An illustration of just how critical the demand side of the equation is to coin values.
Russ
Posts: 48,514 ✭✭✭
1965 PCGS MS67DCAM SMS Jefferson Nickel - $3630.
In DCAM, this coin has a total population of only 14 pieces, at any grade level. It has also been a long time since one has been made.
If this were an SMS Kennedy with the same population profile, it would have easily realized over $10,000. If it were an SMS Lincoln, the sky would have been the limit.
If Jeffersons ever heat up, that buyer is going to be looking like a genius.
Note: You modern bashers can save the ignorant comments about the "millions" that were minted. It just shows those who know anything about SMS coins how clueless you are.
Russ, NCNE
In DCAM, this coin has a total population of only 14 pieces, at any grade level. It has also been a long time since one has been made.
If this were an SMS Kennedy with the same population profile, it would have easily realized over $10,000. If it were an SMS Lincoln, the sky would have been the limit.
If Jeffersons ever heat up, that buyer is going to be looking like a genius.
Note: You modern bashers can save the ignorant comments about the "millions" that were minted. It just shows those who know anything about SMS coins how clueless you are.
Russ, NCNE
0
Comments
<< <i>Note: You modern bashers can save the ignorant comments about the "millions" that were minted. It just shows those who know anything about SMS coins how clueless you are. >>
Okay, everyone, put down the knives and guns.
Can't you feel the love in this forum? It's just small bits of metal they we all like to chase.
Even though Don has a hell of a lot more experience with these than I do, I'm going to have to disagree with my esteemed colleague in that I think he's being a bit too conservative.
Russ, NCNE
I was close.
and it sets us apart from practitioners and consultants. Gregor
<< <i>If Jeffersons ever heat up, that buyer is going to be looking like a genius. >>
And if they don't "heat up" what's he gonig to look like?
The real issue here is not necessarily the collector base in Jeffs as it is the collector base for proof/sms Jeffs. If most of the action is in business strikes, this segment could languish.
CG
it might also be a case of bids running low due to the coin itself being perceived as a high end MS66DCAM. the trouble with the Jefferson SMS issues, particularly 1965's, is the type of hazed or occluded fields like what the TeleTrade coin exhibits, mainly near the rim. there's usually nothing that can be done about that, it seems to be a striking anomaly or a result of the coins being in the mint cello as opposed to the later year in the hard paks. i currently have a rock solid raw DCAM 1965-----my opinion, of course-----and it has haze in the lettering that means it'll go to NCS for help; PCGS is just too hard on that and NGC not much more lenient. the Kennedys seem to be easier to "help" and also have the added benefit of not suffering from the same type of haze problem to begin with, something the PCGS pops for both issues seem to show. the Kennedys have been graded in CAM/DCAM approximately 2-1.
with all that said, i don't see how anyone can go wrong purchasing any denomination 1965 SMS issue in true DCAM at a reasonable price. the pops will prove stable in the long run which means the prices have nowhere to go but up unless demand drops. as i see it, the demand isn't even strong now, so it also has nowhere to go but up.
just my opinion of course.
al h.
But Russ, that's not a real coin auction, it's Teletrade.
<< <i>it might also be a case of bids running low due to the coin itself being perceived as a high end MS66DCAM. >>
That couldn't be the case because, afterall, moderns only bring the money they do because of registry mania and we all know that registry participants only care about the points and not the quality of the coin.
Russ, NCNE
I own a legitimately rare seated dime with a total PCGS population of 10, and mine is in the mid-range of the graded specimens. It's worth about a third of the SMS nickel you profiled. There may be 50 (WAG) serious Jefferson/SMS collectors for every serious seated dime collector and so long as this is the case, the Jefferson nickel will always be worth considerably more.
There, problem solved.
Camelot
<< <i>I own a legitimately rare seated dime with a total PCGS population of 10, and mine is in the mid-range of the graded specimens. >>
And, if the demand side of the equation for that coin / series heats up, you also will end up looking like a genius.
Russ, NCNE
One thing that needs to be considered is the base of collectors who have a raw one (like Keets) and who are not playing in the registry. Will their specimen DCAM at PCGS? They might not be certain but it might be good enough for them as is (ie. sans slab). But one day some of those might get sent in and find their way to the market.
CG
My experience as an outsider suggests that there is much greater demand in the high grade modern market than I would have intuitively expected. While I am not attracted to it (ie. My Position on Moderns), I no longer fight it. Now, if I could only find that pesky 82-D quarter in PCGS MS-67, I will bet that I could coax a cup of coffee out of Keets.
<< <i>The price illustrates how important the supply side is. If there were more than 14 DCAMs made what would it have sold for? If two or three more are coaxed out of the woodwork by this price, where will the price go in the near term? >>
Again, that depends on demand. The pop for the 1967 SMS Kennedy in MS67DCAM has grown about 40% over the last couple years. It brings the same today as it did two years ago.
As far as coaxing these out of the woodwork, good luck. There are two problems with that. One is that the price this coin sold for is nothing new - it is at historical norms. Since none have been coaxed out for quite some time, one can assume that either a) $3500 isn't enough incentive to search for them or, b) Not very damned many exist.
Russ, NCNE
<< <i>The only element you neglected to mention, is the Registry effect. If there was no Registry competition would the prices for these coins be so high? >>
Actually, I did mention it.
Russ, NCNE
CG
1. I am very glad that I only collect Jefferson Proof/MS coins raw.
2. I wonder if back in the 1800's and before, there were the same kind of dialogs about "they are only Modern coins"?????
Let's use the example of a high-grade Kennedy half dollar...
* A very high-grade Kennedy half is one heck of a nice, flashy coin; but it is technically better than others that look very much as flashy but under the right light has something that subjectively takes it out of a higher grade range.
* There are millions and millions of very flashy, nice looking Kennedy halves (of every year); some are better to look at under various degrees and angles of light (63....64....65....???)
* There are probably a large number of sets that have yet to be broken up (maybe many thousands) that have yet to attempt a grade at a TPGS.
* There could be some mis-graded (undergraded) coins in slabs already out there.
* These half dollars are (figuratively speaking) still in our pocket change today. They are today's money, not yesteryear's, and ubiquitous to anyone alive today.
Us "classic" guys sometimes don't get any respect from these type of collectors because they like to collect what's out there and what they see in today's money supply. Hence, the reason odd denomination coins seem so undervalued (even though an efficient market says they're not) because they are totally outside the average, U.S. citizen's mind and they wouldn't normally think of collecting something they've never seen nor heard of.
You're right, it's all about supply and demand. It's just kind of funny that there's enough people chasing after this modern cr... (I won't say it) that was minted in the gajillions when there's so much other history to go after that so much scarcer and in some cases can be had for a lot less money.
Just as an example, take proof and business strike post-1862 three-cent silver pieces. In each of those years, probably only about 10% of the original mintage is left (after all the meltings, only hundreds potential exist for most of these issues) and only hundreds of any given year exist of them in proof. Yet, for a few thousand dollars you could own one of the lowest population, beautiful pieces with few, if any, better in existence for any given year.
It's just mind-blowing to someone like myself to see someone chase after something, that is essentially still in circulation today, and pay thousands for it when there's stuff a lot scarcer (even rare), unusual, and beautiful out there for the taking for sometimes a lot less money!
That said...I'm learning to respect some of this modern stuff a bit more (I still won't chase after it), but it's interesting all the same.
Bruce
<< <i>Just as an example, take proof and business strike post-1862 three-cent silver pieces. In each of those years, probably only about 10% of the original mintage is left (after all the meltings, only hundreds potential exist for most of these issues) and only hundreds of any given year exist of them in proof. Yet, for a few thousand dollars you could own one of the lowest population, beautiful pieces with few, if any, better in existence for any given year. >>
Bad example. They will never see high demand because you can't see the damned things!
Russ, NCNE
<< <i>1965 PCGS MS67DCAM SMS Jefferson Nickel - $3630.
In DCAM, this coin has a total population of only 14 pieces, at any grade level. It has also been a long time since one has been made.
If this were an SMS Kennedy with the same population profile, it would have easily realized over $10,000. If it were an SMS Lincoln, the sky would have been the limit.
If Jeffersons ever heat up, that buyer is going to be looking like a genius.
Note: You modern bashers can save the ignorant comments about the "millions" that were minted. It just shows those who know anything about SMS coins how clueless you are.
Russ, NCNE >>
<< <i>1965 PCGS MS67DCAM SMS Jefferson Nickel - $3630.
If Jeffersons ever heat up, that buyer is going to be looking like a genius.
Note: You modern bashers can save the ignorant comments about the "millions" that were minted. It just shows those who know anything about SMS coins how clueless you are.
Russ, NCNE >>
Howdy Russ
Not IF but WHEN Jeffersons heat up
On the moderns...
I can't believe some of these crazy prices for all of these common pieces of metal. Modern stuff won't ever REALLY be worth anything...I mean who in their right mind would collect those Kennedy Halves.
Shadow...
<< <i>$3,630 for a 1965 nickel? A little stiff, don't you think? >>
I suppose that one who doesn't understand the rarity of deep cameo 1965 SMS Jeffersons might consider the price to be a little stiff.
Russ, NCNE
<< <i>I'd love to walk up to a dealer at a show and offer him/her that coin at $3,630 and see what he/she says. >>
hehe
<< <i>I understand the rarity of DCAM Jeffersons all too well. In fact, you quoted numbers earlier. I am not impressed. >>
Ah, so in your case it's not ignorance, but rather elitism.
Russ, NCNE
it's about a $250 to $275 coin, it aint no real dcam. suckers are buying holders for their ego's
IDIOTS !
ya'll will soon see what a snow white 65sms's really look like. like 69-s snow blast lookalikes
now those coins will be worth 3500+
you folks are burying yourselves,know your cameos before laying down suicide money
out of the holder it may, i say MAY fetch 150 to 200
<< <i>ya'll will soon see what a snow white 65sms's really look like. >>
Sure we will.
Russ, NCNE
<< <i>
Let's use the example of a high-grade Kennedy half dollar...
* A very high-grade Kennedy half is one heck of a nice, flashy coin; but it is technically better than others that look very much as flashy but under the right light has something that subjectively takes it out of a higher grade range. >>
There are millions of nice flashy Kennedy half dollars. In fact the vast majority
of all the Kennedys that still exist in collections and rolls are very flashy. But
this isn't what most modern collectors are looking for in coins. They are looking
for coins that are well struck and mark free. You'll find a great deal of variation
in both these parameters from the finest to the worst.
<< <i>
* There are probably a large number of sets that have yet to be broken up (maybe many thousands) that have yet to attempt a grade at a TPGS. >>
The vast majority of mint sets have already been destroyed (or checked). While
pops will continue to grow there is a limit to high far and how fast.
<< <i>
* There could be some mis-graded (undergraded) coins in slabs already out there. >>
There probably are, but this applies to all coins.
<< <i>
* These half dollars are (figuratively speaking) still in our pocket change today. They are today's money, not yesteryear's, and ubiquitous to anyone alive today. >>
Check your change for 1965 nickels. Very early on you'll discover they are far more
difficult than you think. After you do locate some you'll see that they are almost always
very poorly made from very poor dies and are very worn down with at least some mi-
nor damage. These do not look like a DCam.
<< <i>
You're right, it's all about supply and demand. It's just kind of funny that there's enough people chasing after this modern cr... (I won't say it) that was minted in the gajillions when there's so much other history to go after that so much scarcer and in some cases can be had for a lot less money. >>
Where the scarcity is equal the old coin almost always sells for much more than the
modern. The twenty 1804 dollars each sells for more than all the high grade '72 tI's
put together.
>>
You have not responded to my inquiry as to the pop in CAM. The PCGS price guide shows that as a $230 coin. How much more eye appeal does one get for an additional $3,000? Not much I would suppose if you have a high end CAM compared to a just made it DCAM. The higher the price of the DCAM the more coins will be submitted shooting for the DCAM. Since there is such a big jump in price, the services will continue to be really tight on putting a coin into a DCAM holder--which will grow the pops of very high end CAMS. The availability of high end CAMs at moderate prices will contine to affect the price of DCAMs.
CG
<< <i>From the point of view of an early type collector, the amount of speculation that is going on with modern cameos is just outright scary. $3,630 for a 1965 nickel? A little stiff, don't you think? I'd love to walk up to a dealer at a show and offer him/her that coin at $3,630 and see what he/she says. >>
There is not much apparent speculation in moderns. One simply doesn't see
the signs of promotion and speculation in these areas. It might be argued
that there is speculation in all high grade coins and that moderns are not exempt.
This is a very small niche market. You don't offer Morgans to a token and medals
dealer so don't offer moderns to the typical coin show dealer or shop owner.
<< <i>One simply doesn't see the signs of promotion and speculation in these areas >>
Sure you do. Its called the registry and the pops. There are plenty of dealers out there, including the auction houses, touting coins as "registry" quality and quoting pops for high grade moderns. Now whether any of these dealers will step up to the plate and buy these for inventory at anything near the price guide and auction prices, I don't know--that's the question being raised by those who question the depth of the market.
The real question is whether the scarcity of the DCAM makes them the subject of a counter promotion. Since the DCAMs are scarce, the dealers are going to have CAMs not DCAMs in stock and will push those on their clients, saying that its not worth the extra money for the DCAM. So there actually may have a counter vailing effect on price.
CG
<< <i>You have not responded to my inquiry as to the pop in CAM. >>
With the exception of Lincolns, the cameo pops for SMS coins are actually pretty high relative to the DCAM population. This is particularly so in the case of the Kennedy Half, where cameo examples are plentiful for all three years. Yet, that fact has had no negative impact on the value of the high grade deep cameo coins.
Again, it's all about demand.
Russ, NCNE
<< <i>Yet, that fact has had no negative impact on the value of the high grade deep cameo coins. >>
That cannot be true. Is there no demand at all for high grade CAMs? Every high grade CAM sold represents a high grade DCAM that might have sold had the buyer not opted for the CAM instead.
CG
<< <i><< Yet, that fact has had no negative impact on the value of the high grade deep cameo coins. >>
That cannot be true. >>
The market clearly says it is true.
<< <i>Is there no demand at all for high grade CAMs? >>
Some, but relative to demand for DCAMs, seemingly low. For example, a 1965 SMS Kennedy in MS67CAM is about a $350 coin. A 1965 SMS Kennedy in MS67DCAM is about an $8000 coin. There are about 80 of the first graded, and 8 of the second.
Russ, NCNE
The 1965 SMS Jefferson has a pop of 31 in MS67CAM. It's about a $175 coin, these days (although I've seen as high as $250 and as low as $110).
The 1965 SMS Kennedy has a pop of 92 in MS67CAM, (seems it's gone up since last time I checked), yet it consistently brings $350. Nearly three times the pop, and approximately double the market value.
Demand.
Edited to add: The total population for cameo 1965 SMS Jeffersons in all grades is 196, for the Kennedy it's 341. In either cameo or deep cameo, the Jefferson is a much tougher coin, yet brings markedly less money.
Russ, NCNE
<< <i>The market clearly says it is true >>
The laws of economics say it is not true. The forces at work here are the elasiticity of demand and the availability of substitutes. If the price of a DCAM dropped to the price of a CAM which would buyers opt for? The DCAM no doubt. But current prices stem demand and many collectors opt for a CAM instead at the lower price.
Now in order for that not to be the case, the CAM could not be a price based substitute for a DCAM. In other words, you would have to have a market in which CAM collectors would not accept a DCAM at a CAM price, and those who yearn for a DCAM but can't afford one would not acquire a CAM for their set.
Now it might be that there are some DCAM collectors who will not accept a CAM and will pay the full freight for the DCAM. And there may be some folks who have decided that if they cannot afford DCAMs they will not collect this series at all. And there may be some who cannot afford to pay a penny more than the current price of a CAM. But there are bound to be many collectors who simply are not willing to pay the extra price for a DCAM though they could if they had to.
S long as anyone is buying a CAM because they do not wish to pay the price for the DCAM, the pop of CAMs has an affect on the price of DCAMs.
CG
Edited to add a missing but important "not"
<< <i><< The market clearly says it is true >>
The laws of economics say it is not true. >>
I just realized what the problem is. When I said the number of cameo graded examples has not negatively impacted the value of high grade DCAM examples, I was referring to the fact that the latter have maintained their value while the population and availability of cameos has continued to rise.
From a fundamental economics standpoint, of course a high pop of nice cameo examples will keep the price of DCAMs in check but, thus far, it has not caused them to drop.
That's a side argument anyway, as the premise of this thread was a comparison of the difference in demand between coin series and how that demand effects market values.
Russ, NCNE
Sure we will.
you damn straight bubba
I'm curious why doop keeps threatening forum members with future cameos that are going to change the market and destroy certain collectors..... and why does he call others "bubba"?......
<< <i>I'm curious why doop keeps threatening forum members with future cameos that are going to change the market and destroy certain collectors..... >>
He's been babbling the same thing for a couple years now.
Russ, NCNE
For me, I looked closely at the picture of the PCGS 1956 MS67DCAM nickel that sold at auction for over $3,000.00 linked in Russ's opening post. Looking at it caused me to dig out my very best raw 1965 SMS nickel [which I cut out of a 1965 SMS set I bought for $10.00 a few years ago] and compare it to the $3,000.00 plus coin.
If the picture accurately shows the coin as it would look "in hand" and if it is truely a DCAM, then I am compelled to say CHA CHINGGGGGGGGGGGGG, since my own raw coin has the same, if not better mirrors and frost [Don't you just love cherrypicking?].
Guess I should submit mine to PCGS and cause the DCAM pops to increase from 14 to 15; and then solicit bids on my coin. I would definitely consider selling it for $3,000.00+. At $3,000.00 I think the rate of return on my $10.00 investment would be 30,000%. It would be even higher if I deduct from the $10.00 investment the extra 86 cents [half, quarter, dime and cent] in pocket change I obtained from the rest of the 1965 SMS set.
<< <i>
<< <i>One simply doesn't see the signs of promotion and speculation in these areas >>
Sure you do. Its called the registry and the pops. There are plenty of dealers out there, including the auction houses, touting coins as "registry" quality and quoting pops for high grade moderns. Now whether any of these dealers will step up to the plate and buy these for inventory at anything near the price guide and auction prices, I don't know--that's the question being raised by those who question the depth of the market.
CG >>
Calling a coin registry quality is merely defining it not hyping it. One doesn't need to
call the finest 1804 dollar registry quality because there are few collectors in the reg-
istry for these coins. The market for moderns is very thin at higher prices and many of
the collectors are relatively new. Many of the buyers for these do have registry sets
or intentions to have one in the future. Identifying coins that are near the top of the
pops might be helpful to some prospective buyers.
As has been discussed many times, there are dealers who buy moderns. There are
some moderns with little more spread than classics. Again, it is supply and demand
and the dynamics of these markets is much different than the more mature markets.
Most of these markets are only a few years old and none exceed twenty years.
Ah-ha! Finally, someone who collects them admitted that moderns are pocket change.
<< <i>Ah-ha! Finally, someone who collects them admitted that moderns are pocket change. >>
Hell, I have a couple of proof Frankies and a proof Kennedy in my pocket right now.
Russ, NCNE
All I know is that I've looked at an average of 100 SMS sets a month for the last 4 years (approximately 50,000 coins), and I'm a piker. PCGS has graded a TOTAL of 14,381 SMS coins. They're REAL pikers.
and it sets us apart from practitioners and consultants. Gregor
To get nickel specific, the metal is the hardest of any circulation coin. It is hard to strike up, wears the dies out fastest, so forth. And, nickel simply does not produce the kind of "mirrors" and frost you find on the 40-percent silver JFKs. Yet, PCGS seems fond of holding the SMS to darn near the same standards of regular proof coinage, particularly for DCAMs. And, nickels get no break for not producting the same frost and fields of its silver counterpart(s). For a SMS to score DCAM it darn near has to walk on water. Add a 1965 to the equation and you are in rarified air. PCGS is darn tough on DCAMs for SMS coins. I can show you a ton of CAMs most collectors would call DCAM, but they are not, typically coming up short on "mirrored" fields and needed contrast. I have seen and bought more SMS sets than I care to admit, and found lots of CAMs, but still have only scored two DCAMs, both MS-66 and both 1967, both the Jeff and JFK. I don't work as hard as Russ. Credit where it is due to the SMS DCAMs...
How about a little respect?
The Ludlow Brilliant Collection (1938-64)
Send it in, and tell us the results you received!
Are they "pocket change"? YES.
Are they conditonally rare? YES.
Does that make them collectable to some?
YES.
End of story.
Clearly the person spending all of the cash for this coin was into near-perfection. This thread seems to bash the basis of why people collect coins, their own reasoning is in question for some strange reason
Btw, Cladking, I think it was you who said the 1965 Nickels were rarer in good conditions and I never really thought about it, but the majority of them that I find in circulation are 64s, not 65s, thanks for pointing that out
-Daniel
-Aristotle
Dum loquimur fugerit invida aetas. Carpe diem quam minimum credula postero.
-Horace