@JimTyler....That is not rare, that is raw.... As for the thread discussion point.... Like so much in numismatics, the term does not have an objective standard. There are several, general scales as enumerated above, and these have general similarities. Having spent my professional career in industries that demanded standards, I miss that in numismatics. It would be nice to have accepted, conclusive standards in the hobby. Cheers, RickO
It would be nice to have accepted, conclusive standards in the hobby.
RickO, we have that as expressed by a few members on page one. the Sheldon Scale, the Sheldon-Breen Scale and the Universal Rarity Scale put forth by QDB all state essentially the same numbers. to the point of "RARE" for discussion, the first two agree at R-5 and 75 as the defining line, QDB just uses different numbers and would be somewhere around R7/8.
not intending to roll my eyes at those who like to think closer to 10-20, but that's simply a personally chosen number to fit their collecting habits. those aren't numbers which are widely accepted within the Hobby.
@keets said:
not intending to roll my eyes at those who like to think closer to 10-20, but that's simply a personally chosen number to fit their collecting habits. those aren't numbers which are widely accepted within the Hobby.
It's not just personal collecting habits but also how many in the hobby talk about provenance. When looking at many auction lot descriptions from different auction houses, I have yet to see a full census when the specimen count goes above 20. The PCGS CoinFacts Condition Census is also much less than 20 and often less than 10. Given this, a limit of 20 seems to be a fairly widely accepted level for specimen tracking. I'm just tying rarity to the specimen tracking activity that many parties have been doing for decades.
@keets said:
not intending to roll my eyes at those who like to think closer to 10-20, but that's simply a personally chosen number to fit their collecting habits. those aren't numbers which are widely accepted within the Hobby.
It's not just personal collecting habits but also how many in the hobby talk about provenance. When looking at many auction lot descriptions from different auction houses, I have yet to see a full census when the specimen count goes above 20. The PCGS CoinFacts Condition Census is also much less than 20 and often less than 10. Given this, a limit of 20 seems to be a fairly widely accepted level for specimen tracking. I'm just tying rarity to the specimen tracking activity that many parties have been doing for decades.
The fact that you don't usually see a full census when the count goes above 20 doesn't mean that coins with populations greater than that aren't rare. I'm with Keets on this one.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
@keets said:
not intending to roll my eyes at those who like to think closer to 10-20, but that's simply a personally chosen number to fit their collecting habits. those aren't numbers which are widely accepted within the Hobby.
It's not just personal collecting habits but also how many in the hobby talk about provenance. When looking at many auction lot descriptions from different auction houses, I have yet to see a full census when the specimen count goes above 20. The PCGS CoinFacts Condition Census is also much less than 20 and often less than 10. Given this, a limit of 20 seems to be a fairly widely accepted level for specimen tracking. I'm just tying rarity to the specimen tracking activity that many parties have been doing for decades.
The fact that you don't usually see a full census when the count goes above 20 doesn't mean that coins with populations greater than that aren't rare. I'm with Keets on this one.
This is why we're having the discussion. Everyone doesn't have to have the same opinion.
My view is that when every specimen is being tracked by multiple parties over a significant amount of time, there's a significant difference in behavior than when they are not all being tracked. When all specimens are not being tracked, I'm not sure the behavior is that different whether there's 50 not being tracked or 500 not being tracked.
@keets said:
not intending to roll my eyes at those who like to think closer to 10-20, but that's simply a personally chosen number to fit their collecting habits. those aren't numbers which are widely accepted within the Hobby.
It's not just personal collecting habits but also how many in the hobby talk about provenance. When looking at many auction lot descriptions from different auction houses, I have yet to see a full census when the specimen count goes above 20. The PCGS CoinFacts Condition Census is also much less than 20 and often less than 10. Given this, a limit of 20 seems to be a fairly widely accepted level for specimen tracking. I'm just tying rarity to the specimen tracking activity that many parties have been doing for decades.
The fact that you don't usually see a full census when the count goes above 20 doesn't mean that coins with populations greater than that aren't rare. I'm with Keets on this one.
This is why we're having the discussion. Everyone doesn't have to have the same opinion.
My view is that when every specimen is being tracked by multiple parties, there's a significant change in behavior. When all specimens are not being tracked, the behavior is more similar whether there's 50 not being tracked or 500 not being tracked.
So in your view, is a coin either rare or not rare? What about "very/extra rare", as in few enough traced, such that auction houses are likely to list a full census?
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
@keets said:
not intending to roll my eyes at those who like to think closer to 10-20, but that's simply a personally chosen number to fit their collecting habits. those aren't numbers which are widely accepted within the Hobby.
It's not just personal collecting habits but also how many in the hobby talk about provenance. When looking at many auction lot descriptions from different auction houses, I have yet to see a full census when the specimen count goes above 20. The PCGS CoinFacts Condition Census is also much less than 20 and often less than 10. Given this, a limit of 20 seems to be a fairly widely accepted level for specimen tracking. I'm just tying rarity to the specimen tracking activity that many parties have been doing for decades.
The fact that you don't usually see a full census when the count goes above 20 doesn't mean that coins with populations greater than that aren't rare. I'm with Keets on this one.
This is why we're having the discussion. Everyone doesn't have to have the same opinion.
My view is that when every specimen is being tracked by multiple parties, there's a significant change in behavior. When all specimens are not being tracked, the behavior is more similar whether there's 50 not being tracked or 500 not being tracked.
So in your view, is a coin either rare or not rare? What about "very/extra rare", as in few enough traced, such that auction houses are likely to list a full census?
I could see "near rare" or "almost rare" for coins above the tracking limit.
For me, it makes sense that "rare" is when all specimens are known and tracked, because there's a materially different approach for those coins from multiple parties. There's just a lot more knowledge and interest in all specimens of these coins. Put another way, rare is when every specimen matters.
This is why we're having the discussion. Everyone doesn't have to have the same opinion.
the easy answer to this is that your opinion is just wrong, the difficult answer is to explain why it makes logical sense. the fine folks at PCGS, NGC etc. who stop at your imagined 20 tend to only practice that on well known rarities with well known Provenance and prices to match. I will assume that after the "20" the price and Provenance start to become more pedestrian, who wants to talk about the fact that Joe Fabeets owns something that cost him $6,000 when Pogue's coin fetched 100 times that?? drawing the rare line at the imagined 20 strikes me as a bit snobbish.
there's nothing wrong with tailoring a "Rarity Scale" to one's personal definition. the simple point is that the Hobby already has a well defined definition of the term Rare.
@keets said: This is why we're having the discussion. Everyone doesn't have to have the same opinion.
the easy answer to this is that your opinion is just wrong, the difficult answer is to explain why it makes logical sense. the fine folks at PCGS, NGC etc. who stop at your imagined 20 tend to only practice that on well known rarities with well known Provenance and prices to match. I will assume that after the "20" the price and Provenance start to become more pedestrian, who wants to talk about the fact that Joe Fabeets owns something that cost him $6,000 when Pogue's coin fetched 100 times that?? drawing the rare line at the imagined 20 strikes me as a bit snobbish.
there's nothing wrong with tailoring a "Rarity Scale" to one's personal definition. the simple point is that the Hobby already has a well defined definition of the term Rare.
Well, it's common knowledge that there's no well-defined definition of the term "rare" in the hobby, as evidenced by many sellers of "rare" coins
And while there's some alignment of rarity scales, it should be noted that the scales were created by the opinion of individuals.
just because dealers like to hype coins as rare certainly doesn't make them so. also, there isn't "some" alignment, they're pretty much in agreement, but you know that.
perhaps you should post the ZRS to this thread or another one for discussion. I'd be anxious to see how that compares with Sheldon and QDB.
@keets said:
just because dealers like to hype coins as rare certainly doesn't make them so. also, there isn't "some" alignment, they're pretty much in agreement, but you know that.
This is how the term is commonly used in the hobby. I imagine this use is more widely adopted than the rarity scales.
perhaps you should post the ZRS to this thread or another one for discussion. I'd be anxious to see how that compares with Sheldon and QDB.
Publishing a rarity scale is not a bad idea. I’m already thinking about publishing reference guides with catalog numbers. The “Introduction” can talk about the meaning of “rare” as an introduction to this series of references.
and this seems like a plausible definition, if we are talking about coins that are, casually, all "very rare".
A somewhat obvious question: what is the purpose of the definition? @ricko raised the concept of standards, but in the case of rarity, what is the purpose of the standard? Presumably in the case of the Sheldon scale, it is of historical interest, it helps collectors classify, acquire, even price. It may help our self esteem if we own such a thing, or even a few, or many.
But, I'll come back to the more casual use of rare. I don't think I'd be abusing language if I said that an 1805 quarter eagle is rare, even though it probably doesn't quite make it on the Sheldon scale. How about a $50 Pan Pac? They are not hard to obtain, but they are hardly common. I am being too loose with language if I call it a rare coin?
the word "rare" might be the most abused word in Numismatics. it generally gets used in an attempt to sell and in that regard it's just a little disingenuous. its acceptance by so many and the refusal to use an actual Rarity Scale only speaks to what Paul Fussell wrote of in 1991, The Dumbing of America. how can you collect coins and not be aware of the Sheldon Scale??
I am somewhat jaded. I have held in my hands the 1870-S $3 and Half Dime, five 1804 Dollars at various times and all five 1913 Liberty Nickles at once. I think that 10 is a good ballpark for the cutoff point, but would not call you wrong if you said 12 or 15.
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
@ErrorsOnCoins said:
I often use the term "rare" in many of my offerings. I also use "unique", "very rare', and "extremely rare"
I have never misused the description about a coin being rare.
Doesn't it depend on how narrowly you define the error? For example, if I consider all wrong planchet errors to be the same error type then they aren't "rare." If I consider only wrong planchets of 1968 Washington quarters, then the error type is "rare".
I'm less technical about it than some of the posts here. If I can walk into any coin shop, coin show or go on eBay and buy one at any time, then to me it isn't rare. Coins considered by many to be rare that aren't rare, by this definition:
Circulated 1909-S VDB Lincoln cents
Circulated 1914-D Lincoln cents
Circulated 1922-D no D die pair 2 Lincoln Cents
Circulated and brown unc. 1955 Doubled Die DDO-001 Lincoln cents
Circulated 1942/1 P & D Mercury dimes
Circulated 1932-D & S quarters
Low-grade 1916-D Mercury dimes
Low-grade 1877 Indian cents
You Suck! Awarded 6/2008- 1901-O Micro O Morgan, 8/2008- 1878 VAM-123 Morgan, 9/2022 1888-O VAM-1B3 H8 Morgan | Senior Regional Representative- ANACS Coin Grading. Posted opinions on coins are my own, and are not an official ANACS opinion.
@ErrorsOnCoins said:
I often use the term "rare" in many of my offerings. I also use "unique", "very rare', and "extremely rare"
I have never misused the description about a coin being rare.
Doesn't it depend on how narrowly you define the error? For example, if I consider all wrong planchet errors to be the same error type then they aren't "rare." If I consider only wrong planchets of 1968 Washington quarters, then the error type is "rare".
Date and error together make it rare or not. The error itself could be unique or rare. The specific date with a major error could be considered rare or not.
For example, a 1983 off-center quarter is not rare. A 1972 D quarter struck on dime stock is not rare. A 2000 off center cent is not rare. Clipped coins in general are not rare.
Off center cents dated 2002 and beyond are rare. Clipped National Park quarters are rare.
Lots of interesting perspectives. While it is hard to argue with the Sheldon scale, I think PerryHall is on to something. A coin with a high demand can be "rare" even when there are a significant number of them while a coin with low demand may not be rare because there is ample availability even though the total number is limited.
@1northcoin said:
Lots of interesting perspectives. While it is hard to argue with the Sheldon scale, I think PerryHall is on to something. A coin with a high demand can be "rare" even when there are a significant number of them while a coin with low demand may not be rare because there is ample availability even though the total number is limited.
Sorry, but no. If there are a “significant number of them” they don’t magically become rare, just because of high demand. And if a coin is truly rare, it doesn’t become any less so, simply due to low demand. You’re talking about availability and opportunity, not rarity.
Many years ago, the company I worked for had three 1922 Matte Proof Proof Peace Dollars for sale at the same time. If I remember correctly, two of them graded Proof 65 and the third one, Proof 66. I think the large majority of experts would agree that Matte Proof Peace Dollars are quite rare. But because there were three for sale at the same time, those rare coins were temporarily available. That didn’t make them ANY less rare than If none of them had been available for sale. It took several weeks or months to sell all three of them. After that, I didn’t see another one for sale for years. The availability changed over time. The rarity did not.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Sometimes an original coin with nice eye appeal can be rare too. For example, an 1855-S Seated half dollar isn't necessarily "rare" even though it is a low mintage date. However, try to find one that isn't cleaned, damaged or ugly. Any original, eye appealing 1855-S without problems is rare in my opinion.
@CaptHenway said:
I am somewhat jaded. I have held in my hands the 1870-S $3 and Half Dime, five 1804 Dollars at various times and all five 1913 Liberty Nickles at once. I think that 10 is a good ballpark for the cutoff point, but would not call you wrong if you said 12 or 15.
Amazing. How many people have held all five 1913 Liberty Nickels at once, living or otherwise??
I use the Sheldon scale and my slab pops as source in deterring markup on my scarcer material.
It’s similar method how I used to markup slabbed world gold years ago when Krause cv was starting basis. I have a number of graded world coins and bank notes with pops of 1-4 none higher. Others 20 graded or less. Premium over raw CV is based on grade plus an additional factor for low pop.
Business been brisk as many chasing this material.
For most coins it comes down to supply and demand. If there is a rare token with a population of 10 but only five collectors want it, the price will be fairly low. A common coin such as the 1909-SVDB cent with an estimated survival of 50,000 coins based on the PCGS Coin Facts is fairly expensive due to high demand from collectors.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
@PerryHall said:
For most coins it comes down to supply and demand. If there is a rare token with a population of 10 but only five collectors want it, the price will be fairly low. A common coin such as the 1909-SVDB cent with an estimated survival of 50,000 coins based on the PCGS Coin Facts is fairly expensive due to high demand from collectors.
Some of the price levels for popular coins is also due to sellers keeping prices high instead of selling.
@PerryHall said:
For most coins it comes down to supply and demand. If there is a rare token with a population of 10 but only five collectors want it, the price will be fairly low. A common coin such as the 1909-SVDB cent with an estimated survival of 50,000 coins based on the PCGS Coin Facts is fairly expensive due to high demand from collectors.
Again, you're talking about price, not rarity.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
I wouldn't know a rare coin if it hit me in the face! So for now I'm on the conditional side of things. But it's kind of fun listening to you guys banter back and forth about something you can never have. Well, not all of you, maybe a handful which is also kinda rare.
@CoinscratchFever said:
I wouldn't know a rare coin if it hit me in the face! So for now I'm on the conditional side of things. But it's kind of fun listening to you guys banter back and forth about something you can never have. Well, not all of you, maybe a handful which is also kinda rare.
I'm guessing most people can afford the rare tokens and errors being discussed here
@CoinscratchFever said:
I wouldn't know a rare coin if it hit me in the face! So for now I'm on the conditional side of things. But it's kind of fun listening to you guys banter back and forth about something you can never have. Well, not all of you, maybe a handful which is also kinda rare.
I'm guessing most people can afford the rare tokens and errors being discussed here
True but I'm guessing not many including myself can afford the three in your opening. Sure, the discussion has evolved but I'm still having a hard time wrapping my little mind around "only 5" and the fact that some of you have actually held them, at once!
Carry on, I wasn't trying to be disrespectful just throwing in a dose of middle America reality
@Baley said "I do not view the word Rare as binary."
I agree. Also, while strictly speaking, rarity may be independent of demand, in reality, rarity tends to fuel demand, and we may have little interest in certain things if they are not rare. So, at risk of stretching the definition a little, I would tend to allow for somewhat larger numbers in the case of something that is in demand.
Also, our sense of rarity seems to be tied to quality or historical significance. In the domain of wine, any wine from the Domaine de la Romanee Conti could be considered rare. The wine made in my neighbor's basement may be good and more limited in quantity than a Romanee Conti, but it would probably not be considered rare!
@PerryHall said:
For most coins it comes down to supply and demand. If there is a rare token with a population of 10 but only five collectors want it, the price will be fairly low. A common coin such as the 1909-SVDB cent with an estimated survival of 50,000 coins based on the PCGS Coin Facts is fairly expensive due to high demand from collectors.
@CoinscratchFever said:
I wouldn't know a rare coin if it hit me in the face! So for now I'm on the conditional side of things. But it's kind of fun listening to you guys banter back and forth about something you can never have. Well, not all of you, maybe a handful which is also kinda rare.
I'm guessing most people can afford the rare tokens and errors being discussed here
Not to mention world coins. I had an 1806/1805 Irish bank token where only 5 are known. I bought it from a major auction company (y'all know it) for $160 and sold it for $299.
it's probably heresy to some for me to say as much, but QDB didn't "create" anything, he only took what was already the accepted standard, the Sheldon Scale, and expounded on it to go from R-8 to his URS-20. I mean, really, when was the last time you concerned yourself with needing to know that URS-17 was 32,001 to 65,000 known?? that's just silly and not necessary. in reality it's not necessary for anything past the QDB URS-11, and all he did with the Sheldon Scale was use different numbers.
not much of a creation at all, maybe we should sue him for plagiarism!!
@CoinscratchFever said:
I wouldn't know a rare coin if it hit me in the face! So for now I'm on the conditional side of things. But it's kind of fun listening to you guys banter back and forth about something you can never have. Well, not all of you, maybe a handful which is also kinda rare.
I'm guessing most people can afford the rare tokens and errors being discussed here
Not to mention world coins. I had an 1806/1805 Irish bank token where only 5 are known. I bought it from a major auction company (y'all know it) for $160 and sold it for $299.
$299 sounds like a bargain! That’s one of the things I like about you most, the numbers, something tells me you haven’t lost money on too many deals.
@CoinscratchFever said:
I wouldn't know a rare coin if it hit me in the face! So for now I'm on the conditional side of things. But it's kind of fun listening to you guys banter back and forth about something you can never have. Well, not all of you, maybe a handful which is also kinda rare.
I'm guessing most people can afford the rare tokens and errors being discussed here
Not to mention world coins. I had an 1806/1805 Irish bank token where only 5 are known. I bought it from a major auction company (y'all know it) for $160 and sold it for $299.
$299 sounds like a bargain! That’s one of the things I like about you most, the numbers, something tells me you haven’t lost money on too many deals.
Oh, I've lost money on plenty of deals. And I've got a few burials lying around here right now that would be hard to dig out from under. But I try to be conservative and I only buy aggressively if it is something I don't mind owning longer term.
It's the supply/demand issue that people have mentioned. 5 of something can be too many if no one wants it.
@daltex said:
I guess I'm on an island all by myself. I say a rare coin is one that (base metal) sells for more than face value, otherwise more than bullion value.
Under that definition, among other coins, Morgan and Peace Dollars, wheat cents, pre-1933 gold coins and ASE’s would qualify. You consider coins rare, even when there are millions of them?
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
I sat down and jotted down Sheldon and URS scale to use in classifying individual slabbed coins in inventory (pop) for easy overview (like am I likely have only one in bourse room). I settled on Sheldon. Using pop of item in its grade plus number higher. Ditto for graded currency. Not saying low pop means item technically rare just looking for easy reference measure.
Comments
@JimTyler....That is not rare, that is raw....
As for the thread discussion point.... Like so much in numismatics, the term does not have an objective standard. There are several, general scales as enumerated above, and these have general similarities. Having spent my professional career in industries that demanded standards, I miss that in numismatics. It would be nice to have accepted, conclusive standards in the hobby. Cheers, RickO
It would be nice to have accepted, conclusive standards in the hobby.
RickO, we have that as expressed by a few members on page one. the Sheldon Scale, the Sheldon-Breen Scale and the Universal Rarity Scale put forth by QDB all state essentially the same numbers. to the point of "RARE" for discussion, the first two agree at R-5 and 75 as the defining line, QDB just uses different numbers and would be somewhere around R7/8.
not intending to roll my eyes at those who like to think closer to 10-20, but that's simply a personally chosen number to fit their collecting habits. those aren't numbers which are widely accepted within the Hobby.
It's not just personal collecting habits but also how many in the hobby talk about provenance. When looking at many auction lot descriptions from different auction houses, I have yet to see a full census when the specimen count goes above 20. The PCGS CoinFacts Condition Census is also much less than 20 and often less than 10. Given this, a limit of 20 seems to be a fairly widely accepted level for specimen tracking. I'm just tying rarity to the specimen tracking activity that many parties have been doing for decades.
The fact that you don't usually see a full census when the count goes above 20 doesn't mean that coins with populations greater than that aren't rare. I'm with Keets on this one.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
This is why we're having the discussion. Everyone doesn't have to have the same opinion.
My view is that when every specimen is being tracked by multiple parties over a significant amount of time, there's a significant difference in behavior than when they are not all being tracked. When all specimens are not being tracked, I'm not sure the behavior is that different whether there's 50 not being tracked or 500 not being tracked.
So in your view, is a coin either rare or not rare? What about "very/extra rare", as in few enough traced, such that auction houses are likely to list a full census?
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
I could see "near rare" or "almost rare" for coins above the tracking limit.
For me, it makes sense that "rare" is when all specimens are known and tracked, because there's a materially different approach for those coins from multiple parties. There's just a lot more knowledge and interest in all specimens of these coins. Put another way, rare is when every specimen matters.
This is why we're having the discussion. Everyone doesn't have to have the same opinion.
the easy answer to this is that your opinion is just wrong, the difficult answer is to explain why it makes logical sense. the fine folks at PCGS, NGC etc. who stop at your imagined 20 tend to only practice that on well known rarities with well known Provenance and prices to match. I will assume that after the "20" the price and Provenance start to become more pedestrian, who wants to talk about the fact that Joe Fabeets owns something that cost him $6,000 when Pogue's coin fetched 100 times that?? drawing the rare line at the imagined 20 strikes me as a bit snobbish.
there's nothing wrong with tailoring a "Rarity Scale" to one's personal definition. the simple point is that the Hobby already has a well defined definition of the term Rare.
Well, it's common knowledge that there's no well-defined definition of the term "rare" in the hobby, as evidenced by many sellers of "rare" coins
And while there's some alignment of rarity scales, it should be noted that the scales were created by the opinion of individuals.
just because dealers like to hype coins as rare certainly doesn't make them so. also, there isn't "some" alignment, they're pretty much in agreement, but you know that.
perhaps you should post the ZRS to this thread or another one for discussion. I'd be anxious to see how that compares with Sheldon and QDB.
This is how the term is commonly used in the hobby. I imagine this use is more widely adopted than the rarity scales.
Publishing a rarity scale is not a bad idea. I’m already thinking about publishing reference guides with catalog numbers. The “Introduction” can talk about the meaning of “rare” as an introduction to this series of references.
Although our society tends to overuse certain superlatives (e.g. "genius"), I'm personally not offended by a rather broad use of the term "rare".
@Zoins pointed to the Sheldon scale:
Rare: 31-75
Very Rare: 13-30
Extremely Rare: 4-12
and this seems like a plausible definition, if we are talking about coins that are, casually, all "very rare".
A somewhat obvious question: what is the purpose of the definition? @ricko raised the concept of standards, but in the case of rarity, what is the purpose of the standard? Presumably in the case of the Sheldon scale, it is of historical interest, it helps collectors classify, acquire, even price. It may help our self esteem if we own such a thing, or even a few, or many.
But, I'll come back to the more casual use of rare. I don't think I'd be abusing language if I said that an 1805 quarter eagle is rare, even though it probably doesn't quite make it on the Sheldon scale. How about a $50 Pan Pac? They are not hard to obtain, but they are hardly common. I am being too loose with language if I call it a rare coin?
Bag Burn
Drunner
the word "rare" might be the most abused word in Numismatics. it generally gets used in an attempt to sell and in that regard it's just a little disingenuous. its acceptance by so many and the refusal to use an actual Rarity Scale only speaks to what Paul Fussell wrote of in 1991, The Dumbing of America.
how can you collect coins and not be aware of the Sheldon Scale??
I am somewhat jaded. I have held in my hands the 1870-S $3 and Half Dime, five 1804 Dollars at various times and all five 1913 Liberty Nickles at once. I think that 10 is a good ballpark for the cutoff point, but would not call you wrong if you said 12 or 15.
I enjoy my 100-1000 population coins.
IMO, if a coin takes more than a year or two to find, it's rare enough. We are only on this planet for so long.
Collector, occasional seller
I often use the term "rare" in many of my offerings. I also use "unique", "very rare', and "extremely rare"
I have never misused the description about a coin being rare.
Doesn't it depend on how narrowly you define the error? For example, if I consider all wrong planchet errors to be the same error type then they aren't "rare." If I consider only wrong planchets of 1968 Washington quarters, then the error type is "rare".
I'm less technical about it than some of the posts here. If I can walk into any coin shop, coin show or go on eBay and buy one at any time, then to me it isn't rare. Coins considered by many to be rare that aren't rare, by this definition:
Date and error together make it rare or not. The error itself could be unique or rare. The specific date with a major error could be considered rare or not.
For example, a 1983 off-center quarter is not rare. A 1972 D quarter struck on dime stock is not rare. A 2000 off center cent is not rare. Clipped coins in general are not rare.
Off center cents dated 2002 and beyond are rare. Clipped National Park quarters are rare.
Lots of interesting perspectives. While it is hard to argue with the Sheldon scale, I think PerryHall is on to something. A coin with a high demand can be "rare" even when there are a significant number of them while a coin with low demand may not be rare because there is ample availability even though the total number is limited.
Sorry, but no. If there are a “significant number of them” they don’t magically become rare, just because of high demand. And if a coin is truly rare, it doesn’t become any less so, simply due to low demand. You’re talking about availability and opportunity, not rarity.
Many years ago, the company I worked for had three 1922 Matte Proof Proof Peace Dollars for sale at the same time. If I remember correctly, two of them graded Proof 65 and the third one, Proof 66. I think the large majority of experts would agree that Matte Proof Peace Dollars are quite rare. But because there were three for sale at the same time, those rare coins were temporarily available. That didn’t make them ANY less rare than If none of them had been available for sale. It took several weeks or months to sell all three of them. After that, I didn’t see another one for sale for years. The availability changed over time. The rarity did not.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
How about errors like a planchet flaw?
For that matter, what about a one of a kind amazing toner?
Am I overvaluing them? Undervaluing them?
I honestly just go with eye appeal, and $$$ pain threshold.
Have no clue where to place them.
Would love to hear more thoughts...
BST: KindaNewish (3/21/21), WQuarterFreddie (3/30/21), Meltdown (4/6/21), DBSTrader2 (5/5/21) AKA- unclemonkey on Blow Out
Sometimes an original coin with nice eye appeal can be rare too. For example, an 1855-S Seated half dollar isn't necessarily "rare" even though it is a low mintage date. However, try to find one that isn't cleaned, damaged or ugly. Any original, eye appealing 1855-S without problems is rare in my opinion.
Amazing. How many people have held all five 1913 Liberty Nickels at once, living or otherwise??
I use the Sheldon scale and my slab pops as source in deterring markup on my scarcer material.
It’s similar method how I used to markup slabbed world gold years ago when Krause cv was starting basis. I have a number of graded world coins and bank notes with pops of 1-4 none higher. Others 20 graded or less. Premium over raw CV is based on grade plus an additional factor for low pop.
Business been brisk as many chasing this material.
I think the large majority of experts would agree that Matte Proof Peace Dollars are quite rare
I don't know, are there more than 20 or less??
10 or less for some!
For most coins it comes down to supply and demand. If there is a rare token with a population of 10 but only five collectors want it, the price will be fairly low. A common coin such as the 1909-SVDB cent with an estimated survival of 50,000 coins based on the PCGS Coin Facts is fairly expensive due to high demand from collectors.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
as Mark said, how does that affect the actual rarity?? a coin is either rare or not rare no matter how many people want it.
Some of the price levels for popular coins is also due to sellers keeping prices high instead of selling.
Again, you're talking about price, not rarity.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
I wouldn't know a rare coin if it hit me in the face! So for now I'm on the conditional side of things. But it's kind of fun listening to you guys banter back and forth about something you can never have. Well, not all of you, maybe a handful which is also kinda rare.
I'm guessing most people can afford the rare tokens and errors being discussed here
True but I'm guessing not many including myself can afford the three in your opening. Sure, the discussion has evolved but I'm still having a hard time wrapping my little mind around "only 5" and the fact that some of you have actually held them, at once!
Carry on, I wasn't trying to be disrespectful just throwing in a dose of middle America reality
Anything that Rick Tomaska is selling on TV...
I do not view the word Rare as binary. There a spectrum of rarity (in school we would say "a number line of positive integers"
Picking any arbitrary number (below which is Yes, Rare, above which is Not Rare) seems silly to me.
Put me on the camp that's fine with the Sheldon scale.
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
I have to settle for scarce.
@Baley said "I do not view the word Rare as binary."
I agree. Also, while strictly speaking, rarity may be independent of demand, in reality, rarity tends to fuel demand, and we may have little interest in certain things if they are not rare. So, at risk of stretching the definition a little, I would tend to allow for somewhat larger numbers in the case of something that is in demand.
Also, our sense of rarity seems to be tied to quality or historical significance. In the domain of wine, any wine from the Domaine de la Romanee Conti could be considered rare. The wine made in my neighbor's basement may be good and more limited in quantity than a Romanee Conti, but it would probably not be considered rare!
Didn’t Bowers create a Universal Rarity Scale?
I’d have to agree there is no consensus rarity scale in numismatics
One per pack. Mythics are sometimes in their place, once every 12 packs or so.
"It's like God, Family, Country, except Sticker, Plastic, Coin."
The price changes but the rarity doesn't.
Not to mention world coins. I had an 1806/1805 Irish bank token where only 5 are known. I bought it from a major auction company (y'all know it) for $160 and sold it for $299.
Didn’t Bowers create a Universal Rarity Scale?
it's probably heresy to some for me to say as much, but QDB didn't "create" anything, he only took what was already the accepted standard, the Sheldon Scale, and expounded on it to go from R-8 to his URS-20. I mean, really, when was the last time you concerned yourself with needing to know that URS-17 was 32,001 to 65,000 known?? that's just silly and not necessary. in reality it's not necessary for anything past the QDB URS-11, and all he did with the Sheldon Scale was use different numbers.
not much of a creation at all, maybe we should sue him for plagiarism!!
$299 sounds like a bargain! That’s one of the things I like about you most, the numbers, something tells me you haven’t lost money on too many deals.
Oh, I've lost money on plenty of deals. And I've got a few burials lying around here right now that would be hard to dig out from under. But I try to be conservative and I only buy aggressively if it is something I don't mind owning longer term.
It's the supply/demand issue that people have mentioned. 5 of something can be too many if no one wants it.
I guess I'm on an island all by myself. I say a rare coin is one that (base metal) sells for more than face value, otherwise more than bullion value.
Under that definition, among other coins, Morgan and Peace Dollars, wheat cents, pre-1933 gold coins and ASE’s would qualify. You consider coins rare, even when there are millions of them?
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Somewhere between al dente' and paleo. Peace Roy
BST: endeavor1967, synchr, kliao, Outhaul, Donttellthewife, U1Chicago, ajaan, mCarney1173, SurfinHi, MWallace, Sandman70gt, mustanggt, Pittstate03, Lazybones, Walkerguy21D, coinandcurrency242 , thebigeng, Collectorcoins, JimTyler, USMarine6, Elkevvo, Coll3ctor, Yorkshireman, CUKevin, ranshdow, CoinHunter4, bennybravo, Centsearcher, braddick, Windycity, ZoidMeister, mirabela, JJM, RichURich, Bullsitter, jmski52, LukeMarshall, coinsarefun, MichaelDixon, NickPatton, ProfLiz, Twobitcollector,Jesbroken oih82w8, DCW
In reading this thread.
I sat down and jotted down Sheldon and URS scale to use in classifying individual slabbed coins in inventory (pop) for easy overview (like am I likely have only one in bourse room). I settled on Sheldon. Using pop of item in its grade plus number higher. Ditto for graded currency. Not saying low pop means item technically rare just looking for easy reference measure.