90's Proof Coins?
SarasotaFrank
Posts: 1,625 ✭✭
Maybe my lack of saavy will show through in this post, in which case, my cover will most assuredly be blown.
I have collected proof sets for a while and have amassed a collection back to 1950. I will probably not venture further back, as I enjoy food, lodging and have a nine year old to send to college.
I have also been collecting additional sets of San Francisco minted proofs in album collections. Being from the "silver era" (I remember my Dad telling me anything minted after 1964 was worthless), I have built a varierty of collections up to 1964. I am now expanding these to current date by chopping up mint and proof sets in Intercept Shield albums that I didn't buy from Wayne (sorry Wayne - I just didn't know!)
Every week or so, I'll buy a fistfull of extra proof sets and mint sets, compare the quality to my proof and mint set specimans and then crack em open and transfer them to albums. I was putting a few of these in today. I assign a general cost to each coin in a spreadsheet by dividing up the total value of the set by a percentage for each coin.
After assigning these costs, I then assign a value, based on a Red Book PF-65 price - which is oh so scientific. The disparity of set cost versus individual coin cost in some cases is pretty broad. For example - a 1993 $16.00 proof set shows PF-65 prices for individual coins totalling over $35.00. Further if any of these coins grade out at only 65, I would be very surprised. The 90's are filled with $7.00 PF-65 Lincoln Cents, popped out of $9.50 proof sets.
Is there a reason the Proof Set values have not accelerated in step with the total coin value - or have I missed a big glaring point which would lead anyone standing next to me to wear a shirt that reads "I'm With Stupid -->".
I have collected proof sets for a while and have amassed a collection back to 1950. I will probably not venture further back, as I enjoy food, lodging and have a nine year old to send to college.
I have also been collecting additional sets of San Francisco minted proofs in album collections. Being from the "silver era" (I remember my Dad telling me anything minted after 1964 was worthless), I have built a varierty of collections up to 1964. I am now expanding these to current date by chopping up mint and proof sets in Intercept Shield albums that I didn't buy from Wayne (sorry Wayne - I just didn't know!)
Every week or so, I'll buy a fistfull of extra proof sets and mint sets, compare the quality to my proof and mint set specimans and then crack em open and transfer them to albums. I was putting a few of these in today. I assign a general cost to each coin in a spreadsheet by dividing up the total value of the set by a percentage for each coin.
After assigning these costs, I then assign a value, based on a Red Book PF-65 price - which is oh so scientific. The disparity of set cost versus individual coin cost in some cases is pretty broad. For example - a 1993 $16.00 proof set shows PF-65 prices for individual coins totalling over $35.00. Further if any of these coins grade out at only 65, I would be very surprised. The 90's are filled with $7.00 PF-65 Lincoln Cents, popped out of $9.50 proof sets.
Is there a reason the Proof Set values have not accelerated in step with the total coin value - or have I missed a big glaring point which would lead anyone standing next to me to wear a shirt that reads "I'm With Stupid -->".
"I want to die peacefully in my sleep like my Grandfather did, as opposed to screaming in terror like his passengers."
0
Comments
anyone?
Bueller?
So lets send it ttt.
I let my cat play with some proof sets and sometimes find them buried in the litter box.
I don't know if they are worth as much as some might be
<< <i>For example - a 1993 $16.00 proof set shows PF-65 prices for individual coins totalling over $35.00. Further if any of these coins grade out at only 65, I would be very surprised. >>
The problem is that, in this day and age of certified coins, you wouldn't be able to sell the raw for anywhere near the Redbook prices. The potential buyer would automatically assume that since the coin isn't slabbed, it must be junk. But, if you do get them slabbed, they'd have to all score 69DCAM (or maybe a couple at 68) in order to realize an adequate ROI after considering fees, postage, and your time.
Russ, NCNE
the sets and the coins which comprise them. Most collecors act as though there is
something sacrosanct about the mint and proof sets. "What the mint has joined, let
no one set asunder". Many people do demand singles for sets. Very few people ever
sell any of these coins which they buy when they buy them as singles. This is a rapidly
growing market segment containing a rapidly growing number of people with rapidly
growing collections so coins largely flow only one way.
There were far more mint and proof sets produced than the actual demand for all the
coins and sets. It's dificult to say why people bought these each year since for the main
part the coins were not appreciated. Largely it was just that they were available and peo-
ple wanted to own whatever the mint made and to stay current. They suffered in the se-
condary market because there were far more sets than buyers. People do speculate in
them to some degree, so when prices escalate there are sets coming on the market. But
the rate at which the sets are dismantled hasn't kept up with demand for singles for many
years now. Hence higher prices for the coins than the sets.