Options
Minimalist or Maximalist?
MrEureka
Posts: 24,698 ✭✭✭✭✭
OK, maybe the terms aren't perfect. I welcome suggestions for better terminology.
Anyway, here's the question.
Do you tend to be happier with more coins or less coins for the same amount of money? For example, would you tend to prefer one rarer coin instead of two more common pieces? Or one higher grade coin instead of two lower grade coins? Does a super large pile of coins bother you, or make you feel warm and fuzzy? Would you like it if you woke up in the morning and your entire collection had been magically converted to one super rarity of your dreams, of the same value as your entire collection had been?
And for one more twist, instead of picking one extreme or another, do you think there's an optimum size for your collection? For example, perhaps a one coin collection could never satisfy you, a 10,000 coin collection would always drive you batty, but a Box of 20 is just about right.
For what it's worth, I think my ideal number is somewhere between 100 and 500.
Anyway, here's the question.
Do you tend to be happier with more coins or less coins for the same amount of money? For example, would you tend to prefer one rarer coin instead of two more common pieces? Or one higher grade coin instead of two lower grade coins? Does a super large pile of coins bother you, or make you feel warm and fuzzy? Would you like it if you woke up in the morning and your entire collection had been magically converted to one super rarity of your dreams, of the same value as your entire collection had been?
And for one more twist, instead of picking one extreme or another, do you think there's an optimum size for your collection? For example, perhaps a one coin collection could never satisfy you, a 10,000 coin collection would always drive you batty, but a Box of 20 is just about right.
For what it's worth, I think my ideal number is somewhere between 100 and 500.
Andy Lustig
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
0
Comments
I find myself always parting with one or a few to make room for others or to help finance a better coin/s that come along. Its easier to sell a better piece then a mass of ho hum coins.
I don't think I would be satisfied with just one coin. If that had to be my option, I would prefer to concentrate on building my numismatic library to the point where it would continue to keep me somehow connected to numismatics.
RMR: 'Wer, wenn ich schriee, hörte mich denn aus der Engel Ordnungen?'
CJ: 'No one!' [Ain't no angels in the coin biz]
Partner @Gold Hill Coin
Eric
Sometimes, it’s better to be LUCKY than good. 🍀 🍺👍
My Full Walker Registry Set (1916-1947):
https://www.ngccoin.com/registry/competitive-sets/16292/
I would happily do it again for the right coin.
But scenarios like this shouldn't be all or nothing. Once I obtained the one great coin, I set about rebuilding my "new" collection around it.
In general, though, I think of myself as a minimalist and I value quality much more than quantity.
<< <i>Good topic. Since getting back into collecting in 2008 I went from having ALOT to downsizing to just some. As a kid it was always fun to have the mentally "more coins the better" but since I am older now I find more joy in having piece I would like to have many decades down the road versus having piles of coins that mean nothing to me & take up space.
I find myself always parting with one or a few to make room for others or to help finance a better coin/s that come along. Its easier to sell a better piece then a mass of ho hum coins. >>
Similar situation. Fewer is better for me. 20-30 would be my max.
If something is cool I will hang onto it for a while even though I do not collect the series. I sold off my Lincoln Registry set some years back but could stopped short of major pieces. The Morgan Registry set is a big commitment, and even though it has been technically completed years ago it seems to always have 10 or 20 coins that need an upgrade.
There are just too many cool coins I grew-up wanting as a kid (55 dbl-die Cent, 16-D Merc, 93-S Morgan) and now that I have them I enjoy that. I do not think I start any new registry sets moving forward, but I will keep working the ones I have and then hang onto any key dates from other series that I have the opportunity to buy well.
Joe.
<< <i>Your question probably falls on deaf ears to most die marriage and variety collectors. I understand the quest for quality, and can appreciate the concept of a "box of 20", but that will never fly for anyone seeking to collect all 454 (?) die marriages of the Capped Bust half dollars or all 92 marriages of the Capped Bust half dimes. I confess to having been greatly impressed, several years ago, when Jules Reiver showed me over 60 different die states of the 1855 "Knob on Ear" large cent that he had accumulated over a period of years. What a fabulous study of the slow deterioration of a die pair! That was significantly more impressive to me than would be the highest grade example of that same die marriage. This is why I presently have 1,942 half dimes in my reference collection, and have no intention of stopping now. Yes, there are some duplicates, but mostly there are numerous die studies, and examples of as many different die marriages as I can find. To be sure, if I took the same amount of money that I have invested in these many half dimes over the years, and spent it on just one 1792 half disme, I likely could own one of the higher grade examples of that fabulous piece of Americana. But I would not have enjoyed all of the fun, all of the history, all of the enjoyment, and all of the camaraderie that have kept me so intrigued with this hobby for so long. The thought is tempting, but I have no regrets for accumulating such a hoard because I have studied and learned so much from the experience. There is no wrong way to collect; just different ways. >>
Myself I prefer quality over quantity. I must say that mreureka's response is very good and makes a lot of (cents) also.
I decided that I have too many interests to narrow everything down to a box of twenty, but I have weaned myself away from the temptation to buy everything unusual that comes across my path, which has proven to be the true challenge. Four albums and three registry sets are enough to keep me occupied for the rest of my life, if I can keep my eye from wandering. That in its own right is easier said than done....
Both of those projects fall in my own personal range of 100-500 coins.
As for the Box of 20, 1793 Large Cents by die variety come to mind.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
<< <i>Minimalists here. I like the extra rare or unusual. Besides, it's easy to move when necessary. >>
I am of the opposite frame of mind. Sure it might be easy to sell classic better dates or rarities, it's also pretty easy to get royally hosed on bull/sell spreads with such, "talking down the market" for "X", and lose a boatload of money. Not that it's not also easy to lose $ on bullionish items, but at today's prices I'm still ahead on "neat old silver coins" and common gold stuff I bought years and years ago. I also find it easier to sell an item for $20 than $200 or $2000.
On a supposed-quality "rare date" Indian $5 that I had no business buying at the time, I eventually lost $4000, and was lucky to bail out of it. I'm quite sure it was a doctorer's delight, was probably processed and now resides in someone's collection to eventually be an unpleasant surprise for them, however many years hence. As William Atkinson said in his EXCELLENT book from some years ago -- don't buy the best you can afford. Buy the best you can understand. I am much better generally at following this rule, now. Particularly because, come time to sell, every potential buyer seems ready and willing to take full advantage of whatever weakness or LACK of knowledge they perceive in you, the seller. You sure do learn a lot by collecting coins.
<< <i>If I had to get out of town I want to be able to take them with me without a problem. >>
Make sure to also keep gas in the car and the engine running.
Coin Rarities Online
<< <i>For example, perhaps a one coin collection could never satisfy you, a 10,000 coin collection would always drive you batty, but a Box of 20 is just about right. >>
This example describes my current philosophy pretty well.
I haven't pared all the way down to a Box of 20 yet, but I am working on it.
Counting my Box of 20, my daughter's 1901 British Empire type set, and my Holey Gold Hat, but not my detector finds album, I guess I'm somewhere around 100, maybe a little more. Count the detector finds, and I'm still probably in MrEureka's "100 to 500" sweet spot.
Collector since 1976. On the CU forums here since 2001.
I would estimate that until 5 years ago, I needed to have a larger quantity of coins, in any holder, and maybe got to 400 coins.
Today, I will buy only eye appealing coins in a series, either for type or to complete a set. That will mean the technical grade
is not as important as the look. I find that in many cases, the MS 64 is more to my liking that the 65 and/or 66. (and the cost is so much less).
In fact, I own some AU's that are fab, rather than plain looking MS examples.
Maybe 175 to 200 coins. And 2 less safety deposit boxes.
Hoard the keys.
Edited to add that I might be able to go for well over 1000 coins if they were stored more compactly. For example, in coin albums or Capital Plastics. The important thing is that they all fit in that same 5X10 safe deposit box.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
To me my coin hobby is a balancing act between history, rarity, popularity of the item (I have collected things that many collectors don't care about.) and state of preservation. For some collectors state of preservation is the ruling factor. For others rarity is the ruling factor. For example there are Civil War token collectors who won't collect anything with an estimated population that exceeds ten pieces known. To me that limits you, and leaves you missing out on a lot of neat, historic material.
Condition is important, and I have my limits as to how far down I will go on a given item. If I can only afford a piece that is an eyesore, I would rather not own it. Usually my lowest grade in the Fine to Very Fine area although a really exceptional VG might work. Anything lower than that, the chances are high that I will pass.
It kind of goes against the grain of collecting, where completing a set is everything. But with age comes
descretion and I get more satisfaction looking at a small sample of coins I know would be tough to upgrade
than looking at a bunch of dates.
A collector has to know their limitations, and minimalism - with the right taste and experience - can make a small time
collector very satisfied with the small niche they carve out in this hobby.
between 4,000 and 5,000 coins, tokens, paper money, etc. Some go away when the market
dictates (such as when silver hit $50), and some is used for trades (I helped a local dealer
restock part of his store with $1 to $5 coins a few years ago, in exchange for a Proof gold coin).
Makes me a maximalist, doesn't it?
Just a progression in what I collect, and a progression not unlike a lot of collectors.
I do also have 300-400 raw, inexpensive coins that are just for fun and not worth much other than sentimentality.
"Look up, old boy, and see what you get." -William Bonney.
MJ
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
I give away money. I collect money.
I don’t love money . I do love the Lord God.
between 4,000 and 5,000 coins, tokens, paper money, etc. Some go away when the market
dictates (such as when silver hit $50), and some is used for trades (I helped a local dealer
restock part of his store with $1 to $5 coins a few years ago, in exchange for a Proof gold coin).
Makes me a maximalist, doesn't it?
It depends. How did you feel about giving up so many coins in that trade?
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
I could not disagree more. Even just 20 coins, which have nothing more in common than the fact that they are all round, is an accumulation. But a large, life-long collection of a single series, which involves new and unprecedented research into their manufacture, and comprehensive study and identification of the numerous die marriages, re-marriages, and die states, is the very definition of a collection.
I don't believe that there are any wrong ways to collect; there are just different ways. For many here, grade (or more accurately, high numbers on an insert) are the defining factor in their collections. For others, who have an abiding interest in the manufacturing processes by which the coins are made, absolute grade is somewhat less important than are the minute differences in the coins, or die marriages. Neither method of collecting is any better or worse than the other. The different methods merely appeal to different collector types.
For the record, and so that I do not leave the impression that I have merely 'accumulated' a large quantity of low grade coins, I would point out that the average grade for my nearly 2000 half dimes is AU-50+, and includes examples of almost all known die marriages. If that seems somehow inconsequential, try duplicating it.
<< <i>"For coins, 20-50 is about right, 100 max. Anything over that is an accumulation, not a collection."
I could not disagree more. Even just 20 coins, which have nothing more in common than the fact that they are all round, is an accumulation. But a large, life-long collection of a single series, which involves new and unprecedented research into their manufacture, and comprehensive study and identification of the numerous die marriages, re-marriages, and die states, is the very definition of a collection.
I don't believe that there are any wrong ways to collect; there are just different ways. For many here, grade (or more accurately, high numbers on an insert) are the defining factor in their collections. For others, who have an abiding interest in the manufacturing processes by which the coins are made, absolute grade is somewhat less important than are the minute differences in the coins, or die marriages. Neither method of collecting is any better or worse than the other. The different methods merely appeal to different collector types.
For the record, and so that I do not leave the impression that I have merely 'accumulated' a large quantity of low grade coins, I would point out that the average grade for my nearly 2000 half dimes is AU-50+, and includes examples of almost all known die marriages. If that seems somehow inconsequential, try duplicating it. >>
WOW !
I give away money. I collect money.
I don’t love money . I do love the Lord God.
That's not something I would try unless I was confident that they would fit in a peanut butter jar. Raw, of course.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
Focus, direction, and careful selection are all good qualities to have as a collector no matter how large the collection.
That said, Virgil Brand had 368,000 coins in his collection, according to an inventory taken at the time of his death in 1926. Yet PCGS lists his collection in their Set Registry Hall of Fame, noting - "The Brand collection was one of the finest of all time."
<< <i>"For coins, 20-50 is about right, 100 max. Anything over that is an accumulation, not a collection."
I could not disagree more. Even just 20 coins, which have nothing more in common than the fact that they are all round, is an accumulation. But a large, life-long collection of a single series, which involves new and unprecedented research into their manufacture, and comprehensive study and identification of the numerous die marriages, re-marriages, and die states, is the very definition of a collection.
I don't believe that there are any wrong ways to collect; there are just different ways. For many here, grade (or more accurately, high numbers on an insert) are the defining factor in their collections. For others, who have an abiding interest in the manufacturing processes by which the coins are made, absolute grade is somewhat less important than are the minute differences in the coins, or die marriages. Neither method of collecting is any better or worse than the other. The different methods merely appeal to different collector types.
For the record, and so that I do not leave the impression that I have merely 'accumulated' a large quantity of low grade coins, I would point out that the average grade for my nearly 2000 half dimes is AU-50+, and includes examples of almost all known die marriages. If that seems somehow inconsequential, try duplicating it. >>
It was just my opinion, don't take it personally.
That being said. I understand the difference between a coherent collection and an accumulation. 20 coins could be an accumulation if they don't have a recognizable theme. That wasn't what I meant though. I'd much rather see a focused collection of 1794 cents by die variety (50-60 I think), than a complete sheldon set of large cents.
You're completely free to disagree of course, but I would find a collection of 2000 half dimes an unmanageable accumulation even though it has recognizable boundaries as a collection. I'd be willing to bet you have coins in that collection you haven't looked at in years. If I had that kind of money and collected half dimes, I'd find it much more meaningful to focus on a specific area, such as 1794-1805 and spend all the money I would have spent on the 1829-1873 coins, upgrading the 1794-1805 set.
Again, just my opinion, so no need to take it personally.
It's not an opinion. It's a personal preference. And what is manageable to one person is unmanageable to another. Etc. That's the point of the thread, more or less.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
I don't care if something has very very little value; if one exists, I want it.
I only need one so I guess I'm a minimalist.
I'm a bit all over the place. My collection includes darkside, ancients, moderns, gold, junk silver, commems, classic US coins, and a small bit of currency. I have several hole-fillers in my type set. They're not fascinating pieces, but needed to give the important pieces perpective. I see no problem with that. A quality set of all-gem Peace dollars would be immensely more interesting to me than seeing a couple of "finest known" keys. On the other hand, I can't imagine anything more boring than a full set of Lincoln cents. I reserve the right to see it differently later.
I would feel more like an investor than a collector, which is not what I seek from the hobby.
" I'd be willing to bet you have coins in that collection you haven't looked at in years."
I'll take that bet! No, as a serious student of the series, and an author of many articles on the subject of half dimes, I study my coins on a daily basis, and over time I have had occasion to closely study all of them many times in the course of answering questions or conducting independent research. Just yesterday I had calls or emails from two collectors asking questions about obscure varieties they wanted more information on. That, more or less, was the point of my argument. Even a large 'accumulation', or 'collection', as I prefer, can be the focus of considerable close study and scrutiny. That is why we have the term 'reference collection'. This collection, or at least the Liberty Seated portion, will be the basis of a comprehensive reference on the Liberty Seated half dimes which I hope one day to publish. We have already published a reference on the earlier series.
<< <i>Less is more. I apply that philosophy to almost everything in life. For coins, 20-50 is about right, 100 max. Anything over that is an accumulation, not a collection. >>
I cannot disagree more. I am one of the few collectors who has completed a U.S. type set from the 1792 half disme to the modern state quarters. I have all of the old commemoratives and all of the modern commemorative pieces excluding the first lady series. That adds up to over 500 coins. I also have just as many if not more 19th century presidential campaign tokens, medalets and medals. I could write and in many cases have written, an essay on the history of every one of the those pieces that could vary from a few lines to several pages.
I also have a number of 19th century U.S. mint medals included a virtually complete representative collection of the Comitia Americana medals, which were award to heroes of the American Revolutionary War. You might not call what I have "a collection"; it is several collections; but it is hardly "an accumulation." I am not a hoarder; I have very few duplicates. It's just over years my interests have run far and wide, and my collections are a reflection of that.
10 times as much as a
$100 dollar coin
<< <i>I don't think I enjoy a $1000 dollar coin
10 times as much as a
$100 dollar coin >>
I don't think I would either. But my attitude changes as the dollar amount goes up. I enjoy owning a $10K coin a lot more than owning a $1K coin.
I guess that makes me a coin snob.
``https://ebay.us/m/KxolR5
<< <i>
<< <i>I don't think I enjoy a $1000 dollar coin
10 times as much as a
$100 dollar coin >>
I don't think I would either. But my attitude changes as the dollar amount goes up. I enjoy owning a $10K coin a lot more than owning a $1K coin.
I guess that makes me a coin snob. >>
As one who can only dream of owning a 10K coin -- seriously, ridiculously out of the question, as that would be $ that just wouldn't make sense to tie up in a coin -- I'd classify that as a "first world" problem.