Options
Pogue III Auction Analysis
Analyst
Posts: 1,438 ✭✭✭
All are invited to agree or disagree with the points in my analysis. I continually reflect upon market levels. I reviewed the FUN sale in January and the auctions in the fall. I spent hours viewing coins in the Pogue III sale. I attended the event.
I refer to some coins that did set record prices in my review. Several dimes set auction records as did a Proof 1827 half. For an 1875 Three, 329k is likely to be a record. Pending further research, I believe 188k is an auction record for an 1854-D Three.
The total of the prices realized for a sale should not be a major issue in an auction analysis, if an issue at all. It is important to think about the meaning of the consignments, the physical characteristics of the coins, interpretations by experts of groups of coins in the sale, collector-participation, dealer-participation, and especially upon the overall depth, quality and rarity of the offerings. The energy or lack thereof in the room is a factor, too.
The Marvelous Pogue Family Coin Collection, part 14: Successful Third Auction Given Uncertain Market Conditions
"In order to understand the scarce coins that you own or see, you must learn about coins that you cannot afford." -Me
0
Comments
Great read and keep them coming.
Easton—Congratulations on acquiring the Pogue 1830/29 dime.
I give away money. I collect money.
I don’t love money . I do love the Lord God.
Bidask- If you don't think that there are enough deep pocket dealers to support the high end market in this tough market with the stock market over 10% off from the top and oil way low, then smart collectors should consider acquiring few special coins at discounts for their portfolio using a 5 year plan.
Certain seated and Barber coins in high grade are way off and they are really rare and have good potential IMHO. - Also, some copper and some gold went fairly well priced as well.
Rays:
In 1996, I carefully inspected it at least twice. There was much dark brown color contrasting nicely with much rich original mint red. Although there is still some red, this coin is now, to a significant extent, a creamy tan color, which is not clear in published pictures. Oddly, the scratches under the letters IBE of Liberty were much more noticeable in 1996 and are sort of obscured now.
The images on PCGS CoinFacts fairly reveal these scratches. Indeed, the PCGS CoinFacts images are amazingly detailed in terms of hairlines and contact marks. In this case, however, the coin looks much different in reality in tems of color and texture.
There is no doubt that this is a very important coin. It is just not as great as talk among collectors in the past suggested that it might be. My guess is that some potential bidders were disappointed.
If we suggest, for this discussion, that prices for these are down 20% since 2014, $891,250 for the Missouri-Tettenhorst '96 No Pole in 2014 would be equivalent to $713,000 now, 20% less. Is valuing the Eliasberg-Pogue piece at $763,750 now in line with a valuation of $713k for the Missouri-Tettenhorst piece?
BloodMan:
Thanks, please read about the Pogue II sale, too.
The Marvelous Pogue Family Coin Collection, Part 9 – US Gold Coin Rarities Bring Strong Prices
Easton:
Well, no, even in the greatest collections of all time, including Eliasberg, Norweb, Pittman, JAS, Earle, etc., there are some awful coins. The fact that there are some awful coins in each of the greatest collections, including Pogue, is part of the reality of the history of coin collecting.
BidAsk:
I find this statement to be wrong. At Rarities Night and Platinum Night events, which have often totaled more than 20m each, there have been plenty of dealers who are each prepared to spend vast sums on coins.
A) It should not be the intention of "deep pocket dealers" to prevent prices from falling when demand falls. If they were willing and able to continually do that, prices would never fall. I hope that BidAsk is not implying that "deep pocket dealers" should be or would like to be preventing prices from falling when demand goes down.
C) At Pogue II on Sept. 30, 2015, there were many "deep pocket dealers" in attendance who were hoping to buy coins at wholesale prices. Collector bidding then was so intense and so extensive that the "deep pocket dealers" were unable to buy much. Some of those "deep pocket dealers" skipped Pogue III or did not spend a lot of time preparing for it because they were expecting retail levels like those that prevailed at Pogue II.
D) Even if all those "deep pocket" dealers had come in roaring at Pogue III, it would not have been so easy to buy coins at weak to moderate prices. Many of the dimes and quite a few of the halves brought strong or very strong prices, as did several of the Threes. The S-1 Chain cent certainly brought a very strong price, much more than any dealer would pay. I imply above that the 1796 No Pole half cent did not really bring a weak price. I hope that people learn about auction outcomes by reading my reviews.
Latin American Collection
There are not enough deep pocket dealers to support the high end market.
While many dealers are strapped for cash these days, the amount of cash other dealers have on hand could absorb hundreds of Pogue III's. (Walk into a major show with $100 million in fresh coins priced a little too cheaply and you'll see what I mean.) The reason you see weak dealer support at the auctions is because the auctions have become a less interesting place to spend time and money. First, because competition is usually very tough. And second, because it's difficult to "flip" coins when everyone knows what you paid.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
There are not enough deep pocket dealers to support the high end market.
That might be the only segment of the market supported by deep pocket dealers and collectors. They tend to buy the very best available with the notion that the next buyer down the road will be someone fairly immune from economic and market cycles.
There aren't enough dealers out there to support the dreck, low end, and more common parts of the US rare coin market.
Speaking of "energized" Eliasberg coin auctions. When I went to NY City for the 1982 gold coin auction there were so many dealers and collectors in for viewing on the day of the auction ($5's, $10's and $20's) that I waited from 9 am to 1 pm getting nowhere. The auction house told us if we were willing to look at only 20 coins or less they'd get us in, otherwise we'd likely see nothing. I ended up looking at 20 coins....and being blown out of the water by 50-100% on all of them....lol. Maybe it was 50 coins but the number 20 sticks in my head.
There are not enough deep pocket dealers to support the high end market.
There aren't enough dealers out there to support the dreck, low end, and more common parts of the US rare coin market.
Of course there are. It's just a matter of price.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
There are not enough deep pocket dealers to support the high end market.
There aren't enough dealers out there to support the dreck, low end, and more common parts of the US rare coin market.
Of course there are. It's just a matter of price.
I'll agree. At $0 there would be plenty more demand.
Mr. Eureka:
I thought I had made the point repeatedly that $15m to $40m coin auctions have not been unusual since Jan. 2005. Moreover, when there were a few more coin auction companies as recently as 2008, the total amount auctioned during a ten day period, before and during a major show, was often in the tens of millions of dollars. The coin business can easily handle the amounts for almost all Pogue Collection coins.
At Pogue III, there was plenty of dealer participation and collector participation. There was more of both, though, at Pogue II on 09/30/15.
Nonetheless, I find that Mr. Eureka is exaggerating a little in his post above. There are limits. There are not a large number of dealers who could afford to inventory a single coin at a cost of $2 million, for example, and there are not many dealers who could afford to spend more than $5 million in one auction for inventory.
Sill, the perspective expressed by BidAsk is on the wrong track. There are more than a few "deep pocket dealers" who are willing and able to buy auction lots for weak to moderate prices, values in the wholesale range, as I explain these terms in my articles.
Demand for classic U.S. coins has dropped since August 2015. Even when clearly able, many dealers are not willing to pay the same prices for inventory as they were a year ago. Mr. Eureka and I agree that dealers are willing to pay less now to inventory coins from auctions, even if they are able to pay more.
Interesting that the Pogue 3 Legend Market Report stated that numerous deep pocketed dealers sat their stunned as the prices realized were much less than expected on many coins. It doesn't appear they were willing to buy on the cheap at the auction itself.
This thread is getting better. I appreciate the input from all facets of the hobby/business. Looking forward to reading more!
...
Regarding the 1796 No Pole 1/2c, throwing out a comment on how the coin has "changed" should be done with caution. In my opinion, the coin had not changed at all. We bought the coin based upon value, knowing that the coin should not have graded MS67 due to the two obverse scratches. But at that price level, we're happy.
Greg's article states:
In May 1996, an auction record for a half cent was set when the Eliasberg-Pogue 1796 ‘No Pole’ sold for $506,000. Although it was certified by PCGS as MS-67-RB soon after the Eliasberg ’96 event, its appearance has changed since I saw it in May 1996.
I really believe that, if most prospective buyers of gem quality, early rarities really agreed with the certified grade of this coin, then this it would have sold for more than $1.25 million in this Pogue III sale. Given the true level of quality of this coin, the $763,750 result was moderate to strong.
You agreed it's overgraded at MS-67 RB, but still a great coin, and were happy with the price you paid.
So I'm not sure where all the negativity is coming from.
Is "moderate to strong" nonsense, or fighting words or something?
There's nothing wrong with disagreeing with someone and stating your case.
But attacking the person is poor form, sorry.
Sill, the perspective expressed by BidAsk is on the wrong track. There are more than a few "deep pocket dealers" who are willing and able to buy auction lots for weak to moderate prices, values in the wholesale range, as I explain these terms in my articles.
Interesting that the Pogue 3 Legend Market Report stated that numerous deep pocketed dealers sat their stunned as the prices realized were much less than expected on many coins. It doesn't appear they were willing to buy on the cheap at the auction itself.
I am not buying they were to stunned to bid. I for one can't pas up a bargain if I believe it is a bargain. I went to an equiptment auction a few years back to get a dump truck and a tractor. When the dust settled I had bought 3 dump trucks, a track loader and a rubber tired loader. Done the same thing at cattle auction, gun auctions etc. I can change gears in seconds.
NGC registry V-Nickel proof #6!!!!
working on proof shield nickels # 8 with a bullet!!!!
RIP "BEAR"
How's your memory regarding the nuances of a particular coin you saw 20 years ago?
Actually, Analyst keeps notes from his viewing of coins, and uses them to be able to write descriptions like this one from his 2/14 post:
In 1996, I carefully inspected it at least twice. There was much dark brown color contrasting nicely with much rich original mint red. Although there is still some red, this coin is now, to a significant extent, a creamy tan color, which is not clear in published pictures. Oddly, the scratches under the letters IBE of Liberty were much more noticeable in 1996 and are sort of obscured now.
The images on PCGS CoinFacts fairly reveal these scratches. Indeed, the PCGS CoinFacts images are amazingly detailed in terms of hairlines and contact marks. In this case, however, the coin looks much different in reality in tems of color and texture.
There is no doubt that this is a very important coin. It is just not as great as talk among collectors in the past suggested that it might be. My guess is that some potential bidders were disappointed.
If you've read some of his articles, sometimes he can't locate his notes from past viewings, and then he does not attempt to rely on his memory.
He's trying to provide accurate information.
I've been in that "stunned" situation more than once. I recall one Long Beach auction where an MS67 half dime toner I had marked to bid at $3K opened up on the floor at $1.5K and didn't get a single bid. I graded that coin 67+. I looked around the room and wondered what the heck? No bids? I loved the coin. But then again, I wasn't 100% sure it couldn't be AT. So with 5 seconds to think on it....I didn't bid knowing that no other dealer in the room were taking a shot. Even a guy who I trusted immensely sitting right behind me didn't bid either, and he was a seated expert who would "never" let something like that go by dirt cheap.
After that lot closed I asked the buy behind what just happened? He remarked that the coin was so nice for the grade that a group of dealers went in together on that lot so as not to bid it up and ensure they all got a piece. And that dealer didn't want to horn in on their game. They were figuring the coin as an excellent MS68 upgrade shot. Of course, I've also been the "winner" on lots that bid way too cheap imo where the room went silent. Some of those lots came back body bagged and I found out why no one was bidding beyond the initial high mail bid....lol.
As for me, my clients and I have bought about 20% of the value of the first three Pogue sales, so I guess that makes my opinion meaningful as well.
Not only meaningful, but the only opinion that really matters in the end, the bidders and under-bidders. The only other opinions I would consider nearly as important would be those from TPG quality graders (past and present) that have made markets in those coins before.
I've been in that "stunned" situation more than once. I recall one Long Beach auction where an MS67 half dime toner I had marked to bid at $3K opened up on the floor at $1.5K and didn't get a single bid. I graded that coin 67+. I looked around the room and wondered what the heck? No bids? I loved the coin. But then again, I wasn't 100% sure it couldn't be AT. So with 5 seconds to think on it....I didn't bid knowing that no other dealer in the room were taking a shot. Even a guy who I trusted immensely sitting right behind me didn't bid either, and he was a seated expert who would "never" let something like that go by dirt cheap.
After that lot closed I asked the buy behind what just happened? He remarked that the coin was so nice for the grade that a group of dealers went in together on that lot so as not to bid it up and ensure they all got a piece. And that dealer didn't want to horn in on their game. They were figuring the coin as an excellent MS68 upgrade shot. Of course, I've also been the "winner" on lots that bid way too cheap imo where the room went silent. Some of those lots came back body bagged and I found out why no one was bidding beyond the initial high mail bid....lol.
As for me, my clients and I have bought about 20% of the value of the first three Pogue sales, so I guess that makes my opinion meaningful as well.
Not only meaningful, but the only opinion that really matters in the end, the bidders and under-bidders. The only other opinions I would consider nearly as important would be those from TPG quality graders (past and present) that have made markets in those coins before.
In the past I have done the same but I have learned a little along the way. The biggest lesson learned was to look at everything to some degree in the auctions beyond the few items you are going after. I have bought a few pieces of heavy equiptemt that could not make it off the auction yard under its own power. Coins are different for sure. I do not have the ability to place a good value on most and if you are not in the big circle you will not fair well
NGC registry V-Nickel proof #6!!!!
working on proof shield nickels # 8 with a bullet!!!!
RIP "BEAR"
Any fan who is a season ticket holder for a particular team attends ( and studies) many performances over the course of seasons, and is certainly qualified to pass judgement on the playing abilities of the participants.
There are also the cold, hard, numerical facts, which speak for themselves. Even though I have never played in the NBA, I can say with confidence that Andre Drummond is a poor free throw shooter, merely through my own observation. Likewise, I am confident saying that Tiger Woods' skills have diminished considerably, even though I have never broken 85 on a golf course....he doesn't 'look' the same as he did in 1998.
Actuaries are very good at predicting lifespans without dying. A person who critiques the performing arts does not have to be a Broadway performer or opera singer to express a valuable opinion.....their accumulated knowledge is enough to present an informed opinion, which is what they get paid to do.
I have no skin in this particular game, but I feel that anybody who is good at observing their subject(s), takes the appropriate notes in order to have a historical basis on which to refer, and stays current with the changing dynamics of the field of study is certainly qualified to voice an opinion that carries some weight.
every treasure on Earth
to be young at heart?
And as rich as you are,
it's much better by far,
to be young at heart!
These comparisons have little to do with evaluating the grade and pricing of rare US coins in the 5 to 7 figure level. A 3rd grader with a passing knowledge of sports would be able to make those same sports evaluations. They could not remotely tell the difference on say the ranking of 10 different raw gem bust quarters. A more reasonable comparison would be evaluating the 3 point shooting skills of Curry and Thompson vs. say the next dozen best shooters and being able to discuss the physiological/mechanical and psychological reasons behind it. Same would go with comparing Tiger Woods at his prime to say McIlroy or Spieth today....and knowing the reasons why. If you can evaluate the technical and mental differences in pro-golfer and NBA player skills, then you are on the same order of skill evaluation as a TPG grader/top 100 rare coin dealer.
Since Drummond was mentioned. He grew up only 35 miles from me. Rather than bemoan his poor Free Throw % which even my wife knows is bad, explain why he shot 56% as a high school freshman, 29% in college, and now 38% during his pro career. I only played basketball for fun and for years was never better than an 80% FT shooter. I never understand why I could never do better than 8 or 9 in a row in practice. Years later I ran into an old grade school coach who gave me 3 tips to try. Using those and a thousand free throw attempts later, I was routinely doing 15-35 in a row. My best that year was 103 straight while leaving the line after each attempt. A big change from doing only 8 or 9 in a row. I would suspect Curry and other pros could probably do 500, or even 1,000 in a row with more emphasis. The world record is over 5,000 straight. Drummond? I hope he eventually figures it out and not go the way of Wilt, who actually was quite a good shooter while at Kansas. And game pressure/fatigue makes it much harder than in practice. TPG graders have to utilize some of the same inputs as the top NBA shooters.
Again, regarding the 1796 No Pole 1/2c, throwing out a comment on how the coin has "changed" should be done with caution. When we say a coin has "changed", it is usually not for the better. Could there be another explanation? Maybe our perception has changed over time. And maybe it's just because the PCGS holder has changed. I re-holder nearly all of the coins that I buy so that the holders don't have scratches or stickers, and you may be surprised at the difference between the older blue gray plastic and the new clear plastic on the appearance of toned silver, and especially early copper.
Thank you for explaining.
The possibility of a copper coin toning in a PCGS holder is certainly disturbing and something not frequently observed.
I believe Analyst was surprised as well, but it was apparently plain in his notes so he felt it was valid to present.
Your possible explanations for the observations are also reasonable - a change in perception or change(?) in the plastic.
However, when a writer crosses the line from being an observer to seemingly wanting to be an adviser, he can now be held to a higher standard. And when that writer openly dismisses someone like Andy Lustig, who is one of the smarter guys in the business, with a quiet, easy going temperament to match, then that writer should expect strong criticism to follow.
My read on Analyst's response to MrEureka in his post of 2/15/2016 2:28 PM is that they largely agreed.
Of course my judgement and yours are both subjective to some extent.
Joe:
Is there anyone who writes objectively about specific coins who is better able to grade them than I am? Moreover, I frequently talk to leading grading experts such as John Albanese, Scott Travers, Charlie Browne, Richard Burdick, Matt Kleinsteuber, etc. Indeed, I have cited all these people on numerous occasions.
After covering coin auctions for more than twenty five years, I believe that there is no one better suited to analyze market prices, trends and auction results. The fact that I am not a consignor and am not buying rarities for my own account contributes to impartiality, though no one is entirely neutral. I never claimed to be totally unbiased. Besides, what are the items on Joe's reading list and how informative are these items in regard to rarities in auctions?
Joe:
The thrust of this statement is questionable and is misleading. The vast majority of my comments about specific coins are positive, often extremely positive. No one publicly displays more enthusiasm for great classic U.S. coins than I do! Negative remarks are not that frequent, and often refer to coins that have serious problems. Joe's point here is unfairly vague, as the identities of the coins in question are not being revealed.
Joe:
This is not a controversial point. Even during a lot viewing session, an expert collector mentioned this coin to me on his own initiative. He did not know that I would write about it. He said that it had much more red on it when he saw it in 1996. I took extensive notes when I saw it in 1996. I discussed it with several players and non-playing experts at that time. Moreover, experts in early copper know that it is not unusual for copper coins to change color over time. It has been more than nineteen years since the Eliasberg '96 sale.
Joe:
So, Joe is maintaining that the PCGS grade is wrong, yet he is attacking me for implying that a coin with creamy tan color and just a little mint red, with noticeable scratches, maybe should not still be in a holder with a PCGS MS-67RB certification. Besides, I remarked in my review and above in this thread that the auction result at Pogue III for this coin was sound, given the true characteristics of the coin. So, Joe and I are in agreement that the auction result is consistent with a grade lower than the assigned grade. As an aside, I hypothesize that this coin would not receive a CAC sticker if it was submitted after being downgraded to MS-66-Brown! There should not be a question as to the validity of my opinions about early copper coins. People are welcome to disagree in a pleasant and rational manner.
Joe: Greg
My condition ranking of Chain cents is non-controversial. Yes, experts may disagree with finer points, but even those experts who disagree respect the integrity and soundness of my ranking. Moreover, my ranking in this case is consistent with PCGS certifications and CAC approvals , with one qualifier. Joe is evidently repudiating both the PCGS certifications and the corresponding CAC approvals, while claiming that I am "incorrect"!
As for the qualifier, people who are knowledgeable about early copper know that a mainstream (not EAC) graded MS-65-RB coin is often of higher quality than a mainstream graded MS-66-Brown of the same major variety, as a mainstream MS-64RB certified coin is usually of higher quality than a MS-65-BN certified coin of the same die pairing. As for my condition ranking, I understand how an expert might argue that the Garrett-Pogue S-3 Chain cent should be ranked above the PCGS certified Specimen-65-Brown S-1 Chain cent, as many early copper specialists suggest. I am certainly willing to consider moving the Garrett-Pogue piece from #3 to #2. I am really skeptical as to how the remainder of my ranking could be subject to a severe challenge. Any intelligent challenge, if there was one, would be indicative of a minority viewpoint, not a consensus opposition as Joe suggests. In any event, I invite members of this forum to read my ranking and to comment:
http://www.coinweek.com/auctions-news/pogue-family-coin-collection-part-12-the-amazing-garrett-1793-chain-cent/">Pogue Family Coin Collection, Part 12 – The Amazing Garrett 1793 Chain Cent
Joe:
My understanding is that one of Joe's clients has spent a vast sum. As best as I can tell, he is not bidding through Joe on the floor, as Joe seems to be the successful bidder with a paddle on only a small number of coins. In any event, I have never said nor have I every implied that Joe's opinion is not "meaningful." In the past, Joe has been hostile when I have asked him to contribute. I am glad that Joe did contribute to my three part series on natural toning in 2009, about which I am proud.
Natural Toning, Dipping and Coin Doctoring, Part 3
Joe:
I believe that I have been held to a higher standard, the highest standard practical, for years. A grading service can grade a coin as MS-66, usually without providing an explanation for the grade, and a dealer can say to his clients that he grades the same coin as just MS-65, without a detailed explanation. The CoinWeek publisher, my colleagues, my sources and others expect me to be prepared to put forth specific reasons regarding the physical characteristics of coins! I write or voice intelligent arguments as to why specific coins have been accurately graded, undergraded or overgraded. I present cases with specific points. I do not just say 'I think.'
Joe can tell his clients that he thinks a specific coin grades "MS-66" without providing specific reasons or being subjected to scrutiny as I am. Many people provide feedback regarding my articles. If experts thought that I was often very wrong, they would stop communicating. On the contrary, many experts find that I am in excellent grader and they like cooperating, usually 'off the record.'
Joe:
In a post above in this thread, I was largely in agreement with Andy Lustig. I pointed out that he may have overstated one point and he may have done so deliberately for poetic effect. I was hoping that it would be apparent to every reader that I was in agreement with Andy. I have been mentioning Andy by name in dozens of articles. He and I often communicate.
YOSclimber: ... Of course!
Joe:
Disagreeing is fine, questioning my skills in a malicious and misleading manner is another issue altogether. The Newman 1796 quarter is NGC certified as "MS-67+*"! It has a CAC sticker. The Pogue 1796 quarter is PCGS graded as MS-66 and also has a CAC sticker. Joe seems to be implying that the Pogue 1796 is better than the Newman 1796.
I first saw the Newman 1796 at the 2013 ANA Convention, when officials at Heritage graciously permitted me to spend time carefully inspecting a substantial number of silver coins in the Newman Collection. I then put my hand over the label. I might possibly have heard a rumor before August 2013 that it had been graded as MS-67. I did not then know that it had been CAC approved. On my own, I figured its grade in the MS-67 range. Moreover, before I wrote about it, I discussed it with JA and with Richard Burdick. Later, I discussed it with Jason Carter and Matt Kleinsteuber. Also, at a lot viewing session in New York in Nov. 2013, John Dannreuther did not seem to have a doubt about the assigned 67 grade and JD raved about this Newman 1796 quarter.
Although an expert could argue about whether this coin grades in the middle or high end, all top level grading experts were in agreement that the grade of this coin is in the MS-67 range, as far as I know. As I said, I graded it as MS-67 before I consulted anyone about it. I then did additional research.
As I publicly put forth my analyses of coins, I put much time and effort into analyzing coins, researching coins and communicating about coins with others, before facing public scrutiny, and thus perhaps attain a greater understanding than some dealers who just talk about coins on the phone. Anyone with access to a lot of money can buy and sell rare coins.
Absolutely incorrect. I do not grade the Newman coin 67, nor does Laura, nor do several other experts in the industry - at least one of whom has stated so publicly here on the chat room. We had this discussion once or twice before. The Pogue coin was quite wholesome and pleasing for the grade - the Newman coin was 'off' to my eyes. If Joe is inferring what you believe, I completely agree with him.
I have always found that old, sorry 'sportswriter' analogy to be among the worst critiques of a person's ability to observe and comment on a subject. On the contrary, the person is employed as a 'writer', and whether it is sports, politics or coins, that person had better know what they are talking about, or they will not be employed very long. Do any ex NFL players write sports columns that you know of? Have George Will, Maureen Dowd, or more to the point, Donald Trump, ever held an elected office?
Any fan who is a season ticket holder for a particular team attends ( and studies) many performances over the course of seasons, and is certainly qualified to pass judgement on the playing abilities of the participants.
There are also the cold, hard, numerical facts, which speak for themselves. Even though I have never played in the NBA, I can say with confidence that Andre Drummond is a poor free throw shooter, merely through my own observation. Likewise, I am confident saying that Tiger Woods' skills have diminished considerably, even though I have never broken 85 on a golf course....he doesn't 'look' the same as he did in 1998.
Actuaries are very good at predicting lifespans without dying. A person who critiques the performing arts does not have to be a Broadway performer or opera singer to express a valuable opinion.....their accumulated knowledge is enough to present an informed opinion, which is what they get paid to do.
I have no skin in this particular game, but I feel that anybody who is good at observing their subject(s), takes the appropriate notes in order to have a historical basis on which to refer, and stays current with the changing dynamics of the field of study is certainly qualified to voice an opinion that carries some weight.
Great post. I will add to that list the male OBGYN doctor who is an expert on childbirth but who has never had a baby
Newman 1796 quarter in MS67 plus - guess the final price?
They both make good points.
Thanks to both and others who have participated on this thread!
"Look up, old boy, and see what you get." -William Bonney.
Greg- I enjoyed reading your article, even though I would not likely be able to purchase any of the rarities pictured!
"Is there anyone who writes objectively about specific coins who is better able to grade them than I am?"
"I believe that there is no one better suited to analyze market prices, trends and auction results."
"There should not be a question as to the validity of my opinions about early copper coins."
"My condition ranking of Chain cents is non-controversial."
Finally, what I would like to be remembered as is a good teacher, one who made collectors better collectors. And if I were a collector, I would seek out guys like David McCarthy, Doug Winter, John Agre, Andy Lustig, Chris McCawley, Tony Terranova, John Kraljevich, and certainly a few more. You will sense a common thread in that list - these are all highly intelligent and capable dealers who all share a quiet demeanor, none of whom would ever boast about being some all-knowing expert.
I would like to add Gordon Wrubel to that list. A long-time EAC member, a former dealer having sold over $50 million of rare coins, co-founder of PCGS and long-time PCGS grader, particularly of early U.S. Coins, Gordon happily works behind the scenes for the benefit of collectors -- never tooting his own horn. I have met with him on several occasions, and he is the most kindly and considerate a person as you can imagine. On top of that, he has the astounding recollection for details to recall the precise history of many, many of the coins that have passed through his hands.
Regarding the condition ranking of chain cents, why exclude a "reported" chain cent, and why mention it as "reportedly" in a private collection? Does that not impact the validity of the condition ranking. I can attest to the existence of the "reported" specimen, and I have examined it in hand on several occasions through the courtesy of its private owner. I found it to be at least as "red" as the Garrett specimen, and with far more cartwheel luster, which sparkles like a late-1800's mint production. Add to that, the coin is from the S-1 Ameri. die variety. Wouldn't an MS66RB AMERI cent be worthy of a mention in a condition ranking?
Joe:
Quite the opposite is true, more so than any other expert, I seek the opinions of others. In my current article, I include quoted statements about the grades of coins from Scott Travers.
The Marvelous Pogue Family Coin Collection, Part 15: Reich Half Dollars from the 1830s
Over the years, I have frequently quoted longtime PCGS grader Charlie Browne, other former PCGS graders, Andy Lustig, Richard Burdick (who John Albanese calls a "pioneer" in identifying gem quality coins), Albanese himself, Matt K., and Dr. Duckor. I frequently quote Jim McGuigan about circulated pre-1840 coins and Denis Loring about copper. I have quoted Chris McCawley.
Additionally, I have quoted Jason Carter, David Hall and experts ATS about specific coins. Moreover I hope that readers will trust me when I say that I frequently discuss the grades of specific coins with experts who decline to be identified at all or to be quoted about specific coins. Some of the reasons why they may not wish to be so identified may be inferred by reading these two articles:
The Specter of Coin Doctoring and The Survival of Great Coins
How will Coin Collectors Interpret Certified Coin Grades in the Future?
I have always maintained that no one can bat 1.000, or close to it, when grading coins. We will all strike-out or ground out on occasion. It takes some courage to admit miscues. The graders who are unduly egotistical are the ones who seem to think that they have precisely graded each coin every time. A point that I made above is that I am subject to scrutiny, feedback, oversight and public reactions that other graders do not have to worry about. They can tell a client on the phone that a coin grades MS-65, even if 95% of other experts do not grade that particular coin as MS-65. I resented the implied message earlier in this thread that I am not qualified to grade coins because I am not buying the coins that I am grading. There are logical reasons for theorizing that an openly grading writer is a better grader than people who have 'skin in the game,' who voice grades in private conversations that are not reviewed by anyone.
Admittedly, the remark about my ability to analyze coin auctions may have been overstated. Hopefully, people who read the harsh attacks from Joe earlier in this thread will realize that he was questioning my ability and qualifications to do my job. A response was warranted. Again, I have been analyzing rarities and reviewing coin auctions for twenty-five years, before tens of thousands of readers. A serious question, who is better qualified than me to do so?
Joe:
On the contrary, there are experts. Joe and I are among them. The vast majority of collectors and even a majority of full-time coin people have little understanding of grades above 60. Moreover, the number of people who know how to grade such coins keeps declining. It is essential for the experts to rationally and pleasantly communicate with each other in order to provide educational information about coins to collectors and for posterity.
Joe:
Perhaps in this statement Joe is implying a point that he has honestly known all along, given all my prior communications with him over the last dozen years, which is that I am an expert grader. My points above regarding PCGS and CAC rankings were not directed at Joe; they were directed at other readers of this thread because Joe put forth the erroneous and insulting impression that my rankings were strangely off-base and not expertly formulated. As I already said, I am more than willing to admit that I may be wrong about some points and I am willing to revise my rankings of coins.
Even if CAC had never been founded, my ranking of Chain cents would be the same. Indeed, I have been paying close attention to gem Chain cents, off and on, since Jay Parrino showed me most of the large cents that he obtained from the legendary Naftzger-Streiner deal in 1992.
Joe:
There are a much larger number of doctored silver coins that have failed to be approved at CAC.
It is unfair to hold JA responsible for the especially complex issues and unresolved issues regarding early copper, which tends to corrode. At both PCGS and CAC, graders often encounter early copper coins that simultaneously have very positive and very negative characteristics; it is extremely difficult to balance the positive and negative factors. In my opinion, there is a need to provide collectors with written analyses of early copper coins so that they have more information. A numerical grade, however applicable, is not a sufficient amount of information about a high grade early copper coin.
I will agree that CAC is not perfect and I argue with JA somewhat often. While others try to persuade him to reconsider coins that have failed at CAC in the past; I sometimes try to encourage him to revoke stickers that have been applied.
Even so, I find Joe's remarks about CAC to be unfair and misleading. Because Ted Williams had trouble with some pitchers, it would not make sense to doubt his skills. Someone could put together a list of the instances in which Babe Ruth struck out and then conclude Babe Ruth was not a good baseball player. Around 500 coins are evaluated at CAC every day.
John Albanese is the foremost expert regarding U.S. gold coins. No one is trying harder or is better suited than John to identify large numbers of solidly graded, classic U.S. coins of all metals. I find the speed at which John can grade coins to be absolutely amazing. I know that I will never be able to grade coins at even half the speed that he can. In any one week, John provides a service that is very helpful to a large number of coin buyers regarding thousands of coins!
I'll add two observations/opinions:
First, Greg is doing a far better job than anyone else in reporting on the auction scene for high end coins.
Second, some people seem to have far too much time on their hands.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
Greg is doing a far better job than anyone else in reporting on the auction scene for high end coins
What a sad thread.
Painful. Like a train wreck and I watched the whole thing.
While EXTREMELY knowledgeable to be sure both Joe and Greg are both a little too high on their own supply. It wasn't just just thread that lead me to this conclusion.
mark
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
What a sad thread.
Painful. Like a train wreck and I watched the whole thing.
While EXTREMELY knowledgeable to be sure both Joe and Greg are both a little too high on their own supply. It wasn't just just thread that lead me to this conclusion.
mark
+1
My 1866 Philly Mint Set
There is nothing wrong with a heated discussion between two very opinionated people.
Greg is convinced he is right. I know he's wrong. That simple.
You killed the thread now. Case closed
NGC registry V-Nickel proof #6!!!!
working on proof shield nickels # 8 with a bullet!!!!
RIP "BEAR"
Any time theory is being applied to the real world experts rarely agree on much of anything. When they do agree it's a pretty safe bet that they are all wrong.
People just don't notice just as we don't notice when communication fails.
It's not the theory or the process that fails, it's the irreconcilability of axioms, perspectives, and definitions.
I spend my own money and its not for investment, its for collecting. And its one thing to say this coin is worth 2 Million USD and its another thing to actually put the money on the table and buy the coin. And to have the money, over a period of 5! Pogue sales.
Im collecting US coins since more than 20 years now and while prices increased and also sometimes decreased during this time, there was mostly more money than coins.
Now there are more coins than money. Thats why some of the coins sell cheap.
I also see that coins I am not bidding on sell cheaper than coins I am bidding on. I know for a matter of fact, if I would have bid on the Chain Cent 65 RB, it would have brought at least 2 Mio USD. There also was third collector who would have brought the 65 RB Chain Cent to 2 Mio, if he would not have bought another great Chain cent just a week ago for full price.
I brought the 1794 PCGS 67 half Cent from 600k hammer to 800k (and ended up buying it) and then the 1794 half cent in 66 RB sold cheap for around 230k.
Im sure if I had not bid on the 1794 PCGS 67 and on the 66 instead, it would just be the other way around.
What does it mean ? Does it mean the Chain Cent in 65 RB is worth 1 Mio USD ? I dont think so.
The truth is, I could not have bough the 65 RB Chain Cent below 2 Mio USD, thats just how it is. Nobody could have bought this coin below 2 Mio USD, other than the one who got it for 1 Mil.
Regarding the discussion about coin quality, I think at the end of the day everybody must have his own opinion when he is spending his own money. You need to have thoughts why you buy a certain coin and pass on another one.
e.g. I was very agressive on the Pogue 1796 25 Cent because for me it was the finest I have ever seen, potentially better looking than the PCGS 67. I still graded the coin a 66. But I also graded the Newman NGC 67 a no grade cleaned and while this coin brought the same price (1.5 Mio USD), I didnt like it.
So I think its really fair if everybody has his own opinion and thats good. I just dont like when people say coins have changed over time when its not really true. I bough the 1796 half cent in 67 RB and I do not think the coin has changed since Eliasberg. It sold cheap the same like the Chain Cent in 65 RB sold cheap.
I think I have done well so far by trusting PCGS, CAC, my trusted dealer and agent plus my own eye and taste and my wives taste. We all make mistakes, but if I put them all together, its very few coins that are left to fit our high quality standards.
And I enjoy reading Gregs reports also if I do not agree always on what he writes. I hope he will write more.
And on the journalism.
I rest my case...