CK may have been a bit early back in 1972 in his predictions about 1965 to date material (I started loving the stuff back in 1983), but, he will, in my opinion, be proven right “in the end”.
Look... last week at Heritage a 1976 quarter (60% clad, 40% silver) fetched over $19,000.00 and it was a problem coin at that (check out the reverse of the coin that obviously “turned” in the holder) that might or might not be salvaged with proper conservation if performed soon. Need I say more about the potential for 1965-date material!
Wondercoin
Please visit my website at www.wondercoins.com and my ebay auctions under my user name www.wondercoin.com.
@wondercoin said:
CK may have been a bit early back in 1972 in his predictions about 1965 to date material (I started loving the stuff back in 1983), but, he will, in my opinion, be proven right “in the end”.
Look... last week at Heritage a 1976 quarter (60% clad, 40% silver) fetched over $19,000.00 and it was a problem coin at that (check out the reverse of the coin that obviously “turned” in the holder) that might or might not be salvaged with proper conservation if performed soon. Need I say more about the potential for 1965-date material!
Wondercoin
I won't argue the fact that super high grade 1976 Quarters are very few to be found, but there could be bags of them somewhere or not.
Anyway the group of people who would pay 19K for a 1976 Quarter would all fit in a VW Bug with luggage.
I would think that would be a VERY thin market. Hanson probably bought that Quarter for his type set that knocked High Desert down to #2. One grade down is probably a 20 buck coin!
My thoughts are, when legislation is inevitably passed, this will help spur on a move to collect/preserve solid looking examples of these coins, in clad alloys, and may also present a natural "boon" for the hobby. It may not be as a "shock," per silver being replaced by clad, up through the early '70's, yet, it will not be a hindrance to clad's demand.
Also, dropping the cent would be a benefit as well...as any change, within this hobby, will produce a need to collect "change."
I have a number of MS clad coins (mostly quarters) that I collected during the late 1960s and the 1970s as a YN. I placed them in Whitman albums in order to fill holes.
Once collected and place in the albums I mostly ignored them until I returned to the hobby as an adult and joined the forums. I follow with interest the posts by Cladking and others about clad coinage. I must admit that some of the clads I collected as a YN are very eye appealing look very nice. Some have eye appealing toning. Some have great luster. Some are even relatively well struck and minimally marked. Whether they will ever have great numismatic value is unknown and at this time I do not care.
They are fun to look at and they are proof that clads can be gorgeous.
“I would think that would be a VERY thin market. Hanson probably bought that Quarter for his type set that knocked High Desert down to #2. One grade down is probably a 20 buck coin!”
Even if 1 grade down is $100... at 190x for the 1 point... “Houston, we have a problem”. Dimeman... we are on the same side for once! Lol.
Am I happy my perfect example of this (pop 3) 1976 quarter in my #1 1965-1998 MS quarter set jumped from being a $5,000 coin to a near $20,000 coin? Not really. I am not selling anyway. Building the set was never about the money.
Wondercoin
Please visit my website at www.wondercoins.com and my ebay auctions under my user name www.wondercoin.com.
@DIMEMAN said:
Why spend the time searching for a nice XF-AU 1971 Quarter or 1982-P Dime when you can buy them slabbed in 67 for next to nothing???
1971 in 7 is a pop 6 coin
Would be low to medium four figures.
If this is next to nothing you must be Warren Buffet's nephew.
On the 71 Quarter you would have to drop down to 65 (GEM) which is a robust 8 bucks.
My point was that moderns are dirt cheap and common up to Gem. Some get pricey in ultra Gem.
The 71 in 66 is 275 and 4500 in 67. Who would spend that kind of money on a modern...…..not me! Maybe Hanson.
I wouldn't spend that kind of money for a modern if I had Hanson's money!
Jon, I wasn't trying to be a smart a**.
(Just wanted you to know that.)
I do agree that (most) moderns are indeed dirt cheap, but I disagree that they are all common.
As other posters have said, it is diminished demand for these that keep prices low.
There may be MS67 1971's waiting to be discovered/submitted (and likely are) but the number is not great.
There are many truly scarce to rare moderns (high grade 1970 dimes for example) but the relatively low demand keeps prices down to a point if you "miss" there's little chance to recover your grading fees.
The larger "problem" for moderns is quite simply, lack of respect.
Collectors have an inherent issue with valuing the coins they used in commerce and dismissed at the time, while they were chasing Indian Head Cents and Morgans.
I'd much rather have a flashy 1969 dime in 66 than a super-common 64 Morgan, but I am well aware that I am in the distinct minority.
On the 71 Quarter you would have to drop down to 65 (GEM) which is a robust 8 bucks.
This is a great example of what I'm talking about. It may be only an $8 coin but most MS-64 and lower look like junk. Roll coins, if you can find them, are poorly struck and mint set coins are banged up. Luster used to be pretty good on some mint set coins but now days most are tarnished or have a haze. Only about 40% of the mint sets survive.
Even when the '71 sets were fresh fewer than 1% (~.75%) had a nice Gem Philly quarter. Today you'd probably have to search 500 sets to find one and finding 500 sets is a tough job now days.
So collectors are left with the choice between a Gem or a lower grade that is probably unattractive for this date (even circs tend to be unattractive and no better than VF). Despite the scarcity of the coin the anemic demand still makes it an $8 coin. It's hard for me to understand how a nearly half century old US coin that's tough in nice condition is so inexpensive.
I've been selling off everything that isn't nailed down starting with the higher grades and anything that can be wholesaled. In a few years all I'll have left is things like MS-64 and 65 '71 quarters. If they are still cheap I'll just dump them and most at wholesale.
I'm not getting out of collecting so much as out of promoting and accumulations. I won't be collecting moderns any longer except from circulation. It's been a lot of fun and I hope buyers can have as much fun.
On the 71 Quarter you would have to drop down to 65 (GEM) which is a robust 8 bucks.
This is a great example of what I'm talking about. It may be only an $8 coin but most MS-64 and lower look like junk. Roll coins, if you can find them, are poorly struck and mint set coins are banged up. Luster used to be pretty good on some mint set coins but now days most are tarnished or have a haze. Only about 40% of the mint sets survive.
Even when the '71 sets were fresh fewer than 1% (~.75%) had a nice Gem Philly quarter. Today you'd probably have to search 500 sets to find one and finding 500 sets is a tough job now days.
So collectors are left with the choice between a Gem or a lower grade that is probably unattractive for this date (even circs tend to be unattractive and no better than VF). Despite the scarcity of the coin the anemic demand still makes it an $8 coin. It's hard for me to understand how a nearly half century old US coin that's tough in nice condition is so inexpensive.
I've been selling off everything that isn't nailed down starting with the higher grades and anything that can be wholesaled. In a few years all I'll have left is things like MS-64 and 65 '71 quarters. If they are still cheap I'll just dump them and most at wholesale.
I'm not getting out of collecting so much as out of promoting and accumulations. I won't be collecting moderns any longer except from circulation. It's been a lot of fun and I hope buyers can have as much fun.
Collecting from circulation is fun and a challenge.
I recently found a really nice 72-D quarter (slightly to moderately PL) in low "MS", fields ticked a little due to the PL surfaces, and while I know that's a real common date it was a nice circ. find and gave me a smidgen of delight.
That is the main benefit of collecting like this; enjoying the little things and appreciating them.
Plus the obvious benefit of no cost over face.
@cladking - I remember back when I was filling in the modern years on my Complete Dime set back in 2004-2007. It was easy finding high (66-67) grades that I wanted, but finding NICE ones was the problem. I found a real nice 96-W in 68. Probably spent more on that coin than any other clad coin and it was only around $100.
On the 71 Quarter you would have to drop down to 65 (GEM) which is a robust 8 bucks.
This is a great example of what I'm talking about. It may be only an $8 coin but most MS-64 and lower look like junk. Roll coins, if you can find them, are poorly struck and mint set coins are banged up. Luster used to be pretty good on some mint set coins but now days most are tarnished or have a haze. Only about 40% of the mint sets survive.
Even when the '71 sets were fresh fewer than 1% (~.75%) had a nice Gem Philly quarter. Today you'd probably have to search 500 sets to find one and finding 500 sets is a tough job now days.
So collectors are left with the choice between a Gem or a lower grade that is probably unattractive for this date (even circs tend to be unattractive and no better than VF). Despite the scarcity of the coin the anemic demand still makes it an $8 coin. It's hard for me to understand how a nearly half century old US coin that's tough in nice condition is so inexpensive.
I've been selling off everything that isn't nailed down starting with the higher grades and anything that can be wholesaled. In a few years all I'll have left is things like MS-64 and 65 '71 quarters. If they are still cheap I'll just dump them and most at wholesale.
I'm not getting out of collecting so much as out of promoting and accumulations. I won't be collecting moderns any longer except from circulation. It's been a lot of fun and I hope buyers can have as much fun.
Collecting from circulation is fun and a challenge.
I recently found a really nice 72-D quarter (slightly to moderately PL) in low "MS", fields ticked a little due to the PL surfaces, and while I know that's a real common date it was a nice circ. find and gave me a smidgen of delight.
That is the main benefit of collecting like this; enjoying the little things and appreciating them.
Plus the obvious benefit of no cost over face.
I've found similar PL's hunting half dollar rolls. It truly is a joy finding a PL clad coin from the early 70's. You mentioned '72-D PL quarter. Here is mine.
It could be in 30 years that a similar concern, discussion, will be circulating around forums concerning nickel plated steel U.S. coinage. lol.
@cladking said:
Despite the scarcity of the coin the anemic demand still makes it an $8 coin. It's hard for me to understand how a nearly half century old US coin that's tough in nice condition is so inexpensive.
I think there are just too many different things for people to collect these days. The move away from date/mm sets is also an issue.
I'm not getting out of collecting so much as out of promoting and accumulations. I won't be collecting moderns any longer except from circulation. It's been a lot of fun and I hope buyers can have as much fun.
Sorry to hear that. It will be the end of an era. Will you change your forum handle?
Interesting thread. For a spell (about a decade ago), I did spend some time looking for nice clad coinage in 2x2's at shows from the 60's and Cladking is dead on, some dates are just about impossible to find and look like junk. I concentrated mostly on the quarters and quickly found the the '69 Philly issues were mostly dogs. I ended up finding just one nice one and got a 65 for the grade. I did manage to find a very nice 1967 and got a MS-67 grade from it, and it wasn't SMS. I did look thru lots of Bicentennial clad quarters and found while many were nice, they just missed a good high grade. The lone 1976-D I submitted had very nice light lavender toning and graded MS-67.
Will these coins see any demand years from now? Who knows, but it was fun looking for clad coins like this!
Comments
CK may have been a bit early back in 1972 in his predictions about 1965 to date material (I started loving the stuff back in 1983), but, he will, in my opinion, be proven right “in the end”.
Look... last week at Heritage a 1976 quarter (60% clad, 40% silver) fetched over $19,000.00 and it was a problem coin at that (check out the reverse of the coin that obviously “turned” in the holder) that might or might not be salvaged with proper conservation if performed soon. Need I say more about the potential for 1965-date material!
Wondercoin
I won't argue the fact that super high grade 1976 Quarters are very few to be found, but there could be bags of them somewhere or not.
Anyway the group of people who would pay 19K for a 1976 Quarter would all fit in a VW Bug with luggage.
I would think that would be a VERY thin market. Hanson probably bought that Quarter for his type set that knocked High Desert down to #2. One grade down is probably a 20 buck coin!
I believe clad's future is going to be o.k., and desired, so long as there is a collecting base.
A few things I see going for clad coinage: Changes! Under the mandated Coin Modernization, Oversight and Continuity Act of 2010, Public Law 11-302.
https://www.coinworld.com/news/us-coins/2019/06/us-mint-continues-alternative-metals-experiments.html
My thoughts are, when legislation is inevitably passed, this will help spur on a move to collect/preserve solid looking examples of these coins, in clad alloys, and may also present a natural "boon" for the hobby. It may not be as a "shock," per silver being replaced by clad, up through the early '70's, yet, it will not be a hindrance to clad's demand.
Also, dropping the cent would be a benefit as well...as any change, within this hobby, will produce a need to collect "change."
Change is good!
Be prepared....
I have a number of MS clad coins (mostly quarters) that I collected during the late 1960s and the 1970s as a YN. I placed them in Whitman albums in order to fill holes.
Once collected and place in the albums I mostly ignored them until I returned to the hobby as an adult and joined the forums. I follow with interest the posts by Cladking and others about clad coinage. I must admit that some of the clads I collected as a YN are very eye appealing look very nice. Some have eye appealing toning. Some have great luster. Some are even relatively well struck and minimally marked. Whether they will ever have great numismatic value is unknown and at this time I do not care.
They are fun to look at and they are proof that clads can be gorgeous.
“I would think that would be a VERY thin market. Hanson probably bought that Quarter for his type set that knocked High Desert down to #2. One grade down is probably a 20 buck coin!”
Even if 1 grade down is $100... at 190x for the 1 point... “Houston, we have a problem”. Dimeman... we are on the same side for once! Lol.
Am I happy my perfect example of this (pop 3) 1976 quarter in my #1 1965-1998 MS quarter set jumped from being a $5,000 coin to a near $20,000 coin? Not really. I am not selling anyway. Building the set was never about the money.
Wondercoin
Here's the discussion on this from October of last year:
Coin World reports US Mint ready to jump the shark...
Jon, I wasn't trying to be a smart a**.
(Just wanted you to know that.)
I do agree that (most) moderns are indeed dirt cheap, but I disagree that they are all common.
As other posters have said, it is diminished demand for these that keep prices low.
There may be MS67 1971's waiting to be discovered/submitted (and likely are) but the number is not great.
There are many truly scarce to rare moderns (high grade 1970 dimes for example) but the relatively low demand keeps prices down to a point if you "miss" there's little chance to recover your grading fees.
The larger "problem" for moderns is quite simply, lack of respect.
Collectors have an inherent issue with valuing the coins they used in commerce and dismissed at the time, while they were chasing Indian Head Cents and Morgans.
I'd much rather have a flashy 1969 dime in 66 than a super-common 64 Morgan, but I am well aware that I am in the distinct minority.
Man is that 1971-P Quarter a sight to behold in true MS67 grade! A great condition rarity for the series!
Wondercoin
'71 quarters come real nice but almost never.
“71 quarters come real nice but almost never.”
I would personally buy EVERY MS66+ offered to me to put away for a generation or two. But, what do I know!
Wondercoin
This is a great example of what I'm talking about. It may be only an $8 coin but most MS-64 and lower look like junk. Roll coins, if you can find them, are poorly struck and mint set coins are banged up. Luster used to be pretty good on some mint set coins but now days most are tarnished or have a haze. Only about 40% of the mint sets survive.
Even when the '71 sets were fresh fewer than 1% (~.75%) had a nice Gem Philly quarter. Today you'd probably have to search 500 sets to find one and finding 500 sets is a tough job now days.
So collectors are left with the choice between a Gem or a lower grade that is probably unattractive for this date (even circs tend to be unattractive and no better than VF). Despite the scarcity of the coin the anemic demand still makes it an $8 coin. It's hard for me to understand how a nearly half century old US coin that's tough in nice condition is so inexpensive.
I've been selling off everything that isn't nailed down starting with the higher grades and anything that can be wholesaled. In a few years all I'll have left is things like MS-64 and 65 '71 quarters. If they are still cheap I'll just dump them and most at wholesale.
I'm not getting out of collecting so much as out of promoting and accumulations. I won't be collecting moderns any longer except from circulation. It's been a lot of fun and I hope buyers can have as much fun.
Collecting from circulation is fun and a challenge.
I recently found a really nice 72-D quarter (slightly to moderately PL) in low "MS", fields ticked a little due to the PL surfaces, and while I know that's a real common date it was a nice circ. find and gave me a smidgen of delight.
That is the main benefit of collecting like this; enjoying the little things and appreciating them.
Plus the obvious benefit of no cost over face.
@cladking - I remember back when I was filling in the modern years on my Complete Dime set back in 2004-2007. It was easy finding high (66-67) grades that I wanted, but finding NICE ones was the problem. I found a real nice 96-W in 68. Probably spent more on that coin than any other clad coin and it was only around $100.
I've found similar PL's hunting half dollar rolls. It truly is a joy finding a PL clad coin from the early 70's. You mentioned '72-D PL quarter. Here is mine.
It could be in 30 years that a similar concern, discussion, will be circulating around forums concerning nickel plated steel U.S. coinage. lol.
I think there are just too many different things for people to collect these days. The move away from date/mm sets is also an issue.
Sorry to hear that. It will be the end of an era. Will you change your forum handle?
Interesting thread. For a spell (about a decade ago), I did spend some time looking for nice clad coinage in 2x2's at shows from the 60's and Cladking is dead on, some dates are just about impossible to find and look like junk. I concentrated mostly on the quarters and quickly found the the '69 Philly issues were mostly dogs. I ended up finding just one nice one and got a 65 for the grade. I did manage to find a very nice 1967 and got a MS-67 grade from it, and it wasn't SMS. I did look thru lots of Bicentennial clad quarters and found while many were nice, they just missed a good high grade. The lone 1976-D I submitted had very nice light lavender toning and graded MS-67.
Will these coins see any demand years from now? Who knows, but it was fun looking for clad coins like this!
10-4,
My Instagram picturesErik
My registry sets