Disappearing pedigree on a pattern and interesting (?) price mark-up

[mark]

I posted this on the site across the street, but in my never ending attempt to boost my post count, I will post it here, too. Plus it has some pedigree related information and there is already an itneresting thread about pedigrees here.

 

 

 

I was drooling over the patterns on the Heritage website and I came across a J-894 for sale: J-894 for sale It's a nice looking J-894 and because of its relatively common status it's for sale for "only" $2,375. I noticed that Heritage had recently auctioned a J-894 for $1,782.50, so I took a look at it: J-894 auctioned If you scroll down the page, you'll see it's the same coin. The PCGS certification number is the same. BUT when the coin was auctioned, it was pedigreed to the Bass collection. Now that it's for sale on the Heritage website, the pedigree is gone.

 

Now, I hasten to add that I definitely have NO doubt that the pedigree was correct because PCGS encapsulated the coins before there were sold. However, does anyone have any idea why Heritage would have the coin reslabbed, sans pedigree? Though I am not in the market for this coin (I already have a J-894, though in a lower grade) I think a Bass pedigree would add to the desirability of the coin.

 

Mark

 

P.S.: Notice that from the auction price of $1,782.50, Heritage applied a 33% mark-up to the coin. Indeed, if Heritage actually bought the coin and so didn't pay the 15% buyers premium to itself, the coin's gavel price was $1,550 and from that price Heritage applied a 53% mark-up. I don't know if this mark-up is unreasonable because I expect Heritage has huge expenses they need to cover, but it is an interesting calculation.

[MAULEMALL]

Interesting

[braddick]

That's a great questioning regarding the Pedigree. One I don't even have a speculation for.

Regarding Heritage's pricing structure I need to remind myself that is their asking price and that may very well differ from the actual selling price. It is the selling price that should be compared to the buying price for a profit calculation.

 

Although, your point is not lost. A 50%+ markup does seem high considering the first closing price would have been an offer (read: value) that was dictated by the collector.

[IrishMike]

Mark, I posted a thread a couple of weeks ago along similar lines. It was a proof IHC that they increased the price on which had sold 45 days before in one of their auction that they are selling out of inventory.