Can you list and describe misinformation that is out there that allows a rare coin to fly under the

Realone

certain coins and/or varieties are said not to be rare while others are said to be rare and the fact is that the supposedly nonrare examples are as rare as the supposed rare ones but just not as POLULAR. So certain coins/varietes basically win a popularity contest and thus are said to be rare and the less popular ones who are just as rare get zero attention. I like to pave my own path and go after the unpopular rare ones, why you ask. Well I don't intend on flipping them just collecting them. I want R6 and higher coins in my collection popular or not. I mean who the heck deems a coin popular int he first place? So give my your unwanted (unpoluar) rarities please, you never know what happens in the future!

STONE

Rarity visibility!

Popular rare varieties - Rare varieties that are easy to spot and find yet remain elusive to specialists, and only occur on one die marriage
(Identifying markers include: Cuds, die cracks, date/mm position, shape and alignment, OMM, overdates, etc)
(Examples from my own experience are: 1829 Curl Base 2, 1827 JR-2 (and 14) with Flat Top 1 in denomination, 1833 JR-2 with reverse Cud, etc.)

Unpopular rare varieties - Rare varieties that are NOT easy to spot unless [multiple] specific details of the coin are known and match.
(Examples are those coins which blend in and do not exhibit specific features such as those listed above)

MikeInFL

Beyond a certain point, a coin can be so rare as to be unpopular.

Said a bit differently, in order for a coin to be collectible, it needs to be available in quantities sufficient to satisfy some level of demand, otherwise people will look for more attainable ways to collect.

I suspect that's precisely what's going on here -- not really flying under the radar, but rather unpopular because of their rarity.

That, and in coin collecting, bigger is almost always better -- so small, rare coins generally 'fly under the radar' or are 'unpopular because they are unpopular", depeneding on your perspective...Mike

pruebas

Patterns as a class are rare, but not every particular issue is rare. And they are not particularly popular. But they are interesting, challenging, and historical.

MidLifeCrisis

My willingness to pay more for a rare variety depends on a lot of factors.

How historically popular is the rarity? I don't buy with the intention of selling quickly, but I'm mindful of the prospect of selling or trading the coin down the road.

Even if the variety is not particularly popular, is it well known among those who collect that type of coin?

Do I like the coin type/design in general? If it's a coin I need for my type set, but not one of my favorite types, I probably won't buy a rare variety.

How obvious is the variety? Can I see it without magnification? Is the difference meaningful and distinctive?

I don't generally bother with collecting die marriages or die states - although I generally look for EDS.

messydesk

I think the reason some rare coins fly under the radar is that the more popular and readily available "rarities" run interference for them as part of the popularity contest they've won. For example, 1909-S VDB cent in 65RB, of which Heritage's archives show 180 vs. 1924-S cent in the same grade, of which they've sold 19, which is just over one per year in their 16 year archive. I'm sure there are other, better examples.

jmcu12

I think it boils down, as others have said, to the popularity of the rarity. I know of a coin (not a secret at all but this thread is not about a specific coin) that is IMO quite scarce although the price does not match the scarcity. And the reason is that it is not that popular.

messydesk

In the case of the 1909-S VDB, we can look to the penny boards and Whitman folders people filled from circulation, finding that the 1909-S VDB (a real one, anyway) was one of the hardest to get. Conventional wisdom became that this was the hardest one to get in any grade. Whitman has long (always?) published mintage numbers in their price guides and pocket checklists that perpetuate this, and now it's rather difficult to undo that misconception. It does remain one of the least likely coins to be pulled from a bag of wheat cents for a folder, though.

In VAM collecting, the Top 100 guide first published in 1996 presented (and promoted) 100 different and interesting varieties, some rare, some not. For some of these, the rarity wasn't really known at the time the book was put together, because not enough people were looking at the coins. As VAM collecting took off over the next several years, it became evident that varieties like the 1887 VAM 12 "Alligator Eye" were far more common than originally thought, but you can't unprint all the books that contained the original estimates. Its popularity has waned quite a bit, and others have taken its place, which is a testament to new information supplanting old.

jmcu12

Realone;

point well taken - but dont we have to start somewhere? Yes, some stats are purposefully misreported/misrepresented (i.e. Breen) but others are simply reporting what they know as of the moment. It is the research and resulting popularity that tend to vault a given item.

ambro51

Sometimes the TOTAL lack of information can reduce an interesting coin, or series, to the realm of krazy specialists.

MidLifeCrisis

<< <i>I for one am tired of the nonesensical facts and myths created by so-called disinterested third party so-called experts that tell us what it rare or not and further the popularity contests that either were created by them or that they just went along with.

The example of the 1924-s 1c and the 1909 svdb 1c is a fine example. And this one is so apparent it isn't funny, in reality I was originally speaking of the more esoteric examples that aren't as apparent because the info is either unknown, not dicsused or unresearched or ignored. >>


I don't understand your example. I don't think there are any made up facts or "created" myths about the 1924-S Lincoln Cent vs. the 1909-S VDB.

1924-S mintage 11,696,000

1909-S VDB mintage 484,000

So the mintages show that the S-VDB is a true rarity compared to the 24-S. The fact that only 19 MS65RB 24-S pieces have sold at Heritage shows that it may be a condition rarity. The low mintage of the 09-S VDB, coupled with its status as a first year coin and first circulating coin with a US president, caused it to be saved and collected - hence its availability in high grade. This is not a mystery.

I generally am not interested in paying a premium for condition rarities. I will make an exception for a coin that is a key date, meaning it has both absolute rarity and condition rarity going for it.

DNADave

Coal Scrip is an example IMO.
There are some VERY rare examples,
a ton of history.

Collecting them does not mean you're somehow supporting the abuses that happened or that are associated with king coal and the use of scrip.

They can be had for a song relative to other collecting areas like cwt's or conders or etc.

bidask

The holder (NGC) failed to mention this coin as a wide date.

I think I stole it.


Lot 3949 of Heritage FUN auction as described by the cataloguer: January 9, 2009 .

1802 $1 Wide Date AU55 NGC. CAC. B-5, BB-242, R.5. Along with B-9, B-5 is the rarest business strike 1802 dollar. Aside from the uncollectible novodel proof, B-5 is the most valuable variety of the date. This is because it receives its own Guide Book listing, as the 'Wide Normal Date.' B-2, B-3, and B-9 also have wide dates, but those three marriages are 1802/1 overdates.
Rich golden-brown, olive-green, dove-gray, and powder-blue toning embraces this well defined and partly lustrous Choice AU dollar. The surfaces are smooth aside from faint marks on the right obverse field. Neither major grading service has certified an Uncirculated example, which clarifies the importance of the present piece. Census: 2 in 55, 0 finer (11/08).
Ex: Auction '86 (RARCOA, 7/1986), lot 736.
From The Deb-Ann Collection

PCGS has one graded AU 55, none finer. That is a total of 3 coins for the grade, none finer.......

Coin Facts.com states:

1802/1
BB-231 - Bolender 1 - Very Scarce
BB-232 - Bolender 4 - Very Scarce
BB-233 - Bolender 2 - Very Scarce
BB-234 - Bolender 3 - Scarce
BB-235 - Bolender 9 - Very Rare
Normal Date
BB-241 - Bolender 6 - Very Common
BB-242 - Bolender 5 - Rare
Proof Novodel
BB-302 - Bolender 8 - Extremely Rare

The coin I bought has been in a collection for 23 years.

rec78

If it is printed in a book then it becomes more popular- Did anyone collect by variety before the specialty books started to appear? I don't know of anyone collecting bust halves by variety before Overton's book (Maybe he did). In most instances after the books appeared the varieties became more popular-Large cents had Sheldon, Bust halves have Overton, Seated dimes-Fortin and Greer,Seated halves- Wiley and Bugart, Seated quarters-Briggs, etc.,etc.-Right after these references were published the varieties became more popular.

The cherry-pickers guide made all those varieties more popular and desirable. Anything printed in the red book becomes more popular also. Publication in a numismatic magazine also helps popularity. If, for instance, Coin World would put a front page article stating that 1924-S BU Lincolns are much more rare than BU 1909-S VDB's -They would instantly be more popular and searched for.
Bob

GrumpyEd

2 examples that aren't exactly rare:

If you go to any coin show there are many nice slabbed high grade 1909 plain VDBs in dealer cases but there are much fewer high grade slabbed 1909 plains in the same shows. The plains sell for less. People seem trained to see that VDB as "special" but many nice coins were saved and most were VDBs.


Then an example of flying under the radar. The 1955 doubled die-2 is harder to see without a good magnifier and many people don't know about it and sometimes think it's a poormans double.
At a show a guy had a nice RB in a junk box for 25 cents, I liked that dealer and already had one so I told him it was doubled die-2 and he growled that it was a poormans and nothing special. I went ahead and bought it for a quarter. Still worth some $ even if it's less than the die-1 and less of the die-2 are known.

messydesk

<< <i>

<< <i>

<< <i>I for one am tired of the nonesensical facts and myths created by so-called disinterested third party so-called experts that tell us what it rare or not and further the popularity contests that either were created by them or that they just went along with.

The example of the 1924-s 1c and the 1909 svdb 1c is a fine example. And this one is so apparent it isn't funny, in reality I was originally speaking of the more esoteric examples that aren't as apparent because the info is either unknown, not dicsused or unresearched or ignored. >>


I don't understand your example. I don't think there are any made up facts or "created" myths about the 1924-S Lincoln Cent vs. the 1909-S VDB.

1924-S mintage 11,696,000

1909-S VDB mintage 484,000

So the mintages show that the S-VDB is a true rarity compared to the 24-S. The fact that only 19 MS65RB 24-S pieces have sold at Heritage shows that it may be a condition rarity. The low mintage of the 09-S VDB, coupled with its status as a first year coin and first circulating coin with a US president, caused it to be saved and collected - hence its availability in high grade. This is not a mystery.

I generally am not interested in paying a premium for condition rarities. I will make an exception for a coin that is a key date, meaning it has both absolute rarity and condition rarity going for it. >>




Greatg point! It isn't my example, I just quoted a member here. But since you called him out I will comment. This is another case in point of how misinfo is easily spread. I know nothing of Lincoln cents, I read what a member had to say, it made perfectly good sense to me, I quoted him, thereby using his info as fact and used his so-called facts as a concrete example. You proved he was incorrect. But how many others think like he does, and how many dealers promote the erooneous info in order to push their inventory. >>



Citing a mintage does not prove I am incorrect. Of course, I don't know what I'm incorrect about. My premise that high-profile popular rarities that are masking the rarity of other coins seems perfectly valid. My "so-called" facts were the number of times an MS65RB 1909-S VDB cent was sold by Heritage over the past 16 years as compared to MS65RB 1924-S cents, used as a single example. Nothing more, nothing less. Mintage has little bearing on availability and quality of surviving specimens, or "real world" rarity.