Legendary Franklin resells for 63% less than $129,250 price

@Zoins said:

@WCC said:
I'd hardly call this coin "legendary".

It's pretty Legendary to me. I'm not sure what else to call it since the provenance isn't known.

You have far lower standards of significance than I do. I could give you my real opinion of it but then, I'd be accused of "thrashing" the coin or something worse.

that is quite a haircut, obviously. at least a few years between results and with the wild-west of coin price results out there these days, it could've been a calculated gamble.

perhaps the under-bidder got a "good" deal this time?

here is a new quote i may think, "it only takes two get into trouble at an auction but it takes three to get out."

if a player at this level and above does this continually and is pretty good, this result may not be as bad as it seems, if averaged out.

gonna take some hits and i've seen many an experienced forum member (roadrunner, wondercoin, tomb, captainhenway and MANY more) having not gotten themselves banned like some, speak calmly and rationally about many ups and downs of big sales results of the past decades.

a pinhole analysis of a result like this certainly gets the attention though and i've came close to posting some a few times, including frankies.

lots of diverse and interesting posts, information, presentation and neutrality on part of the OP.

hope you newer members are paying attention to many of the threads in this forum. a PhDs worth of information lay right at your fingertips with this forum...

@1Mike1 said:
I honestly don't know how someone can absorb these losses and continue to enjoy collecting.

If you have lots of zeros in your net wealth who cares.

@Zoins said:

@WCC said:

@Zoins said:

@WCC said:
I'd hardly call this coin "legendary".

It's pretty Legendary to me. I'm not sure what else to call it since the provenance isn't known.

You have far lower standards of significance than I do. I could give you my real opinion of it but then, I'd be accused of "thrashing" the coin or something worse.

My standard is based on the amount of fame the coin has. Do you know of a more famous Franklin Half?

I wouldn't call a single Franklin half famous or anything close to it.

It wouldn't surprise me if most collectors of the series have never heard of this coin. I presume it's well known to the modest number who spend "material" amounts on the series. Otherwise, likely only to the low proportion who are professional numismatists, read the coin press, or read forums like this one.

@Zoins said:
There's definitely something to be said for her advice.

Sure, but it is her choice to be flippant. "OUCH! I guess the thrill hunt was that great of an experience?" And on. Maybe it was? Maybe it was a complete disaster driven by hardship or a personal emergency? If I were the one she's calling out I'd take my business elsewhere the next time I spent or sold. Why give $ to people presenting your choices to the world as idiotic?

@tradedollarnut said:

@foraiur said:

@Zoins said:
There's definitely something to be said for her advice.

Sure, but it is her choice to be flippant. "OUCH! I guess the thrill hunt was that great of an experience?" And on. Maybe it was? Maybe it was a complete disaster driven by hardship or a personal emergency? If I were the one she's calling out I'd take my business elsewhere the next time I spent or sold. Why give $ to people presenting your choices to the world as idiotic?

Because when your choices are indeed idiotic you deserve to be called out on them

The only idiotic person is Laura for calling out someone who bought a coin from her.

Well we can’t call the guy the end user but end what? You guys fill in the blank. What pct or total amount does the auction house make on these 2 transactions. And this a common date issue. A nice MS 65 at $33 (CPG) fills the hole good enough.

It only illustrates the highly speculative risk of this material rofl. But for a billionaire chump change.

When I think of all the slabbed coins somebody could have bought at a show from a wholesaler (recently setup at) at 2 pct behind bid I feel sick. Just think their cases would be full of slabs!

Even if he invested in MS69 & 70 slabbed bullion coins he would have done better. The really sad part is all the single digit slabbed world coins that would buy.

@Justacommeman said:
*

Exactly.

@Zoins said:

@pmh1nic said:

@Zoins said:

@IkesT said:

@Zoins said:
Laura just issued a warning to set builders for selling quickly after completing their sets. She used the example of the $129,250 Franklin half which recently resold for just $47,000 on May 27, 2021.

Laura wrote on May 28, 2021:
We see many newer collectors who come in and distort the marketplace while being in the throws of a raging hunt. A great example is the collector who bought the 1958 wildly toned Franklin for $129,000.00 out of one of our auctions last year. He finished his set and sold it off-all but this coin. The underbidder clearly lost his taste and we just resold the coin for $47,000.00-OUCH! I guess the thrill hunt was that great of an experience?

If someone, say, buys a coin from me at $129,000...then consigns it to me, and I sell it again for $47,000...I'm not sure I'd be in such a rush to critique that person...

Her advice could be to help such a collector to:

1. not endure such a loss again
2. be a happier collector long term

There's definitely something to be said for her advice.

I was just looking up Joseph Jacob Mickley's 1804 dollar and noted it dropped 32% or $1.2M in 5 years from 2013 to 2018. Imagine absorbing a $1.2M loss?

I have a feeling the 1804 has a better chance of recovering some of the lost value versus the Franklin.

That won’t help the person who lost $1.2M.

Laura’s point is that longer holding periods help maintain value.

It definitely won't help the seller.

As far as how long the coin is held, I'm not sure if that applies to a coin like the 1804 that is so very rare and relatively very expensive. Putting aside the one sold in 1941 the sales that have occurred according to PCGS auctions records were in 1989, 1993, 1997, 1999, 2000, 2008, 2013, 2017, 2018 and 2020. You had PR-62 coins that sold in 2008 for $3.7 million (NGC), 2013 for $3.8 million (PCGS) and then in 2018 for $2.6 million (PCGS). So you have approximately five year time spans where coins become available and in this case five year time spans where similar coins (all 62's) become available and in five years the price goes up marginally and after another five year span the price dropped dramatically for a similar coin. In between (2017) you had a PR-65 sell for $3.2 million, less than the PR-62 coin sold in 2013. Did the selling price on the PR-65 greatly impact the price on the PR-62 sold the following year? Would that have changed if the seller of the PR-62 had waited another five years?

@SeattleSlammer said:
I’m thinking it’s around a 64 obverse at best, technically speaking…

I think 67+ is very generous for it. I also think $47k is much too strong. Both owners are buried IMHO.

It looks like another retread/piece of expensive dreck. Sigh.

Yes the 130k buyer buried himself in a real deep hole. CPG for MS 67 that piece $377. Toners of course emotion kicks in / bid war.

While the coin is an attractive toner tarnish gets darker with age, reaction with the atmosphere - it might not be so nice after another ten years lol.

As far as holding coins a long time so make a bigger return can be nonsense rubbish. Look at Pcgs 3000 many coins still down since 89 crash. Classic Commems cheaper than 25 yr ago.

Sure a whale of a buyer may come along or NOT.

Churn your investment, buy low / sell high.