@oreville said:
i noticed PCGS and other price reporting entities raised the prices of most $20 Libs and Saints.
was this just a timing coincidence?
Yes. The market for these has been hot along with everything else. Premiums have been increasing. Wholesale on 63 saints is around$2000 which is $180 over spot.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
@oreville said:
i noticed PCGS and other price reporting entities raised the prices of most $20 Libs and Saints.
was this just a timing coincidence?
About 2 weeks ago the price list turned majority green.
This was a few months late from what I've seen.
There used to be many more saint available and now, not so much.
@oreville said:
i noticed PCGS and other price reporting entities raised the prices of most $20 Libs and Saints.
was this just a timing coincidence?
About 2 weeks ago the price list turned majority green.
This was a few months late from what I've seen.
There used to be many more saint available and now, not so much.
I agree. The sheet lagged the market. The premiums have gotten stupid. I would actually pay a premium for MS62 common date coins...I never thought I'd see the day.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
@tradedollarnut said:
Bottom line is the underbidder was willing to pay $19.2M for the coin. So representing it as sold at $18.9M is just as misleading as sold at $19.5M
Based on Mr. Eureka's excellent explanation, what the guarantor did was write a put option to the auction house. It's an economically distinct transaction from their winning bid, unless that put also required them to bid above their 'strike'. The back-end accounting of subtracting the option premium from the guarantor's winning bid is a red herring.
@MsMorrisine said:
What does one do with multiple irrevocable bids?
That's not in the auction house's economic interest. Remember, they're paying for the puts, either notionally (if one of the guarantors wins) or economically (to the non-winning guarantor). Why buy puts from more than one party?
@MsMorrisine said:
What does one do with multiple irrevocable bids?
That's not in the auction house's economic interest. Remember, they're paying for the puts, either notionally (if one of the guarantors wins) or economically (to the non-winning guarantor). Why buy puts from more than one party?
there's theoretical value to the second to the extent there's risk that the first wouldn't perform but yeah that would be weird
@oreville said:
i noticed PCGS and other price reporting entities raised the prices of most $20 Libs and Saints. > >
was this just a timing coincidence? >
Yes. The market for these has been hot along with everything else. Premiums have been increasing. Wholesale on 63 saints is around $2000 which is $180 over spot.
When you or others quote DEs relative to spot, that's a raw numbers comparision, right ? You're not adjusting for the fact that DEs are 0.9675 ounces ?
Which means basically the actual premium is another ~3% higher.
Comments
There were at least 5 unique bidders. That’s a fact
How many were clients of Legend?
One. Heritage had two. Then there was the under bidder and the winning bidder
i noticed PCGS and other price reporting entities raised the prices of most $20 Libs and Saints.
was this just a timing coincidence?
Yes. The market for these has been hot along with everything else. Premiums have been increasing. Wholesale on 63 saints is around$2000 which is $180 over spot.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
For those who are extremely wealthy, the final bid on the 1933 Double Eagle was probably little more than pocket change.
About 2 weeks ago the price list turned majority green.
This was a few months late from what I've seen.
There used to be many more saint available and now, not so much.
My Saint Set
I agree. The sheet lagged the market. The premiums have gotten stupid. I would actually pay a premium for MS62 common date coins...I never thought I'd see the day.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
I am a collector
And things, well things
They tend to accumulate
Based on Mr. Eureka's excellent explanation, what the guarantor did was write a put option to the auction house. It's an economically distinct transaction from their winning bid, unless that put also required them to bid above their 'strike'. The back-end accounting of subtracting the option premium from the guarantor's winning bid is a red herring.
That's not in the auction house's economic interest. Remember, they're paying for the puts, either notionally (if one of the guarantors wins) or economically (to the non-winning guarantor). Why buy puts from more than one party?
there's theoretical value to the second to the extent there's risk that the first wouldn't perform but yeah that would be weird
interesting discussion btw
When you or others quote DEs relative to spot, that's a raw numbers comparision, right ? You're not adjusting for the fact that DEs are 0.9675 ounces ?
Which means basically the actual premium is another ~3% higher.