Bowers/Stacks raising buyer's Fee

[jom]

Yay! In June it's gonna be 17.5%...how long until Heritage follows suit?

 

You probably can't find this info on the website yet but it was mentioned in a leaflet in the auction catalog I saw at the lot viewing today. Sad....IMO that is just too much. Hell, I think 15% is too much. The person helping me said it was for many reasons...one being the catalog costing so much ($30 + postage)...etc etc.

 

jom

[MarkFeld]

For bidders/buyers, an increase in the "buyer's fee" shouldn't make any appreciable difference. All they need to do is adjust their hammer bid amounts accordingly.

 

The increase does negatively impact consignors/sellers, however. That's because in general, hammer prices will be lower, so sellers will net less on their consignments.

 

Many people do not seem to understand that so-called "buyer's fees" are generally paid for by sellers, who receive less money, based on the lower hammer prices which result.

[Arizonadesertrat]

This will have an impact on the kinds of coins that are consigned to SB auctions. Coins that are traded on relatively thin margins, like MS 60-63 generic gold, will probably be seen less frequently after this higher fee kicks in.

[MarkFeld]

This will have an impact on the kinds of coins that are consigned to SB auctions. Coins that are traded on relatively thin margins, like MS 60-63 generic gold, will probably be seen less frequently after this higher fee kicks in.

 

I agree. Though, other than in the case of PQ examples, I have never understood why sellers consign generic gold (or, for that matter, other generic types) to auctions in the first place.

[James_OldeTowne]

For bidders/buyers, an increase in the "buyer's fee" shouldn't make any appreciable difference. All they need to do is adjust their hammer bid amounts accordingly.

 

The increase does negatively impact consignors/sellers, however. That's because in general, hammer prices will be lower, so sellers will net less on their consignments.

 

Many people do not seem to understand that so-called "buyer's fees" are generally paid for by sellers, who receive less money, based on the lower hammer prices which result.

Yep, and I decided to start a thread here on this very subject.

[MarkFeld]

For bidders/buyers, an increase in the "buyer's fee" shouldn't make any appreciable difference. All they need to do is adjust their hammer bid amounts accordingly.

 

The increase does negatively impact consignors/sellers, however. That's because in general, hammer prices will be lower, so sellers will net less on their consignments.

 

Many people do not seem to understand that so-called "buyer's fees" are generally paid for by sellers, who receive less money, based on the lower hammer prices which result.

Yep, and I decided to start a thread here on this very subject.

 

Sorry, James, I beat you to the punch (in 2007) - See here

 

[Mark T]

For bidders/buyers, an increase in the "buyer's fee" shouldn't make any appreciable difference. All they need to do is adjust their hammer bid amounts accordingly.

 

The increase does negatively impact consignors/sellers, however. That's because in general, hammer prices will be lower, so sellers will net less on their consignments.

 

Many people do not seem to understand that so-called "buyer's fees" are generally paid for by sellers, who receive less money, based on the lower hammer prices which result.

 

You could not have said it better.

[James_OldeTowne]

For bidders/buyers, an increase in the "buyer's fee" shouldn't make any appreciable difference. All they need to do is adjust their hammer bid amounts accordingly.

 

The increase does negatively impact consignors/sellers, however. That's because in general, hammer prices will be lower, so sellers will net less on their consignments.

 

Many people do not seem to understand that so-called "buyer's fees" are generally paid for by sellers, who receive less money, based on the lower hammer prices which result.

Yep, and I decided to start a thread here on this very subject.

 

Sorry, James, I beat you to the punch (in 2007) - See here

As usual !

[johnny9434]

i wonder how long it will be before we see 20%. i agree you adjust for the price and all but it still does not help. jmo

[RWB]

Yep! And...eve rsince ice cream went to that 1.5 quart package there's been an extra Bryers' fee, too.

[James_OldeTowne]

Yep! And...eve rsince ice cream went to that 1.5 quart package there's been an extra Bryers' fee, too.

Bah, ice cream can keep it's extra Bryer's! Make mine the frozen yogurt, and I'll take whip cream and an extra 2.5% sprinkle of buyer's fee on top, please.

[jom]

i wonder how long it will be before we see 20%. i agree you adjust for the price and all but it still does not help. jmo

 

Hell...why not just charge 100%?

 

At what point does this become out of hand?

 

jom

[RWB]

Competition

[World Colonial]

I do not know why catalogs are still sent out apparently as they were before. I like having some of them in hard copy (like the Gold berg Millenium Collection) but otherwise, that is what the internet is for. I recently moved and ended up just leaving most of them behind.

[Walkerfan]

How much is the TOTAL that the buyer loses?? I sold some antiques through a reputable internet dealler and only got 70% of hammer fee.

 

15% buyers' fee and 15 percent sellers fee were sucked up!!

 

I only got 425 for a 575 dollar item!! What is it like on Heritage after all is said and done?? What percentage do you 'absorb' or lose from them?

[Walkerfan]

I only got 70% of what my item was worth!! That's one hell of a racket!!!

[jom]

Walkerfan: Heritage is just a 15% buyers fee. But as it has been pointed out it is really the seller that "pays" so to speak.

 

However, a seller can negotiate part of the 15% back to them if they have a nice set of coins or something. Often dealers have this ability and you can ask to have your coins sent in with them.

 

jom

[Houston Investor]

I throw their catalogs in the trash. 17.5% Buyers Fee, what are they now a retail site .

 

 

[James_OldeTowne]

I only got 70% of what my item was worth!! That's one hell of a racket!!!

For non-numismatic items, that is not uncommon at all. There is far more overhead selling antiques, cars, and collectable farm vehicles than coins, simply due to storage. So the auction house will take a bigger piece of the pie,.

[Conder101]

i wonder how long it will be before we see 20%.

I've been paying 20% on the sales I have participated in in England for at least two years now.

[physics-fan3.14]

The ridiculous buyers premium is completely unjustifiable - especially in light of their terrible service. Stacks and Bowers is perhaps the absolute slowest major auction house I've ever seen.

[Walkerfan]

Thanks for the info Jom & James.

 

I still think 30% is TOO much for non-numismatic items.

[James_OldeTowne]

Stacks and Bowers is perhaps the absolute slowest major auction house I've ever seen.

For consignor's or buyers?

 

I have bid successfully in two SB auctions, the first not long after their merger. After paying for the coins near-instantly in both cases, I found them to be slow as molasses in the early auction.

 

However, in a recent sale of about three months ago or so, I won three (inexpensive) coins and received them well within a tolerable amount of time.

 

They may have had growing pains that are being ironed out. Personally, I thought SB was going to be a serious player for market share, but the increase in BPs gives me pause. It's a serious mistake in my opinion.

[physics-fan3.14]

James, I have only bought from them, never sold. I have purchased items in three separate auctions over the past year. Each time, the earliest my item arrived was 3 full weeks after the auction (I paid the day after the auction in each case). The most recent purchase was in October or November (I think, it was late last year sometime). In that case, it took over 4 weeks to receive my item. This is completely unacceptable.

[Walkerfan]

This is unrelated to shipping time but I find their (SB) images to be VERY deceiving and inaccurate. They are worse than Heritage by FAR. I think Heritage's images are rather good. IMHO

[Oldtrader3]

When Bower's/Stack's was forged from the wreakage of Stack's/ANR/Bowers and Merena I was a customer at various times like probably many here, of all three. I was also actively buying about a coin or so a month from Stacks/ANR. I never was on their "A list because I don't spend enough on coins to make that list. Plus, had also sold gold coins through ANR at auction. However, I lasted exactly one auction catalog from the grand new company and was dropped, after more than 40 years of being a customer through their various permutations. In fact my dad was a customer of Bowers and Ruddy before I was.

 

I looked at Bower's/Stack's big cash flow, overhead spread and that was the last coin that I ever bought from them. I bet that they trampled other collector customers than just lil old me. Heritage at least gives a break on fees, if you originally bought the coin from them.

[jom]

Well, maybe with the extra dough Stacks/Bowers can improve their website. I mean, Heritage's Auction Archive alone beats the out of anything at Stacks....no contest.

 

When it was mentioned to me Monday when I was there the reason for the increase was due to the cost of the catalogs I said they should take the time to improve their website. I got a blank stare in return...

 

jom

[Oldtrader3]

I am not a marketing person so my advice is suspect in this area. However, with current imaging technology and with everyone (whom I know) under 45 years old carrying powerful coin imaging electronics on their IPad phone or whatever, I am surprised that they are still pushing as many catalogs, out the door, especially since I was just dropped recently? Who consumes all of these catalogs and are they over spending for promotion on a nicity that people like to have but do not really need. Are they just afraid to kill their cost overruns?

 

I do not save auction catalogs and they are expensive. I would rather not get the catalogs and have these company's sites carry more of the burden of promotion. I agree, Jom, they should upgrade their site. I always prefer on-line digital pictures to catalogs. Just my $.02 and I am over 65 and do not use digital phones but I do use a computer.

[James_OldeTowne]

I am not a marketing person so my advice is suspect in this area. However, with current imaging technology and with everyone (whom I know) under 45 years old carrying powerful coin imaging electronics on their IPad phone or whatever, I am surprised that they are still pushing as many catalogs, out the door, especially since I was just dropped recently? Who consumes all of these catalogs and are they over spending for promotion on a nicity that people like to have but do not really need. Are they just afraid to kill their cost overruns?

 

I do not save auction catalogs and they are expensive. I would rather not get the catalogs and have these company's sites carry more of the burden of promotion. I agree, Jom, they should upgrade their site. I always prefer on-line digital pictures to catalogs. Just my $.02 and I am over 65 and do not use digital phones but I do use a computer.

Everything you state is probably true for many savvy collectors. However, these older auction companies are savvy as well, and recognize that their catalogs are "static advertisement", since many collectors DO save them. Thus, their name brand is often "in your sights" if you are one of these more traditional collectors who like paper catalogs.

 

That used to be me. I used to have two massive bookcases creaking and groaning under the weight of a huge number of catalogs, but in recent years, I had a change of heart. I reduced down to just about 20 that I consider indespensible, and recycled the rest. Now, I prefer to rely on digital media.

[Oldtrader3]

I did also James. I had all of the auction catalogs that I bought from or sold through and some other major sales stacked floor to ceiling in my closet. This grouping went back 12 years. I decided that this had to end and kept a couple of the catalogs that were important to me and recycled the others. I must admit that I felt better when I was finished. Most of these catalogs are archived online anyhow.