@EastonCollection said:
how about buying all 230 coins at auction, then destroy 229 of them and then you can own an unique piece and price the coin like if the mint auctioned off the 1849 $20. Win - Win - I would like to know if anyone has the guts to try it?
I don’t think the value of that unique coin would equal the cost of the 230 coins. And the comparison of it to an 1849 $20 strikes me as faulty. But my guess is that we’ll never know for certain which of us is right.😉
you’ve bought all of the coins, melted all but one and sold the remaining example. 😉
Also overly optimistic about being able to get the coins for $15K each. Add another $10K to that, and what does that do to the math? $15K? Etc.? Not to mention the first coin is already at least $200K more than $15K.
It's at $170k currently
Understood. I thought we all realized that's not where it will be hammering.
Do you read your own words? You said "the first coin is ALREADY at least $200k more than $15k." [Emphasis added.]
Yes. Sorry for the misstatement. $155K and counting. Better?
I just can't anymore...
Can't what? Keep nitpicking at small insignificant misstatements, as though $170K on 11/30 isn't going to be at least $215K by 12/12, because it isn't ALREADY 12/12, or the bid hasn't ALREADY hit $215K?
Great, take a little break from the nitpicking, because the point I was making doesn't change, even a little bit, regardless of whether the number is $215K or $170K. Even though I admittedly should not have said "ALREADY."
@jwitten said:
NJ gets to decide when he’s being literal and when he’s not. We just have to guess
Yup. Kind of like we all have to guess whether or not the Mint is being literal when it publishes Mintage and Product Limits.
In the meantime, as an alternative to guessing whether or not to take anything literally, maybe just use a little common sense to take a post in context and ask yourself whether or not taking anything literally makes a difference. As in, for example, whether a $45K difference in a $6,000,000+ number makes any difference at all, unless you are just looking to nitpick.
@jwitten said:
NJ gets to decide when he’s being literal and when he’s not. We just have to guess
Disclaimer: My words should not be read and taken literally. As such, any factual inaccuracies shall be considered the fault of the reader. Any direct response to questions posed shall be considered off topic.
@jwitten said:
NJ gets to decide when he’s being literal and when he’s not. We just have to guess
Yup. Kind of like we all have to guess whether or not the Mint is being literal when it publishes Mintage and Product Limits.
In the meantime, as an alternative to guessing whether or not to take anything literally, maybe just use a little common sense to take a post in context and ask yourself whether or not taking anything literally makes a difference. As in, for example, whether a $45K difference in a $6,000,000+ number makes any difference at all, unless you are just looking to nitpick.
As you know, the $45K difference that was pointed out to you pertained to a single coin which was bid $170,000, not “a $6,000,000+ number” for a group of coins. So please don’t pretend otherwise.
And if someone tells you that you were off by 26% (based on $170,000), not less than 1% (based in $6,000,000+) they aren’t nitpicking.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
@jwitten said:
NJ gets to decide when he’s being literal and when he’s not. We just have to guess
Yup. Kind of like we all have to guess whether or not the Mint is being literal when it publishes Mintage and Product Limits.
In the meantime, as an alternative to guessing whether or not to take anything literally, maybe just use a little common sense to take a post in context and ask yourself whether or not taking anything literally makes a difference. As in, for example, whether a $45K difference in a $6,000,000+ number makes any difference at all, unless you are just looking to nitpick.
As you know, the $45K difference that was pointed out to you pertained to a single coin which was bid $170,000, not “a $6,000,000+ number” for a group of coins. So please don’t pretend otherwise.
And if someone tells you that you were off by 26% (based on $170,000), not less than 1% (based in $6,000,000+) they aren’t nitpicking.
I'm not pretending otherwise. The discussion was concerning a hypothetical regarding cornering the market.
The baseline for the cost was $3.5M (230x15K). I pointed out that was probably an overly optimistic cost estimate, and asked what would happen to the analysis if the cost increased by $10K per coin, bringing us to $6M (actually, $5.75M for those who want to nitpick). Then I pointed out that coin #1 was already $200K more than $15K when it was actually only $155K more.
So what? All are rounding errors on whether anyone can make money spending $3M, $6M, or any number in between in a foolish attempt to destroy 229 coins in order to make money on the single remaining coin. 26% of $170K doesn't mean anything, because it's also 0.76% of $5,895,000, which is what I was really talking about.
A $45,000 difference on a single coin when you are talking about a population of 230 coins only means something if you are looking to nitpick, since the difference in overall cost between $5,895,000 and $5,940,000 is entirely immaterial with respect to whether or not the scheme to corner the market would make economic sense. Which was the point of this tiny piece of the thread. Not whether Lot #1 was bid to $170K or $215K on November 30th.
Moreover, that is not even the grave error that was pointed out. The big mistake was my saying "already" when Lot #1 had not yet hit $215K, as though anyone picking nits actually believes the lot will not exceed that price by hammer time. The average of all 230 lots similarly has not yet hit $15K or $25K. But that's not a problem, because no one said "already" with respect to them.
So, yes, they were, and continue, to look for any small inconsistency (nitpicking), just to point it out, since it does not otherwise advance any point, one way or the other.
@jwitten said:
NJ gets to decide when he’s being literal and when he’s not. We just have to guess
Yup. Kind of like we all have to guess whether or not the Mint is being literal when it publishes Mintage and Product Limits.
In the meantime, as an alternative to guessing whether or not to take anything literally, maybe just use a little common sense to take a post in context and ask yourself whether or not taking anything literally makes a difference. As in, for example, whether a $45K difference in a $6,000,000+ number makes any difference at all, unless you are just looking to nitpick.
As you know, the $45K difference that was pointed out to you pertained to a single coin which was bid $170,000, not “a $6,000,000+ number” for a group of coins. So please don’t pretend otherwise.
And if someone tells you that you were off by 26% (based on $170,000), not less than 1% (based in $6,000,000+) they aren’t nitpicking.
I'm not pretending otherwise. The discussion was concerning a hypothetical regarding cornering the market.
The baseline for the cost was $3.5M (230x15K). I pointed out that was probably an overly optimistic cost estimate, and asked what would happen to the analysis if the cost increased by $10K per coin, bringing us to $6M (actually, $5.75M for those who want to nitpick). Then I pointed out that coin #1 was already $200K more than $15K when it was actually only $155K more.
So what? All are rounding errors on whether anyone can make money spending $3M, $6M, or any number in between in a foolish attempt to destroy 229 coins in order to make money on the single remaining coin. 26% of $170K doesn't mean anything, because it's also 0.76% of $5,895,000,** which is what I was really talking about. **
A $45,000 difference on a single coin when you are talking about a population of 230 coins only means something if you are looking to nitpick, since the difference in overall cost between $5,895,000 and $5,940,000 is entirely immaterial with respect to whether or not the scheme to corner the market would make economic sense. Which was the point of this tiny piece of the thread. Not whether Lot #1 was bid to $170K or $215K on November 30th.
Moreover, that is not even the grave error that was pointed out. The big mistake was my saying "already" when Lot #1 had not yet hit $215K, as though anyone picking nits actually believes the lot will not exceed that price by hammer time. The average of all 230 lots similarly has not yet hit $15K or $25K. But that's not a problem, because no one said "already" with respect to them.
So, yes, they were, and continue, to look for any small inconsistency (nitpicking), just to point it out, since it does not otherwise advance any point, one way or the other.
“… which is what I was really talking about.”
Unfortunately, from one of your abundance of posts to another, what you’re really talking about becomes elusive to some of us.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
@jwitten said:
NJ gets to decide when he’s being literal and when he’s not. We just have to guess
Yup. Kind of like we all have to guess whether or not the Mint is being literal when it publishes Mintage and Product Limits.
In the meantime, as an alternative to guessing whether or not to take anything literally, maybe just use a little common sense to take a post in context and ask yourself whether or not taking anything literally makes a difference. As in, for example, whether a $45K difference in a $6,000,000+ number makes any difference at all, unless you are just looking to nitpick.
As you know, the $45K difference that was pointed out to you pertained to a single coin which was bid $170,000, not “a $6,000,000+ number” for a group of coins. So please don’t pretend otherwise.
And if someone tells you that you were off by 26% (based on $170,000), not less than 1% (based in $6,000,000+) they aren’t nitpicking.
I'm not pretending otherwise. The discussion was concerning a hypothetical regarding cornering the market.
The baseline for the cost was $3.5M (230x15K). I pointed out that was probably an overly optimistic cost estimate, and asked what would happen to the analysis if the cost increased by $10K per coin, bringing us to $6M (actually, $5.75M for those who want to nitpick). Then I pointed out that coin #1 was already $200K more than $15K when it was actually only $155K more.
So what? All are rounding errors on whether anyone can make money spending $3M, $6M, or any number in between in a foolish attempt to destroy 229 coins in order to make money on the single remaining coin. 26% of $170K doesn't mean anything, because it's also 0.76% of $5,895,000,** which is what I was really talking about. **
A $45,000 difference on a single coin when you are talking about a population of 230 coins only means something if you are looking to nitpick, since the difference in overall cost between $5,895,000 and $5,940,000 is entirely immaterial with respect to whether or not the scheme to corner the market would make economic sense. Which was the point of this tiny piece of the thread. Not whether Lot #1 was bid to $170K or $215K on November 30th.
Moreover, that is not even the grave error that was pointed out. The big mistake was my saying "already" when Lot #1 had not yet hit $215K, as though anyone picking nits actually believes the lot will not exceed that price by hammer time. The average of all 230 lots similarly has not yet hit $15K or $25K. But that's not a problem, because no one said "already" with respect to them.
So, yes, they were, and continue, to look for any small inconsistency (nitpicking), just to point it out, since it does not otherwise advance any point, one way or the other.
“… which is what I was really talking about.”
Unfortunately, from one of your abundance of posts to another, what you’re really talking about becomes elusive to some of us.
Sorry about that! All I was trying to do was support your response. Others nitpick because that's what they do with me.
It's all good. It's all in good fun. I do actually admit when I'm wrong, or when I misstate something. As I did here by saying "already."
It's just that the amount of the misstatement was immaterial, and "already" simply doesn't matter, because the point actually remains exactly the same whether Lot #1 sells for $170K, $215K, $15K, or $1,000,000. Cornering the market to create a modern mint issue with a surviving population of 1 is highly unlikely to make anyone rich.
@EastonCollection said:
how about buying all 230 coins at auction, then destroy 229 of them and then you can own an unique piece and price the coin like if the mint auctioned off the 1849 $20. Win - Win - I would like to know if anyone has the guts to try it?
I don’t think the value of that unique coin would equal the cost of the 230 coins. And the comparison of it to an 1849 $20 strikes me as faulty. But my guess is that we’ll never know for certain which of us is right.😉
Hi Mark - - The way I think about it is as follows - Buy all 230 FH Gold dollars for an average price of $15k each for a total of $3.5M. Melt/Destroy 229 of them and at 1 Oz each at $2600 then you got about $600k of gold so the net cost for the one and only FH gold dollar with the 230 is $2.9M. Auction it off and have it sell for $4M netting you a profit of $1.9M. Not bad? If it sells for more than your a bigger winner. If you really want more, then maybe tape the coin to a picture and have Sotheby's sell it for $7M. If a banana taped to a picture sells for over $5M, then the only FH gold dollar should sell for at least $7Mthan $4M. This whole 230 FH dollar thing is just crazy to me.........
I think you’re overly optimistic regarding the price that could be obtained for the (unique) coin. But I could certainly be wrong.
Best of luck in your endeavor. Please report back to the forum after you’ve bought all of the coins, melted all but one and sold the remaining example. 😉
Also overly optimistic about being able to get the coins for $15K each. Add another $10K to that, and what does that do to the math? $15K? Etc.? Not to mention the first coin is already at least $200K more than $15K.
I think most of the additional value in the lot with the first coin is for the 2 cancelled dies also in the lot.
@EastonCollection said:
how about buying all 230 coins at auction, then destroy 229 of them and then you can own an unique piece and price the coin like if the mint auctioned off the 1849 $20. Win - Win - I would like to know if anyone has the guts to try it?
I don’t think the value of that unique coin would equal the cost of the 230 coins. And the comparison of it to an 1849 $20 strikes me as faulty. But my guess is that we’ll never know for certain which of us is right.😉
Hi Mark - - The way I think about it is as follows - Buy all 230 FH Gold dollars for an average price of $15k each for a total of $3.5M. Melt/Destroy 229 of them and at 1 Oz each at $2600 then you got about $600k of gold so the net cost for the one and only FH gold dollar with the 230 is $2.9M. Auction it off and have it sell for $4M netting you a profit of $1.9M. Not bad? If it sells for more than your a bigger winner. If you really want more, then maybe tape the coin to a picture and have Sotheby's sell it for $7M. If a banana taped to a picture sells for over $5M, then the only FH gold dollar should sell for at least $7Mthan $4M. This whole 230 FH dollar thing is just crazy to me.........
I think you’re overly optimistic regarding the price that could be obtained for the (unique) coin. But I could certainly be wrong.
Best of luck in your endeavor. Please report back to the forum after you’ve bought all of the coins, melted all but one and sold the remaining example. 😉
Also overly optimistic about being able to get the coins for $15K each. Add another $10K to that, and what does that do to the math? $15K? Etc.? Not to mention the first coin is already at least $200K more than $15K.
I think most of the additional value in the lot with the first coin is for the 2 cancelled dies also in the lot.
Definitely. But that's irrelevant to a theoretical discussion regarding buying them all in order to destroy all but one.
@EastonCollection said:
how about buying all 230 coins at auction, then destroy 229 of them and then you can own an unique piece and price the coin like if the mint auctioned off the 1849 $20. Win - Win - I would like to know if anyone has the guts to try it?
I don’t think the value of that unique coin would equal the cost of the 230 coins. And the comparison of it to an 1849 $20 strikes me as faulty. But my guess is that we’ll never know for certain which of us is right.😉
Hi Mark - - The way I think about it is as follows - Buy all 230 FH Gold dollars for an average price of $15k each for a total of $3.5M. Melt/Destroy 229 of them and at 1 Oz each at $2600 then you got about $600k of gold so the net cost for the one and only FH gold dollar with the 230 is $2.9M. Auction it off and have it sell for $4M netting you a profit of $1.9M. Not bad? If it sells for more than your a bigger winner. If you really want more, then maybe tape the coin to a picture and have Sotheby's sell it for $7M. If a banana taped to a picture sells for over $5M, then the only FH gold dollar should sell for at least $7Mthan $4M. This whole 230 FH dollar thing is just crazy to me.........
I think you’re overly optimistic regarding the price that could be obtained for the (unique) coin. But I could certainly be wrong.
Best of luck in your endeavor. Please report back to the forum after you’ve bought all of the coins, melted all but one and sold the remaining example. 😉
Also overly optimistic about being able to get the coins for $15K each. Add another $10K to that, and what does that do to the math? $15K? Etc.? Not to mention the first coin is already at least $200K more than $15K.
I think most of the additional value in the lot with the first coin is for the 2 cancelled dies also in the lot.
Definitely. But that's irrelevant to a theoretical discussion regarding buying them all in order to destroy all but one.
Hopefully the person keeps the first one
But the reality is that you probably don't need to destroy all but one, just donate them to the Smithsonian
@EastonCollection said:
how about buying all 230 coins at auction, then destroy 229 of them and then you can own an unique piece and price the coin like if the mint auctioned off the 1849 $20. Win - Win - I would like to know if anyone has the guts to try it?
I don’t think the value of that unique coin would equal the cost of the 230 coins. And the comparison of it to an 1849 $20 strikes me as faulty. But my guess is that we’ll never know for certain which of us is right.😉
Hi Mark - - The way I think about it is as follows - Buy all 230 FH Gold dollars for an average price of $15k each for a total of $3.5M. Melt/Destroy 229 of them and at 1 Oz each at $2600 then you got about $600k of gold so the net cost for the one and only FH gold dollar with the 230 is $2.9M. Auction it off and have it sell for $4M netting you a profit of $1.9M. Not bad? If it sells for more than your a bigger winner. If you really want more, then maybe tape the coin to a picture and have Sotheby's sell it for $7M. If a banana taped to a picture sells for over $5M, then the only FH gold dollar should sell for at least $7Mthan $4M. This whole 230 FH dollar thing is just crazy to me.........
I think you’re overly optimistic regarding the price that could be obtained for the (unique) coin. But I could certainly be wrong.
Best of luck in your endeavor. Please report back to the forum after you’ve bought all of the coins, melted all but one and sold the remaining example. 😉
Also overly optimistic about being able to get the coins for $15K each. Add another $10K to that, and what does that do to the math? $15K? Etc.? Not to mention the first coin is already at least $200K more than $15K.
I think most of the additional value in the lot with the first coin is for the 2 cancelled dies also in the lot.
Definitely. But that's irrelevant to a theoretical discussion regarding buying them all in order to destroy all but one.
Hopefully the person keeps the first one
But the reality is that you probably don't need to destroy all but one, just donate them to the Smithsonian
Yeah. To me, it was nothing more than a foolish thought experiment. The reason not to donate to anyone would be to recapture some cost by melting 229 ounces of gold.
No reason to buy them to permanently remove them from the market to create a single super coin that the market will then magically confer a hyper value, like a 1933 St. Gaudens. Very expensive endeavor, and very unlikely to achieve the desired result.
As it is, I happen to think the 229 that don't include the dies are all going to sell for far more than some on this forum believe. The cost of obtaining all 230 will be significantly higher than speculated, and the value of one survivor after destroying the others would not approach that of true organic rarities.
@EastonCollection said:
how about buying all 230 coins at auction, then destroy 229 of them and then you can own an unique piece and price the coin like if the mint auctioned off the 1849 $20. Win - Win - I would like to know if anyone has the guts to try it?
I don’t think the value of that unique coin would equal the cost of the 230 coins. And the comparison of it to an 1849 $20 strikes me as faulty. But my guess is that we’ll never know for certain which of us is right.😉
Hi Mark - - The way I think about it is as follows - Buy all 230 FH Gold dollars for an average price of $15k each for a total of $3.5M. Melt/Destroy 229 of them and at 1 Oz each at $2600 then you got about $600k of gold so the net cost for the one and only FH gold dollar with the 230 is $2.9M. Auction it off and have it sell for $4M netting you a profit of $1.9M. Not bad? If it sells for more than your a bigger winner. If you really want more, then maybe tape the coin to a picture and have Sotheby's sell it for $7M. If a banana taped to a picture sells for over $5M, then the only FH gold dollar should sell for at least $7Mthan $4M. This whole 230 FH dollar thing is just crazy to me.........
I think you’re overly optimistic regarding the price that could be obtained for the (unique) coin. But I could certainly be wrong.
Best of luck in your endeavor. Please report back to the forum after you’ve bought all of the coins, melted all but one and sold the remaining example. 😉
Also overly optimistic about being able to get the coins for $15K each. Add another $10K to that, and what does that do to the math? $15K? Etc.? Not to mention the first coin is already at least $200K more than $15K.
I think most of the additional value in the lot with the first coin is for the 2 cancelled dies also in the lot.
Definitely. But that's irrelevant to a theoretical discussion regarding buying them all in order to destroy all but one.
Hopefully the person keeps the first one
But the reality is that you probably don't need to destroy all but one, just donate them to the Smithsonian
Yeah. To me, it was nothing more than a foolish thought experiment. The reason not to donate to anyone would be to recapture some cost by melting 229 ounces of gold.
No reason to buy them to permanently remove them from the market to create a single super coin that the market will then magically confer a hyper value, like a 1933 St. Gaudens. Very expensive endeavor, and very unlikely to achieve the desired result.
As it is, I happen to think the 229 that don't include the dies are all going to sell for far more than some on this forum believe. The cost of obtaining all 230 will be significantly higher than speculated, and the value of one survivor after destroying the others would not approach that of true organic rarities.
I think the whole thing is just crazy - lets play a different game - rather than destroying the 229 FH privey coins - I would suggest the mint doing the following - Currently, the mint is producing 10,000 FH without the 230 privey logo and selling them for $3,640. If at auction the average price for the FH is $25,000 with a mintage of 230, then that would gross $5,750,000. Divide that amount by the 10,000 mintage and that equals $575. Add the $575 to the cost of the non privey 230 labeled FH golds and each would cost $4,215. The mint would include and distribute randomly the 230 privey so everyone that purchases the FH has an equal chance of getting the 230 privey ones. With the price of gold at about $2,600 an oz. The premium is $1,615 rather than $1,040. This premium is a gamble of getting a FH with the 230 privey coin that could be worth $25k. I just think this whole thing is crazy by auctioning off these coins. Quite frankly, I dont collect modern coins, so I will just focus on my series that I follow. Thank you for reading my crazy thinking..... just saying......
@EastonCollection said:
how about buying all 230 coins at auction, then destroy 229 of them and then you can own an unique piece and price the coin like if the mint auctioned off the 1849 $20. Win - Win - I would like to know if anyone has the guts to try it?
I don’t think the value of that unique coin would equal the cost of the 230 coins. And the comparison of it to an 1849 $20 strikes me as faulty. But my guess is that we’ll never know for certain which of us is right.😉
Hi Mark - - The way I think about it is as follows - Buy all 230 FH Gold dollars for an average price of $15k each for a total of $3.5M. Melt/Destroy 229 of them and at 1 Oz each at $2600 then you got about $600k of gold so the net cost for the one and only FH gold dollar with the 230 is $2.9M. Auction it off and have it sell for $4M netting you a profit of $1.9M. Not bad? If it sells for more than your a bigger winner. If you really want more, then maybe tape the coin to a picture and have Sotheby's sell it for $7M. If a banana taped to a picture sells for over $5M, then the only FH gold dollar should sell for at least $7Mthan $4M. This whole 230 FH dollar thing is just crazy to me.........
I think you’re overly optimistic regarding the price that could be obtained for the (unique) coin. But I could certainly be wrong.
Best of luck in your endeavor. Please report back to the forum after you’ve bought all of the coins, melted all but one and sold the remaining example. 😉
Also overly optimistic about being able to get the coins for $15K each. Add another $10K to that, and what does that do to the math? $15K? Etc.? Not to mention the first coin is already at least $200K more than $15K.
I think most of the additional value in the lot with the first coin is for the 2 cancelled dies also in the lot.
Definitely. But that's irrelevant to a theoretical discussion regarding buying them all in order to destroy all but one.
Hopefully the person keeps the first one
But the reality is that you probably don't need to destroy all but one, just donate them to the Smithsonian
Yeah. To me, it was nothing more than a foolish thought experiment. The reason not to donate to anyone would be to recapture some cost by melting 229 ounces of gold.
No reason to buy them to permanently remove them from the market to create a single super coin that the market will then magically confer a hyper value, like a 1933 St. Gaudens. Very expensive endeavor, and very unlikely to achieve the desired result.
As it is, I happen to think the 229 that don't include the dies are all going to sell for far more than some on this forum believe. The cost of obtaining all 230 will be significantly higher than speculated, and the value of one survivor after destroying the others would not approach that of true organic rarities.
I think the whole thing is just crazy - lets play a different game - rather than destroying the 229 FH privey coins - I would suggest the mint doing the following - Currently, the mint is producing 10,000 FH without the 230 privey logo and selling them for $3,640. If at auction the average price for the FH is $25,000 with a mintage of 230, then that would gross $5,750,000. Divide that amount by the 10,000 mintage and that equals $575. Add the $575 to the cost of the non privey 230 labeled FH golds and each would cost $4,215. The mint would include and distribute randomly the 230 privey so everyone that purchases the FH has an equal chance of getting the 230 privey ones. With the price of gold at about $2,600 an oz. The premium is $1,615 rather than $1,040. This premium is a gamble of getting a FH with the 230 privey coin that could be worth $25k. I just think this whole thing is crazy by auctioning off these coins. Quite frankly, I dont collect modern coins, so I will just focus on my series that I follow. Thank you for reading my crazy thinking..... just saying......
What you are saying is not crazy. It's just not what the Mint does. They aren't in the business of charging for lottery tickets, because that would call into question the means they use to distribute the winners.
The silver lottery was free, since they did not jack up the price of the non-privy to account for the winners. That's what made playing such a no-brainer for anyone paying attention.
They also did not determine the value of the winners ahead of time. The market did that after the fact.
What they are doing now really is the most honest, fair and democratic way to distribute these. The market determines pricing at public auction.
Those who can afford to play do so. Others don't. If you need a lottery to be able to afford to play, go to your nearest casino or 7-11, play your chosen game of chance, and use your winnings, if any, to participate in the auction.
No reason for the Mint to get involved in that. Or for anyone wanting a non-privy coin to be forced to buy a $575 lottery ticket to subsidize a privy coin for a few lucky public winners and several large ABPP and bulk purchaser guaranteed winners.
@EastonCollection said:
how about buying all 230 coins at auction, then destroy 229 of them and then you can own an unique piece and price the coin like if the mint auctioned off the 1849 $20. Win - Win - I would like to know if anyone has the guts to try it?
I don’t think the value of that unique coin would equal the cost of the 230 coins. And the comparison of it to an 1849 $20 strikes me as faulty. But my guess is that we’ll never know for certain which of us is right.😉
Hi Mark - - The way I think about it is as follows - Buy all 230 FH Gold dollars for an average price of $15k each for a total of $3.5M. Melt/Destroy 229 of them and at 1 Oz each at $2600 then you got about $600k of gold so the net cost for the one and only FH gold dollar with the 230 is $2.9M. Auction it off and have it sell for $4M netting you a profit of $1.9M. Not bad? If it sells for more than your a bigger winner. If you really want more, then maybe tape the coin to a picture and have Sotheby's sell it for $7M. If a banana taped to a picture sells for over $5M, then the only FH gold dollar should sell for at least $7Mthan $4M. This whole 230 FH dollar thing is just crazy to me.........
No need to destroy the others. Lock them in a deep vault for a couple centuries creating a mystery that will go around.
Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value. Zero. Voltaire. Ebay coinbowlllc
@EastonCollection said:
how about buying all 230 coins at auction, then destroy 229 of them and then you can own an unique piece and price the coin like if the mint auctioned off the 1849 $20. Win - Win - I would like to know if anyone has the guts to try it?
I don’t think the value of that unique coin would equal the cost of the 230 coins. And the comparison of it to an 1849 $20 strikes me as faulty. But my guess is that we’ll never know for certain which of us is right.😉
Hi Mark - - The way I think about it is as follows - Buy all 230 FH Gold dollars for an average price of $15k each for a total of $3.5M. Melt/Destroy 229 of them and at 1 Oz each at $2600 then you got about $600k of gold so the net cost for the one and only FH gold dollar with the 230 is $2.9M. Auction it off and have it sell for $4M netting you a profit of $1.9M. Not bad? If it sells for more than your a bigger winner. If you really want more, then maybe tape the coin to a picture and have Sotheby's sell it for $7M. If a banana taped to a picture sells for over $5M, then the only FH gold dollar should sell for at least $7Mthan $4M. This whole 230 FH dollar thing is just crazy to me.........
No need to destroy the others. Lock them in a deep vault for a couple centuries creating a mystery that will go around.
Or you could just do this to ensure there are no ultra high grade coins
Come on all - I think it would be so much fun buying them all and trashing 229 of them and holding on to just one. If I could afford to do that (I can't) and I did buy all of them, then most likely I would have to buy all the 2025 FH as the mint would do it again in 2025 as they felt the 2024 program was successful. Only difference is the privey would say 231 and they won't auction off the cancelled dies. My next question is why in the world is the Mint minting Flowing Hair dollars in Gold when it was minted only in silver. I would prefer the mint issuing a Flowing Hair in copper with no stars - Judd 18. Maybe if they made a Judd-18, then I might be interested. This modern stuff - I just don't get. Boy -- I really digested this thread. LOL
@SilverEagle1974 said:
Remember, at the end of the day, it's just 1 oz of gold.
The rest is numismatic value, which may, or may not, go up in value.
Chris
Not only that, it's MODERN "numismatic" value. Which is even more fleeting and more susceptible to big changes based on whims, changing tastes, fads, etc. Look at the drop from the Bubble Peak for the ASE 1995-W, over 75% I believe (and even if you ignore the 1 outlier price, down 50% or more from where there were multiple sales).
I guess if money is no object, who cares. But for anybody with a budget...or even with a healthy budget but liimts to what you can buy....I'd MUCH rather buy classic gold or numismatic coins. I KNOW there will not be anymore pre-1933 gold or Saints struck, and most of the hoards in size for rare years have already been found.
@NJCoin said:
The fact that there is a market for this, and they have woken up to that fact after 232 years of existence, is a good thing. It allows them to generate windfalls for the US Treasury at no cost to taxpayers, or to any collectors who are priced out of this end of the market.
This is pocket change for the Treasury. The Fed made $60 billion a year for the Fed from 2010-22 , close to 3/4's of a trillion dollars or so.
@NJCoin said:
For the record, there has only ever been one other auction like this. And then, I don't remember seeing the lots being offered for resale en masse. Dealers who bought by and large resold privately. 700 lots were offered. I don't remember seeing any offered on anyone's website, or on eBay. To this day, I don't know if any of those lots held their value, other than maybe through the rise in precious metal prices since the summer of 2022.
What coin are we talking about here ?
There are only 230 total. No Big Boy is going to be getting more than a few, because if they actually outbid all retail bidders for all 230 of them, they will by definition be paying more than retail is willing to pay, and that will involve a huge risk, with big money involved, that they will have 230 buyers not involved in the auction willing to pay even more after the fact. This is not one specific coin, with a list of buyers to market it to, where they know they will have a taker.
I don't go back as far as many of you, but my recent history has that Kennedy Gold Coin sold at the ANA Convention moving to a big premium; the 2019 ASE-S (Reverse Proof ?) selling for 4-figures though I think if you could get it from the Mint it was < $200; and then the 2021 Morgan/Peace Dollars which moved to a big premium in the highest condition.
I know the price for the ASE 1995-W spiked and then fell back....how have these held their peak pricing in the years since their release ?
@NJCoin said:
For the record, there has only ever been one other auction like this. And then, I don't remember seeing the lots being offered for resale en masse. Dealers who bought by and large resold privately. 700 lots were offered. I don't remember seeing any offered on anyone's website, or on eBay. To this day, I don't know if any of those lots held their value, other than maybe through the rise in precious metal prices since the summer of 2022.
What coin are we talking about here ?
There are only 230 total. No Big Boy is going to be getting more than a few, because if they actually outbid all retail bidders for all 230 of them, they will by definition be paying more than retail is willing to pay, and that will involve a huge risk, with big money involved, that they will have 230 buyers not involved in the auction willing to pay even more after the fact. This is not one specific coin, with a list of buyers to market it to, where they know they will have a taker.
I don't go back as far as many of you, but my recent history has that Kennedy Gold Coin sold at the ANA Convention moving to a big premium; the 2019 ASE-S (Reverse Proof ?) selling for 4-figures though I think if you could get it from the Mint it was < $200; and then the 2021 Morgan/Peace Dollars which moved to a big premium in the highest condition.
I know the price for the ASE 1995-W spiked and then fell back....how have these held their peak pricing in the years since their release ?
The Dusk to Dawn silver eagles are what he is referring to in 2022.
They could have minted 7500 privy gold and sold them for the $3640
AND
netted $27 million!!!!
so if they’re trying to make a profit, they’re not doing a very good job.
Actually, they are doing a pretty decent job. Making a tiny niche product, to sell for a massive premium, in addition to their regular offerings, was an inspired bit of genius for as long as the hyper-premium market is willing to indulge it.
They already sold 10K without privys for $3640 each and have another 7.5K sitting in a warehouse ready to go at some point in the future. Likely to be paired with other coins and sold for even more.
And, on top of that, they are going to sell 230 with privys for a nice multiple of what they already sold the 10K for. They don't have to choose -- they get to do both.
7500 privy golds would not be special and would not carry much of a premium, so no need to even think about them separately from the non-privy coins they sold. Or to think of them as an alternative to what they are doing with the 230. Very different products being offered into very different markets.
Comments
Can't what? Keep nitpicking at small insignificant misstatements, as though $170K on 11/30 isn't going to be at least $215K by 12/12, because it isn't ALREADY 12/12, or the bid hasn't ALREADY hit $215K?
Great, take a little break from the nitpicking, because the point I was making doesn't change, even a little bit, regardless of whether the number is $215K or $170K. Even though I admittedly should not have said "ALREADY."
NJ gets to decide when he’s being literal and when he’s not. We just have to guess
Yup. Kind of like we all have to guess whether or not the Mint is being literal when it publishes Mintage and Product Limits.
In the meantime, as an alternative to guessing whether or not to take anything literally, maybe just use a little common sense to take a post in context and ask yourself whether or not taking anything literally makes a difference. As in, for example, whether a $45K difference in a $6,000,000+ number makes any difference at all, unless you are just looking to nitpick.
For the silver, the relevant page on the mint's website says:
Mintage Limit: 75,000
It didn't say "Mintage: 75,000".
Disclaimer: My words should not be read and taken literally. As such, any factual inaccuracies shall be considered the fault of the reader. Any direct response to questions posed shall be considered off topic.
As you know, the $45K difference that was pointed out to you pertained to a single coin which was bid $170,000, not “a $6,000,000+ number” for a group of coins. So please don’t pretend otherwise.
And if someone tells you that you were off by 26% (based on $170,000), not less than 1% (based in $6,000,000+) they aren’t nitpicking.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
I'm not pretending otherwise. The discussion was concerning a hypothetical regarding cornering the market.
The baseline for the cost was $3.5M (230x15K). I pointed out that was probably an overly optimistic cost estimate, and asked what would happen to the analysis if the cost increased by $10K per coin, bringing us to $6M (actually, $5.75M for those who want to nitpick). Then I pointed out that coin #1 was already $200K more than $15K when it was actually only $155K more.
So what? All are rounding errors on whether anyone can make money spending $3M, $6M, or any number in between in a foolish attempt to destroy 229 coins in order to make money on the single remaining coin. 26% of $170K doesn't mean anything, because it's also 0.76% of $5,895,000, which is what I was really talking about.
A $45,000 difference on a single coin when you are talking about a population of 230 coins only means something if you are looking to nitpick, since the difference in overall cost between $5,895,000 and $5,940,000 is entirely immaterial with respect to whether or not the scheme to corner the market would make economic sense. Which was the point of this tiny piece of the thread. Not whether Lot #1 was bid to $170K or $215K on November 30th.
Moreover, that is not even the grave error that was pointed out. The big mistake was my saying "already" when Lot #1 had not yet hit $215K, as though anyone picking nits actually believes the lot will not exceed that price by hammer time. The average of all 230 lots similarly has not yet hit $15K or $25K. But that's not a problem, because no one said "already" with respect to them.
So, yes, they were, and continue, to look for any small inconsistency (nitpicking), just to point it out, since it does not otherwise advance any point, one way or the other.
“… which is what I was really talking about.”
Unfortunately, from one of your abundance of posts to another, what you’re really talking about becomes elusive to some of us.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Sorry about that! All I was trying to do was support your response. Others nitpick because that's what they do with me.
It's all good. It's all in good fun. I do actually admit when I'm wrong, or when I misstate something. As I did here by saying "already."
It's just that the amount of the misstatement was immaterial, and "already" simply doesn't matter, because the point actually remains exactly the same whether Lot #1 sells for $170K, $215K, $15K, or $1,000,000. Cornering the market to create a modern mint issue with a surviving population of 1 is highly unlikely to make anyone rich.
I think most of the additional value in the lot with the first coin is for the 2 cancelled dies also in the lot.
Definitely. But that's irrelevant to a theoretical discussion regarding buying them all in order to destroy all but one.
Hopefully the person keeps the first one
But the reality is that you probably don't need to destroy all but one, just donate them to the Smithsonian
Yeah. To me, it was nothing more than a foolish thought experiment. The reason not to donate to anyone would be to recapture some cost by melting 229 ounces of gold.
No reason to buy them to permanently remove them from the market to create a single super coin that the market will then magically confer a hyper value, like a 1933 St. Gaudens. Very expensive endeavor, and very unlikely to achieve the desired result.
As it is, I happen to think the 229 that don't include the dies are all going to sell for far more than some on this forum believe. The cost of obtaining all 230 will be significantly higher than speculated, and the value of one survivor after destroying the others would not approach that of true organic rarities.
I think the whole thing is just crazy - lets play a different game - rather than destroying the 229 FH privey coins - I would suggest the mint doing the following - Currently, the mint is producing 10,000 FH without the 230 privey logo and selling them for $3,640. If at auction the average price for the FH is $25,000 with a mintage of 230, then that would gross $5,750,000. Divide that amount by the 10,000 mintage and that equals $575. Add the $575 to the cost of the non privey 230 labeled FH golds and each would cost $4,215. The mint would include and distribute randomly the 230 privey so everyone that purchases the FH has an equal chance of getting the 230 privey ones. With the price of gold at about $2,600 an oz. The premium is $1,615 rather than $1,040. This premium is a gamble of getting a FH with the 230 privey coin that could be worth $25k. I just think this whole thing is crazy by auctioning off these coins. Quite frankly, I dont collect modern coins, so I will just focus on my series that I follow. Thank you for reading my crazy thinking..... just saying......
What you are saying is not crazy. It's just not what the Mint does. They aren't in the business of charging for lottery tickets, because that would call into question the means they use to distribute the winners.
The silver lottery was free, since they did not jack up the price of the non-privy to account for the winners. That's what made playing such a no-brainer for anyone paying attention.
They also did not determine the value of the winners ahead of time. The market did that after the fact.
What they are doing now really is the most honest, fair and democratic way to distribute these. The market determines pricing at public auction.
Those who can afford to play do so. Others don't. If you need a lottery to be able to afford to play, go to your nearest casino or 7-11, play your chosen game of chance, and use your winnings, if any, to participate in the auction.
No reason for the Mint to get involved in that. Or for anyone wanting a non-privy coin to be forced to buy a $575 lottery ticket to subsidize a privy coin for a few lucky public winners and several large ABPP and bulk purchaser guaranteed winners.
No need to destroy the others. Lock them in a deep vault for a couple centuries creating a mystery that will go around.
Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value. Zero. Voltaire. Ebay coinbowlllc
Or you could just do this to ensure there are no ultra high grade coins
Come on all - I think it would be so much fun buying them all and trashing 229 of them and holding on to just one. If I could afford to do that (I can't) and I did buy all of them, then most likely I would have to buy all the 2025 FH as the mint would do it again in 2025 as they felt the 2024 program was successful. Only difference is the privey would say 231 and they won't auction off the cancelled dies. My next question is why in the world is the Mint minting Flowing Hair dollars in Gold when it was minted only in silver. I would prefer the mint issuing a Flowing Hair in copper with no stars - Judd 18. Maybe if they made a Judd-18, then I might be interested. This modern stuff - I just don't get. Boy -- I really digested this thread. LOL
Not only that, it's MODERN "numismatic" value. Which is even more fleeting and more susceptible to big changes based on whims, changing tastes, fads, etc. Look at the drop from the Bubble Peak for the ASE 1995-W, over 75% I believe (and even if you ignore the 1 outlier price, down 50% or more from where there were multiple sales).
I guess if money is no object, who cares. But for anybody with a budget...or even with a healthy budget but liimts to what you can buy....I'd MUCH rather buy classic gold or numismatic coins. I KNOW there will not be anymore pre-1933 gold or Saints struck, and most of the hoards in size for rare years have already been found.
This is pocket change for the Treasury. The Fed made $60 billion a year for the Fed from 2010-22 , close to 3/4's of a trillion dollars or so.
This Mint coin stuff is a rounding error.
What coin are we talking about here ?
I don't go back as far as many of you, but my recent history has that Kennedy Gold Coin sold at the ANA Convention moving to a big premium; the 2019 ASE-S (Reverse Proof ?) selling for 4-figures though I think if you could get it from the Mint it was < $200; and then the 2021 Morgan/Peace Dollars which moved to a big premium in the highest condition.
I know the price for the ASE 1995-W spiked and then fell back....how have these held their peak pricing in the years since their release ?
The Dusk to Dawn silver eagles are what he is referring to in 2022.
Slightly OT but Goldfinger was referring to the 2019-s ASE Enhanced Reverse Proof with mintage of 30K
Don't recalled paying $200 mint issue price, maybe more liked $70?
Liked the FH Gold, It was also first released to the public during the Baltimore Whitman Coin Expo show.
ORRRRR
They could have minted 7500 privy gold and sold them for the $3640
AND
netted $27 million!!!!
so if they’re trying to make a profit, they’re not doing a very good job.
Actually, they are doing a pretty decent job. Making a tiny niche product, to sell for a massive premium, in addition to their regular offerings, was an inspired bit of genius for as long as the hyper-premium market is willing to indulge it.
They already sold 10K without privys for $3640 each and have another 7.5K sitting in a warehouse ready to go at some point in the future. Likely to be paired with other coins and sold for even more.
And, on top of that, they are going to sell 230 with privys for a nice multiple of what they already sold the 10K for. They don't have to choose -- they get to do both.
7500 privy golds would not be special and would not carry much of a premium, so no need to even think about them separately from the non-privy coins they sold. Or to think of them as an alternative to what they are doing with the 230. Very different products being offered into very different markets.