<< <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... :-) >>
It's difficult for me to take you seriously with that anti-intellectual quote, especially when you can't even get the name of the movie correct, The Big Lebowski.
I have bid in well over 100 live auctions during the past 30 years. I have made jump bids in a handful of those auctions, with mixed results. The technique or strategy is not unknown to me.
God bless whoever video taped the auction bidding and thereby prevented the possibility of revisionist history.
I have no objection to jump bidding per se. My primary criticism in this instance is that Laura BID AGAINST HERSELF. The bidding was likely over, with Laura the winner, at $5.5M. If the auctioneer had called, "I have a split bid of $5.25M, who will give me $5.5M" and Laura then jumped the bid, I would have let her spend her money without comment. If she had jumped the bid at any point earlier, without bidding against herself, I also would have let her spend her money without comment.
My secondary criticism relates to the oddball amount of the bid, which I believe was a publicity stunt to get the coin over $10M. The bid increment was $500K. Explain to me how an off increment bid of $8.525M, which amounts to $10,016,875 including the buyer's premium, is anything other than a publicity stunt. That's the kind of oddball bid you make at a sealed bid auction, not a live sale.
Jay Parrino was the first person to pay over $1M for a coin, the Eliasberg 1913 nickel in 1996. He has stated that it was his ambition in life to be the first person to ever pay $1M for a coin. I believe Parrino sold that coin to none other than TDN. You don't think Parrino's huge profit on the Eliasberg 1913, the first coin to crack $1M, might have given TDN the idea that he wanted to be the first person ever to pay $10M for a coin? If not, I think you're naive or willingly blind.
Incidentally, in 1989, an 1804 dollar was sold at auction for $990,000 with no shenanigans or gamesmanship.
My tertiary criticism relates to the self congratulations Legend has given itself for its "brilliant" bidding strategy and the board lemmings who endorse it. Looking at the video, there's a significant chance that the bidding would have ended at $5.5M with Laura the winner. Legend may have paid $3.025M plus 17.5% more than was necessary to acquire the coin. That's not what I would call brilliant, unless you happen to think that $10M is a "magic" number.
In short, I believe Legend wanted to duplicate the publicity and profit that Parrino realized from cracking the $1M barrier, by cracking the $10M barrier, even if they had to bid against themselves with oddball amounts to do it.
<< <i> In short, I believe Legend wanted to duplicate the publicity and profit that Parrino realized from cracking the $1M barrier, by cracking the $10M barrier, even if they had to bid against themselves with oddball amounts to do it. >>
Even if this was true, so the f what? Why are you so concerned about their bets, hedges and holdings strategy at a game you aren't even a player at.
While I respect your right to ask contrary questions, your diatribe has long turned into a rant that reeks of jealousy all while having a pretty high opinion of your unsolicited opinion. Win, lose or draw I think it is time you stop posting, you're making a fool of your self independent of your points.
<< <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... :-) >>
It's difficult for me to take you seriously with that anti-intellectual quote, especially when you can't even get the name of the movie correct, The Big Lebowski.
I have bid in well over 100 live auctions during the past 30 years. I have made jump bids in a handful of those auctions, with mixed results. The technique or strategy is not unknown to me.
God bless whoever video taped the auction bidding and thereby prevented the possibility of revisionist history.
I have no objection to jump bidding per se. My primary criticism in this instance is that Laura BID AGAINST HERSELF. The bidding was likely over, with Laura the winner, at $5.5M. If the auctioneer had called, "I have a split bid of $5.25M, who will give me $5.5M" and Laura then jumped the bid, I would have let her spend her money without comment. If she had jumped the bid at any point earlier, without bidding against herself, I also would have let her spend her money without comment.
My secondary criticism relates to the oddball amount of the bid, which I believe was a publicity stunt to get the coin over $10M. The bid increment was $500K. Explain to me how an off increment bid of $8.525M, which amounts to $10,016,875 including the buyer's premium, is anything other than a publicity stunt. That's the kind of oddball bid you make at a sealed bid auction, not a live sale.
Jay Parrino was the first person to pay over $1M for a coin, the Eliasberg 1913 nickel in 1996. He has stated that it was his ambition in life to be the first person to ever pay $1M for a coin. I believe Parrino sold that coin to none other than TDN. You don't think Parrino's huge profit on the Eliasberg 1913, the first coin to crack $1M, might have given TDN the idea that he wanted to be the first person ever to pay $10M for a coin? If not, I think you're naive or willingly blind.
Incidentally, in 1989, an 1804 dollar was sold at auction for $990,000 with no shenanigans or gamesmanship.
My tertiary criticism relates to the self congratulations Legend has given itself for its "brilliant" bidding strategy and the board lemmings who endorse it. Looking at the video, there's a significant chance that the bidding would have ended at $5.5M with Laura the winner. Legend may have paid $3.025M plus 17.5% more than was necessary to acquire the coin. That's not what I would call brilliant, unless you happen to think that $10M is a "magic" number.
In short, I believe Legend wanted to duplicate the publicity and profit that Parrino realized from cracking the $1M barrier, by cracking the $10M barrier, even if they had to bid against themselves with oddball amounts to do it. >>
Oh for heaven's sake. You have NO basis for claiming the bidding was going to end there - none. And OF COURSE we added an extra $25k to the bid to get over $10M. Only a fool (and apparently you as well) would not. As for the 1804 dollar at $990k, the purchaser is well known for having stated that if he'd have thought about it, he would have added $10k to his bid. And no, I did not buy the 1913 from Parrino. Good Lord - at least get SOME facts correct if you are going to go on and on about this!
This is the last post I will ever make on this matter.
<< <i>Oh for heaven's sake. You have NO basis for claiming the bidding was going to end there - none. And OF COURSE we added an extra $25k to the bid to get over $10M. Only a fool (and apparently you as well) would not. As for the 1804 dollar at $990k, the purchaser is well known for having stated that if he'd have thought about it, he would have added $10k to his bid. And no, I did not buy the 1913 from Parrino. Good Lord - at least get SOME facts correct if you are going to go on and on about this! >>
I believe you have posted that you purchased an ultra rarity from Jay Parrino long ago and hated giving him a large profit. I could not recall if it was the Eliasberg 1913; thus, I stated it as a matter of belief as opposed to fact.
<< <i> In short, I believe Legend wanted to duplicate the publicity and profit that Parrino realized from cracking the $1M barrier, by cracking the $10M barrier, even if they had to bid against themselves with oddball amounts to do it. >>
Even if this was true, so the f what? Why are you so concerned about their bets, hedges and holdings strategy at a game you aren't even a player at.
While I respect your right to ask contrary questions, your diatribe has long turned into a rant that reeks of jealousy all while having a pretty high opinion of your unsolicited opinion. Win, lose or draw I think it is time you stop posting, you're making a fool of your self independent of your points. >>
I am offended by market manipulation, in this case the premeditated creation of a $10M coin. The fact that I have suffered no direct financial harm is irrelevant to whether my sensibilities are offended.
I have no desire to provoke your ire; however, whether I'm declining in your popularity contest because of my sensibilities isn't of interest to me.
If you think I post because of jealousy, you're sorely mistaken. If you think a principled man, unafraid to criticize when others are afraid, is a fool, then I don't respect your opinion or character.
Thanks for explaining in detail. We are all seeing the stall at 5.5m; it's just a matter of speculation (on whether there were other people likely to bid), I think.
<< <i>If the auctioneer had called, "I have a split bid of $5.25M, who will give me $5.5M" and Laura then jumped the bid, I would have let her spend her money without comment. >>
I think maybe what happened here is that Laura quickly raised her card, to stay aggressive / unflinching, and "take control" as she generally put it in the Market Report. Maybe on hindsight she would have jumped the bid here, if she had not been aggressive.
It seems that jump bids have to follow some kind of stall, as you can't just raise your card to do one, or the auctioneer applies the standard increment. You have to be in a period of silence where the auctioneer can hear you. You have done jump bids - how did the timing work?
There was a shorter stall at 4.75m, where Laura eventually bid 5m. This is consistent with what she stated in the Market Report, about how she initially wanted to jump the bid to 5m early, but at 4.75m she may have paused as she realized the window for that plan was gone.
However, I am uncomfortable with guessing Laura''s unobserved motivations for the sequence and timing of bids, even though it's so tempting to do it and I've given my guesses above. So I'm accepting of the explanation in the Market Report.
Instead of "market manipulation", I think "placing a bet" is a friendlier term. They bet that others will agree it's worth $10m or more. They may be right or wrong, but it's their bet and nobody is being directly manipulated.
I think we are all in agreement on the secondary criticism, that adding $25k to $8.5m was a smart move to bump the result over $10m and make it easier to remember this as the first over $10m.
<< <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. >>
We have had plenty of financial resets in different asset classes in this country and that's when I want to have cash.
Edited to add: housing, gold, stocks, bonds, commercial real estate just a few examples....,
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.
A couple observations before I bow out of this thread for good:
1) Legend wanted to own the coin and they wanted it to cost at least $10M. So, regardless of what anyone else feels about those motives, you have to admit they accomplished both goals at the minimum price.
2) I am so freaking sick and tired of people saying "you're just jealous" whenever anyone comments less than positively on a high dollar coin transaction. Makes me wonder if these people are just projecting their own feelings.
Incidentally, in 1989, an 1804 dollar was sold at auction for $990,000 with no shenanigans or gamesmanship.
There's not a person on this board that if they had $990K to buy that coin, that adding an additional $10K would have been money well spent and returned many times over. Ok, maybe 1 person on this board might not agree.
Legend felt all along the coin was worth $10M and that it might take more to buy it. They won it and that's all there is to it. As I said earlier, there's not exactly a ton of top flight coins in the $5 MILL to $10 MILL range on the market.
J-1776 is one coin that I don't think one would have to think twice about paying 8 figures for.
<< <i>Legend felt all along the coin was worth $10K and that it might take more to buy it. >>
Hopefully you were meaning $10M?
At any rate, Legend certainly felt the coin was worth $10 million and they made damn sure that it sold for that amount and NOT $5.5 M or $7M. >>
Yep, type. Now fixed.
The 94-s dime story might be cool....if some or all of it were true. The 1913 Lib nickel story is probably cool too....if we knew any of the actual details as to how they were "authorized."
The legend of the 1794 SP dollar is growing. There's a lot to be said for a large dollar vs. a tiny dime. "Smallcoinitis" is partly responsible for keeping the price of the unique 70-s half dime and the 73-cc NA dimes well below the price of other major rarities existing in larger numbers. "Bigcoinitis" is a huge plus. $20/$50 gold pieces and silver dollars are a tough act to follow. In my mind, the "story" of the 94-s dime is more than countered by it's smaller size vs. the 1794 dollar. And I'm not really sure what the story is either. 10 of them were supposedly officially authorized and minted. That's about the only story that counts. The 1804 dollar has a much more storied history. Not much can measure up to that. The 1794 was really made for commerce. Most of the other big dollar rarities were not. Then again, depending on one's point of view, that might be a plus or a negative.
<< <i>I am offended by market manipulation, in this case the premeditated creation of a $10M coin. >>
I'm offended by market manipulation for immediate profit. Like the stock broker who buys cheap on his own account and then starts pushing the same product to all his customers.
I chose the 1794 dollar. While i figure the coin will sell for more than 10 million down the road i was a little surprised that more bidders were not holding their paddles up. Very little action imo, a few saavy bidders could have run the price up on legend and maybe there would have been a real sale at 14 million without a cast of doubt over the price. The video seems akward for a dealer that been in the game as long as they have and participated in as many auctions as they have.
I just passed the 50 year milemark eariler this year and my eyes now need reading glasses for the first time in my life so the dimes are out.
I jumped the price of a dump truck at auction years ago. I needed the truck and had already been nickeled and dimed on other pieces of constuction equiptment earlier in the day so i just thru out my nuclear bid after the first 3 or 4 bids. I won it, wrote the check and took it home. Never thought much as to wether i over paid or not. I way overbid on the job i needed it for and they accepted my bid.
Mark NGC registry V-Nickel proof #6!!!! working on proof shield nickels # 8 with a bullet!!!!
TDN: <<As a point of fact, I use the factor of 4 when guesstimating values of ultra-rarities from the Eliasberg sale. That's a double every 8 years which fits in with the others IMO. That would make the 1913 nickel worth $6M (seems right) and the 1885 trade dollar worth $3.65M (seems right). 1894-S dime comes in at $1.8M and it is reportedly slightly below our specimen.>>
Your 1894-S dime is now of higher quality than the Eliasberg 1894-S dime was, when I last examined it.
Col. Jessup: <<The Norweb coin now grades PR62. It's just barely not a piece of crap. Perhaps consideration of the 1990 sale of a better piece (PR65) at $275,000 might be a data point with more relevance>>
The grade of the Norweb coin was then in the high end of the 62 range. It may receive a higher grade now. It is or was a really pleasant coin. The history, since the 1980s, of 1894-S dimes, including these two, is spelled out in my recent article.
19Lyds: <<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 explain that there are really only nine currently known, not ten. It is extremely unlikely that others will turn up. Certainly, the probability of there existing more than eleven must be close to zero. This is one of the five most famous U.S. coins and people have been searching for them for many decades. Besides, most Great Rarities do not have thoroughly documented stories, and no one expects them to have such stories.
The 1894-S is the rarest Barber Dime and the second rarest dime overall. More than 100,000 people collect dimes.
Col. Jessup: <<The Norweb coin now grades PR62. It's just barely not a piece of crap. Perhaps consideration of the 1990 sale of a better piece (PR65) at $275,000 might be a data point with more relevance>>
The grade of the Norweb coin was then in the high end of the 62 range. It may receive a higher grade now. It is or was a really pleasant coin. The history, since the 1980s, of 1894-S dimes, including these two, is spelled out in my recent article. >>
I was there with my hand in the air, though not on that one. I'll retract "piece of crap" and call it schlock.
Maybe we should call it a "consolation prize".
Analyst, perhaps my somewhat florid style of describing coins from a visceral level contrasts jarringly with the precisions you assume from your research. You often give us valuable factual knowledge. While I find some fun in violating your intellectual boundaries, I have more fun as a garrulous old man telling stories until he falls asleep in his rocker on the porch.
MrE and I and Roshi Aki has lunch today. We had a laugh discussing the Garrett 1821 $2 1/2 PCGS PR64 we co-owned and what happened after I placed it in '88 and bought it back a year later. We dance to the music. Try not to mess with my fun based on technical facts. Miss a few nights sleep because you're overspent $500K on wonderful coins and get back to me.
"People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf." - Geo. Orwell
Col. Jessup:<<. I'll retract "piece of crap" and call it schlock.
I like that specific coin and I have a strong affinity for 1894-S dimes.
Col. Jessup:<<Analyst, perhaps my somewhat florid style of describing coins from a visceral level contrasts jarringly with the precisions [of] your research. ... While I find some fun in violating your intellectual boundaries, I have more fun as a garrulous old man telling stories until he falls asleep in his rocker on the porch.>>
Not all of the people who read your posts have met you. Furthermore, not everyone understands your sense of humor. Part of my role as a writer, researcher and analyst is to try help collectors, including providing information that is useful to them. I do not poke fun at collectors and I do not insult excellent coins for amusement.
Even so, I enjoy reading your posts and I have enjoyed our conversations. To an extent, I have learned from you, over the years. I am not offended by your statements. I am concerned, though, that you are sometimes misleading or otherwise disorienting those readers who wish to learn about coins and wish to enjoy collecting. While the very active participants of this forum may not take your jibes too seriously, many people come across this forum via Google searches and some of them are seeking knowledge, not laughs.
Col. Jessup: << Try not to mess with my fun based on technical facts>>
I have not attempted to prevent you from having fun. I do believe, though, that you could be more concerned about facts and still have a lot of fun. You have an amazing ability to write in an exceptionally entertaining and very distinctively creative manner.
<< <i>If I had to live with the choice forever, I would take the dollar. If I could wheel and deal after the decision, I would likely take the dimes. >>
Captain Picard was not as flamboyant, sarcastic, emotional and wild-talking as Colonel Jessup. I would like to think that I have more analogous real life experience than Lieutenant Data, and greater depth of feeling.
I, too, have attended a large number of major coin auctions over a period of many years, including epic sales, and I talk often with the players in the business. While I do not have the experience and wisdom of the Colonel, I may possibly be older, wiser, more creative and more emotional than ScubaFuel may think that I am. Nevertheless, the remark is funny.
I'm a Trek fan but ya lost me there. I must've missed the referenced comment from earlier in the thread.
When I think of Picard, I think of Moby Dick and earl grey tea. When I read comments from [our] Col. Jessup, I always hear them in Nicholson's voice. I can't help it. No matter how hard I try it's always that voice in my head
One day I'm going to meet Jack Nicholson and expect him to be knowledgable about numismatics.
When I read comments from [our] Col. Jessup, I always hear them in Nicholson's voice. I can't help it. No matter how hard I try it's always that voice in my head
Comments
<< <i>
<< <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... :-) >>
It's difficult for me to take you seriously with that anti-intellectual quote, especially when you can't even get the name of the movie correct, The Big Lebowski.
I have bid in well over 100 live auctions during the past 30 years. I have made jump bids in a handful of those auctions, with mixed results. The technique or strategy is not unknown to me.
God bless whoever video taped the auction bidding and thereby prevented the possibility of revisionist history.
I have no objection to jump bidding per se. My primary criticism in this instance is that Laura BID AGAINST HERSELF. The bidding was likely over, with Laura the winner, at $5.5M. If the auctioneer had called, "I have a split bid of $5.25M, who will give me $5.5M" and Laura then jumped the bid, I would have let her spend her money without comment. If she had jumped the bid at any point earlier, without bidding against herself, I also would have let her spend her money without comment.
My secondary criticism relates to the oddball amount of the bid, which I believe was a publicity stunt to get the coin over $10M. The bid increment was $500K. Explain to me how an off increment bid of $8.525M, which amounts to $10,016,875 including the buyer's premium, is anything other than a publicity stunt. That's the kind of oddball bid you make at a sealed bid auction, not a live sale.
Jay Parrino was the first person to pay over $1M for a coin, the Eliasberg 1913 nickel in 1996. He has stated that it was his ambition in life to be the first person to ever pay $1M for a coin. I believe Parrino sold that coin to none other than TDN. You don't think Parrino's huge profit on the Eliasberg 1913, the first coin to crack $1M, might have given TDN the idea that he wanted to be the first person ever to pay $10M for a coin? If not, I think you're naive or willingly blind.
Incidentally, in 1989, an 1804 dollar was sold at auction for $990,000 with no shenanigans or gamesmanship.
My tertiary criticism relates to the self congratulations Legend has given itself for its "brilliant" bidding strategy and the board lemmings who endorse it. Looking at the video, there's a significant chance that the bidding would have ended at $5.5M with Laura the winner. Legend may have paid $3.025M plus 17.5% more than was necessary to acquire the coin. That's not what I would call brilliant, unless you happen to think that $10M is a "magic" number.
In short, I believe Legend wanted to duplicate the publicity and profit that Parrino realized from cracking the $1M barrier, by cracking the $10M barrier, even if they had to bid against themselves with oddball amounts to do it.
Legend already admitted that the bid was at least partly for publicity.
As to their "self-congratulatory" tone, you were expecting something else?
<< <i>100! Finally got one. >>
What? what did you get?
Amat Colligendo Focum
Top 10 • FOR SALE
<< <i>
In short, I believe Legend wanted to duplicate the publicity and profit that Parrino realized from cracking the $1M barrier, by cracking the $10M barrier, even if they had to bid against themselves with oddball amounts to do it. >>
Even if this was true, so the f what? Why are you so concerned about their bets, hedges and holdings strategy at a game you aren't even a player at.
While I respect your right to ask contrary questions, your diatribe has long turned into a rant that reeks of jealousy all while having a pretty high opinion of your unsolicited opinion. Win, lose or draw I think it is time you stop posting, you're making a fool of your self independent of your points.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <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... :-) >>
It's difficult for me to take you seriously with that anti-intellectual quote, especially when you can't even get the name of the movie correct, The Big Lebowski.
I have bid in well over 100 live auctions during the past 30 years. I have made jump bids in a handful of those auctions, with mixed results. The technique or strategy is not unknown to me.
God bless whoever video taped the auction bidding and thereby prevented the possibility of revisionist history.
I have no objection to jump bidding per se. My primary criticism in this instance is that Laura BID AGAINST HERSELF. The bidding was likely over, with Laura the winner, at $5.5M. If the auctioneer had called, "I have a split bid of $5.25M, who will give me $5.5M" and Laura then jumped the bid, I would have let her spend her money without comment. If she had jumped the bid at any point earlier, without bidding against herself, I also would have let her spend her money without comment.
My secondary criticism relates to the oddball amount of the bid, which I believe was a publicity stunt to get the coin over $10M. The bid increment was $500K. Explain to me how an off increment bid of $8.525M, which amounts to $10,016,875 including the buyer's premium, is anything other than a publicity stunt. That's the kind of oddball bid you make at a sealed bid auction, not a live sale.
Jay Parrino was the first person to pay over $1M for a coin, the Eliasberg 1913 nickel in 1996. He has stated that it was his ambition in life to be the first person to ever pay $1M for a coin. I believe Parrino sold that coin to none other than TDN. You don't think Parrino's huge profit on the Eliasberg 1913, the first coin to crack $1M, might have given TDN the idea that he wanted to be the first person ever to pay $10M for a coin? If not, I think you're naive or willingly blind.
Incidentally, in 1989, an 1804 dollar was sold at auction for $990,000 with no shenanigans or gamesmanship.
My tertiary criticism relates to the self congratulations Legend has given itself for its "brilliant" bidding strategy and the board lemmings who endorse it. Looking at the video, there's a significant chance that the bidding would have ended at $5.5M with Laura the winner. Legend may have paid $3.025M plus 17.5% more than was necessary to acquire the coin. That's not what I would call brilliant, unless you happen to think that $10M is a "magic" number.
In short, I believe Legend wanted to duplicate the publicity and profit that Parrino realized from cracking the $1M barrier, by cracking the $10M barrier, even if they had to bid against themselves with oddball amounts to do it. >>
Oh for heaven's sake. You have NO basis for claiming the bidding was going to end there - none. And OF COURSE we added an extra $25k to the bid to get over $10M. Only a fool (and apparently you as well) would not. As for the 1804 dollar at $990k, the purchaser is well known for having stated that if he'd have thought about it, he would have added $10k to his bid. And no, I did not buy the 1913 from Parrino. Good Lord - at least get SOME facts correct if you are going to go on and on about this!
This is the last post I will ever make on this matter.
<< <i>Oh for heaven's sake. You have NO basis for claiming the bidding was going to end there - none. And OF COURSE we added an extra $25k to the bid to get over $10M. Only a fool (and apparently you as well) would not. As for the 1804 dollar at $990k, the purchaser is well known for having stated that if he'd have thought about it, he would have added $10k to his bid. And no, I did not buy the 1913 from Parrino. Good Lord - at least get SOME facts correct if you are going to go on and on about this! >>
I believe you have posted that you purchased an ultra rarity from Jay Parrino long ago and hated giving him a large profit. I could not recall if it was the Eliasberg 1913; thus, I stated it as a matter of belief as opposed to fact.
<< <i>
<< <i>
In short, I believe Legend wanted to duplicate the publicity and profit that Parrino realized from cracking the $1M barrier, by cracking the $10M barrier, even if they had to bid against themselves with oddball amounts to do it. >>
Even if this was true, so the f what? Why are you so concerned about their bets, hedges and holdings strategy at a game you aren't even a player at.
While I respect your right to ask contrary questions, your diatribe has long turned into a rant that reeks of jealousy all while having a pretty high opinion of your unsolicited opinion. Win, lose or draw I think it is time you stop posting, you're making a fool of your self independent of your points. >>
I am offended by market manipulation, in this case the premeditated creation of a $10M coin. The fact that I have suffered no direct financial harm is irrelevant to whether my sensibilities are offended.
I have no desire to provoke your ire; however, whether I'm declining in your popularity contest because of my sensibilities isn't of interest to me.
If you think I post because of jealousy, you're sorely mistaken. If you think a principled man, unafraid to criticize when others are afraid, is a fool, then I don't respect your opinion or character.
This is exactly why I would be very careful before buying any coin for an eight figure price.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
Thanks for explaining in detail. We are all seeing the stall at 5.5m; it's just a matter of speculation (on whether there were other people likely to bid), I think.
<< <i>If the auctioneer had called, "I have a split bid of $5.25M, who will give me $5.5M" and Laura then jumped the bid, I would have let her spend her money without comment. >>
I think maybe what happened here is that Laura quickly raised her card, to stay aggressive / unflinching, and "take control" as she generally put it in the Market Report.
Maybe on hindsight she would have jumped the bid here, if she had not been aggressive.
It seems that jump bids have to follow some kind of stall, as you can't just raise your card to do one, or the auctioneer applies the standard increment.
You have to be in a period of silence where the auctioneer can hear you.
You have done jump bids - how did the timing work?
There was a shorter stall at 4.75m, where Laura eventually bid 5m.
This is consistent with what she stated in the Market Report, about how she initially wanted to jump the bid to 5m early,
but at 4.75m she may have paused as she realized the window for that plan was gone.
However, I am uncomfortable with guessing Laura''s unobserved motivations for the sequence and timing of bids, even though it's so tempting to do it and I've given my guesses above.
So I'm accepting of the explanation in the Market Report.
Instead of "market manipulation", I think "placing a bet" is a friendlier term.
They bet that others will agree it's worth $10m or more.
They may be right or wrong, but it's their bet and nobody is being directly manipulated.
I think we are all in agreement on the secondary criticism, that adding $25k to $8.5m was a smart move to bump the result over $10m and make it easier to remember this as the first over $10m.
<< <i>
<< <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. >>
We have had plenty of financial resets in different asset classes in this country and that's when I want to have cash.
Edited to add: housing, gold, stocks, bonds, commercial real estate just a few examples....,
I give away money. I collect money.
I don’t love money . I do love the Lord God.
1) Legend wanted to own the coin and they wanted it to cost at least $10M. So, regardless
of what anyone else feels about those motives, you have to admit they accomplished both goals
at the minimum price.
2) I am so freaking sick and tired of people saying "you're just jealous" whenever anyone
comments less than positively on a high dollar coin transaction. Makes me wonder if these
people are just projecting their own feelings.
Not always though........
I give away money. I collect money.
I don’t love money . I do love the Lord God.
<< <i>I'd probably opt for about 100 coins at about $100,000 each. >>
I agree! I could just be as happy as a pea in a pod with those 100 coins.
There's not a person on this board that if they had $990K to buy that coin, that adding an additional $10K would have been money well spent and returned many times over.
Ok, maybe 1 person on this board might not agree.
Legend felt all along the coin was worth $10M and that it might take more to buy it. They won it and that's all there is to it. As I said earlier, there's not exactly a ton of top flight
coins in the $5 MILL to $10 MILL range on the market.
J-1776 is one coin that I don't think one would have to think twice about paying 8 figures for.
<< <i>Legend felt all along the coin was worth $10K and that it might take more to buy it. >>
Hopefully you were meaning $10M?
At any rate, Legend certainly felt the coin was worth $10 million and they made damn sure that it sold for that amount and NOT $5.5 M or $7M.
The name is LEE!
Five coins or one? Just one '94-S thank you very much.
The ice cream specimen will do...
Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.-Albert Einstein
<< <i>
<< <i>Legend felt all along the coin was worth $10K and that it might take more to buy it. >>
Hopefully you were meaning $10M?
At any rate, Legend certainly felt the coin was worth $10 million and they made damn sure that it sold for that amount and NOT $5.5 M or $7M. >>
Yep, type. Now fixed.
The 94-s dime story might be cool....if some or all of it were true. The 1913 Lib nickel story is probably cool too....if we knew any of the actual details as to how they were "authorized."
The legend of the 1794 SP dollar is growing. There's a lot to be said for a large dollar vs. a tiny dime. "Smallcoinitis" is partly responsible for keeping the price of the unique 70-s half
dime and the 73-cc NA dimes well below the price of other major rarities existing in larger numbers. "Bigcoinitis" is a huge plus. $20/$50 gold pieces and silver dollars are a tough act
to follow. In my mind, the "story" of the 94-s dime is more than countered by it's smaller size vs. the 1794 dollar. And I'm not really sure what the story is either. 10 of them were
supposedly officially authorized and minted. That's about the only story that counts. The 1804 dollar has a much more storied history. Not much can measure up to that. The 1794 was
really made for commerce. Most of the other big dollar rarities were not. Then again, depending on one's point of view, that might be a plus or a negative.
<< <i>I am offended by market manipulation, in this case the premeditated creation of a $10M coin. >>
I'm offended by market manipulation for immediate profit. Like the stock broker who buys cheap on his own account and then starts pushing the same product to all his customers.
This, not so much.
I just passed the 50 year milemark eariler this year and my eyes now need reading glasses for the first time in my life so the dimes are out.
I jumped the price of a dump truck at auction years ago. I needed the truck and had already been nickeled and dimed on other pieces of constuction equiptment earlier in the day so i just thru out my nuclear bid after the first 3 or 4 bids. I won it, wrote the check and took it home. Never thought much as to wether i over paid or not. I way overbid on the job i needed it for and they accepted my bid.
NGC registry V-Nickel proof #6!!!!
working on proof shield nickels # 8 with a bullet!!!!
RIP "BEAR"
<< <i> I could not recall if it was the Eliasberg 1913; thus, I stated it as a matter of belief as opposed to fact. >>
Wow, this is a new one for me. So Ryan Braun could have said that "I did not take PEDs as a matter of belief as opposed to fact."
TDN: <<As a point of fact, I use the factor of 4 when guesstimating values of ultra-rarities from the Eliasberg sale. That's a double every 8 years which fits in with the others IMO. That would make the 1913 nickel worth $6M (seems right) and the 1885 trade dollar worth $3.65M (seems right). 1894-S dime comes in at $1.8M and it is reportedly slightly below our specimen.>>
Your 1894-S dime is now of higher quality than the Eliasberg 1894-S dime was, when I last examined it.
Col. Jessup: <<The Norweb coin now grades PR62. It's just barely not a piece of crap. Perhaps consideration of the 1990 sale of a better piece (PR65) at $275,000 might be a data point with more relevance>>
The grade of the Norweb coin was then in the high end of the 62 range. It may receive a higher grade now. It is or was a really pleasant coin. The history, since the 1980s, of 1894-S dimes, including these two, is spelled out in my recent article.
19Lyds: <<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 explain that there are really only nine currently known, not ten. It is extremely unlikely that others will turn up. Certainly, the probability of there existing more than eleven must be close to zero. This is one of the five most famous U.S. coins and people have been searching for them for many decades. Besides, most Great Rarities do not have thoroughly documented stories, and no one expects them to have such stories.
The 1894-S is the rarest Barber Dime and the second rarest dime overall. More than 100,000 people collect dimes.
[L=Unique 1873-CC ‘No Arrows’ Dime]http://www.coinweek.com/featured-news/coin-rarities-related-topics-unique-1873-cc-no-arrows-dime/">Condition Ranking of 1894-S Dimes, with Recent Histories
<< <i>
Col. Jessup: <<The Norweb coin now grades PR62. It's just barely not a piece of crap. Perhaps consideration of the 1990 sale of a better piece (PR65) at $275,000 might be a data point with more relevance>>
The grade of the Norweb coin was then in the high end of the 62 range. It may receive a higher grade now. It is or was a really pleasant coin. The history, since the 1980s, of 1894-S dimes, including these two, is spelled out in my recent article. >>
I was there with my hand in the air, though not on that one. I'll retract "piece of crap" and call it schlock.
Maybe we should call it a "consolation prize".
Analyst, perhaps my somewhat florid style of describing coins from a visceral level contrasts jarringly with the precisions you assume from your research. You often give us valuable factual knowledge. While I find some fun in violating your intellectual boundaries, I have more fun as a garrulous old man telling stories until he falls asleep in his rocker on the porch.
MrE and I and Roshi Aki has lunch today. We had a laugh discussing the Garrett 1821 $2 1/2 PCGS PR64 we co-owned and what happened after I placed it in '88 and bought it back a year later. We dance to the music. Try not to mess with my fun based on technical facts. Miss a few nights sleep because you're overspent $500K on wonderful coins and get back to me.
We'll use our hands and hearts and if we must we'll use our heads.
Col. Jessup:<<. I'll retract "piece of crap" and call it schlock.
I like that specific coin and I have a strong affinity for 1894-S dimes.
Col. Jessup:<<Analyst, perhaps my somewhat florid style of describing coins from a visceral level contrasts jarringly with the precisions [of] your research. ... While I find some fun in violating your intellectual boundaries, I have more fun as a garrulous old man telling stories until he falls asleep in his rocker on the porch.>>
Not all of the people who read your posts have met you. Furthermore, not everyone understands your sense of humor. Part of my role as a writer, researcher and analyst is to try help collectors, including providing information that is useful to them. I do not poke fun at collectors and I do not insult excellent coins for amusement.
Even so, I enjoy reading your posts and I have enjoyed our conversations. To an extent, I have learned from you, over the years. I am not offended by your statements. I am concerned, though, that you are sometimes misleading or otherwise disorienting those readers who wish to learn about coins and wish to enjoy collecting. While the very active participants of this forum may not take your jibes too seriously, many people come across this forum via Google searches and some of them are seeking knowledge, not laughs.
Col. Jessup: << Try not to mess with my fun based on technical facts>>
I have not attempted to prevent you from having fun. I do believe, though, that you could be more concerned about facts and still have a lot of fun. You have an amazing ability to write in an exceptionally entertaining and very distinctively creative manner.
[L=Condition Ranking of 1894-S Dimes, with Recent Histories]http://www.coinweek.com/expert-columns/greg-reynolds-classic-rarities/condition-ranking-of-1894-s-dimes-with-recent-histories/
<< <i>If I had to live with the choice forever, I would take the dollar. If I could wheel and deal after the decision, I would likely take the dimes. >>
Nicely stated.
Captain Picard was not as flamboyant, sarcastic, emotional and wild-talking as Colonel Jessup. I would like to think that I have more analogous real life experience than Lieutenant Data, and greater depth of feeling.
I, too, have attended a large number of major coin auctions over a period of many years, including epic sales, and I talk often with the players in the business. While I do not have the experience and wisdom of the Colonel, I may possibly be older, wiser, more creative and more emotional than ScubaFuel may think that I am. Nevertheless, the remark is funny.
Condition Ranking of 1894-S Dimes, with Recent Histories
When I think of Picard, I think of Moby Dick and earl grey tea. When I read comments from [our] Col. Jessup, I always hear them in Nicholson's voice. I can't help it. No matter how hard I try it's always that voice in my head
One day I'm going to meet Jack Nicholson and expect him to be knowledgable about numismatics.
Amat Colligendo Focum
Top 10 • FOR SALE
When I read comments from [our] Col. Jessup, I always hear them in Nicholson's voice. I can't help it. No matter how hard I try it's always that voice in my head
Me too!