Does anything trump absolute rarity for you??
keets
Posts: 25,351 ✭✭✭✭✭
Maybe the only thing that does is an absolutely rare item in high grade with attractive tone and a stimulating design, a sort of Numismatic trifecta +1. Post something if you have it.
Al H.
8
Comments
Gorgeous, Al.
Here is a very tough R5 bust half (O.122) PCGS graded AU58+. One of my favorites.
Lance.
My great grandfather had a collection.
Anything he had would be a great prize.
Alas...It is totally gone.
My Saint Set
the Continental Currency design that uses the "All Seeing Eye" has been a favorite of mine since I first saw it. Prof. Montroville Dickeson used it and the dies passed into the possession of Thomas Elder some years later and he used it extensively. though they both struck probably more than 100 pieces each with it, there are probably less than 10-20 pieces of any planchet alloy mated with any other die.
I have found a mention of Dickeson's issues being available at auction in the early 1860's, but the good Captain is better informed than me as to who actually struck what. Hibler-Kappen were perhaps misinformed when they wrote their book, TD did his seminal articles for Coin Word and then the second edition of HK seems to have sorted it all out. as a general rule the thick planchet issues were struck by Dickeson but I wonder if it is unreasonable to consider that some unused planchets may have transferred with the dies.
whatever the truth the medals are a favorite, both for their design and message, strongly patriotic.
Great medals Al! I love seeing those whenever you post them.
When I saw the question "Does anything trump absolute rarity for you??" I was thinking this would be about things that were not absolute rarities but more desirable than absolute rarities.
Instead, this seems to be about absolute rarities that are more desirable than other absolute rarities?
In the scenario of not all absolute rarities being equal, my preferences are:
1) Absolute rarities that are related to coins and the US Mint
The below are plasters for the first accepted design for the New Rochelle commemorative half dollar. I was able to pick these up because the design, although accepted, was later deselect in favor of another. I like this one better, at least the side with the denomination.
2) Absolute rarities that have a direct tie to famous people and events
The following medal was issued to General John Gibbon, a Civil War general who later fought in the Indian Wars for his essay on the American Indians. His father was the assayer of the Charlotte Mint.
None of what I own was procured under the auspices of "absolutely rarity".
I do have some very attractive coins though.
"Eye Appeal" trumps "absolute rarity" for me.
Eye appeal and the beauty of the design almost always trump rarity for me. If the only thing I can afford is an ugly, low grade piece, I almost never own an example of that issue. It's the reason why I don't don't own a 1799 large cent, and probably never will.
i seem to be in the minority but i have always appreciated something that is very rare even if it may not be in top condition. I have owned some very rare gold from the dahlonega mint and even though some of these coins were crudely made and the top condition may be MS-62---i appreciated the rareness. The same could be said for some proof gold with minuscule mintage that may not be as beautiful as a 1906 PR 67 CAM QE but if only 8 or 9 exists i get a special thrill of owning it.
These are awesome coins. It's a provocative question, and I don't know where I would decide. Those Continental coins are really spectacular.
For me, I like absolute rarity. I did obtain an 1876s ddo (the highest grade) and it has a chopmarks too for my collection. I would be hard pressed to get rid of it. I expect it to be in my collection for quite some time.
Minor Variety Trade dollar's with chop marks set:
More Than It's Chopped Up To Be
Love the medals Keets. I love rarity over popularity. It just means that you have a discerning eye while the other sheeple fight over the expensive widgets!
Zoins, the plaster cast has to be one of the coolest numismatics items ever posted on these boards. I love it.
Eye appeal, Rarity, and Design in that order.
I'm pretty sure that these are unique, so they are absolutely rare. And just think of all the coins for which these could have been exchanged.
Considered to be RRR in Dalton and Hamer, meaning 10 or fewer made.
Condition Rarity, eye appeal, blazing luster, originality, and foundational rarity (absolute and condition Rarity combined).
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 have a few of my great grandfather's coins.
There were in a small change purse when I bought my grandfather's collection from him.
They are indeed pretty cool.
The whole worlds off its rocker, buy Gold™.
BOOMIN!™
Wooooha! Did someone just say it's officially "TACO™" Tuesday????
I would find it difficult to decide between rarity and design.... and then eye appeal....When the three come together though, my cash comes out of the pocket...
Cheers, RickO
In a perfect world, absolute rarity meets superb eye appeal, and they stand shoulder to shoulder with each other.
But, alas, the world of numismatics is an imperfect one. We will most always have to choose one or the other.
I always recommend to pounce on the item that has both of those qualities.
Dead Cat Waltz Exonumia
"Coin collecting for outcasts..."
I like to rate my coins on a 10 point scale for each eye appeal, rarity, and design.
Here is how I rate my last two nuke bid purchases ....
EA 10, R 10, D 3
EA 10, R10, D 10
DCW, that's my approach although it doesn't always work since my pockets are only so deep.
I HAVE A LETTER FROM TOM HOFFMAN DATED 2008 SAYING THAT THIS IS THE EXAMPLE THAT IS THE PLATE COIN, AND IS PICTURED ON THE FRONT COVER OF THE 2ND EDITION OF THE SO CALLED DOLLAR BOOK BY HIBLER AND KAPPEN. TOM HOFFMAN IS THE PERSON CREDITED WITH THE PHOTO OF HK-280A IN THE BOOK.
no need to shout.
If you looked at my collection you would conclude that I favor condition rarity over absolute rarity. There are a few noteworthy exceptions.
Oh show us yer dang collage again, dammit!
Easy: Eye appeal. Rarity is nice, but if it’s an unattractive coin, I pass. I probably passed on 15 VF 1901-S quarters before I found a nice original piece that fit my set. Most were certified (PCGS or NGC) but were either cleaned or dipped white, or both. Rarity isn’t everything.
Dave
I believe that Eye Appeal is the most desirable trait. Rarity is fine, as long as it is not unattractive. Sometimes you have to call the ugly baby...ugly.
BST transactions: dbldie55, jayPem, 78saen, UltraHighRelief, nibanny, liefgold, FallGuy, lkeigwin, mbogoman, Sandman70gt, keets, joeykoins, ianrussell (@GC), EagleEye, ThePennyLady, GRANDAM, Ilikecolor, Gluggo, okiedude, Voyageur, LJenkins11, fastfreddie, ms70, pursuitofliberty, ZoidMeister,Coin Finder, GotTheBug, edwardjulio, Coinnmore, Nickpatton, Namvet69,...
Rarity isn’t everything.
it's interesting to me that the replies that seem to be negative towards "absolute rarity" tend to be imply that there are a lot of ugly, unattractive rare coins out there. most of the real rarities found in major collections or posted here by members are anything but. heck, even some of the respondents to this thread who voice that opinion have in the past posted some rarities they own/have owned and were duly proud of them.
to the 1901-S Barber Quarter, the PCGS pop report lists almost 1,000 graded so it hardly qualifies as a rare coin in the scheme of things. scarce, maybe, but not really rare.
If they look like the stuff posted here I’m saying nothing trumps rare coins but there are ugly examples out there boooooo
https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/quarters/washington-quarters-major-sets/washington-quarters-date-set-circulation-strikes-1932-present/publishedset/209923
https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/quarters/washington-quarters-major-sets/washington-quarters-date-set-circulation-strikes-1932-present/album/209923
I think this concept really underscores how "super" coins manage the prices they do - rare coins in exceptional states of preservation with great eye appeal.
Well, just Love coins, period.
Eye appeal first and foremost to me, then design, then rarity last. Rarity is cool, but I prefer the aesthetics.
My YouTube Channel
I agree with asheland, eye appeal is most important to me, uniqueness next - rarity is as an added bonus.
The Penny Lady®
interestingly, that sort of meets the OP criteria.
Rarity is subjective, I guess. Heck, compared to the 1894-S dime, the 1901-S Quarter is downright common!
Dave
Rarity is subjective, I guess.
I have never thought that way. more to the point, I have tended to view "Rare" as a word used to market and sell coins which has proved effective over the years. here's a basic scale which many/most tend to agree with, though maybe not you.
R1 --- 5,000+ --- what Legend might call a Widget.
R2 --- 1,251-5,000 Common.
R3 --- 500-1,250 Uncommon.
R4 --- 201-500 Scarce.
R5 --- 76-200 Very scarce.
R6 --- 21-75 Rare.
R7 --- 11-20 Very rare.
R8 --- 5-10 Extremely rare.
R9 --- 2-4 Nearly Unique.
R10 --- 1 known, Unique.
You might disagree with the parameters and the terminology used but the scale itself has been around for a while and generally accepted. I believe mis-use of the term "Rare" and any other descriptors came into play when coins began to be encapsulated by TPG's such as PCGS. as Bryce pointed out above, then the marketing strategy machine got revved up and a high grade coin got called a "Condition Rarity" by dealers. the result seems to be collectors who want "eye appeal over rarity" when I think what the Hobby has told them is they really mean "eye appeal over Condition rarity."
my experience has been that most, certainly not all, absolutely rare coins tend to look pretty good. I will invite a reply by TDN and ask if he has ever seen an 1884 Proof Trade Dollar that was a dog??
so while a 1901-S Barber Quarter might be expensive or Conditionally Rare in a PCGS MS65 holder(and beautiful to boot!) it simply isn't rare.
Maybe these medals would trump rarity? LOL
Edited to say I think they are an R-5. Minting quality is superb, but eye appeal is debatable.
My US Mint Commemorative Medal Set
I’d also add, don’t be fooled by population reports. Key dates are normally submitted numerous times, for obvious reasons. Last I checked, there were under 25 VF examples graded by PCGS. Assuming they were submitted 2-3 times each, that leaves us with what....maybe 8 to 10 examples?
Dave
If it’s that few, CoinFacts and Heritage Condition Census may help. Other than that, how can you tell?
OK, Dave, I'll agree with the multiple submissions. so help us understand --- how many 1901-S Barber Quarters do you think exist??
Let's not mix apples and oranges...
There is a difference between rarity, condition rarity, quantity minted, surviving population and the intended purpose for coins, medals or so-called dollars. Then consider the scope of what is collected and the demand for what remains.
Perameters need to be set for the discussion to have meaning.
This should be reflective of a representative sample in contrast to the Literary Digest polling of 1936.
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
I was very clear from the start, my intent was absolute rarity,
Sorry Keets... I regret that I am missing your point. Absolute rarity must have some boundaries in terms of the intended purpose of what it is which can be measured by how many were minted and how many survived. Absolute rarity may not be defining if there is simply no interest. And for rarities and even for certain condition rarities there has to be interest for it to register.
As sad as this sounds and may read, there is an old proverb... You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make them drink it.
And inasmuch as it pains me to write this, it applies to the overall mentality that exits with respect to coins, medals, so-called dollars and collectables in general.
I suspect you just do not look at the initial question in the same light that I do...
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
Sorry Keets... I regret that I am missing your point. Absolute rarity must have some boundaries in terms of the intended purpose of what it is which can be measured by how many were minted and how many survived.
absolute rarity is what it is, how many are known to have been made.
that is why I posted the medals I posted, there weren't very many of them made. all the examples I show are R7 or lower. since this forum is rather exceptional I had hoped some members would post things they have which meets the criteria I outlined in the thread title and OP. I know they are here, they have been shown here before. a few members posted things like what Zoins has pictured above, others decided to say they think eye appeal is better than rarity, I get that and even tend to agree.
not to be argumentative, but I don't really get your point, you know what absolute rarity is, so what are YOU trying to say??
I look to purchase numismatically significant coins with exceptional eye appeal....I am less concerned with conditional or overall scarcity...
For example this coin which is a one-year type with first-year-of issue status....
nice!!
What am I saying?
Absolute rarity does not carry weight unless the coin, medal, so-called dollar or whatever is something of interest whereby there is demand. You are looking at absolute rarity in a vacuum which is fine.
Not beat a dead horse, but take a look at absolute rarity with respect to a modern proof issue that most collectors don't even know exists....a 1971-s type one proof Eisnhower Dollar. There are likely less than 12 known and few collectors know it exists at all. And because they are unaware of this, the decision has been made for them that it is okay not to care because after all... It's modern crap. But for a moment just consider the purpose and audience for which this 1971-s proof was struck ... And to have a possible controversy in connection with the design and whether that initial design would satisfy expectations. As we know the type two reverse was ultimately selected and used for the proof issues.
So is the the 1971-s Ike type one reverse proof an absolute rarity? Yes it is and perhaps it is worthy of the title of being the rarest proof coin struck in the US in the second half of the twentieth century.
And what percentage of the collector community even know this coin exists? It is likely less than 7-10% and that is probably generous.
So what am I saying (writing)?
Absolute rarity needs to be evaluated based not on solely on numbers, but the intended purpose as well as the audience for what is being made, commemorated or whatever. Seems a coin made for circulation that has a low surviving population maybe an absolute rarity given the scope of use and the size of the audience. That ratio speaks volumes as to what should be considered within the realm of absolute rarity. And even a proof coin made for collectors as the one described herein with significantly lower production numbers, would still likely be an absolute rarity just based on that ratio.
In contrast and what may have influenced this thread in the first place, is the mentality of chasing other coins, some that have been the subject of their own threads, at valuations comparable to the cost of what a reasonable house costs that most folks would happy to own. And it is those coins that capture the interest and the headlines in contrast to absolute rarity which may rarely register on the radar of most collectors.
Keets... I doubt that you are looking at this from my perspective. That does not make either of us right or wrong
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.