Many of his Jefferson nickels don't have all the necessary or appropriate parts/details that make for a true collector's coin. He lacks finesse, skill to recognize better coins. But who knows, he might eventually upgrade to the far rarer fully struck examples. But I'm not going to hold my breath on that. I only wish someone would let him know. I have no way to get to the guy. With the kind of wealth he has, why doesn't he have higher quality coins in his set? Oh, well.
Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
@leothelyon said:
Many of his Jefferson nickels don't have all the necessary or appropriate parts/details that make for a true collector's coin. He lacks finesse, skill to recognize better coins. But who knows, he might eventually upgrade to the far rarer fully struck examples. But I'm not going to hold my breath on that. I only wish someone would let him know. I have no way to get to the guy. With the kind of wealth he has, why doesn't he have higher quality coins in his set? Oh, well.
Leo
Leo..
I am told that Mr, Hansen and his kids are viewers of Hansen Watch. Anything you post over there, I am very confident he will see. This thread, I don't know. I think you are aware that with the collection he is assembling, it is no way his knowledge can compare to someone that has 20 years specializing in one series. It is really a math problem. I know he has brought a gold specialist on his team. As for a Jefferson nickel specialist, I would be very doubtful.
oh its not me......I know TWO major players who will be problems to him. One he has already tangled with and got no where. I have no clue why the other is not a fan of his.
@specialist said:
First off, Delloy will never complete what Eliasberg had. He has to buy patterns and good luck finding anything or going against us.
For better or worse, as much as I like patterns, I get the feeling that the patterns aren’t key to accomplishing what many people consider Eliasberg’s greatest feat. Even the 1913 Liberty nickel isn’t considered a key coin.
@specialist said:
First off, Delloy will never complete what Eliasberg had. He has to buy patterns and good luck finding anything or going against us.
For better or worse. as much as I like patterns, I get the feeling that the patterns aren’t key to accomplishing what many people consider Eliasberg’s greatest feat. Even the 1913 Liberty nickel isn’t considered a key coin.
@specialist said:
First off, Delloy will never complete what Eliasberg had. He has to buy patterns and good luck finding anything or going against us.
For better or worse. as much as I like patterns, I get the feeling that the patterns aren’t key to accomplishing what many people consider Eliasberg’s greatest feat. Even the 1913 Liberty nickel isn’t considered a key coin.
I call bs on this assertion.
Which part?
Wasn’t the 1913 Liberty Nickel discussed here on the Hansen Watch thread?
The 1913 liberty head nickel is an American coin legitimized by the Mint retroactively. Whether you agree with its supposed origins or not, it’s a real coin now
And Eliasberg had one. In fact, it was his most expensive coin (per prices realized). No twisting of facts or traditions will get out of him needing one to match Eliasberg
@tradedollarnut said:
The 1913 liberty head nickel is an American coin legitimized by the Mint retroactively. Whether you agree with its supposed origins or not, it’s a real coin now
Independent of my own opinion, the importance of this coin was debated in the Hansen Watch thread.
Specialist even mentioned: "Maybe he subscribes to the Bob Simpson theory they are not real and thus he does not want to pay up Simpson has no desire to buy them)."
Yes. And the 1870-s half dime. And the 1873cc no arrows dime. And del Loy won’t pay up for such things. Which is why he will never fully complete the set
@tradedollarnut said:
Yes. And the 1870-s half dime. And the 1873cc no arrows dime. And del Loy won’t pay up for such things. Which is why he will never fully complete the set
While he may not get those coins, from following the posts on the thread, it's unclear how much that actually matters to many people following the set.
@tradedollarnut said:
Yes. And the 1870-s half dime. And the 1873cc no arrows dime. And del Loy won’t pay up for such things. Which is why he will never fully complete the set
While he may not get those coins, from following the posts on the thread, it's unclear how much that actually matters to many people following the set.
Goodness gracious, you’re right. They’re already proclaiming his set the finest ever. Why actually complete it when the masses don’t really care?
@tradedollarnut said:
Yes. And the 1870-s half dime. And the 1873cc no arrows dime. And del Loy won’t pay up for such things. Which is why he will never fully complete the set
While he may not get those coins, from following the posts on the thread, it's unclear how much that actually matters to many people following the set.
Goodness gracious, you’re right. They’re already proclaiming his set the finest ever. Why actually complete it when the masses don’t really care?
An interesting thing is that from a certain perspective, Hansen's set may end up being more complete than Eliasberg's since he's doing both circulation strikes and proofs and Eliasberg didn't make a distinction.
@specialist said:
Delloy can not ever top SImpsons Saints or even Hedgies
In 4 out of 7 Saint sets Hansen has the top current set.
So far as I know, Simpson doesn't have any proofs or pattern saints.
Hansen is one coin away from best ever in that big set (Judd 1776 or 1933)
Simpson has some very nice looking coins but Hansen has that EX-HR 1907 now.
I can have all MS60 & win with one coin if nobody else has it.
We used to have a saying at the track...
"when the green flag drops, the BS stops"
The PCGS registry "drops-the-flag" on secret/imaginary friends.
Simpson ABSOLUTELY has Proof saints (the 1907 PR68-which we have repeatedly turned down over $1 million for) and Patterns (including unique ones). Ask ANYONE in the know, we did not buy the coin UHR Delloy has because it is really NOT a 69. Further we bought a really HIGH END PR68.
Such BS that Delloy is even close to Bob or hedgie. They BOTH own 27D's in 66. For the ultimate key, Delloy on has a 63.
@specialist said:
Simpson ABSOLUTELY has Proof saints (the 1907 PR68-which we have repeatedly turned down over $1 million for) and Patterns (including unique ones). Ask ANYONE in the know, we did not buy the coin UHR Delloy has because it is really NOT a 69. Further we bought a really HIGH END PR68.
Such BS that Delloy is even close to Bob or hedgie. They BOTH own 27D's in 66. For the ultimate key, Delloy on has a 63.
Fake news is all this place is about.
An issue with Simpson’s and Hedgie’s sets for the general public may be that their sets are not public.
In 4 out of 7 Saint sets Hansen has the top current set.
So far as I know, Simpson doesn't have any proofs or pattern saints.
Hansen is on top for all 3 Saint major sets with proofs. Simpson isn’t in any of them. Nothing wrong with being private but then it cannot be verified by others.
Hansen is on top for all 3 Saint major sets with proofs. Simpson isn’t in any of them. Nothing wrong with being private but then it cannot be verified by others.
...
This thread has drifted off the OP topic, as most do, but the title of the OP is: Is Dell Loy Hansen unique in how public his collecting is?
Hansen is on top for all 3 Saint major sets with proofs. Simpson isn’t in any of them. Nothing wrong with being private but then it cannot be verified by others.
This thread has drifted off the OP topic, as most do, but the title of the OP is: Is Dell Loy Hansen unique in how public his collecting is?
Seem like we may be proving that point.
Agree. While this thread has meandered a bit, this seems to bring it back home. Since Dell Loy is public while Simpson and Hedgie are private for these proof registry sets, in that group of collectors, Hansen is unique.
The public vs. private collecting approaches also seems to be part of what is creating issues. A lot of people can only look at public sets and base their perceptions around that, but others like @specialist have more “insider” info and take exception to public perceptions based on their private information.
@specialist said:
geez, we just have not listed them. I do not need to make things up.
I guess when I get time I need to fix all that. How nieve people are.
It’s not about making things up but having a record people can reference. When you post information, it’s valuable, but it’s not complete or in a central, referenceable place.
ok, back to the topic. NO Delloy is not unique. The last Bruce Sher was big time in showing off his sets and there were many others
When I look at Hansen's collection, I look at the overall collection when determining where it ranks. Clearly, there are subsets where someone may have a better Jefferson Nickel collection or St Gaudens collection but to me the key is to look at the collection as whole and make that comparison.
As far as the public display, no he is not at all unique, and given that we are posting on a coin message board where we freely share items from our collections, it’s odd to even think that.
Many collectors share their collections openly on registry site, on coin forums, on websites, at coin clubs, with displays at shows, etc.
And I wouldn’t consider him the most public. Compare a guy who posts a mess of coins on a competitive registry site, with someone who writes up a three page description and history of a particular interesting piece they just acquired and posts it on the message board. There are many collectors that do the latter- they know who they are. And they get way more kudos from me than just some guy putting up pictures with no write up.
As far as what generates a following, remember the public is fickle. Some guy makes a video of him playing computer games and he gets a million followers watching him. Another guy is a talented but starving artist trying to hawk his works on the street and nobody bothers to take a look.
There are a number of reasons why Hanson’s collection is popular, none of which need to be re-hashed. But the publicness of it is by no means unique.
@specialist said:
First off, Delloy will never complete what Eliasberg had. He has to buy patterns and good luck finding anything or going against us.
For better or worse. as much as I like patterns, I get the feeling that the patterns aren’t key to accomplishing what many people consider Eliasberg’s greatest feat.
The reason Eliasberg got public traction, appearance in Life magazine, etc. was because he owned one of every U.S. coin. That's it. If you start talking about patterns the public doesn't care - that's too much wonky nuance for them. One of every coin in the Guide Book is it. You don't add the Judd book, the Sheldon book, or anything else.
Has anyone ever said Eliasberg was incomplete because he didn't have every Judd variety? No, because the public mind share is around regular-issue coins.
I have only one true pattern in my collection, an 1836 gold dollar because I like gold dollars in general.
The other two, which have been all of the pattern books, are the 1792 half disme and the 1836 On-Base Gobrecht Dollar. I consider those coins to be regular issues because of their relatively high mintages and large number of circulated pieces known.
Retired dealer and avid collector of U.S. type coins, 19th century presidential campaign medalets and selected medals. In recent years I have been working on a set of British coins - at least one coin from each king or queen who issued pieces that are collectible. I am also collecting at least one coin for each Roman emperor from Julius Caesar to ... ?
Dell Loy is definitely the best, and most feared collector of our generation. And he's not even self-promoting. He just lays in the weeds and acquires the best coins and collections with his superior representation assisting him every step of the way. Truly amazing that he's less than a half a dozen coins away from history.
I don’t fear Hansen. He’s in his world, and I am in mine. As a matter of fact, I was very happy to get one of his coins when he found an upgrade.
Retired dealer and avid collector of U.S. type coins, 19th century presidential campaign medalets and selected medals. In recent years I have been working on a set of British coins - at least one coin from each king or queen who issued pieces that are collectible. I am also collecting at least one coin for each Roman emperor from Julius Caesar to ... ?
Pcgs is really missing the publicity boat by not having an Eliasberg Registry set.. I just looked at the Complete Sets Registry and there is no way to compare apples to apples...it’s apples to oranges.
Eliasberg’s accomplishment was not a complete circulation strike set so if that’s where you are coming up with ‘less than half a dozen’ then it’s irrelevant. Nor was his accomplishment a complete circulation and proof set - I agree that if Hanson does this then he exceeds Eliasberg. His accomplishment was a complete set regardless of method of manufacture of the coin.
Come on, pcgs - give us that set so we can truly compare Hanson’s quest.
TDN and Specialist are starting to sway me toward their position a bit. On the boards here we have been defining "Public Collecting" as have a registry set that is open to viewing. That, in truth, is a pretty limited definition! Compare to Eliasberg on the cover of Life with his coins. Other numismatist have published books (e.g. Newman) for example.
@AngryTurtle said:
TDN and Specialist are starting to sway me toward their position a bit. On the boards here we have been defining "Public Collecting" as have a registry set that is open to viewing. That, in truth, is a pretty limited definition! Compare to Eliasberg on the cover of Life with his coins. Other numismatist have published books (e.g. Newman) for example.
If you are referring the 1953 publication of Life, Eliasberg was not on the cover. I believe it to the Queen. He did have a very nice multipage article if I remember correctly. If referring to him being on the cover of a later addition, I would not know. The April 27th 1953 Edition is when his collection was introduced to the world as "Greatest Collection of US Coins", which I believe to be for the first time this phase was used in this type of setting.
Here is reality. I have several BIG collections I am building. Virtually all are private. Why? You don't think we get offered coins? There are serious security issues my clients face as well. Keeping a collection private will building it-or even owning it is NOT anyones business. Some people don't brag or want to be in a rat race. Like I said, you don'rt think we don't get offered coins?
Some people collect for their own joy and for their family. Why people here don't get it is a mystery to me.
As far as Delloy, yes, he is one of the greatest coin collectors, but sorry, he does not blow away simpson or a few others we know of. And for the record, NOT all of Simspons coins are registered nor will they be as we are working on a few sets. At Mr Simpson knows the dates, grades and history of what he buys-unlike Delloy (who really is just a hoarder).
The late Gene Gardner must be rolling over in his grave about how collectors have made plastic more important then the coins...
@specialist said:
There are serious security issues my clients face as well. Keeping a collection private will building it-or even owning it is >NOT anyones business. Some people don't brag or want to be in a rat race. Like I said, you don'rt think we don't get offered >coins?
My lack of understanding consists of 3 parts.
1) You say they have security issues but we're talking about people who have access to better security than the rest of us.
2) You say they wish to keep their collections private yet complain about always being offered coins.
3) What do you consider bragging? I sure don't think Hansen is bragging by posing pictures of his coins any more than I am.
@specialist said:
Here is reality. I have several BIG collections I am building. Virtually all are private. Why? You don't think we get offered coins? There are serious security issues my clients face as well. Keeping a collection private will building it-or even owning it is NOT anyones business. Some people don't brag or want to be in a rat race. Like I said, you don'rt think we don't get offered coins?
Some people collect for their own joy and for their family. Why people here don't get it is a mystery to me.
As far as Delloy, yes, he is one of the greatest coin collectors, but sorry, he does not blow away simpson or a few others we know of. And for the record, NOT all of Simspons coins are registered nor will they be as we are working on a few sets. At Mr Simpson knows the dates, grades and history of what he buys-unlike Delloy (who really is just a hoarder).
The late Gene Gardner must be rolling over in his grave about how collectors have made plastic more important then the coins...
I have no problem with collectors being private. I can understand some reasons for it.
What I find hard to understand is being private while also wanting to be recognized as having a great set. If a set is private, how does one know enough about it to recognize or praise it? It seems like not being recognized, or even known, is a natural and intended result of being private.
I've been wondering if it's that private collectors want to be recognized, or their dealer wants them to be recognized?
Either way, it's simply seems difficult to recognize or appreciate a private set from the outside, even if one wanted to.
Obscured sets on the NGC Registry are a waste of time IMO. They often are high in the rankings, but no one, except the owner, knows what’s in them. I was looking at one of coins that I have not put up in a registry. I was surprised to find that it’s still in a registry set, and I have owned it for over three years.
Retired dealer and avid collector of U.S. type coins, 19th century presidential campaign medalets and selected medals. In recent years I have been working on a set of British coins - at least one coin from each king or queen who issued pieces that are collectible. I am also collecting at least one coin for each Roman emperor from Julius Caesar to ... ?
Love these threads. I sit back, drink a 🍺, read and learn and enjoy.
People should remember, we are all different. People collect to make themselves happy.
Some want glory, some want privacy, some want to share the experience with others.
I don’t think there is a right or a wrong, nor do I think the collectors that get referenced care.
Why would some people build great sets and then sell...because it was what they felt was best for them at the time. Why would others help build sets rather than make their own, because that may be what is right for them... Why are some people very public and others very private, once again, because it fits their personality and values and makes them happy.
Why do some people specialize and others expand...why do some start in one area and then move to another....maybe been there, done that...It’s what a person feels is right for them at the time. Why do some people spend lots of money and others less, because other activities may give them more enjoyment or be more important to them.
Personally, I wouldn’t be surprised if there are wonderful collections and coins that almost no one knows about.
So have healthy debates, expand interest in this wonderful hobby and accept that diversity and differences of opinions exist, keep an open mind and most important of all....Have fun!!!
Here’s to a few thousand more entertaining and informative posts🍻🥂
Comments
Many of his Jefferson nickels don't have all the necessary or appropriate parts/details that make for a true collector's coin. He lacks finesse, skill to recognize better coins. But who knows, he might eventually upgrade to the far rarer fully struck examples. But I'm not going to hold my breath on that. I only wish someone would let him know. I have no way to get to the guy. With the kind of wealth he has, why doesn't he have higher quality coins in his set? Oh, well.
Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
My Jefferson Nickel Collection
Leo..
I am told that Mr, Hansen and his kids are viewers of Hansen Watch. Anything you post over there, I am very confident he will see. This thread, I don't know. I think you are aware that with the collection he is assembling, it is no way his knowledge can compare to someone that has 20 years specializing in one series. It is really a math problem. I know he has brought a gold specialist on his team. As for a Jefferson nickel specialist, I would be very doubtful.
My 20th Century Gold Major Design Type Set ---started : 11/17/1997 ---- completed : 1/21/2004
oh its not me......I know TWO major players who will be problems to him. One he has already tangled with and got no where. I have no clue why the other is not a fan of his.
I see Hanson is going after varieties as well as regular issues. I personally a bunch of POP 1 Dime varieties.
I would be VERY hard to deal with.
For better or worse, as much as I like patterns, I get the feeling that the patterns aren’t key to accomplishing what many people consider Eliasberg’s greatest feat. Even the 1913 Liberty nickel isn’t considered a key coin.
I call bs on this assertion
Which part?
Wasn’t the 1913 Liberty Nickel discussed here on the Hansen Watch thread?
The 1913 liberty head nickel is an American coin legitimized by the Mint retroactively. Whether you agree with its supposed origins or not, it’s a real coin now
And Eliasberg had one. In fact, it was his most expensive coin (per prices realized). No twisting of facts or traditions will get out of him needing one to match Eliasberg
Independent of my own opinion, the importance of this coin was debated in the Hansen Watch thread.
Specialist even mentioned: "Maybe he subscribes to the Bob Simpson theory they are not real and thus he does not want to pay up Simpson has no desire to buy them)."
I put more weight into a hundred years of coin collecting tradition than I do in either Simpson’s or Hanson’s opinions on the matter
It’s one of the top 5 American coins. He needs one to hold any claim to matching Eliasberg
Even harder than the 1913 Liberty Nickel may be the 1933 Double Eagle.
Yes. And the 1870-s half dime. And the 1873cc no arrows dime. And del Loy won’t pay up for such things. Which is why he will never fully complete the set
While he may not get those coins, from following the posts on the thread, it's unclear how much that actually matters to many people following the set.
Goodness gracious, you’re right. They’re already proclaiming his set the finest ever. Why actually complete it when the masses don’t really care?
An interesting thing is that from a certain perspective, Hansen's set may end up being more complete than Eliasberg's since he's doing both circulation strikes and proofs and Eliasberg didn't make a distinction.
In 4 out of 7 Saint sets Hansen has the top current set.
So far as I know, Simpson doesn't have any proofs or pattern saints.
Hansen is one coin away from best ever in that big set (Judd 1776 or 1933)
Simpson has some very nice looking coins but Hansen has that EX-HR 1907 now.
I can have all MS60 & win with one coin if nobody else has it.
We used to have a saying at the track...
"when the green flag drops, the BS stops"
The PCGS registry "drops-the-flag" on secret/imaginary friends.
My Saint Set
Simpson ABSOLUTELY has Proof saints (the 1907 PR68-which we have repeatedly turned down over $1 million for) and Patterns (including unique ones). Ask ANYONE in the know, we did not buy the coin UHR Delloy has because it is really NOT a 69. Further we bought a really HIGH END PR68.
Such BS that Delloy is even close to Bob or hedgie. They BOTH own 27D's in 66. For the ultimate key, Delloy on has a 63.
Fake news is all this place is about.
An issue with Simpson’s and Hedgie’s sets for the general public may be that their sets are not public.
@ReadyFireAim wrote:
Hansen is on top for all 3 Saint major sets with proofs. Simpson isn’t in any of them. Nothing wrong with being private but then it cannot be verified by others.
...
...
This thread has drifted off the OP topic, as most do, but the title of the OP is:
Is Dell Loy Hansen unique in how public his collecting is?
Seem like we may be proving that point.
Agree. While this thread has meandered a bit, this seems to bring it back home. Since Dell Loy is public while Simpson and Hedgie are private for these proof registry sets, in that group of collectors, Hansen is unique.
The public vs. private collecting approaches also seems to be part of what is creating issues. A lot of people can only look at public sets and base their perceptions around that, but others like @specialist have more “insider” info and take exception to public perceptions based on their private information.
geez, we just have not listed them. I do not need to make things up.
I guess when I get time I need to fix all that. How nieve people are.
ok, back to the topic. NO Delloy is not unique. The last Bruce Sher was big time in showing off his sets and there were many others
It’s not about making things up but having a record people can reference. When you post information, it’s valuable, but it’s not complete or in a central, referenceable place.
Good to know.
When I look at Hansen's collection, I look at the overall collection when determining where it ranks. Clearly, there are subsets where someone may have a better Jefferson Nickel collection or St Gaudens collection but to me the key is to look at the collection as whole and make that comparison.
PEOPLE: "Dell Loy will try to put together a full collection of United States coins"
NAYSAYERS: "He'll never come close!"
DELL LOY:
NAYSAYERS: "He needs patterns too!"
As far as the public display, no he is not at all unique, and given that we are posting on a coin message board where we freely share items from our collections, it’s odd to even think that.
Many collectors share their collections openly on registry site, on coin forums, on websites, at coin clubs, with displays at shows, etc.
And I wouldn’t consider him the most public. Compare a guy who posts a mess of coins on a competitive registry site, with someone who writes up a three page description and history of a particular interesting piece they just acquired and posts it on the message board. There are many collectors that do the latter- they know who they are. And they get way more kudos from me than just some guy putting up pictures with no write up.
As far as what generates a following, remember the public is fickle. Some guy makes a video of him playing computer games and he gets a million followers watching him. Another guy is a talented but starving artist trying to hawk his works on the street and nobody bothers to take a look.
There are a number of reasons why Hanson’s collection is popular, none of which need to be re-hashed. But the publicness of it is by no means unique.
And ancients ...
And dark side...
And...
My Saint Set
The reason Eliasberg got public traction, appearance in Life magazine, etc. was because he owned one of every U.S. coin. That's it. If you start talking about patterns the public doesn't care - that's too much wonky nuance for them. One of every coin in the Guide Book is it. You don't add the Judd book, the Sheldon book, or anything else.
Has anyone ever said Eliasberg was incomplete because he didn't have every Judd variety? No, because the public mind share is around regular-issue coins.
I have only one true pattern in my collection, an 1836 gold dollar because I like gold dollars in general.
The other two, which have been all of the pattern books, are the 1792 half disme and the 1836 On-Base Gobrecht Dollar. I consider those coins to be regular issues because of their relatively high mintages and large number of circulated pieces known.
Dell Loy is definitely the best, and most feared collector of our generation. And he's not even self-promoting. He just lays in the weeds and acquires the best coins and collections with his superior representation assisting him every step of the way. Truly amazing that he's less than a half a dozen coins away from history.
Less than half a dozen? Huh?
I don’t fear Hansen. He’s in his world, and I am in mine. As a matter of fact, I was very happy to get one of his coins when he found an upgrade.
Pcgs is really missing the publicity boat by not having an Eliasberg Registry set.. I just looked at the Complete Sets Registry and there is no way to compare apples to apples...it’s apples to oranges.
Eliasberg’s accomplishment was not a complete circulation strike set so if that’s where you are coming up with ‘less than half a dozen’ then it’s irrelevant. Nor was his accomplishment a complete circulation and proof set - I agree that if Hanson does this then he exceeds Eliasberg. His accomplishment was a complete set regardless of method of manufacture of the coin.
Come on, pcgs - give us that set so we can truly compare Hanson’s quest.
TDN and Specialist are starting to sway me toward their position a bit. On the boards here we have been defining "Public Collecting" as have a registry set that is open to viewing. That, in truth, is a pretty limited definition! Compare to Eliasberg on the cover of Life with his coins. Other numismatist have published books (e.g. Newman) for example.
If you are referring the 1953 publication of Life, Eliasberg was not on the cover. I believe it to the Queen. He did have a very nice multipage article if I remember correctly. If referring to him being on the cover of a later addition, I would not know. The April 27th 1953 Edition is when his collection was introduced to the world as "Greatest Collection of US Coins", which I believe to be for the first time this phase was used in this type of setting.
My 20th Century Gold Major Design Type Set ---started : 11/17/1997 ---- completed : 1/21/2004
Here is reality. I have several BIG collections I am building. Virtually all are private. Why? You don't think we get offered coins? There are serious security issues my clients face as well. Keeping a collection private will building it-or even owning it is NOT anyones business. Some people don't brag or want to be in a rat race. Like I said, you don'rt think we don't get offered coins?
Some people collect for their own joy and for their family. Why people here don't get it is a mystery to me.
As far as Delloy, yes, he is one of the greatest coin collectors, but sorry, he does not blow away simpson or a few others we know of. And for the record, NOT all of Simspons coins are registered nor will they be as we are working on a few sets. At Mr Simpson knows the dates, grades and history of what he buys-unlike Delloy (who really is just a hoarder).
The late Gene Gardner must be rolling over in his grave about how collectors have made plastic more important then the coins...
My lack of understanding consists of 3 parts.
1) You say they have security issues but we're talking about people who have access to better security than the rest of us.
2) You say they wish to keep their collections private yet complain about always being offered coins.
3) What do you consider bragging? I sure don't think Hansen is bragging by posing pictures of his coins any more than I am.
My Saint Set
hey firearms, you are clueless. sorry
Snort
Yea...I think one of us is.
My Saint Set
I have no problem with collectors being private. I can understand some reasons for it.
What I find hard to understand is being private while also wanting to be recognized as having a great set. If a set is private, how does one know enough about it to recognize or praise it? It seems like not being recognized, or even known, is a natural and intended result of being private.
I've been wondering if it's that private collectors want to be recognized, or their dealer wants them to be recognized?
Either way, it's simply seems difficult to recognize or appreciate a private set from the outside, even if one wanted to.
Obscured sets on the NGC Registry are a waste of time IMO. They often are high in the rankings, but no one, except the owner, knows what’s in them. I was looking at one of coins that I have not put up in a registry. I was surprised to find that it’s still in a registry set, and I have owned it for over three years.
Love these threads. I sit back, drink a 🍺, read and learn and enjoy.
People should remember, we are all different. People collect to make themselves happy.
Some want glory, some want privacy, some want to share the experience with others.
I don’t think there is a right or a wrong, nor do I think the collectors that get referenced care.
Why would some people build great sets and then sell...because it was what they felt was best for them at the time. Why would others help build sets rather than make their own, because that may be what is right for them... Why are some people very public and others very private, once again, because it fits their personality and values and makes them happy.
Why do some people specialize and others expand...why do some start in one area and then move to another....maybe been there, done that...It’s what a person feels is right for them at the time. Why do some people spend lots of money and others less, because other activities may give them more enjoyment or be more important to them.
Personally, I wouldn’t be surprised if there are wonderful collections and coins that almost no one knows about.
So have healthy debates, expand interest in this wonderful hobby and accept that diversity and differences of opinions exist, keep an open mind and most important of all....Have fun!!!
Here’s to a few thousand more entertaining and informative posts🍻🥂