POLL: For moderns collectors, do you make them or buy them?
Russ
Posts: 48,514 ✭✭✭
I like to make them. But, it's not that I have anything against buying them - I'm just poor. What about the other modern registry set participants? Do you buy or make?
Russ, NCNE
Russ, NCNE
0
Comments
Joe
So, I can make a reasonable argument for #1, #2, and #3.
I vote for the wienies but the wienies without money. I think a real #1 registry set should be made though.
Millertime
Complete Dime Set
<< <i>I've bought some slabs off of ebay that have cost less than the grading fees. >>
That's one of the nice things about the proof Kennedy set. Much of the series can be had in PR69DCAM for dirt cheap.
Russ, NCNE
hey Robert
if you collected Moderns and paid attention to what you were doing, you would lose most of the concern. knowledge is always the key that unlocks the door.
al h.
Okay, Al, here's one back at you:
I would be concerned about the stability of the value of high-grade Morgans that are conditionally rare and otherwise common. Feel free to substitute any series for "Morgans".
Russ, NCNE
I will say that If I put together a set of PCGS PR69 DCAM Kennedys and A knowledgeable guy like Russ did and they both wnet to auction his would sell for three times or more than mine!
Tbig
The "Classic coin only" submitters are really missing the boat. These post 1963 coins are fun and profitable to submit.......that is if you have the knowledge and grading skills to do so.
Sorry but, numismatics is about more than just grading Morgan Dollars.
I say this not to be difficult , but there are those that would say the modern era dates to the early 1830s and "Across the Pond", I imagine it would be even earlier.
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
<< <i>I like to make them. But, it's not that I have anything against buying them - I'm just poor. What about the other modern registry set participants? Do you buy or make?
Russ, NCNE >>
Ditto that.
We'll use our hands and hearts and if we must we'll use our heads.
<< <i>I did not vote because I do not think there is a concensus as to what constitutes Modern Coinage... >>
Just think...sometime in the distant future todays "modern coinage" will shift into the classic catagory.
Yes and no. One of the primary attributes that attracts me to coins, as I have said ad nauseum, is rarity. Coins in the pre-Civil War era were not minted or saved in nearly the number that they are now, respectively. There is now, and will always be, more 1964 Kennedys than 1948 Franklins and more 1948 Franklins than 1916 Walkers, and so on back through time.
Another question...why is that I always get sucked into these modern vs. classics themed threads?
<< <i>Another question...why is that I always get sucked into these modern vs. classics themed threads? >>
This is not a modern versus classic themed thread.
Russ, NCNE
<< <i>Russ, I know this issue has been debated and will continue to be debated until Hell freezes over, so just pick a year... 1964? >>
I believe the modern era began in 1948 when Miss Liberty disappeared from the last coin.
Russ, NCNE
perfectstrike
<< <i>I spend 'em.
Roger that.
-YN Currently Collecting & Researching Colonial World Coins, Especially Spanish Coins, With a Great Interest in WWII Militaria.
My Ebay!
<< <i>
Yes and no. One of the primary attributes that attracts me to coins, as I have said ad nauseum, is rarity. Coins in the pre-Civil War era were not minted or saved in nearly the number that they are now, respectively. There is now, and will always be, more 1964 Kennedys than 1948 Franklins and more 1948 Franklins than 1916 Walkers, and so on back through time.
Another question...why is that I always get sucked into these modern vs. classics themed threads?
ROFL.
I like rarity whether it's old or new. I also like beautiful high grade coins whether they're old or new.
...actually I like a lot of other coins too.
The Ludlow Brilliant Collection (1938-64)
When you made one of the choices "moderns suck" you made it into a classics vs. modern thread.
Survival rate has nothing to do with a coin being a classic or modern, its all about the date the coin was minted.
Perhaps survival rate does not, but neither does the time it was minted.
I also like beautiful high grade coins whether they're old or new.
Oh yeah, Cladking. Well, I only like ugly coins--so there!
<< <i>When you made one of the choices "moderns suck" you made it into a classics vs. modern thread. >>
That's what I get for being accommodating.
Russ, NCNE
I disagree with 1948... not that it matters. The design is not as significant as the minting process and how that has changed.
For the poll, 1948 sounds fine. I have made very few and bought even less. However, I have raw examples that are begging to go on vacation to Newport Beach
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
I both make them and buy them and it all depends on the best value involved in doing so, it has nothing to do with having money or not having money.
I also don't break down US coinage the way most people seem to.
For me, post 64 is modern, ie; when we stopped putting precious metal into our business strike coinage. No I'm not going to split hairs over the few 40% silver coins that were produced or the fact that recent moderns are again done in gold, silver and platinum. The recent coinage is done simply for profit per US mint protocol.
1934 to 1964 is what I call the Golden age or Middle age and 1933 and previous is Classic to me. Again, this does relate to precious metals, in this case gold and in the US Mint protocals. The only two coins I put into classic from outside that era are last two Peace dollars.
That's my point of view on the subject and I'm sticking to it!
John Marnard Keynes, The Economic Consequences of the Peace, 1920, page 235ff
$1200 for a 1964 Kennedy Half?
You are not poor, you're rusing us Russ.
heh heh
Looking for uncirculated Indian Heads and PRS electric guitars
<< <i>"I'm poor"
$1200 for a 1964 Kennedy Half?
You are not poor, you're rusing us Russ.
heh heh >>
I've never paid anywhere near that kind of money for a coin.
Russ, NCNE
BTW Russ I didn't answer the poll I don't think I fit in any of those groups.
hey Robert
same answer for _____________.(substitute series) if you collected _____________(substitute series) and paid attention to what you were doing, you would lose most of the concern. knowledge is always the key that unlocks the door. for most any series and for most any key dates or high grade common dates within that series, i think an educated collector is better able to make decisions about what's safe and what's risky, what should hold value and what is more likely to slide back. Morgans are always a good example---i think it's true and not a coincidence that you chose them---and the large hoard from Las Vegas last year or the Gold salvage recoveries of the past several years show why there is risk with all coins for a novice, an investor or a collector who isn't paying attention.
al h.
Coin Junkie
cameoproofcoins.com
<< "I'm poor"
$1200 for a 1964 Kennedy Half?
You are not poor, you're rusing us Russ.
heh heh >>
I've never paid anywhere near that kind of money for a coin.
Russ, NCNE
so, what gives?? was this auction some kind of a halucinatory experience flashback from the 60's??
inquiring minds want to know!!
al h.
al h.
<< <i>so, what gives?? was this auction some kind of a halucinatory experience flashback from the 60's?? >>
I probably should have said I've never paid that kind of money for a coin for my own collection. I've bought several more expensive ones for quick flips.
Russ, NCNE
Just a weiner
In Laurel
MD
Just a fist full of Dollars
Sleep well tonight for the 82nd Airborne Division is on point for the nation.
AIRBORNE!
But this weanie can still whup any of you so don't try to make anything of it.