@cladking said: June 24, 2021 1:36PM
The quarters are gone and there aren't enough sets to meet the demand.
Why did you write this earlier then?
@cladking said: June 24, 2021 7:32AM
There are hundreds of thousands of most dates of clad quarters in chBU and more than half are attractive enough to be put into collections.
@MasonG said: @cladking said: June 24, 2021 1:36PM
The quarters are gone and there aren't enough sets to meet the demand.
Why did you write this earlier then?
@cladking said: June 24, 2021 7:32AM
There are hundreds of thousands of most dates of clad quarters in chBU and more than half are attractive enough to be put into collections.
I can't keep up with the changing narrative.
1950-D nickels, I'm told, did not suffer from speculation in1964 but from a belief that there would not be enough to go around. I think that's the definition of speculation.
First it was a quality issue, now I'm told there are MORE 1950-D nickels in all grades (mintage 2.6 million) than 1969 quarters (mintage 176 million including 1.8 million mint sets).
First there were not going to be any raw sets because of attrition. Then it was Gem, then choice, now coins of any quality???
@jmlanzaf said:
I can't keep up with the changing narrative.
It's a challenge.
I'm wondering how some of the numbers here are being arrived at. In a search of past posts, I see where CK estimated there were 3,000,000 serious collectors in 2010. Ok. Adjusting for a population increase, that would be about 3,200,000 today. Earlier in the thread, he claimed there are 250,000 to 500,000 Ike collectors. Who here believes that one out of every eight (+/-) collectors is currently buying Ikes? Count me out on that one.
Sometimes I'll pay a dollar and upgrade one of the clad quarters in my Dansco album. The duplicate becomes "supply".. I'll try to get a dollar for it but no takers
@cladking said: June 24, 2021 1:36PM
The quarters are gone and there aren't enough sets to meet the demand.
Why did you write this earlier then?
@cladking said: June 24, 2021 7:32AM
There are hundreds of thousands of most dates of clad quarters in chBU and more than half are attractive enough to be put into collections.
There is no changing narrative.
There is merely a distinction between coins in existence and coins available to the wholesale market (which doesn't yet exist). Large numbers of existing chBU clad quarters are not available to the market and many never will be as explained elsewhere. Remember; they are in the hands of the general public and often exposed to harsh storage conditions (including mint set packaging).
I don't know how many times I've said this but the point is there are not enough chBU clads to support a mass market at any price. The point is it doesn't matter how many nice chBU '72-D quarters exist (lots of them) if a collector is looking for a '74-D (not so many). If demand continues to increase for chBU quarters at the same time that the more common dollars are in short supply then we have the "perfect storm".
@cladking said:
There is merely a distinction between coins in existence and coins available to the wholesale market (which doesn't yet exist). Large numbers of existing chBU clad quarters are not available to the market and many never will be as explained elsewhere. Remember; they are in the hands of the general public and often exposed to harsh storage conditions (including mint set packaging).
It's not 1960 anymore. Tons of coins change hands without going anywhere near a wholesaler. You've heard of eBay, I'm sure.
@MasonG said:
I see where CK estimated there were 3,000,000 serious collectors in 2010. Ok. Adjusting for a population increase, that would be about 3,200,000 today.
It doesn't work this way.
Population and the number of collectors are not dependent on one another. We don't have to increase the population by a hundred to get one more collector and a whole boatload of non-collectors could arrive at any given time.
Since 2010 the number of collectors has ballooned even more than the US population, by far, and many of these new collectors are interested in moderns. Almost all of the new collectors were born AFTER clad coins were introduced and many of them grew up in this country using clad quarters.
Life is not a zero sum gain. This is EXACTLY why things keep changing all the time and EXACTLY why the future is never predictable. Things you need to know to predict the future haven't happened yet but there is one clue to the future that is highly relevant here; the supply of Ikes is apparently insufficient to meet the demand.
You can say that I'm "changing my story" but the fact is this is my story. If there really aren't enough Ikes then imagine the fireworks if people start wanting the dimes and quarters.
Here's another way to look at it. In twenty years there will be Ike sets walking into coin shops for sale because they exist now today and are unlikely to just disappear. But unless something changes there will be almost no dime and quarter sets walking into stores because they don't exist today. If collectors choose to make them then where will they get the coins without mint sets and pristine coins?
I'm just trying to say the same thing from different perspectives. It's not my intention to confuse even though I often have that effect on people.
“But unless something changes there will be almost no dime and quarter sets walking into stores because they don't exist today.”
This is a very fair point. Most TV stations were not peddling Roosie dime sets almost ever! And, the peddling of quarters mostly began with the state quarters. But, of course, why leave nickels out of this argument- they were ignored just as much as dimes.
Wondercoin
Please visit my website at www.wondercoins.com and my ebay auctions under my user name www.wondercoin.com.
@wondercoin said:
“But unless something changes there will be almost no dime and quarter sets walking into stores because they don't exist today.”
This is a very fair point. Most TV stations were not peddling Roosie dime sets almost ever! And, the peddling of quarters mostly began with the state quarters. But, of course, why leave nickels out of this argument- they were ignored just as much as dimes.
I agree that the nickels are ignored and many modern nickels are scarcer than the '50-D in unc. The attrition on circulating nickels is just staggering so some like the '71-(P) is not so common in any grade.
Nickels are the dark horse because there's so much less price discovery for them. The very low face value means some dates were set aside in massive quantities. Nickels never attracted the kind of hatred that clad coins did though they are collected little more. These tend to clean up from mint sets better than the clad so the attrition is a little lower on chBU coins.
Nickels have a very bright future but it's much harder to predict the winners. I like quite a few dates but generally save only the Gems of those dates I believe to be common. I do save nice chBU '71, '72-D, '75, '75-D, '76, '82-P, and some of the mid-'80's. Some of the '90's might be keepers as well so anything nice from this decade is set aside. There aren't that many nice '90's dates anyway.
@wondercoin said:
Great discussion here and isn’t CK doing a great job defending his position even if you do not agree with it 100%!
Look- at the core of CK’s analysis is the rising prices on the Mint sets (in some cases “20x the premium” of just a couple years ago). I clearly demonstrated that a simple explanation for these rising prices is not the incredible rise in collectors wanting MS62 and MS63 common moderns, but the reality that the pricing guides’ skewed values on these mint sets were way behind the proper individual values of the coins in the set. In fact, CK acknowledged that even today, an $8 1975 valued mint set actually contains “$15” in coin value based upon the individual prices. So, I just raised my buy on that set as well to the highest buy price I see in the land, but not because any new collectors are banging on my door for these coins.
But, when I demonstrated that the roll “bid” prices of the individual coins (INCLUDING THE IKES AND KENNEDY 50C) have not moved up in price in years, CK dismissed this as immaterial. CK didn’t consider the roll prices all that relevant to the discussion as, if I understood him correctly, the quality wasn’t as good in the rolls. And, here is where I believe CK’s argument misses the mark as…
It is true that the quality of my rolls isn’t as good as the quality in the “fresh” mint sets I started with (39) years ago as I may have pulled 2-5 gummy quality coins per 100 sets I examined. But, it shouldn’t matter at all to the theory that tens of thousands of collectors are pouring into the hobby to gobble up these moderns in high end circs. and lower Choice to Gem MS quality if there is also a large pool of rolls that were “homemade” over the past (20) years with these grades in them by breaking up mint sets (and proof sets). I, myself, literally have thousands of BU and proof rolls of nice coins pulled from Mint Sets and Proof sets over the past (39) years. Of course, “hungry” collectors will feed their hunger with these Choice to Gem coins from my rolls. Many of my coins in these rolls look like the coins in Bailey’s album that CK loves! I simply want the “needle in the haystack” superb gems that have always been nearly nonexistent.
There will be plenty of coins to go around to feed the new clad lover’s hunger for these coins. Only a few people ever dive into the deep waters of pursuing the super premium gems. For example, I noticed my Top 5 Franklin Mint State FBL set went to #6 recently. I said “I wonder who the new player is”. I wasn’t the least bit surprised to see it was Mr Hansen now listing his 3rd set in the top 5 (this time under a family member’s name it appears). The Franklins ended nearly (60) years ago and you can count the “players” chasing the best of the best on a few fingers!! And 4 of the top six Registry sets after nearly 25 years of Registry Set collecting this super popular Silver 50C series are now me and Mr Hansen, Mr Hansen and Mr. Hansen! With just (2) other folks (one who hasn’t updated his set in years if not more than a decade) in the Universe rounding out the Top 6 Registry sets. This speaks volumes to me! And, I believe is quite relevant to this discussion.
Bid prices are immaterial only because they are not fully reflective of the actual wholesale market. Many of the rolls simply don't change hands very frequently and for the main part bid price reflects typical quality and what's at issue is chBU quality. Many people have no idea how bad typical quality of moderns can be. I am often heart broken when I open an '82 roll and find ugly poorly made coins that are tarnished. Large percentages of the early zincoln rolls are rotted and some even bust the seams of the paper as they expand. It's very difficult to price or deal in the modern markets between the poor quality and the virtually meaningless price guides. chBU is often at substantial premium to bid. And the bad stuff can't be given away. Nobody wants ugly coins except at a very low price.
Life is not a zero sum gain. This is EXACTLY why things keep changing all the time and EXACTLY why the future is never predictable. Things you need to know to predict the future haven't happened yet but there is one clue to the future that is highly relevant here; the supply of Ikes is apparently insufficient to meet the demand.
Yes, collector preferences are supposedly random. That's why collectors prefer the same series now they did previously.
It's possible to identify the coin attributes which make one series preferred over another. You can pick any two widely collected series (US or otherwise) and I can tell you why one is preferred over the other, most of the time. The only possibility for your claim is a radical change in the general culture which the non-collector brings with them into the hobby.
Here's another way to look at it. In twenty years there will be Ike sets walking into coin shops for sale because they exist now today and are unlikely to just disappear. But unless something changes there will be almost no dime and quarter sets walking into stores because they don't exist today. If collectors choose to make them then where will they get the coins without mint sets and pristine coins?
There are two outcomes to what you just wrote:
One: They won't collect it just like they do not buy the coins I collect now. The coins I collect are probably cheaper for being too scarce. This is the (apparent reality) for many world coins. This is never going to happen with US moderns but that's one outcome you are implying.
Two: You are predicting the price will increase where those who want it and have the money will pay the amount necessary to buy it, at very large multiples to current prices. This the usual outcome where price is the adjusting factor.
Life is not a zero sum gain. This is EXACTLY why things keep changing all the time and EXACTLY why the future is never predictable. Things you need to know to predict the future haven't happened yet but there is one clue to the future that is highly relevant here; the supply of Ikes is apparently insufficient to meet the demand.
Yes, collector preferences are supposedly random. That's why collectors prefer the same series now they did previously.
It's possible to identify the coin attributes which make one series preferred over another. You can pick any two widely collected series (US or otherwise) and I can tell you why one is preferred over the other, most of the time. The only possibility for your claim is a radical change in the general culture which the non-collector brings with them into the hobby.
What is going to make this happen?
The supply of Ikes in what grade? I tell people to spend circ Ikes all the time. I just don't see why people can't be collecting AU Ikes 50 years from now rather than Gem or Choice Uncs. And, frankly, I would say the same for all the clad coins. Would you tell someone not to collect Barber coins because there aren't enough Ch Uncs? Especially with Ikes and Kennedy halves, I don't think there is any attrition to speak of since they don't circulate and hardly ever did.
And, frankly, it is really hard for me to imagine that 50 years from now in an all digital currency world that people are suddenly going to want to put together date/mm sets of Ch Bu Roosevelts or Washington quarters. The sheer length and monotony of the series is enough to make most people type collectors.
If you want another counterargument, I would argue that Roosevelt's reputation will have faded when you are 3 generations or more removed from WW II. And Washington is already becoming somewhat controversial. The icons of the future might barely have reached adulthood in 2021. And demographics will make the country increasingly LatinX and their nostalgia might well lead them to non-U.S. coins not memorial coins to dead Presidents who are controversial. I think there is far more working against an increase in collectors for these series than in favor of them.
@jmlanzaf said:
I just don't see why people can't be collecting AU Ikes 50 years from now rather than Gem or Choice Uncs. And, frankly, I would say the same for all the clad coins.
If high grade clads don't exist in numbers to make them a reasonable choice, people will collect something else. At the end of the day, what real difference does it make what people choose to collect? If there are not enough choice/gem clads to allow a large number of people to collect them, so what?
Another thought- if future collectors end up being more condition-conscious than collectors are today, that would seem to lead them to NCLT coinage over whatever nice clads still exist.
Another thought- if future collectors end up being more condition-conscious than collectors are today, that would seem to lead them to NCLT coinage over whatever nice clads still exist.
It's not just the coin quality. Most US moderns aren't even close to being competitive with NCLT due to the coin attributes I previously described, at similar price points.
The easiest way to evaluate the future prospects is by comparing clad dimes and quarters to the silver. The silver FDR dime's preference (not "popularity") is easily dead last if classified as a classic. The quarter is noticeably higher but not the ranking.
The last time I checked the Heritage archives (2019 I believe), silver quarters outsold clad by 15-1 between $100 and $1000 and 32-1 between $1000 and $10000. Dimes were a lot more equal but only because so few (proportionately) sell for higher prices.
The primary explanation for this difference is the metal content. Many collectors presumably misjudge survival rates in better quality but don't care.
Are clad quarters and dimes going to noticeably close the gap with the silver after 50+ years? Probably somewhat but not soon enough where it will be meaningful to anyone now.
Are the silver really going to have a noticeably higher preference in the future? If the SQ program couldn't do it, I'd say the answer is no.
WCC: It’s a “chicken and egg” thing. The reason Heritage has that 32-1 ratio is totally understandable to me. But, not for the reasons you are suggesting.
On a separate note, I am not sure CK’s position weakens if even but one or two of the six denominations has a strong preference among collectors (and the other 4-5 denominations do not). It would still result in the breaking up of the mint sets, etc.
So, in short, although your research is quite interesting, it doesn’t appear all that relevant to CK’s argument.
Just my 2 cents.
Wondercoin
Please visit my website at www.wondercoins.com and my ebay auctions under my user name www.wondercoin.com.
If you want another counterargument, I would argue that Roosevelt's reputation will have faded when you are 3 generations or more removed from WW II. And Washington is already becoming somewhat controversial. The icons of the future might barely have reached adulthood in 2021. And demographics will make the country increasingly LatinX and their nostalgia might well lead them to non-U.S. coins not memorial coins to dead Presidents who are controversial. I think there is far more working against an increase in collectors for these series than in favor of them.
Roosevelt's reputation already isn't great. All we need is a member of congress to introduce legislation to bring back the Mercury Dime and put out a statement of findings highlighting the negatives of FDR and argue to remove FDR and bring back AW's design, which was well liked.
@wondercoin said:
WCC: It’s a “chicken and egg” thing. The reason Heritage has that 32-1 ratio is totally understandable to me. But, not for the reasons you are suggesting.
On a separate note, I am not sure CK’s position weakens if even but one or two of the six denominations has a strong preference among collectors (and the other 4-5 denominations do not). It would still result in the breaking up of the mint sets, etc.
So, in short, although your research is quite interesting, it doesn’t appear all that relevant to CK’s argument.
Just my 2 cents.
Wondercoin
It's relevant if he is inferring that the price level will increase noticeably, which is the only plausible outcome from his comments even if he won't state it. I asked him twice and he did not answer. If the collector base is going to increase anywhere near as much as he claims, I don't see any other conclusion.
I am aware Heritage is not exactly accurate for the reason you infer, but it is "directionally" correct. Heritage has "self selection bias" if that's what you mean.
This is why I intentionally omitted sales from $1-$100 because it's the more typical price range for clad buyers. Yes, I agree this is a lot more equal but that's my primary point. Clad isn't competitive above nominal prices.
The more important number which I cannot quantify without spending a lot of time is the relative value, how much collectors are spending on both, I believe it's more than the ratio I provided (much bigger).
The supply of Ikes in what grade? I tell people to spend circ Ikes all the time. I just don't see why people can't be collecting AU Ikes 50 years from now rather than Gem or Choice Uncs. And, frankly, I would say the same for all the clad coins. Would you tell someone not to collect Barber coins because there aren't enough Ch Uncs? Especially with Ikes and Kennedy halves, I don't think there is any attrition to speak of since they don't circulate and hardly ever did.
What's so absurd about nice attractive XF/ AU eagle reverse quarters or Ike dollars increasing? Of course Ike dollars are more plentiful in high circ grades so the same amount of demand would merely mean they go up much less. Are you aware these are going for over $1.50 right now because there is demand?
The attrition on Ikes is well over 1% annually. In any given grade it is much higher because many coins degrade.
...Ch Bu Roosevelts or Washington quarters. The sheer length and monotony of the series is enough to make most people type collectors.
In the '70's and '80's pundits said these series were too short to be collected and now they are too long.
You see "monotony", I see history. It's just modern history but it is marked by coins that are each different and each with their own unique characteristics.
The easiest way to evaluate the future prospects is by comparing clad dimes and quarters to the silver. The silver FDR dime's preference (not "popularity") is easily dead last if classified as a classic. The quarter is noticeably higher but not the ranking.
This is not true and where you are continually being led astray. Silver is very popular among the current generation of coin collectors. I'm referring to older collectors and baby boomers who hold most of the total value of all US coins. More importantly though is that most of these collectors hate clad coins. We didn't get many new collectors between 1965 and 1999 because new collectors were given this advice that only silver and old copper were worthwhile to collect. This discouraged two generations of collectors so they were mostly lost as collectors. Most new collectors simply agreed with this "folk wisdom". Besides everyone believed that in addition to clads being junk they were also excessively common with mintages literally in the billions.
Given the situation it is only natural that there has been so little demand for even the scarcest moderns.
But the new generation is arising from outside the numismatic mainstream. They usually find other like minded collectors before they hear people tell them post-'64 issues aren't even really coins but more like chucky cheese tokens (not that there's anything wrong with that).
The last time I checked the Heritage archives (2019 I believe), silver quarters outsold clad by 15-1 between $100 and $1000 and 32-1 between $1000 and $10000. Dimes were a lot more equal but only because so few (proportionately) sell for higher prices.
I'm surprised it's not higher.
Most clads are never going to be worth the amount of the older silver coins except as high grade and varieties.
Are the silver really going to have a noticeably higher preference in the future?
I'm not suggesting a typical BU common date clad like the '72-D is going to be worth as much as a BU '30's era quarter. But the scarcer date are far scarcer than most of the quarters from the '40's and '50's. Even if they don't get as much demand they can still approach or exceed the prices of the older coins.
As far as prices and the relative values achieved by the clads a great deal depends on the new generation and how they are and will collect them. This is largely unpredictable because it's the result of millions of decisions that haven't been made yet and which each depend on experiences that haven't occurred yet. Everything depends on how these new collectors choose to collect and how many of them have an interest. I am merely saying that demand has been skyrockets for years as seen in sales of the albums for the coins and that it appears this demand is just beginning to bump up against supply constraints. I am also saying that these supply constraints are fundamental because our generation has neglected these coins and allowed them to be lost and degrade. The coins no longer exist in the kind of quantity to supply even these "niche" markets.
It's relevant if he is inferring that the price level will increase noticeably, which is the only plausible outcome from his comments even if he won't state it. I asked him twice and he did not answer.
No. Still irrelevant.
It's impossible to predict price levels. If clad quarters become as popular or more popular than Ikes as I believe they will then their prices will probably be brackets between the value of an Ike ($3.50) and the value of '50-D nickel in 1964 ($350). Remember these will be far scarcer than Ikes especially at wholesale.
I do not believe that the clad quarter market is going to become a ten or 15 billion dollar market. This is very highly improbable. I'll be surprised if a common date BU roll wholesales for more than $100 in the next few years. There are some "common date" rolls already pushing this level but for reasons that are outside the scope of this thread I won't elaborate on what makes them exceptions. I'm essentially talking about rolls that aren't tarnished in the mint set and lots of mint sets survive like the '72-D or the '81-P. Common coins will always be common but none of the eagle reverse quarters are nearly so common as the market believes.
When better date coins increase substantially more then you'll also see XF/ AU prices soar. But remember it's almost impossible to find these in XF/ AU so the aggregate value of all these circs will not be "financially significant" to borrow a phrase.
The supply of Ikes in what grade? I tell people to spend circ Ikes all the time. I just don't see why people can't be collecting AU Ikes 50 years from now rather than Gem or Choice Uncs. And, frankly, I would say the same for all the clad coins. Would you tell someone not to collect Barber coins because there aren't enough Ch Uncs? Especially with Ikes and Kennedy halves, I don't think there is any attrition to speak of since they don't circulate and hardly ever did.
What's so absurd about nice attractive XF/ AU eagle reverse quarters or Ike dollars increasing? Of course Ike dollars are more plentiful in high circ grades so the same amount of demand would merely mean they go up much less. Are you aware these are going for over $1.50 right now because there is demand?
The attrition on Ikes is well over 1% annually. In any given grade it is much higher because many coins degrade.
...Ch Bu Roosevelts or Washington quarters. The sheer length and monotony of the series is enough to make most people type collectors.
In the '70's and '80's pundits said these series were too short to be collected and now they are too long.
You see "monotony", I see history. It's just modern history but it is marked by coins that are each different and each with their own unique characteristics.
Yes, Ikes sell for $1.50. That means they wholesale for 95 cents. LOL. When someone comes in with 5 Ikes from Grandpa's desk, I'm not paying over $1 for them so I can try and accumulate a bag quantity someday so I can ship it to a wholesaler for $50 profit on $1000 investment.
Upon what is the 1% attrition rate based? They don't circulate at all. How could 1% of them reach scrap metal status per year?
You see history, 99% of the rest of the world sees monotony. It's the whole nature of "type" collecting. Why do I need to care if the date on the quarter changed from 1968 to 1969? If your whole argument is based on more people thinking like you, then you are failing to address the most fundamental rule of retail: know your customers.
If you open a discussion about bitcoin on this forum, most people are negative. If you open a discussion about gold, most people are positive. For post-millenials who grew up in a digital world, it is reversed. If you spent your formative years dumping real money into a video game to try and acquire a virtual sword and then sold that virtual sword for a profit to another gamer, you are not bothered by the digital nature of bitcoin. Why do you think those kids are going to suddenly develop a love for a dead President that they consider to be a racist white supremacist? And even if they do wish to collect Americana, why do you think they will wish to be date/mm collectors as opposed to type collectors?
I'm not saying that none of them will. Some always will. But you are expecting more people than is currently the case to become like us. In fact, as we die off we are going to be replaced by fewer people like us and more people that are very different. It is at least equally possible that demand for these series decrease not increase.
We are almost SIXTY years into the clad era and they still haven't caught on with many of the date/mm collectors who intentionally stop their collections at 1964.
Yes, Ikes sell for $1.50. That means they wholesale for 95 cents. LOL. When someone comes in with 5 Ikes from Grandpa's desk, I'm not paying over $1 for them so I can try and accumulate a bag quantity someday so I can ship it to a wholesaler for $50 profit on $1000 investment.
With the exception of coins worth over $20 the retail and other prices are meaningless. The only price that matters is the wholesale price. I made the statement in context of wholesale prices and was referring to wholesale price. Circulated Ikes that are attractive and not culls in F or better wholesale at $1.50 They are very popular right now among the general public and collectors. They have become almost impossible to get from the FED. I believe they were simply all dispersed but it's entirely possible some were melted. In any case the attrition on these was sufficient to reduce the supply to less than the demand. It is entirely possible the FED has more in storage and will release more in the future but this seems improbable to me. If you think about it they only made about two Ikes for every living American so it's not so hard to believe attrition and the removal of coins by collectors and visitors taking them home for souvenirs could wipe out the supply. Of course they are still common enough it would be surprising if there is much room for more price increases.
To put this in more perspective there are more than ten Ikes for every BU eagle reverse clad quarters of any date. There are only about three times as many Bu clad quarters than Ikes even though there are five times as many dates. While all BU Ikes are common some of the quarters are not!
I still take Ikes to the bank. They are very popular. Of course I don't bother saving copper pennies either. I didn't bother saving silver from circulation until after 1971.
Yes, Ikes sell for $1.50. That means they wholesale for 95 cents. LOL. When someone comes in with 5 Ikes from Grandpa's desk, I'm not paying over $1 for them so I can try and accumulate a bag quantity someday so I can ship it to a wholesaler for $50 profit on $1000 investment.
With the exception of coins worth over $20 the retail and other prices are meaningless. The only price that matters is the wholesale price. I made the statement in context of wholesale prices and was referring to wholesale price. Circulated Ikes that are attractive and not culls in F or better wholesale at $1.50 They are very popular right now among the general public and collectors. They have become almost impossible to get from the FED. I believe they were simply all dispersed but it's entirely possible some were melted. In any case the attrition on these was sufficient to reduce the supply to less than the demand. It is entirely possible the FED has more in storage and will release more in the future but this seems improbable to me. If you think about it they only made about two Ikes for every living American so it's not so hard to believe attrition and the removal of coins by collectors and visitors taking them home for souvenirs could wipe out the supply. Of course they are still common enough it would be surprising if there is much room for more price increases.
To put this in more perspective there are more than ten Ikes for every BU eagle reverse clad quarters of any date. There are only about three times as many Bu clad quarters than Ikes even though there are five times as many dates. While all BU Ikes are common some of the quarters are not!
I still take Ikes to the bank. They are very popular. Of course I don't bother saving copper pennies either. I didn't bother saving silver from circulation until after 1971.
Putting coins in collections does not count as attrition. What is the point of that?
“Yes, Ikes sell for $1.50.”…. “$50 profit on $1000 investment.”
Would you separate them for a $500 profit per $1000 investment? If so, you might want to give grandpa a fairer price on his coins than face value as that’s what $1.50/coin means.
Wondercoin
P.S. I’ve purchased about 15,000 circulated Ikes in the past 6 or so months and have run numerous tests on what is in these “fresh” accumulations from Grandpa’s drawer! Lol.
P.S.S. 1972 Ty 2 Ikes (raw) sell for around $25-$40 in nice circulated grade and around $60-$70 in PCGS AU holders. It would be quite helpful to know how many 1972 Ty 2 coins are found these days per random 1,000 circulated Ikes- yes? You need to put in the work to know this!
Please visit my website at www.wondercoins.com and my ebay auctions under my user name www.wondercoin.com.
Putting coins in collections does not count as attrition. What is the point of that?
There is attrition on everything. Every year houses burn and flood. Coins get lost or degraded. Attrition on Ikes is probably more than 1%.
No, putting coins in collections isn't attrition but these coins become unavailable for the wholesale market for many years. They become the "overhang"; the coins that will walk into shops for the next half century. There just aren't a lot of them and there are far fewer chBU eagle reverse quarter sets.
.....as to the day of of raw moderns being over, I kind of agree. Even still, there are many who continue to pick through them.... just to get them out of the wild.
@wondercoin said:
“Yes, Ikes sell for $1.50.”…. “$50 profit on $1000 investment.”
Would you separate them for a $500 profit per $1000 investment? If so, you might want to give grandpa a fairer price on his coins than face value as that’s what $1.50/coin means.
Wondercoin
P.S. I’ve purchased about 15,000 circulated Ikes in the past 6 or so months and have run numerous tests on what is in these “fresh” accumulations from Grandpa’s drawer! Lol.
P.S.S. 1972 Ty 2 Ikes (raw) sell for around $25-$40 in nice circulated grade and around $60-$70 in PCGS AU holders. It would be quite helpful to know how many 1972 Ty 2 coins are found these days per random 1,000 circulated Ikes- yes? You need to put in the work to know this!
I don't buy them at all, as I indicated, because they have never been with the trouble. It would take me years to accumulate a bag and by then the price might be back down to $1.1 or $1.20
The easiest way to evaluate the future prospects is by comparing clad dimes and quarters to the silver. The silver FDR dime's preference (not "popularity") is easily dead last if classified as a classic. The quarter is noticeably higher but not the ranking.
This is not true and where you are continually being led astray. Silver is very popular among the current generation of coin collectors. I'm referring to older collectors and baby boomers who hold most of the total value of all US coins. More importantly though is that most of these collectors hate clad coins. We didn't get many new collectors between 1965 and 1999 because new collectors were given this advice that only silver and old copper were worthwhile to collect. This discouraged two generations of collectors so they were mostly lost as collectors. Most new collectors simply agreed with this "folk wisdom". Besides everyone believed that in addition to clads being junk they were also excessively common with mintages literally in the billions.
Given the situation it is only natural that there has been so little demand for even the scarcest moderns.
But the new generation is arising from outside the numismatic mainstream. They usually find other like minded collectors before they hear people tell them post-'64 issues aren't even really coins but more like chucky cheese tokens (not that there's anything wrong with that).
Nonsense.
It's another example proving you understand virtually nothing about collector motivation or the factors driving collector preferences. This is the real reason your expectation differs so widely from reality for over 40 years.
The preference for silver over base metals has nothing to do with generations or anyone's age. It's a generic societal preference which collectors acquire from the external culture. The public overwhelmingly prefers silver over base metals (as evident in the relative market price) and as long as they do, collectors in the aggregate will never have a preference contradicting it.
In prior posts (including here) I also told you that demographic turnover will never lead to your claims either. Collectors no longer "hating" clad doesn't mean they will like it anywhere near as much as you imply.
Aside from this message board, I've never heard anyone talking about hating clad coinage or advising that only silver and copper were worthwhile to collect.
** As far as prices and the relative values achieved by the clads a great deal depends on the new generation and how they are and will collect them. This is largely unpredictable because it's the result of millions of decisions that haven't been made yet and which each depend on experiences that haven't occurred yet. ** Everything depends on how these new collectors choose to collect and how many of them have an interest. I am merely saying that demand has been skyrockets for years as seen in sales of the albums for the coins and that it appears this demand is just beginning to bump up against supply constraints. I am also saying that these supply constraints are fundamental because our generation has neglected these coins and allowed them to be lost and degrade. The coins no longer exist in the kind of quantity to supply even these "niche" markets.
It's hard for me to respond to your posts because you aren't being clear in your claims.
Whether your claims in this thread have any credibility depends upon the future prices you have in mind. I asked you twice and you declined to reply both times.
If your claims in this thread lead to what I consider to be marginal increases from now, I'll grant you that. If it's anything like you have claimed in the past, especially that one post in the last Raw Moderns thread, it's never going to happen.
Generically, I can predict with virtual certainty that future collectors will have essentially identical aggregate preferences to those they have now, as long as the external cultural factors do not change.
This covers the four primary attributes I listed previously: metal content, design perception, coin size and relative scarcity. The importance varies by collector and coin but in the aggregate, explains the very low aggregate preference US moderns have now and previously. It's not because collectors "hated" it.
It's relevant if he is inferring that the price level will increase noticeably, which is the only plausible outcome from his comments even if he won't state it. I asked him twice and he did not answer.
No. Still irrelevant.
It's impossible to predict price levels. If clad quarters become as popular or more popular than Ikes as I believe they will then their prices will probably be brackets between the value of an Ike ($3.50) and the value of '50-D nickel in 1964 ($350). Remember these will be far scarcer than Ikes especially at wholesale.
It's impossible to predict specifics. It's not impossible to predict relative prices with reasonable accuracy.
Since the general population overwhelmingly prefers silver over base metals and that's where collectors get this preference, I can predict with virtual certainty that collectors in the future will still prefer silver quarters and dimes with a similar preference to today, in the aggregate. The only way this is not going to happen is if base metal prices substantially close the gap or become more valuable.
This excludes condition census coins and a limited number of specialization, such as die varieties and errors.
When better date coins increase substantially more then you'll also see XF/ AU prices soar. But remember it's almost impossible to find these in XF/ AU so the aggregate value of all these circs will not be "financially significant" to borrow a phrase.
“The preference for silver over base metals has nothing to do with generations or anyone's age.”
Not exactly true. I know many collectors who greatly prefer collecting clad Kennedy 50C over Walkers or Franklins almost solely due to their age! They grew up with the Clad 50C and collect them for that reason. Ditto on the Clad Ikes. Justin delivered 10,000 clad Ikes recently to an astute and seasoned younger collector because of his grandfather’s ties to Pres. Eisenhower and receiving a clad Ike as a youth whenever he visited grandpa.
You doubt these particular stories or myriad more I am aware of tied to clad collecting?
Wondercoin
Please visit my website at www.wondercoins.com and my ebay auctions under my user name www.wondercoin.com.
The point I've made now and again in Cladking's threads on this subject, over the past 19 years, is that if clad era coins become more popular, how can earlier silver issues not become even more popular?
You 4 dealers keep discussing these recent coins in set, roll, and bag quantities. The only collector of singles commenting... has mostly completed his set already.
Where are the other buyers?
The registry, I guess, with he attendant fees to get "officially" told my coins are nice enough.
@wondercoin said:
“The preference for silver over base metals has nothing to do with generations or anyone's age.”
Not exactly true. I know many collectors who greatly prefer collecting clad Kennedy 50C over Walkers or Franklins almost solely due to their age! They grew up with the Clad 50C and collect them for that reason. Ditto on the Clad Ikes. Justin delivered 10,000 clad Ikes recently to an astute and seasoned younger collector because of his grandfather’s ties to Pres. Eisenhower and receiving a clad Ike as a youth whenever he visited grandpa.
You doubt these particular stories or myriad more I am aware of tied to clad collecting?
Wondercoin
I wasn't clear, did not mean this isn't true for individual collectors. It's no different than those who buy condition census US moderns or "rare" coins from specialization.
That's why if you tell me the 1975 "No S" proof dime will become the most valuable US coin, I'm not going to tell you it won't. I don't believe it but it only takes one person to make it happen. It is effectively a random event.
This isn't true with aggregate collector preferences or if you claim it, I'd like to know how you arrive at this conclusion.
@Baley said:
The point I've made now and again in Cladking's threads on this subject, over the past 19 years, is that if clad era coins become more popular, how can earlier silver issues not become even more popular?
This is a point I have made to him numerous times. It's either:
US moderns are going to become so popular, it will become preferred over at least 95% of all coinage and sell for higher prices based upon his prior claims.
Or
The demand for all coins will increase and by his prior claims, also substantially with US moderns increasing noticeably more. This of course would make many more coins completely unaffordable to most current collectors later but apparently, this isn't a factor either.
Now, if the counterpoint is that it's more likely that a nice BU clad Washington quarter will go from $0.50 to $2.50 than it is for a draped bust quarter in nice Good to go from $500 to $2500, I'll agree with the percentage math.
But how much time and effort will go into the transactions needed to make $2000? How much profit will be eaten up in shipping, handling, materials, space, and general life energy?
Ya gotta really love clad coins to look at and deal with them all of your free time.
It's another example proving you understand virtually nothing about collector motivation or the factors driving collector preferences. This is the real reason your expectation differs so widely from reality for over 40 years.
The preference for silver over base metals has nothing to do with generations or anyone's age. It's a generic societal preference which collectors acquire from the external culture. The public overwhelmingly prefers silver over base metals (as evident in the relative market price) and as long as they do, collectors in the aggregate will never have a preference contradicting it.
Almost everyone prefers gold to silver yet very few baby boomers collect gold; they collect silver. And the boomers who don't collect silver are likely to collect indian cents or old 3c nickels. Two cent piece collectors don't prefer copper to gold, they prefer 2C pcs to double eagles. What most of us don't collect are clad coins because existing coin collectors usually hat clad coins and this goes double for older collectors.
In prior posts (including here) I also told you that demographic turnover will never lead to your claims either. Collectors no longer "hating" clad doesn't mean they will like it anywhere near as much as you imply.
I never suggested that not hating clad will lead to clad coin collecting. I said the number of individuals who desire clad among a group that doesn't hate clad will far exceed the number of individuals who collect clad in a group that hates clad. Considering the former group that doesn't hate clad is several fold LARGER than the group who hates it the total number of individuals collecting clad COULD be substantially larger. Considering the number of clad collectors is obviously soaring the transition has at least begun from a clad hating hobby to a non clad hating hobby. This suggests some of the problems will simply fix themselves as younger people take over responsibilities for making price lists, for instance. I believe demand is severely suppressed by lists that show moderns at under wholesale prices. If a collector wants a coin and is willing to spend the catalog price he might not be willing to pay a far higher price that the coin ACTUALLY ALREADY COMMANDS. This has the effect of reducing the demand and increasing the supply. The coin remains for sale and the demand does not become manifest until it is actually satisfied.
@wondercoin said:
“The preference for silver over base metals has nothing to do with generations or anyone's age.”
Not exactly true. I know many collectors who greatly prefer collecting clad Kennedy 50C over Walkers or Franklins almost solely due to their age! They grew up with the Clad 50C and collect them for that reason. Ditto on the Clad Ikes. Justin delivered 10,000 clad Ikes recently to an astute and seasoned younger collector because of his grandfather’s ties to Pres. Eisenhower and receiving a clad Ike as a youth whenever he visited grandpa.
You doubt these particular stories or myriad more I am aware of tied to clad collecting?
Wondercoin
There is definitely a generational difference in many ways, not just clad vs silver. I already mentioned digital. There's also NCLT which seems to skew younger.
Given how much the world has changed in the last 50 years, it would be rather stunning if there weren't generational differences.
@Baley said:
The point I've made now and again in Cladking's threads on this subject, over the past 19 years, is that if clad era coins become more popular, how can earlier silver issues not become even more popular?
You 4 dealers keep discussing these recent coins in set, roll, and bag quantities. The only collector of singles commenting... has mostly completed his set already.
Where are the other buyers?
The registry, I guess, with he attendant fees to get "officially" told my coins are nice enough.
I think this is valid. This forum in general has a slab bias and I don't think it always reflects the raw market. And the fact that those coins are not in a registry or pop report makes it hard for them to be counted. That's one of the reason I think there are more coins out there than CK thinks.
@wondercoin said:
“The preference for silver over base metals has nothing to do with generations or anyone's age.”
Not exactly true. I know many collectors who greatly prefer collecting clad Kennedy 50C over Walkers or Franklins almost solely due to their age! They grew up with the Clad 50C and collect them for that reason. Ditto on the Clad Ikes. Justin delivered 10,000 clad Ikes recently to an astute and seasoned younger collector because of his grandfather’s ties to Pres. Eisenhower and receiving a clad Ike as a youth whenever he visited grandpa.
You doubt these particular stories or myriad more I am aware of tied to clad collecting?
Wondercoin
I wasn't clear, did not mean this isn't true for individual collectors. It's no different than those who buy condition census US moderns or "rare" coins from specialization.
That's why if you tell me the 1975 "No S" proof dime will become the most valuable US coin, I'm not going to tell you it won't. I don't believe it but it only takes one person to make it happen. It is effectively a random event.
This isn't true with aggregate collector preferences or if you claim it, I'd like to know how you arrive at this conclusion.
Aggregate collector preference is, by definition, the aggregate of individuals. If there is a generational difference, and I believe there is, you will not see the current aggregate preferences remain unchanged.
@MasonG said:
Aside from this message board, I've never heard anyone talking about hating clad coinage or advising that only silver and copper were worthwhile to collect.
But then, that's just me.
Really!?!
Until about 1993 Madison Avenue used ONLY 1964 and earlier coinage when they used in in advertising. Krause didn't list values for moderns until about 1995.
There used to be a thread here almost every day advising people not to collect moderns or not to collect specific moderns. It is irrelevant that some of the derogatory comments were accurate or even spot-on. We almost never see this applied to old coins.
How many coin dealers just automatically tell people to spend things like mint sets and BU rolls. I've even seen them tell people to spend scarce quarter rolls and would have seen it far more except scarce coins are rarely seen. Remember where I got my '69 circulation issue quarters, from a coin dealer's cash register. A few of the coins in these rolls are excessively scarce due to their condition as non mint set Gems. All of them are quite scarce as well made and chBU non mint set '69 quarters.
Why do you think Redbook lists moderns at a fraction of wholesale and classics wholesale at a fraction of quoted prices? It's not because they like moderns so much.
In 1965 nobody hated clads more than I did. They replaced and drove from circulation all the coins I loved and they were all the same. I had been punished for the perception that collectors had caused a coin shortage in addition to having cheap, debased, and ugly coins thrust upon me. But times changed and I found not all of the new coins were ugly and they gained a lot character and variety over the years.
It is not reasonable to expect a quarter to be made out of silver in 2021 even if it weren't so far-fetched in 1968.
If your claims in this thread lead to what I consider to be marginal increases from now, I'll grant you that. If it's anything like you have claimed in the past, especially that one post in the last Raw Moderns thread, it's never going to happen.
If you really can grant that the common chBU '72-D quarter can wholesale at $2 in three years then how much do YOU think a scarce or rare modern will be worth?
It's relevant if he is inferring that the price level will increase noticeably, which is the only plausible outcome from his comments even if he won't state it. I asked him twice and he did not answer.
No. Still irrelevant.
It's impossible to predict price levels. If clad quarters become as popular or more popular than Ikes as I believe they will then their prices will probably be brackets between the value of an Ike ($3.50) and the value of '50-D nickel in 1964 ($350). Remember these will be far scarcer than Ikes especially at wholesale.
It's impossible to predict specifics. It's not impossible to predict relative prices with reasonable accuracy.
Since the general population overwhelmingly prefers silver over base metals and that's where collectors get this preference, I can predict with virtual certainty that collectors in the future will still prefer silver quarters and dimes with a similar preference to today, in the aggregate. The only way this is not going to happen is if base metal prices substantially close the gap or become more valuable.
This excludes condition census coins and a limited number of specialization, such as die varieties and errors.
When better date coins increase substantially more then you'll also see XF/ AU prices soar. But remember it's almost impossible to find these in XF/ AU so the aggregate value of all these circs will not be "financially significant" to borrow a phrase.
It depends upon your definition of "soar".
Like almost all prognosticators you are merely predicting the past.
Even now that things are probably changing you remain fixated on the past.
If your claims in this thread lead to what I consider to be marginal increases from now, I'll grant you that. If it's anything like you have claimed in the past, especially that one post in the last Raw Moderns thread, it's never going to happen.
If you really can grant that the common chBU '72-D quarter can wholesale at $2 in three years then how much do YOU think a scarce or rare modern will be worth?
Not to a price where it will be uncompetitive with the alternatives, whatever amount that is or will be. Collectors don't collect in a vacuum.
You tell me which coins you have in mind and how much you will think it will be worth, then I can answer.
@cladking said: @MasonG said:
Aside from this message board, I've never heard anyone talking about hating clad coinage or advising that only silver and copper were worthwhile to collect.
But then, that's just me.
Really!?!
There used to be a thread here almost every day advising people not to collect moderns or not to collect specific moderns. It is irrelevant that some of the derogatory comments were accurate or even spot-on. We almost never see this applied to old coins.
No one, in my memory, has advised anyone not to collect clad coins at face value, or double, or even 10 times face
Rather, collectors are advised not to spend $50 on a slabbed clad coin if the same Quality can be had for $5 raw, because there an enormous number of coins out there that are as good or better, but not worth certifying in a money-losing proposition. Don't overpay in a one-way market, in other words.
And we see related advice in classics: don't overpay for problem coins... collect cleaned and damaged rare coins if you like them, but net-grade them very conservatively if you do.
It's relevant if he is inferring that the price level will increase noticeably, which is the only plausible outcome from his comments even if he won't state it. I asked him twice and he did not answer.
No. Still irrelevant.
It's impossible to predict price levels. If clad quarters become as popular or more popular than Ikes as I believe they will then their prices will probably be brackets between the value of an Ike ($3.50) and the value of '50-D nickel in 1964 ($350). Remember these will be far scarcer than Ikes especially at wholesale.
It's impossible to predict specifics. It's not impossible to predict relative prices with reasonable accuracy.
Since the general population overwhelmingly prefers silver over base metals and that's where collectors get this preference, I can predict with virtual certainty that collectors in the future will still prefer silver quarters and dimes with a similar preference to today, in the aggregate. The only way this is not going to happen is if base metal prices substantially close the gap or become more valuable.
This excludes condition census coins and a limited number of specialization, such as die varieties and errors.
When better date coins increase substantially more then you'll also see XF/ AU prices soar. But remember it's almost impossible to find these in XF/ AU so the aggregate value of all these circs will not be "financially significant" to borrow a phrase.
It depends upon your definition of "soar".
Like almost all prognosticators you are merely predicting the past.
Even now that things are probably changing you remain fixated on the past.
This is really funny.
You are predicting a return to 1960's collecting only at a larger scale yet you tell me this?
Album and set collecting to the scale you claim isn't the future, much less at the prices you imply for this coinage.
@Baley said:
The point I've made now and again in Cladking's threads on this subject, over the past 19 years, is that if clad era coins become more popular, how can earlier silver issues not become even more popular?
You 4 dealers keep discussing these recent coins in set, roll, and bag quantities. The only collector of singles commenting... has mostly completed his set already.
Where are the other buyers?
The registry, I guess, with he attendant fees to get "officially" told my coins are nice enough.
I have no idea what will happen to the silvers. I don't really know what will happen to the clads either but I do know the supply is "gone" and the demand is soaring. I would guess the silvers will do generally well because once a modern collector completes his clad set the earlier dimes and quarters are a natural target. But this won't help quarters as much because there are a few scarcer early dates that will be stoppers. Silver dimes should benefit significantly from increased demand but these coins are each and all "common". There are some major potential winners like the '49-D & S, '50-S, '51-S, and '52-S but generally a tripling of demand is not going to have a huge impact on pricing. The S mints in truly choice condition are not so common .
The increase in demand for clads can be ten to fifty fold and this is why I expect sharply higher prices. Remember BU silver dime sets will be walking into coin shops for at least a half century.
If demand for very high grade coin persists for ten or twenty years then much higher prices might well be expected for Gem silver.
Comments
Why did you write this earlier then?
I can't keep up with the changing narrative.
1950-D nickels, I'm told, did not suffer from speculation in1964 but from a belief that there would not be enough to go around. I think that's the definition of speculation.
First it was a quality issue, now I'm told there are MORE 1950-D nickels in all grades (mintage 2.6 million) than 1969 quarters (mintage 176 million including 1.8 million mint sets).
First there were not going to be any raw sets because of attrition. Then it was Gem, then choice, now coins of any quality???
It's a challenge.
I'm wondering how some of the numbers here are being arrived at. In a search of past posts, I see where CK estimated there were 3,000,000 serious collectors in 2010. Ok. Adjusting for a population increase, that would be about 3,200,000 today. Earlier in the thread, he claimed there are 250,000 to 500,000 Ike collectors. Who here believes that one out of every eight (+/-) collectors is currently buying Ikes? Count me out on that one.
Sometimes I'll pay a dollar and upgrade one of the clad quarters in my Dansco album. The duplicate becomes "supply".. I'll try to get a dollar for it but no takers
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
There is no changing narrative.
There is merely a distinction between coins in existence and coins available to the wholesale market (which doesn't yet exist). Large numbers of existing chBU clad quarters are not available to the market and many never will be as explained elsewhere. Remember; they are in the hands of the general public and often exposed to harsh storage conditions (including mint set packaging).
I don't know how many times I've said this but the point is there are not enough chBU clads to support a mass market at any price. The point is it doesn't matter how many nice chBU '72-D quarters exist (lots of them) if a collector is looking for a '74-D (not so many). If demand continues to increase for chBU quarters at the same time that the more common dollars are in short supply then we have the "perfect storm".
It's not 1960 anymore. Tons of coins change hands without going anywhere near a wholesaler. You've heard of eBay, I'm sure.
It doesn't work this way.
Population and the number of collectors are not dependent on one another. We don't have to increase the population by a hundred to get one more collector and a whole boatload of non-collectors could arrive at any given time.
Since 2010 the number of collectors has ballooned even more than the US population, by far, and many of these new collectors are interested in moderns. Almost all of the new collectors were born AFTER clad coins were introduced and many of them grew up in this country using clad quarters.
Life is not a zero sum gain. This is EXACTLY why things keep changing all the time and EXACTLY why the future is never predictable. Things you need to know to predict the future haven't happened yet but there is one clue to the future that is highly relevant here; the supply of Ikes is apparently insufficient to meet the demand.
You can say that I'm "changing my story" but the fact is this is my story. If there really aren't enough Ikes then imagine the fireworks if people start wanting the dimes and quarters.
Here's another way to look at it. In twenty years there will be Ike sets walking into coin shops for sale because they exist now today and are unlikely to just disappear. But unless something changes there will be almost no dime and quarter sets walking into stores because they don't exist today. If collectors choose to make them then where will they get the coins without mint sets and pristine coins?
I'm just trying to say the same thing from different perspectives. It's not my intention to confuse even though I often have that effect on people.
“But unless something changes there will be almost no dime and quarter sets walking into stores because they don't exist today.”
This is a very fair point. Most TV stations were not peddling Roosie dime sets almost ever! And, the peddling of quarters mostly began with the state quarters. But, of course, why leave nickels out of this argument- they were ignored just as much as dimes.
Wondercoin
I agree that the nickels are ignored and many modern nickels are scarcer than the '50-D in unc. The attrition on circulating nickels is just staggering so some like the '71-(P) is not so common in any grade.
Nickels are the dark horse because there's so much less price discovery for them. The very low face value means some dates were set aside in massive quantities. Nickels never attracted the kind of hatred that clad coins did though they are collected little more. These tend to clean up from mint sets better than the clad so the attrition is a little lower on chBU coins.
Nickels have a very bright future but it's much harder to predict the winners. I like quite a few dates but generally save only the Gems of those dates I believe to be common. I do save nice chBU '71, '72-D, '75, '75-D, '76, '82-P, and some of the mid-'80's. Some of the '90's might be keepers as well so anything nice from this decade is set aside. There aren't that many nice '90's dates anyway.
Bid prices are immaterial only because they are not fully reflective of the actual wholesale market. Many of the rolls simply don't change hands very frequently and for the main part bid price reflects typical quality and what's at issue is chBU quality. Many people have no idea how bad typical quality of moderns can be. I am often heart broken when I open an '82 roll and find ugly poorly made coins that are tarnished. Large percentages of the early zincoln rolls are rotted and some even bust the seams of the paper as they expand. It's very difficult to price or deal in the modern markets between the poor quality and the virtually meaningless price guides. chBU is often at substantial premium to bid. And the bad stuff can't be given away. Nobody wants ugly coins except at a very low price.
Yes, collector preferences are supposedly random. That's why collectors prefer the same series now they did previously.
It's possible to identify the coin attributes which make one series preferred over another. You can pick any two widely collected series (US or otherwise) and I can tell you why one is preferred over the other, most of the time. The only possibility for your claim is a radical change in the general culture which the non-collector brings with them into the hobby.
What is going to make this happen?
There are two outcomes to what you just wrote:
One: They won't collect it just like they do not buy the coins I collect now. The coins I collect are probably cheaper for being too scarce. This is the (apparent reality) for many world coins. This is never going to happen with US moderns but that's one outcome you are implying.
Two: You are predicting the price will increase where those who want it and have the money will pay the amount necessary to buy it, at very large multiples to current prices. This the usual outcome where price is the adjusting factor.
There is no third option.
The supply of Ikes in what grade? I tell people to spend circ Ikes all the time. I just don't see why people can't be collecting AU Ikes 50 years from now rather than Gem or Choice Uncs. And, frankly, I would say the same for all the clad coins. Would you tell someone not to collect Barber coins because there aren't enough Ch Uncs? Especially with Ikes and Kennedy halves, I don't think there is any attrition to speak of since they don't circulate and hardly ever did.
And, frankly, it is really hard for me to imagine that 50 years from now in an all digital currency world that people are suddenly going to want to put together date/mm sets of Ch Bu Roosevelts or Washington quarters. The sheer length and monotony of the series is enough to make most people type collectors.
If you want another counterargument, I would argue that Roosevelt's reputation will have faded when you are 3 generations or more removed from WW II. And Washington is already becoming somewhat controversial. The icons of the future might barely have reached adulthood in 2021. And demographics will make the country increasingly LatinX and their nostalgia might well lead them to non-U.S. coins not memorial coins to dead Presidents who are controversial. I think there is far more working against an increase in collectors for these series than in favor of them.
If high grade clads don't exist in numbers to make them a reasonable choice, people will collect something else. At the end of the day, what real difference does it make what people choose to collect? If there are not enough choice/gem clads to allow a large number of people to collect them, so what?
Another thought- if future collectors end up being more condition-conscious than collectors are today, that would seem to lead them to NCLT coinage over whatever nice clads still exist.
Is the horse dead yet?
Turns out there aren't enough dead horses to constitute a market...
It was getting there. Good thing somebody bumped the thread back up to the top.
It's not just the coin quality. Most US moderns aren't even close to being competitive with NCLT due to the coin attributes I previously described, at similar price points.
The easiest way to evaluate the future prospects is by comparing clad dimes and quarters to the silver. The silver FDR dime's preference (not "popularity") is easily dead last if classified as a classic. The quarter is noticeably higher but not the ranking.
The last time I checked the Heritage archives (2019 I believe), silver quarters outsold clad by 15-1 between $100 and $1000 and 32-1 between $1000 and $10000. Dimes were a lot more equal but only because so few (proportionately) sell for higher prices.
The primary explanation for this difference is the metal content. Many collectors presumably misjudge survival rates in better quality but don't care.
Are clad quarters and dimes going to noticeably close the gap with the silver after 50+ years? Probably somewhat but not soon enough where it will be meaningful to anyone now.
Are the silver really going to have a noticeably higher preference in the future? If the SQ program couldn't do it, I'd say the answer is no.
WCC: It’s a “chicken and egg” thing. The reason Heritage has that 32-1 ratio is totally understandable to me. But, not for the reasons you are suggesting.
On a separate note, I am not sure CK’s position weakens if even but one or two of the six denominations has a strong preference among collectors (and the other 4-5 denominations do not). It would still result in the breaking up of the mint sets, etc.
So, in short, although your research is quite interesting, it doesn’t appear all that relevant to CK’s argument.
Just my 2 cents.
Wondercoin
Roosevelt's reputation already isn't great. All we need is a member of congress to introduce legislation to bring back the Mercury Dime and put out a statement of findings highlighting the negatives of FDR and argue to remove FDR and bring back AW's design, which was well liked.
It's relevant if he is inferring that the price level will increase noticeably, which is the only plausible outcome from his comments even if he won't state it. I asked him twice and he did not answer. If the collector base is going to increase anywhere near as much as he claims, I don't see any other conclusion.
I am aware Heritage is not exactly accurate for the reason you infer, but it is "directionally" correct. Heritage has "self selection bias" if that's what you mean.
This is why I intentionally omitted sales from $1-$100 because it's the more typical price range for clad buyers. Yes, I agree this is a lot more equal but that's my primary point. Clad isn't competitive above nominal prices.
The more important number which I cannot quantify without spending a lot of time is the relative value, how much collectors are spending on both, I believe it's more than the ratio I provided (much bigger).
What's so absurd about nice attractive XF/ AU eagle reverse quarters or Ike dollars increasing? Of course Ike dollars are more plentiful in high circ grades so the same amount of demand would merely mean they go up much less. Are you aware these are going for over $1.50 right now because there is demand?
The attrition on Ikes is well over 1% annually. In any given grade it is much higher because many coins degrade.
In the '70's and '80's pundits said these series were too short to be collected and now they are too long.
You see "monotony", I see history. It's just modern history but it is marked by coins that are each different and each with their own unique characteristics.
This is not true and where you are continually being led astray. Silver is very popular among the current generation of coin collectors. I'm referring to older collectors and baby boomers who hold most of the total value of all US coins. More importantly though is that most of these collectors hate clad coins. We didn't get many new collectors between 1965 and 1999 because new collectors were given this advice that only silver and old copper were worthwhile to collect. This discouraged two generations of collectors so they were mostly lost as collectors. Most new collectors simply agreed with this "folk wisdom". Besides everyone believed that in addition to clads being junk they were also excessively common with mintages literally in the billions.
Given the situation it is only natural that there has been so little demand for even the scarcest moderns.
But the new generation is arising from outside the numismatic mainstream. They usually find other like minded collectors before they hear people tell them post-'64 issues aren't even really coins but more like chucky cheese tokens (not that there's anything wrong with that).
I'm surprised it's not higher.
Most clads are never going to be worth the amount of the older silver coins except as high grade and varieties.
I'm not suggesting a typical BU common date clad like the '72-D is going to be worth as much as a BU '30's era quarter. But the scarcer date are far scarcer than most of the quarters from the '40's and '50's. Even if they don't get as much demand they can still approach or exceed the prices of the older coins.
As far as prices and the relative values achieved by the clads a great deal depends on the new generation and how they are and will collect them. This is largely unpredictable because it's the result of millions of decisions that haven't been made yet and which each depend on experiences that haven't occurred yet. Everything depends on how these new collectors choose to collect and how many of them have an interest. I am merely saying that demand has been skyrockets for years as seen in sales of the albums for the coins and that it appears this demand is just beginning to bump up against supply constraints. I am also saying that these supply constraints are fundamental because our generation has neglected these coins and allowed them to be lost and degrade. The coins no longer exist in the kind of quantity to supply even these "niche" markets.
No. Still irrelevant.
It's impossible to predict price levels. If clad quarters become as popular or more popular than Ikes as I believe they will then their prices will probably be brackets between the value of an Ike ($3.50) and the value of '50-D nickel in 1964 ($350). Remember these will be far scarcer than Ikes especially at wholesale.
I do not believe that the clad quarter market is going to become a ten or 15 billion dollar market. This is very highly improbable. I'll be surprised if a common date BU roll wholesales for more than $100 in the next few years. There are some "common date" rolls already pushing this level but for reasons that are outside the scope of this thread I won't elaborate on what makes them exceptions. I'm essentially talking about rolls that aren't tarnished in the mint set and lots of mint sets survive like the '72-D or the '81-P. Common coins will always be common but none of the eagle reverse quarters are nearly so common as the market believes.
When better date coins increase substantially more then you'll also see XF/ AU prices soar. But remember it's almost impossible to find these in XF/ AU so the aggregate value of all these circs will not be "financially significant" to borrow a phrase.
Yes, Ikes sell for $1.50. That means they wholesale for 95 cents. LOL. When someone comes in with 5 Ikes from Grandpa's desk, I'm not paying over $1 for them so I can try and accumulate a bag quantity someday so I can ship it to a wholesaler for $50 profit on $1000 investment.
Upon what is the 1% attrition rate based? They don't circulate at all. How could 1% of them reach scrap metal status per year?
You see history, 99% of the rest of the world sees monotony. It's the whole nature of "type" collecting. Why do I need to care if the date on the quarter changed from 1968 to 1969? If your whole argument is based on more people thinking like you, then you are failing to address the most fundamental rule of retail: know your customers.
If you open a discussion about bitcoin on this forum, most people are negative. If you open a discussion about gold, most people are positive. For post-millenials who grew up in a digital world, it is reversed. If you spent your formative years dumping real money into a video game to try and acquire a virtual sword and then sold that virtual sword for a profit to another gamer, you are not bothered by the digital nature of bitcoin. Why do you think those kids are going to suddenly develop a love for a dead President that they consider to be a racist white supremacist? And even if they do wish to collect Americana, why do you think they will wish to be date/mm collectors as opposed to type collectors?
I'm not saying that none of them will. Some always will. But you are expecting more people than is currently the case to become like us. In fact, as we die off we are going to be replaced by fewer people like us and more people that are very different. It is at least equally possible that demand for these series decrease not increase.
We are almost SIXTY years into the clad era and they still haven't caught on with many of the date/mm collectors who intentionally stop their collections at 1964.
With the exception of coins worth over $20 the retail and other prices are meaningless. The only price that matters is the wholesale price. I made the statement in context of wholesale prices and was referring to wholesale price. Circulated Ikes that are attractive and not culls in F or better wholesale at $1.50 They are very popular right now among the general public and collectors. They have become almost impossible to get from the FED. I believe they were simply all dispersed but it's entirely possible some were melted. In any case the attrition on these was sufficient to reduce the supply to less than the demand. It is entirely possible the FED has more in storage and will release more in the future but this seems improbable to me. If you think about it they only made about two Ikes for every living American so it's not so hard to believe attrition and the removal of coins by collectors and visitors taking them home for souvenirs could wipe out the supply. Of course they are still common enough it would be surprising if there is much room for more price increases.
To put this in more perspective there are more than ten Ikes for every BU eagle reverse clad quarters of any date. There are only about three times as many Bu clad quarters than Ikes even though there are five times as many dates. While all BU Ikes are common some of the quarters are not!
I still take Ikes to the bank. They are very popular. Of course I don't bother saving copper pennies either. I didn't bother saving silver from circulation until after 1971.
Putting coins in collections does not count as attrition. What is the point of that?
“Yes, Ikes sell for $1.50.”…. “$50 profit on $1000 investment.”
Would you separate them for a $500 profit per $1000 investment? If so, you might want to give grandpa a fairer price on his coins than face value as that’s what $1.50/coin means.
Wondercoin
P.S. I’ve purchased about 15,000 circulated Ikes in the past 6 or so months and have run numerous tests on what is in these “fresh” accumulations from Grandpa’s drawer! Lol.
P.S.S. 1972 Ty 2 Ikes (raw) sell for around $25-$40 in nice circulated grade and around $60-$70 in PCGS AU holders. It would be quite helpful to know how many 1972 Ty 2 coins are found these days per random 1,000 circulated Ikes- yes? You need to put in the work to know this!
There is attrition on everything. Every year houses burn and flood. Coins get lost or degraded. Attrition on Ikes is probably more than 1%.
No, putting coins in collections isn't attrition but these coins become unavailable for the wholesale market for many years. They become the "overhang"; the coins that will walk into shops for the next half century. There just aren't a lot of them and there are far fewer chBU eagle reverse quarter sets.
.....as to the day of of raw moderns being over, I kind of agree. Even still, there are many who continue to pick through them.... just to get them out of the wild.
I don't buy them at all, as I indicated, because they have never been with the trouble. It would take me years to accumulate a bag and by then the price might be back down to $1.1 or $1.20
Nonsense.
It's another example proving you understand virtually nothing about collector motivation or the factors driving collector preferences. This is the real reason your expectation differs so widely from reality for over 40 years.
The preference for silver over base metals has nothing to do with generations or anyone's age. It's a generic societal preference which collectors acquire from the external culture. The public overwhelmingly prefers silver over base metals (as evident in the relative market price) and as long as they do, collectors in the aggregate will never have a preference contradicting it.
In prior posts (including here) I also told you that demographic turnover will never lead to your claims either. Collectors no longer "hating" clad doesn't mean they will like it anywhere near as much as you imply.
Aside from this message board, I've never heard anyone talking about hating clad coinage or advising that only silver and copper were worthwhile to collect.
But then, that's just me.
It's hard for me to respond to your posts because you aren't being clear in your claims.
Whether your claims in this thread have any credibility depends upon the future prices you have in mind. I asked you twice and you declined to reply both times.
If your claims in this thread lead to what I consider to be marginal increases from now, I'll grant you that. If it's anything like you have claimed in the past, especially that one post in the last Raw Moderns thread, it's never going to happen.
Generically, I can predict with virtual certainty that future collectors will have essentially identical aggregate preferences to those they have now, as long as the external cultural factors do not change.
This covers the four primary attributes I listed previously: metal content, design perception, coin size and relative scarcity. The importance varies by collector and coin but in the aggregate, explains the very low aggregate preference US moderns have now and previously. It's not because collectors "hated" it.
It's impossible to predict specifics. It's not impossible to predict relative prices with reasonable accuracy.
Since the general population overwhelmingly prefers silver over base metals and that's where collectors get this preference, I can predict with virtual certainty that collectors in the future will still prefer silver quarters and dimes with a similar preference to today, in the aggregate. The only way this is not going to happen is if base metal prices substantially close the gap or become more valuable.
This excludes condition census coins and a limited number of specialization, such as die varieties and errors.
>
It's not just improbable, anyone here would have a higher probability of winning the Powerball lottery.
It depends upon your definition of "soar".
“The preference for silver over base metals has nothing to do with generations or anyone's age.”
Not exactly true. I know many collectors who greatly prefer collecting clad Kennedy 50C over Walkers or Franklins almost solely due to their age! They grew up with the Clad 50C and collect them for that reason. Ditto on the Clad Ikes. Justin delivered 10,000 clad Ikes recently to an astute and seasoned younger collector because of his grandfather’s ties to Pres. Eisenhower and receiving a clad Ike as a youth whenever he visited grandpa.
You doubt these particular stories or myriad more I am aware of tied to clad collecting?
Wondercoin
The point I've made now and again in Cladking's threads on this subject, over the past 19 years, is that if clad era coins become more popular, how can earlier silver issues not become even more popular?
You 4 dealers keep discussing these recent coins in set, roll, and bag quantities. The only collector of singles commenting... has mostly completed his set already.
Where are the other buyers?
The registry, I guess, with he attendant fees to get "officially" told my coins are nice enough.
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
I wasn't clear, did not mean this isn't true for individual collectors. It's no different than those who buy condition census US moderns or "rare" coins from specialization.
That's why if you tell me the 1975 "No S" proof dime will become the most valuable US coin, I'm not going to tell you it won't. I don't believe it but it only takes one person to make it happen. It is effectively a random event.
This isn't true with aggregate collector preferences or if you claim it, I'd like to know how you arrive at this conclusion.
This is a point I have made to him numerous times. It's either:
US moderns are going to become so popular, it will become preferred over at least 95% of all coinage and sell for higher prices based upon his prior claims.
Or
The demand for all coins will increase and by his prior claims, also substantially with US moderns increasing noticeably more. This of course would make many more coins completely unaffordable to most current collectors later but apparently, this isn't a factor either.
Now, if the counterpoint is that it's more likely that a nice BU clad Washington quarter will go from $0.50 to $2.50 than it is for a draped bust quarter in nice Good to go from $500 to $2500, I'll agree with the percentage math.
But how much time and effort will go into the transactions needed to make $2000? How much profit will be eaten up in shipping, handling, materials, space, and general life energy?
Ya gotta really love clad coins to look at and deal with them all of your free time.
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
Almost everyone prefers gold to silver yet very few baby boomers collect gold; they collect silver. And the boomers who don't collect silver are likely to collect indian cents or old 3c nickels. Two cent piece collectors don't prefer copper to gold, they prefer 2C pcs to double eagles. What most of us don't collect are clad coins because existing coin collectors usually hat clad coins and this goes double for older collectors.
I never suggested that not hating clad will lead to clad coin collecting. I said the number of individuals who desire clad among a group that doesn't hate clad will far exceed the number of individuals who collect clad in a group that hates clad. Considering the former group that doesn't hate clad is several fold LARGER than the group who hates it the total number of individuals collecting clad COULD be substantially larger. Considering the number of clad collectors is obviously soaring the transition has at least begun from a clad hating hobby to a non clad hating hobby. This suggests some of the problems will simply fix themselves as younger people take over responsibilities for making price lists, for instance. I believe demand is severely suppressed by lists that show moderns at under wholesale prices. If a collector wants a coin and is willing to spend the catalog price he might not be willing to pay a far higher price that the coin ACTUALLY ALREADY COMMANDS. This has the effect of reducing the demand and increasing the supply. The coin remains for sale and the demand does not become manifest until it is actually satisfied.
There is definitely a generational difference in many ways, not just clad vs silver. I already mentioned digital. There's also NCLT which seems to skew younger.
Given how much the world has changed in the last 50 years, it would be rather stunning if there weren't generational differences.
I think this is valid. This forum in general has a slab bias and I don't think it always reflects the raw market. And the fact that those coins are not in a registry or pop report makes it hard for them to be counted. That's one of the reason I think there are more coins out there than CK thinks.
Aggregate collector preference is, by definition, the aggregate of individuals. If there is a generational difference, and I believe there is, you will not see the current aggregate preferences remain unchanged.
Really!?!
Until about 1993 Madison Avenue used ONLY 1964 and earlier coinage when they used in in advertising. Krause didn't list values for moderns until about 1995.
There used to be a thread here almost every day advising people not to collect moderns or not to collect specific moderns. It is irrelevant that some of the derogatory comments were accurate or even spot-on. We almost never see this applied to old coins.
How many coin dealers just automatically tell people to spend things like mint sets and BU rolls. I've even seen them tell people to spend scarce quarter rolls and would have seen it far more except scarce coins are rarely seen. Remember where I got my '69 circulation issue quarters, from a coin dealer's cash register. A few of the coins in these rolls are excessively scarce due to their condition as non mint set Gems. All of them are quite scarce as well made and chBU non mint set '69 quarters.
Why do you think Redbook lists moderns at a fraction of wholesale and classics wholesale at a fraction of quoted prices? It's not because they like moderns so much.
In 1965 nobody hated clads more than I did. They replaced and drove from circulation all the coins I loved and they were all the same. I had been punished for the perception that collectors had caused a coin shortage in addition to having cheap, debased, and ugly coins thrust upon me. But times changed and I found not all of the new coins were ugly and they gained a lot character and variety over the years.
It is not reasonable to expect a quarter to be made out of silver in 2021 even if it weren't so far-fetched in 1968.
If you really can grant that the common chBU '72-D quarter can wholesale at $2 in three years then how much do YOU think a scarce or rare modern will be worth?
Like almost all prognosticators you are merely predicting the past.
Even now that things are probably changing you remain fixated on the past.
Not to a price where it will be uncompetitive with the alternatives, whatever amount that is or will be. Collectors don't collect in a vacuum.
You tell me which coins you have in mind and how much you will think it will be worth, then I can answer.
No one, in my memory, has advised anyone not to collect clad coins at face value, or double, or even 10 times face
Rather, collectors are advised not to spend $50 on a slabbed clad coin if the same Quality can be had for $5 raw, because there an enormous number of coins out there that are as good or better, but not worth certifying in a money-losing proposition. Don't overpay in a one-way market, in other words.
And we see related advice in classics: don't overpay for problem coins... collect cleaned and damaged rare coins if you like them, but net-grade them very conservatively if you do.
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
This is really funny.
You are predicting a return to 1960's collecting only at a larger scale yet you tell me this?
Album and set collecting to the scale you claim isn't the future, much less at the prices you imply for this coinage.
I have no idea what will happen to the silvers. I don't really know what will happen to the clads either but I do know the supply is "gone" and the demand is soaring. I would guess the silvers will do generally well because once a modern collector completes his clad set the earlier dimes and quarters are a natural target. But this won't help quarters as much because there are a few scarcer early dates that will be stoppers. Silver dimes should benefit significantly from increased demand but these coins are each and all "common". There are some major potential winners like the '49-D & S, '50-S, '51-S, and '52-S but generally a tripling of demand is not going to have a huge impact on pricing. The S mints in truly choice condition are not so common .
The increase in demand for clads can be ten to fifty fold and this is why I expect sharply higher prices. Remember BU silver dime sets will be walking into coin shops for at least a half century.
If demand for very high grade coin persists for ten or twenty years then much higher prices might well be expected for Gem silver.