Options
The Battle Born Collection
GeorgeKellogg
Posts: 1,251 ✭✭
...of Carson City coins just crossed the block at the Philly ANA. Are there any comments on the Prices Realized? What was the buzz in the auction room?
"Clamorous for Coin"
0
Comments
bob
<< <i>Total with the 17.5% just shy of $10,000,000. The room was packed. >>
WOW!!!
Rainbow Stars
This meant even bigger hammer bids.
For what did the 1876-CC double dime hammer?
See http://www.doubledimes.com for a free online reference for US twenty-cent pieces
<< <i>For what did the 1876-CC double dime hammer? >>
The SB web site indicates the hammer was $400K, which puts it at $460K, with 15% BP.
<< <i>
<< <i>For what did the 1876-CC double dime hammer? >>
The SB web site indicates the hammer was $400K, which puts it at $460K, with 15% BP. >>
Dang! Looks like I was an underbidder ... again!
See http://www.doubledimes.com for a free online reference for US twenty-cent pieces
<< <i>What did the unique 1873-CC No Arrows dime go for, the last coin Louis Eliasberg needed ... ? >>
Never mind, looked it up myself. $1,840,000! Pretty swell, but then again it's among a very few U.S. coins that can truly be called unique. I was the high bidder for about 14 seconds.
<< <i>
<< <i>What did the unique 1873-CC No Arrows dime go for, the last coin Louis Eliasberg needed ... ? >>
Never mind, looked it up myself. $1,840,000! Pretty swell, but then again it's among a very few U.S. coins that can truly be called unique. I was the high bidder for about 14 seconds. >>
Better luck next time!
See http://www.doubledimes.com for a free online reference for US twenty-cent pieces
<< <i>Laura said my old 1873-CC seated dollar went for $55k hammer. If true, this was an absolute steal as IIRC we sold the coin for $75k at least six years ago. >>
That's 73% of the 2005-2007 market area peak for seated material. That's pretty much in line with the 25-40% drop seen in many other areas in choice/gem PF/MS material.
There were several very visible people actively building choice to gem seated dollar sets from 2004-2008. From what I can see, that demand/competition has dropped off
considerably since then.
yes it did, It started at 32, 800 open I bid it to 50k, but hesitated after that , it sold to somebody in the room at 55k . It was too early in the sale for me to go all in due to a few other lots I wanted more , after getting blown out on them, I wish i had bid the 73-cc $ higher after the fact. Especially now that I here it sold for 75k in the past. Oh well. A well respected seated guy i know was in the room to bid on the 70-cc quarter, course we were both blown away on the price it brought 140k. Anyway the reason I was mentioning it, him and I disagreed on both these coins. He did not like the 73-cc$, but really liked the quarter. My take was the 73-cc $ had a few minor scrapes on the high points but the overall look to me was pleasing. I thought the 70-cc quarter had great surface quality, but was a bit dark for my taste, also the strike was a little less that what id expect to see on a 55 coin.
Where is that sarcasm emoticon?
Rusty did a wonderful job for his collector, and the perfect storm paid off.
Seen the 76-CC $5 a few times, and it's beyond very sweet. For some reason I was particularly impressed with the 1871-CC $10. Definitely DOG (in the RYK sense) and quite lustrous too.
Prices? A perfect storm for specialist collectors. Rusty Goe proved that not only do you need a lot of money to build a set like this, but knowledge and patience too. No one will EVER see a CC set like this again.
Save the catalogue. Superb job with more information about that mint, history and coinage practices than has ever been presented before. Consider it a must read.
<< <i>
<< <i>Total with the 17.5% just shy of $10,000,000. The room was packed. >>
WOW!!! >>
who says theres a tough economy out there? ( people want there coins i know )
A large percentage of the lots in the Battle Born session were subject to a 15% buyer’s fee, not a 17.5% buyer’s fee. It may be a good idea for bidders to read the terms of sale. As I said in part 1 of my auction review, there were more than 100 people in attendance, NOT including Stack’s-Bowers employees.
Giorgio11: <<What did the unique 1873-CC No Arrows dime go for[?]>>
The price realized is analyzed in part 1 of my auction review. Comments from dealers who bid on the coin at the 1996 Eliasberg sale are included.
Battle Born Results, Part 1: Rare Silver Carson City Coins
Giorgio11: <<... the last coin Louis Eliasberg needed ...>>
Although Eliasberg acquired this dime in 1950, he purchased the finest known 1817/4 half in 1953. Granted, it is debatable as to whether the 1817/4 was “needed”! Is it true that Eliasberg, like many others, did regard the 1817/4 as a distinct ‘date’ rather than as a die variety?
Pre-Auction Article about the Unique 1873-CC ‘No Arrows’ Dime
ColonelJessup: <<Seen the 76-CC $5 a few times, and it's beyond very sweet. For some reason I was particularly impressed with the 1871-CC $10.>>
I discussed the auction results for these two. Please read:
Battle Born Results, Part 2: Carson City Gold
<< <i>Smoebody don't know a sweet seated dollar when he sees one.
This taken from Analysts article above:
Burdick does not agree with the PCGS grade of AU-58 for the “Battle Born” 1873-CC Liberty Seated Silver Dollar and he found the $63,250 “price to be strong for what it is.” These are very rare. In my view, this is a difficult coin to interpret and it is hard to evaluate the result.
I'm assuming that means Burdick feels it's less than an AU58. Otoh he calls these hard to interpret. Either it's unc or it's not. Any many times the market doesn't care if something
is nice or not, or used to be worth "X." Sometimes it just takes a bit out of everything. The 1794 SP66 Amon Carter dollar is the best example of that. Worth $1 MILL in 1989, then
a third of that only a few years later. Did they make any more of them? No, of course not. But the market said to dump everything. And then later, it transacted for something
around $8 MILL. You could basically toss out the $375K price and just jump from $1 MILL to $8 MILL.
I keep thinking that (some) of the coins went so high /strong, it will take a miracle for some to get out of them when the time comes to sell them. They will not have the big anticipation of the complete set being sold at once and all the fan fare leading up to the sale, as well as the large turn out at this one juncture to bring in all the bidder competition., but I guess as long as they enjoy thier coins, thats all that really matters. Congrats to the winning bidders one last time.
same with the 78-cc $1?
If I remember correctly, i wasnt all that impressed with a majority of the cc morgans for the grade assigned, that along with them in NGC holders probably contributed to the lower than expected price. Honeslty, I didnt pay that much attention to them like the rest of the coins as High grade CC Morgans come up in auctions all the time.
<< <i>....As I mentioned, after the fact I wish i would have bid higher on the 73-cc $, course after reading laura's comment in her report she was willing to go to 150k on that coin, its really a mute point. >>
Would you expect the winning bidder to state anything different? Somewhat strange when you have one bidder willing to go more than 2X higher than anyone else. And it's not like a
73-cc $ trades so infrequently as to be unpriceable.
i think this is the link for those that desire to peruse
warning: take your heart medication in advance
.
Wasn't there once a saying....... "the power of the holder"
<< <i>
<< <i>....As I mentioned, after the fact I wish i would have bid higher on the 73-cc $, course after reading laura's comment in her report she was willing to go to 150k on that coin, its really a mute point. >>
Would you expect the winning bidder to state anything different? Somewhat strange when you have one bidder willing to go more than 2X higher than anyone else. And it's not like a
73-cc $ trades so infrequently as to be unpriceable. >>
Excuse me - but it was a 73CC SEATED dollar in AU58. PCGS. With CAC. Show me another.
What you don't know is that Legend sold a very nice AU55 CAC for $105k. But Legend does know that and has to factor it in when pricing a coin. Bottom line is the coin went stupid cheap - I would have written a check for $75k before the sale and thought I'd gotten a steal. And I know my seated dollars.
There's still a huge gap here if you'd write a check for $75K but Legend was willing to bid to $150K.
I would think that the gouging under star #5 is one of the reasons it didn't catch anyone else's eyes, especially in today's quality driven market. If this were just an 1873 Philly coin I could see this getting bagged or at least downgraded to 55. But this is one of the few high grade AU's so apparently leeway is allowed. The coin does have some high point friction as well as most of the luster missing from the right obv field which suggests AU58 is the highest grade it could achieve. But it definitely has nice eye appeal. It's worth whatever 2 bidders are willing to pay for it.....$64K on this day under full national competition. That's the only reality. It matters much less as to what one specific dealer can retail a similar coin for. There are just too many sharp seated dealers and specialists out there to have let the bidding stop on this one at $64K if they honestly felt it was worth $100K or more. Either that, or they all "gifted" the coin to Legend figuring they'd pay up to moon money any ways. The huge price fetched by the AU55 1870-cc quarter does indicate there was money to be spent. Why it went to the 70-cc 25c and not the 73-cc $ will have to wait for the Colonel Jessup ANA auction scoop (CJANAAS).
I personally feel the coin was never in circulation - the high point friction is different - more like envelope or glassine scraping. As far as the test mark - yup, I agree that it's distracting - but if the Norweb 70-S can have one, so can this coin. In the grand scheme of things I'll take the full luster and the test marks over what you usually see for the date: washed out pieces of crap devoid of any life whatsoever. That's why the coin was a bargain - show me ANY other 73CC that's less than 6 figures with any life to it.
Coins fall through the cracks all the time at auction - it certainly did in this case.
<< <i>Coins fall through the cracks all the time at auction - it certainly did in this case. >>
I agree with TDN. There were so many coins in the auctions, that some coins went for much less than they should have.
And that happens in just about every auction. The bidders have a finite amount of money, and they focus on the coins they want the most. So some coins just don't get the attention or the price that they would without all of that competition from the other coins.
I won't mention the coins I bought as being bargains, but obviously I believed they were or I wouldn't have bought them. I didn't buy the two coins below, but I think they were bargains:
The 1870-CC half in MS-62 NGC - - $109,250 here compared with $172,500 a year ago at the ANA auction.
Also the 1872-CC quarter in MS-62 PCGS at $74,750 - - only two known in Unc. for this date.
Congratulations to the successful bidders on both of these coins!
An authorized PCGS dealer, and a contributor to the Red Book.
Take a zero off and it's the EXACT same situation.
Is it dated 1802?
What's the PCGS pop for AU58 73CC seated dollars? Still three? Do the naysayers know that one (Eliasberg) has upgraded to 61 and the other won't sticker? Hmmmmm.
<< <i>
Also the 1872-CC quarter in MS-62 PCGS at $74,750 - - only two known in Unc. for this date.
>>
Yup, very good price. Nice coin too, I really liked that one.
<< <i>No. What it is isn't as important as the naysayers understanding that when a coin comes along that you almost never see and it's in the right holder and is also CAC stickered that you have to plan for the perfect storm. If you are building a great set, you have to step up and buy coins for more than you want to because most times great coins sell for 'too much'. The opportunity to acquire them is too rare so you have to be aggressive. >>
I agree.
Another way I have heard it is "you have to pay tomorrow's price to get a really rare coin today".
Edit to add: just took another look at the 1873-CC Seated dollar in the catalog - - I don't see any wear on it either. Probably graded 58 because of the small scratch.
An authorized PCGS dealer, and a contributor to the Red Book.
This coin definitely circulated. It didn't lose most of the right obv field luster from just sitting around in a cabinet. It takes a lot of handling to remove metal and luster from
a coin, potentially several years or more of being in circulation. What we call choice unc seated coins today are coins that generally circulated for months if not years before being
plucked out for good.
The high pt obv friction has already been mentioned. The reverse shows it on the wing tips (eagle's left tip as well), neck feathers, shield horiz lines, central wing and leg feather
tips, eagle's center knuckles (esp. left side, outer two). That's not all strike. Overall the coin has about 65-85% of the orig luster intact. If not for that right obv field I might go along
with the cabinet friction theory. The fact that a graded 70-s $ has allowed damage doesn't necessarily make it acceptable for the next rarity. Again, if this were a '73 Philly coin,
it probably wouldn't be graded. That's not to dimish what this 73-cc $ is either. It can well be the finest AU and the 2nd or 3rd most appealing one known. That 70-cc half in MS62
did go for way too much money earlier. The new price is more in line imo. The rare date seated market is still recovering from the effects of several now missing big buyers that
aggressively competed about 4-6 years ago. The current market is almost to the point of being stupidly critical for overall quality, holders, and stickers. If you're missing any one
element a coin can sell for peanuts. Take away the obv field etchings on this one and it could have easily bid to $150K. If I were building a seated dollar set today and this 73-cc
dollar was the best specimen that would be available to me, I probably wouldn't go after it. I've seen too many coins go begging the past 0-4 yrs when they have noteworthy
imperfections. Price has almost become a non-issue for such coins. Still, we have a chasm here in the competitive market valuation of AU55's/58's from $64K to $150K. If I were a
buyer in such a market, I'd have to think conservatively....not aggresively. If that makes me a naysayer, so be it. 1873-cc's in all grades (and CC dollars in general) have tended
to be overrated in both price and rarity over the past 40 yrs. Their miniscule mintages overshadowed the fact that a sizeable % were saved, much more so than the dimes and quarters
for example. But the dollar's large size has made them fan favorites. If I just sold an AU55 for $105K, I sure as heck better a buyer for an AU58 up to and beyond that point to
support my market. An AU-unc 73-cc dollar is a high profile coin, these don't just fall through the cracks. Obviously, a lot of support for the coin's quality. But where were the bidders?
A lack of bidders/ready cash is just as important to a market as the coins themselves.
When I bought the Share collection in order to get some massive seated rarities to fill out my set, I considered briefly retaining this coin over the pristine but dark MS65. That's how nice this coin's eye appeal is.
Holding the coin in hand is not going to change the field friction. I also can't disagree that the entire range of 58-62 can be essentially one grade with varying levels of quality.
Therefore, all we have to really go on with this particular situation is what it fetched in the open market at the year's most important and strongly attended auction. That's the
only truth that can't be disputed or argued. Where were Heritage, Spectrum, Contursi, RCNH, Laibstein, CAM, Avena, Pinnacle, and all the others? There "should" have been
numerous bidders on this coin above $64K. The Heritage archives show the Joe Thomas "bright" NGC AU58 selling for $34K at the 4/2009 market bottom and the Queller NGC AU55
going for $49K in 4/2008 (market peak). Those coins didn't have the appeal of this one though this is nearly 2X the price of the Thomas coin and considerably more than the Quellar
which sold during the peak of the last bull market. And to compare apples to apples, Legend's AU55 1873-cc $ is reported as sold in their archives in Feb 2008 during the market peak
period....same time as the Quellar coin sold. Did Legend's James Stack 73-cc get sold by them again or is that $105K price from early 2008? We're a long ways from the heat of early
2008.
When I bought the Share collection in order to get some massive seated rarities to fill out my set, I considered briefly retaining this coin over the pristine but dark MS65. That's how nice this coin's eye appeal is.
Certainly the price differential must have been a huge factor with a $500K coin vs. a $50K-$100K coin. And then you have to coinsider giving up 7 registry points as well. Having the
world's finest set but knowing there was an MS65 73-cc seated dollar kicking around out there would have eventually taken a toll on the psyche. Fwiw the key 73-cc MS65 trade dollar
has the same issue with being a bit dark and subdued. That's the way most gem seated coins end up looking if they didn't get dipped sometime in the past 50-75 years. You probably
didn't think too long on retaining the scratched AU58 over an MS65, even at the heftier price tag.
<< <i>This is dark and subdued? >>
Not what I said. You left out "a bit." Big difference. The coin is in the mid to deeper browns of the toning spectrum. The luster comes through though it is a tad muted. If the coin
weren't a bit darker/less flashy than the usual PCGS MS65 it wouldn't have taken a few trips to get the grade. The photo certainly does make it look much better with a more
colorful pattern. At Vermeulle I recall the coin being a fairly consistent brown/coppery/bronze coloration (graded it 64++ with good 5 shot). In this photo it looks like a MS66 short of
minor striking issues.
<< <i>Could one of the expert members here explain to me the halo around the stars as seen in the recent stack's Bowers photo, over the past few years different theories have been suggested by what could have possibly caused that to happen. thanks >>
In my experience there is no one single explanation as to the cause. I've seen coins that have been dipped and/or cleaned where the coin has subsequently retoned with halos forming around stars, lettering etc. and I've also seen this on coins that appear to be 100% originally toned and have an original skin. The halo effect can also sometimes be seen on coins that have been AT'd after being worked on.
<< <i>Could one of the expert members here explain to me the halo around the stars as seen in the recent stack's Bowers photo, over the past few years different theories have been suggested by what could have possibly caused that to happen. thanks >>
Cant say im an expert as this is one of the best analytical threads (with 2 major players going back and forth) Ive read here in a while, but if Im not mistaken thats retained luster. You can find on many similar pieces that a semi-prooflike like is retained around the stars causing a halo effect.
Analyst on Coinweek.com: <<Burdick does not agree with the PCGS grade of AU-58 for the “Battle Born” 1873-CC Liberty Seated Silver Dollar and he found the $63,250 “price to be strong for what it is.” These are very rare. In my view, this is a difficult coin to interpret and it is hard to evaluate the result.>>
Roadrunner: <<I'm assuming that means Burdick feels it's less than an AU58. How [does] he calls these hard to interpret. Either it's unc or it's not.>>
Burdick maintains that the interruptions in the metal indicate that it should be net graded well below 58 or possibly determined to be not gradable. His opinion is not exactly the same as mine.
Roadrunner: <<I would think that the gouging under star #5 is one of the reasons it didn't catch anyone else's eyes, especially in today's quality driven market. If this were just an 1873 Philly coin I could see this getting bagged or at least downgraded to 55. But this is one of the few high grade AU's so apparently leeway is allowed. >>
Roadrunner’s points here are fair.
TDN: <<As far as the test mark - yup, I agree that it's distracting - but if the Norweb 70-S can have one, so can this coin.>>
Others indicated to me that they were very concerned about the interruptions in the metal. This is a serious issue. Its state is not far from the borderline of not being gradable. While I agree that it is gradable, the extent to which TDN is raving about it is very puzzling. As I said, it is a very difficult coin to interpret.
Also, it is not analogous to the Norweb 70-S dollar. The interruptions in the metal on this coin are more serious than any scratches on the Norweb 70-S, which is a terrific coin.
TDN: << Coins fall through the cracks all the time at auction - it certainly did in this case.>>
It did not. The price realized is commensurate with the quality of the coin.
Rich: <<. So, some coins just don't get the attention or the price that they would without all of that competition from the other coins.>>
While Rich’s point is applicable to most auction settings, the offering of the Battle Born Collection is in a different category. The entire 111 coin set was placed on display at FUN, at Central States, at Long Beach and at two conventions in Baltimore. Additionally, there was lot viewing in California, New York City and for several days in Philadelphia. Plus, there was an advertising blitz. There were a few weak results, but ‘nothing fell through the cracks.’
Rich: <<The 1870-CC half in MS-62 NGC - - $109,250 here compared with $172,500 a year ago at the ANA auction. >>
Roadrunner: <<that 70-cc half in MS62did go for way too much money earlier. The new price is more in line imo. >>
I agree with Roadrunner. The price last year was extremely strong, well above market levels. Further, it was fresh last year and stale this year. The consignor may have benefitted financially if he had waited a few years after buying his last coin before selling his collection.
Rich: <<Also the 1872-CC quarter in MS-62 PCGS at $74,750 - - only two known in Unc. for this date>>
Rich and I discussed this coin on the phone. We agreed to disagree. This coin has issues. IMO, the auction result is not weak.
Battle Born Results, Part 1: Rare Silver Carson City Coins
Battle Born Results, Part 1: Rare Silver Carson City Coins
No. Did you miss my cash offer of $75k? You can't claim an auction result defines the value of a coin when there's a higher bid.