Collectors of the far future will not understand our.....
ambro51
Posts: 13,949 ✭✭✭✭✭
....utter disdain and rejection of hoards of Proof Sets. They will LOVE those coins and proofs will make up most of their high grade specimens
0
Comments
<< <i>....utter disdain and rejection of hoards of Proof Sets. They will LOVE those coins and proofs will make up most of their high grade specimens >>
What will cause this dramatic change in view?
Coin Rarities Online
<< <i>What will cause this dramatic change in view? >>
. ....in the year 2525
<< <i>
<< <i>What will cause this dramatic change in view? >>
. ....in the year 2525 >>
Zager and Evans?
In honor of the memory of Cpl. Michael E. Thompson
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>What will cause this dramatic change in view? >>
. ....in the year 2525 >>
Zager and Evans? >>
Cleopatra 2525?
Successful Transactions With: JoeLewis, Mkman123, Harry779, Grote15, gdavis70, Kryptonitecomics
People that have "utter disdain" for them are dealers that feel the need to transport large quantites of these to distant shows where they may hope to make a dollar or two per set they sell and just as much hope they don't have to cart them all home or end up with more than they started with.
As for things that collectors of the far future won't understand, the MS/PR70 premium gets my vote. As holders deteriorate, more and more people will understand the "70 paradox" and scratch their heads at this generation's obsession with the grade.
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution
Coin Club Benefit auctions ..... View the Lots
<< <i>....utter disdain and rejection of hoards of Proof Sets. They will LOVE those coins and proofs will make up most of their high grade specimens >>
Then they will love truly rare and historic coins even more. Everything is expected to remain relative, as attrition of all these coins stabilizes.
If a 1988 proof set ends up being something really special in the future, then what will they think of an 1888 proof set? Or an 1818 quarter?
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
Numismatists with disdain for there quirckiness, and might even break it down into micro ages
such as 1960's to 1990's as the Dipping Age, 1980's to 20??'s as the TPG Plastic Age, 2000's to
20??'s as the Moon Money Toned Age, 2012 to 20??'s as the Reconsideration Age and so on
Steve
Oh I forgot the Drek Age
``https://ebay.us/m/KxolR5
Archaelogists in 2525 will believe that this coin commemorates the first American astronaut
to land on the moon in 1979.
The Mysterious Egyptian Magic Coin
Coins in Movies
Coins on Television
<< <i>Archaelogists in 2525 will believe that this coin commemorates the first American astronaut to land on the moon in 1979. >>
An then quickly bury it again just in case there's a curse attached from even touching a SBA?
<< <i>Archaelogists in 2525 will believe that this coin commemorates the first American astronaut
to land on the moon in 1979.
And that Charlie Chaplin and his Nazis tried taking over the world, only to die from a cocaine overdose.
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution
<< <i>
<< <i>Archaelogists in 2525 will believe that this coin commemorates the first American astronaut to land on the moon in 1979. >>
An then quickly bury it again just in case there's a curse attached from even touching a SBA?
OUCH!
https://imdb.com/name/nm1835107/
Why is this? There seems to be a lack of respect for Proof coins. It seems that collectors and investor only have confidence in business strike coins. Find one of those in high grade, and the buyers will come running. Proof coins are viewed as "common," especially in high grade, and don't get much respect.
I have cut back as a collector. This year for the first time I decided not to buy the copper-nickel clad Proof set. Every year all I have done is lose money on them. Now I'm only going to buy the silver sets. At least with those you get some silver bullion which does have some intrinsic value.
As for what will surprise collectors in the future, I could see them take a disinterest in "low mintage, modern rarities" like the Jackie Robinson Uncirculated $5 gold and the 1995-W silver eagle. With a mintage of the 5,000, and a high survival rate, the Jackie Robinson coin is anything but rare. I saw a four piece set in the original box go begging at the end of the 2013 winter FUN show even though it was priced more than $100 below Gray Sheet bid. I know it sold later, but the fact that a dealer could buy it at the show, offer it for a profit at that price, and still not sell it tells me something.
<< <i>
<< <i>Archaelogists in 2525 will believe that this coin commemorates the first American astronaut to land on the moon in 1979. >>
An then quickly bury it again just in case there's a curse attached from even touching a SBA?
the sba was cursed fright errr right from the get go.
The Mysterious Egyptian Magic Coin
Coins in Movies
Coins on Television
<< <i>I don't know how the market for modern Proof sets is ever going to come back without a major change in collectors tastes. Now it seems that those of us who have a run of modern Proof sets by date make sure we get one every year. After that it seems there is little interest in them from other collectors, including new collectors, and the prices languish. Each year the prices get lower and lower because few people demand sets. The new collectors just don't seem to be interested. >>
I'm not the biggest fan of modern proof sets but there are two things that surprise me about
them which just might still surprise people in the far future; How was there such a big market
to make so many of them and why hasn't any excess been absorbed after so many years?
I'm sure the fact that there's not much interest in moderns plays a big role in the lack of any
new secondary market but if this demand is so low then why aren't the older dates with heavy
attrition more valuable?
Eventually I expect at least a small mass market in moderns and these will do reasonably well
since they are the source of most proofs. By that time nearly three quarters of them might be
gone completely. None of the regular issue proofs will be valuable because millions were made
but it's easy to imagine many of the individual coins could get to several dollars. Something like
a nice pristine 1969-S quarter isn't nearly so common as people think because of attrition and
corrosion. Finding Philly or Denver coins of this date is relatively difficult pushing a lot of demand
on this one coin. Surely there will be a quarter million of them even in 100 years so they just
aren't "ever" really going to be tough.
rare through inattentiveness. Many US and world coins, tokens, and medals made since
WW II simply were never saved and almost every example is already degraded or lost.
Virtually every collector has ignored these coins and they simply no longer exist. This has
probably never been such a large factor in the history of coinage. In the past scarcities
have almost always been the result of low mintage rather than high attrition. Even mus-
eums won't have examples of many 20th century coins because there aren't even enough
for every museum to have one.
Now it's PMbro
``https://ebay.us/m/KxolR5
Eric
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
<< <i>Nice toning will always be preferred by the majority. It just looks so good and most certainly a natural occurrence with a metal such as silver. >>
Well not quite, there was a time in the 70's and 80's (and into the 90's even) that no one wanted tarnished coins, and everything got dipped pure white. Of course all those silver dollars have now retoned quite "naturally" I am sure.
World Collection
British Collection
German States Collection
<< <i>
<< <i>Nice toning will always be preferred by the majority. It just looks so good and most certainly a natural occurrence with a metal such as silver. >>
Well not quite, there was a time in the 70's and 80's (and into the 90's even) that no one wanted tarnished coins, and everything got dipped pure white. Of course all those silver dollars have now retoned quite "naturally" I am sure. >>
I thought about dipping a few coins from the sixties and the last decade, but opted out, today. Maybe in the future.
``https://ebay.us/m/KxolR5
<< <i>
<< <i>Nice toning will always be preferred by the majority. It just looks so good and most certainly a natural occurrence with a metal such as silver. >>
Well not quite, there was a time in the 70's and 80's (and into the 90's even) that no one wanted tarnished coins, and everything got dipped pure white. Of course all those silver dollars have now retoned quite "naturally" I am sure. >>
I remember those days well, seeing Mercury dimes and so on dipped in huge batches, hundreds, in the backroom. No rinsing either. To think those rolls today...
Eric
<< <i>they will not understand our fascination with micro numerical grades..................MJ >>
Yes, certainly agree with this comment and the comment about common coins that will become
rare. In 1892-1893 everyone saved the Colombian coins but the Barber 50c are
worth 15-20 times as much to collectors now.
<< <i>How would someone in 2525 connect the name Susan Anthony with the coin?
In 2525 collectors will know this because it's explained in volume 7 of the red book.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
<< <i>they will not understand our fascination with micro numerical grades..................MJ >>
.........or the stars, +'s, stickers, .......
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
and it sets us apart from practitioners and consultants. Gregor
<< <i>Collectors of the far future will not understand why we didn't devise a better way of preserving our coins. >>
This should be easy enough to do with all the space age materials that can be cheaply made now days.
It seems storage media comes in only two types; a little better than merely adequate or bad enough to assure the coins wll be ruined.
Of course slabs are better and there are some "tweeners" like 2 x 2 holders that often have the plastic break or tear.
Everyone orders heavy on the years AFTER an "error" ....ha ha ha ha.... is discovered.
Every grandparent mistakenly thinks they will bestow a treasure on their grandkids by buying proof sets.
Grandkids then think grandparents are stupid.
I hate modern proof sets almost worse than Mao Tse Tung and that's going some.
STAMP OUT PROOF SETS!
...inability to have seen what was coming before we finished what we were doing. Technically speaking, of course.
Numismatically, who gives a flippin' _ _ _ _ ?
Hint:
It's not a plane and it's not superman.
``https://ebay.us/m/KxolR5
For those sets minted prior to 1973, there are wide variations in quality of the individual coins. The highest quality coins are those which have frosted devices and deep mirrored fields. Coins which would warrant a CAM or a DCAM/UCAM designation from a TPG. Those coins are the exception and are much harder to find that your run of the mill briliant proof. Some have very small populations (i.e. 1957 CAM and DCAM nickels) while others have larger populations (i.e. 1964 CAM cents).
Easy to find or hard to find, these coins make an attractive display and are much more desirable than brilliant proofs.
Whether demand for these older CAM, DCAM/UCAM coins ever gets big enough to cause prices to spike is uncertain.
Too bad that something does not happen to cause 90% - 95% of the remaining proof and SMS sets from 1936-1972 to simply go away, leaving only the highest quality examples of these coins in the market. That would help with the supply side by reducing same dramatically.
<< <i>I do not have any interest in annual proof sets minted after 1972.
For those sets minted prior to 1973, there are wide variations in quality of the individual coins. The highest quality coins are those which have frosted devices and deep mirrored fields. Coins which would warrant a CAM or a DCAM/UCAM designation from a TPG. Those coins are the exception and are much harder to find that your run of the mill briliant proof. Some have very small populations (i.e. 1957 CAM and DCAM nickels) while others have larger populations (i.e. 1964 CAM cents).
Easy to find or hard to find, these coins make an attractive display and are much more desirable than brilliant proofs.
Whether demand for these older CAM, DCAM/UCAM coins ever gets big enough to cause prices to spike is uncertain.
Too bad that something does not happen to cause 90% - 95% of the remaining proof and SMS sets from 1936-1972 to simply go away, leaving only the highest quality examples of these coins in the market. That would help with the supply side by reducing same dramatically. >>
A lot of people who don't like proof sets miss some very important points. Proofs are
normally extremely high quality examples of coinage of the date. Some dates are very
tough in high quality and this leaves proofs. Proofs also vary in quality and this is no-
where more dramatic than in the early cameo pieces which can also be scarce or rare.
There are varieties in proofs and some of these can be both dramatic and quite rare
such as the '75-NMM dime.
When you're actually looking at a very common cameo proof like a 1983 quarter it's
very hard not to like it. It might be easy to have the feeling it's common and the de-
mand can never exceed the supply but it's just too pretty to not like it. Anyone who
can't see this probably doesn't like any modern at all.
Modern proof coins have everything except the scarcity and some have that, too.