Estimated survivors in the 2017 Red Book

Weiss

I think this might be new, correct me if I'm wrong. The only series I saw it on was the American Gold Medallions, but the 2017 Red Book offers mintage, quantity sold, as well as "estimated surviving, after melting and other attrition" for this series.

I think it's an interesting idea. Thoughts?

renman95

"Estimated surviving" reminds me of the "save and created jobs" scheme/scam. RB should focus on actual mintage, no hyperbole, just the facts Ma'am.

291fifth

It is pure guesswork and has no business being published without solid factual evidence.

PerryHall

Guess work doesn't belong in the Red Book. Different experts will come up with different numbers. Even the pop reports are inaccurate due to all the crack outs and resubmissions.

BillJones

It might be guesswork, but it's something that all collectors should consider. Mintages only tell half of the story. What really counts is how many examples survive today.

If you only look at mintages you might think that the 1883 No Cents nickel is a semi-key coin. With a mintage of 5.4 million, there are only four coins in the Liberty Nickel set that rank ahead of it. A new collector might get excited if he saw one in AU. As most of us know, the coin was subject to considerable hoarding and is really common in that grade.

I don't see anything wrong with mentioning the existence of hoards in the Red Book.

PerryHall

I have no problem with mentioning hoards but that's a bit different from guessing the total surviving numbers of coins. As far as which coins are key or semi-key dates it makes more sense to look at the prices rather than the mintages. To use your example, a quick glace at the prices for the 1883 No Cents Liberty nickel shows that it's not a key date.

CaptHenway

Paging Dennis Tucker.

JohnnyCache

I, personally, wouldn't mind the inclusion of an estimated survival rate figure.
After all, the prices published are not exactly accurate.

Provided that the Redbook made it clear that the figures were "estimated", I see no harm in the inclusion of that info. Perhaps, with some significant effort, the estimates could have their accuracy improved over the course of several years.

BillJones

As those who collect by die variety well know, the estimated number of survivors is a standard piece of information, usually defined by the Sheldon rarity scale or something close to it. I also might add that "Coin Facts" has estimates for the number of survivors for just about every U.S. coin that is listed.

If the editors of the Red Book would like to include some of that information, I don't see the harm. The trouble is they need to update the estimates when new information comes to light.

ernie11

I think they also need to declare by whom the figures were "estimated". In the case of the American Gold Medallions, where did get their estimates from - their own internal research? If so, that figure might be less biased than an estimate from an outside party.

illini420

I think it is enough for them to put in the header of that section something like "it is believed that many of these medals were melted since the issue date." Any attempt to put an actual number or even a range to the number of surviving pieces is an absolute guess and can mislead collectors.

ricko

I believe that with a general disclaimer in the foreword (i.e. survival estimates based on best available information at time of printing) that the inclusion of such information is worthwhile. Cheers, RickO