ANA chooses Heritage for 2008 - What else is new!
dorancoins
Posts: 2,091 ✭✭✭
Found this on the Numismatic News website this morning. Looks like SS,DD just happened at Denver. What is everyone's take on this?
Quote --
<< <i>ANA chooses Heritage for 2008
When the American Numismatic Association board of governors granted rights to its two 2008 convention auctions at a meeting Aug. 17 conducted during the World's Fair of Money in Denver, Heritage Auctions was the winner. It bested bids by Bowers and Merena.
The distinguishing feature between the bids was that Heritage amounts were flat fees – $135,000 for the rights to the ANA's National Money Show auction in 2008 in Phoenix and $501,000 for the World's Fair of Money auction in Baltimore.
Bowers and Merena made bids of certain percentages of prices realized. ANA President Bill Horton commented after the meeting that the board did not know what market conditions would be like in two years and didn't want to take a chance with the Bowers and Merena bids. >>
Looks like ANA and its not-so-competent leadership is giving Heritage preferential treatment (after all, I wouldn't be suprised that some of the board members are on Heritage's payroll or received campaign contributions from them.)
Quote --
<< <i>ANA chooses Heritage for 2008
When the American Numismatic Association board of governors granted rights to its two 2008 convention auctions at a meeting Aug. 17 conducted during the World's Fair of Money in Denver, Heritage Auctions was the winner. It bested bids by Bowers and Merena.
The distinguishing feature between the bids was that Heritage amounts were flat fees – $135,000 for the rights to the ANA's National Money Show auction in 2008 in Phoenix and $501,000 for the World's Fair of Money auction in Baltimore.
Bowers and Merena made bids of certain percentages of prices realized. ANA President Bill Horton commented after the meeting that the board did not know what market conditions would be like in two years and didn't want to take a chance with the Bowers and Merena bids. >>
Looks like ANA and its not-so-competent leadership is giving Heritage preferential treatment (after all, I wouldn't be suprised that some of the board members are on Heritage's payroll or received campaign contributions from them.)
DORAN COINS - On Facebook, Instagram, X (formerly Twitter), & www.dorancoins.net - UPCOMING SHOWS (tentative dates)- 10/8/2023 - Fairfield, IL, 11/5/2023 - Urbana, IL., 12/3/2023 - Mattoon, IL.
0
Comments
With all of these pre-ANA auctions why should companies pay anything extra to the ANA for the rights
to hold an auction? They are going to draw essentially the same crowd of bidders as at the official ANA auction
and most likely at a lower cost to the auction company.
There's nothing to indicate that except your imagination.
As for which offer was better, there's not enough information in that article to enable an intelligent opinion.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
From the information provided, it looks like they awarded the auction to the highest bidder. Based on recent trends in auction activity, Heritage would seem like the logical choice.
Unless you have evidence of it, your speculation is inappropriate and anti-ANA agenda is getting tiresome.
<< <i>Looks like ANA and its not-so-competent leadership is giving Heritage preferential treatment (after all, I wouldn't be suprised that some of the board members are on Heritage's payroll or received campaign contributions from them.)
From the information provided, it looks like they awarded the auction to the highest bidder. Based on recent trends in auction activity, Heritage would seem like the logical choice.
Unless you have evidence of it, your speculation is inappropriate and anti-ANA agenda is getting tiresome. >>
For one, I do not, nor ever, have an anti-ANA agenda (as I am a proud life member). All that I am saying is that I feel that Heritage is getting some preferential treatment. Personally, I am not a huge fan of Heritage, but that is beside the point. By the way, this is a forum - a place to discuss stuff and express opinions whether all concerned likes them or not - and for those who have a hard time understanding this - if you don't like what I say on these forums - that is your opinion! If you're going to get nasty, please do yourself a favor (and to avoid embarassment), don't waste YOUR time responding unless you have a point that has some validity!
Michael - Since this is a civil forum for intelligent discusussion, let's discuss the basis for your comment above.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
<< <i>I wouldn't be suprised that some of the board members are on Heritage's payroll
Michael - Since this is a civil forum for intelligent discusussion, let's discuss the basis for your comment above. >>
Andy - When I said that "I wouldn't be suprised", what I meant it either as a probability or, for all practical purposes, a theory. If I had hard, undisputible evidence, then I wouldn't theorize it.
Actually, my point does have some validity. Your innuendo that ANA members are on the take from Heritage lacks foundation and is inappropriate (my opinion) and harms your image and reputation (my opinion). I am a lowly collector with no political or economic agenda. IIRC, you have run for the CSNS board of governors in the past (maybe ANA as well). I guess if you want to sling mud at those in political power on a public forum, that's cool, but be prepared for some of it to come back to you. That's politics!
<< <i>Looks like ANA and its not-so-competent leadership is giving Heritage preferential treatment (after all, I wouldn't be suprised that some of the board members are on Heritage's payroll or received campaign contributions from them.) >>
Huh? How you came to that conclusion based on what you posted is absolutely beyond me.
Nothing wrong with taking the hard cash and not gambling on results. I for one am impressed that the ANA can command two thirds of a million bucks just to lend their name, and provide a couple of rooms to an auction company.
<< <i>If you're going to get nasty, please do yourself a favor (and to avoid embarassment), don't waste YOUR time responding unless you have a point that has some validity!
Actually, my point does have some validity. Your innuendo that ANA members are on the take from Heritage lacks foundation and is inappropriate (my opinion) and harms your image and reputation (my opinion). I am a lowly collector with no political or economic agenda. IIRC, you have run for the CSNS board of governors in the past (maybe ANA as well). I guess if you want to sling mud at those in political power on a public forum, that's cool, but be prepared for some of it to come back to you. That's politics! >>
As far as my feelings about the current leadership in the ANA, as you know, things are not good. I am only one person, but there are those who agree with me on this. We, as hobbyists, are obligated to make sure that numismatics is an INCLUSIVE hobby, not an EXCLUSIVE one. Now, I know that you are indifferent to these matters, and you (like anyone else) are entitled to such. But ask yourself this question - Would it be better to accept things for what they are even though they're not right or would it be better to question it?
Now, as far as Central States, I did run for a seat twice (2004, 2006). I had no problems in 2004, but in 2006 the (now past) president was giving me a very hard time in regards to my campaign website and its content, which was carefully reviewed by me before I even posted it online. From what I heard from very reliable sources within Central States, some of the board members complained about it. I think that these people are very scared of an outsider possibly getting into the board. And as far as mud slinging goes, I only do it when the opposition does it first, and quite frankly, I'm not a big fan of that (and I joke at times that I'm coated with teflon
<< <i>
<< <i>Looks like ANA and its not-so-competent leadership is giving Heritage preferential treatment (after all, I wouldn't be suprised that some of the board members are on Heritage's payroll or received campaign contributions from them.) >>
Huh? How you came to that conclusion based on what you posted is absolutely beyond me. >>
Have you ever heard of a theory?
<< <i>I do believe the bidding is a fair process with preferential treatment. >>
A "fair process with preferential treatment?" Isn't that an oxymoron?
<< <i>
<< <i>I do believe the bidding is a fair process with preferential treatment. >>
A "fair process with preferential treatment?" Isn't that an oxymoron? >>
TD
I guess when you start a sentence with "It wouldn't surprise me if...", you can pretty much say whatever you want afterward.
Didn't wanna get me no trade
Never want to be like papa
Working for the boss every night and day
--"Happy", by the Rolling Stones (1972)
As to Legend's comment, in the past (older regimes) there HAS been favoritism shown to Heritage. Such as giving them lists of recently deceased members so they could solicit the surviving spouse for their collection. In at least one year, making the sealed bids of the other auction houses known to Heritage before taking their bid.
I think Coin World printed more of the details about the bids. It seemed to me that the ANA was simply taing the less risky bid, which sure doesn't smack of anything illegal or even immoral. I generally agree with dorancoins and others about the current board of the ANA. But I think that dorancoins is over selling his hostility to the board with his suggestion that perhaps favoritism was shown. Condor was right that such favoritism was an issue in the past but seems to be no longer the case.
I also strongly disagree with dorancoins' suggestion in another thread to rotate the auction among major auction houses. The ANA can use the money and such a rotation would lead to even more financial problems for the ANA. In addition, the definition of what constitutes a major auction house and hence what constitutes eligibility to be in a dorancoin-rotation would seem to be a huge can of worms.
Mark
For the 2008 World's Fair of Money, B+M offered a flat $460k as its first option; its second option was $400k + 1% of hammer between $15 and $20 mil, +2% of hammer over $20 mil.
Heritage offered $501k as its first option, and its second was $626k if the ANA lifted its restriction on the # of lots, the dates of sales, and the time of sessions.
She also states the ANA has for years limited the # of lots to 3500 with 4k lots as an extra cost option and has limited the sale to the days of the week of the convention. She further stated that the ANA board didn't want to be maneuvered into something by the auction houses without further study.
<< <i>I think Coin World printed more of the details about the bids. It seemed to me that the ANA was simply taing the less risky bid, which sure doesn't smack of anything illegal or even immoral. I generally agree with dorancoins and others about the current board of the ANA. But I think that dorancoins is over selling his hostility to the board with his suggestion that perhaps favoritism was shown. Condor was right that such favoritism was an issue in the past but seems to be no longer the case.
I also strongly disagree with dorancoins' suggestion in another thread to rotate the auction among major auction houses. The ANA can use the money and such a rotation would lead to even more financial problems for the ANA. In addition, the definition of what constitutes a major auction house and hence what constitutes eligibility to be in a dorancoin-rotation would seem to be a huge can of worms.
Mark >>
Let me make one thing clear - I do not have a problem with the ANA as an organization (or I'd not become a life member over 6 years ago). My concern is the behavior of the board and especially its Executive Director. And I am not the only one who is concerend either. Like everyone else, I am sick and tired of politics as usual and I plan to do something about it - its either put up or shut up!
What will be more interesting to me is what the ANA will do with the endorsing of the grading services when NGC's term runs out, I believe next year.
<< <i>dorancoins: At least superficially, it appears that the ANA did what I would have done. More guaranteed funds. Believe me, I am no big fan of Heritage either.
What will be more interesting to me is what the ANA will do with the endorsing of the grading services when NGC's term runs out, I believe next year. >>
Thanks for reminding me about the TPG endorsements, oreville. Will the outcome of this happen "behind closed doors"?
<< <i>What will be more interesting to me is what the ANA will do with the endorsing of the grading services when NGC's term runs out, I believe next year. >>
From the 9/04/06 CW, the ANA will be sending a letter to all grading firms for an endorsment. In exchange for a fee, the grading or conservation services will be allowed to use the ANA logo and name in advertising and marketing, will be listed as approved on the ANA website, and the firm's brochure sent to all new ANA members. Seven criteria for selection by the ANA are as follows:
1. All prinicipals with 5% or more ownership, as well as key execs, must be ANA members.
2.Number of years as an active grading or cons. service.
3.Market share (avg. quantity of coins/currency certified monthly for past 3 yrs.)
4.Written grading, authentication and encapsulation standards, procedures and oversights.
5. Written grading guarantees and appeal procedures
6. Company's written criteria for education, selection and review of graders
7. Disclosure of all 5% owners or higher, and key execs.
ANA will select either two or three companies and license each for 3 yrs. If 2 companies are selected, each company will pay $210k/yr. and 210 man hours of graders at ANA seminars and forums. If 3 are selected, fee is $140k/yr. plus 140 Mn/hrs. there are also lower fees for paper graders and conservors. Think ACG will apply?
Edited for removal of signs of illiteracy.
any progress on finding out the whereabouts of all the money that was to be used in the ACG suit?
<< <i>Dorancoins....
any progress on finding out the whereabouts of all the money that was to be used in the ACG suit? >>
Well, I got a hunch whose pockets the money went to.
if they stall on you, contact coinworld or numismatic news, etc.
I did NOT say I liked politics as usual. I DID say that I do not like your rotation suggestion. I think the fact that I disagree with your idea is not a sign that I like politics as usual. I will also say that I do not like your habit of saying "You still have to wonder ..." and/or "Well, I got a hunch ..." and then launching into a negative comment about the ANA. Semi-smears such as these ARE politics as usual and I do not like it.
One last point: I REALLY do like your anger about the way the ANA is currently being run. I almost totally concur. Despite apparently massive growth in the number of coin collectors since 1999, the ANA's total membership has grown by about 10%. And this growth has, in part, been fostered by dealers and others giving "free" memberships to clients. Such tepid growth, combined with recurring budget deficits, is a sign that the ANA leadership isn't working. So, I really do wish you'd tone down your "wondering" and your "hunches" and stick to facts. I think (actually, I hope) that if you do, you've got a strong shot at winning a seat. And, frankly, if you tone down your non-factual comments, you have a VERY strong probability of winning my vote.
Mark
<< <i>dorancoins:
I did NOT say I liked politics as usual. I DID say that I do not like your rotation suggestion. I think the fact that I disagree with your idea is not a sign that I like politics as usual. I will also say that I do not like your habit of saying "You still have to wonder ..." and/or "Well, I got a hunch ..." and then launching into a negative comment about the ANA. Semi-smears such as these ARE politics as usual and I do not like it.
One last point: I REALLY do like your anger about the way the ANA is currently being run. I almost totally concur. Despite apparently massive growth in the number of coin collectors since 1999, the ANA's total membership has grown by about 10%. And this growth has, in part, been fostered by dealers and others giving "free" memberships to clients. Such tepid growth, combined with recurring budget deficits, is a sign that the ANA leadership isn't working. So, I really do wish you'd tone down your "wondering" and your "hunches" and stick to facts. I think (actually, I hope) that if you do, you've got a strong shot at winning a seat. And, frankly, if you tone down your non-factual comments, you have a VERY strong probability of winning my vote.
Mark >>
OK, I see your point. The free memberships are nothing more than a small band-aid on a big open wound - that being a declining membership. Now I do hand out applications and tell people about the benefits about membership in the ANA - but after I shut my mouth, the person can decide either to join, sleep on it, or hold off or even not bother joining - its that person's choice.
Regarding the recurring deficits - what is happening with this problem is that the association has, in my opinion, an irresponsible fiscal plan that sooner or later is going to cause the cost of dues to increase and maybe something beyond that.
My feeling is that those elected to the ANA board and its Executive Director are ANSWERABLE TO ITS MEMBERS, NOT THE REVERSE! If they can't do this, then they need to go.
And by the way, I do get mad-as-heck, but I can't help it - I'm Irish
What changes would you make to the "fiscal plan"? Please be as specific as possible, especially with respect to budget cuts.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.