Your theory is out to lunch for several reasons. First and foremost, a cut bid doesn't suggest one is dropping out - it merely suggests one is being smart and trying to save $300k by cutting above a big round number where your competition might logically have a limit.
First and foremost, the theory is out to lunch because it requires knowledge of what went through someone else's mind.
Andy Lustig
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
<< <i>Your theory is out to lunch for several reasons. First and foremost, a cut bid doesn't suggest one is dropping out - it merely suggests one is being smart and trying to save $300k by cutting above a big round number where your competition might logically have a limit.
First and foremost, the theory is out to lunch because it requires knowledge of what went through someone else's mind. >>
Tis true. We were told after the sale that one of the competitors had a top bid of $7M hammer. While this may or may not be accurate, it certainly is far more information than the previous poster has about what was going on based upon a video.
<< <i> Your unwarranted condescension is both predictable and laughable.
Anybody who saw the video of the artificial jump bid will never forget the look of disbelief on Greg Rohan's face. If you reauctioned the 1794 tomorrow, you'd almost certainly take a loss of multiple millions.
>>
Actually, this past weekend, I had a conversation with one of the underbidders on the 1794 dollar. That bidder was also waiting for the right moment to jump the bid to scare off his competition, but he was not expecting TDN's preemptive strike, and the "shock and awe" and odd increment caught him off guard and uncertain how to respond. Now post-auction, he regrets the lost opportunity. So, if and when TDN decides to sell (at auction or otherwise), I fully expect he will sell at a profit. >>
As the consignor, that's a gracious thing to say; however, I just rewatched the video of the sale. It appears that Laura was on the coin at $5.5M and the bidding was stalled. The previous bid of $5.25M was a split bid, suggesting that the underbidder had made his final bid. It wouldn't have been shocking had the coin been knocked down to Laura for $5.5M given the lull in the bidding and previous split bid. Then, she seemingly bid against herself by raising the bid to a contrived $8.525M. I don't subscribe to the "shock and awe" story line. The jump bid was a publicity stunt to create a $10M coin, not a brilliant strategy to disorient other bidders. 1794 $ auction video >>
Your theory is out to lunch for several reasons. First and foremost, a cut bid doesn't suggest one is dropping out - it merely suggests one is being smart and trying to save $300k by cutting above a big round number where your competition might logically have a limit. >>
A split or cut bid is often made when someone has reached their bidding limit, typically when a competitor is on the item at that predetermined limit. The bidder may stretch half an increment beyond his bidding limit in a last desperate attempt to acquire the item. Although the rules have changed recently, traditionally once a split bid was made that bidder was prohibited by the auctioneer from further bidding on the item.
Regardless of the above, the video appears to show Laura bidding against herself, hardly the act of someone trying to obtain an item for the lowest possible price. Furthermore, you have posted on this board that your oddball bid was calculated to artificially create a $10M coin. I seem to recall that you claimed to be the person on the phone with Laura and you even said something like, "don't forget the extra $25,000."
Yawn. Your entire assertion is based upon the fact that 'traditionally' a cut bid ended one's bidding? Do you know how silly that sounds?
For anyone interested, this has all been played out before. Go read the old threads as I'm done with this nattering nabob. Bayard apparently still has silver envy...
<< <i>Your theory is out to lunch for several reasons. First and foremost, a cut bid doesn't suggest one is dropping out - it merely suggests one is being smart and trying to save $300k by cutting above a big round number where your competition might logically have a limit.
First and foremost, the theory is out to lunch because it requires knowledge of what went through someone else's mind. >>
Tis true. We were told after the sale that one of the competitors had a top bid of $7M hammer. While this may or may not be accurate, it certainly is far more information than the previous poster has about what was going on based upon a video. >>
Mind reading is a ridiculous standard for ascribing motives to human behavior. The likely motive behind human behavior may often be inferred, deduced, or proven.
I have bid in well over 100 live auctions. The bidding activity in that video is perhaps the most bizarre example of bidding that I have ever seen.
If someone else was willing to pay $7M hammer, then your transparent publicity stunt possibly only cost you $1.5M instead of $3M, congratulations.
<< <i>Your theory is out to lunch for several reasons. First and foremost, a cut bid doesn't suggest one is dropping out - it merely suggests one is being smart and trying to save $300k by cutting above a big round number where your competition might logically have a limit.
First and foremost, the theory is out to lunch because it requires knowledge of what went through someone else's mind. >>
Tis true. We were told after the sale that one of the competitors had a top bid of $7M hammer. While this may or may not be accurate, it certainly is far more information than the previous poster has about what was going on based upon a video. >>
Mind reading is a ridiculous standard for ascribing motives to human behavior. The likely motive behind human behavior may often be inferred, deduced, or proven.
I have bid in well over 100 live auctions. The bidding activity in that video is perhaps the most bizarre example of bidding that I have even seen.
If someone else was willing to pay $7M hammer, then your transparent publicity stunt possibly only cost you $1.5M instead of $3M, congratulations. >>
You are wrong again (of course). Since we would have had to bid $7.5M hammer to win the coin, our decision to nuke the bid only cost us an extra $1M. Well worth it in the end, thank you very much.
<< <i>Yawn. Your entire assertion is based upon the fact that 'traditionally' a cut bid ended one's bidding? Do you know how silly that sounds?
For anyone interested, this has all been played out before. Go read the old threads as I'm done with this nattering nabob. Bayard apparently still has silver envy... >>
There's nothing silly about it. Until a few years ago, if you made a split bid, you were not allowed to bid on that lot again, period. Split bids typically signify that the bidder has made his final bid.
Frankly, the 1794 dollar doesn't do much for me. The adjustment marks are a huge turn off and the example that Martin owned previously seemed to be more attractive overall from my perspective. Regardless, I don't envy what others own and am quite content with my own collection.
The fact that you can afford to buy $10M coins doesn't mean that you're smart or that you can fool people.
I post in threads such as this as a counterbalance to your propaganda and the board sycophants who lap it up.
<< <i>Yawn. Your entire assertion is based upon the fact that 'traditionally' a cut bid ended one's bidding? Do you know how silly that sounds?
For anyone interested, this has all been played out before. Go read the old threads as I'm done with this nattering nabob. Bayard apparently still has silver envy... >>
There's nothing silly about it. Until a few years ago, if you made a split bid, you were not allowed to bid on that lot again, period. Split bids typically signify that the bidder has made his final bid.
Frankly, the 1794 dollar doesn't do much for me. The adjustment marks are a huge turn off and the example that Martin owned previously seemed to be more attractive overall from my perspective. Regardless, I don't envy what others own and am quite content with my own collection.
The fact that you can afford to buy $10M coins doesn't mean that you're smart or that you can fool people.
I post in threads such as this as a counterbalance to your propaganda and the board sycophants who lap it up. >>
Once again you assert an old rule to prove your thinking. WRONG.
Just the fact the 1794 doesn't do much for you says it all.
<< <i>Your theory is out to lunch for several reasons. First and foremost, a cut bid doesn't suggest one is dropping out - it merely suggests one is being smart and trying to save $300k by cutting above a big round number where your competition might logically have a limit.
First and foremost, the theory is out to lunch because it requires knowledge of what went through someone else's mind. >>
Tis true. We were told after the sale that one of the competitors had a top bid of $7M hammer. While this may or may not be accurate, it certainly is far more information than the previous poster has about what was going on based upon a video. >>
Mind reading is a ridiculous standard for ascribing motives to human behavior. The likely motive behind human behavior may often be inferred, deduced, or proven.
I have bid in well over 100 live auctions. The bidding activity in that video is perhaps the most bizarre example of bidding that I have even seen.
If someone else was willing to pay $7M hammer, then your transparent publicity stunt possibly only cost you $1.5M instead of $3M, congratulations. >>
You are wrong again (of course). Since we would have had to bid $7.5M hammer to win the coin, our decision to nuke the bid only cost us an extra $1M. Well worth it in the end, thank you very much. >>
You could have split the bid at $7.25M, which was $1.275M below your "winning" bid. Add the buyer's premium of 17.5% and we're talking about $1,498,125. I'd say that's closer to $1.5 than $1M. Thank you for playing, please come again.
<< <i>Yawn. Your entire assertion is based upon the fact that 'traditionally' a cut bid ended one's bidding? Do you know how silly that sounds?
For anyone interested, this has all been played out before. Go read the old threads as I'm done with this nattering nabob. Bayard apparently still has silver envy... >>
There's nothing silly about it. Until a few years ago, if you made a split bid, you were not allowed to bid on that lot again, period. Split bids typically signify that the bidder has made his final bid.
Frankly, the 1794 dollar doesn't do much for me. The adjustment marks are a huge turn off and the example that Martin owned previously seemed to be more attractive overall from my perspective. Regardless, I don't envy what others own and am quite content with my own collection.
The fact that you can afford to buy $10M coins doesn't mean that you're smart or that you can fool people.
I post in threads such as this as a counterbalance to your propaganda and the board sycophants who lap it up. >>
Once again you assert an old rule to prove your thinking. WRONG.
Just the fact the 1794 doesn't do much for you says it all. >>
Sir, there is a difference between argument and contradiction. Stating that someone is "WRONG" without any support for that assertion is merely contradiction and is the province of children. Argument requires support for one's assertions and is how adults resolve their differences, persuade others, or politely agree to disagree.
One doesn't split bids in the middle like that - one splits a bid near a huge round number that may be a competitor's maximum, or to get on increment for the same, or at one's limit. Since we were willing to go to $12,500,000 hammer and $7M had no major significance your attempted point just illustrates your inexperience with high level bidding.
<< <i>Yawn. Your entire assertion is based upon the fact that 'traditionally' a cut bid ended one's bidding? Do you know how silly that sounds?
For anyone interested, this has all been played out before. Go read the old threads as I'm done with this nattering nabob. Bayard apparently still has silver envy... >>
There's nothing silly about it. Until a few years ago, if you made a split bid, you were not allowed to bid on that lot again, period. Split bids typically signify that the bidder has made his final bid.
Frankly, the 1794 dollar doesn't do much for me. The adjustment marks are a huge turn off and the example that Martin owned previously seemed to be more attractive overall from my perspective. Regardless, I don't envy what others own and am quite content with my own collection.
The fact that you can afford to buy $10M coins doesn't mean that you're smart or that you can fool people.
I post in threads such as this as a counterbalance to your propaganda and the board sycophants who lap it up. >>
Once again you assert an old rule to prove your thinking. WRONG.
Just the fact the 1794 doesn't do much for you says it all. >>
Sir, there is a difference between argument and contradiction. Stating that someone is "WRONG" without any support for that assertion is merely contradiction and is the province of children. Argument requires support for one's assertions and is how adults resolve their differences, persuade others, or politely agree to disagree. >>
Ah yes - support for one's position. Like saying that it's obvious a bidder was dropping out because it's traditional to split one's bid and then stop - despite the rule change allowing one to do it whenever. /eyeroll
<< <i>One doesn't split bids in the middle like that - one splits a bid near a huge round number that may be a competitor's maximum, or to get on increment for the same, or at one's limit. Since we were willing to go to $12,500,000 hammer and $7M had no major significance your attempted point just illustrates your inexperience with high level bidding. >>
Earlier you said that there was no stigma or significance to making a split bid. Now you admit otherwise. I agree with the last two reasons you gave for bid splitting by the way.
You're right that I have no experience with "high level bidding" on coins. For $10M, I'd rather buy an office building, apartment building, or something else that throws off income, instead of an overpriced shiny trinket.
Good luck with your purchase. I don't think it was an act of genius by any means; however, I wish you no harm. You've already lost the opportunity cost on $10M for six months, that's harm enough.
It's not out of the realm of possibility for classic rare coins to get over invested.
I kind of like the comparison's that Legend makes regarding classic rare coins and collectible art (Hype) but isn't that comparing apples to oranges? Classic art are guaranteed unique pieces whereas there were 24 of the 1894-S Dimes minted. Only 10 are known about which leaves 14 unaccounted for.
While I'd certainly appreciate the dime, my butt would pucker up real tight if another one showed up that happened to look better and be of a higher grade than previously known.
I decided to change calling the bathroom the John and renamed it the Jim. I feel so much better saying I went to the Jim this morning.
<< <i>... the video appears to show Laura bidding against herself .. >>
Don't forget, she had multiple clients who wanted it. So it could be viewed as those clients bidding against each other, not Laura bidding against herself. There are essentially unobserved bidders. If one client's max is 7 and another's max is 8, she can't stop at 5.5 and pick one of them at random to receive it. Can't break trust with the other client like that.
<< <i>... the video appears to show Laura bidding against herself .. >>
Don't forget, she had multiple clients who wanted it. So it could be viewed as those clients bidding against each other, not Laura bidding against herself. There are essentially unobserved bidders. If one client's max is 7 and another's max is 8, she can't stop at 5.5 and pick one of them at random to receive it. Can't break trust with the other client like that. >>
I have never heard anyone from Legend state that Laura was bidding on behalf of even one client, much less multiple clients. Why would Legend agree to bid as an agent for someone else when they wanted the coin for themselves? TDN was so interested in acquiring the coin that he ran a board contest in advance of the auction to guess the winning bid.
<< <i>I have never heard anyone from Legend state that Laura was bidding on behalf of even one client, much less multiple clients. >>
Martin Logies (aka Cardinal) states it, right in the video you linked, at 3:02: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SyIdC3j5Krg&t=3m2s "The representative of the buyer, Laura Sperber, she had commented to me that she had multiple people, multiple clients of that echelon, and sure enough, amongst them, they ended up with the high bid ..."
After viewing the video, I'm at a lose. I think they wanted at 10 Mil, they wanted that record. to go from 5 to 8.2+ which just brings it over 10 mil, when you have high bid, just doesn't make sense at all. When bidding on items at auction for your clients, you should handle only one for any single particular item. IMHO Maybe I'm wrong but they got the Benchmark 10 Million Dollar Coin
<< <i> Your unwarranted condescension is both predictable and laughable.
Anybody who saw the video of the artificial jump bid will never forget the look of disbelief on Greg Rohan's face. If you reauctioned the 1794 tomorrow, you'd almost certainly take a loss of multiple millions.
>>
Actually, this past weekend, I had a conversation with one of the underbidders on the 1794 dollar. That bidder was also waiting for the right moment to jump the bid to scare off his competition, but he was not expecting TDN's preemptive strike, and the "shock and awe" and odd increment caught him off guard and uncertain how to respond. Now post-auction, he regrets the lost opportunity. So, if and when TDN decides to sell (at auction or otherwise), I fully expect he will sell at a profit. >>
As the consignor, that's a gracious thing to say; however, I just rewatched the video of the sale. It appears that Laura was on the coin at $5.5M and the bidding was stalled. The previous bid of $5.25M was a split bid, suggesting that the underbidder had made his final bid. It wouldn't have been shocking had the coin been knocked down to Laura for $5.5M given the lull in the bidding and previous split bid. Then, she seemingly bid against herself by raising the bid to a contrived $8.525M. I don't subscribe to the "shock and awe" story line. The jump bid was a publicity stunt to create a $10M coin, not a brilliant strategy to disorient other bidders. 1794 $ auction video >>
No doubt.
Markets are made and this one will serve as the basis for a "made market" whereas that market might not have been there had that last, and seemingly unwarranted, bid not been made. The icing on the cake was when Laura said that she was pleased with the price??
I decided to change calling the bathroom the John and renamed it the Jim. I feel so much better saying I went to the Jim this morning.
<< <i> Your unwarranted condescension is both predictable and laughable.
Anybody who saw the video of the artificial jump bid will never forget the look of disbelief on Greg Rohan's face. If you reauctioned the 1794 tomorrow, you'd almost certainly take a loss of multiple millions.
>>
Actually, this past weekend, I had a conversation with one of the underbidders on the 1794 dollar. That bidder was also waiting for the right moment to jump the bid to scare off his competition, but he was not expecting TDN's preemptive strike, and the "shock and awe" and odd increment caught him off guard and uncertain how to respond. Now post-auction, he regrets the lost opportunity. So, if and when TDN decides to sell (at auction or otherwise), I fully expect he will sell at a profit. >>
As the consignor, that's a gracious thing to say; however, I just rewatched the video of the sale. It appears that Laura was on the coin at $5.5M and the bidding was stalled. The previous bid of $5.25M was a split bid, suggesting that the underbidder had made his final bid. It wouldn't have been shocking had the coin been knocked down to Laura for $5.5M given the lull in the bidding and previous split bid. Then, she seemingly bid against herself by raising the bid to a contrived $8.525M. I don't subscribe to the "shock and awe" story line. The jump bid was a publicity stunt to create a $10M coin, not a brilliant strategy to disorient other bidders. 1794 $ auction video >>
Your theory is out to lunch for several reasons. First and foremost, a cut bid doesn't suggest one is dropping out - it merely suggests one is being smart and trying to save $300k by cutting above a big round number where your competition might logically have a limit. >>
Assuming that you were the one on the phone with Laura, why then, did you two decide to add $3 million to an, as of yet, uncontested bid?
I decided to change calling the bathroom the John and renamed it the Jim. I feel so much better saying I went to the Jim this morning.
<< <i>As far as I'm concerned, the video showing the auction sale is negative publicity. >>
Anyone ready to spend $10M is going do a lot more homework than just watch a video.
I do agree that most people watching that video would come to the conclusion that Laura jumped her own bid. But, I will defer to the people who were actually in the room, especially those who knew all the players.
<< <i>I have never heard anyone from Legend state that Laura was bidding on behalf of even one client, much less multiple clients. >>
Martin Logies (aka Cardinal) states it, right in the video you linked, at 3:02: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SyIdC3j5Krg&t=3m2s "The representative of the buyer, Laura Sperber, she had commented to me that she had multiple people, multiple clients of that echelon, and sure enough, amongst them, they ended up with the high bid ..." >>
I have no doubt that Legend has clients able to drop $10M. However, that video doesn't say Legend was acting as agent for multiple clients in the bidding.
<< <i>I have never heard anyone from Legend state that Laura was bidding on behalf of even one client, much less multiple clients. >>
Martin Logies (aka Cardinal) states it, right in the video you linked, at 3:02: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SyIdC3j5Krg&t=3m2s "The representative of the buyer, Laura Sperber, she had commented to me that she had multiple people, multiple clients of that echelon, and sure enough, amongst them, they ended up with the high bid ..." >>
Right.
Except that Legend bought the coin and clearly states that on their web site.
<< <i>LEGEND NUMISMATICS IS THE SOLE OWNER AND PROUD BUYER OF THE CARDINAL $1 1794 PCGS SP66 THAT SOLD FOR A WORLD RECORD $10,000,000.00 IN A NYC AUCTION JANUARY 28TH 2013. >>
Legend (Laura) may have multiple clients of that "echelon" but it appears that none of them were actually bidding.
I decided to change calling the bathroom the John and renamed it the Jim. I feel so much better saying I went to the Jim this morning.
The strategy and actions behind the bid has all been hashed over before. Rather than write it all again, I suggest reading the old threads. The agreed strategy was to jump the bid once it was ascertained that certain bidders were active - and they were.
<< <i>The strategy and actions behind the bid has all been hashed over before. Rather than write it all again, I suggest reading the old threads. The agreed strategy was to jump the bid once it was ascertained that certain bidders were active - and they were. >>
If you want to pay $10M for a $6.5M coin, that's your business, but, why bid against yourself?
At the request of TDN, I am editing this post for clarification. When I said this was a $6.5M coin, I was strictly basing that number upon the $5.5M hammer price when the bidding stalled, immediately before Laura's jump bid. $5.5M plus the buyer's premium is approximately $6.5M, just as the jump bid plus buyer's premium is approximately $10M.
My statement that the 1794 is a $6.5M coin is based solely on the $5.5M bid, plus buyer's premium, and was not an appraisal or the result of a market study on the coin. TDN has pointed out that the coin had previously sold for more than $6.5M, and he was told another attendee at the auction was willing to pay $7M hammer. Although I am not confident the bidding would have advanced beyond $5.5M without the jump bid, in fairness to TDN I am clarifying my statement.
I collect dollars. My eyesight is not improving. The Flowing Hair design is one of my all-time favorites. Five wealthy dime collectors would be tougher to find than one very wealthy dollar collector.
<< <i>The strategy and actions behind the bid has all been hashed over before. Rather than write it all again, I suggest reading the old threads. The agreed strategy was to jump the bid once it was ascertained that certain bidders were active - and they were. >>
If you want to pay $10M for a $6.5M coin, that's your business, but, why bid against yourself? >>
You need to stop committing slander just because you don't like the coin and don't like me.
Maybe I'm stepping a little outside here, but me, I'm thinking that a guy like you really doesn't need to justify what he does here to us. I mean, sure, it's your business, and you seem to be doing a pretty good job turning a fair profit, but isn't it a bit de classe to defend it ad nauseum here in a public forum? And seriously, why add fuel to the fire?
<< <i>The strategy and actions behind the bid has all been hashed over before. Rather than write it all again, I suggest reading the old threads. The agreed strategy was to jump the bid once it was ascertained that certain bidders were active - and they were. >>
If you want to pay $10M for a $6.5M coin, that's your business, but, why bid against yourself? >>
You need to stop committing slander just because you don't like the coin and don't like me. >>
Please point out anything I have posted which you think is defamatory. If it is not a matter of opinion, a verified fact, or an honest accounting of the video, I would be happy to retract said statement and apologize for all on this board to see. As an attorney, who has successfully sued for defamation in the past, I believe that I have said absolutely nothing which is defamatory. If you disagree, please point it out with specificity and we can resolve it right now.
As for disliking you, we have never met and I have no personal animus toward you. I just don't happen to agree with your pontifications, nothing personal.
As for disliking the coin, I'd rather have five 1894-S dimes; but, I don't hate your coin.
The cut bid for 5.25m is right at 1:20 in the video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SyIdC3j5Krg&t=1m20s Shortly the auctioneer gets to "we have 5.5 million, looking for 6". And then Laura's winning bid at 8+. The 5.5 never got to "going once...", so there could definitely have been other bidders ready to keep incrementing it.
So I agree with Bruce - the auction footage is consistent with the jump bid strategy to discourage other bidders, which has been discussed on previous threads.
<< <i>The cut bid for 5.25m is right at 1:20 in the video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SyIdC3j5Krg&t=1m20s Shortly the auctioneer gets to "we have 5.5 million, looking for 6". And then Laura's winning bid at 8+. The 5.5 never got to "going once...", so there could definitely have been other bidders ready to keep incrementing it.
So I agree with Bruce - the auction footage is consistent with the jump bid strategy to discourage other bidders, which has been discussed on previous threads. >>
Someone else could have raised the bid after $5.5M. Conversely, the bidding might have ended at $5.5M. What I don't understand is why make the jump bid when you are currently the winning bidder. Laura appears to be the $5.5M bidder. Why not wait until somebody overbids you at $5.75M or $6M? What's the downside to waiting?
... What I don't understand is why make the jump bid when you are currently the winning bidder. Laura appears to be the $5.5M bidder. Why not wait until somebody overbids you at $5.75M or $6M? What's the downside to waiting?
What Bayard1908 stated above is the key point in all of this.
We were watching the auction live and when the hammer fell everyone in the office just stared at each other for a few seconds. Then someone finally asked, "what in the heck was that all about?" The consensus opinion was that it was a publicity stunt. What else could it be?
Think of all of the free, international media attention: network television news, radio, newspapers, trade journals, internet articles, magazine articles, etc.
That being said, I picked the 1794 dollar over the five 94-S dimes. I love the Cardinal 1794 dollar, although I never agreed with the specimen designation. Regardless, it is a breathtaking piece and an important part of American numismatic history.
<< <i>Yawn. Your entire assertion is based upon the fact that 'traditionally' a cut bid ended one's bidding? Do you know how silly that sounds?
For anyone interested, this has all been played out before. Go read the old threads as I'm done with this nattering nabob. Bayard apparently still has silver envy... >>
There's nothing silly about it. Until a few years ago, if you made a split bid, you were not allowed to bid on that lot again, period. Split bids typically signify that the bidder has made his final bid.
Frankly, the 1794 dollar doesn't do much for me. The adjustment marks are a huge turn off and the example that Martin owned previously seemed to be more attractive overall from my perspective. Regardless, I don't envy what others own and am quite content with my own collection.
The fact that you can afford to buy $10M coins doesn't mean that you're smart or that you can fool people.
I post in threads such as this as a counterbalance to your propaganda and the board sycophants who lap it up. >>
Sycophants? Hey I had to look the word up! Bayard 1908, why debate Bruce so much on his thought process that went into his bidding on a coin you cannot afford and have no interest in anyway...?
I manage money. I earn money. I save money . I give away money. I collect money. I don’t love money . I do love the Lord God.
Assuming that you could get 2% per annum on $10M, that's $100K lost in the six months since buying the coin. As far as I'm concerned, the video showing the auction sale is negative publicity.
I think Bruce has proven that major rarities like this have generally appreciated an average of 8% per year over the past 50 years or so. No, they won't go up 8% every year in the PCGS price guide. But over a multi-year period when they eventually do show up for sale again, they often make leaps and bounds over the previous price. One thing is for certain though, coins like this (and big time art as well) is doing a lot better than 2% per year. No matter how you factor it, I'm confident TDN is up 2% or more on this coin since it was purchased. I have no doubts they've been approached already by those wishing to give them a nice profit. Those with serious money have been placing money in the ultimate collectibles for the past 3 years, despite what appears to be a sluggish or downtrending world economy. The reason for this is to gain traction from depreciating fiat money and rising sovereign and state debt.
My prediction: When Legend/TDN does eventually sell this coin, they will have made out better than 2% per annum. The video is a side bar. It only matters what was paid and how much it will cost the next person to own it. There's only one of these graded 66 Specimen. It doesn't hurt that 1794 was the first year of silver dollar production.
<< <i>My prediction: When Legend/TDN does eventually sell this coin, they will have made out better than 2% per annum. >>
One would certainly hope the "risk free" rate of return could be exceeded.
Roadrunner, you're one of the better posters on financial matters. You surely know that acquisition cost, or price paid, is perhaps the greatest factor in overall financial returns. I'm shocked you think that $10M for this coin will produce a respectable financial return.
If we have a financial reset in this country, any hard asset is better than cash; however, trees don't grow to the sky.
<< <i>The strategy and actions behind the bid has all been hashed over before. Rather than write it all again, I suggest reading the old threads. The agreed strategy was to jump the bid once it was ascertained that certain bidders were active - and they were. >>
If you want to pay $10M for a $6.5M coin, that's your business, but, why bid against yourself? >>
You need to stop committing slander just because you don't like the coin and don't like me. >>
How would that ever be considered slander?
I decided to change calling the bathroom the John and renamed it the Jim. I feel so much better saying I went to the Jim this morning.
<< <i>Your theory is out to lunch for several reasons. First and foremost, a cut bid doesn't suggest one is dropping out - it merely suggests one is being smart and trying to save $300k by cutting above a big round number where your competition might logically have a limit.
First and foremost, the theory is out to lunch because it requires knowledge of what went through someone else's mind. >>
Tis true. We were told after the sale that one of the competitors had a top bid of $7M hammer. While this may or may not be accurate, it certainly is far more information than the previous poster has about what was going on based upon a video. >>
Right. And an "unnamed" source has confirmed this? Uh huh!
I decided to change calling the bathroom the John and renamed it the Jim. I feel so much better saying I went to the Jim this morning.
I'm still trying to get over the fact that one of them was spent buying an ice cream cone. If my daddy worked at the mint and he came home one day and gave me some "special coins" you better be danged sure I wouldn't spend them, and if I had, you know he would've taken the rest back away from me...
Where would I have put $10 MILL last year if I had it? Good question. And not an easy one. If one is trying to grow a coin business to be the best in the world, then buying the finest 1794 dollar isn't the worst thing to do. Bruce has done well with his trade/seated dollar sets as well as individual purchases of US rarities. I don't expect him to fall on his sword on this one. I'd be sort of surprised if in 1-3 years this isn't sold for a 15% or better profit. In today's financial world (ie 2013-2015) it will not be easy to hang on to your money investing in traditional financial instruments. There's something to be said for owning the world's finest "X." You don't get that satisfaction by owning shares in Apple or Green Mountain Coffee Roasters.....and I do mean "roasted." Yeah, you can put $10 MILL in an "insured" govt/muny bonds or some stock/bond portfolio and end up on the wrong end of a bail-in or in the after shock of a TBTF bank going "poof." Something to be said about a portable, well known, world class, rarity. And the coin fits in his theme of building a type set of major rarities in finest or near finest known condition. I'm not saying that would work for me as $10 MILL is a log of eggs in one basket. What other major rarities are available in the market or can be pryed loose for $3 MILL and up? There aren't many. The Pogues and others like them aren't exactly selling in the near future. Sorry, the PF68 1804 dollar is not available. 1913 Lib nickel? Been there done that. 1894-s dime? Just did that too. 1838-0 half? Ditto. 1884/1885 trade dollars? Check. I'm sure TDN would have loved to get a crack at Judd-1776 too. So would the entire upper echelon of the coin market.
Let's face it, there are few top-flight, finest known, major rarities out there for the taking. And it seems fewer and fewer of them are making it to major auction when there are ready buyers in the wings at world record prices....and no commissions. If you know of any, give TDN a call. You'll probably get a generous finder's fee for your efforts. We're all aware of the potential for a financial "reset." But we've been waiting for one for years or even decades. Still not here. Maybe it comes in 2014-2015 as the 120 yr economic cycle bottoms out for the first time since 1894. Something tells me that even in such a reset, the finest known US coins will still hold their relative value. If big money can spend $100-$200 MILL on paintings, $10 MILL for one of the top dozen or so US coins in existance doesn't seem out of bounds. I do think that this single coin will probably do better than if you spread it around on say 1,000 - $10,000 US coins....or even 10,000 - $1,000 US coins.
<< <i>Assuming that you could get 2% per annum on $10M, that's $100K lost in the six months since buying the coin. As far as I'm concerned, the video showing the auction sale is negative publicity.
I think Bruce has proven that major rarities like this have generally appreciated an average of 8% per year over the past 50 years or so. No, they won't go up 8% every year in the PCGS price guide. But over a multi-year period when they eventually do show up for sale again, they often make leaps and bounds over the previous price. One thing is for certain though, coins like this (and big time art as well) is doing a lot better than 2% per year. No matter how you factor it, I'm confident TDN is up 2% or more on this coin since it was purchased. I have no doubts they've been approached already by those wishing to give them a nice profit. Those with serious money have been placing money in the ultimate collectibles for the past 3 years, despite what appears to be a sluggish or downtrending world economy. The reason for this is to gain traction from depreciating fiat money and rising sovereign and state debt.
My prediction: When Legend/TDN does eventually sell this coin, they will have made out better than 2% per annum. The video is a side bar. It only matters what was paid and how much it will cost the next person to own it. There's only one of these graded 66 Specimen. It doesn't hurt that 1794 was the first year of silver dollar production. >>
I kinda take exception to the term "major rarities" since "major rarities" usually have some type of "story" associated with them. Kinda like art in a sense but for this particular series of coin, there are many. many BS "stories" associated with it.
RWB posted ATS:
"Per modern research and not the invented stories:
There are many theories as to why 24 proof Dimes were minted in 1894 at San Francisco. [True, although few would meet the basic standards of "theory"]
Only 10 are confirmed to exist today and this coin is likely the third finest known. [Estimate & Opinion]
The most widely accepted theory is that the Mint Superintendent, John Daggett, had high ranking visitors he wanted to impress with special coins. [Bologna]
No one knows for sure why he picked the Dime, except that he needed to balance a $2.40 deficit in the Mint ledger, so striking 24 dimes achieved dual purposes. [Conflicts with 1895 newspaper account; no explanation for why this had to be balanced since the Coiner could carry forward bullion and/or coins.]
After minting and distribution to his friends and guests, he gave 3 or 4 coins to his daughter, Hallie Daggett. [More Bologna]
This story is one of the greatest [chunks of bologna] in numismatic lore, and continues when Daggett's daughter Hallie eventually sold a couple gem examples, including this very coin, to Earl Parker, a coin dealer in California, around 1950. [Bologna]
At the time, she told Parker that she originally spent one of her prized dimes to buy an ice cream cone. [Bologna a la mode]
That coin is known today in Good-4 as the "Ice Cream Specimen" but has not traded hands publicly since 1981. [Known by that name only to marketers]"
Not necessarily a "glowing" review.
As for rarity, rarity ONLY means something if there is a good story to go along with it AND if the associated coins in the series also have some type of public draw.
While I do not discount the coin itself, I do think that its way over hyped for what it is. 1 of 10 known with 14 unaccounted for.
I decided to change calling the bathroom the John and renamed it the Jim. I feel so much better saying I went to the Jim this morning.
I'd place my bet/money on no more Specimen 1794 dollars coming to light.
For that matter, there is no guarantee that more 1913 Lib nickels or 1804 dollars won't come out of the woodwork some day. At least the 1794 dollar has over 200 yrs of experience in trying to draw out new specimens. And I like the fact that it was a legitimately struck for circulation US coin. The 1804 $, 1913 nickels, and 1894-s dimes are fantasy coins....one of them with multiple mintings from 1834 to the late 1850's. And even though they've been tested time and time again as legal to own....you never know if that might change in the future. Another hoard of lower grade 1794's being discovered won't affect the value of the SP66. That's certainly not the case with most other major rarities where current pops are say 3-14 known. Considering TDN's trade and seated dollar sets, Gobrechts too.....the 1794 dollar was a logical extension as that dollar type set expanded. Interesting to debate this. The 1822 $5 could be a candidate but the finest known is not mint state. Doesn't fit well in a gem silver 18th/19th century type set. Other than the 1794 in SP66 I can't think of a worthy candidate....other than J-1776. In a sense, the 1794 may be the end of the road other than filling in some other major silver dollar, half dollar, and quarter type coins. I'd not be surprised if Legend and TDN are waiting in the wings should J-1776 be made available for private sale someday....Pogues too?
Just for giggles.....I'd like to know what TDN's next "have to get coin someday" will be. My lips are sealed.
<< <i>I'm still trying to get over the fact that one of them was spent buying an ice cream cone. If my daddy worked at the mint and he came home one day and gave me some "special coins" you better be danged sure I wouldn't spend them, and if I had, you know he would've taken the rest back away from me... >>
According to RWB, this is simply not true.
I decided to change calling the bathroom the John and renamed it the Jim. I feel so much better saying I went to the Jim this morning.
<< <i> I don't subscribe to the "shock and awe" story line. The jump bid was a publicity stunt to create a $10M coin, not a brilliant strategy to disorient other bidders. >>
Quoting from The Great Lebowsky: "Well, that's just your opinion, man." You are certainly entitled to your opinion, but there's no conclusive evidence either way, in my view.
I feel this airing of opinions as something more factual has derailed this thread and led things too negative. So maybe the discussion could be diverted to the "1/26/13 Legend Market Report" thread, if you think there is some substantial evidence or new theories to air? I made a currently valid link to the Legend Market Report there, so its original text could be discussed. http://forums.collectors.com/messageview.cfm?catid=26&threadid=879013&STARTPAGE=2 However, I believe the issue may be too complex for discussing in the style we have been using here, with short bits of text. So I invite you to write a complete explanation of why you 'don't subscribe to the "shock and awe"' explanation. Laura did also offer the "unlocking the value" explanation, which you like better. I believe it was a combination of the two. But that's just my opinion... :-)
I enjoyed reading that again. Last night at dinner the subject came up and we relayed to two clients how it was six months of hell planning for the coin. Reading Laura's words just reinforces that in my mind.
Comments
First and foremost, the theory is out to lunch because it requires knowledge of what went through someone else's mind.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
<< <i>Your theory is out to lunch for several reasons. First and foremost, a cut bid doesn't suggest one is dropping out - it merely suggests one is being smart and trying to save $300k by cutting above a big round number where your competition might logically have a limit.
First and foremost, the theory is out to lunch because it requires knowledge of what went through someone else's mind. >>
Tis true. We were told after the sale that one of the competitors had a top bid of $7M hammer. While this may or may not be accurate, it certainly is far more information than the previous poster has about what was going on based upon a video.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i> Your unwarranted condescension is both predictable and laughable.
Anybody who saw the video of the artificial jump bid will never forget the look of disbelief on Greg Rohan's face. If you reauctioned the 1794 tomorrow, you'd almost certainly take a loss of multiple millions.
>>
Actually, this past weekend, I had a conversation with one of the underbidders on the 1794 dollar. That bidder was also waiting for the right moment to jump the bid to scare off his competition, but he was not expecting TDN's preemptive strike, and the "shock and awe" and odd increment caught him off guard and uncertain how to respond. Now post-auction, he regrets the lost opportunity. So, if and when TDN decides to sell (at auction or otherwise), I fully expect he will sell at a profit. >>
As the consignor, that's a gracious thing to say; however, I just rewatched the video of the sale. It appears that Laura was on the coin at $5.5M and the bidding was stalled. The previous bid of $5.25M was a split bid, suggesting that the underbidder had made his final bid. It wouldn't have been shocking had the coin been knocked down to Laura for $5.5M given the lull in the bidding and previous split bid. Then, she seemingly bid against herself by raising the bid to a contrived $8.525M. I don't subscribe to the "shock and awe" story line. The jump bid was a publicity stunt to create a $10M coin, not a brilliant strategy to disorient other bidders.
1794 $ auction video >>
Your theory is out to lunch for several reasons. First and foremost, a cut bid doesn't suggest one is dropping out - it merely suggests one is being smart and trying to save $300k by cutting above a big round number where your competition might logically have a limit. >>
A split or cut bid is often made when someone has reached their bidding limit, typically when a competitor is on the item at that predetermined limit. The bidder may stretch half an increment beyond his bidding limit in a last desperate attempt to acquire the item. Although the rules have changed recently, traditionally once a split bid was made that bidder was prohibited by the auctioneer from further bidding on the item.
Regardless of the above, the video appears to show Laura bidding against herself, hardly the act of someone trying to obtain an item for the lowest possible price. Furthermore, you have posted on this board that your oddball bid was calculated to artificially create a $10M coin. I seem to recall that you claimed to be the person on the phone with Laura and you even said something like, "don't forget the extra $25,000."
For anyone interested, this has all been played out before. Go read the old threads as I'm done with this nattering nabob. Bayard apparently still has silver envy...
<< <i>
<< <i>Your theory is out to lunch for several reasons. First and foremost, a cut bid doesn't suggest one is dropping out - it merely suggests one is being smart and trying to save $300k by cutting above a big round number where your competition might logically have a limit.
First and foremost, the theory is out to lunch because it requires knowledge of what went through someone else's mind. >>
Tis true. We were told after the sale that one of the competitors had a top bid of $7M hammer. While this may or may not be accurate, it certainly is far more information than the previous poster has about what was going on based upon a video. >>
Mind reading is a ridiculous standard for ascribing motives to human behavior. The likely motive behind human behavior may often be inferred, deduced, or proven.
I have bid in well over 100 live auctions. The bidding activity in that video is perhaps the most bizarre example of bidding that I have ever seen.
If someone else was willing to pay $7M hammer, then your transparent publicity stunt possibly only cost you $1.5M instead of $3M, congratulations.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>Your theory is out to lunch for several reasons. First and foremost, a cut bid doesn't suggest one is dropping out - it merely suggests one is being smart and trying to save $300k by cutting above a big round number where your competition might logically have a limit.
First and foremost, the theory is out to lunch because it requires knowledge of what went through someone else's mind. >>
Tis true. We were told after the sale that one of the competitors had a top bid of $7M hammer. While this may or may not be accurate, it certainly is far more information than the previous poster has about what was going on based upon a video. >>
Mind reading is a ridiculous standard for ascribing motives to human behavior. The likely motive behind human behavior may often be inferred, deduced, or proven.
I have bid in well over 100 live auctions. The bidding activity in that video is perhaps the most bizarre example of bidding that I have even seen.
If someone else was willing to pay $7M hammer, then your transparent publicity stunt possibly only cost you $1.5M instead of $3M, congratulations. >>
You are wrong again (of course). Since we would have had to bid $7.5M hammer to win the coin, our decision to nuke the bid only cost us an extra $1M. Well worth it in the end, thank you very much.
<< <i>Yawn. Your entire assertion is based upon the fact that 'traditionally' a cut bid ended one's bidding? Do you know how silly that sounds?
For anyone interested, this has all been played out before. Go read the old threads as I'm done with this nattering nabob. Bayard apparently still has silver envy... >>
There's nothing silly about it. Until a few years ago, if you made a split bid, you were not allowed to bid on that lot again, period. Split bids typically signify that the bidder has made his final bid.
Frankly, the 1794 dollar doesn't do much for me. The adjustment marks are a huge turn off and the example that Martin owned previously seemed to be more attractive overall from my perspective. Regardless, I don't envy what others own and am quite content with my own collection.
The fact that you can afford to buy $10M coins doesn't mean that you're smart or that you can fool people.
I post in threads such as this as a counterbalance to your propaganda and the board sycophants who lap it up.
<< <i>
<< <i>Yawn. Your entire assertion is based upon the fact that 'traditionally' a cut bid ended one's bidding? Do you know how silly that sounds?
For anyone interested, this has all been played out before. Go read the old threads as I'm done with this nattering nabob. Bayard apparently still has silver envy... >>
There's nothing silly about it. Until a few years ago, if you made a split bid, you were not allowed to bid on that lot again, period. Split bids typically signify that the bidder has made his final bid.
Frankly, the 1794 dollar doesn't do much for me. The adjustment marks are a huge turn off and the example that Martin owned previously seemed to be more attractive overall from my perspective. Regardless, I don't envy what others own and am quite content with my own collection.
The fact that you can afford to buy $10M coins doesn't mean that you're smart or that you can fool people.
I post in threads such as this as a counterbalance to your propaganda and the board sycophants who lap it up. >>
Once again you assert an old rule to prove your thinking. WRONG.
Just the fact the 1794 doesn't do much for you says it all.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>Your theory is out to lunch for several reasons. First and foremost, a cut bid doesn't suggest one is dropping out - it merely suggests one is being smart and trying to save $300k by cutting above a big round number where your competition might logically have a limit.
First and foremost, the theory is out to lunch because it requires knowledge of what went through someone else's mind. >>
Tis true. We were told after the sale that one of the competitors had a top bid of $7M hammer. While this may or may not be accurate, it certainly is far more information than the previous poster has about what was going on based upon a video. >>
Mind reading is a ridiculous standard for ascribing motives to human behavior. The likely motive behind human behavior may often be inferred, deduced, or proven.
I have bid in well over 100 live auctions. The bidding activity in that video is perhaps the most bizarre example of bidding that I have even seen.
If someone else was willing to pay $7M hammer, then your transparent publicity stunt possibly only cost you $1.5M instead of $3M, congratulations. >>
You are wrong again (of course). Since we would have had to bid $7.5M hammer to win the coin, our decision to nuke the bid only cost us an extra $1M. Well worth it in the end, thank you very much. >>
You could have split the bid at $7.25M, which was $1.275M below your "winning" bid. Add the buyer's premium of 17.5% and we're talking about $1,498,125. I'd say that's closer to $1.5 than $1M. Thank you for playing, please come again.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>Yawn. Your entire assertion is based upon the fact that 'traditionally' a cut bid ended one's bidding? Do you know how silly that sounds?
For anyone interested, this has all been played out before. Go read the old threads as I'm done with this nattering nabob. Bayard apparently still has silver envy... >>
There's nothing silly about it. Until a few years ago, if you made a split bid, you were not allowed to bid on that lot again, period. Split bids typically signify that the bidder has made his final bid.
Frankly, the 1794 dollar doesn't do much for me. The adjustment marks are a huge turn off and the example that Martin owned previously seemed to be more attractive overall from my perspective. Regardless, I don't envy what others own and am quite content with my own collection.
The fact that you can afford to buy $10M coins doesn't mean that you're smart or that you can fool people.
I post in threads such as this as a counterbalance to your propaganda and the board sycophants who lap it up. >>
Once again you assert an old rule to prove your thinking. WRONG.
Just the fact the 1794 doesn't do much for you says it all. >>
Sir, there is a difference between argument and contradiction. Stating that someone is "WRONG" without any support for that assertion is merely contradiction and is the province of children. Argument requires support for one's assertions and is how adults resolve their differences, persuade others, or politely agree to disagree.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>Yawn. Your entire assertion is based upon the fact that 'traditionally' a cut bid ended one's bidding? Do you know how silly that sounds?
For anyone interested, this has all been played out before. Go read the old threads as I'm done with this nattering nabob. Bayard apparently still has silver envy... >>
There's nothing silly about it. Until a few years ago, if you made a split bid, you were not allowed to bid on that lot again, period. Split bids typically signify that the bidder has made his final bid.
Frankly, the 1794 dollar doesn't do much for me. The adjustment marks are a huge turn off and the example that Martin owned previously seemed to be more attractive overall from my perspective. Regardless, I don't envy what others own and am quite content with my own collection.
The fact that you can afford to buy $10M coins doesn't mean that you're smart or that you can fool people.
I post in threads such as this as a counterbalance to your propaganda and the board sycophants who lap it up. >>
Once again you assert an old rule to prove your thinking. WRONG.
Just the fact the 1794 doesn't do much for you says it all. >>
Sir, there is a difference between argument and contradiction. Stating that someone is "WRONG" without any support for that assertion is merely contradiction and is the province of children. Argument requires support for one's assertions and is how adults resolve their differences, persuade others, or politely agree to disagree. >>
Ah yes - support for one's position. Like saying that it's obvious a bidder was dropping out because it's traditional to split one's bid and then stop - despite the rule change allowing one to do it whenever. /eyeroll
<< <i>One doesn't split bids in the middle like that - one splits a bid near a huge round number that may be a competitor's maximum, or to get on increment for the same, or at one's limit. Since we were willing to go to $12,500,000 hammer and $7M had no major significance your attempted point just illustrates your inexperience with high level bidding. >>
Earlier you said that there was no stigma or significance to making a split bid. Now you admit otherwise. I agree with the last two reasons you gave for bid splitting by the way.
You're right that I have no experience with "high level bidding" on coins. For $10M, I'd rather buy an office building, apartment building, or something else that throws off income, instead of an overpriced shiny trinket.
Good luck with your purchase. I don't think it was an act of genius by any means; however, I wish you no harm. You've already lost the opportunity cost on $10M for six months, that's harm enough.
<< <i>You've already lost the opportunity cost on $10M for six months, that's harm enough. >>
You have to balance vs. the publicity value for the firm. Or the risk of being upside down on whatever else they invested $10M in six months ago.
I kind of like the comparison's that Legend makes regarding classic rare coins and collectible art (Hype) but isn't that comparing apples to oranges? Classic art are guaranteed unique pieces whereas there were 24 of the 1894-S Dimes minted. Only 10 are known about which leaves 14 unaccounted for.
While I'd certainly appreciate the dime, my butt would pucker up real tight if another one showed up that happened to look better and be of a higher grade than previously known.
The name is LEE!
<< <i>
<< <i>You've already lost the opportunity cost on $10M for six months, that's harm enough. >>
You have to balance vs. the publicity value for the firm. Or the risk of being upside down on whatever else they invested $10M in six months ago. >>
Assuming that you could get 2% per annum on $10M, that's $100K lost in the six months since buying the coin.
As far as I'm concerned, the video showing the auction sale is negative publicity.
<< <i>... the video appears to show Laura bidding against herself .. >>
Don't forget, she had multiple clients who wanted it.
So it could be viewed as those clients bidding against each other, not Laura bidding against herself.
There are essentially unobserved bidders.
If one client's max is 7 and another's max is 8, she can't stop at 5.5 and pick one of them at random to receive it. Can't break trust with the other client like that.
<< <i>
<< <i>... the video appears to show Laura bidding against herself .. >>
Don't forget, she had multiple clients who wanted it.
So it could be viewed as those clients bidding against each other, not Laura bidding against herself.
There are essentially unobserved bidders.
If one client's max is 7 and another's max is 8, she can't stop at 5.5 and pick one of them at random to receive it. Can't break trust with the other client like that. >>
I have never heard anyone from Legend state that Laura was bidding on behalf of even one client, much less multiple clients. Why would Legend agree to bid as an agent for someone else when they wanted the coin for themselves? TDN was so interested in acquiring the coin that he ran a board contest in advance of the auction to guess the winning bid.
<< <i>I have never heard anyone from Legend state that Laura was bidding on behalf of even one client, much less multiple clients. >>
Martin Logies (aka Cardinal) states it, right in the video you linked, at 3:02:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SyIdC3j5Krg&t=3m2s
"The representative of the buyer, Laura Sperber, she had commented to me that she had multiple people, multiple clients
of that echelon, and sure enough, amongst them, they ended up with the high bid ..."
I think they wanted at 10 Mil, they wanted that record.
to go from 5 to 8.2+ which just brings it over 10 mil, when you have high bid, just doesn't make sense at all.
When bidding on items at auction for your clients, you should handle only one for any single particular item. IMHO
Maybe I'm wrong but they got the Benchmark 10 Million Dollar Coin
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i> Your unwarranted condescension is both predictable and laughable.
Anybody who saw the video of the artificial jump bid will never forget the look of disbelief on Greg Rohan's face. If you reauctioned the 1794 tomorrow, you'd almost certainly take a loss of multiple millions.
>>
Actually, this past weekend, I had a conversation with one of the underbidders on the 1794 dollar. That bidder was also waiting for the right moment to jump the bid to scare off his competition, but he was not expecting TDN's preemptive strike, and the "shock and awe" and odd increment caught him off guard and uncertain how to respond. Now post-auction, he regrets the lost opportunity. So, if and when TDN decides to sell (at auction or otherwise), I fully expect he will sell at a profit. >>
As the consignor, that's a gracious thing to say; however, I just rewatched the video of the sale. It appears that Laura was on the coin at $5.5M and the bidding was stalled. The previous bid of $5.25M was a split bid, suggesting that the underbidder had made his final bid. It wouldn't have been shocking had the coin been knocked down to Laura for $5.5M given the lull in the bidding and previous split bid. Then, she seemingly bid against herself by raising the bid to a contrived $8.525M. I don't subscribe to the "shock and awe" story line. The jump bid was a publicity stunt to create a $10M coin, not a brilliant strategy to disorient other bidders.
1794 $ auction video >>
No doubt.
Markets are made and this one will serve as the basis for a "made market" whereas that market might not have been there had that last, and seemingly unwarranted, bid not been made. The icing on the cake was when Laura said that she was pleased with the price??
The name is LEE!
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i> Your unwarranted condescension is both predictable and laughable.
Anybody who saw the video of the artificial jump bid will never forget the look of disbelief on Greg Rohan's face. If you reauctioned the 1794 tomorrow, you'd almost certainly take a loss of multiple millions.
>>
Actually, this past weekend, I had a conversation with one of the underbidders on the 1794 dollar. That bidder was also waiting for the right moment to jump the bid to scare off his competition, but he was not expecting TDN's preemptive strike, and the "shock and awe" and odd increment caught him off guard and uncertain how to respond. Now post-auction, he regrets the lost opportunity. So, if and when TDN decides to sell (at auction or otherwise), I fully expect he will sell at a profit. >>
As the consignor, that's a gracious thing to say; however, I just rewatched the video of the sale. It appears that Laura was on the coin at $5.5M and the bidding was stalled. The previous bid of $5.25M was a split bid, suggesting that the underbidder had made his final bid. It wouldn't have been shocking had the coin been knocked down to Laura for $5.5M given the lull in the bidding and previous split bid. Then, she seemingly bid against herself by raising the bid to a contrived $8.525M. I don't subscribe to the "shock and awe" story line. The jump bid was a publicity stunt to create a $10M coin, not a brilliant strategy to disorient other bidders.
1794 $ auction video >>
Your theory is out to lunch for several reasons. First and foremost, a cut bid doesn't suggest one is dropping out - it merely suggests one is being smart and trying to save $300k by cutting above a big round number where your competition might logically have a limit. >>
Assuming that you were the one on the phone with Laura, why then, did you two decide to add $3 million to an, as of yet, uncontested bid?
The name is LEE!
<< <i>As far as I'm concerned, the video showing the auction sale is negative publicity. >>
Anyone ready to spend $10M is going do a lot more homework than just watch a video.
I do agree that most people watching that video would come to the conclusion that Laura jumped her own bid. But, I will defer to the people who were actually in the room, especially those who knew all the players.
<< <i>
<< <i>I have never heard anyone from Legend state that Laura was bidding on behalf of even one client, much less multiple clients. >>
Martin Logies (aka Cardinal) states it, right in the video you linked, at 3:02:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SyIdC3j5Krg&t=3m2s
"The representative of the buyer, Laura Sperber, she had commented to me that she had multiple people, multiple clients
of that echelon, and sure enough, amongst them, they ended up with the high bid ..." >>
I have no doubt that Legend has clients able to drop $10M. However, that video doesn't say Legend was acting as agent for multiple clients in the bidding.
<< <i>
<< <i>I have never heard anyone from Legend state that Laura was bidding on behalf of even one client, much less multiple clients. >>
Martin Logies (aka Cardinal) states it, right in the video you linked, at 3:02:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SyIdC3j5Krg&t=3m2s
"The representative of the buyer, Laura Sperber, she had commented to me that she had multiple people, multiple clients
of that echelon, and sure enough, amongst them, they ended up with the high bid ..." >>
Right.
Except that Legend bought the coin and clearly states that on their web site.
<< <i>LEGEND NUMISMATICS IS THE SOLE OWNER AND PROUD BUYER OF THE CARDINAL $1 1794 PCGS SP66 THAT SOLD FOR A WORLD RECORD $10,000,000.00 IN A NYC AUCTION JANUARY 28TH 2013. >>
Legend (Laura) may have multiple clients of that "echelon" but it appears that none of them were actually bidding.
The name is LEE!
<< <i>The strategy and actions behind the bid has all been hashed over before. Rather than write it all again, I suggest reading the old threads. The agreed strategy was to jump the bid once it was ascertained that certain bidders were active - and they were. >>
If you want to pay $10M for a $6.5M coin, that's your business, but, why bid against yourself?
At the request of TDN, I am editing this post for clarification. When I said this was a $6.5M coin, I was strictly basing that number upon the $5.5M hammer price when the bidding stalled, immediately before Laura's jump bid. $5.5M plus the buyer's premium is approximately $6.5M, just as the jump bid plus buyer's premium is approximately $10M.
My statement that the 1794 is a $6.5M coin is based solely on the $5.5M bid, plus buyer's premium, and was not an appraisal or the result of a market study on the coin. TDN has pointed out that the coin had previously sold for more than $6.5M, and he was told another attendee at the auction was willing to pay $7M hammer. Although I am not confident the bidding would have advanced beyond $5.5M without the jump bid, in fairness to TDN I am clarifying my statement.
My eyesight is not improving.
The Flowing Hair design is one of my all-time favorites.
Five wealthy dime collectors would be tougher to find than one very wealthy dollar collector.
Picking the big coin is a no-brainer for me.
<< <i>
<< <i>The strategy and actions behind the bid has all been hashed over before. Rather than write it all again, I suggest reading the old threads. The agreed strategy was to jump the bid once it was ascertained that certain bidders were active - and they were. >>
If you want to pay $10M for a $6.5M coin, that's your business, but, why bid against yourself? >>
You need to stop committing slander just because you don't like the coin and don't like me.
Maybe I'm stepping a little outside here, but me, I'm thinking that a guy like you really doesn't need to justify what he does here to us. I mean, sure, it's your business, and you seem to be doing a pretty good job turning a fair profit, but isn't it a bit de classe to defend it ad nauseum here in a public forum? And seriously, why add fuel to the fire?
Sincerely,
Matt
Empty Nest Collection
Matt’s Mattes
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>The strategy and actions behind the bid has all been hashed over before. Rather than write it all again, I suggest reading the old threads. The agreed strategy was to jump the bid once it was ascertained that certain bidders were active - and they were. >>
If you want to pay $10M for a $6.5M coin, that's your business, but, why bid against yourself? >>
You need to stop committing slander just because you don't like the coin and don't like me. >>
Please point out anything I have posted which you think is defamatory. If it is not a matter of opinion, a verified fact, or an honest accounting of the video, I would be happy to retract said statement and apologize for all on this board to see. As an attorney, who has successfully sued for defamation in the past, I believe that I have said absolutely nothing which is defamatory. If you disagree, please point it out with specificity and we can resolve it right now.
As for disliking you, we have never met and I have no personal animus toward you. I just don't happen to agree with your pontifications, nothing personal.
As for disliking the coin, I'd rather have five 1894-S dimes; but, I don't hate your coin.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SyIdC3j5Krg&t=1m20s
Shortly the auctioneer gets to "we have 5.5 million, looking for 6".
And then Laura's winning bid at 8+.
The 5.5 never got to "going once...", so there could definitely have been other bidders ready to keep incrementing it.
So I agree with Bruce - the auction footage is consistent with the jump bid strategy to discourage other bidders, which has been discussed on previous threads.
<< <i>The cut bid for 5.25m is right at 1:20 in the video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SyIdC3j5Krg&t=1m20s
Shortly the auctioneer gets to "we have 5.5 million, looking for 6".
And then Laura's winning bid at 8+.
The 5.5 never got to "going once...", so there could definitely have been other bidders ready to keep incrementing it.
So I agree with Bruce - the auction footage is consistent with the jump bid strategy to discourage other bidders, which has been discussed on previous threads. >>
Someone else could have raised the bid after $5.5M. Conversely, the bidding might have ended at $5.5M. What I don't understand is why make the jump bid when you are currently the winning bidder. Laura appears to be the $5.5M bidder. Why not wait until somebody overbids you at $5.75M or $6M? What's the downside to waiting?
... What I don't understand is why make the jump bid when you are currently the winning bidder. Laura appears to be the $5.5M bidder. Why not wait until somebody overbids you at $5.75M or $6M? What's the downside to waiting?
What Bayard1908 stated above is the key point in all of this.
We were watching the auction live and when the hammer fell everyone in the office just stared at each other for a few seconds. Then someone finally asked, "what in the heck was that all about?" The consensus opinion was that it was a publicity stunt. What else could it be?
Think of all of the free, international media attention: network television news, radio, newspapers, trade journals, internet articles, magazine articles, etc.
That being said, I picked the 1794 dollar over the five 94-S dimes. I love the Cardinal 1794 dollar, although I never agreed with the specimen designation. Regardless, it is a breathtaking piece and an important part of American numismatic history.
<< <i>
<< <i>Yawn. Your entire assertion is based upon the fact that 'traditionally' a cut bid ended one's bidding? Do you know how silly that sounds?
For anyone interested, this has all been played out before. Go read the old threads as I'm done with this nattering nabob. Bayard apparently still has silver envy... >>
There's nothing silly about it. Until a few years ago, if you made a split bid, you were not allowed to bid on that lot again, period. Split bids typically signify that the bidder has made his final bid.
Frankly, the 1794 dollar doesn't do much for me. The adjustment marks are a huge turn off and the example that Martin owned previously seemed to be more attractive overall from my perspective. Regardless, I don't envy what others own and am quite content with my own collection.
The fact that you can afford to buy $10M coins doesn't mean that you're smart or that you can fool people.
I post in threads such as this as a counterbalance to your propaganda and the board sycophants who lap it up. >>
Sycophants? Hey I had to look the word up! Bayard 1908, why debate Bruce so much on his thought process that went into his bidding on a coin you cannot afford and have no interest in anyway...?
I give away money. I collect money.
I don’t love money . I do love the Lord God.
As far as I'm concerned, the video showing the auction sale is negative publicity.
I think Bruce has proven that major rarities like this have generally appreciated an average of 8% per year over the past 50 years or so.
No, they won't go up 8% every year in the PCGS price guide. But over a multi-year period when they eventually do show up for sale again, they
often make leaps and bounds over the previous price. One thing is for certain though, coins like this (and big time art as well) is doing a lot better
than 2% per year. No matter how you factor it, I'm confident TDN is up 2% or more on this coin since it was purchased. I have no doubts they've been
approached already by those wishing to give them a nice profit. Those with serious money have been placing money in the ultimate collectibles for the past
3 years, despite what appears to be a sluggish or downtrending world economy. The reason for this is to gain traction from depreciating fiat money and rising sovereign
and state debt.
My prediction: When Legend/TDN does eventually sell this coin, they will have made out better than 2% per annum. The video is a side bar. It only matters what
was paid and how much it will cost the next person to own it. There's only one of these graded 66 Specimen. It doesn't hurt that 1794 was the first year of silver dollar production.
<< <i>My prediction: When Legend/TDN does eventually sell this coin, they will have made out better than 2% per annum. >>
One would certainly hope the "risk free" rate of return could be exceeded.
Roadrunner, you're one of the better posters on financial matters. You surely know that acquisition cost, or price paid, is perhaps the greatest factor in overall financial returns. I'm shocked you think that $10M for this coin will produce a respectable financial return.
If we have a financial reset in this country, any hard asset is better than cash; however, trees don't grow to the sky.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>The strategy and actions behind the bid has all been hashed over before. Rather than write it all again, I suggest reading the old threads. The agreed strategy was to jump the bid once it was ascertained that certain bidders were active - and they were. >>
If you want to pay $10M for a $6.5M coin, that's your business, but, why bid against yourself? >>
You need to stop committing slander just because you don't like the coin and don't like me. >>
How would that ever be considered slander?
The name is LEE!
<< <i>
<< <i>Your theory is out to lunch for several reasons. First and foremost, a cut bid doesn't suggest one is dropping out - it merely suggests one is being smart and trying to save $300k by cutting above a big round number where your competition might logically have a limit.
First and foremost, the theory is out to lunch because it requires knowledge of what went through someone else's mind. >>
Tis true. We were told after the sale that one of the competitors had a top bid of $7M hammer. While this may or may not be accurate, it certainly is far more information than the previous poster has about what was going on based upon a video. >>
Right. And an "unnamed" source has confirmed this? Uh huh!
The name is LEE!
Amat Colligendo Focum
Top 10 • FOR SALE
buying the finest 1794 dollar isn't the worst thing to do. Bruce has done well with his trade/seated dollar sets as well as individual purchases of US rarities. I don't expect him
to fall on his sword on this one. I'd be sort of surprised if in 1-3 years this isn't sold for a 15% or better profit. In today's financial world (ie 2013-2015) it will not be easy to hang
on to your money investing in traditional financial instruments. There's something to be said for owning the world's finest "X." You don't get that satisfaction by owning shares in
Apple or Green Mountain Coffee Roasters.....and I do mean "roasted." Yeah, you can put $10 MILL in an "insured" govt/muny bonds or some stock/bond portfolio and end up on the
wrong end of a bail-in or in the after shock of a TBTF bank going "poof." Something to be said about a portable, well known, world class, rarity. And the coin fits in his theme of
building a type set of major rarities in finest or near finest known condition. I'm not saying that would work for me as $10 MILL is a log of eggs in one basket. What other major rarities
are available in the market or can be pryed loose for $3 MILL and up? There aren't many. The Pogues and others like them aren't exactly selling in the near future. Sorry, the PF68
1804 dollar is not available. 1913 Lib nickel? Been there done that. 1894-s dime? Just did that too. 1838-0 half? Ditto. 1884/1885 trade dollars? Check. I'm sure TDN would have
loved to get a crack at Judd-1776 too. So would the entire upper echelon of the coin market.
Let's face it, there are few top-flight, finest known, major rarities out there for the taking. And it seems fewer and fewer of them are making it to major auction when there are ready
buyers in the wings at world record prices....and no commissions. If you know of any, give TDN a call. You'll probably get a generous finder's fee for your efforts. We're all aware of
the potential for a financial "reset." But we've been waiting for one for years or even decades. Still not here. Maybe it comes in 2014-2015 as the 120 yr economic cycle bottoms out
for the first time since 1894. Something tells me that even in such a reset, the finest known US coins will still hold their relative value. If big money can spend $100-$200 MILL on
paintings, $10 MILL for one of the top dozen or so US coins in existance doesn't seem out of bounds. I do think that this single coin will probably do better than if you spread it around on
say 1,000 - $10,000 US coins....or even 10,000 - $1,000 US coins.
<< <i>Assuming that you could get 2% per annum on $10M, that's $100K lost in the six months since buying the coin.
As far as I'm concerned, the video showing the auction sale is negative publicity.
I think Bruce has proven that major rarities like this have generally appreciated an average of 8% per year over the past 50 years or so.
No, they won't go up 8% every year in the PCGS price guide. But over a multi-year period when they eventually do show up for sale again, they
often make leaps and bounds over the previous price. One thing is for certain though, coins like this (and big time art as well) is doing a lot better
than 2% per year. No matter how you factor it, I'm confident TDN is up 2% or more on this coin since it was purchased. I have no doubts they've been
approached already by those wishing to give them a nice profit. Those with serious money have been placing money in the ultimate collectibles for the past
3 years, despite what appears to be a sluggish or downtrending world economy. The reason for this is to gain traction from depreciating fiat money and rising sovereign
and state debt.
My prediction: When Legend/TDN does eventually sell this coin, they will have made out better than 2% per annum. The video is a side bar. It only matters what
was paid and how much it will cost the next person to own it. There's only one of these graded 66 Specimen. It doesn't hurt that 1794 was the first year of silver dollar production. >>
I kinda take exception to the term "major rarities" since "major rarities" usually have some type of "story" associated with them. Kinda like art in a sense but for this particular series of coin, there are many. many BS "stories" associated with it.
RWB posted ATS:
"Per modern research and not the invented stories:
There are many theories as to why 24 proof Dimes were minted in 1894 at San Francisco. [True, although few would meet the basic standards of "theory"]
Only 10 are confirmed to exist today and this coin is likely the third finest known. [Estimate & Opinion]
The most widely accepted theory is that the Mint Superintendent, John Daggett, had high ranking visitors he wanted to impress with special coins. [Bologna]
No one knows for sure why he picked the Dime, except that he needed to balance a $2.40 deficit in the Mint ledger, so striking 24 dimes achieved dual purposes. [Conflicts with 1895 newspaper account; no explanation for why this had to be balanced since the Coiner could carry forward bullion and/or coins.]
After minting and distribution to his friends and guests, he gave 3 or 4 coins to his daughter, Hallie Daggett. [More Bologna]
This story is one of the greatest [chunks of bologna] in numismatic lore, and continues when Daggett's daughter Hallie eventually sold a couple gem examples, including this very coin, to Earl Parker, a coin dealer in California, around 1950. [Bologna]
At the time, she told Parker that she originally spent one of her prized dimes to buy an ice cream cone. [Bologna a la mode]
That coin is known today in Good-4 as the "Ice Cream Specimen" but has not traded hands publicly since 1981. [Known by that name only to marketers]"
Not necessarily a "glowing" review.
As for rarity, rarity ONLY means something if there is a good story to go along with it AND if the associated coins in the series also have some type of public draw.
While I do not discount the coin itself, I do think that its way over hyped for what it is. 1 of 10 known with 14 unaccounted for.
The name is LEE!
Amat Colligendo Focum
Top 10 • FOR SALE
For that matter, there is no guarantee that more 1913 Lib nickels or 1804 dollars won't come out of the woodwork some day. At least the
1794 dollar has over 200 yrs of experience in trying to draw out new specimens. And I like the fact that it was a legitimately struck for circulation US coin.
The 1804 $, 1913 nickels, and 1894-s dimes are fantasy coins....one of them with multiple mintings from 1834 to the late 1850's. And even though they've been tested time
and time again as legal to own....you never know if that might change in the future. Another hoard of lower grade 1794's being discovered won't affect the
value of the SP66. That's certainly not the case with most other major rarities where current pops are say 3-14 known. Considering TDN's trade and seated
dollar sets, Gobrechts too.....the 1794 dollar was a logical extension as that dollar type set expanded. Interesting to debate this. The 1822 $5 could be a candidate but the
finest known is not mint state. Doesn't fit well in a gem silver 18th/19th century type set. Other than the 1794 in SP66 I can't think of a worthy candidate....other than J-1776.
In a sense, the 1794 may be the end of the road other than filling in some other major silver dollar, half dollar, and quarter type coins. I'd not be surprised if Legend and TDN
are waiting in the wings should J-1776 be made available for private sale someday....Pogues too?
Just for giggles.....I'd like to know what TDN's next "have to get coin someday" will be. My lips are sealed.
<< <i>I'm still trying to get over the fact that one of them was spent buying an ice cream cone. If my daddy worked at the mint and he came home one day and gave me some "special coins" you better be danged sure I wouldn't spend them, and if I had, you know he would've taken the rest back away from me... >>
According to RWB, this is simply not true.
The name is LEE!
I was hoping someone knowledgable about this would reply. Thanks
edit: Hey your grandfather didn't sell ice cream, did he?
Amat Colligendo Focum
Top 10 • FOR SALE
<< <i> I don't subscribe to the "shock and awe" story line. The jump bid was a publicity stunt to create a $10M coin, not a brilliant strategy to disorient other bidders. >>
Quoting from The Great Lebowsky: "Well, that's just your opinion, man."
You are certainly entitled to your opinion, but there's no conclusive evidence either way, in my view.
I feel this airing of opinions as something more factual has derailed this thread and led things too negative.
So maybe the discussion could be diverted to the "1/26/13 Legend Market Report" thread, if you think there is some substantial evidence or new theories to air?
I made a currently valid link to the Legend Market Report there, so its original text could be discussed.
http://forums.collectors.com/messageview.cfm?catid=26&threadid=879013&STARTPAGE=2
However, I believe the issue may be too complex for discussing in the style we have been using here, with short bits of text.
So I invite you to write a complete explanation of why you 'don't subscribe to the "shock and awe"' explanation.
Laura did also offer the "unlocking the value" explanation, which you like better.
I believe it was a combination of the two. But that's just my opinion... :-)