What would Eliasberg or Pittman think of today’s market?
dan1ecu
Posts: 1,573
Do you think they’d be buying moderns for outrageous prices just because they are in a rare condition (or a rare slab...)? For that matter, what would they think of slabbing coins? My guess is that any seasoned collector would realize that there’s very little room for price appreciation on something like a $39,000 1963 proof Lincoln cent. In fact, I think it’s quite a gamble to buy modern condition rarities because who knows how many more are out there that haven’t been slabbed yet.
The moderns bubble has got to burst sometime. What do you think will be the cause when it finally does? What do you think will be the implications of the bottom dropping out of the moderns market as far as the hobby and the slabbing companies are concerned? Will people who have lost a great deal of money blame the grading services? Do you think that the grading services are primarily responsible for the irrational exuberance that we’re seeing in today’s market?
Dan
The moderns bubble has got to burst sometime. What do you think will be the cause when it finally does? What do you think will be the implications of the bottom dropping out of the moderns market as far as the hobby and the slabbing companies are concerned? Will people who have lost a great deal of money blame the grading services? Do you think that the grading services are primarily responsible for the irrational exuberance that we’re seeing in today’s market?
Dan
0
Comments
He was one of the first collectors to concentrate on buying the finest possible quality.
While he did primarily collect classic proofs and other rare coins he had collections of
various moderns and acquired the coins in the highest possible grade. He often paid
prices far in excess of bid to get coins he needed for his collection. In all likelyhood he
just guessed that the future would value high grade coins much more than the more
available counterparts so he put his efforts in the highest grades. He was one of very
few collectors assembling clad sets as early as the mid-80's, and he may well have started
much sooner.
It may be instructive that when he died in 1996 that none of his clad coins were offered
for sale. So far as I know these coins still haven't hit the market. Hmmm....
I'm not entirely convinced that the high grade modern trend is a bubble. Understand that the concept of set registries within the context of the Internet is something of a "discontinuity" in coin collecting - i.e. for the first time ever we now have a quantifiable way for people to publicly compete with each other in the field of coin collecting. This is a profound idea, and it may very well be a permanent thing. American collectors have always been hung up on the concept of numbers & this just plays into that whole mindset.
I prefer classics myself, but I'm not writing off the "latest craze" yet.
mcinnes@mailclerk.ecok.edu">dmcinnes@mailclerk.ecok.edu
Go BIG or GO HOME. ©Bill
Go BIG or GO HOME. ©Bill
(I want his loupe)
yeah right!
It would also be interesting to know what the Pittman coins which were sold in '97 would
bring today. Would they be worth much more? Somewhat less? How about his clad
collections which were not sold? Do you think they'd have brought more a few years ago?
Without a doubt,When I began collecting slabbed coins in 1988 there was nothing even remotely close to the insanity going on with slabbed moderns.Tothe best of my knowledge NGC and PCGS did NOT slab post 1970 coinage or moderns.
The craziest prices in the late 1980's were coins like proof Barber halves in PR 67 selling for $40,000 and a proof 69 Morgan dollar selling for a $100,000
Stewart
<< <i>
Without a doubt,When I began collecting slabbed coins in 1988 there was nothing even remotely close to the insanity going on with slabbed moderns.Tothe best of my knowledge NGC and PCGS did NOT slab post 1970 coinage or moderns.
>>
NGC's stated reason for not slabbing moderns in those days was that they
feared people would slab common late date cameo proofs and attempt to
promote them as rarities. Many of the 80's dates proofs were almost uni-
versally DCAM and these were the only moderns people were interested in
slabbing in those days. PCGS was slabbing moderns quite early on, but there
was exceedingly little demand for them until recent years.
Moderns are a huge area and not all of it has experienced the same level of
demand and appreciation. As this young area develops there will be numerous
price adjustments as supply becomes better understood and demand stabilizes
and becomes less focused and firmer.
<< <i>NGC's stated reason for not slabbing moderns in those days was that they
feared people would slab common late date cameo proofs and attempt to
promote them as rarities. >>
And NGC was right, they did. . . .through PCGS. When NGC realized that they had handed a large and profitable market niche to PCGS on a silver platter they changed their tune and started slabbing moderns.
"Moderns" often get lumped together in a discussion, as if there is any connection between the truly very scarce or rare modern coins and the coins that are far more common. For example, IMHO, FOR THE MOST PART, proof coins dated after 1976 (with some exceptions) are not that interesting to me. I also believe this is the area Stewart also primarily refers to when he mentions outrageous prices on moderns. On the other hand, there are plenty of MINT STATE moderns dated after 1976 that are immensely interesting to me, such as certain select MS clad quarters, MS state quarters, and Jefferson nickel dates, not to mention many MS Kennedys and even modern Commems such as the 1982(d) GW Half in true MS69 grade.
I believe, if either Eliasberg or Pittman carefully studied the modern coins of this time, both their collections would contain, at minimum select pieces. AND, SINCE ELIASBERG and/or PITTMAN MIGHT BE LEGEND'S CLIENT TODAY, LEGEND MIGHT HAVE TO DEAL A BIT IN MODERNS
Wondercoin
Obscurum per obscurius
other modern coins. These coins were not offered for sale when his collections
were sold. Perhaps his family was instructed not to sell at the price then current.
If he did have such collections then he certainly would have known that the prices
were laughable and in many cases are not much higher today.
These coins are still dramatically underappreciated in many cases, and this is exactly
the kind of coins that he specialized in. Granted, he probably would not concern him-
self unduly with third party grading decisions.
Neither of them would have been on any registry. They knew what they had, and the collectors who count knew that they had it. One of Eliasberg’s contemporaries told me years ago that Eliasberg was like a vacuum clearer. If there were coins that he needed for his sets it was virtually impossible to out bid him. Having said that however once Eliasberg had a rarity covered, he didn’t have to obsess about upgrading it. For example his 1854-S quarter eagle was only in Good to Very Good condition. Among dozen or so examples that have survived of this rare piece, that may have been the poorest one. Better ones were auctioned during his time, but he did not buy them.
Those who rule the registries are living in a fantasy world if they think they have the best coins known. There are many collectors who have great stuff who chose not to have their coins slabbed, or chose not to toot their horn about what they have. PCGS’ requirement that the coins must be graded by them to qualify for the competition places a severe limitation on the validity of their claim that the #1 collection is the finest known. NCG’s registry, which accepts PCGS and NGC coins, is little better.
Heck, if I had my collection slabbed, I could give the top registry type collectors a run for their money, and I’m a no body. I know that my collection is a drop in the bucket compared to what others have. I've seen that though first hand experiece, and I also know about what I have sold to others.
Enjoy the competition, guys. But bear in mind that when it comes to rankings in the universe, winning the Registry War is like saying that the team that wins the championship in the Cape Cod Baseball League is better than the team that wins the Major League World Series.
I give this the Post Of The Day award.
Obscurum per obscurius
Great job!
<< <i>I doubt that either Pitman or Eliasberg would have been throwing boatloads of money at modern coins in high grade slabs. Both of them were very astute buyers, and they were FAR more impressed by coins that were rare on an overall basis, not “condition rarities” that become important only because of some real or imagined superiority in their state of preservation. They were also far more impressed by items that were real collectors’ pieces, not fads. >>
I certainly never meant to imply that John J Pittman would be throwing boat loads of money
at slabbed moderns. John J Pittman COLLECTED modern coins in high grade. It wasn't nec-
essary to throw boatloads of money at them to acquire them. They were available at the
banks at face value or for little more in mint and proof sets. It is still possible to get these
coins for very nominal amounts in the sets, but how long can this last after many years of
high attrition and the current soaring demand from the legions of new collectors. As these
sets become harder to locate the demand will focus on the singles. Many will demand that
the coins be slabbed so this may be the norm for some time.
The rules of the game change from time to time, but it's really always been the same game.
...and always will be. Play ball!