Nice double on the sell out news. Only one open bid, not mine.
Ren >>
Most of the Plats are buy it now anymore at high prices. I don't think anyone on Ebay ever knew they came back on the market and sold out again. Those people don't read board like this one, many adds I've seen had them sold out and the lowest mintage of the series before they were sold out. Now that price range seems fine but I'm not sure those people really know the mintages have now jumped on the 08's.
Just thought I'd share some Mint order info from this weekend.....take it for what it's worth. Just ordered some more 08-W Plat UNC sets and unlike other orders early Sat and Friday night which say in stock and reserved, todays order says ship date of 11/10. Also the order numbers between 9:00 am Saturday and 6pm Sunday is almost 5000 different. I don't know if 5000 orders is significant. I know a larger dealer ordered 20 UNC sets alone Saturday AM. I'd venture a guess things are moving quickly with the UNC's. That is all, over and out.
<< <i>Just thought I'd share some Mint order info from this weekend.....take it for what it's worth. Just ordered some more 08-W Plat UNC sets and unlike other orders early Sat and Friday night which say in stock and reserved, todays order says ship date of 11/10. Also the order numbers between 9:00 am Saturday and 6pm Sunday is almost 5000 different. I don't know if 5000 orders is significant. I know a larger dealer ordered 20 UNC sets alone Saturday AM. I'd venture a guess things are moving quickly with the UNC's. That is all, over and out. >>
<< <i>Just thought I'd share some Mint order info from this weekend.....take it for what it's worth. Just ordered some more 08-W Plat UNC sets and unlike other orders early Sat and Friday night which say in stock and reserved, todays order says ship date of 11/10. Also the order numbers between 9:00 am Saturday and 6pm Sunday is almost 5000 different. I don't know if 5000 orders is significant. I know a larger dealer ordered 20 UNC sets alone Saturday AM. I'd venture a guess things are moving quickly with the UNC's. That is all, over and out. >>
Thank you for your comments..
Ericj96 >>
Edited to say: Again, thank you for your intuition, though would like to ask how confident you are with those '08 figures? Thanks again, appreciate your insight.
If the 4 coin set goes black by Monday we will know the whole story by Wednesday and the guessing will be over. If this date thing is just a fluke then we will have to wait.
<< <i>I'm saying if you want rarity you just need to look at proof seated and barber material. These have mintages of 700 or less and 100+ years old. The leason is you have to have a collector base or they sit right around PM prices or sell for stupid cheap compared to their rarity. "
The problem by and large with the old seated and barber proof material is its collected by type not date and mint mark so the total design based type mintages of these coins is out of sight. Type coins with very high type mintages are very low dollar items. The proof plats have much lower design based type mintages in than many of the old proofs.
<< <i>Just thought I'd share some Mint order info from this weekend.....take it for what it's worth. Just ordered some more 08-W Plat UNC sets and unlike other orders early Sat and Friday night which say in stock and reserved, todays order says ship date of 11/10. Also the order numbers between 9:00 am Saturday and 6pm Sunday is almost 5000 different. I don't know if 5000 orders is significant. I know a larger dealer ordered 20 UNC sets alone Saturday AM. I'd venture a guess things are moving quickly with the UNC's. That is all, over and out. >>
UNC sets now showing in stock and reserved from Sunday night. Still available apparently fyi. Strange.
Thx for the info, who knows what's going on with the USM ordering system.......if you're confirmation sometime Sun gave a 2 week delivery date, it would indicate that the USM has dug down to the bottom of the pile and there isnt many more left for sale. Now it is back to normal order indications...???
How many were sold? That is the million dollar question.
<< <i>I'm saying if you want rarity you just need to look at proof seated and barber material. These have mintages of 700 or less and 100+ years old. The leason is you have to have a collector base or they sit right around PM prices or sell for stupid cheap compared to their rarity. "
The problem by and large with the old seated and barber proof material is its collected by type not date and mint mark so the total design based type mintages of these coins is out of sight. Type coins with very high type mintages are very low dollar items. The proof plats have much lower design based type mintages in than many of the old proofs.
Ericj >>
Also those early proof coins are not a different mint mark then the buisness strike coins.
Barber and Seated coinage is collected but collecting those in high grade is a very expensive thing to do. Look at how many people collect Morgan Dollars and what percentage of those people collect the proof morgan dollars. Are the Barber proof coins something that I would like to collect, yes, but dollar wise that is really time consuming and expensive.....
Collection under construction: VG Barber Quarters & Halves
Well you sure don't see the seated proof quarters or halves much and have to search. The Barbers are the same way but too expensive for those collecting Platinum? I don't think so if you look at the proof quarter seated section on Dick Osburns website you'll fine these in PF 62 quarter for around $775 dollars and Proof 64's are $1200 to $1300 and they are nice coins.
It's a long series with some show stoppers but really how many collectors of plats will be building sets in the future. Not many IMO unless you've collected them for a while. This series is now 12 years old and just got extended another 6 years. I don't buy the "to expensive" argument for those collecting the larger Plat sizes. You don't have the Platinum to add value to the coin but as a collectors piece they're hard to beat.
They have the same problem that the Plat series will have in the future, too few of coins for a dealer to promote in the UNC series but the proof series although low maybe able to be promoted in the future. I really believe future collectors will be buying the "keys" and not building set. Like been said with the seated proofs they're to expensive for the smaller collector. And this analysis is at todays Platinum prices it goes over a grand and your paying much more than the old classic proofs. Collecting is about having something no one has seen or had to me, it's not about bragging about a Plat coin that in most peoples eyes are a piece of bullion. That said I like the Plats for what they are and love the classic proofs too both are cool coins and one has to spend their limited budget on what you like.
JMO
PS my PF64 quarters were purchase a year or two ago for $1100 and my PF 64 Barber (only coin) was purchased for a grand. They are very very nice PCGS/NGC graded coins.
The Plats in proofs have some really wonderful designs, and are the best looking thing the Mint has been producing in recent years. The series has run full into this historical (and hysterical) whip-saw of commodity prices, which has made hanging in for regular collectors of the series difficult (I bought the set earlier this year when they came out, only to find them selling for half-price now). But my humble little side-line opinion is that inflation will eventually undo the dollar loss, and ultimately leave us glad we accumulated the series, financially as well as aesthetically.
<< <i>The Plats in proofs have some really wonderful designs, and are the best looking thing the Mint has been producing in recent years. The series has run full into this historical (and hysterical) whip-saw of commodity prices, which has made hanging in for regular collectors of the series difficult (I bought the set earlier this year when they came out, only to find them selling for half-price now). But my humble little side-line opinion is that inflation will eventually undo the dollar loss, and ultimately leave us glad we accumulated the series, financially as well as aesthetically. >>
The problem by and large with the old seated and barber proof material is its collected by type not date and mint mark so the total design based type mintages of these coins is out of sight. Type coins with very high type mintages are very low dollar items.
I think there is something to be said for this theory -- I've resisted it for some time, since I know that many collectors work to collect entire series by date and mintmark rather than by type. However, the Mint has been out-of-control for over a decade, introducing too many coins to keep up with.
When I started collecting coins as a kid in the 70s, in my opinion, it was a great time to start collecting. It was inexpensive to start a coin collection -- a minimal investment on an uncirculated set and a proof set each year was all that was required to stay current, and the rest of your money and energy could be spent learning and working backwards towards assembling a set of classic coins. You could work to assemble a full series based on date and mintmark.
Somewhere in the last 25 years or so, that changed. First the Mint restarted commemoratives. Just one or two, and demand was huge -- look at the mintages on commemoratives in 1982-1983. Then the Mint started issuing special packaging, the "prestige" sets, "premier" sets, etc. The commemoratives went from a trickle to a flood, going from 1 or 2 commemoratives a year to several, including dollars and gold coins, proof and uncirculated alike. Proofs were expanded to add silver proofs. Special packaging was expanded to add young collector sets, and coin and currency sets. Special finishes were added too -- the 1994 and 1997 nickels in the coin and currency sets started things off, and then we got satin finishes, burnished uncirculateds, and even reverse proofs. Mint marks were toyed with-- the Mint tossed a 1996 w dime into the mix following the 1995 w silver eagle. The Washington Quarter kicked off the 50 state quarters program-- 5 new designs each year, in unc (P-D), proof and silver proof. Then the Jefferson Nickel got into the act, followed by the Presidential Dollar, and soon the Lincoln Cent. Commemoratives were also expanded - with the First Spouse gold coins, in proof and uncirculated, adding 8 new gold coins each year. American Eagle silver, gold and platinum bullion coins were also expanded, platinums added the "w" uncirculated coins, and gold was expanded to add buffalo coins.
It's basically impossible for someone just entering the hobby to even hope to stay current. You can't simply buy a proof and uncirculated set and see what else the hobby has to offer. So we are segmented into 2 types of collectors, moderns and classics. Both are daunting.
A 10 year old kid who might be attracted to coins by an interesting -but basically worthless- state quarter... what's he going to do? Probably just collect 50 state quarters for awhile. Maybe focus on P and D, even S. Start to learn more about coins, and realize that these coins are worthless. I don't hold much faith in the popular belief that the 50 state quarters program will attract a large number of new collectors. The 1976 bicentennial quarter was widely hoarded in its day. A single year design change, with historic significance. It was readily identified in circulation; stood out against the regular humdrum quarter. Now, with 50 designs out there, NONE of our quarters stands out. I'd be exhausted just trying to assemble a collection of 50 state quarters. Do we really expect that someone will stick with the hobby and move to another bloated series after that?
On top of that, coins are becoming less relevant as a medium of exchange. Pennies, nickels, dimes are irrelevant. While we used to need change for pay phones, pay phones are largely obsolete. Quarters are still useful for parking meters and vending machines, but event those are starting to take credit and debit cards. Circulating coins don't circulate, they accumulate in jars and are then dumped at a grocery store or bank which will convert them to useable currency.
Classic coins at least have a measure of historic relevance to them, modern circulating coins are mostly worthless tokens. Modern bullion coins and commemoratives have a few advantages, bullion value can be a hedge, and are many times scarcer than their circulating counterparts. But I still can't escape my feeling that there are way too many coins offered each year. Overwhelming choices force collectors to become specialists, and sub-specialists. People might dabble across series, but for the most part, the collectors are focused. Proof or uncirculated? Circulating or non-circulating coins? Classic or moderns? Silver? Gold? Platinum? We can't afford everything, and even if we could, the time spent would be overwhelming.
Anyway, I've lost track of why I started writing. I guess it was to agree with Eric, that to the extent people will continue to collect coins, it seems likely that it will be by type.
As modern collector, I'd pick a cutoff date of 1965 for defining modern. From that point forward, with circulating coins, there is too much worthless product out there to support collecting by date and mintmark.
Starting with 1965, it's much easier and logical to collect by type. There's really nothing very compelling from 1965 to 1983, when the commemorative boom started. Pick up the standouts. For cents, the error coins. 1969 double die, 1972 double die, 1983, 1985, 1995. The special finish nickels in 1994 and 1997 and the transition designs from 2004 and 2005. The no "s" dimes, and the 1996 w. Quarters? Maybe the bicentennial and silver state proofs. Kennedy halves, I suppose the silver and 40% silver. I personally see some merit in all the dollar coins... they are a little different to me, maybe because the offerings were more sporadic. As a series, the silver American Eagles are the best, I can understand the appeal of assembling a full set. I like the silver commemorative dollars and $5 golds, but there are a lot of them. For that reason, my focus has always been on the low mintage coins; I trust that the rest will remain attainable in the future. The 1997 Jackie Robinson $5 gold. The 2000 Library of Congress bimetallic unc. The 1999 w $5 and $10 unc. gold errors. The 2004 and 2008 proof platinums and the 2007 reverse proof. 2006-2008 w uncirculated platinums.
Anyway, that's how I see things starting from 1965, understanding that many here will have a different point of view.
Wow! Quite an essay for first thing in the morning! It was fun to read, though. Thank you!
I don't know if my collecting habits are quite as philosophical as yours, but I have done the same thing as you to a large extent, i.e. focusing on the low-mintage rare examples. I suppose this is with the thought that I can go back and pick up the more common dates later. In reality, I probably never will complete most of the series from which I've collected the rarities. I've got most of the key dates for the 1/2-oz gold eagles, for example, but will probably never backtrack and pick up the others. A big reason is that I exhaust my funds every year trying to keep up with proof plats and other high-end Mint issues.
That said, I think 2008--and probably 2009 as well--are excellent times to pick up future low-mintage classics at or below issue price--if, as you suggest--coin collecting continues at all. And then, well, who cares? I had fun working on it...
A wonderful and well thought-out essay from "NYCouncil" ... I could not have said it better.
I would only differ with you in drawing the line between the "Classic" and "Modern" eras .... the dividing line has traditionally been established at 1950.
Let me first say that I am the symbolic long-term collector who has not traditionally been a platinum collector (or even known about them), and about whom speculation abounds.
I am also a professional historian and dealer in historical artifacts, with an emphasis on the pioneer American space program (www.spacerelics.com).
I have been a coin collector for roughly 35 years, and despite knowing nothing about platinum before a few months ago, I was automatically drawn to the 2006 - 2008 "Foundations" series of one-ounce "Burnished Uncirculateds" once I saw the initial mintage figures!
I prefer the one ounce size given both the ease of viewing the design, and the impressive "presence" and heft of the largest coin as opposed to the tiny fractionals.
Simply put, if you could only acquire one gold coin from the 1915 Pan-Pacific series, would you take the $2.50 size or the $50.00 size (independent of price, of course). Most folks would be drawn to the largest and most impressive coin, as I think most collectors would be.
What I would like is one of each of the three "Foundations" one-ounce coins displayed with their reverse sides facing up, in a PCGS or NGC three-coin holder and in gem condition. The set label would also list each of the three coin's low mintage figures.
Then try showing that encapsulated three-coin set to a teenager collecting State Quarters, and who is used to seeing mintages in the millions, instead of a few thousand. Not to mention seeing three large one-ounce platinum coins with stunning designs side by side.
Talk about an encapsulated PCGS or NGC set with some "heft" to it, and thrilling a young collector with the possibilities once they become adults and have more disposable income!
Again, I am not a serious platinum collector, and as such I simply want the "short 3-year set" that comprises the lowest platinum mintages ever produced to represent the metal. Lowest mintages also mean uncirculated and not proof coins, as they are FAR rarer the the proofs.
In general with post-1950 moderns, I also think that a 5,000 mintage figure level will be an important dividing line separating "rare" from "common" modern coins, regardless of type.
It is just a nice low "round number" that feels "right" to me in this regard.
I also agree with you regarding "type" Vs. "date and mintmark" in the modern series ... too many issues, as opposed to a few classic type designs of "key" mintage status.
Again, I discovered the platinum series by accident, but I am sure glad that I did!
There is nothing like being able to acquire a double-eagle sized coin made of pure platinum, bearing a beautiful design, in gem condition, and struck to the tune of only a few thousand!
I also agree with others that once the official mintage figures are posted in the "Red Book", then all bets are off price-wise (suggestive of big upward price movement over time).
This, then, is an opinion from a long-time coin collector (and perhaps indicative of how the larger collector community might now react IF they were currently aware of these coins).
Again, I think that awareness will grow via publication in the Red Book of final mintage figures, along with the myrid of articles on the platinum series that will undoubtly appear in the future.
I look forward to everyones thoughts and insights to my "outsider" coin collecting perspective!
Thank you!
David Frohman, President Peachstate Historical Consulting, Inc.
<< <i>Four coin sets are a lot of money. Not many people have that kind of liquid money out there right now.
It may take a few weeks... >>
If it happen like 06 you'll see HSN/Coin Vault shows promoting them. They purchased quite a few last time and actually HSN had the 4 pc set of graded NGC 69's for just under $5k which at the time was about the going rate and a rare decent buy. If the volume dealers get involved they will move quickly.
I would also like to add as a follow-on to my above post that, in my opinion, the value of each of the one-ounce uncirculated coins comprising the "Foundations Short Set" does not rely AT ALL on its precious metal content.
Believe it or not, they could be comprised of silver or copper, and still have extraordinary value, given their surreal post-1915 mintages!
Yes, it is a nice (and very impressive) plus that these coins are made out of platinum.
However, any officlal United States coin produced AFTER the "Classic" pre-1915 period (and especially in the 21st Century!) with a mintage of only a few thousand is a purely numismatic item, and NOT a slug of bullion.
Again, just my humble opinion (but backed up by 35 years of collecting experience).
<< <i>I would also like to add as a follow-on to my above post that, in my opinion, the value of each of the one-ounce uncirculated coins comprising the "Foundations Short Set" does not rely AT ALL on its precious metal content.
Believe it or not, they could be comprised of silver or copper, and still have extraordinary value, given their surreal post-1915 mintages!
Yes, it is a nice (and very impressive) plus that these coins are made out of platinum.
However, any officlal United States coin produced AFTER the "Classic" pre-1915 period (and especially in the 21st Century!) with a mintage of only a few thousand is a purely numismatic item, and NOT a slug of bullion.
Again, just my humble opinion (but backed up by 35 years of collecting experience).
David >>
You should look up the owl design they had scheduled for the 08's and scraped it, too bad although this coin is nice that one was awesome IMO.
"In general with post-1950 moderns, I also think that a 5,000 mintage figure level will be an important dividing line separating "rare" from "common" modern coins, regardless of type.
It is just a nice low "round number" that feels "right" to me in this regard."
The tenth single issue sold out at about 40 percent lower numbers than 2007. The quarter single issue sold out at about about half the 2007 quarter final sales. The 4 coin set had 4,000 worth of platinum in them and had high material risk involved in it. Can you think of any reason to cut cheap single issue coins by 40-50 percent and not do the same to the expensive high material cost high risk 4 coin set? I can't.
It they cut the cheap single issue offering I must expect the same for the UNC "w" platinum eagle 4 coin set SO:
2007 4 coin set x .55 =2650 x .55 =1457 say 1500 max for 2008 quarter died at 615 say 750 max halves are struck to quarter number or less, say 650 tenths died at 2046
I am hoping to see as a high end 2008 plat "w" estimate:
I still wonder about the melting that happened on the run up in platinum prices. A few cars may be driving around with 2006 W UNC cleaning the exhaust.
" I'm in agreement on 5,000 also. If the entire Mint production is less than the number of coins in a $50 bag, it works for me". "
What a great description of what we are talking about here in terms of relative rarity and mintages, and hence the long-term numismatic value pertaining to ANY of the platinum "Foundations" coins!
Because I waiting for my order of 5 unc 1/4 is in process I was think is my order was good or not but with that #s thanks eric and also I have some 50 pcgs ms70 fs and 10.......
I look for buy one 2006 w ms70 pcgs 50 dollar first strike
<< <i>I still wonder about the melting that happened on the run up in platinum prices. A few cars may be driving around with 2006 W UNC cleaning the exhaust. >>
Yes that's the hype but not the case IMO. Now if you were to say the more common dates like the 1997 I'd agree. More than likely the UNC Plat coins (non-W) for investors hit the pot first. There just isn't too many 06's just floating out there since they are in everyones collection IMO.
For some reason the usual FL dealers aren't flooding eBay with NGC MS70s this time. They also aren't seeking to purchase coins from posters here, wonder why?
<< <i>For some reason the usual FL dealers aren't flooding eBay with NGC MS70s this time. They also aren't seeking to purchase coins from posters here, wonder why? >>
<< <i>For some reason the usual FL dealers aren't flooding eBay with NGC MS70s this time. They also aren't seeking to purchase coins from posters here, wonder why? >>
Yes that's been the case all year. I usually get the latest 1/10 ounce bullion coin since I have the whole set. Well this year you couldn't find hardly any from PCGS/NGC and even raw were hard to come by. I purchased a raw one from APMEX that I usually wouldn't ever consider using them since I'm in Oklahoma and they charge sales tax. So now I've got my 69's (some first strike..big deal) in TPG's every year except the 08 which I have no interest in sending it in and being anymore upside down in it.
<< <i>For some reason the usual FL dealers aren't flooding eBay with NGC MS70s this time. They also aren't seeking to purchase coins from posters here, wonder why? >>
Who says they're not buying on the open market? >>
<< <i>For some reason the usual FL dealers aren't flooding eBay with NGC MS70s this time. They also aren't seeking to purchase coins from posters here, wonder why? >>
Because there are no order limits, they more likely then not bought direct...
<< <i>For some reason the usual FL dealers aren't flooding eBay with NGC MS70s this time. They also aren't seeking to purchase coins from posters here, wonder why? >>
Because there are no order limits, they more likely then not bought direct... >>
If they bought direct from the Mint eBay would be flooded now with NGC MS70. For some reason or other they are avoiding this issue.
Comments
<< <i>jmski - are you sure of the 1 oz. 1997 unc. mintage levels as I seem to recall them quite a bit higher?? >>
Yeah, I was astonished by this, too!
Had you goin' there, didn't I?
It was a typo, mintage was 56,000.
I knew it would happen.
Proof Mintages
Mint News Blog
I knew it would happen.
I would guess most people don't even know that the coins are back on sale.....
Nice double on the sell out news. Only one open bid, not mine.
Ren
those unc mintages are for NON W bullion coins
<< <i>BIN's on the 1/10 2008 W-unc are $259-$299.
Nice double on the sell out news. Only one open bid, not mine.
Ren >>
Most of the Plats are buy it now anymore at high prices. I don't think anyone on Ebay ever knew they came back on the market and sold out again. Those people don't read board like this one, many adds I've seen had them sold out and the lowest mintage of the series before they were sold out. Now that price range seems fine but I'm not sure those people really know the mintages have now jumped on the 08's.
Thanks for the info!
Or maybe the rush of orders is for the highly popular state quarter collector's spoons!
My Adolph A. Weinman signature
7 over 8, my post included both types of uncs. Regards, jmski
Oh, I see. Give me a few minutes and I'll post all denominations of the "W" Uncs.
2006-W Uncs:
1/10th oz. - 3,544
1/4th oz. - 2,676
1/2 oz. - 2,577
1 oz. - 3,068
2007-W Uncs:
1/10th oz. - 5,774
1/4th oz. - 3,900
1/2 oz. - 3,940
1 oz. - 4,451
2008-W Uncs:
1/10th oz. - 2,714*
1/4th oz. - 1,283*
1/2 oz. - 960*
1 oz. - 881*
I knew it would happen.
<< <i>Or maybe the rush of orders is for the highly popular state quarter collector's spoons!
Doh! Forgot about those!
I'm not sure a comparsion of 2006's to 2008's is really valid at this point until all of the 08's are reported by interesting to watch.
<< <i>Just thought I'd share some Mint order info from this weekend.....take it for what it's worth. Just ordered some more 08-W Plat UNC sets and unlike other orders early Sat and Friday night which say in stock and reserved, todays order says ship date of 11/10. Also the order numbers between 9:00 am Saturday and 6pm Sunday is almost 5000 different. I don't know if 5000 orders is significant. I know a larger dealer ordered 20 UNC sets alone Saturday AM. I'd venture a guess things are moving quickly with the UNC's. That is all, over and out.
Thank you for your comments..
Ericj96
<< <i>
<< <i>Just thought I'd share some Mint order info from this weekend.....take it for what it's worth. Just ordered some more 08-W Plat UNC sets and unlike other orders early Sat and Friday night which say in stock and reserved, todays order says ship date of 11/10. Also the order numbers between 9:00 am Saturday and 6pm Sunday is almost 5000 different. I don't know if 5000 orders is significant. I know a larger dealer ordered 20 UNC sets alone Saturday AM. I'd venture a guess things are moving quickly with the UNC's. That is all, over and out.
Thank you for your comments..
Ericj96 >>
Edited to say: Again, thank you for your intuition, though would like to ask how confident you are with those '08 figures? Thanks again, appreciate your insight.
Eric
San Diego, CA
<< <i>I'm saying if you want rarity you just need to look at proof seated and barber material. These have mintages of 700 or less and 100+ years old. The leason is you have to have a collector base or they sit right around PM prices or sell for stupid cheap compared to their rarity. "
The problem by and large with the old seated and barber proof material is its collected by type not date and mint mark so the total design based type mintages of these coins is out of sight. Type coins with very high type mintages are very low dollar items. The proof plats have much lower design based type mintages in than many of the old proofs.
Ericj
<< <i>Just thought I'd share some Mint order info from this weekend.....take it for what it's worth. Just ordered some more 08-W Plat UNC sets and unlike other orders early Sat and Friday night which say in stock and reserved, todays order says ship date of 11/10. Also the order numbers between 9:00 am Saturday and 6pm Sunday is almost 5000 different. I don't know if 5000 orders is significant. I know a larger dealer ordered 20 UNC sets alone Saturday AM. I'd venture a guess things are moving quickly with the UNC's. That is all, over and out.
UNC sets now showing in stock and reserved from Sunday night. Still available apparently fyi. Strange.
Thx for the info, who knows what's going on with the USM ordering system.......if you're confirmation sometime Sun gave a 2 week delivery date, it would indicate that the USM has dug down to the bottom of the pile and there isnt many more left for sale. Now it is back to normal order indications...???
How many were sold? That is the million dollar question.
<< <i>
<< <i>I'm saying if you want rarity you just need to look at proof seated and barber material. These have mintages of 700 or less and 100+ years old. The leason is you have to have a collector base or they sit right around PM prices or sell for stupid cheap compared to their rarity. "
The problem by and large with the old seated and barber proof material is its collected by type not date and mint mark so the total design based type mintages of these coins is out of sight. Type coins with very high type mintages are very low dollar items. The proof plats have much lower design based type mintages in than many of the old proofs.
Ericj >>
Also those early proof coins are not a different mint mark then the buisness strike coins.
Barber and Seated coinage is collected but collecting those in high grade is a very expensive thing to do. Look at how many people collect Morgan Dollars and what percentage of those people collect the proof morgan dollars. Are the Barber proof coins something that I would like to collect, yes, but dollar wise that is really time consuming and expensive.....
It's a long series with some show stoppers but really how many collectors of plats will be building sets in the future. Not many IMO unless you've collected them for a while. This series is now 12 years old and just got extended another 6 years. I don't buy the "to expensive" argument for those collecting the larger Plat sizes. You don't have the Platinum to add value to the coin but as a collectors piece they're hard to beat.
They have the same problem that the Plat series will have in the future, too few of coins for a dealer to promote in the UNC series but the proof series although low maybe able to be promoted in the future. I really believe future collectors will be buying the "keys" and not building set. Like been said with the seated proofs they're to expensive for the smaller collector. And this analysis is at todays Platinum prices it goes over a grand and your paying much more than the old classic proofs. Collecting is about having something no one has seen or had to me, it's not about bragging about a Plat coin that in most peoples eyes are a piece of bullion. That said I like the Plats for what they are and love the classic proofs too both are cool coins and one has to spend their limited budget on what you like.
JMO
PS my PF64 quarters were purchase a year or two ago for $1100 and my PF 64 Barber (only coin) was purchased for a grand. They are very very nice PCGS/NGC graded coins.
Here's a warning parable for coin collectors...
<< <i>The Plats in proofs have some really wonderful designs, and are the best looking thing the Mint has been producing in recent years. The series has run full into this historical (and hysterical) whip-saw of commodity prices, which has made hanging in for regular collectors of the series difficult (I bought the set earlier this year when they came out, only to find them selling for half-price now). But my humble little side-line opinion is that inflation will eventually undo the dollar loss, and ultimately leave us glad we accumulated the series, financially as well as aesthetically. >>
No doubt, I love it too and I'm a collector.
I think there is something to be said for this theory -- I've resisted it for some time, since I know that many collectors work to collect entire series by date and mintmark rather than by type. However, the Mint has been out-of-control for over a decade, introducing too many coins to keep up with.
When I started collecting coins as a kid in the 70s, in my opinion, it was a great time to start collecting. It was inexpensive to start a coin collection -- a minimal investment on an uncirculated set and a proof set each year was all that was required to stay current, and the rest of your money and energy could be spent learning and working backwards towards assembling a set of classic coins. You could work to assemble a full series based on date and mintmark.
Somewhere in the last 25 years or so, that changed. First the Mint restarted commemoratives. Just one or two, and demand was huge -- look at the mintages on commemoratives in 1982-1983. Then the Mint started issuing special packaging, the "prestige" sets, "premier" sets, etc. The commemoratives went from a trickle to a flood, going from 1 or 2 commemoratives a year to several, including dollars and gold coins, proof and uncirculated alike. Proofs were expanded to add silver proofs. Special packaging was expanded to add young collector sets, and coin and currency sets. Special finishes were added too -- the 1994 and 1997 nickels in the coin and currency sets started things off, and then we got satin finishes, burnished uncirculateds, and even reverse proofs. Mint marks were toyed with-- the Mint tossed a 1996 w dime into the mix following the 1995 w silver eagle. The Washington Quarter kicked off the 50 state quarters program-- 5 new designs each year, in unc (P-D), proof and silver proof. Then the Jefferson Nickel got into the act, followed by the Presidential Dollar, and soon the Lincoln Cent. Commemoratives were also expanded - with the First Spouse gold coins, in proof and uncirculated, adding 8 new gold coins each year. American Eagle silver, gold and platinum bullion coins were also expanded, platinums added the "w" uncirculated coins, and gold was expanded to add buffalo coins.
It's basically impossible for someone just entering the hobby to even hope to stay current. You can't simply buy a proof and uncirculated set and see what else the hobby has to offer. So we are segmented into 2 types of collectors, moderns and classics. Both are daunting.
A 10 year old kid who might be attracted to coins by an interesting -but basically worthless- state quarter... what's he going to do? Probably just collect 50 state quarters for awhile. Maybe focus on P and D, even S. Start to learn more about coins, and realize that these coins are worthless. I don't hold much faith in the popular belief that the 50 state quarters program will attract a large number of new collectors. The 1976 bicentennial quarter was widely hoarded in its day. A single year design change, with historic significance. It was readily identified in circulation; stood out against the regular humdrum quarter. Now, with 50 designs out there, NONE of our quarters stands out. I'd be exhausted just trying to assemble a collection of 50 state quarters. Do we really expect that someone will stick with the hobby and move to another bloated series after that?
On top of that, coins are becoming less relevant as a medium of exchange. Pennies, nickels, dimes are irrelevant. While we used to need change for pay phones, pay phones are largely obsolete. Quarters are still useful for parking meters and vending machines, but event those are starting to take credit and debit cards. Circulating coins don't circulate, they accumulate in jars and are then dumped at a grocery store or bank which will convert them to useable currency.
Classic coins at least have a measure of historic relevance to them, modern circulating coins are mostly worthless tokens. Modern bullion coins and commemoratives have a few advantages, bullion value can be a hedge, and are many times scarcer than their circulating counterparts. But I still can't escape my feeling that there are way too many coins offered each year. Overwhelming choices force collectors to become specialists, and sub-specialists. People might dabble across series, but for the most part, the collectors are focused. Proof or uncirculated? Circulating or non-circulating coins? Classic or moderns? Silver? Gold? Platinum? We can't afford everything, and even if we could, the time spent would be overwhelming.
Anyway, I've lost track of why I started writing. I guess it was to agree with Eric, that to the extent people will continue to collect coins, it seems likely that it will be by type.
As modern collector, I'd pick a cutoff date of 1965 for defining modern. From that point forward, with circulating coins, there is too much worthless product out there to support collecting by date and mintmark.
Starting with 1965, it's much easier and logical to collect by type. There's really nothing very compelling from 1965 to 1983, when the commemorative boom started. Pick up the standouts. For cents, the error coins. 1969 double die, 1972 double die, 1983, 1985, 1995. The special finish nickels in 1994 and 1997 and the transition designs from 2004 and 2005. The no "s" dimes, and the 1996 w. Quarters? Maybe the bicentennial and silver state proofs. Kennedy halves, I suppose the silver and 40% silver. I personally see some merit in all the dollar coins... they are a little different to me, maybe because the offerings were more sporadic. As a series, the silver American Eagles are the best, I can understand the appeal of assembling a full set. I like the silver commemorative dollars and $5 golds, but there are a lot of them. For that reason, my focus has always been on the low mintage coins; I trust that the rest will remain attainable in the future. The 1997 Jackie Robinson $5 gold. The 2000 Library of Congress bimetallic unc. The 1999 w $5 and $10 unc. gold errors. The 2004 and 2008 proof platinums and the 2007 reverse proof. 2006-2008 w uncirculated platinums.
Anyway, that's how I see things starting from 1965, understanding that many here will have a different point of view.
I don't know if my collecting habits are quite as philosophical as yours, but I have done the same thing as you to a large extent, i.e. focusing on the low-mintage rare examples. I suppose this is with the thought that I can go back and pick up the more common dates later. In reality, I probably never will complete most of the series from which I've collected the rarities. I've got most of the key dates for the 1/2-oz gold eagles, for example, but will probably never backtrack and pick up the others. A big reason is that I exhaust my funds every year trying to keep up with proof plats and other high-end Mint issues.
That said, I think 2008--and probably 2009 as well--are excellent times to pick up future low-mintage classics at or below issue price--if, as you suggest--coin collecting continues at all. And then, well, who cares? I had fun working on it...
A wonderful and well thought-out essay from "NYCouncil" ... I could not have said it better.
I would only differ with you in drawing the line between the "Classic" and "Modern" eras ....
the dividing line has traditionally been established at 1950.
Let me first say that I am the symbolic long-term collector who has not traditionally been
a platinum collector (or even known about them), and about whom speculation abounds.
I am also a professional historian and dealer in historical artifacts, with an emphasis on
the pioneer American space program (www.spacerelics.com).
I have been a coin collector for roughly 35 years, and despite knowing nothing about platinum
before a few months ago, I was automatically drawn to the 2006 - 2008 "Foundations"
series of one-ounce "Burnished Uncirculateds" once I saw the initial mintage figures!
I prefer the one ounce size given both the ease of viewing the design, and the impressive
"presence" and heft of the largest coin as opposed to the tiny fractionals.
Simply put, if you could only acquire one gold coin from the 1915 Pan-Pacific series, would
you take the $2.50 size or the $50.00 size (independent of price, of course). Most folks
would be drawn to the largest and most impressive coin, as I think most collectors would be.
What I would like is one of each of the three "Foundations" one-ounce coins displayed with
their reverse sides facing up, in a PCGS or NGC three-coin holder and in gem condition.
The set label would also list each of the three coin's low mintage figures.
Then try showing that encapsulated three-coin set to a teenager collecting State Quarters,
and who is used to seeing mintages in the millions, instead of a few thousand. Not to
mention seeing three large one-ounce platinum coins with stunning designs side by side.
Talk about an encapsulated PCGS or NGC set with some "heft" to it, and thrilling a young
collector with the possibilities once they become adults and have more disposable income!
Again, I am not a serious platinum collector, and as such I simply want the "short 3-year set"
that comprises the lowest platinum mintages ever produced to represent the metal. Lowest
mintages also mean uncirculated and not proof coins, as they are FAR rarer the the proofs.
In general with post-1950 moderns, I also think that a 5,000 mintage figure level will be an
important dividing line separating "rare" from "common" modern coins, regardless of type.
It is just a nice low "round number" that feels "right" to me in this regard.
I also agree with you regarding "type" Vs. "date and mintmark" in the modern series ...
too many issues, as opposed to a few classic type designs of "key" mintage status.
Again, I discovered the platinum series by accident, but I am sure glad that I did!
There is nothing like being able to acquire a double-eagle sized coin made of pure platinum,
bearing a beautiful design, in gem condition, and struck to the tune of only a few thousand!
I also agree with others that once the official mintage figures are posted in the "Red Book",
then all bets are off price-wise (suggestive of big upward price movement over time).
This, then, is an opinion from a long-time coin collector (and perhaps indicative of how the
larger collector community might now react IF they were currently aware of these coins).
Again, I think that awareness will grow via publication in the Red Book of final mintage figures,
along with the myrid of articles on the platinum series that will undoubtly appear in the future.
I look forward to everyones thoughts and insights to my "outsider" coin collecting perspective!
Thank you!
David Frohman, President
Peachstate Historical Consulting, Inc.
(253) 851-0251
www.spacerelics.com
It may take a few weeks...
<< <i>Four coin sets are a lot of money. Not many people have that kind of liquid money out there right now.
It may take a few weeks... >>
If it happen like 06 you'll see HSN/Coin Vault shows promoting them. They purchased quite a few last time and actually HSN had the 4 pc set of graded NGC 69's for just under $5k which at the time was about the going rate and a rare decent buy. If the volume dealers get involved they will move quickly.
of each of the one-ounce uncirculated coins comprising the "Foundations Short Set"
does not rely AT ALL on its precious metal content.
Believe it or not, they could be comprised of silver or copper, and still have extraordinary
value, given their surreal post-1915 mintages!
Yes, it is a nice (and very impressive) plus that these coins are made out of platinum.
However, any officlal United States coin produced AFTER the "Classic" pre-1915 period
(and especially in the 21st Century!) with a mintage of only a few thousand is a purely
numismatic item, and NOT a slug of bullion.
Again, just my humble opinion (but backed up by 35 years of collecting experience).
David
<< <i>I would also like to add as a follow-on to my above post that, in my opinion, the value
of each of the one-ounce uncirculated coins comprising the "Foundations Short Set"
does not rely AT ALL on its precious metal content.
Believe it or not, they could be comprised of silver or copper, and still have extraordinary
value, given their surreal post-1915 mintages!
Yes, it is a nice (and very impressive) plus that these coins are made out of platinum.
However, any officlal United States coin produced AFTER the "Classic" pre-1915 period
(and especially in the 21st Century!) with a mintage of only a few thousand is a purely
numismatic item, and NOT a slug of bullion.
Again, just my humble opinion (but backed up by 35 years of collecting experience).
David >>
You should look up the owl design they had scheduled for the 08's and scraped it, too bad although this coin is nice that one was awesome IMO.
important dividing line separating "rare" from "common" modern coins, regardless of type.
It is just a nice low "round number" that feels "right" to me in this regard."
YES
Ericj96
If the entire Mint production is less than the number of coins in a $50 cent bag, it works for me.
The tenth single issue sold out at about 40 percent lower numbers than 2007. The quarter single issue sold out at about about half the 2007 quarter final sales. The 4 coin set had 4,000 worth of platinum in them and had high material risk involved in it. Can you think of any reason to cut cheap single issue coins by 40-50 percent and not do the same to the expensive high material cost high risk 4 coin set? I can't.
It they cut the cheap single issue offering I must expect the same for the UNC "w" platinum eagle 4 coin set SO:
2007 4 coin set x .55 =2650 x .55 =1457 say 1500 max for 2008
quarter died at 615 say 750 max
halves are struck to quarter number or less, say 650
tenths died at 2046
I am hoping to see as a high end 2008 plat "w" estimate:
$50 = 2150 coins
$25 = 2250 coins
$10 = 3500 coins
Sub 2,000 mintages on the half and quarter would not be shocking.
Ericj96
in a $50 bag, it works for me". "
What a great description of what we are talking about here in terms of relative rarity and mintages,
and hence the long-term numismatic value pertaining to ANY of the platinum "Foundations" coins!
David
Many members on this forum that now it cannot fit in my signature. Please ask for entire list.
<< <i>I still wonder about the melting that happened on the run up in platinum prices. A few cars may be driving around with 2006 W UNC cleaning the exhaust. >>
Yes that's the hype but not the case IMO. Now if you were to say the more common dates like the 1997 I'd agree. More than likely the UNC Plat coins (non-W) for investors hit the pot first. There just isn't too many 06's just floating out there since they are in everyones collection IMO.
<< <i>For some reason the usual FL dealers aren't flooding eBay with NGC MS70s this time. They also aren't seeking to purchase coins from posters here, wonder why?
Who says they're not buying on the open market?
<< <i>For some reason the usual FL dealers aren't flooding eBay with NGC MS70s this time. They also aren't seeking to purchase coins from posters here, wonder why?
Yes that's been the case all year. I usually get the latest 1/10 ounce bullion coin since I have the whole set. Well this year you couldn't find hardly any from PCGS/NGC and even raw were hard to come by. I purchased a raw one from APMEX that I usually wouldn't ever consider using them since I'm in Oklahoma and they charge sales tax. So now I've got my 69's (some first strike..big deal) in TPG's every year except the 08 which I have no interest in sending it in and being anymore upside down in it.
<< <i>
<< <i>For some reason the usual FL dealers aren't flooding eBay with NGC MS70s this time. They also aren't seeking to purchase coins from posters here, wonder why?
Who says they're not buying on the open market?
That is funny.
donbonser ?
Joe
<< <i>For some reason the usual FL dealers aren't flooding eBay with NGC MS70s this time. They also aren't seeking to purchase coins from posters here, wonder why?
Because there are no order limits, they more likely then not bought direct...
<< <i>
<< <i>For some reason the usual FL dealers aren't flooding eBay with NGC MS70s this time. They also aren't seeking to purchase coins from posters here, wonder why?
Because there are no order limits, they more likely then not bought direct... >>
If they bought direct from the Mint eBay would be flooded now with NGC MS70. For some reason or other they are avoiding this issue.