Log In
Members
Home
Add Reply
Add Topic
Online
I hate to pick on Don Grove’s estate, and it would be better if this were an anonymous individual with greedy kids who care not a whit about a Winchester and its history, and only see greenbacks, as opposed to a devoted spouse, but this sets a great example as to why it rarely is a good idea to set a reserve on an item. If a reserve is set, and an item doesn’t sell, and is offered again, it becomes stale. Folks question why it is relisted. Is there a problem with it? Did it ship to a winning bidder and was it returned due to unspecified problems? Or…? Etc, etc.
There were ten Winchesters in a previous Wards auction from Don Grove’s estate that were offered in the sake that closed yesterday. (If I missed any, please let me know). Collectively, they brought $52,063. With buyer’s premium, $61,434.34. But, in the previous sale, they brought $72,608. With buyer’s premium, that’s $85677.44. Previous full retail for all ten was, from Don’s site, $131,300. It states on the website that any firearm that hammers at over 5k will require no commission. If the estate was shrewd enough to negotiate no commission on everything, these rifles brought to the estate $52,063, 39.7% of previous retail. This was $20,545 less than these Winchesters previously brought at auction with a reserve. Very costly for the estate. Frankly, I think all auctions should be no reserve, let the bidding start at a dollar. Hey, if you manage to snag a Winchester 1886 with condition dripping with features for $750, good for you! Nothing p*ss*s me off more than a greedy heir holding out for top dollar, this often being unrealistic. To level the playing field here, I try and educate myself about firearms, and were an uneducated heir want to sell me a firearm at well under actual value, I would strike while the iron is hot. I have no qualms about this, but this is increasingly uncommon. As some of these estates with valuable firearms have increased in value to extraordinary numbers, heirs have become increasingly greedy, or so it seems.
In my case, I have already learned my lesson when it comes to reserve auctions, but it was much less costly for me. Several years ago, I sent a Colt Single Action Army revolver to auction with a reserve of $2400, and it brought $2300. It came up in the next auction with no reserve and hammered at $2200. So I waited 6 months to receive less. Not a great business decision.
Also, the figure at auction with commission yesterday was 46.8% of full retail, but this might not be quite accurate as full retail might have been negotiated by a prospective buyer.
Wards told me that these Winchesters had been offered with a reserve previously, and this auction there was no reserve, so these all supposedly did sell. The valuation with 18% buyer’s premium is in parentheses. Note: Lot numbers in this auction differ from the previous auction.
Here is where I addressed the earlier auction:
https://winchestercollector.org/forum/winchester-rifles/don-groves-winchesters-at-wards-auctions/
Eight rifles brought less than at previous auction, one exactly the same, and one negligibly more.
Lot 4010: Winchester 1866 SRC, number 14,412. $12,525. ($14,779.50). Previous sale: $19047 ($22,475.46). Previous retail: $29,000.
Lot 4012: Winchester 1873 First Model, number 20,068. $6300 ($7434). Previous sale: $11,904. ($14,046.72). Previous retail: $15,900.
Lot 4015: Winchester 1886 rifle, number 57,985. This was the only Winchester that brought more than at the previous auction. $4410. ($5203.80). $4305. ($5079.90). Previous retail: $15,000.
Lot 4021: Winchester 1892 rifle, number 531,759. $4,546. ($5,364.28). Previous auction: $4725 ($5,575.50). Previous retail: $9900.
Lot 4025: Winchester 1892 SRC, number 16,239. $5579. ($6583.22). Previous sale: $10,475. ($12,360.50). Previous retail: $14,900.
This carbine, at the previous sale, I believed to have a replaced buttstock due to poor fit. The auction house agreed, and revised their description. This time around, this was omitted, and I again brought it to their attention. They stated that several experts looked at this SRC and proclaimed it to be right as rain.
Lot 4026: Another 1892 SRC in .44-40, number 470,853. $5000. ($5900). Identical to previous sale. Previous retail: $10,900. Previous description mentioned importer’s marks and electric pencil markings which I brought to their attention, midway through the auction. This disclaimer was omitted this time around. This was disclosed at the time of a previous sale where this SRC hammered at $5250.
Lot 4028: Winchester 1894 rifle, number 686030. $2625. ($3097.50). Previous sale: $3260 ($3846.80). Previous retail: $5900.
Lot 4032: Winchester 1894 SRC, number 1,082,787. $2625. ($3097.50. Previous sale: $3586 ($4,231.48). Previous retail: $6900.
Lot 4033: Winchester 1894 trapper carbine, number 1,051,727. $5828 ($6,877.04). Previous sale: $7,156 ($8,444.08). Previous retail: $15,000.
Lot 4042: Winchester 1895 rifle, number 419,874. $2625 ($3,097.50). Previous sale: $3150 ($3,717). Previous retail: $7900.
As you can tell, I’m not a big fan of retail. I get it, dealers have to make a living, but it’s more fun to dabble with other hobbyists instead of being gouged.
Ian,
For lot 4033 (1894 trapper) Don Grove had the retail set on his website for $15,000. I was surprised it didn’t go for more than $5,828 last night even with the incorrect sight. In defense of Jan, she did just follow Don’s path of setting the high reserves at Wards in the initial auctions and the second time around with no reserve (per Ward’s Auction rules). I did pick up this Lyman 103 DA coded sight though.
https://www.wardscollectibles.com/auction/A97/viewitem.php?item=90927
Don
deerhunter said
Ian,For lot 4033 (1894 trapper) Don Grove had the retail set on his website for $15,000. I was surprised it didn’t go for more than $5,828 last night even with the incorrect sight. In defense of Jan, she did just follow Don’s path of setting the high reserves at Wards in the initial auctions and the second time around with no reserve (per Ward’s Auction rules). I did pick up this Lyman 103 DA coded sight though.
https://www.wardscollectibles.com/auction/A97/viewitem.php?item=90927
Don
Thank you! I thought that previous retail value seemed awfully low.
I have since corrected my post, and all maths and percentages, to reflect this.
mrcvs said
deerhunter said
Ian,
For lot 4033 (1894 trapper) Don Grove had the retail set on his website for $15,000. I was surprised it didn’t go for more than $5,828 last night even with the incorrect sight. In defense of Jan, she did just follow Don’s path of setting the high reserves at Wards in the initial auctions and the second time around with no reserve (per Ward’s Auction rules). I did pick up this Lyman 103 DA coded sight though.
https://www.wardscollectibles.com/auction/A97/viewitem.php?item=90927
Don
Thank you! I thought that previous retail value seemed awfully low.
I have since corrected my post, and all maths and percentages, to reflect this.
deerhunter said
Ian,For lot 4033 (1894 trapper) Don Grove had the retail set on his website for $15,000. I was surprised it didn’t go for more than $5,828 last night even with the incorrect sight. In defense of Jan, she did just follow Don’s path of setting the high reserves at Wards in the initial auctions and the second time around with no reserve (per Ward’s Auction rules). I did pick up this Lyman 103 DA coded sight though.
https://www.wardscollectibles.com/auction/A97/viewitem.php?item=90927
Don
Nice sight!
steve004 said
mrcvs said
deerhunter said
Ian,
For lot 4033 (1894 trapper) Don Grove had the retail set on his website for $15,000. I was surprised it didn’t go for more than $5,828 last night even with the incorrect sight. In defense of Jan, she did just follow Don’s path of setting the high reserves at Wards in the initial auctions and the second time around with no reserve (per Ward’s Auction rules). I did pick up this Lyman 103 DA coded sight though.
https://www.wardscollectibles.com/auction/A97/viewitem.php?item=90927
Don
Thank you! I thought that previous retail value seemed awfully low.
I have since corrected my post, and all maths and percentages, to reflect this.
deerhunter said
Ian,
For lot 4033 (1894 trapper) Don Grove had the retail set on his website for $15,000. I was surprised it didn’t go for more than $5,828 last night even with the incorrect sight. In defense of Jan, she did just follow Don’s path of setting the high reserves at Wards in the initial auctions and the second time around with no reserve (per Ward’s Auction rules). I did pick up this Lyman 103 DA coded sight though.
https://www.wardscollectibles.com/auction/A97/viewitem.php?item=90927
Don
Nice sight!
Agreed!
I’m not accusing anyone of anything, but hammer prices last evening compared to the previous go around—what is that attributed to?
1. Being offered a second time around, folks are suspicious that there’s something wrong with them, even if it was only not meeting reserve?
2. Shill bidding in a valiant attempt to meet reserve?
3. An extra 6 months or so to identify problems inherent with many of these Winchesters and bid a bit wiser?
4. A recession really is imminent folks are a bit more cautious?
5. Or???
This sale, collectively, brought only 71.7% as when previously offered earlier in the year. That’s statistically SIGNIFICANT, no matter which way you slice it!
I’m no expert on the industry but I’ve been observing and occasionally participating in online gun auctions since 2000, so I’ve watched it through several booms and busts of the American national economy. Based on what I’ve observed and experienced in a modest way, I believe the collectible firearms market and what I call the desirable used firearms market, both respond inversely to the prevailing short and medium term interest rates available to investors, in roughly the same way dividend paying stock prices behave. The prevailing prices of those sorts of guns have a strong alternative investment element. After the Federal Reserve Board quit putting a heavy thumb on interest rates and it became possible to buy relatively risk-free instruments yielding over 5% per annum, collectors not rich as Croesus realized the opportunity cost of buying the high condition Spencer with provenance to Abe Lincoln, was no longer small.
My experience in making occasional sales at auction to alter my collection — eventually to reduce it — has consistently been that, if you want top dollar, you must take the risk of a no reserve, nominal starting bid, auction. You will learn what the real market price is for your jewel of the first water and it can be unpleasant. Far better than setting a cowardly reserve that irritates potential buyers, if you can’t bear the risk, then set a fixed price that foregoes top dollar sufficiently to make the item an attractive buy.
I have seen two auctions of virtually identical, highly collectible rifles, the first one with a $4,000 starting bid, and the second with a dollar start, no reserve. The first closed without a bid. The second closed for $4200.
The grifter’s secret sauce is greed. Something for nothing. That is also what makes low start no reserve auctions work. But the Seller’s risk goes up when interest rates go up.
- Bill
WACA # 65205; life member, NRA; member, TGCA; member, TSRA; amateur preservationist
"I have seen wicked men and fools, a great many of both, and I believe they both get paid in the end, but the fools first." -- David Balfour, narrator and protagonist of the novel, Kidnapped, by Robert Louis Stevenson.
So let me get this straight…..
It’s OK for a knowledgeable collector to take advantage of an uninformed widow or heir, but it’s not appropriate for an uninformed widow or heir to contract with an auction house to avoid being taken advantage of?
Personally I have bought quite a few Winchesters from the Ward’s sale, (4 last night), and have so far been pleased with everything I bought. I also bought several guns from Don over the years and was also very pleased. Like with any antique firearm it is My responibility to be knowledgable of condition and value of what I’m purchasing. The answer is pretty simple, If You think it’s to dear for You , it probably is.
W.A.C.A. life member, Marlin Collectors Assn. charter and life member, C,S.S.A. member and general gun nut.
Henry Mero said
Personally I have bought quite a few Winchesters from the Ward’s sale, (4 last night), and have so far been pleased with everything I bought. I also bought several guns from Don over the years and was also very pleased. Like with any antique firearm it is My responibility to be knowledgable of condition and value of what I’m purchasing. The answer is pretty simple, If You think it’s to dear for You , it probably is.
What did you get?
Were any of the ten outstanding bargains?
Tedk said
So let me get this straight…..It’s OK for a knowledgeable collector to take advantage of an uninformed widow or heir, but it’s not appropriate for an uninformed widow or heir to contract with an auction house to avoid being taken advantage of?
I didn’t mean it that way.
I meant they should just let it go at market and not hold out at an unreasonable reserve.
There’s also the advantage of cash now, and guaranteed, at a low price, vs waiting until later, with no guarantees.
Accepting 50% of previous retail prices would have been advantageous to the estate over what they actually brought.
A lot of the major auction houses won’t let you set reserves for items of small value. Guns under $10K or so are small value. Auction houses don’t want to do the work it takes to try and sell a gun then have it not sell.
Zebulon said
My experience in making occasional sales at auction to alter my collection — eventually to reduce it — has consistently been that, if you want top dollar, you must take the risk of a no reserve, nominal starting bid, auction. You will learn what the real market price is for your jewel of the first water and it can be unpleasant. Far better than setting a cowardly reserve that irritates potential buyers, if you can’t bear the risk, then set a fixed price that foregoes top dollar sufficiently to make the item an attractive buy.
Not a risk you need to run–just arrange for a “friend” to place your true reserve near end of auction. If his bid turns out to be highest, you’ll of course be liable for commission, but that’s preferable to a big loss on item. Think I invented this ruse? Not hardly. But a fixed-price may be a better method, because if a viewer is seriously interested, but thinks your price is unreasonable, he may (if possessing reasonable intelligence) contact you directly to negotiate a mutually agreeable compromise; I’ve done it.
clarence said
Not a risk you need to run–just arrange for a “friend” to place your true reserve near end of auction. If his bid turns out to be highest, you’ll of course be liable for commission, but that’s preferable to a big loss on item. Think I invented this ruse? Not hardly. But a fixed-price may be a better method, because if a viewer is seriously interested, but thinks your price is unreasonable, he may (if possessing reasonable intelligence) contact you directly to negotiate a mutually agreeable compromise; I’ve done it.
I’ve seen sellers use someone else to buy their guns back more than a few times. You can negotiate with sellers on sites like gun broker but not at auction houses. It is not uncommon for an auction house to negotiate after the item did not sell.
clarence said
Zebulon said
My experience in making occasional sales at auction to alter my collection — eventually to reduce it — has consistently been that, if you want top dollar, you must take the risk of a no reserve, nominal starting bid, auction. You will learn what the real market price is for your jewel of the first water and it can be unpleasant. Far better than setting a cowardly reserve that irritates potential buyers, if you can’t bear the risk, then set a fixed price that foregoes top dollar sufficiently to make the item an attractive buy.
Not a risk you need to run–just arrange for a “friend” to place your true reserve near end of auction. If his bid turns out to be highest, you’ll of course be liable for commission, but that’s preferable to a big loss on item. Think I invented this ruse? Not hardly. But a fixed-price may be a better method, because if a viewer is seriously interested, but thinks your price is unreasonable, he may (if possessing reasonable intelligence) contact you directly to negotiate a mutually agreeable compromise; I’ve done it.
Assuming I’ve set the auction to run long enough to expose the item to the market, I’ve usually found my idea of the item’s market value was pretty close. In the instances where I’ve taken a haircut, I’ve learned post mortem that I’d simply paid too much to begin with and couldn’t admit it.
In the Sixties, when large business corporations were converting their accounting and payroll systems to COBOL running on large mainframe computers, it was an article of faith in executive suites that “No President or Chief Financial Officer has ever been fired for buying IBM.”
Similarly, I have never taken a bath when selling a Colt or a Winchester. I should probably add Browning to that short list but I don’t like selling the several I own and use.
- Bill
WACA # 65205; life member, NRA; member, TGCA; member, TSRA; amateur preservationist
"I have seen wicked men and fools, a great many of both, and I believe they both get paid in the end, but the fools first." -- David Balfour, narrator and protagonist of the novel, Kidnapped, by Robert Louis Stevenson.
I bought 4 Mod. 1890’s. It is “funny ” however that the closest bid to mine , on all 4 items, was in a range that one more bid would have been over My pre determined “maximum” bid , Coincidence I guess
. I haven’t seen the guns yet but the pictures sure looked good.
W.A.C.A. life member, Marlin Collectors Assn. charter and life member, C,S.S.A. member and general gun nut.
Henry Mero said
I bought 4 Mod. 1890’s. It is “funny ” however that the closest bid to mine , on all 4 items, was in a range that one more bid would have been over My pre determined “maximum” bid , Coincidence I guess
Henry, was it the same guy bidding you up in all four auctions? When you say “predetermined” do you mean you placed a maximum bid, well over the last hostile bid, and allowed autobidding to increment up as needed to stay high? if so, is the implication the house was running your autobids up to your max, to increase fees? That would serious.
If it’s not the same guy, odds are you just have from your experience a better grip on what the items at auction were worth and your opponents were looking for a bargain but gave up in the face of your persistence.
- Bill
WACA # 65205; life member, NRA; member, TGCA; member, TSRA; amateur preservationist
"I have seen wicked men and fools, a great many of both, and I believe they both get paid in the end, but the fools first." -- David Balfour, narrator and protagonist of the novel, Kidnapped, by Robert Louis Stevenson.
Henry Mero said
I bought 4 Mod. 1890’s. It is “funny ” however that the closest bid to mine , on all 4 items, was in a range that one more bid would have been over My pre determined “maximum” bid , Coincidence I guess
I didn’t track these, Henry. How did they sell relative to what Don valued them at?
I had thought perhaps you bought the 1866 or an 1873.
Did anyone purchase any of these ten lots I outlined, or did they reason there just were too many problems with these that it just wasn’t worth while?
November 7, 2015
Offline
Tedk said
So let me get this straight…..It’s OK for a knowledgeable collector to take advantage of an uninformed widow or heir, but it’s not appropriate for an uninformed widow or heir to contract with an auction house to avoid being taken advantage of?
Jan Grove is not an uninformed widow, she has spent years behind tables at gun shows. She may not be up to speed on the latest auction strategies but it’s often a crapshoot and I wish her the best. Don had some good stuff and many pieces should bring a premium.
I’ve made some fortuitous purchases at the Orphanage and I have no knowledgeable heirs. What goes around, comes around. If you want a chance at some pretty decent Winchesters all you have to do is outlive me! If you’re a reloader be sure to make an offer on that pile of reloading equipment and supplies.
Mike
I will reference Austinguns and Charyn’s model – start them at a penny with no reserve. I note this is wildly successful for them (and a great many gunbroker sellers). These type auctions always generate a lot of interest. In fact, gunbroker has a couple canned search categories that buyers often check. They have a category for auctions that start at a penny. They also have a category that for auctions where the bidding is currently under $1.
I realize more of the discussion in this thread is about live auctions. There, my general advice is start with a very low opening bid with no reserve. The exception would be unusual items that have a very limited following. Winchesters don’t fit this category
TXGunNut said
Tedk said
So let me get this straight…..
It’s OK for a knowledgeable collector to take advantage of an uninformed widow or heir, but it’s not appropriate for an uninformed widow or heir to contract with an auction house to avoid being taken advantage of?
Jan Grove is not an uninformed widow, she has spent years behind tables at gun shows. She may not be up to speed on the latest auction strategies but it’s often a crapshoot and I wish her the best. Don had some good stuff and many pieces should bring a premium.
I’ve made some fortuitous purchases at the Orphanage and I have no knowledgeable heirs. What goes around, comes around. If you want a chance at some pretty decent Winchesters all you have to do is outlive me! If you’re a reloader be sure to make an offer on that pile of reloading equipment and supplies.
Mike
You twisted my comment, that was a general statement and not referring to this specific situation
1 Guest(s)
