My guess is that the value is being skewed and based on by the one auction record on the Numista page.
He supplied a link to the coin on the website without saying where he was getting the „high amount“ from, or even stating what such „high amount“ was. I can also assume instead I would prefer for the OP to clarify first before helping explain the situation.
You know what they say; assume makes an ASS out of U and ME!
„If your reply or post in the Forum stinks of AI, I will call you out! Knowledge comes from experience, the I in AI stands for incompetence.“
Numista values are based on input values from purchases from individuals and auction sales. The one auction sale at AU is over €3250 (however this is a mint error, off strike) and taken with other individual entries say at €10, €15, €5 it has produced a mean amount of €400 (300 uk pounds). Although why it has added this value for VF, XF, AU & UNC I don’t know. The proof UNC is at €6 or something. The point is Numista prices, like other valuations can be inflated, deflated, skewed etc
Always use multiple sources to find a more reliable price, eBay sales, online auctions, World coin catalog, your local coin shop. Remember a price is only realistic if someone is willing to pay said price with enough knowledge to know if he or she is making an informed decision.
„If your reply or post in the Forum stinks of AI, I will call you out! Knowledge comes from experience, the I in AI stands for incompetence.“
Outliers either high or low don't factor in the Numista price (at least they aren't supposed to). Either there is something wrong with automatic the calculation or a bunch of accounts have entered 300-500 € values (maybe some Honk Kongers used Hong Kong dollar prices with US currency settings?).
Outliers either high or low don't factor in the Numista price (at least they aren't supposed to). Either there is something wrong with automatic the calculation or a bunch of accounts have entered 300-500 € values.
One outlier no, so yes I agree with you some erroneous person or persons have added unrealistic values as mistake or to bump up the price and are probably using Numista website to justify such high price when selling the coin.
Reminds me of an encounter I once had in a flee market, one seller had a coin with no price, when I enquired about it he produced a photocopied piece of paper with a screen shot of an eBay price in the 100s of thousands, his next words were „what are you willing to give me for it“ - even if I said €10, that was €10 more than it was worth!
„If your reply or post in the Forum stinks of AI, I will call you out! Knowledge comes from experience, the I in AI stands for incompetence.“
has produced a mean amount of €400 (300 uk pounds).
Don't confuse mean with median. They have completely different statistical meanings.
Having error coins assigned to a specific year line is a known problem. I've edited those types of auction results when I've found them. I've submitted a CR to remove this value from the year line it's attached to. After/if it is accepted we'll see if it caused the problem. I suspect not as it should only have affected the UNC value and not those below AU.
has produced a mean amount of €400 (300 uk pounds).
Don't confuse mean with median. They have completely different statistical meanings.
Having error coins assigned to a specific year line is a known problem. I've edited those types of auction results when I've found them. I've submitted a CR to remove this value from the year line it's attached to. After/if it is accepted we'll see if it caused the problem. I suspect not as it should only have affected the UNC value and not those below AU.
Yes I couldn’t think of the other (median) at the time of writing, so just went with mean - because it was quicker and easier than doing a Google search to explain which is which, as honestly I also have forgotten which one refers to which average value and how it is worked out. But I think the OP would have understood either way.
Are you and a few others who comment nonstop on the forum, the forum Police? You all seem to like to point out mistakes or assumed errors, differences of opinion at great pleasure, instead of just adding your experience and expertise to the original posters question. For example; here you could have just replied as a normal post adding in the „median“ instead of going out of your way to put someone down by assuming I confused mean with median.
You know what they say „don’t assume“ it makes an ASS out of U and ME!
„If your reply or post in the Forum stinks of AI, I will call you out! Knowledge comes from experience, the I in AI stands for incompetence.“
has produced a mean amount of €400 (300 uk pounds).
Don't confuse mean with median. They have completely different statistical meanings.
Having error coins assigned to a specific year line is a known problem. I've edited those types of auction results when I've found them. I've submitted a CR to remove this value from the year line it's attached to. After/if it is accepted we'll see if it caused the problem. I suspect not as it should only have affected the UNC value and not those below AU.
The CR I submitted has been accepted. The Numista value of the coin is now US $5.40.
The CR I submitted has been accepted. The Numista value of the coin is now US $5.40.
When I did the $HK to $U.S. conversion (above), it still showed they were valued at around $54 U.S. 10x more than actual value. Thanks for taking the time to correct that mess.
Hong Kong • 10 Dollars (Special Administration Region)
