This is essentially NCLT and this mintage is very high for NCLT. Comparing this to business strikes isn't the most appropriate due to the high survival rate and not only is it 100% survival rate it is a survival rate at a near perfect grade. Nineteenth century coins with that survival rate will still have many fewer MS condition rarities.
Maybe irrelevant, but how much would it cost to certify a complete set of Lincoln Cents and how much would it cost every year to keep them in safe deposit boxes?
Andy Lustig
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
Someone failed 3rd grade when they did not understand that rare and desirable are not synonyms. If your "vision" of a price point is based on a strict definition of rare, then your will be slammed so hard by the coin sharks it will make piranhas gasp in horror. Over and over, 146 times if I count correctly in your posts, low mintage means this coin is going to soar in value once all the (apparent) idiots wake up and realize your are the true coin prophet.
The mintage of this set (225K) is more than the TOTAL mintage for the proof or uncirculated mintage of the 1st spouse SERIES, depending on what the final numbers are for the remaining coins. Plus that series is already have losses due to coins being sent to melt.
@mustangmanbob said:
Someone failed 3rd grade when they did not understand that rare and desirable are not synonyms. If your "vision" of a price point is based on a strict definition of rare, then your will be slammed so hard by the coin sharks it will make piranhas gasp in horror. Over and over, 146 times if I count correctly in your posts, low mintage means this coin is going to soar in value once all the (apparent) idiots wake up and realize your are the true coin prophet.
The mintage of this set (225K) is more than the TOTAL mintage for the proof or uncirculated mintage of the 1st spouse SERIES, depending on what the final numbers are for the remaining coins. Plus that series is already have losses due to coins being sent to melt.
Man, you studied supply/demand/economics in 3rd grade???? Pretty advanced school there.. lol
@Zoins said:
Not only is it 100% survival rate it is a survival rate at a near perfect grade. Nineteenth century coins with that survival rate will still have many fewer MS condition rarities.
apples and oranges. Who said anything about condition rarities? UNC 50-D nickels are not condition rarities. UNC 96-W dimes are not condition rarities. UNC 70-D halves aren't condition rarities. UNC 95-W ASE aren't condition rarities. For that matter. 98-S SMS Kennedy halves are not condition rarities.
The issue isn't condition, it's scarcity in any grade. > @Zoins said:
This is essentially NCLT and this mintage is very high for NCLT. Comparing this to business strikes isn't the most appropriate due to the high survival rate and not only is it 100% survival rate it is a survival rate at a near perfect grade. Nineteenth century coins with that survival rate will still have many fewer MS condition rarities.
96-W - 100% survival, essentially NCLT as only in mint sets.
70-D halves - 100% survival, essentially NCLT as only in mint sets.
98-S SMS Kennedy halves - 100% survival rate, NCLT as only in special sets
EVERY SILVER EAGLE EVER ISSUED, NCLT and 100% survival rate.
@MrEureka said:
Maybe irrelevant, but how much would it cost to certify a complete set of Lincoln Cents and how much would it cost every year to keep them in safe deposit boxes?
I'm not advocating collecting Lincoln cents. I don't. But people DO!
@mustangmanbob said:
Someone failed 3rd grade when they did not understand that rare and desirable are not synonyms. If your "vision" of a price point is based on a strict definition of rare, then your will be slammed so hard by the coin sharks it will make piranhas gasp in horror. Over and over, 146 times if I count correctly in your posts, low mintage means this coin is going to soar in value once all the (apparent) idiots wake up and realize your are the true coin prophet.
The mintage of this set (225K) is more than the TOTAL mintage for the proof or uncirculated mintage of the 1st spouse SERIES, depending on what the final numbers are for the remaining coins. Plus that series is already have losses due to coins being sent to melt.
Wow, you really missed the point. I never said "soar". I never said "idiots". And comparing a Lincoln, a widely collected series, to the 1st spouse series...well, I'm actually speechless.
@mustangmanbob said:
Someone failed 3rd grade when they did not understand that rare and desirable are not synonyms. If your "vision" of a price point is based on a strict definition of rare, then your will be slammed so hard by the coin sharks it will make piranhas gasp in horror. Over and over, 146 times if I count correctly in your posts, low mintage means this coin is going to soar in value once all the (apparent) idiots wake up and realize your are the true coin prophet.
The mintage of this set (225K) is more than the TOTAL mintage for the proof or uncirculated mintage of the 1st spouse SERIES, depending on what the final numbers are for the remaining coins. Plus that series is already have losses due to coins being sent to melt.
I never established rare or desirable as synonyms or even appropriate terms. "Rarity" is a sliding scale. "Rare" as a moniker really doesn't apply to ANY Lincoln cents, ANY CC Morgans, etc. Swedish speaking people are rarer than Mandarin speaking people but neither group is "rare". And my question was why the Lincoln was NOT desirable WHEN COMPARED TO SIMILAR MODERN COINS.
My "vision" of a price point was based largely on other similar coins: 96-W dime, 50-D nickel, 70-D half, etc.
I don't collect US at all. I don't collect anything post-1900 from almost anywhere in the world but Tibet. But PEOPLE DO and I sell to those people do meaning I come across more collectors than your average board member sitting in his office salivating over his collection. And those people buy 400,000 U.S. proof sets per year (double this total). Those people buy 200,000+ MINT sets per year. Those people keep Dansco albums of coins, of which the Lincoln series is probably the second most popular.
So, rather than try to pretend you are smarter than you are with your thinly veiled ad hominems, why don't you stick to the topic. Let me simplify it for you:
Why is a 1950-D nickel with a mintage of 2 million in a relatively unpopular series a $10 coin and a 2017-S Lincoln with a mintage of only 225,000 in a popular series only a $6 to $8 coin?
Or, if you prefer to stick to NCLT:
Why is a 96-W dime with a mintage of 1.5 million in a relatively unpopular series an $8-$10 coin and a 2017-S Lincoln only a $6-$8 coin?
All righty then...I stopped purchasing mint sets years ago.... storage becomes an issue... That being said, the controversy over this set is interesting. I believe I will add one set to my collection. That way, each time this, or other threads appear, I can look at it and comment with authority.... Cheers, RickO
@MrEureka said:
Maybe irrelevant, but how much would it cost to certify a complete set of Lincoln Cents and how much would it cost every year to keep them in safe deposit boxes?
I'm not advocating collecting Lincoln cents. I don't. But people DO!
Perhaps fewer people than before, and perhaps for some good reasons?
Andy Lustig
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
With low mintages like this it merely requires less demand to have a more highly leveraged effect on price.
This coin will take a two or three years to see what kind of base demand it will command. That it will be collected is certain.
The attrition on inexpensive coins such as this one is far higher than most people realize. Very few '09-S VDB cents are lost or degraded each year but lots of the '17-S are and will be, for at least a couple years.
@ricko said:
All righty then...I stopped purchasing mint sets years ago.... storage becomes an issue... That being said, the controversy over this set is interesting. I believe I will add one set to my collection. That way, each time this, or other threads appear, I can look at it and comment with authority.... Cheers, RickO
I love your attitude and really appreciate you in these boards
jmlanzaf reminds me of several posters who have gone awol over the years. These posters continually pumped and pumped new issues and refused to listen to sound advice from people with 100's of years of experience. Most recently I recall 7OVER8 who swore up and down the Gold Kennedy halves were the next hot thing and posted as such till the cows came home! Pitboss pumped the 2009 "Thumb" variety Lincolns for years!!! Those Lincoln "rarity" coins have also been forgotten. Before him there was FLBuffalohunter........before him.......the list goes on and on. Gone but not forgotten. And the coins they pumped have since been dumped and forgotten and are nothing but footnotes in numismatic history. The EU sets will be footnotes in history and forgotten also because of limited demand and the US Mint pumping out garbage year after year. Just my 2c. No ill will intended toward you jmlanzaf, but us old-timers have seen this play out over and over again over the years!! These "rare" coins are not so rare when 99.999% are saved.
@MrEureka said:
Maybe irrelevant, but how much would it cost to certify a complete set of Lincoln Cents and how much would it cost every year to keep them in safe deposit boxes?
I'm not advocating collecting Lincoln cents. I don't. But people DO!
Perhaps fewer people than before, and perhaps for some good reasons?
Possible. I've been trying to find an estimate on the number of collectors but can't find a definitive source
@Manorcourtman said:
jmlanzaf reminds me of several posters who have gone awol over the years. These posters continually pumped and pumped new issues and refused to listen to sound advice from people with 100's of years of experience. Most recently I recall 7OVER8 who swore up and down the Gold Kennedy halves were the next hot thing and posted as such till the cows came home! Pitboss pumped the 2009 "Thumb" variety Lincolns for years!!! Those Lincoln "rarity" coins have also been forgotten. Before him there was FLBuffalohunter........before him.......the list goes on and on. Gone but not forgotten. And the coins they pumped have since been dumped and forgotten and are nothing but footnotes in numismatic history. The EU sets will be footnotes in history and forgotten also because of limited demand and the US Mint pumping out garbage year after year. Just my 2c. No ill will intended toward you jmlanzaf, but us old-timers have seen this play out over and over again over the years!! These "rare" coins are not so rare when 99.999% are saved.
No offense, but I'm an old timer myself. 40 years collecting, 25 years dealing. I've bought and sold millions in coins. You can disagree, but it is presumptuous to assume you actually know more.
TIme will tell.If the Mint wants to salvage this.Destroy all returns and unsold sets at years end.Don't sell into next year.Final mintage much lower would help boost values.Who knows what the return rate is ? I ordered 5 and returned 2 sets for quality issues.I heard major buyer returned 25K sets is that True?
@Manorcourtman said:
jmlanzaf reminds me of several posters who have gone awol over the years. These posters continually pumped and pumped new issues and refused to listen to sound advice from people with 100's of years of experience. Most recently I recall 7OVER8 who swore up and down the Gold Kennedy halves were the next hot thing and posted as such till the cows came home! Pitboss pumped the 2009 "Thumb" variety Lincolns for years!!! Those Lincoln "rarity" coins have also been forgotten. Before him there was FLBuffalohunter........before him.......the list goes on and on. Gone but not forgotten. And the coins they pumped have since been dumped and forgotten and are nothing but footnotes in numismatic history. The EU sets will be footnotes in history and forgotten also because of limited demand and the US Mint pumping out garbage year after year. Just my 2c. No ill will intended toward you jmlanzaf, but us old-timers have seen this play out over and over again over the years!! These "rare" coins are not so rare when 99.999% are saved.
RE: Why hasn't the rarest Lincoln cent ever produced caught anyone's attention?
When I saw the thread title, I immediately thought of the 1958 1C Doubled Die Obverse, which I (not a Lincoln collector) think is really cool. I'd like to know the back story why only 3 specimens of this dramatic DD are known. Excited, I opened this thread, 'nuff said.
@Zoins said:
Not only is it 100% survival rate it is a survival rate at a near perfect grade. Nineteenth century coins with that survival rate will still have many fewer MS condition rarities.
apples and oranges. Who said anything about condition rarities? UNC 50-D nickels are not condition rarities. UNC 96-W dimes are not condition rarities. UNC 70-D halves aren't condition rarities. UNC 95-W ASE aren't condition rarities. For that matter. 98-S SMS Kennedy halves are not condition rarities.
The issue isn't condition, it's scarcity in any grade.
This is essentially NCLT and this mintage is very high for NCLT. Comparing this to business strikes isn't the most appropriate due to the high survival rate and not only is it 100% survival rate it is a survival rate at a near perfect grade. Nineteenth century coins with that survival rate will still have many fewer MS condition rarities.
96-W - 100% survival, essentially NCLT as only in mint sets.
70-D halves - 100% survival, essentially NCLT as only in mint sets.
98-S SMS Kennedy halves - 100% survival rate, NCLT as only in special sets
EVERY SILVER EAGLE EVER ISSUED, NCLT and 100% survival rate.
I guess it might be worthwhile to discuss what you mean by "attention". The specific date coins above also haven't caught my attention and from looking at the prices, they don't seem to go for that much compared to say the 1995-W ASE. ASEs are different because because they are large, silver bullion.
@PQueue said:
RE: Why hasn't the rarest Lincoln cent ever produced caught anyone's attention?
When I saw the thread title, I immediately thought of the 1958 1C Doubled Die Obverse, which I (not a Lincoln collector) think is really cool. I'd like to know the back story why only 3 specimens of this dramatic DD are known. Excited, I opened this thread, 'nuff said.
Probably because it was made as any amusement by a mint employee. Weren't all 3 in the hands of one retired mint employee?
When I can collect coins with estimated surviving populations of under 100 an issue with a surviving population of 225,000 pristine coins does not impress me as rare.
@OnlyGoldIsMoney said:
When I can collect coins with estimated surviving populations of under 100 an issue with a surviving population of 225,000 pristine coins does not impress me as rare.
Sure, sure. True. But, that does ignore the 96-W dime, any modern ASE, the 70-D half, all of which have 100% survival rates in "pristine" condition.
I also don't think this is an appropriate comparison, but what would you say to a classic period coin with survival of a couple hundred thousand mint state examples?
"Walter Breen noted that an individual by the name of Maurice Sherlack single-handedly acquired a hoard of 200,000 uncirculated 1931-S Lincoln cents."
Yet, it is worth noting that this coin has a CIRCULATED value of $100 despite near 100% survival of the 866,000 mintage and over 200,000 uncirculated copies (according to Breen).
By the way, does anyone find it odd that our host tells the Breen story, indicates a near 100% survival rate due to contemporary hoarding in the CoinFAct page ,but the ESTIMATED SURVIVAL on the same page indicates a total of less than 20,000. Not a very good estimate, is it?
@Shamika said:
I don't like collecting things that are made to be collected.
yes, that's a real possibility. It is why some people don't include proofs in their date/mm sets. Do you collect modern at all? Proofs? Just curious, no judgment.
@dbldie55 said:
Does the Dansco have a place for the '96 W dime? (I know none of mine do, but I have had them for a while, but still after 96)?
supposedly not. Yet it is an $8 coin. You could argue it is OVER-priced because of the high mintage and the relative unpopularity of the series. Yet, the market is what it is.
It is still hard to believe that if the 96-W dime is an $8 coin with 1.457 million minted that the 2017-S EU isn't an $8 coin. Lincolns and Kennedys are more popular. How do you take a bunch of $8-$10 coins, put them into a set and end up with a $25 set?
Time will tell. In the meantime, I'm buying ALL EU cents at $6 and under if anyone's selling.
@jmlanzaf said: "No offense, but I'm an old timer myself. 40 years collecting, 25 years dealing. I've bought and sold millions in coins. You can disagree, but it is presumptuous to assume you actually know more."
ROTFL!!! No offense from me either as I lost all my hair and teeth over fifteen years ago. I'll just remind the folks posting here how many times have we all heard something like this? How many dealers/collectors do we know with so much experience as this?
I'm in an extremely mellow mood tonight so I'll just say I salute you @jmlanzaf and your contributions to numismatics. You've raised a popular discussion and I'm enjoying your posts very much.
@Shamika said:
I don't like collecting things that are made to be collected.
yes, that's a real possibility. It is why some people don't include proofs in their date/mm sets. Do you collect modern at all? Proofs? Just curious, no judgment.
The only "modern" I collect are State quarters that I get as pocket change. As for proofs, not interested.
@OnlyGoldIsMoney said:
When I can collect coins with estimated surviving populations of under 100 an issue with a surviving population of 225,000 pristine coins does not impress me as rare.
Sure, sure. True. But, that does ignore the 96-W dime, any modern ASE, the 70-D half, all of which have 100% survival rates in "pristine" condition.
I also don't think this is an appropriate comparison, but what would you say to a classic period coin with survival of a couple hundred thousand mint state examples?
I would consider a classic period coin with a survival of a couple hundred thousand mint state examples to be common and not rare.
@OnlyGoldIsMoney said:
When I can collect coins with estimated surviving populations of under 100 an issue with a surviving population of 225,000 pristine coins does not impress me as rare.
Sure, sure. True. But, that does ignore the 96-W dime, any modern ASE, the 70-D half, all of which have 100% survival rates in "pristine" condition.
I also don't think this is an appropriate comparison, but what would you say to a classic period coin with survival of a couple hundred thousand mint state examples?
I would consider a classic period coin with a survival of a couple hundred thousand mint state examples to be common and not rare.
and yet CC dollars sell for several hundred dollars...
@Insider2 said: @jmlanzaf said: "No offense, but I'm an old timer myself. 40 years collecting, 25 years dealing. I've bought and sold millions in coins. You can disagree, but it is presumptuous to assume you actually know more."
ROTFL!!! No offense from me either as I lost all my hair and teeth over fifteen years ago. I'll just remind the folks posting here how many times have we all heard something like this? How many dealers/collectors do we know with so much experience as this?
I'm in an extremely mellow mood tonight so I'll just say I salute you @jmlanzaf and your contributions to numismatics. You've raised a popular discussion and I'm enjoying your posts very much.
LOL. I lost all my hair, but thankfully still have my teeth! And my eyesight...otherwise those damned little round things would become a chore.
Bingo. I was going to say about the same thing as well. It is the MINTMARK that makes that '96-W dime something that people want. It is "unique" for the series. It is something that you don't see in circulating coinage....the "W" mintmark.
It is definitely NOT comparing apples to apples trying to compare a different, desirable, mintmark with a coin with a gimmicky 1-off finish.
As a long time dealer, and a long time collector, as you say, you should already realize that.
@Bochiman said:
Bingo. I was going to say about the same thing as well. It is the MINTMARK that makes that '96-W dime something that people want. It is "unique" for the series. It is something that you don't see in circulating coinage....the "W" mintmark.
It is definitely NOT comparing apples to apples trying to compare a different, desirable, mintmark with a coin with a gimmicky 1-off finish.
As a long time dealer, and a long time collector, as you say, you should already realize that.
Why is a 96-W dime with a mintage of 1.5 million in a relatively unpopular series an $8-$10 coin and a 2017-S Lincoln only a $6-$8 coin?>
My son bought it because of the W mint mark.
Yes, I recognize the difference.
But you should also recognize that some people care more about finish (proofs) than mintmarks. Some people collect series in years without respect to mintmarks. Some people don't collect series at all. Some people don't collect the proofs because it is "just a different finish". Some people do include proofs.
When searching for a comp, none is perfect. The ones that are arguably closest cause too much controversy.
The fact is, there is a counterargument to every counterargument.
You say finish, I say "proof sets" - of which they sell 400,000 per year, almost double the EU sets.
You say mint mark, I say 2017-S cent - the only non-proof with an S mintmark.
You say NCLT, I say 70-D or 96-W
You say gimmick - I point to just about every special finish Kennedy and ASE in the last 15 years.
I'm sure they are all part of the puzzle. But none of them are singularly compelling. And all of them are potentially transitory.
The 95-W silver eagle was hated, DESPITE it's mintmark but because it was gimmicky. People avoided it even though it was FREE. Now it's a $10,000 coin in high grade.
How do you explain 2012-S proof sets? They weren't bought at $25 but are now $100.
And, again, Lincoln cents are one of the most popular series. And the 2017-S cent is an affordable edition. Yet it seems like people are actively hating it and avoiding putting it, or the full set, into their collection.
I see more interest in the gimmicky, special finish 4 medal Liberty set at $200 than the "gimmicky, special finish" NCLT EU set at $30.
The market is what it is, but it doesn't seem wholly explainable or rational.
Low mintage rarely translates to rare, in this hobby. The main question is "why does our minting facility not recognize their own foolishness when it comes to targeting collectors?
They should have seen this coming. Collectors are the only rarity nowadays.
"Walter Breen noted that an individual by the name of Maurice Sherlack single-handedly acquired a hoard of 200,000 uncirculated 1931-S Lincoln cents."
Yet, it is worth noting that this coin has a CIRCULATED value of $100 despite near 100% survival of the 866,000 mintage and over 200,000 uncirculated copies (according to Breen).
By the way, does anyone find it odd that our host tells the Breen story, indicates a near 100% survival rate due to contemporary hoarding in the CoinFAct page ,but the ESTIMATED SURVIVAL on the same page indicates a total of less than 20,000. Not a very good estimate, is it?
Also check out the estimated survival rates for any later date Indian cent.
@Manorcourtman said:
jmlanzaf reminds me of several posters who have gone awol over the years. These posters continually pumped and pumped new issues and refused to listen to sound advice from people with 100's of years of experience. Most recently I recall 7OVER8 who swore up and down the Gold Kennedy halves were the next hot thing and posted as such till the cows came home! Pitboss pumped the 2009 "Thumb" variety Lincolns for years!!! Those Lincoln "rarity" coins have also been forgotten. Before him there was FLBuffalohunter........before him.......the list goes on and on. Gone but not forgotten. And the coins they pumped have since been dumped and forgotten and are nothing but footnotes in numismatic history. The EU sets will be footnotes in history and forgotten also because of limited demand and the US Mint pumping out garbage year after year. Just my 2c. No ill will intended toward you jmlanzaf, but us old-timers have seen this play out over and over again over the years!! These "rare" coins are not so rare when 99.999% are saved.
You got it right.... some forum members got in over their heads buying too many of the 225th sets
Sets have been dead in the water
Now all left to try the pump ..LOL
@Manorcourtman said:
jmlanzaf reminds me of several posters who have gone awol over the years. These posters continually pumped and pumped new issues and refused to listen to sound advice from people with 100's of years of experience. Most recently I recall 7OVER8 who swore up and down the Gold Kennedy halves were the next hot thing and posted as such till the cows came home! Pitboss pumped the 2009 "Thumb" variety Lincolns for years!!! Those Lincoln "rarity" coins have also been forgotten. Before him there was FLBuffalohunter........before him.......the list goes on and on. Gone but not forgotten. And the coins they pumped have since been dumped and forgotten and are nothing but footnotes in numismatic history. The EU sets will be footnotes in history and forgotten also because of limited demand and the US Mint pumping out garbage year after year. Just my 2c. No ill will intended toward you jmlanzaf, but us old-timers have seen this play out over and over again over the years!! These "rare" coins are not so rare when 99.999% are saved.
@jmlanzaf said:
The 2017-S Enhanced Uncirculated set has a limit of 225,000 sets. They are still available from the Mint despite the fact that at 225,000 the Cent is the lowest mintage business strike Lincoln ever produced.
The other coins are also among the new keys for their sets. The Jefferson nickel is a factor of TEN rarer than the 1950-D which is a $10 coin. Yet these sets languish. The Kennedy half is a factor of NINE rarer than the 1970-D which is a $10 coin. The Roosevelt Dime is a factor of SIX rarer than the 1996-W which is an $8 coin.
Is this the Market's final verdict or an opportunity?
Are there 225,000 people putting together complete Lincoln cent sets who would want one for their set?
@DCW said:
100% survival rate...so what is so sexingly rare about a coin with a mintage of 225,000?
1921 Morgan Dollars are 1000 times more common, what is so sexy and rare about them?
The survival rate of 50-D nickels is near 100% making them 10x more common, yet that is still a $10 coin. What's so sexy and rare about them?
I don't expect the 2017-S cent to match an S-VDB in price, but the Mint currently sells 400,000 regular old proof sets per year. What's so sexy about a 2017-S proof cent (or nickel or dime) with 100% survival rate?
There just seems to be a general lack of appreciation for the coins in this set.
Not only is the cent the RAREST CENT - possibly including survival rates. It is a UNIQUE FINISH in the cent series. It may not be sexy, but it should at least be good-looking.
@DCW said:
100% survival rate...so what is so sexingly rare about a coin with a mintage of 225,000?
1921 Morgan Dollars are 1000 times more common, what is so sexy and rare about them?
The survival rate of 50-D nickels is near 100% making them 10x more common, yet that is still a $10 coin. What's so sexy and rare about them?
I don't expect the 2017-S cent to match an S-VDB in price, but the Mint currently sells 400,000 regular old proof sets per year. What's so sexy about a 2017-S proof cent (or nickel or dime) with 100% survival rate?
There just seems to be a general lack of appreciation for the coins in this set.
Not only is the cent the RAREST CENT - possibly including survival rates. It is a UNIQUE FINISH in the cent series. It may not be sexy, but it should at least be good-looking.
@DCW said:
100% survival rate...so what is so sexingly rare about a coin with a mintage of 225,000?
1921 Morgan Dollars are 1000 times more common, what is so sexy and rare about them?
The survival rate of 50-D nickels is near 100% making them 10x more common, yet that is still a $10 coin. What's so sexy and rare about them?
I don't believe 1921 Morgans or 1950-D cents are sexy or rare. If the 2017-S cent is ,going to become popular among collectors, it may have to wait a decade or so, like many other collectible coins did back in the day. The problem seems to be that newer collectors in the market want some immediate gratification and just want to find and unload various coins for a profit. That may be the motivation here.
@Manorcourtman said:
jmlanzaf reminds me of several posters who have gone awol over the years. These posters continually pumped and pumped new issues and refused to listen to sound advice from people with 100's of years of experience. Most recently I recall 7OVER8 who swore up and down the Gold Kennedy halves were the next hot thing and posted as such till the cows came home! Pitboss pumped the 2009 "Thumb" variety Lincolns for years!!! Those Lincoln "rarity" coins have also been forgotten. Before him there was FLBuffalohunter........before him.......the list goes on and on. Gone but not forgotten. And the coins they pumped have since been dumped and forgotten and are nothing but footnotes in numismatic history. The EU sets will be footnotes in history and forgotten also because of limited demand and the US Mint pumping out garbage year after year. Just my 2c. No ill will intended toward you jmlanzaf, but us old-timers have seen this play out over and over again over the years!! These "rare" coins are not so rare when 99.999% are saved.
No offense, but I'm an old timer myself. 40 years collecting, 25 years dealing. I've bought and sold millions in coins. You can disagree, but it is presumptuous to assume you actually know more.
No offense, but that makes your fervor all the more difficult to understand.
I guess the 1901-S Quarter is twice as common as a 1913-S. Why don't the prices reflect this disparity? Why does the 1880 Nickel cost so much, compared to the 1879. While fewer were minted, there are still 2/3 as many. Should only cost about 1.5x the cost of an 1879 (not 10x as much)
Collector and Researcher of Liberty Head Nickels. ANA LM-6053
@TwoSides2aCoin said:
Low mintage rarely translates to rare, in this hobby. The main question is "why does our minting facility not recognize their own foolishness when it comes to targeting collectors?
They should have seen this coming. Collectors are the only rarity nowadays.
You just said it ALL , right there. The day is coming when Pog Collectors, Stamp Collectors, Coin Collectors , and Card Collectors will be right there with Dust Bunny Collectors.
It's already so bad that when Welfare Collectors learn I collect Pennies, Nickels and Dimes, they start walking taller. Funny how they throw Pennies down whenever I'm around. Finally, someone that's below their status in the world.
@OnlyGoldIsMoney said:
When I can collect coins with estimated surviving populations of under 100 an issue with a surviving population of 225,000 pristine coins does not impress me as rare.
Sure, sure. True. But, that does ignore the 96-W dime, any modern ASE, the 70-D half, all of which have 100% survival rates in "pristine" condition.
I also don't think this is an appropriate comparison, but what would you say to a classic period coin with survival of a couple hundred thousand mint state examples?
Yes, many of us ignore those, too, preferring 180+ year old Real coins (not "made for collectors during our lifetime" ) that are R4, R5, R6 in Any condition.
Hell, this penny you're so excited about was made after some of the olives in my refrigerator!
@Manorcourtman said:
jmlanzaf reminds me of several posters who have gone awol over the years. These posters continually pumped and pumped new issues and refused to listen to sound advice from people with 100's of years of experience. Most recently I recall 7OVER8 who swore up and down the Gold Kennedy halves were the next hot thing and posted as such till the cows came home! Pitboss pumped the 2009 "Thumb" variety Lincolns for years!!! Those Lincoln "rarity" coins have also been forgotten. Before him there was FLBuffalohunter........before him.......the list goes on and on. Gone but not forgotten. And the coins they pumped have since been dumped and forgotten and are nothing but footnotes in numismatic history. The EU sets will be footnotes in history and forgotten also because of limited demand and the US Mint pumping out garbage year after year. Just my 2c. No ill will intended toward you jmlanzaf, but us old-timers have seen this play out over and over again over the years!! These "rare" coins are not so rare when 99.999% are saved.
You got it right.... some forum members got in over their heads buying too many of the 225th sets
Sets have been dead in the water
Now all left to try the pump ..LOL
Nice recount of forum pumpers
I've made money on these sets. I continue to make money on these sets. I'm not pumping anything. If I were, I'd do it somewhere where there were far more eyeballs than this little board.
@Manorcourtman said:
jmlanzaf reminds me of several posters who have gone awol over the years. These posters continually pumped and pumped new issues and refused to listen to sound advice from people with 100's of years of experience. Most recently I recall 7OVER8 who swore up and down the Gold Kennedy halves were the next hot thing and posted as such till the cows came home! Pitboss pumped the 2009 "Thumb" variety Lincolns for years!!! Those Lincoln "rarity" coins have also been forgotten. Before him there was FLBuffalohunter........before him.......the list goes on and on. Gone but not forgotten. And the coins they pumped have since been dumped and forgotten and are nothing but footnotes in numismatic history. The EU sets will be footnotes in history and forgotten also because of limited demand and the US Mint pumping out garbage year after year. Just my 2c. No ill will intended toward you jmlanzaf, but us old-timers have seen this play out over and over again over the years!! These "rare" coins are not so rare when 99.999% are saved.
No offense, but I'm an old timer myself. 40 years collecting, 25 years dealing. I've bought and sold millions in coins. You can disagree, but it is presumptuous to assume you actually know more.
No offense, but that makes your fervor all the more difficult to understand.
Manorcourtman said it well, and i agree.
"Fervor"??? That seems to overstate it. I find this INTERESTING. No more, no less.
@jmlanzaf said:
The 2017-S Enhanced Uncirculated set has a limit of 225,000 sets. They are still available from the Mint despite the fact that at 225,000 the Cent is the lowest mintage business strike Lincoln ever produced.
The other coins are also among the new keys for their sets. The Jefferson nickel is a factor of TEN rarer than the 1950-D which is a $10 coin. Yet these sets languish. The Kennedy half is a factor of NINE rarer than the 1970-D which is a $10 coin. The Roosevelt Dime is a factor of SIX rarer than the 1996-W which is an $8 coin.
Is this the Market's final verdict or an opportunity?
Are there 225,000 people putting together complete Lincoln cent sets who would want one for their set?
First of all, you don't need 225,000 people putting together Lincoln cent sets. Total demand is a combination of set collectors and Lincoln collectors. There are 400,000 proof sets sold every year.
As for 225,000 Lincoln cent collectors...there have to be some significant fraction of that, otherwise why are there any semi-key cents in the series when all the semi-keys have survivorship higher than 225,000. S-VDBs also have survivorship higher than that, but I presume some people want that coin as "sexy" without being collectors of the entire series.
@OnlyGoldIsMoney said:
When I can collect coins with estimated surviving populations of under 100 an issue with a surviving population of 225,000 pristine coins does not impress me as rare.
Sure, sure. True. But, that does ignore the 96-W dime, any modern ASE, the 70-D half, all of which have 100% survival rates in "pristine" condition.
I also don't think this is an appropriate comparison, but what would you say to a classic period coin with survival of a couple hundred thousand mint state examples?
Yes, many of us ignore those, too, preferring 180+ year old Real coins (not "made for collectors during our lifetime" ) that are R4, R5, R6 in Any condition.
Hell, this penny you're so excited about was made after some of the olives in my refrigerator!
"made for collectors" would include 1913 Liberty Nickels, 1804 dollars, most 19th century proof coins, all 20th century proof coins...
@Manorcourtman said:
jmlanzaf reminds me of several posters who have gone awol over the years. These posters continually pumped and pumped new issues and refused to listen to sound advice from people with 100's of years of experience. Most recently I recall 7OVER8 who swore up and down the Gold Kennedy halves were the next hot thing and posted as such till the cows came home! Pitboss pumped the 2009 "Thumb" variety Lincolns for years!!! Those Lincoln "rarity" coins have also been forgotten. Before him there was FLBuffalohunter........before him.......the list goes on and on. Gone but not forgotten. And the coins they pumped have since been dumped and forgotten and are nothing but footnotes in numismatic history. The EU sets will be footnotes in history and forgotten also because of limited demand and the US Mint pumping out garbage year after year. Just my 2c. No ill will intended toward you jmlanzaf, but us old-timers have seen this play out over and over again over the years!! These "rare" coins are not so rare when 99.999% are saved.
Comments
This is essentially NCLT and this mintage is very high for NCLT. Comparing this to business strikes isn't the most appropriate due to the high survival rate and not only is it 100% survival rate it is a survival rate at a near perfect grade. Nineteenth century coins with that survival rate will still have many fewer MS condition rarities.
Maybe irrelevant, but how much would it cost to certify a complete set of Lincoln Cents and how much would it cost every year to keep them in safe deposit boxes?
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
Someone failed 3rd grade when they did not understand that rare and desirable are not synonyms. If your "vision" of a price point is based on a strict definition of rare, then your will be slammed so hard by the coin sharks it will make piranhas gasp in horror. Over and over, 146 times if I count correctly in your posts, low mintage means this coin is going to soar in value once all the (apparent) idiots wake up and realize your are the true coin prophet.
The mintage of this set (225K) is more than the TOTAL mintage for the proof or uncirculated mintage of the 1st spouse SERIES, depending on what the final numbers are for the remaining coins. Plus that series is already have losses due to coins being sent to melt.
Man, you studied supply/demand/economics in 3rd grade???? Pretty advanced school there.. lol
apples and oranges. Who said anything about condition rarities? UNC 50-D nickels are not condition rarities. UNC 96-W dimes are not condition rarities. UNC 70-D halves aren't condition rarities. UNC 95-W ASE aren't condition rarities. For that matter. 98-S SMS Kennedy halves are not condition rarities.
The issue isn't condition, it's scarcity in any grade. > @Zoins said:
96-W - 100% survival, essentially NCLT as only in mint sets.
70-D halves - 100% survival, essentially NCLT as only in mint sets.
98-S SMS Kennedy halves - 100% survival rate, NCLT as only in special sets
EVERY SILVER EAGLE EVER ISSUED, NCLT and 100% survival rate.
I'm not advocating collecting Lincoln cents. I don't. But people DO!
Wow, you really missed the point. I never said "soar". I never said "idiots". And comparing a Lincoln, a widely collected series, to the 1st spouse series...well, I'm actually speechless.
I never established rare or desirable as synonyms or even appropriate terms. "Rarity" is a sliding scale. "Rare" as a moniker really doesn't apply to ANY Lincoln cents, ANY CC Morgans, etc. Swedish speaking people are rarer than Mandarin speaking people but neither group is "rare". And my question was why the Lincoln was NOT desirable WHEN COMPARED TO SIMILAR MODERN COINS.
My "vision" of a price point was based largely on other similar coins: 96-W dime, 50-D nickel, 70-D half, etc.
I don't collect US at all. I don't collect anything post-1900 from almost anywhere in the world but Tibet. But PEOPLE DO and I sell to those people do meaning I come across more collectors than your average board member sitting in his office salivating over his collection. And those people buy 400,000 U.S. proof sets per year (double this total). Those people buy 200,000+ MINT sets per year. Those people keep Dansco albums of coins, of which the Lincoln series is probably the second most popular.
So, rather than try to pretend you are smarter than you are with your thinly veiled ad hominems, why don't you stick to the topic. Let me simplify it for you:
Why is a 1950-D nickel with a mintage of 2 million in a relatively unpopular series a $10 coin and a 2017-S Lincoln with a mintage of only 225,000 in a popular series only a $6 to $8 coin?
Or, if you prefer to stick to NCLT:
Why is a 96-W dime with a mintage of 1.5 million in a relatively unpopular series an $8-$10 coin and a 2017-S Lincoln only a $6-$8 coin?
All righty then...I stopped purchasing mint sets years ago.... storage becomes an issue... That being said, the controversy over this set is interesting. I believe I will add one set to my collection. That way, each time this, or other threads appear, I can look at it and comment with authority....
Cheers, RickO
Perhaps fewer people than before, and perhaps for some good reasons?
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
As with all coins price is merely about demand.
With low mintages like this it merely requires less demand to have a more highly leveraged effect on price.
This coin will take a two or three years to see what kind of base demand it will command. That it will be collected is certain.
The attrition on inexpensive coins such as this one is far higher than most people realize. Very few '09-S VDB cents are lost or degraded each year but lots of the '17-S are and will be, for at least a couple years.
I love your attitude and really appreciate you in these boards
jmlanzaf reminds me of several posters who have gone awol over the years. These posters continually pumped and pumped new issues and refused to listen to sound advice from people with 100's of years of experience. Most recently I recall 7OVER8 who swore up and down the Gold Kennedy halves were the next hot thing and posted as such till the cows came home! Pitboss pumped the 2009 "Thumb" variety Lincolns for years!!! Those Lincoln "rarity" coins have also been forgotten. Before him there was FLBuffalohunter........before him.......the list goes on and on. Gone but not forgotten. And the coins they pumped have since been dumped and forgotten and are nothing but footnotes in numismatic history. The EU sets will be footnotes in history and forgotten also because of limited demand and the US Mint pumping out garbage year after year. Just my 2c. No ill will intended toward you jmlanzaf, but us old-timers have seen this play out over and over again over the years!! These "rare" coins are not so rare when 99.999% are saved.
Possible. I've been trying to find an estimate on the number of collectors but can't find a definitive source
No offense, but I'm an old timer myself. 40 years collecting, 25 years dealing. I've bought and sold millions in coins. You can disagree, but it is presumptuous to assume you actually know more.
im not interested in it. just saying
TIme will tell.If the Mint wants to salvage this.Destroy all returns and unsold sets at years end.Don't sell into next year.Final mintage much lower would help boost values.Who knows what the return rate is ? I ordered 5 and returned 2 sets for quality issues.I heard major buyer returned 25K sets is that True?
+1
Successful Trades: Swampboy,
RE:
Why hasn't the rarest Lincoln cent ever produced caught anyone's attention?
When I saw the thread title, I immediately thought of the 1958 1C Doubled Die Obverse, which I (not a Lincoln collector) think is really cool. I'd like to know the back story why only 3 specimens of this dramatic DD are known. Excited, I opened this thread, 'nuff said.
I guess it might be worthwhile to discuss what you mean by "attention". The specific date coins above also haven't caught my attention and from looking at the prices, they don't seem to go for that much compared to say the 1995-W ASE. ASEs are different because because they are large, silver bullion.
Probably because it was made as any amusement by a mint employee. Weren't all 3 in the hands of one retired mint employee?
When I can collect coins with estimated surviving populations of under 100 an issue with a surviving population of 225,000 pristine coins does not impress me as rare.
https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/gold/liberty-head-2-1-gold-major-sets/liberty-head-2-1-gold-basic-set-circulation-strikes-1840-1907-cac/alltimeset/268163
Sure, sure. True. But, that does ignore the 96-W dime, any modern ASE, the 70-D half, all of which have 100% survival rates in "pristine" condition.
I also don't think this is an appropriate comparison, but what would you say to a classic period coin with survival of a couple hundred thousand mint state examples?
Another odd Lincoln fact can be found here for the 1931-S Lincoln:
http://www.pcgscoinfacts.com/Coin/Detail/2620
Note the excerpt here:
"Walter Breen noted that an individual by the name of Maurice Sherlack single-handedly acquired a hoard of 200,000 uncirculated 1931-S Lincoln cents."
Yet, it is worth noting that this coin has a CIRCULATED value of $100 despite near 100% survival of the 866,000 mintage and over 200,000 uncirculated copies (according to Breen).
By the way, does anyone find it odd that our host tells the Breen story, indicates a near 100% survival rate due to contemporary hoarding in the CoinFAct page ,but the ESTIMATED SURVIVAL on the same page indicates a total of less than 20,000. Not a very good estimate, is it?
I don't like collecting things that are made to be collected.
yes, that's a real possibility. It is why some people don't include proofs in their date/mm sets. Do you collect modern at all? Proofs? Just curious, no judgment.
My son bought it because of the W mint mark.
@jmlanzaf said: "No offense, but I'm an old timer myself. 40 years collecting, 25 years dealing. I've bought and sold millions in coins. You can disagree, but it is presumptuous to assume you actually know more."
ROTFL!!! No offense from me either as I lost all my hair and teeth over fifteen years ago. I'll just remind the folks posting here how many times have we all heard something like this? How many dealers/collectors do we know with so much experience as this?
I'm in an extremely mellow
mood tonight so I'll just say I salute you @jmlanzaf and your contributions to numismatics. You've raised a popular discussion and I'm enjoying your posts very much.
The only "modern" I collect are State quarters that I get as pocket change. As for proofs, not interested.
I would consider a classic period coin with a survival of a couple hundred thousand mint state examples to be common and not rare.
https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/gold/liberty-head-2-1-gold-major-sets/liberty-head-2-1-gold-basic-set-circulation-strikes-1840-1907-cac/alltimeset/268163
and yet CC dollars sell for several hundred dollars...
LOL. I lost all my hair, but thankfully still have my teeth! And my eyesight...otherwise those damned little round things would become a chore.
Bingo. I was going to say about the same thing as well. It is the MINTMARK that makes that '96-W dime something that people want. It is "unique" for the series. It is something that you don't see in circulating coinage....the "W" mintmark.
It is definitely NOT comparing apples to apples trying to compare a different, desirable, mintmark with a coin with a gimmicky 1-off finish.
As a long time dealer, and a long time collector, as you say, you should already realize that.
Why is a 96-W dime with a mintage of 1.5 million in a relatively unpopular series an $8-$10 coin and a 2017-S Lincoln only a $6-$8 coin?>
I've been told I tolerate fools poorly...that may explain things if I have a problem with you. Current ebay items - Nothing at the moment
Yes, I recognize the difference.
But you should also recognize that some people care more about finish (proofs) than mintmarks. Some people collect series in years without respect to mintmarks. Some people don't collect series at all. Some people don't collect the proofs because it is "just a different finish". Some people do include proofs.
When searching for a comp, none is perfect. The ones that are arguably closest cause too much controversy.
The fact is, there is a counterargument to every counterargument.
You say finish, I say "proof sets" - of which they sell 400,000 per year, almost double the EU sets.
You say mint mark, I say 2017-S cent - the only non-proof with an S mintmark.
You say NCLT, I say 70-D or 96-W
You say gimmick - I point to just about every special finish Kennedy and ASE in the last 15 years.
I'm sure they are all part of the puzzle. But none of them are singularly compelling. And all of them are potentially transitory.
The 95-W silver eagle was hated, DESPITE it's mintmark but because it was gimmicky. People avoided it even though it was FREE. Now it's a $10,000 coin in high grade.
How do you explain 2012-S proof sets? They weren't bought at $25 but are now $100.
And, again, Lincoln cents are one of the most popular series. And the 2017-S cent is an affordable edition. Yet it seems like people are actively hating it and avoiding putting it, or the full set, into their collection.
I see more interest in the gimmicky, special finish 4 medal Liberty set at $200 than the "gimmicky, special finish" NCLT EU set at $30.
The market is what it is, but it doesn't seem wholly explainable or rational.
Supply exceeds demand.
A: The year they spend more on their library than their coin collection.
A numismatist is judged more on the content of their library than the content of their cabinet.
Low mintage rarely translates to rare, in this hobby. The main question is "why does our minting facility not recognize their own foolishness when it comes to targeting collectors?
They should have seen this coming. Collectors are the only rarity nowadays.
``https://ebay.us/m/KxolR5
Also check out the estimated survival rates for any later date Indian cent.
My Adolph A. Weinman signature
You got it right.... some forum members got in over their heads buying too many of the 225th sets
Sets have been dead in the water
Now all left to try the pump ..LOL
Nice recount of forum pumpers
Or an EASY way to pump up posting numbers.
Are there 225,000 people putting together complete Lincoln cent sets who would want one for their set?
I don't believe 1921 Morgans or 1950-D cents are sexy or rare. If the 2017-S cent is ,going to become popular among collectors, it may have to wait a decade or so, like many other collectible coins did back in the day. The problem seems to be that newer collectors in the market want some immediate gratification and just want to find and unload various coins for a profit. That may be the motivation here.
No offense, but that makes your fervor all the more difficult to understand.
Manorcourtman said it well, and i agree.
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
I guess the 1901-S Quarter is twice as common as a 1913-S. Why don't the prices reflect this disparity? Why does the 1880 Nickel cost so much, compared to the 1879. While fewer were minted, there are still 2/3 as many. Should only cost about 1.5x the cost of an 1879 (not 10x as much)
You just said it ALL , right there. The day is coming when Pog Collectors, Stamp Collectors, Coin Collectors , and Card Collectors will be right there with Dust Bunny Collectors.
It's already so bad that when Welfare Collectors learn I collect Pennies, Nickels and Dimes, they start walking taller. Funny how they throw Pennies down whenever I'm around. Finally, someone that's below their status in the world.
Yes, many of us ignore those, too, preferring 180+ year old Real coins (not "made for collectors during our lifetime" ) that are R4, R5, R6 in Any condition.
Hell, this penny you're so excited about was made after some of the olives in my refrigerator!
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
I've made money on these sets. I continue to make money on these sets. I'm not pumping anything. If I were, I'd do it somewhere where there were far more eyeballs than this little board.
"Fervor"??? That seems to overstate it. I find this INTERESTING. No more, no less.
First of all, you don't need 225,000 people putting together Lincoln cent sets. Total demand is a combination of set collectors and Lincoln collectors. There are 400,000 proof sets sold every year.
As for 225,000 Lincoln cent collectors...there have to be some significant fraction of that, otherwise why are there any semi-key cents in the series when all the semi-keys have survivorship higher than 225,000. S-VDBs also have survivorship higher than that, but I presume some people want that coin as "sexy" without being collectors of the entire series.
"made for collectors" would include 1913 Liberty Nickels, 1804 dollars, most 19th century proof coins, all 20th century proof coins...
Yes, because that is soooo important to me.