Lissner CNG auction

[marvf]

Anyone who was at the CNG Lissner auction know the hammer for the following lots:

 

367 - France 20 Gold Francs 1815 proof65

1134 - Cochin China Piastre 1879 proof66

1333 - Santiago Peso MS65

2119 - Peru 8E 1837 MS66

 

Thanks.

 

 

[jgenn]

Prices realized are posted here: http://www.cngcoins.com/Coins_archive.aspx?CONTAINER_ID=639&ITEM_IS_SOLD=1

[Gallienus]

Lissner prices realized:

lot 1333 Chile 1820 Volcano Peso in65 $17,000

lot 2119 Sud Peru 1837 8E in 66 brought $35,000

 

PR were extremely strong and I lost ALL major lots I bid on: just picking up some junk, mostly Peruvian but none of the better Peruvian I bid on. I think I won 10 lots but no gold & no copper.

 

I think I was the immediate underbidder on my most major lot (Mexico) unless my auction rep increased my bid by 3% & I got it?

 

I recall seeing the same type as lot 2119 South Peru Sunface 8 escudos in 65, not 66 bringing $5,500 at auction a few years ago. Also at Millenium a Chile Volcano P, 1821 in 65 brought around $4,500. However '21 is a bit of a common hoard date while '20 is not.

 

Did you bid on any of these?

 

[marvf]

Lissner prices realized:

lot 1333 Chile 1820 Volcano Peso in65 $17,000

lot 2119 Sud Peru 1837 8E in 66 brought $35,000

 

PR were extremely strong and I lost ALL major lots I bid on: just picking up some junk, mostly Peruvian but none of the better Peruvian I bid on. I think I won 10 lots but no gold & no copper.

 

I think I was the immediate underbidder on my most major lot (Mexico) unless my auction rep increased my bid by 3% & I got it?

 

I recall seeing the same type as lot 2119 South Peru Sunface 8 escudos in 65, not 66 bringing $5,500 at auction a few years ago. Also at Millenium a Chile Volcano P, 1821 in 65 brought around $4,500. However '21 is a bit of a common hoard date while '20 is not.

 

Did you bid on any of these?

 

I was the successful bidder on lot 1333, the 1820 Peso.

 

I've checked the Millennia catalog and cannot find an 1821 P or any MS65 Volcano type. There is an 1817 (centered Y) AU58 @ $15,500 an 1822 MS62 @ $3900, and an 1832 MS61 @ $4,800. Of course there's the Coquimbo and the 1819 pattern. I've also checked the TPG stats for the 1820. PCGS has one AU58, NGC has one VF35 and this MS65. There's a ton of 1817 FJ & FD offset; next most populous is 1822, then 1833. There is no 1821. Was it made? So it looks like the 1820 is pretty rare even though recorded mintage is 116,000. From what I've read, the speculation is that most of that year (and others) was sent to Brazil to be over struck with their 960 Reis dies. I've looked back through Heritage and Coinarchives as well as mcsearch.info and there are no other MS65 volcano pesos anywhere. This one is it. It comes from the Bowers and Ruddy Springfield II collection from 1981 where it was graded (raw) as EF-AU. But they had a habit of interpreting a bit of softness in the strike, especially in early coins, as wear. I own another coin, a 1696 GB Crown from that sale that also was graded EF-AU that is in a PCGS MS64 slab and is a gorgeous, lustrous unc coin with great surfaces.

[Gallienus]

Congratulations on the 1820 Chilean Peso. You did immeasurably better than I at that auction...

 

Regarding the piece that I mentioned I can't find any mention of it in my Millenium catalog (The New World). However I do recall the piece and I thought it was 1821. I attended the Millenium auction in LA in 2008 in person and discussed that piece with Chilean numistmatist Carlos Jara as we both were interested in it. I do recall it being in a 65 slab and being pretty flashy but of a "common", (!?) non -1817 date.

 

If I recall there may have been another auction run at that hotel, probably by the Goldbergs which was almost contiguous with Millenium but may not have been part of the Millenium Collection. Check with Goldbergs to see if they ran an auction in late May, 2008. The Chilean Volcano Peso I saw may have actually been in that sale & not in Millenium.

 

I had representation at Lissner and as it was the first time I used this person, but we did not do well. However, no way could I be there.

 

Various dates of Chilean Volcano Pesos appear as the undercoins for Brazilian 960 reis. They have such a frequency, that I believe they were much more common then than now. My conclusion is that Brazil having a pretty massive coinage, basically sucked up all the non hoard (non 1817) Volcano Pesos and to a lesser extent, Argentine sunfaces. They may have stayed away from Peru & Bolivia as those were later starters on crowns while their minors became infected with the moneda feble disease.

[marvf]

I'm glad to get any historical information on the volcano series as I am a relative newcomer to new world coinage (outside of US of course). My primary focus has been European and Asian coinage. I never saw so many beautifully preserved New World coins before, and I knew I wanted to come away with at least one. I can see why the Chilean pesos are so popular. Volcanos are awesome (in a real sense), and this series as well as those of the other newly minted (pun intended) countries of Latin America shows, tangibly, their struggles to produce a quality coinage while wrestling with many production problems such as poor strikes and rough dies.

 

I'm one who values the beauty of coin design and strive to find coins that exhibit their designs to the maximum extent, so the Lissner collection was right up my ally.

 

I'd love to find the best reference for the Chilean peso series.

 

Thanks.

[marvf]

Congratulations on the 1820 Chilean Peso. You did immeasurably better than I at that auction...

 

Regarding the piece that I mentioned I can't find any mention of it in my Millenium catalog (The New World). However I do recall the piece and I thought it was 1821. I attended the Millenium auction in LA in 2008 in person and discussed that piece with Chilean numistmatist Carlos Jara as we both were interested in it. I do recall it being in a 65 slab and being pretty flashy but of a "common", (!?) non -1817 date.

 

If I recall there may have been another auction run at that hotel, probably by the Goldbergs which was almost contiguous with Millenium but may not have been part of the Millenium Collection. Check with Goldbergs to see if they ran an auction in late May, 2008. The Chilean Volcano Peso I saw may have actually been in that sale & not in Millenium.

 

You are right, but the date is 1822 not 1821. It's in the Goldberg Pre-Long Beach Sale held immediately after the Millennia sale in 2008. The coin is in an MS63 holder, and it's very nice, went for around $6000 with the juice. It's the only NGC MS63 of that date and highest graded for that date. There is another MS63, this time in a PCGS holder that went for considerably less, around $3600 total in 2010 in a Heritage sale, but that coin is ugly, so I'm not surprised that the eye appeal effect held it back.

 

If you're right about most of the early volcano peso coinage being sucked up by Brazil, then the larger mintages for the earlier volcano series, with the exception of the hoard date, 1817, don't really mean anything. One can get an idea just by looking at the NGC (where the lion's share of foreign coins are graded) stats for the volcano series. Excluding 1817 and the "centered Y" design, the rarest dates are: 1820, 1821 (pop 0), 1823, 1824 (pop 0), 1825, 1826 (pop 0), 1830 (pop 0), 1831, 1832, 1834 (pop 0). Each of these dates have pops of 2 or less in all grades, with the pop 0 coins being the very rarest. The other dates have more, some three or four times as many. This obviously is not scientific, but it probably has some basis in fact. We don't know how many of these coins are held by foreign collectors who don't have their coins slabbed, but the TPG have now been in business for more than 20 years, so their populations should be somewhat meaningful. The other thing to consider is that owners of heavily circulated coins probably do not want to pay to have them graded, so this unscientific rarity is probably more valid for higher end coins than the total population rarity.

[Gallienus]

If you're right about most of the early volcano peso coinage being sucked up by Brazil, then the larger mintages for the earlier volcano series, with the exception of the hoard date, 1817, don't really mean anything. One can get an idea just by looking at the NGC (where the lion's share of foreign coins are graded) stats for the volcano series. Excluding 1817 and the "centered Y" design, the rarest dates are: 1820, 1821 (pop 0), 1823, 1824 (pop 0), 1825, 1826 (pop 0), 1830 (pop 0), 1831, 1832, 1834 (pop 0). Each of these dates have pops of 2 or less in all grades, with the pop 0 coins being the very rarest. The other dates have more, some three or four times as many. This obviously is not scientific, but it probably has some basis in fact. We don't know how many of these coins are held by foreign collectors who don't have their coins slabbed, but the TPG have now been in business for more than 20 years, so their populations should be somewhat meaningful. The other thing to consider is that owners of heavily circulated coins probably do not want to pay to have them graded, so this unscientific rarity is probably more valid for higher end coins than the total population rarity.

 

Yeah I really should've jumped when I was once offered an unc 1833 Volcano Peso. Of course that's my memory again, it may have really been 1933... I'm certain it wasn't 1834 as I'd always be interested in the last year of issue.

 

While NGC pops are helpful, with certain series they are less so. I think the high value of Chilean Volcano Pesos pretty much means that many of these coins will be slabbed. There is a classical reference book on these which has "rubbings" of all of the Chilean Volcano Pesos. It was some old time numistmatist's personal collection which was published in the early 1900's. I'll have to ask to see what the name is, otherwise I don't have any better references for the Volcano Pesos.

 

I only have the common 1817 Peso. It may grade unc or AU, I bought it at the NYIC floor back in the late 90's. Earlier this year ('14) I picked up the old Eliasberg onza, which I had actually viewed in '05 but didn't get it back then. It's in a 64 slab but is still not as rare as the silver Pesos.

 

(photo by me ...)

(photo by Heritage)

 

 

For some reason I do a lot better with the Argentine sunfaces: also a pretty coin although you can bascially find ALL of those dates in various grades: except for 1829 I think. However there I have a problem with the gold.

 

[marvf]

Thanks for the discussion. This is my first high value South American coin, and it's created an interest to learn more.

[World Colonial]

While NGC pops are helpful, with certain series they are less so. I think the high value of Chilean Volcano Pesos pretty much means that many of these coins will be slabbed.

 

I would say that for most non-US series, the census is mostly meaningless. With a few exceptions such as South Africa that I collect, most collectors based outside of the United States do not like their coins in a TPG holder.

 

This is evident in the frequency that coins in a TPG holder are offered outside of the US. If you look on Sixbid.com or other auctions, these coins are occasionally offered, but nothing more.

 

I am not familiar with the scarcity of the individual dates in this series, but I can tell you that, almost invariably, the supply of most coins (even expensive ones) is proportionately much greater than the census counts show, even when the absolute number is low.

 

For example, I collect the pillar coinage. Most of the expensive coins that are known currently are not in the census either. This includes the 1732 Mexico which presumably every long time Latin America specialist knows about but almost many others such as the 1772 Mexico, 1729 Pattern and those from Chile and Colombia.

 

For the most part, this type of coin in the census was almost certainly submitted by a US collector. Those owned by others are predominantly not graded.

[Gallienus]

Well I'm a US collector, I was sent to Brazil for a few years for work. Also I'm a member of the ANA although I think my membership may have lapsed this year. I started collecting ca 1972 or really 1973. I have never submitted a coin for slabbing although I bought a coin for a friend who sent it in to be slabbed. NGC or PCGS sent him a different (and much higher grade !!!) coin back. I imagine the former owner of the superior coin was not too happy? Also I bought an 1865 Peso NGC PF-64 of El Salvadore from a major auction (Stacks) for around $1200.

 

After talking with some friends we suspected the coin to be counterfeit and sent it in for reappraisal. It was counterfeit and since I had my auction records, they paid me for the coin and sent the coin back to me (minus the slab).

 

Thus of two submissions I've been involved in in my collecting [accumulating?] career, both have been problems.

 

However my reluctance to slab is partially due to my laziness to go to the Post Office as they always give me problems about shipping things. Also to insure for the full value is really expensive w/ the US PO.

 

To give another example of my extreme bad luck with slabs. I happened to win lot 1285 of the Lissner auction, using a coin firm to represent me. If you'll look at the cat, you'll see that it's described as an NGC-63, Brazilian 640 reis of 1749. However if you look closely at the photo, you'll see that it's a 1794 -- which is a lot cheaper in the Brazilian catalogs. The representer made the case that even the 1794 is still the best NGC coin by 5 grades and thus worth what I paid for it. My counterpoint was that it's a comparatively common coin and the vast majority of those haven't been slabbed. I think the coin's going back.

 

 

[World Colonial]

I bought a few coins from the Lissner sale also,. All Bolivian Republic decimals and their value is nominal in the scheme of things. If I had experienced what you described, I wouldn't be happy with it either. I also find it hard to believe that the auctioneer would try to make an argument like that, though maybe others would as well and I just don't know it.

 

On slabbing, I prefer my coins graded but its predominantly because I don't have the opportunity to inspect them in person before I buy them. In the early 2000's when I first started buying them in quantity, I bought both but more "raw" because that is how they were sold, primarily I presume because they were worth so much less and many of them from sellers outside the United States. I left them that way until the value of my collection became more meaningful by my standards.

 

But the primary reason I did it (in 2005 for the first time) was in case someone else had to sell them if I could or did not; as an estate planning contingency. This is still the primary reason I do so now. If you are not going to sell the coin, does it really matter? My answer is disproportionately, it doesn't.

 

Going back to the actual scarcity of these coins, in the lopsided majority of instances, I would say that most of them are far more available than is apparent from the census for sure but even proportionately from what any one individual sees for sale. This is less true for more expensive coins but given the lopsided preference of most non-US collectors for ungraded coins, I don't see any reason to believe otherwise unless there is specific evidence to support it.

 

As an example, the South Africa ZAR and Union series has larger or far larger counts than practically any other non-US series. But this is mostly true because these collectors (even those based in South Africa) disproportionately prefer their coins graded. It certainly isn't because most other world coins are scarcer because in the majority of instances, they are not.

 

In my opinion, the current census counts for any particular coins are mostly a function of the personal preferences of who happens to own them which I suspect are almost excluively collectors based in the US.

 

So to take another example, I know that Ecuador 19th century bust coinage is either scarce or rare because I have followed them at auction for many years. But I still expect there is some unspecified multiple of what is listed in the census now.

 

Another thing to consider is that it is mostly or exclusively US collectors who care about what are actually mostly minor differences in quality between most MS grades. The fact that the best known is an MS-65 versus an MS-63 is not going to matter that much to most "locals", not where they are going to pay a substantial premium for it.

[marvf]

 

To give another example of my extreme bad luck with slabs. I happened to win lot 1285 of the Lissner auction, using a coin firm to represent me. If you'll look at the cat, you'll see that it's described as an NGC-63, Brazilian 640 reis of 1749. However if you look closely at the photo, you'll see that it's a 1794 -- which is a lot cheaper in the Brazilian catalogs. The representer made the case that even the 1794 is still the best NGC coin by 5 grades and thus worth what I paid for it. My counterpoint was that it's a comparatively common coin and the vast majority of those haven't been slabbed. I think the coin's going back.

 

The listing in the catalog for lot 1285 is obviously a typo (1749 vs 1794). You have every right to return for a mis-description within five days according to the T&C in the catalog.

 

As for PCGS or NGC switching a coin, that is amazing. So these two coins were the exact same date and type? What are the chances of two people submitting the exact same coin at the exact same time unless these are very common coins. If they weren't the same type and date, then how could the TPG make that mistake since the input sheet is checked at the time of submission, and the coin is verified to the original order right before shpping? I would think the collecting (and submitting) public would like more details on that!

[Gallienus]

 

To give another example of my extreme bad luck with slabs. I happened to win lot 1285 of the Lissner auction, using a coin firm to represent me. If you'll look at the cat, you'll see that it's described as an NGC-63, Brazilian 640 reis of 1749. However if you look closely at the photo, you'll see that it's a 1794 -- which is a lot cheaper in the Brazilian catalogs. The representer made the case that even the 1794 is still the best NGC coin by 5 grades and thus worth what I paid for it. My counterpoint was that it's a comparatively common coin and the vast majority of those haven't been slabbed. I think the coin's going back.

 

The listing in the catalog for lot 1285 is obviously a typo (1749 vs 1794). You have every right to return for a mis-description within five days according to the T&C in the catalog.

 

As for PCGS or NGC switching a coin, that is amazing. So these two coins were the exact same date and type? !

 

Yes this was one of the major grading services either NGC or more likely PCGS. This also happened a long time ago: possibly in the late 80's or in the very early 90's. The coin was a [non 1921] Morgan dollar which my friend asked me to pick out of a bargin bin for him. I picked out what I thought might be a common date unc (hopefully a 62) and it came back in a 64 slab. However it was a different coin.

[Gallienus]

I bought a few coins from the Lissner sale also,. All Bolivian Republic decimals...

 

So to take another example, I know that Ecuador 19th century bust coinage is either scarce or rare because I have followed them at auction for many years. But I still expect there is some unspecified multiple of what is listed in the census now.

 

Hey, you didn't get the Bolivian 1879 20 centimes in 61? I always wanted one of those as it's the last Proc and I like coins with politicos or caudillos on them.

 

One Lissner coin that I put a cheap bid on but actually I might have stretched a bit more for it as it went cheaply is the Ecudorian 2 Hills 1841 or 43, 4 reales. I like this series but just have a not so nice 1841, actually it might be an xf but was of average strike so nobody really cares.

 

Do you mean Ecudorian Bust coinage like the 1858 5 francs or other types? I have an interesting story about the 1858 5F. My specimen, I believe, was bought for Lissner by ML Teller in 2002. It was high grade (NGC-65) but doesn't have the full eye of the Condor. Thus the coin was rejected and he ended up with an ms-63 but having the eye of the Condor showing. ML Teller, who beat me out for the coin at a Stack's auction earlier, brought it to the Florida FUN show. I saw it and said, well if nobody at the show wants it, I'll call him afterwards & submit a low offer. Nobody at FUN was interested in an 1858 Ecudor 5 F in a 65 slab so the coin was available after the show. I bought it for around 2K. Technically it's the nicest Ecudorian 5 francs certified, but that's not why I bought it.

 

Astectically I thought it was one of the most georgous pieces I have, BUT the Condor does not show the eye.

Ecuadorian 5 francs

[marvf]

I just printed out the PR for the LIssner, and looking at it, I realized that the most expensive coins in the sale went for $90,000 hammer - the Coquimbo peso and the 1879 Cochin China Piastre. Then I took a look at one of my piled up Coin Worlds only to see the results of some recent auctions where many of the coins went for hundreds of thousands of dollars or millions. My opinion: rarity is still cheap in world coins. So whatever you bought in Lissner will probably prove to be a good buy in a few years.

[World Colonial]

Hi Gallienus,

 

I did see the 1879 20c but even though I am trying to complete the full decimal series from 1864, I don't really care for that coin and it will be one of the last coins I prioritize if I ever even buy it. Generally, I don't like portrait coinage as much as other designs. Practically all of these coins sold cheap but if I wanted it, I could try to negotiate for the MS-63 with the Mexican Coin Company. They have had that coin for ages.

 

The lots I bought were the 1865 1/5 Boliviano NGC AU-55, 1872 20C NGC MS-64, 1871 5C NGC MS-65 (the more common variety since I am not a variety collector of this series) and 1874 10C NGC MS-65. The 1872 I have seen in UNC once before (in the Whiittier collection) and the 1865 never in any decent grade. This is in 12 years.

 

I should have bought more but given the other results, even during the live bidding, I was waiting for bidding to pick up and it never did. To give you a few examples, I own the 1870 20C in AU-58, 1864 1/5 Boliviano in MS-63 and the 1879 50C in AU-58. All of these coins are scarce, especially the first and third. The Lissner coins were MS-64 and MS-65 and sold for about the same as what I paid for mine. However, I don't really think I paid too much, these just sold really cheaply.

 

One coin which I thought sold for a strong price was the 1864 Centavo MS-64 for $1000 plus BP. I didn't care for it because it has a die crack and blotchy toning. I own both the MS-62 (from the Whittier collection) and the MS-63 and I paid about $500 for each. From the image only, I think both of mine are better.

 

The pre-decimals (1825-1863) with Bolivar's portrait, many of these sold for what I consider strong prices but it is specifically because I suspect that many Latin collectors like any coin with his portrait. One of the 8E sold for $60,000 plus BP which I believe is a record price for any Bolivian coin.

 

The Ecuador coins I was referring to are the ones that somewhat resemble the US design. Its one of my favorites though I only own a single 2R, the 1848 in NGC AU-58 which is a really sharp coin. The coin in this sale I would like to have bought if this series was a priority for me was the 1857 4R MS-63. (Unfortunately, I have other things I have to spend my money on now.) I presume you know how scarce these coins are but for those who do not, there aren't many decent ones even in circulated grades. The 1862 I consider a major rarity and have seen it only once.

[World Colonial]

I just printed out the PR for the LIssner, and looking at it, I realized that the most expensive coins in the sale went for $90,000 hammer - the Coquimbo peso and the 1879 Cochin China Piastre. Then I took a look at one of my piled up Coin Worlds only to see the results of some recent auctions where many of the coins went for hundreds of thousands of dollars or millions. My opinion: rarity is still cheap in world coins. So whatever you bought in Lissner will probably prove to be a good buy in a few years.

 

You are right, rarity is cheap with many world coins. But you also need to consider that it is likely to be an obstacle to their future financial prospects in many instances going forward because collectors do not generally tend to pursue coins that are not available. No one can buy what doesn't exist.

 

This applies to most of the coins I own now. As an example, I would like to complete the date run for Peru pillar minors in AU or MS. I consider these coins very cheap but its almost certainly first because the coins are small which is why they are much less popular than the pillar dollar and they also almost never come up for sale. I own seven dates of the 1/2R plus two duplicates in grades of AU-58 to MS-65. It is possible that no one has ever completed the series in this quality and that maybe I own more high quality specimens than anyone has for 100+ years.

 

The Chile Volcano pesos you like, they have the advantage over mine because they are larger, but from a financial standpoint, they are likely to do better if they are at least somewhat more available than I suspect you believe them to be. If this sounds like a contradiction, look at the prices of US coins. Only a small percentage are remotely even scarce except in a narrow sense, yet look how much they cost.

[marvf]

The Chile Volcano pesos you like, they have the advantage over mine because they are larger, but from a financial standpoint, they are likely to do better if they are at least somewhat more available than I suspect you believe them to be. If this sounds like a contradiction, look at the prices of US coins. Only a small percentage are remotely even scarce except in a narrow sense, yet look how much they cost.

 

I think it's a function of the ratio of the collector base to the number of coins. If you've got a rare coinage with 10 coins, but only six people want to collect them, they'll never be worth much since those six collectors will each have their coin. This raises the issue of why people want to collect a particular coin. There are many reasons: history, design, eye appeal, perceived investment value, etc.

 

Take the US High Relief $20 for example. With a mintage of 11,000, almost every major US auction that features gold will have several examples of a high relief. It's not a rare coin. Anyone of means who wants one can get one easily. But still, many thousands of people desire them, and as soon as they have the money, they will buy them, so this supports their price level which is around $45,000 or more for very nice examples.

 

With a series like the volcano peso, there are so few available that it doesn't take many who desire one to drive up the price. In good economic times, there will be enough collectors for this series that the price will go up. So assuming that many more volcano pesos don't suddenly materialize, and assuming that the economy will improve over time, these very scarce, desirable items will increase in price, with the best preserved showing the largest increase.

 

Really rare US items with the large collector base that US coins have, can jump to incredible heights in no time at all. Even relatively common coins can show the effect. Just look at some of the prices for Chinese coins over the last 20 years. As the Chinese economy has improved tremendously, even relatively common republic Chinese dollar-sized coins have gone crazy just because there is so much competition among so many with money. An uncirculated 1914 Y-322 Chinese Dollar that could have been bought in the '90s for $200 is now worth $10,000 - $30,000 depending on condition. A few years ago, "Birds over Junk" dollars used to be obtainable for a few hundred dollars. It's a fairly common coin, but now be ready to shell out thousands for a nice one. And many foreign collectors, Chinese and Russian in particular, have "bought" into the concept of condition rarity that so permeates the US market. The Lissner coins were good examples of that. Would anyone have paid $20,000 for a circulated volcano peso? There are quite a few of those; but for a choice uncirculated one, at least two people were willing to bid it up to that level. The perception is that uncirculated volcano pesos are few and far between, and that seems to be true based on my research over the past 15 years of auctions. The 1820 in Lissner is the only uncirculated one I have seen after searching through many auctions. When it comes to this series, the larger mintage for some dates means nothing as apparently many ended up as planchets for Brazilian 960 Reis coins.

 

As there is, in general, a larger collector base for the crown-sized coins then for the smaller coins, these tend to increase faster.

 

 

[World Colonial]

I am familiar with the reasoning you are using. It all depends upon how much of an increase you have in mind. I covered this subject in detail in another thread that I don't care to bring up now.

 

The primary point I am trying to make is that at a certain point, too much scarcity is an impediment to price appreciation. This isn't a "numismatic law" but I believe it is apparent now and is going to become even more apparent as the number of collectors for Latin coinage continue to increase. I say Latin coinage here because I believe a disporportionate percentage of the better coins are already bought by Americans today and given the demographic trends in the US, I expect more of them to prefer them in the future, a lot more. The problem is with many of these series, the coins do not exist in sufficient quantity in the quality that TPG collectors want to satisfy the demand for more than a niche market.

 

If you want a test case of what is the likely outcome for many of these coins, you can look at the availablility, price level and price structure of South Africa ZAR and Union. Union are disproportionately scarce for 20th century coins and many of them only exist in low or very low numbers in higher grades. Quite a few even in average circulated grades.

 

In high grades, both of these series are very expensive on average compared to most other series and other markets. I would rank ZAR in the top 5 behind the US, Australia and maybe some segments of the Russian market but that is about it. Union is probably top 20. TPG is preferred in both markets.

 

What I have told these collectors is that the prices of these coins are never going to replicate what exists in the US today, even though the coins are disproportionately so much scarcer. There is room for some appreciation but the spreads between higher and lower grades (even decent grades) are already very wide.

 

In the US, "trophy" coins sell for exorbitant prices because percentage wise, it is still low proportionately and there are a lot of collectors who can afford to pay "big money". Then there are many coins like the 1796 quarter which purportedly has 56 to 70 individual coins in MS-60 or better and somewhat over 600 in total. This supply enables many collectors to buy these coins even at high prices in low grades. No actually rare Latin coin or series that I know remotely has the suvival rate or quality distribution of a coin like the 1796 quarter.

 

I'm not that familiar with Chile coins across the board. My opinion is that those from the mid or maybe late 19th century and later are not that scarce in grades that most collectors will accept. (I believe them to generally be a lot more common than the comporable period Bolivian coins I collect but with greater demand.) Scarce compared to the US yes, but not really that scarce. So maybe if the supply of the later coins is large enough and collectors find enough they want to buy, then coins like these Volcano pesos in high quality can sell for much higher prices.

 

But in any series like Union, I predict never except in isolation. There aren't enough coins that enough collectors actually want to buy available. This differs from the Chinese coins you used as examples which are common by my standards. I agree that this is possible or even likely (depending upon the market) for those which resemble them.

 

 

[marvf]

The primary point I am trying to make is that at a certain point, too much scarcity is an impediment to price appreciation. This isn't a "numismatic law" but I believe it is apparent now and is going to become even more apparent as the number of collectors for Latin coinage continue to increase.

 

I just don't quite follow the logic that if something exists in very small numbers it can't appreciate in price over time or that it will hit a ceiling. To me it seems that it's a function of how attractive the item is to enough people to cause competition for ownership. And if those people who compete have spendable assets that grow, then the value of the scarce item will grow.

 

For example, if I'm a rich Russian, I will probably be aware of some Russian coins that exist in tiny numbers, perhaps I've never even seen one. Those particular coins are very desirable due to historical association, or beauty, or national pride, etc. If one of these coins comes up at auction, even once in 50 years, I'm going to be at that auction, and, as a billionaire or multi-millionaire, I'm going to bid strongly. And my fellow billionaires will also be bidding strongly, so the price will go to the moon. And the next time the same coin comes up at auction, assuming inflation and economic growth, I may have even more money and will bid even higher. I don't see any impact on that process due to scarcity.

 

If we look at ancients - and I don't pretend to be an expert in that field - many are very rare. In some ways due to the manual nature of production, one could say that they're each unique. They have a huge following, and there's been tremendous growth of the most beautiful and rarest. The old rule in numismatics, "buy the best you can afford" still holds true. In the '50's when I started collecting, I found things in change that I still have. Most of them are not worth much more than when I got them since they're lower circulated grades. It's in the choicer uncirculated grades where the real growth has been in US coins since the '50's. My take today is that eye appeal is everything!

 

Just as people would rather buy a painting in beautiful condition rather than a painting that is all scratched up or disfigured, most coin collectors naturally want beautiful coins. I realize there are some that like to accumulate date runs, but my date runs of pennies, nickels, dimes quarters that I formed in the '50's, all low grade, are not worth much more now, with the exception of course of rare dates that I couldn't for the most part find in change even then.

 

Sorry for my rambling. Thanks for the conversation. I'm not sure we solve anything here, but it's fun to dialog with folks.

[World Colonial]

In isoation I agree with you, but not across the board. My claim is that ususual scarcity impedes price appreciation by reducing the number of potential collectors because most people aren't in the habit of pursuing coins that cannot be bought.

 

Think of this way. Why is it that US coins cost so much more than all others, especially in better quality? It certainly isn't because they are generally scacer. World coins from most countries are disproportionately much scarcer than US coins. And it certainly isn't because US coins have better numismatic credentials and are more desirable either. Sometimes they are and sometimes they are not. It isn't because collectors outside the United States can't afford to pay the same prices either, especially in countries like Germany or the UK but even in a country like Chile. At least in isolation, they can easily afford to pay the same prices US collectors do right now. There literally isn't a single country where more cannot both start collecting right now and pay the same prices US collectors do given the much greater scacity of their coinage.

 

With a series like the pillar coinage I mentioned, there aren't ever going to be a lot of collectors for any denomination because the coins do not exist to be bought, except the Mexico pillar dollars. I recently bought a 1758 Peru 1/2 real that I believe will grade somewhere between MS-64 and MS-66, depending upon whether a spot of residue can be removed. Flowing Hair and Draped Bust half dimes (which i consider comporable) in MS-65 and MS-66 sell from about $70k to over $100k according to recent Heritage data. Even as an MS-66, maybe this coin is worth $3000 today.

 

In the future, I can see this coin selling for a lot more, but I don't see it ever selling for anywhere near these US prices because I don't ever see anywhere near the same number consistently trying to buy coins like it because there aren't any coins to buy. In high grades, almost all of these half dimes are almost certainly more common or a lot more common than my coin.

 

You can see the same pricing behaviour with the few US coins that share similar characteristics to mine with the difference being that US collectors are used to paying a lot more and out of the thousands that pay very high prices, one or a few happen to pick one of these coins.

 

Anyway, i am getting off topic here.

 

 

[marvf]

Thanks for your comments. I appreciate them.

 

I'll just leave it with the thought that perhaps the fundamental reason that US coins have shown so much more price appreciation than other countries' collector coins is that there are just many more collectors pursuing the coins. Remember that the US has one of the largest populations of all other highly industrialized countries. China's economy is growing fast and may soon surpass the US, but not yet. India has a long way to go, and Russia is also very strong.

 

It's clear that a Chinese collector/investor who has made so much money needs to park it somewhere - perhaps in real estate, perhaps in coins. In the US, there has been a tremendous growth in the amount of real estate investment by Chinese, and at the same time, the prices of Chinese coins have gone through the roof as more and more Chinese coins are repatriated. The same thing has happened with Russian coins, so I'm not sure in a few years that we'll be able to make a blanket statement that US coins have experienced much more growth than world coins. With the arrival of the TPG, those that want the best of the best, and can afford it, now have a convenient way to measure the degree of perfection, and as the foreign coin markets are "infected" by that concept, I think their markets will experience huge increases in the prices for the top tier of coins as has the US market. As we've seen in the US market, the price difference between MS65 and MS67 even for a common coin can be enormous, and coupled with the eye appeal factor (i.e. toning, luster, etc.) can add fuel to the fire.

 

It all comes down to how much investment assets people have and how they view coins versus other possible investments. The high prices that coins can realize feed that lust for profit that normally would spill into stocks/bonds, but since the melt down, I think people see hard assets as potentially a better long term choice. Don't think that people paying hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars don't consider the investment potential when buying a coin.

 

Time to climb down from my soap box. Good night.

[World Colonial]

My prior comments are a simplication of a complicated subject and I was generalizing. However, what you described has either always been true or at least so since TPG was created which is the only real structural difference (along with the itnernet) between now and the past. Except in isolation (such as maybe in Chima prior to 1979), there hasn't ever been a time when those outside the US could not have paid the same prices as those in the US in the aggregate, regardless of whether specific collectors could, especially since their coins are disproportionately so much scarcer. They just didn't.

 

In a mass market like the United States, the comments you made make perfect sense and I agree with them because the coins here are mostly common and it takes a lot of buyers paying high prices to maintain the price level and push prices higher. China and Russia I still don't see that much similarity to the US though I agree it matters somewhat. It matters somewhat because the coins are a lot scarcer than the US but I don't believe that scarce across the board.

 

But with practically all markets, I don't see that there is much of any correlation to the economy at all. It's more of a function of random chance based upon the whims of a small number of buyers and their fickle individual preferences. Given the very low supply of the preferred coins in the best grades, the local economy doesn't matter at all since Americans (like you and me) can and I believe have been the primary driver of the price increases of these better coins anyway. I agree that more collectors increases the probability of what you describe, but not significantly and still randomly.

[Gallienus]

Just got trounced a 2nd time for a major piece at auction (Goldbergs'). A Roman Provincial Coin I was seeking for a while went for 4x estimate. Talked with auctioneer and they said an honest appraisal was about 2x estimate for the piece. Even at that, the coin would bring more than any previous price ever recorded. I phone bid at 2x estimate and then pushed that by 30% which should be a healthy amount. I wasn't the immediate underbidder but was third in line this time.

 

At Lissner I lost my major lot despite what I was told is a fairly strong bid. A number of other pieces also brought record amounts. I was the immediate underbidder for my major lot.

 

While looking at PR for the Goldberg's pre Longbeach sale (closed today) I glanced at some US coins. The stuff isn't selling. I thought some of the prices were reasonable. Some things that didn't sell were a USA 1795 Flowing Hair half dollar in a 61 slab. Also a Charlotte mint unc no motto $5 gold and some nice Territorial gold. It appeared that perhaps 1/2 of the high end US didn't sell.

 

I wonder if people are getting scared of USA stuff? There seems to be serious money moving into better foreign. Too bad I don't really have any of it!

 

[World Colonial]

I find many auction estimates really low and I am not sure if it is intentional. I have heard that it is used to increase bidder interest but I don't see why that would make any difference to knowledgeable buyers. I have speculated in the past that maybe it is related to consigner advances (as in the art world) but no one has either confirmed or corrected me.

 

I did not watch or follow all of the Lissner lots but I consider most of those I did to be strong, except for the Bolivia Republic decimals I wanted to buy which is fine with me.

 

I wouldn't assume too much from the Goldberg results you saw. I'm not familiar with recent prices for all those coins but its also possible that potential bidders just didn't really like them that much in their grades. As you probably know, US collectors can be far more choosy about the quality of their speciments even with coins that are supposedly rare because they can almost always find another one. A 1795 MS half dollar certainly isn't common but the last time I checked the combined census, 70 were included. Even with duplicates, at close to $50,000, I would be really selective at that price level especially since I don't believe the coin merits it.

 

As for serious money moving into foreign, depends what you mean. Compared to the US price level and using any impartial assessment of relative numismatic merits, world coins are dirt cheap.

 

However, as I attempted to explain in my most recent posts and earlier in this thread but apparently not very successfully, there isn't ever going to be the same money in world coins in the aggregate because the most preferred coins do not exist in sufficient quantity and quality to be bought. No one can buy what doesn't exist and the only way I see it happening otherwise is if most collectors are priced out of most of the coins they actually want to buy. That has never happened anywhere and it isn't going to either because it contradicts how collectors actually act. For a somewhat limited preview of that outcome, you can look at the price structure right now in South Africa Union.

 

For the coins you used as examples or especially others that cost a lot more, I believe that a very low proportion of world coins can achieve price parity with them but that is all.

[Gallienus]

I find many auction estimates really low .... I did not watch or follow all of the Lissner lots but I consider most of those I did to be strong, except for the Bolivia Republic decimals I wanted to buy which is fine with me....

 

I wouldn't assume too much from the Goldberg results you saw. I'm not familiar with recent prices for all those coins but its also possible that potential bidders just didn't really like them that much in their grades. As you probably know, US collectors can be far more choosy about the quality of their speciments even with coins that are supposedly rare because they can almost always find another one. A 1795 MS half dollar certainly isn't common but the last time I checked the combined census, 70 were included. Even with duplicates, at close to $50,000, I would be really selective at that price level especially since I don't believe the coin merits it.

 

No one can buy what doesn't exist and the only way I see it happening otherwise is if most collectors are priced out of most of the coins they actually want to buy. That has never happened anywhere and it isn't going to either because it contradicts how collectors actually act. For a somewhat limited preview of that outcome, you can look at the price structure right now in South Africa Union.

 

For the coins you used as examples or especially others that cost a lot more, I believe that a very low proportion of world coins can achieve price parity with them but that is all.

 

The 1795 NGC-61 half-dollar was estimated at only $25 K at Goldberg's this week. No bids for it. Another coin I admired was a very attractive 1788 Massachusetts Cent which was removed from a PCGS or NGC 62 holder. Estimate was 3K & also no bids. I am somewhat knowledgeable about the 1795 half because, years ago I really tried to find one. I collected catalogs about them and looked at every one I ran across. I no longer collect US but to this day my cell phone # ends in 1795. Anyhow my theory is that a lot of seemingly nice US coins aren't selling right now.

 

Investment items such as PF-67 $4 golds are doing well. I looked at NGC trends for four critical [iMO] collector series: Bust dollars, Capped Bust halves, type III Lib $20 golds, & Lincoln cents and I didn't see price increases.

 

On the other hand, I bid more than the above estimate listed for the 1795 half, for the world coin I attempted to buy. I was unsuccessful as it went for approaching double that. Even my bid was 10K more than the highest price ever realized for one of those. At these price levels or more I have been very unsucessful this year in buying any better world coins except for a common, cheaper, 1832 Chilean 8E.

 

I stopped collecting US coins almost exactly 20 years ago to focus on world coins & US was very expensive. I don't believe demographics and the US economy will support current prices for US rarities. For example, the old white WASP types who formed most of the US collector base are dying off. Although the new diverse US population may be wonderful, I doubt they'll care about old WASP history and collect the US coins.

[World Colonial]

I agree with your comments on demographics. It is one I have made many times in my prior posts. I expect the particularly increasing Latin population in the US to favor coins like the ones I understand you are trying to buy and to a lesser extent those I collect subject to the limitation I made in my last post.

 

I also agree with your economic comments which I have expressed multiple times. Because US coins are in the aggregate a mass market and I expect most people to be worse or much worse off in the future, I expect their ability to pay to shrink.

 

At the same time, no one can buy what does not exist which is exactly what applies to many of the coins I believe you have in mind. In theory, this doesn't prevent a small number of buyers from paying "moon money" for the "best" coins which is exactly what I suspect those who disagree with my opinion most likely believe.

 

No, it doesn't but I still believe the limited supply will (significantly) reduce the number of future collectors (or "investors") which will both make these coins sell for less than they would otherwise and disproportionately sell for less than comparable US coins sell for today (in 2014 money).

 

I know that these foreign collectors disproportionately do not care for TPG and I don't believe they will later either. Non-US collectors don't think in these terms by a lopsided proportion because their cultural attitude towards collecting is disproportionately different. There isn't much "investing" in coins outside the US at all; only in isolation and even then it is still mostly limited to a few markets like Australia, South Africa and maybe somewhat for Russia, China and the UK.

 

I believe that most or at least a disproportionate number and percentage of what you describe for these world coins is caused by Americans, whether they live in the US like I do or elsewhere such as you. I am not saying that there aren't any non-US collectors buying expensive (TPG) coins because I know there are but I don't see any reason to believe otherwise.

 

The idea that there is something so significant about a coin and it should sell for a huge price or premium just because it is in a particular TPG grade is a US concept and doesn't hardly exist at all elsewhere, certainly not for the actually trivial differences represented by two proximate MS grades.

 

The other reason I have this opinion is because most coins like these aren't really "trophy" coins at all. US collectors have a vastly inflated opinion of the merits of the US coins you have listed in these last two posts and I don't believe those outside the US share that opinion about their own coins today or that they will for the most part in the future either.

 

I have my idea of "trophy" coins from the series I collect or those I am familiar with and there aren't many of them. The problem is, under the US criteria, disproportionately they aren't eligible for the same TPG grades (as if that should even really make a difference). So since they aren't, unless non-US collectors decide to apply an even more absurd price structure, I don't see that lower or supposedly lower quality though scarcer coins are going to sell for the same prices (much less more) than their US counterparts do today.