Options
Are 1996 Silver Eagles Overpriced?
sportsfan007
Posts: 28
Looking at some of the mintage figures for other years, it seems 1996 while it is the lowest mintage, it's not the lowest mintage by that much. Other years come close and they don't seem to command much if any premium. The 94, 95, 97, 98, and 88 issues are comparitively low as well. For instance 1996 had 3.6 million, and 1994 was at 4.2 million. The 1996 sells for $50 and the 1994 can be had for 2 over spot. Is it that collectors haven't yet appreciated the other low mintage years or something else?
0
Comments
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
The '96 didn't become the key date right when it was issued. About 2000 (+/-), the 1986 was the high-priced one. The '96 price started edging upward from there and really hasn't stopped. That type of a slow, continual increase usually means it's not going back down.
If indeed that price is justified then the 2006-W should behave similarly.
Edited for not proofing before posting..
These could be had for $35, a few years ago, now closer to $100.
<< <i>I think people putting ASE sets together drives the price of this coin up since it is the lowest mintage. >>
The KEY here is WAS the lowest mintage.
<< <i>
<< <i>I think people putting ASE sets together drives the price of this coin up since it is the lowest mintage. >>
The KEY here is WAS the lowest mintage. >>
I see you are including the 2006-W.
If you have to ask, then, yes, for you, it's overpriced.
If you want one or have one and haven't sold it and have no plans of selling it, knowing what they trade for, then: no, they're not "overpriced"
Are Washington smoothies overpriced? it depends. Are 1794 dollars overpriced? it depends. 1996 eagles? it depends. Southern California Coastal Real estate? it depends.
If by "overpriced" do you mean do I have or want one? yes, they're overpriced.
If by "overpriced" you mean, "Do I think they'll decrease in value in the future?" then I say who the hell knows.
Hope this helps
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
Limited availability to collectors might be driving the price.
Since these are bullion coins, a certain number of each year's mintage probably goes to non-collectors, who put them in long-term storage and don't pay any attention to the date.
I suspect that a lot fewer than 3.6 million of these coins are available in the numismatic marketplace.
Right now the demand says about $100 +/-.
About 5 years ago I went into my local coin shop and wanted to buy some eagles. I decided to ask for the ones with the lowest mintages and I asked for the 86, 88, 94, 96, 97, and 98. The dealer told me had tubes and tubes of all dates and that they were all the same price $10 each (I think that's what the charged). He didn't care about dates. I bet he does now. But only because the market does.
The 1996 uncirculated SAE (mintage 3.6 million) and the 1996-W proof SAE (mintage 0.5 million) are selling at around the same price.
Evidently there are a lot more series collectors for uncirculated than for proof.
It will be interesting to see how many collectors treat the "W" uncirculated coins as a separate series, rather than combining them with the bullion coins. The advantage would be that a collector could start a "set" fresh with the 2006-W issue, and not have to buy any of the more expensive previous dates.
Box of 20
<< <i>I too believe that the 96s are overpriced but I watch 'em sell at the posted price level on Teletrade! Go figure.
The '96 didn't become the key date right when it was issued. About 2000 (+/-), the 1986 was the high-priced one. The '96 price started edging upward from there and really hasn't stopped. That type of a slow, continual increase usually means it's not going back down.
If indeed that price is justified then the 2006-W should behave similarly.
Edited for not proofing before posting.. >>
Fred, Las Vegas, NV
<< <i>I don't really see how something with a mintage of 3.6 MILLION can be considered "low mintage"....
It's not, it's only low mintage compared to the other dates. Every series, no matter how common it is to obtain, needs a "key date"--collectors insist upon it. And these were chugging along for a good 15 years before anyone paid any attention to the mintages... the 1996 shared a very small premium with the 1988 and 94 for a little while, but it took off into a world of it's own. Now, it never did make any sense since the 88, 94, 97, and 98 are all similarly low in mintage but have no premium now that spot price has gone up so high. And with the super low mintage W eagles coming out, it will be interesting to see if the W's go way up or if the '96 goes way down. Because as it is, selling at the same level, it doesn't make any sense.
And with the super low mintage W eagles coming out, it will be interesting to see if the W's go way up or if the '96 goes way down. Because as it is, selling at the same level, it doesn't make any sense.
It depends to some extent on whether demand for the '96 and demand for the W's are coming from the same place.
For people collecting only year sets of bullion coins, the 1996 will continue to be the key and the W uncirculated coins will be ignored. Proof-only collectors similarly don't need the W uncirculated coins for their sets.
Some bullion ASE collectors will include the W uncirculated coins in their sets, and some newcomers might collect the W uncirculated coins only, starting with the 2006.
It's possible that prices for the bullion, proof, and W uncirculated ASEs will be somewhat independent of each other.
<< <i>There is one on the 'bay right now for $50.00 BIN # 260103404353. It looks like it has a spot? >>
gotta love those spots
The first is that in 1996 the design of the silver eagle was changed. If you examine the 1986 through 1994 strikes you will see that they have a much higher design and that the field is noticeably concave, similar to the St. Gaudens high-relief double eagle. In 1996 the design became much shallower and there were far fewer high-quality strikes of the coin. I don't know if the Mint reduced the striking pressure, if the dies weren't as well executed, or if the design just didn't transfer as well to the coin but the quality in general is far below what it had been up until then.
The second is that there was an issue with the coining process used to make the 1996 coins. When many of the coins were produced, some substance (possible a solvent used to clean the dies and/or planchets) was not properly rinsed from the coins. As a result, after some months horrendous spotting problems occurred even with coins that had been slabbed in airtight holders. Collectors and dealers had to be much more selective in picking coins and the demand (and price) for high-quality spot-free coins went up. Dealers in particular had to recoup the losses from the "ruined" eagles with higher profit margins on the remaining coins.
Together these factors have led to the high price of 1996 silver eagles. It's no different than the situation for toned or spotted uncirculated 1949-S Franklin half and a Gem BU 1949-S FBL Frankln half. In theory both are the same coin and both are uncirculated specimens, but the devil and huge price difference are in the details.
Gads
<< <i>Actually, the price of the 1996 silver eagle has nothing to do with the mintage numbers. The problem lies in a couple areas.
The first is that in 1996 the design of the silver eagle was changed. If you examine the 1986 through 1994 strikes you will see that they have a much higher design and that the field is noticeably concave, similar to the St. Gaudens high-relief double eagle. In 1996 the design became much shallower and there were far fewer high-quality strikes of the coin. I don't know if the Mint reduced the striking pressure, if the dies weren't as well executed, or if the design just didn't transfer as well to the coin but the quality in general is far below what it had been up until then.
The second is that there was an issue with the coining process used to make the 1996 coins. When many of the coins were produced, some substance (possible a solvent used to clean the dies and/or planchets) was not properly rinsed from the coins. As a result, after some months horrendous spotting problems occurred even with coins that had been slabbed in airtight holders. Collectors and dealers had to be much more selective in picking coins and the demand (and price) for high-quality spot-free coins went up. Dealers in particular had to recoup the losses from the "ruined" eagles with higher profit margins on the remaining coins.
Together these factors have led to the high price of 1996 silver eagles. It's no different than the situation for toned or spotted uncirculated 1949-S Franklin half and a Gem BU 1949-S FBL Frankln half. In theory both are the same coin and both are uncirculated specimens, but the devil and huge price difference are in the details.
Gads >>
interesting...and welcome
Jonathan
Question: if your ASEs don't have spots or milky haze by now, what's the likelihood of them developing this at a later date? I've sent in ASEs from my original Mint purchases from 1986 on, and have had good luck with spot-free specimens so far.
Vietnam Vet 1968-1969