Actually, it is not clear that the first prediction is better. It depends. Also, to the point 1), consider that the probability density function can be asymmetric within the range, i.e. the mean can be different from 0.5*(max+min).
Yes, it depends on how you define "better". I'd consider the first prediction more useful and therefore better, even though the actual falls outside the range. That's what range is not a good method.
A more precise method would be to assume a normal distribution on a log scale and have the prediction include both mean and standard deviation so one could compute the probability associated with a given price. The prediction with the high probability at the final actual value wins.