Guilty or just feeling bad or not feeling bad at all?

coinkat

Well... what might appear to be a possible miscarriage of justice is how certain coins find a final resting place in a collection that would be better served if the coin(s) would have landed elsewhere in terms of what other collectors may have been able to assemble in terms of a complete set. And does completeness add to the hobby or is it just something that really just does not matter?

1630Boston

Interesting thought

JBK

Interestingly topic.

I know of members on this very forum who have been unreasonably generous in trying to unite specific items with the collectors who would most appreciate them.

moursund

@coinkat said:
Well... what might appear to be a possible miscarriage of justice is how certain coins find a final resting place in a collection that would be better served if the coin(s) would have landed elsewhere in terms of what other collectors may have been able to assemble in terms of a complete set. And does completeness add to the hobby or is it just something that really just does not matter?

That first (run-on?) sentence is a doozy. What do you mean?

coinkat

Dammit... this is exactly what happens if you are not an English major. And for those of you who are... Figure it out and tell me what I wrote.

FrankH

SETS are TYRANTS !!

"Fill me or die!!"

JBK

@coinkat said:
Dammit... this is exactly what happens if you are not an English major. And for those of you who are... Figure it out and tell me what I wrote.

Here's a potential version:

"Do you feel it is wrong for one collector to monopolize a particular coin that would be an especially meaningful addition to another collector's collection or uniquely benefit another collector's specific mission in the hobby?"

coinkat

And this is where the fun begins... omg and LOL

FranklinHalfAddict

@moursund said:

@coinkat said:
Well... what might appear to be a possible miscarriage of justice is how certain coins find a final resting place in a collection that would be better served if the coin(s) would have landed elsewhere in terms of what other collectors may have been able to assemble in terms of a complete set. And does completeness add to the hobby or is it just something that really just does not matter?

That first (run-on?) sentence is a doozy. What do you mean?

I’ve read it several times and still can’t make it out.
I’m pretty sure I know what the OP was attempting to say, but really not sure.

Jzyskowski1

I’m just tryin to complete my Roosie dime album. Never thought much about it either way. I sure don’t expect anyone to give me several of the issues I need. I enjoy a gift like the next formite but perhaps I should expect more?😁

coinbuf

I know exactly what you are saying and I agree completely. Everyone that owns a Regency slab should contact me immediately!!

JBK

@Jzyskowski1 said:
I’m just tryin to complete my Roosie dime album. Never thought much about it either way. I sure don’t expect anyone to give me several of the issues I need. I enjoy a gift like the next formite but perhaps I should expect more?😁

I don't think it's about gifting, but rather a rare or unique item being bought by one person when there is another person who really has a special need for it.

U1chicago

Sounds like the OP missed out on a coin that would have been great for his set but went to someone else. It happens all the time; it’s understandable to be upset but the next coin is just around the corner so don’t let that opportunity be wasted.

MasonG

Aside from the individuals involved, why would one person's special need be more important than another's?

silverpop

expect the unexpected to happen as it will no matter what you try

TurtleCat

@JBK said:

@coinkat said:
Dammit... this is exactly what happens if you are not an English major. And for those of you who are... Figure it out and tell me what I wrote.

Here's a potential version:

"Do you feel it is wrong for one collector to monopolize a particular coin that would be an especially meaningful addition to another collector's collection or uniquely benefit another collector's specific mission in the hobby?"

I was having trouble understanding the OP. If what you said is the right interpretation then I’d say no. It is just how it goes. The other person should have bid higher or understand their limitations.

JBK

@MasonG said:
Aside from the individuals involved, why would one person's special need be more important than another's?

I read his scenario to be that only one person had the special need. The person who got the coin didn't have a particularly special need, whereas someone else did.

coinkat

While it is never my intent to be the Hemmingway or the Falkner of the forum... I accept the challenge and dammit I am going to meet that expectation.

Obviously the coins I have posted on this forum and even the better coins that were linked to a thread on the US Forum recently may have failed to meet expectations even though most here would not recognize the coin... under any circumstances... even if it had approached them in a non-confrontational way in broad daylight... is not the issue nor are my run-on sentences. I am really tired of trying to share Numismatic knowledge and what should matter to an empty crowd that is more willing to jump on what does not matter instead of what represents progress and the wave of the future.

ricko

I do not work on sets, and I do not hunt rare coins. I can imagine, if I were seeking a specific coin and was outbid, I would be disappointed. However, then I would continue my search. I do not dwell on minor setbacks - not even major ones. I simply regroup, understand the situation, and then move forward. Time wasted on frustrations, mistakes or disappointments is wasted time and not conducive to good mental health. Cheers, RickO

dsessom

It doesn't make sense to me. Should someone feel guilty for not having a huge turnover in their collection? Why would anyone feel guilt about hoarding coins? It happens all the time. I feel that we are all temporary guardians of the coins we collect. Life is short, and they will all eventually pass into other hands. I for one am thankful for past "hoarders" because the coins they hoarded may have otherwise gone into circulation, and eventually been melted or lost.
Just my $0.02.

MasonG

@JBK said:
I read his scenario to be that only one person had the special need. The person who got the coin didn't have a particularly special need, whereas someone else did.

What makes one person's desire to own a coin a special need but not anybody else's?

Oldhoopster

@coinkat said:
Dammit... this is exactly what happens if you are not an English major. And for those of you who are...

It's not about being an English major, it's about clearly communicating your point. Why should I have to go out of my way to figure out what you're talking about. IMO, the "Figure it out and tell me what I wrote." is uncalled for. Its up to you to make a coherent post. Apparently there are other members who are having difficulty understanding your post as well. Too bad because it could be in interesting thread, but I'm guessing many will just skip over it.

MasonG

@coinkat said:
I am really tired of trying to share Numismatic knowledge and what should matter to an empty crowd that is more willing to jump on what does not not matter instead of what represents progress and the wave of the future.

Nothing wrong with trying to share knowledge but expecting that everybody will agree with what you think should matter is almost certainly going to be an uphill battle.

Just sayin'.

coinkat

I posted something that is coherent... Oldhoopster please skip over it because it seems clear you have nothing constructive to add.

U1chicago

We embark on a journey that will rival @jmlanzaf thread about the 13 year return

Project Numismatics

People spend time and money on what is important to them. If you want a specific rare coin to finish your collection, you have to spend time building relationships with dealers and collectors and when you find it, you have to make the necessary financial commitment.

Whether that is “fair” or “just” is a philosophical question with implications far beyond numismatics.

braddick

I think I kind of know what the OP means. . .
I own a PCGS "plus" coin, but only one exists. Not just for the date but the entire series.
It would be required in an Everyman's collection to make the set number one.
I've been hit up a few times to sell the coin, yet I think, what if one day I decide to go after the set?
Perhaps rude, I don't know.
And if I misinterpreted what the OP was stating, I apologize.

Oldhoopster

@coinkat said:
I posted something that is coherent... Oldhoopster please skip over it because it seems clear you have nothing constructive to add.

Just trying to help with an opinion on why you're getting some negative comments. Nothing was meant to be snarky or adversarial. Just felt that my thoughts could help explain things from a different objective (I hope) opinion. But do what you want

coinkat

There are coins... when you see, handle and experience what they are and represent matters to numismatics. And it would seem reasonable that it is our duty to record what is found and what it is important in terms of preserving a record... even if it is late... better late than never.

The real issue seems to be who benefits... there is often no vested interest in acknowledging what transpired verse capitalizing on what can easily traded based on what can be promoted

coastaljerseyguy

No one should feel bad owning and keeping their bot/inherited coins for as long as they wish. I'm not in the league a lot of folks here are with respect to numismatic treasures, but JMHO.

coinkat

@dsessom

Turnover in a collection has nothing to to with it...it is about rarity... real rarity... not condition rarity. We are looking at those coins that rarely surface and so happens to land in the hands of someone that knows what it is but that coin is not something that is within their primary interest.

JBK

@MasonG said:

@JBK said:
I read his scenario to be that only one person had the special need. The person who got the coin didn't have a particularly special need, whereas someone else did.

What makes one person's desire to own a coin a special need but not anybody else's?

In the scenario presented in the OP, it is the owner of the coin making the determination that his "need" was not as great as someone else's.

Let's stay focused on the issue at hand. It's been hard enough as it is. 😀

MasonG

You might get more useful input if you described what happened, what you think should have happened instead and why you're bothered by it.

MasonG

@JBK said:
In the scenario presented in the OP, it is the owner of the coin making the determination that his "need" was not as great as someone else's.

Nothing is stopping the coin's owner from giving the coin to the person who needs it more, is it?

coinkat

@braddick

What you outlined seems reasonable

coinkat

@Oldhoopster

I truly appreciate your reply. You deserved a better reply than my initial one. I have lived with negative responses as in either no responses or responses that simply fail to pass the straight face test

JBK

@MasonG said:

@JBK said:
In the scenario presented in the OP, it is the owner of the coin making the determination that his "need" was not as great as someone else's.

Nothing is stopping the coin's owner from giving the coin to the person who needs it more, is it?

He's asking for your opinion on the issue, that's all. Should someone in that scenario feel badly or not?

How can such a simple question go off the rails so easily? 🤔

Maywood

Why would you think you have some sort of inherent right to own a coin, that it is more important to your collection than to someone else??

hfjacinto

@JBK said:
>
"Do you feel it is wrong for one collector to monopolize a particular coin that would be an especially meaningful addition to another collector's collection or uniquely benefit another collector's specific mission in the hobby?"

Thanks @JBK for posting as I had no idea what the OP posted.

As to what people collect. WHO CARES! Collect what you like, if some one hoarded all the 1877 IHC and I couldn't buy one, I would just put a different coin in its slot. Just because a hole exists doesn't mean it has to get filled. I think that the Ben Franklin 50 is the ugliest coin ever and I regretfully purchased 2 of them for my type set. If Ben Franklin was both and expensive, I would just skip it and add a Pretty Lady Walking in Sunshine 50 cents and not miss Ben at all. You can have all the pretty Ben's in your collection.

jesbroken

@coinkat said:
And this is where the fun begins... omg and LOL

Cornering the market has been attempted by many throughout history of the hobby. Some may have actually done so, at least to the extent that it drove the price up high enouqh for them to make a tidy profit. Not saying it is bad, it is just legal enough to prevent me saying so. It is certainly bad for ones trying to get one for their collections. The opposite occurs when a large hoard of coins are released upon the market and drives the prices down. Only those with the particular coin in their inventory or collection complain.
Jim

coinkat

@Maywood

This is a good question and is fair to ask even if I have an answer that you likely will not like. There are those items that one seeks and buys mainly because they are of interest and part of a collecting objective. And there are those items... which are interesting... and are bought because they are interesting. And one just may not have a complete appreciation for what it may be at that time. While I may not have an inherent right to own a coin, I hope we can at least agree that the one who undertakes the purchase and whatever risk there is associated with that purchase exercises the full right of ownership of that coin. The issue here is simply is whether that coin would be better suited in a collection of another collector mainly because that collection has greater numismatic significance. And the addition of that coin adds to its significance.

MasonG

@coinkat said:
We are looking at those coins that rarely surface and so happens to land in the hands of someone that knows what it is but that coin is not something that is within their primary interest.

If he's holding onto the coin, doesn't that show he has some sort of interest in it? Do you think other people should decide for you what coins you hold based on their opinion of your interest level?

coinkat

my question really has nothing to with cornering the market

Maywood

@coinkat, I understand all that. What you seem not to understand(or maybe you do, I don't know) is that we can't know what the new owner is thinking and what their motive might be for wanting to own the coin in question. Whenever I lose an auction I always assume that the person who outbid me had a greater desire to own the coin, that it meant more to them than to me.

After that, I move on. @ricko's post above summed it up nicely.

JBK

@MasonG said:

@coinkat said:
We are looking at those coins that rarely surface and so happens to land in the hands of someone that knows what it is but that coin is not something that is within their primary interest.

If he's holding onto the coin, doesn't that show he has some sort of interest in it? Do you think other people should decide for you what coins you hold based on their opinion of your interest level?

Why do you insist on continually missing the point?

This has nothing to do with other people deciding anything about your interests.

It has to do with you having decided that a particular coin you own would have been better off in another collector's collection.

hfjacinto

@JBK said:
It has to do with you having decided that a particular coin you own would have been better off in another collector's collection.

This makes no sense, why would I decide a coin I own is better off in another collection? If I own its mine. If you want one go buy one, I'm not selling you mine.

MasonG

@hfjacinto said:

@JBK said:
It has to do with you having decided that a particular coin you own would have been better off in another collector's collection.

This makes no sense, why would I decide a coin I own is better off in another collection? If I own its mine. If you want one go buy one, I'm not selling you mine.

Not only that, but if you really do think it would be better for it to be in another collection, you can sell it to the other collector. You don't have to ask for permission or opinions to do that.

jesbroken

My answer was predicated on your statement "coins or coins". Wrongly, perhaps, I took that to mean someone may legally have 2 or 3 or even all of a coin with only 5 total examples, suchas the 1913 Liberty Head Nickel. I went from there. Sorry if not applicable to your post. Your post does bring up the supposition that someone other than the current owner has the right to decide the coin's best interest.
Jim

MasonG

@JBK said:
It has to do with you having decided that a particular coin you own would have been better off in another collector's collection.

What does a "duty to record what is found" , "what it is important in terms of preserving a record" , "who benefits" and "capitalizing on what can easily traded" have to do with that? Because those things seemed to matter to the OP.

@jesbroken said:
Your post does bring up the supposition that someone other than the current owner has the right to decide the coin's best interest.

It would appear the question being asked is not as simple as some are suggesting.

SPalladino

@coinkat said:
Well... what might appear to be a possible miscarriage of justice is how certain coins find a final resting place in a collection that would be better served if the coin(s) would have landed elsewhere in terms of what other collectors may have been able to assemble in terms of a complete set.

.
rightful/equitable distribution is not a necessary component of a free market system

And does completeness add to the hobby or is it just something that really just does not matter?

.
it matters to a degree in my own collecting, but again, is not a necessary element

OAKSTAR