The point people are missing about moderns.
cladking
Posts: 29,898 ✭✭✭✭✭
When I first got into moderns back in 1972 I had no interest in Ike dollars. They were
big coins with a stunning reverse design but I couldn't appreciate them because every
single one I'd ever seen had at least one severe problem. Usually they were covered
with scratches or planchet marking and if you found one that was cleaner then it was
probably poorly struck or struck with poor dies. Indeed, most Ikes had all of these pro-
blems and I didn't even believe Gems existed. It wasn't until 1978 that I stumbled on my
very first Gem Ike which was a stunning '77-P and then I started looking much more clo-
sely and finding there had been a few all along that had escaped my notice.
What people are missing (even some modern collectors) is that cent, dime, quarter, and
half moderns (some nickels) are all somewhat more generally available in Gem condition.
As a rule about 4% of mint set quarters, for instance, are nice attractive and gemmy coins
with about half of these being true Gems. We look at the mintages in the millions for the
mint sets and figure there can never be enough demand to even affect the 4% that stand
out above the rest. This is despite the fact that these mint sets have been ignored for so
long that more than half of some dates have been cut up and spent.
But look at this in another light. There are relatively few variety collectors but they have
caused the 10.1% of '70-S cents in mint set that are small dates to go to $50 per coin!!!!
Here's a very "common" coin that even existed in circulation that has been recognized all
along so few have been lost that is $50 per coin while the far scarcer '70-D Gem quarter
in 4% of the same set that has never been saved is 50c per coin. The incidence of the quar-
ter has dropped only slightly since there are lots of people who'll check this set for the sm
dt or a choice half dollar but almost no one who checks it for Gem quarters or dimes.
Why should nearly 200,000 sm dts that appeal primarily to variety collectors command so
lofty a price when 15,000 regular issue dimes and quarters needed by all regular issue col-
lectors go begging? This is why I keep saying there is virtually no demand at all for mod-
erns. There are a couple thousand serious collectors and most have a Gem or near Gem
of most dates in their collections. Almost all of these collectors are still seeking to upgrade
some of their coins. Also there are perhaps a million new collectors in the early stages of
putting together sets of the older eagle reverse coins.
I think we're going to see the demand collide with the very low supply. There are almost
hoards and no significant hoards of these coins to sataisfy the demand. There is virtually no
speculation at all in base metal circulating moderns. There are exceedingly few "old time
collections" to help satisfy demand going forward. Even today an attempt to "take a posi-
tion" in moderns would prove very difficult. The die has been cast since people first decided
that base metal coins made very poorly in huge numbers weren't collectible.
Time has a way of proving everyone wrong.
big coins with a stunning reverse design but I couldn't appreciate them because every
single one I'd ever seen had at least one severe problem. Usually they were covered
with scratches or planchet marking and if you found one that was cleaner then it was
probably poorly struck or struck with poor dies. Indeed, most Ikes had all of these pro-
blems and I didn't even believe Gems existed. It wasn't until 1978 that I stumbled on my
very first Gem Ike which was a stunning '77-P and then I started looking much more clo-
sely and finding there had been a few all along that had escaped my notice.
What people are missing (even some modern collectors) is that cent, dime, quarter, and
half moderns (some nickels) are all somewhat more generally available in Gem condition.
As a rule about 4% of mint set quarters, for instance, are nice attractive and gemmy coins
with about half of these being true Gems. We look at the mintages in the millions for the
mint sets and figure there can never be enough demand to even affect the 4% that stand
out above the rest. This is despite the fact that these mint sets have been ignored for so
long that more than half of some dates have been cut up and spent.
But look at this in another light. There are relatively few variety collectors but they have
caused the 10.1% of '70-S cents in mint set that are small dates to go to $50 per coin!!!!
Here's a very "common" coin that even existed in circulation that has been recognized all
along so few have been lost that is $50 per coin while the far scarcer '70-D Gem quarter
in 4% of the same set that has never been saved is 50c per coin. The incidence of the quar-
ter has dropped only slightly since there are lots of people who'll check this set for the sm
dt or a choice half dollar but almost no one who checks it for Gem quarters or dimes.
Why should nearly 200,000 sm dts that appeal primarily to variety collectors command so
lofty a price when 15,000 regular issue dimes and quarters needed by all regular issue col-
lectors go begging? This is why I keep saying there is virtually no demand at all for mod-
erns. There are a couple thousand serious collectors and most have a Gem or near Gem
of most dates in their collections. Almost all of these collectors are still seeking to upgrade
some of their coins. Also there are perhaps a million new collectors in the early stages of
putting together sets of the older eagle reverse coins.
I think we're going to see the demand collide with the very low supply. There are almost
hoards and no significant hoards of these coins to sataisfy the demand. There is virtually no
speculation at all in base metal circulating moderns. There are exceedingly few "old time
collections" to help satisfy demand going forward. Even today an attempt to "take a posi-
tion" in moderns would prove very difficult. The die has been cast since people first decided
that base metal coins made very poorly in huge numbers weren't collectible.
Time has a way of proving everyone wrong.
tempus fugit extra philosophiam.
0
Comments
The supply of Gem modern circulating coinage (particularly dates from 1965 through the 1980's and into the early 1990's) is very low since almost no one cared about these coins when they were minted and thus no one saved them in any significant numbers.
If demand (a big "if") for Gem modern circulating coinage ever arises (maybe after the collectors now in their 50's and older pass on and the post baby boomer generation inherits whatever wealth the baby boomers have accumulated and spend it on discretionary things, including coin collections) the supply of these coins will not come close to meeting the demand for same. Another thing that may help in creating some demand for these coins would be to retire the series and replace them with new designs (or drop the cent and nickel for good).
Populations of slabbed Gem modern circulating coinage is low and, contrary to the belief of many that there is an endless supply of raw MS examples of these coins just lying around, the populations of same will not be going through the roof.
One day it would be great to see high quality photographs of a set of GEM (or better) MS Ike dollars, SBA dollars, 1970-2002 Kennedy half dollars, 1965-1998 Washington Quarters, 1965-1999 Roosevelt dimes, 1965-2002 Jefferson Nickels and 1959-2008 Lincoln Cents. Having high quality photographs of examples of these coins available for viewing would allow those who participate in the hobby an opportunity to compare to the photographs the best examples of these coins to the best of whatever "modern coins" they happen to have sitting around in mint sets, folders, rolls and flips.
Wondercoin has posted pictures of some of his best Silver Washington quarters and many people were amazed at the quality and beauty of same. I suspect that his best 1965-1998 Clad quarters would, if displayed, generate quiet a bit of buzz around the forums.
I keep up with all of the modern commemorative coins, and in all but two cases, the 1982 Washington and the Bill of Rights half dollars, the 50 cent pieces are all clad coins. Some of the designs are great and are often better than the designs of their silver dollar counterparts, but that grayish nickel surface is just inferior to silver. I don't care for it.
That is just my taste in coins, and I will never be a modern coin collector or student of the series.
World Collection
British Collection
German States Collection
Coin Rarities Online
<< <i>I know that the copper-nickel clad coinage is scarce to rare in the Gem Mint State grades (MS-65 and higher), but I'm sorry, I just don't like the look of the stuff.
I keep up with all of the modern commemorative coins, and in all but two cases, the 1982 Washington and the Bill of Rights half dollars, the 50 cent pieces are all clad coins. Some of the designs are great and are often better than the designs of their silver dollar counterparts, but that grayish nickel surface is just inferior to silver. I don't care for it.
That is just my taste in coins, and I will never be a modern coin collector or student of the series. >>
They are an acquired taste but speaking for myself, the hardest thing about acquiring
the taste was in getting past the fact that they are base metal. I was never especially
enamoured of the Washington quarter and still consider the reverse somewhat 'homely".
I used to consider the reverse quite ugly but have softened a little over the years and
have discovered it's not an entirely unnatural depiction of a bald eagle.
Most people are not going to change their minds about moderns but new collectors have
a new perspective. They aren't quite as adamant that coins be made of precious metals
and they don't think of clad as a debasement so much as a necessary evolution in coinage
materials. Many of the new collectors in the world won't have any interest in base metal
coins generally or clad specifically. But there are still many millions interested in the ongoing
clad quarter series in circulation and many of them are likely to eventually pass through the
collecting of the older clads on their way to classics, foreign, and (eventually) even tokens
and medals.
I confess my initial interest in clad was mostly as an investor. In 1972 I learned the FED
was going to start rotating their coins out of stock that had been there the longest and it
was obvious all the clads would be worn after only a few years. I expected everyone to
jump on the bandwagon and I'd make lots of money at anytime. Obviously I was very
wrong bvut over the years the coins started holding a deep fascination for me and I be-
came a true modern collector.
While cu/ ni can never hold a candle to silver in terms of appearance the fact is i've come
to greatly appreciate the color and its depth on nice pristine early clad. They usually tone
a very rich slightly golden color. Where most of the silvers are nicely made the clad tends
much more to have retained planchet marks, scratches, and to have been made with poor
dies.
Ultimately collectors tend to appreciate rarity above all else. Of course it must be a rarity
that the individual can appreciate and for most of us this means rarity in series we collect
or might collect in the future.
<< <i>What percentage of collectors do you (in general, not directed at any specific poster) suppose there are who are willing to pay big bucks for an upgrade from a MS66 to a 67 vs. those that are satisfied with putting together a set of nice lower graded MS64-65 coins? >>
I could hazard a guess but this isn't my point (perhaps 5%)(based on the number of
collectors and price spread in higher grades). The point is that there aren't enough nice
choice coins even in MS-64 to supply a mass market. Below MS-64 most moderns are
not very attractive and can look like something the cat dragged in. Indeed, some of
these coins are so unattractive and so poorly made that they have the detail of a VF.
One could grade them MS-30. I'm not saying these ugly coins are uncollectible, merely
thaty most collectors will desire a nice choice gemmy coin in MS-64+ or better. Today
these coins are so unappreciated that they still languish in mint sets that can be purch-
ased for near face value. I believe this is a unique and very temporary situation caused
by the great recession resulting a flood of raw sets onto the market.
<< <i>The point is that there aren't enough nice choice coins even in MS-64 to supply a mass market. >>
I just picked numbers out of the air for the purpose of my first comment. I guess my point is I believe the majority of collectors will stay below a big price jump in grades, regardless of the actual number.
<< <i>You might very well be right, and I am not claiming to be an expert in moderns, but I personally have a difficult time digesting phrases like "very low supply" when I see the mintage figures for some (many, most) of these issues. >>
OK. Take a 1969 mint set, for instance. You see a mintage of 1.9 million so it's a very common
set that will forever be common. To be more accurate this set was considered common for dec-
ades so they have been getting destroyed for decades. It's not only dealers cutting them up
for their face value but they were melted in '79/ '80 and again since 2008. One assumes they
are common and exist in large hoards but in actuality there was an order limit of five sets and
they are now so old that very few still come into the coin shops. It's likely that nearly two thirds
have been destroyed and the vast majority of the coins put into circulation with no regard to their
quality or lack of it.
The most interesting coin in the set is the Philly quarter. This coin can't be found by the roll and
was not saved because of its abysmal quality. But the mint set coin is little better. Yes, it's ful-
ly struck but they almost all have retained planchet marking that makes them ugly and most are
scratched as well. About one '69 mint set in eight will have a decent (MS-63 or better) Philly quar-
ter. This means the absolute number of half decent '69-P 25c's is very very small and the number
of Gems is far smaller yet. This is exactly the point; there simply aren't enough coins to support
any sort of mass market. 80,000 MS-63 '69 quarters could leave a very large number of collectors
seeking upgrades for a long time. Sales of folders and albums for these coins is far in excess of
the supply of the coins.
1. diminishing collector base (look at all the grey haired or bald men at the next coin show).
2. most collectors of 'pre-clad' year coins have a strong bias against collecting clad coins.
3. there's a definite difference of appearance between a high grade clad coin and one that is silver (or gold).
I compare the silver-clad coinage debate very closely to the Canadian coin and Newfoundland coins markets.
Many here in Canada have been saying for years and years that Newfoundland prices will take off and soar because of their very low mintage numbers.
They haven't and in fact have probably dropped over the years for many reasons but mainly because there just isn't the numbers of Newfoundland coin collectors out there to support the higher prices.
To sum up, I just don't see a healthy market for 'modern coins' in the future.
"“Those who sacrifice liberty for security/safety deserve neither.“(Benjamin Franklin)
"I only golf on days that end in 'Y'" (DE59)
<< <i>
<< <i>The point is that there aren't enough nice choice coins even in MS-64 to supply a mass market. >>
I just picked numbers out of the air for the purpose of my first comment. I guess my point is I believe the majority of collectors will stay below a big price jump in grades, regardless of the actual number. >>
Yes and no. I generally agree but I believe the big jump in prices might be BELOW the
level at which most people prefer to collect moderns. One of the most attractive things
for the few who collect moderns is that these coins are cheap allowing them to be col-
lected in higher grades. But there is a cutoff around MS-63 that most moderns look like
junk and most collectors will want to avoid them. Above this level the coins can be scarce
enough that any real demand could cause significantly higher prices.
Every day I'm seeing more and more indication that the economy is turning the corner.
This won't necesarily have much impact on demand (some since it will make pre-recess-
ion items more nostalgic), but it will have a huge impact on supply. The supply is caused
by people who lose their jobs or are fearful of losing their jobs and selling possessions.
When this ends the supply dries up. Suddenly the small demand is greater than the ev-
en smaller supply.
<< <i>This is exactly the point; there simply aren't enough coins to support
any sort of mass market. 80,000 MS-63 '69 quarters could leave a very large number of collectors
seeking upgrades for a long time. Sales of folders and albums for these coins is far in excess of
the supply of the coins. >>
I am thinking that most collectors will be satisfied with the best coin they can find that doesn't involve a ten year search or an exponential price jump from one grade to the next. If that happens to be an MS62, that will be good enough.
I've been collecting for 50 years and from reading hobby periodicals during that time, I have noticed a story topic that is repeated regularly- coins that would increase in value substantially if only more people decided to put together sets. But demand almost never seems to materialize. Maybe it will for high grade clad- who knows? Certainly not me.
<< <i>I generally agree but I believe the big jump in prices might be BELOW the
level at which most people prefer to collect moderns. >>
If that price jump happens, my prediction would be that there would be a reassessment of what grade level is acceptable to the collector, not that most collectors would decide to spend considerably more money than they had originally intended.
<< <i>They are an acquired taste but speaking for myself, the hardest thing about acquiring
the taste was in getting past the fact that they are base metal. I was never especially
enamoured of the Washington quarter and still consider the reverse somewhat 'homely".
I used to consider the reverse quite ugly but have softened a little over the years and
have discovered it's not an entirely unnatural depiction of a bald eagle.
>>
I have never liked the Washington quarter, especially the reverse. It always looked crowded and ugly to me. When I was a kid collector in the early to mid 1960s, I finished every modern set from circulation or purchase EXCEPT the Washington quarter. I just never could get into them. Then as an adult when I read about how Mrs. Laura Fraser was cheated out of having her design used on the coin, I became even more anti-Washington quarter.
As for base metal thing, that's not the basis of my problem. I just don't find most nickel coins to be attractive as opposed to silver. I look at the Statue of Liberty half dollar and think, "Wow that would look great in silver, but it's not." Buying bullion just does not turn me on. For the money that I've spent on collector coins I could have huge safe full of gold and silver bullion by now, and I'd be bored as hell with it.
I got one of the U.S. Platinum coins when they first came out. It bored me. Now if I could find one of the old Russian Platinum coins or that Bust half dollar with 33 "P"s punched into the obverse, that might grab my attention.
My only issue is people telling me how rare they are when every B&M I have ever been in has rolls and rolls of every date and calling MS67 rarities when there are hundreds of graded ms66s an thousads of MS65s is missing a fundamental rule of supply and demand.
Moderns aren't for me, so that means there are more for everyone else!
I don't think there is any significant future in any post 1964 circulating coinage, at least from a "making money because there will be a lot of future demand and limited supply someday" perspective.
I'm one of the last of the dinosaurs, I lived through the change in coins from silver to clad. I actually experienced finding coins of value as a kid from change. None of my kids has experienced that, none of them collect coins. When I grew up, change was important and cool and fun and you could really buy stuff with it. My 19 year old literally throws away any pennies he gets.
I only go to the Orlando FUN coin show every year, as I live here, and it looks to me like the most active foot traffic on the floor is certainly on average older than me (and I'm 55). And most everyone I buy or sell collectible coins from is as old or older than me.
I think within 5-10 years they won't bother making pennies and nickels anymore, and probably will do away with dimes. Really, quarters are close enough today.
I sincerely doubt that in 20 years there will be half as many people collecting coins as now. Nor will that population be as wealthy as the current 55-plus crowd.
<< <i>[.... and I woul dlike to add with a name like Cladking I wouldn't think you would make an argument for the decrease in value, in interest, or of value of moderns.............so in the end this is pure conjecture with not much factual data to back one up, of course that is assuming one could get actual reliable factual data that isn't a promoter of the series(s). >>
Out of line.
The OP has shown his commitment to collecting these series over an extended period of time.
Everyone extols the virtues of what they like. How does this differ in any way with someone who has a clear preference for, and is the owner of, very small undipped type coins, "pushing" his own series ?
As you go back in time for the "early' moderns 1965-1980 or so, many issues are extremely hard to find in GEM or better quality. Not all, but a heck of a lot of them. People will end up putting date sets together, just like early Lincolns, Jefferesons, Washingtons etc. Will any be rare as a coin, like a 93-S Morgan, probably not, but as a condition rarity, you bet they will be.
If you doubt that, check the pop reports and then go and try to "make" some. If you are lucky enough, you'll strike gold.
Anyhow, Cladking is spot on, and has the background to prove it.
GO FOR IT!!!
Ike Specialist
Finest Toned Ike I've Ever Seen, been looking since 1986
<< <i>I just don't see the demand for these coins in the near future for the following reasons:
1. diminishing collector base (look at all the grey haired or bald men at the next coin show). >>
It's only the traditional collector base that is shrinking. There are many millions of new
younger collectors from an exploding middle class world wide and younger collectors
brought in by precious metals and the states coins.
<< <i>2. most collectors of 'pre-clad' year coins have a strong bias against collecting clad coins. >>
Yes, this is unlikely to change but these collectors generally don't have many moderns
so won't affect the supply either.
<< <i>3. there's a definite difference of appearance between a high grade clad coin and one that is silver (or gold). >>
Again, yes. But this is the reason that collectors who do collect clad will desire higher grade
coins; lower grades tend to look awful.
<< <i>I compare the silver-clad coinage debate very closely to the Canadian coin and Newfoundland coins markets.
Many here in Canada have been saying for years and years that Newfoundland prices will take off and soar because of their very low mintage numbers.
They haven't and in fact have probably dropped over the years for many reasons but mainly because there just isn't the numbers of Newfoundland coin collectors out there to support the higher prices.
To sum up, I just don't see a healthy market for 'modern coins' in the future. >>
Of course you may be right but this is the quintessential comparison of apples and oranges.
I, too, thought (and still think) that Newfoundland coins will do better in the future. But we're
not splitting hairs about what's a US coin and what is not here. We are talking about US coins
made after 1964 and it's a virtual certainty these will be collected at some point. Newfoundland
coins require that collectors come to recognize them as being Canadian but there's no question
that a 1965 clad quarter is just as American as a 1964. Canadian coins have been widely collect-
ed in the US significantly increasing their availability. Clad coins have been widely collected no-
where.
<< <i>It always amuses me to read threads here that attempt to predict the future. Nothing wrong with that, actually part of human nature. However, I do chuckle when individuals make positive statements about the future, as if they truly had foresight. The only thing that can be predicted with confidence is change, and there will be a great deal of that. Having myself lived and collected from the period that IHC's were still circulating, SLQ's common and silver change was standard fare, I can assure you that even more change will be coming - and as technology avalanches upon the human condition, these changes will likely be far more radical than the change from silver to clad. As a collector, (not a seller or dealer), I will be content to sit by and marvel at the coming world of change. Cheers, RickO >>
Well said RickO
<< <i>
<< <i>You might very well be right, and I am not claiming to be an expert in moderns, but I personally have a difficult time digesting phrases like "very low supply" when I see the mintage figures for some (many, most) of these issues. >>
I've stated before that I do have a financial interest in these coins.
This hardly is evidence that the argument is flawed in some way.
The point here goes beyond any personal financial or collector interest. Suffice to say I've
watched these coins and markets pretty carefully for a very long time. I've been wrong about
them for a very long time as well but never in the past has there been as much interest as
there is today. People are watching modern coins from all over the world explode in price and
increasing numbers are collecting the US coins. When the economy improves the supply will
necessarily drop dramatically and this might well signal the birth of a market I've expected for
decades.
Or maybe I'm wrong again...
<< <i>Whether MS modern circulating coinage will ever be considered worthwhile to collect by a a collector base that drives demand far above available supply is an open question. For me, the prevailing opinion about this modern coinage is that it is ugly. Most of the coins are, but there are exceptions. Over the years I have stumbled across some MS clad coins that are very beautiful coins. For those who do not like clads, have you ever seen any of the best examples in hand or through high quality photographs? >>
You're probably right about the need for some pictures to be out there. I keep meaning
to get a camera and post some but the software is still frightening to me. I did learn how
to photobucket pictures so I'm about half way there.
I think most people would be very surprised to see something like an '88-D cent that looks
like a branch mint proof. Many would be surprised to see almost any clad Gem.
<< <i>I am thinking that most collectors will be satisfied with the best coin they can find that doesn't involve a ten year search or an exponential price jump from one grade to the next. If that happens to be an MS62, that will be good enough. >>
The typical indian cent was made pretty decently. Sure some dates were worse but even
the worst date indian cent was made to a higher standrad than a clad quarter. Most of the
worst indian cents went into circulation where their defects would be hidden under many
layers of wear so except for culls most indian cents are fairly attractive. People collect them
in all conditions.
Clad quarters are different. Most were horribly made and are in no way attractive. As a rule
they look worse after circulation rather than better but this varies. Attractive clad isn't com-
mon in any grade! Attractive clad doesn't exist in MS-62. Every MS-62 clad will look like junk.
This doesn't mean they aren't collectible in this grade and some varieties are rare this nice
but they aren't pretty.
I just don't believe there will ever be large numbers of collectors who collect MS-62 because
they want to. Anyone collecting in this grade will be collecting because they can't afford more
attractive coins or the coins don't exist in attractive condition.
<< <i>My only issue is people telling me how rare they are when every B&M I have ever been in has rolls and rolls of every date and calling MS67 rarities when there are hundreds of graded ms66s an thousads of MS65s is missing a fundamental rule of supply and demand. >>
I've been watching clads and the markets since 1965. I've been buying bank rolls and
looking at the coins since 1957 right through the change to clad. I've been in the market
since the late '70's and promoting the coins since 1986. I've known or corresponded with
many of the principles in the markets for decades and have spoken to many in person. I've
followed the periodicals, visited many shops, and been to coin shows.
I have never seen a BU roll of 1969 quarters since 1971. These have not been for sale since
Arlan Kramer removed them from his published price list in 1974 because he was sold out. No
doubt there are a few rolls around but I've seen one. The others rolls are not much more
common. Most rolls that are offerred are actually mint set coins.
I came very close to a couple rolls of '69 quarters back about 1997 when a coin dealer gave me
a nice attractive BU in change. I asked him if he had more and was able to recover about 75
of the nicest '69 quarters I ever saw from a circulation source. The rolls had just come in and
he tossed them in the cash register.
You can find some Ike rolls still and half dollar rollsaren't too tough. Nickel roll availability is
very spotty with some dates being extremely common and others elusive. Penny rolls are every-
where though some are tough in nice condition and many zinc rolls are a fright. A few of the '90's
zinc rolls are tougher as well as the '84 and '86-D. But there are almost no dime and quarter rolls
from before '99 and some of the later ones might not be as common as is percieved.
If you could find a roll of '69 quarters the odds are poor that there would be a single coin nicer
than MS-63.
<< <i>I guess I take a more "macro" view. I think the easiest mistake in life is assuming as a baseline that things in the future will be like they are today, and that the next generation's experience will be like their own experience.
I don't think there is any significant future in any post 1964 circulating coinage, at least from a "making money because there will be a lot of future demand and limited supply someday" perspective.
I'm one of the last of the dinosaurs, I lived through the change in coins from silver to clad. I actually experienced finding coins of value as a kid from change. None of my kids has experienced that, none of them collect coins. When I grew up, change was important and cool and fun and you could really buy stuff with it. My 19 year old literally throws away any pennies he gets.
I only go to the Orlando FUN coin show every year, as I live here, and it looks to me like the most active foot traffic on the floor is certainly on average older than me (and I'm 55). And most everyone I buy or sell collectible coins from is as old or older than me.
I think within 5-10 years they won't bother making pennies and nickels anymore, and probably will do away with dimes. Really, quarters are close enough today.
I sincerely doubt that in 20 years there will be half as many people collecting coins as now. Nor will that population be as wealthy as the current 55-plus crowd. >>
I don't disagree but am reminded of an old saying; the more things change the more they remain the same.
The fundamentals and definitions never change so there's always a reverting to the mean. A pendulum can't
swing in only one direction.
Most world coins were always saved by Americans because most countries didn't have a large middle class
to demand the coins. But Americans quit saving world coins as they transitioned from silver to cu/ ni. Today
the emerging middle classes in these countries is exerting a little demand for the moderns and prices of mod-
erns all over the world are exploding.
Nothing ever really changes except for everything.
Velocity, Not Valuation Defines A Bubble.
<< <i>It always amuses me to read threads here that attempt to predict the future. Nothing wrong with that, actually part of human nature. However, I do chuckle when individuals make positive statements about the future, as if they truly had foresight. The only thing that can be predicted with confidence is change, and there will be a great deal of that. Having myself lived and collected from the period that IHC's were still circulating, SLQ's common and silver change was standard fare, I can assure you that even more change will be coming - and as technology avalanches upon the human condition, these changes will likely be far more radical than the change from silver to clad. As a collector, (not a seller or dealer), I will be content to sit by and marvel at the coming world of change. >>
I've been marveling at the change even since 1965.
Didn't Yogi Berra say something like "what makes the future so hard to predict is that it hasn't happened yet."?
Some things don't require a Nostradamus to predict. The main thing you need to predict the future is just a lot
of very good luck and a little bit of solid theory. Most major changes have lots of foreshadowing. No trend can
play out forever.
<< <i>they won't always be moderns. >>
...And here's the most solid of predictions.
We're fast approaching half a century of the "new" coins. Indeed, it's been longer than fifty years
ago that the government announced that the days of silver were numbered and initiated the great
coin shortage (like that wasn't predictable).
<< <i>
<< <i>What percentage of collectors do you (in general, not directed at any specific poster) suppose there are who are willing to pay big bucks for an upgrade from a MS66 to a 67 vs. those that are satisfied with putting together a set of nice lower graded MS64-65 coins? >>
I could hazard a guess but this isn't my point (perhaps 5%)(based on the number of
collectors and price spread in higher grades). The point is that there aren't enough nice
choice coins even in MS-64 to supply a mass market. Below MS-64 most moderns are
not very attractive and can look like something the cat dragged in. Indeed, some of
these coins are so unattractive and so poorly made that they have the detail of a VF.
One could grade them MS-30. I'm not saying these ugly coins are uncollectible, merely
thaty most collectors will desire a nice choice gemmy coin in MS-64+ or better. Today
these coins are so unappreciated that they still languish in mint sets that can be purch-
ased for near face value. I believe this is a unique and very temporary situation caused
by the great recession resulting a flood of raw sets onto the market. >>
I can see the argument both ways. I recently "invested" in a modern Jefferson nickel that was at the highest available grade but I have subsequently noticed that although none have yet to be graded higher I am seeing the population numbers for the grade growing. My guess is that someone has a nice roll of them that they are trickling to the grading services. Makes one question how many other untouched rolls of the modern issues have been preserved and which just have not been submitted to the grading services since the cost of submission has historically not made it worth the effort.
Going back 100 years, Barbers and the coinage of Edward VII was modern and really was not saved in GEM quality- even see a GEM GB 1905 1/2 Crown?
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
I started seriously collecting clad coinage (and related coins such as Memorial cents) around 1983 and have never stopped. So, I have about (30) years of experience behind my (clad) findings. I believe CK started seriously around (10) years before I did so he has closer to (40) years of experience behinds his (clad) findings.
I am "dusting off" some of my oldest clad hoard this year especially now that I have the strong screening services available from my 23 year old daughter, Lauren. It is really slow going though .. plenty of "near gemmy" material, but very little super gem MS66/MS67 stuff. As CK states, these coins are super tough to find in high gem grade. But, the hunts have to be done and you either need to be an expert in screening this kind of stuff yourself or find someone that is. The labor cost is very high ... last week Lauren screened about 5,000 coins from the 1960's for me and, in the end, handed me about (25) or (30) possible candidates for submission. I ruled them down to less than (10) very serious coins. Of that, there were one or two that had a shot of being really special.
Then, the next question is what to do with the roughly 4,970 rejects per 5,000 coins looked at. I am just too busy to deal with them now. I just need to wait for CK's predictions to come true and then we will (hopefully) see hundreds of collectors wanting a nice Choice BU example of this and that clad coin and I will have plenty of options to sell the coins at that point. At this moment, I simply have a HUGE cost in these projects that has yielded (10) possible submission coins out of each 5,000 coins purchased.
More comments to follow.
Wondercoin
``https://ebay.us/m/KxolR5
<< <i>You might very well be right, and I am not claiming to be an expert in moderns, but I personally have a difficult time digesting phrases like "very low supply" when I see the mintage figures for some (many, most) of these issues. >>
As always, access to coins, expertise in grading, and market knowledge are what will rule the day. It is not all that different whether a person is collecting colonials, or Morgans, or Bust halves, or dirty gold, or moderns, or ultra moderns. Any or all of those can pay off financially, or be a burial. Those three factors will tend to play a far larger role in monetary gain or loss than whether a particular series goes up or down. As always, those buying at full retail prices will do well to break even.
I have no doubt that Cladking and Wondercoin and his child, and Segoja will do very well financially with their modern and ultramodern coins. For an average collector, it would be a steep uphill climb. The new person will need to spend the hundreds or perhaps even thousands of hours getting up to a similar level of expertise as these major players or be food for the higher ups on the food chain. Even then, most will never have the dealer access that a dealer like Wondercoin might have.
Unless these kinds of coins are a burning passion for you, the odds are against you. The level of skill is high: a person has to grade at a very high level, have access to lots of raw coins, spend lots of hours (that's after the intensive training), and then roll the dice at the grading companies in order to get paid. Yes, I'm sure a few can do it, have done it, will continue to do it, but it isn't many. That number is near zero for those that lack passion for these modern designs.
<< <i>I have the strong screening services available from my 23 year old daughter, Lauren. It is really slow going though .. plenty of "near gemmy" material, but very little super gem MS66/MS67 stuff. As CK states, these coins are super tough to find in high gem grade. But, the hunts have to be done and you either need to be an expert in screening this kind of stuff yourself or find someone that is. The labor cost is very high ... last week Lauren screened about 5,000 coins from the 1960's for me and, in the end, handed me about (25) or (30) possible candidates for submission. >>
It sounds like the modern coin market is ripe for some outsourcing.
Coin Rarities Online
<< <i>Yes, I'm sure a few can do it, have done it, will continue to do it, but it isn't many. >>
Tom Hanks, as Jimmy Dugan in "A League of Their Own": "It's supposed to be hard. If it wasn't hard, everyone would do it."
If everybody could do it, who would *you* sell the coins *you* made to?
1. the designs are still being struck.
2. the coins are struck on planchets with no intrinsic value.
3. the bulk of the collecting population is older and advanced past entry level.
the point of this topic which always dumbfounds me is that those collectors who have solid working knowledge of the market are often talked over by collectors who just have no interest in Moderns coupled with little working knowledge. logic should tell us that when the current designs are abandoned and the collecting base is distanced from the time when these coins were current that they will be popular, widely collected and advancing in value. this has always been true. historically, currently circulating designs aren't popular, aren't widely collected and have little value past face value. why would these coins from this era be any different?? the thought which comes to my mind when this is discussed is always that old saying about "Contempt prior to investigation" and it has happened again.
Sam has stated himself clearly over the past decade to the point where he should probably give up already..........except that he has a passion for the Hobby and the ability to express that passion without much bias. those of us who "hear" what he says understand him.
<< <i>why would these coins from this era be any different?? >>
Just for the sake of discussion and not that I have any disagreement with your post but how long have people collected coins using an 11 point MS grading scale? IMO, that's a difference from one era to another.
<< <i>
I started seriously collecting clad coinage (and related coins such as Memorial cents) around 1983 and have never stopped. So, I have about (30) years of experience behind my (clad) findings. I believe CK started seriously around (10) years before I did so he has closer to (40) years of experience behinds his (clad) findings.
I am "dusting off" some of my oldest clad hoard this year especially now that I have the strong screening services available from my 23 year old daughter, Lauren. It is really slow going though .. plenty of "near gemmy" material, but very little super gem MS66/MS67 stuff. As CK states, these coins are super tough to find in high gem grade. But, the hunts have to be done and you either need to be an expert in screening this kind of stuff yourself or find someone that is. The labor cost is very high ... last week Lauren screened about 5,000 coins from the 1960's for me and, in the end, handed me about (25) or (30) possible candidates for submission. I ruled them down to less than (10) very serious coins. Of that, there were one or two that had a shot of being really special.
Then, the next question is what to do with the roughly 4,970 rejects per 5,000 coins looked at. I am just too busy to deal with them now. I just need to wait for CK's predictions to come true and then we will (hopefully) see hundreds of collectors wanting a nice Choice BU example of this and that clad coin and I will have plenty of options to sell the coins at that point. At this moment, I simply have a HUGE cost in these projects that has yielded (10) possible submission coins out of each 5,000 coins purchased.
More comments to follow.
>>
Thanks for the post. It's always great to hear about the experiences of people who are actually out
there in the trenches instead of just "theory" and observation. It's really difficult to find great coins and
I've always employed a sort of "radar" myself. I've just learned where to look and will just not bother
searching some bags or sources because I know in advance the odds are too low. If I scan a bag of
1968-D nickels and there there isn't a single half decent coin in the first dozen pieces then I look for
something else to search. If a batch of rolls are all from the same source then I just spot check them.
Getting rid of the rejects is less of a problem with new coins or whatever you can find at face value but
you still need an understanding banker.
Cost is always a factor since there is always overhead and there aren't always any coins worth saving.
<< <i>I can see the argument both ways. I recently "invested" in a modern Jefferson nickel that was at the highest available grade but I have subsequently noticed that although none have yet to be graded higher I am seeing the population numbers for the grade growing. My guess is that someone has a nice roll of them that they are trickling to the grading services. Makes one question how many other untouched rolls of the modern issues have been preserved and which just have not been submitted to the grading services since the cost of submission has historically not made it worth the effort. >>
It's very difficult to impossible to predict the final tallies of the highest grade coins because
there are rolls out there that can be superb and this is strictly "luck of the draw". But generally
the Gems are found in mint sets (applies less to Ikes) and these can be closely estimated. It
can't be exacly estimated because there was a tendency for Gems to bunch up in specific cities
since they were shipped by zip code.
But the coins that are likely to be most in demand can be almost exactly estimated. For instance
Gem '72-D quarters appear in about 7% of the mint sets. There really iusn't any guesswork just
your prediction of the relatiuve demand of choice and Gem '72-D quarters. The sm dt cent appeared
in 10.1% of mint sets so, same thing, no guessing needed. If you locate 1000 fresh original sets
there will be just about 109 small dates and almost no variation. If 10,000 coins are available then
any demand ibn excess of this will affect prices. Of course there are different types of demand
and specific collector demand is the most potent.
was not saved because of its abysmal quality. But the mint set coin is little better. Yes, it's ful-
ly struck but they almost all have retained planchet marking that makes them ugly and most are
scratched as well. About one '69 mint set in eight will have a decent (MS-63 or better) Philly quar-
ter. This means the absolute number of half decent '69-P 25c's is very very small and the number
of Gems is far smaller yet. This is exactly the point; there simply aren't enough coins to support
any sort of mass market. 80,000 MS-63 '69 quarters could leave a very large number of collectors
seeking upgrades for a long time. Sales of folders and albums for these coins is far in excess of
the supply of the coins. >>
Point taken on the 1969 P quarter. That is only 1 die variety. But consider the 1969 D.
The 1969 D has 5 varieties. The type B like type H is the most obvious and the scarcest. Starting in 1973 I used to find
almost 1% of the 1969 D's were this variety. By that time, they all had some degree of circulation to them. I would like to have an unc version. That is virtually impossible to find.
THe the 1970D, 1971D and 1972D ones are much scarcer that the 1969D's ones.