Pouge currently values these two coins more and can better afford to own them than anyone else. So they stay with him, for now.
No doubt that an auction with a 94% sell through rate in terms of number of lots is quite successful while a sell through rate of under 50% in terms of value is pretty bad. It was unusual, to be sure.
I don't have an issue that Pogue places more value on the coins than apparently anyone else and chose to keep them---my concern having watched the live feed was the manner it was done. People asking for more time to bid, cut bids, etc. and then declaring the 1804 sold---only to learn a few minutes later it did not sell. I am having a hard time with the manner the coins went "unsold"
..... I think it goes to the integrity of our marketplace that things will be done in an above board way. If I lose confidence in two coins that are the subject of the most scrutiny the coin world has to offer---how does that impact me when I am considering bidding on that key date missing from my set for $5000? ....
I've been around coins since the early 1970's, and "integrity" and "above board" are not terms I would ever use to define the general business side of the hobby, let alone price discovery or the auction process. Caveat emptor and cutthroat are the two that come to mind for me. The 1804 and 1822 aren't necessarily exempt either. There are other collectible markets that are in far worse shape too.
How many coin auctions are nearly entirely unreserved? Not many. A large % have reserves and "things" going on. Integrity is only something you can demand of the dealer(s) you choose to work with....and your self. Outside of that, it's a free for all. From what I hear the price discovery on most of the Pogue coins (95+%) have been pretty good.
I'm curious if you have any thoughts or impressions that you can share publicly that haven't already been mentioned in the thread.
There are things I was told in confidence that I can't say. But, one can say any of the following could have happened:
1) SB ran up the bid to the high reserve and no one bit. It's within their rights as Andy pointed out. If you believe this then we don't know what the last real bid was. Reasonable
2) There was a qualified real live bidder at the last bids and they didn't hit the high reserve. Maybe Mr Pogue said to himself, it will take a monster bid or I'm taking these home with me. In other words he was having sellers remorse. It happens
Very plausible.
mark
Walker Proof Digital Album Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
For anyone that actually bid on these two coins, yes, they were "used", in the sense that they were (more or less) tricked into revealing the highest price that they were willing to pay. That information could, in certain circumstances, be used against them at a later date.
But the real problem with the way the auction was handled is that now some people will worry a little more about the risk of bidding against potted plants and chandeliers at every auction, on coins of any value. It's not good for the market.
Andy Lustig
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
But the real problem with the way the auction was handled is that now some people will worry a little more about the risk of bidding against potted plants and chandeliers at every auction, on coins of any value. It's not good for the market.
Boom
mark
Walker Proof Digital Album Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
1) SB ran up the bid to the high reserve and no one bit. It's within their rights as Andy pointed out. If you believe this then we don't know what the last real bid was. Reasonable
If in fact there were any real bids. They ran the bid up to what we presume was the reserve, perhaps it was higher but owing to the complete lack of interest, the matter was drawn to a close. Regardless, whatever transpired, the 1804 is NOT a 9 or 10 million dollar coin, as some seem to believe. To have any credibility, a few enthusiastic floor bidders/agents/known entities would have helped the theatre. It remains an item that we would say in the old days, "If it's not going to sell, let it not sell at a high price".
Originally posted by: MrEureka For anyone that actually bid on these two coins, yes, they were "used", in the sense that they were (more or less) tricked into revealing the highest price that they were willing to pay. That information could, in certain circumstances, be used against them at a later date.
But the real problem with the way the auction was handled is that now some people will worry a little more about the risk of bidding against potted plants and chandeliers at every auction, on coins of any value. It's not good for the market.
But the real problem with the way the auction was handled is that now some people will worry a little more about the risk of bidding against potted plants and chandeliers at every auction, on coins of any value. It's not good for the market.
Boom
mark
Shill bidding is never good and generally against the law. Call it anything you want, but I smell a rat!
We are forgetting that there is another 1804 Class I in the collection - the Dexter specimen. I suppose that coin will be buyable.
Was Brent in the room? People bidding knew they were bidding against the owner.
He was in the room before the auction started, but I looked for him and didn't see him once bidding began.
Stacks clearly stated that the seller reserved the right to bid. The bidding was between Chris K up front, presumably for the seller, and one phone bidder to the right (facing front), who that was for who knows.
Some refer to overgraded slabs as Coffins. I like to think of them as Happy Coins.
I saw in the new coin world there is a column saying that at the end of the day the pogues simply could not let go of the two coins. If that is true , I understand and don't blame them. But I guess I would rather pull the coins than going through the process of bidding and then no sale despite record prices
Roadrunner: "The bid on the 1822 seemed plenty of money for that coin ($7.5 MILL all in). Not sure why that's wasn't let go. Having been owned by the Pogues for 34 years, it may have been difficult to let go."
Before the auction began, there was an announcement that the auction firm may continue bidding up to undisclosed reserves on some lots. I am not aware of any true bids, though there could have been some. I was there and I have been writing about auctions for more than twenty years.
JustACommeMan: "Most bizarre auction and "bidding" I've ever seen in art, wine, sports cars or autos"
I have seen similar 'bidding' in other Sotheby's auctions, lot of phones with undisclosed reserves. The "going backwards" bid on the 1822 was puzzling, however, as I have never seen a situation exactly like that before.
Roadrunner: "There are 3 1822's known. Could even be another one out there."
Come on, Runner, what is the probability of another 1822 surfacing? It was much more famous among collectors during the period from the 1870s to the 1920s than it is currently. There must have been many people searching for an 1822.
Roadrunner: "Another 1804 dollar showing up would have little to no change on the price structure."
It would affect price levels if turned out to be a gem quality, Class I "Original" 1804. Even a newly discovered, 63 grade piece could lead to one serious buyer not being interested in the others. Even so, the probability of a 16th 1804 dollar existing is very low. These have received endless publicity for generations.
Come on, Runner, what is the probability of another 1822 surfacing? It was much more famous among collectors during the period from the 1870s to the 1920s than it is currently. There must have been many people searching for an 1822.
Gold coins are recovered from shipwrecks all the time
Come on, Runner, what is the probability of another 1822 surfacing? It was much more famous among collectors during the period from the 1870s to the 1920s than it is currently. There must have been many people searching for an 1822.
The probability is higher than zero. No amount of searching will produce another if an owner doesn't want to reveal it to the numismatic community. And the idea of "freshness" vs. market value has been beat into the coin market over the past 20 years. If a coin is not fresh, it brings less money....even an 1804 silver dollar. What could be fresher than a previously unknown specimen of a rarity coming to auction within 6-12 months? If I had an 1822 $5 sitting around, the best course of action would be to keep it hidden until the day came for it to be sold.
As far as "searches" go, there were very few collectors and dealers back in the 1870's to 1920's. What, those guys had effective means to scour the entire country and its population to find an 1822 $5 via horseback, train, and telegraph? Compare that to the past 2 generations of coin enthusiasts. The sheer numbers and flow of information today dwarfs those old days. 50 years of "searching" back then is probably worth 1 year of searching with today's skill set.
Collectors have been aware for a long time that 1870-s coinage was struck for special purposes yet never released. None of them found an 1870-s half dime or quarter until approx 1980 when the half dime popped up in a junk box. Are there more? Probably. Will they be found? The odds are very low. But I suspect sometime in the next 100 yrs another one (or more) will pop...maybe even some 1873-s No Arrows coinage, or even an 1873-s silver dollar.
TDN: "Gold coins are recovered from shipwrecks all the time"
While this is true, it is extremely rare for a Capped Head half eagle to be recovered in a shipwreck. None of them were minted in SF or NO. By the late 1820s or early 1830s, they stopped circulating altogether and were exported and/or melted; each then than more than $5 worth of gold.
Roadrunner: "The probability is higher than zero. No amount of searching will produce another if an owner doesn't want to reveal it to the numismatic community."
So, Roadrunner is saying that someone could well be sitting on a coin from 1822, which was extremely popular from the 1870s to the 1920s, and is now certainly worth millions if it is fairly gradable. This is a fascinating hypothesis. Are there other precedents for such a turn of events?
Roadrunner: "None of them found an 1870-s half dime or quarter until approx 1980 when the half dime popped up in a junk box. Are there more? Probably. Will they be found? The odds are very low. But I suspect sometime in the next 100 yrs another one (or more) will pop...maybe even some 1873-s No Arrows coinage, or even an 1873-s silver dollar. "
The emergence of the 1870-S half dime is a good point. A gold coin, though, would have been far more likely to be traded or melted by non-numismatists in the past than an 1870-S half dime. Even so, I am glad that I raised the issue. Roadrunner's perspective on this topic is interesting.
Gazes: "I keep reading that the two coins did not sell because the reserve was not met. Is it a reserve if it a secret and changing number ? "
I will research the matter further. My current understanding is that, under NY State Law, an undisclosed reserve is legal and the auction firm may bid for the purpose of pushing the level to approach the reserve. There was an announcement before the auction began, and it was implied that there would be such activity. Why would Gazes think that any of the reserves was a "changing number"? I am not aware of any evidence that the reserves were changing during the activity.
As I said in another post, it's odd that the Stacks' - Bowers when to the trouble an expense to publish a hardcover book on the 1822 half eagle, which they gave free of charge to preferred customers, when it turned out that the coin was essentually withdrawn from sale.
Retired dealer and avid collector of U.S. type coins, 19th century presidential campaign medalets and selected medals. In recent years I have been working on a set of British coins - at least one coin from each king or queen who issued pieces that are collectible. I am also collecting at least one coin for each Roman emperor from Julius Caesar to ... ?
Pogue IV provided a lot of coverage for the 1804 and 1822 coins as well as the auction. Perhaps the attention for the coins and the auction was enough?
Bill Jones: "As I said in another post, it's odd that the Stack's - Bowers when to the trouble an expense to publish a hardcover book on the 1822 half eagle, which they gave free of charge to preferred customers, when it turned out that the coin was essentially withdrawn from sale."
Not fair, Mr. Jones, consider that there were no reserves in the Pogue I or II sales. Although I have heard rumors of reserves in Pogue III, including some spread on this forum, I am not aware of any evidence that there were reserves in Pogue III. So, Pogue IV might have been the first Pogue auction with reserves.
1) The 1822 half eagle book was written long before the Pogue III sale. The staff at SBG might then have been under the impression that the 1822 would be put 'on the block' without a reserve. Indeed, it is likely that they thought so.
2) Rumors from reliable sources suggest that the contract with the Pogues included a provision for SBG to publish a book on the Eliasberg-Pogue 1822 half eagle. If so, it would be unfair to blame SBG for the poorly reasoned reserve or to suggest that SBG mis-allocated resources by publishing that book.
Bill Jones: "As I said in another post, it's odd that the Stack's - Bowers when to the trouble an expense to publish a hardcover book on the 1822 half eagle, which they gave free of charge to preferred customers, when it turned out that the coin was essentially withdrawn from sale."
Not fair, Mr. Jones, consider that there were no reserves in the Pogue I or II sales. Although I have heard rumors of reserves in Pogue III, including some spread on this forum, I am not aware of any evidence that there were reserves in Pogue III. So, Pogue IV might have been the first Pogue auction with reserve.
They were afraid those 2 coins might have sold for 4 to 7 million which would look bad. Considering what happened at the last sale can you blame them?
Mark NGC registry V-Nickel proof #6!!!! working on proof shield nickels # 8 with a bullet!!!!
Although I am flattered by the attention to my views, I am a little puzzled by PennyAnnie's post above. Someone reading it may get the impression that I used the terms "afraid" and "look bad." I did not. Although my e-mail address appears underneath the last paragraph in the rectangle inside Penny's post, I did not write that paragraph. I hope that readers will consider an accurate re-statement, for the record, and an additional comment.
Bill Jones: "As I said in another post, it's odd that the Stack's - Bowers when to the trouble an expense to publish a hardcover book on the 1822 half eagle, which they gave free of charge to preferred customers, when it turned out that the coin was essentially withdrawn from sale."
Originally Posted by Analyst: Not fair, Mr. Jones, consider that there were no reserves in the Pogue I or II sales. Although I have heard rumors of reserves in Pogue III, including some spread on this forum, I am not aware of any evidence that there were reserves in Pogue III. So, Pogue IV might have been the first Pogue auction with reserves.
1) The 1822 half eagle book was written long before the Pogue III sale. The staff at SBG might then have been under the impression that the 1822 would be put 'on the block' without a reserve.
2) Rumors from reliable sources suggest that the contract with the Pogues included a provision for SBG to publish a book on the Eliasberg-Pogue 1822 half eagle. If so, it would be unfair to blame SBG for the poorly reasoned reserve or to suggest that SBG mis-allocated resources by publishing that book.
Who said the following? It was not me! : "They were afraid those 2 coins might have sold for 4 to 7 million which would look bad. Considering what happened at the last sale can you blame them?"
Who are "they" in this statement, the Pogues or the SBG employees? In any event, it is usually not a good idea to speculate about what others are thinking. Moreover, while $4m would be weak for the Childs-Pogue 1804, auction sales of $5m to $7m each for these two coins would not have made anyone "look bad" in the minds of those who are knowledgeable about coin markets. I really disagree with that statement in Penny's post. For the 1804, $5 to $7m would be a range of moderate to strong prices. For the 1822, such amounts would certainly be even stronger, really strong!
Originally posted by: BillJones As I said in another post, it's odd that the Stacks' - Bowers when to the trouble an expense to publish a hardcover book on the 1822 half eagle, which they gave free of charge to preferred customers, when it turned out that the coin was essentually withdrawn from sale.
I bought that book. QDB autograph. Interesting read. Like $22.
With folks conjuring reasons for Mr. Pogue's decision, I'm kind wondering if maybe his tax attys/accountants may have advised him to wait until next year to sell.
After all these two coins would prolly have sold for nearly as much as the other 61 coins combined . . . Just a thought.
HH
Need the following OBW rolls to complete my 46-64 Roosevelt roll set: 1947-P & D; 1948-D; 1949-P & S; 1950-D & S; and 1952-S. Any help locating any of these OBW rolls would be gratefully appreciated!
It doesn't matter how much something sells for, but the size of your profit or loss. It's certainly possible that the Pogues were trying to optimize their tax treatment, especially if they had sizable LT capital gains from the coins already sold this year.
Zoins: "Pogue IV provided a lot of coverage for the 1804 and 1822 coins as well as the auction. Perhaps the attention for the coins and the auction was enough?"
The attention paid to those two coins deflected attention from the other great coins in the auction. How many people are familiar with the rarity of 1828/7, 1828 and 1829 half eagles? Do many people remember that there was a choice 1838-O half dollar in this auction?
HalfHunter: "With folks conjuring reasons for Mr. Pogue's decision, I'm kind wondering if maybe his tax attys/accountants may have advised him to wait until next year to sell. "
The coins are owned by a non-human entity, I believe a trust, though it could be a foundation or some other construct. Tax issues are different and it is unlikely that they are crucial. The elder Pogue is not as interested in coins now as he was in the past, and he wishes to concentrate on other matters during the remainder of his life. He is a senior citizen.
My hypothesis is that the elder Pogue or 'team Pogue' placed values on those two coins that are inconsistent with current market levels. 'The Market' was mis-interpreted and/or those two coins are worth more to the consignor than they are to bidders now. There is no secret plan or game, as far as I know. After the Pogue III sale, it was clear that coin markets have dropped since August 2015. Please read my articles:
Comments
No reason to make more of this than what it is.
Pouge currently values these two coins more and can better afford to own them than anyone else. So they stay with him, for now.
No doubt that an auction with a 94% sell through rate in terms of number of lots is quite successful while a sell through rate of under 50% in terms of value is pretty bad. It was unusual, to be sure.
I don't have an issue that Pogue places more value on the coins than apparently anyone else and chose to keep them---my concern having watched the live feed was the manner it was done. People asking for more time to bid, cut bids, etc. and then declaring the 1804 sold---only to learn a few minutes later it did not sell. I am having a hard time with the manner the coins went "unsold"
I've been around coins since the early 1970's, and "integrity" and "above board" are not terms I would ever use to define the general business side of the hobby, let alone price discovery or the auction process. Caveat emptor and cutthroat are the two that come to mind for me. The 1804 and 1822 aren't necessarily exempt either. There are other collectible markets that are in far worse shape too.
How many coin auctions are nearly entirely unreserved? Not many. A large % have reserves and "things" going on. Integrity is only something you can demand of the dealer(s) you choose to work with....and your self. Outside of that, it's a free for all. From what I hear the price discovery on most of the Pogue coins (95+%) have been pretty good.
Just wanted to say that in order to say something positive about the sale
For me it was an exciting sale with many pricing surprises on the high side as well as on the low side - and with many beautiful coins.
I actually bought quite a few coins in this sale and I am very happy with my buys.
Just wanted to say that in order to say something positive about the sale
For me it was an exciting sale with many pricing surprises on the high side as well as on the low side - and with many beautiful coins.
Congrats, love to see your newps!
Latin American Collection
My 1866 Philly Mint Set
I learned a lot tonight. Light bulb kind of stuff
mark
I'm curious if you have any thoughts or impressions that you can share publicly that haven't already been mentioned in the thread.
Was Brent in the room? People bidding knew they were bidding against the owner.
Sounds like the potted plant ran things up to establish a number.
Looking for Top Pop Mercury Dime Varieties & High Grade Mercury Dime Toners.
I learned a lot tonight. Light bulb kind of stuff
mark
I'm curious if you have any thoughts or impressions that you can share publicly that haven't already been mentioned in the thread.
There are things I was told in confidence that I can't say. But, one can say any of the following could have happened:
1) SB ran up the bid to the high reserve and no one bit. It's within their rights as Andy pointed out. If you believe this then we don't know what the last real bid was. Reasonable
2) There was a qualified real live bidder at the last bids and they didn't hit the high reserve. Maybe Mr Pogue said to himself, it will take a monster bid or I'm taking these home with me. In other words he was having sellers remorse. It happens
Very plausible.
mark
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
But the real problem with the way the auction was handled is that now some people will worry a little more about the risk of bidding against potted plants and chandeliers at every auction, on coins of any value. It's not good for the market.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
But the real problem with the way the auction was handled is that now some people will worry a little more about the risk of bidding against potted plants and chandeliers at every auction, on coins of any value. It's not good for the market.
Boom
mark
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
1) SB ran up the bid to the high reserve and no one bit. It's within their rights as Andy pointed out. If you believe this then we don't know what the last real bid was. Reasonable
If in fact there were any real bids. They ran the bid up to what we presume was the reserve, perhaps it was higher but owing to the complete lack of interest, the matter was drawn to a close. Regardless, whatever transpired, the 1804 is NOT a 9 or 10 million dollar coin, as some seem to believe. To have any credibility, a few enthusiastic floor bidders/agents/known entities would have helped the theatre. It remains an item that we would say in the old days, "If it's not going to sell, let it not sell at a high price".
that's awesome!
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
For anyone that actually bid on these two coins, yes, they were "used", in the sense that they were (more or less) tricked into revealing the highest price that they were willing to pay. That information could, in certain circumstances, be used against them at a later date.
But the real problem with the way the auction was handled is that now some people will worry a little more about the risk of bidding against potted plants and chandeliers at every auction, on coins of any value. It's not good for the market.
They weren't already worried?
But the real problem with the way the auction was handled is that now some people will worry a little more about the risk of bidding against potted plants and chandeliers at every auction, on coins of any value. It's not good for the market.
Boom
mark
Shill bidding is never good and generally against the law. Call it anything you want, but I smell a rat!
The auctioneer CLEARLY stated that they retained the right to bid on behalf of the consignor.
Absolutely true, but that doesn't make it smart.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
We are forgetting that there is another 1804 Class I in the collection - the Dexter specimen. I suppose that coin will be buyable.
Was Brent in the room? People bidding knew they were bidding against the owner.
He was in the room before the auction started, but I looked for him and didn't see him once bidding began.
Stacks clearly stated that the seller reserved the right to bid. The bidding was between Chris K up front, presumably for the seller, and one phone bidder to the right (facing front), who that was for who knows.
I actually bought quite a few coins in this sale and I am very happy with my buys.
Just wanted to say that in order to say something positive about the sale
For me it was an exciting sale with many pricing surprises on the high side as well as on the low side - and with many beautiful coins.
+1
I bought a few as well. Yes, there were surprises both high and low. There were some fantastic coins in this collection beyond the Omnipresent Duo.
I give away money. I collect money.
I don’t love money . I do love the Lord God.
I thought PCGS was quite liberal with their grading on most coins.
What about the 31 of 63 coins that CACed?
Pre auction collusion?
Not that there's anything wrong with that.
The most storied coin in numismatics just got another chapter.
I like that perspective !
The simpler explanation is that "someone" had to bid the coin up to the reserve to help establish current market value.
Establishing a "market value" (real or not) was the first thought that came to my mind.
The simpler explanation is that "someone" had to bid the coin up to the reserve to help establish current market value.
Establishing a "market value" (real or not) was the first thought that came to my mind.
But under these circumstances, does it really establish a market value ?
The simpler explanation is that "someone" had to bid the coin up to the reserve to help establish current market value.
Establishing a "market value" (real or not) was the first thought that came to my mind.
But under these circumstances, does it really establish a market value ?
Not at all.
But it's certainly better than no bids whatsoever
Before the auction began, there was an announcement that the auction firm may continue bidding up to undisclosed reserves on some lots. I am not aware of any true bids, though there could have been some. I was there and I have been writing about auctions for more than twenty years.
JustACommeMan: "Most bizarre auction and "bidding" I've ever seen in art, wine, sports cars or autos"
I have seen similar 'bidding' in other Sotheby's auctions, lot of phones with undisclosed reserves. The "going backwards" bid on the 1822 was puzzling, however, as I have never seen a situation exactly like that before.
Roadrunner: "There are 3 1822's known. Could even be another one out there."
Come on, Runner, what is the probability of another 1822 surfacing? It was much more famous among collectors during the period from the 1870s to the 1920s than it is currently. There must have been many people searching for an 1822.
Roadrunner: "Another 1804 dollar showing up would have little to no change on the price structure."
It would affect price levels if turned out to be a gem quality, Class I "Original" 1804. Even a newly discovered, 63 grade piece could lead to one serious buyer not being interested in the others. Even so, the probability of a 16th 1804 dollar existing is very low. These have received endless publicity for generations.
Marvelous Pogue Family Coin Collection Part 18 – Half Dollars and Bust Dollars Fare Well in 4th Auction
Marvelous Pogue Family Coin Collection, part 17: Importance of 4th Sale to Collectors who Cannot Afford the Coins
insightful10@gmail.com
Gold coins are recovered from shipwrecks all the time
Come on, Runner, what is the probability of another 1822 surfacing? It was much more famous among collectors during the period from the 1870s to the 1920s than it is currently. There must have been many people searching for an 1822.
The probability is higher than zero. No amount of searching will produce another if an owner doesn't want to reveal it to the numismatic community. And the idea of "freshness" vs. market value has been beat into the coin market over the past 20 years. If a coin is not fresh, it brings less money....even an 1804 silver dollar. What could be fresher than a previously unknown specimen of a rarity coming to auction within 6-12 months? If I had an 1822 $5 sitting around, the best course of action would be to keep it hidden until the day came for it to be sold.
As far as "searches" go, there were very few collectors and dealers back in the 1870's to 1920's. What, those guys had effective means to scour the entire country and its population to find an 1822 $5 via horseback, train, and telegraph? Compare that to the past 2 generations of coin enthusiasts. The sheer numbers and flow of information today dwarfs those old days. 50 years of "searching" back then is probably worth 1 year of searching with today's skill set.
Collectors have been aware for a long time that 1870-s coinage was struck for special purposes yet never released. None of them found an 1870-s half dime or quarter until approx 1980 when the half dime popped up in a junk box. Are there more? Probably. Will they be found? The odds are very low. But I suspect sometime in the next 100 yrs another one (or more) will pop...maybe even some 1873-s No Arrows coinage, or even an 1873-s silver dollar.
While this is true, it is extremely rare for a Capped Head half eagle to be recovered in a shipwreck. None of them were minted in SF or NO. By the late 1820s or early 1830s, they stopped circulating altogether and were exported and/or melted; each then than more than $5 worth of gold.
Roadrunner: "The probability is higher than zero. No amount of searching will produce another if an owner doesn't want to reveal it to the numismatic community."
So, Roadrunner is saying that someone could well be sitting on a coin from 1822, which was extremely popular from the 1870s to the 1920s, and is now certainly worth millions if it is fairly gradable. This is a fascinating hypothesis. Are there other precedents for such a turn of events?
Roadrunner: "None of them found an 1870-s half dime or quarter until approx 1980 when the half dime popped up in a junk box. Are there more? Probably. Will they be found? The odds are very low. But I suspect sometime in the next 100 yrs another one (or more) will pop...maybe even some 1873-s No Arrows coinage, or even an 1873-s silver dollar. "
The emergence of the 1870-S half dime is a good point. A gold coin, though, would have been far more likely to be traded or melted by non-numismatists in the past than an 1870-S half dime. Even so, I am glad that I raised the issue. Roadrunner's perspective on this topic is interesting.
Gazes: "I keep reading that the two coins did not sell because the reserve was not met. Is it a reserve if it a secret and changing number ? "
I will research the matter further. My current understanding is that, under NY State Law, an undisclosed reserve is legal and the auction firm may bid for the purpose of pushing the level to approach the reserve. There was an announcement before the auction began, and it was implied that there would be such activity. Why would Gazes think that any of the reserves was a "changing number"? I am not aware of any evidence that the reserves were changing during the activity.
Marvelous Pogue Family Coin Collection Part 18 – Half Dollars and Bust Dollars Fare Well in 4th Auction
Marvelous Pogue Family Coin Collection, part 17: Importance of 4th Sale to Collectors who Cannot Afford the Coins
insightful10@gmail.com
Bill Jones: "As I said in another post, it's odd that the Stack's - Bowers when to the trouble an expense to publish a hardcover book on the 1822 half eagle, which they gave free of charge to preferred customers, when it turned out that the coin was essentially withdrawn from sale."
Not fair, Mr. Jones, consider that there were no reserves in the Pogue I or II sales. Although I have heard rumors of reserves in Pogue III, including some spread on this forum, I am not aware of any evidence that there were reserves in Pogue III. So, Pogue IV might have been the first Pogue auction with reserves.
1) The 1822 half eagle book was written long before the Pogue III sale. The staff at SBG might then have been under the impression that the 1822 would be put 'on the block' without a reserve. Indeed, it is likely that they thought so.
2) Rumors from reliable sources suggest that the contract with the Pogues included a provision for SBG to publish a book on the Eliasberg-Pogue 1822 half eagle. If so, it would be unfair to blame SBG for the poorly reasoned reserve or to suggest that SBG mis-allocated resources by publishing that book.
The Marvelous Pogue Family Coin Collection, part 19: Most Dynamic Half Eagles in 4th Auction
insightful10@gmail.com
Bill Jones: "As I said in another post, it's odd that the Stack's - Bowers when to the trouble an expense to publish a hardcover book on the 1822 half eagle, which they gave free of charge to preferred customers, when it turned out that the coin was essentially withdrawn from sale."
Not fair, Mr. Jones, consider that there were no reserves in the Pogue I or II sales. Although I have heard rumors of reserves in Pogue III, including some spread on this forum, I am not aware of any evidence that there were reserves in Pogue III. So, Pogue IV might have been the first Pogue auction with reserve.
They were afraid those 2 coins might have sold for 4 to 7 million which would look bad. Considering what happened at the last sale can you blame them?
NGC registry V-Nickel proof #6!!!!
working on proof shield nickels # 8 with a bullet!!!!
RIP "BEAR"
Bill Jones: "As I said in another post, it's odd that the Stack's - Bowers when to the trouble an expense to publish a hardcover book on the 1822 half eagle, which they gave free of charge to preferred customers, when it turned out that the coin was essentially withdrawn from sale."
Originally Posted by Analyst: Not fair, Mr. Jones, consider that there were no reserves in the Pogue I or II sales. Although I have heard rumors of reserves in Pogue III, including some spread on this forum, I am not aware of any evidence that there were reserves in Pogue III. So, Pogue IV might have been the first Pogue auction with reserves.
1) The 1822 half eagle book was written long before the Pogue III sale. The staff at SBG might then have been under the impression that the 1822 would be put 'on the block' without a reserve.
2) Rumors from reliable sources suggest that the contract with the Pogues included a provision for SBG to publish a book on the Eliasberg-Pogue 1822 half eagle. If so, it would be unfair to blame SBG for the poorly reasoned reserve or to suggest that SBG mis-allocated resources by publishing that book.
The Marvelous Pogue Family Coin Collection, part 19: Most Dynamic Half Eagles in 4th Auction
insightful10@gmail.com
Who said the following? It was not me! : "They were afraid those 2 coins might have sold for 4 to 7 million which would look bad. Considering what happened at the last sale can you blame them?"
Who are "they" in this statement, the Pogues or the SBG employees? In any event, it is usually not a good idea to speculate about what others are thinking. Moreover, while $4m would be weak for the Childs-Pogue 1804, auction sales of $5m to $7m each for these two coins would not have made anyone "look bad" in the minds of those who are knowledgeable about coin markets. I really disagree with that statement in Penny's post. For the 1804, $5 to $7m would be a range of moderate to strong prices. For the 1822, such amounts would certainly be even stronger, really strong!
What are Auction Prices?
As I said in another post, it's odd that the Stacks' - Bowers when to the trouble an expense to publish a hardcover book on the 1822 half eagle, which they gave free of charge to preferred customers, when it turned out that the coin was essentually withdrawn from sale.
I bought that book. QDB autograph. Interesting read. Like $22.
The coin essentially withdrawn from sale?
It'll be offered again. MHO.
After all these two coins would prolly have sold for nearly as much as the other 61 coins combined . . . Just a thought.
HH
1947-P & D; 1948-D; 1949-P & S; 1950-D & S; and 1952-S.
Any help locating any of these OBW rolls would be gratefully appreciated!
Zoins: "Pogue IV provided a lot of coverage for the 1804 and 1822 coins as well as the auction. Perhaps the attention for the coins and the auction was enough?"
The attention paid to those two coins deflected attention from the other great coins in the auction. How many people are familiar with the rarity of 1828/7, 1828 and 1829 half eagles? Do many people remember that there was a choice 1838-O half dollar in this auction?
The Marvelous Pogue Family Coin Collection, part 17: Importance of 4th Sale to Collectors who Cannot Afford the Coins
HalfHunter: "With folks conjuring reasons for Mr. Pogue's decision, I'm kind wondering if maybe his tax attys/accountants may have advised him to wait until next year to sell. "
The coins are owned by a non-human entity, I believe a trust, though it could be a foundation or some other construct. Tax issues are different and it is unlikely that they are crucial. The elder Pogue is not as interested in coins now as he was in the past, and he wishes to concentrate on other matters during the remainder of his life. He is a senior citizen.
My hypothesis is that the elder Pogue or 'team Pogue' placed values on those two coins that are inconsistent with current market levels. 'The Market' was mis-interpreted and/or those two coins are worth more to the consignor than they are to bidders now. There is no secret plan or game, as far as I know. After the Pogue III sale, it was clear that coin markets have dropped since August 2015. Please read my articles:
The Marvelous Pogue Family Coin Collection, part 14: Successful Third Auction Given Uncertain Market Conditions
Pogue Family Coin Collection Part 18 – Half Dollars and Bust Dollars Fare Well in 4th Auction
insightful10@gmail.com