@breakdown said:
I would go for the rarer date. I have always been a series collector though so rare dates are more interesting to me. As an example, I find certain coins very close to cheapening a type set. Think 38-D Buffalo nickel or 1904 Double Eagle.
I daydream about the better and rare dates. Ninety percent of my coin budget goes to better and rare dates.
For a few years its been $5.00 Lib is AU. However if I found a very rare and nice $5.00 in G or F, I would buy it in a heartbeat! Unfortunately there are very very few rare $5.00 like that.
I also like the idea of buying high grade coins in a set, but swapping out a few points of grade for a rarer coin.
I would rather have an pretty MS-62 CAC 1906 $20 than a lovely MS-65+ CAC 1904 $20. There are over 1 million existing 1904 $20s as opposed to about 2K 1906 20s.
The MS-62 1906 only has 200 coins finer than MS-62 at PCGS. There are 300 coins finer than a 1904 in MS-65+.
A perfect, original, un-messed with, great eye appeal 1932-D Washington quarter in AU58 (likely just under $1k given those parameters) or a perfect, original, un-messed with, great eye appeal generic date in MS67+ (perhaps as much as $1k given those parameters). I'd probably take the generic date.
Great example. I would do the opposite.
Me too!!
Sometimes, it’s better to be LUCKY than good. 🍀 🍺👍
Years ago there was type collector, Leland Rogers. He collected the rarest varieties in the highest grades for his types. I owned one of his coins over 20 years ago. It was the discovery specimen of the 1806 Small 6, Stems Half Cent, C-2.
It had once been a beautiful Mint State coin and easily the finest known for the variety. An idiot decided to "improve it" by making it red. It was skillfully re-toned, but still a damaged coin. I bought and sold it for a few thousand dollars. The person to whom I sold it told me years later that he had sold it to partially finance his kid's college bills. So I guess I didn't charge him too much.
Some other ex-Leland Rogers coins were valued way beyond my pay grade.
Here is the piece. The pictures are digital images of slide transparencies.
Retired dealer and avid collector of U.S. type coins, 19th century presidential campaign medalets and selected medals. In recent years I have been working on a set of British coins - at least one coin from each king or queen who issued pieces that are collectible. I am also collecting at least one coin for each Roman emperor from Julius Caesar to ... ?
I asked this question on another forum a while back. Key date in a type set vs high grade. I replaced this 1924 S buffalo in lower grade with a gem 1937. Responses basically told me that a type set is supposed to be the BEST you can get for that type. I always thought the goal was just to get one of each type regardless of grade and it was up to the individual to decide their goal.
@RYK said:
Let’s say that you were looking for a specific type coin for your collection. You can accommodate one coin. Your budget would allow you to have a nice uncirculated version of the common date (6000 in 60 or better, hundreds in 65 or better) or an AU version of a scarce date (survivors in all grades in the hundreds).
How many of the scarcer date exist in similar or better grades?
For the sake of argument, let's say that for the scarcer date, there are 75 in 60 or better and 15 in 65 or better). How does that affect your analysis. What if I said it was 10 in 60 or better, for example? These are all actual considerations. I will give some examples later on.
I think that when you get down to something like the top 15 or 20 known of something, it's an appealing enough proposition that it makes sense to make some compromises on quality. So, for example, I might choose a PR63 1848 Seated Dollar over a PR67 1863, even for a type set. And I might choose a choice VF 1794 Starred Reverse Cent over a common gem 1794. Of course, every situation is different, and there will be exceptions to any rules.
Andy Lustig
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
@RYK said:
I believe I have resolved the issue with a third option, one that I do not believe was brought up in this discussion. I will know for sure next week.
Buy the high-grade key date and don't tell your wife?
Good advice! Unfortunately my lovely wife sees the FEDEX truck in our driveway; but I make sure I rip the package open and put the invoice in my pocket before she gets to me. It's a delicate dance that I have mastered.
@DeplorableDan said:
Higher grade in a common date for a true type set, however I like to avoid THE most common date, 1904 $20 for example. Now if we’re “box o 20” collecting, then I prefer issues with scarcity.
>
Yeah, exactly. But for me, I’m not a type collector. If I was however, I don’t believe I would change.
I really like the rare stuff!
For example a ‘55-O DE in 45 is around the same price as a ‘55-s DE in 64. Bet you can guess which I chose!😉
@breakdown said:
I would go for the rarer date. I have always been a series collector though so rare dates are more interesting to me. As an example, I find certain coins very close to cheapening a type set. Think 38-D Buffalo nickel or 1904 Double Eagle.
So an MS67 38D Buffalo "cheapens " the set but a G06 1913-S Type 2 for the same money enhances it?
Fair enough. Cheapen was probably a poor word choice. I don't really collect by type but if I did, I would not choose to include a 38-D buffalo or 1904 DE in my set.
"Look up, old boy, and see what you get." -William Bonney.
@breakdown said:
I would go for the rarer date. I have always been a series collector though so rare dates are more interesting to me. As an example, I find certain coins very close to cheapening a type set. Think 38-D Buffalo nickel or 1904 Double Eagle.
So an MS67 38D Buffalo "cheapens " the set but a G06 1913-S Type 2 for the same money enhances it?
Fair enough. Cheapen was probably a poor word choice. I don't really collect by type but if I did, I would not choose to include a 38-D buffalo or 1904 DE in my set.
@RYK said:
Let’s say that you were looking for a specific type coin for your collection. You can accommodate one coin. Your budget would allow you to have a nice uncirculated version of the common date (6000 in 60 or better, hundreds in 65 or better) or an AU version of a scarce date (survivors in all grades in the hundreds).
Which would you choose? Does it depend on the coin type? What other factors would guide your decision? Would it change if you were working down the grade scale, ie better date IN XF vs common date in AU?
@RYK did you ask that question to Ben the Coin Geek? He did a Q and A video and the first question was what you asked.
@RYK said:
Let’s say that you were looking for a specific type coin for your collection. You can accommodate one coin. Your budget would allow you to have a nice uncirculated version of the common date (6000 in 60 or better, hundreds in 65 or better) or an AU version of a scarce date (survivors in all grades in the hundreds).
Which would you choose? Does it depend on the coin type? What other factors would guide your decision? Would it change if you were working down the grade scale, ie better date IN XF vs common date in AU?
@RYK did you ask that question to Ben the Coin Geek? He did a Q and A video and the first question was what you asked.
Comments
Best grade / eye appeal budget will support.
Agree totally!
I daydream about the better and rare dates. Ninety percent of my coin budget goes to better and rare dates.
For a few years its been $5.00 Lib is AU. However if I found a very rare and nice $5.00 in G or F, I would buy it in a heartbeat! Unfortunately there are very very few rare $5.00 like that.
I also like the idea of buying high grade coins in a set, but swapping out a few points of grade for a rarer coin.
I would rather have an pretty MS-62 CAC 1906 $20 than a lovely MS-65+ CAC 1904 $20. There are over 1 million existing 1904 $20s as opposed to about 2K 1906 20s.
The MS-62 1906 only has 200 coins finer than MS-62 at PCGS. There are 300 coins finer than a 1904 in MS-65+.
Me too!!
Sometimes, it’s better to be LUCKY than good. 🍀 🍺👍
My Full Walker Registry Set (1916-1947):
https://www.ngccoin.com/registry/competitive-sets/16292/
Better date AU every time.
Dave
Years ago there was type collector, Leland Rogers. He collected the rarest varieties in the highest grades for his types. I owned one of his coins over 20 years ago. It was the discovery specimen of the 1806 Small 6, Stems Half Cent, C-2.
It had once been a beautiful Mint State coin and easily the finest known for the variety. An idiot decided to "improve it" by making it red. It was skillfully re-toned, but still a damaged coin. I bought and sold it for a few thousand dollars. The person to whom I sold it told me years later that he had sold it to partially finance his kid's college bills. So I guess I didn't charge him too much.
Some other ex-Leland Rogers coins were valued way beyond my pay grade.
Here is the piece. The pictures are digital images of slide transparencies.
I asked this question on another forum a while back. Key date in a type set vs high grade. I replaced this 1924 S buffalo in lower grade with a gem 1937. Responses basically told me that a type set is supposed to be the BEST you can get for that type. I always thought the goal was just to get one of each type regardless of grade and it was up to the individual to decide their goal.
I think that when you get down to something like the top 15 or 20 known of something, it's an appealing enough proposition that it makes sense to make some compromises on quality. So, for example, I might choose a PR63 1848 Seated Dollar over a PR67 1863, even for a type set. And I might choose a choice VF 1794 Starred Reverse Cent over a common gem 1794. Of course, every situation is different, and there will be exceptions to any rules.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
Good advice! Unfortunately my lovely wife sees the FEDEX truck in our driveway; but I make sure I rip the package open and put the invoice in my pocket before she gets to me. It's a delicate dance that I have mastered.
Grade for sure!
Depending on the coin I'm looking at the time, either will do. I have no preference.
>
Yeah, exactly. But for me, I’m not a type collector. If I was however, I don’t believe I would change.
I really like the rare stuff!
For example a ‘55-O DE in 45 is around the same price as a ‘55-s DE in 64. Bet you can guess which I chose!😉
Fair enough. Cheapen was probably a poor word choice. I don't really collect by type but if I did, I would not choose to include a 38-D buffalo or 1904 DE in my set.
"Look up, old boy, and see what you get." -William Bonney.
And I'll repeat my post
Mike
My Indians
Danco Set
@RYK did you ask that question to Ben the Coin Geek? He did a Q and A video and the first question was what you asked.
Nope, was not me, but you made me watch it. 😀
For the record, the coin in my question is not for a type set, per se.