How do you think the controversies around 2026 coin design are likey to affect collector value?
nickelsciolist
Posts: 220 ✭✭✭
I'd be interested in hearing various opinions and/or speculations related to this. For example, could controversies such as the olive branch being deleted from the dime lead to a short run if the design is changed, and make those coins really valuable?
I respectfully request we not turn this into an overly political discussion and we all hold respect for others opinions. Thanks.
Tagged:
0
Comments
If you are specifically asking about the olive branch on the dime then I will state that there will not be a design change.
In honor of the memory of Cpl. Michael E. Thompson
I don't think the coins are controversial except to those whose preferred designs weren't chosen.
The dime's reverse design was carefully created to meet the intended symbolism.
Besides, no one outside of coin collectors even knows what's on our coins even on the rare occassions when they see any.
Non-issue. There is no real controversy. They are coins for commerce.
Honestly, have you heard anyone but a few coin nerds on a forum complain at all? What percentage of the percentage do you think even know there used to be an olive branch in the eagle's talon?
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
>
100% agree
85% agree.
A few non-collectors do.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
No impact. Will just refer to CDN.
Now the Olive branch thread you started makes even less sense to me.
Perhaps we could start a separate thread to discuss the nature of this thread?
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
No impact.
Some average citizens will notice the dime and set aside one or two. The quarter will blend into the dozens of different designs. The half will never be seen by the average person.
A pretty good bet since they are already circulating.
Why do people try to make everything political now, I mean the artist apparently was thinking of the revolutionary period when this was designed quite a while back.
I find it a big improvement over the tiresome Roosevelt that will hopefully be replaced. We need to get over dead Presidents and get back to beautiful classic designs that show artistry that is apolitical.
That is true but sad, the half is a nice design for a change.
New designs usually bring out strong hobby interest.
If anything, the across the board price increase is far worse. How many younger collectors do you suppose are going to have any? And this is the future of our hobby. This and the cent ending only leads to troubling times ahead.
I’ve generally stayed away from politically charged threads on the coin boards, but I think the discussion around the 2026 designs raises a legitimate numismatic question:
How (if at all) do design controversies affect long-term collector value? At the end of the day, what makes a coin desirable or even “rare” hasn’t really changed:
Availability / Mintage / Survival
Variety or uniqueness
Eye appeal / design preference
Bullion content (where applicable)
For modern circulating coinage (dimes, quarters, halves), we’re still talking about mass production at scale, 100’s of millions to billions, with limited circulation (especially halves). That alone tends to limit true scarcity. My sense is that 2026 issues may ultimately fall into the category of 1- A one-year type for collectors; 2- Possibly a short-term novelty bump in interest, but not something that fundamentally changes “rarity” status. Even if a particular segment of the population finds certain designs especially appealing, the math doesn’t really translate into scarcity when you’re dealing with hundreds of millions to billions of coins struck.
On a related note, I’ve taken a bit of a hiatus from early copper lately. The pieces I’m pursuing are legitimately scarce and expensive even in lower grades. It gets a little tough writing four-figure checks for AG-3 Details coins. That’s what led me to a slight detour into Hard Times Tokens. These early-to-mid 19th century pieces are tangible history, and they can often be found in AU–MS for $100–$200 or so, with very attractive VF–XF examples readily available. Yes, there are true rarities with low mintages or limited surviving populations but here’s the interesting part: there are also far fewer collectors actively pursuing Hard Times Tokens, so the collector base supporting prices remains relatively small (at least for the moment 😉 ). So you end up with this nice intersection of:
Historical significance
Strong eye appeal (often in higher grades)
Relative affordability
Which kind of reinforces the broader point… controversy doesn’t create rarity, scarcity (and demand) does. Modern issues may generate discussion… and maybe even short-term interest…but long-term value still comes back to fundamentals.
Successful BST transactions with: SilverEagles92; Ahrensdad; Smitty; GregHansen; Lablade; Mercury10c; copperflopper; whatsup; KISHU1; scrapman1077, crispy, canadanz, smallchange, robkool, Mission16, ranshdow, ibzman350, Fallguy, Collectorcoins, SurfinxHI, jwitten, Walkerguy21D, dsessom.
They’re not so bad, certainly nothing to get MAD about 😉
Mr_Spud
I see what you did there . . .
...not familiar with that thread...
...''get back to beautiful classic designs that show artistry that is apolitical''. Great thought.
Very clarifying and well said. Thank you.
Okay, this is just plain hilarious....
Thanks so much for all the comments. Primary take-away for me; the hubris over the design changes net impact on collectabilty and value will be nil, and what traditionally affects value over the long term will.
Also if I were to give an award for best post in forum history , Mr. Spud get's the prize hands down.
No impact, the controversy is largely due to a single left-leaning news outlet picking up on the absence of an olive branch on the new dime. It has been debunked that the current administration had any influence over the design choice. Whatever controversy exists will quickly fade as better clickbait comes around. Long term, they are all more or less aesthetically pleasing designs that will be collected alongside the rest of modern coinage without significant discrimination.
“Land of the free because of the brave”
“Saved by grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone”
In Deo solo confidimus
Successful BST transactions with: Ted 1, JWP, bigjpst,
One of the things I'd be curious to see is if there might be a short run, as with the early ''no VDB'' Lincoln...as in the ''no olive branch'' dime. Apparently people didn't like Brenners initials on there, hence the short run which resulted in the 09 s vdb being such a scarce and valuable coin. Seems like the general concensus is probably not gonna happen with the 26 dime and the olive branch getting added.
Another interesting fact regarding the ''rumor mill'' about the intent of the design change on the dime...I understand there was at least some amount of ''red scare'' conjecture that designer John Simock's initials on the Roosevelt Dime stood for '' Joseph Stalin''. Almost had another one there, it sounds like.
The way things are going with cash, I never see any coins anyway. I do everything with credit cards.
I won't see any of the new coins, except the quarter which I saw at a coin show, until I get a silver Proof set, which is supposed to be released this month.
For those that are stating that these controversies over aspects of coin design are a uniquely modern phenomenon, may I remind you of the following events whereby a public uproar resulted in alterations to coinage design:
I'm sure there are many others...
Nothing is as expensive as free money.
There is also one other example that is much more recent. The first several years if the Presidential dollar coins had "In God We Trust" appeared on the edge. After some complaints there was legislation enacted that required the motto to be placed on the obverse or reverse.
In any case, there full absolutely be no changes to the one-year design of the dime.
chopmarkedtradedollars.com