Options
Today's Modern Crap...
aus3000tin
Posts: 369 ✭✭✭
... is tomorrow's treasures.
Does anyone think this is true?
I mean at one time all coins were modern crap: 1909-S VDB Lincoln Cent, 1916-D Winged Liberty Dime and 1932-D Washington Quarter.
I perfect example of this would be 1994 SMS & 1997 SMS Jefferson Nickel. It has low mintage and very few collectors after it. But given another 10-15 years the price will likely appreciate.
Given another 10-15 years, do you think there will be appreciation for 1950's proof sets?
I've been purchasing 1954 and 1955 proof sets for the past 5 years.
I've about 25 sets for each year.
I know most would call these sets modern crap, but they do have value today, and will must likely have value tomorrow.
Just venting alittle.
Thanks,
Chris
Post script:
Can anyone give me an example of a coin that was "modern crap" in the 1950's that has appreciated?
Thanks,
Chris
Does anyone think this is true?
I mean at one time all coins were modern crap: 1909-S VDB Lincoln Cent, 1916-D Winged Liberty Dime and 1932-D Washington Quarter.
I perfect example of this would be 1994 SMS & 1997 SMS Jefferson Nickel. It has low mintage and very few collectors after it. But given another 10-15 years the price will likely appreciate.
Given another 10-15 years, do you think there will be appreciation for 1950's proof sets?
I've been purchasing 1954 and 1955 proof sets for the past 5 years.
I've about 25 sets for each year.
I know most would call these sets modern crap, but they do have value today, and will must likely have value tomorrow.
Just venting alittle.
Thanks,
Chris
Post script:
Can anyone give me an example of a coin that was "modern crap" in the 1950's that has appreciated?
Thanks,
Chris
0
Comments
First of all, the modern crap of 100 years ago didn't have business strike mintages in the hudreds of millions.
The Commems of 100 years ago were not all saved.
The coins of 100 years ago had gold and silver in them. IMHO clad will never be even close in popularity to silver.
<< <i>Can anyone give me an example of a coin that was "modern crap" in the 1950's that has appreciated? >>
The 1955 DDO Lincoln Cent.
There are some modern keys, but they don't receive their deserved respect.
Given a few years, 10-15 years, maybe the "modern crap" bashers will think differently.
Just because the 19th century coinage was not preserved in high grade, many collectors treat the coinage as Holy Grail.
Let them collect their heavily worn, dark toned and just plain crusty coins.
I prefer to collect a coin that is high quality struck and pleasing to the eye.
I know I'll probably get flack for bashing the old-time collector, but then again maybe I deserve it.
Thanks,
Chris
Yes but there was only about 75 million people in the US then.
Best Regards,
John
1947-P & D; 1948-D; 1949-P & S; 1950-D & S; and 1952-S.
Any help locating any of these OBW rolls would be gratefully appreciated!
<< <i>No, I don't agree.
First of all, the modern crap of 100 years ago didn't have business strike mintages in the hudreds of millions.
The Commems of 100 years ago were not all saved.
The coins of 100 years ago had gold and silver in them. IMHO clad will never be even close in popularity to silver. >>
Ugh, I'm too tired to even know where to start. Someone else wanna take this one?
<< <i>I mean at one time all coins were modern crap: 1909-S VDB Lincoln Cent, 1916-D Winged Liberty Dime and 1932-D Washington Quarter. >>
It depends on your definition of crap. It seems that "crap" is used to describe coins that were created for collectors, not circulation. If the coins listed above were meant for regular circulation then they would not be classified as crap.
<< <i>I perfect example of this would be 1994 SMS & 1997 SMS Jefferson Nickel. It has low mintage and very few collectors after it. But given another 10-15 years the price will likely appreciate. >>
Because SMS Jeffs were only available in collector sets, they can be considered crap and not a part of a regular circulation strike set.
<< <i>Given another 10-15 years, do you think there will be appreciation for 1950's proof sets? >>
Proofs can be classified as crap, whether they are classic or modern.
Just wanted to make a distinction. At one time all coins were modern, but not all coins were "crap"
I think, despite the obscenely high mintages, there will be treasures from among the clad era circulation coins. No absolute date rarities, but plenty of condition rarities. This will be especially true if we find clad coins to be particularly sensitive to their long term storage environments. Virtually no rolls were set aside for many years and then those that were often were split as junk and not maintained. I think quarters especially are going to have some condition stoppers in that early 70s branch mint era.
State quarters? No f'ing way, unless clad doesn't physically hold up, will those have any real future. Too many collectors of those who think they will obviously weren't in the hobby in 1976. Fun to collect though, especially at face; my kids do that. But they are indeed modern crap.
I also love strike rarities among the Jeffersons in the 50s through early 70s. We know the full steps are nowhere for many dates, but the best accumulation secert probably is grabing those ones that are pretty close to full.
NSDR - Life Member
SSDC - Life Member
ANA - Pay As I Go Member
<< <i>I also love strike rarities among the Jeffersons in the 50s through early 70s. We know the full steps are nowhere for many dates, but the best accumulation secert probably is grabing those ones that are pretty close to full. >>
Sounds like it would be a major coup if someone bought up a lot of those and convinced a top TPG to slab them with a designation such as AFS (About Full Steps) or someting else. Actually, if AFS coins started to be worth as much as FS coins, then they could simply be designated as FS using market grading. Could be an interesting development if it happened.
A number of folks have expressed the opinion that some modern collectors are mostly in it for a buck. Take a look at the number of bulk submissions that the TPG's look at, follow the money. It's also disturbing to a number of us the numerous threads about how to get around the order limits at the US Mint, the arguements over 70's vs 69's, the arguements over NGC 70's vs PCGS 70's. There is a reason the TPG's make a lot of money. Once again follow it. Add on the way too many threads about delivery dates and order numbers and it becomes mind boggling to those here who aren't interested. You continually have to search back to find a numismatically interesting thread rather than one bragging about what price they sold their 70 Plats or how many boxes they stuffed away.
Some of the posters know very little even about the history of the designs of these coins and others like Don Heath Russ and Cladking have interesting coins and provide an intellectual discussion. Even the most crusty ol classic collector admires their knowledge and dedication. Unfortunately when the discussions about moderns come up we see too little of this. You often see some thin skin come through which in my view only validates some of the truth in why some folks buy moderns.
As been said a million times collect what you like, learn to appreciate the work and enjoyment others put into collecting what they like. No one should affect your attitude but yourself.
I would agree in the latter statement as we hae seen it time & time again, not only with the 'flippers', but with low mintage MC.
Another driving force are Red Book, Coin Albums & Registry sets.
Some would agree with the first statement, but not me.
Compared to the designs of the classics, it is MC, and I still collect it!
JMO
ADDED:
To answer your question, "Today's Modern Crap is tomorrow's treasures.", some, but very few, based on mintage, not design.
It depends on your definition of crap. It seems that "crap" is used to describe coins that were created for collectors, not circulation. If the coins listed above were meant for regular circulation then they would not be classified as crap.
One might define crap as any coin that doesn't have newly-minted proof surfaces. For instance, an AU 1895 Morgan could be considered crap alongside a 2007 Proof 1 oz. Silver Eagle.
The 1909-S VDB is one of the most overrated and overpromoted pieces of crap. The survival rate doesn't rival the true bullion crap of today, but they sure are not rare coins. Nonetheless, they are still coins.
One might define crap as a variety that no one except a specialist in that series might be interested in, such as a die pairing that nobody else in the whole world cares about. In stark contrast, that same specialist might consider a 1909-S vdb Lincoln, one of the most popularized and collected U.S. coins ever, as crap.
**You might take the attitude that John Albanese takes - that any coin graded as 70 is overrated crap and is therefore hazardous to your financial health.**
Or, in contrast - you might decide that too many dealers have marked up prices for too many old coins for too many years - and that anything bought from the coin syndicate is over-graded and over-rated crap, which makes 70-graded coins look like a flaming once-in-a-millennium buying opportunity by comparison.
**You might believe, as do Laura and TDN - that most of the slabbed coins showing up at auction are crap, and that they are dragging down the prices of your inventory so badly that you are justified in calling everyone else's inventory crap (because of a "bifucated market", don't you know?), whilst placing stickers on your own crap for "soft money" trading purposes within the syndicate.**
Instead, you might just come to recognize that good material is hard to come by (just like it always has been), that coins worth less than $50,000 need love too, and that it's cathartic and sometimes even good for the soul to admit things as they really are, such as admitting that the coin market is "soft" and not "bifurcated", that you don't know everything about every coin in the market, and that other sellers have nice coins too.
**You might observe that the U.S. Mint is whoring up the coin market with so many different coins and special finishes that you can't keep up with your list of new issues, much less find the time or money to buy them with. You might feel that Congress is so self-absorbed in self-adulation, scandal and political infighting that it's hard to see how they find the time to authorize so many meaningless and ill-conceived new coin issues designed to fleece as many coin collectors as is humanly possible in as short a time period as possible, so that in a year, they can start doing it all over again.**
Ultimately, you can worry about all of this crap, or you can learn how to grade, develop your own set of priorities, and not really worry about what other people think about your collections. And in the end, if you enjoy your collection, you win.
I knew it would happen.
the crap of 100 years ago didn't sell for multitudes of ten over the face value
<< <i>
<< <i>Can anyone give me an example of a coin that was "modern crap" in the 1950's that has appreciated? >>
The 1955 DDO Lincoln Cent. >>
That's a significantly different situation. It falls into the realm of errors, where the clash over modern coins is between strictly classic collectors and hybrids of classic and/or modern collectors.
<< <i>This is the kind of thread that deserves an answer that infuriates the most people possible.
It depends on your definition of crap. It seems that "crap" is used to describe coins that were created for collectors, not circulation. If the coins listed above were meant for regular circulation then they would not be classified as crap.
One might define crap as any coin that doesn't have newly-minted proof surfaces. For instance, an AU 1895 Morgan could be considered crap alongside a 2007 Proof 1 oz. Silver Eagle.
The 1909-S VDB is one of the most overrated and overpromoted pieces of crap. The survival rate doesn't rival the true bullion crap of today, but they sure are not rare coins. Nonetheless, they are still coins.
One might define crap as a variety that no one except a specialist in that series might be interested in, such as a die pairing that nobody else in the whole world cares about. In stark contrast, that same specialist might consider a 1909-S vdb Lincoln, one of the most popularized and collected U.S. coins ever, as crap.
**You might take the attitude that John Albanese takes - that any coin graded as 70 is overrated crap and is therefore hazardous to your financial health.**
Or, in contrast - you might decide that too many dealers have marked up prices for too many old coins for too many years - and that anything bought from the coin syndicate is over-graded and over-rated crap, which makes 70-graded coins look like a flaming once-in-a-millennium buying opportunity by comparison.
**You might believe, as do Laura and TDN - that most of the slabbed coins showing up at auction are crap, and that they are dragging down the prices of your inventory so badly that you are justified in calling everyone else's inventory crap (because of a "bifucated market", don't you know?), whilst placing stickers on your own crap for "soft money" trading purposes within the syndicate.**
Instead, you might just come to recognize that good material is hard to come by (just like it always has been), that coins worth less than $50,000 need love too, and that it's cathartic and sometimes even good for the soul to admit things as they really are, such as admitting that the coin market is "soft" and not "bifurcated", that you don't know everything about every coin in the market, and that other sellers have nice coins too.
**You might observe that the U.S. Mint is whoring up the coin market with so many different coins and special finishes that you can't keep up with your list of new issues, much less find the time or money to buy them with. You might feel that Congress is so self-absorbed in self-adulation, scandal and political infighting that it's hard to see how they find the time to authorize so many meaningless and ill-conceived new coin issues designed to fleece as many coin collectors as is humanly possible in as short a time period as possible, so that in a year, they can start doing it all over again.**
Ultimately, you can worry about all of this crap, or you can learn how to grade, develop your own set of priorities, and not really worry about what other people think about your collections. And in the end, if you enjoy your collection, you win. >>
.....................................................
<< <i>
<< <i>It depends on your definition of crap. It seems that "crap" is used to describe coins that were created for collectors, not circulation. If the coins listed above were meant for regular circulation then they would not be classified as crap. >>
One might define crap as any coin that doesn't have newly-minted proof surfaces. >>
You can create any definition for yourself, but from what I've seen, numismatic crap is usually synonymous with NCLT.
Hoard the keys.
A 1900 proof set (less gold) cost all of around $3-$4 at time of issue.
A smaller premium than what stuff cost in the last 40-50 years.
In the mid-1940's you could purchase gem bust and seated coinage in the $1.50 to $3 range as Benson and others did. Guess for those prices that stuff was crap too. I can only imagine what they thought of BU rolls of Washington 25c's or Walkers.
roadrunner
<< <i>As been said a million times collect what you like, learn to appreciate the work and enjoyment others put into collecting what they like. No one should affect your attitude but yourself. >>
Great statement and total response, IrishMike. You aren't taking the coins with you to the grave, and no amount of money or MS70 Plats will change that outcome. Enjoy the HOBBY and talk to us about the HOBBY, not the number of Jefferson spouse coins you bought.
<< <i>You aren't taking the coins with you to the grave >>
That's not always true. Sometimes people do.
Not necessarily, in my view.
I tend to associate poor quality, over-grading and over-pricing with the concept of "crap", which occurs in every facet of the hobby.
I knew it would happen.
<< <i>
<< <i>numismatic crap is usually synonymous with NCLT. >>
Not necessarily, in my view.
I tend to associate poor quality, >>
I guess weakly struck, non-FBL/FH/FS, and non-70s could be crap then. If non-70s are crap, then perhaps every classic coin is crap.
<< <i>over-grading and over-pricing with the concept of "crap", which occurs in every facet of the hobby. >>
Those are more to do with the slab and pricing than the coin itself but I see what you're getting at.
John
That may well be true, John. And, if you leave a market alone - most of the time, they self-correct. That may happen someday with highly-graded slabs. And if it ever does, it will reflect what the market perceives as a new reality. For the time being, we have to deal with the current realities.
I knew it would happen.
just completed 3d tour to Iraq and retired after 28+ years in the US Army
We are only temporary keepers and they will be passed on and on and on.
And in due time they will be ancient curiosities like a Roman copper. </FONT>
<< <i>There's no way I will live to see today's modern coins become classics so I am not collecting for myself. Over the past few years I have been selling off the majority of my Morgans keeping only Walkers, gold and platinum coins. Gold and certain platinum coins are all I purchase now. I have told my wife that anything she doesn't need is to be given to our 16 year old granddaughter. She is the one that will see these coins become classics. >>
MOST of the modern stuff looks like crap to me, very shallow relief and no artistic value.
I'm an old school kinda person.
Ray
<< <i>
<< <i>There's no way I will live to see today's modern coins become classics so I am not collecting for myself. Over the past few years I have been selling off the majority of my Morgans keeping only Walkers, gold and platinum coins. Gold and certain platinum coins are all I purchase now. I have told my wife that anything she doesn't need is to be given to our 16 year old granddaughter. She is the one that will see these coins become classics. >>
MOST of the modern stuff looks like crap to me, very shallow relief and no artistic value.
I'm an old school kinda person.
Ray >>
Depends on which coins you like. Most of the late 19th century coins looked like crap to TR so if you like those, you're not that old school
We entertained ourselves on a rainy day by setting them up on opposite sides of the room and knocking them down by rolling a golf ball at them.
Today these things are valued at $300 to $500 each. They are known to toy soldier collectors as "dime stores".
My brother is to this day an avid toy soldier collector. His specialty is Napoleonic era European and Cossack soldiers.
They don't hold much interest for me but he sure enjoys going around the country attending toy soldier shows.
There are thousands of collectors of all types of things most of us couldn't care less about.
Collectors should do exactly that-- collect.
If the main goal is financial gain there is apt to be great disappointment in many cases.
I happen to have no interest whatsoever in the modern products the Mint has produced strictly as a revenue producing program rather than real circulating currency.
However everyone should collect whatever they can afford an enjoy without regard for anyone else's opinion. Dave W
David J Weygant Rare Coins website: www.djwcoin.com
Will modern crap be worth a lot of money tomorrow? Sure why not! But didn't it take a LONG, LONG time for most of the classic stuff to appreciate a lot? How long do you want to wait? How much opportunty cost can you afford? I like the ideas I've read here -- your SMS nickels and the 50's cameos, for example, seem like safe bets for a better payoff some day.
I think the point that cladking has made most clearly is that everybody takes today's coins for granted, so the nicest specimens in some series are guaranteed to be especially rare and costly -- someday. There's enough in the archives here alone to put together a few ten-baggers and a lot of two- or three-baggers, I'd say.