@Walkerfan said: @oreville I admire that in you and I was going to commend you on it. I am the same way. I like what I have and plan to keep it. I worked too long and hard to just sell it off. I guess that I am old school, too. There are others like us....I know a few. However, I am NOT criticizing those who quickly sell......We all have our reasons for what we do and that is just fine. It is just refreshing to see a collector who is in it for the long term. I think that you will be handsomely rewarded, in the end.
Would you believe I do not want to sell because it hurts to sell since I realize it is difficult to replace what I sell.
Being "handsomely rewarded" to me is only the recognition that I bought the "right stuff" at the right time.
@tradedollarnut said:
Collectors aren’t keeping their sets anymore because the drive for quality is simply costing too much money. That urge to finish a set causes them to spend more than they really wanted to do and then reality sets in - they can sell and stay in the game or they can sit and twiddle their thumbs. Add in a dose of constant gradeflation to erode the value of their set while they hold it and the choice becomes even clearer
Call me old school. I have kept most of my collection since 1993 and 1983 including the Jack Lee 1921 PCGS/CAC MS-66 walker since 1997 which I bought from Jay Parrino.
Except....when you needed money [for a very worthy cause, mind you] you sold the crown jewel. Kinda my point...
@tradedollarnut said:
Collectors aren’t keeping their sets anymore because the drive for quality is simply costing too much money. That urge to finish a set causes them to spend more than they really wanted to do and then reality sets in - they can sell and stay in the game or they can sit and twiddle their thumbs. Add in a dose of constant gradeflation to erode the value of their set while they hold it and the choice becomes even clearer
I see this happening more as well. There was a larger number of old large collection collectors. There seem to be much fewer collectors at this level now.
One reason for the increasing costs to complete a set may be due to type collecting where individual specimens are increasing in price due to collectors who are not building full collections.
In the old days, the mantra was "buy the keys first", but what happens when it turns to "buy the keys only"? A growing number of collectors may pay more, sometimes excessively more, for key specimens without the intention of building a full set. If there are enough collectors like this, it may make it harder for those who are building full collections.
Along these lines at the highest levels, Bob Simpson said his goal was never to complete sets, but buy beautiful coins.
Except....when you needed money [for a very worthy cause, mind you] you sold the crown jewel. Kinda my point...
i think you have the wrong reason as to why I sold my crown jewel of my collection back in January 2009. You meant the 1875-S $20?
i sold the 1875-S when I did because I saw an opportunity for even harder to find tax free like kind exchange including the numerous 1942 patterns, black 1.0 NGC slabs, white 2.1 NGC slabs, numerous $20 CC mint Liberties in PCGS OGH slabs which received CAC stickers as well as ultimate rare Carson City Mint 1872 cancelled $20 die. The timing was perfect and most unusual. It was like waling into a candy store of a lifetime.
I took very little cash in the transaction which minimized my 28% capital gains tax .
By 2020, I had enough cash on hand to withstand my daughter getting married and my wife’s expensive re-election campaign. I did not sell any coins but still grumbled about spending the money. LOL.
@Walkerfan said: @oreville I admire that in you and I was going to commend you on it. I am the same way. I like what I have and plan to keep it. I worked too long and hard to just sell it off. I guess that I am old school, too. There are others like us....I know a few. However, I am NOT criticizing those who quickly sell......We all have our reasons for what we do and that is just fine. It is just refreshing to see a collector who is in it for the long term. I think that you will be handsomely rewarded, in the end.
Would you believe I do not want to sell because it hurts to sell since I realize it is difficult to replace what I sell.
Being "handsomely rewarded" to me is only the recognition that I bought the "right stuff" at the right time.
I, absolutely, believe you and I feel the exact same way. I have more than a few coins, in my set, that I feel this way about. But you must admit that, the longer you hold on, the better off you will be, if or when the time ever comes to sell. Even if you never sell, time is an excellent money maker, especially for rare and quality items, because they will always have that equity....
Sometimes, it’s better to be LUCKY than good. 🍀 🍺👍
Except....when you needed money [for a very worthy cause, mind you] you sold the crown jewel. Kinda my point...
i think you have the wrong reason as to why I sold my crown jewel of my collection back in January 2009. You meant the 1875-S $20?
i sold the 1875-S when I did because I saw an opportunity for even harder to find tax free like kind exchange including the numerous 1942 patterns, black 1.0 NGC slabs, white 2.1 NGC slabs, numerous $20 CC mint Liberties in PCGS OGH slabs which received CAC stickers as well as ultimate rare Carson City Mint 1872 cancelled $20 die. The timing was perfect and most unusual. It was like waling into a candy store of a lifetime.
I took very little cash in the transaction which minimized my 28% capital gains tax .
By 2020, I had enough cash on hand to withstand my daughter getting married and my wife’s expensive re-election campaign. I did not sell any coins but still grumbled about spending the money. LOL.
That's really interesting to me.
It seems like you mentioned this die was acquired at the 2012 ANA Stack's sale in the thread below. I didn't realize you could do a tax-free, like-for-like exchange with Stack's Bowers, and with 3 years in passing. It would be great to know more about how to do this type of transaction with Stack's Bowers.
The 1872-CC $20 double eagle cancelled obverse die sells at the 2012 Summer ANA Stacks Bowers rarity
@tradedollarnut said:
Collectors aren’t keeping their sets anymore because the drive for quality is simply costing too much money. That urge to finish a set causes them to spend more than they really wanted to do and then reality sets in - they can sell and stay in the game or they can sit and twiddle their thumbs. Add in a dose of constant gradeflation to erode the value of their set while they hold it and the choice becomes even clearer
I see this happening more as well. There was a larger number of old large collection collectors. There seem to be much fewer collectors at this level now.
One reason for the increasing costs to complete a set may be due to type collecting where individual specimens are increasing in price due to collectors who are not building full collections.
In the old days, the mantra was "buy the keys first", but what happens when it turns to "buy the keys only"? A growing number of collectors may pay more, sometimes excessively more, for key specimens without the intention of building a full set. If there are enough collectors like this, it may make it harder for those who are building full collections.
Along these lines at the highest levels, Bob Simpson said his goal was never to complete sets, but buy beautiful coins.
Keep in mind, we see well collectors who are public with their collections selling and holding for smaller periods of time. However, there are many collectors with significant collections who remain private and are not selling.
@tradedollarnut said:
Collectors aren’t keeping their sets anymore because the drive for quality is simply costing too much money. That urge to finish a set causes them to spend more than they really wanted to do and then reality sets in - they can sell and stay in the game or they can sit and twiddle their thumbs. Add in a dose of constant gradeflation to erode the value of their set while they hold it and the choice becomes even clearer
I see this happening more as well. There was a larger number of old large collection collectors. There seem to be much fewer collectors at this level now.
One reason for the increasing costs to complete a set may be due to type collecting where individual specimens are increasing in price due to collectors who are not building full collections.
In the old days, the mantra was "buy the keys first", but what happens when it turns to "buy the keys only"? A growing number of collectors may pay more, sometimes excessively more, for key specimens without the intention of building a full set. If there are enough collectors like this, it may make it harder for those who are building full collections.
Along these lines at the highest levels, Bob Simpson said his goal was never to complete sets, but buy beautiful coins.
Keep in mind, we see well collectors who are public with their collections selling and holding for smaller periods of time. However, there are many collectors with significant collections who remain private and are not selling.
True, however, it’s hard to know how many exist and what they hold. The best we may have to go on is private registry sets. If it’s not a private registry set, there may be no evidence any such sets exist.
@tradedollarnut said:
Collectors aren’t keeping their sets anymore because the drive for quality is simply costing too much money. That urge to finish a set causes them to spend more than they really wanted to do and then reality sets in - they can sell and stay in the game or they can sit and twiddle their thumbs. Add in a dose of constant gradeflation to erode the value of their set while they hold it and the choice becomes even clearer
I see this happening more as well. There was a larger number of old large collection collectors. There seem to be much fewer collectors at this level now.
One reason for the increasing costs to complete a set may be due to type collecting where individual specimens are increasing in price due to collectors who are not building full collections.
In the old days, the mantra was "buy the keys first", but what happens when it turns to "buy the keys only"? A growing number of collectors may pay more, sometimes excessively more, for key specimens without the intention of building a full set. If there are enough collectors like this, it may make it harder for those who are building full collections.
Along these lines at the highest levels, Bob Simpson said his goal was never to complete sets, but buy beautiful coins.
Keep in mind, we see well collectors who are public with their collections selling and holding for smaller periods of time. However, there are many collectors with significant collections who remain private and are not selling.
True, however, it’s hard to know how many exist and what they hold. The best we may have to go on is private registry sets. If it’s not a private registry set, there may be no evidence any such sets exist.
@tradedollarnut said:
Collectors aren’t keeping their sets anymore because the drive for quality is simply costing too much money. That urge to finish a set causes them to spend more than they really wanted to do and then reality sets in - they can sell and stay in the game or they can sit and twiddle their thumbs. Add in a dose of constant gradeflation to erode the value of their set while they hold it and the choice becomes even clearer
I see this happening more as well. There was a larger number of old large collection collectors. There seem to be much fewer collectors at this level now.
One reason for the increasing costs to complete a set may be due to type collecting where individual specimens are increasing in price due to collectors who are not building full collections.
In the old days, the mantra was "buy the keys first", but what happens when it turns to "buy the keys only"? A growing number of collectors may pay more, sometimes excessively more, for key specimens without the intention of building a full set. If there are enough collectors like this, it may make it harder for those who are building full collections.
Along these lines at the highest levels, Bob Simpson said his goal was never to complete sets, but buy beautiful coins.
Keep in mind, we see well collectors who are public with their collections selling and holding for smaller periods of time. However, there are many collectors with significant collections who remain private and are not selling.
True, however, it’s hard to know how many exist and what they hold. The best we may have to go on is private registry sets. If it’s not a private registry set, there may be no evidence any such sets exist.
Ive talked to a few top end dealers who tell me they know very few of their top clients who post on the registry. I take their word on it. Look at proof gold---some of.the most valuable coins. There are very very few registry sets. The collectors are there but they wish to remain private.
The finest liberty quarter eagle set by far is a collection called the Kansas collection. The collector has apparently no desire to list his collection.
There are 5 or 6 well known collectors who buy and sell quite a bit. I would just caution to read too much into their actions
@tradedollarnut said:
Collectors aren’t keeping their sets anymore because the drive for quality is simply costing too much money. That urge to finish a set causes them to spend more than they really wanted to do and then reality sets in - they can sell and stay in the game or they can sit and twiddle their thumbs. Add in a dose of constant gradeflation to erode the value of their set while they hold it and the choice becomes even clearer
I see this happening more as well. There was a larger number of old large collection collectors. There seem to be much fewer collectors at this level now.
One reason for the increasing costs to complete a set may be due to type collecting where individual specimens are increasing in price due to collectors who are not building full collections.
In the old days, the mantra was "buy the keys first", but what happens when it turns to "buy the keys only"? A growing number of collectors may pay more, sometimes excessively more, for key specimens without the intention of building a full set. If there are enough collectors like this, it may make it harder for those who are building full collections.
Along these lines at the highest levels, Bob Simpson said his goal was never to complete sets, but buy beautiful coins.
Keep in mind, we see well collectors who are public with their collections selling and holding for smaller periods of time. However, there are many collectors with significant collections who remain private and are not selling.
True, however, it’s hard to know how many exist and what they hold. The best we may have to go on is private registry sets. If it’s not a private registry set, there may be no evidence any such sets exist.
Ive talked to a few top end dealers who tell me they know very few of their top clients who post on the registry. I take their word on it. Look at proof gold---some of.the most valuable coins. There are very very few registry sets. The collectors are there but they wish to remain private.
The finest liberty quarter eagle set by far is a collection called the Kansas collection. The collector has apparently no desire to list his collection.
There are 5 or 6 well known collectors who buy and sell quite a bit. I would just caution to read too much into their actions
I'm sure they are some, but the fact they are unknown means they are hard to track. Collectors that are private and unknown don't really affect my view of provenance and coin ownership over time as they are unknown, whether they are collecting now or over 100 years ago. If they are private now, it's also quite likely their collections will be anonymous when sold. Quite a few coins that Hansen has acquired over the years have no known provenance. I'm sure they were in collections but not ones that are able to matter from a historical perspective, as they are unknown. That being said, they can affect realized prices and availability of top coins and, here, it likely comes down whether it's possible for known collectors to win top coins or not.
Comments
Nice old thread revived here. I'm about 3 coins short from my early date set. Complete with my late date set. Walkers are nice. Pics?
Would you believe I do not want to sell because it hurts to sell since I realize it is difficult to replace what I sell.
Being "handsomely rewarded" to me is only the recognition that I bought the "right stuff" at the right time.
It must be nice!
Except....when you needed money [for a very worthy cause, mind you] you sold the crown jewel. Kinda my point...
I see this happening more as well. There was a larger number of old large collection collectors. There seem to be much fewer collectors at this level now.
One reason for the increasing costs to complete a set may be due to type collecting where individual specimens are increasing in price due to collectors who are not building full collections.
In the old days, the mantra was "buy the keys first", but what happens when it turns to "buy the keys only"? A growing number of collectors may pay more, sometimes excessively more, for key specimens without the intention of building a full set. If there are enough collectors like this, it may make it harder for those who are building full collections.
Along these lines at the highest levels, Bob Simpson said his goal was never to complete sets, but buy beautiful coins.
tradedollarnut said:
i think you have the wrong reason as to why I sold my crown jewel of my collection back in January 2009. You meant the 1875-S $20?
i sold the 1875-S when I did because I saw an opportunity for even harder to find tax free like kind exchange including the numerous 1942 patterns, black 1.0 NGC slabs, white 2.1 NGC slabs, numerous $20 CC mint Liberties in PCGS OGH slabs which received CAC stickers as well as ultimate rare Carson City Mint 1872 cancelled $20 die. The timing was perfect and most unusual. It was like waling into a candy store of a lifetime.
I took very little cash in the transaction which minimized my 28% capital gains tax .
By 2020, I had enough cash on hand to withstand my daughter getting married and my wife’s expensive re-election campaign. I did not sell any coins but still grumbled about spending the money. LOL.
I, absolutely, believe you and I feel the exact same way. I have more than a few coins, in my set, that I feel this way about. But you must admit that, the longer you hold on, the better off you will be, if or when the time ever comes to sell. Even if you never sell, time is an excellent money maker, especially for rare and quality items, because they will always have that equity....
Sometimes, it’s better to be LUCKY than good. 🍀 🍺👍
My Full Walker Registry Set (1916-1947):
https://www.ngccoin.com/registry/competitive-sets/16292/
That's really interesting to me.
It seems like you mentioned this die was acquired at the 2012 ANA Stack's sale in the thread below. I didn't realize you could do a tax-free, like-for-like exchange with Stack's Bowers, and with 3 years in passing. It would be great to know more about how to do this type of transaction with Stack's Bowers.
The 1872-CC $20 double eagle cancelled obverse die sells at the 2012 Summer ANA Stacks Bowers rarity
https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/864172/the-1872-cc-20-double-eagle-cancelled-obverse-die-sells-at-the-2012-summer-ana-stacks-bowers-rarity
You can’t anymore. It’s now specifically limited to real estate
https://www.irs.gov/newsroom/like-kind-exchanges-now-limited-to-real-property
Ah too bad. Very unfortunate!
That was just a few years ago. Hopefully it can be changed to be more even with other asset classes.
Keep in mind, we see well collectors who are public with their collections selling and holding for smaller periods of time. However, there are many collectors with significant collections who remain private and are not selling.
True, however, it’s hard to know how many exist and what they hold. The best we may have to go on is private registry sets. If it’s not a private registry set, there may be no evidence any such sets exist.
Ive talked to a few top end dealers who tell me they know very few of their top clients who post on the registry. I take their word on it. Look at proof gold---some of.the most valuable coins. There are very very few registry sets. The collectors are there but they wish to remain private.
The finest liberty quarter eagle set by far is a collection called the Kansas collection. The collector has apparently no desire to list his collection.
There are 5 or 6 well known collectors who buy and sell quite a bit. I would just caution to read too much into their actions
I'm sure they are some, but the fact they are unknown means they are hard to track. Collectors that are private and unknown don't really affect my view of provenance and coin ownership over time as they are unknown, whether they are collecting now or over 100 years ago. If they are private now, it's also quite likely their collections will be anonymous when sold. Quite a few coins that Hansen has acquired over the years have no known provenance. I'm sure they were in collections but not ones that are able to matter from a historical perspective, as they are unknown. That being said, they can affect realized prices and availability of top coins and, here, it likely comes down whether it's possible for known collectors to win top coins or not.