<< <i>Yes most people have a limited buget. Thats one reason why so few bought the Pan Pacific coins or gold proofs in 1910!! >>
I think you mean 1915.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
Commemoratives and any other set without unifying design elements:
We are moving into a period of too many issues at one time much like the commemorative mania of the mid 1930s. The problem with endless streams of coins without unifying design elements is the value of the coins to a large extent is not based primarily on mintage but by design appeal. Lets look at some examples of this:
This is the danger we face. When a group of coins has a significant percentage of its members with completely different designs without some clearly unifying design element the series will be collected by design type. Dates and mint marks count for very little if anything. That’s the problem with the Arkansas halves. They are a 15 coin series with rare keys but it does not matter. They are a 85,000 total mintage type coin and the market prices them as such. You do not want a series you collect to get caught in this scenario.
The bullion platinum eagles with the eagle flying over the sun are in serious trouble because their structure is going to be identical to the Arkansas Halves if the changing reverse mint state plats survive as long as the mint indicates they will. We may see a 2,000-5000 mintage platinum bullion coin this year but it may not matter as much as one might expect 10 years out.
Notice to a large extent total type mintage does not count as much as one would expect either. The Hawaiian and the Hudson are of the same rarity class but the Hudson in not that well liked. The buffalo dollar is common as dirt but its worth 2.5 times that of the Leif dollar that’s 8 times rarer. Even the Wheel chair dollar with its tiny 14,500 mintage is only pulling a 50% premium over a coin that’s 15 times more common. The problem with coins lacking clear and strong design unity of some sort is they are in effect stand alone coins or close to it and the pricing structure acts like it.
Modern Commems:
I was asked about the potential of the commemorative dollars and the best answer I can think of is look to the value of the Hudson in MS-63 which is the center of its grading bell line curve. A 70 year old commem key date with a 10,000 mintage is worth $1000 in todays dollars. I doubt any of the MS-69 1996 Olympic Dollars with roughly 15,000 mintage will do any better at full maturity unless a promoter is able to corner the market and produce a short term spike. If you see the four 1996 MS Olympic dollars roll past $900 each it may be time to collect something else.
Gold eagles: What I REALLY want to know about this series is how will it die? We know that the series is subject to the 1890 law requiring 25 years of design stability prior to a change and this is a good thing. If the series ends by to 2010 or even better continues well into the next decade with its current designs then the mint marked key dates will be something to behold especially the little 99-Ws with their next to nothing mintages because the total populations of these coins in high grade are getting huge and the keys are extremely tight. My one remote fear is that at some point after 2011 the mint will decide to go to a changing reverse on the gold eagle. If they do so over an extended period of time we could find ourselves in an Arkansas type mess just like the bullion plats are in.
We are fortunate that the existing Gold Eagles are protected from change for the foreseeable future and the Mint more than likely realizes that some people like to collect stable series and it is a lovely series.
I have been trying to figure out how to know when the collector base of a series is getting strong enough to send its keys into orbit. This is especially true of the 99-W gold eagles. Given that all the mint state finish gold eagles came in rolls or draw string bags I think its safe to say the MS coins are more likely to be collected in slabs than non existent government packaging. Notice that the common date fractional gold eagles from 1990 to 1995 are not rare but they have pops that are about 30 percent lower than that of the 99-w issues. This indicates to me that today there are more 99-w gold eagles than there are series collectors. When the common back dates pull even with the slab pops of the keys this may be an early sign that time is running out on building a set.
Next up I would like to look at historical percentage growth appreciation relationships amoung the various denominations and continue with the plats. I must go for now as I am out of time....will finish later.
This indicates to me that today there are more 99-w gold eagles than there are series collectors. When the common back dates pull even with the slab pops of the keys this may be an early sign that time is running out on building a set.
Probably a very good observation, astute even.
I would like to look at historical percentage growth appreciation relationships amoung the various denominations and continue with the plats.
Eric, you produce some good analytics. The problem, as you pointed out earlier in this addendum, is that the Mint is turning the Plats into an ozarkian nightmare. When there are 15 or 20 "instant rarities" produced every year, how many collectors can keep up financially, and how many of them will have any incentive to do so, when the instant rarities are so prolific that you can't know off the top of your head how many different designs are available in a given year, let alone the past years?
At some point, good analysis gives way to sheer hopelessness. But hey - it's still platinum, and it's still gold. It may be worth something, someday.
Added: (If I were someone like RYK, as these mintages get smaller and smaller, I'd be mindlessly plunking down my savings from not buying old gold classics all the time now to buying whatever Plats were offered by the Mint.) RYK, you can thank me later.
Q: Are You Printing Money? Bernanke: Not Literally
I was asked about the potential of the commemorative dollars and the best answer I can think of is look to the value of the Hudson in MS-63 which is the center of its grading bell line curve. A 70 year old commem key date with a 10,000 mintage is worth $1000 in todays dollars. I doubt any of the MS-69 1996 Olympic Dollars with roughly 15,000 mintage will do any better at full maturity unless a promoter is able to corner the market and produce a short term spike. If you see the four 1996 MS Olympic dollars roll past $900 each it may be time to collect something else.
I have several reasons for thinking more highly of at least some of the 1996 MS Olympic dollars.
The 1935 Hudson has a mintage of 10,000 and sells for around $1,000. The key 1996-D MS Paralympic dollar has a mintage of ~14,500 and sells for around $325.
On the supply side, the Hudson is the scarcer coin. But on the demand side, which group has more collectors, classic commems or modern commems? Which theme has more widespread appeal, the sesquicentennial of Hudson, New York, or the Olympics?
Another interesting comparison is with the gold $5.00 modern commems. The lowest mintage 1997 Jackie Robinson MS $5 gold (mintage 5,174) sells for $4,500+. At less than 3 times that mintage, the lowest mintage Paralympic MS silver dollar sells for around $325. How many people collect silver commems compared to gold commems?
Or compare the above two coins with their proof counterparts. The MS Jackie Robinson $5 gold is 4.6 times as scarce as the proof version, and sells for 7 times the price. The MS 1996-D Paralympics dollar is 5.8 times as scarce as the 1996-P proof, yet sells for only 4.3 times the price.
This is not to say that the MS Paralympic dollars (or other 1996 MS Olympic dollars) are necessarily underpriced, only that there can be several reasons to consider them a decent value.
I have been looking for good long term reference points for the performance of various denominations.
The unified proof Liberty Head gold designs of the late 1800s look interesting:
Total proof mintage $2.5 is 4,152 and its Red Book price is $5,500 Total proof mintage $5.0 is 2,938 and its Red Book price is $11,000 Total proof mintage $10 is 2,666 and its Red Book price is $12,500 Total proof mintage $20 is 3,108 and its Red Book price is $22,500
Notice that the total mintage relationship for the one oz, half, quarter and tenth are amazingly simmilar to the current best 2006-w platinum data we have from the mint. So if you consider that the more common 1 oz 2006-w coin is not trading at twice the half it may in fact be a relative sleeper.
Eric Good posts, interesting similarities to classic proof gold mintages. I believe the 06-W PLATS are the sleepers of the decade and only will be fully appreciated a few more years out Just wanted to throw out a point for discussion - we always discuss similar mintages when comparing classics to moderns, however, shouldn't we also add the "other" factor of total classics extant? There may be a similar mintage, but, may be very few extant - driving pricing as long as demand is there. Whereas some moderns have ultra low mintages, but essentially they all "survive" in high grade, thus the pricing disconnect
<< <i>Eric Good posts, interesting similarities to classic proof gold mintages. I believe the 06-W PLATS are the sleepers of the decade and only will be fully appreciated a few more years out Just wanted to throw out a point for discussion - we always discuss similar mintages when comparing classics to moderns, however, shouldn't we also add the "other" factor of total classics extant? There may be a similar mintage, but, may be very few extant - driving pricing as long as demand is there. Whereas some moderns have ultra low mintages, but essentially they all "survive" in high grade, thus the pricing disconnect >>
Survival rates are high for most of these but there is still normal attrition and many are degraded by improper handling or use in jewelry. The plat- inum coins have been said to sometimes have very high attrition since they are a convenient and inexpensive way for labs and industry to acquire this rare metal.
<< <i>Eric Good posts, interesting similarities to classic proof gold mintages. I believe the 06-W PLATS are the sleepers of the decade and only will be fully appreciated a few more years out Just wanted to throw out a point for discussion - we always discuss similar mintages when comparing classics to moderns, however, shouldn't we also add the "other" factor of total classics extant? There may be a similar mintage, but, may be very few extant - driving pricing as long as demand is there. Whereas some moderns have ultra low mintages, but essentially they all "survive" in high grade, thus the pricing disconnect >>
Without doubt there are fewer classics extant than moderns, there is also a larger collector base for moderns though mainly due to affordability. It is interesting to look at the PCGS populations of modern bullion. It appears that the large scale push to preserve modern bullion started in about 2000, suddenly the total number of bullion fractionals in high grades explodes. If you look at the numbers before 2000 they are fairly low which may or may not mean that the "survivability' of these coins was fairly low. Examples are the 1991 1/4 eagle with only 441 graded and 310 in ms69 of a total mintage of 36100. 1990 1/2 eagle , 798 graded and 377 in ms69 of a total mintage of 31000. I know some of these were used for jewellery and some even melted for other reasons.....it remains to be seen how many survived. I think that after 2000 we can almost assume a 90% plus survival rate.
<< <i>there is also a larger collector base for moderns though mainly due to affordability. >>
To be fair, there are a lot of affordable classics, they just have low demand because they are average in grade, not super high grade nor super low grade. Many may have also been cleaned but they are affordable.
<< <i>there is also a larger collector base for moderns though mainly due to affordability. >>
To be fair, there are a lot of affordable classics, they just have low demand because they are average in grade, not super high grade nor super low grade. Many may have also been cleaned but they are affordable. >>
The low demand is also because it is impossible to complete a set , even low grade keys are beyond the pocket books of the majority of us. It is still possible though to put a set of modern 1/4 oz eagles together
<< <i>there is also a larger collector base for moderns though mainly due to affordability. >>
To be fair, there are a lot of affordable classics, they just have low demand because they are average in grade, not super high grade nor super low grade. Many may have also been cleaned but they are affordable. >>
The low demand is also because it is impossible to complete a set , even low grade keys are beyond the pocket books of the majority of us. It is still possible though to put a set of modern 1/4 oz eagles together >>
To introduce the concept of attrition in modern collecting is very interesting as many people that love to bash moderns like to present attrition as their strong card against modern coin collecting. Well, let's face it, attrition does occur on modern coins and at a higher rate than many would like to admit. I have come to a point where I no longer purchase raw modern coins sight unseen. I have purchased so many raw modern dogs these past few years that I no longer bother buying raw unless I know the dealer very well.
You have compiled some great information. I would add my own comments regarding moderns in that I believe there are two forces at work regarding prices. Rarity is the one constant and it tends to push prices, but the quesiton at hand is the true demand. This is particularly true for some of the more recent Mint offerings, i.e. first spouse coins, platinum offerings.
On the other hand, you have a couple of offerings that are not "rare" in the sense of low mintages, yet demand is very strong for these. The Buffalo dollars, proof and unc totaled about 500K and sell for around $200 each, +/- . The three coins sets with the reverse proof are also doing quite well. I believe these have done well due to true collector demand.
With all the talk about flipping, I believe it is important to acknowledge the true demand factors and the good health of the modern commemorative markets. Ugly designs, i.e. Capitol Visitiors Center, only do well when there is a miniscule mintage ($5 Unc gold), while the silver unc and proof are still quite inexpensive.
Retired United States Mint guy, now working on an Everyman Type Set.
These modern dogs come from the mint I've sent my modern dogs in to PCGS and they don't do any better (percentage wise) than any other coin.
True. Some coins have been beat with the ugly stick while still at the mint. In my personal experience, I have come across some really bad looking coins from third party retailers. About six months ago I purchased a pair of 1997 and 1999 Platinum Proof Eagles raw from eBay. The coins seemed to be in fair condition judging by the pictures I saw. When I received the coins they looked horrible. The coins had not been cared for properly and were in really bad condition.
I have seen a fair amount of modern coins in such condition in coin shows as well. To begin, seeing a Platinum Proof Eagle at a coin show is uncommon; but, I have seen a few and I can't say they all looked perfect. Many people say that modern coins are well preserved and that many will survive in great condition but I personally believe that many modern coins are preserved poorly.
I wonder how many of these low mintage modern coins will be preserved properly. I can tell by my own experience that some will not be. I feel lucky to be here now and I feel lucky to be able to buy straight from the mint. I believe, IMHO, that coins like the 2006 W Platinum Uncirculated Eagles are going to be very expensive and hard to come buy items just like 2004 Proof Plats have come to be in just three years. Mintages of 2,500 to 2,700 are hard to ignore.
Modern collectors have the opportunity to buy tomorrow's classics for next to nothing today. Besides, as Eric has mentioned plenty of times in the past, coin collecting is changing and many people are collecting by design and not by mint mark anymore. We have the opportunity to take advantage of this today. For the past ten to twelve years the mint has changed the way series are produced. Today, most series consist of coins with one steady element and one varying element (Statehood Quarters - steady obverse, changing reverse; Westward Nickels - steady obverse, changing reverse; Sac's - soon to have a steady obverse and a changing reverse; Platinum Proof and Uncirculated Eagles - steady obverse, changing reverse). This technique has already proven successful in other countries around the world.
Thank you very much for responding to my post. It's great discussing the depth of numismatics in today's market. I'm happy we don't have bashers kickin' our butts in here. It wasn't so long ago. I try to make my points without HURTING feelings and bashing and you took it in great stride.
Of course, I couldn't help but see who's leading the pack with $25 plats
I do agree that the older series have vastly higher attrition rates. I wish the older mintage number were the same thing as current true populations but they are not. But the relationships are better than just guessing. The behaviors of the past give us insight into the future. Its so great to see you guys post so many great points and I like the fact that you guys will give me counter points. This is how we all grow. You go guys..........and by the way when I say guys I am saying everyone.
as Eric has mentioned plenty of times in the past, coin collecting is changing and many people are collecting by design and not by mint mark anymore.
Eric has put a great deal of careful thought into his analyses, and his information is truly a great benefit to those of us who read his posts. I appreciate his generosity in sharing his insights, information and data.
But, while the Mint might be trending towards the issuance of smaller series grouped by design, I think it is not a good thing - for one reason. They abuse their customers by outrunning even the most generous coin budgets.
I had hopes of a complete Platinum set by year and date one day - but it is becoming impossible to afford it. Even if you don't have that particular goal, the large number of offerings in Plats is diluting the importance of any one issue.
Take the 2006-Ws for instance, with estimated mintages of 2,500 to 3,100. The price of platinum is on another run to the upside. Every time platinum takes a jump, the number of plats purchased by the Mint's customers tails off.
Every time that the Mint adds another variety, the total numbers of plats bought stays somewhat constant, but the mintages are split yet again into more and smaller groups. The trend is definitely toward more mintages that approach 2,000 per issue, rather than 5,000 per issue.
Within the Platinum Eagle Series itself, I've seen new rarities created for several years running - only to have even lower mintage rarities that eclipse the importance of the existing rarities pop up every year or two.
Time will tell. I've dealt with the Mint for 40 years, and one thing can be said - they are oblivious to their customers. They are politically-driven. And in addition to vagaries of political changes, the Mint's quality comes and goes in cycles. We seem to be hitting another rough patch with the Silver Eagle milk spots, poor Presidential dollar quality, and beat up Proof and "W" Plats being released.
The Mint doesn't authorize coinage, but they have discretion in creating instant rarities through constant design changes, special finishes, special anniversary sets, special markings, one-time mintmarks, and other perogatives available to the Mint Director. All of these variables tend to split the collector base into smaller market segments and in so doing, they lower the mintages for each special segment that is being created.
Creating all of these special market segments might work during a time of increased expansion of the customer base (i.e. through the State Quarters and Prez Dollars), but it will work in the opposite direction when the customers disappear.
I contend that the best way to build a collector base is through consistancy. Change is sometimes good. Constant change, such as we are seeing now in such an unprecedented way will eventually degrade the values of everything that comes out of the Mint. That day seems to be coming sooner, rather than later. You heard it here first.
Q: Are You Printing Money? Bernanke: Not Literally
I collect the $50s and I really like the platinum eagle proof series and over time I think it will go up in numismatic value.(not just metal) , but to intimate that attrition has a real effect on Plat proofs or Ws, is a reach at best... imho.
<< <i>as Eric has mentioned plenty of times in the past, coin collecting is changing and many people are collecting by design and not by mint mark anymore.
Eric has put a great deal of careful thought into his analyses, and his information is truly a great benefit to those of us who read his posts. I appreciate his generosity in sharing his insights, information and data.
But, while the Mint might be trending towards the issuance of smaller series grouped by design, I think it is not a good thing - for one reason. They abuse their customers by outrunning even the most generous coin budgets.
I had hopes of a complete Platinum set by year and date one day - but it is becoming impossible to afford it. Even if you don't have that particular goal, the large number of offerings in Plats is diluting the importance of any one issue.
Take the 2006-Ws for instance, with estimated mintages of 2,500 to 3,100. The price of platinum is on another run to the upside. Every time platinum takes a jump, the number of plats purchased by the Mint's customers tails off.
Every time that the Mint adds another variety, the total numbers of plats bought stays somewhat constant, but the mintages are split yet again into more and smaller groups. The trend is definitely toward more mintages that approach 2,000 per issue, rather than 5,000 per issue.
Within the Platinum Eagle Series itself, I've seen new rarities created for several years running - only to have even lower mintage rarities that eclipse the importance of the existing rarities pop up every year or two.
Time will tell. I've dealt with the Mint for 40 years, and one thing can be said - they are oblivious to their customers. They are politically-driven. And in addition to vagaries of political changes, the Mint's quality comes and goes in cycles. We seem to be hitting another rough patch with the Silver Eagle milk spots, poor Presidential dollar quality, and beat up Proof and "W" Plats being released.
The Mint doesn't authorize coinage, but they have discretion in creating instant rarities through constant design changes, special finishes, special anniversary sets, special markings, one-time mintmarks, and other perogatives available to the Mint Director. All of these variables tend to split the collector base into smaller market segments and in so doing, they lower the mintages for each special segment that is being created.
Creating all of these special market segments might work during a time of increased expansion of the customer base (i.e. through the State Quarters and Prez Dollars), but it will work in the opposite direction when the customers disappear.
I contend that the best way to build a collector base is through consistancy. Change is sometimes good. Constant change, such as we are seeing now in such an unprecedented way will eventually degrade the values of everything that comes out of the Mint. That day seems to be coming sooner, rather than later. You heard it here first. >>
I AGREE THE MINT NEEDS TO BACK OFF ON THE EXPANSION RATE OF SERIES AND DESIGNS. ITS 1936 ALL OVER!
Sometimes even super low mintage moderns take a while to really rise in $$$. I am glad I hung on to all of my 1995-1996 Olympic $5 gold unc coins....man did they pay off in the long term. It took about ten years. Good things come to those who wait.
Eric.... just wanted to say that I was wrong about the 1999-W unc $5 and $10 gold "error" coins. I do believe they are truely sleeper key dates and are a part of the W mint unc set.
Just as a point of comparison, how do the number of U.S. offerings compare to the number of Canadian offerings, and how have the number of Canadian offerings affected the popularity / price of their collector coinage as a whole?
You have compiled some great information. I would add my own comments regarding moderns in that I believe there are two forces at work regarding prices. Rarity is the one constant and it tends to push prices, but the quesiton at hand is the true demand. This is particularly true for some of the more recent Mint offerings, i.e. first spouse coins, platinum offerings.
On the other hand, you have a couple of offerings that are not "rare" in the sense of low mintages, yet demand is very strong for these. The Buffalo dollars, proof and unc totaled about 500K and sell for around $200 each, +/- . The three coins sets with the reverse proof are also doing quite well. I believe these have done well due to true collector demand.
With all the talk about flipping, I believe it is important to acknowledge the true demand factors and the good health of the modern commemorative markets. Ugly designs, i.e. Capitol Visitiors Center, only do well when there is a miniscule mintage ($5 Unc gold), while the silver unc and proof are still quite inexpensive. >>
"man did they pay off in the long term. It took about ten years. Good things come to those who wait."
Exactly. If you look to the fundamentals and don't just try to guess short term price changes you will end up with the right stuff in hand..................if you are willing to wait.
"Eric.... just wanted to say that I was wrong about the 1999-W unc $5 and $10 gold "error" coins. I do believe they are truely sleeper key dates and are a part of the W mint unc set"
I have been wrong about many things over the years and thats how we learn. We have got to constantly review our mind set so it can grow.
IMO the 2006 W Gold won't hold for long if the mint releases the 24 Kt Buffalo fractionals. I think what would be more interesting to see is how much can the Buffalo fractionals affect Spouse Gold Liberty coins?
I agree, The fractional buffalo could produce a new set of half oz keys in everything struck in gold in one year. Thats proof and unc, first hags and gold eagles. The standing one once gold and half oz gold keys are very vulnerable and the $10 and $5 gold keys (99-W) will likely survive almost anything.
Its probably too late to introduce Gold Buffalo Fractionals this year. But if they do they will be a quick sellout I believe, except the one ouncer. So they would probably just sell these as sets and not singles.
So they would probably just sell these as sets and not singles
I wouldn't put it passed the mint that they would introduce them at any time if they really wanted to. What I think they would do is produce more sets than singles like they did with the 2006 Ws last year...
If and when the day comes that they strike fractional Buffalos that is the year new keys are created more than likely. If the fractional comes early in the year it will have more impact than if it comes late in the year after the first quarter surge in sales has already past. I think the mint knows that the fractional Buffalo could have a profound impact on the gold eagle saints.
Ben just told me about the unc 1999-w $50 gold eagle that was found. If there is one I be there are many more in a safe somelace. Very interesting!
"I have been looking for good long term reference points for the performance of various denominations. The unified proof Liberty Head gold designs of the late 1800s look interesting: Total proof mintage $2.5 is 4,152 and its Red Book price is $5,500 Total proof mintage $5.0 is 2,938 and its Red Book price is $11,000 Total proof mintage $10 is 2,666 and its Red Book price is $12,500 Total proof mintage $20 is 3,108 and its Red Book price is $22,500 Notice that the total mintage relationship for the one oz, half, quarter and tenth are amazingly simmilar to the current best 2006-w platinum data we have from the mint. So if you consider that the more common 1 oz coin is not trading at twice the half it may in fact be a relative sleeper. Good night, Ericj96"
Eric: To date, you been a huge fan of the $50 coins and the $25's based upon pure mintage figures. This is certainly interesting research - it supports why, for example, the $100 Proof 2004 Platinum sells for much more than the $50 2004 Proof Plat despite being a higher mintage (and has performed nearly as well as the $50 despite the $50 having been crowned by some the "king" of the Proof Platinum series). It also suggests that the $100 2006-w Burnished Plat might do relatively well in the future as well.
So, does this mean, you might actually tuck a couple of those $100's away now?
Wondercoin
Please visit my website at www.wondercoins.com and my ebay auctions under my user name www.wondercoin.com.
Yes I must admit I bought some $100 2006-w plats this time........the 3100 mintage made me do it. I have a limited budget and in most cases go for the cheaper rare coins all else equal. I have no doubt those that pick up the $100 coins will do very well with them. 1.5 times melt is a beautiful thing on a 3100 mintage coin.
Ericj96
Notice that the quarter and half of the old type gold are very close in price now. Will the $25 coins close the gap with the plat halves? How much help will the anniversary set be to the halves as far as building collecotr base?
I got my single 2007 W $50 gold. I put my order in just before the product went unavailable. Seeing where gold is now and the longer the mint puts off their decision the better the value for this coin in the near future. So far 5,269 singles and 4,818 in 4-coin sets. Very low when compare to 2006. Of course it's nowhere near the minscule mintages of the same year plats. However, there are many more gold American Eagle collectors.
I just noticed something on NN Mint Statistics page. If you compare Sept 4 to Sept 25: the 2007 1 ounce plat W went down from 434 pcs to 420? And the 2007 4-coin set Plat W down from 1,619 to 1,610?
Comments
Thanks for the post. I have been hiding away the proof platinum sets since inception and it is nice to get opinions on the series.
You opinions are well stated and appreciated.
Jim
<< <i>Yes most people have a limited buget. Thats one reason why so few bought the Pan Pacific coins or gold proofs in 1910!! >>
I think you mean 1915.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
<< <i>
<< <i>Yes most people have a limited buget. Thats one reason why so few bought the Pan Pacific coins or gold proofs in 1910!! >>
I think you mean 1915. >>
No the 1910 is much rarer
Maybe at Club Gitmo?
Commemoratives and any other set without unifying design elements:
We are moving into a period of too many issues at one time much like the commemorative mania of the mid 1930s. The problem with endless streams of coins without unifying design elements is the value of the coins to a large extent is not based primarily on mintage but by design appeal. Lets look at some examples of this:
1928 Hawiian Half Mintage 10,000 MS-63 Price= $3000
1935 Hudson Half Mintage 10,000 MS-63 Price=$1000
1939 Arkansas Half-any Mintage 2,100 MS-63 Price=$350
1935-1939 Arkansas-PD&S Mintage 85,000 MS-63 Price=$100
1996 Wheel Chair Dollar Mintage 14,500 MS-69 Price=$300
2001 Buffalo Dallar Mintage 227,000 MS-69 Price=$200
2000 Leif Ericson Dollar Mintage 28,000 MS-69 Price=$75
This is the danger we face. When a group of coins has a significant percentage of its members with completely different designs without some clearly unifying design element the series will be collected by design type. Dates and mint marks count for very little if anything. That’s the problem with the Arkansas halves. They are a 15 coin series with rare keys but it does not matter. They are a 85,000 total mintage type coin and the market prices them as such. You do not want a series you collect to get caught in this scenario.
The bullion platinum eagles with the eagle flying over the sun are in serious trouble because their structure is going to be identical to the Arkansas Halves if the changing reverse mint state plats survive as long as the mint indicates they will. We may see a 2,000-5000 mintage platinum bullion coin this year but it may not matter as much as one might expect 10 years out.
Notice to a large extent total type mintage does not count as much as one would expect either. The Hawaiian and the Hudson are of the same rarity class but the Hudson in not that well liked. The buffalo dollar is common as dirt but its worth 2.5 times that of the Leif dollar that’s 8 times rarer. Even the Wheel chair dollar with its tiny 14,500 mintage is only pulling a 50% premium over a coin that’s 15 times more common. The problem with coins lacking clear and strong design unity of some sort is they are in effect stand alone coins or close to it and the pricing structure acts like it.
Modern Commems:
I was asked about the potential of the commemorative dollars and the best answer I can think of is look to the value of the Hudson in MS-63 which is the center of its grading bell line curve. A 70 year old commem key date with a 10,000 mintage is worth $1000 in todays dollars. I doubt any of the MS-69 1996 Olympic Dollars with roughly 15,000 mintage will do any better at full maturity unless a promoter is able to corner the market and produce a short term spike. If you see the four 1996 MS Olympic dollars roll past $900 each it may be time to collect something else.
Gold eagles:
What I REALLY want to know about this series is how will it die? We know that the series is subject to the 1890 law requiring 25 years of design stability prior to a change and this is a good thing. If the series ends by to 2010 or even better continues well into the next decade with its current designs then the mint marked key dates will be something to behold especially the little 99-Ws with their next to nothing mintages because the total populations of these coins in high grade are getting huge and the keys are extremely tight. My one remote fear is that at some point after 2011 the mint will decide to go to a changing reverse on the gold eagle. If they do so over an extended period of time we could find ourselves in an Arkansas type mess just like the bullion plats are in.
We are fortunate that the existing Gold Eagles are protected from change for the foreseeable future and the Mint more than likely realizes that some people like to collect stable series and it is a lovely series.
I have been trying to figure out how to know when the collector base of a series is getting strong enough to send its keys into orbit. This is especially true of the 99-W gold eagles. Given that all the mint state finish gold eagles came in rolls or draw string bags I think its safe to say the MS coins are more likely to be collected in slabs than non existent government packaging. Notice that the common date fractional gold eagles from 1990 to 1995 are not rare but they have pops that are about 30 percent lower than that of the 99-w issues. This indicates to me that today there are more 99-w gold eagles than there are series collectors. When the common back dates pull even with the slab pops of the keys this may be an early sign that time is running out on building a set.
Next up I would like to look at historical percentage growth appreciation relationships amoung the various denominations and continue with the plats. I must go for now as I am out of time....will finish later.
Applied coin market theory - helps with the basics even though its 3 years old
Probably a very good observation, astute even.
I would like to look at historical percentage growth appreciation relationships amoung the various denominations and continue with the plats.
Eric, you produce some good analytics. The problem, as you pointed out earlier in this addendum, is that the Mint is turning the Plats into an ozarkian nightmare. When there are 15 or 20 "instant rarities" produced every year, how many collectors can keep up financially, and how many of them will have any incentive to do so, when the instant rarities are so prolific that you can't know off the top of your head how many different designs are available in a given year, let alone the past years?
At some point, good analysis gives way to sheer hopelessness. But hey - it's still platinum, and it's still gold. It may be worth something, someday.
Added: (If I were someone like RYK, as these mintages get smaller and smaller, I'd be mindlessly plunking down my savings from not buying old gold classics all the time now to buying whatever Plats were offered by the Mint.) RYK, you can thank me later.
I knew it would happen.
I have several reasons for thinking more highly of at least some of the 1996 MS Olympic dollars.
The 1935 Hudson has a mintage of 10,000 and sells for around $1,000. The key 1996-D MS Paralympic dollar has a mintage of ~14,500 and sells for around $325.
On the supply side, the Hudson is the scarcer coin. But on the demand side, which group has more collectors, classic commems or modern commems? Which theme has more widespread appeal, the sesquicentennial of Hudson, New York, or the Olympics?
Another interesting comparison is with the gold $5.00 modern commems. The lowest mintage 1997 Jackie Robinson MS $5 gold (mintage 5,174) sells for $4,500+. At less than 3 times that mintage, the lowest mintage Paralympic MS silver dollar sells for around $325. How many people collect silver commems compared to gold commems?
Or compare the above two coins with their proof counterparts. The MS Jackie Robinson $5 gold is 4.6 times as scarce as the proof version, and sells for 7 times the price. The MS 1996-D Paralympics dollar is 5.8 times as scarce as the 1996-P proof, yet sells for only 4.3 times the price.
This is not to say that the MS Paralympic dollars (or other 1996 MS Olympic dollars) are necessarily underpriced, only that there can be several reasons to consider them a decent value.
My opinion only.
My Adolph A. Weinman signature
The unified proof Liberty Head gold designs of the late 1800s look interesting:
Total proof mintage $2.5 is 4,152 and its Red Book price is $5,500
Total proof mintage $5.0 is 2,938 and its Red Book price is $11,000
Total proof mintage $10 is 2,666 and its Red Book price is $12,500
Total proof mintage $20 is 3,108 and its Red Book price is $22,500
Notice that the total mintage relationship for the one oz, half, quarter and tenth are amazingly simmilar to the current best 2006-w platinum data we have from the mint. So if you consider that the more common 1 oz 2006-w coin is not trading at twice the half it may in fact be a relative sleeper.
Good night,
Ericj96
Good posts, interesting similarities to classic proof gold mintages.
I believe the 06-W PLATS are the sleepers of the decade and only will be fully appreciated a few more years out
Just wanted to throw out a point for discussion - we always discuss similar mintages when comparing classics to moderns, however, shouldn't we also add the "other" factor of total classics extant?
There may be a similar mintage, but, may be very few extant - driving pricing as long as demand is there.
Whereas some moderns have ultra low mintages, but essentially they all "survive" in high grade, thus the pricing disconnect
<< <i>Eric
Good posts, interesting similarities to classic proof gold mintages.
I believe the 06-W PLATS are the sleepers of the decade and only will be fully appreciated a few more years out
Just wanted to throw out a point for discussion - we always discuss similar mintages when comparing classics to moderns, however, shouldn't we also add the "other" factor of total classics extant?
There may be a similar mintage, but, may be very few extant - driving pricing as long as demand is there.
Whereas some moderns have ultra low mintages, but essentially they all "survive" in high grade, thus the pricing disconnect >>
Survival rates are high for most of these but there is still normal attrition
and many are degraded by improper handling or use in jewelry. The plat-
inum coins have been said to sometimes have very high attrition since
they are a convenient and inexpensive way for labs and industry to acquire
this rare metal.
<< <i>Eric
Good posts, interesting similarities to classic proof gold mintages.
I believe the 06-W PLATS are the sleepers of the decade and only will be fully appreciated a few more years out
Just wanted to throw out a point for discussion - we always discuss similar mintages when comparing classics to moderns, however, shouldn't we also add the "other" factor of total classics extant?
There may be a similar mintage, but, may be very few extant - driving pricing as long as demand is there.
Whereas some moderns have ultra low mintages, but essentially they all "survive" in high grade, thus the pricing disconnect >>
Without doubt there are fewer classics extant than moderns, there is also a larger collector base for moderns though mainly due to affordability.
It is interesting to look at the PCGS populations of modern bullion. It appears that the large scale push to preserve modern bullion started in about 2000, suddenly the total number of bullion fractionals in high grades explodes.
If you look at the numbers before 2000 they are fairly low which may or may not mean that the "survivability' of these coins was fairly low. Examples are the 1991 1/4 eagle with only 441 graded and 310 in ms69 of a total mintage of 36100. 1990 1/2 eagle , 798 graded and 377 in ms69 of a total mintage of 31000. I know some of these were used for jewellery and some even melted for other reasons.....it remains to be seen how many survived.
I think that after 2000 we can almost assume a 90% plus survival rate.
<< <i>there is also a larger collector base for moderns though mainly due to affordability. >>
To be fair, there are a lot of affordable classics, they just have low demand because they are average in grade, not super high grade nor super low grade. Many may have also been cleaned but they are affordable.
<< <i>
<< <i>there is also a larger collector base for moderns though mainly due to affordability. >>
To be fair, there are a lot of affordable classics, they just have low demand because they are average in grade, not super high grade nor super low grade. Many may have also been cleaned but they are affordable. >>
The low demand is also because it is impossible to complete a set , even low grade keys are beyond the pocket books of the majority of us. It is still possible though to put a set of modern 1/4 oz eagles together
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>there is also a larger collector base for moderns though mainly due to affordability. >>
To be fair, there are a lot of affordable classics, they just have low demand because they are average in grade, not super high grade nor super low grade. Many may have also been cleaned but they are affordable. >>
The low demand is also because it is impossible to complete a set , even low grade keys are beyond the pocket books of the majority of us. It is still possible though to put a set of modern 1/4 oz eagles together >>
Not everyone is a date/mm collector.
You have compiled some great information. I would add my own comments regarding moderns in that I believe there are two forces at work regarding prices. Rarity is the one constant and it tends to push prices, but the quesiton at hand is the true demand. This is particularly true for some of the more recent Mint offerings, i.e. first spouse coins, platinum offerings.
On the other hand, you have a couple of offerings that are not "rare" in the sense of low mintages, yet demand is very strong for these. The Buffalo dollars, proof and unc totaled about 500K and sell for around $200 each, +/- . The three coins sets with the reverse proof are also doing quite well. I believe these have done well due to true collector demand.
With all the talk about flipping, I believe it is important to acknowledge the true demand factors and the good health of the modern commemorative markets. Ugly designs, i.e. Capitol Visitiors Center, only do well when there is a miniscule mintage ($5 Unc gold), while the silver unc and proof are still quite inexpensive.
True. Some coins have been beat with the ugly stick while still at the mint. In my personal experience, I have come across some really bad looking coins from third party retailers. About six months ago I purchased a pair of 1997 and 1999 Platinum Proof Eagles raw from eBay. The coins seemed to be in fair condition judging by the pictures I saw. When I received the coins they looked horrible. The coins had not been cared for properly and were in really bad condition.
I have seen a fair amount of modern coins in such condition in coin shows as well. To begin, seeing a Platinum Proof Eagle at a coin show is uncommon; but, I have seen a few and I can't say they all looked perfect. Many people say that modern coins are well preserved and that many will survive in great condition but I personally believe that many modern coins are preserved poorly.
I wonder how many of these low mintage modern coins will be preserved properly. I can tell by my own experience that some will not be. I feel lucky to be here now and I feel lucky to be able to buy straight from the mint. I believe, IMHO, that coins like the 2006 W Platinum Uncirculated Eagles are going to be very expensive and hard to come buy items just like 2004 Proof Plats have come to be in just three years. Mintages of 2,500 to 2,700 are hard to ignore.
Modern collectors have the opportunity to buy tomorrow's classics for next to nothing today. Besides, as Eric has mentioned plenty of times in the past, coin collecting is changing and many people are collecting by design and not by mint mark anymore. We have the opportunity to take advantage of this today. For the past ten to twelve years the mint has changed the way series are produced. Today, most series consist of coins with one steady element and one varying element (Statehood Quarters - steady obverse, changing reverse; Westward Nickels - steady obverse, changing reverse; Sac's - soon to have a steady obverse and a changing reverse; Platinum Proof and Uncirculated Eagles - steady obverse, changing reverse). This technique has already proven successful in other countries around the world.
Thank you very much for responding to my post. It's great discussing the depth of numismatics in today's market. I'm happy we don't have bashers kickin' our butts in here. It wasn't so long ago.
I try to make my points without HURTING feelings and bashing and you took it in great stride.
Of course, I couldn't help but see who's leading the pack with $25 plats
Thank you! Those will be with me until the day I die!!!
I do agree that the older series have vastly higher attrition rates. I wish the older mintage number were the same thing as current true populations but they are not. But the relationships are better than just guessing. The behaviors of the past give us insight into the future. Its so great to see you guys post so many great points and I like the fact that you guys will give me counter points. This is how we all grow. You go guys..........and by the way when I say guys I am saying everyone.
ericj96
Eric has put a great deal of careful thought into his analyses, and his information is truly a great benefit to those of us who read his posts. I appreciate his generosity in sharing his insights, information and data.
But, while the Mint might be trending towards the issuance of smaller series grouped by design, I think it is not a good thing - for one reason. They abuse their customers by outrunning even the most generous coin budgets.
I had hopes of a complete Platinum set by year and date one day - but it is becoming impossible to afford it. Even if you don't have that particular goal, the large number of offerings in Plats is diluting the importance of any one issue.
Take the 2006-Ws for instance, with estimated mintages of 2,500 to 3,100. The price of platinum is on another run to the upside. Every time platinum takes a jump, the number of plats purchased by the Mint's customers tails off.
Every time that the Mint adds another variety, the total numbers of plats bought stays somewhat constant, but the mintages are split yet again into more and smaller groups. The trend is definitely toward more mintages that approach 2,000 per issue, rather than 5,000 per issue.
Within the Platinum Eagle Series itself, I've seen new rarities created for several years running - only to have even lower mintage rarities that eclipse the importance of the existing rarities pop up every year or two.
Time will tell. I've dealt with the Mint for 40 years, and one thing can be said - they are oblivious to their customers. They are politically-driven. And in addition to vagaries of political changes, the Mint's quality comes and goes in cycles. We seem to be hitting another rough patch with the Silver Eagle milk spots, poor Presidential dollar quality, and beat up Proof and "W" Plats being released.
The Mint doesn't authorize coinage, but they have discretion in creating instant rarities through constant design changes, special finishes, special anniversary sets, special markings, one-time mintmarks, and other perogatives available to the Mint Director. All of these variables tend to split the collector base into smaller market segments and in so doing, they lower the mintages for each special segment that is being created.
Creating all of these special market segments might work during a time of increased expansion of the customer base (i.e. through the State Quarters and Prez Dollars), but it will work in the opposite direction when the customers disappear.
I contend that the best way to build a collector base is through consistancy. Change is sometimes good. Constant change, such as we are seeing now in such an unprecedented way will eventually degrade the values of everything that comes out of the Mint. That day seems to be coming sooner, rather than later. You heard it here first.
I knew it would happen.
<< <i>as Eric has mentioned plenty of times in the past, coin collecting is changing and many people are collecting by design and not by mint mark anymore.
Eric has put a great deal of careful thought into his analyses, and his information is truly a great benefit to those of us who read his posts. I appreciate his generosity in sharing his insights, information and data.
But, while the Mint might be trending towards the issuance of smaller series grouped by design, I think it is not a good thing - for one reason. They abuse their customers by outrunning even the most generous coin budgets.
I had hopes of a complete Platinum set by year and date one day - but it is becoming impossible to afford it. Even if you don't have that particular goal, the large number of offerings in Plats is diluting the importance of any one issue.
Take the 2006-Ws for instance, with estimated mintages of 2,500 to 3,100. The price of platinum is on another run to the upside. Every time platinum takes a jump, the number of plats purchased by the Mint's customers tails off.
Every time that the Mint adds another variety, the total numbers of plats bought stays somewhat constant, but the mintages are split yet again into more and smaller groups. The trend is definitely toward more mintages that approach 2,000 per issue, rather than 5,000 per issue.
Within the Platinum Eagle Series itself, I've seen new rarities created for several years running - only to have even lower mintage rarities that eclipse the importance of the existing rarities pop up every year or two.
Time will tell. I've dealt with the Mint for 40 years, and one thing can be said - they are oblivious to their customers. They are politically-driven. And in addition to vagaries of political changes, the Mint's quality comes and goes in cycles. We seem to be hitting another rough patch with the Silver Eagle milk spots, poor Presidential dollar quality, and beat up Proof and "W" Plats being released.
The Mint doesn't authorize coinage, but they have discretion in creating instant rarities through constant design changes, special finishes, special anniversary sets, special markings, one-time mintmarks, and other perogatives available to the Mint Director. All of these variables tend to split the collector base into smaller market segments and in so doing, they lower the mintages for each special segment that is being created.
Creating all of these special market segments might work during a time of increased expansion of the customer base (i.e. through the State Quarters and Prez Dollars), but it will work in the opposite direction when the customers disappear.
I contend that the best way to build a collector base is through consistancy. Change is sometimes good. Constant change, such as we are seeing now in such an unprecedented way will eventually degrade the values of everything that comes out of the Mint. That day seems to be coming sooner, rather than later. You heard it here first. >>
I AGREE THE MINT NEEDS TO BACK OFF ON THE EXPANSION RATE OF SERIES AND DESIGNS. ITS 1936 ALL OVER!
Eric.... just wanted to say that I was wrong about the 1999-W unc $5 and $10 gold "error" coins. I do believe they are truely sleeper key dates and are a part of the W mint unc set.
<< <i>Sometimes even super low mintage moderns take a while to really rise in $$$. >>
I think the ones that take several years to take off have a richer story than the instant sell outs.
Just as a point of comparison, how do the number of U.S. offerings compare to the number of Canadian offerings, and how have the number of Canadian offerings affected the popularity / price of their collector coinage as a whole?
My Adolph A. Weinman signature
'though I have no kids, I hope that, in years to come, my nieces and nephews will be saying " boy, old uncle Don was one smart dude".
<< <i>.I dont intend to ever send in another coin for PCGS slab game again but will yearly pay for membership just to read your posts. >>
Greedygeek,
You don't have to be a member of CC to read or post here.
<< <i>Eric,
You have compiled some great information. I would add my own comments regarding moderns in that I believe there are two forces at work regarding prices. Rarity is the one constant and it tends to push prices, but the quesiton at hand is the true demand. This is particularly true for some of the more recent Mint offerings, i.e. first spouse coins, platinum offerings.
On the other hand, you have a couple of offerings that are not "rare" in the sense of low mintages, yet demand is very strong for these. The Buffalo dollars, proof and unc totaled about 500K and sell for around $200 each, +/- . The three coins sets with the reverse proof are also doing quite well. I believe these have done well due to true collector demand.
With all the talk about flipping, I believe it is important to acknowledge the true demand factors and the good health of the modern commemorative markets. Ugly designs, i.e. Capitol Visitiors Center, only do well when there is a miniscule mintage ($5 Unc gold), while the silver unc and proof are still quite inexpensive. >>
I agree
Exactly. If you look to the fundamentals and don't just try to guess short term price changes you will end up with the right stuff in hand..................if you are willing to wait.
"Eric.... just wanted to say that I was wrong about the 1999-W unc $5 and $10 gold "error" coins. I do believe they are truely sleeper key dates and are a part of the W mint unc set"
I have been wrong about many things over the years and thats how we learn. We have got to constantly review our mind set so it can grow.
Best Wishes,
Ericj96
Ericj96
Box of 20
I wouldn't put it passed the mint that they would introduce them at any time if they really wanted to. What I think they would do is produce more sets than singles like they did with the 2006 Ws last year...
Ben just told me about the unc 1999-w $50 gold eagle that was found. If there is one I be there are many more in a safe somelace. Very interesting!
Ericj96
The unified proof Liberty Head gold designs of the late 1800s look interesting:
Total proof mintage $2.5 is 4,152 and its Red Book price is $5,500
Total proof mintage $5.0 is 2,938 and its Red Book price is $11,000
Total proof mintage $10 is 2,666 and its Red Book price is $12,500
Total proof mintage $20 is 3,108 and its Red Book price is $22,500
Notice that the total mintage relationship for the one oz, half, quarter and tenth are amazingly simmilar to the current best 2006-w platinum data we have from the mint. So if you consider that the more common 1 oz coin is not trading at twice the half it may in fact be a relative sleeper. Good night, Ericj96"
Eric: To date, you been a huge fan of the $50 coins and the $25's based upon pure mintage figures. This is certainly interesting research - it supports why, for example, the $100 Proof 2004 Platinum sells for much more than the $50 2004 Proof Plat despite being a higher mintage (and has performed nearly as well as the $50 despite the $50 having been crowned by some the "king" of the Proof Platinum series). It also suggests that the $100 2006-w Burnished Plat might do relatively well in the future as well.
So, does this mean, you might actually tuck a couple of those $100's away now?
Wondercoin
I think it is undervalued presently in relation to the fractionals.
Fred, Las Vegas, NV
Ericj96
Notice that the quarter and half of the old type gold are very close in price now. Will the $25 coins close the gap with the plat halves? How much help will the anniversary set be to the halves as far as building collecotr base?
Ren
Returns?
Ren
Ive sent back 2 100$ UNC Ws myself. Marked damaged, Im told by a rep that these are not resold but melted. So yes I second your theory.
But a check on NN for sept 22nd has 465 for 1 oz and 1,628 for set:
http://www.numismaticnews.net/Default.aspx?tabid=459&articleid=8029&articlemid=1391#1391ArticlesnullLink
<< <i>"Returns?"
Ive sent back 2 100$ UNC Ws myself. Marked damaged, Im told by a rep that these are not resold but melted. So yes I second your theory.
But a check on NN for sept 22nd has 465 for 1 oz and 1,628 for set:
http://www.numismaticnews.net/Default.aspx?tabid=459&articleid=8029&articlemid=1391#1391ArticlesnullLink >>
First, Eric...congrats on a 100.
2nd, I see that the NN numbers online are different than the printed numbers in the weekly paper of the same date.
Ren