An auction experience to remember.

Please forgive me for some repeated material...

At the 2008 Summer ANA show in Baltimore, I was chatting with Bob Grellman at Chris McCawley's table. Bob suggested that I attend the February 1, 2009 (yes, Super Bowl Sunday) Goldberg auction of Ted Naftzger's middle date large cents. Some of the Naftzger early and middle dates were available for viewing at the Goldbergs' table, and I saw how much nicer they are than most other middle dates I've seen.

As the weeks and months passed, Bob's suggestion stayed with me, and I started thinking seriously about going. I resolved to save my numismatic allowance for a shot at one or two of the wonderful cents. I managed to get through the December 2008 Baltimore show without buying, but soon succumbed to an MS67BN 1855 cent and an MS66 1838 half dime in a Heritage auction. With the allowance savings depleted, I would have to find another source of money.

When I was young I inherited 60 shares of AT&T. After the breakup of AT&T, and various AT&T and baby Bell stock splits, mergers and spin-offs, I had stock in several companies. Over the years I had sold some here and there to help pay for my son's ski race training, home improvements, and some 2006 FUN acquistions. All I had left was about 950 shares of AT&T. I sold it all to fund purchases of Naftzger cents, and made sure I would be able to cover the tax consequences of the sale.

Having taken that step, I started serious planning for the auction. I created a spreadsheet to summarize pertinent information from the catalog. For every lot, I listed date, variety, die state, slab grade, EAC grade (as given for the catalog by McCawley & Grellman), condition census rank, and various price guidelines. I also had columns for my lot viewing comments and for the eventual hammer prices. This spreadsheet proved to be a valuable tool during the auction.

Before leaving for LA, I had decided on my general priorities: upgrading my 1819 and getting a nice 1828. I had a few examples picked out based on catalog photos and descriptions, but I knew that in-hand examination is highly desirable. I also knew that it would be prudent to be prepared for the possibility that I might not get any of the highest priority lots, and to have contingency plans for later lots. At lot viewing the day before the auction, I carefully looked at each lot and wrote brief notes on a copy of the spreadsheet. That night, I went over everything one last time, deciding which lots to pursue for each date and what dollar limit I should put on each.

My quantitative criteria were: high EAC grade, high slab grade, and high position in the condition census. Of course, the coins also had to pass my own visual selection criteria. I look for even color, paucity of blemishes like contact marks and spots, good strike, and good luster. I especially dislike fingerprints. I can tolerate some as-struck imperfections, but try to avoid them as well.

Due to my own stupidity, I was late to the auction. I had missed the 1819 and 1828 I wanted. I later saw that the ones I wanted sold for more than my maximums, but I'm still upset with myself 8+ weeks later. Anyway, I had to settle in and make good use of the spreadsheet and planning I had done. My previous six journals give some details about the auction and the lots I bought.

Normally I stay toward the back of the room so I can see what's going on, including who I'm bidding against. This time the room was fairly full, and I found a seat in the front half next to Bill Noyes, a noted early copper personality. He and I chatted quietly a little bit throughout the rest of the auction. While bidding, I was not looking to see who the other bidders were. So I was not my usual solitary, cicumspect self. That was okay though, as I was able to get what my later analysis suggests were six comparatively good deals. The interaction with Bill was enjoyable too.

Since the auction, I've done a couple things. I entered all the hammer prices into the spreadsheet, added a column for the total prices, and added summary information (e.g., total & average prices for the sale). I plan to take the spreadsheet with me to shows in case I find some of the lots that got away. I'll want to have all that information handy when considering any of these coins that might become available.

The really loony thing I've done is to save copies of all the catalog photos from the Goldberg website. The catalog is great, but only the priciest lots got large images there. The actual digital images are all the same decent size, and their quality is excellent. I plan to use them as a personal reference in addition to The Cent Book by John Wright. They make a great screen saver too.

Regarding the Registry: My six Naftzger cents were worth over 14,000 points, replacing coins that were about 6000 points. That pushed my middle date set to #2 by a few hundred points, and my overall rank under 300 for the first time. I have just sold some of my duplicates (details to come in another journal), and have slipped back to #3 and 300+ in the process.

I also noticed that the #1 middle date set has 5 ex-Naftzger additions. Because they were added to that set with the Newcomb number attributions, I could determine exactly which lots 4 of them were, and narrowed the 5th to two possible lots. Those 5 coins cost about four times what my 6 coins did. Like I wrote in my bio, I can't really compete with the big boys, though I do spend more than many collectors do.

As I've written before, I think going to live auctions is a valuable experience. There's something special about being able to participate in lot viewing when many top quality coins are for sale. This is especially true in cases like the Naftzger sale, when an entire session is devoted to one great collection of several hundred coins that are among the best of their kind. (If you're interested, the online catalog is still available at http://www.mkjassociates.com/cgi-bin/ilgvutoc.pl?sale=51) Participation in the actual sale is exciting as well. This was one I will remember fondly for a long time.