Are auctions fixed?

[MikeKing]

This 1836 Proof half cent is up for auction at Goldberg's:

Please see Lot #39

 

Of note:

 

I bid on this coin in a recent (2004) Superior auction but stopped when the price started to fly really high. I watched the bidding go up to I believe, about $15,000. I watched this on ebay live, and the bidding was between a floor bidder and an ebayer. I followed the ebayer's id and saw the he/she was not a major coinbuyer, more a buyer of antiques and that sort of stuff. I just found this interesting. Did they know each other? Was it set up? Could it simply be that this person who likes antiques had a lot of money to spend and really liked that coin? I think that chances of that are pretty damn slim, don't you? Also, why didn't the floor bidder get it? (I cannot be absolutely sure of the final bid but it was 15K or one step below that).

 

Also interesting, Goldberg's states "unfortunately, we don't have the prior pedigree for this piece. "

 

and

 

"This example does not show the buckling of the obverse die that is diagnostic of the First Restrike, but the knife rims give it away."

 

BUT

 

This coin was auctioned off at an even earlier (2003) Superior auction of the Dr. Wallace Lee collection of half cents (May 25-27 2003), lot #323. It was then in a PCGS holder graded PF 64 RB (it is now in an NGC holder graded PF 66 Brown and was in the NGC holder when put up for auction by Superior in 2004 as well).

 

Additionally, in the Superior 2003 catalogue, a pedigree is given:

ex Milton A. Holmes, Stack's 10/60:1333-Philip E. Benedetti (Pickwick Stamp and Coin Co.)-Loye L Lauder, William Doyle Galleries 12/16/83:290-Mi American 1985-Dr. Wallace Lee

 

and sold for $8,050.00 (May 2003).

 

They also mention: "There is a sharp lknife edge on the left side of the obverse and upper left portion of the reverse, and the obverse is clearly bulged outward in the center, all characteristics of the first restrikes. An attractive example in spite of the minor flawas (prior mention of a carbon flake, a planchet flake and a low spot that was abraded).

 

So, clearly, the pedigree is known, Superior brings up the buckling but Goldbergs says there is no buckling (this IS the same coin).

 

What's going on?

 

edited to add:

 

I searched for the Superior 2004 photo of this coin and found this:

Superior 2004

 

They say it sold for 17K. Gee, when was watching the auction, it looked like it didn't sell, and the prices realized list doesn't have it listed. Is this the 'buyback'? the reserve? What?

[Tradedollarnut]

Sharp eye! The more you watch, the more you see.

[jom]

Very interesting. I'd love to know what everyone thinks about this. Is it shill? Why does Goldberg say they don't have the pedigree? Maybe they didn't know it was on sale recently across the street (literally)?

 

TDN, if you have anything to add here please elaborate.

 

jom

[Tradedollarnut]

Only that if you closely follow coins that interest you, you begin to notice some of the games that are played in the industry.

[TomB]

I believe there is less security of the information provided to an auction house than they would like you to believe. This, in turn, may lead to improper information sharing or nondisclosure and is intended to manipulate the market and/or price for a certain coin.

[Leothelion]

I believe there is less security of the information provided to an auction house than they would like you to believe. This, in turn, may lead to improper information sharing or nondisclosure and is intended to manipulate the market and/or price for a certain coin.

 

That makes sense! If you're trying to be a major auction house but have problems writing the predgree to a coin, it could only hinder their credibility. That is if anyone catches it and I imagine someone does when the big money coin is at stake1

 

Leo

[michael]

Only that if you closely follow coins that interest you, you begin to notice some of the games that are played in the industry.

 

--------------------

.................................................................

Looking for superb chopmarked trade dollars!

 

www.tradedollarnut.com

 

 

Post Extras

[michael]

I believe there is less security of the information provided to an auction house than they would like you to believe. This, in turn, may lead to improper information sharing or nondisclosure and is intended to manipulate the market and/or price for a certain coin.

 

--------------------

Tom

Questions about toning? Read the articles on my web site.

Ivy League Coin

[jom]

The echo has returned.

 

jom

[Chippewa]

I am very skeptical of some of the auctions. Heritage for example appears to show reserves amounts for unsold coins as actual sale transactions in their auction archives.

[coinman1794]

I am very skeptical of some of the auctions. Heritage for example appears to show reserves amounts for unsold coins as actual sale transactions in their auction archives.

 

Could that be the result of the heritage giving bidders a chance to buy the unsold coins at the reserve price for the next day after the sale is over?

[MikeKing]

I imagine it must be the buyback for the seller at the reserve price.

 

edited to add:

which makes me wonder: does anyone know of or has anyone heard of auction firms allowing 'good' customers to place a high (bordering on unreasonable) reserve without a buyback fee?

 

[jom]

Mike: I could never comprehend a world in which something like that would EVER happen.

 

That being said, I really believe people should just do more research on prices and learn to grade before bidding at auction. Then, while bidding, don't get caught up in the "rush". It's hard to do sometimes but it can be done.

 

jom