Here is an interesting statistic. There are 306 collectors (that's a lot!) of the 50 coin set on the PCGS Set Registry and 100 collectors of the 144 coin set on the PCGS Set Registry. Of those two sets, 66 collectors have completed the 50 coin set and only 16 have completed the 144 coin set! The way the 50 coin set is set up by PCGS, the least expensive type coin is treated the same as the most expensive. For example, the Grant with star is equal to the Grant without star. As a result there is no incentive to purchase the better coins unless one is fully commited to the 144 coin set. Few are! Collecting a 144 coins set can be both tiring and overwhelming. Perhaps PCGS should consider a commemorative coin date set to create more interest?
I can’t believe how difficult it is to find nice panama pacific half dollars. eBay used to have at least a dozen examples MS 65 or above at any given point, now you can mostly just find AU or details coin.
"I'll split the atom! I am the fifth dimension! I am the eighth wonder of the world!" -Gef the talking mongoose.
@kiyote said:
I can’t believe how difficult it is to find nice panama pacific half dollars. eBay used to have at least a dozen examples MS 65 or above at any given point, now you can mostly just find AU or details coin.
We've been adding lots of collectors during Covid. Good to hear they are picking up good coins!
And you're right, the coins available there at the moment don't look that attractive to me.
I just pick up a 1915S gold pan pac dollar MS64 for under $600 . I have wanted this coin for a while and it’s almost my favorite coin. Just wish my eyes were better or the coin was bigger! Absolutely beautiful design for the time period, makes a nice companion for my 15S Pan Pan half dollar.
The whole classic commemorative series is interesting to study - there are a number of dogs in the group so I have focused on specific coins rather than the series.
@Cougar1978 said:
They are definitely undervalued.
I don’t think so. I’ve been on this forum for almost 18 years. Every one of those years there are always a couple of threads, “are classic commems finally making a comeback?” ...... (yawn) (eye roll)
Nope.
Negative.
Zero chance.
Better off investing in circulated Ike’s !
🤓😈
I'm with you on this opinion. Nothing is undervalued in isolation. It's always relative to something else. So what is it? Versus what other competing alternatives where collectors are likely to buy one or the other does this apply?
Maybe I missed it, but in all the threads and posts I have read claiming it on any coin forum, I don't remember a single answer to this question.
As far as I am concerned, it isn't an accident. It's a series losing "share of wallet" primarily to modern NCLT and to a much lesser extent, world coinage.
@thefinn said:
Undervalued doesn't mean at the bottom. When you compare mintages, survivor quantities and conditions, the commem series is definitely underpriced. Everything goes in cycles. When people start to realize how few there are, they will be the fastest rising series in the U.S. coins.
But there aren't that few. The valid comparison is not versus other circulating US coinage.
There also isn't uniform demand. Sure, some of the mintages are low, but the prices indicate that the collector preference for some is maybe somewhat higher than First Spouse gold. (Yes, this is a slight exaggeration.) Other than simply filling holes, I doubt that many of the coins have much collector demand which the prices indicate.
Common coins, disproportionately obscure or uninteresting themes, and wide but not necessarily compelling design variety. For most collectors, it makes a lot more sense to buy the specific coins they like rather than the full series for coins they mostly do not seem to want.
@Orlena said:
I just pick up a 1915S gold pan pac dollar MS64 for under $600 . I have wanted this coin for a while and it’s almost my favorite coin. Just wish my eyes were better or the coin was bigger! Absolutely beautiful design for the time period, makes a nice companion for my 15S Pan Pan half dollar.
Nice choice, I just picked one up in the same grade although I did not do as well on the price. It sure is a tiny specimen! Had to break out the magnifier and the 10x loupe. Luckily, DLRC did a nice job with the photography. I'll be sending it for a reholder + TrueView in the near future, as it is a "toner" and I enjoy the vanity shots.
@Orlena said:
I just pick up a 1915S gold pan pac dollar MS64 for under $600 . I have wanted this coin for a while and it’s almost my favorite coin. Just wish my eyes were better or the coin was bigger! Absolutely beautiful design for the time period, makes a nice companion for my 15S Pan Pan half dollar.
Nice choice, I just picked one up in the same grade although I did not do as well on the price. It sure is a tiny specimen! Had to break out the magnifier and the 10x loupe. Luckily, DLRC did a nice job with the photography. I'll be sending it for a reholder + TrueView in the near future, as it is a "toner" and I enjoy the vanity shots.
At least it is larger than the type 1 gold dollar. Those were tiny indeed.
@Orlena said:
I just pick up a 1915S gold pan pac dollar MS64 for under $600 . I have wanted this coin for a while and it’s almost my favorite coin. Just wish my eyes were better or the coin was bigger! Absolutely beautiful design for the time period, makes a nice companion for my 15S Pan Pan half dollar.
The whole classic commemorative series is interesting to study - there are a number of dogs in the group so I have focused on specific coins rather than the series.
First, congrats on that acquisition. That's on my list too, and 64 would probably be the target grade for me also. Secondly, I totally agree -- I've never felt like the whole set made any sense for me to be concerned with, but there are eight or ten issues that either for reasons of personal connection or because of the excellence of the design appeal to me strongly.
I'm with you on this opinion. Nothing is undervalued in isolation. It's always relative to something else. So what is it? Versus what other competing alternatives where collectors are likely to buy one or the other does this apply?
I view your definition of value as relative value. An example would be saying that classic commemoratives are cheap relative to Morgans.
I think there can be absolute value also, or value relative to itself. A backwards looking example might be saying that classic commemoratives are cheap today relative to where they traded in the past.
Or they are cheap relative to where you think they will be valued at in five years.
I view your definition of value as relative value. An example would be saying that classic commemoratives are cheap relative to Morgans.
I think there can be absolute value also, or value relative to itself. A backwards looking example might be saying that classic commemoratives are cheap today relative to where they traded in the past.
Or they are cheap relative to where you think they will be valued at in five years.
Yes, the series is cheap compared to the past, especially 1989. That was a bubble. I'd also agree that it's cheap relative to Morgan dollars but that's not saying much either.
I keep on hearing it's cheap yet what exactly is going to make enough real collectors (as opposed to financially motivated buyers) want to pay noticeably more and keep it?
None of the coins are even close to being scarce despite the low mintages, except in grade or color which isn't any different than any other coin.
The coins with a high preference are already expensive, though cheaper than previously. Hawaii is an example and one of the most expensive coins in the world for it's availability.
Most of the themes have very limited appeal and the designs are hardly compelling either. Mostly commemorating regional or obscure events, maybe with better designs; debatable but which I would rate having less thematic interest than the less popular modern ones.
Hawaii, Pan Pac, Spanish Trail, Lafayette dollar, already popular. Alabama and Arkansas Centennial and others like it, probably mostly hole fillers and impulse buyers.
Comments
How specific is a group of over 1000 coins? How would you define this group and was there sub groups?
others replies have answered that.
I should say I do think the nice ones are on the rise.
In what parts of the hobby are the not-nice coins rising?
Here is an interesting statistic. There are 306 collectors (that's a lot!) of the 50 coin set on the PCGS Set Registry and 100 collectors of the 144 coin set on the PCGS Set Registry. Of those two sets, 66 collectors have completed the 50 coin set and only 16 have completed the 144 coin set! The way the 50 coin set is set up by PCGS, the least expensive type coin is treated the same as the most expensive. For example, the Grant with star is equal to the Grant without star. As a result there is no incentive to purchase the better coins unless one is fully commited to the 144 coin set. Few are! Collecting a 144 coins set can be both tiring and overwhelming. Perhaps PCGS should consider a commemorative coin date set to create more interest?
New ANA webpage on commemoratives.
https://www.money.org/commemorative-coins
They are focusing on toners too.
I can’t believe how difficult it is to find nice panama pacific half dollars. eBay used to have at least a dozen examples MS 65 or above at any given point, now you can mostly just find AU or details coin.
Absolutely! Strong retail sales for me and then have to bid higher to replace. I been putting in nuclear bids....loading up on them.
We've been adding lots of collectors during Covid. Good to hear they are picking up good coins!
And you're right, the coins available there at the moment don't look that attractive to me.
I just pick up a 1915S gold pan pac dollar MS64 for under $600 . I have wanted this coin for a while and it’s almost my favorite coin. Just wish my eyes were better or the coin was bigger! Absolutely beautiful design for the time period, makes a nice companion for my 15S Pan Pan half dollar.
The whole classic commemorative series is interesting to study - there are a number of dogs in the group so I have focused on specific coins rather than the series.
I'm with you on this opinion. Nothing is undervalued in isolation. It's always relative to something else. So what is it? Versus what other competing alternatives where collectors are likely to buy one or the other does this apply?
Maybe I missed it, but in all the threads and posts I have read claiming it on any coin forum, I don't remember a single answer to this question.
As far as I am concerned, it isn't an accident. It's a series losing "share of wallet" primarily to modern NCLT and to a much lesser extent, world coinage.
But there aren't that few. The valid comparison is not versus other circulating US coinage.
There also isn't uniform demand. Sure, some of the mintages are low, but the prices indicate that the collector preference for some is maybe somewhat higher than First Spouse gold. (Yes, this is a slight exaggeration.) Other than simply filling holes, I doubt that many of the coins have much collector demand which the prices indicate.
Common coins, disproportionately obscure or uninteresting themes, and wide but not necessarily compelling design variety. For most collectors, it makes a lot more sense to buy the specific coins they like rather than the full series for coins they mostly do not seem to want.
Nice choice, I just picked one up in the same grade although I did not do as well on the price. It sure is a tiny specimen! Had to break out the magnifier and the 10x loupe. Luckily, DLRC did a nice job with the photography. I'll be sending it for a reholder + TrueView in the near future, as it is a "toner" and I enjoy the vanity shots.
Nothing is as expensive as free money.
At least it is larger than the type 1 gold dollar. Those were tiny indeed.
First, congrats on that acquisition. That's on my list too, and 64 would probably be the target grade for me also. Secondly, I totally agree -- I've never felt like the whole set made any sense for me to be concerned with, but there are eight or ten issues that either for reasons of personal connection or because of the excellence of the design appeal to me strongly.
I view your definition of value as relative value. An example would be saying that classic commemoratives are cheap relative to Morgans.
I think there can be absolute value also, or value relative to itself. A backwards looking example might be saying that classic commemoratives are cheap today relative to where they traded in the past.
Or they are cheap relative to where you think they will be valued at in five years.
Completed Oregon Trail Set. Fun project.
Potential: nowhere but up!
@Along said:
>
Yes, the series is cheap compared to the past, especially 1989. That was a bubble. I'd also agree that it's cheap relative to Morgan dollars but that's not saying much either.
I keep on hearing it's cheap yet what exactly is going to make enough real collectors (as opposed to financially motivated buyers) want to pay noticeably more and keep it?
None of the coins are even close to being scarce despite the low mintages, except in grade or color which isn't any different than any other coin.
The coins with a high preference are already expensive, though cheaper than previously. Hawaii is an example and one of the most expensive coins in the world for it's availability.
Most of the themes have very limited appeal and the designs are hardly compelling either. Mostly commemorating regional or obscure events, maybe with better designs; debatable but which I would rate having less thematic interest than the less popular modern ones.
Hawaii, Pan Pac, Spanish Trail, Lafayette dollar, already popular. Alabama and Arkansas Centennial and others like it, probably mostly hole fillers and impulse buyers.
In 2036, many of the commemoratives will be 100 years old, sparking interest and demand from many new collectors. Best to buy now before the rush!