Options
Should the 2021 Morgan Dollar be considered part of the Morgan dollar series?
jmlanzaf
Posts: 31,910 ✭✭✭✭✭
Will PCGS include it in registry sets?
I've been thinking about this lately and I think it is a huge issue in whether these coins "have legs".
The coin has kept the original design with a new hub which was, per the Mint website, "created through the use of modern technology and historical U.S. Mint assets."
The coin does not say "100th Anniversary" or present any other evidence of being "commemorative".
The coin is being issued with a business strike finish.
Is there any reason to consider these as anything but an addition to the series?
[Same applies to the Peace Dollar version, of course.]
6
Comments
It should not be included in the Morgan Dollar because it is a commemorative. But I am sure that it will because it will boost sales and prices.
If the 1921 does I guess it should. the only issue being it was never real currency
11.5$ Southern Dollars, The little “Big Easy” set
No, it is a commemorative and not a regular production piece.
BST transactions: dbldie55, jayPem, 78saen, UltraHighRelief, nibanny, liefgold, FallGuy, lkeigwin, mbogoman, Sandman70gt, keets, joeykoins, ianrussell (@GC), EagleEye, ThePennyLady, GRANDAM, Ilikecolor, Gluggo, okiedude, Voyageur, LJenkins11, fastfreddie, ms70, pursuitofliberty, ZoidMeister,Coin Finder, GotTheBug, edwardjulio, Coinnmore...
I'm torn on that designation. It will be interesting to see what PCGS does and where Greysheet puts it.
Isn't it as "regular" a production piece as US Mint sets?
By Law the United States Mint does NOT consider it a commemorative...
I hope it's not included.
IG: DeCourcyCoinsEbay: neilrobertson
"Numismatic categorizations, if left unconstrained, will increase spontaneously over time." -me
By Law the United States Mint classifies the Morgan and Peace Silver Dollars "Special Collectibles"...
They included all the 2014 Kennedy’s in the registry set, including the gold Kennedy. I would expect them to do the same with these.
IMO, if it is not the same exact design and composition, then no.
What’s the story of the 1921? I never knew it wasn’t real currency.
If the gold Kennedy is included, this should certainly be included.
Only when the AT specimens show up.
Seriously though, if it is a legal tender monetized coin and a similar design I would think yes, absolutely.
Here is one way to look at it:
Would a type collector be satisfied to include one of these as their representative of the Morgan dollar?
Well, they don't really have a category for single circulating coins, do they? I mean Mint sets fall under "annual sets". Kennedy halves fall under "Rolls, bags and boxes", ASEs fall under bullion products. There isn't a category for just "coins", or "circulation coins" or NCLT.
No. These are made as NCLT collector coins, not circulation strikes. The gold Mercury dime, SLQ, and WLH are not parts of those registry sets. I think by the time all the dust settles, the number of coins in this issue will be sufficiently high to warrant a set of its own.
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars
So you're saying that 1965 quarters aren't part of the Washington quarter series? ATB quarters aren't part of the clad quarter series? Steel cents aren't part of the Lincoln series?
And, if you want a more classic look, seated coinage "with arrows" aren't part of the seated coinage series.
I just don't think it is so easy to be so definitive.
I’ve said it in other threads but I can see PCGS having a classic series that goes through 1921 then an extended series including 2021 and beyond (since they could mint them every year onwards if they wanted) plus just a new series one.
TurtleCat Gold Dollars
Sure, why not?
@jmlanzaf: The Washington quarters , Lincoln cents and the Seated Liberty coinage were a continuously issued series. We're talking about a 100 year gap here. Besides, I said it's just my opinion. I will consider my Morgan dollar set complete at 1921 with the 2021 coins as commemoratives. You're free to do as you wish.
NO.
Should the 2021 Morgan Dollar be considered part of the Morgan dollar series?
I would say ABSOLUTELY THEY SHOULD, based mostly on the precedent established by the Eisenhower dollars.
Different metallic composition. The 40% silver Ikes are part of the set.
Date not struck for circulation. No Ike dollars dated 1973 were struck for circulation, but all are part of the set.
Sold by the Mint at a premium to face value. Most coins in the Ike set fall into this category.
Issued for a single year, long after the previous coins in the series were struck. Both the 1921 Morgan and the 1999 Susan B. Anthony dollars fall into this category, and both are part of their respective sets.
So in my opinion, complete Morgan and Peace dollar sets should include the coins dated 2021.
My Adolph A. Weinman signature
If you look at the existing Registry sets (Roosie dimes, for example), you'll see that there are a multitude of different sets for a given series, some of which only include a specific date range or some other qualifier. Given that, why wouldn't there be Morgan sets that do and do not include the 2021 (and beyond) issue(s)?
Then the 1921 shouldn't be part of the Morgan series if gaps bother you. But I was referring to your criteria of composition and design.
This is a very interesting argument in favor of it. Originally, I would have thought "no way", but now I really don't see an obvious reason to exclude it.
I don't think so. Not if they are considered a special collectible, and of a significantly different thickness.
And if they continue to make them into future years, then they should become a unique set.
This is very clearly a commemorative issue, so ... no.
Although I agree with others that the composition is not a deciding factor, it does highlight the fact that it is not intended as a regular issue coin. It would actually be much more convincing if it were clad - so a more dramatic change in composition.
Are they a significantly different thickness? My understanding is that the dimensions are the same, but they are .999 fine silver rather than 90% silver, and contain .858 ounces of silver rather than .7734 ounces of silver.
My Adolph A. Weinman signature
I do think that the 100 year gap is significant, and don’t think the 17 year prior gap on the Morgan or the 18 year gap on the SBA provide compelling counter arguments. Silver dollars circulated between 1904-1921, and 1921 Morgans circulated extensively in some parts of the country. The 1999 SBA was not exactly a major factor in commerce, but I have received them in change and have spent them. I don’t expect to receive any 2021 Morgans in change, and am unlikely to spend one!
This is a commemorative coin.
I vote no. They're made of .999 silver, a composition that isn't capable of enduring even light circulation. Even the "silver" Ikes are only 40% silver.
Including the gold 2014 Kennedy in that set was a mistake. If the mint did a .999 silver Flowing Hair dollar from newly mastered hubs, would it be included in that series? I should think not.
Now, if they used original hubs and changed only the date with 90/10 planchets, I'd vote yes.
My vote is yes because it makes the older coins more relevant to today’s new collectors.
Imagine all the kids getting 2021 Morgans for gifts and being introduced to the older series?
Without this, more newer collectors may only focus on Silver Eagle Dollars like now.
I posted erroneously...
What should the gap be?
20, 50 ,70, 30 there is no answer.
So it should not be a criteria.
Good question...
I would like to see D Carrs 1964 Peace dollar become part of the registry, too.
I believe the 1921 Morgans did not use original hubs either.
My Adolph A. Weinman signature
They didn’t. They were already destroyed by then. Morgan did a transfer process to create a new hub and worked it a bit from there. Essentially what some counterfeiters do but he was under a time crunch.
TurtleCat Gold Dollars
No, for the reasons noted in some of the other posts here.
They are of the same design and carry a one Dollar denomination. I think the only thing that might disqualify them from the set is that they are not minted for circulation. These should be in the same category as SMS or proof coins, not required for the circulation set, but required for the complete circulation and proof set. Or maybe they will just have their own category like the 2009 UHR $20 Double Eagle.
I'm not sure if you are joking here, but adding a non US Mint fantasy coin that some would argue is questionably legal to a US coin set will never happen, nor should it.
Collector, occasional seller
By this criteria, wouldn't Kennedy halves dated 2002 and later also be commemorative coins? They weren't struck for circulation, and they were and are sold at a premium by the Mint. Meanwhile, earlier dated Kennedy halves continue to circulate, though not as often as before. I don't expect to receive any post-2001 Kennedys in change, and am unlikely to spend one!
My Adolph A. Weinman signature
They definitely used a different reverse hub.
The Mint website says they used "historical Mint assets" to create these. I would think that means they were working from either coins or models or hubs.
@Overdate asked "By this criteria, wouldn't Kennedy halves dated 2002 and later also be commemorative coins?"
No, the situation is quite different. One could certainly decide to exclude modern Kennedys from a set because they are not circulating coins, but they are nonetheless a natural extension of the "real" thing (perhaps a bit like the later three cent pieces). Also, they are not being struck to commemorate the Kennedy series. Finally, they are common enough and the premium over face is low enough that they probably find their way into Coinstar machines from time to time. They very much "feel" like a continuation of a series that has never circulated much to begin with!
For those who suggest including it in the Morgan series, here is a question: are you arguing that this is not a commemorative? Or, should commemoratives be included among regular issue series? (You might respond that there is precedent for that with the Washington quarter, or even the "CAL" quarter eagle, but, those are different situation!)
Commemoratives are sometimes included among regular issue series. Examples are the 1975-1976 Bicentennial coins (including the 40% silver versions, which were not issued for circulation), the 2004-2005 Jefferson nickels, the early Presidential dollars, and the entire state quarter and ATB quarter series.
The "commemorative" reason for issuing the 2021 silver dollars should not be the sole determining factor as to whether they belong in their respective sets. Just about every U.S. coin is a commemorative to some extent.
My Adolph A. Weinman signature
1973 Ikes weren't issued for circulation. None of the silver Ikes were.
1970-D halves are only in Mint sets.
You could argue that the entire Kennedy series barely circulated and that the entire Kennedy series is commemorative - actually memorial.
When did Ikes ever really circulate?
I'm torn on this, honestly. People are making very definite exclusions based on specific criteria that don't apply to other series. I mean, in the end, you can choose to collect whatever you want to collect. Some people choose to exclude all proofs from a series for similar reasons, but at least they exclude all proofs not just some proofs.
This coin is certainly NCLT. But I'm not sure that is a sole reason for exclusion.
Personally, when they were first announced, I was thinking "commemorative" all the way. But I expected some kind of fancy proof finish and some horrendous design homage. But when they went with a business strike from the identical design, it is a much harder case to make. Other than the composition change, which has happened before, they would seem to be a resurrection of the series.
Can anyone think of an actual "commemorative" that has the identical design to the original? UHR Saint?
Edited to add: There are design differences in the 1907 and 2009 UHR.
@Overdate said" "The "commemorative" reason for issuing the 2021 silver dollars should not be the sole determining factor as to whether they belong in their respective sets. Just about every U.S. coin is a commemorative to some extent."
Of course I agree with that and did not say it was the sole factor. The commemorative factor is one important reason, but I and others have given many other reasons why it is not a natural part of the Morgan set.
The other examples you have given do not offer strong precedents. The 2004 - 2005 nickels are circulation issues, as are the state quarter and ATB coins. The 1975-1976 bicentennial 40 % silver coins are variants on a circulating issue. The 2021 Morgan is not a circulating issue and has a precious metal content that far exceeds the nominal value. It is strictly a commemorative-- it is not remotely a variant on a circulating coin.
Not to mention that the 2009 is much smaller in diameter.
Regarding your earlier comment, Kennedy halves did circulate rather commonly in the 1960s and into the 1970s. Ikes circulated as well, but not to the same degree, at least in part due to their size and heft.
I love debates like this. In my view, this is the entire raison d'être of a forum. There are strong arguments to be made on both sides. I hope the coins they make look a little better than what they're showing on their website. If they're actually made as "business strike" coins, the look, luster, and "feel" of the coins should be pretty close to the originals. If they're dull, matte ASE-like CNC affairs, it won't be a very close match.
But, at least now all of us will have the opportunity to own a fully struck mint-made Peace dollar.
True, but the overall feel of the coin was pretty close. Not exact, but close enough for government work. I have a notion the "new" Peace and Morgan dollars will be qualitatively very different than the originals. We'll see.
Good point, Bill. I agree.
Pete