I wish to define what an "ULTRA" rarity is, and a "MONSTER" rarity!!!

lloydmincy

I always hear the TPG's saying the coin is an Ultra rarity, or Monster, and even Laura calls certain coins Monster rarities. As a lowly respected coin forum member, I wish to provide the definition from my own opinions, and no sources. (Don't confuse the term "monster rarity" with "monster coin". This is based on rarity, not looks):

I guess we could define the coin in the two catagories by its rarity, such as R5 or R8, but I am going to separate them according to VALUES:

Any editing to my two-minute analysis is greatly appreciated:

I decided to class an ULTA RARITY as a coin that has a value between $150,000 and $750,000.
And the Monster Rarities to have a value at $750,000 and above. I thought of saying $,1000,000 or more, but lowered the standard until further feedback.

This may provide some confusion. For example, Tradedollarnut's (Bruce) 1870-S Dollar is considered a MONSTER, yet the 1870-S that sold at David Lawrence Richmond II (based on price realized and my parameters) is an ULTRA. There may very well be a very poor (I mean damaged, worn) 1870-S dollar that will not be a MONSTER or an ULTRA. So is my $$$ classing of the rarities flawed???

Same with the 1894-s Magnificant Dime. Some may say it is a monster rarity, no matter which one it is, just because of the date. Though some are over $750,000 easily, and some are possibly below $200,000. But there are currently NINE that are known, and worth more than say the J-361 aluminum pattern 1864 IHC, of which there are only 3 (R8)???

Has someone already come up with the definition, or can I patent this???


_____Lloyd's of London

roadrunner

There are a number of coins hitting the $150-250k range they imo are not technical "rarities" at all. And before this definition was posted I would have assumed an 1804 dollar was an ultra rarity. Monster rarity might be a superb condition coin that otherwise might only be worth $5-50K. Like a 1901-s 25c in MS67 or a bust dollar in MS66. An 1842 SD proof quarter (5 known) is an ultra rarity imo but not reach the dollar value suggested. Same for an 1853-0 NA half or 1873-cc NA 25c.

roadrunner

keets

please don't confuse dollar amounts with rarity. you should probably confuse dollar amounts with demand.

al h.

tradedollarnut

Monster rarity might be a superb condition coin that otherwise might only be worth $5-50K.

I gotta agree with this. Personally, I've never even heard the term used ... other than 'that coin's a monster', which is usually in the context of condition and not rarity.

So, in the context of my seated set, I would consider the 1870-S to be an ultra rarity [9 known] and I would consider the gem 1873-CC to be a monster [rare coin, tho not ultra rare, but conditionally a monster as it's one of a handful of uncs known and is the finest by 4 grades].

lloydmincy

Maybe I can't use dollar figures, but I wanted to. How about $250,000 to $750,000 as the ULTRA??? ALL the 1804 dollars would fall under my classification as MONSTER. Trying to tweak the flaws. Maybe I will not be going to the patent office after all...


keets. you're right. $ value does not have a lot to do with rarity. I thought about that too. Again, I did little research, and had zero sources!!!

tradedollarnut

Lloyd: the flaw in your definition is illustrated above. Both the 70-S and the 73-CC are 7 figure coins - but one is a monster and the other is an ultra rarity.

roadrunner

I like the old system better (i.e. R7, R8). But having few known is no indicator of value or demand. An ultra or monster rarity has few known (<20) and is in strong demand and brings a strong price....typically >$100,000. I know rarity when I see it

roadrunner

lloydmincy

I guess you can't really define it. But Bruce is close to how it should be I guess...with no dollar values attached to rarity. I agree a coin with 4 grades higher than second place, and considered "unique" in that particular grade, should be a MONSTER, and a coin with 9 or more available, shouldn't be a MONSTER. So much for the PRICE definition..

tradedollarnut

Perhaps a better way of looking at it is how much would the coin bring if it was in basal condition. An 1873-CC seated dollar in basal condition wouldn't bring that much - no more than 3 figures. An 1894-S dime in basal condition is easily a 6 figure coin - as is an 1804 dollar or an 1885 trade dollar.

This is the best way of separating the monsters from the ultra rarities.

tradedollarnut

So much for the PRICE definition

No - you were on the right track.... just the wrong end of the spectrum. Price is a combination of supply and demand and thus an integral part of the definition.

I'd define it something like this [today's dollars]:

An ultra rarity is one that is worth $100k or more in a basal state of the date [1913 Lib nickel, 1804 dollar, 1885 trade dollar, 1894-S dime, etc]
A classic rarity is one that is worth $50k or more in a basal state of the date [1838-O half, 1884 trade dollar, Strawberry leaf cent, etc]

A monster is just a coin that is so outstanding it is head and shoulders above most other examples of the date or type. Perhaps a monster rarity could be defined as a coin that is so outstanding in condition and rarity that it's worth more than $500,000 and yet doesn't meet the two thresholds above? Not sure on that one.

morgannut2

This is an interesting discussion. Price, and the supply/demand ratios it implies, is a current assessment of the adjective used with rarity. I'd prefer to use the term "Classic Rairity" for those coins that have an historical record of high demand and interest to the numismatic community. Ultra implies to me an extreemly rare/desireable coin regardless of condition, while the term monster is used to describe a coin's unique condition. Hence, a beautifully toned Oregon Commemorative or proof Lincoln Cent and like coins may be price/demand wise thought of as "monster" coins, but I am reluctant to apply the term "classic" to any denomination/coin that hasn't demonstrated long-term historical interest, demand and anomalous price within the numismatic community.

Coinosaurus

As long as we are defining terms, what is a "wannabee" rarity

tradedollarnut

One that knew how to grade?

RYK

what is a "wannabee" rarity

I will arbitrarily define a "wannabe rarity", as a coin that is genuinely rare, like my 1862-S dime, that nobody cares about.

Peaceman

I'm with Keets on this one.... There are very rare Peace $ VAM's out there that don't command $ 100......

coppercoins

Oh great...let's put specific dollar amounts on flowery sales-pitch terms.

I know of a number of items that are absolutely unique, only one known in the world, that are rarer than those flowery term half-million dollar coins...but because they won't sell for the six figure amounts, they don't deserve such terms? That's about the biggest load of BS I've seen here in a long time.

Dollar figures some people are willing to pay for stuff has little to do with rarity.

tradedollarnut

Dollar figures some people are willing to pay for stuff has little to do with rarity.

That's true, but the term "Ultra Rarity" has taken on a meaning ... and it does indeed have much to do with demand and thus price.

RGL

Rarity does not drive price, demand does ...

Baley

An Ultra Rarity is a coin with fewer than a dozen known examples in any condition.

A Monster Rarity is an Ultra Rarity that also enjoys extraordinary fame, popularity, demand, and therefore price.

Dahlonega

Paraphrased: I don't know how to define it but, I know it when I see it.

ER

Ultra Rarity = see Baley 's sig line or icon.

morgannut2

And a "Classic Monster Rarity" is an ultra rarity the has enjoyed fame, popularity, demand, and therefore price through a generation of knowledgeable collectors. An Au-58 1943 Cent in copper might qualify, whereas a population 1 1963 PR-69 Lincoln Cent might not stand the test of time.

coinkat

please don't confuse dollar amounts with rarity. you should probably confuse dollar amounts with demand.

Well said Keets... I couldn't agree more

Barry

To me, rarity is defined by the number of coins that exist or are thought to exist, which is objective. Grade has nothing to do with it, as rarity shouldn't be defined by an ever-changing opinion, always subjective.

Baley

Ultra Rarity = see Baley 's sig line or icon

... and one that illustrates the difference between ultra and monster rarity status.

There are fewer 1807 O.115 half dollars than there are 1913 Liberty nickels, 1804 dollars, 1885 trade dollars, or 1894-S dimes, or Brasher doubloons, to name a few very famous rarities.

However, it's not "worth" 7 figures, or even 6. Why? First, it's a rare die variety of a common date, and not a rare date in and of itself. Second, it is just recently discovered, and more may turn up (a second piece is rumored to have surfaced this year) Third, it has no price history, no popular media coverage, no "lore." And Fourth, the demand for the rarest die varieties of the draped bust halves is limited to maybe a dozen very advanced collectors of the series, while just about any collector wealthy enough to afford it would want one of the above "trophy" coins.

Nysoto

Since Baley's 1807 O.115 is one of the rarest coins around (2 known), it should be classified as a classic ultra monster rarity

Russ

Baley's coin achieves a status higher than either "monster" or "ultra". Because of what he paid for it, it is a "YOU SUCK" rarity. That trumps all else.

Russ, NCNE

coinkat

What about the 1896-o, 1900-o and 1902-o micro o Morgans in AU? These are quite rare and currently are quite affordable in comparison to other rarities... BTW, no Morgan set is complete without these.