That is correct. We are looking at well over 20,000 proof platinum eagle halves now. I do not bother to ask about the 10th set anymore because the numbers are so high its a non issue.
<< <i> GOLD: The 2006-w gold has an effective mintage of about 11,000 quarters and halves but thats good for just over melt. >>
Eric, what do you mean by this? Isn't the mintage something like 16 or 18,000 for each of these? This is still lowest than the lowest of the regular bullion AGEs. I know, I know, this is a different series, but if a 1990 or 1991 1/2-oz commands a significant premium, why wouldn't the 2007-w at less than half the mintage--even accounting for the low survival rate of the 1991? As usual, thank you for all the great info and thoughts!
The strongest buyer I have ever seen came on the market last January and for about six months picked up 2006-w unc halves and quarters. He bought a very large percentage of the total (roughly 15000) mintage off the market. There are only about 11,000 coins left in the market after the cornering effort. After all that the 2006-w has fallen back to melt or close to it. So if the 2007-w come in at 11,000 coins there may be a short flipper spike but will it have legs? In the short run the numbers form 2006-w would indicate maybe not. I don't know its just not clear to me at least that 10,000 mintage gold makes for super coins. The gold long term inflection point looks like its 9,000 or less based on the data I have.
The 1991 half oz golds price is not a result of collector buying. The guys like Universal coin that put up gold for 401k programs have been buying them for investors by the roll for years because they are by law acceptable for 401k holdings. The W mint mark collector gold may not be at this time.
Let me ask you a question. What will happen when the 1991 half goes from being the lowest mintage coin for 15 years to being number 5 for 5 years. Will it be the most expensive coin in the series then? The only hope the 91 has is if condition rarity can save it.
Gradeflation being so rampant its a high risk holding in my view.
I don't think that I would be very comfortable putting my money on modern coins where the only differentiation is date and mint mark. Most of the modern series are collected by type. If you look at the lower end entry level products provided by the mint currently you'll realize that the mint is pushing collecting by design out of pocket change. That would be a scary tough for me if I was to put too much money on date and mint mark high end products.
I believe that today's eight year old quarter collectors will graduate one day to higher end changing reverse design with static obverses. I think that's why the mint calls Platinum "the Mint's premier product". IMO, I would rather look forward to a new design every year on a coin than just watch a number change...
<< <i> Most of the modern series are collected by type. >>
Neo, I've heard this kind of statement before, but don't really understand it. Unless I'm really overlooking something, each plat series has only one mint mark available. True for the AGEs also--unless you lump the satin finish coins with the bullion with the proof. I have come to consider each of these as a separate series. So really, our only option IS to collect by type, yes? I mean, I don't know anyone who would be happy with a satin-finish for one year and a proof for another and a bullion coin for another.
At the same time, when I'm collecting circulating series, I definitely don't collect by type. I've got to have those different mint marks!
"I don't know anyone who would be happy with a satin-finish for one year and a proof for another and a bullion coin for another"
Grits,
I see what you are saying, after all 110 million collectors buying from the mint every year can't be wrong. As humans (and collectors) we are creatures of habit and tend to group and categorize things. If I was putting together a set of Statehood quarters I too would have to get my "P" and my "D" and maybe even my "S" mint marks. That's what we do as humans.
Now, with that said, let's look at things from a little different perspective (I'll explain in detail). Through the last century the US Mint has gone through different phases, and we as collectors have had to adjust our collecting habits based on what the Mint produces (that is if we like to play the Mint's game). If you go back in history (around 75 years ago) there was a period when the mint tried to discourage collecting (or rather hoarding). At that time, the mint tried to minimize creativity on the coins to keep the desirability of the coins down (therefore nobody would collect them). At that point, collectors concentrated on getting a coin for each year (regardless of mint mark). A good example of that is the 1932 Quarter, the "D" was collected more widely than the "S" because at the time the "D" was considered to be more collectible (it had an original lower mintage). Today, the 1932 "D" Quarter is easier to get in higher grades because it was initially more widely collected than the "S" since the "S" was more common at that time and most people collected only the "D". Later, Whitman collecting albums came out and people started collecting both mint marks. At the time that was the trend.
Times change and so do trends. If we collected by mint mark is only because we learned to do so. If it came natural to us we would have been doing it before the albums came out (but we didn't). Now, going back to collecting trends, in 1997 the US Mint introduced us to a new concept in coin collecting: "Static Obverse and Changing Reverse". This is a way of collecting that establishes greater confidence on series collectors. Why? Because the coins don't change completely; yet, there's more changes on a coin than just a mint mark and a date. This type of collecting establishes a coin as a series (commemorative and artistic) while allowing beautiful designs to flow every year attracting more people.
In 1999, the Statehood Program started and it was a huge success from Day 1. Why?
1. They are affordable to collect. 2. Static obverse inspires confidence and establishes the coin as a series and not a stand alone coin. 3. Changing reverse allows for more artistic designs through the series.
Keep in mind that Platinum American Eagles are NOT very affordable (which is why they are such a great opportunity now). Like collecting by mint mark and date became such a huge success in the past after the early album collectors grew up and were able to afford higher graded coins, in time "Static Obverse and Changing Reverse" collectors will reach maturity and will speak with their wallets just like mint mark and date collectors have done for years now. When that happens you are going to have mature collectors (with deep wallets) that are willing to pay up for finer "Static Obverse and Changing Reverse" products (as that is the trend they grew up with).
Would I collect a proof one year and a matte finish the next and consider them the same? NO. Will I collect a Platinum Proof every year to have all designs? YES. Would I collect an American Gold Eagle every year? NO. Why? I already own a 1999W. After all, as beautiful as they are, they all look exactly alike; so, have one and you'll have all the designs available.
Is mint mark and date collecting going out of style? NO. There will always be collectors that will collect that way.
Is "Static Obverse and Changing Reverse" collecting a new trend? YES. Does it have a promising future? YES.
That is my point.
I collect W Uncirculated Platinum Eagles and W Proof Platinum Eagles and consider them two different things. I buy one every year to have the different dates and designs like everybody else. My point is:
Collecting trends are changing and, in the future, If there are more "Static Obverse and Changing Reverse" collectors than mint mark and date collectors I wouldn't want to be stock with a lot of that type of material.
Thanks for the discussion and insights. Even though I have readily embraced the changing-reverse plats, I guess this idea of collecting by design still seems the exception rather than the rule. You are right, though. It's clear this is changing. There's a lot to be said for both ways to collect, however. Like you, I love the changing designs of the plats (while despising those of the dollar coins). The fluctuating mintages of a "static" series offer their own excitement, however--one reason I, unlike you, have an interest in the plain old gold bullion series. One thing's for sure--it's an exciting time to be collecting moderns!
Yes it is Grits! It's great to be a modern coin collector. Although I used AGE's as an example, I personally believe that the America Gold Eagle program is a good series. I haven't meet a modern collector yet that doesn't own at the very least one. They are very popular and have a long history (well at least 20 years) and a large overall population.
You are right, collecting by "Static Obverse and Changing Reverse" is the exception to the rule in US for high end collectors today; but, the rest of the world has been doing so for many years. A great example of that is Chinese Pandas. Since 1982 (if I am not mistaken), China has produced Chinese Panda coins. The obverse of the coins has change little over the years; but the reverse is new every year (some years are repeated).
I own a full Silver Panda set and I'll tell you, finding a 1983 and a 1995 Proof could be a great challenge (and a pricey one at that too). There were only 10,000 1983 Silver Pandas made (that's a very low mintage for a Silver coin) and they are collected in many countries.
Platinum Eagles are even rarer than the Silver Pandas and are the only successful 10 year straight run Platinum program. Collectors in other countries have already started to collect these coins. Like Eric says, "there is nothing better than the absolute absence of the coins". These coins are not only beautiful but they are also rare. We are very lucky to be living witnesses of the first successful Platinum program and to be able to afford these coins at today's prices!
Well guys its good many of us were able to act on the 2007-w platinum half and quarter eagles before they went back order. The quarter and half are more than likely dead or very close to it. They may come back up for a very brief period if the mint has any unprocessed returns in the system. The $100 and $10 will be back repriced.
5th and sixth rarest type coins since 1915 and we bought them for melt because we were paying attention!
Remember that the price on 05s was slightly up and then mostly flat for about a year or so after close. It will take some time for the dealer/flipper overhang to evaporate.
Right now they are a great coin at a great price. SO to are the mighty 06-ws.
At 27% grade through rate on the 2007W $50s you have a possible 1,080 MS70 (if they were all graded by PCGS) for 2007 At 45% grade through rate on the 2007W $50s you have a possible 1,160 MS70 (if they were all graded by PCGS) for 2006
Keeping in mind that a lot of the 2007W material has gone to NGC (as opposed to last year), there's a big hole in 2007 W stuff. 2007 is going to be harder to find in MS70 than 2006 definitely (unless they were all graded by PCGS)...
Yeah it would be nice to buy the low mintage coins if you only knew which coins they were. It usually takes a few years to find out the actual mintages of a coin and by then we have most often past the reasonable window of opportunity. Yes I know that the platinum uncs are low mintage even the Proofs would be a great set. But if you can afford the platinum coins at US mint prices, above your/our regular coin spending, then I would say someone is paying you way too much for whatever it is that you do for a living.
<< <i>Yeah it would be nice to buy the low mintage coins if you only knew which coins they were. It usually takes a few years to find out the actual mintages of a coin and by then we have most often past the reasonable window of opportunity. Yes I know that the platinum uncs are low mintage even the Proofs would be a great set. But if you can afford the platinum coins at US mint prices, above your/our regular coin spending, then I would say someone is paying you way too much for whatever it is that you do for a living. >>
The $25 Plat Unc just once a year does your wallet good..
<< <i>Yes I know that the platinum uncs are low mintage even the Proofs would be a great set. But if you can afford the platinum coins at US mint prices, above your/our regular coin spending, then I would say someone is paying you way too much for whatever it is that you do for a living. >>
If you are a collector on a budget just portion out a slice of your budget for platinum coins and it takes care of itself.....
Also the money that you earn is never to much, most times that is hard earned money that those people worked hard for.....
The people that want to penalize people for earning a good living are a problem in this country.....
Collection under construction: VG Barber Quarters & Halves
<< <i>Yeah it would be nice to buy the low mintage coins if you only knew which coins they were. It usually takes a few years to find out the actual mintages of a coin and by then we have most often past the reasonable window of opportunity. Yes I know that the platinum uncs are low mintage even the Proofs would be a great set. But if you can afford the platinum coins at US mint prices, above your/our regular coin spending, then I would say someone is paying you way too much for whatever it is that you do for a living. >>
For some of us, buying plats IS our regular coin spending!!
Looks like the 2007-w does in fact have a fighting chance in PCGS70. If the coin pans out around 4000 coins and keeps grading badly we are all set.
Ericj96 >>
A fighting chance just in MS70 ? >>
**********
The 07-w half longer term is going to be a great coin. When I say fighting chance I am talking about being strong enough to challenge the mighty 06-w half in the PCGS-70 set.
<< <i>Yeah it would be nice to buy the low mintage coins if you only knew which coins they were. It usually takes a few years to find out the actual mintages of a coin and by then we have most often past the reasonable window of opportunity.
The board has done a good job of indicating the moderns that are going to be very low mintage before the close of sales. Yes final audited sales numbers take 2 years to come out but we don't need final audited numbers to know what is rare. Sources that have a history of being mostly right are mostly right and you should listen to them. Sources that have a history of being mostly wrong are mostly wrong and don't listen to them.
Use more than one data source. If there is reason to think printed data is bad look for other reference points that can help you see the most probable outcome.
"..Never too much.." You are probably right but I seem to have an irrational fear of greed and gluttony. Maybe if I could embrace these “qualities” the way my other California neighbors have, I would be much happier and certainly more well respected. But back to platinum. If you go with the more affordable $10 or $25 coins, you will move significantly away from the spot price of the metal. This will not be a problem until you try sell your coins, then it is my guess that you will have a very difficult time finding a dealer that will pay anything more than melt for uncs or Proofs, if they will buy them at all. Just my experience.
if you can afford the platinum coins at US mint prices, above your/our regular coin spending, then I would say someone is paying you way too much for whatever it is that you do for a living.
That's one of the more interesting correlations that I've seen on these boards. Aside from the presumption that I must be overpaid for what I do, I would submit to you the fact that platinum has been a very good investment for the past 5 years must have absolutely nothing to do with it, then.
If you go with the more affordable $10 or $25 coins, you will move significantly away from the spot price of the metal. This will not be a problem until you try sell your coins, then it is my guess that you will have a very difficult time finding a dealer that will pay anything more than melt for uncs or Proofs, if they will buy them at all. Just my experience.
It's been discussed at great length here, but it's true with virtually any and every collectible - your proceeds for a given coin depends very much on which $10 or $25 platinum coins that you are selling. My only other suggestion is that you might want to consider selling the coins on ebay if they are worth a premium and you aren't getting full price. Scum dealers are a dime a dozen, so make sure that the one you are dealing with is fair, for starters.
Q: Are You Printing Money? Bernanke: Not Literally
I have a 1/10 oz proof platinum coins that I have no intent on selling in the forseeable future so I don't care what the dealers are paying for them right now.....
With the rising platinum cost the mintages will only go down, which long term is a good thing.....
Collection under construction: VG Barber Quarters & Halves
Sales as of 1/14/2008 for Unc-w changing reverse platinum eagles
$100...1518 still in stock but not for sale $50....1260* went back order and dead or close to it. $25....1218* wend back order and dead or close to it. $10....3083 still in stock but not for sale. 4 Set..2741* dead for good
Thats: 4259 4001* 3959* 5824
There you have it folks
We may see sub 4000 half and quarter. I hope they come in just under 4000.
<< <i>Is there any chance that the 06-W $25 is a lower mintage than the 06-W $50. It seems for now that the 07-W $25 is the lowest of the 07's >>
There is *some* chance, but it doesn't look likely based on the data that we have seen on this board. I believe that EricJ96 has confirmed these with the mint's public affairs office, so I'd take them as pretty close to reality. That being said, the numbers for the $50 are 2577 and the numbers for the $25 are 2676, so they are close to one another (only 101 apart).
Traditionally (for the past 10 years) the $50 coins have been the low mintage of the series, with the exception of the 2006 proofs, where the $25 coin was the low mintage of the series. Given this trend, I would expect that the $50 w-unc for 2006 will remain the low mintage point.
Eric
EAC member since 2011, one third of the way through my 1793 large cent type set
<< <i>Is there any chance that the 06-W $25 is a lower mintage than the 06-W $50. It seems for now that the 07-W $25 is the lowest of the 07's >>
There is *some* chance, but it doesn't look likely based on the data that we have seen on this board. I believe that EricJ96 has confirmed these with the mint's public affairs office, so I'd take them as pretty close to reality. That being said, the numbers for the $50 are 2577 and the numbers for the $25 are 2676, so they are close to one another (only 101 apart).
Traditionally (for the past 10 years) the $50 coins have been the low mintage of the series, with the exception of the 2006 proofs, where the $25 coin was the low mintage of the series. Given this trend, I would expect that the $50 w-unc for 2006 will remain the low mintage point.
<< <i>Yeah it would be nice to buy the low mintage coins if you only knew which coins they were. It usually takes a few years to find out the actual mintages of a coin and by then we have most often past the reasonable window of opportunity. Yes I know that the platinum uncs are low mintage even the Proofs would be a great set. But if you can afford the platinum coins at US mint prices, above your/our regular coin spending, then I would say someone is paying you way too much for whatever it is that you do for a living. >>
YGTBSM! You probably like higher taxes and radio controlled heaters and air conditioners, "a chicken in every pot...and a car in every garage."
But that's not why I'm writing. You Grading Gurus, what are you finding the most common things that keep the burnished Uncs from scoring a 70? I just got my 1/4-oz (thanks for the nudge) and under a field monocular cannot find a single flaw on it. No marks. No rim dings. No unevenness in the fields. Of course these all have sharp strikes. Would this almost surely grade a 70?
Comments
7450
5547
5678
6816
including 4 coin sets of 4302
<< <i>
GOLD:
The 2006-w gold has an effective mintage of about 11,000 quarters and halves but thats good for just over melt. >>
Eric, what do you mean by this? Isn't the mintage something like 16 or 18,000 for each of these? This is still lowest than the lowest of the regular bullion AGEs. I know, I know, this is a different series, but if a 1990 or 1991 1/2-oz commands a significant premium, why wouldn't the 2007-w at less than half the mintage--even accounting for the low survival rate of the 1991? As usual, thank you for all the great info and thoughts!
The 1991 half oz golds price is not a result of collector buying. The guys like Universal coin that put up gold for 401k programs have been buying them for investors by the roll for years because they are by law acceptable for 401k holdings. The W mint mark collector gold may not be at this time.
Gradeflation being so rampant its a high risk holding in my view.
<< <i>Eric, what about the Buffalos? Do you have any data on them? >>
Answer:
I don't bother to ask because the mintages are way too high to be worth messing with.
Eric
I believe that today's eight year old quarter collectors will graduate one day to higher end changing reverse design with static obverses. I think that's why the mint calls Platinum "the Mint's premier product". IMO, I would rather look forward to a new design every year on a coin than just watch a number change...
<< <i> Most of the modern series are collected by type. >>
Neo, I've heard this kind of statement before, but don't really understand it. Unless I'm really overlooking something, each plat series has only one mint mark available. True for the AGEs also--unless you lump the satin finish coins with the bullion with the proof. I have come to consider each of these as a separate series. So really, our only option IS to collect by type, yes? I mean, I don't know anyone who would be happy with a satin-finish for one year and a proof for another and a bullion coin for another.
At the same time, when I'm collecting circulating series, I definitely don't collect by type. I've got to have those different mint marks!
Am I missing something here?
Grits,
I see what you are saying, after all 110 million collectors buying from the mint every year can't be wrong. As humans (and collectors) we are creatures of habit and tend to group and categorize things. If I was putting together a set of Statehood quarters I too would have to get my "P" and my "D" and maybe even my "S" mint marks. That's what we do as humans.
Now, with that said, let's look at things from a little different perspective (I'll explain in detail). Through the last century the US Mint has gone through different phases, and we as collectors have had to adjust our collecting habits based on what the Mint produces (that is if we like to play the Mint's game). If you go back in history (around 75 years ago) there was a period when the mint tried to discourage collecting (or rather hoarding). At that time, the mint tried to minimize creativity on the coins to keep the desirability of the coins down (therefore nobody would collect them). At that point, collectors concentrated on getting a coin for each year (regardless of mint mark). A good example of that is the 1932 Quarter, the "D" was collected more widely than the "S" because at the time the "D" was considered to be more collectible (it had an original lower mintage). Today, the 1932 "D" Quarter is easier to get in higher grades because it was initially more widely collected than the "S" since the "S" was more common at that time and most people collected only the "D". Later, Whitman collecting albums came out and people started collecting both mint marks. At the time that was the trend.
Times change and so do trends. If we collected by mint mark is only because we learned to do so. If it came natural to us we would have been doing it before the albums came out (but we didn't). Now, going back to collecting trends, in 1997 the US Mint introduced us to a new concept in coin collecting: "Static Obverse and Changing Reverse". This is a way of collecting that establishes greater confidence on series collectors. Why? Because the coins don't change completely; yet, there's more changes on a coin than just a mint mark and a date. This type of collecting establishes a coin as a series (commemorative and artistic) while allowing beautiful designs to flow every year attracting more people.
In 1999, the Statehood Program started and it was a huge success from Day 1. Why?
1. They are affordable to collect.
2. Static obverse inspires confidence and establishes the coin as a series and not a stand alone coin.
3. Changing reverse allows for more artistic designs through the series.
Keep in mind that Platinum American Eagles are NOT very affordable (which is why they are such a great opportunity now). Like collecting by mint mark and date became such a huge success in the past after the early album collectors grew up and were able to afford higher graded coins, in time "Static Obverse and Changing Reverse" collectors will reach maturity and will speak with their wallets just like mint mark and date collectors have done for years now. When that happens you are going to have mature collectors (with deep wallets) that are willing to pay up for finer "Static Obverse and Changing Reverse" products (as that is the trend they grew up with).
Would I collect a proof one year and a matte finish the next and consider them the same? NO. Will I collect a Platinum Proof every year to have all designs? YES. Would I collect an American Gold Eagle every year? NO. Why? I already own a 1999W. After all, as beautiful as they are, they all look exactly alike; so, have one and you'll have all the designs available.
Is mint mark and date collecting going out of style? NO. There will always be collectors that will collect that way.
Is "Static Obverse and Changing Reverse" collecting a new trend? YES. Does it have a promising future? YES.
That is my point.
I collect W Uncirculated Platinum Eagles and W Proof Platinum Eagles and consider them two different things. I buy one every year to have the different dates and designs like everybody else. My point is:
Collecting trends are changing and, in the future, If there are more "Static Obverse and Changing Reverse" collectors than mint mark and date collectors I wouldn't want to be stock with a lot of that type of material.
Thanks for the discussion and insights. Even though I have readily embraced the changing-reverse plats, I guess this idea of collecting by design still seems the exception rather than the rule. You are right, though. It's clear this is changing. There's a lot to be said for both ways to collect, however. Like you, I love the changing designs of the plats (while despising those of the dollar coins). The fluctuating mintages of a "static" series offer their own excitement, however--one reason I, unlike you, have an interest in the plain old gold bullion series. One thing's for sure--it's an exciting time to be collecting moderns!
You are right, collecting by "Static Obverse and Changing Reverse" is the exception to the rule in US for high end collectors today; but, the rest of the world has been doing so for many years. A great example of that is Chinese Pandas. Since 1982 (if I am not mistaken), China has produced Chinese Panda coins. The obverse of the coins has change little over the years; but the reverse is new every year (some years are repeated).
I own a full Silver Panda set and I'll tell you, finding a 1983 and a 1995 Proof could be a great challenge (and a pricey one at that too). There were only 10,000 1983 Silver Pandas made (that's a very low mintage for a Silver coin) and they are collected in many countries.
Platinum Eagles are even rarer than the Silver Pandas and are the only successful 10 year straight run Platinum program. Collectors in other countries have already started to collect these coins. Like Eric says, "there is nothing better than the absolute absence of the coins". These coins are not only beautiful but they are also rare. We are very lucky to be living witnesses of the first successful Platinum program and to be able to afford these coins at today's prices!
5th and sixth rarest type coins since 1915 and we bought them for melt because we were paying attention!
Good for us!
Remember that the price on 05s was slightly up and then mostly flat for about a year or so after close. It will take some time for the dealer/flipper overhang to evaporate.
Right now they are a great coin at a great price. SO to are the mighty 06-ws.
Ericj96
For all interested, these are the latest realized prices for PCGS graded W Uncirculated PLatinum to date:
If 06-w numbers are about 3068, 2577, 2676 and 3544 and 07-w 5000, 4000, 4200, 7000 what would that put the 70 rarity ranking?
These are Grade-Thru rates as of this week:
At 45% grade through rate on the 2007W $50s you have a possible 1,160 MS70 (if they were all graded by PCGS) for 2006
Keeping in mind that a lot of the 2007W material has gone to NGC (as opposed to last year), there's a big hole in 2007 W stuff. 2007 is going to be harder to find in MS70 than 2006 definitely (unless they were all graded by PCGS)...
I knew it would happen.
Looks like the 2007-w does in fact have a fighting chance in PCGS70. If the coin pans out around 4000 coins and keeps grading badly we are all set.
Ericj96
<< <i>Thanks Ben,
Looks like the 2007-w does in fact have a fighting chance in PCGS70. If the coin pans out around 4000 coins and keeps grading badly we are all set.
Ericj96 >>
A fighting chance just in MS70 ?
Yes I know that the platinum uncs are low mintage even the Proofs would be a great set. But if you can afford the platinum coins at US mint prices, above your/our regular coin spending, then I would say someone is paying you way too much for whatever it is that you do for a living.
<< <i>Yeah it would be nice to buy the low mintage coins if you only knew which coins they were. It usually takes a few years to find out the actual mintages of a coin and by then we have most often past the reasonable window of opportunity.
Yes I know that the platinum uncs are low mintage even the Proofs would be a great set. But if you can afford the platinum coins at US mint prices, above your/our regular coin spending, then I would say someone is paying you way too much for whatever it is that you do for a living. >>
The $25 Plat Unc just once a year does your wallet good..
Maybe. On the other hand, at my house, we live debt free. We're willing to live with just one TV and no Nike. That helps.
<< <i>Yes I know that the platinum uncs are low mintage even the Proofs would be a great set. But if you can afford the platinum coins at US mint prices, above your/our regular coin spending, then I would say someone is paying you way too much for whatever it is that you do for a living. >>
If you are a collector on a budget just portion out a slice of your budget for platinum coins and it takes care of itself.....
Also the money that you earn is never to much, most times that is hard earned money that those people worked hard for.....
The people that want to penalize people for earning a good living are a problem in this country.....
<< <i>Yeah it would be nice to buy the low mintage coins if you only knew which coins they were. It usually takes a few years to find out the actual mintages of a coin and by then we have most often past the reasonable window of opportunity.
Yes I know that the platinum uncs are low mintage even the Proofs would be a great set. But if you can afford the platinum coins at US mint prices, above your/our regular coin spending, then I would say someone is paying you way too much for whatever it is that you do for a living. >>
For some of us, buying plats IS our regular coin spending!!
<< <i>
<< <i>Thanks Ben,
Looks like the 2007-w does in fact have a fighting chance in PCGS70. If the coin pans out around 4000 coins and keeps grading badly we are all set.
Ericj96 >>
A fighting chance just in MS70 ? >>
**********
The 07-w half longer term is going to be a great coin. When I say fighting chance I am talking about being strong enough to challenge the mighty 06-w half in the PCGS-70 set.
<< <i>Yeah it would be nice to buy the low mintage coins if you only knew which coins they were. It usually takes a few years to find out the actual mintages of a coin and by then we have most often past the reasonable window of opportunity.
The board has done a good job of indicating the moderns that are going to be very low mintage before the close of sales. Yes final audited sales numbers take 2 years to come out but we don't need final audited numbers to know what is rare. Sources that have a history of being mostly right are mostly right and you should listen to them. Sources that have a history of being mostly wrong are mostly wrong and don't listen to them.
Use more than one data source. If there is reason to think printed data is bad look for other reference points that can help you see the most probable outcome.
But back to platinum. If you go with the more affordable $10 or $25 coins, you will move significantly away from the spot price of the metal. This will not be a problem until you try sell your coins, then it is my guess that you will have a very difficult time finding a dealer that will pay anything more than melt for uncs or Proofs, if they will buy them at all. Just my experience.
That's one of the more interesting correlations that I've seen on these boards. Aside from the presumption that I must be overpaid for what I do, I would submit to you the fact that platinum has been a very good investment for the past 5 years must have absolutely nothing to do with it, then.
If you go with the more affordable $10 or $25 coins, you will move significantly away from the spot price of the metal. This will not be a problem until you try sell your coins, then it is my guess that you will have a very difficult time finding a dealer that will pay anything more than melt for uncs or Proofs, if they will buy them at all. Just my experience.
It's been discussed at great length here, but it's true with virtually any and every collectible - your proceeds for a given coin depends very much on which $10 or $25 platinum coins that you are selling. My only other suggestion is that you might want to consider selling the coins on ebay if they are worth a premium and you aren't getting full price. Scum dealers are a dime a dozen, so make sure that the one you are dealing with is fair, for starters.
I knew it would happen.
With the rising platinum cost the mintages will only go down, which long term is a good thing.....
$100...1518 still in stock but not for sale
$50....1260* went back order and dead or close to it.
$25....1218* wend back order and dead or close to it.
$10....3083 still in stock but not for sale.
4 Set..2741* dead for good
Thats:
4259
4001*
3959*
5824
There you have it folks
We may see sub 4000 half and quarter. I hope they come in just under 4000.
Impressive if you did
$100...7685
$50....5565+ anniversary set = 20,000 ++++
$25....5702
$10....6863
includes 4302*
Are they a good buy or not?
<< <i>Is there any chance that the 06-W $25 is a lower mintage than the 06-W $50. It seems for now that the 07-W $25 is the lowest of the 07's >>
There is *some* chance, but it doesn't look likely based on the data that we have seen on this board. I believe that EricJ96 has confirmed these with the mint's public affairs office, so I'd take them as pretty close to reality. That being said, the numbers for the $50 are 2577 and the numbers for the $25 are 2676, so they are close to one another (only 101 apart).
Traditionally (for the past 10 years) the $50 coins have been the low mintage of the series, with the exception of the 2006 proofs, where the $25 coin was the low mintage of the series. Given this trend, I would expect that the $50 w-unc for 2006 will remain the low mintage point.
Eric
<< <i>
<< <i>Is there any chance that the 06-W $25 is a lower mintage than the 06-W $50. It seems for now that the 07-W $25 is the lowest of the 07's >>
There is *some* chance, but it doesn't look likely based on the data that we have seen on this board. I believe that EricJ96 has confirmed these with the mint's public affairs office, so I'd take them as pretty close to reality. That being said, the numbers for the $50 are 2577 and the numbers for the $25 are 2676, so they are close to one another (only 101 apart).
Traditionally (for the past 10 years) the $50 coins have been the low mintage of the series, with the exception of the 2006 proofs, where the $25 coin was the low mintage of the series. Given this trend, I would expect that the $50 w-unc for 2006 will remain the low mintage point.
Eric >>
********
Well said
<< <i>Yeah it would be nice to buy the low mintage coins if you only knew which coins they were. It usually takes a few years to find out the actual mintages of a coin and by then we have most often past the reasonable window of opportunity.
Yes I know that the platinum uncs are low mintage even the Proofs would be a great set. But if you can afford the platinum coins at US mint prices, above your/our regular coin spending, then I would say someone is paying you way too much for whatever it is that you do for a living. >>
YGTBSM! You probably like higher taxes and radio controlled heaters and air conditioners, "a chicken in every pot...and a car in every garage."
Ren
<< <i>I don't have the numbers, how do these compare to the 2004? >>
Lower, across the board!
But that's not why I'm writing. You Grading Gurus, what are you finding the most common things that keep the burnished Uncs from scoring a 70? I just got my 1/4-oz (thanks for the nudge) and under a field monocular cannot find a single flaw on it. No marks. No rim dings. No unevenness in the fields. Of course these all have sharp strikes. Would this almost surely grade a 70?
Great thread, Eric
Ren