ErrorsOnCoins stated that they do not pay a buyers fee.
How is this done?
By having the consignor pay for all fees, as is customary in the coin auction business.
Just because the buyer's fee shows up on the high bidder's invoice, doesn't mean that the 17.5% also came out of their pocket. There's a difference between "on invoice" and "out-of-pocket." If the auction house wants to put the 10% "seller's" fee on me as a buyer too, have at it because I can handle it. Call it "buyer's fee" #2. I'll just subtract 27.5% from my future auction bids rather than 10%. The house can then tell the consignor's that they are paying no seller's fee....the bidder's now pay it all (0% seller's fees).....after all, it shows up on THEIR invoice. What further proof could you want?
In reality, the larger auction houses already have something similar because they typically will waive the 10% seller's fee on most consignments $10K-$20K or more. So it really all comes down to how much of that 17.5% buyer's fee also gets negotiated away by the consignor. Consignor's typically get "hammer plus X%." Unless they get Hammer + 17.5%, they are paying something. If they only negotiate for Hammer....then they paid the entire 17.5% BF as a commission.
Take this test for 90+% of auction coins (ie the same type of coins that are available on the bourse floor all the time). Did you end up paying 14.89%-17.5% more for them at auction vs. the bourse floor? If you didn't, then someone's pocket other than yours paid that buyer's fee.
I can't wait for a 20% buyer's fee to be able to do the math w/o a calculator.
Overall, auctions are a more efficient and transparent marketplace than shows. Combine that with strong marketing and a state of the art website, like Heritage, and that's much of the reason that numismatic sales have migrated from shows to auctions over the last few decades.
Knowing that the House is making 20% and the perception that a bidder is only paying one increment above what the next buyer was willing to pay, is a strong appeal to many buyers. For sellers, the wide exposure for their material and having the auction process select the highest buyer is often well worth the 20%.
Collector and dealer in obsolete currency. Always buying all obsolete bank notes and scrip.
Originally posted by: Tibor ErrorsOnCoins stated that they do not pay a buyers fee. How is this done?
By having the consignor pay for all fees, as is customary in the coin auction business.
Just because the buyer's fee shows up on the high bidder's invoice, doesn't mean that the 17.5% also came out of their pocket. There's a difference between "on invoice" and "out-of-pocket." If the auction house wants to put the 10% "seller's" fee on me as a buyer too, have at it because I can handle it. Call it "buyer's fee" #2. I'll just subtract 27.5% from my future auction bids rather than 10%. The house can then tell the consignor's that they are paying no seller's fee....the bidder's now pay it all (0% seller's fees).....after all, it shows up on THEIR invoice. What further proof could you want?
In reality, the larger auction houses already have something similar because they typically will waive the 10% seller's fee on most consignments $10K-$20K or more. So it really all comes down to how much of that 17.5% buyer's fee also gets negotiated away by the consignor. Consignor's typically get "hammer plus X%." Unless they get Hammer + 17.5%, they are paying something. If they only negotiate for Hammer....then they paid the entire 17.5% BF as a commission.
Take this test for 90+% of auction coins (ie the same type of coins that are available on the bourse floor all the time). Did you end up paying 14.89%-17.5% more for them at auction vs. the bourse floor? If you didn't, then someone's pocket other than yours paid that buyer's fee.
I can't wait for a 20% buyer's fee to be able to do the math w/o a calculator.
Your logic is so strained, it's not worth my effort to follow it. How the hell you can get charged an addition 17.5% at the bottom of the invoice and not pay for it is beyond me. When the hammer price is equal to or higher than the retail value, you are screwed. When you add the travel costs to attend an auction, it becomes even more unattractive. You can got there and find the lots are not up to snuff, or you can get blown out of the water by a "yahoo" bidder.
To answer your one point, I've done MUCH better with private treaty transactions with the dealers I know, and even some I didn't know or didn't like, than I have with the major auctions. I'll take buying a coin at bourse over a major auction anytime. To me auctions are a path of last resort. If you can't find it anywhere else, then you have to cope with the auction.
I have purchased very few bargains at major auctions, and even the "fair deals" have been a challenge. I've also had a couple of burials. Although I enjoy the coins very much, I know I'm going to get the shaft when sell them.
Small auctions can be an different story if the items are not overly protected or shilled. I got some great items off the Worthy Coin Board in Boston back in the 1980s. I also got some coins off of bid walls in the small towns. Neither of those venues had buyers' fees.
When I was dealer I could get some stuff out of auctions, especially on the "dark side" material auctions because I'd place bids on a hundred items or more. Given that range something had to work, if you bids were made on an informed basis. I can't do that today because I'm not selling as dealer any more. When you going less than five coins in an auction, your chances for a good deal are limited.
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 ... ?
My auction strategy is Ebay only as that's the only auction format I participate. My strategy is to have a wide net of interested coins and not get tied in to any specific coin. Then make low bids on all the coins that interest me. A few of the low bids do eventually win and are great deals.
Originally posted by: Tibor ErrorsOnCoins stated that they do not pay a buyers fee. How is this done?
I suppose we should let ErrorsOnCoins answer for himself, but I suspect all he is saying is that he backs out the buyer's premium and submits a net bid, just like everyone else who doesn't bid in auctions as part of a potlach, so that the "buyer's fee" really just comes out of the consignor's pocket. See Col Jessup's post above
On the other hand it is also possible that his just plain FOS, but I think we should give him the benefit of the doubt in order to usher in the new year on a good note.
ErrorsOnCoins stated that they do not pay a buyers fee. How is this done?
I suppose we should let ErrorsOnCoins answer for himself, but I suspect all he is saying is that he backs out the buyer's premium and submits a net bid, just like everyone else who doesn't bid in auctions as part of a potlach, so that the "buyer's fee" really just comes out of the consignor's pocket. See Col Jessup's post above
On the hand it is also possible that his just plain FOS, but I think we should give him the benefit of the doubt in order to usher in the new year on a good note.
CG
I agree it would be more straight forward if EOC intended to say he would submit a bid that adds in the BF to get to the net price he wants.
I haven't seen anyone say a buyer can negotiate out of paying the BF. For example, bid $1000, have a net price of $1175 at 17.5%, and then pay the auction house $1000.
ColonelJessup's "Watch How Bad I Screw You Any Which Way but Loose If You Don't Know Any Better" auction service plans.
You're always on the hook for shipping and applicable sales tax.
Plan #1
1) All lots are sold at hammer and no buyers fee of any nature will be charged.
2) The seller will pay a negotiated commission, in this case, the negotiated commission is hammer minus 10%. Intending to pay $1000, you bid $1000.
Cost to you - $1000. Proceeds to consignor - $900
Plan #2
1)All lots are sold at hammer with a 10% buyers fee.
2) The seller is given full hammer (plus 0%).
Intending to pay $1000, you bid $900
Cost to you - $990. Proceeds to consignor - $900
Plan #3
1) All lots are sold at hammer with a buyers fee of 25%.
2) The consignor negotiates a commission of hammer+12.5%.
Intending to pay $1000, you bid $800.
Cost to you $1000. Proceeds to consignor - $900
Plan #4
1)All lots are sold at hammer with a 100% buyers fee.
2)The consignor negotiates a commission of hammer plus 80%
Intending to pay $1000, you bid $500 Cost to you - $1000. Proceeds to consignor - $900
Choose any plan. Screwed you good, huh?
Plans 3 and 4 only happen if you are Eric P. Newman, Pogue or Missouri Cabinet. For the rest of us the best you can hope for is no sellers' fee.
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 ... ?
I haven't seen anyone say a buyer can negotiate out of paying the BF. For example, bid $1000, have a net price of $1175 at 17.5%, and then pay the auction house $1000.
Especially if the house has promised the consignor 105% of hammer.
Of course, a modest 100K consignment would be out of reach for 95-98% of the coin collectors. So they're stuck in Schmoland, unless they can find a dealer to work with.
Member: EAC, NBS, C4, CWTS, ANA
RMR: 'Wer, wenn ich schriee, hörte mich denn aus der Engel Ordnungen?'
....Knowing that the House is making 20% and the perception that a bidder is only paying one increment above what the next buyer was willing to pay, is a strong appeal to many buyers. For sellers, the wide exposure for their material and having the auction process select the highest buyer is often well worth the 20%.
I agree with all of this except:
1. The house doesn't make 20% - try something more like 3-6% after all expenses. It's a tough business on the national level.
2. The buyer doesn't pay an extra 20% unless they are collecting/bidding like Bill Jones does.
Your logic is so strained, it's not worth my effort to follow it. How the hell you can get charged an addition 17.5% at the bottom of the invoice and not pay for it is beyond me. When the hammer price is equal to or higher than the retail value, you are screwed. When you add the travel costs to attend an auction, it becomes even more unattractive. You can got there and find the lots are not up to snuff, or you can get blown out of the water by a "yahoo" bidder.
I understand that you don't get it. That's fine. Leave the auctions to Colonel Jessup, Mr. Eureka, and others who do get it. 99% of my purchases at auctions over the past 40 years (over a thousand coins) have been for coins that sold for their typical FMV's/or less...or in today's lingo...they bid up to approximately hammer price. If you wish to place a bid of FMV (ie 17.5% ABOVE hammer), that's your business. I have plenty of contacts in the coin industry to not have to pay 17.5% above FMV for anything. And if those coins are truly worth 35% over hammer (2x17.5)....a trusted agent will tell you that. One time I wouldn't bid higher than $9K on an G 1796 half dollar....until a trusted agent told me in was really worth 30% more. In the cases where "bids" of 17.5%-25% over hammer occurs on hot items...that may be the real market for them (ie the price guides are wrong). Don't keep blaming the Buyer's Fee. A week doesn't go buy here in the Coin Forum where Buyer's Fees are blamed for all the ills of the auction market. Isn't global warming enough to worry about? I'm pretty sure I once ran a poll on whose pocket the buyer's fee ultimately comes out of. But, I'm not going to dig for it.
When I attended the major auctions at FUN, Baltimore, and Long Beach over the years (a few dozen of them) it was always in concert with attending the major show/bourse at the same time. 2 big birds with one stone. At Long Beach and FUN there are multiple auctions going on. Call that 3 birds with 1 stone. It didn't cost me anything extra. On several of those shows I visited friends and relatives in the Long Beach and Orlando areas. Sometimes those were the only times I'd see them. Those trips to Florida and LA were my vacations. We had a great time while out there....sometimes staying several days after the show. One of my friends who I often shared FUN tables with would stay for a week after FUN. Auctions, bourse, friends, vacations, etc. 4 birds or more with one stone, one air fare. On one FUN trip I stayed at a friend's place in Sarasota after the show. Traveling to auctions can actually be cheap if you factor it into your annual plans as I suspect many dealers and collectors do. If you're paying airfare to LA or FUN, make it worth every penny.
I've never attended auctions at FUN or Long Beach where I couldn't buy something to make it worth my while. If anything, there were more lots I could buy than I had money to spend. 10,000 or more lots and you can't find anything to make money or use for your collection? For those having problems at auctions where everything you bid on goes for 17.5% more than it's worth, I suggest enlisting the help of a dealer like Colonel Jessup to scan the auctions for you. Clearly, bidding on your own account is not working. Eventually, something will show up that is priced properly...and the agent's fee will be well worth it.
The only time I had isolated travel costs were the major auctions I attended in NY City at Stacks when no show was being conducted (125 mile trip by car/train). Those did cost me approximately an $80 round trip train fare....and maybe $10 for lunch. But $100 or so when buying $10,000 or more out of auction is a pittance. On one trip to Stacks in 1988 I had them show me some of their coins in the display cases while I was waiting on lots. I found an under-graded MS63 seated dollar as a MS63 no drapery half dime. I paid their "full retail." I showed them to a dealer next to me and they offered me a 10% profit. I knew I'd get the grade on those so I passed. The coins both came back MS64 from NGC and I profited $1,000 for 5 minutes of extra work at auction viewing....enough to cover 10 additional Stack auction expenses. And that was in a crowded room of 2 dozen dealers all fighting to view lots. The irony!
On some of those trips to Stacks and other auction I met up with coin dealers and conducted some business. In one case, one dealer offered to pay all my expenses to the summer ANA (a 3 day stay) if I reviewed auction lots with them (2-3 sets of eyes are better than 1). Considering you were a full time dealer before, these same opportunities to conduct business at auctions/shows should have been readily available. The Stack's mail bid sales were a prime stomping ground to pick up lots of "cheap" stuff for local Northeast shows. When attending a Stacks' auction, I usually reviewed the upcoming mail bid sale as well as their inventory if I had time. I typically found much better and many more deals at the auction/mail bid sale route than I could from dealer inventories. Coordinating a Stack's visit to hit a Broadway show or other venue made it more worthwhile. Fwiw I never traveled by air to any major auction to just see auction lots and bid. There were always other things going on. I never came back empty-handed from any such venture.
I've also been snared by the potted plant at least twice...once by on line bidding and another time on the auction floor. It does happen. And it's less likely to happen with a qualified agent sharp shooter on your side.
The world as a whole misunderstands buyer's fees. Reading Wiki here will convince Joe Six Pack that indeed buyer's "pay" this fee to the house, because it shows up on their invoice. Note also, that nowhere does it even hint that the crafty Colonel Jessup's of the world back off their bids by the amount of the buyer's fee to ensure that they pay no more than FMV (hey, is that even legal or a form of collusion within yourself?).
Even if you search for an hour on line, odds are you won't find a single site saying anything different than Wiki does. It's the world's best kept "secret." If auctions resulted in bidder's having to consistently pay 17.5%-25% over what a coin was normally worth, the auction houses would eventually be left with no bidders ....at least on those items. Supply and demand doesn't work differently in auctions having buyer's fees. It only matters what a coin sells for and what the consignor gives up. Everything else is irrelevant legalese.
In auctions, the buyer's premium is a percentage additional charge on the hammer price (winning bid at auction) of the lot that must be paid by the winner. It is charged by the auctioneer to cover administrative expenses. The buyer's premium goes directly to the auction house and not to the seller.
Major auction houses have made this charge for some time, particularly in the fine arts sector, with premiums in the region of 10%-25%.[1] In the real estate sector in many European countries, the premium, if charged at all, is much less (2%-2.5%). However, more recently, in the UK foreclosure properties have been offered without fee to the seller, but with a substantial buyer's premium of 10%.
The buyer's premium is considered to be either a necessary contribution to the costs of the administrative process or an unreasonable extra charge by the auction community. [2] Auction houses may now market themselves as "not charging a premium" to gain favor with customers. [3] Regardless, such premiums are now commonplace and continue to grow.
The amount of the buyer's premium will normally be stated in the auction house terms and conditions or, in the case of UK properties, it would be listed in the RICS (Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors) Common Auction Conditions or in the special conditions for the lot.
In Europe, the buyer's premium will also be subject to VAT (value added tax), while in the United States, some states require the premium to be included in the sales tax base.
1. Note that they state it is "paid by the winner." That is technically true since it's on their invoice. What it doesn't say is that the 98% of all bidders back off their bids by same amount as the BF. They don't bid FMV....rather they bid FMV-17.5%.
2. "It goes directly to the house and not the seller." This alone states that a 15% BF
cannot go to the seller. But, in my last auction I was paid a net 91% (hammer +5%). So where did that other 10% of the BF go to? Clearly, it went back to the seller (ie me). So Wiki must be wrong. I as the seller got 1/3 of the BF, and 100% of the 10% seller's fee removed.
FMV can change drastically from auction to auction. When Gene Gardner bought the Newman 1840-0 MS67 No Drapery 25c he was bidding against a very stubborn bidder(s). The coin fetched a world record $330K. No doubt the fact that Gene was on this coin helped to keep others in it longer. When Gene sold his set the following year the same coin fetched about 30% less. That's a lot bigger difference than a 17.5% buyer's fee. One could say that at Newman, the coin fetched an extra 50% because of Gene. Variations in FMV on any given day/week/month/year can easily mask the buyer's premium. On run of the mill stuff at auction, the buyer's fee should be easy spot vs. FMV.
In first reading the above article it appeared they were going to stick with the notion that bidders pay more as BF's increase. But by the end of the article it has an interesting result. I'm surprised they actually need "studies" on this type of stuff. Nowhere in the article does it mention that bidders might back off their bids....it's as if it's an industry insider secret. Shhhh. Don't tell anyone. Even when I was a schmo I still never did worse than a net of 87% at auction...and that was with a 10% buyer's fee. That usually required a worthwhile consignment of no more than a few dozen items totaling $15K-$20K.
For smaller consignments there are better or equivalent alternatives. Though even if I took those same $20K in coins around the bourse, I doubt I could have done any better than a net of 85-87%. There are trustworthy dealers out there that will take smaller consignments and pool them together to get the better rates of a $50K-$100K deal.
Originally posted by: Sonorandesertrat Of course, a modest 100K consignment would be out of reach for 95-98% of the coin collectors. So they're stuck in Schmoland, unless they can find a dealer to work with.
I hope I've clarified, at least for some, the simple arithmetical demonstration that, whatever the buyers fee, the total cost of the coin is easily and consistently calculable.
Dealers here don't toot their own horns, but, based on my own experience, I'll put in a plug for Ian Russell of GreatCollections. Ian is a delight to do business with. I'm pretty sure his commission structure (check his website) is 10% buyers fee for coins over $1000 and over and 15% on coins below that. I don't know what his lower limit is on overall consignment value or individual lot value (I'll guess pretty low), but he seems an ideal venue for locating, buying, and selling coins of lesser value than former medium-range big shots like myself might consign. I've used GC myself and been quite happy with my results.
and ANYONE can get his rates.
"People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf." - Geo. Orwell
Roadrunner- What's up with the baseless attack? You completely misunderstood my statements and it seems that we agree, based on your comments. The below comments were made as an explanation of why shows have become less popular and auctions more popular. I have been an active participant in both for the past 50 years.
....Knowing that the House is making 20% and the perception that a bidder is only paying one increment above what the next buyer was willing to pay, is a strong appeal to many buyers. For sellers, the wide exposure for their material and having the auction process select the highest buyer is often well worth the 20%.
I agree with all of this except:
1. The house doesn't make 20% - try something more like 3-6% after all expenses. It's a tough business on the national level. 2. The buyer doesn't pay an extra 20% unless they are collecting/bidding like Bill Jones does.
Your logic is so strained, it's not worth my effort to follow it. How the hell you can get charged an addition 17.5% at the bottom of the invoice and not pay for it is beyond me. When the hammer price is equal to or higher than the retail value, you are screwed. When you add the travel costs to attend an auction, it becomes even more unattractive. You can got there and find the lots are not up to snuff, or you can get blown out of the water by a "yahoo" bidder.
I understand that you don't get it. That's fine. Leave the auctions to Colonel Jessup, Mr. Eureka, and others who do get it.
1. 20% is the traditional auction house gross markup. The old European system was 10 and 10. That's 10% sellers fee and 10% to the buyer. At one time, this was the way that all US numismatic auction houses set their fee structure. Then, one company (Heritage) was bold and raised their buyer fee to 15%. This enabled them to be more competitive on the rate to the seller and undersell other auction house. This is part of the strategy that made Heritage what it is today. Your comment of 3-6% net is irrelevant to this discussion of why auctions have become more popular than shows.
2. Who said that the buyer pays an extra 20%? Not me. My point is that the 20% fee for the seller is reasonable, especially compared to the who-knows-what markup that the coin dealer will make when I do business at a show. The known, reasonable markup of an auction is greatly preferable to many consignors than the possibility of getting ripped off by a dealer.
I understand that you don't get it. That's fine. Leave the auctions to Colonel Jessup, Mr. Eureka, and others who do get it.[/
I didn't read any further than this because at this point I fully understood that you had no idea what you were talking about.
I'm afraid that you don't understand anything as illustrated by your misunderstanding of my above comments. Do you understand that I sat in the same room as Mr. Eureka 30 years ago and bid against him and other major dealers before I went to work for 12 years for a major auction house? Part of my job there was to explain to people why they would be better off consigning to us rather than bringing their coins to a show to sell them. I lost very few consignments, so I'm really quite qualified to answer the question of why shows are dying and auctions growing, in response to Easton Collection's original comments.
You have quite a nerve to misinterpret my comments and then attack me as inexperienced.
-Russell Kaye
Collector and dealer in obsolete currency. Always buying all obsolete bank notes and scrip.
sellitstore.. I missed the insult, but won't dismiss how you feel.
However, If you were in the audience bidding at auction 30 years ago, you might recall there were no buyers fee whatsoever in US coin auctions.
I've seen Christie's sell a large lot of five Pan-Pac $50's.
I sat in FUN Platinum 2010 next to Kevin, Contursi and Laurie (and I can't remember who else) when the Queller run of proof sets (1856-1916) was sold as year set groupings. Chris Napolitano and I partnered and spent $200K. Immediately took the sets to NGC at the show and had them reholdered as individual coins. Broke them up, crossed some, upgraded some. and made $100K on what we bought. At the same sale I bought other some coins due to a recto-cranial infarction. And....
The "truth" is nothing but a mosaic of anecdotes (or call them data points) arranged quasi-logically as in Mark Twain's "There are lies, damn lies, and statistics.". And the Devil can quote Scripture to his own purposes.
I knew every wholesale consignment director at Bowers, Superior, Stacks, Paramount/Akers,Rarcoa, Christie's and Sotheby from the early 80's, so I'm surmising you worked for Heritage. No one keeps a job there unless they are quite effective. If so, you were doing retail. If they only talked to you without shopping around, they did not do proper due diligence. No knocking JH and his crew. They're the best. Mostly. And generally. I've also :2blah
I remember in the early 2000's when HA sold three full sets of Indian pennies in the same sale, two with their own individual vanity catalogs. Blood in the water! .
I've seen Stacks sell pages upon pages of large lots of raw $20's at full retail commission rates (perhaps 20%) when the lawyers for estates (Stacks had advertised in the NY Journal of Law for decades.). Maybe they could have gone 3 blocks away and sold to Joel Coen for 2%. But due diligence? Not.
I don't know how your consignors did. But you clearly gave them the best deal they could get (and likely a fairly good one) if they didn't know any better. And HA does have the best overall platform in the industry.
And I bought a choice proof $10 Indian from a local bucket shop at Redbook because he bought it for melt, then I tripled up.
Per Buffalo' Springfield's "For What It's Worth" .. "Nobody's right and everybody's wrong".
"People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf." - Geo. Orwell
your stream-of-consciousness writing pairs well with wine and fruit. After a couple-three glass, it makes a lot of sense. Slap everything together and get that book manuscript sent off. I'm good for a copy.
Member: EAC, NBS, C4, CWTS, ANA
RMR: 'Wer, wenn ich schriee, hörte mich denn aus der Engel Ordnungen?'
Yeah, I'm not sure of the point of that stream of conscious ramble, too. Am I supposed to be impressed? I've consulted with, bought from and sold to many of the top dealers, too, over the decades. It's hard not to if you have been a professional dealer/consultant for 50 years.
Colonel, your memory is clearly defective. There was a 10% buyer's premium at major auctions in 1985, 30 years ago. Check your old catalogs. I just pulled two different 1985 ones off my shelf (Stack's and Christies) and the buyer's premium was 10% in both. Heritage went to 15% several years later.
Collector and dealer in obsolete currency. Always buying all obsolete bank notes and scrip.
Yeah, I'm not sure of the point of that stream of conscious ramble, too. Am I supposed to be impressed? I've consulted with, bought from and sold to many of the top dealers, too, over the decades. It's hard not to if you have been a professional dealer/consultant for 50 years.
Colonel, your memory is clearly defective. There was a 10% buyer's premium at major auctions in 1985, 30 years ago. Check your old catalogs. I just pulled two different 1985 ones off my shelf (Stack's and Christies) and the buyer's premium was 10% in both. Heritage went to 15% several years later.
You and Bill still don't get it.
There is, never was, and never will be a buyer premium. Total cost per lot is what buyers figure.
Sellers negotiate their portion of such or not.
RR is not one who insults. The military guy is different.
Excuse me if I misunderstood RR. I'll admit that I had a hard time understanding the long narrative but "Your logic is so strained, it's not worth my effort to follow it." is a bit insulting and are the words of someone who is not understanding my point.
I beg to differ on the buyers premium. Just because you and I and most reasonable buyers subtract this amount from our top buying price to come up with our actual bidding limit, the buyer's premium does, in fact, exist. The points that I've been trying to make is that the auction commission has shifted from (roughly) a 10-10 split to a 20-0 split over the years and this still means that it costs roughly 20% to sell at auction. Yes, I know the numbers are slightly different where more competitive, like selling through Heritage or Stacks, but my point is that the net "cost" to the seller is roughly 20%. This is attractive to many potential sellers vs. offering the coins directly to dealers. Why trust the price offered by one dealer when the auction, in effect, selects the highest price from many dealers? (less 20%).
Auctions are more efficient and that's why the action has migrated there from the shows. Some people, like Easton Collection, prefer the person to person contact and that value shouldn't be overlooked or underestimated, but auctions get the job done for buyer and seller efficiently and economically.
Collector and dealer in obsolete currency. Always buying all obsolete bank notes and scrip.
SIS, I'm in competition with Howard Stern for the smallest penis on the planet. All my life I've been overcompensating. And now, in my old age and infirmity, this........ How about 32 or 33 years ago?
I'm thinking I should huff some Jewel-Luster and go over to the coin doctor thread
Only acetone causes drain bamage
"People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf." - Geo. Orwell
SIS, you made the statement that auction houses "make" 20%, not me. And they clearly don't make 20% once the total sale is tabulated less expenses. Just because the lower end consignors might be only netting 75-80% due to lack of due diligence or weak consignments doesn't mean that the heavyweight consignments are doing that. Then consider all the insider dealers who have deals with the house where they reduced rates and free buy-backs if they consistently consign material sale after sale. The auction houses making a net 3-6% after all expenses is hardly irrelevant. It is the crux of the entire posted fees vs. reality discussion. The buyer's and seller's fee totaling 27.5% (out of 117.5% or a net 23.4%) are so far from the 3-6% that it's obvious this is about smoke and mirrors. Disguise the mix any way you want, European, Australian, Chinese, etc. it doesn't matter. Bidders will pay "X" (usually near FMV) and consignors will get "Y." That math to get there has changed quite a bit in 30 years. What hasn't changed much at all are X and Y.
I don't believe that Heritage raising their buyer's fee to 15% "first" (and lowering seller's premiums) gave them any advantage over the other guys. It didn't fool me or anyone else who had been around more than 5-10 years. I liked dividing by 1.1....but dividing by 1.15 was going to be a pita. The other guys followed soon after any ways with the 15%. What really mattered was that Heritage was a growing giant with considerable resources that just rolled over everyone else the past 10-20 years. They brought in the right talent and kept plowing forward, utilizing technology first. The other auction houses didn't have leaders like Halperin and Ivy. They could have done it with a 10% (or even 0%) buyer's fee if they wanted.
For my money B&M and Stacks were still #1 and #2 in my mind by 1989...even with 10-15% buyer's fees in play. I consigned to those guys and frequently bid at their auctions. I never even considered consigning to Heritage in the 1980's, regardless of so-called "favorable" seller's premiums. I only cared about the net premium I paid. In those days I got a net 87-88% from Stacks and B&M, and far better exposure to my consignments out of NY City auctions.
A net 20% consignor's fee is ridiculous imo for any reasonable $20K or higher consignment. I've never paid anything higher than 13% at major auction, ever. And I've had a dozen or so major consignments. I can get 80% on the bourse floor the same day, why accept that after 3-4 months? If you know what your coins are worth both on the bourse and at auction, then pick the optimum route. If a collector doesn't know this, or can't figure it out, they had no business buying their coins in the first place, assuming they had a profit motive (or minimum loss) from the very start.
I'm glad you were able to sit next to Mr. Eureka 30 yrs ago in an auction room. When I started bidding at major auctions in 1974 Mr Eureka was probably still in high school (no offense to Mr. E.). I spent a lot of time bidding against the biggest dogs in the 1980's raw coin auction market, and it was a dog eat dog world (Martin Paul, the Avenas, Eric Streiner, Jay Miller, Rick Sear, Bill Nagle, Bill Shamhart, Lee Bellisario, Brian Hendleson, Greg Holloway, John Dannreuther, Sylvano Degenova, Kevin Lipton, Steve Contursi, Charlie Brown, Marty Haber, and Andy Lustig to name the ones that come to mind first). It was not easy to get wins with that competition. Those were the guys that were defining grading standards, cracking out coins, and getting wins. Those were the guys that knew how to grade on the front lines. And many or most of them did some time grading at the TPG's. It was the same guys at nearly every auction. I bumped heads with Martin on so many lots that it was incredible. That's what buying 10% of the auction can get you.
My only beef with auction fees and bidding is that the same people continue to post erroneous information time and time again. It's hard enough for newbies around here to get started without getting off entirely on the wrong foot....such as avoiding auctions because of published "fees"......which in reality have made little difference to the majority of bidders and consignors over the past 45 years. As bidder and consignor over 40 years, those changes have not impacted me in any noticeable way.
SIS, there was no attack on you from me. I merely stated what I thought in response to your comments. When I strongly disagree with someone stating particular figures as fact, I will post my disagreement. What I didn't respond as nicely to was this attack by Bill Jones.
Your logic is so strained, it's not worth my effort to follow it. How the hell you can get charged an addition 17.5% at the bottom of the invoice and not pay for it is beyond me. When the hammer price is equal to or higher than the retail value, you are screwed. When you add the travel costs to attend an auction, it becomes even more unattractive. You can got there and find the lots are not up to snuff, or you can get blown out of the water by a "yahoo" bidder.
That was directed at me, not you. And any comments in my long-winded post were directed back at Mr. Jones, who seems to like to keep this game of "misunderstanding" auction fees going on. This debate is on the reality of buyer's fees. If there really were a total of 27.5% in available auction fees to apply, then it is illogical that the house clears only 3-6% after a sale. Smoke and mirrors, nothing more. I can't help it if Bill Jones only bids on lots that sell for Hammer + 37.5%. I prefer to spend my time on those lots that stay within Hammer + 17.5%....which is usually 85-95% of the auction lots.
Fwiw, the 15% buyer's fee wasn't even around yet at the B&M April 1997 Eliasberg sale. Sotheby's first came out with it in January 1993. If it were such a great idea why didn't the coin company's follow suit soon after? I do know that the 15% BF was in play by Stack's Nov 2001 Vermeulle sale. I sort of think that B&M/ANR and Stacks lost their edge to Heritage as their owners aged or left the market....and Heritage piled on the technology advances.
RR- I'm seriously having trouble following your long-winded posts. Don't you know how to write concisely and get to the point?
Because you were insulting me and Bill Jones in the same post, I thought that your comments were directed at me and I apologize for taking offense at those particular comments.
However, when you fail to understand the point that I made twice about auction houses making 20%, I realize that it's not worth trying to explain it to someone who is not listening a third time. You just seem to want to find statements with which you disagree.
I'm not interested in a bragging contest with you or any other board members. I don't need to name drop because, as I said, I was involved at the top level of numismatics for many years and couldn't help but deal with these folks.
I have much to contribute to this board. I have seen things and had experiences that others here would likely find of interest and I'm happy to share. Specializing in obsolete currency for the past 25 years has given me a unique perspective and knowledge of the relationship between coins and paper from the 1700s to the early 20th century. The stories are fascinating and coin collectors would benefit so much by learning the other half of the story of their money and appreciate their coins that much more.
Russell, I sorta doubt that, after 35 years of buying and selling tens of millions of dollars of rare coins at auctions, you have much to teach me personally. I tried to check you out, but, except for a corporation under your name that was dissolved in 2006, your name doesn't exist on the WWW. I don't leave that many traces there myself, but I still have some limited street cred. Now I'm old and feeble, but still have some chops left. I used to be big; now I'm just fat.
MrEureka was listening to me snore in 1979. And virtually everyone who does major auctions has sat next to him more than a few times. I'm so special(?) that his new puppies chew on me.
You have a much better prose style than I, yet mine can be demonstrated (after excellent editing) in my year and a half of writing the Auction News column in the Numismatist.
Since you're an auction maven, maybe you've seen me give Laurie (or Tony, or Sil, or Ron) shoulder rubs and energy work at a few of them. Then, outbid her (occasionally, and always on an upgrade)
The last piece of name-dropping I'll do (you mentioned his name first, LOL) is having smoked a bone or three with Walter Breen in the early 80's.
You likely have many interesting stories to tell, but auction commission structures (after backing out Paypal fees, which may highly respected people here work with) are not an area I'd consider to be your forte. Tell us your stories, share your knowledge about obsoletes.
BillJones, one of the finest and widest-ranging contributors here, has so much to share in so many areas that I'll forgo much more comment on his auction twitch. I was born after Arabic numerology was introduced in Western culture. Maybe he had a problem transitioning from Roman numerals.
"People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf." - Geo. Orwell
SIS, as far as contributions to this forum I'll stack up my 14 years and 26,000+ posts, and 16,000+ PMs against your approx 1800 posts. I've researched and analyzed various portions of the rare coin and bullion markets to the nth degree over the past 40 years, a decent portion of it being original work. I like making comparisons of the coin market to the other collectible and financial markets (stocks, bonds, commodities, currencies).
It doesn't matter to me if you don't find anything useful. The ones who have responded to me and asked for help are the ones that matter. If the brevity of posts rather than information contained within is what you value...that's your right. How many worthwhile papers and research projects have you done over the years that were 1-2 sentences long? Has QDB ever read or referenced your analysis?
I've read every word in this thread carefully, and responded appropriately to it. I will continue to do it as long as erroneous information gets posted as the truth. Revamping the same bad information into a different form doesn't make it less wrong. For readability, it would help if you learned how to indent a paragraph.
However, when you fail to understand the point that I made twice about auction houses making 20%,...
Please explain how the major auction houses "make 20%." I'm all ears. Either they make it or they don't. Maybe you need to make your point more clearly. From what I've seen, you've failed to explain/prove it twice. And I've stated enough times already, that as a consignor, the auction house has never made anywhere near close to 20% off me. And we already know that none of the net commissions from auctions are paid by knowledgeable buyers. So where are they making the 20%?
Rick, Rick, Rick. I remember you well but you don't remember me. I'm hurt. We sat in many auction rooms together. You sat in the back and yelled out wisecracks while I was earning a very nice living buying rare date gold for several investment clients. Sorry to see that you've been demoted from class clown to internet troll. I used to think that you had a pretty good sense of humor and found you entertaining. I went on to work for two different auction companies, as a consultant.
As far as auction experience and numismatic knowledge, I'm quite confident that mine has grown significantly and steadily while you seem to have hit a dead end. Sorry about that. Getting high with Walter Breen is quite an achievement, especially considering who he turned out to be. I don't think I'd brag about that.
RR- I took you to say that I should leave the commentary to those with more experience, like Mr. Eureka. If that wasn't directed at me but at Bill Jones, then I'm sorry that I misunderstood. I have plenty of experience. If it was directed at me, then you are wrong.
My claim was never that auction houses net 20% profit. I don't know why you keep drawing this conclusion, as I never said or meant this. Perhaps "charge" should be substituted for "make" but I figured that if I'm making a point about what costs of selling is to a consignor, you'd get it. I'm talking about the costs of selling at an auction, not how much profit an auction house nets. I don't know how to be more explicit. You appear to just want to disagree, so I'm moving on to more productive threads.
Collector and dealer in obsolete currency. Always buying all obsolete bank notes and scrip.
I executed my new auction strategy last night and I'm loving it!!
I am leaving out names of auctions houses and coins on purpose as the last time I went down this path I received a warning, so I am not going to violate any Forum rules.
Coin 1: was up for auction a couple weeks ago and I put in what I thought was a strong bid of $1.8k, including the juice, (Price Guide is $1.7k, and I've had a few examples of this coin at this grade that I've bought between $1.3k-$1.5k last year, which is slightly higher than its normal trading range). Coin 1 was an AU55. It wound up selling for (final hammer) nearly $2.2k and I didn't chase it, else I would have paid the highest price ever recorded at an auction for a commensurately graded coin and that is one honor I no longer ever wish to have (I admittedly received this shameful honor a few times last year and it stunk!)
Low and behold Coin 2, and AU58 from a Registry Set shows up for auction. At AU58, the retail price for the coin is $2.05k, and I put in a placeholder bid of $800, and decided to bid live. I won the coin last night for $1.53k.
There is an AU50 example that will be sold in the next couple days and I bet it sells for more than $1.2k because whoever was the underbidder will chase it and overpay by about $400+.
I am proud of myself for showing patience and understanding/learning over the past decade that even coins that are thinly traded come up for sale in batches, why I don't know -- but they do! First guy in will pay through the roof, and usually for a coin in quality that is likely to be equaled or trumped by the coins that follow in sales.
While this is not a foolproof strategy, my experience shows that 90% of the time I would have gotten a far nicer coin at lower price point, so for 2016 and beyond this is my new approach/rule, understanding I might miss out on one/two coins, but I will buy more coins that are equally nice or nicer at much lower prices.
Happy hunting!!
PS. Will post pics in a couple weeks when I receive the coin
I am proud of myself for showing patience and understanding/learning over the past decade that even coins that are thinly traded come up for sale in batches, why I don't know -- but they do!
How many 1869 dates coins do you have? How many 1842 dated coins do I have. If either of us sold there would be thinly traded coins coming out in bunches.
First guy in will pay through the roof, and usually for a coin in quality that is likely to be equaled or trumped by the coins that follow in sales.
If I was selling a hoard of tough coins with small pops and decent demand (like 64-S $5's or $10's), I would sell the worst and best to establish the market ranges, and then drip feed in the middle. With that strategy you hit the point you referenced of getting top dollar for the weakest coin, then advance the market with an awesome coin. It would be tough to see the middle coins breaking the band if the demand is broadly there.
Comments
ErrorsOnCoins stated that they do not pay a buyers fee.
How is this done?
By having the consignor pay for all fees, as is customary in the coin auction business.
Just because the buyer's fee shows up on the high bidder's invoice, doesn't mean that the 17.5% also came out of their pocket. There's a difference between "on invoice" and "out-of-pocket." If the auction house wants to put the 10% "seller's" fee on me as a buyer too, have at it because I can handle it. Call it "buyer's fee" #2. I'll just subtract 27.5% from my future auction bids rather than 10%. The house can then tell the consignor's that they are paying no seller's fee....the bidder's now pay it all (0% seller's fees).....after all, it shows up on THEIR invoice. What further proof could you want?
In reality, the larger auction houses already have something similar because they typically will waive the 10% seller's fee on most consignments $10K-$20K or more. So it really all comes down to how much of that 17.5% buyer's fee also gets negotiated away by the consignor. Consignor's typically get "hammer plus X%." Unless they get Hammer + 17.5%, they are paying something. If they only negotiate for Hammer....then they paid the entire 17.5% BF as a commission.
Take this test for 90+% of auction coins (ie the same type of coins that are available on the bourse floor all the time). Did you end up paying 14.89%-17.5% more for them at auction vs. the bourse floor? If you didn't, then someone's pocket other than yours paid that buyer's fee.
I can't wait for a 20% buyer's fee to be able to do the math w/o a calculator.
Knowing that the House is making 20% and the perception that a bidder is only paying one increment above what the next buyer was willing to pay, is a strong appeal to many buyers. For sellers, the wide exposure for their material and having the auction process select the highest buyer is often well worth the 20%.
ErrorsOnCoins stated that they do not pay a buyers fee.
How is this done?
By having the consignor pay for all fees, as is customary in the coin auction business.
Just because the buyer's fee shows up on the high bidder's invoice, doesn't mean that the 17.5% also came out of their pocket. There's a difference between "on invoice" and "out-of-pocket." If the auction house wants to put the 10% "seller's" fee on me as a buyer too, have at it because I can handle it. Call it "buyer's fee" #2. I'll just subtract 27.5% from my future auction bids rather than 10%. The house can then tell the consignor's that they are paying no seller's fee....the bidder's now pay it all (0% seller's fees).....after all, it shows up on THEIR invoice. What further proof could you want?
In reality, the larger auction houses already have something similar because they typically will waive the 10% seller's fee on most consignments $10K-$20K or more. So it really all comes down to how much of that 17.5% buyer's fee also gets negotiated away by the consignor. Consignor's typically get "hammer plus X%." Unless they get Hammer + 17.5%, they are paying something. If they only negotiate for Hammer....then they paid the entire 17.5% BF as a commission.
Take this test for 90+% of auction coins (ie the same type of coins that are available on the bourse floor all the time). Did you end up paying 14.89%-17.5% more for them at auction vs. the bourse floor? If you didn't, then someone's pocket other than yours paid that buyer's fee.
I can't wait for a 20% buyer's fee to be able to do the math w/o a calculator.
Your logic is so strained, it's not worth my effort to follow it. How the hell you can get charged an addition 17.5% at the bottom of the invoice and not pay for it is beyond me. When the hammer price is equal to or higher than the retail value, you are screwed. When you add the travel costs to attend an auction, it becomes even more unattractive. You can got there and find the lots are not up to snuff, or you can get blown out of the water by a "yahoo" bidder.
To answer your one point, I've done MUCH better with private treaty transactions with the dealers I know, and even some I didn't know or didn't like, than I have with the major auctions. I'll take buying a coin at bourse over a major auction anytime. To me auctions are a path of last resort. If you can't find it anywhere else, then you have to cope with the auction.
I have purchased very few bargains at major auctions, and even the "fair deals" have been a challenge. I've also had a couple of burials. Although I enjoy the coins very much, I know I'm going to get the shaft when sell them.
Small auctions can be an different story if the items are not overly protected or shilled. I got some great items off the Worthy Coin Board in Boston back in the 1980s. I also got some coins off of bid walls in the small towns. Neither of those venues had buyers' fees.
When I was dealer I could get some stuff out of auctions, especially on the "dark side" material auctions because I'd place bids on a hundred items or more. Given that range something had to work, if you bids were made on an informed basis. I can't do that today because I'm not selling as dealer any more. When you going less than five coins in an auction, your chances for a good deal are limited.
ColonelJessup's "Watch How Bad I Screw You Any Which Way but Loose If You Don't Know Any Better" auction service plans.
You're always on the hook for shipping and applicable sales tax.
Plan #1
1) All lots are sold at hammer and no buyers fee of any nature will be charged.
2) The seller will pay a negotiated commission, in this case, the negotiated commission is hammer minus 10%.
Intending to pay $1000, you bid $1000.
Cost to you - $1000. Proceeds to consignor - $900
Plan #2
1)All lots are sold at hammer with a 10% buyers fee.
2) The seller is given full hammer (plus 0%).
Intending to pay $1000, you bid $900
Cost to you - $990. Proceeds to consignor - $900
Plan #3
1) All lots are sold at hammer with a buyers fee of 25%.
2) The consignor negotiates a commission of hammer+12.5%.
Intending to pay $1000, you bid $800.
Cost to you $1000. Proceeds to consignor - $900
Plan #4
1)All lots are sold at hammer with a 100% buyers fee.
2)The consignor negotiates a commission of hammer plus 80%
Intending to pay $1000, you bid $500
Cost to you - $1000. Proceeds to consignor - $900
Choose any plan. Screwed you good, huh?
I suppose we should let ErrorsOnCoins answer for himself, but I suspect all he is saying is that he backs out the buyer's premium and submits a net bid, just like everyone else who doesn't bid in auctions as part of a potlach, so that the "buyer's fee" really just comes out of the consignor's pocket. See Col Jessup's post above
On the other hand it is also possible that his just plain FOS, but I think we should give him the benefit of the doubt in order to usher in the new year on a good note.
CG
ErrorsOnCoins stated that they do not pay a buyers fee. How is this done?
I suppose we should let ErrorsOnCoins answer for himself, but I suspect all he is saying is that he backs out the buyer's premium and submits a net bid, just like everyone else who doesn't bid in auctions as part of a potlach, so that the "buyer's fee" really just comes out of the consignor's pocket. See Col Jessup's post above
On the hand it is also possible that his just plain FOS, but I think we should give him the benefit of the doubt in order to usher in the new year on a good note.
CG
I agree it would be more straight forward if EOC intended to say he would submit a bid that adds in the BF to get to the net price he wants.
I haven't seen anyone say a buyer can negotiate out of paying the BF. For example, bid $1000, have a net price of $1175 at 17.5%, and then pay the auction house $1000.
ColonelJessup's "Watch How Bad I Screw You Any Which Way but Loose If You Don't Know Any Better" auction service plans.
You're always on the hook for shipping and applicable sales tax.
Plan #1
1) All lots are sold at hammer and no buyers fee of any nature will be charged.
2) The seller will pay a negotiated commission, in this case, the negotiated commission is hammer minus 10%.
Intending to pay $1000, you bid $1000.
Cost to you - $1000. Proceeds to consignor - $900
Plan #2
1)All lots are sold at hammer with a 10% buyers fee.
2) The seller is given full hammer (plus 0%).
Intending to pay $1000, you bid $900
Cost to you - $990. Proceeds to consignor - $900
Plan #3
1) All lots are sold at hammer with a buyers fee of 25%.
2) The consignor negotiates a commission of hammer+12.5%.
Intending to pay $1000, you bid $800.
Cost to you $1000. Proceeds to consignor - $900
Plan #4
1)All lots are sold at hammer with a 100% buyers fee.
2)The consignor negotiates a commission of hammer plus 80%
Intending to pay $1000, you bid $500
Cost to you - $1000. Proceeds to consignor - $900
Choose any plan. Screwed you good, huh?
Plans 3 and 4 only happen if you are Eric P. Newman, Pogue or Missouri Cabinet. For the rest of us the best you can hope for is no sellers' fee.
Especially if the house has promised the consignor 105% of hammer.
CG
ColonelJessup's "Watch How Bad I Screw You Any Which Way but Loose If You Don't Know Any Better" auction service plans.
You're always on the hook for shipping and applicable sales tax.
Plan #1
1) All lots are sold at hammer and no buyers fee of any nature will be charged.
2) The seller will pay a negotiated commission, in this case, the negotiated commission is hammer minus 10%.
Intending to pay $1000, you bid $1000.
Cost to you - $1000. Proceeds to consignor - $900
Plan #2
1)All lots are sold at hammer with a 10% buyers fee.
2) The seller is given full hammer (plus 0%).
Intending to pay $1000, you bid $900
Cost to you - $990. Proceeds to consignor - $900
Plan #3
1) All lots are sold at hammer with a buyers fee of 25%.
2) The consignor negotiates a commission of hammer+12.5%.
Intending to pay $1000, you bid $800.
Cost to you $1000. Proceeds to consignor - $900
Plan #4
1)All lots are sold at hammer with a 100% buyers fee.
2)The consignor negotiates a commission of hammer plus 80%
Intending to pay $1000, you bid $500
Cost to you - $1000. Proceeds to consignor - $900
Choose any plan. Screwed you good, huh?
Plans 3 and 4 only happen if you are Eric P. Newman, Pogue or Missouri Cabinet. For the rest of us the best you can hope for is no sellers' fee.
Anyone with a 100K consignment can get 107.5% (or better)on 117.5%
ANYONE
RMR: 'Wer, wenn ich schriee, hörte mich denn aus der Engel Ordnungen?'
CJ: 'No one!' [Ain't no angels in the coin biz]
Anyone with a 100K consignment can get 107.5% (or better)on 117.5%
ANYONE
Thanks for the context. This puts things in perspective and will help clear up the conversation.
I agree with all of this except:
1. The house doesn't make 20% - try something more like 3-6% after all expenses. It's a tough business on the national level.
2. The buyer doesn't pay an extra 20% unless they are collecting/bidding like Bill Jones does.
Your logic is so strained, it's not worth my effort to follow it. How the hell you can get charged an addition 17.5% at the bottom of the invoice and not pay for it is beyond me. When the hammer price is equal to or higher than the retail value, you are screwed. When you add the travel costs to attend an auction, it becomes even more unattractive. You can got there and find the lots are not up to snuff, or you can get blown out of the water by a "yahoo" bidder.
I understand that you don't get it. That's fine. Leave the auctions to Colonel Jessup, Mr. Eureka, and others who do get it. 99% of my purchases at auctions over the past 40 years (over a thousand coins) have been for coins that sold for their typical FMV's/or less...or in today's lingo...they bid up to approximately hammer price. If you wish to place a bid of FMV (ie 17.5% ABOVE hammer), that's your business. I have plenty of contacts in the coin industry to not have to pay 17.5% above FMV for anything. And if those coins are truly worth 35% over hammer (2x17.5)....a trusted agent will tell you that. One time I wouldn't bid higher than $9K on an G 1796 half dollar....until a trusted agent told me in was really worth 30% more. In the cases where "bids" of 17.5%-25% over hammer occurs on hot items...that may be the real market for them (ie the price guides are wrong). Don't keep blaming the Buyer's Fee. A week doesn't go buy here in the Coin Forum where Buyer's Fees are blamed for all the ills of the auction market. Isn't global warming enough to worry about? I'm pretty sure I once ran a poll on whose pocket the buyer's fee ultimately comes out of. But, I'm not going to dig for it.
When I attended the major auctions at FUN, Baltimore, and Long Beach over the years (a few dozen of them) it was always in concert with attending the major show/bourse at the same time. 2 big birds with one stone. At Long Beach and FUN there are multiple auctions going on. Call that 3 birds with 1 stone. It didn't cost me anything extra. On several of those shows I visited friends and relatives in the Long Beach and Orlando areas. Sometimes those were the only times I'd see them. Those trips to Florida and LA were my vacations. We had a great time while out there....sometimes staying several days after the show. One of my friends who I often shared FUN tables with would stay for a week after FUN. Auctions, bourse, friends, vacations, etc. 4 birds or more with one stone, one air fare. On one FUN trip I stayed at a friend's place in Sarasota after the show. Traveling to auctions can actually be cheap if you factor it into your annual plans as I suspect many dealers and collectors do. If you're paying airfare to LA or FUN, make it worth every penny.
I've never attended auctions at FUN or Long Beach where I couldn't buy something to make it worth my while. If anything, there were more lots I could buy than I had money to spend. 10,000 or more lots and you can't find anything to make money or use for your collection? For those having problems at auctions where everything you bid on goes for 17.5% more than it's worth, I suggest enlisting the help of a dealer like Colonel Jessup to scan the auctions for you. Clearly, bidding on your own account is not working. Eventually, something will show up that is priced properly...and the agent's fee will be well worth it.
The only time I had isolated travel costs were the major auctions I attended in NY City at Stacks when no show was being conducted (125 mile trip by car/train). Those did cost me approximately an $80 round trip train fare....and maybe $10 for lunch. But $100 or so when buying $10,000 or more out of auction is a pittance. On one trip to Stacks in 1988 I had them show me some of their coins in the display cases while I was waiting on lots. I found an under-graded MS63 seated dollar as a MS63 no drapery half dime. I paid their "full retail." I showed them to a dealer next to me and they offered me a 10% profit. I knew I'd get the grade on those so I passed. The coins both came back MS64 from NGC and I profited $1,000 for 5 minutes of extra work at auction viewing....enough to cover 10 additional Stack auction expenses. And that was in a crowded room of 2 dozen dealers all fighting to view lots. The irony!
On some of those trips to Stacks and other auction I met up with coin dealers and conducted some business. In one case, one dealer offered to pay all my expenses to the summer ANA (a 3 day stay) if I reviewed auction lots with them (2-3 sets of eyes are better than 1). Considering you were a full time dealer before, these same opportunities to conduct business at auctions/shows should have been readily available. The Stack's mail bid sales were a prime stomping ground to pick up lots of "cheap" stuff for local Northeast shows. When attending a Stacks' auction, I usually reviewed the upcoming mail bid sale as well as their inventory if I had time. I typically found much better and many more deals at the auction/mail bid sale route than I could from dealer inventories. Coordinating a Stack's visit to hit a Broadway show or other venue made it more worthwhile. Fwiw I never traveled by air to any major auction to just see auction lots and bid. There were always other things going on. I never came back empty-handed from any such venture.
I've also been snared by the potted plant at least twice...once by on line bidding and another time on the auction floor. It does happen. And it's less likely to happen with a qualified agent sharp shooter on your side.
Even if you search for an hour on line, odds are you won't find a single site saying anything different than Wiki does. It's the world's best kept "secret." If auctions resulted in bidder's having to consistently pay 17.5%-25% over what a coin was normally worth, the auction houses would eventually be left with no bidders ....at least on those items. Supply and demand doesn't work differently in auctions having buyer's fees. It only matters what a coin sells for and what the consignor gives up. Everything else is irrelevant legalese.
In auctions, the buyer's premium is a percentage additional charge on the hammer price (winning bid at auction) of the lot that must be paid by the winner. It is charged by the auctioneer to cover administrative expenses. The buyer's premium goes directly to the auction house and not to the seller.
Major auction houses have made this charge for some time, particularly in the fine arts sector, with premiums in the region of 10%-25%.[1] In the real estate sector in many European countries, the premium, if charged at all, is much less (2%-2.5%). However, more recently, in the UK foreclosure properties have been offered without fee to the seller, but with a substantial buyer's premium of 10%.
The buyer's premium is considered to be either a necessary contribution to the costs of the administrative process or an unreasonable extra charge by the auction community. [2] Auction houses may now market themselves as "not charging a premium" to gain favor with customers. [3] Regardless, such premiums are now commonplace and continue to grow.
The amount of the buyer's premium will normally be stated in the auction house terms and conditions or, in the case of UK properties, it would be listed in the RICS (Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors) Common Auction Conditions or in the special conditions for the lot.
In Europe, the buyer's premium will also be subject to VAT (value added tax), while in the United States, some states require the premium to be included in the sales tax base.
1. Note that they state it is "paid by the winner." That is technically true since it's on their invoice. What it doesn't say is that the 98% of all bidders back off their bids by same amount as the BF. They don't bid FMV....rather they bid FMV-17.5%.
2. "It goes directly to the house and not the seller." This alone states that a 15% BF
cannot go to the seller. But, in my last auction I was paid a net 91% (hammer +5%). So where did that other 10% of the BF go to? Clearly, it went back to the seller (ie me). So Wiki must be wrong. I as the seller got 1/3 of the BF, and 100% of the 10% seller's fee removed.
FMV can change drastically from auction to auction. When Gene Gardner bought the Newman 1840-0 MS67 No Drapery 25c he was bidding against a very stubborn bidder(s). The coin fetched a world record $330K. No doubt the fact that Gene was on this coin helped to keep others in it longer. When Gene sold his set the following year the same coin fetched about 30% less. That's a lot bigger difference than a 17.5% buyer's fee. One could say that at Newman, the coin fetched an extra 50% because of Gene. Variations in FMV on any given day/week/month/year can easily mask the buyer's premium. On run of the mill stuff at auction, the buyer's fee should be easy spot vs. FMV.
What about the big art auction houses who have moved up to 25% buyer's fees?
In first reading the above article it appeared they were going to stick with the notion that bidders pay more as BF's increase. But by the end of the article it has an interesting result. I'm surprised they actually need "studies" on this type of stuff. Nowhere in the article does it mention that bidders might back off their bids....it's as if it's an industry insider secret. Shhhh. Don't tell anyone. Even when I was a schmo I still never did worse than a net of 87% at auction...and that was with a 10% buyer's fee. That usually required a worthwhile consignment of no more than a few dozen items totaling $15K-$20K.
For smaller consignments there are better or equivalent alternatives. Though even if I took those same $20K in coins around the bourse, I doubt I could have done any better than a net of 85-87%. There are trustworthy dealers out there that will take smaller consignments and pool them together to get the better rates of a $50K-$100K deal.
Of course, a modest 100K consignment would be out of reach for 95-98% of the coin collectors. So they're stuck in Schmoland, unless they can find a dealer to work with.
I hope I've clarified, at least for some, the simple arithmetical demonstration that, whatever the buyers fee, the total cost of the coin is easily and consistently calculable.
Dealers here don't toot their own horns, but, based on my own experience, I'll put in a plug for Ian Russell of GreatCollections. Ian is a delight to do business with. I'm pretty sure his commission structure (check his website) is 10% buyers fee for coins over $1000 and over and 15% on coins below that. I don't know what his lower limit is on overall consignment value or individual lot value (I'll guess pretty low), but he seems an ideal venue for locating, buying, and selling coins of lesser value than former medium-range big shots like myself might consign. I've used GC myself and been quite happy with my results.
and ANYONE can get his rates.
Je me suis trompé
RMR: 'Wer, wenn ich schriee, hörte mich denn aus der Engel Ordnungen?'
CJ: 'No one!' [Ain't no angels in the coin biz]
....Knowing that the House is making 20% and the perception that a bidder is only paying one increment above what the next buyer was willing to pay, is a strong appeal to many buyers. For sellers, the wide exposure for their material and having the auction process select the highest buyer is often well worth the 20%.
I agree with all of this except:
1. The house doesn't make 20% - try something more like 3-6% after all expenses. It's a tough business on the national level.
2. The buyer doesn't pay an extra 20% unless they are collecting/bidding like Bill Jones does.
Your logic is so strained, it's not worth my effort to follow it. How the hell you can get charged an addition 17.5% at the bottom of the invoice and not pay for it is beyond me. When the hammer price is equal to or higher than the retail value, you are screwed. When you add the travel costs to attend an auction, it becomes even more unattractive. You can got there and find the lots are not up to snuff, or you can get blown out of the water by a "yahoo" bidder.
I understand that you don't get it. That's fine. Leave the auctions to Colonel Jessup, Mr. Eureka, and others who do get it.
1. 20% is the traditional auction house gross markup. The old European system was 10 and 10. That's 10% sellers fee and 10% to the buyer. At one time, this was the way that all US numismatic auction houses set their fee structure. Then, one company (Heritage) was bold and raised their buyer fee to 15%. This enabled them to be more competitive on the rate to the seller and undersell other auction house. This is part of the strategy that made Heritage what it is today. Your comment of 3-6% net is irrelevant to this discussion of why auctions have become more popular than shows.
2. Who said that the buyer pays an extra 20%? Not me. My point is that the 20% fee for the seller is reasonable, especially compared to the who-knows-what markup that the coin dealer will make when I do business at a show. The known, reasonable markup of an auction is greatly preferable to many consignors than the possibility of getting ripped off by a dealer.
I understand that you don't get it. That's fine. Leave the auctions to Colonel Jessup, Mr. Eureka, and others who do get it.[/
I didn't read any further than this because at this point I fully understood that you had no idea what you were talking about.
I'm afraid that you don't understand anything as illustrated by your misunderstanding of my above comments. Do you understand that I sat in the same room as Mr. Eureka 30 years ago and bid against him and other major dealers before I went to work for 12 years for a major auction house? Part of my job there was to explain to people why they would be better off consigning to us rather than bringing their coins to a show to sell them. I lost very few consignments, so I'm really quite qualified to answer the question of why shows are dying and auctions growing, in response to Easton Collection's original comments.
You have quite a nerve to misinterpret my comments and then attack me as inexperienced.
-Russell Kaye
I missed the insult, but won't dismiss how you feel.
However, If you were in the audience bidding at auction 30 years ago, you might recall there were no buyers fee whatsoever in US coin auctions.
I've seen Christie's sell a large lot of five Pan-Pac $50's.
I sat in FUN Platinum 2010 next to Kevin, Contursi and Laurie (and I can't remember who else) when the Queller run of proof sets (1856-1916) was sold as year set groupings. Chris Napolitano and I partnered and spent $200K. Immediately took the sets to NGC at the show and had them reholdered as individual coins. Broke them up, crossed some, upgraded some. and made $100K on what we bought. At the same sale I bought other some coins due to a recto-cranial infarction. And....
The "truth" is nothing but a mosaic of anecdotes (or call them data points) arranged quasi-logically as in Mark Twain's "There are lies, damn lies, and statistics.".
And the Devil can quote Scripture to his own purposes.
I knew every wholesale consignment director at Bowers, Superior, Stacks, Paramount/Akers,Rarcoa, Christie's and Sotheby from the early 80's, so I'm surmising you worked for Heritage. No one keeps a job there unless they are quite effective. If so, you were doing retail. If they only talked to you without shopping around, they did not do proper due diligence. No knocking JH and his crew. They're the best. Mostly. And generally. I've also
I remember in the early 2000's when HA sold three full sets of Indian pennies in the same sale, two with their own individual vanity catalogs. Blood in the water!
I've seen Stacks sell pages upon pages of large lots of raw $20's at full retail commission rates (perhaps 20%) when the lawyers for estates (Stacks had advertised in the NY Journal of Law for decades.).
Maybe they could have gone 3 blocks away and sold to Joel Coen for 2%. But due diligence? Not.
I don't know how your consignors did. But you clearly gave them the best deal they could get (and likely a fairly good one) if they didn't know any better. And HA does have the best overall platform in the industry.
And I bought a choice proof $10 Indian from a local bucket shop at Redbook because he bought it for melt, then I tripled up.
Per Buffalo' Springfield's "For What It's Worth" .. "Nobody's right and everybody's wrong".
your stream-of-consciousness writing pairs well with wine and fruit. After a couple-three glass, it makes a lot of sense. Slap everything together and get that book manuscript sent off. I'm good for a copy.
RMR: 'Wer, wenn ich schriee, hörte mich denn aus der Engel Ordnungen?'
CJ: 'No one!' [Ain't no angels in the coin biz]
Plan #3
1) all lots are sold at hammer+25%
2) The consignor negotiates a commission of hammer+12.5%.
Intending to pay $1000, you bid $800.
Cost to you $1000. Proceeds to consignor - $900
Plan #4
1)All lots are sold at hammer with a 100% buyers fee.
2)The consignor negotiates a commission of hammer plus 80%
Intending to pay $1000, you bid $500
Cost to you - $1000. Proceeds to consignor - $900
Choose any plan. Screwed you good, huh?
BillJones, neither of the above rates is available to Newman, Pogue or Gardner.
Because they do not now and have not ever existed.
The last one was meant as pure unmitigated satire.
Colonel, your memory is clearly defective. There was a 10% buyer's premium at major auctions in 1985, 30 years ago. Check your old catalogs. I just pulled two different 1985 ones off my shelf (Stack's and Christies) and the buyer's premium was 10% in both. Heritage went to 15% several years later.
Yeah, I'm not sure of the point of that stream of conscious ramble, too. Am I supposed to be impressed? I've consulted with, bought from and sold to many of the top dealers, too, over the decades. It's hard not to if you have been a professional dealer/consultant for 50 years.
Colonel, your memory is clearly defective. There was a 10% buyer's premium at major auctions in 1985, 30 years ago. Check your old catalogs. I just pulled two different 1985 ones off my shelf (Stack's and Christies) and the buyer's premium was 10% in both. Heritage went to 15% several years later.
You and Bill still don't get it.
There is, never was, and never will be a buyer premium. Total cost per lot is what buyers figure.
Sellers negotiate their portion of such or not.
RR is not one who insults. The military guy is different.
My 1866 Philly Mint Set
I beg to differ on the buyers premium. Just because you and I and most reasonable buyers subtract this amount from our top buying price to come up with our actual bidding limit, the buyer's premium does, in fact, exist. The points that I've been trying to make is that the auction commission has shifted from (roughly) a 10-10 split to a 20-0 split over the years and this still means that it costs roughly 20% to sell at auction. Yes, I know the numbers are slightly different where more competitive, like selling through Heritage or Stacks, but my point is that the net "cost" to the seller is roughly 20%. This is attractive to many potential sellers vs. offering the coins directly to dealers. Why trust the price offered by one dealer when the auction, in effect, selects the highest price from many dealers? (less 20%).
Auctions are more efficient and that's why the action has migrated there from the shows. Some people, like Easton Collection, prefer the person to person contact and that value shouldn't be overlooked or underestimated, but auctions get the job done for buyer and seller efficiently and economically.
I'm thinking I should huff some Jewel-Luster and go over to the coin doctor thread
Only acetone causes drain bamage
I don't believe that Heritage raising their buyer's fee to 15% "first" (and lowering seller's premiums) gave them any advantage over the other guys. It didn't fool me or anyone else who had been around more than 5-10 years. I liked dividing by 1.1....but dividing by 1.15 was going to be a pita. The other guys followed soon after any ways with the 15%. What really mattered was that Heritage was a growing giant with considerable resources that just rolled over everyone else the past 10-20 years. They brought in the right talent and kept plowing forward, utilizing technology first. The other auction houses didn't have leaders like Halperin and Ivy. They could have done it with a 10% (or even 0%) buyer's fee if they wanted.
For my money B&M and Stacks were still #1 and #2 in my mind by 1989...even with 10-15% buyer's fees in play. I consigned to those guys and frequently bid at their auctions. I never even considered consigning to Heritage in the 1980's, regardless of so-called "favorable" seller's premiums. I only cared about the net premium I paid. In those days I got a net 87-88% from Stacks and B&M, and far better exposure to my consignments out of NY City auctions.
A net 20% consignor's fee is ridiculous imo for any reasonable $20K or higher consignment. I've never paid anything higher than 13% at major auction, ever. And I've had a dozen or so major consignments. I can get 80% on the bourse floor the same day, why accept that after 3-4 months? If you know what your coins are worth both on the bourse and at auction, then pick the optimum route. If a collector doesn't know this, or can't figure it out, they had no business buying their coins in the first place, assuming they had a profit motive (or minimum loss) from the very start.
I'm glad you were able to sit next to Mr. Eureka 30 yrs ago in an auction room. When I started bidding at major auctions in 1974 Mr Eureka was probably still in high school (no offense to Mr. E.). I spent a lot of time bidding against the biggest dogs in the 1980's raw coin auction market, and it was a dog eat dog world (Martin Paul, the Avenas, Eric Streiner, Jay Miller, Rick Sear, Bill Nagle, Bill Shamhart, Lee Bellisario, Brian Hendleson, Greg Holloway, John Dannreuther, Sylvano Degenova, Kevin Lipton, Steve Contursi, Charlie Brown, Marty Haber, and Andy Lustig to name the ones that come to mind first). It was not easy to get wins with that competition. Those were the guys that were defining grading standards, cracking out coins, and getting wins. Those were the guys that knew how to grade on the front lines. And many or most of them did some time grading at the TPG's. It was the same guys at nearly every auction. I bumped heads with Martin on so many lots that it was incredible. That's what buying 10% of the auction can get you.
My only beef with auction fees and bidding is that the same people continue to post erroneous information time and time again. It's hard enough for newbies around here to get started without getting off entirely on the wrong foot....such as avoiding auctions because of published "fees"......which in reality have made little difference to the majority of bidders and consignors over the past 45 years. As bidder and consignor over 40 years, those changes have not impacted me in any noticeable way.
Your logic is so strained, it's not worth my effort to follow it. How the hell you can get charged an addition 17.5% at the bottom of the invoice and not pay for it is beyond me. When the hammer price is equal to or higher than the retail value, you are screwed. When you add the travel costs to attend an auction, it becomes even more unattractive. You can got there and find the lots are not up to snuff, or you can get blown out of the water by a "yahoo" bidder.
That was directed at me, not you. And any comments in my long-winded post were directed back at Mr. Jones, who seems to like to keep this game of "misunderstanding" auction fees going on. This debate is on the reality of buyer's fees. If there really were a total of 27.5% in available auction fees to apply, then it is illogical that the house clears only 3-6% after a sale. Smoke and mirrors, nothing more. I can't help it if Bill Jones only bids on lots that sell for Hammer + 37.5%. I prefer to spend my time on those lots that stay within Hammer + 17.5%....which is usually 85-95% of the auction lots.
Fwiw, the 15% buyer's fee wasn't even around yet at the B&M April 1997 Eliasberg sale. Sotheby's first came out with it in January 1993. If it were such a great idea why didn't the coin company's follow suit soon after? I do know that the 15% BF was in play by Stack's Nov 2001 Vermeulle sale. I sort of think that B&M/ANR and Stacks lost their edge to Heritage as their owners aged or left the market....and Heritage piled on the technology advances.
Because you were insulting me and Bill Jones in the same post, I thought that your comments were directed at me and I apologize for taking offense at those particular comments.
However, when you fail to understand the point that I made twice about auction houses making 20%, I realize that it's not worth trying to explain it to someone who is not listening a third time. You just seem to want to find statements with which you disagree.
I'm not interested in a bragging contest with you or any other board members. I don't need to name drop because, as I said, I was involved at the top level of numismatics for many years and couldn't help but deal with these folks.
I have much to contribute to this board. I have seen things and had experiences that others here would likely find of interest and I'm happy to share. Specializing in obsolete currency for the past 25 years has given me a unique perspective and knowledge of the relationship between coins and paper from the 1700s to the early 20th century. The stories are fascinating and coin collectors would benefit so much by learning the other half of the story of their money and appreciate their coins that much more.
I found this thread interesting. I've got to think that you are not helping this situation.
I guess that I have to learn who is not worth responding to on this board and who are trying to be positive and learn something.
MrEureka was listening to me snore in 1979. And virtually everyone who does major auctions has sat next to him more than a few times. I'm so special(?) that his new puppies chew on me.
You have a much better prose style than I, yet mine can be demonstrated (after excellent editing) in my year and a half of writing the Auction News column in the Numismatist.
Since you're an auction maven, maybe you've seen me give Laurie (or Tony, or Sil, or Ron) shoulder rubs and energy work at a few of them. Then, outbid her (occasionally, and always on an upgrade)
The last piece of name-dropping I'll do (you mentioned his name first, LOL) is having smoked a bone or three with Walter Breen in the early 80's.
You likely have many interesting stories to tell, but auction commission structures (after backing out Paypal fees, which may highly respected people here work with) are not an area I'd consider to be your forte. Tell us your stories, share your knowledge about obsoletes.
BillJones, one of the finest and widest-ranging contributors here, has so much to share in so many areas that I'll forgo much more comment on his auction twitch. I was born after Arabic numerology was introduced in Western culture. Maybe he had a problem transitioning from Roman numerals.
And this year I already learned don't mess with the old auction codgers. They know people!
I've learned in previous years on this forum, don't mess with the modern guys/gals, don't mess with the big ebay sellers.
And this year I already learned don't mess with the old auction codgers. They know people!
Codgers? I love it! A euphemistic term for an elderly curmudgeon?
It doesn't matter to me if you don't find anything useful. The ones who have responded to me and asked for help are the ones that matter. If the brevity of posts rather than information contained within is what you value...that's your right. How many worthwhile papers and research projects have you done over the years that were 1-2 sentences long? Has QDB ever read or referenced your analysis?
I've read every word in this thread carefully, and responded appropriately to it. I will continue to do it as long as erroneous information gets posted as the truth. Revamping the same bad information into a different form doesn't make it less wrong. For readability, it would help if you learned how to indent a paragraph.
However, when you fail to understand the point that I made twice about auction houses making 20%,...
Please explain how the major auction houses "make 20%." I'm all ears. Either they make it or they don't. Maybe you need to make your point more clearly. From what I've seen, you've failed to explain/prove it twice. And I've stated enough times already, that as a consignor, the auction house has never made anywhere near close to 20% off me. And we already know that none of the net commissions from auctions are paid by knowledgeable buyers. So where are they making the 20%?
As far as auction experience and numismatic knowledge, I'm quite confident that mine has grown significantly and steadily while you seem to have hit a dead end. Sorry about that. Getting high with Walter Breen is quite an achievement, especially considering who he turned out to be. I don't think I'd brag about that.
RR- I took you to say that I should leave the commentary to those with more experience, like Mr. Eureka. If that wasn't directed at me but at Bill Jones, then I'm sorry that I misunderstood. I have plenty of experience. If it was directed at me, then you are wrong.
My claim was never that auction houses net 20% profit. I don't know why you keep drawing this conclusion, as I never said or meant this. Perhaps "charge" should be substituted for "make" but I figured that if I'm making a point about what costs of selling is to a consignor, you'd get it. I'm talking about the costs of selling at an auction, not how much profit an auction house nets. I don't know how to be more explicit. You appear to just want to disagree, so I'm moving on to more productive threads.
I am leaving out names of auctions houses and coins on purpose as the last time I went down this path I received a warning, so I am not going to violate any Forum rules.
Coin 1: was up for auction a couple weeks ago and I put in what I thought was a strong bid of $1.8k, including the juice, (Price Guide is $1.7k, and I've had a few examples of this coin at this grade that I've bought between $1.3k-$1.5k last year, which is slightly higher than its normal trading range). Coin 1 was an AU55. It wound up selling for (final hammer) nearly $2.2k and I didn't chase it, else I would have paid the highest price ever recorded at an auction for a commensurately graded coin and that is one honor I no longer ever wish to have (I admittedly received this shameful honor a few times last year and it stunk!)
Low and behold Coin 2, and AU58 from a Registry Set shows up for auction. At AU58, the retail price for the coin is $2.05k, and I put in a placeholder bid of $800, and decided to bid live. I won the coin last night for $1.53k.
There is an AU50 example that will be sold in the next couple days and I bet it sells for more than $1.2k because whoever was the underbidder will chase it and overpay by about $400+.
I am proud of myself for showing patience and understanding/learning over the past decade that even coins that are thinly traded come up for sale in batches, why I don't know -- but they do! First guy in will pay through the roof, and usually for a coin in quality that is likely to be equaled or trumped by the coins that follow in sales.
While this is not a foolproof strategy, my experience shows that 90% of the time I would have gotten a far nicer coin at lower price point, so for 2016 and beyond this is my new approach/rule, understanding I might miss out on one/two coins, but I will buy more coins that are equally nice or nicer at much lower prices.
Happy hunting!!
PS. Will post pics in a couple weeks when I receive the coin
How many 1869 dates coins do you have? How many 1842 dated coins do I have. If either of us sold there would be thinly traded coins coming out in bunches.
If I was selling a hoard of tough coins with small pops and decent demand (like 64-S $5's or $10's), I would sell the worst and best to establish the market ranges, and then drip feed in the middle. With that strategy you hit the point you referenced of getting top dollar for the weakest coin, then advance the market with an awesome coin. It would be tough to see the middle coins breaking the band if the demand is broadly there.
Latin American Collection
``https://ebay.us/m/KxolR5