December 2021 LCA catalogue now posted

[1949threepence]

9 hours ago, 1949threepence said:

As long as you know what you're looking for the website is just as good as the hard copy catalogue + the photos are larger and more detailed.

The LCA catalogue comes into its own when the realised prices are posted. You can then easily find which items haven't sold.

 

 

Although in the case of the SOHO collection, that would be nothing as every single lot sold. 

[Rob]

22 hours ago, Peckris 2 said:

Eh? If you download the pdf it takes very little time to scroll down to the lots that might interest you.

Having gone through the exercise, I suppose 3 minutes to download last week's sale isn't the end of the world. However, they could make the pages bigger, as the pdf I downloaded only uses a 1/3 of the screen width here compared with over 3/4 looking at the list view. I guess I can enlarge it to 200+%, but surely scaling to fit the screen could be built into the software? After all, programmers take the time and effort to make things fit a phone screen.

It still doesn't compensate for flicking through pages though, IMO. 

[VickySilver]

Lot 1491 was listed as a proof 1937 crown - can't tell from the pictures, is it proof or currency?

[Bruce]

1 out of 6 successful bids was at my ceiling price, other 4 were only at 1 to 2 steps away from max, don't know if it is coincidence or not.

Edited December 6, 2021 by Bruce

[Bruce]

1 hour ago, VickySilver said:

Lot 1491 was listed as a proof 1937 crown - can't tell from the pictures, is it proof or currency?

If there is no description in the lot, i think it is likely a currency issue as details seems not sharp enough.

[Rob]

I didn't win one lot. 1594 hammered at 1200 which was way above my max. I was underbidder when it went through LC in 2007 and regretted not bidding higher at the time, but 1500 all in would be too much, as nice as it is .

[VickySilver]

I won both small lots at quite a bit less than bid max, however they were so small as to not be on the radar. I did get the OMS 1965 halfpenny but am concerned that is possible plated given its weight (despite CGS slabbing).

Bruce, I think that piece is currency as well and if so would have to have been a steal at 75 Quid. I don't usually have that sort of luck....

[Bruce]

6 hours ago, VickySilver said:

I won both small lots at quite a bit less than bid max, however they were so small as to not be on the radar. I did get the OMS 1965 halfpenny but am concerned that is possible plated given its weight (despite CGS slabbing).

Bruce, I think that piece is currency as well and if so would have to have been a steal at 75 Quid. I don't usually have that sort of luck....

It's hard to differentiate proof or currency issue with LCA quality of photo, as a result, better to avoid in view of doubt.

By the way, I am always thinking why some sovereign are hammered at for example GBP272, why not GBP270 or 280.

[Rob]

4 hours ago, Bruce said:

By the way, I am always thinking why some sovereign are hammered at for example GBP272, why not GBP270 or 280.

That depends on what was bid as a maximum. You often see it in CNG's online auction for example, where similarly odd numbers (e.g.501) appear as the hammer price. It happens more often in the US than the UK, but a maximum bid is a maximum bid, even if the increments are required in standard steps. Online bidding might not allow it due to a drop down menu of increments, but a postal or email bid can have any number. And the auction house makes a small amount of additional income, so wouldn't turn it down. 

Edited December 7, 2021 by Rob

[1949threepence]

19 hours ago, jelida said:

I bid on seventeen coins and won seven, two at my max and five below. between five and 25% less than my bid.  That seems a reasonable outcome to me. and doesn't obviously suggest any bidding shenanegans.  One of the bigger savings was on my most expensive lot, too. Basically I am building up my halfpenny collection, commoner varieties so none of the bids were stupid, several less than the last time they sold.

 

Jerry

You're probably right Jerry. 

With every lot in the SOHO collection having been sold, it would be inaccurate to presume that in any given case, there was one single bidder. The cynicism arises because it appears that in so many instances, the underbidder was co-incidentally, just one step down from the successful bid at maximum.  

[Bruce]

1 hour ago, Rob said:

That depends on what was bid as a maximum. You often see it in CNG's online auction for example, where similarly odd numbers (e.g.501) appear as the hammer price. It happens more often in the US than the UK, but a maximum bid is a maximum bid, even if the increments are required in standard steps. Online bidding might not allow it due to a drop down menu of increments, but a postal or email bid can have any number. And the auction house makes a small amount of additional income, so wouldn't turn it down. 

Thanks for your explanation Rob, and see your point why odd number prices are taking place.  Then, in this case, since LCA do not have online bidding system, it's better to bid all lots in 101, 111 etc, so that you may win 1 lot in a marginal way.

[VickySilver]

Yes, I have used that technique to not much avail. It is amusing that when attending live auctions, the auctioneer does what s/he can to beat these down.

I do hope that the crown I won is a currency strike as that would be a steal, but even if proof not a bad price in any case. But I have too many already...LOL

[Bruce]

23 minutes ago, VickySilver said:

Yes, I have used that technique to not much avail. It is amusing that when attending live auctions, the auctioneer does what s/he can to beat these down.

I do hope that the crown I won is a currency strike as that would be a steal, but even if proof not a bad price in any case. But I have too many already...LOL

Good luck, and let's have a look when you receive it.

[VickySilver]

Yes, and will try to post the halfpenny as well...

[azda]

On 12/6/2021 at 4:24 PM, 1949threepence said:

Bid £800 on Lot No 2148 - hammer price £800!!!

Lol, surprise surprise

[Bruce]

Any idea why Lot 2011 1927 Halfcrown was only hammered at GBP44?  Seems a bargain for buyer?

https://www.londoncoins.co.uk/?page=Pastresults&auc=175&searchlot=2011&searchtype=2

[VickySilver]

I think that is what they bring at auction and IMO somewhat of a bargain at that price point. I think that is why the 1937 crown went for so little, even at CGS 88 (I am still hoping on a currency).

[Peckris 2]

5 hours ago, VickySilver said:

I think that is what they bring at auction and IMO somewhat of a bargain at that price point. I think that is why the 1937 crown went for so little, even at CGS 88 (I am still hoping on a currency).

Is the 1937 currency crown scarcer than the proof? I didn't think it was.

[VickySilver]

In the better states of preservation only, in worn states not so. This one is supposedly CGS88 which may or not be the same as PCGS or NGC 67. I will have a look if it ever does make it here.