1933 Double Eagle has sold for $18,872,250

That'd be interesting...release a hoard AND get docked 2 points on the grade!!! $18M investment down the drain!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

There are loose ends that haven't been tied up yet. For one, chain of custody is a little weak, or at least nobody seriously challenged it. As such, it's an assumption, hinging on credibility, rather than fact. There are others, as well, and they all relate to if this is the one, the lawful one. And they're a big deal. $18,872,250 big.

 

I heard a rumor that the winning bidder also gets a red oak presentation box. Just a rumor, mind you....

 

Velvet too?

 

The prices for the stamps were at the low-end or below. No record-setting headlines there.

Big $$$ and the ultra-rich are not going for stamps which means even rarities with a popularion of 1 are not setting records or beating guestimates.

 

It could be bought by someone so wealthy that the future sales prices doesn't matter to them.

If it's someone with a net-worth of $10 billion, do you think that they care if the coin sells for $25 MM or $35 MM if it grades higher or with CAC or slabbed or not ?

In Weitzman's case, the value of the 3 Treasures actually was a decent portion of his liquid net-worth which is why he wanted to sell them to fund his foundation and philanthropic endeavors.

 

I wonder why some of these people remain anonymous.

 

I don't believe that the coin was ever graded informally, JM. I never saw any definitive "it would grade X." But there may be such quotes, I'll have to check....and there may be a reference in RWB's SAINTS book, too.

I believe that the grade was just guestimated as MS-65 from the public viewings and previous auction. Which is a bit surprising since the gashes on the left-leg are so noticeable.

 

Why not, it’s millions of dollars. No different than buying art or any other trophy

Supposedly it was, just not as a 63

 

I have a better one. The grading fees are too high. That makes about as much sense as what you just said. Your problem is you don't even see the issue. No wonder you keep getting this wrong. The issue isn't the future sales prices, as you erroneously think. I agree. The world agrees. These chums don't give two hoots about that. They don't care about the grade. The issue is what comes with the grade. Switch your thinking to that, the attribution.

This half-assed way PCGS and CAC communicated this grade was for this auction to proceed. How is this a numismatic auction without a grade? I can hear it now. Please grade this for us, you fools, so we can auction this sorry-looking, damaged thing!

The more this nonsense continues, the more it's the genuine article, right? But by innuendo, it is. This is the second big auction reinforcing that innuendo. Where are the facts this is the one? Who cares about that? This one said this, and that one said that, and said, and said, and said, and said--get off our backs with facts! Are you beginning to get the idea? It's like my SVDB. I say it's genuine. Therefore, it's genuine. Let's get on with the show.

I'll tell you. There are better attributions from Variety Vista and Wexler on single-squeeze DDOs you can't see without a microscope than there is here. Every week we're coming to blows over whether some minuscule deformity is a genuine error, and yet they don't give a thought to whether this coin is what they say it is? Why is that? They lack the experts to track it down? Or they don't care to know? Which do you think?

Here, PCGS, CAC, grade my 1914-D. It's a 1914-D. And when you finish with that, grade my 1922 "No D." And then my 1916-D Merc. You can trust me. A little old lady gave them to me after I helped her across the street. That's how authentic this 1933 Farouk is. Get it together...

 

Oh...OK. Were you the sore underbidder of the 4.9 mil paid for the block of four for the Jenny, which is a philatelic record and 2 mil more than the last recorded sale, or just don't care for philately? Or maybe you just don't like Weitzman and the whole shoe thing.

Reminder to self: Pass on your consultation when I decide to sell any philatelic or numismatic holdings.

 

Most of the buyers -- especially American -- have disclosed their identity on the winning bids for art the last 30 years that I have been watching. Not all the time, but most of the time.

 

You make some good points, Eddie, but this coin is unique: a popular series...and 1 of a kind.

First, I think it would have sold regardless. Second, the best information to date says this is the "Farouk Coin" but regardless....it IS the only legal 1933 regardless of if the identity of the coin(s) in question got shifted some 77 years ago.

 

I freely admit I am not a philatelic expert. The prices paid for the stamps were at the low end of the range/estimates, whereas the 1933 Saint was above it. That's all I am saying.

I have read bond guru Bill Gross's comments religiously since the mid-1990's and he had probably the top stamp collection in recent memory. It was he who said that unlike other collectibles that stamps had major headwinds with dwindling buyers (and big $$$ buyers) and had noted this since 2000 I believe.

And yes, Gross had some recent Inverted Jenny's sold.

 

Many years ago people knew the DuPont family had two 1804 dollars. They were robbed at gunpoint. It took years to recover the coins. When they were recovered, the DuPonts donated them. Just saying.

 

That is not correct at all. In fact, it is grossly incorrect. One does not have to be a philatelic expert to determine the incorrectness of your opinion. When an item sells for 4.9 mil and it is 2 mil above the last known sale, and breaks all records in doing so, that is not the definition of "low end of the range/estimates" (whatever that gobbldygobbledness means).

I don't care one way or the other, but try to at least present some semblance of reasonable opinion, when that is all you are saying.

BTW, no, it was not Gross on that "probably the top stamp collection" thing. The Bechtel Family and the Farouk Family and the Royal Family and the Boy's Town Collections would have to be bypassed, and 4 others that I know of, before the "probably" becomes a possibility of a semblance of comparison. Or maybe your recent memory does not recall past memory. That is understandable.

 

Charley, I'm just going by Sotheby's own figures. Take it up with them, not me.

Maybe they were high, but the commentary AFTER the auction was that the show-stopper was the Saint, not the stamps.

 

Here's the prices estimated BEFORE:

https://www.sothebys.com/en/buy/auction/2021/three-treasures-collected-by-stuart-weitzman

Here's the actual sales prices AFTER:

https://www.sothebys.com/en/digital-catalogues/three-treasures-collected-by-stuart-weitzman

Yes, I know the estimate from the selling auction house may or may not reflect market value but I would say that the conensus before was that all 3 price ranges were fair.

 

OK