Options
The Millionaire Bottom Feeder
halfcentman
Posts: 1,498 ✭✭✭
Last year, I wrote an article about a very interesting man. The story is as follows, and it has a moral.
There was this guy (call him "Ted"), who had a very interesting way of acquiring coins. There is a saying that says "a key date coin with a problem is still a key date." This is an interesting phrase because it is still a problem coin as well.
Ted walked around flea markets, small shops, and bourses with large amounts of cash. He was also very keen at spotting certain "Cherrypicker" varieties of Lincoln Cents. He would buy anything, and I mean anything at the right price (and he had an excellent sense of the market). An example of this was a purchase of a genuine 1909-S VDB, a corroded VG with a hole in it. He also purchased an 1893-S Morgan Dolar in Good where someone took a knife and "canceled" the obverse of the coin!
When he died, his instructions in his will were explicit so as not to burden his family. He kept a careful log of all of his purchases, exactly what they were, and how much he paid for them. Since he knew he was dying, he updated them with current market prices. Something we should all do regardless.
The dealer to whom the collection was disbursed (thank god) did not have to lay out a dime for the coins. When everything was said and done, Ted realized a handsome 40% profit on his "ka-ka" over a period of slightly under 20 years.
It does not matter what you buy, as long as you know the market. You do not need nice coins for them to appreciate in value. As a matter of fact, I would even argue that people overpay for coins that they think are nice and then take a bath when they upgrade or unload them. The old adage that you can never pay too much for quality is far from being always true.
There was this guy (call him "Ted"), who had a very interesting way of acquiring coins. There is a saying that says "a key date coin with a problem is still a key date." This is an interesting phrase because it is still a problem coin as well.
Ted walked around flea markets, small shops, and bourses with large amounts of cash. He was also very keen at spotting certain "Cherrypicker" varieties of Lincoln Cents. He would buy anything, and I mean anything at the right price (and he had an excellent sense of the market). An example of this was a purchase of a genuine 1909-S VDB, a corroded VG with a hole in it. He also purchased an 1893-S Morgan Dolar in Good where someone took a knife and "canceled" the obverse of the coin!
When he died, his instructions in his will were explicit so as not to burden his family. He kept a careful log of all of his purchases, exactly what they were, and how much he paid for them. Since he knew he was dying, he updated them with current market prices. Something we should all do regardless.
The dealer to whom the collection was disbursed (thank god) did not have to lay out a dime for the coins. When everything was said and done, Ted realized a handsome 40% profit on his "ka-ka" over a period of slightly under 20 years.
It does not matter what you buy, as long as you know the market. You do not need nice coins for them to appreciate in value. As a matter of fact, I would even argue that people overpay for coins that they think are nice and then take a bath when they upgrade or unload them. The old adage that you can never pay too much for quality is far from being always true.
0
Comments
But what do you mean the dealer didn't lay out a dime?
If a collector, I'd have a hard time getting excited about owning those coins.
<< <i>Interesting parable!
But what do you mean the dealer didn't lay out a dime? >>
I would imagine the dealer worked the deal on consignment...
<< <i>A 40% return over 20 years is paltry. He would have been better off in CDs if capital appreciation were his motive. >>
-Paul
<< <i>A 40% return over 20 years is paltry. He would have been better off in CDs if capital appreciation were his motive. >>
Seriously - that's like going from $1 to $1.40 over 20 years, what does that work out to in terms of annual return?
Yes, the arrangements were to put the coins on consignment because of their nature. Everything has a price as I stated.
I agree that it is very difficult to get your boat floated over stuff like this. However, look at it another way. The crappy 1893-S dollar was used and abused. It's a piece of history. If your budget is extremely Spartan, how cool is it for someone to bring in a coin like that to a talk?? Where has that thing been. What idiot "canceled" the obverse? These are the aspects of numismatics that we tend to forget. What I have found is that the collectors with depth have not - regardless of how much money they spend or what they collect.
Please visit my website Millcitynumismatics.com
<< <i>A 40% return over 20 years is paltry. He would have been better off in CDs if capital appreciation were his motive. >>
Yes, you are correct. Simple math works out to 2% per year, and if you did the compound interest calculation it would be less. Given the better interest rates from 10 to 20 years ago this guy would have been off with a passbook account at a bank.
I would not advise anyone to buy junk coins like this even if they are better dates. If you put your money into clean collector grade stuff, chances are you will do better.
And as a dealer I would not want my working capital tied up in this stuff. It's just too hard to sell to REAL collectors.
<< <i>The point is that it gave him enjoyment, and he did not get buried like most people. Do you realize how many people bought 1971 Proof Sets for $5.00 a piece when they came out, and think they are going to retire on them when they've held them for 40 years.
Yes, the arrangements were to put the coins on consignment because of their nature. Everything has a price as I stated.
I agree that it is very difficult to get your boat floated over stuff like this. However, look at it another way. The crappy 1893-S dollar was used and abused. It's a piece of history. If your budget is extremely Spartan, how cool is it for someone to bring in a coin like that to a talk?? Where has that thing been. What idiot "canceled" the obverse? These are the aspects of numismatics that we tend to forget. What I have found is that the collectors with depth have not - regardless of how much money they spend or what they collect. >>
If that floats your boat, it's fine with me. I prefer to collect old coins in original cicrculated condition that do not have holes, knife scrapes, etc. You know, coins that do not usually cause you to gasp in horror when you look at them.
Check out some of my 1794 Large Cents on www.coingallery.org
That said, if his method were my only coin collecting option, I would skip it entirely.
It does reinforce to me, that the hobby is a big tent. Even someone that seemed to specialize in what many others see as ugly coins can enjoy the hobby. No one can be sure that this is the case, but I'm guessing the guy did it mostly for fun, not for the potential of huge financial return.
For what it's worth: The annual return is likely somewhere between 1.2% and 6% a year. Remember that the coins were not all purchased 20 years ago, and then sold after that time period. They were accumulated a little bit each year, and then sold. If it were a single shot purchase then resold it works out to about 1.2%. If accumulated equally over each of the 20 years, it is about a 3.5% annual return. If purchases were back loaded, with more spent later during the 20 years, it might be more like 6%.
However, an accumulation of ALL problem coins? Hope he had fun, because, as others said, 40% over two decades is a very poor return if it was done for investment.
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
The nicest coin that he had (that I never saw) was a 1793 S-13 Liberty Cap Large Cent. It ended up in that Bowers auction with the "roll" of 40, 1793 Caps. I have no idea which one it was, but from what I was told it was one of the "nicest" coins he owned. Keep in mind that word is very relative.
<< <i>
<< <i>A 40% return over 20 years is paltry. He would have been better off in CDs if capital appreciation were his motive. >>
Seriously - that's like going from $1 to $1.40 over 20 years, what does that work out to in terms of annual return? >>
Wow tough crowd here
Buying coins for a collection is not like a systematic deposit into some investment, like a CD or an S&P 500 Index fund. In other words, this collector wasn't putting $50 a month into an investment over a 20 year period. Likey he, and many of us here buy coins we like sporatically. A $50 coin here or a $2000 one there etc. You just cannot compare the "investment" behavior of a collector to that of a securities investment. I am not talking about some proxy index made up of high value rare coins either. I am talking about the regular collector here. This gentlement did well!! He acquired undesireable coins over the years and turned a profit and that is not easy to do if you ask me. I am sure his greatest "return" was the enjoyment of collecting those items too.
Like I said, to me the moral is that there are a lot of ways to enjoy the hobby. The financial return wasn't that hot--his percentage return on investment would have been many times better had "Ted" stuck to junk silver coins, or gold coins near melt value, and avoided everything else. Sticking with bullion related items would likely have made that 5% of net worth, more like 15% to 25%, had he accumulated slow and steady then sold.
The other moral that I think of, is that most millionaires don't look like the TV vision. It reminds me of a story. A young relative of mine asked me if I knew any millionaires. I told him that his dad was probably a millionaire after factoring in home equity and accrued pension benefits. Now, not that many would think that his dad "looked like" a millionaire, not with the ten year old car, and the modest clothes and shoes. The moral of that story is that living below ones means, driving an older car, is much more common for real life millionaires, than the TV image of free-spending, with multiple high end cars, and fancy vacations every year. A good many that fit that TV image live the high life for a while, but a good many also end up broke in their later years, having spent all the money on high living. Not sure how this fits in with coins, but the thread does remind me of the story.
Had he been picky and bought gem morgans along the way (what I collect) he'd have more than quadrupled is money in 20 years, not earn a palty 40%.
<< <i>So Halfcentman, what do you see as the "moral" to the story?
Like I said, to me the moral is that there are a lot of ways to enjoy the hobby. The financial return wasn't that hot--his percentage return on investment would have been many times better had "Ted" stuck to junk silver coins, or gold coins near melt value, and avoided everything else. Sticking with bullion related items would likely have made that 5% of net worth, more like 15% to 25%, had he accumulated slow and steady then sold.
The other moral that I think of, is that most millionaires don't look like the TV vision. It reminds me of a story. A young relative of mine asked me if I knew any millionaires. I told him that his dad was probably a millionaire after factoring in home equity and accrued pension benefits. Now, not that many would think that his dad "looked like" a millionaire, not with the ten year old car, and the modest clothes and shoes. The moral of that story is that living below ones means, driving an older car, is much more common for real life millionaires, than the TV image of free-spending, with multiple high end cars, and fancy vacations every year. A good many that fit that TV image live the high life for a while, but a good many also end up broke in their later years, having spent all the money on high living. Not sure how this fits in with coins, but the thread does remind me of the story. >>
The moral of this story is that life is too damn short not to enjoy yourself, and to feel like "work" is a four-letter word. Your observation is dead-on. You would have never known that this guy had as much money as he had. He was a very nice man, but if ever "F"'ed him on a business deal, NOT GOOD!!
BTW, he had a legal business (which I am not allowed to divulge because it's still in his family).
For me such coins bring me little or no joy. I don't need to have the very best of everything, unlike some collectors. But I do get a lot of satisfaction from collecting coins that are "pleasant" for their kind. That means that a 20th century Proof coin usually has to be at least a PR-64, and a piece of "modern junk" needs to be PR-69 DCam to make me happy. But a scarcer 18th century piece in VF with no problems will work for me also.
<< <i>
It does not matter what you buy, as long as you know the market. You do not need nice coins for them to appreciate in value. As a matter of fact, I would even argue that people overpay for coins that they think are nice and then take a bath when they upgrade or unload them. The old adage that you can never pay too much for quality is far from being always true. >>
There is a market for everything.
More money is made by knowing to whom to sell coins than by appreciation
or by buying right. Other than extremely high value coins there is a far wider
range in potential sale prices than other determinants of profit.
If it were me, I would be solely focused on the "idiot" to the point that there is no way I could see "history in your hands" or any other romantic facets. I would much rather collect common date seated half dimes and dimes in problem-free fine condition, likely at a similar or lower price point, than abused and mutilated key date coins.
<< <i>It does not matter what you buy, as long as you know the market. You do not need nice coins for them to appreciate in value. As a matter of fact, I would even argue that people overpay for coins that they think are nice and then take a bath when they upgrade or unload them. The old adage that you can never pay too much for quality is far from being always true. >>
Agreed. I've often walked the "road less traveled" myself. It can be fun.
Edit- ha, look at that. Two holey coin guys, back to back.
<< <i>And as a dealer I would not want my working capital tied up in this stuff. It's just too hard to sell to REAL collectors >>
Well, how Sperber of you to say that.
For the first time since I've been on these forums, I am disappointed in you, Bill. I am a REAL collector.
I, like many other REAL collectors, just don't happen to have the wherewithall to purchase
higher end coins. These problem coins are a boon to REAL collectors like me. I'd love to own
a problem-free 1893-S Morgan. Problem is, my finances won't allow it. I would purchase the
problem coin because I want one and this is the one I can afford.
Bill, where do you draw the line defining REAL collectors? Do you exclude collectors of moderns?
Twentieth century? Nineteenth century? How about everyone other than token collectors? Or do
you just have a set dollar amount to make the determination?
Don't get me wrong, Bill. I'm not saying that you are obligated to carry the stuff. I just take particular
offense to the undefinable and nebulous term "Real collector." As you may recall, I had to wait a month
to put together the money to purchase that nicely toned Isabella you had a few years back. Does the
fact that I had to ask if you would hold it that long with a small deposit eliminate me from REAL collector
status?
I'm really surprised at you, Bill. I thought making such a statement was beneath you.
Bob
It sounds like to me that the gentleman found a hobby that gave him enjoyment
that ended up costing him nothing over a lifetime. Doesn't get any better than that.
Believe it or not there is a whole bunch of people that think that money is no different
than any other tool like a hammer, saw or screwdriver.
It is something that is used to get something done.
So the amount of return on the money is not even close to what is important
It is the amount of enjoyment that is had for the money expended.
There is ALWAYS more money to be accumulated, They make more of it everyday
Finding something that gives you joy is much much harder to find.
<< <i>even if he made a profit (doubtful, given inflation) it wasn't even realized until after he was dead. not much consolation there! >>
But the same could be said even if he purchased coins that appreciated 1000%.
Joe.
So, this gentleman had fun acquiring his hoard and his family got most of his money back (after inflation). It sounds like he enjoyed a nice hobby and it cost him a lot less than many other hobbys.
<< <i>
<< <i>And as a dealer I would not want my working capital tied up in this stuff. It's just too hard to sell to REAL collectors >>
Well, how Sperber of you to say that.
For the first time since I've been on these forums, I am disappointed in you, Bill. I am a REAL collector.
I, like many other REAL collectors, just don't happen to have the wherewithall to purchase
higher end coins. These problem coins are a boon to REAL collectors like me. I'd love to own
a problem-free 1893-S Morgan. Problem is, my finances won't allow it. I would purchase the
problem coin because I want one and this is the one I can afford.
Bill, where do you draw the line defining REAL collectors? Do you exclude collectors of moderns?
Twentieth century? Nineteenth century? How about everyone other than token collectors? Or do
you just have a set dollar amount to make the determination?
Don't get me wrong, Bill. I'm not saying that you are obligated to carry the stuff. I just take particular
offense to the undefinable and nebulous term "Real collector." As you may recall, I had to wait a month
to put together the money to purchase that nicely toned Isabella you had a few years back. Does the
fact that I had to ask if you would hold it that long with a small deposit eliminate me from REAL collector
status?
I'm really surprised at you, Bill. I thought making such a statement was beneath you.
Bob >>
Well said.
Regardless, I bet he had fun buying and searching for his coins and you can't put a price on that.
Good on him.
<< <i>
<< <i>And as a dealer I would not want my working capital tied up in this stuff. It's just too hard to sell to REAL collectors >>
Well, how Sperber of you to say that.
For the first time since I've been on these forums, I am disappointed in you, Bill. I am a REAL collector.
I, like many other REAL collectors, just don't happen to have the wherewithall to purchase
higher end coins. These problem coins are a boon to REAL collectors like me. I'd love to own
a problem-free 1893-S Morgan. Problem is, my finances won't allow it. I would purchase the
problem coin because I want one and this is the one I can afford.
Bill, where do you draw the line defining REAL collectors? Do you exclude collectors of moderns?
Twentieth century? Nineteenth century? How about everyone other than token collectors? Or do
you just have a set dollar amount to make the determination?
Don't get me wrong, Bill. I'm not saying that you are obligated to carry the stuff. I just take particular
offense to the undefinable and nebulous term "Real collector." As you may recall, I had to wait a month
to put together the money to purchase that nicely toned Isabella you had a few years back. Does the
fact that I had to ask if you would hold it that long with a small deposit eliminate me from REAL collector
status?
I'm really surprised at you, Bill. I thought making such a statement was beneath you.
Bob >>
As a DEALER I was in business to make money. As such I had to use my working capital (cash plus inventory) judiciously to make sure that I had the liquidity to act on deals when they came my way. If I had thousands of dollars tied up in slow moving merchandise, I was in trouble. I was known for attractive, properly graded collector grade coins. I was not known for low grade, problem merchandise. Those who collected that material did not come to me.
My experience when I bought low end problem stuff was that I could not sell it UNLESS it was very, very cheap. My usual customers for this material were flea market dealers who were looking to buy it as cheap as possible. I am just saying I could not have survived as a dealer with this material. There are others who can.
I am not condemning collectors for buying this material if they can't afford better. But if you can afford better, why are you buying it?
I knew a guy who graduated from Harvard University who had very good job in Boston. He once showed me a 1909-S-VDB cent that was corroded and bent. He paid something like $150 for it when you could have bought a VF for less than $500. My question is why? At a time you could not get the coin certified by a reputable grading service, such a coin was a problem. To me it was a true “white elephant.”
I'm sorry you guys are angry at me, but as a young collector I got burned a couple of time on problem coins including an 1878 three dollar gold piece that had been mounted on the edge as jewelry and very skillfully repaired. I paid $300 for that piece, and only got $100 when I sold it. Such experiences leave a very bad taste in a collectors’ mouth. I don’t like problem coins, and I advise people to stay away from them if they can.
As for modern coins I've my position very clear. I like modern coins, and I collect them; but I don't like OVER PRICED modern coins. My position on that has been vindicated by the dropping of prices for much of this material in recent years.
I don't have a problem with the fact that you preferred not to make a market
in problem key-date coins, nor am I angry. I simply took exception to the term
"REAL" collectors. I always loved to stop and look at your stuff, as a matter of
fact, I looked forward to it and to this day, I miss seeing you there.
Cheers,
Bob
<< <i>
...
I am not condemning collectors for buying this material if they can't afford better. But if you can afford better, why are you buying it?
I knew a guy who graduated from Harvard University who had very good job in Boston. He once showed me a 1909-S-VDB cent that was corroded and bent. He paid something like $150 for it when you could have bought a VF for less than $500. My question is why? At a time you could not get the coin certified by a reputable grading service, such a coin was a problem. To me it was a true “white elephant.”
... >>
That question is tough to answer for someone that doesn't get it. Like my story about the young relative that asked if I knew any millionaires, didn't even think for a moment that his own dad was a millionaire, it was about lifestyle. The "millionaire" dad in my story certainly could afford better than a 10-year old car. When he does buy a new one, it won't be a high end luxury brand, even though he probably can afford that. He just doesn't see it as a good use of money. It might be the same for the guy with the bent and corroded key date coin. That guy just wanted to fill the hole with the cheapest real example he could find. Again, there is no right or wrong in that decision.
Some other folks might scratch their head at a person spending big bucks on collecting gem certified Morgans, or for that matter dirty old gold coins, when there are so many other seemingly more appealing choices.
To me, almost all coins, no matter their state of preservation, can find a place in an honest person's collection, and it doesn't always mean it is all a person can afford. Here is a test question that outlines what I am talking about: there are two puppies, one is healthy, happy, and friendly, the other puppy has a limp and seems kind of sad. A lot of folks will chose the healthy puppy, but a good many will also choose the hurt dog first. It is the simliar kind of personality that might attract a person to the beat up, cheap key date coins. There is no right or wrong answer, it is a choice.
When I was young collector a couple of the dealers at Gimbels Department store took me under their wing. When I was 16 or 17 they offered me a job behind the counter. Their phrase for nice collector grade material was, "That's a real collectors' item," as opposed to "It's not really a collectors' item." One piece in particular was the Three Dollar Gold Piece when I was looking for a type coin. Anything below EF was "not really a collectors' item," in their opinion. Why? Because, at that time, better coins than that were generally available.
I'll put it another way. The last type I needed to finish my type set was the 1796-7 Draped Bust, Small Eagle half dollar. The best that I could afford was holed and polished with the sharpness of an AG for the "bargain price" of $8,500. I would rather have a hole in my collection that something like that. That coin was an eye sore.
If you are on a budget and want an 1893-S silver dollar, look for one in Good or AG with original surfaces that has no problems. That is a “coin.” One in Good condition with an "X" scratched into the obverse, or “canceled” like this millionaire bottom feeder bought to put it politely is "junk." It’s not something that any serious collector is going to be proud to own.
One of my goals here is to help direct people toward aspects of this hobby that are rewarding and satisfying. Most collectors are not happy with “junk.” Those who might aspire to own “junk” should know that before they plunk down their hard earned or saved dollars for it they are walking out on a limb where few collectors care to tread. If you are going to buy “junk,” buy it cheap, and I mean really cheap.
If you decide to go there, that’s your choice. But don’t expect a lot of “That a boy’s” from your peers.
As for problem coins, I would only buy one if I could not afford the lowest
acceptable no-problem grade and I could get the problem coin real cheap.
Cheers,
Bob
BTW, I really appreciate the feedback that I have been getting to my posts - ones of this nature and the others of coin images. I made a decision to be more active on the board this year, and I am glad I did.
Now I have to go and get the kiddies ready for school.
Have a good day,
Greg
His passion certainly isn't mine.
I have often read around here that it is good to buy the most coin you can afford. On the money front, I have found that to be good advice, because those coins tend to be the easiest to resell.
move and defeats him with a missile.
The encounter was a victory, but we
show it as an example of what not to do.
"Please send me the best two examples
from your holdings. I will examine them, and if
I'm pleased with their quality, I might
purchase the entire lot."
For $2 or whatever, he's expecting to be pleased with their quality?!
<< <i>The moral I walk away with is you can collect what you like and get enjoyment out of the hobby, however different that may be from the typical collector.
His passion certainly isn't mine.
I have often read around here that it is good to buy the most coin you can afford. On the money front, I have found that to be good advice, because those coins tend to be the easiest to resell. >>
I am involved in two other hobbies where there are similar sentiments. Those that have and like to spend, often look down on those that have not, or don't want to spend. It is human nature to want others to be like yourself. In the other hobbies, and in coins, I see the snobbery of the haves as a bad thing. Again, there is no right or wrong in the choice and all it is, is a choice. A person that collects high end certified coins is not a better or a worse person than the one that prefers problem junk box coins, even if both have the same budget. The high end collector may end up doing better or worse financially, depending on their eye, their connections, their market knowledge. Yes, other collectors are less likely to like the junk box coins than the certified coins that the other person bought. The untold story is that many frugal folks are to going to flinch if they know the price tags, even if they know the hobby. Those that don't know the hobby might shake their heads and see it as wastefully spending hard earned money. That is part of the unspoken perspective that I think the original post tried to point out.
I understand that this forum is dominated by the BillJones' and those from his tribe, the deep pocket, high end, quality oriented collectors. There is nothing wrong with that way of collecting, but it is not the only way. Some might call it the "best way," but that is vanity. There is no right or wrong in the decision to pursue high end coins, or junk box coins. Halfcentman's post is showing the other side, a deep pocket, bottom feeder that apparently got a lot of joy out of the hobby as well as doing okay financially. As BillJones put it, he doesn't understand how anyone with that much money can make that choice. Well, then it is a very enlightening thread for others from the deep pocket tribe. Maybe it can help them be better people and less snobbish when someone is excited about their junk box "bargain." Deriding them with sentences such as "junk is junk," is case in point. Spending more money on a hobby item doesn't make you a better person, or guarantee more enjoyment. Of course, most dealers will appreciate you more, and most will encourage folks to spend. It certainly brings more business in.
BillJones' post about problem coins is valuable information, and it is one of the things that I have learned from this forum. I appreciate his perspective.
That said, let me ask the quality oriented collectors: Do folks take this over to other areas of their life? Do you buy the best car you can afford? Or a car that you like and fits your lifestyle? Do you dine at the finest restaurants you can afford when you eat out? Or do you choose restaurants that suit your taste and feel comfortable to you? Do you buy the best clothes and shoes that you can afford, or clothes and shoes that are comfortable to you? I know the analogies are not 100%, but with cars, clothes, dining out, a lot of that spending will impress others.
The high end free spending collector that doesn't care about price or value, might be akin to the young man who is leasing his high end foreign car, or just able to make the payments if buying. After all, it is the best car he can afford. He has spent his money there. Do you other deep pocket guys admire this kind of thinking in cars or only in coins? To me, that person that went all out on budget for his car doesn't look so smart. To me, I am thinking he might have spent that money much better elsewhere. Again, I understand that the analogies aren't 100%, but I am trying to find ways to make the points that much clearer.
As always, collect what you like and enjoy the hobby. Don't worry about impressing others, or keeping up with the Jones'.
<< <i>That said, let me ask the quality oriented collectors: Do folks take this over to other areas of their life? Do you buy the best car you can afford? Or a car that you like and fits your lifestyle? Do you dine at the finest restaurants you can afford when you eat out? Or do you choose restaurants that suit your taste and feel comfortable to you? Do you buy the best clothes and shoes that you can afford, or clothes and shoes that are comfortable to you? I know the analogies are not 100%, but with cars, clothes, dining out, a lot of that spending will impress others. >>
Car - I drive a 2005 Buick Park Avenue. It large, comfortable to drive and gets better gas mileage that the new cars that are not as large. It has enough trunk space to carry the stuff my wife wants to take on vacation. She won't travel light. Our second car is a Honda Accord. I’m sure what I’m going to get next. I won’t be Mercedes or something like that.
I buy a nice car and run it for a number of years. I change oil regularly and keep up on the maintenance. Cheap cars drive me nuts. I've rented some of the small ones like the small Chevrolets, and they are pretty bad. Some of the Hundis and Ford Torus (sp) are nice. The Chevy Malabo is okay, but the roofline is too low for me. The Chevy Impala is okay in some ways but Chevy cuts corners that drive me nuts. Ford seems to get right more often, and I have been an old GM guy.
Restaurants - The average for us is places like Olive Garden. Fast food, Burger King over McDonalds, Wendy’s ... Subway.
Yea we've eaten at Victoria and Albert’s' at Disney, but only once over a couple of years at Christmas time. We would never stay at the Grand Floridian.
Clothes - I'm a very casual dresser nothing fancy. A coat and tie is not for me.
House - nice retirement place in Florida. A little short of 3,000 square feet. I've got a pool in the back yard that I maintain.
I'm pretty much into the upper middle class lifestyle. Nothing pretentious ... just comfortable.
My coins are my big splurge, but that is going to slow down once I get a couple more “bears.”
<< <i>Last year, I wrote an article about a very interesting man. The story is as follows, and it has a moral. There was this guy (call him "Ted"), who had a very interesting way of acquiring coins. There is a saying that says "a key date coin with a problem is still a key date." This is an interesting phrase because it is still a problem coin as well. Ted walked around flea markets, small shops, and bourses with large amounts of cash. He was also very keen at spotting certain "Cherrypicker" varieties of Lincoln Cents. He would buy anything, and I mean anything at the right price (and he had an excellent sense of the market). An example of this was a purchase of a genuine 1909-S VDB, a corroded VG with a hole in it. He also purchased an 1893-S Morgan Dolar in Good where someone took a knife and "canceled" the obverse of the coin! When he died, his instructions in his will were explicit so as not to burden his family. He kept a careful log of all of his purchases, exactly what they were, and how much he paid for them. Since he knew he was dying, he updated them with current market prices. Something we should all do regardless. The dealer to whom the collection was disbursed (thank god) did not have to lay out a dime for the coins. When everything was said and done, Ted realized a handsome 40% profit on his "ka-ka" over a period of slightly under 20 years. It does not matter what you buy, as long as you know the market. You do not need nice coins for them to appreciate in value. As a matter of fact, I would even argue that people overpay for coins that they think are nice and then take a bath when they upgrade or unload them. The old adage that you can never pay too much for quality is far from being always true. >>
Excellent story and it makes a very good point. The only thing I would like to know is how much did he enjoy collecting and owning his ka-ka as opposed to how much would he have enjoyed owning truly beautiful art, expressed in coins? A Mona Lisa with an "X" across her face wouldn't give me too much enjoyment. Owning this would: