Key dates - Will they change over time?

stephunter

A recent thread (09-O Quarter vs. 01-S)got me to thinking about this concept. As the population report becomes more common place in the market will the collecting community's concept of what a key date is change over time? 20 years from now will population reports decide for a higher percentage of the collectors what the key dates are vs. mintages of coins and what the redbook tells us are the key dates. I have always felt that it is not how many of a certain date that were minted that counts but how many exhist in that grade. I would like to get some feedback from dealers and what they see in the marketplace. What percentage of your customers beleive that the lower mintage coin is the one to buy in any grade? In reference to the previously mentioned thread, I would much rather have a high graded 1909-O Barber quarter than an 01-S in lower grade given the same price.

coppercoins

Not exactly in queue with your idea, but pertinent nonetheless is the possibility that the 1986P cent 'could' take over the #1 spot for the Lincoln memorial short set as the "coin to have" - right now it's the 1970S small date. Poor quality and an overall general lack of people saving cents has led to a heavy shortage of certain date/mm combinations in the 1980s in 66 or better.

ziggy29

I don't think pop reports will much change perception of the keys in general. For the very high grades I think it can and will. Some of the common dates are more rare in ultra-high MS than some of the "keys."

dorkkarl

i think the answer is yes. not necessarily due to pop reports, but just an overall impression that a certain coin is more scarce than previously though. more likely to happen w/ recent coins of course.

K S

Stuart

Stephunter: You may wish to check into the history of the 1903-O Morgan Dollar which prior to 1964 sold for $1500+ in mint state condition.

In 1964, after a large number of bags of 1903-O's were discovered in the government vaults, the price plummeted to $30

Moral of the story is that there's always the possibility that a coin hoard will be found in a vault, or a Treasure Ship (Ship of Gold), which may make a previously expensive coin with date or version rarity, a relatively inexpensive coin after the discovery is made.

Mike Fuljenz pointed out that early Type 1 $20 Gold Liberty condition rarities can sometimes be a bad investment if a treasure ship full of them is discovered -- however he said since "Trains Don't Sink" the later $20 Liberties which were transported cross-country via train are less likely to be susceptable to large hoard discoveries and subsequent price collapse.

By the way, the price collapse is a dual-edged sword -- it's bad if you already own the rarity, but is good if you are a buyer after the discovery is made...

cladking

Back in the '20's most collectors felt most of the key date coins were common junk. They'd
tell you that a '16-D dime might be a little harder to find but there'd always be plenty for
everyone who wanted one. Most collectors were more interested in coins that were scarce by
type or possibly by date than coins with low mintage dates/mintmarks. Grades too, were less
important in those days to most collectors. Sure they'd get the best coin available, but if that
were VF then they'd normally be satisfied with it. There was nothing wrong with collecting this
way and, indeed, the price performance of coins like an 1804 dollar would seem to indicate that
the thinking was hardly "wrong".

But things do change. Where Morgan dollars were of relatively little importance, this is no longer
true. Where four grades were adequate for all coins, now ten grades of uncirculated are too few
for some people. Where once Mercury dimes were considered common junk, they are now thought
of as high art and pursued in all grades. Coins like the '16-D dime are considered scarce because
there is more demand than coins.

As coppercoins alluded to, the evolution is continuing. Not only is the assessment of what consti-
tutes rare dates and grades an ongoing process but even the evolution of the coins themselves
changes in time. Another major change is exactly what coins people desire. Where thirty years
ago they may have had little interest in any memorial cent, much less a variety like a '70-S sm date,
today more and more varieties are eagerly sought by a growing number of collectors. Part of the
reason is that so many of the moderns are common in some grade. People want to own coins that
aren't common in any grade also. The varieties make a fun way to learn about coins and are also
fun to track down. Just as an '86 is being seen as increasingly desirable and far more difficult to
find than is normally thought, there are some dates which are also disappearing at an alarming rate.
The '68 cent in mint sets are virtually all carbon spotted now. While choice coins can be found in
rolls, the gems are pretty tough and the roll coins too show some distress caused by time. The '84-D
cent is notoriously poorly made and this coin is "rotting" at an alarming rate. It may not be so many
years before some of these are more difficult than the older keys.

PhillyJoe

Stuart, you must not watch the History Channel. This week there was a special about 2 locomotives from the 1840's or 50's found off the Jersey coast.

Joe

Stuart

Joe: You are correct, I missed that History Channel Show. -- I guess that there's an exception to every rule

haletj

Looking at old price guides it appears the 21-s Buffalo was the key in unc... and after years of pop reports it showed 26-s was rarer. 23-s Lincoln used to be considered the rarest Lincoln in BU too rather than 26-s (although maybe it still is, just not in gem BU).

sliderider

I think the only real thing that can change whether a date is key is for the known population of that coin to change dramatically. If a hoard surfaced tomorrow, containing many high grade 1916D Mercury dimes, for example, the value of those coins that are currently available would plummet. Of course, like the ship wreck coins, or the Binion hoard, someone would put a fancy slab around the coin to artificially inflate the value for a while, but I think the principle of buy the coin, not the holder would eventually prevail and the pricing structure around that coin would collapse.

There is also condition rarity to consider. Populations mean nothing if there is not a good spread of those coins across all grades. I have seen many coins, especially in the Morgan dollar series that are commons in circulated grades, but once you move into MS territory, the prices become astronomical because there's relatively few in those grades, even though there may be millions of them still on the market in all other grades combined.

stephunter

"There is also condition rarity to consider. Populations mean nothing if there is not a good spread of those coins across all grades."

This is where I was going with this. For example, there are many coins that are pop 25 with 0 higher that I would rather have than a VG 16-D mercury dime. Now I am straying a little into my personal opion and what I like to collect, but I would rather have an uncirculated small motto two cent piece than a the 16-D mercury dime that would cost about the same. I guess this is part of what makes collecting interesting.

kamehameha00

I believe small mintage dates of unpopular series, such as the 1840-O With Drapery Seated Quarter with a mintage of 40,000 will rise in value, even in lesser grades. Other commonly overlooked dates such as some modern commemoratives or the Twenty Cent Piece of 1875 are just a couple examples of how you can get a low mintage coin without spending too much money.

coinkat

Values can change based on the perceived rarity of coins... the 1903-O was a good example, but pick up a RED BOOK from 1960 and check the value of the following Morgans in UNC:

1898-O $375.00
1896-O $15.00
1897-O $10.00
1904-O $150.00
1902-O $85.00

1892-CC $6.00

well, I think that says enough for one post...

ldhair

A top grade 14-D cent is now worth more than a 1909-S VDB.
Lots of normal folks (non collectors) know of the 09 but not the 14.