Quantity or Quality

Exbrit

Would you rather have a Au/low to mid MS complete set of a certain coin or a high MS subset of the series? Eventually you would sell, so that may be your deciding factor - maybe not.

ajaan

I'll take the complete set.

brg5658

I'd rather have one super stellar example of the type.

mvs7

I'd rather have a matching complete set. So instead of an AU to mid MS set, if there were stoppers in low MS, I'd try for a complete set in high AU. For really large sets, I like runs in matching similar grades; for example in bust dimes, early dates in F-VF, middle dates in VF-EF, late dates in EF-AU.

1960NYGiants

I admit to trying to complete the set and upgrade as I go along. So I vote option A (set).

Sapyx

Personally, I prefer quantity over quality. But then, I never buy with eventual reselling in mind either.

pruebas

To me, quality is more important.

But completeness also counts.

zompels

This period , I would choose quality only .

desslok

I prefer the long journey. If you were to buy just one great coin, what would you do next? Set building has the "advantage" that it can take years to complete, depending on your definition of your set, and your budget. I prefer to define a long-term goal and slowly work towards it. But then, I do it as a hobby, not with the intention of making a profit on resale.

Boosibri

Id follow the path of quality where each coin can be a collection of one

coinkat

The best approach largely depends on what you are collecting and your financial resources. Also, consider what quality means. It may not be owning a marginal MS example instead of a nice high end circulated example that speaks volumes and defines quality for the grade. It really can be a combination of the two depending the size and value of a series.

Weiss

I can appreciate the completeness of collecting a whole series. But it's not for me. The idea of collecting the exact same thing over something as inconsequential as mintmarks, die parings, or even dates bores me to tears. One example that defines the series, the country, the age is much more interesting.

TomB

I'd rather have what made me happier.

Yorkshireman

I would rather have a small number of coins that have great eye appeal than a complete set of very average coins.

pruebas

@Weiss said:
I can appreciate the completeness of collecting a whole series. But it's not for me. The idea of collecting the exact same thing over something as inconsequential as mintmarks, die parings, or even dates bores me to tears. One example that defines the series, the country, the age is much more interesting.

@Weiss, completeness may not mean collecting a whole series. Its definition depends on what one collects.

Like you, I'm bored to tears with a series of the same coin with minute differences. That's why I collect patterns. For my collection, completeness isn't a bunch of similar coins. Maybe a few are similar (because I also collect different varieties of patterns such as coin axis or medal axis), but most are very different from each other.

Completeness for me is having every known pattern within my defined parameters, and a few previously unknown ones as well.

Cougar1978

AU to Ch Unc to fill holes, then perhaps shop for upgrades. I don't believe a set has to be in some stellar grade range.

desslok

@Weiss said:
I can appreciate the completeness of collecting a whole series. But it's not for me. The idea of collecting the exact same thing over something as inconsequential as mintmarks, die parings, or even dates bores me to tears. One example that defines the series, the country, the age is much more interesting.

I agree completely, but a "series" or a set doesn't have to be a conventional date/mint set. It can be a type set, or a set of countries, or a set of error types.

Bodan

Unless a budget is unlimited (which mine is certainly not), I would prefer an incomplete set in outstanding quality and eye appeal to a complete set with dog food filling the holes of the rare issues.

Take Morgans for instance. Who can afford a mint-state-looking 93-S Morgan? But you can accumulate several dozen Morgans with outstanding technical and subjective attributes for fairly reasonable prices. If completeness is your game, you must sacrifice quality and visual beauty somewhere, and usually spend an awful lot of money.

Unless you are Warren Buffett. Then you can do just about anything you want.

coinkat

Quality exists at different grades. And owning a quality VF rarity can be an accomplishment if it has the look

Nap

From an investment standpoint, the high quality pieces will probably perform better.

As a collector however, I aim to complete sets, and will consider obtaining coins that are low grade and even damaged, especially when considering things that are really rare (i.e. less than 10 known).

messydesk

There's quality at every price point. Looking at my collection, I guess I like to have a quantity of such quality, dotted with some exceptional "cornerstone" pieces that are a bit more special.

Cougar1978

The essence of coin collecting I grew up with was filling the holes from examples in change. Buying a coin at a show or shop was a luxury. I remember one time for my bd I got a roll of dimes both silver mercury and Roosevelt which were circulating at that time - this was before clad coinage. I filled a lot of holes in my blue Whitman folders. When clad coinage came out I thought it was like a sorta of ripoff - not even mint marks plus the cupro nickel junk coins were ugly vs a gem BU silver half dollar.

At present I am diversified with both Coins and Currency both US and World. I like having a lot of different things not a bunch of the same and my ebay searches may be certain dates important in my life.

syl

I'm into collecting more for the history than aesthetics, so a coin untouched by hands or commerce has almost no interest for me. I'd take the whole set in AU.

Analyst

Bodan: Take Morgans for instance. Who can afford a mint-state-looking 93-S Morgan? But you can accumulate several dozen Morgans with outstanding technical and subjective attributes for fairly reasonable prices. If completeness is your game, you must sacrifice quality and visual beauty somewhere, and usually spend an awful lot of money. ... Unless you are Warren Buffett. Then you can do just about anything you want.

Gosh, Bodan, I wish that you would read my series on collecting Classic U.S. coins for less than $500 each. There are many series that can literally be completed while spending less than $500 on each coin. Other series may be nearly completed, missing just one to three coins.

Classic U.S. Coin for Less Than $500 Each, Part 25: Liberty Head Nickels

Among other examples, consider that Draped Bust half cents, Classic Head half cents and Braided Hair half cents are all series that may be completed, while spending less than $500 on each coin. Attractive, problem-free Braided Hair half cents may be purchased with such a budget.

Classic U.S. Coins for Less Than $500 Each, Part 22: Braided Hair Half Cents

CoinKat: Quality exists at different grades. And owning a quality VF rarity can be an accomplishment if it has the look.

I would rather have a russet and blue toned VF grade coin, with minimal imperfections, than a dipped-white certified MS-64 coin that was struck from the same pair of dies. There is more to the concept of quality than numerical grades, as CoinKat suggests.

insightful10@gmail.com

DNADave

I'll take quantity, and then enjoy the search for upgrades.

lordmarcovan

@brg5658 said:
I'd rather have one super stellar example of the type.

Nowadays, with my "Box of 20" pursuit, this would be my answer.