Do you think collectors' expect too much from circulated coins?
NumisOxide
Posts: 10,984 ✭✭✭✭✭
First, let me say that this isn't a post against grading standards, just something I was thinking about on how we collect our coins. I understand grading and how people want the "perfect" coin for the grade but in a way it seems we want too much. Shouldn't we have to expect scratches,dings, and other light "damage" for a coin. I mean if it did circulate, then shouldn't it have these things. I've seen collectors lose interest in a coin if it had a tiny scratch.
What's your take on this? Just let me say today was my day off from classes, so maybe I just need some air.
What's your take on this? Just let me say today was my day off from classes, so maybe I just need some air.
0
Comments
It is the challenge of finding just the right coins.
Bob
<< <i>You may be right, but if there is a better example without the minor damage, then why buy the damaged coin? As the rarer the coin gets the more problems become more acceptable. The damaged piece will not fit in with the rest in the collection. Also if you lower your standards it will be quite easy to complete your set.
It is the challenge of finding just the right coins.
Bob >>
Good point, I was going to include something similiar in my post but decided to leave it out.
On the other hand I turned down a number of 1836 pattern gold dollars until I bought this one. For a little more money and a longer search I got a coin that pleased me.
<< <i>Shouldn't we have to expect scratches,dings, and other light "damage" for a coin. I mean if it did circulate, then shouldn't it have these things. >>
Some collectors do expect wear and tear. And they expect to pay a price commensurate with its condition.
Lance.
look of a silver or copper coin that's put in its time as a workhorse of American commerce,
without being rode so hard that it looks like it's ready for the glue factory.
<< <i>It all depends upon how rare it is and how nice the coins of a particular issue were made in the first place. For example I am working on a southern gold type set. After looking at a number 1855-C gold dollars I bought this one in less than perfect EF-45. The way I looked at it I could spend $10,000 or more for one in a higher grade, but in the end I wouldn't get much for more than double the price. These coins were very poorly made, and all of them are less than attractive.
On the other hand I turned down a number of 1836 pattern gold dollars until I bought this one. For a little more money and a longer search I got a coin that pleased me.
>>
Whoa, spectacular pattern dollar!!!
<< <i>I think that the essence and raison d'etre of collecting circulated gold coins is the satisfaction of finding a coin that has actually circulated and acquired some degree of character, without excessive marks, nicks, or subsequent numismatic abuse in an attempt to gussy it up. >>
I couldn't agree more ! Gussied up coins are my very least favorite type...
<< <i>
<< <i>I think that the essence and raison d'etre of collecting circulated gold coins is the satisfaction of finding a coin that has actually circulated and acquired some degree of character, without excessive marks, nicks, or subsequent numismatic abuse in an attempt to gussy it up. >>
I couldn't agree more ! Gussied up coins are my very least favorite type...
>>
Totally agree, and beautiful dollars, by the way! I just love that look.
Now I do like shiny pretty coins as much as the next guy, but for those, I seek out proofs.
I have to go shop for raw , worn out keys in my business nearly ALL the time.
The sewer outside my shop stinks.
Lightly Cleaned
Scratch/gouge
Rim bump
Questionable toning
Harshly Cleaned
Tooled
Bent
Holed & repaired
Holed
Are all problems which affect the level of preservation.
If problems are not too bad and common for the series (like dipped bust halves),
they may still be acceptable to most collectors.
For other series, there is less likely to be agreement across collectors about how to "net grade" a problem coin.
So it doesn't belong in the fungible market, and won't slab (except as "genuine").
<< <i>A circulated coin fulfilled it's purpose for being created. To have an unc robs that coin of it's reason for existing.
Now I do like shiny pretty coins as much as the next guy, but for those, I seek out proofs. >>
HUH?
<< <i>
<< <i>A circulated coin fulfilled it's purpose for being created. To have an unc robs that coin of it's reason for existing.
Now I do like shiny pretty coins as much as the next guy, but for those, I seek out proofs. >>
HUH?
>>
Could I take a crack at translation ? " The guy who loved collecting shiney and new coins was a dweeb a hundred years ago. Now he's a genius, but he died."
I doubt that is what was meant. I'm just up late and it costs me more money for what some dweeb did a hundred years ago.
<< <i>a circulated coin acquires more scratches, dings, etc as it circulates. this is logical, and i believe average for the grade. some coins however, wear very nicely and do not get banged up. these are above average coins. the "birthplace" of the coin (i believe) has alot to do with its survival, for instance, most early san francisco silver coins are almost impossible to find with nice mark free surfaces. the environment of the old west was not gentle to these coins. the turmoil, the corrosive ocean environment, the general preference of gold over silver in the first place, and the low mintages. these factors almost insured that nice early san fran coins would never be plentiful. in contrast, the coins from the philadelphia mint are much more available with nice surfaces, even low mintage coins. the philly area would have been a much more stable environment, and the economy large enough that coins could circulate for years >>
Early Carson city silver coins(early 1870's) also were below average as they used more purer silver than required a lot of times and the coins wore faster. Pure silver wears faster then an alloyed silver used for coinage. It is hard to find a nice f-xf carson city coin dated from 1870-1874.
<< <i>
<< <i>a circulated coin acquires more scratches, dings, etc as it circulates. this is logical, and i believe average for the grade. some coins however, wear very nicely and do not get banged up. these are above average coins. the "birthplace" of the coin (i believe) has alot to do with its survival, for instance, most early san francisco silver coins are almost impossible to find with nice mark free surfaces. the environment of the old west was not gentle to these coins. the turmoil, the corrosive ocean environment, the general preference of gold over silver in the first place, and the low mintages. these factors almost insured that nice early san fran coins would never be plentiful. in contrast, the coins from the philadelphia mint are much more available with nice surfaces, even low mintage coins. the philly area would have been a much more stable environment, and the economy large enough that coins could circulate for years >>
Early Carson city silver coins(early 1870's) also were below average as they used more purer silver than required a lot of times and the coins wore faster. Pure silver wears faster then an alloyed silver used for coinage. It is hard to find a nice f-xf carson city coin dated from 1870-1874. >>
Not to mention they were put straight to work with few set aside.
<< <i>the satisfaction of finding a coin that has actually circulated and acquired some degree of character, without excessive marks, nicks, or subsequent numismatic abuse in an attempt to gussy it up.[/IMG] >>
The same applies for most collectors of ancient coins