidder would have received the same smooch, and his net payment would have been less than the winner's net payment.
That said, this is a hell of a way to run a railroad!
Anyone who provided Sotheby's with a guaranty on an auction lot knew exactly what he was doing, and how the price would be reported.
And FWIW, yes, I understand why he might not like that part of the arrangement, but it has to be that way. Otherwise, it would be way too easy to manipulate auction records in a really big way.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
I’m talking about the underbidder- there’s no evidence that he provided any sort of guaranty.
Can someone explain what exactly an irrevocable bid is? I know what the word irrevocable means, but I can't figure out what it means in the broader auction context. After some googling, I'm just as confused as when I started.
You are assuming that the irrevocable bid was the winning bid, but this is not certain...
Our bulletin posted Sotheby's initial quoted price for the coin, which the firm then changed a little after we published the results. It took us some time to update the article, which took longer than usual due to technical difficulties at our end.
William T. Gibbs
Coin World
Thank you for all you do CW.
we appreciate our numismedia.
The evidence points to just that being the case. Why else would they have re-calculated the buyer’s fee?