Do you think that Roma Numismatics overestimate the value of their lots?

Thanks Irbguy, just like you I use Internet and laptop or desktop (whatever you prefer not sure if there is any app... In terms of paying $600, you can use a free function, but then you will have to go to multiple sources to look up hammer price. - if you have few additional minutes to spare - you dont need to spend $600. but I want to reiterate - it is up to individual to do research, i think @TIF is excellent at this- where, what and for how much it was sold - including images of lots from years ago...

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

acsearch is, I think, 50 euros per year and well worth the cost. Collectors need not go all the way to CoinArchives for this kind of data.

 

CNG has an archive of their sold coins going which goes back to the early 2000s. ACsearch went to a paid subscription a couple of years ago. Anyone can still access the database but to see the prices realized you have to have a paid subscription. I find it well worth the 85 EUR/year. The cost of CoinArchives Pro is a bit steep for my needs but at some point I may bite the bullet.

 

ACSearch lists the auction house, sale, and lot number on the free listing as well. So if you really have time on your hands you can usually also find the sale price on the auction house website.

 

Let me reinforce this endorsement, especially for those collectors who bid in even just a modest number of auctions or who search the VCoins site for potential acquisitions. ACSearch covers a very wide range of auctions and dates, and more often than not you'll find similar (if not the exact same) coin(s) that you're considering.

CNG is also an excellent resource since it includes CNG's own private catalogs as well as its e-auctions.

 

Ah, thank you everyone. CNG and I are old friends, though I tend to use it more for varietal information rather than pricing. That needs another look. I had a free acsearch account before I asked, which is also good for tracking down research type info, but without price info not so much for auction bidding. Hearing all this I think that the next time I plan an assault on the houses I will try a week's subscription to see how it helps.

 

i will echo the other comments here. Acsearch is well worth the investment. It is always an open tab on my browser. I find myself using it a few times per day. It is also helpful for getting a general idea of rarity.

 

Roma is waaay better than heritage regarding ancient coins they should not be mentioned in the same breath.

 

The answer lies within, if you have the will to learn. It is more succinct and an easier read than most. Either that or go learn economics, game theory and psychology, after which it becomes obvious.

https://www.nuff.ox.ac.uk/users/klemperer/VirtualBook/07_Chapter1.pdf

Or you can take the advice of anonymous posters who love you but offer only platitudes.

 

Totally agree. Setting much lower opening bids just adds an air of unrealism as especially novice collectors climb the inevitable ladder to get close to a realistic estimate of value. An estimate is normally a fairly conservative assessment of what a coin should fetch on an ordinary rainy day. An opening lower than estimate allows for the fact that a seller may sometimes (especially over hundreds of coins) misjudge the quality or market-desirability of a coin, and the coin may be worth a bit less than estimate even to the very highest bidder who turns up on the day. It allows some leeway. Once you set openings very low e.g. at 50% then the whole thing turns into a game of guesswork because probably only a few percent of lots are going to actually sell at such low estimates, AND it disrupts consignors who just may not want to consign if they think their coin might be sold for half of a conservative reasonable estimate made by an expert.

If I were setting an estimate, I'd go onto CoinArchives or ACsearch and see what coins in similar condition have hammered for. Then I'd choose a number which would be rather less than the median and somewhat above the lowest. So if there were 9 comparable coins in about the same condition, I'd probably estimate my coin at about what the third cheapest sold for (so a bit conservative). And then set a starting price of 80% of that number. I suspect most dealers do this process by instinct, especially for cheaper coins.

 

It is obvious that everyone here has an uninformed opinion. Also, nobody understands math or can read a simple paper on auction theory. LAZY

This is stupid easy to understand.
https://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/10/magazine/10Section2b.t-2.html


btw CNG puts decent estimates on their coins and start at 60%. So all you experts touting that everyone is at 80%............you are showing your lack of basic research and your predispositon for twaddle.

 

Thanks for the nice words.

So far as I'm aware, CNG is the only company that starts at 60% in a world of maybe 50 active auction houses. I regularly sell through CNG. I typically realise an average of 60% above estimate, which means the starting prices are typically as little as forty percent the final sale price. The CNG estimates may indeed generate high sale prices. However I regularly also sell through Roma, indeed I sell as much volume through Roma as through CNG. I typically realise about 20% above estimate at Roma, but on higher estimates. When I compare results over the last three years, over perhaps five hundred sold coins, I find the end result to me is pretty much exactly comparable whether I sold through CNG or Roma, with some types of coins selling better in one venue, and other types selling better in the other. What I get in my pocket is the same. As a consignor it seems to make no difference in practice. I believe this is because this is a sophisticated specialised hobby where buyers know the true value of what they bid on, and mentally adjust accordingly. To win a lot they bid 60% above estimate at CNG and 20% above estimate at Roma, and they know they have to do so.

Where the thread started wasn't with the question about what works best for sellers. It was whether the estimates are accurate. They seem more accurate in Roma than CNG. But the end result seems to be a wash, no better in one than the other.

 

I am currently bidding in a Christies auction (You might not know them.)

Photo estimate $5-7.5k starting bid $1,500............30% opening price. According to you and Rich, this is foolish for anyone with pricey or unique items. Christies attracts a lot of fools I guess.

Ever hear of Sotheby's? Same deal. I can go on and on, but I won't.

The thread started about estimates around Richs auctions. I offered him a suggestion to improve his auctions. Increased participation (less complaints by lowering the barrier to entry) and better odds his customers will sell at a fair price (less no-sales and drawn out sales cycles)

Everyone else has offered nothing of substance. Just a lot of sycophants jumping in with bewildering logic based on anectdotes and nonsense. I bet nobody has a business degree. But the opinions keep coming.

btw I have assumed you are an expert in RR, but that is because I know less than you about them. Now I wonder if I presumed too much.

 

As I read this thread, I note that you offered your opinions about ancient coin auctions, unsubstantiated by analysis or objective data, as did most of the other posts (including my opinion about NAC's auctions getting the highest prices). You obviously believe strongly in your opinions. That's understandable. No need to insult others' opinions, though.

Andrew McCabe offers fact, based on his actual, verifiable experience:

OK, so it's just one individual with about five hundred data points, but they're actual data points in a thread full of unsubstantiated opinions. Kudos to Andrew!

It might surprise you to know that some collectors on this site have graduate degrees in academic subjects, including mathematics, and really can understand math! Again, no need to blindly insult those whose opinions don't agree with yours.

You'll probably lose your bet. It might surprise you to find out that some of the collectors on this site have started successful businesses, at least one of which had a successful IPO. Again, no need to insult the collectors here based on your lack of knowledge about their academic and business backgrounds.

I personally like a lively exchange of ideas and opinions about a topic, in an objective and non-belligerent manner, and even more I appreciate opinions that are backed up with actual analysis of verifiable facts. Feel free to question any opinions and offer opposing points of view and, even better, offer your own data collection and analysis in response to those who question the basis for your opinions. We'll all learn more if we keep these threads civil and courteous.

 

You are just being downright rude for no legitimate reason.

 

MBA (Henley, 1995). Career in commerce in oil sector, most recent period in acquisitions and divestments. I was aware of the study you linked to and have no disagreements with the study. Still I have my own experience in selling several hundred coins through Roma and several hundred through CNG. Relative to price I originally paid for coins, I have achieved essentially identical results through both approaches. Both CNG and Roma have returned to me approx 95-100% my prices paid over the long run. Buyers are paying more than I paid of course, including commissions. Noting again what I said in my prior post as it may have been missed, this thread is about the accuracy of estimates, not about the most effective approach to take. Although from my experience both the strong and weak estimate approach seem in practice to give me same results as a consignor. Perhaps there's a third way I haven't yet tried.

On Friday I added another Christies auction to my shelves, their June 1987 New York sale. I've a few Christies provenanced coins, such as Christies Roma (18 Dec.1980) lot 138 P.MAE ANT denarius, or my Vibia aureus, ex Christies (28 May 1963) lot 1, Lord Hever, John Jacob Astor coll. (1886-1971) 1908 Olympic gold medallist, owner The Times newspaper, MP for Dover 1922-1945. My records show I've checked most of their London, Milan, New York sales back to about 1900. But I've a short memory span and probable early-onset dementia, so it's possible as you say that right now I might not know them.

 

Nice Carisia.

 

Obviously starting bid is up to the auction house. On the other hand if the meaning of estimate is what Roma considers as fair value of the coin, starting with 80% doesn't make much sense. For coins estimated at £100 and below winners end up paying in total more then the estimate even if won at starting bid, particularly if there are no other lots to combine shipping costs. I am more concerned though by some fake late romans (of typical Balkan craftsmanship made using worn ancient flans) that made their way to couple of recent auctions. Definitely not to the extent of infestation seen at some other auction houses I will not name here, but still worrying.

 

Andrew this is off topic but out of curiosity do you think being from the "McCabe collection" adds any value to your coins? I would imagine it would seeing that anyone who is serious about collecting Republican coins would know of your collection and want an ex-McCabe coin.

 

It depends.

If it is an ordinary coin type in ordinary condition, even a nice Julius Caesar portrait denarius, it adds nothing to my sales value. I've lots of accumulated numerical evidence.

If it is something unusual - rare or a nice style or a good provenance or a better strike, especially if (and if not already obvious) I note what's unusual, then it adds something relative to the same scarcity/condition coin from the market in general. The McCabe stamp adds a level of security and endorsement that "yes this is a better than usual strike", "yes this is rare", that confirms a higher value. Sure that may be higher than the market in general, but when a collector is looking at something similar in the market in general he is wondering "is this really rare?", "is this really a good style?" and so on. There's a value added when I add that endorsement.

Within this category of something unusual

• unique types, unpublished overstrikes etc. especially get a boost from having someone with knowledge, first of all notice it, and then confirm it with reference to what the books say
• my bronzes are correctly classified, including reference to the very latest research. Mostly this isn't the case. In fact one of the very worst books ever published, Rainer Albert's dreadful handbook of RR coins, has over 100 (out of about 1000) totally incorrect attributions because he was so dumb as to believe the attributions of dealers who had no knowledge or experience. If an author can make money from a book where 10% is just wrong (and you don't know which 10%), that means collectors really value having some help to ensure they know what they are buying
  
• my bronzes aren't messed about with!! (but if, by exception, one is, it gets pointed out). In fact they are generally under-cleaned. I don't have to specifically point this out, but the absence of comments indicates no one has messed with my bronzes. That's a really big extra security blanket for buyers who aren't aware of every style and die and are fearful of buying a tooled, altered coin. It translates into higher prices.

So, I'd deduce from this that it's not my name that adds the value. It's the whole load of extra research and verification that is added permanently to the coins that makes them actually worth more.

I have the sense that collectors of my coins are generally astute and discerning and knowledgeable. They know what adds value or not. Caesar portrait in the usual condition? - no added value. Rare symbol on a denarius with checks carried out against the Babelon database, Crawford, and the Charles Hersh manuscript in the ANS? - lots of added value. Fully explained die-clash? - added value. Rare bronze with untouched surfaces - added value. Unpublished overstrike? - added value. 1970's Ratto provenance? - added value. Unusually good strike in good style on a large flan explained by me? - added value. Correctly classified anonymous bronze which turns out to be a no-symbol variety of a type ordinarily having a symbol? - added value. Decent legionary denarius - no added value.

Wisdom prevails.