<< <i>Mostly what's wrong with moderns for most older collectors is that they have a strongly negative emotional reaction. A lot of we older collectors simply never got over what was done to us in the mid-'60's and to the coin market. We haven't gotten over the debase- ment of small change. Most hate to see the money for "real" coins being siphoned off for "junk". >>
<< <i>Much congrats on your 2004 Seated America Half. 5063 mintage....twice as rare a Hawiian, struck on $650 worth of platinum not six dollars worth of silver and great looking but unworthy of ownership........according to the short sighted. >>
Thanks, Eric.
I think I got it for a "song", relatively speaking!
HORRIBLE INVESTMENT??? I won't EVEN go responding to that statement other than saying, Since 1996 moderns have made me NOTHING BUT HUGE PROFITS, with which I've been able to aquire coins I otherwise would never have owned! Plus I believe such low mintage moderns will CONTINUE to be great future investments.
You know, I have already said my piece so don't have a lot more to say but I do think that these modern coins have quite a following, ARE attractive (for you "classics" lovers, how about V nickels, or even the beloved [?] Barber series - now those to most are butt ugly!), reasonably priced, scarce though somewhat available.
The fact that "major" dealers do not make a secondary market makes my heart glad; here are coins for the average person, and if chosen well do well. I certainly hope that they do not take them to any of the dealers that do not specialize in these and do sell them in a proper forum.
BTW, I just sold to a friend the 20th Anniv. SAEs in OGP for 300 as a favor to him and could have gotten more on the open market. This paid for the other two sets I got and still got him a good deal. This would be a perfect example of what we have been trying to say.
Love that Milled British (1830-1960) Well, just Love coins, period.
<< <i>I know I am probably going to get yelled at for this question but why does it seem like whenever someone speaks of a modern coin some people here act as though modern coins are just the most aweful thing to ever happen? Can someone enlighten me? >>
In my opinion, there is absolutely nothing wrong with moderns or the collecting of them. They range from the common and not very valuable but enjoyable to collect to the extremely rare (and probably just as enjoyable to collect).
The problem is not with moderns, but rather is more general, with certain high grade moderns just being one very obvious exemplification of that problem, but certainly not the only. And that is with the reification of numerical grading (plus an implicit denial in any probabilistic or multivarient grading (even if this denial is explicitly denied!)) and the resultant absurd grade/price scheme and an overreliance on partial information from pop reports. Put simply, any coin with a grade of "x" has a non-trivial probability of being graded at "x+1" or "x-1" at the same service at a different time, or even counterfactually at the same time if different graders were used (or even the same ones!). And this means that a given "x" coin is not necessarily better than a given "x-1" coin, or necessarily worse than an "x+1" coin. And thus, any increase in value (on paper or "real") based on a micrograde difference (or an upgrade) has very little, or usually in fact nothing to do with the coin, but only the attached label. Once people realize just how much the label really means, the label-based prices are due for a steep crash; I consider it inevitable. Sure, there will be some profit taking in the near future, but someone will be the greater fool, the high grade crash will make the 1990 crash look mild.
(As an aside before I go on to pop reports, another thread today was posted on the purchase of label information for registry sets. This should not at all be surprising. In fact, it is the purest form of registry collecting. Face it, the labels are of similar rarity to coins with labels of the same grade attached. And the "sets" so obtained say as much about coins as the sets (with actual coins) where the only goal is to get those coins with labels that just happen to have high numbers on them.)
The other problem is that or use of pop reports are incomplete, and also has to do with the small differences in grade from one point to the next. And that is the explicit or implicit ignoring of underpopulation date. "Pop 3/0" might sound rare, and in fact, in some cases it actually will be a condition rarity. But when there are, say, 567 one point down (and countless others not submitted because to be the 568th will not increase the price enough to justify slabbing), the coin is not a condition rarity, and as the underpop increases, the probability that the 3 at top are in fact the three finest known decreases rapidly. And that just leads back to the first point above. In fact, I propose that condition rarity is better understood using descriptive grades, rather than numerical grades. Further, one should be highly skeptical of a statement of condition rarity when its rarity is very much decreased at the next descriptive grade down.
(As a final aside, I am not even denying that there will not be any moderns which will turn out to be condition rarities. I am sure there are some condition rarities in modern series. But the last two sentences of the last paragraph must be kept in mind when evaluating if a certain issue really does qualify as such. I do think the number of condition rarities among moderns is much much lower than is often stated by modern "apologists.")
Edit: hopefully made more clear that I am not talking about all moderns, nor am I not talking about any classics.
I agree with your reasoned analysis, but unfortunately, it doesn't address demand. As of today, PCGS has holdered 457 1969 proof Kennedy halves PR-69 Dcam. They're not exactly rare. They sell for $200 about as fast as you can holder them, and they DO get holdered. 1972-P type 2 Ikes aren't particularly uncommon. I purchased an OBW roll last year that contained two. One holdered MS63, and the other MS64. The pair sold for $700 with a $1 opening bid, no hype, and no reserve. There have been 700 type 2's holdered so far.
Developing theory is what we are meant to do as academic researchers and it sets us apart from practitioners and consultants. Gregor
Real modern coins are fine. No date rarities, due to their enormous mintages. Some condition rarities to be sure.
Modern Mint marvels are not in the same league as real coins. They are Mint medallions. Very, very pretty sometimes. Sometimes limited (by the MInt) in numbers, akin to limited firings of dinner plates. Perfectly collectible, but not the future classic coins some chirp about.
A guy at our local coin club did a little presentation on ultahigh denomination notes last night. It occurred to me that if the BEP ever wanted to provide the treasury with a nice pocket of seinorage all they would have to do is produce collector-direct $5K, $10K and $100K notes in limited numbers. There are people that would gobble them up at premium release prices and others on a secondary eBay-type market that would bid them to insane levels. These sorts of things are gimmicks created under the auspices of the US Treasury. Like ASEs, modern commems, ..., they just are not coins. It is almost laughable that people discuss the bullion crap as numismatic treasures.
The slab game is a problem for moderns and classics. Don't pay high prices for high mintage, low pop slab coins because the slab population is artificial and does nothing but go up.
As far as the value of key date moderns with design based mintages in the 2500-6000 range being a poor purchase thats just the some classic guys with perceptual barriers speaking. The same comments about "modern mint slugs and trinkets" were made by collectors about Pan Pac $50 gold in 1920. The moderns have design based rarity not seen since the late 1800s-1915 by and large. Gary Knaus did some published research on the price behavior of coinage specifically classics recently that showed cleary its the keys that drive set values. This is true for moderns and classics.
The key date classics have had 75+ years to reach price maturity and are not affordable to the typical collector. Equally importantly key date prices are driven by collector base growth. The moderns have not only affordable key dates but the fastest growing collector base. Our coins have design based rarity and thats what the mint is training the new generation of collectors to pursue.
The establishment always misses the big opportunities. Be thankful that the guys with large dollars don't see the need to pick up modern design based rare coins with mintages in the 2000-6000 range whos collector bases are growing rapidly.
"Perfectly collectible, but not the future classic coins some chirp about." Please bring forth some data that demonstates that todays 2000-6000 mintage design based moderns will not be "classics" in time. There is no historical precedent for you to stand on. What is a "classic" tomorrow depends on how people collect tomorrow. How you collect today is a result of the long standing mint policy of very limited design change to discourage collecting otherwise know as "hoarding" of US issues. The mint has abandoned this almost static design policy and is openly training the public to collect by design. More specifically design with low mintages.
So you guys can run on about how modern design based rarity on a 100 year scale is never going to be worth holding but in 20 years when the old series you think so much of are collected by type like everything else we will see who is all wet. If the mint succeeds in producing a broad design oriented collector base the mint mark rare old semi keys will get killed.
The problem is not with moderns, but rather is more general, with moderns just being one very obvious exemplification of that problem. And that is with the reification of numerical grading (plus an implicit denial in any probabilistic or multivarient grading (even if this denial is explicitly denied!)) and the resultant absurd grade/price scheme and an overreliance on partial information from pop reports. Put simply, any coin with a grade of "x" has a non-trivial probability of being graded at "x+1" or "x-1" at the same service at a different time, or even counterfactually at the same time if different graders were used (or even the same ones!). And this means that a given "x" coin is not necessarily better than a given "x-1" coin, or necessarily worse than an "x+1" coin. And thus, any increase in value (on paper or "real") based on a micrograde difference (or an upgrade) has very little, or usually in fact nothing to do with the coin, but only the attached label. Once people realize just how much the label really means, the label-based prices are due for a steep crash; I consider it inevitable. Sure, there will be some profit taking in the near future, but someone will be the greater fool, the high grade crash will make the 1990 crash look mild.
The other problem is that or use of pop reports are incomplete, and also has to do with the small differences in grade from one point to the next. And that is the explicit or implicit ignoring of underpopulation date. "Pop 3/0" might sound rare, and in fact, in some cases it actually will be a condition rarity. But when there are, say, 567 one point down (and countless others not submitted because to be the 568th will not increase the price enough to justify slabbing), the coin is not a condition rarity, and as the underpop increases, the probability that the 3 at top are in fact the three finest known decreases rapidly. And that just leads back to the first point above. In fact, I propose that condition rarity is better understood using descriptive grades, rather than numerical grades. Further, one should be highly skeptical of a statement of condition rarity when its rarity is very much decreased at the next descriptive grade down.
(As a final aside, I am not even denying that there will not be any moderns which will turn out to be condition rarities. I am sure there are some condition rarities in modern series. But the last two sentences of the last paragraph must be kept in mind when evaluating if a certain issue really does qualify as such. I do think the number of condition rarities among moderns is much much lower than is often stated by modern "apologists.") >>
There were no grading companies before 1986 and still people collected moderns and classics. Why would the variability in grading affect only the moderns while it is the moderns which tend to be easier to grade?
While it's true that price tends to be more grade sensitive with moderns than it is for classics, why should moderns be more adversely affected than classics in the event that collectors no longer care about labels or grades? It would seem that there is an implied assumption that all or most modern collectors care primarily a- bout the assigned grade.
Just because a modern coin exists with a pop 3/0 and there are 567 in the next grade down, how does it follow that all moderns will collapse in price or all pop-top moderns are doomed?
There's no question that collectors are well advised to know something about the coins they collect. This goes double when paying significant premiums for "intangi- bles" like condition, toning, grade rarity, demand or any attribute which is depen- dent on the beliefs of yourself or other collectors. Obviously this applies to all coins and it's the collector who has to decide whether he is willing to accept the risk or even care about it.
I know if I paid a huge premium for a pop 3 (567 in undergrade), I'd be darn sure that the coin is properly graded at the least. But additionally, I'd have studied some of these coins raw and graded to decide if the premium were worth the cost. In ma- ny cases it's possible to find very attractive pieces raw and save not only the pre- mium but even the grading fees. Of course, the more easily you can find such pieces the riskier it is to pay a lot for a graded coin.
Modern coins and collectors really don't need an "apologist". If if they really did take the plunge that so many have so long predicted the coins and collectors still wouldn't need an apologist. There is a lot less hyping in the moderns than in the other coins so few individuals would need to apologize either. People have fun collecting all of the moderns and ideally they all know about the risks to which they are exposed. It is probable that there are still some of these markets that are at levels which can't be maintained in the long term but this applies to some of the classic markets as well.
Just as cladking said, if you are going to pay dearly for top pop modern coins, then you had better have a good idea as to the quality of such coins. It really doesn't take a tremendous amount of research on one's part, but it does take a willingness to search out these quality related aspects. Uncirculated State Quarters are a good case in point. The 1999 quarters at the programs beginning saw very low pops in the ms68 grade, but as roll after roll was searched, it was soon becomming obvious that high end examples COULD be found. Then the Mint Sets were issued and many 68's and even 69's were showing up. I personally sold a PCGS MS68 2002-D Ohio Quarter, that graded farther down the road could have received a 69. It was THAT good! I cannot remember the price paid, but I'd say the pop of a 68 would be MUCH higher by now. Now we have the matte finish coins in Mint Sets, and it becomes easier to get high grade examples. I actually like this because now we can search rolls for the much rarer, much perferred by my standards, high grade business strikes.
Bottom line. Profits or not, this is a Wonderful hobby and past time, and we shoud continue to purchase what is pleasing to OUR particular standards.
<< <i>"Perfectly collectible, but not the future classic coins some chirp about." Please bring forth some data that demonstates that todays 2000-6000 mintage design based moderns will not be "classics" in time. There is no historical precedent for you to stand on. What is a "classic" tomorrow depends on how people collect tomorrow. How you collect today is a result of the long standing mint policy of very limited design change to discourage collecting otherwise know as "hoarding" of US issues. The mint has abandoned this almost static design policy and is openly training the public to collect by design. More specifically design with low mintages.
So you guys can run on about how modern design based rarity on a 100 year scale is never going to be worth holding but in 20 years when the old series you think so much of are collected by type like everything else we will see who is all wet. If the mint succeeds in producing a broad design oriented collector base the mint mark rare old semi keys will get killed.
ericj96 >>
The Mint training coin collectors? Now that will last as long as the USPS trained stamp collectors. The Mint is indeed creating potential coin collectors by marketing its pseudo-coins. Modern business strikes in commerce, including state quarters, are coins and collecting them is coin collecting. The difference between them and so-called classics is a matter of mintage and survival rates. On one hand, classics willl absolutely dominate in the area of date rarities. OTOH, surprising condition rarities are arising for spans of dates in the clad era simply because people failed to put them aside and preserve them in any great numbers. If the Mint-direct stuff endures in collectibility, which is possible, it still doesn't assume the mantle of coin collecting and certainly they do not represent future classics. Perhaps classic medals or NCLT, but not true coins, despite the technical Congressional gibberish. If real coin collecting wanes, even because of NCLT collecting, it is speaking of its own hobby, different from NCLT. And yes, NCLT colelctors do largely appear to fancy design over date (a potential hazard for those who are coveting dates and mintmarks in ASEs and similar perhaps). That doesn't mean coin collecting will succumb to design over date. Type collecting has always been popular from ancient times forward. However, the inertia in numismatics has been trending to die collecting since the late 19th century. In the end, I thinkit is more likely that the Mint-directed collector base will face attrition because of the USPS design effect and some will invariably grow up to become real coin collectors.
Please, no dealers or market makers. Most of the fun is thinking you're ahead of the market. If you're just part of the market, there will be no raw material left.
Developing theory is what we are meant to do as academic researchers and it sets us apart from practitioners and consultants. Gregor
I guess the $50 Pan Pacs (otherwise know as NCLT and every other proof ever issued) has no chance of becoming a classic by your definition. Anyway if you take the time to run growth in total market capitalization for low mintage design based modern coins vs your stuff over the last ten years you will find that the classic date based coins are not doing so well. As far as calling coins sold directly to the public anything other than coins you need to check with the Feds. If being created for circulation is the requirement for being a coin then I can give you a massive list of loved classics that are not coins either.
You guys are just like the people in the 1920s that thought only bust and seated material was worthy.
Moderns are so darned original - nice surfaces, sharp strikes, a great assortment of designs - why would anyone collect them?
I mean, when you actually know that the coin hasn't been tampered with by several generations of coin doctors, and when you actually don't need a third party opinion to determine whether or not the coin is genuine - where's the intrigue?
Really, if you aren't paying for 40 or 50 years' worth of markups and TPG fees, crackouts, etc, and when the coins themselves can be obtained for a small premium over melt, directly from the issuing authority, who would buy a coin that could actually double in price within a short 90 days?
And yeah, I almost forgot. Why would you buy a nice modern from the Mint, when you could have the priviledge of keeping a dealer in business who has nothing but contempt for you and your collecting preferences - even if you also collect so called "classics" too? Believe me, it leaves no doubt about whose interests that dealer really has at heart - not yours.
It all seems so clear to me now. Bash away!!
Q: Are You Printing Money? Bernanke: Not Literally
<< <i>Ok, if slabs go away, which still even has a numismatic premium? A Bust Half in ANY grade or 2006 MS69 widget? I doubt there would be any more than face value as no one would buy and sell a 2006 coin as an MS69 then... >>
Some 2006 coins might be impacted dramatically if slabs went away but it wouldn't have too much impact on something like an MS-66 1976-P type I Ike.
The problem is not with moderns, but rather is more general, with moderns just being one very obvious exemplification of that problem. And that is with the reification of numerical grading (plus an implicit denial in any probabilistic or multivarient grading (even if this denial is explicitly denied!)) and the resultant absurd grade/price scheme and an overreliance on partial information from pop reports. Put simply, any coin with a grade of "x" has a non-trivial probability of being graded at "x+1" or "x-1" at the same service at a different time, or even counterfactually at the same time if different graders were used (or even the same ones!). And this means that a given "x" coin is not necessarily better than a given "x-1" coin, or necessarily worse than an "x+1" coin. And thus, any increase in value (on paper or "real") based on a micrograde difference (or an upgrade) has very little, or usually in fact nothing to do with the coin, but only the attached label. Once people realize just how much the label really means, the label-based prices are due for a steep crash; I consider it inevitable. Sure, there will be some profit taking in the near future, but someone will be the greater fool, the high grade crash will make the 1990 crash look mild.
The other problem is that or use of pop reports are incomplete, and also has to do with the small differences in grade from one point to the next. And that is the explicit or implicit ignoring of underpopulation date. "Pop 3/0" might sound rare, and in fact, in some cases it actually will be a condition rarity. But when there are, say, 567 one point down (and countless others not submitted because to be the 568th will not increase the price enough to justify slabbing), the coin is not a condition rarity, and as the underpop increases, the probability that the 3 at top are in fact the three finest known decreases rapidly. And that just leads back to the first point above. In fact, I propose that condition rarity is better understood using descriptive grades, rather than numerical grades. Further, one should be highly skeptical of a statement of condition rarity when its rarity is very much decreased at the next descriptive grade down.
(As a final aside, I am not even denying that there will not be any moderns which will turn out to be condition rarities. I am sure there are some condition rarities in modern series. But the last two sentences of the last paragraph must be kept in mind when evaluating if a certain issue really does qualify as such. I do think the number of condition rarities among moderns is much much lower than is often stated by modern "apologists.") >>
There were no grading companies before 1986 and still people collected moderns and classics. Why would the variability in grading affect only the moderns while it is the moderns which tend to be easier to grade?
While it's true that price tends to be more grade sensitive with moderns than it is for classics, why should moderns be more adversely affected than classics in the event that collectors no longer care about labels or grades? It would seem that there is an implied assumption that all or most modern collectors care primarily a- bout the assigned grade.
Just because a modern coin exists with a pop 3/0 and there are 567 in the next grade down, how does it follow that all moderns will collapse in price or all pop-top moderns are doomed?
There's no question that collectors are well advised to know something about the coins they collect. This goes double when paying significant premiums for "intangi- bles" like condition, toning, grade rarity, demand or any attribute which is depen- dent on the beliefs of yourself or other collectors. Obviously this applies to all coins and it's the collector who has to decide whether he is willing to accept the risk or even care about it.
I know if I paid a huge premium for a pop 3 (567 in undergrade), I'd be darn sure that the coin is properly graded at the least. But additionally, I'd have studied some of these coins raw and graded to decide if the premium were worth the cost. In ma- ny cases it's possible to find very attractive pieces raw and save not only the pre- mium but even the grading fees. Of course, the more easily you can find such pieces the riskier it is to pay a lot for a graded coin.
Modern coins and collectors really don't need an "apologist". If if they really did take the plunge that so many have so long predicted the coins and collectors still wouldn't need an apologist. There is a lot less hyping in the moderns than in the other coins so few individuals would need to apologize either. People have fun collecting all of the moderns and ideally they all know about the risks to which they are exposed. It is probable that there are still some of these markets that are at levels which can't be maintained in the long term but this applies to some of the classic markets as well. >>
Thats right before 1986 there were no grading companies and I was very happy in the hobby. Then, well, lets just say there were not enough tits to feed all the pigs.
I have never ever seen people act like oh gee, now that the crap is out of the horse lets put it back in. Too late. Now everyone, everywhere can make their own absurd three letter company name and tell the whoke world yeah man this is a PF70 for sure. Who cares if the thing is so dipped it looks like an albino and there are enough scratches to make it look like it was cleaned with a brillo pad. Who cares because WE SAY, its a 70. What a steamy beefy beany load of fecal matter that was. IMO, 1986 was the death knell for every regular every day guy or gal who wanted to collect coins. You know, you reached in your pocket and looked or wow, went to the local coin shop and chewed the fat with the owner etc etc.
BUT NOT NOW.
OH NO. Now yiou have to deal with overtanned dried out men who look like they are on the third wife, fourth pack of cigarettes and are getting over the binger which involved cheap scotch and a case of night train. They just sit there and say WOW WHAT A COIN.......WOW WHAT A COIN.........Lest I forget, fill in the blank slab says, WOW WHAT A COIN............
All you need is to buy a coin from the mint, crack trhe coin out. Send it to a TPG and BAM....you just made a babillion mamillion gagillion dollars because its rated a 70 and EVERYONE KNOWS (yeah buddy) these are the most sought after on the market.
<< <i>What I do not understand is why collectors, with all due respect to our host here, insist on getting their Mint stuff slabbed and "making" a grade. Seems the Mint packaging is adequate if not attractive and doesn't require additional expense and time away from home. Certainly they are all genuine; so that's no concern. >>
Many collectors do not understand why other collectors collect what they do. Indeed, many non-collectors don't understand why collectors behave the way they do But it seems to take a special person to feel the need to attack someone else's collecting interests. Not understanding and attacking are two very different things IMO.
<< <i>What I do not understand is why collectors, with all due respect to our host here, insist on getting their Mint stuff slabbed and "making" a grade. Seems the Mint packaging is adequate if not attractive and doesn't require additional expense and time away from home. Certainly they are all genuine; so that's no concern. >>
Many collectors do not understand why other collectors collect what they do. Indeed, many non-collectors don't understand why collectors behave the way they do But it seems to take a special person to feel the need to attack someone else's collecting interests. >>
I'm having a heck of a lot of fun building a set of world one oz silver coins-- all displayed in a 24-coin tray with capsules. I have only spent about $20.00 per coin. If there's no market, then does that mean I'll stick it on eBay and get no bids with an opening $1.00 reserve?
Also, say what you want about Moderns, but heavens almighty, I'd made some fantastic, quick returns on them. I don't think too many people are kicking themselves if they bought the 2006 W three piece silver sets from the mint.
"I'll split the atom! I am the fifth dimension! I am the eighth wonder of the world!" -Gef the talking mongoose.
<< <i>I'm having a heck of a lot of fun building a set of world one oz silver coins-- all displayed in a 24-coin tray with capsules. I have only spent about $20.00 per coin. If there's no market, then does that mean I'll stick it on eBay and get no bids with an opening $1.00 reserve?
Also, say what you want about Moderns, but heavens almighty, I'd made some fantastic, quick returns on them. I don't think too many people are kicking themselves if they bought the 2006 W three piece silver sets from the mint. >>
Well hey, all you need o do is slab all those coins and BABOOM, more money more money more money more.......
Why cant folks just collect for the sheer fun anymore? Why am I made to feel like a knuckle dragging cave man because HEAVEN FORBID, I just have the original mint packaging and did not get the coins slabbed.
<< <i>I'm having a heck of a lot of fun building a set of world one oz silver coins-- all displayed in a 24-coin tray with capsules. I have only spent about $20.00 per coin. If there's no market, then does that mean I'll stick it on eBay and get no bids with an opening $1.00 reserve?
Also, say what you want about Moderns, but heavens almighty, I'd made some fantastic, quick returns on them. I don't think too many people are kicking themselves if they bought the 2006 W three piece silver sets from the mint. >>
Well hey, all you need o do is slab all those coins and BABOOM, more money more money more money more.......
Why cant folks just collect for the sheer fun anymore? Why am I made to feel like a knuckle dragging cave man because HEAVEN FORBID, I just have the original mint packaging and did not get the coins slabbed. >>
I buy a few sets of whatever looks good that year-- I keep one and sell the rest so I can buy more coins later. I never slab moderns, I don't see the point in it. I order everything from the mint, so I'm the original owner. No wondering or guessing if it's been messed with. If there's a problem with it, I return it. My proof platinum half oz coins with the original purchase receipt with my name on it from 2004-present will hopefully never see a slab.
I *do* like collecting coins. I really enjoy completing my statehood quarter series, no matter how many zillion were made. I just don't get SGS graded coins from HSN.
"I'll split the atom! I am the fifth dimension! I am the eighth wonder of the world!" -Gef the talking mongoose.
Has anyone seen what the 3 pce. SAE sets are going for at shows? I attended the Dalton show this morning, and the OMP sets are flying out the door at OVER ebay prices! And the PCGS 69's are through the roof and still SELLING!
<< <i>I'm having a heck of a lot of fun building a set of world one oz silver coins-- all displayed in a 24-coin tray with capsules. I have only spent about $20.00 per coin. If there's no market, then does that mean I'll stick it on eBay and get no bids with an opening $1.00 reserve?
Also, say what you want about Moderns, but heavens almighty, I'd made some fantastic, quick returns on them. I don't think too many people are kicking themselves if they bought the 2006 W three piece silver sets from the mint. >>
Well hey, all you need o do is slab all those coins and BABOOM, more money more money more money more.......
Why cant folks just collect for the sheer fun anymore? Why am I made to feel like a knuckle dragging cave man because HEAVEN FORBID, I just have the original mint packaging and did not get the coins slabbed. >>
Hey Whitby, You have no idea how much in the majority you are. The plastic only weenies are a small minority in the numismatic community....vocal on these boards of course, but a minority none the less. The big ticket items are an exception, but they are also in the minority in our hobby.
<< <i>Why cant folks just collect for the sheer fun anymore? Why am I made to feel like a knuckle dragging cave man because HEAVEN FORBID, I just have the original mint packaging and did not get the coins slabbed. >>
I find the plastic pretty helpful sometimes. I'm looking for a 69-P Washington I like for my set. I bought a PCGS MS66 from Heritage for around $300, and the coin is OK, but just OK. The planchet is terrific for a 69 P, but ticky for the grade. This month, I've purchased just over 50 1969 mint sets locally, 10 more on Ebay, and this roll. I haven't found a coin yet I'd call a solid 5, but for the one in the 66 holder. I'll keep looking, but I don't mind paying for someone else's efforts, and the holder facilitates that transaction. I'm not sure why that bothers classic coin folks so much. I've been looking for just over two years.
Thats right before 1986 there were no grading companies and I was very happy in the hobby. Then, well, lets just say there were not enough tits to feed all the pigs.
I have never ever seen people act like oh gee, now that the crap is out of the horse lets put it back in. Too late. Now everyone, everywhere can make their own absurd three letter company name and tell the whoke world yeah man this is a PF70 for sure. Who cares if the thing is so dipped it looks like an albino and there are enough scratches to make it look like it was cleaned with a brillo pad. Who cares because WE SAY, its a 70. What a steamy beefy beany load of fecal matter that was. IMO, 1986 was the death knell for every regular every day guy or gal who wanted to collect coins. You know, you reached in your pocket and looked or wow, went to the local coin shop and chewed the fat with the owner etc etc.
BUT NOT NOW.
OH NO. Now yiou have to deal with overtanned dried out men who look like they are on the third wife, fourth pack of cigarettes and are getting over the binger which involved cheap scotch and a case of night train. They just sit there and say WOW WHAT A COIN.......WOW WHAT A COIN.........Lest I forget, fill in the blank slab says, WOW WHAT A COIN............
All you need is to buy a coin from the mint, crack trhe coin out. Send it to a TPG and BAM....you just made a babillion mamillion gagillion dollars because its rated a 70 and EVERYONE KNOWS (yeah buddy) these are the most sought after on the market. >>
I feel your pain.
It's so ironic that so much damage was done to moderns by third party grading and we have to listen to claptrap that says without third party grading there would be no market in moderns at all.
I don't blame the graders since it wasn't intentional, it's just a direct off- shoot of the new concept that an unslabbed coin is somehow tainted. A corrolary would be that a modern can only derive its value from a slab.
If it weren't for TPG's moderns would be widely accepted and traded in the hobby by now.
In the long run it might be a boon since the extra couple of decades has allowed a great deal of attrition and time for the teeming masses to find coins in general.
Am I wrong, but don't Classic dealers sell slabbed coins also? How much would YOU pay for a PCGS graded MS67 common date Morgan if it was cracked out of it's plastic and sold as RAW
I know someone who was out bid, at close to $500,000, on a raw Morgan that PCGS later called MS67. Wonder what the downside is on this coin if cracked now? Compare this to a 2003 cent.
Collector and Researcher of Liberty Head Nickels. ANA LM-6053
<< <i>I find the plastic pretty helpful sometimes. I'm looking for a 69-P Washington I like for my set. I bought a PCGS MS66 from Heritage for around $300, and the coin is OK, but just OK. The planchet is terrific for a 69 P, but ticky for the grade. This month, I've purchased just over 50 1969 mint sets locally, 10 more on Ebay, and this roll. I haven't found a coin yet I'd call a solid 5, but for the one in the 66 holder. I'll keep looking, but I don't mind paying for someone else's efforts, and the holder facilitates that transaction. I'm not sure why that bothers classic coin folks so much. I've been looking for just over two years.
I didn't see the roll in the first link. I'm assuming it's a put-together roll from mint sets since BU rolls are extremely scarce.
Fifty 1969 mint sets is not going to do it unless you get pretty lucky. I usually figure there will only be 8% of the Philly quarters that are nice. This means they are attractive and reasonably well-struck. ...the kind of coin that the average Joe might include in a collection. 1% will be a true gem. Generally you have to lower the bar for "gem" a little on this date to allow some ticks or planchet scratches. Perhaps about .1% is a true gem or maybe even a little nicer (MS-66). I have lit- tle doubt that higher grades exist but even chasing these down by zip code for 35 years hasn't gotten one into my hands.
And for all those people who figure with a mintage of two million 8% makes for a very common coin, you should go out and see how many 1969 mint sets you can find. Of the few that have survived the decades of ridicule and being ignored, many are now tarnished and won't count toward the 8%.
For a collector this is just one date. You'll find the Denver quarter while looking for the Philly with no trouble but there are lots of other dates with their own uni- que characteristics and difficulties in locating them. You'll find plenty of ALL of the moderns tough enough that you just might decide it's easier to buy one than try to make it or collect it raw.
<< <i>Why cant folks just collect for the sheer fun anymore? Why am I made to feel like a knuckle dragging cave man because HEAVEN FORBID, I just have the original mint packaging and did not get the coins slabbed. >>
Why do you care how other people collect? >>
Thats the point.
IF you want to slab everything go nuts. In fact, I will send you my pocket change and you can slab that. Hey wait, I just found an old bottle opener, its round, go slab that too!
I do not care what anyone does with their coins. Melt them all and make a suit of body armor. BUT, the moment I want to get a coin that is a Modern and all that I can find are slabs...I pay a premium because..its a slab.
IF I want a coin that I could have BEFORE 1986 gotten verified and traded great. NOT ANYNORE. OH NO, its not in a slab. I cant trade unless I have a slab. WHY because SLABS go at a premium. If you can tell me with a straight face and not fear being struck dead by a bolt of lightning that most folks who slab do so because they just want an authentic coin and NEVER EVER slab to make a quik buck I will buy you the next coin.
Because the reality is, slabs sell at a premium.
Thats just swell, but slabs are starting to ruin MY ENJOYMENT of the hobby and while I COLLECT MY COINS THE WAY I WANT, DO NOT TELL ME THE VALUE OF ANY COIN BECAUSE YOU STUCK IT IN SLAB. So ironically, I would ask the same of ou.
DONT EVER TELL ME THE VALUE OF ANYTHING BECAUSE YOU STUCK IT IN A SLAB. Sorry.
<< <i>BUT, the moment I want to get a coin that is a Modern and all that I can find are slabs...I pay a premium because..its a slab. >>
This is not a legitimate argument. The vast majority of slabbed moderns barely bring the submission fee, and many bring less. Unless, of course, you're buying coins graded 70.
<< <i>BUT, the moment I want to get a coin that is a Modern and all that I can find are slabs...I pay a premium because..its a slab. >>
This is not a legitimate argument. The vast majority of slabbed moderns barely bring the submission fee, and many bring less. Unless, of course, you're buying coins graded 70.
Russ, NCNE >>
Graded 70 is a good choice? Is it not. I purchased some jamestown coins ms 70 & I think I will grab a couple pr 70. Is this a wise choice?
<< <i>BUT, the moment I want to get a coin that is a Modern and all that I can find are slabs...I pay a premium because..its a slab. >>
This is not a legitimate argument. The vast majority of slabbed moderns barely bring the submission fee, and many bring less. Unless, of course, you're buying coins graded 70.
Russ, NCNE >>
Excellent point Russ and exactly what causes me to get a bit unhinged. I however do not agree about the vast majority statement. Show me the pops. Even then, who cares, its not a science. Worse yet, they tell you that. Go figure.
I just want the coin. I just collect. My first CC dollar, hey, its a cleaned coin. BUT, you know what? I have alwats wanted one and golly gee, there it was and I paid a good price as both myself and the dealer knew this was a cleaned coin. HOWEVER, now that we live in the world of the oh its a 70 bacause I got lucky last night, even the 69'sd and 68's go for more. Please dont let me be among the unwashed who didnt know that fill in the lblank company is a "bad" TPG that churns out 70's like rice in a chinese restaurant. Another favorite for me, I assure you.
Is this a universal truth? No, it is not. Is it impacting what I could collect easily say 20 years ago? Yes, yes it is. In fact, I would love to play a game with these folks called what finger am I holding upi right now on my left hand. HINT: I am not saying they are number 1.
I know enough about the coins, DO NOT SELL ME A NUMBER ON A SLAB. Please.
<< <i>BUT, the moment I want to get a coin that is a Modern and all that I can find are slabs...I pay a premium because..its a slab. >>
This is not a legitimate argument. The vast majority of slabbed moderns barely bring the submission fee, and many bring less. Unless, of course, you're buying coins graded 70.
Russ, NCNE >>
Graded 70 is a good choice? Is it not. I purchased some jamestown coins ms 70 & I think I will grab a couple pr 70. Is this a wise choice? >>
There is not enough liquor drugs or women to get me to buy any coin with 70 on a slab. I will take this bet with anyone here.
<< <i>It is one thing to collect for sheer fun-which I don't even question that many Moderns can offer. However it is the artifical rarities and the inflated pricing that to me end the "fun".
Like I said before, would ANY 2006 MS widget sell raw for $2,000.00??? Don't think so!
The only reason why some sets are selling for big numbers raw, because the dealers are getting stupid numbers for them in slabs! Thats a weak link food chain!
Hey, there are plenty of beautiful smartly priced Moderns to collect (Like PR69 State Quarters). But when people start to blow real oney not realizing there i no net to fall back on....Then its nothing but the greater fool theory. >>
Wow, I agree with like most of this! Wonders never cease.
"I'll split the atom! I am the fifth dimension! I am the eighth wonder of the world!" -Gef the talking mongoose.
The condescension continues.............ignorance is bliss - Laura doesn't even know what the Moderns she is bashing sell for, why they attract so many collectors, or even how many were produced. Isn't it a bit laughable to continue bashing something that you cannot understand? It speaks volumes about a person when they can only speak poorly about something that is well beyond their own area of expertise, to wit:
It is one thing to collect for sheer fun-which I don't even question that many Moderns can offer. However it is the artifical rarities and the inflated pricing that to me end the "fun".
Like I said before, would ANY 2006 MS widget sell raw for $2,000.00??? Don't think so!
The only reason why some sets are selling for big numbers raw, because the dealers are getting stupid numbers for them in slabs! Thats a weak link food chain!
Hey, there are plenty of beautiful smartly priced Moderns to collect (Like PR69 State Quarters). But when people start to blow real oney not realizing there i no net to fall back on....Then its nothing but the greater fool theory.
Let me reiterate:
And yeah, I almost forgot. Why would you buy a nice modern from the Mint, when you could have the priviledge of keeping a dealer in business who has nothing but contempt for you and your collecting preferences - even if you also collect so called "classics" too? Believe me, it leaves no doubt about whose interests that dealer really has at heart - not yours.
It all seems so clear to me now. Bash away!!
The fact is - that I will not **ever** buy any coin from a dealer who has such contempt for my collecting preferences and clearly thinks that my collection is a fool's game. I am being turned completely against ever buying another "classic" coin, because of such arrogance and self-important blather.
Like I said, just keep on Bashing. It's not very flattering.
Q: Are You Printing Money? Bernanke: Not Literally
Personally, I'd just like to find a 69-P Washington I like as a 66. I don't mind buying it for holdered money raw, but I want a nice coin. Perhaps it's easier to talk about how many there are.
Developing theory is what we are meant to do as academic researchers and it sets us apart from practitioners and consultants. Gregor
Comments
<< <i>Mostly what's wrong with moderns for most older collectors is that they have a strongly
negative emotional reaction. A lot of we older collectors simply never got over what was
done to us in the mid-'60's and to the coin market. We haven't gotten over the debase-
ment of small change. Most hate to see the money for "real" coins being siphoned off
for "junk". >>
Makes sense to me.
<< <i>Much congrats on your 2004 Seated America Half. 5063 mintage....twice as rare a Hawiian, struck on $650 worth of platinum not six dollars worth of silver and great looking but unworthy of ownership........according to the short sighted. >>
Thanks, Eric.
I think I got it for a "song", relatively speaking!
My set will be up to date with this addition.
"Senorita HepKitty"
"I want a real cool Kitty from Hepcat City, to stay in step with me" - Bill Carter
I won't EVEN go responding to that statement other than saying, Since 1996 moderns have made me NOTHING BUT HUGE PROFITS, with which I've been able to aquire coins I otherwise would never have owned!
Plus I believe such low mintage moderns will CONTINUE to be great future investments.
Get off your HIGH INCOME, HIGH HORSE LAURA!!!!!
The fact that "major" dealers do not make a secondary market makes my heart glad; here are coins for the average person, and if chosen well do well. I certainly hope that they do not take them to any of the dealers that do not specialize in these and do sell them in a proper forum.
BTW, I just sold to a friend the 20th Anniv. SAEs in OGP for 300 as a favor to him and could have gotten more on the open market. This paid for the other two sets I got and still got him a good deal. This would be a perfect example of what we have been trying to say.
Well, just Love coins, period.
<< <i>I know I am probably going to get yelled at for this question but why does it seem like whenever someone speaks of a modern coin some people here act as though modern coins are just the most aweful thing to ever happen? Can someone enlighten me? >>
In my opinion, there is absolutely nothing wrong with moderns or the collecting of them. They range from the common and not very valuable but enjoyable to collect to the extremely rare (and probably just as enjoyable to collect).
The problem is not with moderns, but rather is more general, with certain high grade moderns just being one very obvious exemplification of that problem, but certainly not the only. And that is with the reification of numerical grading (plus an implicit denial in any probabilistic or multivarient grading (even if this denial is explicitly denied!)) and the resultant absurd grade/price scheme and an overreliance on partial information from pop reports. Put simply, any coin with a grade of "x" has a non-trivial probability of being graded at "x+1" or "x-1" at the same service at a different time, or even counterfactually at the same time if different graders were used (or even the same ones!). And this means that a given "x" coin is not necessarily better than a given "x-1" coin, or necessarily worse than an "x+1" coin. And thus, any increase in value (on paper or "real") based on a micrograde difference (or an upgrade) has very little, or usually in fact nothing to do with the coin, but only the attached label. Once people realize just how much the label really means, the label-based prices are due for a steep crash; I consider it inevitable. Sure, there will be some profit taking in the near future, but someone will be the greater fool, the high grade crash will make the 1990 crash look mild.
(As an aside before I go on to pop reports, another thread today was posted on the purchase of label information for registry sets. This should not at all be surprising. In fact, it is the purest form of registry collecting. Face it, the labels are of similar rarity to coins with labels of the same grade attached. And the "sets" so obtained say as much about coins as the sets (with actual coins) where the only goal is to get those coins with labels that just happen to have high numbers on them.)
The other problem is that or use of pop reports are incomplete, and also has to do with the small differences in grade from one point to the next. And that is the explicit or implicit ignoring of underpopulation date. "Pop 3/0" might sound rare, and in fact, in some cases it actually will be a condition rarity. But when there are, say, 567 one point down (and countless others not submitted because to be the 568th will not increase the price enough to justify slabbing), the coin is not a condition rarity, and as the underpop increases, the probability that the 3 at top are in fact the three finest known decreases rapidly. And that just leads back to the first point above. In fact, I propose that condition rarity is better understood using descriptive grades, rather than numerical grades. Further, one should be highly skeptical of a statement of condition rarity when its rarity is very much decreased at the next descriptive grade down.
(As a final aside, I am not even denying that there will not be any moderns which will turn out to be condition rarities. I am sure there are some condition rarities in modern series. But the last two sentences of the last paragraph must be kept in mind when evaluating if a certain issue really does qualify as such. I do think the number of condition rarities among moderns is much much lower than is often stated by modern "apologists.")
Edit: hopefully made more clear that I am not talking about all moderns, nor am I not talking about any classics.
Ed. S.
(EJS)
I agree with your reasoned analysis, but unfortunately, it doesn't address demand. As of today, PCGS has holdered 457 1969 proof Kennedy halves PR-69 Dcam. They're not exactly rare. They sell for $200 about as fast as you can holder them, and they DO get holdered. 1972-P type 2 Ikes aren't particularly uncommon. I purchased an OBW roll last year that contained two. One holdered MS63, and the other MS64. The pair sold for $700 with a $1 opening bid, no hype, and no reserve. There have been 700 type 2's holdered so far.
and it sets us apart from practitioners and consultants. Gregor
Modern Mint marvels are not in the same league as real coins. They are Mint medallions. Very, very pretty sometimes. Sometimes limited (by the MInt) in numbers, akin to limited firings of dinner plates. Perfectly collectible, but not the future classic coins some chirp about.
A guy at our local coin club did a little presentation on ultahigh denomination notes last night. It occurred to me that if the BEP ever wanted to provide the treasury with a nice pocket of seinorage all they would have to do is produce collector-direct $5K, $10K and $100K notes in limited numbers. There are people that would gobble them up at premium release prices and others on a secondary eBay-type market that would bid them to insane levels. These sorts of things are gimmicks created under the auspices of the US Treasury. Like ASEs, modern commems, ..., they just are not coins. It is almost laughable that people discuss the bullion crap as numismatic treasures.
NSDR - Life Member
SSDC - Life Member
ANA - Pay As I Go Member
As far as the value of key date moderns with design based mintages in the 2500-6000 range being a poor purchase thats just the some classic guys with perceptual barriers speaking. The same comments about "modern mint slugs and trinkets" were made by collectors about Pan Pac $50 gold in 1920. The moderns have design based rarity not seen since the late 1800s-1915 by and large. Gary Knaus did some published research on the price behavior of coinage specifically classics recently that showed cleary its the keys that drive set values. This is true for moderns and classics.
The key date classics have had 75+ years to reach price maturity and are not affordable to the typical collector. Equally importantly key date prices are driven by collector base growth. The moderns have not only affordable key dates but the fastest growing collector base. Our coins have design based rarity and thats what the mint is training the new generation of collectors to pursue.
The establishment always misses the big opportunities. Be thankful that the guys with large dollars don't see the need to pick up modern design based rare coins with mintages in the 2000-6000 range whos collector bases are growing rapidly.
Ericj96
The greater fools buying and selling moderns represent about half of the TPG's business.
and it sets us apart from practitioners and consultants. Gregor
"Perfectly collectible, but not the future classic coins some chirp about." Please bring forth some data that demonstates that todays 2000-6000 mintage design based moderns will not be "classics" in time. There is no historical precedent for you to stand on. What is a "classic" tomorrow depends on how people collect tomorrow. How you collect today is a result of the long standing mint policy of very limited design change to discourage collecting otherwise know as "hoarding" of US issues. The mint has abandoned this almost static design policy and is openly training the public to collect by design. More specifically design with low mintages.
So you guys can run on about how modern design based rarity on a 100 year scale is never going to be worth holding but in 20 years when the old series you think so much of are collected by type like everything else we will see who is all wet. If the mint succeeds in producing a broad design oriented collector base the mint mark rare old semi keys will get killed.
ericj96
<< <i>
The problem is not with moderns, but rather is more general, with moderns just being one very obvious exemplification of that problem. And that is with the reification of numerical grading (plus an implicit denial in any probabilistic or multivarient grading (even if this denial is explicitly denied!)) and the resultant absurd grade/price scheme and an overreliance on partial information from pop reports. Put simply, any coin with a grade of "x" has a non-trivial probability of being graded at "x+1" or "x-1" at the same service at a different time, or even counterfactually at the same time if different graders were used (or even the same ones!). And this means that a given "x" coin is not necessarily better than a given "x-1" coin, or necessarily worse than an "x+1" coin. And thus, any increase in value (on paper or "real") based on a micrograde difference (or an upgrade) has very little, or usually in fact nothing to do with the coin, but only the attached label. Once people realize just how much the label really means, the label-based prices are due for a steep crash; I consider it inevitable. Sure, there will be some profit taking in the near future, but someone will be the greater fool, the high grade crash will make the 1990 crash look mild.
The other problem is that or use of pop reports are incomplete, and also has to do with the small differences in grade from one point to the next. And that is the explicit or implicit ignoring of underpopulation date. "Pop 3/0" might sound rare, and in fact, in some cases it actually will be a condition rarity. But when there are, say, 567 one point down (and countless others not submitted because to be the 568th will not increase the price enough to justify slabbing), the coin is not a condition rarity, and as the underpop increases, the probability that the 3 at top are in fact the three finest known decreases rapidly. And that just leads back to the first point above. In fact, I propose that condition rarity is better understood using descriptive grades, rather than numerical grades. Further, one should be highly skeptical of a statement of condition rarity when its rarity is very much decreased at the next descriptive grade down.
(As a final aside, I am not even denying that there will not be any moderns which will turn out to be condition rarities. I am sure there are some condition rarities in modern series. But the last two sentences of the last paragraph must be kept in mind when evaluating if a certain issue really does qualify as such. I do think the number of condition rarities among moderns is much much lower than is often stated by modern "apologists.") >>
There were no grading companies before 1986 and still people collected moderns
and classics. Why would the variability in grading affect only the moderns while it
is the moderns which tend to be easier to grade?
While it's true that price tends to be more grade sensitive with moderns than it is
for classics, why should moderns be more adversely affected than classics in the
event that collectors no longer care about labels or grades? It would seem that
there is an implied assumption that all or most modern collectors care primarily a-
bout the assigned grade.
Just because a modern coin exists with a pop 3/0 and there are 567 in the next
grade down, how does it follow that all moderns will collapse in price or all pop-top
moderns are doomed?
There's no question that collectors are well advised to know something about the
coins they collect. This goes double when paying significant premiums for "intangi-
bles" like condition, toning, grade rarity, demand or any attribute which is depen-
dent on the beliefs of yourself or other collectors. Obviously this applies to all coins
and it's the collector who has to decide whether he is willing to accept the risk or
even care about it.
I know if I paid a huge premium for a pop 3 (567 in undergrade), I'd be darn sure
that the coin is properly graded at the least. But additionally, I'd have studied some
of these coins raw and graded to decide if the premium were worth the cost. In ma-
ny cases it's possible to find very attractive pieces raw and save not only the pre-
mium but even the grading fees. Of course, the more easily you can find such pieces
the riskier it is to pay a lot for a graded coin.
Modern coins and collectors really don't need an "apologist". If if they really did take
the plunge that so many have so long predicted the coins and collectors still wouldn't
need an apologist. There is a lot less hyping in the moderns than in the other coins
so few individuals would need to apologize either. People have fun collecting all of
the moderns and ideally they all know about the risks to which they are exposed. It
is probable that there are still some of these markets that are at levels which can't
be maintained in the long term but this applies to some of the classic markets as well.
It really doesn't take a tremendous amount of research on one's part, but it does take a willingness to search out these quality related aspects.
Uncirculated State Quarters are a good case in point. The 1999 quarters at the programs beginning saw very low pops in the ms68 grade, but as roll after roll was searched, it was soon becomming obvious that high end examples COULD be found. Then the Mint Sets were issued and many 68's and even 69's were showing up.
I personally sold a PCGS MS68 2002-D Ohio Quarter, that graded farther down the road could have received a 69. It was THAT good! I cannot remember the price paid, but I'd say the pop of a 68 would be MUCH higher by now. Now we have the matte finish coins in Mint Sets, and it becomes easier to get high grade examples. I actually like this because now we can search rolls for the much rarer, much perferred by my standards, high grade business strikes.
Bottom line. Profits or not, this is a Wonderful hobby and past time, and we shoud continue to purchase what is pleasing to OUR particular standards.
<< <i>"Perfectly collectible, but not the future classic coins some chirp about." Please bring forth some data that demonstates that todays 2000-6000 mintage design based moderns will not be "classics" in time. There is no historical precedent for you to stand on. What is a "classic" tomorrow depends on how people collect tomorrow. How you collect today is a result of the long standing mint policy of very limited design change to discourage collecting otherwise know as "hoarding" of US issues. The mint has abandoned this almost static design policy and is openly training the public to collect by design. More specifically design with low mintages.
So you guys can run on about how modern design based rarity on a 100 year scale is never going to be worth holding but in 20 years when the old series you think so much of are collected by type like everything else we will see who is all wet. If the mint succeeds in producing a broad design oriented collector base the mint mark rare old semi keys will get killed.
ericj96 >>
The Mint training coin collectors? Now that will last as long as the USPS trained stamp collectors. The Mint is indeed creating potential coin collectors by marketing its pseudo-coins. Modern business strikes in commerce, including state quarters, are coins and collecting them is coin collecting. The difference between them and so-called classics is a matter of mintage and survival rates. On one hand, classics willl absolutely dominate in the area of date rarities. OTOH, surprising condition rarities are arising for spans of dates in the clad era simply because people failed to put them aside and preserve them in any great numbers. If the Mint-direct stuff endures in collectibility, which is possible, it still doesn't assume the mantle of coin collecting and certainly they do not represent future classics. Perhaps classic medals or NCLT, but not true coins, despite the technical Congressional gibberish. If real coin collecting wanes, even because of NCLT collecting, it is speaking of its own hobby, different from NCLT. And yes, NCLT colelctors do largely appear to fancy design over date (a potential hazard for those who are coveting dates and mintmarks in ASEs and similar perhaps). That doesn't mean coin collecting will succumb to design over date. Type collecting has always been popular from ancient times forward. However, the inertia in numismatics has been trending to die collecting since the late 19th century. In the end, I thinkit is more likely that the Mint-directed collector base will face attrition because of the USPS design effect and some will invariably grow up to become real coin collectors.
NSDR - Life Member
SSDC - Life Member
ANA - Pay As I Go Member
and it sets us apart from practitioners and consultants. Gregor
I guess the $50 Pan Pacs (otherwise know as NCLT and every other proof ever issued) has no chance of becoming a classic by your definition. Anyway if you take the time to run growth in total market capitalization for low mintage design based modern coins vs your stuff over the last ten years you will find that the classic date based coins are not doing so well. As far as calling coins sold directly to the public anything other than coins you need to check with the Feds. If being created for circulation is the requirement for being a coin then I can give you a massive list of loved classics that are not coins either.
You guys are just like the people in the 1920s that thought only bust and seated material was worthy.
Ericj
<< <i>This thread reminds me of the movie, Groundhog Day. >>
We're just gonna hafta keep doin' this till we get it right.
I mean, when you actually know that the coin hasn't been tampered with by several generations of coin doctors, and when you actually don't need a third party opinion to determine whether or not the coin is genuine - where's the intrigue?
Really, if you aren't paying for 40 or 50 years' worth of markups and TPG fees, crackouts, etc, and when the coins themselves can be obtained for a small premium over melt, directly from the issuing authority, who would buy a coin that could actually double in price within a short 90 days?
And yeah, I almost forgot. Why would you buy a nice modern from the Mint, when you could have the priviledge of keeping a dealer in business who has nothing but contempt for you and your collecting preferences - even if you also collect so called "classics" too? Believe me, it leaves no doubt about whose interests that dealer really has at heart - not yours.
It all seems so clear to me now. Bash away!!
I knew it would happen.
<< <i>Ok, if slabs go away, which still even has a numismatic premium? A Bust Half in ANY grade or 2006 MS69 widget? I doubt there would be any more than face value as no one would buy and sell a 2006 coin as an MS69 then...
>>
Some 2006 coins might be impacted dramatically if slabs went away but it wouldn't have
too much impact on something like an MS-66 1976-P type I Ike.
Slabs ain't goin' nowhere anyway.
<< <i>
<< <i>
The problem is not with moderns, but rather is more general, with moderns just being one very obvious exemplification of that problem. And that is with the reification of numerical grading (plus an implicit denial in any probabilistic or multivarient grading (even if this denial is explicitly denied!)) and the resultant absurd grade/price scheme and an overreliance on partial information from pop reports. Put simply, any coin with a grade of "x" has a non-trivial probability of being graded at "x+1" or "x-1" at the same service at a different time, or even counterfactually at the same time if different graders were used (or even the same ones!). And this means that a given "x" coin is not necessarily better than a given "x-1" coin, or necessarily worse than an "x+1" coin. And thus, any increase in value (on paper or "real") based on a micrograde difference (or an upgrade) has very little, or usually in fact nothing to do with the coin, but only the attached label. Once people realize just how much the label really means, the label-based prices are due for a steep crash; I consider it inevitable. Sure, there will be some profit taking in the near future, but someone will be the greater fool, the high grade crash will make the 1990 crash look mild.
The other problem is that or use of pop reports are incomplete, and also has to do with the small differences in grade from one point to the next. And that is the explicit or implicit ignoring of underpopulation date. "Pop 3/0" might sound rare, and in fact, in some cases it actually will be a condition rarity. But when there are, say, 567 one point down (and countless others not submitted because to be the 568th will not increase the price enough to justify slabbing), the coin is not a condition rarity, and as the underpop increases, the probability that the 3 at top are in fact the three finest known decreases rapidly. And that just leads back to the first point above. In fact, I propose that condition rarity is better understood using descriptive grades, rather than numerical grades. Further, one should be highly skeptical of a statement of condition rarity when its rarity is very much decreased at the next descriptive grade down.
(As a final aside, I am not even denying that there will not be any moderns which will turn out to be condition rarities. I am sure there are some condition rarities in modern series. But the last two sentences of the last paragraph must be kept in mind when evaluating if a certain issue really does qualify as such. I do think the number of condition rarities among moderns is much much lower than is often stated by modern "apologists.") >>
There were no grading companies before 1986 and still people collected moderns
and classics. Why would the variability in grading affect only the moderns while it
is the moderns which tend to be easier to grade?
While it's true that price tends to be more grade sensitive with moderns than it is
for classics, why should moderns be more adversely affected than classics in the
event that collectors no longer care about labels or grades? It would seem that
there is an implied assumption that all or most modern collectors care primarily a-
bout the assigned grade.
Just because a modern coin exists with a pop 3/0 and there are 567 in the next
grade down, how does it follow that all moderns will collapse in price or all pop-top
moderns are doomed?
There's no question that collectors are well advised to know something about the
coins they collect. This goes double when paying significant premiums for "intangi-
bles" like condition, toning, grade rarity, demand or any attribute which is depen-
dent on the beliefs of yourself or other collectors. Obviously this applies to all coins
and it's the collector who has to decide whether he is willing to accept the risk or
even care about it.
I know if I paid a huge premium for a pop 3 (567 in undergrade), I'd be darn sure
that the coin is properly graded at the least. But additionally, I'd have studied some
of these coins raw and graded to decide if the premium were worth the cost. In ma-
ny cases it's possible to find very attractive pieces raw and save not only the pre-
mium but even the grading fees. Of course, the more easily you can find such pieces
the riskier it is to pay a lot for a graded coin.
Modern coins and collectors really don't need an "apologist". If if they really did take
the plunge that so many have so long predicted the coins and collectors still wouldn't
need an apologist. There is a lot less hyping in the moderns than in the other coins
so few individuals would need to apologize either. People have fun collecting all of
the moderns and ideally they all know about the risks to which they are exposed. It
is probable that there are still some of these markets that are at levels which can't
be maintained in the long term but this applies to some of the classic markets as well. >>
Thats right before 1986 there were no grading companies and I was very happy in the hobby. Then, well, lets just say there were not enough tits to feed all the pigs.
I have never ever seen people act like oh gee, now that the crap is out of the horse lets put it back in. Too late. Now everyone, everywhere can make their own absurd three letter company name and tell the whoke world yeah man this is a PF70 for sure. Who cares if the thing is so dipped it looks like an albino and there are enough scratches to make it look like it was cleaned with a brillo pad. Who cares because WE SAY, its a 70. What a steamy beefy beany load of fecal matter that was. IMO, 1986 was the death knell for every regular every day guy or gal who wanted to collect coins. You know, you reached in your pocket and looked or wow, went to the local coin shop and chewed the fat with the owner etc etc.
BUT NOT NOW.
OH NO. Now yiou have to deal with overtanned dried out men who look like they are on the third wife, fourth pack of cigarettes and are getting over the binger which involved cheap scotch and a case of night train. They just sit there and say WOW WHAT A COIN.......WOW WHAT A COIN.........Lest I forget, fill in the blank slab says, WOW WHAT A COIN............
All you need is to buy a coin from the mint, crack trhe coin out. Send it to a TPG and BAM....you just made a babillion mamillion gagillion dollars because its rated a 70 and EVERYONE KNOWS (yeah buddy) these are the most sought after on the market.
<< <i>What I do not understand is why collectors, with all due respect to our host here, insist on getting their Mint stuff slabbed and "making" a grade. Seems the Mint packaging is adequate if not attractive and doesn't require additional expense and time away from home. Certainly they are all genuine; so that's no concern. >>
Many collectors do not understand why other collectors collect what they do. Indeed, many non-collectors don't understand why collectors behave the way they do
<< <i>
<< <i>What I do not understand is why collectors, with all due respect to our host here, insist on getting their Mint stuff slabbed and "making" a grade. Seems the Mint packaging is adequate if not attractive and doesn't require additional expense and time away from home. Certainly they are all genuine; so that's no concern. >>
Many collectors do not understand why other collectors collect what they do. Indeed, many non-collectors don't understand why collectors behave the way they do
Serve no wine before its time...........
Also, say what you want about Moderns, but heavens almighty, I'd made some fantastic, quick returns on them. I don't think too many people are kicking themselves if they bought the 2006 W three piece silver sets from the mint.
<< <i>I'm having a heck of a lot of fun building a set of world one oz silver coins-- all displayed in a 24-coin tray with capsules. I have only spent about $20.00 per coin. If there's no market, then does that mean I'll stick it on eBay and get no bids with an opening $1.00 reserve?
Also, say what you want about Moderns, but heavens almighty, I'd made some fantastic, quick returns on them. I don't think too many people are kicking themselves if they bought the 2006 W three piece silver sets from the mint. >>
Well hey, all you need o do is slab all those coins and BABOOM, more money more money more money more.......
Why cant folks just collect for the sheer fun anymore? Why am I made to feel like a knuckle dragging cave man because HEAVEN FORBID, I just have the original mint packaging and did not get the coins slabbed.
<< <i>
<< <i>I'm having a heck of a lot of fun building a set of world one oz silver coins-- all displayed in a 24-coin tray with capsules. I have only spent about $20.00 per coin. If there's no market, then does that mean I'll stick it on eBay and get no bids with an opening $1.00 reserve?
Also, say what you want about Moderns, but heavens almighty, I'd made some fantastic, quick returns on them. I don't think too many people are kicking themselves if they bought the 2006 W three piece silver sets from the mint. >>
Well hey, all you need o do is slab all those coins and BABOOM, more money more money more money more.......
Why cant folks just collect for the sheer fun anymore? Why am I made to feel like a knuckle dragging cave man because HEAVEN FORBID, I just have the original mint packaging and did not get the coins slabbed. >>
I buy a few sets of whatever looks good that year-- I keep one and sell the rest so I can buy more coins later. I never slab moderns, I don't see the point in it. I order everything from the mint, so I'm the original owner. No wondering or guessing if it's been messed with. If there's a problem with it, I return it. My proof platinum half oz coins with the original purchase receipt with my name on it from 2004-present will hopefully never see a slab.
I *do* like collecting coins. I really enjoy completing my statehood quarter series, no matter how many zillion were made. I just don't get SGS graded coins from HSN.
I attended the Dalton show this morning, and the OMP sets are flying out the door at OVER ebay prices!
And the PCGS 69's are through the roof and still SELLING!
<< <i>
<< <i>I'm having a heck of a lot of fun building a set of world one oz silver coins-- all displayed in a 24-coin tray with capsules. I have only spent about $20.00 per coin. If there's no market, then does that mean I'll stick it on eBay and get no bids with an opening $1.00 reserve?
Also, say what you want about Moderns, but heavens almighty, I'd made some fantastic, quick returns on them. I don't think too many people are kicking themselves if they bought the 2006 W three piece silver sets from the mint. >>
Well hey, all you need o do is slab all those coins and BABOOM, more money more money more money more.......
Why cant folks just collect for the sheer fun anymore? Why am I made to feel like a knuckle dragging cave man because HEAVEN FORBID, I just have the original mint packaging and did not get the coins slabbed. >>
Hey Whitby,
You have no idea how much in the majority you are.
The plastic only weenies are a small minority in the numismatic community....vocal on these boards of course, but a minority none the less. The big ticket items are an exception, but they are also in the minority in our hobby.
<< <i>Why cant folks just collect for the sheer fun anymore? Why am I made to feel like a knuckle dragging cave man because HEAVEN FORBID, I just have the original mint packaging and did not get the coins slabbed. >>
Why do you care how other people collect?
some sets
some more sets
and it sets us apart from practitioners and consultants. Gregor
<< <i>
Thats right before 1986 there were no grading companies and I was very happy in the hobby. Then, well, lets just say there were not enough tits to feed all the pigs.
I have never ever seen people act like oh gee, now that the crap is out of the horse lets put it back in. Too late. Now everyone, everywhere can make their own absurd three letter company name and tell the whoke world yeah man this is a PF70 for sure. Who cares if the thing is so dipped it looks like an albino and there are enough scratches to make it look like it was cleaned with a brillo pad. Who cares because WE SAY, its a 70. What a steamy beefy beany load of fecal matter that was. IMO, 1986 was the death knell for every regular every day guy or gal who wanted to collect coins. You know, you reached in your pocket and looked or wow, went to the local coin shop and chewed the fat with the owner etc etc.
BUT NOT NOW.
OH NO. Now yiou have to deal with overtanned dried out men who look like they are on the third wife, fourth pack of cigarettes and are getting over the binger which involved cheap scotch and a case of night train. They just sit there and say WOW WHAT A COIN.......WOW WHAT A COIN.........Lest I forget, fill in the blank slab says, WOW WHAT A COIN............
All you need is to buy a coin from the mint, crack trhe coin out. Send it to a TPG and BAM....you just made a babillion mamillion gagillion dollars because its rated a 70 and EVERYONE KNOWS (yeah buddy) these are the most sought after on the market. >>
I feel your pain.
It's so ironic that so much damage was done to moderns by third party
grading and we have to listen to claptrap that says without third party
grading there would be no market in moderns at all.
I don't blame the graders since it wasn't intentional, it's just a direct off-
shoot of the new concept that an unslabbed coin is somehow tainted. A
corrolary would be that a modern can only derive its value from a slab.
If it weren't for TPG's moderns would be widely accepted and traded in
the hobby by now.
In the long run it might be a boon since the extra couple of decades has
allowed a great deal of attrition and time for the teeming masses to find
coins in general.
How much would YOU pay for a PCGS graded MS67 common date Morgan if it was cracked out of it's plastic and sold as RAW
<< <i>I know someone who was out bid, at close to $500,000, on a raw Morgan that PCGS later called MS67. >>
He said common date.
Russ, NCNE
<< <i>I find the plastic pretty helpful sometimes. I'm looking for a 69-P Washington I like for my set. I bought a PCGS MS66 from Heritage for around $300, and the coin is OK, but just OK. The planchet is terrific for a 69 P, but ticky for the grade. This month, I've purchased just over 50 1969 mint sets locally, 10 more on Ebay, and this roll. I haven't found a coin yet I'd call a solid 5, but for the one in the 66 holder. I'll keep looking, but I don't mind paying for someone else's efforts, and the holder facilitates that transaction. I'm not sure why that bothers classic coin folks so much. I've been looking for just over two years.
some sets
some more sets >>
I didn't see the roll in the first link. I'm assuming it's a put-together roll from
mint sets since BU rolls are extremely scarce.
Fifty 1969 mint sets is not going to do it unless you get pretty lucky. I usually
figure there will only be 8% of the Philly quarters that are nice. This means they
are attractive and reasonably well-struck. ...the kind of coin that the average Joe
might include in a collection. 1% will be a true gem. Generally you have to lower
the bar for "gem" a little on this date to allow some ticks or planchet scratches.
Perhaps about .1% is a true gem or maybe even a little nicer (MS-66). I have lit-
tle doubt that higher grades exist but even chasing these down by zip code for
35 years hasn't gotten one into my hands.
And for all those people who figure with a mintage of two million 8% makes for a
very common coin, you should go out and see how many 1969 mint sets you can
find. Of the few that have survived the decades of ridicule and being ignored, many
are now tarnished and won't count toward the 8%.
For a collector this is just one date. You'll find the Denver quarter while looking
for the Philly with no trouble but there are lots of other dates with their own uni-
que characteristics and difficulties in locating them. You'll find plenty of ALL of the
moderns tough enough that you just might decide it's easier to buy one than try
to make it or collect it raw.
Guess I'll have to stick with the plentiful draped bust and large sized capped bust coins in order to find any nice coins to buy
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
<< <i>
<< <i>Why cant folks just collect for the sheer fun anymore? Why am I made to feel like a knuckle dragging cave man because HEAVEN FORBID, I just have the original mint packaging and did not get the coins slabbed. >>
Why do you care how other people collect? >>
Thats the point.
IF you want to slab everything go nuts. In fact, I will send you my pocket change and you can slab that. Hey wait, I just found an old bottle opener, its round, go slab that too!
I do not care what anyone does with their coins. Melt them all and make a suit of body armor. BUT, the moment I want to get a coin that is a Modern and all that I can find are slabs...I pay a premium because..its a slab.
IF I want a coin that I could have BEFORE 1986 gotten verified and traded great. NOT ANYNORE. OH NO, its not in a slab. I cant trade unless I have a slab. WHY because SLABS go at a premium. If you can tell me with a straight face and not fear being struck dead by a bolt of lightning that most folks who slab do so because they just want an authentic coin and NEVER EVER slab to make a quik buck I will buy you the next coin.
Because the reality is, slabs sell at a premium.
Thats just swell, but slabs are starting to ruin MY ENJOYMENT of the hobby and while I COLLECT MY COINS THE WAY I WANT, DO NOT TELL ME THE VALUE OF ANY COIN BECAUSE YOU STUCK IT IN SLAB. So ironically, I would ask the same of ou.
DONT EVER TELL ME THE VALUE OF ANYTHING BECAUSE YOU STUCK IT IN A SLAB. Sorry.
and it sets us apart from practitioners and consultants. Gregor
<< <i>BUT, the moment I want to get a coin that is a Modern and all that I can find are slabs...I pay a premium because..its a slab. >>
This is not a legitimate argument. The vast majority of slabbed moderns barely bring the submission fee, and many bring less. Unless, of course, you're buying coins graded 70.
Russ, NCNE
<< <i>
<< <i>BUT, the moment I want to get a coin that is a Modern and all that I can find are slabs...I pay a premium because..its a slab. >>
This is not a legitimate argument. The vast majority of slabbed moderns barely bring the submission fee, and many bring less. Unless, of course, you're buying coins graded 70.
Russ, NCNE >>
Graded 70 is a good choice? Is it not. I purchased some jamestown coins ms 70 & I think I will grab a couple pr 70. Is this a wise choice?
<< <i>
<< <i>BUT, the moment I want to get a coin that is a Modern and all that I can find are slabs...I pay a premium because..its a slab. >>
This is not a legitimate argument. The vast majority of slabbed moderns barely bring the submission fee, and many bring less. Unless, of course, you're buying coins graded 70.
Russ, NCNE >>
Excellent point Russ and exactly what causes me to get a bit unhinged. I however do not agree about the vast majority statement. Show me the pops. Even then, who cares, its not a science. Worse yet, they tell you that. Go figure.
I just want the coin. I just collect. My first CC dollar, hey, its a cleaned coin. BUT, you know what? I have alwats wanted one and golly gee, there it was and I paid a good price as both myself and the dealer knew this was a cleaned coin. HOWEVER, now that we live in the world of the oh its a 70 bacause I got lucky last night, even the 69'sd and 68's go for more. Please dont let me be among the unwashed who didnt know that fill in the lblank company is a "bad" TPG that churns out 70's like rice in a chinese restaurant. Another favorite for me, I assure you.
Is this a universal truth? No, it is not. Is it impacting what I could collect easily say 20 years ago? Yes, yes it is. In fact, I would love to play a game with these folks called what finger am I holding upi right now on my left hand. HINT: I am not saying they are number 1.
I know enough about the coins, DO NOT SELL ME A NUMBER ON A SLAB. Please.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>BUT, the moment I want to get a coin that is a Modern and all that I can find are slabs...I pay a premium because..its a slab. >>
This is not a legitimate argument. The vast majority of slabbed moderns barely bring the submission fee, and many bring less. Unless, of course, you're buying coins graded 70.
Russ, NCNE >>
Graded 70 is a good choice? Is it not. I purchased some jamestown coins ms 70 & I think I will grab a couple pr 70. Is this a wise choice? >>
There is not enough liquor drugs or women to get me to buy any coin with 70 on a slab. I will take this bet with anyone here.
<< <i>It is one thing to collect for sheer fun-which I don't even question that many Moderns can offer. However it is the artifical rarities and the inflated pricing that to me end the "fun".
Like I said before, would ANY 2006 MS widget sell raw for $2,000.00??? Don't think so!
The only reason why some sets are selling for big numbers raw, because the dealers are getting stupid numbers for them in slabs! Thats a weak link food chain!
Hey, there are plenty of beautiful smartly priced Moderns to collect (Like PR69 State Quarters). But when people start to blow real oney not realizing there i no net to fall back on....Then its nothing but the greater fool theory. >>
Wow, I agree with like most of this! Wonders never cease.
It is one thing to collect for sheer fun-which I don't even question that many Moderns can offer. However it is the artifical rarities and the inflated pricing that to me end the "fun".
Like I said before, would ANY 2006 MS widget sell raw for $2,000.00??? Don't think so!
The only reason why some sets are selling for big numbers raw, because the dealers are getting stupid numbers for them in slabs! Thats a weak link food chain!
Hey, there are plenty of beautiful smartly priced Moderns to collect (Like PR69 State Quarters). But when people start to blow real oney not realizing there i no net to fall back on....Then its nothing but the greater fool theory.
Let me reiterate:
And yeah, I almost forgot. Why would you buy a nice modern from the Mint, when you could have the priviledge of keeping a dealer in business who has nothing but contempt for you and your collecting preferences - even if you also collect so called "classics" too? Believe me, it leaves no doubt about whose interests that dealer really has at heart - not yours.
It all seems so clear to me now. Bash away!!
The fact is - that I will not **ever** buy any coin from a dealer who has such contempt for my collecting preferences and clearly thinks that my collection is a fool's game. I am being turned completely against ever buying another "classic" coin, because of such arrogance and self-important blather.
Like I said, just keep on Bashing. It's not very flattering.
I knew it would happen.
and it sets us apart from practitioners and consultants. Gregor