Options
Real Kennedy Sealed Rolls, what to do?
Proofmorgan
Posts: 984 ✭✭✭✭✭
I picked up these 3 original rolls of 1964 P Kennedys almost 20 years ago now. They had passed down in a neighbors family. They were sealed in the tubes seen and show some toning on the ends. These aren’t eBay “sealed rolls”.
These are way off from my area of expertise, but with silver high and prices for high MS Kennedys having some value...I’m taking a second look at them.
Any advice on what to do? Grade them? Sell them as is? What are they worth?
Collector of Original Early Gold with beginnings in Proof Morgan collecting.
0
Comments
With silver value presently around $27/toz., you could save a lot of work and sell them melt + premium as rolls. If you do not mind searching (and maybe find nothing), you might find some high grade MS coins....MS67 or above would bring significant prices. Check here....https://www.pcgs.com/prices/detail/kennedy-half-dollar/125/most-active Cheers, RickO
Unless these rolls were bank wrapped in 1964, chances are that they are circulated or at best AU with a few BU...Sell them, ASIS on the BST or ebay. Suggest you review "sold items" on ebay to get some idea what they are going for. Good luck
If you're 100% sure they are unopened bank rolls from 1964 ... at auction could bring big bucks.
We need to see pictures
With silver at $27 an ounce there shouldn't even be a need to ask the question. Sell them for melt!
The last thing you want to do with ultra-common coins like this is spend money on slabbing in the faint hope of making a high grade score.
I’m not sure how you define “big bucks”, but considering that the large majority of mint state pieces are still worth only approximately melt value, I’d be surprised if the rolls would bring large premiums.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
I am not sure what the market would bear for them but I personally would pay a slight premium over melt for them, however not much.
"It's like God, Family, Country, except Sticker, Plastic, Coin."
These are way off from my area of expertise
listen to what 291fifth said. the odds of any of these grading past MS65 are pretty low.............................OOPsie!
thank you, Mark.
220$ a roll maybe $250 if you are patient. $275 end of the rainbow.
High silver costs have brought BU rolls "out of the woodwork."
Its nice that they were carefully preserved in the plastic tubes (I love the "Made in Hong Kong" markings) with an extra layer of Saran wrap, but they are just bank rolled half dollars. Assuming they were rolled when new, they are rolls of BU 1964 half dollars. And the end one looks pretty tarnished.
The reason high grade modern coins have a premium is because they are rare, so by definition the chance of finding high grade coins in your rolls is very slim. Being "original" or "old" rolls does not change that.
If someone else wants to pay a premium to go on a treasure hunt, I say take the money and run.
When bidding gets HOT on rolls like I said above ... people like me will pay four hundred or more for that roll.
Not long ago I saw and posted an eBay auction on a roll of 1955p cents going for over $1,500 dollars. That's what I'm talking about "big bucks".
Opened and attempted re-sealed BU roll maybe .
The "Federal Reserve" Bank wrappers alone, in my estimation, would bring these rolls into $300 to $350 or higher price range. It's been years since I've seen an original Fed Reserve Bank wrapped Kennedy 1964 Kennedy Roll
Around the time that I joined the forum in 2006, I was buying BU rolls on ebay that appeared to have toned end coins, mainly because the premiums weren't too terrible and I liked some of the toners I was seeing online.
I ended up buying an opened 1964 Kennedy roll with flapped ends - the buyer had spread the coins out for a pic and the coins all looked toned, so I took a flyer on a somewhat dim photo and bought the roll.
I was pleasantly surprised when I received the roll, and all of the coins had bullseye toning, front and back. Both Russ and (I forget her name, she was a classic car lover - and a Frankie expert) - expressed skepticism with my find. I sent an example to Russ and he was convinced that the toning was natural, so he even sent the coin to PCGS for me. It came back graded MS-64, and I followed up by sending the rest of the coins in the roll to PCGS for grading - all of which were certified and graded between MS-64 and MS-66.
Over the years, I've sold most of them (I think I have about 4 or 5 of the nicest ones left), in a range between $35 and $85 per coin. Not bad for a roll that I bought for something like $95 at the time.
My suggestion - open one of the rolls and inspect the coins to see how they look. If they have attractive toning, you might consider sending some of them in for grading. In your situation, the rolls might be wrapped tightly enough that there isn't as much toning going on inside the roll - but you never know. The coins have had 56 years to mellow inside the paper.
I knew it would happen.
Unless you want to keep it for the silver, I would sell all of it.
For a '64 Kennedy, there must be at least hundreds of thousands of MS-65 eligible coins and even an MS-67 is probably an R-1 with 1250+, especially with "gradeflation". Already over 100 including "+".
I just checked and there are over 17,600 MS examples slabbed just at PCGS alone, almost 3K in MS66 and above. I doubt the market really needs any more to be slabbed. If I was bored I might look thru the rolls and then sell it for melt, or save yourself the time and sell the rolls as is and I'm betting you will make a handsome profit on them.
My Collection of Old Holders
Never a slave to one plastic brand will I ever be.
The odds of nice coins in the rolls is exceedingly low.
I'd open one up and see if there's anything close. If not there's no real reason to open the others.
Odds are you'll sell them for melt.
There are quite a few Philly doubled dies but none are very dramatic.
I'm surprised at a lot of the responses here. I saw that they were listed on the BST and sold quickly. I saw them and almost pulled the trigger myself. Quite a lot of folks collect OBW rolls (myslef included before premiums got a little too much for me) and truly unopened ones are only getting scarcer. Those Kennedys are common enough, yes but being able to trust that they were original and un-messed with certainly adds value.
Even before the recent rise in silver, I think $225-$250 would have been a pretty realistic price on ebay.
Thanks all, I figured I’d cut them loose quickly and listed them on the BST. At $250 they lasted a few minutes. Maybe I sold myself short but hopefully they go to a good home.
Good move. Now you don't have to spend any more time or money worrying about them. This is the time to sell ultra-common date modern siiver coins. Don't wait until the price of silver drops.
I have never understood roll buying, other than for future speculation. That's what was common in the late 50's to early or mid-60's. I own a few duplicates but 20 to 50 (the number in a roll) sounds more like hoarding.
I am aware buyers look for these rolls to find die varieties, high grades etc. but that's not what I understand is behind this buying. Years ago, someone I consider a prominent numismatist wrote an article on Coin Week attempting to make a financial case for the price potential of original rolls. He wasn't specific but presume it was for post 1933 since none of these coins are even close to being scarce in higher grades. He didn't claim anything about the coins in the roll, just the rarity of unopened roll itself.
Sounds more like commodity buying or trading to me.
>
You can still say it but you're still wrong.
1965 to date coins are not all common in high grade.
I wager you couldn't even find an original roll of 1969 quarters in a year for less than 20x catalog. There are a mere handful and some of the owners don't even know they have them. If you had every original roll of 1969 quarters odds are there wouldn't be a single Gem (attractive, well struck, and clean coin) in any of them.
Many moderns have NOTHING in common with commodities because everyone believes they are common.
Yes, but more generally, the demand for the coins in these rolls is more likely to decrease than increase in the future, for a variety of reasons. Aside from some specialization (highest TPG grades and varieties) there are more "high quality" examples represented by these rolls than there are ever going to be collectors who will want it at anything other than a (decreasing) nominal price.
Since prices are set at the margin and most of it is "off market" and the only reason prices aren't even lower than now is because people are hoarding it, for speculation or by forgetting they have it. From a combination of the owners dying off and poor economic conditions, I expect a noticeable proportion of it to become available later.
Why are you going out your way to misrepresent my post? Did I say anything about US moderns or 1969 quarters?
Your post reminds where in a prior thread, you were telling me that decent 69-D quarters weren't available in any quantity and then I find 23 rolls of "BU" on eBay.
" From a combination of the owners dying off and poor economic conditions, I expect a noticeable proportion of it to become available later."
This has been the prediction for years yet population still aren't exploding as promised.
"Your post reminds where in a prior thread, you were telling me that decent 69-D quarters weren't available in any quantity and then I find 23 rolls of "BU" on eBay."
I sure don't remember this!
Even were it true the fact of the matter is that these were most assuredly not original rolls. Even though the Denver is far more available than the Philly, it is still highly elusive. Any rolls you find will be assembled from mint sets.
There are more post-'33 coins elusive in high grades than clad. Even the '33 to '64 issues were often very poorly made. I recently went through a large number of rolls of cents and nickels from this era and found only a few Gems and a few varieties. Most of these rolls were hand selected years ago for quality. Later issues can be even more difficult since post-'64 coinage can be hard to find at all.
This only matters if you're looking for gems. People putting together Dansco sets don't.
edited to add... They might look for them, but they don't need them if they're too hard to find.
Unfortunately the value in these is in the rolls themselves, but it sure would be fun to open them. Thanks for posting them.
Very true.
But many moderns are extremely poorly made and most collectors want attractive coins.
About 40% of 1976 tI Ikes for instance are so ugly straight out of original mint sets that they can't be sold as "BU". Now days about 80% of these specific mint sets are tarnished and can't be sold for BU either. Couple this with the fact that half of these sets have been destroyed and you can see few of these survive. Despite this fact they can be had for a few dollars each.
As far as high grades for this date; lots of luck.
WCC is of the mind that if a coin isn't rare AND very valuable it is not "significant". There's nothing wrong with this mind set but it does lead to some statements that can be easily misinterpreted. It's true all post-'33 coins are common and commodity-like in high grade but this "opinion" rests on the definitions of "common" and "high grade". Even choice examples that are well struck can be elusive.
Sure, most collectors want attractive coins. But then again, what one wants and what one will make do with are not always the same thing. Most collectors won't invest years looking for high grade coins that don't exist. They'll find one that's attractive enough and call it good.
Obviously you're right.
What I am suggesting is that unlike 1968 nickels that "never" come with Full Steps so most collectors will look for nice specimens with a few steps, 1976 Ikes are different. Collectors may not be willing to lower their standards enough to get what's common. If many collectors want a nice lustrous coin that isn't covered in marking and tarnished as well there are few to go around. No, these are hardly scarce in BU but they are far tougher than people realize. This same thing applies to many other moderns as well; they are not readily available in attractive BU, AU, or XF. Clad and other moderns simply weren't made to the same standards and then rather than existing in lots and lots of rolls they might be scarce in rolls because 1964 was the last year large numbers of coins were saved.
It's this last part that isn't widely known; People quit saving coins and rolls in 1964. This means many moderns are anything but "commodity coins". Frankly I find the term somewhat misleading even applied to 1964 pennies which exist by the millions and millions. If I were seeking top grade '64 cents I'd be somewhat offended.
If 1964 cents exist by “the millions and millions”, they most assuredly are “commodity coins”, even if top grade examples are elusive.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
When coins are produced by the hundreds of millions or billions they are going to be common even if a large percentage are not well made. They aren't being slabbed because they are not worth the cost of slabbing.
>
I never said anything you claimed or even inferred it, then or now. In this thread, I wasn't referring to any US moderns and wasn't referring to the strike quality either. This thread has nothing to do with the strike quality.
In my second comment, I didn't say it was original rolls. I used it as an example of your consistent prior history of repeated exaggeration. I have never encountered or exchanged posts with anyone else on any coin forum who exaggerates as much as you do.
None of these coins are remotely scarce, except under narrow criteria like yours which is only relevant to a very low number, most of whom are "cherry pickers" or CRH like you. Under TPG standards which is relevant to the other 99%+ of the collector base for this coinage, all of this coinage is more common than 99% of all coins ever struck regardless of quality, except as I conceded previously.
The only reason I can see why you disputed my post is because I consistently contradict your claims. You should know from our prior exchanges based upon what I have learned from you and told you that I don't believe what you claimed, even though I overwhelmingly disagree with you otherwise.
As for my comment on commodities, I was making an entirely different point that you missed or ignored. No collector needs a roll for their collection, especially one where they don't even look at the coins. What kind of "collecting" is that? Anyone is free to do what they want but that's how speculators typically act, holding it for future appreciation.
>
Once again,. you are missing my point. Read my last reply to you. **My comment on "commodities" was on the "collecting" of unopened rolls, not the coins in it. **
As I just said, the best explanation for your rush to misinterpret my post is that I consistently disagree with you and you dislike it. The only reason you read what you did in my post is because it's what you wanted to see, not because I said anything like it.
As for "significant", my prior dispute with you on this aspect is twofold. First, unlike so many US collectors today, I don't find any credibility that literally every coin (date/MM combination or even specialization) is somehow significant because it meets some arbitrary quality standard. This is the position you hold but even more exaggerated than US collecting generally.
Second, most of our disagreements are on the future price level, not what you claim now. In our last debate here a few months ago, you kept on insisting that most collectors are "avoiding" the coinage you like when the truth is they just won't pay what you think these coins should be worth.
No.
In the old days mintage was the determinant of how many were saved but when coins are made in large numbers AND VERY FEW PEOPLE SAVE ANY AT ALL the big determinant is the perception of how many are being saved. We simply can't see that many are scarce because there is ALMOST NO DEMAND. Most post-'64 coins are tougher than the old key and semi-key dates disregarding mint sets.
The mintage of that '76 Ike was probably about 6 million. The attrition on moderns is staggering because they were not saved and people don't collect them.
I'm not really disputing that '64 Lincolns are "commodity coins", merely saying the the term is a little rude to those who do collect them. Obviously being common and sometimes well made means they are common even in Gem. You can find rolls of Gems with effort.
I am saying that 1976 Ikes and many other moderns ARE NOT commodity coins. You can't just "take a position" or "go long" 1969 quarters or 1984 pennies with attractive surfaces because you can't find a supplier. You might find bags or rolls of '38-D half dollars but it doesn't work this way with any of the desirable moderns.
No luck needed. Along with the 12 pieces sold in the past couple of months, there are currently 6 MS65 pieces for sale on eBay right now.
You suggested that you can find original rolls of post-'33 coinage which isn't true for post-'65 coinage and you implied that the coins in a roll of '69 quarters if they could be found were "commodities". I'm saying that people buy rolls largely to search for Gems and varieties or to set aside for people in the future to do so. I know very few people who collect any BU rolls of post-64 coins for any reason. There is no demand and for dates with no varieties or few Gems there are very low prices for BU rolls. 1969 quarters bid only $29 despite being rare. This is not a speculative market and it's not a commodity market. There simply is little demand for singles or rolls so collectors aren't even aware a nice attractive '69 is tough. It is far tougher than a '36-S buffalo or '50-D nickel.
Lol. We certainly disagree a lot but the reason I comment is that you make misleading statements detrimental to modern coins and collectors. I have no problem with viewpoint or most of your facts but you believe all moderns are common. It is irrelevant that this is largely true by your definitions.
To each his own. I don't believe a coin has to meet some arbitrary standard of rarity or high price to be "significant".
Future price is irrelevant.
Nobody has to pay much for most moderns because even scarce coins are cheap.
Part of the reason they are cheap is that everyone has been led to believe they are all common. But in order to purchase some of them you must pay multiples of catalog because they are wrong, too.
"He wasn't specific but presume it was for post 1933 since none of these coins are even close to being scarce in higher grades."
You just can't help yourself. You believe all the coins are either common or not significant (or both) so you end up making statements like this.