Coin prices continue to rise

[Peckris 2]

6 hours ago, Old Money said:

SNC January 2014 1853 Proof and 1919kn CuN.pdf

A link would be much appreciated rather than something you have to download.

[1949threepence]

On 7/22/2023 at 12:10 PM, 1949threepence said:

A case in point regarding the ongoing rise in coin prices.

"The Coinery" are offering an 1839 proof penny at their auction of 29.7.23, with estimates of between £5,000 and £6,000, and a minimum starting bid of £4,000. The coin is NGC slabbed in a special "Coinery" holder, and is graded as PF66 BN - link 

I won an 1839 proof on 22.5.22, also from The Coinery for £3,700 hammer. But I had to fight for it, from the £2500 commission bid I'd left. Mine was also in a special NGC Coinery slab, but PF64 BN. 

So my theory is that yes, although almost certainly the difference between PF64 & PF66 makes a price difference, I wouldn't have thought it would account for such a sizeable difference. Much of the increase is surely due to overall price rises in coins.

Incidentally, any differences betwen this coin, and the one I got, are Rizla paper thin. In fact I'd venture that my reverse is superior to this one. There are marks (scratches) on the coin currently offered, although as with many slabbed coins, it's often difficult to determine whether the mark is on the coin itself, or externally on the plastic holder.  

1839 pennies are scarce generally, but rare in undisturbed, issue free, high grade. 

 

On 7/22/2023 at 12:42 PM, PWA 1967 said:

Unfortunately the price difference in just a grade or two on most pennies determined by NGC are huge ,for the few collectors currently buying them.

The 1839 PF66 for sale in "The Coinery auction " sold for £10,000 the last time it sold and at the time it was the highest grade.

Now one is graded 67 (Maybe bought by the seller of this one) the one graded 66 has almost certainly lost its highest grade attraction.

Unfortunately its not what we think the grade is but what NGC put on the label and if its high or the highest , there are a few collectors who will pay big money for them.

Only my opinion but i have been watching the prices of NGC pennies for the last few years and ones graded really high or the highest can sell for daft money.

Fortunately its only a few buyers though who will pay these high prices and what it does mean is the ones graded high but not really high 😀 ,we can buy for sensible money.

 

Well, whoever sold it, assuming they were the previous buyer at £10k, sustained a huge loss as it just went for £4,900 hammer at the Coinery live auction.

[PWA 1967]

Yes , as i was trying to explain shows that paying daft prices for the highest graded can all change tomorrow when one gets graded higher 😀

There was another penny today i sold a couple of years ago and that also only went to less than half of what i sold it for,due to others now being higher.

Edited July 29, 2023 by PWA 1967

[1949threepence]

2 hours ago, PWA 1967 said:

Yes , as i was trying to explain shows that paying daft prices for the highest graded can all change tomorrow when one gets graded higher 😀

There was another penny today i sold a couple of years ago and that also only went to less than half of what i sold it for,due to others now being higher.

Hmmm......oh well, whatever.

I'm just very pleased I managed to get the coin I was interested in today. 

[VickySilver]

Agreed. Crazy to PAY for such pieces, but the seller unloading it for 10k did well! 

[1949threepence]

28 minutes ago, VickySilver said:

Agreed. Crazy to PAY for such pieces, but the seller unloading it for 10k did well! 

Indeed so. According to the NGC rankings there are now 7 at PF66.

[VickySilver]

Mine is a keeper and not slabbed. But fess up, the funny thing is that one's ego wonders what the TPG grade would be on occasion....

[Kipster]

1 hour ago, 1949threepence said:

I'm just very pleased I managed to get the coin I was interested in today. 

Well done. 

I didn't get the one I was after as it went for about 40% more than I was prepared to pay for it, but I did pick up an alternative which is an improvement on my current one. 

[1949threepence]

1 hour ago, Kipster said:

Well done. 

I didn't get the one I was after as it went for about 40% more than I was prepared to pay for it, but I did pick up an alternative which is an improvement on my current one. 

Thanks, and also well done on your win, albeit not necessarily your No 1 choice.

I received my invoice via e mail earlier on, and was very pleasantly surprised to find there was absolutely no premium payable. None - just straight hammer price plus postage. Whether that's re-couped via higher estimate ranges, I'm not sure. But it certainly stands in contrast to my previous win from The Coinery which had, I think, just under 20% premium and an "internet surcharge". That was May 2022.     

[1949threepence]

1 hour ago, 1949threepence said:

Thanks, and also well done on your win, albeit not necessarily your No 1 choice.

I received my invoice via e mail earlier on, and was very pleasantly surprised to find there was absolutely no premium payable. None - just straight hammer price plus postage. Whether that's re-couped via higher estimate ranges, I'm not sure. But it certainly stands in contrast to my previous win from The Coinery which had, I think, just under 20% premium and an "internet surcharge". That was May 2022.     

Thought it was too good to be true. Just received a revised invoice with the buyer's premium added, and had to pay a further £232.00.

Apparently there is no seller's fee on items over £1000, and on this occasion the no fee was applied in the wrong place.

I'll await with baited breath to see if an internet surcharge is also added.

[Bruce]

4 hours ago, 1949threepence said:

Thought it was too good to be true. Just received a revised invoice with the buyer's premium added, and had to pay a further £232.00.

Apparently there is no seller's fee on items over £1000, and on this occasion the no fee was applied in the wrong place.

I'll await with baited breath to see if an internet surcharge is also added.

You bid through easylive, so that there's internet surcharge?

[1949threepence]

9 hours ago, Bruce said:

You bid through easylive, so that there's internet surcharge?

Spot on Bruce. I actually found this out when I called The Coinery late yesterday and spoke to Guy. I'd forgotten, but last year I went through easy live auction because of technical issues (couldn't get sound) - hence the extra surcharge. This time I went throughThe Coinery's website so there will be no surcharge. 

[Bruce]

4 hours ago, 1949threepence said:

Spot on Bruce. I actually found this out when I called The Coinery late yesterday and spoke to Guy. I'd forgotten, but last year I went through easy live auction because of technical issues (couldn't get sound) - hence the extra surcharge. This time I went throughThe Coinery's website so there will be no surcharge. 

Nice, so that you saved few percentage off👍.

[Rob]

Easylive isn't extortionate. A flat fee of £3 is a pint - not going to break the bank. Spend over £100 and you are winning compared to the %age route.

[1949threepence]

4 hours ago, Rob said:

Easylive isn't extortionate. A flat fee of £3 is a pint - not going to break the bank. Spend over £100 and you are winning compared to the %age route.

If it had just been £3, I'd have dismissed it as a minor anomaly, but as you can see from this extract from the invoice, it was considerably more than that. Out of sight is the £592 buyer premium.

 

[1949threepence]

On 7/23/2023 at 10:35 PM, Peckris 2 said:

A link would be much appreciated rather than something you have to download.

If you're working from a standard desktop PC, Chris, you should be able to see it at the bottom left of the screen a few seconds after clicking. Just click on it to read. 

It will in any case be saved in your downloads. 

[Rob]

1 hour ago, 1949threepence said:

If it had just been £3, I'd have dismissed it as a minor anomaly, but as you can see from this extract from the invoice, it was considerably more than that. Out of sight is the £592 buyer premium.

 

When you sign in to Easylive to register to bid on an auction it gives you the option of either a flat fee of £3 which is taken whether you win anything or not, or a 3% of hammer surcharge. That's a no-brainer. I've spent thousands on many occasions for the same £3 a pop. On very rare occasions I have not won anything, but happily paid £3 to give me the ability to bid live, particularly with less prestigious auctioneers, where you might be wary of leaving commission bids. 

As I said, it's the cost of a pint and you need to do incredibly badly to spend more in wasted £3s than the 3% charge on any winnings.

[Michael-Roo]

6 minutes ago, Rob said:

When you sign in to Easylive to register to bid on an auction it gives you the option of either a flat fee of £3 which is taken whether you win anything or not, or a 3% of hammer surcharge. That's a no-brainer. I've spent thousands on many occasions for the same £3 a pop. On very rare occasions I have not won anything, but happily paid £3 to give me the ability to bid live, particularly with less prestigious auctioneers, where you might be wary of leaving commission bids. 

As I said, it's the cost of a pint and you need to do incredibly badly to spend more in wasted £3s than the 3% charge on any winnings.

Me too. £3, wins or no, is neither here nor there.

Edited July 30, 2023 by Michael-Roo

[1949threepence]

35 minutes ago, Rob said:

When you sign in to Easylive to register to bid on an auction it gives you the option of either a flat fee of £3 which is taken whether you win anything or not, or a 3% of hammer surcharge. That's a no-brainer. I've spent thousands on many occasions for the same £3 a pop. On very rare occasions I have not won anything, but happily paid £3 to give me the ability to bid live, particularly with less prestigious auctioneers, where you might be wary of leaving commission bids. 

As I said, it's the cost of a pint and you need to do incredibly badly to spend more in wasted £3s than the 3% charge on any winnings.

Oh....right thanks. Not sure what went wrong there. Will have to pay more attention next time. 

[Bruce]

9 hours ago, Rob said:

Easylive isn't extortionate. A flat fee of £3 is a pint - not going to break the bank. Spend over £100 and you are winning compared to the %age route.

I also use £80-100 as benchmark to bid through easylive.  if i guess my winning lots exceed that sum, i will pay for the £3.  

Back to Coinery case, i remember there is no flat £3 option, and bidding through coinery website is less expensive than easylive portal.  However, i am not sure about this now, coz i changed to bid through Coinery website since 2nd auction held by them because of the auction premium issue.

[1949threepence]

19 hours ago, Bruce said:

I also use £80-100 as benchmark to bid through easylive.  if i guess my winning lots exceed that sum, i will pay for the £3.  

Back to Coinery case, i remember there is no flat £3 option, and bidding through coinery website is less expensive than easylive portal.  However, i am not sure about this now, coz i changed to bid through Coinery website since 2nd auction held by them because of the auction premium issue.

That might explain why things didn't accord with Rob's experience. Thanks for the extra info, Bruce. 

[Rob]

Maybe there is some input required by the auctioneer to permit flat fee charges? I paid £3 with Lockdales this week for example. The only time I opted for the % fee was when the only lot I was bidding on was going to be £50 max.

[Peckris 2]

On 7/30/2023 at 9:24 PM, 1949threepence said:

If you're working from a standard desktop PC, Chris, you should be able to see it at the bottom left of the screen a few seconds after clicking. Just click on it to read. 

It will in any case be saved in your downloads. 

Yeah, but I don't want to download something just to look at it - a standard link or an inline picture is much preferable.

[1949threepence]

1 minute ago, Peckris 2 said:

Yeah, but I don't want to download something just to look at it - a standard link or an inline picture is much preferable.

Looking at it, I'm not sure it's linkable. Or if it is, it might be out of my skillset.

Excellent and really interesting couple of articles though.

[Rob]

34 minutes ago, 1949threepence said:

Excellent and really interesting couple of articles though.

The question of the 1853 bronzed proofs has occupied my mind one more than one occasion since the article was written.

A stumbling block in resolving the outstanding questions is the images in Baldwin's 44 catalogue are not good enough to determine the positions of the pitting to the reverse rim on the 1853 bronzed halfpenny, which is unfortunate as the 1839/41 bronzed proof in my possession also has a pitted rim. If in the same positions, it would imply the same reverse die and by extension that quite possibly the two dates are contemporary.

Following my acquisition of the 1841/39 bronzed proof halfpenny in 2007 I wrote an article in the May 2009 Circular outlining some thoughts for the existence of the dozen or so known inverted die 1841 halfpennies, which are all struck from the same worn reverse die and point to a striking for a specific reason. The bronzed 1853s have an inverted die axis, as does the 1839/41. As the anomalous 1839 proof sixpence is struck from an obverse that was only used from 1880 on and similarly has the wrong die axis, speculatively I wonder if the non-standard die axis coins are all from this late period. Assuming they were from sets made to order before the mint was refurbished and the old Soho equipment replaced, with a maximum window of 2 years for the sixpence, it would point to a minimal number of the other coins - as is seen.

It would also help to know if the die fixings were compatible on both the Soho presses and their replacements.

I can't help feeling that all the information is currently known, but different bits are in different places.