Options
The problem is - how do we make beautiful coins more relevant?
HJP
Posts: 423 ✭✭✭
The problem is - how do we make beautiful coins more relevant?
To more people.
How can we expand on the knowledge and display the beauty and substance -
of so many beautiful metal objects (BMO’s) to more people?
What is needed to add some “excitement” to the coin industry circa 2019?
I have some new ideas on this subject that are sure to offend and cause discussion (constructive, hopefully).
I’ll start with one, in no particular order of importance:
Change how coins, medals and other BMO’s are packaged.
Next?
Sent from my iPhone
0
Comments
I will beam light into darkness and find relevance in what I pursue- why else do we live?
Instagram
I signed up for Instagram 4 days ago,
I put up 9 beautiful coins.
I have 144 follows in four days.
I already sold one of those coins and two others are on hold.
Instagram is extremely active for coin nerds.
Hashtag pcgscoin
Hashtag erorrcoins
Follow us at ctf_error_coins
The mint can:
Huge disagree on this one.
The fact that the mint is so tight on error coins makes them that much rarer and valuable.
Knew you’d object
OP asked what would create interest circa 2019
Why do you consider it a “problem”?
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Ah, good question. I choose to describe the issue of relevance as a “problem” - for a couple of reasons. One, to try and learn from other collectors what they find important.
Another reason is “purely commercial” - I want to find better ways to sell coins.
OK?
Better ways to sell coins - meaning innovative ways to present coins and other BMO’s to the world.
Technology has come a long way since 1986...
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. As it is and always will be. There's nothing WE can do about it. So....forget it.
P> @HJP said:
Whatever your answer was would have been OK. I was just curious.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Oh, I beg to differ.
In US coins, the problem is the designers. Too much political correctness hampers any artistic creativity.
With all due respect, please explain your viewpoint.
I’m focused on the way coins and other BMO’s are displayed, in particular-
the information that is offered on the display, how the display allows the coin to be viewed, and a few other things...
Thank you. It's all crystal clear now other than what those "few other things" might be. With all due respect please enlighten me as to what those "few other things" are.
More labels! And I really didn't want to say that.
But people seem to have more interest in labels than the coins as we have witness for years by the quality of coins some Registry set participants buy up. Make a label for each President from Washington to Trump and mix up the coins......yeah that would be a dossie to assemble, people hunting down their favorite President/label to assemble a match collection for an entire series. Create a few Metoo#tag labels, that should stir up a few markets.
Leo
Forgot one: Make labels like the Monopoly game but print only one label for Boardwalk. This should start a frenzy search to complete a collection/series........
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
My Jefferson Nickel Collection
Hah!
I like your enthusiasm!
Not sure about more labels- but thanks for contributing to the discussion!
If coin collectors could get the "Eight New York" critics to praise the artistic merit of coins the billionaire money will flow. (Don't hold your breath waiting for this to happen.)
I think younger people will gravitate towards pretty, rare, important collectible items as their income increases accordingly through life. It’s kind of a natural progression. I say that from personal experience. However, I say that from a standpoint of a collector of baseball cards and coins in the late 89’s - early 90’s, with a break between high school and about 10 years after college. If the younger crowd doesn’t have that background in collecting then it may change that basis...
In general, I think the era of beautiful coins ended in 1948 with the issuance of the Franklin Half Dollar. Everything since then has been relatively mundane depictions of political figures.
It would help if coins were relevant. Inflation has destroyed their value and we systematically destroyed their intrinsic value when silver went away. Today more than a few people just throw their change in the garbage. Even the quarter doesn't really hold much value.
If I was king of the world, I'd issue bills in $1000, $500, $100, $50, and $20 denominations. Everything below that would be a coin, with the smallest being a little teeny copper dime. That would put us more or less on-par with what was happening back when coins actually mattered.
I visit Europe every year or two and each time I notice that I have 10-15 euros in coins in my pocket after a day or two. That equates to almost $20. When was the last time you randomly noticed $20 worth of US coins in your pocket?
From my perspective, there needs to be a better “path” for coins to be presented to the fine art market.
Marketing and presentation of numismatics along with, and as a part of other types of fine art is a tangential approach.
I believe the path consists in some part, on how a coin is evaluated, designated and displayed.
The key issue is adding value / interest to the encapsulation package - instead of, and/or in addition to, what is being done now...
The grading companies have taken some good steps in this direction. My interest is in hearing from other collectors and dealers what they would like to see changed, added, removed or just made differently.
I couldn't agree more with you, BryceM. However, If I may say, I think the emphasis placed now on political correctness combined with the "mundane depictions of political figures" has killed it as far as beautiful coins are concerned. Civilizational collapse is also a factor. Compare classic Greek or Roman art to that which followed the fall of Rome. It could be that the time in which we now live is incapable of producing anything of artistic beauty. That's my opinion. I wish I was wrong.
@HGP Many collectors agree with your suggestion that a coin's visual appearance is the most marketable aspect of a coin's value. Nicely toned coins sell for significantly more than PCGS value guidelines. We have tjree major materials of which coins are made, copper, nickel and silver. Each has their own aging characteristics.
Copper being the most reactive metal can react with environmental conditions and the result is sometimes very visually attractive. And naturally toned copper coins are degraded in comparison to "mint red" coins that have dipped to maintain their red color.
Nickel coins are valued because they do tone very nicely. But, unlike copper coins, they are not graded by their coloration and thus their value seems to be more market based based upon their visual appearance than by their technical grade plus their color grade as is copper.
Silver coins seem to be graded without any differentiation as to the attractiveness of their toning. Many highly graded silver coins remind me of my mother's silverware........brown tarnish that looks like a layer of sh_t. Many silver coins tone very nicely with colors of a rainbow. They receive no grading advantage because of their appearance. This is an evident problem with the basis of our technical grading system, To better explain the issue, I would suggest that a coin graded MS67 with very ugly toning should be downgraded to MS65, And a MS 65 coin with fabulous toning and eye appeal should be MS67. It is time to acknowledge the eye appeal is more significant than nicks and spots that can only be seen with a loupe.
Our current grading standards are antiquated. There is resistance to change from both dealers and invested collectors who do not want their very valuable coins downgraded because of their appearance. But without correction to a coin's numerical grade for appearance, the registry set competition will do nothing more than to perpetuate the status quo.
OINK
Change "label for each President" to "label for each Pokemon" ... night be onto something. Pokemon labels; gotta collect them all.
I think we’re part of the way there with the PCGS Calendar. I think it would be great to be able to order TrueViews as glicees and even to have closeups. There may need to be a change in culture to hang up coin art like this but I think it could move coins into the realm of art.
I really have to agree with"EOC"
No More!
Just a thought...Ya know, those roosies could be a PR dream..Just my 2 cents.
This entire issue is relevant to coin sales...not collecting. I am a coin collector, I do not sell coins...therefore, I ignore hype and glitz. The premise put forth in the OP relates to marketing product. Show me the coin... Not interested in sales hype, packaging, labels, stickers or commercial jingles. Cheers, RickO
Yes! Show me the coin! Yes!
Indeed my cause & motivation is “strictly commercial”. I think there are better ways for us to a) view our objects of art
b) display and market them by providing the owner with a better package
Coin designs are hampered by the politics involved, so to promote public awareness of coins we need to have them noticed first. The State Quarters helped, but got boring after awhile. The Presidential Dollars failed miserably, as few even use them, and were very boring. The National Parks quarters were on the heels of an already lengthy State Quarters program, so very little public interest in another lengthy collection, and were boring.
It seems that to catch the eye of the modern public, you would need to put popular coin images on the Smartphone Casings/Covers, or maybe on Starbucks/ McDonald's/Dunkin Donuts cups, to have a shot at actually being noticed.
But then they might just collect the cups...
I may not know what I'm doing most of the time, but I'm Damn good at it. 😇 😈