Author
Topic: Jump and variations in the 1937 Osborne's and other super rare bills  (Read 5193 times)
EyeTradeMoney
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 120

Has anyone noticed... the 1937 Osborne-Towers $5 note is valued as:

VG -   $135
F -     $200
VF -   $325
EF -   $750
...

AU - $3,300 (wtf  ???)
And UNC... $6,600  :o

I mean... are the AU and above notes so scarce that Charlton knows exactly how many are out there and that they are all professionally graded?

Secondly, those with perfect notes (UNC) 5 years ago were booked at $2,500... NOW those same notes are worth $9,200 for GUnc! A 3690% jump! Also, those with AU notes 5 years ago at $1,500 might label them as UNC-60 at $6,600 and those with EF at $500 can now label them at over $3K because the number of flaws might just be a few below UNC, which is 3 demerit points from GUnc.

Am I missing something? Do big collectors pay off Charlton to book such prices?

The rest of the Osborne-Towers don't seem too bad (more or less linear increase in prices from VG to GUnc) and the $10 note is actually cheaper than the $5 note. I don't know what to do with my "F/F-" Osborne now. I mean it's a bit dirty/circulated but there is no wear in the deatails and no tear along the edges either.

The all so sought-after $4 bill went up about 12-25% in value in about 5 years (2.5-5% annual, linear), which is perfectly acceptable with respect to the standard risk-free rate of interest/inflation, where face value doesn't mean anything. In fact, if I sold a $4 bill in 2004, invested the proceeds in real estate, I would have more money than keeping the $4 bill.

The $25 bill went up about 50%, which is about 8.5% compounded annually (more or less equal to real estate).

I know I'm being anal and as much as I love to collect series, when it comes to extremely rare pieces that'll block up a chunk of your bankroll, you gotta think like an investor.
Bob
  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 516
« Reply #1 on: February 03, 2009, 11:17:53 am »

Am I missing something? 
Yes.
Do big collectors pay off Charlton to book such prices?
No.

Collecting Canadian since 1955
EyeTradeMoney
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 120
« Reply #2 on: February 03, 2009, 11:52:37 am »

kid_kc79
  • Wiki Contributor
  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 484
  • Still looking for that one great note
    • KC's Canadian Currency
« Reply #3 on: February 03, 2009, 01:08:50 pm »

The book does not necessarily tell the collectors what to pay but the other way around. These values have been published due to multiple recorded sales in those price range.

Sales on the high end materials were exceeding book values as they often do today!

KC's Canadian Currency
alvin5454
  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 401
  • Paper Money is art!
« Reply #4 on: February 03, 2009, 01:54:01 pm »

Bank notes = apples.
Real estate = oranges.
Bob
  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 516
« Reply #5 on: February 03, 2009, 04:15:31 pm »

Sent you a PM

Collecting Canadian since 1955
EyeTradeMoney
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 120
« Reply #6 on: February 03, 2009, 11:30:33 pm »

Do big collectors pay off Charlton to book such prices?

I am sorry if I offended anyone by making that statement, I do not know who or what group writes the Charlton so I assumed it was a faceless company that runs "procedures" called by big shots like any typical big company.

My first guess is still the fact that all AU's and above are counted, graded and sealed and if your bill is not, it's an EF, even if it looks like an AU.
BWJM
  • Very Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5,021
« Reply #7 on: February 04, 2009, 12:41:00 am »

My first guess is still the fact that all AU's and above are counted, graded and sealed and if your bill is not, it's an EF, even if it looks like an AU.

This is extremely far from the truth. In fact, professional banknote grading is too new yet to have graded even a "majority" of all AU and better notes. First of all, that is a great quantity of overall notes, and second, many notes are held in old collections and will never see the light of day, let alone be brought out for professional grading. Many collectors are quite happy with their ungraded notes. Additionally, it is incomprehensible to suggest that if a note is not professionally graded, then it is automatically no better than EF. How many ungraded Gem UNC notes would you like to see? I've got a pile of them.

Generally speaking, the prices in the Charlton guide are determined based on extensive input from members of the Pricing Panel (see the first page of the book) who monitor sales of banknotes throughout the year. Many are dealers who trade these pieces quite frequently. Auction results, including a sample of information from eBay, are also considered. Bear in mind also that the amounts listed are only estimates of value based on prior observations of supply and demand. The prices are not necessarily based on asking prices however. I could have a rare note for sale and ask several times the current catalogue value for it, but if there's no buyer demand at that price, and certainly no sales, the catalogue value doesn't move. (There was recently an example of that in the AUG Thiessen/Crow $2 notes). With the early 1935 notes, including many of the 1937 Osborne notes that you are so flabbergasted about, there is little supply in the higher grades, but great demand, and several recorded sales for those prices and higher. I suggest you pay attention to the upcoming Torex auction and just watch what some of these notes sell for.

You alluded to what I will call "grading creep" whereby an EF note a few years ago is redefined as AU, and an AU is redefined as Unc-60, etc. Some people may be tempted to do this, but any skilled grader, or competent professional grading service will be able to observe an accurate grade for the note. This is quite simply overgrading, and if done intentionally is a form of fraud. That said, caveat emptor. Learn how to properly grade a note and don't get screwed. Know which TPGs you can trust.

Do big collectors pay off Charlton to book such prices?

And next time you want to consider making statements like that, keep in mind that it could be considered slander, and that the folks you're referring to might well be reading your post, as was the case here.

BWJM, F.O.N.A.
Life Member of CPMS, RCNA, ONA, ANA, IBNS, WCS.
President, IBNS Ontario Chapter.
Treasurer, Waterloo Coin Society.
Show Chair, Cambridge Coin Show.
Fellow of the Ontario Numismatic Association.
friedsquid
  • Very Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,879
  • CPMS 1593
« Reply #8 on: February 04, 2009, 07:16:55 am »

Quote
How many ungraded Gem UNC notes would you like to see? I've got a pile of them.
Could I make an appointment for a private viewing....I will bring the coffee and sticky buns ;D



Always looking for #1 serial number notes in any denomination/any series
Bob
  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 516
« Reply #9 on: February 04, 2009, 09:38:19 am »

1.  The situation with 1937 Osborne-Towers $5 notes is that so many of them that are offered as UNCs are in fact circulated notes that have been processed.  ORIGINAL high grade notes are very difficult to find, hence the big jump in price.  Use a lot of caution when buying, and see note 2:
2.  Unfortunately a TPG holder is no guarantee the note has not been tampered with, and is truly in the stated grade - a lot depends on which grader was involved.  Recall the infamous case of the Gem Unc 66 note with a lovely crease down the centre, for example.  It was discussed on this board I believe.

Collecting Canadian since 1955
 

Login with username, password and session length