At the Goldberg Sale - Running at 34 lots an hour.

MrEureka · January 30, 2024 2:45PM

Everything is running smoothly, but it's still torture. I may be getting too old for this.

pruebas · January 30, 2024 2:55PM

@MrEureka said:
Everything is running smoothly, but it's still torture. I may be getting too old for this.

If not you, who?

Boosibri · January 30, 2024 3:00PM

It is so slow. I'm watching and can hear you (I think) bidding on a few lots.

I hope @pruebas is kicking the commission up to 10% to compensate you for the torture.

MrEureka · January 30, 2024 3:02PM

@Boosibri said:
It is so slow. I'm watching and can hear you (I think) bidding on a few lots.

I hope @pruebas is kicking the commission up to 10% to compensate you for the torture.

Have you ever actually met Pruebas???

pruebas · January 30, 2024 3:07PM

Concentrate!!!

MrEureka · January 30, 2024 3:12PM

@pruebas said:
Concentrate!!!

I'm just jumping everything to my limit to get it over with.

Boosibri · January 30, 2024 3:14PM

@MrEureka said:

@Boosibri said:
It is so slow. I'm watching and can hear you (I think) bidding on a few lots.

I hope @pruebas is kicking the commission up to 10% to compensate you for the torture.

Have you ever actually met Pruebas???

So he wants you to pay him for the priveledge?

pruebas · January 30, 2024 3:22PM

I've got the Pet Shop Boys Dance Mix running on my laptop to help keep me from falling asleep.

PillarDollarCollector · January 30, 2024 4:17PM

Mexico 1732 & 1733 milled 8 reales coming up shortly. Very nice looking coins!!!

bidask · January 30, 2024 4:23PM

@PillarDollarCollector said:
Mexico 1732 & 1733 milled 8 reales coming up shortly. Very nice looking coins!!!

I saw them in hand.

PillarDollarCollector · January 30, 2024 4:31PM

@bidask said:

@PillarDollarCollector said:
Mexico 1732 & 1733 milled 8 reales coming up shortly. Very nice looking coins!!!

I saw them in hand.

Are they better in hand? The images look great.

PillarDollarCollector · January 30, 2024 4:45PM

@PillarDollarCollector said:
Mexico 1732 & 1733 milled 8 reales coming up shortly. Very nice looking coins!!!

49 200$ & 132 000$

PillarDollarCollector · January 30, 2024 4:49PM

Anyone pick any coins up in this auction?

bidask · January 30, 2024 8:02PM

@PillarDollarCollector said:

@bidask said:

@PillarDollarCollector said:
Mexico 1732 & 1733 milled 8 reales coming up shortly. Very nice looking coins!!!

I saw them in hand.

Are they better in hand? The images look great.

I thought the 1732 was very nice

PillarDollarCollector · January 30, 2024 8:17PM

@bidask said:

@PillarDollarCollector said:

@bidask said:

@PillarDollarCollector said:
Mexico 1732 & 1733 milled 8 reales coming up shortly. Very nice looking coins!!!

I saw them in hand.

Are they better in hand? The images look great.

I thought the 1732 was very nice

I wonder if we can call it the King of Mexican coins just like the US 1804 dollar.

MrEureka · January 30, 2024 10:08PM

@PillarDollarCollector said:

@bidask said:

@PillarDollarCollector said:

@bidask said:

@PillarDollarCollector said:
Mexico 1732 & 1733 milled 8 reales coming up shortly. Very nice looking coins!!!

I saw them in hand.

Are they better in hand? The images look great.

I thought the 1732 was very nice

I wonder if we can call it the King of Mexican coins just like the US 1804 dollar.

More like a 1794.

fluffy155 · January 30, 2024 10:24PM

@bidask said:

I thought the 1732 was very nice

Wish I had talked to you then. Goldberg's photos are never great, the fields looked a bit too glossy and it had that cleaned look about it. I was hesitant about going too high on a piece I hadn't seen in person and stopped bidding at $36k.

MrEureka · January 30, 2024 10:32PM

@fluffy155 said:

@bidask said:

I thought the 1732 was very nice

Wish I had talked to you then. Goldberg's photos are never great, the fields looked a bit too glossy and it had that cleaned look about it. I was hesitant about going too high on a piece I hadn't seen in person and stopped bidding at $36k.

@fluffy155 said:

@bidask said:

I thought the 1732 was very nice

Wish I had talked to you then. Goldberg's photos are never great, the fields looked a bit too glossy and it had that cleaned look about it. I was hesitant about going too high on a piece I hadn't seen in person and stopped bidding at $36k.

Did you “only” bid 36K because you thought you wouldn’t like it, or because you thought that was all it was worth, or both?

fluffy155 · January 30, 2024 10:55PM

@MrEureka said:
Did you “only” bid 36K because you thought you wouldn’t like it, or because you thought that was all it was worth, or both?

Started to suspect I wouldn’t be happy with it and got cold feet. $40-$50k is an extreme stretch buy for me, it would knock out a solid 2 years coin budget.

pruebas · January 30, 2024 11:09PM

I found it odd that a straight-graded AU 1732 would hammer for almost the same as it did 15.5 years ago.

But I think that speaks more of the market than of the coin.

There were many bargains in the sale, and 15 years from now, we will look back with surprise at the low prices we missed.

tcollects · January 31, 2024 2:04AM

the more boring the auction, the better the deals

Boosibri · January 31, 2024 5:05AM

Amazing how the two 1733 8Rs downgraded so severely. While some Millennia coins were fairly graded, these were critical failures. The 1733 MX went MS63 to details back to MS60 and the one 1733 went MS64 to saltwater surfaces

MrEureka · January 31, 2024 5:13AM

@Boosibri said:
Amazing how the two 1733 8Rs downgraded so severely. While some Millennia coins were fairly graded, these were critical failures. The 1733 MX went MS63 to details back to MS60 and the one 1733 went MS64 to saltwater surfaces

I don't know how it happened, but I thought the downgrades were appropriate. And there were at least a couple of similarly justified downgrades on other six figure coins throughout the sale.

MrEureka · January 31, 2024 5:25AM

@tcollects said:
the more boring the auction, the better the deals

While that is true, this was hardly a boring sale.

pruebas · January 31, 2024 5:49AM

@MrEureka said:

@Boosibri said:
Amazing how the two 1733 8Rs downgraded so severely. While some Millennia coins were fairly graded, these were critical failures. The 1733 MX went MS63 to details back to MS60 and the one 1733 went MS64 to saltwater surfaces

I don't know how it happened, but I thought the downgrades were appropriate. And there were at least a couple of similarly justified downgrades on other six figure coins throughout the sale.

I know just enough to be dangerous. But here it is.

Someone (probably the Goldbergs) decided these coins should have slabs with vanity labels for Mr Peh. Either NGC decided to regrade the coins instead of simply reholder them, or they were sent in for regrade rather than reholder (or perhaps they were sent in raw to save money).

Either way, NGC is a lot tighter now than in 2007 when they were originally graded.

A few coins received such horrible downgrades from NGC, they were then sent to PCGS where they received further downgrades. Then time ran out and they were sold.

This just reinforces the knowledge that NGC was extremely loose back then and perhaps it’s time to reevaluate all NGC slabs of that era.

Clio · January 31, 2024 6:36AM

@pruebas said:

@MrEureka said:

@Boosibri said:
Amazing how the two 1733 8Rs downgraded so severely. While some Millennia coins were fairly graded, these were critical failures. The 1733 MX went MS63 to details back to MS60 and the one 1733 went MS64 to saltwater surfaces

I don't know how it happened, but I thought the downgrades were appropriate. And there were at least a couple of similarly justified downgrades on other six figure coins throughout the sale.

I know just enough to be dangerous. But here it is.

Someone (probably the Goldbergs) decided these coins should have slabs with vanity labels for Mr Peh. Either NGC decided to regrade the coins instead of simply reholder them, or they were sent in for regrade rather than reholder (or perhaps they were sent in raw to save money).

Either way, NGC is a lot tighter now than in 2007 when they were originally graded.

A few coins received such horrible downgrades from NGC, they were then sent to PCGS where they received further downgrades. Then time ran out and they were sold.

This just reinforces the knowledge that NGC was extremely loose back then and perhaps it’s time to reevaluate all NGC slabs of that era.

I was gathering data on this recently and it does seem that they were graded loosely but in both directions. Seems they are just as likely to upgrade 2 points as downgrade 2 points. Buy the coin not the holder right?

RSP · January 31, 2024 8:21AM

That's right of course. I'm still thinking we collect coins, not slabs.

Boosibri · January 31, 2024 8:30AM

I have a few Millennia coins:
1. 1840 Argentina Rebel peso. Went N58 to P61.
2. 1837 Colombia 8R went N64 to P64 and added Norweb Brand provenance which no one mentioned in Millennia
3. 1868 Chile proof peso N64, regraded the same and added James Longacre provenance

They weren’t all bad

pruebas · January 31, 2024 8:57AM

@Clio said:

@pruebas said:

@MrEureka said:

@Boosibri said:
Amazing how the two 1733 8Rs downgraded so severely. While some Millennia coins were fairly graded, these were critical failures. The 1733 MX went MS63 to details back to MS60 and the one 1733 went MS64 to saltwater surfaces

I don't know how it happened, but I thought the downgrades were appropriate. And there were at least a couple of similarly justified downgrades on other six figure coins throughout the sale.

I know just enough to be dangerous. But here it is.

Someone (probably the Goldbergs) decided these coins should have slabs with vanity labels for Mr Peh. Either NGC decided to regrade the coins instead of simply reholder them, or they were sent in for regrade rather than reholder (or perhaps they were sent in raw to save money).

Either way, NGC is a lot tighter now than in 2007 when they were originally graded.

A few coins received such horrible downgrades from NGC, they were then sent to PCGS where they received further downgrades. Then time ran out and they were sold.

This just reinforces the knowledge that NGC was extremely loose back then and perhaps it’s time to reevaluate all NGC slabs of that era.

I was gathering data on this recently and it does seem that they were graded loosely but in both directions. Seems they are just as likely to upgrade 2 points as downgrade 2 points. Buy the coin not the holder right?

Agreed. And I didn't mean to imply that everything downgraded.

But a 4 point swing? Or undiscovered saltwater damage? Undiscovered hole repair?

Come on!

neildrobertson · January 31, 2024 8:59AM

At 34 lots an hour, I'd expect it to be all 5 figure coins.

WCC · January 31, 2024 9:54AM

@pruebas said:
I found it odd that a straight-graded AU 1732 would hammer for almost the same as it did 15.5 years ago.

But I think that speaks more of the market than of the coin.

There were many bargains in the sale, and 15 years from now, we will look back with surprise at the low prices we missed.

i've seen it before and I don't check nearly as much as you do.

I recall one of the two Rudman 1732 8E selling for the same price as he paid 1985., maybe less If correct, I infer it's a change in preference for quality over rarity. I recall it has about 10 known but is an XF.

Much cheaper coin but Stacks sold an 1809 Bolivia MS-63 1/4R for 2640 last month. The Whittier coin (maybe the same coin or the other of two) sold for $4500 back in 2006 at Heritage.

Someone else (maybe you or Abuelo) mentioned paying $2500 recently for a Mexico 2M which previously sold for 10k.

The 1732 8R sells more often, but there is a financial risk in paying "strong" prices for (relatively) illiquid coins. Less for high or higher quality with current preferences but it's not as low as many seem to think.

bidask · January 31, 2024 11:30AM

We can debate the price paid but I would not characterize the PCGS 58 1732 8 reales in this auction as “illiquid”

WCC · January 31, 2024 1:22PM

@bidask said:
We can debate the price paid but I would not characterize the PCGS 58 1732 8 reales in this auction as “illiquid”

You work in the financial services industry, so you know what liquid means. Liquidity is relative but coins aren't liquid in general. The 1732 Mexico 8R is more liquid than most coins, but there aren't very many buyers for it at "market", whatever that's happens to be at the moment.

Most of MY pillars which aren't Mexico, aren't 8R, but many are in this quality or better are all less liquid than this coin.

If you don't like this characterization, then it was just overpriced at the prior sale. It's one or the other.

scubafuel · January 31, 2024 2:13PM

Just reviewing the sale. @pruebas which lots seemed very cheap to you? (besides the 1732 pillar mentioned already)

Also, where did Goldberg get these estimates? I understand wanting to drum up interest and have lots "exceed" but some are just silly. Ex: the 1976 medal, with 16.67 oz of gold, estimated at "$20,000"

pruebas · January 31, 2024 2:36PM

@scubafuel said:
Just reviewing the sale. @pruebas which lots seemed very cheap to you? (besides the 1732 pillar mentioned already)

Also, where did Goldberg get these estimates? I understand wanting to drum up interest and have lots "exceed" but some are just silly. Ex: the 1976 medal, with 16.67 oz of gold, estimated at "$20,000"

Sorry, I am doing this from my phone, and their website is beyond antiquated.

Here are some that I thought went too cheap. I’m sure there are others, but it’s too hard to find them now.

Excluding US and ancients, since I know little about pricing of them.

1080
1169
1183
1190
1195 to 1199

As for estimates, who knows?

Let me add, I did not view all the lots in person. I only viewed maybe 10 lots. So the “cheap” lots could have had grading or eye appeal problems in-hand that I would have missed. But AFAIK, many lots were won by dealers. Doesn’t that make them “cheap” by definition?

PillarDollarCollector · January 31, 2024 3:02PM

Any chance it was the auction venue that caused certain world coins to go for ''cheap''? I for one have never followed them in the past this was a 1st for me to tune into Goldberg. When looking for world coins they are not a company that ever crossed my mind before this auction.

realeswatcher · January 31, 2024 4:46PM

Sometimes a particular auction brings results where you say "Gee, that went low". Other times, you see results where you say "wow, that's a ridiculous price".

There can be many macro or micro or in-between reasons why.

Cherrypicking from Millenia's more pedestrian offerings... in 2008, how'd they bring $1035 for an NGC62 1823 Potosi 8R or $1208 for an NGC62 1809 Mexico 8R????

http://images.goldbergauctions.com/php/lot_auc.php?site=1&sale=46&lot=1105&lang=1
http://images.goldbergauctions.com/php/lot_auc.php?site=1&sale=46&lot=945&lang=1

PillarDollarCollector · January 31, 2024 6:10PM

@PillarDollarCollector said:
Any chance it was the auction venue that caused certain coins to go for ''cheap''? I for one have never followed them in the past this was a 1st for me to tune into Goldberg. When looking for world coins they are not a company that ever crossed my mind before this auction.

I have known about Goldberg auctions for a long time but always assumed they dealt only in US coins so never looked.

7Jaguars · January 31, 2024 8:48PM

Occasionally scarcer Brit coins come through their venue and are not bid to their probable value levels based on sales at other auctions. Have to look carefully but I have filled out some nicer copper and silver bits...

MrEureka · February 2, 2024 2:45PM

@pruebas said:
But AFAIK, many lots were won by dealers. Doesn’t that make them “cheap” by definition?

If dealers buying coins guaranteed that they were cheap, dealers would buy every lot in every auction.

pruebas · February 2, 2024 3:42PM

@MrEureka said:

@pruebas said:
But AFAIK, many lots were won by dealers. Doesn’t that make them “cheap” by definition?

If dealers buying coins guaranteed that they were cheap, dealers would buy every lot in every auction.

Not sure I follow.

Unless the dealer thinks he can sell the coin for more than he paid, to account for expenses and profit, why would s/he buy it? Perhaps some dealers can afford to put coins away for a few years to let the market catch up, but realistically, how many can do that?

If I (as a collector) think a coin is "cheap," it doesn't necessarily mean it was bought by a dealer. But if a coin was bought by a dealer, it should necessarily mean it is "cheap" from a collector's point of view since the dealer is selling it for more.

Of course, this all falls apart of said collector or dealer doesn't know the market for the coin(s).

MrEureka · February 3, 2024 5:32PM

@pruebas said:

@MrEureka said:

@pruebas said:
But AFAIK, many lots were won by dealers. Doesn’t that make them “cheap” by definition?

If dealers buying coins guaranteed that they were cheap, dealers would buy every lot in every auction.

Not sure I follow.

Unless the dealer thinks he can sell the coin for more than he paid, to account for expenses and profit, why would s/he buy it? Perhaps some dealers can afford to put coins away for a few years to let the market catch up, but realistically, how many can do that?

If I (as a collector) think a coin is "cheap," it doesn't necessarily mean it was bought by a dealer. But if a coin was bought by a dealer, it should necessarily mean it is "cheap" from a collector's point of view since the dealer is selling it for more.

Of course, this all falls apart of said collector or dealer doesn't know the market for the coin(s).

And it falls apart if the dealer doesn't know exactly what he'll get for the coin, which is more often than not the case. Or if he thinks he can get over "market" for the coin for any number of reasons, in which case the coin may be cheap enough to him, but expensive to almost everyone else. Or if he missed a problem with the coin, or if he doesn't know about a recently discovered hoard, or if he simply made a mistake.

bidask · February 3, 2024 6:17PM

@MrEureka said:

@pruebas said:

@MrEureka said:

@pruebas said:
But AFAIK, many lots were won by dealers. Doesn’t that make them “cheap” by definition?

If dealers buying coins guaranteed that they were cheap, dealers would buy every lot in every auction.

Not sure I follow.

Unless the dealer thinks he can sell the coin for more than he paid, to account for expenses and profit, why would s/he buy it? Perhaps some dealers can afford to put coins away for a few years to let the market catch up, but realistically, how many can do that?

If I (as a collector) think a coin is "cheap," it doesn't necessarily mean it was bought by a dealer. But if a coin was bought by a dealer, it should necessarily mean it is "cheap" from a collector's point of view since the dealer is selling it for more.

Of course, this all falls apart of said collector or dealer doesn't know the market for the coin(s).

And it falls apart if the dealer doesn't know exactly what he'll get for the coin, which is more often than not the case. Or if he thinks he can get over "market" for the coin for any number of reasons, in which case the coin may be cheap enough to him, but expensive to almost everyone else. Or if he missed a problem with the coin, or if he doesn't know about a recently discovered hoard, or if he simply made a mistake.

Even if a collector buys a coin from a dealer and certainly pays more …..it still could be a great buy for the collector.

At the Goldberg Sale - Running at 34 lots an hour.

Comments