That is a lot of money-

[Afterword]

for an 1879 S Morgan!

 

 

 

 

http://www.greatcollections.com/Coin/298207/1879-S-Morgan-Silver-Dollar-PCGS-MS-65-OGH-1st-Gen-Toned

[Nutmeg Coin]

Wow, and no CAC gold sticker. The photography surely helped and their track record with these.

[coinman_23885]

Even allowing a healthy premium for the toning, it looks overpriced by about $10k to me. The toning is nice, but I don't think it is that special personally, but to each his own. I am sure that many would be equally critical of some of the premiums I have paid for coins that I like.

[Hard Times]

Color + Rattler = Irrational Exuberance.

 

Best, HT

[physics-fan3.14]

Dang. The coin is clearly not a 66 with the gash on the reverse.

 

I personally don't think the coin is super eye appealing either, with the very dark (almost black) toning, and the fingerprints.

 

I'm guessing somebody mistyped. They meant $120.00 but forgot the period... and wound up spending 100x what the coin is worth.

[Coinbuf]

I'm guessing somebody mistyped. They meant $120.00 but forgot the period... and wound up spending 100x what the coin is worth.

 

Not very likely if you look at the bid history, at any rate just another example of what is imo a crazy high premium for some crayon colors.

[david3142]

I agree that $2K seems more in line for that coin. I suppose it could be much better in hand but presumably the top bidder doesn't know either way.

[Hack]

This is a prime example of three bidders chasing a coin down a rabbit hole. I can think of a lot better ways to spend 12K on coins. I would not be surprised if the buyer gets buyer's remorse and returns the coin.

[physics-fan3.14]

This is a prime example of three bidders chasing a coin down a rabbit hole. I can think of a lot better ways to spend 12K on coins. I would not be surprised if the buyer gets buyer's remorse and returns the coin.

 

Does GC offer a return privilege? Most auction houses don't, unless it is one of a few special cases. Stupidity during bidding is not one of those exceptions.

[coinman_23885]

I would not be surprised if the buyer gets buyer's remorse and returns the coin.

 

I don't think so. There are a few well known collectors with deep pockets that are driving up the prices for toned Morgans at the gem level and higher. I love toned Morgans, and would love to resume collecting them; however, I wouldn't dream of doing so in the current market. The market on these reminds me of the game Jenga; you remove a few of the blocks and the whole structure could come tumbling down.

[coinman_23885]

This is a prime example of three bidders chasing a coin down a rabbit hole. I can think of a lot better ways to spend 12K on coins. I would not be surprised if the buyer gets buyer's remorse and returns the coin.

 

Does GC offer a return privilege? Most auction houses don't, unless it is one of a few special cases. Stupidity during bidding is not one of those exceptions.

 

Yes. I have done it once in the past, and don't remember the exact cut-off but I think you have 24 hours to notify them of a return.

[coinman_23885]

I personally don't think the coin is super eye appealing either, with the very dark (almost black) toning, and the fingerprints.

 

I agree that the darker colors are not as attractive, but the coin could be a stunner if it has blazing luster as the San Francisco pieces from this era often do. The problem is that the photos do not make the luster to appear blazing to make the piece pop in hand. With that said, it can be difficult to judge luster from GC images.

[dragon]

Dang. The coin is clearly not a 66 with the gash on the reverse.

 

I personally don't think the coin is super eye appealing either, with the very dark (almost black) toning, and the fingerprints.

 

I'm guessing somebody mistyped. They meant $120.00 but forgot the period... and wound up spending 100x what the coin is worth.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The fact of whether or not the coin is a 66 due to a hit has no relevancy to the price paid. This coin did not appeal to someone based on the fact they thought it was undergraded by a point.

 

That toning is not almost black. I've seen that type of color many times before and it's an attractive dark purple which is considered very desirable to toning enthusiasts.

 

Clearly there were no typos or misplaced decimal points involved in the bidding on this auction.

[Walkerfan]

Amazing what some little bit of color and a rattler will do to some peoples' thought process. Just imagine, if it had a sticker, too! Makes my most insane purchase look very sensible. Just imagine that this coin normally retails for $165!! Even a 66 is just under $300....simply amazing!!

[Danye West]

Amazing what some little bit of color and a rattler will do to some peoples' thought process. Just imagine, if it had a sticker, too! Makes my most insane purchase look very sensible. Just imagine that this coin normally retails for $165!! Even a 66 is just under $300....simply amazing!!

 

This toning isn't THAT rare, but toners can sell for ten times what they should.

I was at a coin show, and I saw a dealer had a really crazy toned half, some common date MS64. I asked to look at it, and to my surprise, it was priced at $1800. I was shocked. As I was walking away, I saw some guy look at the coin. I stopped. The guy made an offer. It sold for $1650

[Walkerfan]

Amazing what some little bit of color and a rattler will do to some peoples' thought process. Just imagine, if it had a sticker, too! Makes my most insane purchase look very sensible. Just imagine that this coin normally retails for $165!! Even a 66 is just under $300....simply amazing!!

 

This toning isn't THAT rare, but toners can sell for ten times what they should.

I was at a coin show, and I saw a dealer had a really crazy toned half, some common date MS64. I asked to look at it, and to my surprise, it was priced at $1800. I was shocked. As I was walking away, I saw some guy look at the coin. I stopped. The guy made an offer. It sold for $1650

 

Yep, I know---I've seen it, too. It's crazy. The toner market is currently overvalued IMHO and I wouldn't want to be the one holding the bag, when people realize this, if ever. I can MAYBE understand paying for a 'monster' but the coin in the OP is FAR from that from what I see.

[Afterword]

It would seem some people like this type of toning, and some of them are quite wealthy. I doubt there will be any buy's remorse, unless the image did not depict the coin accurately.

 

In all likelihood, it has found itself a nice home where it will be well taken care of and appreciated. Even if a dealer bought it, this kind of money would not be spent without the certainty of finding it just such a home.

[MarkFeld]

I agree that $2K seems more in line for that coin. I suppose it could be much better in hand but presumably the top bidder doesn't know either way.

 

Why would you presume that?

[wdrob]

 

It would seem some people like this type of toning, and some of them are quite wealthy. I doubt there will be any buy's remorse, unless the image did not depict the coin accurately.

 

In all likelihood, it has found itself a nice home where it will be well taken care of and appreciated. Even if a dealer bought it, this kind of money would not be spent without the certainty of finding it just such a home.

 

 

I have heard it said many times when CAC stickers are at the center of a discussion, that CAC and JA are nothing more than "market makers". That seems to make everything OK since they are not market manipulators but market makers.

 

But why does one not consider the possibility of a coin such as this one, selling for such a ridiculous price, possible market manipulation on behalf of a concerted group of individuals that specialize in majority of toned coins, nearly exclusively.

 

Before you dismiss this possibility look at it this way:

 

You have 6 dealers that specialize in toned coins. They collude by putting one of their middle of the road toners up on GC and then they all bid it up to a predetermined price level. The winner (if you can call them that) pays for the coin. The original owner, reimburses the high bidder and the only cost to all 6 is approximately $1,262.00 or $210.00 from each person involved.

 

So for a measly $210.00 I could get in on an exclusive advertising and awareness campaign designed to create a false sense of desirability for crayon colored coins that would otherwise be common date coins not worth much at all.

 

Someone sees the results of this auction and looks at the coin in question and concludes that they have to get involved in toned coins - after all, that is where the money is.

 

I would believe the above BS scenario before I would ever believe a legitimate bidder bought that coin for $13k

 

 

 

 

[BillJones]

This is pure insanity.

 

I ran into the same thing in the recent ANA auction. An MS-64, green CAC 1875-P Twenty Cent Piece in a PCGS rattle holder brought $4,700 with recent auction results at less than $2,000 and the "Coin Facts" retail number at $2,300. The coin was nice, but it had enough marks in the right obverse field to insure that it would not upgrade without a healthy dose of "grade-flation."

 

The theory that someone typed in $12,000 instead of $120 does not hold water because it takes two to result in a foolish bid like this. BTW the buyer paid 13,888.60 with the buyers' fee.

 

This really makes me glad that I am not infected with the "monster toning" disease. I can enjoy my hobby without monstrously overpriced coins like this. When you can buy a decent example of this date and mint mark combination in MS-65 for less than $200, paying over $13,000 for this coin supports the old saying, "A fool and their money are soon departed."

 

[david3142]

Mark, I didn't think the buyer would have been able to view the lot after it was consigned, which means he would have had to have seen it in person beforehand. It's certainly possible that the buyer was already familiar with the coin. I figured that if he were willing to pay $14K for it, he would already have bought it. But yes, the buyer could have examined it in hand when it was not for sale or was not willing to pay so much at the time. And obviously, the exorbitant price is a point in that column. It's really hard to commit that kind of money sight unseen.

 

I am surprised the bidding for this coin was as deep as it was. It's easier to imagine two bidders getting carried away than five people all bidding way past what I would have thought was a reasonable number. The coin is nice but there were better ones in the Hall sale and the Sunnywood sale that didn't go for near that kind of money. Again, my comments are based on the pictures and therefore have uncertainty regarding the relative qualities of the coins.

[MarkFeld]

Mark, I didn't think the buyer would have been able to view the lot after it was consigned, which means he would have had to have seen it in person beforehand. It's certainly possible that the buyer was already familiar with the coin. I figured that if he were willing to pay $14K for it, he would already have bought it. But yes, the buyer could have examined it in hand when it was not for sale or was not willing to pay so much at the time. And obviously, the exorbitant price is a point in that column. It's really hard to commit that kind of money sight unseen.

 

I am surprised the bidding for this coin was as deep as it was. It's easier to imagine two bidders getting carried away than five people all bidding way past what I would have thought was a reasonable number. The coin is nice but there were better ones in the Hall sale and the Sunnywood sale that didn't go for near that kind of money. Again, my comments are based on the pictures and therefore have uncertainty regarding the relative qualities of the coins.

 

My guess is that the top few bidders had either seen the coin at some point before it was consigned, or saw it afterwards. Keep in mind that Great Collections almost certainly lets people come view coins in their office and they might even send coins out for inspection, on occasion.

 

Also, the coin might or might not have been offered for sale privately, before being consigned to auction.

[MarkFeld]

It would seem some people like this type of toning, and some of them are quite wealthy. I doubt there will be any buy's remorse, unless the image did not depict the coin accurately.

 

In all likelihood, it has found itself a nice home where it will be well taken care of and appreciated. Even if a dealer bought it, this kind of money would not be spent without the certainty of finding it just such a home.

 

 

I have heard it said many times when CAC stickers are at the center of a discussion, that CAC and JA are nothing more than "market makers". That seems to make everything OK since they are not market manipulators but market makers.

 

But why does one not consider the possibility of a coin such as this one, selling for such a ridiculous price, possible market manipulation on behalf of a concerted group of individuals that specialize in majority of toned coins, nearly exclusively.

 

Before you dismiss this possibility look at it this way:

 

You have 6 dealers that specialize in toned coins. They collude by putting one of their middle of the road toners up on GC and then they all bid it up to a predetermined price level. The winner (if you can call them that) pays for the coin. The original owner, reimburses the high bidder and the only cost to all 6 is approximately $1,262.00 or $210.00 from each person involved.

 

So for a measly $210.00 I could get in on an exclusive advertising and awareness campaign designed to create a false sense of desirability for crayon colored coins that would otherwise be common date coins not worth much at all.

 

Someone sees the results of this auction and looks at the coin in question and concludes that they have to get involved in toned coins - after all, that is where the money is.

 

I would believe the above BS scenario before I would ever believe a legitimate bidder bought that coin for $13k

 

 

 

 

Believe what you want. But even in your highly implausible conspiracy theory, there would be no assurance that the coin in question or any others would have their prices positively affected in the future as a result of that reported sale.

[Afterword]

It would seem some people like this type of toning, and some of them are quite wealthy. I doubt there will be any buy's remorse, unless the image did not depict the coin accurately.

 

In all likelihood, it has found itself a nice home where it will be well taken care of and appreciated. Even if a dealer bought it, this kind of money would not be spent without the certainty of finding it just such a home.

 

 

I have heard it said many times when CAC stickers are at the center of a discussion, that CAC and JA are nothing more than "market makers". That seems to make everything OK since they are not market manipulators but market makers.

 

But why does one not consider the possibility of a coin such as this one, selling for such a ridiculous price, possible market manipulation on behalf of a concerted group of individuals that specialize in majority of toned coins, nearly exclusively.

 

Before you dismiss this possibility look at it this way:

 

You have 6 dealers that specialize in toned coins. They collude by putting one of their middle of the road toners up on GC and then they all bid it up to a predetermined price level. The winner (if you can call them that) pays for the coin. The original owner, reimburses the high bidder and the only cost to all 6 is approximately $1,262.00 or $210.00 from each person involved.

 

So for a measly $210.00 I could get in on an exclusive advertising and awareness campaign designed to create a false sense of desirability for crayon colored coins that would otherwise be common date coins not worth much at all.

 

Someone sees the results of this auction and looks at the coin in question and concludes that they have to get involved in toned coins - after all, that is where the money is.

 

I would believe the above BS scenario before I would ever believe a legitimate bidder bought that coin for $13k

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I did consider a similar scenario, and your version is certainly a possibility. If it is indeed the case, judging by the response it has gotten here, it does not seem to be generating the desired outcome.

 

[Walkerfan]

It would seem some people like this type of toning, and some of them are quite wealthy. I doubt there will be any buy's remorse, unless the image did not depict the coin accurately.

 

In all likelihood, it has found itself a nice home where it will be well taken care of and appreciated. Even if a dealer bought it, this kind of money would not be spent without the certainty of finding it just such a home.

 

 

I have heard it said many times when CAC stickers are at the center of a discussion, that CAC and JA are nothing more than "market makers". That seems to make everything OK since they are not market manipulators but market makers.

 

But why does one not consider the possibility of a coin such as this one, selling for such a ridiculous price, possible market manipulation on behalf of a concerted group of individuals that specialize in majority of toned coins, nearly exclusively.

 

Before you dismiss this possibility look at it this way:

 

You have 6 dealers that specialize in toned coins. They collude by putting one of their middle of the road toners up on GC and then they all bid it up to a predetermined price level. The winner (if you can call them that) pays for the coin. The original owner, reimburses the high bidder and the only cost to all 6 is approximately $1,262.00 or $210.00 from each person involved.

 

So for a measly $210.00 I could get in on an exclusive advertising and awareness campaign designed to create a false sense of desirability for crayon colored coins that would otherwise be common date coins not worth much at all.

 

Someone sees the results of this auction and looks at the coin in question and concludes that they have to get involved in toned coins - after all, that is where the money is.

 

I would believe the above BS scenario before I would ever believe a legitimate bidder bought that coin for $13k

 

 

 

 

Believe what you want. But even in your highly implausible conspiracy theory, there would be no assurance that the coin in question or any others would have their prices positively affected in the future as a result of that reported sale.

 

+1

 

A lot of trouble for an 'advertising campaign' and little hope that one auction (a needle in a proverbial haystack) would ever affect the larger market and/or knowledgeable/interested bidders.

[KeyMan64]

I am very very happy with my common date Morgan toner. Granted, it is only in blue-fade label holder, it is of lower grade,

the toning is only on the reverse as opposed to the more valuable obverse...but it does have a sticker and

only cost me $423.50 all in. I also got mine via Great Collections.

 

I hope the new owner of the 1879-S is pleased with their coin.

 

[Walkerfan]

My dealer buddy had some decent Morgan reverse toners that were reverse slabbed by NGC at decent prices. Feeling now that I should've grabbed a few of them, while I had the chance.

[physics-fan3.14]

Keyman, I'll say honestly: I prefer the toning on yours to the one in the OP.

[coinman_23885]

My dealer buddy had some decent Morgan reverse toners that were reverse slabbed by NGC at decent prices. Feeling now that I should've grabbed a few of them, while I had the chance.

 

Sadly there is bias against reverse toners in the toning community, and these sell for less than if the identical colors were on the obverse.

[toneddollars]

I'm not sure if anyone realizes how long the "i wouldn't want to be holding the bag when the bubble" phrase has been said. Fifteen years at least. The high end toner market is alive and well as it has been for a long long time. It will be around for a long long time to come JMHO