The value of a provenance
Boosibri
Posts: 12,108 ✭✭✭✭✭
I have taken a lot of enjoyment in tracing the ownership provenance of the coins in my collection back to previous sales.
There are the big names the resonate with US collections: Norweb, Pittman, Farouk, Eliasberg, Garrett, Brand, Newman, perhaps FCC Boyd, Amon Carter, Irving Goodman.
There are the important collections that resonate with specialists in my area of focus: Vidal Quadras y Ramon, Medina, Emilio Tolra, Millennia, Huntington, Richard Stuart, Lissner, Gabriel Calbeto, etc.
And then there are the even more specialized and minor, but important collections: Alexander Patterson, Ray Johnson, Thomas Faistauer, Emilio Ortiz, Canaparo, Haberthauer... and therein lies my question...**Do you think that a coin with these more minor,
but important, provenances identified adds value to the coin? What about if it is amongst a collection with 50% or so of the coins having a notable provenance? **
Comments
Yes I think it does add value, having both major and minor provenance names,....
It also reflects on the current owner patience in finding these coins and putting a collection like this together.
I give away money. I collect money.
I don’t love money . I do love the Lord God.
I also believe they add value.
For me, they add more value than the slab. Even if the previous owner isn't famous, it's a (small) premium over no provenance at all.
I enjoy learning the provenance, and I think I am more likely to bid on a coin or want to buy it as a result. I think that ultimately leads to slightly higher prices.
There aren't many high profile sales or collections in the area I collect. Perhaps I just haven't learned about them yet. Nonetheless, even having a partial sale history/chain of custody is really cool.
IG: DeCourcyCoinsEbay: neilrobertson
"Numismatic categorizations, if left unconstrained, will increase spontaneously over time." -me
To be honest for me they do not but that is simply because I don't know the previous owners names like I know say famous Canadian collectors such as Pittman. I see why they would add value but one would have to be well informed on the subject. And I am not one that is well informed on such a topic for Mexican/Central American/South American coins. Because of my level of knowledge most of these names mean little to me.
I only recognize one name Norweb on the coins you posted. Guess I need to do some more learning but would not even know were to get more information on such a topic maybe old auction catalogs even then how hard are they to locate.
It comes down to a lack of knowledge.
Great thread topic. I would think there is a premium but the valuation of what that premium should be is a challenge... I simply do not have an answer other than to suggest valuations based on facts that you have likely already considered.
Terrific coins
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
Not responding to the question directly, it is a market grading criteria, along with "eye appeal." How much weight if any the TPGs give it in the grade, I wouldn't know.
I don’t understand what point you are making.
Latin American Collection
I see provenance having increasing value as time goes by due to increasingly good counterfeits and the (disturbing?) trend among countries to repatriate looted heritage. Provenance already plays an important part in the antiquities and art worlds, why should numismatics be any different?
While it might be debatable which provenances are "important," it's not a bad idea to get as much of that information put on the slab as the TPG will allow. And it's important to re-provenance pieces purchased from dealers who de-provenance inventory in order to hide their purchase price.
Regardless of what's on the slab, it's incumbent upon collectors to keep good records, not only cost basis for tax purposes, but provenance chains for sales purposes.
As for my own purchases, I would pay more for a coin that came from a specialty collection where I knew the collector searched for a long time to obtain the best of the best (or who had access to a source of the best of the best). In doing so, it would save me time in doing the same.
Lovely group you have there! I find pedigrees special and alluring for a few reasons. When a coin has a pedigree it's generally because a collector with good tastes and a keen eye set it aside for their collection. When I look for coins, I try and be selective in a similar way. In a sea of coinage, we all look for the reason one is different from the rest. Having a pedigree is just like toning, or luster, or other attributes which help add to a coin's character. Many of us enjoy numismatics for the history and having something with a known past just adds to the intrigue. I do take notice and certainly am more willing to bid when I see those with an interesting pedigree. I'll share one which I lost at auction:
https://www.greatcollections.com/Coin/1245543/Great-Britain-ND-1551-53-Silver-Shilling-of-Edward-VI-S-2482-PCGS-XF-45-604gms-Ex-Archbishop-Sharp-Collection
While this one is a pleasing example, there are certainly better. Still the price was nearly 2x what I thought was a reasonable bid. I do believe hammered collectors might value pedigrees a bit higher as well which would've contributed to the hammer price.
https://numismaticmuse.com/ My Web Gallery
The best collecting goals lie right on the border between the possible and the impossible. - Andy Lustig, "MrEureka"
And @Boosibri, it's CalBETO not Calberto. You even got PCGS doing it wrong now!
I have been meaning to re-holder this one. To me, it would be much more appealing with its Farouk-Norweb-Belzberg pedigree on the holder, than it is in its current holder. I do believe there is value in a great pedigree.
http://www.victoriancent.com
…and so it is!
Latin American Collection
Provenance aside, those are some seriously nice coins.
Thank you!
Latin American Collection
Provenance is always nice to have, but the question is, would I actually pay more for it?
Hypothetical scenario: if there were two coins, for all intents and purposes identical, offered for sale at the same time and I wanted to buy just one of them, and one had "cool provenance" and the other did not, would I pay extra for the provenanced one?
I have to say, that unless I knew the named person personally, I probably wouldn't.
Roman emperor Marcus Aurelius, "Meditations"
Apparently I have been awarded one DPOTD.
I find myself neutral on provenance. If the coin meets the criteria to be added to my collection and I can afford it then I buy it. I have several pieces that have pedigrees / provenances on the label that I bought for the coin without expressly paying up for the provenance. I have not tried to sell any so don't know if there is added value.
Life member #369 of the Royal Canadian Numismatic Association
Member of Canadian Association of Token Collectors
Collector of:
Canadian coins and pre-confederation tokens
Darkside proof/mint sets dated 1960
My Ebay
This coin have two name on it but I am not sure if it would add more value. I do believe it make it more attractive for buyer on resell.
Someone needs to write an in dept article about these pedigrees. Here or in one of the upcoming US Mexican Numismatic Association journal. Some are more common knowledge like Pittman Norweb, Farouk and Eliasberg but some of these names I have never even seen before not that they are not famous collectors just never heard of them is all. I can't be the only one. Would be nice to know more. Those like me that have been around Mexican/South America/Central American coins for only a few years (3 years in my case and I have read a lot during those first 2 years) and can't attend shows we don't get to know these pedigrees.
Every series has its famous collections which specialists know well but others are oblivious to. Belzberg isn’t a commonly known collection unless you are into Canadian numismatics. If you are it’s like saying Eliasberg.
Latin American Collection
Both Q. David Bowers and R.B white are pretty famous collectors. You can read more of them if you want to.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Q._David_Bowers
https://www.coinbooks.org/v22/esylum_v22n04a21.html
Any chance you could add some of the names and what they specialized in? I would love to learn. It would be much appreciated.
True, but QDB is not known for his Chinese coins, so why does his name on a Chinese coin give it more value?
I don’t think it should.
It’s similar to having the Eliasberg name on a non-gold world coin.
But having my name on a Mexican pattern should (?) make it more valuable.
Because He bought from R.B. White. SB sold QDB's Chinese copper collection few years back. I did not say it will add more value.
Famous collector's name on the coin always help to sell it. In that sense it might indeed add value to it because no one knows for sure if name is not on the coin how much it would sell.
Like this one. I don't know anything about King's Norton but I like the look of the coin so I bought it. I guess with collector's name on the coin would only help.
There are many threads in the King Nortons mint which are basically “sales samples” from the Birmingham mint archives.
Latin American Collection
My point is with name on the coin, it may not add money value to it but for sure it will help even the buyer does not know the collector name.
I enjoy the provenance but I do not think adds value. Just me. Reason? Nowadays the coin market is number centric. Assuming 2 "similar" coins get to the market, a 63 with pedigree and a 64, I see no reason to pay more for the 63. If both are 63 I assume the majority of collectors will bid for their favourite, and a small crowd might bid for the one with pedigree just for that reason. I have a Norweb coin. It is spectacular in it's own right and I would have paid the same with or without the Spider pedigree.
Let me put it this way, the type of collector that you would want to sell this collection to, would appreciate the provenance and will probably pay up for it. When the time comes to sell, you may want to pick the dealer/auction house that would be most likely to attract such buyers.
That is if you collect grades. Some people value the grade so much, nothing else can matter. So even if a 63 looks better, they will go for the 64. If the 63 was owned by Abraham Lincoln, they still go for the 64. To me, that doesn't make sense, when it's not even easy to tell the difference between a 63 and a 64.
But if you collect coins for the history, the provenance is much more attractive. (Anyone who collects hammered coins would at least be partially motivated by history). If a coin came from a recorded hoard, that is better than a grade. If a coin was owned by a collector known in the field or the person who wrote one of the key references, it's better than a slab. This is particularly true of hammered coins where there's more uncertainty around attribution.
I have a whole bunch of Mexican 8 reales from the morteneden Mexican auction a few years back in London
Fortunately I have my receipt and will most probably get those reholdered to reflect the Clyde Hubbard provenance
I give away money. I collect money.
I don’t love money . I do love the Lord God.
It's a market grading criteria. Like "eye appeal," while it has no bearing on the technical grade, a grader is allowed to bump the market grade for it, to the degree, in the grader's opinion, the bidders would value it. I think ANA refers to it--somewhat erroneously, IMO--as "pedigree." Regardless, it's clear what they're driving at. It's a status thing. When it's valued by the market, the market grade may take it into account, in which case the coin will grade over and above the technical or condition grade.
There's money in it, is the simple answer. And market grading is money grading. And ANA market grading standards, IIRC, recognize that, in much the same way they recognize "eye appeal" as a market grading criteria.
When I will grade my collection I will use my name (Coinsof1984) on the slabs, thats for sure. Uhmm, if this is doable, I mean.
Coinsof1984@martinb6830 on twitter
@JohnConduitt that is why I specify that the market is number centric. That is a broad generalisation I know, but spend some time at Stack's or Heritage and you will see that prices go by the number. You made good points and of course, collecting is a personal experience with preferences. I have coins with interesting provenance, but the original question is if they add value, and that is why I tried to answer.
In your example about Lincoln the problem there will be is that that coin will attract people that have 0 interest in coins but who collect Lincoln or Civil War treasures. Same if you have a coin from the Titanic for example.
Interesting, if you collect shipwreck coins provenance is really important as you have to connect the coin to the ship.
All a matter of taste and preference.
BTW I have few coins pedigree to @Boosibri and really like those 😉
That is true of US coins. But I don't think so for Ancients or Hammered coins, or even a lot of non-US, where little is graded (except at Heritage and Stacks, where grading is in their business models. But they are not such big players there). Those markets are anything but number centric. Provenance adds a lot of value for older coins. If it can prove you didn't loot it, it can be worth the entire value of the coin. So does provenance add value? For hammered coins, of course it does, even if it's not to your taste.
I think we can all agree that that provenance adds no value
Latin American Collection
That chapter is yet to be written...
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
I’ll take a Boosibri provenance any day!
I’ve got a couple. I think a provenance adds $ in three ways. One, provides additional evidence that the coin is authentic because it has an historical track record. Two, cool factor…it’s just cool. Three, most coins of provenance appear in very well publicized auctions. Sometimes they show up in private collections, which tend to become provenanced collections in their own right, but when they don’t they tend to go to dealers. Dealers will not usually lose money on coins, so they slap their margins on it, then sell it. Makes it so that the price on provenance coins always sell for strong money.
That being said, in a weak moment I sold a very cool 1770 Mexico 8 reales AU50 that carried a Norweb/Brand provenance. It barely sold for the going rate. I regret selling that coin almost everyday. They don’t always get a big premium.
I’ve got a couple others with provenance, but none quite as cool.
I'm BACK!!! Used to be Billet7 on the old forum.
In practice, "better" provenance DOES of course, on average, add a reasonable bit of premium.
Personally, though, UNLESS the provenance is from someone who was actually semi-important in the real world - not "famous in the coin collecting world" - I find it so absolutely pointless. Wow, a rich old dead coin collector who no non-coin person has ever heard of previously owned this piece... in the words of noted rebound collector D.D. Coleman - "whoopdy-damn-do".
I myself find the E.H.R. Green coll. interesting (b/c of the mother)... Huntington (Collis /Archer important on their own, plus their name happens to be prominent locally). But Lissner, Norweb, Newman, Bowers... those are meaningless names to non-coin people.
Overall, I kind of see mainly view it this way... it's really just name-dropping. I suppose, though, much of life is, no? Perhaps even moreso, it's auctioneers/sellers trying to seize on that to squeeze more money out of an item.
Though it wasn't really the true point of the question/topic, notable comment made above about the practical importance of legal provenance for ancients.
BTW, should we add in as a variable that when prominent collections get slabbed/sold, they sometimes seem to receive, um, generous grading??
It only takes a few years for the market grading to catch up to those grades
Latin American Collection
But non-coin people dont buy coins… so why should coin people only care about the provenances of people known outside of the coin hobby?
Latin American Collection
I actually think people who ARE serious coin collectors should carry the more robust premium. They know what the crap they’re talking about. Usually means they ended up with the best stuff within the range they collected.
I'm BACK!!! Used to be Billet7 on the old forum.
And they didn't just "throw money at the problem."
To me, the provenance adds an interesting historic dimension, but at the end of the day the coin has to stand on its own.
8 Reales Madness Collection
The provenance (aka "pedigree") of a coin is not in the least a factor in grading the coin. It is, however, sometimes a factor in determining the market value of a coin. Which is a very different thing that what people call "market grading".
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
To whatever extent that is true, it's mostly a function of the individual graders getting excited about seeing one great coin after another, letting their guard down, and getting a little carried away. Which is simply a matter of human nature. On the other hand, I can't imagine a grader thinking that he should intentionally grade a coin higher because it was owned by a famous collector.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
The overwhelming majority of my coins are raw. I am happy to find a provenance to a coin because apart from adding to the history, it’s an extra endorsement of authenticity.
One of my favorite provenances, and one of the oldest provenances obtainable. Archbishop Sharp collected in the late 1600s. The coins remained in his family for hundreds of years. Some coins were sold in the 1970s, but the main portion of his English hammered collection was sold in 2017. I have a few coins from this collection, and if I was not buying a house at the time, I would have bought more at the sale. His provenance seems to add value to coins.
Of course I agree with this.
As I said in the OP, I have added many of these provenances via research after buying a great coin, which was always a great coin, and was appreciated by other knowledgeable collectors.
My central question is does that added historical dimension add value to an otherwise great coin. I think it does, to what degree is determined by the history and the current acquirer, but it adds another dimension which can only be positive.
Latin American Collection