George V market heats up on ebay

[geejay50 10]

Hello all,

I am sure it has not missed the attention of serious collectors amongst you that the George V coins of high class that Greg Marguli listed and sold over the weekend on ebay went for high prices.

Particularly a 1928 Shilling MS61 that fetched $4200 and an MS65 1927 Penny (shared pop1) that unexpectedly was taken off before the auction's end in the face of many bids. In an explanatory email to me later it seems that the consignor to Greg accepted a bid that was in excess of $3000.

Seeing that there is such a scarcity of high grade South African Coinage in the George V and ZAR area, collectors are obviously getting desperate to get the best and will pay whatever they can afford.

Geejay

[Pierre_Henri 92]

George V is going places!

 

Two 1928 Shillings in AU 55 recently sold for R4,902.00 and R4,617.00 respectively on Bid-or-Buy, so R30 000 for a MS61 is a good price but certainly not unexpected.

Another recent winner on BoB was a 1923 Two-Shilling in MS62 that went for R26,500.00.

It looks like in really top MS grades, there are no stopping George V coins, but I think there might be a slow down in some coppers, like the 1923 Pennies - only my opinion though.

Pierre

[Cold Sea 6]

Hi, saw another auction that is current for a complete proof set, estimate 1000- 1200 sterling. Hold thumbs.

[wayjen 10]

what would the coin look like that was sold on eBay?

[Algreco 10]

1928 1/ ms61 (pcgs)

 

[Algreco 10]

1927 1d MS65BN (PCGS)

 

[jwither 17]

There is no comparison between a coin such as the 1923 1D and these other examples. The 1923 by any standard is a common coin. The NGC census has over 300 of them and most in mint state. And most likely, there are several hundred or even a lot more of this coin still available in high grade to be graded. It does not differ that much in this respect from a coin such as the 1892 1D. I still see the 1892 raw all the time in MS.

 

As for the prices of these coins, its hard to make an accurate evaluation without actually seeing them in person. But based strictly upon the grades, I am going to make the same comments I have before. Versus the better grade AU (AU-55 or AU-58), these that are LOW grade MS coins are overpriced. MS-62 and MS-61 are not high grade or better MS coins, they are LOW grade MS.

 

A price multiple of six for the 1928 1/ in MS-61 versus AU-55 is not a reasonable premium. Its not a reasonable premium for this coin and its not one for any coin. If anyone believes that it is, I would like to see other examples where the same or a similar price structure exists for these grades elsewhere. Outside of South Africa Union and ZAR, I have never seen it though I admit that the limited availability of graded coins other than for the United States makes a direct comparison somewhat problematic.

 

But in the US, no knowledgeable collector would normally pay that kind of a price difference for grades like this. And this is even true for the few US coins which are of comporable scarcity.

 

Since there is no absolute value, there are two conclusions everyone can draw from my statements. Either the higher graded coins are overpriced or the lower graded coins are underpriced. Maybe its some of both. But I see no doubt that these AU coins, some of which look BETTER than an MS-61, are much better values at current prices. Using an arbitrary cut-off between MS coins and those below it makes no sense at all in assessing scarcity or how much too pay. There are several coins which have a decent number of specimens in AU-55 or AU-58 even though they have few in MS while most of these MS are in grades such as these. The fact that there may be a handful for MS coins while ignoring the larger number of possibly high quality AU specimens is an arbitrary measure for even conditional scarcity.

Edited November 17, 2010 by jwither

[wayjen 10]

thanks guys, much appreciated.

[Pierre_Henri 92]

It is all in the ratios

 

Sorry but I must have missed your post.

 

I am not sure if some of your comments are directed at me, but here are some replies...

 

 

There is no comparison between a coin such as the 1923 1D and these other examples. The 1923 by any standard is a common coin. The NGC census has over 300 of them and most in mint state. And most likely, there are several hundred or even a lot more of this coin still available in high grade to be graded. It does not differ that much in this respect from a coin such as the 1892 1D. I still see the 1892 raw all the time in MS.

 

Yes, and the recent discovery of the hoard of 1923 pennies will not help either - I see no growth here on the short or medium term.

 

As for the prices of these coins, its hard to make an accurate evaluation without actually seeing them in person. But based strictly upon the grades, I am going to make the same comments I have before. Versus the better grade AU (AU-55 or AU-58), these that are LOW grade MS coins are overpriced. MS-62 and MS-61 are not high grade or better MS coins, they are LOW grade MS.

 

You must have misunderstood me - or rather I did not express myself well. Obviously MS 61 and MS 62 are not high MS grades, but they are high coin grades - ANY MS coin is a high grade - that was what I meant.

 

A price multiple of six for the 1928 1/ in MS-61 versus AU-55 is not a reasonable premium. Its not a reasonable premium for this coin and its not one for any coin. If anyone believes that it is, I would like to see other examples where the same or a similar price structure exists for these grades elsewhere. Outside of South Africa Union and ZAR, I have never seen it though I admit that the limited availability of graded coins other than for the United States makes a direct comparison somewhat problematic.

 

This is were things get rather technical - and where I both agree and disagree with you - let me explain ...

 

Say for instance the ratio between a certain date MS and the same date AU coin graded by NGC is 1:10 - for every (just for example) MS coin, there are 10 in AU condition graded. Let's say that is the norm - on average the ratio is 1: 10 for that series and denomination - lets say George V SA Shillings...

 

NOW, for some or other unexplained reason - for a certain date - lets make it 1928 - the ratio is 1:20 - that is DOUBLE the norm.

 

Lets go back to the norm of all the OTHER shillings being 1:10 - here one would pay say a premium of X for a MS above a AU coin, BUT for specifically the 1928 date one would pay MUCH MORE for a MS compared to a AU because of the ratio difference compared to other GV shillings.

 

I hope to do a small study this coming December holidays regarding these ratio's (MS vs. AU) and prices realized - so then one would know if this is really true. The problem is obviously the small universum size(s) and I also have no access to PCGS PoP reports - maybe someone can help me out here with some stats?

 

Since there is no absolute value, there are two conclusions everyone can draw from my statements. Either the higher graded coins are overpriced or the lower graded coins are underpriced. Maybe its some of both. But I see no doubt that these AU coins, some of which look BETTER than an MS-61, are much better values at current prices. Using an arbitrary cut-off between MS coins and those below it makes no sense at all in assessing scarcity or how much too pay. There are several coins which have a decent number of specimens in AU-55 or AU-58 even though they have few in MS while most of these MS are in grades such as these. The fact that there may be a handful for MS coins while ignoring the larger number of possibly high quality AU specimens is an arbitrary measure for even conditional scarcity.

 

I agree 100% - I would much rather have a nice AU55 in my collection with a superb strike and color (but minimal wear), that an Ugly Duckling MS with no wear but a soft strike and a "not nice" eye appeal ...

 

Regards

 

Pierre

Edited November 19, 2010 by Pierre_Henri

[Pierre_Henri 92]

High George V prices in 2010 ...!

 

By the way ...

 

If I add up the highest prices realized for a ...

 

Farthing

Half Penny

Penny

Tickey

Sixpence

Shilling

Florin ... and

Half Crown

 

....in the George V series on Bid-or-Buy this year (2010) - that is ONLY eight (8) coins - the combined total price paid for that 8 coins is

 

 

(scroll down...)

 

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

 

R262 604.00

 

Yes - for only 8 coins - here on Bid or Buy - this year! That is more than a quarter of a million rand for only eight George V coins!

 

Isn't that just amazing? - and NOT ONE of them was in proof condition!

 

Pierre

Edited November 19, 2010 by Pierre_Henri

[Pierre_Henri 92]

Regarding top ZAR Prices ...

 

Good grief - I just did a Bid-or-Buy search regarding the combined top price(s) paid for the ZAR series (Penny to Crown) this year (2010)

 

For the seven (7) top ZAR coins (one in each denomination - Penny to Crown) on BoB this year - R249 782 was paid -

 

The Union of South Africa George V series obviously have the Farthing (Quarter Penny) and Half Penny added that the ZAR Paul Kruger series do not have but then it (ZAR) have the Crown that the George V series does not have...

 

Whatever - very much the same for the combined amount for the top coins paid (non-gold coins) in both series - a quarter of a million give or take a bundle of notes!

 

Wonder what 2011 will hold for us?

 

Hopefully even BETTER news for South African coin collectors!

 

Pierre

Edited November 19, 2010 by Pierre_Henri

[jwither 17]

Pierre,

 

I actually was not specifically directing my comments at you, though I suppose in retrospect it seems that way.

 

The point I was trying to make is that just because a coin is graded mint state in an NGC or PCGS holder does not make it either a better coin or a better "investment".Yet judging by the prices you quoted and others which anyone can check for themselves, this is exactly what most collectors and "investors" think.

 

Mint state coins which are a 63 or higher are presumably always better than AU-58 (or AU-55) but those in MS-60 to MS-62 frequently are not. I recently sold an NGC AU-58 1928 shilling for much less than this price (to my sorrow I might add). But if I were to show both coins to anyone, most collectors I believe would prefer mine to this one if both coins were raw or if they could be bought at the prices you quoted. The simple reason for this is that the coin that I owned does not have all the "clutter' in the obverse fields which this MS-61 has. Most collectors I do not think would even think that the one I owned was not mint state outside of the holder. Given the relative merits between these two coins, how does it make sense to pay up to six times more for a coin which is actually inferior? The only thing "better" about this MS-61 is that the number on the slab is higher. My response to that is, so what?

 

I do agree that the MS-61 should sell for more, but that is only because the resale market places a premium on the grade. Otherwise since the coin is otherwise inferior, it should not.

 

As for the analysis you described on what is "reasonable" versus not, there are two ways of looking at it. I evaluate value from both an economic and numismatic standpoint. No one has shown any interest at all, but I can describe the methodology I use and then everyone can commnet on it. I could do so in another post.

 

From my stanbpoint, I would not agree that any MS-61 should sell for six times (or more) than an AU-55 or AU-58 even if there were 10 or 20 times more of them than in MS. The relative merits between the two coins do not justify it regardless of the census population. That is the same kind of thinking which exists in the prices of actual conditional rarities which is why so many of them sell at the absurd prices they do, both in South Africa and in the United States.

[4kids 10]

Overlooked 1934 Six Pence MS65 on Ebay.

 

The 1934 Six pence that was on offer by the same seller in my opinion was overlooked by most bidders. I base my reason on the fact that should one want to built a Mint state set from MS63 and higher, there is only a probability of 6 potential sets that can be built since there is only 6 each 2s and 2/6 coins between NGC and PCGS in MS63 and higher. The MS65 Six pence is third best known sharing with one coin at NGC, One MS66 at PCGS and one MS67 with NGC, this makes it four coins in highest grade than could have been taken up in one of the potential 6 potential sets. For the grade the bidding on the item was not as fierce as I suspected it to be. With 12 bidders and only a total of 15 bids, the winner got this item at a very reasonable price at US$ 1535.00

 

 

[jwither 17]

$1535 is a reasonable price for the 1934 6D but there are going to be others that have not been graded which will be added to that census count in the future. The idea that most high grade coins are currently included in the census in most instances is wrong.

[ALJADA 10]

Hello everyone,

 

It’s very pleasing to see all the buzz surrounding our GEOV coins especially since many collectors out there assume there are hundreds if not thousands still to be graded and that will attain MS grades. The truth is that there are very few left to grade that shall attain MS grades. I personally oversee some of the finest and most extensive Union collections in the world. I have a database covering about 75% of all the MINT STATE GEOV coins that are currently graded by the NGC & PCGS which tells me who currently owns a particular coin, crossovers from PCGS to NGC which have not been adjusted, regrades at the NGC that were broken out of the slab before resubmitting & other facts which are hard to come by even in today’s' age. It covers approximately 2,100 coins that are GEOV & MINT STATE. Based entirely upon this database and the portfolios I oversee but excluding my extensive research into this series, I can quite comfortably state that anyone who believes that there are still many GEOV coins that will grade MS out there has missed the boat and its too late to catch up.

 

Of the 1923 Pennies graded, how many are break outs and resubmissions? A lot more than anyone would believe and to assume there are still hundreds to come is fantasy.

 

The 1928 shilling will perhaps reach a mint state pop level of 10 coins but I seriously doubt it and how many of you actually know that the PCGS MS64 specimen does not exist anymore because it is now a NGC MS64 because it was crossed over a while back which means the pop stats should read 6 MS coins & not 7? Furthermore owning a MS61 specimen is exactly what it is i.e. a specimen that has not suffered any wear at all and regardless of how it looks it remains more treasured than a coin which was perhaps slid across a table by accident and therefore suffered wear. To all numismatists mint state will always be the holy grail and AU unfortunately is only tops if you are referring to such letters in terms of what they symbolize in the periodic table i.e. GOLD or whose initials they represent namely mine ALEX URIZZI. One must also remember that AU58 for example, is as close to MS as is possible so the relationship between a MS specimen (say between 60 to 63) and an AU58 specimen must not be as far apart as we see here in SA. Hopefully this will change in time but for now this is how it is.

 

The 1928 Shilling MS61 mentioned herein was sold for $4,200 US which equates to about R30, 000. I just sold my MS62 specimen for R60, 000 and some change!! Many of these coins are never seen being sold online or at bricks & mortar auctions, they are sold behind closed doors for big money to serious buyers who know what they are doing.

 

Anyone using Herns' catalogue for any purpose other than reference when it comes to GEOV coins is going to find themselves in the same boat as those who are wishing they had listened to what I was telling them 4 years ago!! Here are some examples: Please note that the values stated below for the 2010/11 catalogue are being used for comparative purposes to illustrate my point and should not be deemed as being in line with my values for such coin. My 2006 prices were in certain cases heavily suppressed by the catalogue values at the time.

 

 

 

 

 

As you can see the value increases that can be seen from the 2006 catalogue to the 2010/11 catalogue are huge and smack of someone trying to catch up on all the price suppression given over the last 10 years. The downside to such huge increases is that serious intelligent numismatists & collectors from overseas, such as jwither, become suspicious of the entire coinage series and its values which can result in them discontinuing their interest in such coins. For me it is very satisfying seeing a 'numismatist' scramble to fix his errors and still not get it right.

 

Cheers

Alex

Edited November 20, 2010 by ALJADA

[Pierre_Henri 92]

I do NOT agree with you - beauty is in the eye of the beholder....

 

To all numismatists mint state will always be the holy grail and AU unfortunately is only tops if you are referring to such letters in terms of what (-ever) ... Cheers Alex

 

Nope - NOT TRUE - many numismatists do NOT regard MS coins as the Holy Grail because MANY lower MS-graded coins are DOWN RIGHT UGLY - and serious collectors do NOT want them in their collection...

 

MANY serious numismatists would MUCH RATHER have a sparkling AU 58 coin in his/her collection than a MS60 that looks like it has been discriminated against because of its pure UGLINESS - even our Constitution should back me on this one -- LOL --

 

Pierre

[Pierre_Henri 92]

Sorry, and ....

 

I have just noticed that on the first ZAR page of the info I have send to you and Invinci for your upcoming coin catalogue, the following might be of relevance regarding sales prices for BoB this year...

ZAR Penny 1892 = AU 58 BN = R2,499.00 vs. MS60 BN = R2,250.00

The AU got a higher price than the MS - but obviously that is only one example – whatever, it does happens because the market is finicky when it comes to “beauty” – MS60 coins would usually NOT make the beauty parade whilst AU58 are mostly TOP coins with only a whisker of wear ... (I love many of the top-end AU coins and certainly do not consider them inferior to Ugly Duckly MS60s for example)

Regards

Pierre

[Bellcoin 10]

Well said - Pierre

 

Beauty is in the coin NOT the holder!

 

Cheers:weird:

[ALJADA 10]

 

Nope - NOT TRUE - many numismatists do NOT regard MS coins as the Holy Grail because MANY lower MS-graded coins are DOWN RIGHT UGLY - and serious collectors do NOT want them in their collection...

 

MANY serious numismatists would MUCH RATHER have a sparkling AU 58 coin in his/her collection than a MS60 that looks like it has been discriminated against because of its pure UGLINESS - even our Constitution should back me on this one -- LOL --

 

Pierre

 

Pierre, let me rephrase the first part of the statement: "To MOST IF NOT ALL COLLECTORS mint state will always be the holy grail ...". I should not have used the term 'numismatists'. The evidence to back this up is shown by what collectors pay for AU58 specimens of a particular coin versus what they pay for MS60 & MS61!

 

The ZAR penny prices you quote for the AU58BN & the MS60BN are very much the exception rather than the rule.

[jwither 17]

You should rephrase that to say to most South African collectors, MS will (or might) be the holy grail. My reply to that would be that anyone who prefers, much less is willing to pay a substantial premium, for an inferior MS is not a knowledgeable collector at all. This might be true of most "investors" of Union coins in South Africa, but I can assure it is absolutely not true of most others elsewhere, whether "investor" or collector..

 

As for KGV and Union availability, I am one of those who believes that these coins are more available than you do. But I have never said there are "huge" numbers out there remaining to be graded. But there are likely more than many long time collectors think there are, however many exactly that may be.

 

On a coin like the 1923 penny, since it is a relatively common coin, yes I believe there are hundreds more out there and no, I do not believe that most of those in the census today are duplicates. Do you know that they actually are? Given that NEN sold many NGC MS-66 just a few months ago when most of them showed up in the census, there is more evidence that most of these at least are unique specimens and not duplicates. The same applies to the MS-65 since the pop went up so substantially in such a short period of time.

 

On other coins, I'm not sure how many are duplicates. You have mentioned some specific coins that you know have crossed over from PCGS to NGC such as the 1934 2/6. The census has 8 in MS now while a few months ago it had five. Maybe all of these were resubmisisons, I have no idea.

 

The general point I will make though is that, given the relatively low value of most Union coins, it does not make any sense to resubmit them. And this is even true for some of the coins which are scarcer because they are still not worth that much money. Now granted, the census numbers for Union are much lower than those for most US coins, but in the US, the proportion of coins with these prices which are submitted twice or more is low to the best of my knowledge, very low. I could see some of the Union "conditional rarities" or maybe a grade lower being resubmitted but generally not otherwise.

 

The main difference of opinion I have with your conclusions is that, much as your efforts have added greatly to the knowledge and information to this series, it does not appear to consider a few things which I might add, are difficult or impossible to account for.

 

The first is that, though the general preference of collectors in South Africa is for graded coins, there are many collectors who are still going to prefer their coins raw. This is even true in the United States and anyone who takes the census data at face value without considering this is going to be wrong. In the instance of South Africa, this is particularly true for those collectors who neither live in South Africa or in the US like I do. Most collectors elsewhere do not like graded coins, so to whatever extent these coins exist outside of South Africa, there will be no way to know this until we see them for sale. I still believe that the majority of incremental supply of these coins that you do not account for are in places like the UK and that there are also some in the US..Its still not substantial but its enough to increase at least some of these to more than is apparent now.

 

Yesterday, I bought a small group of high grade Union coins from a US seller which includes a 1926 6D, 1923 2/, 1934 2/ (2 of them) and a 1924 2/6. I will receive them tomorrow and once I get them back from NGC, I can post the grades if you or anyone else are interested. I can tell you now that judging from the pictures, at least one of the 1934 2/ is definitely an MS, and also on several others unless there is a problem that I could not see. The 1923 might be (the coin is darkly toned and in my limited experience with this date, it seems to have a weaker strike than some others). All of them though are either AU-58 or better, at least.

 

Is this in and of itself significant? No, but I cannot be the only external South African collector who finds these coins. I do not find them all the time but I do find them occasionally.

 

Another factor is that since most Union coins are not worth that much money, at least some will also not bother submitting them, This is especially true given that many people and most outside of South Africa (even dealers who are professionals), do not know what these coins are really worth. Because if they did, I would not be able to buy these coins for the absolute pittance that I have been able to on such a regular basis.

 

Ultimately, the best evidence for how many actually exist will be revealed as the prices go up. This is true for any coin, whether South African or otherwise. If the prices rise substantially and the census counts remain essentially the same as they are now, then your conclusions will indeed be proven correct.

Edited November 23, 2010 by jwither

[jwither 17]

Hello everyone,

 

 

As you can see the value increases that can be seen from the 2006 catalogue to the 2010/11 catalogue are huge and smack of someone trying to catch up on all the price suppression given over the last 10 years. The downside to such huge increases is that serious intelligent numismatists & collectors from overseas, such as jwither, become suspicious of the entire coinage series and its values which can result in them discontinuing their interest in such coins. For me it is very satisfying seeing a 'numismatist' scramble to fix his errors and still not get it right.

 

Cheers

Alex

 

I have already replied to your comments on the census in my last post. You may reply as you wish on that topic seperately. But I did want to add some comments to this thought.

 

While I am one of the (presumably) few collectors of Union from outside of South Africa who have any significant collection at all, though much less than many here, what you describe is only part of the reason for my collecting approach.

 

The catalgue really has nothing to do with my collecting approach for the simple reason that while I cannot even tell you what the 2009 or 2010 edition includes, I do not care because annual catalogues are of limited to no value in reflecting market pricing. That is true of Hern and its true of any other one though the level of accuracy will vary.

 

Using the 2008 catalog as a point of reference, many of the MS prices were too low while the other grades (which do not even include AU) are too high, way too high for grades such as XF. I do not follow prices on BoB closely because I do not buy any coins here, although I have bought some in the past. The main reason for this is because for the coins I do buy, I am simply not willing to pay many of the prices I see when I can buy the coins for so much less elsewhere. Why would I? So it has little to nothing to do with the reliability or lack thereof with the Hern Reference or even your comments on current prices.

 

On the scarcer more expensive coins, such as those you have listed on eBay now, I do not believe those coins are worth what you are asking. You might sell them for that ultimately, I do not know. But the reason I am not going to pay those prices is because since I do not live in South Africa, I will not be able to sell them for anywhere near that money. This is the first reason. (I have sold many coins to SA buyers that I could have sold for more - a lot more - if I lived there.)

 

In the recent past, there have been a few instances when I could buy coins like yours or others I have seen on BoB from Heritage, St James or Baldwin's for a fraction of your ask prices. So once again, why would I pay so much more for yours or these others? Just last year or earlier this year (I would have to check), there were a couple of multi-coin NGC and PCGS MS lots which included coins as good as any of those you have listed now. These lots had four or five MS 1/ and 2/ (with the same dates and grades and maybe even the same coins) and they sold for much less than you are now asking even for a single coin. I knew about these coins before they were sold and could easily have bid more than the realized price if I really wanted them. I did not. Are these coins worth somewhat more now? Yes, possibly. Did they sell for too little then? Yes, possibly. Even presuming that the prices were far too low in this auction I am referencing, are the coins worth so much more now? No, absolutely not.

 

But secondly and more importantly, the other coins that I collect, they are vastly better values for better material than the prices you or others are asking. This is the primary reason why I will not buy these coins for their South Africa prices and supposed market values, since many of these prices you quote are also private sales and its dubious whether they could be resold for the same price now publicly.

 

What I am telling you here is no different than my decision to not buy US coins and I have stated so MANY MANY times on the NGC Message Boards. Today, US coins represent poor relative value. They are exorbitantly expensive given the alternatives but most US collectors are simply ignorant of that fact or do not care. South African coins are vastly better values than US coins but they are absolutely not better values than the others I collect for the most part.

 

Given the choice between spending $200, $500, $1000...you name it....on a South African Union (or ZAR which are even less favorable), I opt for coins such as AU or MS Spanish colonial pillars.

 

Which coins will turn out to be the better "investment"? Despite their relative merits, it easily could be the Union coins. But here is what I can tell everyone reading this post. Compared to the vast majority of collectors, I am a much better evaluator of value. The proof of this is in my financial performance. At this time, I have essentially recovered my entire outlay versus the "investment" I have in my collection. In others words, I could give my entire collection away and still not lose money. I know that because South African coins have increased a lot in value, its not entirely due to my "brilliance" (much as I wish it were) and some others on this baord have done even better than I have because they focused solely on South Africa and have started collecting even earlier.

 

But I can tell you this, I have not made my money by "chasing" coins and I will not do so now. If economics is very important to any one here, you should not do it either. Those who do will eventually get caught holding the proverbial bag and this applies especially to those who buy coins as 'investments" simply or primarily because of the number on the NGC or PCGS label.

Edited November 23, 2010 by jwither