Respect the Key Dates - Agree or Disagree?

Zoins · July 26, 2015 3:16AM

Bill had a thoughtful response to Laura's Respect the Key Dates Hot Topic in the Rip Off Report thread. I didn't find a thread about this and thought it was worth discussing.

The idea is to wait on acquiring the common dates until you have the key dates and to bid "big money" on the key dates when they are available.

Should you wait to start a set until you have the key dates and then grade balance the set at the best grade you can afford for the key dates?

Boosibri · July 26, 2015 3:23AM

I agree with Laura that in general, the quality of a set is strongly influenced by the quality of the keys. I would follow her advice in building a set.

I agree with Bill that a set is only a set to the owner and is sold individually when it comes time to distribute.

Bottom line, have fun.

LindeDad · July 26, 2015 3:26AM

Have found most "Key" dates to be overpriced and dealer stock and trade too much. Most are not as rare as other coins that did not get the designation. Set building is on the wane for this reason IMO.

So I for one Disagree.

BryceM · July 26, 2015 3:34AM

Depends on the set.

For some series, like Peace dollars, it's isn't terribly difficult to match grades within a reasonable range. The 34-S is expensive, but not to the point of being a show-stopper. An XF example among all BU coins would be out of place.

In other series, the value of a single great rarity might exceed the rest of the set in equivalent grades. In that case the average collector will do just fine to acquire that single key in a lower grade. The exception of course is for the person trying to assemble one of the finest collections. In that case only the best will do, and the keys must be dealt with.

I do agree that picking really stellar key date coins at any grade level is important. They don't come around all that often and it's often a good time to stretch a little to get the right one.

291fifth · July 26, 2015 3:38AM

"Key Date" mania has now driven up prices for such items to levels where they should be avoided. Take the path less traveled and save some money.

Just what is on the "path less traveled" is up to you to decide. Don't let someone else make the decision for you.

GaCoinGuy · July 26, 2015 3:42AM

While I understand the need to "respect" the key dates, I do question Laura's statement about going after the key dates first. What about those of us whose coin budget doesn't allow for the money required to buy "PQ Key Dates", as she puts it? Should we not bother with collecting because we cannot afford the key dates? Is coin collecting reserved for the small percentage of the coin collecting population that she caters too?

I sometimes think that Laura is naive in the sense that she caters to a select market, but there is a larger portion of collectors who cannot afford to drop huge amounts of money for single coins. I collect because I enjoy the history of coins, not as investment and I sometimes think Laura forgets about those who collect for enjoyment.

topstuf · July 26, 2015 3:43AM

KEY DATES FIRST

Allow me to repeat..

KEY DATES FIRST !!!!!

Those are ALL a dealer is going to look at when you want to sell. The rest of the coins are for your ...enjoyment.

And as for TYPE...... HARD ONES FIRST!!

Start your Dansco with the Seated Dollars.

Let the rest fall in over time.

oih82w8 · July 26, 2015 3:44AM

For what it is worth...the varieties that I collect ARE key dates in the regards that hardly any of them are well populated to begin with. It would be nice to obtain a "key" date or two, but, as mentioned earlier, you are looking at "moon money" for them, but are constantly in demand. To each their own...

topstuf · July 26, 2015 3:45AM

<< ...... I sometimes think Laura forgets about those who collect for enjoyment. >>

IMO those are NOT her clientele.
Unless the "enjoyment" includes prestige.

BillJones · July 26, 2015 3:48AM

When I was dealer, there were dealers who stocked nothing but key dates. One guy, whose business was far from a household name in the industry, had nine 1893-S dollars in grades ranging from VG to EF. So much for that coin qualifying as "rare."

The dealers only reflect the market demand made by collectors and speculators. Some collectors and nearly all speculators have driven the price of key date coins to the point where they are becoming over priced IMO.

How did "key date" get that status? They got there because they were coins that were hard to find to complete a set. With set collecting going out the window, why are they still so important? It's sure not for the sake of completing sets any more.

After a while key date price appreciation becomes another example of the "bigger fool theory." You buy coins not because you enjoy them or get a kick out of knowing that few others have them, but because you think you will be able to sell them for a profit. Collectables that are priced beyond the means or desires of the people who originally made them collectables are on thin market ice. When a coin is priced beyond the means of its collector base it is overpriced. That's where I think a lot of key date coins are now, especially the pieces that not rare on an overall basis.

lasvegasteddy · July 26, 2015 4:09AM

as to what you're asking here
my take is..
it is best to seek advice and wisdom from someone active in the series you're to collect
get advice from them
usually a series specialist will let you know the sleeper dates or strike issue dates and what to keep an eye out for

i'd think a person would never sit on a sideline on any coin in the set that hasn't been acquired yet
why pass up rare offerings because you have a personal agenda or plan to assemble a set going by dates

if i was to put together a set of indian head cents...i'd listen to rick snow or other specialist in that series
if i was to put together a set of buffalo nickels...i'd listen to ron pope and crazyoldhounddog or other specialist i've come to know and trust

whom one listens to in this hobby bears alot of weight

Elcontador · July 26, 2015 4:49AM

<< When I was dealer, there were dealers who stocked nothing but key dates. One guy, whose business was far from a household name in the industry, had nine 1893-S dollars in grades ranging from VG to EF. So much for that coin qualifying as "rare."

The dealers only reflect the market demand made by collectors and speculators. Some collectors and nearly all speculators have driven the price of key date coins to the point where they are becoming over priced IMO.

How did "key date" get that status? They got there because they were coins that were hard to find to complete a set. With set collecting going out the window, why are they still so important? It's sure not for the sake of completing sets any more.

After a while key date price appreciation becomes another example of the "bigger fool theory." You buy coins not because you enjoy them or get a kick out of knowing that few others have them, but because you think you will be able to sell them for a profit. Collectables that are priced beyond the means or desires of the people who originally made them collectables are on thin market ice. When a coin is priced beyond the means of its collector base it is overpriced. That's where I think a lot of key date coins are now, especially the pieces that not rare on an overall basis. >>

Bill nailed it. In the last five years or so, many 12 D and 12 S Nickels that are now in MS 66 holders were made (I doubt they were sitting in some collections for generations and collectively, people decided to submit them at the same time). I've seen a number of them, and don't like any of them. Yet despite the population pop, and I think the overall reduction in quality for the grade, prices have remained strong.

I can't speak for anyone else, but I don't want a coin which I do not think is solid for the grade in my collection at any price. I don't care who holdered or stickered it. Secondly, as Bill wrote above, many so called scarce coins aren't scarce at all. You'll have no problems finding a 1916 P SLQ in any grade. Although not many were minted, I don't consider that to be a scarce coin. Compare that to trying to find an all there Classic Head Half Cent in a MS 65 RB holder of any date. I put more priority on a coin which is hard to find rather than a deemed "key date," like the 1916 SLQ (at one Platinum Night, Heritage had SEVENTEEN of them for sale).

Lastly, my people and I will determine what is a solid for the grade coin; not to diss registry sets and people who build them (or sell coins to people who build them), but I don't follow that drumbeat.

Zoins · July 26, 2015 5:02AM

The example discussed in the article is the Sunnywood 93S Morgan (PCGS MS65 CAC 06666371). That coin was purchased by a dealer on spec without bidding from collectors. The recommendation for set collectors appears to be to acquire key dates like that before working on the rest of the set. I can see reasoning to bid or not bid both ways. It makes sense to bid if you are trying to build a #1 set as Laura helps people build since these coins may not appear very often. If you are not trying to build such a set it may make less sense. Per Bill, set collecting is becoming less popular so the answer to Laura's question as to why there weren't collectors out bidding on the coin could be that there are less Morgan set collectors trying to build a #1 set.

It would be nice if PCGS could link to the Legend auctions for latest auction appearances.

MrEureka · July 26, 2015 5:29AM

As usual, Laura has some good points. I'll rephrase them based on my reading - often "between the lines" - of the article.

1. Be especially careful in selecting key date specimens for your set. That doesn't mean that you can't buy lower grades for key dates, but it does mean that the coin should be a "killer" for the assigned grade.

2. Try to always be ready to pull the trigger when and if a set-defining coin - often a superb example of a "key" date - becomes available.

3. When a set-defining coin comes to market, consider it your first priority, even if buying that coin would force you to walk away from lots of other coins that would fit in your collection. (This does NOT mean that you have to start your collection by buying the keys.)

MrEureka · July 26, 2015 5:32AM

winky · July 26, 2015 5:45AM

Always Key dates first or you will not finish the set.

winky · July 26, 2015 5:46AM

Key dates then the rest.

Zoins · July 26, 2015 5:54AM

That makes sense Andy. When building a set, it's important to know the key dates and budget for them as you may not be able to predict when nice examples will become available.

This way, it's more about having reserves set aside for keys than acquiring them first or last.

As to grade matching, it seems important if you're trying to attain a #1 set. Otherwise, grade matching seems less important as be up to the collector as sets are typically broken up upon sale as mentioned.

Nap · July 26, 2015 6:03AM

The "key date bump", in which key date coins receive a small grade bonus, or a straight grade when 'details would be more fitting, is frequently discussed as a common unspoken phenomenon, and is something to keep in mind when buying rare coins.

I see no reason to buy keys first. Not everyone is going to be "serious" about collecting the set they start. If you are deciding to start a new series or set, I think it is quite prudent to buy a few inexpensive coins before plunging serious money into it. Need to decide whether or not the series is really for you.

JJSingleton · July 26, 2015 6:11AM

I think the theory should be be to be prepared to buy the right coin when it becomes available. Sometimes if you wait for key dates you will miss out on superb non key date coins. Know what is it is you are collecting and be ready to pull the trigger if a great coin comes to market, regardless of rarity.

Oh, BTW, the key to a great set is sitting back, show some patience, and only buying great coins.

roadrunner · July 26, 2015 6:13AM

I'll play devil's advocate here. Legend has built some great Morgan sets, and most recently Coronet. So where where they when the Vermeulle 1893-s MS67 Morgan was auctioned at Stacks in Nov 2001? Anyone could see that it was an epic coin. It sold for a very modest $425K or so, actually under sheet level as I recall. They ended up buying that same coin years later for $1 MILL+ to place with a client....apparently "Mr. Coronet." The Vermeulle coin was certainly set defining. And it doesn't appear anyone stepped up at the time? Where were all the "set collectors?" I eagerly await to see what the Vermeulle/Coronet 1893-s Morgan brings later this year at unreserved auction....with one less buyer for a finest known. This should be a good data point to prove or disprove Legend's current theory on key date finest knowns.

I agree with Andy's points as long as there's a#4 that requires you pay a reasonable price for reasonable longer term potential. The key date of the seated quarters is the 1873-cc NA. The finest known is the MS65/66 James Stack coin. It sold for $90K back in 1975. In that same sale you could have bought the 1871-cc MS65/66 PL gem for $10K, the 1901-s MS67 for $5K or the 1867-s MS67 for $1,800, to name just three comparable coins that rank as the finest knowns or at worst #2. Here's a case where there were a dozen or more better coins to focus on for that same $90K. Those coins are up 50X since then. There's no way the 73-cc NA is up 50X ($4.5 MILL?? Not anytime soon). If it were me, I'd much rather have a dozen or two of the second or third tier finest knowns instead of the single key date costing a fortune. For those that have unlimited money to buy any coin towards a finest known set, then buying the top keys in finest known condition is a drop in the bucket. I'll pass on the 1873-cc NA because of cost (and lack of diversity and divisibility) and load up on two or three dozen other finest known gem O and S mints.

The buy the semi-keys first works well for circ coins too. I'll pass on the 1901-s, 1913-s, and 1896-s Barber quarters until I have wonderful VF-AU circ examples of all the other S and O mints. Which ones have more potential? The cheaper semi-keys of course. Those haven't been that subjected to the key date mania of the past 15 years. Maybe my point is that 19th set building might be a bit different than 20th century REG sets. The seated half dimes are a good example where the 1870-s is worth 2X the rest of the set. For my $2 MILL I'd rather have all the other dates in Finest Known condition first. That's a hard task trying to round them up from all over the world. Simpson couldn't do it. You will probably never get it done. Yet with $2+ MILL you can knock on the door of the owner of the 70-s and say "how much?" It's one stop shopping. Guess I've always loved the chase of the most underrated coins in any set, rather than the more overpriced/overrated ones....which often includes the "key" dates. If I were building a nice circ seated set of halves I wouldn't want the 1878-s until last, it at all. It's been outperformed by other top 1/3 of the coins in the set for years. I'd rather put my $50K to $100K into 100 other dates. That would be a formidable set....lacking the 1878-s doesn't make it any less imo.

Ok yeah, to the original question.......I disagree. Pass on the most common 20-30% of the set until the end unless wonderful coins at wonderful prices come your way early on. Focus on those top 3-30% coins first. Seriously consider whether those top 1-2% coins are worth the money to you. It's your set, not any one else's.

TopographicOceans · July 26, 2015 6:36AM

As a type collector, I avoid key dates.

Cougar1978 · July 26, 2015 7:27AM

Agree - would acquire key dates first and not balk at paying top dollar if coin really nice.

Cougar1978 · July 26, 2015 7:59AM

Agree - would acquire key dates first even if having to pay top dollar. Would pay off in long run if key dates appreciated big time.

Zoins · July 26, 2015 8:03AM

<< Agree - would acquire key dates first even if having to pay top dollar. Would pay off in long run if key dates appreciated big time. >>

Looking at return is an interesting approach. From RR's post above, it seems like some semi-keys have had a higher return which makes sense if the keys are already fully priced. Has anyone else analyzed returns for keys vs. semi-keys?

EastonCollection · July 26, 2015 8:25AM

I agree with Laura but I really like what Andy Lustig says. The keys come up so infrequently (depending on the series) so you have to jump when the opportunity comes up. If the key comes up with some frequency than learn the series well so when you pull the trigger you get a killer key for the assigned grade. Thats my 2 cents.

DIMEMAN · July 26, 2015 8:55AM

In one of my series (Mercury's) the only date I don't have is the 16-D. There were a lot of Mercs that were way harder to find, but the 16-D cost way more......and is NOT rare.

Shamika · July 26, 2015 10:46AM

Laura may be making some good points, but anything that Bill says is worth noting. He may not have built #1 sets like Laura, but being both a dealer and collector Bill can speak from both sides of the fence. I trust him over any dealer who trumps up how great he or she is.

mr1931S · July 26, 2015 10:56AM

Most key dates are not rare,not even really all that scarce,just overpriced.The lure of supposedly easy,big money to be made off of keys is swallowed hook,line and sinker by many a neophyte collector/dealer wannabe.

Buy the nicest coins you can afford and think you will enjoy.When you don't enjoy them anymore or your interests change,sell.There's always a market for nice coins and they don't have to be key dates to get acceptable prices for them.Profits are even less guaranteed for key dates than nice non-keys,in my opinion.

Be a coin collector not a fish.

Walkerfan · July 26, 2015 11:47AM

I started collecting primarily Walkers that were dated from 1916-1933 (The first 1/3 of the set) and in those years are where the majority of the key dates and expense for the set lies. That was the smartest thing that I could have ever done, as not only have they exploded in value, since I began but many of the good ones have been cracked out and upgraded. I got great coins for a great price and many will likely upgrade. I could NEVER replace MOST of them, now. Thanking my lucky stars that I recognized this and was able to do it this way. Besides, after that I can still have a lot of fun filling in the more common dates for much less money. I have earned the ability to do that now. If I were to buy my keys today---I'd be paying MORE money for poorer quality coins. Buying the keys first was of the utmost importance for me.

MrEureka · July 26, 2015 11:48AM

Most key dates are not rare,not even really all that scarce,just overpriced.

That's somewhat true for Morgan Dollars and most 20th Century series, but it's clearly not the case for most 18th and 19th Century series.

bidask · July 26, 2015 12:09PM

Then colorful 1880's Morgan dollars in high grade seem way out of whack.

ElKevvo · July 27, 2015 1:56AM

Key dates first are great advice for more advanced collectors moving into a new series but what about beginning collectors? Tough for a kid or someone in their early working years to move into collecting if they have to save up a a grand or two for some lower grade key dates. I know what my friends would have said if I told them 'Sorry, I can't go out with you all tonight as I am saving my money for a nice 1916-D Mercury dime.' plus honestly since I, like many collectors have drifted in and out of collecting over the years I didn't tie up some major $ in keys that when I needed the money would have become a desperate seller.

I think for a beginning collector, find a series you are interested in and can afford the common coins, start there and make sure the interest sticks, then move on to the semi-keys and finally the keys. Sure if you get disinterested and have to sell you will not get a lot for it but your cost will be lower also.

Like many of us I have been collecting since I was a kid and have added key dates to my collection when prices have been reasonable (which they generally have not been over the last few years IMO). That being said if you are looking to complete a set and need the keys you have to pony up or wait until prices fall if they even do.

Just a couple of random thoughts...

K

DeepCoin · July 27, 2015 6:56AM

I think one of the major points that has been a bit obscure here is that when deciding on a set for collecting, it is important to budget or estimate how much it will cost for you to acquire the set in the grades you can afford. For some, that will mean getting lesser coins in the key dates due to cost. As long as it is known when the collecting journey is undertaken, then order does not matter.

Clearly, the key dates for the most popular series abound in inventory in many places. You can get all the 1909 SVDB Lincolns and 1916D Mercury dimes you want in most any grade.

What does eventually cause problems is beginning a series collecting the more common coins in reasonably high grades and then realizing that you will not be able to afford similar grades for the keys. You should know that before you begin a series IMHO. Few Morgan collectors can afford a 1893S in high grade, yet they can acquire many really nice coins very reasonably in that large run of dates and mint marks.

For myself, a low budget collector, I am not thinking of collecting a modified type set where I acquire one of each coin by mint mark, i.e. Morgan P, D, S, O, CC (well P is not really a mint mark, it is the lack on one) for the major series beginning in 1850. The coins from the late 1700s and early 1800s are out of my price range and it would be nice to be able to collect a set that was ultimately achievable.

One great thing about this hobby is that you can collect whatever you think is right, be it a box of 20 or Type Set or Date Set w or w/o MM. Enjoy your coins within your own budget!!

Justacommeman · July 27, 2015 7:18AM

<<<<<<<Respect the beard

Walkerfan · July 27, 2015 8:42AM

Let me add this:

When I first started seriously collecting WLHs 20 years ago; I collected XF/AU coins of both the early and later dates and wasn't focused on just keys.

It was only when I began my certified set in 2005 that I began to focus on only MS coins and started to look at the key dates.

Walkers are perfect for me, b/c I love the coin and the design, itself, but they are also all achievable for me in MS albeit extremely challenging.....but that is part of the fun and satisfaction.

I agree with Mark, as I don't want to settle.

But for me, 'not settling' doesn't mean that I need all superb gems but it does mean that I DO NOT accept anything below MS nor even anything in low grade MS.

jessewvu · July 27, 2015 11:13AM

keys are reserved for those with locks in their collection. I don't think I have ever liked a coin more after finding out it is a key. So, no respect for key dates here. I'd also rather feel the waters of a specific set before blowing all my $ on the keys up front. You don't go to college before graduating high school. You don't buy your mid-life crisis car when you are 19. You don't marry the first girl you kiss. Why buy the keys first?

veryfine · July 27, 2015 2:49PM

I always keep in mind that most of the collectors in here who always diminish key dates are either type set collectors or 18th/19th century "know-it-alls." These are the collectors who fancy themselves as more evolved, more sophisticated and immune to market trends and so-called price manipulation. They are the accountants, the software engineers, the mathematical/empirical ones, the prudent ones who know better, armed and ready with population reports and their careful analysis of the numerous specimens at shows. Then there are the semi-key enthusiasts (yawn.) They do their homework and know "real value." It's sort of like being almost pregnant.

(All of the above is said in jest with some elements of truth)

So, here are some questions I'd like someone to honestly answer.
If key dates are overpriced/overly abundant, and set building is declining, what does that say about the overall strength of the of coin hobby?
Will the 20th century key date losers (like me) cut our losses and pour money into Flowing Hair, Liberty Seated coins, LOW GRADE 18th/19th century type sets and colonials? Moderns?

Or is this really a scary sign that the hobby is doomed forever?

originalisbest · July 27, 2015 2:58PM

If set collecting is going away, then why on earth would anyone buy not only the traditional keys, but the legit tough semikeys as well? If this is true, then the most generic type examples will suffice.

pennyannie · July 27, 2015 3:22PM

If you decide to start a set and you buy the keys first what are you going to think about that few keys 1/2 thru your completion and then at 3/4 complete? Are you going to be impressed with the coins you bought first or just going to be happy they are in pcgs plastic with a bean on them?

Looks like you are just buying plastic to me. No need to buy a book or even study the series.

I say buy the keys after you have spent time looking and buying some of the common coins of the series. I think you will probably end up with better keys and less money in them if you start with some commons to get a feel for the series.

Or just send checks to legend and let them do the work for you. That way coin collecting will not interfere with your golf game or family time. You can just admire the plastic holders and hope you end up on the plus side many years down the road

I would wager the vast majority of collectors loss money on their collections even if they hold for 20 plus years. ( collectors that spend less than 4 or 5k max on on single coins. If you bought a run of the mill 1893 s in vf in 2007 to 2010 what type of offers would you receive walking the isles this week end at any coin show??

originalisbest · July 27, 2015 3:44PM

One could also say that any type coin dated 17xx has also been strongly hyped, and very likely fully priced, in the last 15 years. As far as traditional 20th century key dates, they've certainly dropped from highs achieved around 2006-8. Seems like au 09-s VDBs are around 1000 now, more or less. Am still then in the black on my au example purchased around 500, years ago. Still like it and still need it for the complete lincoln set that I enjoy working on. Does that make me a fish, or a collector? Guess I'll see in the years ahead if interest wanes enough to make an au worth less than 500 again. So much for long term track records if so.

coinkat · July 27, 2015 8:48PM

As for Key dates, its all about Quality for the grade.

7Jaguars · July 27, 2015 10:14PM

I really hate generalizations, though I agree in general! LOL!

I have some coins that are possibly not the absolute keys in their series but are absolutely gorgeous coins that are able to stand on their own. I don't really even have the desire to get all the keys. That obviously is just my opinion but I have posted a couple of them previously on "the dark side" if Brit coins fit that description.

roadrunner · July 28, 2015 1:05AM

<< I always keep in mind that most of the collectors in here who always diminish key dates are either type set collectors or 18th/19th century "know-it-alls." These are the collectors who fancy themselves as more evolved, more sophisticated and immune to market trends and so-called price manipulation. They are the accountants, the software engineers, the mathematical/empirical ones, the prudent ones who know better, armed and ready with population reports and their careful analysis of the numerous specimens at shows. Then there are the semi-key enthusiasts (yawn.) They do their homework and know "real value." It's sort of like being almost pregnant. >>

I'm certainly no "know it all." Just someone who has fought the gem type and seated date coin wars since 1975. My original point was ONLY to say that Legend's premise on "key dates" was very flawed. Take that for whatever it's worth. Legend isn't the "market" nor do they speak for it....as they so clearly state. While it might work great for many or most of the 20th century sets (and in her top 1-5% sets for the top 1-5% of collectors), it doesn't so easily apply to the 18th and 19th century. But by reading her article you'd never know that. I only diminish the key dates (including seated key dates) that I feel have gotten out of whack in price with the rest of the set. I've never liked the key date 1878-s half dollar....ever. It cost a fortune back in 1974. Back then I'd much rather have the 1874-cc dime at 1/4 of the price, which while a key date (though not #1, #2, or #3 in the series back then) was the most under-priced and underrated by far. I crossed off numerous key date coins off my seated want list back in 1974-1975. Did the same thing for Barbers and Bust coins. There were no pop reports back in 1974....so I constructed my own, flaws and all. Today's pop reports do have some merit, flaws and all. No one here is all-knowing and immune from market movements or manipulations. Every article written by the top 1-5% of dealers/collectors is in essence a bit of market manipulation.

Key dates vary from series to series. They all can't be evaluated the same and tossed into the same boat. Evaluate exactly what your key date is, why it should be priced as it is, and why you want it. If it all adds up, then buy it. Same comment goes for semi-keys, and scarce dates. There's a wide difference of opinion in this thread. Which is good. Ever since I started in coins I heard the mantra, buy the key dates first. Just because it's the general view of the coin hobby doesn't mean it's always true, or the best course for every set builder to take. Date sets aren't going away....neither are type sets.

I like to think that if a coin has advanced 40-50X since 1974, regardless of grade it's probably worthy of key date status....even if technically most consider otherwise. It's not hard to find examples of those. The 1893-s $ has advanced 15X-20X. I would think most of today's popular keys are in the 4X to 20X range.

MrEureka · July 28, 2015 2:03AM

My original point was ONLY to say that Legend's premise on "key dates" was very flawed.

There's nothing flawed (or even controversial) in Legend's premise except the language used. If you read my interpretation of her comments above, I think you'll agree.

On the other hand, if you take her comments literally - why in the world would anyone ever do that? - I understand how you might think otherwise.

And as for the OP, it's not a fair representation of the Legend article. Go to the source if you want to know what she really said.

roadrunner · July 28, 2015 2:15AM

<< .....And as for the OP, it's not a fair representation of the Legend article. Go to the source if you want to know what she really said. >>

Uhh, I did that.....before this thread even appeared. And I felt the same way then.

But these were the first 2 that are just incorrect:

....... the information I am telling you IS 100% correct. .....?????...enough said.

I have been seeing more and more people recklessly build sets. The last coins they seem to care about are the keys. That approach is totally wrong. Most of the time you can get great examples of the lesser dates any time. You should NEVER blow your money on them before you have bought a key date....

You most certainly cannot buy great examples of the "lesser" dates (ie non-keys) at any time. Those coins are sometimes harder to find than the so-called keys. You most certainly should "blow" (her term) your money on great examples of non-key scarcer dates when they show up at a fair price. You may not get a 2nd chance at them. And they often sell for pennies on the dollar compared to the keys. If Legend's article is meant to tell us don't by a crappy or low end key date coin to fill a hole....then point taken. Then again, Bill Jones has already shown us that there are times most collectors just have to settle with a problem/low end coin if set completion is one of their goals.

EVERY major set I have ever built with super keys has turned out to be winners with out any issues. QUALITY DOES MAKE A DIFFERENCE! This theory of mine holds true for ANY set you might build.

This makes no sense. Just because you bought a super key, doesn't mean the others are all super non-keys....unless you put forth the same effort and expense towards those. Buying a super key doesn't guarantee set builders anything. Each coin stands on its own merits. And the time involved in tracking down all the super-nice "non-keys," is probably 10X to 50X the effort expended in getting the top 1, 2 or 3 keys.

nwcoast · July 28, 2015 2:30AM

I'd agree in principal and under ideal circumstances for a collector with deep pockets.
It's pretty easy to see how the keys get 'left for last' for collectors of modest means.
Speaking from experience, I started many of my sets from circulation as a kid, i've got sets of several series as works in progress.
For some series, starting with the Keys would have meant not starting those series at all.

Zoins · July 28, 2015 2:33AM

The two things that jump out at me regarding the article are:

<< If you are building a set-it does not have to be the worlds best, Always build the set you can afford. [...] I have built more #1+2 major collections then ANY dealer of my generation. So I can speak with full authorty about this subject. >>

I thought this was interesting because her advice is for any set one can afford, but she highlights her experience building #1+2 sets.

<< Most of the time you can get great examples of the lesser dates any time. You should NEVER blow your money on them before you have bought a key date. >>

Using the Sunnywood 93S Morgan as an example, it would appear that one building a Morgan set would be recommended to purchase that coin before purchasing great examples of other dates. This seems to preclude the learning and enjoyment many discussed and point to jumping into the deep end of the 6-figure pool.

While I agree a lot with what Laura says, my reading of the article is that it's primarily for people building #1-2 sets, and not any set any collector can afford as mentioned in the opening paragraph. Also, following this advice collectors not aiming to build the #1-2 sets, a more limited budget for the keys could mean less enjoyment and quality for the more semi-key and more common dates.

veryfine · July 28, 2015 3:06AM

<< 

<< I always keep in mind that most of the collectors in here who always diminish key dates are either type set collectors or 18th/19th century "know-it-alls." These are the collectors who fancy themselves as more evolved, more sophisticated and immune to market trends and so-called price manipulation. They are the accountants, the software engineers, the mathematical/empirical ones, the prudent ones who know better, armed and ready with population reports and their careful analysis of the numerous specimens at shows. Then there are the semi-key enthusiasts (yawn.) They do their homework and know "real value." It's sort of like being almost pregnant. >>

I'm certainly no "know it all." Just someone who has fought the gem type and seated date coin wars since 1975. My original point was ONLY to say that Legend's premise on "key dates" was very flawed. Take that for whatever it's worth. Legend isn't the "market" nor do they speak for it....as they so clearly state. While it might work great for many or most of the 20th century sets (and in her top 1-5% sets for the top 1-5% of collectors), it doesn't so easily apply to the 18th and 19th century. But by reading her article you'd never know that. I only diminish the key dates (including seated key dates) that I feel have gotten out of whack in price with the rest of the set. I've never liked the key date 1878-s half dollar....ever. It cost a fortune back in 1974. Back then I'd much rather have the 1874-cc dime at 1/4 of the price, which while a key date (though not #1 or #2 in the series back then) was the most under-priced and underrated by far. I crossed off numerous key date coins off my seated want list back in 1974-1975. Did the same thing for Barbers and Bust coins. There were no pop reports back in 1974....so I constructed my own, flaws and all. It was better than nothing. Today's pop reports do have some merit, flaws and all. It would still behoove anyone to construct their own "adjusted" pop reports. No one here is all-knowing and immune from market movements or manipulations. Every article written by the top 1-5% of dealers/collectors is in essence a bit of market manipulation.

Key dates vary from series to series. They all can't be evaluated the same and tossed into the same boat. Evaluate exactly what your key date is, why it should be priced as it is, and why you want it. If it all adds up, then buy it. Same comment goes for semi-keys, and scarce dates. There's a wide difference of opinion in this thread. Which is good. Ever since I started in coins I heard the mantra, buy the key dates first. Just because it's the general view of the coin hobby doesn't mean it's always true, or the best course for every set builder to take. Date sets aren't going away....neither are type sets. >>

roadrunner,
Although nobody can really be a "know-it-all", you certainly know more than most!
Your comments are always well thought out, and I agree with much of what you said. Not all key dates are alike; some are rare, some are not, but the popularity can be equally high for both. No one size fits all.

veryfine · July 28, 2015 3:33AM

<< I can't speak for anyone else, but I don't want a coin which I do not think is solid for the grade in my collection at any price. I don't care who holdered or stickered it. Secondly, as Bill wrote above, many so called scarce coins aren't scarce at all. You'll have no problems finding a 1916 P SLQ in any grade. Although not many were minted, I don't consider that to be a scarce coin. Compare that to trying to find an all there Classic Head Half Cent in a MS 65 RB holder of any date. I put more priority on a coin which is hard to find rather than a deemed "key date," like the 1916 SLQ (at one Platinum Night, Heritage had SEVENTEEN of them for sale). >>

Hard to find can be a euphemism for dull and uninspiring. What if the Standing Liberty quarters are your absolute favorite coin series? Should the seventeen specimens deter you from buying one at current prices?
What if I were to dismiss the classic half cent as a rare, but poorly conceived, artistically laughable, dull, obsolete denomination not worthy of my attention? I cannot be wrong because I am the master of my opinion. I would collectively take the entire US half cent series and use the cents as a colorful addition to my aquarium gravel before I give up on my standing liberty quarter collection (of which the 1916 is an absolute necessity.)

Do you see my point? In reality, I do like the Classic half cent, but if I didn't, its rarity would have little to no meaning. One should also keep in mind that the 16 quarter has so much going for it, as it is not a typical "key date" coin. Enthusiasts of the series, like me, are aware of every date/mm in the series and their respective rarity. Unlike the 19-D, 1919-S or 27-S (all more rare in mint state grades), the 1916 is in a class by itself.

joeykoins · July 28, 2015 3:35AM

My 2 cents: Hunt down the "Keys" first for sets. Find a decent condition Key for your sets but not a high quality one. Save those babies for a "single " sale or to show off to others.

Respect the Key Dates - Agree or Disagree?

Comments

Leave a Comment