Interesting New Pinnacle Rarities article on some tough/undervalued coins....

coinguy1

Not even the skeptics and bashers can fairly claim that the article promotes coins which Pinnacle typically has for sale.

Link to article

EVillageProwler

Not even the skeptics and bashers can fairly claim that the article promotes coins which Pinnacle typically has for sale.

Oh, geez. Here come the fireworks!

Seriously, though, I haven't read the article. But, Pinnacle is a reputable firm with significant market standing. If you do read the article, I suggest you do so with an open mind. Critique and/or criticize it if you wish, but try to do so constructively and with sincerity of intention.

EVP

ss350camaro

How current is the article? None of the pictures show up.

kieferscoins

The pics work for me.

Cameron Kiefer

coinguy1

Steve, you sound as if you are speaking from personal experience.

Doug, it's a new article, and the images show when I click on the link.

ss350camaro

I get a broken link icon on each frame.

If i right click and choose view picture i get

"Not Found
The requested URL /articles/image001.jpg was not found on this server."

Oh well, doesn't matter. My main reason for asking was to determine the time frame of the article. (missing pics might mean an old article with removed pics to create space on a server for newer "stuff")

ss350camaro

<< <i> Not even the skeptics and bashers can fairly claim that the article promotes coins which Pinnacle typically has for sale. >>



I agree Mark. I see this as an informational article with examples shown to promote education.

dpoole

This is very well done.

Hate it when Pinnacle gives out secrets.

Crazy4Coins

When is part two coming out?

coinbuf

An interesting article and some good reading, but I have to dissagree with one statement. <<We have attempted to list a nice cross section of these; focusing on collector-oriented issues that are in the price range of most individuals.>>

I do not really think that most individuals have around 2K to 4K (the range cited) to spend everyday. At least I don't.

Chris

kryptonitecomics

<< <i>An interesting article and some good reading, but I have to dissagree with one statement. <<We have attempted to list a nice cross section of these; focusing on collector-oriented issues that are in the price range of most individuals.>>

I do not really think that most individuals have around 2K to 4K (the range cited) to spend everyday. At least I don't.

Chris >>




I don't ever have that kind of change to spend

RYK

I do not really think that most individuals have around 2K to 4K (the range cited) to spend everyday. At least I don't.

I expect that the article is written primarily for Pinnacle customers. If you look at their inventory, coins start at about $1000 and go up from there. The median coin offering price is probably near $4000. Therefore, when they say "most individuals have $2000-4000 to spend on coins", when you consider they are talking to their customers about their customers, they are probably correct.

coinbuf

<<I expect that the article is written primarily for Pinnacle customers. If you look at their inventory, coins start at about $1000 and go up from there. The median coin offering price is probably near $4000. Therefore, when they say "most individuals have $2000-4000 to spend on coins", when you consider they are talking to their customers about their customers, they are probably correct. >>

That would explain why I've never bought any coins form them


Chris

WACoinGuy

Hey, I actually have 3 of the coins on the list: 1872 two cent, 1912-D nickel, and 1876 twenty cent. I've felt the 1872 2c and 1876 20c were undervalued, but I never thought of the 1912-D nickel that way (though my coin is only MS-64, which I guess is "not really scarce").

tradedollarnut

When I was a kid I loved the 1885 three cent nickel in MS ... I used to dream about cornering the market on that coin. That and the 1864 bronze proof IHC.

RYK

As usual, the Pinnacle article was well-written and timely, especially given the conversation that we had here yesterday about better date vs. generic date type coins. In Coinguy1's thread, the Saint was used as an example. Pinnacle's article offers similar comparisons between better date and generics (ie. 1875 vs. 1875-S 20c pieces). Before I state my counterpoint, I will disclose that I am a customer and friend of one of the principals of Pinnacle. If he is indeed the author, he has a large body of articles and references available and an excellent track record for predicitng what could/should increase in value.

1. Too many small coins (blech!)

2. Undervalued coins may stay undervalued for a long time (ie. forever), or they may become fully valued over time. Unlike investing in stocks, I will generally gravitate toward what is popular.

3. As I expressed in the other thread, as a type collector, I find it more numismatically fulfilling to purchase the more scarce date (read: undervalued) compared to the generic, but I am not sure that one is financially better off for doing so. When we talk about what is "undervalued", we are obviously talking about the price we pay for "A" as compared to "B", so to me it is a financial issue, at least as much as a numismatic issue.

DaveG

I'm just glad the article doesn't really mention any of the coins I collect!

Baley

Looking forward to part 2; I tend to prefer larger coins.

cosmicdebris

Not Found
The requested URL /articles/image001.jpg was not found on this server.

RGL

Hey ... one (barely) 20th Century issue made the list -- the 1912-D Liberty Five-Cents -- what's up with that?

Baley

Hey ... one (barely) 20th Century issue made the list -- the 1912-D Liberty Five-Cents -- what's up with that?

new coins are easy/overvalued, apparently

jdimmick

I think there is some excellent undervalued examples on that list. In fact, One of them I am keeping a watch out for. The only thing I partially disagree with, is thier position that, they most likely will advance in price at somepoint. And that is because some are not the most popular series to collect. Even though some of those coins are extremely tough to locate, if thier are not enough buyers to create the strong demand needed to raise the price levels, then they will stay at realatively the same price even though tough to locate?

Elcontador

J Dimmick makes a good point. I have many coins that are much more scarce than the 09S VDB and there's no way they'll ever bring the same price for the same grade.

Re the 12 D Nickel: From what I've seen of the 1911 and 1912 Unc. Nickels (all mints), the strike is usually poor. Miss Liberty's hair lacks detail, count on a number of soft stars and a soft lt. corn.
I know what an MS 66 Liberty Nickel should look like, and these coins generally don't have that look.

Proof Half Cents generally seem to be in the realm of a few collectors. Yes, they're rare enough, and certainly beautiful enough. But prices haven't moved on them in quite awhile, I think because few people collect them.

When it comes to collecting copper, the "big $ folks" who want to complete a series go either for IHCs or earlier date Lincoln cents.

morgannut2

I had given a lot of thought to these types of coins. My explanation, as dumb as it may seem, is that these non-gold coins which seem undervalued almost always are small in size. By the time collectors are sophisticated enough and old enough to appreciate these issues, their eyesight isn't what it used to be. This plus the fact that many series were not in circulation in our lifetimes sort of leaves them by the wayside as opposed to big coins, and dates at the extreems (very early and current sets).

saintguru

Barber dimes....

RYK

1862-S dimes...

RYK

Interesting and timely article from the good folks at Pinnacle. TTT for the Sunday set.

Trime

Coinguy1 and other guys.
I thought this first segment in a planned series was a terrific web based informative article.
I sent a message to congratulate them and learned that Doug Winter was the author.