Eliasberg Collection premium
Georgems65
Posts: 476
Is there a premium for coin that are certified with the Eliasberg designation. Would you pay extra for one of these coins.
coins are my life
0
Comments
Yes
someone else will have more info.
In the Eliasberg sale, there were the following lots of 1883 No Cents Nickels:
Lot 771: 1 example graded "Proof 67". This piece is plated in the catalog.
Lot 772: A roll of 40 coins described as "average MS63". None are plated.
Lot 773: Another roll of 40 coins described as "average grade MS63". None are plated.
Lot 774: Another 19 examples described as "average grade MS63". None are plated.
So, in total there is one high end proof that should command a pedigree premium, and 99 MS examples of average quality, unplated, and unverifiable as Eliasberg coins.
I've often wondered if, today, there are more than 99 examples floating around the market being pitched as Eliasberg examples.
<< <i>well is pcgs certified in an ogh. how would pcgs know it was an Eliasberg >>
I would guess that someone submitted some with the lot ticket after the sale and had them pedigreed, though some have been crossed, cracked, upgraded, etc. through the years.
I personally would not pay a premium for them.
<< <i>IMO, this is the poster child for the pedigreed coin that does not deserve a pedigree premium.
In the Eliasberg sale, there were the following lots of 1883 No Cents Nickels:
Lot 771: 1 example graded "Proof 67". This piece is plated in the catalog.
Lot 772: A roll of 40 coins described as "average MS63". None are plated.
Lot 773: Another roll of 40 coins described as "average grade MS63". None are plated.
Lot 774: Another 19 examples described as "average grade MS63". None are plated.
So, in total there is one high end proof that should command a pedigree premium, and 99 MS examples of average quality, unplated, and unverifiable as Eliasberg coins.
I've often wondered if, today, there are more than 99 examples floating around the market being pitched as Eliasberg examples. >>
I couldn't agree more! MOST coins with an Eliasberg pedigree are worth a premium. That premium is determined by the buyer and the seller, of course.
But for the Eliasberg 1883 No Cents nickels, there should be in my opinion no premium.
Let's say that Eliasberg had a few rolls of Unc. 1974 cents, and these were sold with proof that they came from Eliasberg. Should they deserve a premium? Perhaps, but only as a curiosity piece.
A pedigree is appropriate for a coin from a significant collection. But even Eliasberg had some ordinary, routine, flotsam and jetsam coins, not deserving of a pedigree, and not worth a premium IMO.
An authorized PCGS dealer, and a contributor to the Red Book.
<< <i>Example is on the bay there is an Eliasberg 1883 No Cents. Pcgs price guide has it at 80.00 in ms64 the seller wants 275. is a piece of history for that much of an up tic in price >>
I owned one of these in an OGH and paid about a 25% premium over the the non-pedigreed slab of the same grade. I sold it on Ebay for a 50% premium about 5 years ago.
for instance...... (of course this one was an Ike Dollar that belonged to Eliasberg's son but that shouldnt make a difference should it??
www.brunkauctions.com
<< <i>If I was interested in an Eliasberg coin, depending on the coin, I would pay a premium, if needed. Paying a premium to own a piece of such an historic collection would be worth it, to me. >>
I agree - and we have done so many times for significant or interesting items from the collection (including a few that are on the cover of the catalog).
I have paid premiums for these two coins. In the long run, the premiums paid have long since vanished.
In honor of the memory of Cpl. Michael E. Thompson
<< <i>IMO, this is the poster child for the pedigreed coin that does not deserve a pedigree premium.
In the Eliasberg sale, there were the following lots of 1883 No Cents Nickels:
Lot 771: 1 example graded "Proof 67". This piece is plated in the catalog.
Lot 772: A roll of 40 coins described as "average MS63". None are plated.
Lot 773: Another roll of 40 coins described as "average grade MS63". None are plated.
Lot 774: Another 19 examples described as "average grade MS63". None are plated.
So, in total there is one high end proof that should command a pedigree premium, and 99 MS examples of average quality, unplated, and unverifiable as Eliasberg coins.
I've often wondered if, today, there are more than 99 examples floating around the market being pitched as Eliasberg examples. >>
<< <i>Listen to CCU. >>
I completely disagree.
The reason that common coins are common is that they are interchangeable. What better place to command a 'name' premium than on a common coin? It reminds me of the debate over paying more for PCGS vs NGC. What does the premium for Eliasberg [or PCGS] matter if you recoup it when you're selling it and it makes it more liquid and it increases your enjoyment of the item while you own it?
Seems like a no brainer to me.
In honor of the memory of Cpl. Michael E. Thompson
<< <i>I think you are wrong here, TDN, but we are free to disagree. For every person you might snare with the Eliasberg pedigree on a run of the mill nickel, you are likely to eliminate a possible buyer, too. If that is a wash then you are looking at price and if you pay 3x the otherwise going rate for such a coin then you have 3x the otherwise going rate tied up in the coin and if your goal is simply to recoup your investment then you tied up 3x the amount of money into that static investment than was otherwise required. Bad buy in my opinion. >>
Most coins are a bad buy ... unless you factor in the enjoyment that we receive from owning them. If the market dictates that a run of the mill nickel fetches $100 and an Eliasberg run of the mill nickel fetches $300 and there's no indication that the market will change so expectations are that one is not throwing one's money away AND one receives a little more pleasure out of holding a coin of great provenance - then which really is the better purchase???
In honor of the memory of Cpl. Michael E. Thompson
<< <i>
<< <i>Listen to CCU. >>
I completely disagree.
The reason that common coins are common is that they are interchangeable. What better place to command a 'name' premium than on a common coin? It reminds me of the debate over paying more for PCGS vs NGC. What does the premium for Eliasberg [or PCGS] matter if you recoup it when you're selling it and it makes it more liquid and it increases your enjoyment of the item while you own it?
Seems like a no brainer to me. >>
I actually agree with TDN on coins like richardshipp's 1853 3 Cent Silver. That is the only such example in the Eliasberg collection, and it's beautiful (IMO), and I believe that coin is a worth a substantial premium over a "regular" example.
But the 1883 NC is different - there were 2 and a half rolls of them, they were sufficiently generic that they were "group graded", and there is nothing much special about that.
Ultimately, though, we are talking about money - how much of a premium should one of those nickels command. I think the answer is virtually nothing, but the market will decide that. I would point out, though, that the "market" for these items generally doesn't say there were 99 such pieces in the Eliasberg sale when they are being sold, and most buyers probably don't realize it when they are buying them, either.
For really cool coins, yes, especially if they haven't been messed with in the interval. I would pay a premium.
<< <i>The reason i started this whole thing is not to resell. I recently sold off my collection and my new years resolution is to buy coins with history behind the. Want to be able to tell my kids about the story and journey of the coins such Eliasberg collection. One of the greatest collections assembled in u.s history and to own a part of that is just amazing to me. Was just trying to gauge what the premium rage is on coins like this. >>
IMO, this thread epitomizes the difference between collectors, collector/investors and investors.
Edited to add: Not that either of the 3 are wrong. Only that I think there may be a difference in the way some view paying a premium for a coin. Collectors might be quicker to pay. Collector/investors, investors might not. Depending on the coin, of course.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
roadrunner
Some of the very best coins in the Eliasberg collection were the Clapp coins. I wish they were pedigreed to Clapp instead of Eliasberg. They really should have been.
Roadrunner's right about many of the coins being optimistically graded at that time, but that's some time ago, so many of them still in the original holders may actually be right in line with today's looser grading standards
IMO the coin, in Eliasberg plastic, has a real market value about half of what the ebay seller wants - a little under $150 or so.
I agree that if you must have an Eliasberg pedigreed coin, it's a good way to get one.
I do not think that this coin is a good buy at the price however.
"Seu cabra da peste,
"Sou Mangueira......."
<< <i>Wow... those cents are gorgeous! >>
I agree, just lovely coins.
We'll use our hands and hearts and if we must we'll use our heads.
A shipwreck provenance is great, even if for a mediocre coin, because the story the coin tells is unaffected by the quality of the coin. But when I see an Eliasberg provenance on a mediocre coin, I'm completely unimpressed, because the coin does not support the story of a great collector.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
Unfortunately many are still lingering whether in the orig older holders or newer ones. For example the 1872-s PCGS MS65 half in the Malibu collection that sold this past month was a former NGC MS66 coin coming out of Eliasberg/Clapp. 13 additional years didn't help make it a legit 66. I'd bet it was only downgraded in the past 2 yrs. More will follow as a downgrade with bean or a + coin might be worth more than an obvious overgrade.
roadrunner
NEN 1801 Eliasberg NGC VF30
1801 Half Dime from the Rich Uhrich collection
An authorized PCGS dealer, and a contributor to the Red Book.
<< <i>I thought that 1801 half dime looked familiar:
1801 Half Dime from the Rich Uhrich collection >>
Realone, this is why I like it.
"From Charles Steigerwalt's sale of the George Crawford Collection, July 1894, Lot 348 (there graded EF)"
"John Clapp to Louis E. Eliasberg, Jr. in 1942"
The persons that owned it prior to Louis interest me.
Since they were apparently trashed, we are stuck with bad micro-dot images for many of the coins, making it hard to be sure of the provenance.
That would be cool....
I give away money. I collect money.
I don’t love money . I do love the Lord God.
Certainly he is one of the most famous collectors ever. Coins with the Eliasberg pedigree sell more easily than coins with other pedigrees or without any.
However, he assembled a collection known for it's completeness...but not always for the quality of the coins.
I have owned two Eliasberg coins. One was a Fugio Silver Restrike that was great and was really a "Wow" coin, in my opinion. But it was a significant rarity and would be a bit of a "wow" coin even without the pedigree.
The other Eliasberg coin I owned was a relatively common Seated Liberty Quarter. Although this coin was graded MS64, it was far from a "wow" coin. In fact, I would now describe its eye appeal as neutral, at best. But I bought it because of the pedigree and learned a valuable lesson: you have to buy the coin, not just the pedigree. Even if you have no intention to resell, you will appreciate a nice coin that has great eye appeal, actual or condition rarity, or some other attribute that makes it a "wow" coin.
Pedigrees - and the history associated with them - can be a lot of fun. But make sure the coin is one you'd be proud to own even without the pedigree.
Most collectors can afford and would most likely accept the 100% premium on such a $100 or even $200 coin. However, when dealing with a $1000 or more coin, the same 100% premium which now becomes a $1000 premium would be viewed as unacceptably too high by the same collectors that didn't object to the 100% premium when the coin was at $100.
As the coin gets more expensive the premium measured as a % of the coin's valuation drops significantly even though the premium expressed in dollars might still be in the hundreds of dollars or so, possibly even more until you reach the super expensive coins in which there is technically no premium attached at all anymore. or so.
It is simply an issue of the % premium versus the absolute $ amount of premium.