Home U.S. Coin Forum
Options

Guy buys raw octagonal $50 pan pac at FUN

AlanSkiAlanSki Posts: 1,829 ✭✭✭✭✭

NGC graded it a 64.

Here’s his YouTube reveal.

https://youtu.be/NRMThJ-efBg

Comments

  • Options
    MaywoodMaywood Posts: 1,897 ✭✭✭✭✭

    A really great coin but the purchase info is a little confusing. Did the dealer in the video buy it in 1972 and just submit it or did he buy it at F.U.N. from a customer and submit it while there??

  • Options
    ironmanl63ironmanl63 Posts: 1,971 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @jmlanzaf said:

    @CaptHenway said:
    What the big deal? I could buy that coin raw.

    Yeah, I don't see the big deal. These purchases happen all the time. Not Pan Pac's necessarily, but high value raw coins. BUT, you have to remember the large number of people on this forum and elsewhere who think that 95% of everything has been slabbed already.

    Or they are not comfortable purchasing high dollar raw coins.

  • Options
    LanceNewmanOCCLanceNewmanOCC Posts: 19,999 ✭✭✭✭✭

    nice to see a clean, curt and simple coin video on youtube. no fluff, no making it last unnecessarily 10-20 minutes long.

    shows a good vid of the coin obv/rev, a neat original receipt.

    it is kinda of like a neat post around here in video form. :+1:

    i'm not old enough to be part of the old guard but i do like when the show the young bucks how to get it done!

    <--- look what's behind the mask! - cool link 1/NO ~ 2/NNP ~ 3/NNC ~ 4/CF ~ 5/PG ~ 6/Cert ~ 7/NGC 7a/NGC pop~ 8/NGCF ~ 9/HA archives ~ 10/PM ~ 11/NM ~ 12/ANACS cert ~ 13/ANACS pop - report fakes 1/ACEF ~ report fakes/thefts 1/NCIS - Numi-Classes SS ~ Bass ~ Transcribed Docs NNP - clashed coins - error training - V V mm styles -

  • Options
    AlanSkiAlanSki Posts: 1,829 ✭✭✭✭✭

    :/ > @Maywood said:

    Thanks, no FaceBook for me.

    But it’s YouTube

  • Options
    jmlanzafjmlanzaf Posts: 31,935 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @ironmanl63 said:

    @jmlanzaf said:

    @CaptHenway said:
    What the big deal? I could buy that coin raw.

    Yeah, I don't see the big deal. These purchases happen all the time. Not Pan Pac's necessarily, but high value raw coins. BUT, you have to remember the large number of people on this forum and elsewhere who think that 95% of everything has been slabbed already.

    Or they are not comfortable purchasing high dollar raw coins.

    I have no problem with the discomfort. But people have frequently stated, there was even a poll last month, that over 90% are in slabs.

  • Options
    GallienusGallienus Posts: 30 ✭✭
    edited January 17, 2023 1:51PM

    FYI: The Philadelphia Main Post Office used to have two of these (Pan_Pac $50 golds) on display in a wall panel in the foyer to the post office. Possibly one was round and the other octagonal. I was not an expert grader at the time but they looked unc to me. This too was in the early-mid 1970s. I doubt they're still there today.

    Nice post Alanski, always an interesting piece.

    I collect Ancients and early Independence Era Latin American.
  • Options
    CoinscratchCoinscratch Posts: 7,928 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @jmlanzaf said:

    @ironmanl63 said:

    @jmlanzaf said:

    @CaptHenway said:
    What the big deal? I could buy that coin raw.

    Yeah, I don't see the big deal. These purchases happen all the time. Not Pan Pac's necessarily, but high value raw coins. BUT, you have to remember the large number of people on this forum and elsewhere who think that 95% of everything has been slabbed already.

    Or they are not comfortable purchasing high dollar raw coins.

    I have no problem with the discomfort. But people have frequently stated, there was even a poll last month, that over 90% are in slabs.

    I missed that poll but would have been a strong opponent to the whole idea. To me, this is a pessimistic ideal that would steer away would-be newcomers including myself. Of course I play in moderns which are still plentiful.

  • Options
    DCWDCW Posts: 6,975 ✭✭✭✭✭

    A dream coin.

    I think the "big deal" is that this beauty graded MS64. Despite the comments about people thinking "95 percent of everything is slabbed already" the fact remains that most six figure items are already in plastic.

    When they're found raw, that's the exception and not the rule. It's a big deal for the buyer, as I'm sure they didn't pay NGC MS64 money, right?

    Dead Cat Waltz Exonumia
    "Coin collecting for outcasts..."

  • Options
    pmh1nicpmh1nic Posts: 3,146 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Beautiful coin!

    The longer I live the more convincing proofs I see of this truth, that God governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without His notice is it possible for an empire to rise without His aid? Benjamin Franklin
  • Options
    logger7logger7 Posts: 8,081 ✭✭✭✭✭

    HA always treated me right when I've gone to their table for offers. But on a high value raw coin the bargaining power is a lot better if in a slab. A high value walkthrough would be de rigeur. You go from under $50K in AU to over $72K in 63 to $90K-$105K in 64 to $140K in 65. So the seller could have left a lot of money on the table depending on who he sold to.

  • Options

    Great post and interesting story. Thank you for posting. I really enjoyed.

  • Options
    WalkerfanWalkerfan Posts: 8,974 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited January 17, 2023 4:38PM

    I wonder what the dealer paid him for it?

    Did the dealer submit it, himself, or did he do it for the client on some sort of contingency plan?

    Worth about $115K, now.....

    “I may not believe in myself but I believe in what I’m doing” ~Jimmy Page~

    My Full Walker Registry Set (1916-1947)

    https://www.ngccoin.com/registry/competitive-sets/16292/

  • Options
    jedmjedm Posts: 2,940 ✭✭✭✭✭

    That's almost 20x what it showed on the receipt in the video!

  • Options
    logger7logger7 Posts: 8,081 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @Walkerfan said:
    I wonder what the dealer paid him for it?

    Did the dealer submit it, himself, or did he do it for the client on some sort of contingency plan?

    Worth about $115K, now.....

    A fair buy price for that coin, which looks like a gem, I'm not sure what is holding it back from MS65 is around $100K.

  • Options
    DisneyFanDisneyFan Posts: 1,708 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Interesting receipt. Buyer bought it for $6,000 in November of 1972 and paid the 4% sales tax. Dealer described the coin as Choice Uncirculated.

  • Options
    jmlanzafjmlanzaf Posts: 31,935 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @jedm said:
    That's almost 20x what it showed on the receipt in the video!

    Bad investment. Look at the s&P 500. In 1972, it was 110. Today it's 32x higher. And if you consider the total yield with dividends reinvested, the S&P500 is 130x higher.

  • Options
    rickoricko Posts: 98,724 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Just an absolutely beautiful, big, gold coin..... I would like to hold one, raw, in hand. Cheers, RickO

  • Options
    PhilLynottPhilLynott Posts: 881 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @jmlanzaf said:

    @jedm said:
    That's almost 20x what it showed on the receipt in the video!

    Bad investment. Look at the s&P 500. In 1972, it was 110. Today it's 32x higher. And if you consider the total yield with dividends reinvested, the S&P500 is 130x higher.

    @DCW said:

    @jmlanzaf said:

    @jedm said:
    That's almost 20x what it showed on the receipt in the video!

    Bad investment. Look at the s&P 500. In 1972, it was 110. Today it's 32x higher. And if you consider the total yield with dividends reinvested, the S&P500 is 130x higher.

    Bad investment? 😆 C'mon, man. I think most of us would be thrilled to have a 20x return when we part with our treasures. I know I would.

    Why does everything have to be compared to the stock market when it is sold? Is it fun to put every penny into the S&P and watch the numbers rise and fall over the years?

    We collect coins here.

    I agree with both these posts

  • Options
    jedmjedm Posts: 2,940 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @jmlanzaf said:

    @jedm said:
    That's almost 20x what it showed on the receipt in the video!

    Bad investment. Look at the s&P 500. In 1972, it was 110. Today it's 32x higher. And if you consider the total yield with dividends reinvested, the S&P500 is 130x higher.

    That same $6,240 in 1972 is equivalent to about $43,000 today -considering inflation over the years. Not only did the "investment" at least do way better than twice the rate of inflation, they also got to ENJOY the stewardship of a beautiful specimen for 50 years. Many less rewarding ways could have been found to spend the money on in 1972.

    Just my opinion. I know people, that in the 70's & 80's wasted a helluva lot more on weed, cocaine, women & booze.
    There are many ways to look at it, this is just one example.

  • Options
    jmlanzafjmlanzaf Posts: 31,935 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @DCW said:

    @jmlanzaf said:

    @jedm said:
    That's almost 20x what it showed on the receipt in the video!

    Bad investment. Look at the s&P 500. In 1972, it was 110. Today it's 32x higher. And if you consider the total yield with dividends reinvested, the S&P500 is 130x higher.

    Bad investment? 😆 C'mon, man. I think most of us would be thrilled to have a 20x return when we part with our treasures. I know I would.

    Why does everything have to be compared to the stock market when it is sold? Is it fun to put every penny into the S&P and watch the numbers rise and fall over the years?

    We collect coins here.

    I didn't introduce value into the argument. But it is worth considering what the 50 year hold on that coin means. Personally, I'm a firm believer that hobbies should be considered sunk costs. But people who care about value are always simply looking at the buy/sell cost. So it is tempting to consider it a "gain" of $114,000 (not inflation adjusted) and ignore the opportunity costs. As a value play, holding that coin for 50 years cost you over $500,000.

  • Options
    jmlanzafjmlanzaf Posts: 31,935 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @jedm said:

    @jmlanzaf said:

    @jedm said:
    That's almost 20x what it showed on the receipt in the video!

    Bad investment. Look at the s&P 500. In 1972, it was 110. Today it's 32x higher. And if you consider the total yield with dividends reinvested, the S&P500 is 130x higher.

    That same $6,240 in 1972 is equivalent to about $43,000 today -considering inflation over the years. Not only did the "investment" at least do way better than twice the rate of inflation, they also got to ENJOY the stewardship of a beautiful specimen for 50 years. Many less rewarding ways could have been found to spend the money on in 1972.

    Just my opinion. I know people, that in the 70's & 80's wasted a helluva lot more on weed, cocaine, women & booze.
    There are many ways to look at it, this is just one example.

    I don't disagree.

  • Options
    logger7logger7 Posts: 8,081 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @jmlanzaf said:

    @jedm said:
    That's almost 20x what it showed on the receipt in the video!

    Bad investment. Look at the s&P 500. In 1972, it was 110. Today it's 32x higher. And if you consider the total yield with dividends reinvested, the S&P500 is 130x higher.

    You could say that precious metals are a "bad" investment but at least they tend to keep up with inflation.

    On the stock market, the S and P has changed over the years in companies they include. They have had bad periods, some stocks have done very badly.

  • Options
    nwcoastnwcoast Posts: 2,845 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited January 18, 2023 9:51AM

    I think it’s a marvelous coin! Incredibly beautiful.
    And to throw my 2 cents in.
    One could have done a lot worse as an investment. That’s one gorgeous coin to have enjoyed during the holding period,
    Take the case of some of those individual components of the S&P 500 which have gone to zero in that time. Index investing wasn’t even a common and widely accepted and available practice back then either.
    And then, there was the close family friend that bought thousands of dollars of postage sheets- Pads at face value through the post office. Now there’s a great investment! (Not!) I’d be lucky to get 70% face value for those after 50 some years! He would have been better off buying savings bonds- by multiples.
    I’m a big fan of index and equity investments by the way. But throwing some cool coins in the mix is a lot more fun- at least for me.

    Happy, humble, honored and proud recipient of the “You Suck” award 10/22/2014

  • Options
    DCWDCW Posts: 6,975 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @jmlanzaf said:

    As a value play, holding that coin for 50 years cost you over $500,000.

    You are assuming that had he not bought the coin, the money would've been invested in the stock market. Maybe the six grand would've been used on expensive vacations and entertainment. No quantifiable return on that money spent, but an immeasurable amount of joy.

    One man's "sunk cost" is another man's happiness :)

    Dead Cat Waltz Exonumia
    "Coin collecting for outcasts..."

  • Options
    jmlanzafjmlanzaf Posts: 31,935 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @logger7 said:

    @jmlanzaf said:

    @jedm said:
    That's almost 20x what it showed on the receipt in the video!

    Bad investment. Look at the s&P 500. In 1972, it was 110. Today it's 32x higher. And if you consider the total yield with dividends reinvested, the S&P500 is 130x higher.

    You could say that precious metals are a "bad" investment but at least they tend to keep up with inflation.

    On the stock market, the S and P has changed over the years in companies they include. They have had bad periods, some stocks have done very badly.

    Which is why you buy the whole S&P.

  • Options
    jmlanzafjmlanzaf Posts: 31,935 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @DCW said:

    @jmlanzaf said:

    As a value play, holding that coin for 50 years cost you over $500,000.

    You are assuming that had he not bought the coin, the money would've been invested in the stock market. Maybe the six grand would've been used on expensive vacations and entertainment. No quantifiable return on that money spent, but an immeasurable amount of joy.

    One man's "sunk cost" is another man's happiness :)

    I have no problem with sunk cost happiness. And that includes the vacation. But one should acknowledge the entire picture.

  • Options
    BryceMBryceM Posts: 11,733 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Great story and fantastic coin. This thread raises some interesting points. Some people consider it borderline crazy to buy a raw coin of this magnitude. If you have the skills to understand it, it's just another day at the office. Actual knowledge will trump the supposed safety of TPG authentication & grading every time. BTW, I'm not ready to swim in those waters, but many people do it successfully every day.

    Many collectors sugar-coat and rationalize away the opportunity cost of owning valuable coins. Valid point were raised above by all, and strangely enough, in a respectful way. :)

  • Options
    logger7logger7 Posts: 8,081 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @DCW said:

    @jmlanzaf said:

    As a value play, holding that coin for 50 years cost you over $500,000.

    You are assuming that had he not bought the coin, the money would've been invested in the stock market. Maybe the six grand would've been used on expensive vacations and entertainment. No quantifiable return on that money spent, but an immeasurable amount of joy.

    One man's "sunk cost" is another man's happiness :)

    Or if it got submitted more than once, it may have graded gem in which case it would have been worth $140K or so. Nothing kills investment profits like hasty sales.

  • Options
    BryceMBryceM Posts: 11,733 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited January 18, 2023 6:59PM

    @logger7 said:

    Or if it got submitted more than once, it may have graded gem in which case it would have been worth $140K or so. Nothing kills investment profits like hasty sales.

    You are assuming that the primary determination of value for 5/6-figure coins is the number on the label. That’s not entirely true. The price difference between a correctly graded weak 65 and exceptional 64 isn’t nearly so big as you suggest.

  • Options
    OwenSeymourOwenSeymour Posts: 366 ✭✭✭✭

    @jmlanzaf said:

    @jedm said:
    That's almost 20x what it showed on the receipt in the video!

    Bad investment. Look at the s&P 500. In 1972, it was 110. Today it's 32x higher. And if you consider the total yield with dividends reinvested, the S&P500 is 130x higher.

    Wow! You almost sound like as swell of a financial advisor as you are a Monday night quarterback. Dump on a 20X return over 50 yrs because you have the incredible foresight to compare the return to that of one of the best performing mainstream indexes, impressive! Curious- how many billions did you make off your 1972 S&P 500 investments with rolled over dividends? Can you buy me a yacht? Hahaha wow

  • Options
    jmlanzafjmlanzaf Posts: 31,935 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @OwenSeymour said:

    @jmlanzaf said:

    @jedm said:
    That's almost 20x what it showed on the receipt in the video!

    Bad investment. Look at the s&P 500. In 1972, it was 110. Today it's 32x higher. And if you consider the total yield with dividends reinvested, the S&P500 is 130x higher.

    Wow! You almost sound like as swell of a financial advisor as you are a Monday night quarterback. Dump on a 20X return over 50 yrs because you have the incredible foresight to compare the return to that of one of the best performing mainstream indexes, impressive! Curious- how many billions did you make off your 1972 S&P 500 investments with rolled over dividends? Can you buy me a yacht? Hahaha wow

    Your answer speaks for itself. I was 8 years old in 1972.

    The S&P is the benchmark most use. By almost any metric, that return is not good over a 50 year time frame. Do you prefer treasury bonds? Treasure bonds would also have yielded a 20x return since 1972 with less risk. Corporate bonds? Up 50x. Real estate? Only up 15x. Gold? Up 28x

    So, interestingly, you would have been better off buying generic gold in 1972 than the Pan Pac. $6000 in K-rands would be worth $170,000 today.

    So, yeah, not really a good investment by comparison to almost any other investment vehicle. It was better than cash, however. $6000 in a money market would only be worth $48,000 today.

    The point of this exercise, despite your data less mocking, is that a 50 year time frame creates tremendous compounding of almost any asset class. Make 20x in 5 years is awesome. Make 20x in 50 years is easy.

    https://pages.stern.nyu.edu/~adamodar/New_Home_Page/datafile/histretSP.html

  • Options
    jmlanzafjmlanzaf Posts: 31,935 ✭✭✭✭✭

    To highlight:

    it is interesting that the Pan Pac did not keep up with the price of gold. $6000 in bullion in 1973 is with $170,000 today

  • Options
    DisneyFanDisneyFan Posts: 1,708 ✭✭✭✭✭

    And how many of us had $6,000 to spend on a coin in 1972.

  • Options
    jmlanzafjmlanzaf Posts: 31,935 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited January 19, 2023 5:25AM

    @DisneyFan said:
    And how many of us had $6,000 to spend on a coin in 1972.

    I had my first savings account, with $100, in 1976.

    How many people can spend $6000 on a coin now?

  • Options
    DisneyFanDisneyFan Posts: 1,708 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @BryceM said:

    You are assuming that the primary determination of value for 5/6-figure coins is the number on the label. That’s not entirely true. The price difference between a correctly graded weak 65 and exceptional 64 isn’t nearly so big as you suggest.

    That's CAC's argument for dropping a weak 65 to a 64+. However, how many astute graders are out there?

  • Options
    DisneyFanDisneyFan Posts: 1,708 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @jmlanzaf said:

    @DisneyFan said:
    And how many of us had $6,000 to spend on a coin in 1972.

    I had my first savings account, with $100, in 1976.

    How many people can spend $6000 on a coin now?

    Sobering; but, they are in almost every coin auction.

  • Options
    Mr Lindy Mr Lindy Posts: 982 ✭✭✭✭✭

    My guess is raw Pan Pac coin with receipt sold to dealer for $20,000 raw. If so, then that's the number to calculate over time.

  • Options
    jmlanzafjmlanzaf Posts: 31,935 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @DisneyFan said:

    @jmlanzaf said:

    @DisneyFan said:
    And how many of us had $6,000 to spend on a coin in 1972.

    I had my first savings account, with $100, in 1976.

    How many people can spend $6000 on a coin now?

    Sobering; but, they are in almost every coin auction.

    True. But the median savings of Americans is less than $6000.

    https://www.bankrate.com/banking/savings/savings-account-average-balance/

    40% of Americans can't cover $1000 emergency.

  • Options
    DisneyFanDisneyFan Posts: 1,708 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @jmlanzaf said:

    True. But the median savings of Americans is less than $6000.

    https://www.bankrate.com/banking/savings/savings-account-average-balance/

    40% of Americans can't cover $1000 emergency.

    That's another positive for coin collecting. It teaches you to save.

  • Options
    CaptHenwayCaptHenway Posts: 31,554 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Chill, people.

    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.
  • Options
    gonzergonzer Posts: 2,990 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @jedm said:

    @jmlanzaf said:

    @jedm said:

    Just my opinion. I know people, that in the 70's & 80's wasted a helluva lot more on weed, cocaine, women & booze.

    But what a ride it was!

  • Options
    7Jaguars7Jaguars Posts: 7,266 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Always interesting to speculate and I think the issues with such have been brought up. Theoretical speculation always challenging and fun, but that is about it. Not that it particularly matters but I like the Pan Pac even retrospectively over the S&P and bullion examples cited, and a dream coin of mine since before even 1972 and only second to a Territorial California $50 slug....

    Love that Milled British (1830-1960)
    Well, just Love coins, period.
  • Options
    Walkerguy21DWalkerguy21D Posts: 11,150 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited January 19, 2023 7:49AM

    @jmlanzaf said:

    @DisneyFan said:
    And how many of us had $6,000 to spend on a coin in 1972.

    I had my first savings account, with $100, in 1976.

    How many people can spend $6000 on a coin now?

    I’m guessing that even at the time of issue, few of the general population could afford it.
    It was a luxury in 1915, in 1972, and still is today.

    Successful BST transactions with 170 members. Recent: Tonedeaf, Shane6596, Piano1, Ikenefic, RG, PCGSPhoto, stman, Don'tTelltheWife, Boosibri, Ron1968, snowequities, VTchaser, jrt103, SurfinxHI, 78saen, bp777, FHC, RYK, JTHawaii, Opportunity, Kliao, bigtime36, skanderbeg, split37, thebigeng, acloco, Toninginthblood, OKCC, braddick, Coinflip, robcool, fastfreddie, tightbudget, DBSTrader2, nickelsciolist, relaxn, Eagle eye, soldi, silverman68, ElKevvo, sawyerjosh, Schmitz7, talkingwalnut2, konsole, sharkman987, sniocsu, comma, jesbroken, David1234, biosolar, Sullykerry, Moldnut, erwindoc, MichaelDixon, GotTheBug

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Emoji
Image
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file