World Colonial

I find many coin prices absurd but no coin in the same price range has anywhere near an equivalent supply. $700K is a totally ridiculous price for a piece of cardboard with at least 316 where this "limited" supply is still only based upon a label. And who knows how many more are just waiting to end up in a GM-10 holder later. It's potentially more than the 316 currently graded now. No duplicates there, that is for sure. That's why I used St Gaudens artwork as a point of comparison earlier. We all hear of the headline prices in the eight or nine figures but that's a tiny portion of the art market. It's just another aspect of the bubble in search of a pin. It must be even worse for athletes like Tom Brady where I saw several of his cards on eBay with current bids at $80K+.

Not a baseball card but I would call a Michael Jordan rookie card (two apparently) selling for $700K+ with 316 GM-10 and 11500 graded "mass produced", even accounting for duplicates. There are potentially many more out there also.

Buyers just adjust their bids to pay whatever they planned. Seller presumably got well over 100% of hammer for a coin like this one. It's evident from the price level that very few US collectors who can afford to buy the "mega priced" coins will seriously compete for it. Apparently Hansen didn't buy it and at least two PCGS forum members who are understood to be able to do so admitted they did not either. Through a process of elimination, I'd guess the buyer could be narrowed down to a very small number, unless lightning actually struck and a non-collector bought it. If they did, it's still almost certainly a US based buyer like Weitzman (who was not a random buyer anyway). Not many coin collectors outside the US are likely able to afford it it but even if they can, aren't about to pay more for any US coin over their own, unless they believe misleading industry hype. Yes, but most of what you describe is more a function of the current asset mania. It's a headed for a crash landing "eventually" and when it does, their will be no bidders or buyers for these inflated luxuries (coin or otherwise) at anything close to current prices, at least measured in relative value. My opinion is based upon the 1822's AU-50 grade. If it were an MS-66 or a grade near it like so many other "mega priced" coins, I think the 1822 would have sold for a lot more than the 1933 DE will realize. As a circulated coin, the only contender seems to be the unique variety of the Brasher doubloon but the recent price of the more common Partrick coin leads me to believe it would sell for less than it did last time.

Presume many saw or heard the 1822 $5 sold for $8.4MM. It will be interesting to know who the buyer was, assuming it is disclosed. On the PCGS forum, one member claimed again it was a non-collector. He is buyer of "mega priced" coins and maybe knows through a process of elimination who did not from those who can afford it, but I still doubt it. His theory was that it was bought as an inflation hedge. If true, I consider it a very poor one, as coins are not an inflation hedge. The inflated price level is the result of credit conditions and the fake prosperity that goes with it. I wasn't specific previously but I think the 1933 DE will sell for somewhat more. Maybe set a price record by what I would describe as a nominal margin which would include up to the lower range of the estimate.

The only reason I can come up with is politics.

Yes, I understand your point but this can be said of anything. I keep on hearing that some ultra-affluent random buyer can't hardly wait to buy some luxury item (a coin and now a stamp) which has no status value to them and no utility. How often does life work that way? The probability isn't much better than being struck by lightning or winning the lottery, literally. I'm not denying a block isn't worth some premium to the individual stamps but if the estimate is going to be met, the probability is that it is going to be a current stamp collector. In the $12MM range, whether for any of these three items or another coin, there are going to be other objects which practically every non-collector is going to find more interesting, no matter how many coin or stamp collectors want to believe otherwise. In the past, I have used Faberge Eggs as a counter example because it's one I know somewhat well and it's possible to buy one in the same price range as these three estimates and a few other coins. Somewhere in the vicinity of 99% of non-collectors who can afford either potentially prefer it over any coin or stamp and if they don't, the most believable reason is because of future resale liquidity, not because they find it more interesting. When I expressed a similar sentiment on the PCGS forum, I received a reply that they had a hard time thinking of Faberge Eggs as unique enough versus the 1933 DE due to the story. It's about the worst rationalization I have ever read. Non-collectors who know anything about (coin) collecting will know why date rarity matters to collectors but there is no reason to believe it has any relevance to them (for any coin) outside of the price and the same apples to quality reflected in the TPG label. If they find the design that compelling, they can buy another date in slightly lower quality for a miniscule fraction. To give everyone here an idea how expensive these three items are, look at prior sales of St. Gaudens' artworks. I was able to find somewhere between half a dozen and a dozen (mostly) sold by Sotheby. A 40" Lincoln sculpture sold for about $1.5MM with the rest between the mid five to high six figures. By art standards, most or all of his creations aren't really worth that much and neither are the majority of others. This means there are a huge number of more interesting alternatives to the non-collector (stamps or coins) for the same money or a lot less.

It is presumably the most valuable circulated coin available but I still think it should be worth more than other more common coins in higher or much higher quality. Same opinion for the 1861 CSA half dollar and numerous others.

So it is a block of four being auctioned here? No way I see this being worth $12 million. It's a ridiculous price.

This is how collectors overwhelmingly see collecting and there is no reason to believe it's going to change. Coin collectors are collecting physical objects, so if you don't have physical possession, what's the point in collecting at all? Many collectors (including me) have some or all of their collection is a SDB but the difference is psychological, not objective. It's also my inference that the perceived necessity of doing this (for financial reasons) is a negative for many collector's collecting experience. This isn't discussed much on coin forums but I know it is for me. If you aren't going to have physical possession, then might as well collect coin images for free or just read and/or write about it. There is no practical difference.

Sports is also in a long term bubble: franchise values, media contracts, player salaries, ticket prices and yes, sports memorabilia including cards. When it bursts (which it will with a vengeance once the financial mania and fake economy supporting it also burst), prices and values are going to plummet. I covered this partly in a prior post here. I remember both those prices but don't have access to the population counts or at least I don't know of it. Jordan has always been popular but heard his increased last year when ESPN showed a documentary of his playing career when the NBA wasn't playing. I had no idea that this card was this common as a 10 though and it is likely a lot more than common than even this count indicates. An ultimate 99%+ loss from this price is likely, eventually. As for NFT and coins, I think it will be a complete bust. Hard to believe that any non-collector would have much interest and collectors aren't about to pay even a noticeable fraction versus the coin. This leaves "investors".

If you mean the "real thing" and not NFT, I still think the modern art selling for record prices is mostly actually garbage and I am dubious that hardly any of it has longer term staying power. Are any of these "artists" really going to be the next Picasso? I don't even like his art but "get" the relative prices paid for his works. The worst and even much of this cr*p reminds me of an "art" object my employer owned which was displayed by the outside entranceat one of facilities. Well, the maintenance person (presumably a Latino since this was in Miami) "mistook" it as garbage and threw it away, literally. It cost millions. Reality was he didn't make a mistake because it was actually garbage. People just pretend this garbage is "art" and pay millions for it anyway. Not sure about the context of the rest of your post. I think everyone who can do so should own some gold. I still think most coins are going to lose value longer term, especially the most overpriced common US coins. I don't follow sports cards but, as with coins, much of the money to buy it is still from the fake wealth made possible by the current asset mania. Modern cards are presumably mostly too common, regardless of how popular a particular player is now or later. Heard there a record price for a Michael Jordan rookie card. It can't be legitimately scarce and any "scarcity" must be from the TPG label. Baseball seems to be in long term secular decline which can't be positive for card prices.

Yes, a few threads on this on the PCGS forum, including one discussing the prospects for coins. As far as I am concerned, NFT are the worst manifestation of the hare brained speculation which has been going in the seemingly never ending mania. Not the most overpriced, but worst.

Good data, thanks. I have noticed the trend you mention even on the common date (I think it is 1852 but might be 1851) US Assay Office Territorial gold which is a coin I would like to own one day. Doesn't seem to have been much movement in a long time on AU-55 or AU-58 which is what I would buy.

The two you mentioned, mostly at least. It's still far from the norm but more noticeable than it used to be.

Yes, the size of the coni matters, a lot, Concurrently, it isn't necessarily the most important factor. Outside of maybe die varieties, I'm not aware of any regular issue US gold coin (not even one) that is unique. The 1870-S is $3 gold has two to my knowledge, but the other one is in the cornerstone of the SF Mint so it's not exactly like it will be available to be bought any time soon. There are a noticeable number of actually rare 18th and 19th century US gold. Most of the Capped Head half eagles are legitimately scarce or rare; all but the 1813. Many of the Liberty Head quarter eagle, half eagle, and eagles are too but this is mostly because the mintages were low or very low. If you are making the point that having so many rare dates in a series dilutes the significance, I agree with you. This is my opinion why actually common 20th century key dates (e.g., 09-S VDB cent and 16-0D dime) had the prior inflated perception which is retained somewhat to this day.

Three known, two in the Smithsonian. Mintage is about 19,000 but most believed to have been melted or struck with another date. Four owners to my recollection in the last 115 years or so, so almost never a chance to buy it. Currently owned by Pogue family, previously by Eliasberg and I think at one time by Virgil Brand but someone can correct me if I am wrong. It doesn't have the story of the 1933 but it was still a lot more prominent than the 1933DE in the past, though this might possibly have been because no one could legally own it. To my knowledge it used to be considered or was the most valuable US coin available for private ownership up to the late 1970's. Q David Bowers wrote a book on it in preparation for its prior sale in 2015 when it did not sell. I would like to buy it but have never seen it for sale and never read it. It was a form of marketing the coin. It last sold for $687,500 in 1982 in the Eliasberg sale, same price as the 1870-S $3 gold. By comparison, J-1776 (believed to be worth more than twice now) sold for about $500,000 to Steve Markoff somewhere around 1979.

To my knowledge, the most valuable coin in Hansen's collection is the 1854-S half eagle he recently bought. I don't keep up regularly with the mega thread on the PCGS forum and while I did read the list of coins he is missing to complete it, don't remember specifics. My recollection is that he doesn't have many seven figure coins but this might have changed in the last year+ since I was reading the thread more regularly.

This goes back to our prior discussions. First, the overwhelming probability is that a current US coin collector will buy it. Second, the buyer will ignore the other coins if they believe the one who will buy from them will do likewise. These people didn't become wealthy by ignoring resale. I have read a lot of claims inferring this yet whenever I have read (mostly second hand) accounts of how they actually bid, they research their purchase carefully before setting their limit.

Positives: It's also almost never available (three or four owners in over 100 years) and tons of money available to buy it if by some miracle a random non-collector decides to bid on it. Cons: It's not particularly high quality in an environment which is obsessed with numismatic minutia quality differences. It's also a small coin (much smaller than the 1933DE) and while I don't have a copy of Bowers' book and did not have a chance to read it, doesn't have as compelling a story. It isn't nearly as well known where a non-collector would be as likely to notice it. One thing I forgot in my prior post is that Sotheby's participation should help and so does (in theory) the more varied nature of the sale if this is true. I'm not sure what else is in it other than the 1933 DE and those two stamps but understand there is more. If it's only these three lots, it won't make as much of a difference.

I don't know much about stamps but I do know that the Inverted Jenny isn't really rare. A member ATS claimed about 90 exist. I'm just not familiar on the premiums between blocks and singles since I am not a stamp collector. I also didn't read how many are in this block though the image appeared to show four. Regardless, I don't see it as desirable enough to be worth the estimate. My understanding is that the estimate also includes the Magenta stamp (1856 British Guiana 1c) which to my knowledge is and has been the most valuable one for a long time. It was claimed as #1 in my late 1970's Guinness Book of World Records edition.

There is an active thread on the PCGS forum. I haven't posted in it in awhile, as I get tired of the inflated claims which I consider nonsense. The only qualification I have to making a forecast is that with the ridiculous level of speculation occurring now in practically everything (including the stupidity with NFTs), practically anything is theoretically "possible". I expect it to sell for around the same price it did last time in 2002, somewhat more or somewhat less. It has a somewhat interesting (though IMO, exaggerated) story and yes, it is the only legally one available to own. Concurrently, this doesn't change the fact that it's still one of purportedly about two dozen in existence. The primary open question to me is whether two bidders will ignore this or not. As usual, one of the claims tossed around in the other thread is the potential of a non-collector buying it, as the current owner purportedly isn't one. However, whether the current owner is or isn't didn't mean they were a random buyer in 2002 because they weren't. The Coin Week article specifically states they had "dreamed" of owning this type of coin since childhood which makes me suspect that at one point in life, they had been one. I believe the prospects of a non-collector buying it are better than practically any other coin but concurrently very low. When contemplating this type of purchase, there is no reason to believe they won't consider other art or collectible alternatives and I have never read a single post on any coin forum supporting it's compelling or competitively priced since comparing it to paintings is apples-oranges. My opinion is that it should be worth somewhat more than the 1907 UHR. Same series, about equally scarce, and better known coin with only one available. A UHR recently sold for $3.6MM. Per above, I expect to sell for twice or slightly more than "fair value".

Very true. About six years isn't "overnight" but I understand your point. The difference with US coinage is that there are far more buyers who will usually "step in" to keep a coin from selling "too cheaply", even if they do not normally collect it. Plenty of dealers who also do so for inventory. I have seen a few high profile US coins sell for noticeably less than previously but it hasn't been often in my experience. It's also why there is a lot of "investor" buying in generic pre-1933 coinage and with NCLT. I have not looked at the premiums lately but one poster on PCGS mentioned that it's increased recently on pre-1933 gold. I am only interested in buying it with both a low premium and at a noticeably lower spot price.

It's my assumption that only a very low proportion of the most widely collected European coinage dated from at minimum 1775 are even scarce. With your series, it would only be if the mintages were abnormally low and a disproportionate percentage were also melted. Otherwise, almost certainly too many collectors who would have saved it at the time. With demand, most non-US series lack a high enough collector preference to generate sufficient scale financially. Usually too large a supply for any realistic increase in the collector base. To give one example of what can potentially happen, yesterday, Aureo & Calico sold a 1732 Mexico NGC XF-45 8 escudos (same size as US DE) for 15,000 Euro plus buyer's fee. So, maybe about $22,000 "all-in". Heritage sold the same coin back in August 2015 for about $54,000. That's almost a 60% "haircut". Why did it happen? Certainly not because the coin is common. Heritage estimated less than 10 known of the variety and the other variety in about the same quality sold for $86,000 in the same sale. Maybe it's the auction firm but other (mostly cheaper) higher quality coins did quite well. Most of these coins are just very illiquid. It won't surprise me if a US dealer bought it and it shows up on their website at 100%+ mark-up. I don't pay as close attention now but I used to see it, all the time. Somebody invariably buys it, possibly without realizing the auction history.

I don't mind losing even a noticeable proportion of my outlay if I like the coin enough. Like other collectors, I mostly don't. I'll do this with my pillar collection because of what I have described. I never bought it with the expectation of making money. I'm not about to do it with coins I can buy any day of the week which mostly have no distinction for the price. If I ever want this type of coin, I'll buy it later. If I wait long enough, I expect to be able to buy most of it for (a lot) less. If I am wrong, it makes no difference to me.

If I ever complete my current interest which I doubt will happen due to both lack of budget and coin availability, it isn't like I can't find something else to collect which interests me. But if I do, it still won't be with coins or a series where I am likely to lose a noticeable proportion of my outlay if it is "material". I expect most coins to lose noticeable value going forward, especially when adjusted for price changes.