Should I dig through the Teletrade or Heritage archives and find out where that coin came from? And with the typical price of $200-400 for a coin like that now showing up on eBay with a four digit reserve?
yes I agree it's a little too pricey for my taste, but if someone wants to pull the trigger....more power too them. I do like the colors though......very interesting toning pattern......almost looks textile in nature.
I'm, sure the current high bidder, who I think is Dale from Spectrum, is very pleased that this thread brings the coin to our attention, especially at the last moment. I know I would be delighted. By the way, even if Eric is wrong about motive here, he is right on in general.
I'm not too worried about the motive gemtone, this seller's auctions get posted here all the time, and for those of us who have been here for some time, it's pretty obvious.
On the coin in question, that is no $1000 coin, and I think you know it as well as anyone.
Eric, the reason this felllow's coins get mentioned here so often is because there are many forum members who consign their own coins to him. As for this particular dollar, you're right, I don't think it's worth $1000 -- you don't see me bidding on it, right?
That said, and notwithstanding GAT's scatological references, I consider this piece to be the best combination of grade and eye appeal for a toned Morgan available on Ebay this week, assuming the coin actually looks like the pictures. If it doesn', then the buyer is out over $100 in "restocking fees." In that case, I could feel his pain -- I've been there myself, on more than one occasion.
Gemtone, I own toners that will run circles around the coin in question. No way is that a 4 figure toner. I don't know the seller and have nothing against him.
<< <i>assuming the coin actually looks like the pictures. If it doesn', then the buyer is out over $100 in "restocking fees." In that case, I could feel his pain -- I've been there myself, on more than one occasion. >>
So you're saying if the coin doesn't look like the picture and you return it you are charged a re-stocking fee?
Please... Save The Stories, Just Answer My Questions, And Tell Me How Much!!!!!
I dont like the toning on that peice at all. I am throwing in with Eric and Gat on this one. That is a 200 dollar coin in my humble opinion. But I wouldnt pay 200 for it. To each his own.
In an insane society, a sane person will appear to be insane.
It's Christmas time. Yall be nice & leave Mr Dick alone. hahahhahahhaha The obv is strangly appealing to me in a weird way but the rev which is nothing but a huge fingerprint makes me want to barf.
Change that we can believe in is that change which is 90% silver.
I'm trying to read this right. Dealer X buys what is an attractive common date in gem for 2-3-4 hundred(?) then consigns to dealer Y, who has customer post here but not bid, while other parties bid the coin up to (in my opinion) a very high price? How do any of the above mentioned benefit from this activity, or is it just fishin?
I think you guys are being way too harsh. In fact, I could use a few other choice words, but I will refrain. And, in fact, I disagree with most of you with respect to the coin's quality and pricing. Fact is, it realized $1000, and I do not believe the winning bidder was in any way conspiring with the seller. Many of you perhaps are unwilling to spend this kind of money for such a coin, and thus, you will not end up owning one. That is fine with me, as I will happily fill up my cabinet with beautifully toned Morgans while some of you sit on the sidelines cursing, grumping, hurling invective and heaping vituperation.
I think the coin was legit, and if you don't like the coin, the seller, or the price, nobody is forcing you to bid on it !!! But I don't think there was any fraudulent practice that would require the kind of harsh public scrutiny that you guys have dished out !!
Personally, I thought the coin looked cool. But, as I already own two monster-toned 1884-O (one PCGS MS65 and one PCGS MS66), I was not going to bid. My current rule is that I am only allowed two specimens of any date !! Now, if the coin had been an 1880-O or an 1894-O in that grade and color, that would have been much more cool !!
By the way, if you all want to bitxh about something on Ebay, what about the sellers who keep posting the overgraded crap in "NTC" holders. Now that is something that we should be warning the collecting community about.
<< <i>Just remember, this was brought to us by the guy who paid $1475 for a raw toned Morgan on eBay that graded 63 at NGC. Enough said. >>
Eric, Again you publically display your profound ignorance with regard to a spectacular toned coin - You can't tell what's real toning and what's AT - Remember, YOU were ADAMANT that it would NOT grade and you were equally ADAMANT that it was AT, and you were profoundly WRONG. Now to obfuscate the fact that you were 100% wrong on the subject of what's AT and what's NT, you denigrate some one else and in the process again display your profound ignorance. The collector who paid $1475 for that very attractive green toned coin has turned down a profit on that very same coin - and from more than 1 person. As I understand it, when you are able to buy a coin for which others are willing to pay more, that's usually an indication that it's worth more than one has paid for it. Clearly he got a nice coin at a fair price, and at a price on which he could make a profit. So your cheap-shot inference that the person who paid $1475 for a coin that graded 63 has over-paid and therefore doesn't know value and somehow lacks credibility, is once again, 100% wrong. Don't you get tired of being wrong?
You seem to have a compulsion to post snide inuendos in order to malign others with whom you disagree (or perhaps more accurately, those who disagree with you), and then when it is established that you are the one who is WRONG, and blatently so, you then throw out your sniviling remarks as if you have some type of expertize. Problem is, your "expertize" seems to be dead wrong. Perhaps it's because you've never owned any spectacular toned coins - If you limit yourself to "B" quality coins, you'll never know what the really nice one's are worth. Check the snide inuendos at the door. If you're not intelligent enough to present a correct position on coins and their values, don't try and resurrect your bruised ego by making gratuitious and malicious remarks about others because you don't have the ability, nor the cojones to step up and buy a spectacular toned coin.
As for Fountainheadgold, he seems to know "A" quality when he sees them, and from his other toned coins that he has posted on this forum, he seems quite capable of buying some very nice quality coins. But perhaps more importantly, he has not denigrated you in any manner, and there is no justification for your snide manner in trying to show disrespect for him because he bought a coin that you couldn't tell was the real deal. He doesn't have the problem here - you do - and the problem is your arrogance in believing that you are the only person who can determine AT/NT coins, and your inability to understand your now quite public limitations in that area. You have now extended that ignorance to valuations for spectacular toned coins - How could you possibly know values when nothing that you buy is the equivilent of the coin that Fountainheadgold bought. Oh, but I must have forgotten - when they don't have that "yellow-brown toning" you can't tell the real thing from the AT'd coins, so you'll never be able to buy the nice ones. You seem to know less about value than you do toning, particularly when it comes to a coin like the one that Fountainheadgold bought.
Collecting eye-appealing Proof and MS Indian Head Cents, 1858 Flying Eagle and IHC patterns and beautiful toned coins.
“It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so.” Mark Twain Newmismatist
<< <i>I dont like the toning on that peice at all. I am throwing in with Eric and Gat on this one. That is a 200 dollar coin in my humble opinion. But I wouldnt pay 200 for it. To each his own. >>
I kind of like the obverse on this one, it's got some character. The reverse is hideous, but then your not paying for that side on this one. The quality stuff is getting pricey, and although more than I would of paid for it certainly not out of reason. I mean, to each his own. I'm getting tired of these threads that end up questioning peoples intelligence regarding what they will pay to aquire what they like. Let's face it, nobody was willing to pay more than I was on every auction I ever won, and I never felt like an idiot for winning any of them!
The coin in question is 100% natural toning and quite attractive. Another coin that went for $1475 and graded MS-63 is really irrelevant unless the owner is involved directly with this example. He says he's not at the beginning and I take him at his word. My question remains: Are some dealers are consigning to other dealers and bidding on each other's coins AS A GENERAL PRACTICE?, as Gemtone seems to suggest in an earlier reply. I don't see the proof of this, or an auction provenance that demonstates it sold for a dramically lower price recently, or the bidding history of this auction.
Only a fool would bid in that seller's auctions with this blatant shilling. And that shiller has private feedback -- gee, wonder how many times cash changed hands in those transactions that he "won."
My name popped up in this thread, as the possible winner of the above mentioned coin. Just wanted to let all know, that dale995 is not me. I am aim2pleaseu2 on ebay. Anyway, the coin has some merits to the price paid, colors are vibrant, and to others it may be worth the money paid. Certain coins appeal to certain people and to each his own opinion! Happy Holidays to ALL........Dale at Spectrum.
Specializing in coins with "thin film interference" & "sulfur impregnated surfaces" due to hanging out with "old bags" and "wrappers"
Sequitur-- They're guilty on ALL COUNTS!! Bidding on toned Mexicans, Canadians and most U.S. denominations isn't my idea of your typical collector bidding pattern, to say the least! This link deserves it's own thread rather than getting sidetracked on subjective opinions on pricing toned Morgans. Thanks for the heads-up!
<< <i>Only a fool would bid in that seller's auctions with this blatant shilling. And that shiller has private feedback -- gee, wonder how many times cash changed hands in those transactions that he "won."
In any event, I'm saving it for posterity. >>
Please, say it ain't so!!!!
Please... Save The Stories, Just Answer My Questions, And Tell Me How Much!!!!!
Just bought this contraption and still can't even put up pictures, much less import Ebay stuff. This is a K6AZ job under a thread title such as to "why do some "collectors" bid on every coin that one dealer wants to sell on Ebay?"
There is clearly some bidding there on behalf of the seller ... however, for those of you who think that is a practice unique to eBay, think again. At major floor auctions, large consignments are often represented on the floor by bidding agents. Sometimes the auction house itselfowns the consignment, and if they see hot bidders on the floor, one of the guys at the podium (sitting at the side table) may bid the coin up "from the book," i.e. essentially increasing the reserve while the bidding is live. It is usually buried in the fine print of the Terms and Conditions that the auction house has the right to sell lots in which it has an interest, and that consignors may be allowed to bid on their own lots without penalty by prior arrangement with the auctioneer.
One thing that is not commonly known is that sometimes when major "name" collections are offered as an anchor consignment, the auction house HAS ALREADY BOUGHT THE DEAL from the consignor, and it is the auction house that owns the coins. This little bit of dirty laundry is rarely publicized, and to me, it is no different from shill bidding on eBay. Right or wrong, this is the nature of auctions everywhere. You should always ASSUME that you may be bidding against the seller, the consignor, the auction house, etc., rather than bidding against another collector. And frankly, if you don't bid more than you want to spend for the coin, it shouldn't make much difference.
Sunnywood, the auction being discussed is not a major auction house's auction, it is an eBay auction. People have been charged with federal statutes for doing this exact same thing, so to try to justify it by comparing it to what goes on in true auctions isn't very wise.
Eric, I was not trying to justify the eBay shilling by comparison. I was trying to educate bidders in all types of auctions. I believe that the sharing of knowledge is the primary point of these forums. I did not pass any judgment on the rectitude of the practice, which I believe to be widespread and impossible to eliminate.
Good people of the forum, I appreciate the advertising on a number of counts but there is a couple of issues I would like to address. First I would like to address concern about my return policy. The only reason I have one is to keep bidding to realistic levels. I may have charged it twice at the most since I have been involved as an ebay seller but I reserve the right to use it if I experience any abuse.
Second is the question raised about a "shill bidder" with private feedback. I can't attempt to convince anyone who has predetermined opinions but let me say this. The bidder has paid for everything, NEVER returned a coin, and buys exclusively from me because he feels comfortable with the way we do business. If anyone has any further questions I welcome any PMs, emails or phone calls(prefered)
According to Sunnyside, consignors may arrange to bid on their own coins. Isn't that shill bidding? Isn't that illegal, reagrdless of any arrangement with the seller?
With regard to the coin in question, I hope everyone here realizes that I like the coin. It does have character as someone else pointed out. It has nice colors, including the reverse, and is pretty clean, even for a PCGS65.
As for the bidding on this coin, it was interesting. Several people thought the coin was worth around $700, as did I. Bestclser1 (a prominent current toned dollar player, unlike many of the negative commenters here) submitted several bids along the way, including a final proxy bid of $790. Absent a reserve and the winning bid by Dale 995 (sorry Mr. Larson), the coin would have sold for about $730.
But, as I recall, the coin did have a reserve. And, several days before closing, Dale 995 submitted a single bid that met the reserve. It seems that the reserve was $1000, which was met by Dale995's proxy bid.
Now, I must say I find this bid by Dale 995 strange for a variety of reasons, none of which I'll bore you with here. Suffice it to say that either Dale 995 really wanted that coin badly and needed to go out of town someplace where computers were scarce, or he preffered to lose that coin and see a winning bid exceed the reserve price. Otherwise, I see no point in such a bid.
<< <i>As for the bidding on this coin, it was interesting. Several people thought the coin was worth around $700, as did I. Bestclser1 (a prominent current toned dollar player, unlike many of the negative commenters here) submitted several bids along the way, including a final proxy bid of $790. >>
Whenever I see a comment like this, it sets off alarm bells. What are you saying? That I don't know anything? I know this, the coin sold in a real auction a few months ago for less than half of what it went on eBay for.
The constant support of artificial prices for toned Morgans here is becoming really transparent.
Although I wouldn't have bid at anywhere near the price this lot went for, I have bought several coins from this seller and have been pleased with them all.
Eric: In the sentence you quote from me, I said "many", not all. I particularly meant to exclude you in "many." Moreover, the intent of my comment here was not to demean those who either don't collect toned dollars or do so only in moderation. Rather, I wanted to indicate that market prices for expensive toned dollars are determined largely by these prominent players, not by those who prefer to kibitz on this forum rather than bid, or who submit unrealistically low bids in the auctions.
Anyway, I'm intrigued by your suggestion that this coin "sold" for half the price realized last night in a recent teletrade sale. Not that I see that it would change anything I've said already, but I would be interested in knowing what sale that was.
fountainheadgold
Posts: 2,467
Comments
As far as the price, well a fool and his money...
On the coin in question, that is no $1000 coin, and I think you know it as well as anyone.
That said, and notwithstanding GAT's scatological references, I consider this piece to be the best combination of grade and eye appeal for a toned Morgan available on Ebay this week, assuming the coin actually looks like the pictures. If it doesn', then the buyer is out over $100 in "restocking fees." In that case, I could feel his pain -- I've been there myself, on more than one occasion.
<< <i>assuming the coin actually looks like the pictures. If it doesn', then the buyer is out over $100 in "restocking fees." In that case, I could feel his pain -- I've been there myself, on more than one occasion. >>
So you're saying if the coin doesn't look like the picture and you return it you are charged a re-stocking fee?
<< <i>Eric, the reason this felllow's coins get mentioned here so often is because there are many forum members who consign their own coins to him. >>
Yes there are, and these same consignors also bid on the coins consigned.
Doug
The obv is strangly appealing to me in a weird way but the rev which is nothing but a huge fingerprint makes me want to barf.
I think the coin was legit, and if you don't like the coin, the seller, or the price, nobody is forcing you to bid on it !!! But I don't think there was any fraudulent practice that would require the kind of harsh public scrutiny that you guys have dished out !!
Best,
Sunnywood
Sunnywood's Rainbow-Toned Morgans (Retired)
Sunnywood's Barber Quarters (Retired)
By the way, if you all want to bitxh about something on Ebay, what about the sellers who keep posting the overgraded crap in "NTC" holders. Now that is something that we should be warning the collecting community about.
Best,
Sunnywood
Sunnywood's Rainbow-Toned Morgans (Retired)
Sunnywood's Barber Quarters (Retired)
<< <i>On the coin in question, that is no $1000 coin, and I think you know it as well as anyone. >>
If someone's willing to pay $1000 for it, it's obviously a $1000 coin. If only for that sale.
Self Indulgence | Holey Coins | Flickr Photostream
<< <i>Just remember, this was brought to us by the guy who paid $1475 for a raw toned Morgan on eBay that graded 63 at NGC. Enough said. >>
Eric, Again you publically display your profound ignorance with regard to a spectacular toned coin - You can't tell what's real toning and what's AT - Remember, YOU were ADAMANT that it would NOT grade and you were equally ADAMANT that it was AT, and you were profoundly WRONG. Now to obfuscate the fact that you were 100% wrong on the subject of what's AT and what's NT, you denigrate some one else and in the process again display your profound ignorance. The collector who paid $1475 for that very attractive green toned coin has turned down a profit on that very same coin - and from more than 1 person. As I understand it, when you are able to buy a coin for which others are willing to pay more, that's usually an indication that it's worth more than one has paid for it. Clearly he got a nice coin at a fair price, and at a price on which he could make a profit. So your cheap-shot inference that the person who paid $1475 for a coin that graded 63 has over-paid and therefore doesn't know value and somehow lacks credibility, is once again, 100% wrong. Don't you get tired of being wrong?
You seem to have a compulsion to post snide inuendos in order to malign others with whom you disagree (or perhaps more accurately, those who disagree with you), and then when it is established that you are the one who is WRONG, and blatently so, you then throw out your sniviling remarks as if you have some type of expertize. Problem is, your "expertize" seems to be dead wrong. Perhaps it's because you've never owned any spectacular toned coins - If you limit yourself to "B" quality coins, you'll never know what the really nice one's are worth. Check the snide inuendos at the door. If you're not intelligent enough to present a correct position on coins and their values, don't try and resurrect your bruised ego by making gratuitious and malicious remarks about others because you don't have the ability, nor the cojones to step up and buy a spectacular toned coin.
As for Fountainheadgold, he seems to know "A" quality when he sees them, and from his other toned coins that he has posted on this forum, he seems quite capable of buying some very nice quality coins. But perhaps more importantly, he has not denigrated you in any manner, and there is no justification for your snide manner in trying to show disrespect for him because he bought a coin that you couldn't tell was the real deal. He doesn't have the problem here - you do - and the problem is your arrogance in believing that you are the only person who can determine AT/NT coins, and your inability to understand your now quite public limitations in that area. You have now extended that ignorance to valuations for spectacular toned coins - How could you possibly know values when nothing that you buy is the equivilent of the coin that Fountainheadgold bought. Oh, but I must have forgotten - when they don't have that "yellow-brown toning" you can't tell the real thing from the AT'd coins, so you'll never be able to buy the nice ones. You seem to know less about value than you do toning, particularly when it comes to a coin like the one that Fountainheadgold bought.
“It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so.” Mark Twain
Newmismatist
<< <i>I dont like the toning on that peice at all. I am throwing in with Eric and Gat on this one. That is a 200 dollar coin in my humble opinion. But I wouldnt pay 200 for it. To each his own. >>
I concur.
I'm getting tired of these threads that end up questioning peoples intelligence regarding what they will pay to aquire what they like. Let's face it, nobody was willing to pay more than I was on every auction I ever won, and I never felt like an idiot for winning any of them!
In any event, I'm saving it for posterity.
<< <i>Only a fool would bid in that seller's auctions with this blatant shilling. And that shiller has private feedback -- gee, wonder how many times cash changed hands in those transactions that he "won."
In any event, I'm saving it for posterity. >>
One thing that is not commonly known is that sometimes when major "name" collections are offered as an anchor consignment, the auction house HAS ALREADY BOUGHT THE DEAL from the consignor, and it is the auction house that owns the coins. This little bit of dirty laundry is rarely publicized, and to me, it is no different from shill bidding on eBay. Right or wrong, this is the nature of auctions everywhere. You should always ASSUME that you may be bidding against the seller, the consignor, the auction house, etc., rather than bidding against another collector. And frankly, if you don't bid more than you want to spend for the coin, it shouldn't make much difference.
Best,
Sunnywood
Sunnywood's Rainbow-Toned Morgans (Retired)
Sunnywood's Barber Quarters (Retired)
Best,
Sunnywood
Sunnywood's Rainbow-Toned Morgans (Retired)
Sunnywood's Barber Quarters (Retired)
First I would like to address concern about my return policy. The only reason I have one is to keep bidding to realistic levels. I may have charged it twice at the most since I have been involved as an ebay seller but I reserve the right to use it if I experience any abuse.
Second is the question raised about a "shill bidder" with private feedback. I can't attempt to convince anyone who has predetermined opinions but let me say this. The bidder has paid for everything, NEVER returned a coin, and buys exclusively from me because he feels comfortable with the way we do business. If anyone has any further questions I welcome any PMs, emails or phone calls(prefered)
617/964-6960
With regard to the coin in question, I hope everyone here realizes that I like the coin. It does have character as someone else pointed out. It has nice colors, including the reverse, and is pretty clean, even for a PCGS65.
As for the bidding on this coin, it was interesting. Several people thought the coin was worth around $700, as did I. Bestclser1 (a prominent current toned dollar player, unlike many of the negative commenters here) submitted several bids along the way, including a final proxy bid of $790. Absent a reserve and the winning bid by Dale 995 (sorry Mr. Larson), the coin would have sold for about $730.
But, as I recall, the coin did have a reserve. And, several days before closing, Dale 995 submitted a single bid that met the reserve. It seems that the reserve was $1000, which was met by Dale995's proxy bid.
Now, I must say I find this bid by Dale 995 strange for a variety of reasons, none of which I'll bore you with here. Suffice it to say that either Dale 995 really wanted that coin badly and needed to go out of town someplace where computers were scarce, or he preffered to lose that coin and see a winning bid exceed the reserve price. Otherwise, I see no point in such a bid.
<< <i>As for the bidding on this coin, it was interesting. Several people thought the coin was worth around $700, as did I. Bestclser1 (a prominent current toned dollar player, unlike many of the negative commenters here) submitted several bids along the way, including a final proxy bid of $790. >>
Whenever I see a comment like this, it sets off alarm bells. What are you saying? That I don't know anything? I know this, the coin sold in a real auction a few months ago for less than half of what it went on eBay for.
The constant support of artificial prices for toned Morgans here is becoming really transparent.
Anyway, I'm intrigued by your suggestion that this coin "sold" for half the price realized last night in a recent teletrade sale. Not that I see that it would change anything I've said already, but I would be interested in knowing what sale that was.