Looking at this from a realistic point, ask yourself why you collect coins. While value is certainly among the reason, the more prevalent would be historical, artistic and so forth. To explain the context of this, all modern U.S. coinage designs (the nickel being an exeption) originated in silver, or in in the case of the Lincoln cent-copper. When the change to nickel-copper occured the effect on particular series collectors focused on had minimal change. Lincoln collectors, as an example, still collect them. Washington quarter collectors the same. While the physical value is absolutely greater, there exists the physcological affect adding that somehow clad is less valuable from a collectible standpoint. The point being, many will still collect their favorite series despite any composition change. As for modern having monetary value, over the past several years major auction houses have sales proving they do. Particularly in the upper grades, with values steadily increased over the years. On the subject of wealth effect, in my opinion a much greater and overlooked is the current generation. Those born in the digital age and collect. The ones who rarely use physical currency or coin, the appeal of historical usage becomes a major factor. Collectors, not the wealthy, drive market value. The wealthy merely draw interest to coinage with record prices. I think of the early '80's when investors drove prices through the roof only for the bottom to drop out ten years later.
@yspsales said:
How many people are out actively searching sets at shows?
Can @wondercoin or @cladking answer to what extent the pop reports have changed over past decade?
How often does a dealer even rotate his stock of mint and proof sets from show to show?
At shows, I am probably the only guy looking thru sets.
I see alot of nice coins that fall a point shy of being slab worthy.
This is just the anecdotal evidence to prove how low the demand is. When I was poking through sets at the shows 30 years ago I had them all to myself too. I didn't have to get up early and be the first one in but I did anyway. The turnover is still very very high as evidenced by the fact so few of these sets are shop worn. Some of the '80's dates will quickly fade if exposed to direct sunlight but even these are rarely seen. Turnover is so high because there is no demand and dealers are constantly buying sets because they have no choice. If they pass on the sets the deal will likely walk right back out the door so when they get too many they either send them off to a wholesaler or cut them up themselves and toss everything including Gems and varieties right into the cash register. This has been going on for nearly 60 years and is the chief reason so few are left. Wholesalers cut up most of the sets they acquire as well as sell them to jobbers who cut them up. The demand for intact sets is exceedingly weak with most dealers selling less than 1% of the sets they buy to retail customers though, no doubt, this is increasing in recent years.
There are a lot of nice coins in the sets but people aren't looking and the few who look aren't seeing. Two mint sets out of three have a nice Gem and one mint set in ten have a nice chGem. One set in a hundred has a gradable coin and about one in 400 has a special coin though some of these are not yet recognized as rarities because people aren't looking.
The number of sets being destroyed (especially on a percentage basis) is increasing. Most of the early sets are tarnishing because the packaging is unstable so coins need to be removed and soaked in acetone before they can't be restored but I wager few are and most are just being dumped into circulation even today. The sets are getting more attention which also increases destruction. Most of the coins that are graded come from these sets because quality is much higher and because they are virtually the sole source of most coins.
Before the mid-'90's it was easy to walk into any coin show and walk out with fifty or sixty nice Gems of US and world coins for less than $1 each. Now days you will not find so many and prices tend to be sharply higher.
@cladking said:
moderns are among the hottest coins at THIS time.
Do you really believe this be true, Cladking?
I dont see it.
The mint set market is finally firming at the new much higher prices.
This also means that there is a new higher floor under the prices of the individual coins.
I don't see many fireworks yet except for the scarcities like chBU and MS-64 '82 and '83 coins which are trading at many multiples of Greysheet and retail sales of BU rolls which are going crazy.
I believe these are the canaries in the coal mine. Eventually the markets will become mature enough that real pricing is established and this will mark the beginning of the real emergence of clad. As long as guides list these coins at prices that are simply wrong the markets will be stymied. But every year the guides get better and the market stronger despite the fact demand is dwarfed by the supply of mint sets.
With so few mint sets surviving it just can't take much to upend the markets.
Surviving mint sets are so poor I can't stand to ask to see them anymore. I've not ever seen a 73 or 74 Ike in a mint set any better than MS 63 for that matter. Yep these coins are scarce !
The low relative preference is a function of all primary attributes: design, coin size, metal content, and relative scarcity. All US moderns as a series rank very low on most or all of these attributes. It's not a coincidence. It's because collectors bring this perception with them into collecting from the external culture.
I guess this doesn't apply to a 1909-S VDB cent despite the act that it's just junk metal, small, low denomination, a president coin, and was saved in far larger numbers than a 1982 quarter.
One staggers at the implications of a market that tell the difference between a rare and desirable coin and common junk in the complete absence of a market!
This thread is about the financial aspects. You do remember this, don't you?
The Lincoln Wheat cent has a noticeably higher design preference while the 09-S VDB retains a "scarcity" perception due to the "low" mintage when collecting was predominantly out of circulating change. Outside of mostly invented US specialization practices and TPG labels, no one is going to believe any US modern is scarce because it isn't. This isn't any different versus most other US coinage.
"Desirability" is relative. The explanation for your perception vs. collecting generally is that you have such an inflated opinion of this coinage. You think others should pay much higher prices, yet your posts demonstrate you won't pay it yourself and never did.
Why would anyone who isn't already paying "full freight" (market value) do it when you won't? Virtually no one (literally) likes this coinage as much as you claim you do.
@cladking said:
moderns are among the hottest coins at THIS time.
Do you really believe this be true, Cladking?
I dont see it.
The mint set market is finally firming at the new much higher prices.
This also means that there is a new higher floor under the prices of the individual coins.
I don't see many fireworks yet except for the scarcities like chBU and MS-64 '82 and '83 coins which are trading at many multiples of Greysheet and retail sales of BU rolls which are going crazy.
I believe these are the canaries in the coal mine. Eventually the markets will become mature enough that real pricing is established and this will mark the beginning of the real emergence of clad. As long as guides list these coins at prices that are simply wrong the markets will be stymied. But every year the guides get better and the market stronger despite the fact demand is dwarfed by the supply of mint sets.
With so few mint sets surviving it just can't take much to upend the markets.
Surviving mint sets are so poor I can't stand to ask to see them anymore. I've not ever seen a 73 or 74 Ike in a mint set any better than MS 63 for that matter. Yep these coins are scarce !
Yes, They suck.
I don't know how many Gem Ikes I passed up because as I was searching sets I never even glanced at the Ikes until I finally stumbled on a Gem 1977 Ike in 1978. Only then did I start searching them. Where about 2% of most mint set coins are Gem With Ikes the only two "common" dates are '77 and '78-D and they are both lower than 1%.
I doubt there's a lot of cherry picking of ikes in existing sets because most batches of cherry picked sets are destined to be destroyed soon after but there is probably some. These coins just didn't look all that nice the day they were made and now every date but the '73's and '74's are probably tarnished in mint sets. The '73's are just heartbreakers. Even back when I had the market to myself I just couldn't find them clean. It seemed even the finest specimens would have a big gouge or scrape. Of course the type I Philly is much worse but you don't expect to find it. The '73 was nice enough you expected to find a nice one but I never did.
My question is more about where will windfall profits go if they do materialize and where are they going now as metals increase. It certainly seems to be no stretch to say a disproportionate share of these dollars will go into everything that is currently hot and moderns are among the hottest coins at THIS time.
It's reasonable to believe US moderns with already high prices (such as the examples I listed) might be bought in isolation for the reason you give, but not much more than that.
Most 1965-1998 US moderns in consensus grade don't actually have low counts, mostly where it's a "68". Once it gets above 5, is that really such a low number? Most in a "67" have (many) more than that.
Otherwise, this coinage isn't competitive at "meaningfully" higher prices because it will have to compete with other coinage with a (much) higher preference in a similar price range, especially where two series directly compete for collector budget.
Collectors buying gold don't buy US moderns except as a sideline collection. Not substantially any different for those buying silver coinage at any "meaningful" budget level. I infer that virtually no non-collector "investor" buys US moderns at all.
So, what are they most likely to buy?
The same coins these people presumably usually do: pre-1933 US gold, Morgan dollars, (world) NCLT, and maybe occasionally world "classic" gold, like British.
@Jacques_Loungecoque said:
I don’t know a single person feeling even close to “wealthier” right now. In fact, the complete opposite, regardless of any contributing factor(s).
I believe the coin market is showing this already and is undergoing an economic adaptation - NOT a correction. If I put on my fortune teller hat, I’d wager the coin market is going to drop, across most types/series, before too long.
The US coin market is presumably more closely correlated to economic conditions versus other markets due to the scale and size of the collector base. My opinion remains that the biggest risk is noticeably tighter credit conditions which finally end the massive asset mania and the loosest credit conditions in history from the last 30 years.
Short to intermediate term, gold and silver appear to be in a bull market and if so, that should provide some price support but not necessarily for the coinage most (US) collectors buy. For one thing, I've read many anecdotal comments about meaningful price increases since 2020 and noticed some myself. I'd describe many (mostly US) coins as extraordinarily expensive for the relative collectible merits, making it vulnerable to any price "correction" from evaporating paper wealth.
@Catbert said:
Well if the 10 year state quarter program didn't do the trick, why think it will do anything now?
Concur; coins will go the way of stamps but it will take longer because there are still gold and silver coins to buy and collect. Occasionally silver coins can be found in rolls, change, or Coinstar machines whereas a similar paradigm for stamps no longer exists.
The SQ program has on occasion been one of my primary arguments against themes in this type of thread. It's yet another data point demonstrating that supposed "popularity" (size of the collector base) does not equal an actual collector preference.
Collectors buying gold don't buy US moderns except as a sideline collection. Not substantially any different for those buying silver coinage at any "meaningful" budget level. I infer that virtually no non-collector "investor" buys US moderns at all.
Are you seriously suggesting there is no or virtually no interlap between the sets of coin collectors who buy gold and silver and those who buy moderns?
Folks are always trying to extrapolate the 1970's to the current environment. It's TOTALLY different, as that period was a once-in-a-lifetime situation:
Inflation was soaring.
Interest rates were double-digits
Stocks stunk (except small-caps and Peter Lynch ).
Exchange rates, fixed forever, were now floating. Except the dollar, which was sinking.
Gold and silver went up 20-fold and 40-fold, each.
Gold and silver coins, because of the rise in the underlying metal, each soared.
Other coins were dragged upwards as folks expected a spill-over effect. It largely didn't happen.
Commemoratives were pretty much the only group to continue to rise into the 1980's.
Gold ownership was only legalized in December 1974.
@cladking said:
Everyone thought that in '79 the market soared because of metals but all these coins that were popular before the >increase enjoyed the largest gains.
What coins that were popular soared even more than those tied directly to gold/silver ? Which are you referencing ?
Perhaps this time people feeling wealthier is going to push up moderns and things like silver eagles.
They may or may not go up based on the underlying metal and demand but I think unless you see protracted lack of interest in stocks/bonds that you won't see people looking bigtime to PMs or "moderns."
This could be a major shot in the arm for the entire hobby at the same time its popularity is exploding everywhere.
What is exploding everywhere ?
I personally believe that gradually rising gold/silver prices might attract people. I think $2,500 and $3,000 gold would gather headlines but the latter is probably 5-6 years away.
What coins that were popular soared even more than those tied directly to gold/silver ? Which are you referencing ?
Morgan dollars and walking libertys of course. Come to think of it the newest WL's affected were only only 35 years old and the oldest moderns today are 60 years old.
They may or may not go up based on the underlying metal and demand but I think unless you see protracted lack of interest in stocks/bonds that you won't see people looking bigtime to PMs or "moderns."
Products and services have never been worse.
What is exploding everywhere ?
interest in and collecting of coins.
I personally believe that gradually rising gold/silver prices might attract people. I think $2,500 and $3,000 gold would gather headlines but the latter is probably 5-6 years away.
This thread is overly presumptive. It will take far higher prices in metals than what we've seen to date to have much effect.
I don't see many fireworks yet except for the scarcities like chBU and MS-64 '82 and '83 coins which are trading at many multiples of Greysheet and retail sales of BU rolls which are going crazy.
As everyone knows, there were no mint sets in 82-83, which is seemingly the only reason these issues garner significant interest (I think "multiples of Greysheet" seems a bit optimistic however-outliers aside), and the only significant changes in other recent issue mint set values seem to be those with issues/varieties etc. unique to those sets... so trying to use those to support a contention of expanded desirability of clads and moderns overall is, to be kind, wishful thinking imo.
As far as the "wealth effect" mentioned in this thread's title, I'm having a hard time believing anyone making good money in metals or related issues would want to park any of their income/profits in an area that has a very narrow interest in the high end and virtually zero interest in anything less than the high end. Combine that with relatively high initial mintages and, I maintain, many unsearched rolls/bags/sets still out there, and I'm just not seeing it happening...anecdotal "I'm not seeing any 19XX dimes/quarters worth a darn out there" stories aside. JMHO as someone in the business full time since 1983.
@telephoto1 said: I don't see many fireworks yet except for the scarcities like chBU and MS-64 '82 and '83 coins which are trading at many multiples of Greysheet and retail sales of BU rolls which are going crazy.
As everyone knows, there were no mint sets in 82-83, which is seemingly the only reason these issues garner significant interest (I think "multiples of Greysheet" seems a bit optimistic however-outliers aside), and the only significant changes in other recent issue mint set values seem to be those with issues/varieties etc. unique to those sets... so trying to use those to support a contention of expanded desirability of clads and moderns overall is, to be kind, wishful thinking imo.
As far as the "wealth effect" mentioned in this thread's title, I'm having a hard time believing anyone making good money in metals or related issues would want to park any of their income/profits in an area that has a very narrow interest in the high end and virtually zero interest in anything less than the high end. Combine that with relatively high initial mintages and, I maintain, many unsearched rolls/bags/sets still out there, and I'm just not seeing it happening...anecdotal "I'm not seeing any 19XX dimes/quarters worth a darn out there" stories aside. JMHO as someone in the business full time since 1983.
Agree.
Besides, are there more than 6 people who made more money in PMs than stocks and real estate in the last decade. I bet there are far more people that made the majority of their money in crypto than PMs.
@telephoto1 said: I don't see many fireworks yet except for the scarcities like chBU and MS-64 '82 and '83 coins which are trading at many multiples of Greysheet and retail sales of BU rolls which are going crazy.
As everyone knows, there were no mint sets in 82-83, which is seemingly the only reason these issues garner significant interest (I think "multiples of Greysheet" seems a bit optimistic however-outliers aside), and the only significant changes in other recent issue mint set values seem to be those with issues/varieties etc. unique to those sets... so trying to use those to support a contention of expanded desirability of clads and moderns overall is, to be kind, wishful thinking imo.
As far as the "wealth effect" mentioned in this thread's title, I'm having a hard time believing anyone making good money in metals or related issues would want to park any of their income/profits in an area that has a very narrow interest in the high end and virtually zero interest in anything less than the high end. Combine that with relatively high initial mintages and, I maintain, many unsearched rolls/bags/sets still out there, and I'm just not seeing it happening...anecdotal "I'm not seeing any 19XX dimes/quarters worth a darn out there" stories aside. JMHO as someone in the business full time since 1983.
Three major milestones have been seen in the last couple years.
First mint set prices more than doubled. This applies chiefly to the older sets but due to the run up in the pieces of the later date set there value has firmed considerably. Two years ago a 1988 mint set with a face value of $1.82 wholesaled for $3.75 and the parts were worth only about $2.75 in aggregate. Today the set is only $4 but the parts are worth $4.25 even if there are no Gems ore varieties. With Gems and varieties it's worth well over $5 on average.
Second The '82 and '83 issue have firmed considerably sight seen. You can see this on eBay where there are good photos the coins are bringing $100 (especially the '82-P quarter) in just MS-64 or nice MS-63. Greysheet lists these as $7 coins.
Third there has suddenly arisen a retail BU roll market. Prices are astronomical though few retailers have much stock. One has to suspect that if they are selling much of anything they'll be flush with cash to restock and expand their offerings. There must be some reason they are suddenly offering BU rolls.
By definition money goes into what's hot. It is not reasonable to assume that everyone who is profiting on metals will only buy silver coin; they will buy what is hot even if it's virtually unknown and in terra incognita. ...They might even buy modern junk if they can find it.
I know $30 per ounce silver is not a big deal now that the dollar has so little value.
But the fact is any dealer will tell you there is a constant turnover in junk silver. Sure most buy high and sell low but still most sellers have tidy profits right now. Those not selling feel wealthier and might increase their coin budgets.
I have a bag of junkish silver to sell at some point. Just like I did when silver hit $28/oz-ish (2009? Not sure) I’ll sell it and turn it into 1 or 2 nice older coins last time it was an XF/AU ‘14D Lincoln.
I’d have to be a bajillionaire with all the classics in hand before I felt rich enough to get into moderns (barring a specialty variety or error here and there).
My son is 10 and poor. I’ve gotten him a few moderns because they’re cheap. If they approach classics in price, we’ll stick to classics, exclusively.
I’m not knocking anything anyone enjoys collecting but accessibility is the only reason moderns are in with anyone I know. They’re obviously not going after condition rarities and I don’t expect them to.
@cladking said:
Everyone thought that in '79 the market soared because of metals but all these coins that were popular before the >increase enjoyed the largest gains.
What coins that were popular soared even more than those tied directly to gold/silver ?
>
In the later months of 1980, common date BU buffalo nickels peaked at around $1500 per roll, or nearly $40 per coin. (In today's dollars that would be over $140 per coin.)
Three major milestones have been seen in the last couple years.
First mint set prices more than doubled. This applies chiefly to the older sets but due to the run up in the pieces of the later date set there value has firmed considerably. Two years ago a 1988 mint set with a face value of $1.82 wholesaled for $3.75 and the parts were worth only about $2.75 in aggregate. Today the set is only $4 but the parts are worth $4.25 even if there are no Gems ore varieties. With Gems and varieties it's worth well over $5 on average.
Second The '82 and '83 issue have firmed considerably sight seen. You can see this on eBay where there are good photos the coins are bringing $100 (especially the '82-P quarter) in just MS-64 or nice MS-63. Greysheet lists these as $7 coins.
Third there has suddenly arisen a retail BU roll market. Prices are astronomical though few retailers have much stock. One has to suspect that if they are selling much of anything they'll be flush with cash to restock and expand their offerings. There must be some reason they are suddenly offering BU rolls.
By definition money goes into what's hot. It is not reasonable to assume that everyone who is profiting on metals will only buy silver coin; they will buy what is hot even if it's virtually unknown and in terra incognita. ...They might even buy modern junk if they can find it.
My 60-seconds-ago eBay search of actual sold listings shows 82-P's in slabbed 65 and 66 bringing less than $50 and even less than $40. All with perfectly legible images. I have no doubt that one can cherrypick a listing from the past where two people perhaps working on registry sets ran each other up over a certain coin here and there but that is far from a market indicator for that date, much less for clads in general.
OK, I just looked again. There are no nice gemmy '82-P's available on eBay right now. When these are available with good pictures they bring around $100. Dave's Coins has a lot of very nice MS-63's available right now but they are not gemmy and they are over $100.
Yes, there are a couple of graded coins but they don't look gemmy because of strike deficiencies and marking.
It's really nice MS-64 and better that are tough. i call these with good solid strikes from good dies and minimum marking "gemmy". Graded coins of this date tend to be fairly clean but the strike is often lacking. My guess is owners are getting rid of the less attractive high grade coins which are selling for as little as $50.
True Gems of this coin are rare to non-existent. Even nice solid strikes from solid dies are pretty scarce and they tend to have marking.
There are numerous very scarce moderns that are unknown as rarities because so few are collecting these coins. They list for peanuts. The problem is even if you're out there looking for them you aren't going to find them and if you're not looking you'll never even know.
@cladking said:
Morgan dollars and walking libertys of course. Come to think of it the newest WL's affected were only only 25 years >old and the oldest moderns today are 60 years old.
As I recall, one or both of those series -- along with coins in general -- got dragged up by the 2 coin bubbles of the last 45 years. In 1979-80, they got ahead of themselves but in 1989-90 (with PMs below their levels of a decade earlier) they ZOOMED in high-grade condition as the TPGs had just started.
I recall an article noting a Seated or Walking coin (forgot which, if anybody wants the details I will check) that went for $40,000 or something like that and years later (the article was from about 1994 or 1995) the coins were down 80-85% or more. Still down 30 years later to the present, for sure.
I may have printed the prices in another thread but I believe Saints, Morgans, and Seated or Walking Dollars were quoted in the collapse.
interest in and collecting of coins.
Going up, for sure, but not skyrocketing like the NFT and Sports Card bubble we saw 3 years ago.
I personally believe that gradually rising gold/silver prices might attract people. I think $2,500 and $3,000 gold > >would gather headlines but the latter is probably 5-6 years away.
This thread is overly presumptive. It will take far higher prices in metals than what we've seen to date to have >much effect.
You think interest in collecting is jumping but that higher gold (and silver) prices with Big Round Numbers falling won't have any headline effect ?
The Bubble Articles I cited -- vets may know them, or even recall how nutty things got -- were by Burton Blumert and Scott Travers. I can post the sections with the price declines cited in their pieces, if anybody here wants them.
Collectors buying gold don't buy US moderns except as a sideline collection. Not substantially any different for those buying silver coinage at any "meaningful" budget level. I infer that virtually no non-collector "investor" buys US moderns at all.
Are you seriously suggesting there is no or virtually no interlap between the sets of coin collectors who buy gold and silver and those who buy moderns?
99%+ of the time, they buy it as a secondary or side collection, when they buy it at all.
This thread of yours is suggesting that buyers at any "material" financial level buy it for anything else.
Where did ever get this idea?
Except for the examples I gave earlier which occur in minimal proportion, they don't. They aren't buying large volumes of very low-priced coinage (US moderns or otherwise) in large volume either. That's the context of this thread you started.
Seriously, why would think they do? The amounts implied in the context of this thread are financially immaterial. It's a waste of time to do what you imply.
Collectors buying gold don't buy US moderns except as a sideline collection. Not substantially any different for those buying silver coinage at any "meaningful" budget level. I infer that virtually no non-collector "investor" buys US moderns at all.
Are you seriously suggesting there is no or virtually no interlap between the sets of coin collectors who buy gold and silver and those who buy moderns?
99%+ of the time, they buy it as a secondary or side collection, when they buy it at all.
This thread of yours is suggesting that buyers at any "material" financial level buy it for anything else.
Where did ever get this idea?
Except for the examples I gave earlier which occur in minimal proportion, they don't. They aren't buying large volumes of very low-priced coinage (US moderns or otherwise) in large volume either. That's the context of this thread you started.
Seriously, why would think they do? The amounts implied in the context of this thread are financially immaterial. It's a waste of time to do what you imply.
I agree. The other reason 1979-80 is a horrible case study is the 70s were a horrible decade for stocks. The current stock market is quite robust. And this focus on PMs ignore that. Over the last 10 years, total gold return is 85%, total silver return is 55%, total S&P500 return is 229%. And real estate...
Why would the wealth effect be concentrated only in metals? How many people have the bulk of their assets in PMs?
As far as the "wealth effect" mentioned in this thread's title, I'm having a hard time believing anyone making good money in metals or related issues would want to park any of their income/profits in an area that has a very narrow interest in the high end and virtually zero interest in anything less than the high end. Combine that with relatively high initial mintages and, I maintain, many unsearched rolls/bags/sets still out there, and I'm just not seeing it happening...anecdotal "I'm not seeing any 19XX dimes/quarters worth a darn out there" stories aside. JMHO as someone in the business full time since 1983.
Anyone can confirm your inference in the Heritage archives. It's not 100% representative but it is "directionally" accurate at higher prices. Out of 69,000+ sales over $10K since 1999, how many are from pre-SQ series (roughly 1965-1998)?
193
68 more for errors.
It's a slightly higher ratio at $1K+, about 1/2 of 1% out of 588,000 sales.
Collectors buying gold don't buy US moderns except as a sideline collection. Not substantially any different for those buying silver coinage at any "meaningful" budget level. I infer that virtually no non-collector "investor" buys US moderns at all.
Are you seriously suggesting there is no or virtually no interlap between the sets of coin collectors who buy gold and silver and those who buy moderns?
99%+ of the time, they buy it as a secondary or side collection, when they buy it at all.
This thread of yours is suggesting that buyers at any "material" financial level buy it for anything else.
Where did ever get this idea?
Except for the examples I gave earlier which occur in minimal proportion, they don't. They aren't buying large volumes of very low-priced coinage (US moderns or otherwise) in large volume either. That's the context of this thread you started.
Seriously, why would think they do? The amounts implied in the context of this thread are financially immaterial. It's a waste of time to do what you imply.
I agree. The other reason 1979-80 is a horrible case study is the 70s were a horrible decade for stocks. The current stock market is quite robust. And this focus on PMs ignore that. Over the last 10 years, total gold return is 85%, total silver return is 55%, total S&P500 return is 229%. And real estate...
Why would the wealth effect be concentrated only in metals? How many people have the bulk of their assets in PMs?
The premise of this thread makes sense when applied to coin collectors but not for US moderns or somewhere between 95% to 99% of all coinage.
For the non-collector, only a very low proportion of the US population likely owns physical metals at all of any "material" value. I'd guess most of these own it in "paper" format. These people aren't candidates to buy coins and if they do, they will predominantly buy the "investment" type I mentioned earlier.
Are you implying that you disagree with this statement: "By definition money goes into what's hot."?
Or are you disagreeing that moderns are in any way "hot"?
The premise of this thread is nonsensical. Virtually no one has the motivation you infer or claim.
Not only are you assuming buyer behavior to your preference, you also assume people are motivated to collect like you do for profit.
They aren't. Virtually no one buying coins for financial reasons at any "material" level fits your collector profile. They don't buy US moderns and they don't buy large volume of very low-priced coinage.
Collectors buying gold don't buy US moderns except as a sideline collection. Not substantially any different for those buying silver coinage at any "meaningful" budget level. I infer that virtually no non-collector "investor" buys US moderns at all.
Are you seriously suggesting there is no or virtually no interlap between the sets of coin collectors who buy gold and silver and those who buy moderns?
99%+ of the time, they buy it as a secondary or side collection, when they buy it at all.
This thread of yours is suggesting that buyers at any "material" financial level buy it for anything else.
Where did ever get this idea?
Except for the examples I gave earlier which occur in minimal proportion, they don't. They aren't buying large volumes of very low-priced coinage (US moderns or otherwise) in large volume either. That's the context of this thread you started.
Seriously, why would think they do? The amounts implied in the context of this thread are financially immaterial. It's a waste of time to do what you imply.
I agree. The other reason 1979-80 is a horrible case study is the 70s were a horrible decade for stocks. The current stock market is quite robust. And this focus on PMs ignore that. Over the last 10 years, total gold return is 85%, total silver return is 55%, total S&P500 return is 229%. And real estate...
Why would the wealth effect be concentrated only in metals? How many people have the bulk of their assets in PMs?
The premise of this thread makes sense when applied to coin collectors but not for US moderns or somewhere between 95% to 99% of all coinage.
For the non-collector, only a very low proportion of the US population likely owns physical metals at all of any "material" value. I'd guess most of these own it in "paper" format. These people aren't candidates to buy coins and if they do, they will predominantly buy the "investment" type I mentioned earlier.
But even among collectors, I suspect (hope) the vast majority have the bulk of their assets somewhere other than PMs.
Thanks Clad to brink this topic. Here it is my vision versus:
Gold it is an very long term investment and perform only in inflationist time.
Silver has more demand now then 1.5 years production world wide.
Now to modern coins:
1. Nickel. The price on forex is 0.02 $ per gram and the demand is considered at 2.75 years world production. So an Nickel coin metalic instrinct it is 0.10 $.
2. Copper: It is 26% high and grow day by day. Reserves are almost inexistentes. 0.015$/gr
3. Zinc: it is 16% high and the demand it is enourmous with almost empty reserves. 0.003$/gr
4. Manganese: It is 26% high and the supply is almost untuchable because China has 80% of the production (natural or syntetic manganese) 0.003$/gr
So in my opinion, the new collectors look also at the future instrinc metallic value.
NEVER ARGUE WITH AN IDIOT.FIRST THEY WILL DRAG YOU DOWN TO THEIR LEVEL.THEN, THEY WILL BEAT YOU WITH EXPERIENCE. MARK TWAIN
@cladking said:
Morgan dollars and walking libertys of course. Come to think of it the newest WL's affected were only only 25 years >old and the oldest moderns today are 60 years old.
As I recall, one or both of those series -- along with coins in general -- got dragged up by the 2 coin bubbles of the last 45 years. In 1979-80, they got ahead of themselves but in 1989-90 (with PMs below their levels of a decade earlier) they ZOOMED in high-grade condition as the TPGs had just started.
>
In 1980, Walking Liberty halves were at the leading edge of the coin bubble. They peaked at about $4000 per common date BU roll a few months after silver began retreating from its high. That equates to $200 for a single BU Walker, or about $700 in today's dollars.
Today a graded MS63 Walker can be acquired for less than $50. Adjusted for inflation, that's a 93% drop from its price 44 years ago.
I cannot speak for the collectors per se but for the makers the market sure is strong. I recently unloaded a nearly 5 year collection of modern misses slabbed and raw including several hundred mint sets and various 20 to $40 items. I listed them separately in shoe boxes full and with .99 starting bids.
Everything sold at or around my cost and quickly. Well, as quick as I could list it about 3 months because I'm already busy 17 hours a day and sleep the other 7.
From what I've read so far it sounds like timing can be everything. I will continue to hunt the high grade moderns for my collection and for selling but mainly for the joy/reward of finding those elusive gems which, to another point they are way under priced. Try finding a '77 Kennedy in MS67 (a $175 coin) as a collector you'd be better off buying one slabbed if you could find it as it may take you $500 in mint sets to equal.
@jmlanzaf said:
Why would the wealth effect be concentrated only in metals? How many people have the bulk of their assets in >PMs?
The current move in gold is being driven by central bank buying. Retail has been SELLING bigtime but the big institutions (CBs, SWFs, pension plans) dwarf retail. Retail in India and China have been buyers offsetting the U.S. and then some.
This is a multi-year move IMO and will probably play out at least to 2030 and maybe 2035.
@jmlanzaf said:
Why would the wealth effect be concentrated only in metals? How many people have the bulk of their assets in >PMs?
The current move in gold is being driven by central bank buying. Retail has been SELLING bigtime but the big institutions (CBs, SWFs, pension plans) dwarf retail. Retail in India and China have been buyers offsetting the U.S. and then some.
This is a multi-year move IMO and will probably play out at least to 2030 and maybe 2035.
That's not what I said. What about other asset classes where people have most of their assets? It's a mistake to be so PM obsessed.
In the last 12 months, gold is up 22% and the S&P is up 26%
I sure didn't intend for this thread to turn into support for clad coins as a collectible. It was simply intended to speculate about where the profits accrued by dealers and collectors would go.
Many are missing the point about moderns; they are collectable by definition because they are coins and it just seems to the old guard that they are neither coins nor collectable. It is this that has held back the demand for common and scarce moderns alike for 60 years now. When modern coins collapsed 60 years ago everyone vowed to never collect moderns again and this went many times over for the debased crap the government provided instead of real dimes and quarters.
What they are missing is this same phenomenon is seen worldwide. When the coinage was debased people quit collecting all coins after the debasement, even continuing series. This has created 60 years of very scarce and rare coinage that still tends to have very weak demand. Despite the very weak demand prices of world moderns have been soaring for some years now. Coins that were available for a dime or a quarter when the above article was written 25 years ago now routinely sell for hundreds or even thousands of dollars. This is a simple fact. Anyone can gainsay it but the fact is coins that had no supply and no demand only a few years ago are now in some demand and prices are exploding higher. Of course many of these coins were virtually impossible to obtain because in addition to their rarity there was (and is) also the fact that with no market and rock bottom catalog prices those who do own them have no incentive to sell and if they did they won't be taking out 2 page ads to sing the praises of a coin "worth" a quarter. They won't even put it on eBay.
Finding the coins requires looking at a lot of coins and choosing the rarities requires that you know what these rarities are.
One of the most interesting and telling things about world moderns is that when there exist mint sets the coins are "common" and you can find them. These mint set mintages are often in the thousands or even hundreds but this mintage is high enough to make every coin in the set "common". Obviously this is only because there is no demand at all.
The coins that don't appear in mint sets are often virtually impossible to find because there were no collections and there are STILL no collections. There never can be many collections for many moderns because they weren't saved and the survivors were destroyed by the issuing authority. Worn out and bent E German 10p coins were being redeemed by a grateful populous at par in 1991. These coins were a mess and had not been saved initially. Now almost the entire huge mintage is gone and what was left in 1991 was used to build refrigerators. Try finding a nice Gem!!! If this is too hard try finding a nice evenly worn F. There's a fairly attractive XF available on eBay right now for $175. 20 years ago you couldn't give this coin away and today most dealers won't pay any more than 20 years ago because this is a "specialty market". All moderns are specialty markets without price guides and almost no demand.
Some of our coins are also quite rare, at least relative potential demand. This even applies to coins in mint sets because of attrition, very poor quality, and universal tarnish on some dates.
@silviosi said:
Thanks Clad to brink this topic. Here it is my vision versus:
Gold it is an very long term investment and perform only in inflationist time.
Silver has more demand now then 1.5 years production world wide.
Now to modern coins:
1. Nickel. The price on forex is 0.02 $ per gram and the demand is considered at 2.75 years world production. So an Nickel coin metalic instrinct it is 0.10 $.
2. Copper: It is 26% high and grow day by day. Reserves are almost inexistentes. 0.015$/gr
3. Zinc: it is 16% high and the demand it is enourmous with almost empty reserves. 0.003$/gr
4. Manganese: It is 26% high and the supply is almost untuchable because China has 80% of the production (natural or syntetic manganese) 0.003$/gr
So in my opinion, the new collectors look also at the future instrinc metallic value.
Gold is great insurance. Most people should have at least 10% of their net wealth in it.
Silver is an investment in our children, rationality, and the inventiveness of man. It is in highly limited supply, is completely unavailable in significant quantity, and markets exist for the benefit of bankers and consumers. All current trends regarding silver are unsustainable.
When metals increase coin dealers and collectors reap a significantly outsized share of the profits just as we endure outsized losses when they decrease. With prices spiking higher there will be more money in the market and unrealized gains and this will loosen up the pursestrings of dealers and collectors alike.
I am proposing that far more of this money will go into moderns than in the past and prices could soar because success in collectibles breeds success. This nis just the way it is and the past is what most people are predicting. The future plays out according to new trends and old laws. All the old laws suggest moderns will flourish if metals continue higher (and even if they don't.
Collectors buying gold don't buy US moderns except as a sideline collection. Not substantially any different for those buying silver coinage at any "meaningful" budget level. I infer that virtually no non-collector "investor" buys US moderns at all.
Are you seriously suggesting there is no or virtually no interlap between the sets of coin collectors who buy gold and silver and those who buy moderns?
99%+ of the time, they buy it as a secondary or side collection, when they buy it at all.
This thread of yours is suggesting that buyers at any "material" financial level buy it for anything else.
Where did ever get this idea?
Except for the examples I gave earlier which occur in minimal proportion, they don't. They aren't buying large volumes of very low-priced coinage (US moderns or otherwise) in large volume either. That's the context of this thread you started.
Seriously, why would think they do? The amounts implied in the context of this thread are financially immaterial. It's a waste of time to do what you imply.
I agree. The other reason 1979-80 is a horrible case study is the 70s were a horrible decade for stocks. The current stock market is quite robust. And this focus on PMs ignore that. Over the last 10 years, total gold return is 85%, total silver return is 55%, total S&P500 return is 229%. And real estate...
Why would the wealth effect be concentrated only in metals? How many people have the bulk of their assets in PMs?
The premise of this thread makes sense when applied to coin collectors but not for US moderns or somewhere between 95% to 99% of all coinage.
For the non-collector, only a very low proportion of the US population likely owns physical metals at all of any "material" value. I'd guess most of these own it in "paper" format. These people aren't candidates to buy coins and if they do, they will predominantly buy the "investment" type I mentioned earlier.
But even among collectors, I suspect (hope) the vast majority have the bulk of their assets somewhere other than PMs.
Everyone is agog when someone presents his multimillion dollar coin rarities but let a poor man talk about thousands in silver and it is foolishness.
I'm a big believer in silver and the probability that man and common sense will prevail in the long term. Of course, I have silver in my safety deposit boxes.
I agree. The other reason 1979-80 is a horrible case study is the 70s were a horrible decade for stocks. The current stock market is quite robust. And this focus on PMs ignore that. Over the last 10 years, total gold return is 85%, total silver return is 55%, total S&P500 return is 229%. And real estate...
Eventually people will be fed up with horrible products and services.
What do you think this will do to the stock market prices? We have an educational system so broken it will require two generations to repair. Our industry builds inferior products and still engineers them to break anyway that they call "planned obsolescence". Much of our food is inedible and longevity is crashing.
I would expect the stock market to begin a sideways movement that will last 25 years within the next few years.
Buying stocks in 1982 was wise. Holding them through 1987 required courage. After 1997 and LTCM the stock market is a crapshoot and little different than living in a casino.
Collectors buying gold don't buy US moderns except as a sideline collection. Not substantially any different for those buying silver coinage at any "meaningful" budget level. I infer that virtually no non-collector "investor" buys US moderns at all.
Are you seriously suggesting there is no or virtually no interlap between the sets of coin collectors who buy gold and silver and those who buy moderns?
99%+ of the time, they buy it as a secondary or side collection, when they buy it at all.
This thread of yours is suggesting that buyers at any "material" financial level buy it for anything else.
Where did ever get this idea?
Except for the examples I gave earlier which occur in minimal proportion, they don't. They aren't buying large volumes of very low-priced coinage (US moderns or otherwise) in large volume either. That's the context of this thread you started.
Seriously, why would think they do? The amounts implied in the context of this thread are financially immaterial. It's a waste of time to do what you imply.
I agree. The other reason 1979-80 is a horrible case study is the 70s were a horrible decade for stocks. The current stock market is quite robust. And this focus on PMs ignore that. Over the last 10 years, total gold return is 85%, total silver return is 55%, total S&P500 return is 229%. And real estate...
Why would the wealth effect be concentrated only in metals? How many people have the bulk of their assets in PMs?
The premise of this thread makes sense when applied to coin collectors but not for US moderns or somewhere between 95% to 99% of all coinage.
For the non-collector, only a very low proportion of the US population likely owns physical metals at all of any "material" value. I'd guess most of these own it in "paper" format. These people aren't candidates to buy coins and if they do, they will predominantly buy the "investment" type I mentioned earlier.
But even among collectors, I suspect (hope) the vast majority have the bulk of their assets somewhere other than PMs.
Everyone is agog when someone presents his multimillion dollar coin rarities but let a poor man talk about thousands in silver and it is foolishness.
I'm a big believer in silver and the probability that man and common sense will prevail in the long term. Of course, I have silver in my safety deposit boxes.
If 60+% of your assets are in silver, you'll never be able to retire. Don't make it a ridiculous all-or- nothing. If you want 100k of your million in silver
Go ahead. If you want 600k of your million in silver, please talk to a financial planner.
And the point is that of you have 10% of your assets in PMs, your "wealth effect" is driven by the other 90%.
Since this is the U.S. coin forum and not the precious metals or world coin forum, there really isn’t any debate that US clad coinage is not “exploding” because there is little demand and hasn’t been for decades. Why one would think circumstances of today will change that reality is delusional wishful thinking.
Seated Half Society member #38 "Got a flaming heart, can't get my fill"
@Catbert said:
Since this is the U.S. coin forum and not the precious metals or world coin forum, there really isn’t any debate that US clad coinage is not “exploding” because there is little demand and hasn’t been for decades. Why one would think circumstances of today will change that reality is delusional wishful thinking.
@Catbert said:
Since this is the U.S. coin forum and not the precious metals or world coin forum, there really isn’t any debate that US clad coinage is not “exploding” because there is little demand and hasn’t been for decades. Why one would think circumstances of today will change that reality is delusional wishful thinking.
So what do you think does change reality?
Science changes one funeral at a time.
It doesn't ever have to change.
What do you see in the horizon that will make the price of 1950s manual typewriters explode in value?
Well, interesting thread. I think PCGS changed "reality" in 1986 with certification services. When did they start slabbing clad?
Then they changed "reality" again with Registry sets. These sets pushed clad higher and I think it continues with Ike's anyway. I don't see that stopping anytime soon. If the mint stops producing coins that will be a reality changer. And would that kill coin collecting or enhance it? I don't know.
So I think change is inevitable. Its fun to watch the coin markets and buying and collecting clad can be fun and very challenging for high grade specimens. I see that part of the collecting community growing in the future as long as it stays fun.. I like what the state quarters program did for numismatics. It brought in a lot of new collectors. Just my opinion
Comments
Looking at this from a realistic point, ask yourself why you collect coins. While value is certainly among the reason, the more prevalent would be historical, artistic and so forth. To explain the context of this, all modern U.S. coinage designs (the nickel being an exeption) originated in silver, or in in the case of the Lincoln cent-copper. When the change to nickel-copper occured the effect on particular series collectors focused on had minimal change. Lincoln collectors, as an example, still collect them. Washington quarter collectors the same. While the physical value is absolutely greater, there exists the physcological affect adding that somehow clad is less valuable from a collectible standpoint. The point being, many will still collect their favorite series despite any composition change. As for modern having monetary value, over the past several years major auction houses have sales proving they do. Particularly in the upper grades, with values steadily increased over the years. On the subject of wealth effect, in my opinion a much greater and overlooked is the current generation. Those born in the digital age and collect. The ones who rarely use physical currency or coin, the appeal of historical usage becomes a major factor. Collectors, not the wealthy, drive market value. The wealthy merely draw interest to coinage with record prices. I think of the early '80's when investors drove prices through the roof only for the bottom to drop out ten years later.
This is just the anecdotal evidence to prove how low the demand is. When I was poking through sets at the shows 30 years ago I had them all to myself too. I didn't have to get up early and be the first one in but I did anyway. The turnover is still very very high as evidenced by the fact so few of these sets are shop worn. Some of the '80's dates will quickly fade if exposed to direct sunlight but even these are rarely seen. Turnover is so high because there is no demand and dealers are constantly buying sets because they have no choice. If they pass on the sets the deal will likely walk right back out the door so when they get too many they either send them off to a wholesaler or cut them up themselves and toss everything including Gems and varieties right into the cash register. This has been going on for nearly 60 years and is the chief reason so few are left. Wholesalers cut up most of the sets they acquire as well as sell them to jobbers who cut them up. The demand for intact sets is exceedingly weak with most dealers selling less than 1% of the sets they buy to retail customers though, no doubt, this is increasing in recent years.
There are a lot of nice coins in the sets but people aren't looking and the few who look aren't seeing. Two mint sets out of three have a nice Gem and one mint set in ten have a nice chGem. One set in a hundred has a gradable coin and about one in 400 has a special coin though some of these are not yet recognized as rarities because people aren't looking.
The number of sets being destroyed (especially on a percentage basis) is increasing. Most of the early sets are tarnishing because the packaging is unstable so coins need to be removed and soaked in acetone before they can't be restored but I wager few are and most are just being dumped into circulation even today. The sets are getting more attention which also increases destruction. Most of the coins that are graded come from these sets because quality is much higher and because they are virtually the sole source of most coins.
Before the mid-'90's it was easy to walk into any coin show and walk out with fifty or sixty nice Gems of US and world coins for less than $1 each. Now days you will not find so many and prices tend to be sharply higher.
Indeed!
With what I know now I'd have done things much differently.
I like colorful clad Washington proof quarters!
"Got a flaming heart, can't get my fill"
Modern BULLION coins: SAE, Maples, Libertads, etc.
Who cares about mint sets or clad? Few people are date collectors anymore, so for type, any date will do.
Surviving mint sets are so poor I can't stand to ask to see them anymore. I've not ever seen a 73 or 74 Ike in a mint set any better than MS 63 for that matter. Yep these coins are scarce !
This thread is about the financial aspects. You do remember this, don't you?
The Lincoln Wheat cent has a noticeably higher design preference while the 09-S VDB retains a "scarcity" perception due to the "low" mintage when collecting was predominantly out of circulating change. Outside of mostly invented US specialization practices and TPG labels, no one is going to believe any US modern is scarce because it isn't. This isn't any different versus most other US coinage.
"Desirability" is relative. The explanation for your perception vs. collecting generally is that you have such an inflated opinion of this coinage. You think others should pay much higher prices, yet your posts demonstrate you won't pay it yourself and never did.
Why would anyone who isn't already paying "full freight" (market value) do it when you won't? Virtually no one (literally) likes this coinage as much as you claim you do.
Yep.
Yes, They suck.
I don't know how many Gem Ikes I passed up because as I was searching sets I never even glanced at the Ikes until I finally stumbled on a Gem 1977 Ike in 1978. Only then did I start searching them. Where about 2% of most mint set coins are Gem With Ikes the only two "common" dates are '77 and '78-D and they are both lower than 1%.
I doubt there's a lot of cherry picking of ikes in existing sets because most batches of cherry picked sets are destined to be destroyed soon after but there is probably some. These coins just didn't look all that nice the day they were made and now every date but the '73's and '74's are probably tarnished in mint sets. The '73's are just heartbreakers. Even back when I had the market to myself I just couldn't find them clean. It seemed even the finest specimens would have a big gouge or scrape. Of course the type I Philly is much worse but you don't expect to find it. The '73 was nice enough you expected to find a nice one but I never did.
It's reasonable to believe US moderns with already high prices (such as the examples I listed) might be bought in isolation for the reason you give, but not much more than that.
Most 1965-1998 US moderns in consensus grade don't actually have low counts, mostly where it's a "68". Once it gets above 5, is that really such a low number? Most in a "67" have (many) more than that.
Otherwise, this coinage isn't competitive at "meaningfully" higher prices because it will have to compete with other coinage with a (much) higher preference in a similar price range, especially where two series directly compete for collector budget.
Collectors buying gold don't buy US moderns except as a sideline collection. Not substantially any different for those buying silver coinage at any "meaningful" budget level. I infer that virtually no non-collector "investor" buys US moderns at all.
So, what are they most likely to buy?
The same coins these people presumably usually do: pre-1933 US gold, Morgan dollars, (world) NCLT, and maybe occasionally world "classic" gold, like British.
The US coin market is presumably more closely correlated to economic conditions versus other markets due to the scale and size of the collector base. My opinion remains that the biggest risk is noticeably tighter credit conditions which finally end the massive asset mania and the loosest credit conditions in history from the last 30 years.
Short to intermediate term, gold and silver appear to be in a bull market and if so, that should provide some price support but not necessarily for the coinage most (US) collectors buy. For one thing, I've read many anecdotal comments about meaningful price increases since 2020 and noticed some myself. I'd describe many (mostly US) coins as extraordinarily expensive for the relative collectible merits, making it vulnerable to any price "correction" from evaporating paper wealth.
The SQ program has on occasion been one of my primary arguments against themes in this type of thread. It's yet another data point demonstrating that supposed "popularity" (size of the collector base) does not equal an actual collector preference.
Collector preferences are almost never a mystery.
Follow the money.
Are you seriously suggesting there is no or virtually no interlap between the sets of coin collectors who buy gold and silver and those who buy moderns?
No.
Folks are always trying to extrapolate the 1970's to the current environment. It's TOTALLY different, as that period was a once-in-a-lifetime situation:
What coins that were popular soared even more than those tied directly to gold/silver ? Which are you referencing ?
They may or may not go up based on the underlying metal and demand but I think unless you see protracted lack of interest in stocks/bonds that you won't see people looking bigtime to PMs or "moderns."
What is exploding everywhere ?
I personally believe that gradually rising gold/silver prices might attract people. I think $2,500 and $3,000 gold would gather headlines but the latter is probably 5-6 years away.
>
Morgan dollars and walking libertys of course. Come to think of it the newest WL's affected were only only 35 years old and the oldest moderns today are 60 years old.
Products and services have never been worse.
interest in and collecting of coins.
This thread is overly presumptive. It will take far higher prices in metals than what we've seen to date to have much effect.
edited ; D'oh, 35 years old not 25.
I don't see many fireworks yet except for the scarcities like chBU and MS-64 '82 and '83 coins which are trading at many multiples of Greysheet and retail sales of BU rolls which are going crazy.
As everyone knows, there were no mint sets in 82-83, which is seemingly the only reason these issues garner significant interest (I think "multiples of Greysheet" seems a bit optimistic however-outliers aside), and the only significant changes in other recent issue mint set values seem to be those with issues/varieties etc. unique to those sets... so trying to use those to support a contention of expanded desirability of clads and moderns overall is, to be kind, wishful thinking imo.
As far as the "wealth effect" mentioned in this thread's title, I'm having a hard time believing anyone making good money in metals or related issues would want to park any of their income/profits in an area that has a very narrow interest in the high end and virtually zero interest in anything less than the high end. Combine that with relatively high initial mintages and, I maintain, many unsearched rolls/bags/sets still out there, and I'm just not seeing it happening...anecdotal "I'm not seeing any 19XX dimes/quarters worth a darn out there" stories aside. JMHO as someone in the business full time since 1983.
RIP Mom- 1932-2012
Agree.
Besides, are there more than 6 people who made more money in PMs than stocks and real estate in the last decade. I bet there are far more people that made the majority of their money in crypto than PMs.
Three major milestones have been seen in the last couple years.
First mint set prices more than doubled. This applies chiefly to the older sets but due to the run up in the pieces of the later date set there value has firmed considerably. Two years ago a 1988 mint set with a face value of $1.82 wholesaled for $3.75 and the parts were worth only about $2.75 in aggregate. Today the set is only $4 but the parts are worth $4.25 even if there are no Gems ore varieties. With Gems and varieties it's worth well over $5 on average.
Second The '82 and '83 issue have firmed considerably sight seen. You can see this on eBay where there are good photos the coins are bringing $100 (especially the '82-P quarter) in just MS-64 or nice MS-63. Greysheet lists these as $7 coins.
Third there has suddenly arisen a retail BU roll market. Prices are astronomical though few retailers have much stock. One has to suspect that if they are selling much of anything they'll be flush with cash to restock and expand their offerings. There must be some reason they are suddenly offering BU rolls.
By definition money goes into what's hot. It is not reasonable to assume that everyone who is profiting on metals will only buy silver coin; they will buy what is hot even if it's virtually unknown and in terra incognita. ...They might even buy modern junk if they can find it.
I know $30 per ounce silver is not a big deal now that the dollar has so little value.
But the fact is any dealer will tell you there is a constant turnover in junk silver. Sure most buy high and sell low but still most sellers have tidy profits right now. Those not selling feel wealthier and might increase their coin budgets.
"The ought-is fallacy occurs when you assume that the way you want things to be is the way they are. This is also called wishful thinking. Wishful thinking is believing what you want to be true no matter the evidence or without evidence at all, or assuming something is not true, because you do not want it to be so."
_
https://txst.edu/philosophy/resources/fallacy-definitions/ought-is.html#:~:text=Wishful%20thinking%20is%20believing%20what,justified%20in%20saying%20they%20are.
"Got a flaming heart, can't get my fill"
Are you implying that you disagree with this statement: "By definition money goes into what's hot."?
Or are you disagreeing that moderns are in any way "hot"?
I have a bag of junkish silver to sell at some point. Just like I did when silver hit $28/oz-ish (2009? Not sure) I’ll sell it and turn it into 1 or 2 nice older coins last time it was an XF/AU ‘14D Lincoln.
I’d have to be a bajillionaire with all the classics in hand before I felt rich enough to get into moderns (barring a specialty variety or error here and there).
My son is 10 and poor. I’ve gotten him a few moderns because they’re cheap. If they approach classics in price, we’ll stick to classics, exclusively.
I’m not knocking anything anyone enjoys collecting but accessibility is the only reason moderns are in with anyone I know. They’re obviously not going after condition rarities and I don’t expect them to.
>
In the later months of 1980, common date BU buffalo nickels peaked at around $1500 per roll, or nearly $40 per coin. (In today's dollars that would be over $140 per coin.)
My Adolph A. Weinman signature
Coin dealers were flush with cash during 1979-80, like we have never seen before and since. Are they now? So, no to your question.
My 60-seconds-ago eBay search of actual sold listings shows 82-P's in slabbed 65 and 66 bringing less than $50 and even less than $40. All with perfectly legible images. I have no doubt that one can cherrypick a listing from the past where two people perhaps working on registry sets ran each other up over a certain coin here and there but that is far from a market indicator for that date, much less for clads in general.
RIP Mom- 1932-2012
I'm talking about nice looking raw coins. Most of these are obviously not candidates for slabbing though some might go MS-65 or even 66.
I haven't looked in a couple weeks though.
OK, I just looked again. There are no nice gemmy '82-P's available on eBay right now. When these are available with good pictures they bring around $100. Dave's Coins has a lot of very nice MS-63's available right now but they are not gemmy and they are over $100.
Yes, there are a couple of graded coins but they don't look gemmy because of strike deficiencies and marking.
It's really nice MS-64 and better that are tough. i call these with good solid strikes from good dies and minimum marking "gemmy". Graded coins of this date tend to be fairly clean but the strike is often lacking. My guess is owners are getting rid of the less attractive high grade coins which are selling for as little as $50.
True Gems of this coin are rare to non-existent. Even nice solid strikes from solid dies are pretty scarce and they tend to have marking.
There are numerous very scarce moderns that are unknown as rarities because so few are collecting these coins. They list for peanuts. The problem is even if you're out there looking for them you aren't going to find them and if you're not looking you'll never even know.
As I recall, one or both of those series -- along with coins in general -- got dragged up by the 2 coin bubbles of the last 45 years. In 1979-80, they got ahead of themselves but in 1989-90 (with PMs below their levels of a decade earlier) they ZOOMED in high-grade condition as the TPGs had just started.
I recall an article noting a Seated or Walking coin (forgot which, if anybody wants the details I will check) that went for $40,000 or something like that and years later (the article was from about 1994 or 1995) the coins were down 80-85% or more. Still down 30 years later to the present, for sure.
I may have printed the prices in another thread but I believe Saints, Morgans, and Seated or Walking Dollars were quoted in the collapse.
Going up, for sure, but not skyrocketing like the NFT and Sports Card bubble we saw 3 years ago.
You think interest in collecting is jumping but that higher gold (and silver) prices with Big Round Numbers falling won't have any headline effect ?
The Bubble Articles I cited -- vets may know them, or even recall how nutty things got -- were by Burton Blumert and Scott Travers. I can post the sections with the price declines cited in their pieces, if anybody here wants them.
99%+ of the time, they buy it as a secondary or side collection, when they buy it at all.
This thread of yours is suggesting that buyers at any "material" financial level buy it for anything else.
Where did ever get this idea?
Except for the examples I gave earlier which occur in minimal proportion, they don't. They aren't buying large volumes of very low-priced coinage (US moderns or otherwise) in large volume either. That's the context of this thread you started.
Seriously, why would think they do? The amounts implied in the context of this thread are financially immaterial. It's a waste of time to do what you imply.
I agree. The other reason 1979-80 is a horrible case study is the 70s were a horrible decade for stocks. The current stock market is quite robust. And this focus on PMs ignore that. Over the last 10 years, total gold return is 85%, total silver return is 55%, total S&P500 return is 229%. And real estate...
Why would the wealth effect be concentrated only in metals? How many people have the bulk of their assets in PMs?
Anyone can confirm your inference in the Heritage archives. It's not 100% representative but it is "directionally" accurate at higher prices. Out of 69,000+ sales over $10K since 1999, how many are from pre-SQ series (roughly 1965-1998)?
193
68 more for errors.
It's a slightly higher ratio at $1K+, about 1/2 of 1% out of 588,000 sales.
The premise of this thread makes sense when applied to coin collectors but not for US moderns or somewhere between 95% to 99% of all coinage.
For the non-collector, only a very low proportion of the US population likely owns physical metals at all of any "material" value. I'd guess most of these own it in "paper" format. These people aren't candidates to buy coins and if they do, they will predominantly buy the "investment" type I mentioned earlier.
The premise of this thread is nonsensical. Virtually no one has the motivation you infer or claim.
Not only are you assuming buyer behavior to your preference, you also assume people are motivated to collect like you do for profit.
They aren't. Virtually no one buying coins for financial reasons at any "material" level fits your collector profile. They don't buy US moderns and they don't buy large volume of very low-priced coinage.
But even among collectors, I suspect (hope) the vast majority have the bulk of their assets somewhere other than PMs.
Thanks Clad to brink this topic. Here it is my vision versus:
Gold it is an very long term investment and perform only in inflationist time.
Silver has more demand now then 1.5 years production world wide.
Now to modern coins:
1. Nickel. The price on forex is 0.02 $ per gram and the demand is considered at 2.75 years world production. So an Nickel coin metalic instrinct it is 0.10 $.
2. Copper: It is 26% high and grow day by day. Reserves are almost inexistentes. 0.015$/gr
3. Zinc: it is 16% high and the demand it is enourmous with almost empty reserves. 0.003$/gr
4. Manganese: It is 26% high and the supply is almost untuchable because China has 80% of the production (natural or syntetic manganese) 0.003$/gr
So in my opinion, the new collectors look also at the future instrinc metallic value.
NEVER ARGUE WITH AN IDIOT.
FIRST THEY WILL DRAG YOU DOWN TO THEIR LEVEL.
THEN, THEY WILL BEAT YOU WITH EXPERIENCE.
MARK TWAIN
>
In 1980, Walking Liberty halves were at the leading edge of the coin bubble. They peaked at about $4000 per common date BU roll a few months after silver began retreating from its high. That equates to $200 for a single BU Walker, or about $700 in today's dollars.
Today a graded MS63 Walker can be acquired for less than $50. Adjusted for inflation, that's a 93% drop from its price 44 years ago.
My Adolph A. Weinman signature
I cannot speak for the collectors per se but for the makers the market sure is strong. I recently unloaded a nearly 5 year collection of modern misses slabbed and raw including several hundred mint sets and various 20 to $40 items. I listed them separately in shoe boxes full and with .99 starting bids.
Everything sold at or around my cost and quickly. Well, as quick as I could list it about 3 months because I'm already busy 17 hours a day and sleep the other 7.
From what I've read so far it sounds like timing can be everything. I will continue to hunt the high grade moderns for my collection and for selling but mainly for the joy/reward of finding those elusive gems which, to another point they are way under priced. Try finding a '77 Kennedy in MS67 (a $175 coin) as a collector you'd be better off buying one slabbed if you could find it as it may take you $500 in mint sets to equal.
The current move in gold is being driven by central bank buying. Retail has been SELLING bigtime but the big institutions (CBs, SWFs, pension plans) dwarf retail. Retail in India and China have been buyers offsetting the U.S. and then some.
This is a multi-year move IMO and will probably play out at least to 2030 and maybe 2035.
That's not what I said. What about other asset classes where people have most of their assets? It's a mistake to be so PM obsessed.
In the last 12 months, gold is up 22% and the S&P is up 26%
https://www.pcgs.com/News/A-Clad-edged-Investment
I sure didn't intend for this thread to turn into support for clad coins as a collectible. It was simply intended to speculate about where the profits accrued by dealers and collectors would go.
Many are missing the point about moderns; they are collectable by definition because they are coins and it just seems to the old guard that they are neither coins nor collectable. It is this that has held back the demand for common and scarce moderns alike for 60 years now. When modern coins collapsed 60 years ago everyone vowed to never collect moderns again and this went many times over for the debased crap the government provided instead of real dimes and quarters.
What they are missing is this same phenomenon is seen worldwide. When the coinage was debased people quit collecting all coins after the debasement, even continuing series. This has created 60 years of very scarce and rare coinage that still tends to have very weak demand. Despite the very weak demand prices of world moderns have been soaring for some years now. Coins that were available for a dime or a quarter when the above article was written 25 years ago now routinely sell for hundreds or even thousands of dollars. This is a simple fact. Anyone can gainsay it but the fact is coins that had no supply and no demand only a few years ago are now in some demand and prices are exploding higher. Of course many of these coins were virtually impossible to obtain because in addition to their rarity there was (and is) also the fact that with no market and rock bottom catalog prices those who do own them have no incentive to sell and if they did they won't be taking out 2 page ads to sing the praises of a coin "worth" a quarter. They won't even put it on eBay.
Finding the coins requires looking at a lot of coins and choosing the rarities requires that you know what these rarities are.
One of the most interesting and telling things about world moderns is that when there exist mint sets the coins are "common" and you can find them. These mint set mintages are often in the thousands or even hundreds but this mintage is high enough to make every coin in the set "common". Obviously this is only because there is no demand at all.
The coins that don't appear in mint sets are often virtually impossible to find because there were no collections and there are STILL no collections. There never can be many collections for many moderns because they weren't saved and the survivors were destroyed by the issuing authority. Worn out and bent E German 10p coins were being redeemed by a grateful populous at par in 1991. These coins were a mess and had not been saved initially. Now almost the entire huge mintage is gone and what was left in 1991 was used to build refrigerators. Try finding a nice Gem!!! If this is too hard try finding a nice evenly worn F. There's a fairly attractive XF available on eBay right now for $175. 20 years ago you couldn't give this coin away and today most dealers won't pay any more than 20 years ago because this is a "specialty market". All moderns are specialty markets without price guides and almost no demand.
Some of our coins are also quite rare, at least relative potential demand. This even applies to coins in mint sets because of attrition, very poor quality, and universal tarnish on some dates.
Gold is great insurance. Most people should have at least 10% of their net wealth in it.
Silver is an investment in our children, rationality, and the inventiveness of man. It is in highly limited supply, is completely unavailable in significant quantity, and markets exist for the benefit of bankers and consumers. All current trends regarding silver are unsustainable.
When metals increase coin dealers and collectors reap a significantly outsized share of the profits just as we endure outsized losses when they decrease. With prices spiking higher there will be more money in the market and unrealized gains and this will loosen up the pursestrings of dealers and collectors alike.
I am proposing that far more of this money will go into moderns than in the past and prices could soar because success in collectibles breeds success. This nis just the way it is and the past is what most people are predicting. The future plays out according to new trends and old laws. All the old laws suggest moderns will flourish if metals continue higher (and even if they don't.
Everyone is agog when someone presents his multimillion dollar coin rarities but let a poor man talk about thousands in silver and it is foolishness.
I'm a big believer in silver and the probability that man and common sense will prevail in the long term. Of course, I have silver in my safety deposit boxes.
Eventually people will be fed up with horrible products and services.
What do you think this will do to the stock market prices? We have an educational system so broken it will require two generations to repair. Our industry builds inferior products and still engineers them to break anyway that they call "planned obsolescence". Much of our food is inedible and longevity is crashing.
I would expect the stock market to begin a sideways movement that will last 25 years within the next few years.
Buying stocks in 1982 was wise. Holding them through 1987 required courage. After 1997 and LTCM the stock market is a crapshoot and little different than living in a casino.
If 60+% of your assets are in silver, you'll never be able to retire. Don't make it a ridiculous all-or- nothing. If you want 100k of your million in silver
Go ahead. If you want 600k of your million in silver, please talk to a financial planner.
And the point is that of you have 10% of your assets in PMs, your "wealth effect" is driven by the other 90%.
Since this is the U.S. coin forum and not the precious metals or world coin forum, there really isn’t any debate that US clad coinage is not “exploding” because there is little demand and hasn’t been for decades. Why one would think circumstances of today will change that reality is delusional wishful thinking.
"Got a flaming heart, can't get my fill"
So what do you think does change reality?
Science changes one funeral at a time.
It doesn't ever have to change.
What do you see in the horizon that will make the price of 1950s manual typewriters explode in value?
Well, interesting thread. I think PCGS changed "reality" in 1986 with certification services. When did they start slabbing clad?
Then they changed "reality" again with Registry sets. These sets pushed clad higher and I think it continues with Ike's anyway. I don't see that stopping anytime soon. If the mint stops producing coins that will be a reality changer. And would that kill coin collecting or enhance it? I don't know.
So I think change is inevitable. Its fun to watch the coin markets and buying and collecting clad can be fun and very challenging for high grade specimens. I see that part of the collecting community growing in the future as long as it stays fun.. I like what the state quarters program did for numismatics. It brought in a lot of new collectors. Just my opinion
Enjoy your coins!