<< <i>With all the talk about the 2008 W Plats, does anyone think that, in the end, the 2008 W Buffs will be the long term kings of the 2008 issues? They seem like they have incredible potential. >>
I think the main difference between '08 plats and buffs is that buffs are already realizing their potential. When plats wake up, IF they wake up, I think they will achieve parity with the buffs. Don't forget the gold unc-w eagles, too. '08 is just going to be seen as an amazing year.
When plats wake up, IF they wake up, I think they will achieve parity with the buffs. Don't forget the gold unc-w eagles, too. '08 is just going to be seen as an amazing year.
As I say, the best time to *collect* is when they aren't being sought by the masses. For Plats, I'd say that that time is now. I think that now is the best chance in the past 6 years for an aspiring collector to drop back and regroup, in order to push for the goal line. That might mean selling a few things in order to buy a few things. Not a bad scenario at all!
So, if you have a few Buffs, and they are already maturing, it might be time to take some off the table. They aren't really rare, although they are obviously popular. And the 2008-W AGEs - I think that they still need time to properly age, like a good year for a fine wine. They will come no doubt, and when they do you will be glad to have held them. Think 1991. Already the 2006-W, 2007-W, and 2008-W half ouncers are approaching $1,000 in PCGS MS-69/NGC MS-70. Interesting stuff.
jmho.
Q: Are You Printing Money? Bernanke: Not Literally
<< <i>>>Suppose a person owns several duplicates of the rarest issues, and not very many of the more common issues. That puts him in a terrible position - does he use his duplicates of the rarities to finance the purchase of the common dates now, or does he risk letting the high mintage issues get away from him because of attrition while he saves up enough money to pick them off, one by one?<<
Private melting probably causes higher attrition of common dates, but not enough for them to become scarcer than the keys. Silver coin melts have been going on for more than 40 years, but as far as I know, none of the circulated common dates in the "junk silver" category have overtaken the keys in price. As an example, the circulated 1955 half dollar is still worth much more than the circulated 1956. >>
<< <i>Somehow, I am not sure the comparison between Plats and classic commems is fair. The design variation is different whether there is a price reflection between them or not.
With the classic commems, you have a changing reverse and a changing obverse. Nothing remains constant on those coins. As a set, you need to read a book or get some sort of guidance to know which coins are required to complete the set since none of them look alike or share anything in common. In other words, you can't tell the coins go together as a set by just looking at them even if they were all in front of you at once. Sort of like, modern commems, first spouses or pres dollars. In a series like that, the key date may not necessarily be the most valuable one (or it may be).
On the other hand, Statehood Quarters and Plats (Proof and W Uncs) share the same obverse every year making them stick together as a set while the reverse changes making them somewhat entertaining to the collector (when compared to a set that does not go together as easy). That seems like a fairly new concept to me, IMHO. In a series like that, I believe, the key date has a little bit more strength as there is better set cohesion.
Speculators exist in every single series. I would dare to say that speculators are, in part, a driving element in healthy series growth. Some people stay for a bit in hopes of quick financial gains. Some people speculate within the series they collect. I think we all are, to an extent, guilty of that. And, some become real collectors and stay for the long run. >>
IMHO, aside from price and low mintages, the yearly reverse changes make them (platinum series) more appealing & entertaining to the collector. The one ounce coins appeal to me because I can see the images a lot clearer on a larger coin. Now if I just could afford to own a few more! >>
.... the above points are very well taken, and I think sum up things very nicely for the platinum coins!
<< <i>When I read Eric's "design-based" assertions, I think he is saying that more and more collectors will be collecting by type rather than collecting within a series. And that an increased interest in type collecting will increase demand for "design-based" coins such as the plats.
My intuition says that type collecting is gaining momentum. The problem that I see, though, is that a complete type collection is immense. Therefore, type collectors will limit their collection to a sub-type. I think Eric is trying to stimulate interest in the rarest (based on mintage) of the type coins. That is certainly a compelling sub-type on which to focus. >>
.... The above is a logical and well thought-out point, and I agee with you! Focus on quality on not necessarily quantity if you are in this as an investor!
So, does it appear that the "wild card" of platinum base metal pricing could result in what appears to be the very "best" platinum coins ending up returning the very worst returns in the long run (if and when platinum starts trading at $3,000 - $5,000/oz)? Yet, on the other hand, a crashing base metal price, could, in theory, result in the "best" platinum coins performing wildly (good) vis a vis the (horribly performing) commons. If the above is true, one might only be able to predict the upside potential of this platinum coin vs. that platinum coin by having a superior knowledge of the commodities markets. Thoughts?
Wondercoin
Please visit my website at www.wondercoins.com and my ebay auctions under my user name www.wondercoin.com.
<< <i>So, does it appear that the "wild card" of platinum base metal pricing could result in what appears to be the very "best" platinum coins ending up returning the very worst returns in the long run (if and when platinum starts trading at $3,000 - $5,000/oz)? Yet, on the other hand, a crashing base metal price, could, in theory, result in the "best" platinum coins performing wildly (good) vis a vis the (horribly performing) commons. If the above is true, one might only be able to predict the upside potential of this platinum coin vs. that platinum coin by having a superior knowledge of the commodities markets. Thoughts?
Wondercoin >>
Notification of 2008 American Eagle Platinum Uncirculated Coin Pricing
The United States Mint will make available the following 2008 American Eagle Uncirculated Platinum Coins according to the following price schedule:
Effective July 23, 2008, the United States Mint will commence selling the following 2008 American Eagle Proof Coins according to the following price schedule:
Private melting probably causes higher attrition of common dates, but not enough for them to become scarcer than the keys. Silver coin melts have been going on for more than 40 years, but as far as I know, none of the circulated common dates in the "junk silver" category have overtaken the keys in price. As an example, the circulated 1955 half dollar is still worth much more than the circulated 1956.
Hmmmmm, I recently searched a bag of 90% halves and found (3) 1955-Ps. Somebody didn't put a premium on them, but maybe that was a fluke.
I wouldn't compare Plats to circulated halves, mainly because the capital requirements are different for a 1/2 oz. Proof Plat than for a 90% silver circulated Frankie, and I believe - so are the market dynamics.
I think that it's entirely possible that all of the surplus Platinum Proofs from an "average" year like 2002 (with a mintage of 8,772) could be liquidated if the spot price rises high enough and yet none of it's brethren from 2004 (with a mintage of 5,063) would make it to the melting pot, because of their status as a key date.
Because of the pervasive (and probably correct) belief that more 2002s exist, they will be more vulnerable to destruction as the price of platinum rises. For example if 5,000 of the 2002s were melted and none of the 2004s were melted - nobody would notice for years that the surviving populations were the reverse of what the original mintages would indicate.
At some point, a collector who is trying to locate a 2002 1/2 oz. Proof may find none being offered at any price while there are (3) separate 2004 1/2 oz. Proofs for sale at the price he wants to pay for the 2002. That's the price discovery mechanism at work.
That is the problem with the Plats already - nobody knows the reality of what's out there. That's what collecting is all about, isn't it?
Q: Are You Printing Money? Bernanke: Not Literally
How many of us have extra proof plats from typical non-key years ('04, '08)? I have only an extra '07 1/2 because of the dastardly RP set. In fact, I'm still missing two common years ('97, '00). The '97 appears fairly often, but not the 2000.
How many of us have extra proof plats from typical non-key years ('04, '08)? I have only an extra '07 1/2 because of the dastardly RP set. In fact, I'm still missing two common years ('97, '00). The '97 appears fairly often, but not the 2000.
I have no extras of the non-key proofs, unless you count '03 & '05.
Q: Are You Printing Money? Bernanke: Not Literally
How many of us have extra proof plats from typical non-key years ('04, '08)? I have only an extra '07 1/2 because of the dastardly RP set. In fact, I'm still missing two common years ('97, '00). The '97 appears fairly often, but not the 2000. >>
My only plats are the '06 W uncs, '07 W uncs, '08 W uncs and '08 W proofs.
<< <i>With all the talk about the 2008 W Plats, does anyone think that, in the end, the 2008 W Buffs will be the long term kings of the 2008 issues? They seem like they have incredible potential. >>
I think the main difference between '08 plats and buffs is that buffs are already realizing their potential. When plats wake up, IF they wake up, I think they will achieve parity with the buffs. Don't forget the gold unc-w eagles, too. '08 is just going to be seen as an amazing year. >>
Hi Grits-
You don't see more upward potential for the '08 W buffs? It seems to me that they still have room to go over time.
"I think that it's entirely possible that all of the surplus Platinum Proofs from an "average" year like 2002 (with a mintage of 8,772) could be liquidated if the spot price rises high enough and yet none of it's brethren from 2004 (with a mintage of 5,063) would make it to the melting pot, because of their status as a key date."
My thoughts exactly. The platinum key dates for now.... will not be the key dates in the future. The dates with the mid level mintages will most likely find their way into the melting pot, and before any one realizes it, there will be less around than the 'key' dates. I think this scenario is more likely to happen.... than not.
But..... if there are not many collectors of the series, will it really matter?
<< <i>"I think that it's entirely possible that all of the surplus Platinum Proofs from an "average" year like 2002 (with a mintage of 8,772) could be liquidated if the spot price rises high enough and yet none of it's brethren from 2004 (with a mintage of 5,063) would make it to the melting pot, because of their status as a key date."
My thoughts exactly. The platinum key dates for now.... will not be the key dates in the future. The dates with the mid level mintages will most likely find their way into the melting pot, and before any one realizes it, there will be less around than the 'key' dates. I think this scenario is more likely to happen.... than not.
But..... if there are not many collectors of the series, will it really matter? >>
If this does happen, and the mid level mintage dates become the keys, how will anyone know? The final mintage numbers will be all that is available to go by with respect to the key label, or is there some way that this would become definitively apparent such that the new - mid level mintage keys - could be recognized as the new keys?
It's the uncertainty that will keep prices of the higher mintage proofs down. Anyone that pays a premium price for a higher mintage platinum proof will run the risk that a hoard of that date could suddenly appear and dramatically lower its value. Anyone who owned an 1898-O or 1903-O Morgan dollar in 1962 received just such an unpleasant surprise when the Treasury hoard was released.
"If I could hand a new collector a grocery list of what to look for it would be the following: 1) Favor series with a major unifying design aspect that is hard to get past. 2) Each coin should be differentiated not just on mint marks and dates because the rest of the world is going type and we may too at some point. Its insurance. 3) Buy coins with mintages less than 7000 coins because if you graph price vs population of design based type coins over the last 100 years the point at which they have a tendency to take off is about 6,500 coins. Anything less that that is pay dirt for the patient. 4) Buy coins with higher mintages only if the total population of the set is massive." . These are my long standing points in regard to coinage and they are posted on page one of this thread. . Lets go though them..... 1) Anyone that does not think a lack of design cohesion doesn't impact price (and frequently negatively) has not taken the time to plot date rarity vs price and design rarity vs price on a series with a high degree of design differentiation. I don't know what else to say on that. . 2a) The united states is one of the few places in the world where coins are collected by date and mint mark and we have done so because we have had so little design variation in pocket change over the last 200 years. The rest of the world is and has been collecting mostly by design and denomination because they have longer histories and countless different coins to pull from. We haven't until now. Under recent & current legislation we will have 3 times the number of new designs in 20 year than have been seen in the last 200! . 2b) I don know why there would be any problem coming up with total market capitalization for dependable mintage coins like US proof coins issued since 1936. The sum of all mintages times market price at the center of the grading bell line curve is the answer. The fifty state silver quarters total market capitalization for the 1999 keys dates with their 800,000 mintage are worth more than the total market value of every proof quarter issued from 1936 to 1998 combined! There is no problem making this calculation. . 2c) You may not believe me but if you will check, our fine friends at the US Mint and one of their favorite members of Congress made a very public statement that changing the reverse of a coin on an annual basis dramatically improves collector interest and absorption. Its the play they are running with and long term its the Mint that dictates what's in collections. You guys can find it your selves or buy KP's book if they print it in the early summer. . 2d) How many changing reverse designs do we have now lets count to three.... 1) Life of Lincoln type cents 2) Westward Journey Nickels 3) Fifty State & Territories Quarters 4) National Parks Quarters 5) Presidential Dollars 6) Native American Dollars Now we can all stick our head in the sand and assume that this will have little impact on collector habits as the older collectors fade from the scene. . 2e) I have gone on record clearly and stated that the reason to like changing reverse platinum eagles is a closely spaced bullion price floor under the purchase price, ultra low mintages regardless of if you are using date rarity, relative rarity in set or type to judge them when you use a 100 year time span as your basis.------" Each coin should be differentiated not just on mint marks and dates because the rest of the world is going type and we may too at some point. Its insurance." Right its insurance. Not the only consideration. Reverse only design variety is protection from almost any collecting structure. I am not suggesting that all platinum eagles are going to be great. They do however have a ton going for them and they do have the structure shown in the six line items above that Mint employees frequently call the collector series. They call them collector series because that's were the next generation is being trained. . Is my suggestion that this design tidal wave will impact the collectors habits over time conjecture? In some peoples view it may be based on what I can get on this forum. It took me 40,000 words and a load of charts to make my points in KP's book. .
Is it conjecture that complete high grade set values go through a maturation cycle like everything else and then flatten out as they mature and the best time to pick up serious keys is when they are "modern" before they go though the growth portion of the cycle. "4) Buy coins with higher mintage only if the total population of the set is massive." Tight mintage bottlenecks on massive massive young series are a sign post of future greatness. This point is fall out of bed easy to prove, just on go on the gray sheet archives and buy one grey sheet for each year from the mid 1960s to present add up the price of each set in mint state grade at the center of the grading bell curve then index them to inflation.....got news for you most popular classic sets peaked almost 20 years ago! Not because anything is wrong with them....its just they have matured! . Is the appreciation rate of the 1936 Lincoln cent in trouble indexed to inflation? Yes its a flat fact. Is the current situation of most classic mint state series that carry a value over 50 times melt dangerous? They dont have a tightly spaced bullion floor to protect them and in general if you index complete set classic values to inflation in the middle of the mint state grading bell line curve over the last 20 years its not an all that attractive situation. If you index high material content classic coinage numismatic premiums to inflation over the last 10 years its almost a disaster. The same can not be said for high bullion content moderns and their keys purchased from the Mint.
Good night to all............
Eric Jordan
Now we can all go collect what we like.... I am a collector by the way. I "flip" very few of my coins but with 40 percent of my net worth in my collection I cant afford to mess with non performers. Moderns are the growth segment on a percentage basis and they allow me to hug the always liquid and normally protective bullion floor in most cases while still enjoying the coins and the price growth behavior of young keys.
I think if platinum goes back up to $2000, we'll see lots of platinum eagles going into the melting pot. Those who were caught flat-footed when platinum took its nose dive last year won't let it happen again.
>>Moderns are the growth segment on a percentage basis and they allow me to hug the always liquid and normally protective bullion floor in most cases while still enjoying the coins and the price growth behavior of young keys.<<
THAT is why I consider the Jackson's Liberty (non)Spouse $10 gold a potential long-term home run! Great looking coin with a classic motif, high design rarity (less than 13,000 mintage split between proof and uncirculated), reasonable bullion floor with 1/2 oz. gold, and member of the popular Liberty short set within the First Spouse series.
Slightly off-topic, but I posted this earlier on another thread and think it may be of interest here since it concerns a "modern" coin set.
I'm picking up a few 2009 Mint Sets as a speculation. I think the eight 2009-P and D cents in the sets have the potential to become key or semi-key coins. As far as I know, the Mint Sets will be the *only* source of these coins in 95% copper composition.
I think it's likely that the mintage for *each* of these 8 cents will likely be less than the mintage of the 1924-D cent (2.5 million), which sells for $25 and more even in low grades. The "satin finish" will make the 2009 copper cents easily distinguishable from the zinc circulation strikes. The 2009-P and D copper cents have the added advantages that they are single-year type coins, and modern Lincolns are much more widely collected than wheats. Lincoln cent collectors will have to compete with Mint Set collectors for the limited supply of 2009-P and D copper cents, since these coins will be available *only* in the Mint Sets.
Last year about 745,000 Mint Sets were produced. Currently these sets are selling at close to double the Mint's issue price. I expect this year's sets to have a higher mintage, but even at double the 2008 mintage I consider the 2009 sets to be a good buy because of the cents.
Face value of the 2009 Mint Sets is $14.38, which limits downside risk to less than 50% of the $27.95 purchase price from the Mint.
<< <i>"If I could hand a new collector a grocery list of what to look for it would be the following: 1) Favor series with a major unifying design aspect that is hard to get past. 2) Each coin should be differentiated not just on mint marks and dates because the rest of the world is going type and we may too at some point. Its insurance. 3) Buy coins with mintages less than 7000 coins because if you graph price vs population of design based type coins over the last 100 years the point at which they have a tendency to take off is about 6,500 coins. Anything less that that is pay dirt for the patient. 4) Buy coins with higher mintages only if the total population of the set is massive." . These are my long standing points in regard to coinage and they are posted on page one of this thread. . Lets go though them..... 1) Anyone that does not think a lack of design cohesion doesn't impact price (and frequently negatively) has not taken the time to plot date rarity vs price and design rarity vs price on a series with a high degree of design differentiation. I don't know what else to say on that. . 2a) The united states is one of the few places in the world where coins are collected by date and mint mark and we have done so because we have had so little design variation in pocket change over the last 200 years. The rest of the world is and has been collecting mostly by design and denomination because they have longer histories and countless different coins to pull from. We haven't until now. Under recent & current legislation we will have 3 times the number of new designs in 20 year than have been seen in the last 200! . 2b) I don know why there would be any problem coming up with total market capitalization for dependable mintage coins like US proof coins issued since 1936. The sum of all mintages times market price at the center of the grading bell line curve is the answer. The fifty state silver quarters total market capitalization for the 1999 keys dates with their 800,000 mintage are worth more than the total market value of every proof quarter issued from 1936 to 1998 combined! There is no problem making this calculation. . 2c) You may not believe me but if you will check, our fine friends at the US Mint and one of their favorite members of Congress made a very public statement that changing the reverse of a coin on an annual basis dramatically improves collector interest and absorption. Its the play they are running with and long term its the Mint that dictates what's in collections. You guys can find it your selves or buy KP's book if they print it in the early summer. . 2d) How many changing reverse designs do we have now lets count to three.... 1) Life of Lincoln type cents 2) Westward Journey Nickels 3) Fifty State & Territories Quarters 4) National Parks Quarters 5) Presidential Dollars 6) Native American Dollars Now we can all stick our head in the sand and assume that this will have little impact on collector habits as the older collectors fade from the scene. . 2e) I have gone on record clearly and stated that the reason to like changing reverse platinum eagles is a closely spaced bullion price floor under the purchase price, ultra low mintages regardless of if you are using date rarity, relative rarity in set or type to judge them when you use a 100 year time span as your basis.------" Each coin should be differentiated not just on mint marks and dates because the rest of the world is going type and we may too at some point. Its insurance." Right its insurance. Not the only consideration. Reverse only design variety is protection from almost any collecting structure. I am not suggesting that all platinum eagles are going to be great. They do however have a ton going for them and they do have the structure shown in the six line items above that Mint employees frequently call the collector series. They call them collector series because that's were the next generation is being trained. . Is my suggestion that this design tidal wave will impact the collectors habits over time conjecture? In some peoples view it may be based on what I can get on this forum. It took me 40,000 words and a load of charts to make my points in KP's book. .
Is it conjecture that complete high grade set values go through a maturation cycle like everything else and then flatten out as they mature and the best time to pick up serious keys is when they are "modern" before they go though the growth portion of the cycle. "4) Buy coins with higher mintage only if the total population of the set is massive." Tight mintage bottlenecks on massive massive young series are a sign post of future greatness. This point is fall out of bed easy to prove, just on go on the gray sheet archives and buy one grey sheet for each year from the mid 1960s to present add up the price of each set in mint state grade at the center of the grading bell curve then index them to inflation.....got news for you most popular classic sets peaked almost 20 years ago! Not because anything is wrong with them....its just they have matured! . Is the appreciation rate of the 1936 Lincoln cent in trouble indexed to inflation? Yes its a flat fact. Is the current situation of most classic mint state series that carry a value over 50 times melt dangerous? They dont have a tightly spaced bullion floor to protect them and in general if you index complete set classic values to inflation in the middle of the mint state grading bell line curve over the last 20 years its not an all that attractive situation. If you index high material content classic coinage numismatic premiums to inflation over the last 10 years its almost a disaster. The same can not be said for high bullion content moderns and their keys purchased from the Mint.
Good night to all............
Eric Jordan
Now we can all go collect what we like.... I am a collector by the way. I "flip" very few of my coins but with 40 percent of my net worth in my collection I cant afford to mess with non performers. Moderns are the growth segment on a percentage basis and they allow me to hug the always liquid and normally protective bullion floor in most cases while still enjoying the coins and the price growth behavior of young keys. >>
... nicely said, Eric, and extremely logical, as usual ... thank you and good night!
<< <i>Slightly off-topic, but I posted this earlier on another thread and think it may be of interest here since it concerns a "modern" coin set.
I'm picking up a few 2009 Mint Sets as a speculation. I think the eight 2009-P and D cents in the sets have the potential to become key or semi-key coins. As far as I know, the Mint Sets will be the *only* source of these coins in 95% copper composition.
I think it's likely that the mintage for *each* of these 8 cents will likely be less than the mintage of the 1924-D cent (2.5 million), which sells for $25 and more even in low grades. The "satin finish" will make the 2009 copper cents easily distinguishable from the zinc circulation strikes. The 2009-P and D copper cents have the added advantages that they are single-year type coins, and modern Lincolns are much more widely collected than wheats. Lincoln cent collectors will have to compete with Mint Set collectors for the limited supply of 2009-P and D copper cents, since these coins will be available *only* in the Mint Sets.
Last year about 745,000 Mint Sets were produced. Currently these sets are selling at close to double the Mint's issue price. I expect this year's sets to have a higher mintage, but even at double the 2008 mintage I consider the 2009 sets to be a good buy because of the cents.
Face value of the 2009 Mint Sets is $14.38, which limits downside risk to less than 50% of the $27.95 purchase price from the Mint. >>
I agree with Overdate....I have been telling my personal friends to pick up a few of them.
<< <i>Slightly off-topic, but I posted this earlier on another thread and think it may be of interest here since it concerns a "modern" coin set.
I'm picking up a few 2009 Mint Sets as a speculation. I think the eight 2009-P and D cents in the sets have the potential to become key or semi-key coins. As far as I know, the Mint Sets will be the *only* source of these coins in 95% copper composition.
I think it's likely that the mintage for *each* of these 8 cents will likely be less than the mintage of the 1924-D cent (2.5 million), which sells for $25 and more even in low grades. The "satin finish" will make the 2009 copper cents easily distinguishable from the zinc circulation strikes. The 2009-P and D copper cents have the added advantages that they are single-year type coins, and modern Lincolns are much more widely collected than wheats. Lincoln cent collectors will have to compete with Mint Set collectors for the limited supply of 2009-P and D copper cents, since these coins will be available *only* in the Mint Sets.
Last year about 745,000 Mint Sets were produced. Currently these sets are selling at close to double the Mint's issue price. I expect this year's sets to have a higher mintage, but even at double the 2008 mintage I consider the 2009 sets to be a good buy because of the cents.
Face value of the 2009 Mint Sets is $14.38, which limits downside risk to less than 50% of the $27.95 purchase price from the Mint. >>
Well said. I agree. I think that this set is winner short and long term.
<< <i>"If I could hand a new collector a grocery list of what to look for it would be the following: 1) Favor series with a major unifying design aspect that is hard to get past. 2) Each coin should be differentiated not just on mint marks and dates because the rest of the world is going type and we may too at some point. Its insurance. 3) Buy coins with mintages less than 7000 coins because if you graph price vs population of design based type coins over the last 100 years the point at which they have a tendency to take off is about 6,500 coins. Anything less that that is pay dirt for the patient. 4) Buy coins with higher mintages only if the total population of the set is massive." . These are my long standing points in regard to coinage and they are posted on page one of this thread. . Lets go though them..... 1) Anyone that does not think a lack of design cohesion doesn't impact price (and frequently negatively) has not taken the time to plot date rarity vs price and design rarity vs price on a series with a high degree of design differentiation. I don't know what else to say on that. >>
How about "Price graphs don't attribute causality". Said a bit differently, you can't stare at price graphs and attribute long-term price growth to design cohesion. You must admit there are other factors which come into play if you are being objective in the discussion.
<< <i>2a) The united states is one of the few places in the world where coins are collected by date and mint mark and we have done so because we have had so little design variation in pocket change over the last 200 years. The rest of the world is and has been collecting mostly by design and denomination because they have longer histories and countless different coins to pull from. We haven't until now. Under recent & current legislation we will have 3 times the number of new designs in 20 ear than have been seen in the last 200! >>
And what will the effect be in the long term with the glut of new designs? I would suggest that collector fatigue will be the result and have presented examples of such. You suggest that "this time it's different" -- the collector will wildly collect these series with increasing frequency over their classic cousins -- without even the first example. Perhaps you will present a more compelling argument in your book showing how world coins with design frequency have taken off, but I've yet to see that argument made effectively. I am, however, certainly open to the possibility.
<< <i>2b) I don know why there would be any problem coming up with total market capitalization for dependable mintage coins like US proof coins issued since 1936. The sum of all mintages times market price at the center of the grading bell line curve is the answer. The fifty state silver quarters total market capitalization for the 1999 keys dates with their 800,000 mintage are worth more than the total market value of every proof quarter issued from 1936 to 1998 combined! There is no problem making this calculation. >>
The problem is not with the calculation, but the conclusions drawn. Market cap tells you nothing in and of itself.
<< <i>2c) You may not believe me but if you will check, our fine friends at the US Mint and one of their favorite members of Congress made a very public statement that changing the reverse of a coin on an annual basis dramatically improves collector interest and absorption. Its the play they are running with and long term its the Mint that dictates what's in collections. You guys can find it your selves or buy KP's book if they print it in the early summer. >>
The post office and baseball card makers said the same thing. Early on they were right, but in retrospect we see what happened to them. Why should coins be any different?
<< <i>2d) How many changing reverse designs do we have now lets count to three.... 1) Life of Lincoln type cents 2) Westward Journey Nickels 3) Fifty State & Territories Quarters 4) National Parks Quarters 5) Presidential Dollars 6) Native American Dollars Now we can all stick our head in the sand and assume that this will have little impact on collector habits as the older collectors fade from the scene. >>
Nobody is sticking their heads in the sand, but some are respectfully questioning your conclusions. Will these sets be collected? Of course. Will they outpace classic coins over the long term? Nobody including yourself knows.
p.s. It appears neither one of us can count. Don't we need to include plats in that list?
<< <i>2e) I have gone on record clearly and stated that the reason to like changing reverse platinum eagles is a closely spaced bullion price floor under the purchase price, ultra low mintages regardless of if you are using date rarity, relative rarity in set or type to judge them when you use a 100 year time span as your basis.------" Each coin should be differentiated not just on mint marks and dates because the rest of the world is going type and we may too at some point. Its insurance." Right its insurance. Not the only consideration. Reverse only design variety is protection from almost any collecting structure. I am not suggesting that all platinum eagles are going to be great. They do however have a ton going for them and they do have the structure shown in the six line items above that Mint employees frequently call the collector series. They call them collector series because that's were the next generation is being trained. >>
The stamp guys said the same thing. So did the baseball card guys. The only series we have as an example, classic commems, that comes close to the current design variability, has languished forever. Your argument -- "reverse only design variety is protection from almost any collecting structure" ignores these factors, along with the high price of the Plats.
That said, I agree with your logic on purchasing coins such as plats because of their "closely spaced bullion price floor", but from where I sit the jury is still out on design variability driving price appreciation going forward, and collector fatigue may be waiting over the horizon.
As an aside, and taking our queue from baseball cards and stamps, after collector fatigue set it, which cards/stamps continued to hold their value? Not the recent offerings with contrived rarity, but the classic and truly rare stamps/cards.
<< <i>Is my suggestion that this design tidal wave will impact the collectors habits over time conjecture? In some peoples view it may be based on what I can get on this forum. It took me 40,000 words and a load of charts to make my points in KP's book. >>
Where are all the threads on state quarters on this forum? How about first spouses? The only threads I see on Lincoln pennies are the latest and greatest errors. Outside this thread, it seems to me the forum is sending a very clear message -- collectors see through design variability.
Furthermore, I would argue that the best arguments are simple ones, grounded in the lessons of history. However, I am open minded to alternatives, and look forward to the book.
<< <i>Is it conjecture that complete high grade set values go through a maturation cycle like everything else and then flatten out as they mature and the best time to pick up serious keys is when they are "modern" before they go though the growth portion of the cycle. "4) Buy coins with higher mintage only if the total population of the set is massive." Tight mintage bottlenecks on massive massive young series are a sign post of future greatness. This point is fall out of bed easy to prove, just on go on the gray sheet archives and buy one grey sheet for each year from the mid 1960s to present add up the price of each set in mint state grade at the center of the grading bell curve then index them to inflation.....got news for you most popular classic sets peaked almost 20 years ago! Not because anything is wrong with them....its just they have matured! >>
Most coins peaked in the late 80s. This is not news, and the new "design variable" issues would have peaked then had they been around just like the entire market. Take a bit longer view of the market and you'd get another view of growth (with likely the same conclusions versus inflation, and I see no reason yet presented to believe plats or state quarters will be any different).
A second question to consider... What did "tight mintage bottlenecks on massive young series" do for the classic commems when viewed in the mirror of history?
That said, I tend to agree with your purchasing recommendation (i.e. buy keys as early as you can). The key question being -- what are the keys, and will that change in coins series that are still being produced? Said another way, what will next year's mintages hold? For series that have completed, the answer is clear (provided we don't get a large group of non-key plats melted), but for those series still being minted, can anyone say?
<< <i>Is the appreciation rate of the 1936 Lincoln cent in trouble indexed to inflation? Yes its a flat fact. Is the current situation of most classic mint state series that carry a value over 50 times melt dangerous? They dont have a tightly spaced bullion floor to protect them and in general if you index complete set classic values to inflation in the middle of the mint state grading bell line curve over the last 20 years its not an all that attractive situation. If you index high material content classic coinage numismatic premiums to inflation over the last 10 years its almost a disaster. The same can not be said for high bullion content moderns and their keys purchased from the Mint. >>
But is that the bullion run-up (or dollar run down) or collector demand? Or is that a new series going through the early years with a run up early and a slow erosion? Or is this the honeymoon period for design variability before the divorce and rapid price decline? If we are to believe the lessons classic commems, baseball cards, and stamps the answer is clear. However, you are suggesting a paradigm shift that suggests this time is different, and all I can offer is my apology for not being convinced.
<< <i>Now we can all go collect what we like.... I am a collector by the way. I "flip" very few of my coins but with 40 percent of my net worth in my collection I cant afford to mess with non performers. Moderns are the growth segment on a percentage basis and they allow me to hug the always liquid and normally protective bullion floor in most cases while still enjoying the coins and the price growth behavior of young keys. >>
As one collector to another, that is an alarming percentage of your net worth, and I must wonder if that isn't blurring your objectivity. Regardless, for your own sake, I hope you are right.
Respectfully...Mike
Collector of Large Cents, US Type, and modern pocket change.
I'm not sure if I follow your analogies to baseball cards, stamps, or even classic commemoratives.
baseball cards are printed on worthless paper or cardboard, whatever it is it isn't worth much. Plats are a precious metal and selling for close to metal prices.
Stamps the same problem as baseball cards, there is no floor on those, especially if they have been used.
Classic commemoratives are not a close analogy because they have changing obverse and reverse so have no noticeable cohesion, and also some have multiple years with the same designs. Also they are made out of silver [at least the ones I think you are using in your analogy]. The large gold pan pacs though make us jealous. I hope that one plays out.
So if someone wants a silver US coin they have a gazillion choices to make. If you want platinum, you have far fewer choices.
Add to that the low mintages, and it doesn't take a lot of demand to raise prices.
The drawback perhaps is that the price of platinum is so high it makes the coins already expensive. I do wonder if there will be much of a premium to keys if platinum continues to rise in the coming years, especially for the 1/2 and 1 ounce coins. If platinum fell it seems it would help the keys more than if it rose.
However I hardly see platinum coins with mintages under 5000 doing worse than classic commemoratives have. Classic commemoratives in silver already have much higher premiums than the plats do.
Anyway it looks like the mint has stopped making platinum coins entirely, we have not heard a word about them lately and may not ever again. They would be best to shift to palladium of they want to make coins out of a different precious metal as it has a lower prices and sales will be higher.
I still say the plats are a play on the shear low mintage, the w unc plats went down to 2676. I think some will collect due to the changing reverses eventually, and that will help them. How much I don't know but it won't take much to move these coins.
<< <i>I'm not sure if I follow your analogies to baseball cards, stamps, or even classic commemoratives.
baseball cards are printed on worthless paper or cardboard, whatever it is it isn't worth much. Plats are a precious metal and selling for close to metal prices.
Stamps the same problem as baseball cards, there is no floor on those, especially if they have been used.
Classic commemoratives are not a close analogy because they have changing obverse and reverse so have no noticeable cohesion, and also some have multiple years with the same designs. Also they are made out of silver [at least the ones I think you are using in your analogy]. The large gold pan pacs though make us jealous. I hope that one plays out. >>
They are the closest comparisons we have. If you or others have alternatives (for instance world coins, which has been presented sans evidence), I'm all ears.
FWIW, I agree with your argument that classic commems/cards/stamps have little intrinsic value, and whereas the plats have bullion value as a floor. However, that doesn't change the premise that excessive design variability leads to collector fatigue and price collapses.
Asked again: Why should coins (to include plats and other design-variable issues) be any different?
Asked slightly differently and focusing on the plat issues: Does the bullion floor which protects the bottom end also absolve us from the risk of collector fatigue negating any numismatic premium?
<< <i>So if someone wants a silver US coin they have a gazillion choices to make. If you want platinum, you have far fewer choices. >>
Fair enough, but there are lots of ways to invest in platinum outside of the US issues -- and those issues have far less of a spread against spot going for them.
<< <i>Add to that the low mintages, and it doesn't take a lot of demand to raise prices. >>
Similarly, it doesn't take a lot of demand reduction to take it the other way. That logic, for instance, fails when applied to other low-mintage coins -- for instance the 1936 proof Lincoln. Thinly traded issues like plats and classic proofs and all other coins for that matter fluctuate with demand in the positive and negative direction.
<< <i>The drawback perhaps is that the price of platinum is so high it makes the coins already expensive. I do wonder if there will be much of a premium to keys if platinum continues to rise in the coming years, especially for the 1/2 and 1 ounce coins. If platinum fell it seems it would help the keys more than if it rose. >>
That's a very interesting observation, and one that I hadn't considered. Rather than react, let me give it some thought and get back to you.
<< <i>However I hardly see platinum coins with mintages under 5000 doing worse than classic commemoratives have. Classic commemoratives in silver already have much higher premiums than the plats do. >>
I can think of two reasons. First, the high price is a barrier to entry. Second, collector fatigue could cause a complete collapse in numismatic premium.
<< <i>Anyway it looks like the mint has stopped making platinum coins entirely, we have not heard a word about them lately and may not ever again. They would be best to shift to palladium of they want to make coins out of a different precious metal as it has a lower prices and sales will be higher.
I still say the plats are a play on the shear low mintage, the w unc plats went down to 2676. I think some will collect due to the changing reverses eventually, and that will help them. How much I don't know but it won't take much to move these coins. >>
It won't take much to move them in either direction. Remember, bullion value is a double-edged sword, and compared against inflation, even the precious metals don't fare well over the long term. They are more of a hedge than anything else, IMO.
Anyway, thanks for your response, and I appreciate the opportunity to discuss these issues with fellow collectors. It is through discussions such as these that I form my own opinion, and I again appreciate the opportunity...Mike
Collector of Large Cents, US Type, and modern pocket change.
Just want to say that since the plat series has ended (at least the fractionals) I don't see collector fatigue as an issue with these. I know I WAS fatigued in '08 when I could barely scrape up the funds to get the new issues, but am relieved that's over for '09. Plat future could go either way, but if I had to guess, I believe this will be seen as a premier series in the not-too-distant future, regardless of base metal price.
Also wanted to add that even though this series HAS changing reverses, I don't think of them that way. I think of them as a year-by-year series that just happens to have different reverses. I don't see the First Spouses that way at all. Yes, that's purely psychology, but I think it helps the plats hang together as a cohesive series better.
<< <i>It is also possible that there platinum coins will be an animal all by themselves....
There is not a model which you can fit them into at all..... >>
I agree. We don't really know. They may follow the examples presented in this thread. They may take on a life of their own. Will collectors become fatigued and ignore the design-variable series? Will design-variability be the big winners going forward? Very interesting questions that certainly makes for interesting discussion.
<< <i>Does anybody want the coins that is the most important question..... >>
If I may restate, the key question is:
"Does anybody want the coins (and how will demand change over time) is the most important question to the future values of these coins."
Respectfully...Mike
Collector of Large Cents, US Type, and modern pocket change.
I think, partially in response, is that we see a situation somewhat analagous to Los Angeles not having a Pro football team. How, you might ask, would this be the case?
There are many more males (and females) of younger age than when the Rams were there in their prime 1950s form. And yet, both Rams and Raiders (or even Chargers if you are counting) all left with no signs of either them or any other team coming back? Why? Most likely because demand in terms of ticket and viewer audience is decreased.
Why is that? Because Southern Cal. has so many other alternative activities that have sprung up in the last 40 or 50 years that not enough people will come to see them, and so it can not be supported. This may be a simplification and yet is what we see. If the Lakers were allowed to start losing on a regular basis, interest might fall away in them also; that having been said, basketball seems to be more a part of youth culture than does football at least in So. Cal and apparently in quite a few demographics.
What I am saying is that demand may not be greater than it was 40 or 50 years ago for some activities, and I believe this may include coin collecting. I really don't think kids putting away a few quarters (state) for a year or two before they became bored is going to bring huge numbers into the field. How many of these kids stuck it out to get one of each state, or a complete PD currency set?
The collector demand, as opposed to flipper demand, may be falling flat and especially for pricey issues such as gold or plat. I know this is not a popular perspective, but I put it up for readers thoughts and comments. I, for one, will continue to collect and have done my bit of giving out buff nickes, etc. at the office and elsewhere but thing that we may for a while at least be into an era of decreased demand from collectors, which is not even taking into account the financial/economic environment we are now in.
Love that Milled British (1830-1960) Well, just Love coins, period.
7Jaguars, I think your insights are valid. However, arguing on behalf of the plats.... At least we have a price floor (i.e. spot) to fall back on. For the other design variable series, I'm not sure how any of them come out winners in a falling coin market -- and the same could be said for classic coins as well....Mike
Collector of Large Cents, US Type, and modern pocket change.
Hi Mike. Yes, true is that. Well, I still dutifully try to keep up with the 1/2 oz. series plat in proof, unc, Ws, and all the rest. Maybe my baby boy will be able to hold on to them without melting them - perish the thought!
I still think we ought to do what we can to stimulate collector interest at the ground level, and hope for the best.
Love that Milled British (1830-1960) Well, just Love coins, period.
<< <i>I'm not sure if I follow your analogies to baseball cards, stamps, or even classic commemoratives.
baseball cards are printed on worthless paper or cardboard, whatever it is it isn't worth much. Plats are a precious metal and selling for close to metal prices.
Stamps the same problem as baseball cards, there is no floor on those, especially if they have been used.
Classic commemoratives are not a close analogy because they have changing obverse and reverse so have no noticeable cohesion, and also some have multiple years with the same designs. Also they are made out of silver [at least the ones I think you are using in your analogy]. The large gold pan pacs though make us jealous. I hope that one plays out.
So if someone wants a silver US coin they have a gazillion choices to make. If you want platinum, you have far fewer choices.
Add to that the low mintages, and it doesn't take a lot of demand to raise prices.
The drawback perhaps is that the price of platinum is so high it makes the coins already expensive. I do wonder if there will be much of a premium to keys if platinum continues to rise in the coming years, especially for the 1/2 and 1 ounce coins. If platinum fell it seems it would help the keys more than if it rose.
However I hardly see platinum coins with mintages under 5000 doing worse than classic commemoratives have. Classic commemoratives in silver already have much higher premiums than the plats do.
Anyway it looks like the mint has stopped making platinum coins entirely, we have not heard a word about them lately and may not ever again. They would be best to shift to palladium of they want to make coins out of a different precious metal as it has a lower prices and sales will be higher.
I still say the plats are a play on the shear low mintage, the w unc plats went down to 2676. I think some will collect due to the changing reverses eventually, and that will help them. How much I don't know but it won't take much to move these coins. >>
Just want to say that since the plat series has ended (at least the fractionals) I don't see collector fatigue as an issue with these. I know I WAS fatigued in '08 when I could barely scrape up the funds to get the new issues, but am relieved that's over for '09. Plat future could go either way, but if I had to guess, I believe this will be seen as a premier series in the not-too-distant future, regardless of base metal price.
Also wanted to add that even though this series HAS changing reverses, I don't think of them that way. I think of them as a year-by-year series that just happens to have different reverses. I don't see the First Spouses that way at all. Yes, that's purely psychology, but I think it helps the plats hang together as a cohesive series better. >>
OK, I am going to follow up on this football thing. I live on the East Coast and notice the dichotomy between watching, where football at higher levels is increasingly being played by minorities, but also that more that kids are seeming (IMO) to be more interested in skateboarding and videogames than either watching, or heaven for bid, playing. This trend did seem to start in California as does so much else good or bad. My point is that fat middle-aged and older men watch football and collect coins but that demographics are shifting. So if there are preferred alternative activity pattern shifts away from collecting coins or stamps, where the trend has been even worse, this represents a problem. The old GM dilemma of Buick buyer demographics....
Don't get me wrong, I love coins but reality is what it is. If you doubt, more power to you, but just take a look at who is doing the buying or even attending at a big show like Baltimore or try to figure out the total attendance figures of young numismatists at club meetings. It is not that there are none, but IMO seemingly fewer. Do we really see more people buying Whitman folders (other than the initial huge surge of State Quarter folders sold with little continuing interest).
PS - I am not sure if a fair response is to say: "well, that is just in California, so it doesn't apply in bum-Egypt __________[supply city or state]". Actually we have seen a harbinger of many other trends there. Darn, come to think of it the Buick demographic dilemma may even have had a start in the Golden State.
Love that Milled British (1830-1960) Well, just Love coins, period.
"As one collector to another, that is an alarming percentage of your net worth, and I must wonder if that isn't blurring your objectivity. Regardless, for your own sake, I hope you are right."
That is funny Mike...... I'm glad to know now that's the source of blurred objectively or vision. I thought the blurred vision was from too many nights pouring over data and pricing history. I did not know that the 40 percent of my current net worth held in high bullion content moderns in gold, silver and platinum who's current melt value is about 30 over what I paid for them and in no case close to their current market trading range was a actually the source of all this willful mental distortion. I bought a great deal of residential real estate in the mid to late 90s and stopped buying in 2001. I am still slightly in the black on the real estate but its the real estate crash combined with the very nice appreciation of my high intrinsic value moderns holdings that has driven them from 20 to 40 percent of my balance sheet over the last 3 years and I am grateful for them. They have done allot to offset the disaster in real estate...............and they are very liquid!
<< <i>"As one collector to another, that is an alarming percentage of your net worth, and I must wonder if that isn't blurring your objectivity. Regardless, for your own sake, I hope you are right."
That is funny Mike...... I'm glad to know now that's the source of blurred objectively or vision. I thought the blurred vision was from too many nights pouring over data and pricing history. I did not know that the 40 percent of my current net worth held in high bullion content moderns in gold, silver and platinum who's current melt value is about 30 over what I paid for them and in no case close to their current market trading range was a actually the source of all this willful mental distortion. I bought a great deal of residential real estate in the mid to late 90s and stopped buying in 2001. I am still slightly in the black on the real estate but its the real estate crash combined with the very nice appreciation of my high intrinsic value moderns holdings that has driven them from 20 to 40 percent of my balance sheet over the last 3 years and I am grateful for them. They have done allot to offset the disaster in real estate...............and they are very liquid!
Eric >>
Eric, There was a lot in my prior post to you, and it is distressing to see you ignored it and instead focused on this comment -- one that was made out of genuine concern. I know when I get very close to something often it is difficult to see the forest through the trees, and it is that wisdom that I was trying to share. I apologize if it rubbed you the wrong way & I am sorry....Mike
Collector of Large Cents, US Type, and modern pocket change.
<< <i>Asked slightly differently and focusing on the plat issues: Does the bullion floor which protects the bottom end also absolve us from the risk of collector fatigue negating any numismatic premium? Similarly, it doesn't take a lot of demand reduction to take it the other way. That logic, for instance, fails when applied to other low-mintage coins -- for instance the 1936 proof Lincoln. Thinly traded issues like plats and classic proofs and all other coins for that matter fluctuate with demand in the positive and negative direction. >>
The 2004 proof plats already had an investor premium prior to the release of the 2008 coins, so going by that it seems that there is no investor fatigue in the proof plats. The Lincoln Cents are a hard price comparison because they are not done in a precious metal and I think it is hard to compare the plats to anything other than gold coins really due to their close spot prices.
Even at that though I think gold is obviously a more popular metal so it is somewhat hard to even compare to those. The thing is like I said the proof plats already did show a numismatic premium for the 2004 coins and even the 2006 w unc have shown it as well so it already exists.
I still think that the ending of the plat series by the mint will help the coins, the shorter run of 12 years of coins for the proofs helps them, and as time passes people will see these low mintages in books and buy in. The coins could languish for some time however until suddenly they will be "discovered" perhaps. Just like the Jackie Robinson was to that series.
I have had 4-packs of Mint Sealed $50 2008 W Plats listed on eBay for 9 months. For the first 7 of those 9 months there was no action at all. About 6 weeks ago offers began picking up. I sold a few 4-packs at $3200, and when the offers picked up it went to $3400. I have sold all I have of those (2 on reserve).
I find it interesting that as soon as I sold my last non-reserved 4-pack, a single $50 PCGS MS70 went for $1300.
I also have some 2008 W Plat 4 coin sets listed on eBay, and the selling price (meaning the price I am actually getting for them) has increased from $3200 to $3600+ in the past 6 weeks.
All the ones I’ve been selling are mint sealed.
Looks like the market for the unc 2008 w plats is doing well.
The current bulllion value of the 2006-W $50.00 one-half ounce platinum coin in PCGS-70 is $650.00. I'll tell you what ... for "struggling" coins that have questionable numismatic value, I will gladly pay anyone 100% over spot, or $1300.00 per piece, all day long. Any takers?
Not a bad three-year rate of return for this coin during which time both the stock and real estate markets crashed.
Or how about the 2008-W $50.00 one-half ounce platinum coin in PCGS Proof-70, with a bullion value is $650.00. Again, for a series of coins with "questionable" numismatic value, I will gladly pay anyone 60% over spot, or $1040.00 per piece, all day long. Any takers?
Not a bad one-year rate of return on investment for this coin!
MikeinFL - I, for one, enjoyed reading your comments. Overall, well thought out.
Basically, I have pointed out recently that some of the very best, low mintage, platinum coins may be subject to the lowest returns in the years to come (vis a vis the base metal common coins) merely by the base metal outperforming the numismatic market - obviously a plausible scenerio. For example, take FloridaBill's most recent observations...
Assuming the 2008-W $50 Plats are now worth $1,300 per coin in MS70, that is $2,600/oz. If and when (in this hypothetical) Platinum reaches $4,000/oz (one day), let's look at what happens to an oz. of platinum vs. that low mintage coin...
The oz. of platinum jumps from $1,300/oz to $4,000/oz - an increase of more than 200%. But, that same MS70 coin needs to reach the price level of $4,000 (or $8,000/oz) to keep up. Will many of the lower mintage 1/2 oz. plat coins trade at $8,000/oz. when Platinum reaches $4,000/oz?
On the other hand, a much more limited move up in the base metal over the next 5-10 years, could see the key date coins significantly outperforming the commons.
On the other hand, if platinum crashes down to $500/oz., it is very possible that the low mintage 1/2 oz. MS70 coin maintains a numismatic value in excess of $500. So, in assessing these coins, do the low mintage coins represent a more CONSERVATIVE vehicle to diversify into compared to simply accumulating platinum metal let's say?
Obviously, no one on these boards has the definitive answer to the question whether simple platinum bullion coins will, or will not, outperform better date platinum coins over the next 5-10 years. Of course, well versed modern enthusiasts can take a position (in a book or elsewhere) as to whether they believe certain low mintage platinum coins may, indeed, outperform, other numismatic coins. But, the 'wild card" here may well be the platinum commodity market, with worldwide influences. But, of course, why stop this thread from reaching 50,000 responses while we see what happens as the platinum commodity market unfolds over the next 5-10 years (and the low mintage plats either "keep up", outperform or fall a bit short).
Just my 2 cents
Wondercoin
Please visit my website at www.wondercoins.com and my ebay auctions under my user name www.wondercoin.com.
Guys there is little question that a run away material price in any series with high intrinsic value will likely batter the premium of the keys and maybe even produce a common date that will later emerge as the lead coin. One of the nice things bout collecting as a set is the material price is the floor and we get to enjoy them all. And yes a crashing material value may actual help a key date by making the total cost of the common dates drop.
And Mike I cant fully respond to all your "prove it" comments without up loading my study that I don't own the rights to anymore. KP has already mention that I should be careful how much material I post. Just like this material price topic. I have a whole chapter modeling how material price spikes kill key dates if the spike is extreme enough and calculate at each $1000 price level total set value and the premium collapse of the key in the section describing the "interaction of bullion and numismatic premiums". I model total set recession behavior too.
There is a fairly simply dymamic at work with regard to numismatic premium and increasing bullion prices. The numismatic premium is often expressed as a percentage of the current value or future value. IMHO this is a mistake as the further and faster the bullion prices climb, the premium as stated in dollars declines and as a percentage plummets.
Conversely as bullion prices decline, the numismatic premium on keys tends to grow in terms of dollars and obviously percentages.
What will be interesting to observe is how many will go into the melting pot if platinum prices climb back to $2,000 per ounce again. If a substantial number are melted, as has been stated previously, the keys may change as the more common plats get melted.
Retired United States Mint guy, now working on an Everyman Type Set.
Comments
<< <i>With all the talk about the 2008 W Plats, does anyone think that, in the end, the 2008 W Buffs will be the long term kings of the 2008 issues? They seem like they have incredible potential. >>
I think the main difference between '08 plats and buffs is that buffs are already realizing their potential. When plats wake up, IF they wake up, I think they will achieve parity with the buffs. Don't forget the gold unc-w eagles, too. '08 is just going to be seen as an amazing year.
As I say, the best time to *collect* is when they aren't being sought by the masses. For Plats, I'd say that that time is now. I think that now is the best chance in the past 6 years for an aspiring collector to drop back and regroup, in order to push for the goal line. That might mean selling a few things in order to buy a few things. Not a bad scenario at all!
So, if you have a few Buffs, and they are already maturing, it might be time to take some off the table. They aren't really rare, although they are obviously popular. And the 2008-W AGEs - I think that they still need time to properly age, like a good year for a fine wine. They will come no doubt, and when they do you will be glad to have held them. Think 1991. Already the 2006-W, 2007-W, and 2008-W half ouncers are approaching $1,000 in PCGS MS-69/NGC MS-70. Interesting stuff.
jmho.
I knew it would happen.
<< <i>>>Suppose a person owns several duplicates of the rarest issues, and not very many of the more common issues. That puts him in a terrible position - does he use his duplicates of the rarities to finance the purchase of the common dates now, or does he risk letting the high mintage issues get away from him because of attrition while he saves up enough money to pick them off, one by one?<<
Private melting probably causes higher attrition of common dates, but not enough for them to become scarcer than the keys. Silver coin melts have been going on for more than 40 years, but as far as I know, none of the circulated common dates in the "junk silver" category have overtaken the keys in price. As an example, the circulated 1955 half dollar is still worth much more than the circulated 1956. >>
.... a very good point!
David
<< <i>
<< <i>Somehow, I am not sure the comparison between Plats and classic commems is fair. The design variation is different whether there is a price reflection between them or not.
With the classic commems, you have a changing reverse and a changing obverse. Nothing remains constant on those coins. As a set, you need to read a book or get some sort of guidance to know which coins are required to complete the set since none of them look alike or share anything in common. In other words, you can't tell the coins go together as a set by just looking at them even if they were all in front of you at once. Sort of like, modern commems, first spouses or pres dollars. In a series like that, the key date may not necessarily be the most valuable one (or it may be).
On the other hand, Statehood Quarters and Plats (Proof and W Uncs) share the same obverse every year making them stick together as a set while the reverse changes making them somewhat entertaining to the collector (when compared to a set that does not go together as easy). That seems like a fairly new concept to me, IMHO. In a series like that, I believe, the key date has a little bit more strength as there is better set cohesion.
Speculators exist in every single series. I would dare to say that speculators are, in part, a driving element in healthy series growth. Some people stay for a bit in hopes of quick financial gains. Some people speculate within the series they collect. I think we all are, to an extent, guilty of that. And, some become real collectors and stay for the long run. >>
IMHO, aside from price and low mintages, the yearly reverse changes make them (platinum series) more appealing & entertaining to the collector. The one ounce coins appeal to me because I can see the images a lot clearer on a larger coin. Now if I just could afford to own a few more! >>
.... the above points are very well taken, and I think sum up things very nicely for the platinum coins!
David
<< <i>When I read Eric's "design-based" assertions, I think he is saying that more and more collectors will be collecting by type rather than collecting within a series. And that an increased interest in type collecting will increase demand for "design-based" coins such as the plats.
My intuition says that type collecting is gaining momentum. The problem that I see, though, is that a complete type collection is immense. Therefore, type collectors will limit their collection to a sub-type. I think Eric is trying to stimulate interest in the rarest (based on mintage) of the type coins. That is certainly a compelling sub-type on which to focus. >>
.... The above is a logical and well thought-out point, and I agee with you! Focus on quality on not necessarily quantity if you are in this as an investor!
David
Wondercoin
amazing.....
They even had the coin i have wanted for years now 06-W $10 Unc..... ($375 sell price). If only I was not buried in expenses right now.....
Most dealers seemed to be more interested in silver then gold today it seemed.....
<< <i>So, does it appear that the "wild card" of platinum base metal pricing could result in what appears to be the very "best" platinum coins ending up returning the very worst returns in the long run (if and when platinum starts trading at $3,000 - $5,000/oz)? Yet, on the other hand, a crashing base metal price, could, in theory, result in the "best" platinum coins performing wildly (good) vis a vis the (horribly performing) commons. If the above is true, one might only be able to predict the upside potential of this platinum coin vs. that platinum coin by having a superior knowledge of the commodities markets. Thoughts?
Wondercoin >>
Notification of 2008 American Eagle Platinum Uncirculated Coin
Pricing
The United States Mint will make available the following 2008
American Eagle Uncirculated Platinum Coins according to the following
price schedule:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Description Price
------------------------------------------------------------------------
American Eagle Platinum Uncirculated Coins:
One ounce platinum coin................................ $2,349.95
One-half ounce platinum coin........................... 1,199.95
One-quarter ounce platinum coin........................ 619.95
One-tenth ounce platinum coin.......................... 259.95
Four-coin platinum set................................. 4,289.95
Effective July 23, 2008, the United States Mint will commence
selling the following 2008 American Eagle Proof Coins according to the
following price schedule:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Description Price
------------------------------------------------------------------------
American Eagle Platinum Proof Coins:
One-ounce platinum coin............................... $2,509.95
One-half ounce platinum coin.......................... 1,279.95
One-quarter ounce platinum coin....................... 664.95
One-tenth ounce platinum coin......................... 279.95
Four-coin platinum set................................ 4,589.95
------------------------------------------------------------------------
How about $2500 platinum? For some it is close to break even if they sell for melt, and for the proof some would still be underwater.
Hmmmmm, I recently searched a bag of 90% halves and found (3) 1955-Ps. Somebody didn't put a premium on them, but maybe that was a fluke.
I wouldn't compare Plats to circulated halves, mainly because the capital requirements are different for a 1/2 oz. Proof Plat than for a 90% silver circulated Frankie, and I believe - so are the market dynamics.
I think that it's entirely possible that all of the surplus Platinum Proofs from an "average" year like 2002 (with a mintage of 8,772) could be liquidated if the spot price rises high enough and yet none of it's brethren from 2004 (with a mintage of 5,063) would make it to the melting pot, because of their status as a key date.
Because of the pervasive (and probably correct) belief that more 2002s exist, they will be more vulnerable to destruction as the price of platinum rises. For example if 5,000 of the 2002s were melted and none of the 2004s were melted - nobody would notice for years that the surviving populations were the reverse of what the original mintages would indicate.
At some point, a collector who is trying to locate a 2002 1/2 oz. Proof may find none being offered at any price while there are (3) separate 2004 1/2 oz. Proofs for sale at the price he wants to pay for the 2002. That's the price discovery mechanism at work.
That is the problem with the Plats already - nobody knows the reality of what's out there. That's what collecting is all about, isn't it?
I knew it would happen.
How many of us have extra proof plats from typical non-key years ('04, '08)? I have only an extra '07 1/2 because of the dastardly RP set. In fact, I'm still missing two common years ('97, '00). The '97 appears fairly often, but not the 2000.
I have no extras of the non-key proofs, unless you count '03 & '05.
I knew it would happen.
Kinda gives us something in common with Morgan dollar collectors.
My Adolph A. Weinman signature
<< <i>So here's a question:
How many of us have extra proof plats from typical non-key years ('04, '08)? I have only an extra '07 1/2 because of the dastardly RP set. In fact, I'm still missing two common years ('97, '00). The '97 appears fairly often, but not the 2000. >>
My only plats are the '06 W uncs, '07 W uncs, '08 W uncs and '08 W proofs.
<< <i>
<< <i>With all the talk about the 2008 W Plats, does anyone think that, in the end, the 2008 W Buffs will be the long term kings of the 2008 issues? They seem like they have incredible potential. >>
I think the main difference between '08 plats and buffs is that buffs are already realizing their potential. When plats wake up, IF they wake up, I think they will achieve parity with the buffs. Don't forget the gold unc-w eagles, too. '08 is just going to be seen as an amazing year. >>
Hi Grits-
You don't see more upward potential for the '08 W buffs? It seems to me that they still have room to go over time.
My thoughts exactly. The platinum key dates for now.... will not be the key dates in the future. The dates with the mid level mintages will most likely find their way into the melting pot, and before any one realizes it, there will be less around than the 'key' dates. I think this scenario is more likely to happen.... than not.
But..... if there are not many collectors of the series, will it really matter?
<< <i>"I think that it's entirely possible that all of the surplus Platinum Proofs from an "average" year like 2002 (with a mintage of 8,772) could be liquidated if the spot price rises high enough and yet none of it's brethren from 2004 (with a mintage of 5,063) would make it to the melting pot, because of their status as a key date."
My thoughts exactly. The platinum key dates for now.... will not be the key dates in the future. The dates with the mid level mintages will most likely find their way into the melting pot, and before any one realizes it, there will be less around than the 'key' dates. I think this scenario is more likely to happen.... than not.
But..... if there are not many collectors of the series, will it really matter? >>
If this does happen, and the mid level mintage dates become the keys, how will anyone know? The final mintage numbers will be all that is available to go by with respect to the key label, or is there some way that this would become definitively apparent such that the new - mid level mintage keys - could be recognized as the new keys?
My Adolph A. Weinman signature
1) Favor series with a major unifying design aspect that is hard to get past.
2) Each coin should be differentiated not just on mint marks and dates because the rest of the world is going type and we may too at some point. Its insurance.
3) Buy coins with mintages less than 7000 coins because if you graph price vs population of design based type coins over the last 100 years the point at which they have a tendency to take off is about 6,500 coins. Anything less that that is pay dirt for the patient.
4) Buy coins with higher mintages only if the total population of the set is massive."
.
These are my long standing points in regard to coinage and they are posted on page one of this thread.
.
Lets go though them.....
1) Anyone that does not think a lack of design cohesion doesn't impact price (and frequently negatively) has not taken the time to plot date rarity vs price and design rarity vs price on a series with a high degree of design differentiation. I don't know what else to say on that.
.
2a) The united states is one of the few places in the world where coins are collected by date and mint mark and we have done so because we have had so little design variation in pocket change over the last 200 years. The rest of the world is and has been collecting mostly by design and denomination because they have longer histories and countless different coins to pull from. We haven't until now. Under recent & current legislation we will have 3 times the number of new designs in 20 year than have been seen in the last 200!
.
2b) I don know why there would be any problem coming up with total market capitalization for dependable mintage coins like US proof coins issued since 1936. The sum of all mintages times market price at the center of the grading bell line curve is the answer. The fifty state silver quarters total market capitalization for the 1999 keys dates with their 800,000 mintage are worth more than the total market value of every proof quarter issued from 1936 to 1998 combined! There is no problem making this calculation.
.
2c) You may not believe me but if you will check, our fine friends at the US Mint and one of their favorite members of Congress made a very public statement that changing the reverse of a coin on an annual basis dramatically improves collector interest and absorption. Its the play they are running with and long term its the Mint that dictates what's in collections. You guys can find it your selves or buy KP's book if they print it in the early summer.
.
2d) How many changing reverse designs do we have now lets count to three....
1) Life of Lincoln type cents
2) Westward Journey Nickels
3) Fifty State & Territories Quarters
4) National Parks Quarters
5) Presidential Dollars
6) Native American Dollars
Now we can all stick our head in the sand and assume that this will have little impact on collector habits as the older collectors fade from the scene.
.
2e) I have gone on record clearly and stated that the reason to like changing reverse platinum eagles is a closely spaced bullion price floor under the purchase price, ultra low mintages regardless of if you are using date rarity, relative rarity in set or type to judge them when you use a 100 year time span as your basis.------" Each coin should be differentiated not just on mint marks and dates because the rest of the world is going type and we may too at some point. Its insurance."
Right its insurance. Not the only consideration.
Reverse only design variety is protection from almost any collecting structure. I am not suggesting that all platinum eagles are going to be great. They do however have a ton going for them and they do have the structure shown in the six line items above that Mint employees frequently call the collector series. They call them collector series because that's were the next generation is being trained.
.
Is my suggestion that this design tidal wave will impact the collectors habits over time conjecture? In some peoples view it may be based on what I can get on this forum. It took me 40,000 words and a load of charts to make my points in KP's book.
.
Is it conjecture that complete high grade set values go through a maturation cycle like everything else and then flatten out as they mature and the best time to pick up serious keys is when they are "modern" before they go though the growth portion of the cycle. "4) Buy coins with higher mintage only if the total population of the set is massive." Tight mintage bottlenecks on massive massive young series are a sign post of future greatness. This point is fall out of bed easy to prove, just on go on the gray sheet archives and buy one grey sheet for each year from the mid 1960s to present add up the price of each set in mint state grade at the center of the grading bell curve then index them to inflation.....got news for you most popular classic sets peaked almost 20 years ago! Not because anything is wrong with them....its just they have matured!
.
Is the appreciation rate of the 1936 Lincoln cent in trouble indexed to inflation? Yes its a flat fact.
Is the current situation of most classic mint state series that carry a value over 50 times melt dangerous? They dont have a tightly spaced bullion floor to protect them and in general if you index complete set classic values to inflation in the middle of the mint state grading bell line curve over the last 20 years its not an all that attractive situation. If you index high material content classic coinage numismatic premiums to inflation over the last 10 years its almost a disaster. The same can not be said for high bullion content moderns and their keys purchased from the Mint.
Good night to all............
Eric Jordan
Now we can all go collect what we like.... I am a collector by the way. I "flip" very few of my coins but with 40 percent of my net worth in my collection I cant afford to mess with non performers. Moderns are the growth segment on a percentage basis and they allow me to hug the always liquid and normally protective bullion floor in most cases while still enjoying the coins and the price growth behavior of young keys.
THAT is why I consider the Jackson's Liberty (non)Spouse $10 gold a potential long-term home run! Great looking coin with a classic motif, high design rarity (less than 13,000 mintage split between proof and uncirculated), reasonable bullion floor with 1/2 oz. gold, and member of the popular Liberty short set within the First Spouse series.
My Adolph A. Weinman signature
I'm picking up a few 2009 Mint Sets as a speculation. I think the eight 2009-P and D cents in the sets have the potential to become key or semi-key coins. As far as I know, the Mint Sets will be the *only* source of these coins in 95% copper composition.
I think it's likely that the mintage for *each* of these 8 cents will likely be less than the mintage of the 1924-D cent (2.5 million), which sells for $25 and more even in low grades. The "satin finish" will make the 2009 copper cents easily distinguishable from the zinc circulation strikes. The 2009-P and D copper cents have the added advantages that they are single-year type coins, and modern Lincolns are much more widely collected than wheats. Lincoln cent collectors will have to compete with Mint Set collectors for the limited supply of 2009-P and D copper cents, since these coins will be available *only* in the Mint Sets.
Last year about 745,000 Mint Sets were produced. Currently these sets are selling at close to double the Mint's issue price. I expect this year's sets to have a higher mintage, but even at double the 2008 mintage I consider the 2009 sets to be a good buy because of the cents.
Face value of the 2009 Mint Sets is $14.38, which limits downside risk to less than 50% of the $27.95 purchase price from the Mint.
My Adolph A. Weinman signature
<< <i>"If I could hand a new collector a grocery list of what to look for it would be the following:
1) Favor series with a major unifying design aspect that is hard to get past.
2) Each coin should be differentiated not just on mint marks and dates because the rest of the world is going type and we may too at some point. Its insurance.
3) Buy coins with mintages less than 7000 coins because if you graph price vs population of design based type coins over the last 100 years the point at which they have a tendency to take off is about 6,500 coins. Anything less that that is pay dirt for the patient.
4) Buy coins with higher mintages only if the total population of the set is massive."
.
These are my long standing points in regard to coinage and they are posted on page one of this thread.
.
Lets go though them.....
1) Anyone that does not think a lack of design cohesion doesn't impact price (and frequently negatively) has not taken the time to plot date rarity vs price and design rarity vs price on a series with a high degree of design differentiation. I don't know what else to say on that.
.
2a) The united states is one of the few places in the world where coins are collected by date and mint mark and we have done so because we have had so little design variation in pocket change over the last 200 years. The rest of the world is and has been collecting mostly by design and denomination because they have longer histories and countless different coins to pull from. We haven't until now. Under recent & current legislation we will have 3 times the number of new designs in 20 year than have been seen in the last 200!
.
2b) I don know why there would be any problem coming up with total market capitalization for dependable mintage coins like US proof coins issued since 1936. The sum of all mintages times market price at the center of the grading bell line curve is the answer. The fifty state silver quarters total market capitalization for the 1999 keys dates with their 800,000 mintage are worth more than the total market value of every proof quarter issued from 1936 to 1998 combined! There is no problem making this calculation.
.
2c) You may not believe me but if you will check, our fine friends at the US Mint and one of their favorite members of Congress made a very public statement that changing the reverse of a coin on an annual basis dramatically improves collector interest and absorption. Its the play they are running with and long term its the Mint that dictates what's in collections. You guys can find it your selves or buy KP's book if they print it in the early summer.
.
2d) How many changing reverse designs do we have now lets count to three....
1) Life of Lincoln type cents
2) Westward Journey Nickels
3) Fifty State & Territories Quarters
4) National Parks Quarters
5) Presidential Dollars
6) Native American Dollars
Now we can all stick our head in the sand and assume that this will have little impact on collector habits as the older collectors fade from the scene.
.
2e) I have gone on record clearly and stated that the reason to like changing reverse platinum eagles is a closely spaced bullion price floor under the purchase price, ultra low mintages regardless of if you are using date rarity, relative rarity in set or type to judge them when you use a 100 year time span as your basis.------" Each coin should be differentiated not just on mint marks and dates because the rest of the world is going type and we may too at some point. Its insurance."
Right its insurance. Not the only consideration.
Reverse only design variety is protection from almost any collecting structure. I am not suggesting that all platinum eagles are going to be great. They do however have a ton going for them and they do have the structure shown in the six line items above that Mint employees frequently call the collector series. They call them collector series because that's were the next generation is being trained.
.
Is my suggestion that this design tidal wave will impact the collectors habits over time conjecture? In some peoples view it may be based on what I can get on this forum. It took me 40,000 words and a load of charts to make my points in KP's book.
.
Is it conjecture that complete high grade set values go through a maturation cycle like everything else and then flatten out as they mature and the best time to pick up serious keys is when they are "modern" before they go though the growth portion of the cycle. "4) Buy coins with higher mintage only if the total population of the set is massive." Tight mintage bottlenecks on massive massive young series are a sign post of future greatness. This point is fall out of bed easy to prove, just on go on the gray sheet archives and buy one grey sheet for each year from the mid 1960s to present add up the price of each set in mint state grade at the center of the grading bell curve then index them to inflation.....got news for you most popular classic sets peaked almost 20 years ago! Not because anything is wrong with them....its just they have matured!
.
Is the appreciation rate of the 1936 Lincoln cent in trouble indexed to inflation? Yes its a flat fact.
Is the current situation of most classic mint state series that carry a value over 50 times melt dangerous? They dont have a tightly spaced bullion floor to protect them and in general if you index complete set classic values to inflation in the middle of the mint state grading bell line curve over the last 20 years its not an all that attractive situation. If you index high material content classic coinage numismatic premiums to inflation over the last 10 years its almost a disaster. The same can not be said for high bullion content moderns and their keys purchased from the Mint.
Good night to all............
Eric Jordan
Now we can all go collect what we like.... I am a collector by the way. I "flip" very few of my coins but with 40 percent of my net worth in my collection I cant afford to mess with non performers. Moderns are the growth segment on a percentage basis and they allow me to hug the always liquid and normally protective bullion floor in most cases while still enjoying the coins and the price growth behavior of young keys. >>
... nicely said, Eric, and extremely logical, as usual ... thank you and good night!
David
<< <i>Slightly off-topic, but I posted this earlier on another thread and think it may be of interest here since it concerns a "modern" coin set.
I'm picking up a few 2009 Mint Sets as a speculation. I think the eight 2009-P and D cents in the sets have the potential to become key or semi-key coins. As far as I know, the Mint Sets will be the *only* source of these coins in 95% copper composition.
I think it's likely that the mintage for *each* of these 8 cents will likely be less than the mintage of the 1924-D cent (2.5 million), which sells for $25 and more even in low grades. The "satin finish" will make the 2009 copper cents easily distinguishable from the zinc circulation strikes. The 2009-P and D copper cents have the added advantages that they are single-year type coins, and modern Lincolns are much more widely collected than wheats. Lincoln cent collectors will have to compete with Mint Set collectors for the limited supply of 2009-P and D copper cents, since these coins will be available *only* in the Mint Sets.
Last year about 745,000 Mint Sets were produced. Currently these sets are selling at close to double the Mint's issue price. I expect this year's sets to have a higher mintage, but even at double the 2008 mintage I consider the 2009 sets to be a good buy because of the cents.
Face value of the 2009 Mint Sets is $14.38, which limits downside risk to less than 50% of the $27.95 purchase price from the Mint. >>
I agree with Overdate....I have been telling my personal friends to pick up a few of them.
<< <i>Slightly off-topic, but I posted this earlier on another thread and think it may be of interest here since it concerns a "modern" coin set.
I'm picking up a few 2009 Mint Sets as a speculation. I think the eight 2009-P and D cents in the sets have the potential to become key or semi-key coins. As far as I know, the Mint Sets will be the *only* source of these coins in 95% copper composition.
I think it's likely that the mintage for *each* of these 8 cents will likely be less than the mintage of the 1924-D cent (2.5 million), which sells for $25 and more even in low grades. The "satin finish" will make the 2009 copper cents easily distinguishable from the zinc circulation strikes. The 2009-P and D copper cents have the added advantages that they are single-year type coins, and modern Lincolns are much more widely collected than wheats. Lincoln cent collectors will have to compete with Mint Set collectors for the limited supply of 2009-P and D copper cents, since these coins will be available *only* in the Mint Sets.
Last year about 745,000 Mint Sets were produced. Currently these sets are selling at close to double the Mint's issue price. I expect this year's sets to have a higher mintage, but even at double the 2008 mintage I consider the 2009 sets to be a good buy because of the cents.
Face value of the 2009 Mint Sets is $14.38, which limits downside risk to less than 50% of the $27.95 purchase price from the Mint. >>
Well said. I agree. I think that this set is winner short and long term.
<< <i>"If I could hand a new collector a grocery list of what to look for it would be the following:
1) Favor series with a major unifying design aspect that is hard to get past.
2) Each coin should be differentiated not just on mint marks and dates because the rest of the world is going type and we may too at some point. Its insurance.
3) Buy coins with mintages less than 7000 coins because if you graph price vs population of design based type coins over the last 100 years the point at which they have a tendency to take off is about 6,500 coins. Anything less that that is pay dirt for the patient.
4) Buy coins with higher mintages only if the total population of the set is massive."
.
These are my long standing points in regard to coinage and they are posted on page one of this thread.
.
Lets go though them.....
1) Anyone that does not think a lack of design cohesion doesn't impact price (and frequently negatively) has not taken the time to plot date rarity vs price and design rarity vs price on a series with a high degree of design differentiation. I don't know what else to say on that. >>
How about "Price graphs don't attribute causality". Said a bit differently, you can't stare at price graphs and attribute long-term price growth to design cohesion. You must admit there are other factors which come into play if you are being objective in the discussion.
<< <i>2a) The united states is one of the few places in the world where coins are collected by date and mint mark and we have done so because we have had so little design variation in pocket change over the last 200 years. The rest of the world is and has been collecting mostly by design and denomination because they have longer histories and countless different coins to pull from. We haven't until now. Under recent & current legislation we will have 3 times the number of new designs in 20 ear than have been seen in the last 200! >>
And what will the effect be in the long term with the glut of new designs? I would suggest that collector fatigue will be the result and have presented examples of such. You suggest that "this time it's different" -- the collector will wildly collect these series with increasing frequency over their classic cousins -- without even the first example. Perhaps you will present a more compelling argument in your book showing how world coins with design frequency have taken off, but I've yet to see that argument made effectively. I am, however, certainly open to the possibility.
<< <i>2b) I don know why there would be any problem coming up with total market capitalization for dependable mintage coins like US proof coins issued since 1936. The sum of all mintages times market price at the center of the grading bell line curve is the answer. The fifty state silver quarters total market capitalization for the 1999 keys dates with their 800,000 mintage are worth more than the total market value of every proof quarter issued from 1936 to 1998 combined! There is no problem making this calculation. >>
The problem is not with the calculation, but the conclusions drawn. Market cap tells you nothing in and of itself.
<< <i>2c) You may not believe me but if you will check, our fine friends at the US Mint and one of their favorite members of Congress made a very public statement that changing the reverse of a coin on an annual basis dramatically improves collector interest and absorption. Its the play they are running with and long term its the Mint that dictates what's in collections. You guys can find it your selves or buy KP's book if they print it in the early summer. >>
The post office and baseball card makers said the same thing. Early on they were right, but in retrospect we see what happened to them. Why should coins be any different?
<< <i>2d) How many changing reverse designs do we have now lets count to three....
1) Life of Lincoln type cents
2) Westward Journey Nickels
3) Fifty State & Territories Quarters
4) National Parks Quarters
5) Presidential Dollars
6) Native American Dollars
Now we can all stick our head in the sand and assume that this will have little impact on collector habits as the older collectors fade from the scene. >>
Nobody is sticking their heads in the sand, but some are respectfully questioning your conclusions. Will these sets be collected? Of course. Will they outpace classic coins over the long term? Nobody including yourself knows.
p.s. It appears neither one of us can count.
<< <i>2e) I have gone on record clearly and stated that the reason to like changing reverse platinum eagles is a closely spaced bullion price floor under the purchase price, ultra low mintages regardless of if you are using date rarity, relative rarity in set or type to judge them when you use a 100 year time span as your basis.------" Each coin should be differentiated not just on mint marks and dates because the rest of the world is going type and we may too at some point. Its insurance."
Right its insurance. Not the only consideration.
Reverse only design variety is protection from almost any collecting structure. I am not suggesting that all platinum eagles are going to be great. They do however have a ton going for them and they do have the structure shown in the six line items above that Mint employees frequently call the collector series. They call them collector series because that's were the next generation is being trained. >>
The stamp guys said the same thing. So did the baseball card guys. The only series we have as an example, classic commems, that comes close to the current design variability, has languished forever. Your argument -- "reverse only design variety is protection from almost any collecting structure" ignores these factors, along with the high price of the Plats.
That said, I agree with your logic on purchasing coins such as plats because of their "closely spaced bullion price floor", but from where I sit the jury is still out on design variability driving price appreciation going forward, and collector fatigue may be waiting over the horizon.
As an aside, and taking our queue from baseball cards and stamps, after collector fatigue set it, which cards/stamps continued to hold their value? Not the recent offerings with contrived rarity, but the classic and truly rare stamps/cards.
<< <i>Is my suggestion that this design tidal wave will impact the collectors habits over time conjecture? In some peoples view it may be based on what I can get on this forum. It took me 40,000 words and a load of charts to make my points in KP's book. >>
Where are all the threads on state quarters on this forum? How about first spouses? The only threads I see on Lincoln pennies are the latest and greatest errors. Outside this thread, it seems to me the forum is sending a very clear message -- collectors see through design variability.
Furthermore, I would argue that the best arguments are simple ones, grounded in the lessons of history. However, I am open minded to alternatives, and look forward to the book.
<< <i>Is it conjecture that complete high grade set values go through a maturation cycle like everything else and then flatten out as they mature and the best time to pick up serious keys is when they are "modern" before they go though the growth portion of the cycle. "4) Buy coins with higher mintage only if the total population of the set is massive." Tight mintage bottlenecks on massive massive young series are a sign post of future greatness. This point is fall out of bed easy to prove, just on go on the gray sheet archives and buy one grey sheet for each year from the mid 1960s to present add up the price of each set in mint state grade at the center of the grading bell curve then index them to inflation.....got news for you most popular classic sets peaked almost 20 years ago! Not because anything is wrong with them....its just they have matured! >>
Most coins peaked in the late 80s. This is not news, and the new "design variable" issues would have peaked then had they been around just like the entire market. Take a bit longer view of the market and you'd get another view of growth (with likely the same conclusions versus inflation, and I see no reason yet presented to believe plats or state quarters will be any different).
A second question to consider... What did "tight mintage bottlenecks on massive young series" do for the classic commems when viewed in the mirror of history?
That said, I tend to agree with your purchasing recommendation (i.e. buy keys as early as you can). The key question being -- what are the keys, and will that change in coins series that are still being produced? Said another way, what will next year's mintages hold? For series that have completed, the answer is clear (provided we don't get a large group of non-key plats melted), but for those series still being minted, can anyone say?
<< <i>Is the appreciation rate of the 1936 Lincoln cent in trouble indexed to inflation? Yes its a flat fact.
Is the current situation of most classic mint state series that carry a value over 50 times melt dangerous? They dont have a tightly spaced bullion floor to protect them and in general if you index complete set classic values to inflation in the middle of the mint state grading bell line curve over the last 20 years its not an all that attractive situation. If you index high material content classic coinage numismatic premiums to inflation over the last 10 years its almost a disaster. The same can not be said for high bullion content moderns and their keys purchased from the Mint. >>
But is that the bullion run-up (or dollar run down) or collector demand? Or is that a new series going through the early years with a run up early and a slow erosion? Or is this the honeymoon period for design variability before the divorce and rapid price decline? If we are to believe the lessons classic commems, baseball cards, and stamps the answer is clear. However, you are suggesting a paradigm shift that suggests this time is different, and all I can offer is my apology for not being convinced.
<< <i>Now we can all go collect what we like.... I am a collector by the way. I "flip" very few of my coins but with 40 percent of my net worth in my collection I cant afford to mess with non performers. Moderns are the growth segment on a percentage basis and they allow me to hug the always liquid and normally protective bullion floor in most cases while still enjoying the coins and the price growth behavior of young keys. >>
As one collector to another, that is an alarming percentage of your net worth, and I must wonder if that isn't blurring your objectivity. Regardless, for your own sake, I hope you are right.
Respectfully...Mike
baseball cards are printed on worthless paper or cardboard, whatever it is it isn't worth much. Plats are a precious metal and selling for close to metal prices.
Stamps the same problem as baseball cards, there is no floor on those, especially if they have been used.
Classic commemoratives are not a close analogy because they have changing obverse and reverse so have no noticeable cohesion, and also some have multiple years with the same designs. Also they are made out of silver [at least the ones I think you are using in your analogy]. The large gold pan pacs though make us jealous. I hope that one plays out.
So if someone wants a silver US coin they have a gazillion choices to make.
If you want platinum, you have far fewer choices.
Add to that the low mintages, and it doesn't take a lot of demand to raise prices.
The drawback perhaps is that the price of platinum is so high it makes the coins already expensive. I do wonder if there will be much of a premium to keys if platinum continues to rise in the coming years, especially for the 1/2 and 1 ounce coins. If platinum fell it seems it would help the keys more than if it rose.
However I hardly see platinum coins with mintages under 5000 doing worse than classic commemoratives have. Classic commemoratives in silver already have much higher premiums than the plats do.
Anyway it looks like the mint has stopped making platinum coins entirely, we have not heard a word about them lately and may not ever again. They would be best to shift to palladium of they want to make coins out of a different precious metal as it has a lower prices and sales will be higher.
I still say the plats are a play on the shear low mintage, the w unc plats went down to 2676. I think some will collect due to the changing reverses eventually, and that will help them. How much I don't know but it won't take much to move these coins.
<< <i>I'm not sure if I follow your analogies to baseball cards, stamps, or even classic commemoratives.
baseball cards are printed on worthless paper or cardboard, whatever it is it isn't worth much. Plats are a precious metal and selling for close to metal prices.
Stamps the same problem as baseball cards, there is no floor on those, especially if they have been used.
Classic commemoratives are not a close analogy because they have changing obverse and reverse so have no noticeable cohesion, and also some have multiple years with the same designs. Also they are made out of silver [at least the ones I think you are using in your analogy]. The large gold pan pacs though make us jealous. I hope that one plays out.
They are the closest comparisons we have. If you or others have alternatives (for instance world coins, which has been presented sans evidence), I'm all ears.
FWIW, I agree with your argument that classic commems/cards/stamps have little intrinsic value, and whereas the plats have bullion value as a floor. However, that doesn't change the premise that excessive design variability leads to collector fatigue and price collapses.
Asked again: Why should coins (to include plats and other design-variable issues) be any different?
Asked slightly differently and focusing on the plat issues: Does the bullion floor which protects the bottom end also absolve us from the risk of collector fatigue negating any numismatic premium?
<< <i>So if someone wants a silver US coin they have a gazillion choices to make.
If you want platinum, you have far fewer choices. >>
Fair enough, but there are lots of ways to invest in platinum outside of the US issues -- and those issues have far less of a spread against spot going for them.
<< <i>Add to that the low mintages, and it doesn't take a lot of demand to raise prices. >>
Similarly, it doesn't take a lot of demand reduction to take it the other way. That logic, for instance, fails when applied to other low-mintage coins -- for instance the 1936 proof Lincoln. Thinly traded issues like plats and classic proofs and all other coins for that matter fluctuate with demand in the positive and negative direction.
<< <i>The drawback perhaps is that the price of platinum is so high it makes the coins already expensive. I do wonder if there will be much of a premium to keys if platinum continues to rise in the coming years, especially for the 1/2 and 1 ounce coins. If platinum fell it seems it would help the keys more than if it rose. >>
That's a very interesting observation, and one that I hadn't considered. Rather than react, let me give it some thought and get back to you.
<< <i>However I hardly see platinum coins with mintages under 5000 doing worse than classic commemoratives have. Classic commemoratives in silver already have much higher premiums than the plats do. >>
I can think of two reasons. First, the high price is a barrier to entry. Second, collector fatigue could cause a complete collapse in numismatic premium.
<< <i>Anyway it looks like the mint has stopped making platinum coins entirely, we have not heard a word about them lately and may not ever again. They would be best to shift to palladium of they want to make coins out of a different precious metal as it has a lower prices and sales will be higher.
I still say the plats are a play on the shear low mintage, the w unc plats went down to 2676. I think some will collect due to the changing reverses eventually, and that will help them. How much I don't know but it won't take much to move these coins. >>
It won't take much to move them in either direction. Remember, bullion value is a double-edged sword, and compared against inflation, even the precious metals don't fare well over the long term. They are more of a hedge than anything else, IMO.
Anyway, thanks for your response, and I appreciate the opportunity to discuss these issues with fellow collectors. It is through discussions such as these that I form my own opinion, and I again appreciate the opportunity...Mike
There is not a model which you can fit them into at all.....
Does anybody want the coins that is the most important question.....
I've said this before but to recap...........
A 4 coin set of either AGE/APE/ABE was what...........appox. $2000 in fall 2008 or 80x the average hourly rate for workers in US??
That is remarkably similar to what it cost to buy a proof $20-$10-$5-$2.5 from US Mint in 1910..............appox. 80x average hourly wage.
Collecting at this level of entry has always been for the fortunate few.
Now before everyone starts comparing mintages remember a few things..........
Current population is over 3x 1910 levels.
We have a much higher percentage of adult males in prime collecting age.
Average discretionary income is several fold higher.
I could argue a 2008 AGE/APE/ABE as being similar to a 1910 $20 proof........expensive and the domain of the privledged few.
Before I go too far however let me ask...............What was value of that 1910 $20 gold proof in 1911?? 1920?? 1930??
I do believe that the Gold Eagle proof coins and the Platinum Eagle proof coins are a different animal.....
I question if the gold ones will really ever be great collectable coins to have from an investment/great profit POV.....
Just want to say that since the plat series has ended (at least the fractionals) I don't see collector fatigue as an issue with these. I know I WAS fatigued in '08 when I could barely scrape up the funds to get the new issues, but am relieved that's over for '09. Plat future could go either way, but if I had to guess, I believe this will be seen as a premier series in the not-too-distant future, regardless of base metal price.
Also wanted to add that even though this series HAS changing reverses, I don't think of them that way. I think of them as a year-by-year series that just happens to have different reverses. I don't see the First Spouses that way at all. Yes, that's purely psychology, but I think it helps the plats hang together as a cohesive series better.
<< <i>It is also possible that there platinum coins will be an animal all by themselves....
There is not a model which you can fit them into at all..... >>
I agree. We don't really know. They may follow the examples presented in this thread. They may take on a life of their own. Will collectors become fatigued and ignore the design-variable series? Will design-variability be the big winners going forward? Very interesting questions that certainly makes for interesting discussion.
<< <i>Does anybody want the coins that is the most important question..... >>
If I may restate, the key question is:
"Does anybody want the coins (and how will demand change over time) is the most important question to the future values of these coins."
Respectfully...Mike
How, you might ask, would this be the case?
There are many more males (and females) of younger age than when the Rams were there in their prime 1950s form. And yet, both Rams and Raiders (or even Chargers if you are counting) all left with no signs of either them or any other team coming back? Why? Most likely because demand in terms of ticket and viewer audience is decreased.
Why is that? Because Southern Cal. has so many other alternative activities that have sprung up in the last 40 or 50 years that not enough people will come to see them, and so it can not be supported. This may be a simplification and yet is what we see. If the Lakers were allowed to start losing on a regular basis, interest might fall away in them also; that having been said, basketball seems to be more a part of youth culture than does football at least in So. Cal and apparently in quite a few demographics.
What I am saying is that demand may not be greater than it was 40 or 50 years ago for some activities, and I believe this may include coin collecting. I really don't think kids putting away a few quarters (state) for a year or two before they became bored is going to bring huge numbers into the field. How many of these kids stuck it out to get one of each state, or a complete PD currency set?
The collector demand, as opposed to flipper demand, may be falling flat and especially for pricey issues such as gold or plat. I know this is not a popular perspective, but I put it up for readers thoughts and comments. I, for one, will continue to collect and have done my bit of giving out buff nickes, etc. at the office and elsewhere but thing that we may for a while at least be into an era of decreased demand from collectors, which is not even taking into account the financial/economic environment we are now in.
Well, just Love coins, period.
I still think we ought to do what we can to stimulate collector interest at the ground level, and hope for the best.
Well, just Love coins, period.
Football else where has thrived while in California it seems to struggle.....
The NFL has grown by alot without a team in the 2nd biggest TV market.....
I don't think that coin collecting and football overlap all that much as far as entities.....
<< <i>I'm not sure if I follow your analogies to baseball cards, stamps, or even classic commemoratives.
baseball cards are printed on worthless paper or cardboard, whatever it is it isn't worth much. Plats are a precious metal and selling for close to metal prices.
Stamps the same problem as baseball cards, there is no floor on those, especially if they have been used.
Classic commemoratives are not a close analogy because they have changing obverse and reverse so have no noticeable cohesion, and also some have multiple years with the same designs. Also they are made out of silver [at least the ones I think you are using in your analogy]. The large gold pan pacs though make us jealous. I hope that one plays out.
So if someone wants a silver US coin they have a gazillion choices to make.
If you want platinum, you have far fewer choices.
Add to that the low mintages, and it doesn't take a lot of demand to raise prices.
The drawback perhaps is that the price of platinum is so high it makes the coins already expensive. I do wonder if there will be much of a premium to keys if platinum continues to rise in the coming years, especially for the 1/2 and 1 ounce coins. If platinum fell it seems it would help the keys more than if it rose.
However I hardly see platinum coins with mintages under 5000 doing worse than classic commemoratives have. Classic commemoratives in silver already have much higher premiums than the plats do.
Anyway it looks like the mint has stopped making platinum coins entirely, we have not heard a word about them lately and may not ever again. They would be best to shift to palladium of they want to make coins out of a different precious metal as it has a lower prices and sales will be higher.
I still say the plats are a play on the shear low mintage, the w unc plats went down to 2676. I think some will collect due to the changing reverses eventually, and that will help them. How much I don't know but it won't take much to move these coins. >>
<< <i>Great discussions, gang.
Just want to say that since the plat series has ended (at least the fractionals) I don't see collector fatigue as an issue with these. I know I WAS fatigued in '08 when I could barely scrape up the funds to get the new issues, but am relieved that's over for '09. Plat future could go either way, but if I had to guess, I believe this will be seen as a premier series in the not-too-distant future, regardless of base metal price.
Also wanted to add that even though this series HAS changing reverses, I don't think of them that way. I think of them as a year-by-year series that just happens to have different reverses. I don't see the First Spouses that way at all. Yes, that's purely psychology, but I think it helps the plats hang together as a cohesive series better. >>
Don't get me wrong, I love coins but reality is what it is. If you doubt, more power to you, but just take a look at who is doing the buying or even attending at a big show like Baltimore or try to figure out the total attendance figures of young numismatists at club meetings. It is not that there are none, but IMO seemingly fewer. Do we really see more people buying Whitman folders (other than the initial huge surge of State Quarter folders sold with little continuing interest).
PS - I am not sure if a fair response is to say: "well, that is just in California, so it doesn't apply in bum-Egypt __________[supply city or state]". Actually we have seen a harbinger of many other trends there. Darn, come to think of it the Buick demographic dilemma may even have had a start in the Golden State.
Well, just Love coins, period.
That is funny Mike...... I'm glad to know now that's the source of blurred objectively or vision. I thought the blurred vision was from too many nights pouring over data and pricing history. I did not know that the 40 percent of my current net worth held in high bullion content moderns in gold, silver and platinum who's current melt value is about 30 over what I paid for them and in no case close to their current market trading range was a actually the source of all this willful mental distortion. I bought a great deal of residential real estate in the mid to late 90s and stopped buying in 2001. I am still slightly in the black on the real estate but its the real estate crash combined with the very nice appreciation of my high intrinsic value moderns holdings that has driven them from 20 to 40 percent of my balance sheet over the last 3 years and I am grateful for them. They have done allot to offset the disaster in real estate...............and they are very liquid!
Eric
<< <i>"As one collector to another, that is an alarming percentage of your net worth, and I must wonder if that isn't blurring your objectivity. Regardless, for your own sake, I hope you are right."
That is funny Mike...... I'm glad to know now that's the source of blurred objectively or vision. I thought the blurred vision was from too many nights pouring over data and pricing history. I did not know that the 40 percent of my current net worth held in high bullion content moderns in gold, silver and platinum who's current melt value is about 30 over what I paid for them and in no case close to their current market trading range was a actually the source of all this willful mental distortion. I bought a great deal of residential real estate in the mid to late 90s and stopped buying in 2001. I am still slightly in the black on the real estate but its the real estate crash combined with the very nice appreciation of my high intrinsic value moderns holdings that has driven them from 20 to 40 percent of my balance sheet over the last 3 years and I am grateful for them. They have done allot to offset the disaster in real estate...............and they are very liquid!
Eric >>
Eric, There was a lot in my prior post to you, and it is distressing to see you ignored it and instead focused on this comment -- one that was made out of genuine concern. I know when I get very close to something often it is difficult to see the forest through the trees, and it is that wisdom that I was trying to share. I apologize if it rubbed you the wrong way & I am sorry....Mike
<< <i>Asked slightly differently and focusing on the plat issues: Does the bullion floor which protects the bottom end also absolve us from the risk of collector fatigue negating any numismatic premium?
Similarly, it doesn't take a lot of demand reduction to take it the other way. That logic, for instance, fails when applied to other low-mintage coins -- for instance the 1936 proof Lincoln. Thinly traded issues like plats and classic proofs and all other coins for that matter fluctuate with demand in the positive and negative direction. >>
The 2004 proof plats already had an investor premium prior to the release of the 2008 coins, so going by that it seems that there is no investor fatigue in the proof plats. The Lincoln Cents are a hard price comparison because they are not done in a precious metal and I think it is hard to compare the plats to anything other than gold coins really due to their close spot prices.
Even at that though I think gold is obviously a more popular metal so it is somewhat hard to even compare to those. The thing is like I said the proof plats already did show a numismatic premium for the 2004 coins and even the 2006 w unc have shown it as well so it already exists.
I still think that the ending of the plat series by the mint will help the coins, the shorter run of 12 years of coins for the proofs helps them, and as time passes people will see these low mintages in books and buy in. The coins could languish for some time however until suddenly they will be "discovered" perhaps. Just like the Jackie Robinson was to that series.
I have had 4-packs of Mint Sealed $50 2008 W Plats listed on eBay for 9 months. For the first 7 of those 9 months there was no action at all. About 6 weeks ago offers began picking up. I sold a few 4-packs at $3200, and when the offers picked up it went to $3400. I have sold all I have of those (2 on reserve).
I find it interesting that as soon as I sold my last non-reserved 4-pack, a single $50 PCGS MS70 went for $1300.
I also have some 2008 W Plat 4 coin sets listed on eBay, and the selling price (meaning the price I am actually getting for them) has increased from $3200 to $3600+ in the past 6 weeks.
All the ones I’ve been selling are mint sealed.
Looks like the market for the unc 2008 w plats is doing well.
FloridaBill
The current bulllion value of the 2006-W $50.00 one-half ounce platinum coin in PCGS-70 is $650.00. I'll tell you what ... for "struggling" coins that have questionable numismatic value, I will gladly pay anyone 100% over spot, or $1300.00 per piece, all day long. Any takers?
Not a bad three-year rate of return for this coin during which time both the stock and real estate markets crashed.
Or how about the 2008-W $50.00 one-half ounce platinum coin in PCGS Proof-70, with a bullion value is $650.00. Again, for a series of coins with "questionable" numismatic value, I will gladly pay anyone 60% over spot, or $1040.00 per piece, all day long. Any takers?
Not a bad one-year rate of return on investment for this coin!
I could go on, but I think I made my point.
Basically, I have pointed out recently that some of the very best, low mintage, platinum coins may be subject to the lowest returns in the years to come (vis a vis the base metal common coins) merely by the base metal outperforming the numismatic market - obviously a plausible scenerio. For example, take FloridaBill's most recent observations...
Assuming the 2008-W $50 Plats are now worth $1,300 per coin in MS70, that is $2,600/oz. If and when (in this hypothetical) Platinum reaches $4,000/oz (one day), let's look at what happens to an oz. of platinum vs. that low mintage coin...
The oz. of platinum jumps from $1,300/oz to $4,000/oz - an increase of more than 200%. But, that same MS70 coin needs to reach the price level of $4,000 (or $8,000/oz) to keep up. Will many of the lower mintage 1/2 oz. plat coins trade at $8,000/oz. when Platinum reaches $4,000/oz?
On the other hand, a much more limited move up in the base metal over the next 5-10 years, could see the key date coins significantly outperforming the commons.
On the other hand, if platinum crashes down to $500/oz., it is very possible that the low mintage 1/2 oz. MS70 coin maintains a numismatic value in excess of $500. So, in assessing these coins, do the low mintage coins represent a more CONSERVATIVE vehicle to diversify into compared to simply accumulating platinum metal let's say?
Obviously, no one on these boards has the definitive answer to the question whether simple platinum bullion coins will, or will not, outperform better date platinum coins over the next 5-10 years. Of course, well versed modern enthusiasts can take a position (in a book or elsewhere) as to whether they believe certain low mintage platinum coins may, indeed, outperform, other numismatic coins. But, the 'wild card" here may well be the platinum commodity market, with worldwide influences. But, of course, why stop this thread from reaching 50,000 responses while we see what happens as the platinum commodity market unfolds over the next 5-10 years (and the low mintage plats either "keep up", outperform or fall a bit short).
Just my 2 cents
Wondercoin
And Mike I cant fully respond to all your "prove it" comments without up loading my study that I don't own the rights to anymore. KP has already mention that I should be careful how much material I post. Just like this material price topic. I have a whole chapter modeling how material price spikes kill key dates if the spike is extreme enough and calculate at each $1000 price level total set value and the premium collapse of the key in the section describing the "interaction of bullion and numismatic premiums". I model total set recession behavior too.
Eric
Conversely as bullion prices decline, the numismatic premium on keys tends to grow in terms of dollars and obviously percentages.
What will be interesting to observe is how many will go into the melting pot if platinum prices climb back to $2,000 per ounce again. If a substantial number are melted, as has been stated previously, the keys may change as the more common plats get melted.
<< <i>One comment on general affordability of Platinum and also Gold Eagles.
I've said this before but to recap...........
A 4 coin set of either AGE/APE/ABE was what...........appox. $2000 in fall 2008 or 80x the average hourly rate for workers in US??
That is remarkably similar to what it cost to buy a proof $20-$10-$5-$2.5 from US Mint in 1910..............appox. 80x average hourly wage.
Collecting at this level of entry has always been for the fortunate few.
Now before everyone starts comparing mintages remember a few things..........
Current population is over 3x 1910 levels.
We have a much higher percentage of adult males in prime collecting age.
Average discretionary income is several fold higher.
I could argue a 2008 AGE/APE/ABE as being similar to a 1910 $20 proof........expensive and the domain of the privledged few.
Before I go too far however let me ask...............What was value of that 1910 $20 gold proof in 1911?? 1920?? 1930?? >>
Guys I'm going to 'Bump' my prior post as no one seemed to note the last sentence which I believe is key..............
What was value of that 1910 $20 gold proof in 1911?? 1920?? 1930?? >>
Rare coins may take considerable time to appreciate.
I doubt people holding 1910 $20 gold proofs were worring why they had limited appreciation by 1911.
For various 2006-2008 APEs we are looking at up to 100% appreciation.
Relax................enjoy your collection,..............don't over analyse everything.