I think I am beginning to take after SaintGuru...

RYK · January 19, 2007 12:49AM

No, not that way.

I have this notion of ditching the whole set concept and picking the most interesting and scarce coins and selling the rest to upgrade the remaining coins. This post is in reference to the New Orleans $5's, not the Dahlonega $5's. I am going to keep the latter intact.

Has anyone (other than SaintGuru) ever done this?

robertpr · January 19, 2007 12:50AM

No, SaintGuru is the only person who does it. In the entire world.

Barndog · January 19, 2007 12:57AM

if there is room to move up in the more desirable dates/mm, I like the idea. Probably your collecting competitors like the idea too -- they will be flocking like gulls for your castoffs.

techeff · January 19, 2007 1:03AM

I remember SG talking people into building sets. When did he change his mind?

Cladiator · January 19, 2007 1:07AM

Interesting. Sell off all my R1-R4's and put the proceeds into nothing but R5+ half dimes. Not a bad idea.

MajorDuty · January 19, 2007 1:09AM

I have a hard time selling off anything. I tend to hold onto every coin I buy; I get kind of attached to them. It amazes me how some people can put so much time, money, and effort into building sets and then turn around and sell off the whole lot after a short while.
Shoot, my humble MS Jefferson set is coming to my grave with me.

Longacre · January 19, 2007 1:09AM

I sort of like the idea of having a few BIG coins, rather than a complete set. I wouldn't sell the Dahlonega $5 set just yet, though.

Hyperion · January 19, 2007 1:11AM

it depends on your nature, and what your real collecting goals are, but I think SGs basic concept seems sound -

If you're goal is value-accumulation, I guess the case where it doesn't make sense is if an entire series catches fire, but the keys dont rise as a multiple of what the non-keys do. Your net value increase would be less than if you owned a whole bunch of coins. I dont know why that would ever occur...

saintguru · January 19, 2007 1:14AM

<< I remember SG talking people into building sets. When did he change his mind? >>

When he ran out of money...and still wanted to play.

And after succeeding in one pursuit there's nothing dishonorable by going in a different direction with the same series. It was great fun to build as complete a set as I could...especially with all the "horizontal" upgrading to have the best there is. But at some point you run out of tactics and I couldn't end there.

So yep...I sold 2/3 of the volume and kept and bought spectacular coins that I would not have been able to own otherwise...and now I have 15 or so coins that are all amazing. (And they are worth more than the much bigger set.)

Go for it Rob. Gotta do smoething. OCD is a driving force.

MadMonk · January 19, 2007 1:16AM

Yes I have...I really think it's a better way to collect. Date and mint mark sets do better for dealers than collectors.

291fifth · January 19, 2007 1:17AM

Set of 20?

mgoodm3 · January 19, 2007 1:18AM

Sometimes we go into a change kicking and screaming and find that the new way is actually pretty cool. I also kinda like the idea of just a few really nice coins. Maybe someday.

Outhaul · January 19, 2007 1:19AM

<< I think I am beginning to take after SaintGuru... >>

What, you've become a moral reprobate?

RYK · January 19, 2007 1:20AM

<< Set of 20? >>

20 would be a lofty gold. I am thinking of pairing down the NO half eagle set (16 coins) to the best five or six coins. They are red-hot right now, and prices have not yet risen; it might be the time to do it. Plus, there is another much more expensive coin out there that i want more than the cast-offs.

saintguru · January 19, 2007 1:24AM

GET THE BIG ONE!!

mhammerman · January 19, 2007 1:48AM

In support of your contemplated new direction...

Box of 20, gold type, rarest and most distinctive coins you can afford. This seems to be more highly evolved state of coin collecting over set builders. Not slamming set builders, been doing it for years . I just found set building to be tedious and missed some great type material because I was trying to stay focused on set building. Also with set building it seems filling the hole and upgrading became more important than grabbing cool coins when they were available. but I saw the light. Now, it seems that the blinders are off and I can dig around in the available material with a little more of the open pastures approach.

Now, if you want to get frisky...a nice pan pac oct, a nice $20 territorial Humbert, a couple nice O's, a few of those 1800 busties (you can do this on the cheap or full tilt...hummmmm, the mind reels and the wallet alarm goes to full scream mode.

Coin ON!

IGWT · January 19, 2007 2:58AM

Everything else falls into place once a person understands the purpose of his collecting.

jmj3esq · January 19, 2007 3:08AM

I have thought about it. I put about 90% into building my 50 piece early commem type set. There are a few real undesireable coins in the set. There are also a few that will cost a sh!t ton of money. I have thought about ditching the whole set and only consentrating on a few of the more gorgeous coins in the set. I still might some day.

bidask · January 19, 2007 9:36AM

<< No, not that way.

I have this notion of ditching the whole set concept and picking the most interesting and scarce coins and selling the rest to upgrade the remaining coins. This post is in reference to the New Orleans $5's, not the Dahlonega $5's. I am going to keep the latter intact.

Has anyone (other than SaintGuru) ever done this? >>

All the time, I have not built a set since I was a kid.

RichieURich · January 19, 2007 10:01AM

There are certain coin series where the only coins I want for my personal collection are the scarce dates. I won't say which series or which dates. For my inventory, I would rather have only scarce and rare dates; however, sometimes I purchase collections that have common coins as well as rare coins.

bumanchu · January 19, 2007 1:01PM

Paring down a collection seems to be something that would (after it is done) free up some valuable time, you know, like so you could post more here and such.

Increase focus.

Circumvent procrastination.

Really "know" what you have.

Etc....

Seems like an amiable strategy.

Deb048gold · January 20, 2007 9:21AM

I agree with the pairing idea. The all-consuming desire to finish a set or get as close as you
can could contribute to the lessoning of the quality or your overall set just to fill some gaps.

However, a problem I can see with just focusing on some keys is that you wind up increasing the price volatility
of your set. Going from 40 to 10 keys can be like reducing your srock portfolio from 20 stocks to 3.

saintguru · January 20, 2007 9:56AM

<< I agree with the pairing idea. The all-consuming desire to finish a set or get as close as you
can could contribute to the lessoning of the quality or your overall set just to fill some gaps.

However, a problem I can see with just focusing on some keys is that you wind up increasing the price volatility
of your set. Going from 40 to 10 keys can be like reducing your srock portfolio from 20 stocks to 3. >>

Actually I think that the key dates in high grades have more resilience than the lesser coins. A POP6 coin is only a POP6 coin, no matter what the market conditions. If you want it you have to PAY for itt.

tradedollarnut · January 20, 2007 10:16AM

I have plenty of coins I don't particularly like next to ones that I absolutely love. Often times I think about selling those off and keeping the best.

But I'd hate to break up my sets!

saintguru · January 20, 2007 11:19AM

<< I have plenty of coins I don't particularly like next to ones that I absolutely love. Often times I think about selling those off and keeping the best.

But I'd hate to break up my sets! >>

The first step is the hardest.

I think I am beginning to take after SaintGuru...

Comments

Leave a Comment