1/4's at $1200 are overpriced. They are extremely overpriced at $1500. My position has not changed.
Dealer buy is nowhere near those prices. IMO, the coin is correctly priced at around $900.
I'm not going to take a position on the sustainability of the 08w buffalo pricing, because only time will tell. That said, I think anyone who bought these as a flip should feel pretty happy with current levels; I can't imagine these will double or triple from here (but I also never believed the 1995w silver eagle would reach the levels it did).
As for the 1/4s being overpriced at $1200-1500, I disagree. First off, some dealers HAVE offered as much as $1500 recently. My personal belief is that of all the buffalos, the 1/4s have the highest crossover appeal for buffalo nickel collectors, and it wouldn't surprise me one bit to see them continue to rise from here. Dealer buy is just not a good indicator for most moderns.
Botanist- I believe the rational for marring collectable coins sold at "melt" is to remove those coins from the collectables population thus making the remaining collectable coins even rarer/more valuable.
NYCounsel: Many thanks for the thoughtful response! Thus the only rationale for marring coin surfaces when selling for melt is that the seller has retained a substantial reserve holding of similar coins? Otherwise, might it be disadvantageous? Wouldn't you expect to get even a slight additional amount from a buyer if the coins are undamaged, because the buyer or someone else in the chain of custody en route to the melting pots might wish to rescue a coin, whether or not for conscious numismatic reasons?
I believe that most of the individuals who reported marring surfaces when selling for melt had coins that they didn't sell; so the thought was by removing the sold coins from the 69/70 market, their remaining holdings would benefit from being part of a smaller surviving population. I don't believe that the coins sold this way were advertised or sold as having a marred surface; presumably the person buying at melt would have no expectation or cause to complain as to condition, but only about metal content. Those buyers who cared about condition would probably have opted for a slabbed 69 coin, as most 69 slabs brought little or no premium to melt during the $2000+ peak.
<< <i>NYCounsel: Many thanks for the thoughtful response! Thus the only rationale for marring coin surfaces when selling for melt is that the seller has retained a substantial reserve holding of similar coins? Otherwise, might it be disadvantageous? Wouldn't you expect to get even a slight additional amount from a buyer if the coins are undamaged, because the buyer or someone else in the chain of custody en route to the melting pots might wish to rescue a coin, whether or not for conscious numismatic reasons?
I believe that most of the individuals who reported marring surfaces when selling for melt had coins that they didn't sell; so the thought was by removing the sold coins from the 69/70 market, their remaining holdings would benefit from being part of a smaller surviving population. I don't believe that the coins sold this way were advertised or sold as having a marred surface; presumably the person buying at melt would have no expectation or cause to complain as to condition, but only about metal content. Those buyers who cared about condition would probably have opted for a slabbed 69 coin, as most 69 slabs brought little or no premium to melt during the $2000+ peak. >>
......................................................................................................................................................................................................... I'm on record as having sold some 2005-2007 platinums during last run up past $2000/oz.
With spot prices close to $1750 I'm considering what to sell if spot rises further.
One choice is some of the 1 oz. MS69 2006-W $100 coins.
Spot would likely have to be above $2000 to see the numismatic premium disappear.
If my B&M buys them based on spot and if they offer no premium for PCGS grade or FS label them I will likely crack them out and perhaps just nick or dent some of the edge reeding.
I can't understand why anyone would deface a collector coin. Just think about all the draped bust silver and capped bust classic gold coins with initials and defacing marks carved into them. Some A hole did the same thing to these "moderns" of their day over 100 years ago.
I can't understand why anyone would deface a collector coin. Just think about all the draped bust silver and capped bust classic gold coins with initials and defacing marks carved into them. Some A hole did the same thing to these "moderns" of their day over 100 years ago.
I don't think the folks who marked coins at that time were thinking about surviving population. It goes against every collector instinct in my body to deliberately mar the surface of a coin, but I do understand the incentive here. At the end of the day, though, I'm not sure if it will really make a difference. If there is insufficient demand to give numismatic premium over melt to a coin like the 2006 w $100 in MS69 -- a coin with a mintage just over 3,000, how many coins would you have to damage before the market would notice? Even if you dropped population by 10%, I doubt it would make any difference. The problem is not too many coins, the problem is not enough collectors, and lowering the population doesn't increase demand.
........and on the whole, all those non defaced surviving draped bust silver, capped bust classic gold coins, etc., etc have a higher value today because of the diminished surviving populations.
What would numismatic premium be on morgan/peace dollars and in particular various gold coins had there not been the past massive melting of coins??
Cry for all the 1901-1933 gold pieces that were defaced down to ingots before you worry about a few platinums with nicked reeds.
Oh......and before you cry too much you might ask those now holding those early 20th century gold rarities how they would feel about say another 100-1000 examples suddenly being on the market?
Coins that blow past their 3-5 year maturity levels in the first 2 years post release ALWAYS decrease in price, sometimes rather quickly.
This is true for the 10 K mIntage of the 2006 W AGE Reverse Proof. It is somewhat of a unique design like the Buffalo. I say come back to this thread in 4 years and see where the 08 Buffalos are. I bought mine from the mint but will never pay for the 70s at these prices. The 1/10 and 1/4 buffalos may be similar to the Jackie Robinson with a mintage of 5K. There does seem to be a lot more demand for these Buffalos, more so than the Jackie. JMHO.
Producing fractionals again would dilute your demand for the coin, while it is scarce at under 10,000; it is not rare. Individuals seeking a type coin would buy newly minted fractionals, even though mintages would be much higher, they would be cheaper.
7/8 at least a couple other people have already pointed this out, but according to your theory then the 1 ounce proof gold buffalo should not sell for much of a premium yet it is. The mint made more of those already, right?
The 1 ounce w unc coin should also drop in price because the mint made more of those without the mintmark?
But prices aren't dropping so what you say doesn't seem to fit with reality.
Actually producing more coins if the mintage is high enough does the opposite of what you say it does, it increases demand. That much higher mintage shows the demand for the coins is much more than the earlier sales.
That is the problem with the platinum coins, they only did 8000 2009 coins which is not a lot when you compare to past years.
The gold buffalo mintages rebounded to much higher earlier levels though leaving 2008 as a crater. That crater creates the spike in prices.
The mint has also said they will not bring back coins unless they are a certain percentage of sales, the fractionals never achieved that percentage, that is why they kept the 1 ounce coins. The mint wants higher revenues, not to tinker around with 1/10 ounce coins.
It is my suspcion that the Mint is not doing fractionals because West Point is all out producing 30 million SAE uncs annually in what is basically a job shop. There is no capacity for other precious metals other than the one ounce gold coins. Just MHO.
Retired United States Mint guy, now working on an Everyman Type Set.
<< <i>Cry for all the 1901-1933 gold pieces that were defaced down to ingots before you worry about a few platinums with nicked reeds. >>
I doesn't matter if you deface a 1 OZ platinum coin or a 1912-P Lincoln cent in VF20, to do so is just plain wrong.
Numismatic Karma:2many2few nics the reeds on his coins only to find out the following day, his now defaced coins are would have been worth thousands over melt. Who would be crying then?
/8 at least a couple other people have already pointed this out, but according to your theory then the 1 ounce proof gold buffalo should not sell for much of a premium yet it is. The mint made more of those already, right?
The 1 ounce w unc coin should also drop in price because the mint made more of those?
But prices aren't dropping so what you say doesn't seem to fit with reality.
Actually producing more coins if the mintage is high enough does the opposite of what you say it does, it increases demand. That much higher mintage shows the demand for the coins is much more than the earlier sales.
That is the problem with the platinum coins, they only did 8000 2009 coins which is not a lot when you compare to past years.
The gold buffalo mintages rebounded to much higher earlier levels though leaving 2008 as a crater. That crater creates the spike in prices.
Half, I agree with you, the numbers on the 2009 Buffalos show that collector base for the coins is pretty strong. If the collector base is only half of 09 buffalo mintages, the 08w buffalos are in good shape.
That said, I agree with 7/8s feeling that at some point the pricing is unsustainable. Having a large collector base is hugely important, but we also must consider the means of that base. We can all rattle off a list of collectible coins that have achieved significant multiples over issue price and/or melt, but at some price point (I'm thinking the $3000-$5000 range), demand dwindles regardless of the collector base.
Let's say the ASE program has a base of 1,000,000 collectors. Within that 1,000,000, all of them can afford a coin at $20-30. As price climbs from $30 to $100, to $500, to $1000, to $3,000+, the pool of collectors with deep enough pockets to buy continues to shrink. In addition, even those who can afford it will consider other options. That's part of what hurt the platinum base. When platinum was $400 an ounce, mintages were pretty high. As platinum climbed, the coins hit price price points that pushed existing and potential collectors out of the market. There wasn't anything inherently wrong with platinums, it was rising prices that corroded demand.
Prices will erode and that is usually very swift once it begins.
Speaking of demand ONLY, when the fractionals only have one date/mm of each size to choose from, naturally all demand is directed at the small population of available pieces. Some of that demand is only there to acquire an example of a denomination or size.
Type/Size collectors are generally not Date/MM collectors. If the USM issues fractionals next year, for example, the demand for a type coin is now split over two issues and therefore price will deteriorate on the 08W's. One will gravitate toward the less expensive coin for a type example.
Now for the one ounce coins. There are several years issued of this coin in both bullion and collector version. Since there are several years available, type collectors are able to obtain a cheaper piece than the scarce 08w unc. Collectors desiring rarity chase after the unc $50, and that demand is not cluttered by type collectors.
As platinum climbed, the coins hit price price points that pushed existing and potential collectors out of the market. There wasn't anything inherently wrong with platinums, it was rising prices that corroded demand.
nycouncel I am not sure it is fair to compare platinum coins to gold coins, or silver coins to gold coins, gold transcends much of what you say. How are conditional rare classic gold coins doing? Has the high gold price hurt those? I don't think so, so to say that the current gold price is bad doesn't make sense since the mint just sold 50,000 2009 gold proof buffalo 1 ounce coins at around $1400 dollars each. If someone is paying for a set of gold buffalos, the 2006, 2007 and 2009 are $4500 for those ones, what is another $4500 for the 2008?
it's a 1 ounce gold coin, not 1/4 ounce, not silver, not platinum. US collectors don't like platinum coins, the w unc coins proved that. Two years of low mintage happened because demand is low. The coins designs are a crisscross of eagles, and themes about the three branches of government and now the Preamble. It is not a cohesive set.
Having said all that I am not throwing in the towel on the platinum coins I have, but they have not been the screaming coins we wished for. It is not just about the lowest mintage, it is about the metal itself and the coin designs.
If it was only the mintage then the wheelchair silver dollar would sell for more than the 1995 w silver eagle proof and it doesn't.
Anyway if you guys think the gold buffalos are topped out then sell all you have, some that already did lost out on a lot of money doing that.
I know that the FS label has given huge premiums to many coins. I also know that platinum is not as popular as gold. I don't understand the logic of the price guide and would like any thoughts as to why 3 out of the 4 2008 W platinum MS70 coins are given a lower value in the FS Label. Come on they should at least be the same as the blue labels. Thanks I notice now that many of the 2008 buffalo's are showing up in the same way.
I believe you are correct a FS MS70 coin should never sell for less than same non FS coin as I believe you could submit coin for reslabing with request to maintain grade but delete FS label.
but how many are type collectors and how many are not? >>
I always wonder about this, too. Many on these boards have talked about the emergence of the type collector, but to me, there's not much point in having an example of a gold buffalo or a platinum eagle. I'd want the whole set and am guessing most other people feel the same way.
It's different with classics, but with moderns, I can't help thinking there are few type collectors. Prove me wrong, please!
I honestly don't understand all the angst over platinum. It's a great investment/hedge/collectible. Nothing goes straight up, and nothing goes up forever. However, in today's environment there aren't many better choices. jmho.
Q: Are You Printing Money? Bernanke: Not Literally
<< <i>I honestly don't understand all the angst over platinum. It's a great investment/hedge/collectible. Nothing goes straight up, and nothing goes up forever. However, in today's environment there aren't many better choices. jmho. >>
The age of short attention spans and the quick kill.
i love reading all the comments on the platinum coins.....
will they be winners....yes??? no??? maybe??? who knows
obviously they have not enjoyed the parabolic rise like the 08 Buffalo....and yes everyone from day one in platinum has made a substantial return and should be grateful....not greedy...grateful...was there better investments....always will be....some worse too...
it reminds me of that other hobby so many of us enjoy....US Stock Market....STOCK in 08 Buffalo off the chart...keeps rising every month...it will come back to earth...everything does...question is....is a PR70 set worth $15000, $20000, $25000???? or $5000???? we'll see
PR70 platinums are a value stock (low mintages across the whole collection) with substantial upside, underpinned by the value of the metal ....key is trying to figure out when the rest of the people looking at them thinks so too....then the parabolic rise will start...
The key to the platinum collecting game is your capital reserves. You don't have enough, you can't pee in the tall weeds with the big dogs.
No one knows for sure how many buyers of fractional Buffaloes are just type collectors and want an example of any given size....
However, all one needs to know is that they are part of the demand equation for these coins and if they were able to buy "a newly minted" 2010-W (if it were ever issued) fractional, demand would erode away from 08-W's and prices would drop.
As for the Proof 1 oz 08-W........the prices are absolutely rediculous and are not consistent with a 1oz coin minted to that level (20,000).
Half, instead of degrading others comments, how about answering this question without regard to popularity of design?
Why does the 08-W Proof Buff 1 oz sell for multiples of the 06-W Anniversary Reverse Proof $50 1oz, which has 1/2 the mintage?
Answer: Over-hyped Buffalo Gold. Yes it is beautiful and popular. But it is resembling tulip bulbs more and more every day.
Half, instead of degrading others comments, how about answering this question without regard to popularity of design?
7/8 you can't answer the question without regard to popularity of design because the design matters a great deal. Last time I checked the 2001 silver buffalo commemoratives were holding a decent premium at mintages over 200,000. And that is for a commemorative that usually don't do that well even with a much smaller mintage.
The buffalo design is a great design that looks great in gold and silver, nearly anyone that sees one appreciates that.
Now why is it that the 2008 w unc platinum are not doing well in comparison? Is it the coin designs? The metal? It has to be something.
Anyway let's see where things are a year from now, I am not worried one way or the other.
I would not doubt that fractional Buffalo's will return......
Just the support this forum has given the coins and the popularity in the marketplace will weigh on the USM's collective minds.........
The one thing you can say without a doubt is that the USM does whatever it wants, whenever it wants. That has been displayed time and time again. The enabling legislation is still intact to allow minting of fractional buff's, it hasnt been repealed or revised.
Whether this Mint Director does it , or the next, my bet is that they will return.
The reason why the 2001 Buff $$ hold a decent premium, is not only because of the design, but they are CHEAP.
A PR70 DCAM $50 Buff Gold priced at $7K-$8K is not CHEAP. It is not rarer than the Reverse Proof $50 AGE (which was a very popular coin upon release-and the only reverse proof AGE) at 10,000 units......the Buff is 2x the mintage....but yet the Reverse Proof 70 sells for $3K or less?
Looks like that $50 70 DCAM Buff 1oz is destined for a fall.......a big one........and that doesnt even bring in the fact that it has crossed the fateful $5K line in numismatics, where buyers thin out dramatically. If you are holding any of those, take your profits or be happy with a $3-4K coin within the next year.
Question about the non “W” platinum coins. I thought the eagle over the sun, no mint mark, platinum coins were released as bullion coins. Not being familiar with how bullion coins are sold and shipped by the mint, I assumed dealers buy them in quantity and they are shipped by the mint in bags or whatever, no special handling or separation in shipping. I am confused about how these coins get a first strike designation, and how a collector/dealer obtains coins of a quality to receive a MS70 designation? Here is a link to a ebay sale of first strike MS70 that triggered my question.
Since [of course] we all concern ourselves with gold coins and never the metal itself...because that would belong on the PM Forum...no one should find it interesting that the indictment of Goldman Sachs has really spanked the market this morning, including gold (down $25/ounce) at last check.
Typical knee-jerk Wall Street stupidity!
In fact, hasn't GS lately been accused of conspiring to manipulate gold prices downward? Therefore, shouldn't this be welcomed news for all the gold bugs out there?!?
Regular issue Plats are shipped in rolls and monster boxes just like bullion Silver Eagles. I have the plastic rolls from times when I bought multiples from a dealer, and just recently I saw an ebay auction for the empty monster box. I can hardly conceive of a monster box of Plats. Yowser.
Q: Are You Printing Money? Bernanke: Not Literally
would the grading standards for a bullion coin be different, It is difficult for me to understand how a coin handled by machines, and put in a roll next to other coins can receive a MS70, a so called perfect coin.
7/8 when I was talking about the gold buffalo prices I was referring to the raw prices, you keep bringing up a specific coin in a specific grade or label. With the 70 coins it is probably more about how many have been graded and I am not going to go into that.
With the silver commemorative buffalo you are talking about a coin with a mintage of over 200,000 and there are plenty of those coins on the market. 10 times as many of those coins as the 1/10 gold buffalos.
So if you think the prices on the silver coins are good I can't see how you think the 1/10 coins are going to crash when there are ten times less of those?
Anyway we can all buy and sell based on what we think, all I can say is if the gold buffalo 1/4 coins hit $4000 to $5000 I am going to LMAO. I still hold out hope for the platinum coins, they are a sleepy group that will hopefully wake up someday.
PS Why is the Jackie Robinson UNC gold coin selling for thousands when the spouse coins with a lower mintage and more gold sell for under 1K? Each coin trades within its own set, at least that is how it looks to me.
I don't think it's possible to make sense out of the 2008-W Buffalo prices unless we have an idea of who is buying at these high prices, and why. Are there any big promotions going on at the moment?
I'm not sure that the demand is design-driven. Anyone who likes the design can buy a one-ounce bullion Buffalo at just above melt, or a proof for about $150 more. Or a nice unc. Buffalo nickel for about $60.
Raven there are registry sets of the platinum coins so people do collect them. I think some are driving around in catalytic converters at this point though.
On the 1/10's, even raw (because I wont even address the stupid prices for FS or non-FS MS70 coins), will decrease from the current 500-600 per, imo, to around 350-400.
I do like the 1/4, for various reasons, one being it's size and the ease in visualizing and appreciating the design (as opposed to the 1/10) - and it's dual allure to both moden and classic collectors (it is closest in size to the original buff nickel, of course in that cool 24kt gold).
But the 1/4, even with the dual demand base, stands to get clobbered if fractional 1/4's are offered again. They are just too pricey (raw) at $1000+. I think $750-$800 raw is very reasonable on the downside. It could fall further.
As for the Jackie Unc, it is a 5,000 issue $5 commem, of a usual 10,000+mintages run of half eagles. It has both collectability from a baseball and coin perspective. It has had it's ups and downs, lately down. Good example. Now use that price point against your 20,000 mintage proof gold $50 buff. See what I mean. What would you rather own from a rarity perspective?
As for the spouses, I think there will be opportunities there. Some of those mintages are real low. Especially looking closely at the low mintages within the Liberty subset.
If fractional Buffaloes are offered again, I think it's likely that they will be bullion coins instead of (or in addition to) W-mint collector versions.
Now use that price point against your 20,000 mintage proof gold $50 buff. See what I mean. What would you rather own from a rarity perspective?
7/8 you are mixing unc and proof coins which is not a fair comparison. If you check the registry sets of gold coins you will see the 1 ounce proof gold buffalo has the most collectors for non American Eagles gold coins, the only gold one with more is the 1/10 gold eagle. So it is a very popular set.
Now as to the gold commemoratives, here is a closed Ebay listing-
Gold buffalo 1/4 mintage 9900 and you think $750-$800???
This is why I say current prices are not high compared to the rest of the market.
As far as the mint bringing back buffalo fractionals, I would not sell my coins based on that possibility. That is like forecasting when we will land back on the moon. If by some fluke they do change their minds I will reevaluate, however if they are bullion releases then the mintages will be in the hundreds of thousands which would not affect the proof fractionals [it might actually help them] and would not hurt the unc anymore than the 2008 w unc 1 ounce was hurt by the 2009 bullion coins.
<< <i>If fractional Buffaloes are offered again, I think it's likely that they will be bullion coins instead of (or in addition to) W-mint collector versions. >>
I agree..... and the planchet shortage has to go away first for that to be a possiblity. I am with DeepCoin and dont expect to see any buff fractionals any time soon...... BUT if I were in the Mint marketing department and got to where I had extra gold planchet capacity I would roll out the fractional gold buffs to the dealer network because the Mint never said that it would not do so and they would sell just fine. Remember that the new policy is that if the Mint cant sell 1% of total sales volume in an item they do not wish to make it unless its required by Congress. Changing reverse fractional plats will likely not be back because they have a obvious long history of not meeting this threshold when demand is broken up over 4 denominations. The gold buffs do not suffer from this stigma and could be back. No one wants to hear this but thats ok.
Lots of day trader mentality is present in the buffs these days........
It is my view that the 2008-w $50 mint state buff in non FS holders is not over valued at todays prices.
Comments
Boy...if only we could turn the clock back to...when was it, November 2008?...and back up the truck EVEN MORE than we did!!!
Dealer buy is nowhere near those prices. IMO, the coin is correctly priced at around $900.
I'm not going to take a position on the sustainability of the 08w buffalo pricing, because only time will tell. That said, I think anyone who bought these as a flip should feel pretty happy with current levels; I can't imagine these will double or triple from here (but I also never believed the 1995w silver eagle would reach the levels it did).
As for the 1/4s being overpriced at $1200-1500, I disagree. First off, some dealers HAVE offered as much as $1500 recently. My personal belief is that of all the buffalos, the 1/4s have the highest crossover appeal for buffalo nickel collectors, and it wouldn't surprise me one bit to see them continue to rise from here. Dealer buy is just not a good indicator for most moderns.
I believe that most of the individuals who reported marring surfaces when selling for melt had coins that they didn't sell; so the thought was by removing the sold coins from the 69/70 market, their remaining holdings would benefit from being part of a smaller surviving population. I don't believe that the coins sold this way were advertised or sold as having a marred surface; presumably the person buying at melt would have no expectation or cause to complain as to condition, but only about metal content. Those buyers who cared about condition would probably have opted for a slabbed 69 coin, as most 69 slabs brought little or no premium to melt during the $2000+ peak.
<< <i>NYCounsel: Many thanks for the thoughtful response! Thus the only rationale for marring coin surfaces when selling for melt is that the seller has retained a substantial reserve holding of similar coins? Otherwise, might it be disadvantageous? Wouldn't you expect to get even a slight additional amount from a buyer if the coins are undamaged, because the buyer or someone else in the chain of custody en route to the melting pots might wish to rescue a coin, whether or not for conscious numismatic reasons?
I believe that most of the individuals who reported marring surfaces when selling for melt had coins that they didn't sell; so the thought was by removing the sold coins from the 69/70 market, their remaining holdings would benefit from being part of a smaller surviving population. I don't believe that the coins sold this way were advertised or sold as having a marred surface; presumably the person buying at melt would have no expectation or cause to complain as to condition, but only about metal content. Those buyers who cared about condition would probably have opted for a slabbed 69 coin, as most 69 slabs brought little or no premium to melt during the $2000+ peak. >>
.........................................................................................................................................................................................................
I'm on record as having sold some 2005-2007 platinums during last run up past $2000/oz.
With spot prices close to $1750 I'm considering what to sell if spot rises further.
One choice is some of the 1 oz. MS69 2006-W $100 coins.
Spot would likely have to be above $2000 to see the numismatic premium disappear.
If my B&M buys them based on spot and if they offer no premium for PCGS grade or FS label them I will likely crack them out and perhaps just nick or dent some of the edge reeding.
Consider it a chop mark or cancellation stamp.
I don't think the folks who marked coins at that time were thinking about surviving population. It goes against every collector instinct in my body to deliberately mar the surface of a coin, but I do understand the incentive here. At the end of the day, though, I'm not sure if it will really make a difference. If there is insufficient demand to give numismatic premium over melt to a coin like the 2006 w $100 in MS69 -- a coin with a mintage just over 3,000, how many coins would you have to damage before the market would notice? Even if you dropped population by 10%, I doubt it would make any difference. The problem is not too many coins, the problem is not enough collectors, and lowering the population doesn't increase demand.
What would numismatic premium be on morgan/peace dollars and in particular various gold coins had there not been the past massive melting of coins??
Cry for all the 1901-1933 gold pieces that were defaced down to ingots before you worry about a few platinums with nicked reeds.
Oh......and before you cry too much you might ask those now holding those early 20th century gold rarities how they would feel about say another 100-1000 examples suddenly being on the market?
This is true for the 10 K mIntage of the 2006 W AGE Reverse Proof. It is somewhat of a unique design like the Buffalo. I say come back to this thread in 4 years and see where the 08 Buffalos are. I bought mine from the mint but will never pay for the 70s at these prices. The 1/10 and 1/4 buffalos may be similar to the Jackie Robinson with a mintage of 5K. There does seem to be a lot more demand for these Buffalos, more so than the Jackie. JMHO.
Box of 20
Wondercoin
7/8 at least a couple other people have already pointed this out, but according to your theory then the 1 ounce proof gold buffalo should not sell for much of a premium yet it is. The mint made more of those already, right?
The 1 ounce w unc coin should also drop in price because the mint made more of those without the mintmark?
But prices aren't dropping so what you say doesn't seem to fit with reality.
Actually producing more coins if the mintage is high enough does the opposite of what you say it does, it increases demand. That much higher mintage shows the demand for the coins is much more than the earlier sales.
That is the problem with the platinum coins, they only did 8000 2009 coins which is not a lot when you compare to past years.
The gold buffalo mintages rebounded to much higher earlier levels though leaving 2008 as a crater. That crater creates the spike in prices.
The mint has also said they will not bring back coins unless they are a certain percentage of sales, the fractionals never achieved that percentage, that is why they kept the 1 ounce coins. The mint wants higher revenues, not to tinker around with 1/10 ounce coins.
<< <i>Cry for all the 1901-1933 gold pieces that were defaced down to ingots before you worry about a few platinums with nicked reeds. >>
I doesn't matter if you deface a 1 OZ platinum coin or a 1912-P Lincoln cent in VF20, to do so is just plain wrong.
Numismatic Karma:2many2few nics the reeds on his coins only to find out the following day, his now defaced coins are would have been worth thousands over melt. Who would be crying then?
If so, was it "wrong" to send all those millions of 90% silver coins to the melting pot over the past several decades?
My Adolph A. Weinman signature
The 1 ounce w unc coin should also drop in price because the mint made more of those?
But prices aren't dropping so what you say doesn't seem to fit with reality.
Actually producing more coins if the mintage is high enough does the opposite of what you say it does, it increases demand. That much higher mintage shows the demand for the coins is much more than the earlier sales.
That is the problem with the platinum coins, they only did 8000 2009 coins which is not a lot when you compare to past years.
The gold buffalo mintages rebounded to much higher earlier levels though leaving 2008 as a crater. That crater creates the spike in prices.
Half, I agree with you, the numbers on the 2009 Buffalos show that collector base for the coins is pretty strong. If the collector base is only half of 09 buffalo mintages, the 08w buffalos are in good shape.
That said, I agree with 7/8s feeling that at some point the pricing is unsustainable. Having a large collector base is hugely important, but we also must consider the means of that base. We can all rattle off a list of collectible coins that have achieved significant multiples over issue price and/or melt, but at some price point (I'm thinking the $3000-$5000 range), demand dwindles regardless of the collector base.
Let's say the ASE program has a base of 1,000,000 collectors. Within that 1,000,000, all of them can afford a coin at $20-30. As price climbs from $30 to $100, to $500, to $1000, to $3,000+, the pool of collectors with deep enough pockets to buy continues to shrink. In addition, even those who can afford it will consider other options. That's part of what hurt the platinum base. When platinum was $400 an ounce, mintages were pretty high. As platinum climbed, the coins hit price price points that pushed existing and potential collectors out of the market. There wasn't anything inherently wrong with platinums, it was rising prices that corroded demand.
Prices will erode and that is usually very swift once it begins.
Speaking of demand ONLY, when the fractionals only have one date/mm of each size to choose from, naturally all demand is directed at the small population of available pieces. Some of that demand is only there to acquire an example of a denomination or size.
Type/Size collectors are generally not Date/MM collectors. If the USM issues fractionals next year, for example, the demand for a type coin is now split over two issues and therefore price will deteriorate on the 08W's. One will gravitate toward the less expensive coin for a type example.
Now for the one ounce coins. There are several years issued of this coin in both bullion and collector version. Since there are several years available, type collectors are able to obtain a cheaper piece than the scarce 08w unc. Collectors desiring rarity chase after the unc $50, and that demand is not cluttered by type collectors.
but how many are type collectors and how many are not?
nycouncel I am not sure it is fair to compare platinum coins to gold coins, or silver coins to gold coins, gold transcends much of what you say. How are conditional rare classic gold coins doing? Has the high gold price hurt those? I don't think so, so to say that the current gold price is bad doesn't make sense since the mint just sold 50,000 2009 gold proof buffalo 1 ounce coins at around $1400 dollars each. If someone is paying for a set of gold buffalos, the 2006, 2007 and 2009 are $4500 for those ones, what is another $4500 for the 2008?
it's a 1 ounce gold coin, not 1/4 ounce, not silver, not platinum. US collectors don't like platinum coins, the w unc coins proved that. Two years of low mintage happened because demand is low. The coins designs are a crisscross of eagles, and themes about the three branches of government and now the Preamble. It is not a cohesive set.
Having said all that I am not throwing in the towel on the platinum coins I have, but they have not been the screaming coins we wished for. It is not just about the lowest mintage, it is about the metal itself and the coin designs.
If it was only the mintage then the wheelchair silver dollar would sell for more than the 1995 w silver eagle proof and it doesn't.
Anyway if you guys think the gold buffalos are topped out then sell all you have, some that already did lost out on a lot of money doing that.
I believe you are correct a FS MS70 coin should never sell for less than same non FS coin as I believe you could submit coin for reslabing with request to maintain grade but delete FS label.
I agree.
In China Platinum is very popular and IMO it won't take much buying to move market for many of the 2004-2008-w plats.
<< <i>ok
but how many are type collectors and how many are not? >>
I always wonder about this, too. Many on these boards have talked about the emergence of the type collector, but to me, there's not much point in having an example of a gold buffalo or a platinum eagle. I'd want the whole set and am guessing most other people feel the same way.
It's different with classics, but with moderns, I can't help thinking there are few type collectors. Prove me wrong, please!
I knew it would happen.
<< <i>I honestly don't understand all the angst over platinum. It's a great investment/hedge/collectible. Nothing goes straight up, and nothing goes up forever. However, in today's environment there aren't many better choices. jmho. >>
The age of short attention spans and the quick kill.
I still hold most of what I purchased......and all of my 2008-Ws
will they be winners....yes??? no??? maybe??? who knows
obviously they have not enjoyed the parabolic rise like the 08 Buffalo....and yes everyone from day one in platinum has made a substantial return and should be grateful....not greedy...grateful...was there better investments....always will be....some worse too...
it reminds me of that other hobby so many of us enjoy....US Stock Market....STOCK in 08 Buffalo off the chart...keeps rising every month...it will come back to earth...everything does...question is....is a PR70 set worth $15000, $20000, $25000???? or $5000???? we'll see
PR70 platinums are a value stock (low mintages across the whole collection) with substantial upside, underpinned by the value of the metal ....key is trying to figure out when the rest of the people looking at them thinks so too....then the parabolic rise will start...
The key to the platinum collecting game is your capital reserves. You don't have enough, you can't pee in the tall weeds with the big dogs.
jmho
gyros
However, all one needs to know is that they are part of the demand equation for these coins and if they were able to buy "a newly minted" 2010-W (if it were ever issued) fractional, demand would erode away from 08-W's and prices would drop.
As for the Proof 1 oz 08-W........the prices are absolutely rediculous and are not consistent with a 1oz coin minted to that level (20,000).
Half, instead of degrading others comments, how about answering this question without regard to popularity of design?
Why does the 08-W Proof Buff 1 oz sell for multiples of the 06-W Anniversary Reverse Proof $50 1oz, which has 1/2 the mintage?
Answer: Over-hyped Buffalo Gold. Yes it is beautiful and popular. But it is resembling tulip bulbs more and more every day.
Moy appears to NOT be minting anything that Congress has not legislated.
Thus, the possiblity of fractionals is slim to none.
7/8 you can't answer the question without regard to popularity of design because the design matters a great deal. Last time I checked the 2001 silver buffalo commemoratives were holding a decent premium at mintages over 200,000. And that is for a commemorative that usually don't do that well even with a much smaller mintage.
The buffalo design is a great design that looks great in gold and silver, nearly anyone that sees one appreciates that.
Now why is it that the 2008 w unc platinum are not doing well in comparison? Is it the coin designs? The metal? It has to be something.
Anyway let's see where things are a year from now, I am not worried one way or the other.
Just the support this forum has given the coins and the popularity in the marketplace will weigh on the USM's collective minds.........
The one thing you can say without a doubt is that the USM does whatever it wants, whenever it wants. That has been displayed time and time again. The enabling legislation is still intact to allow minting of fractional buff's, it hasnt been repealed or revised.
Whether this Mint Director does it , or the next, my bet is that they will return.
The reason why the 2001 Buff $$ hold a decent premium, is not only because of the design, but they are CHEAP.
A PR70 DCAM $50 Buff Gold priced at $7K-$8K is not CHEAP. It is not rarer than the Reverse Proof $50 AGE (which was a very popular coin upon release-and the only reverse proof AGE) at 10,000 units......the Buff is 2x the mintage....but yet the Reverse Proof 70 sells for $3K or less?
Looks like that $50 70 DCAM Buff 1oz is destined for a fall.......a big one........and that doesnt even bring in the fact that it has crossed the fateful $5K line in numismatics, where buyers thin out dramatically. If you are holding any of those, take your profits or be happy with a $3-4K coin within the next year.
ebay link
Typical knee-jerk Wall Street stupidity!
In fact, hasn't GS lately been accused of conspiring to manipulate gold prices downward? Therefore, shouldn't this be welcomed news for all the gold bugs out there?!?
I knew it would happen.
I don't think that the standards are different.
It is difficult for me to understand how a coin handled by machines, and put in a roll next to other coins can receive a MS70
I don't know how they are packed. It might be by hand. There are MS-70 Silver Eagles and they are produced in the 10's of millions. It does happen.
I knew it would happen.
With the silver commemorative buffalo you are talking about a coin with a mintage of over 200,000 and there are plenty of those coins on the market. 10 times as many of those coins as the 1/10 gold buffalos.
So if you think the prices on the silver coins are good I can't see how you think the 1/10 coins are going to crash when there are ten times less of those?
Anyway we can all buy and sell based on what we think, all I can say is if the gold buffalo 1/4 coins hit $4000 to $5000 I am going to LMAO. I still hold out hope for the platinum coins, they are a sleepy group that will hopefully wake up someday.
PS Why is the Jackie Robinson UNC gold coin selling for thousands when the spouse coins with a lower mintage and more gold sell for under 1K? Each coin trades within its own set, at least that is how it looks to me.
I have the 2008 tenth and that is it?
These bullion platinum coins probably get melted most of all.....
I'm not sure that the demand is design-driven. Anyone who likes the design can buy a one-ounce bullion Buffalo at just above melt, or a proof for about $150 more. Or a nice unc. Buffalo nickel for about $60.
My Adolph A. Weinman signature
It's all about price point as well.
On the 1/10's, even raw (because I wont even address the stupid prices for FS or non-FS MS70 coins), will decrease from the current 500-600 per, imo, to around 350-400.
I do like the 1/4, for various reasons, one being it's size and the ease in visualizing and appreciating the design (as opposed to the 1/10) - and it's dual allure to both moden and classic collectors (it is closest in size to the original buff nickel, of course in that cool 24kt gold).
But the 1/4, even with the dual demand base, stands to get clobbered if fractional 1/4's are offered again. They are just too pricey (raw) at $1000+. I think $750-$800 raw is very reasonable on the downside. It could fall further.
As for the Jackie Unc, it is a 5,000 issue $5 commem, of a usual 10,000+mintages run of half eagles. It has both collectability from a baseball and coin perspective. It has had it's ups and downs, lately down. Good example. Now use that price point against your 20,000 mintage proof gold $50 buff. See what I mean. What would you rather own from a rarity perspective?
As for the spouses, I think there will be opportunities there. Some of those mintages are real low. Especially looking closely at the low mintages within the Liberty subset.
Great point. I think they're rising because they have risen, which is great until they fall because they're falling.
My Adolph A. Weinman signature
7/8 you are mixing unc and proof coins which is not a fair comparison. If you check the registry sets of gold coins you will see the 1 ounce proof gold buffalo has the most collectors for non American Eagles gold coins, the only gold one with more is the 1/10 gold eagle. So it is a very popular set.
Now as to the gold commemoratives, here is a closed Ebay listing-
Ebay Linky Cauldron Gold
Mintage 9200 and it sold for $2250 MS69 PCGS.
Gold buffalo 1/4 mintage 9900 and you think $750-$800???
This is why I say current prices are not high compared to the rest of the market.
As far as the mint bringing back buffalo fractionals, I would not sell my coins based on that possibility. That is like forecasting when we will land back on the moon. If by some fluke they do change their minds I will reevaluate, however if they are bullion releases then the mintages will be in the hundreds of thousands which would not affect the proof fractionals [it might actually help them] and would not hurt the unc anymore than the 2008 w unc 1 ounce was hurt by the 2009 bullion coins.
<< <i>If fractional Buffaloes are offered again, I think it's likely that they will be bullion coins instead of (or in addition to) W-mint collector versions. >>
I agree..... and the planchet shortage has to go away first for that to be a possiblity. I am with DeepCoin and dont expect to see any buff fractionals any time soon...... BUT if I were in the Mint marketing department and got to where I had extra gold planchet capacity I would roll out the fractional gold buffs to the dealer network because the Mint never said that it would not do so and they would sell just fine. Remember that the new policy is that if the Mint cant sell 1% of total sales volume in an item they do not wish to make it unless its required by Congress. Changing reverse fractional plats will likely not be back because they have a obvious long history of not meeting this threshold when demand is broken up over 4 denominations. The gold buffs do not suffer from this stigma and could be back. No one wants to hear this but thats ok.
Lots of day trader mentality is present in the buffs these days........
It is my view that the 2008-w $50 mint state buff in non FS holders is not over valued at todays prices.