Okay, what did Seated Dime collectors see in this group?

seanq

A more or less non-descript group of Seated dimes just hammered for $717 on eBay, and I can't figure out why. There looks like a nice 1837 in there, but I have to wonder given the condition of the other 15 coins if it is even genuine. Did I overlook another cherry in the lot, or is the 1837?


Sean Reynolds

STONE

I don't know either.
I saw it when it was first posted, but I was only looking for Cud's
So, since I didn't see any I forgot about the lot

lathmach

It was the 1837 that brought the money.

Ray

Barry

<< <i>It was the 1837 that brought the money. >>


Even so, doesn't make sense.

Look at the top two bidders' histories. They bid 30-40% on this seller's auctions. Are they shills?

ziggy29

I'm sure someone was basically bidding on the 1837 and the others are relative throw-ins. In fact, they basically paid full AU money for it.

guitarwes

That '83 and '87 don't look too shabby. ~ $25-$35 coins. But the hoss was the '37, as has been pointed out already.

Maybe they're hoping for a DDO on that 76-CC.

seanq

<< <i>That '83 and '87 don't look too shabby. ~ $25-$35 coins. But the hoss was the '37, as has been pointed out already.

Maybe they're hoping for a DDO on that 76-CC. >>




How do you think that auction wound up on my radar in the first place?

(It's not, BTW, but you can find them with surprising ease).


Sean Reynolds

tbarreca

This particular seller uses about a half dozen names to sell coins on EBay, and Seated dimes make up a significant percentage of them. The strategy employed in this case is pretty typical of the seller's approach: Construct a set with one really nice dime, and use that to sell off items that are worth melt. Generally, the sales of these sets exhibit exactly the behavior noted here, i.e., the price of the set is about equal to the price of the best coin in it. In this case, the set went for the full CoinValues (Trends) price of an AU 1837 Large date. Seated dime prices remain among the most robust of any series, typically going for more than Trends even in this economy. So in fact, this set of stuff was probably a pretty good deal to the buyer.

TConn

Amazing that anyone would need to bid that much on that particular 1837.

seanq

Apparently the sale above didn't stick, as the exact same group is up for bid again from the same seller: Auction link

I didn't have a chance to see if feedback was left on the original sale, though I guess you have to wonder if the high bidder on that group was real. I winder if he'll get close to the same hammer price this time around.


Sean Reynolds

kryptonitecomics

<< <i>Apparently the sale above didn't stick, as the exact same group is up for bid again from the same seller: Auction link

I didn't have a chance to see if feedback was left on the original sale, though I guess you have to wonder if the high bidder on that group was real. I winder if he'll get close to the same hammer price this time around.


Sean Reynolds >>




It would seem on the surface that a shill won the original auction but you never know

Barry

<< <i>I didn't have a chance to see if feedback was left on the original sale, though I guess you have to wonder if the high bidder on that group was real. >>


See my post ealier in the thread. I thought the top 2 bidders were shills.

seanq

<< <i>

<< <i>Apparently the sale above didn't stick, as the exact same group is up for bid again from the same seller: Auction link

I didn't have a chance to see if feedback was left on the original sale, though I guess you have to wonder if the high bidder on that group was real. I winder if he'll get close to the same hammer price this time around.


Sean Reynolds >>




It would seem on the surface that a shill won the original auction but you never know >>




Well we know a little something - here is the winning bidder's feedback page. Looking at the feedback as a buyer, they are all from different sub-accounts of the same seller (the seller admits using several different accounts in his listings). The buyer sells quite a bit also, mainly singles which he could be culling from these larger lots. I don't want to speculate any further because the evidence is entirely circumstantial. FYI, feedback was not left for the group which is now relisted, though he did receive positive feedback for other lots from the same seller which closed at the same time.


Sean Reynolds

joebb21

low ball set?

seateddime

I would guess that looking at the picture the 37 might have looked like it could be an AU58 coin or even better if there was no rub but also looked better next to the pile of junk it was in. In hand the coin did not look nearly as good. The other option is it was a shill bidder but I would think that if the seller got over $700 for that lot they would run for the hills and prey the sale stuck.

Res

Looks like the winner and the seller are a couple hours away from each other in Illinois. Don't know if that means anything or not.