1 head like 2 tail like 3 edge like 4 feels like 5 looks like 6 weight like 7 costs like 8 market like 9 registry like 10 grades like 11 appreciation and 12...everything a lot of coin collectors like.
your examples don't even support the point you're very poorly trying to make.
Got any documentation that any of my examples ever circulated as coins? I'm using YOUR criteria, not mine.
"My definition of a coin is something spent as money." (Direct Quote)
It is my understanding that the 1933 Saints never circulated. And certainly the Matte Proofs and 1936 Proof Walking Liberty were not intended to circulate, even if a few did.
I've never heard the rationale to the effect that: "such and such is a coin because all of them are". (Paraphrased) No offense intended, but that doesn't cut it as the definition of a coin.
As for my numismatic knowledge, I'll let the readers decide whether they think that I know what I'm talking about. Do you consider all patterns to be coins? (fyi, the 1856 Cent is a pattern) What about issues that were unofficially struck but never authorized by the Treasury to be struck (1913 Nickel, 1804 Silver Dollar)?
I thought I made my point fairly well. Sorry if I got too smug. But, if I'm mistaken in a meaningful way, please someone correct me. What makes me laugh is that the "Old Guard" seems to make up their own sets of rules and definitions to suit, in spite of the facts.
Q: Are You Printing Money? Bernanke: Not Literally
<< <i>I think some of these proofs will trade for close to bullion and a few of them won't, and if platinum prices went high enough all of them would trade for bullion. We saw 2006 w unc being melted in the platinum price spike and they were key coins so the bullion aspect is one reason to OWN the coins, not avoid them.
Also modern silver eagles are very much like the old Morgan dollars, you can call the silver eagles of today that get spotting "circulated". LOL. >>
Is this fact or supposition? If you have a sales # of 2,577 and some/many are melted, WOW...
<< I think some of these proofs will trade for close to bullion and a few of them won't, and if platinum prices went high enough all of them would trade for bullion. We saw 2006 w unc being melted in the platinum price spike and they were key coins so the bullion aspect is one reason to OWN the coins, not avoid them.
Also modern silver eagles are very much like the old Morgan dollars, you can call the silver eagles of today that get spotting "circulated". LOL. >>
Is this fact or supposition? If you have a sales # of 2,577 and some/many are melted, WOW...
Any melting that took place on the 2006-ws would have been limited to the $100 coins. Those had a mintage of 3,068.
As platinum rose to $2300 an ounce, the numismatic premium that the MS69 coins enjoyed was eroded to the point where they didn't carry much, if any, premium to melt. Although they might have enjoyed a small premium to melt on ebay, given the transaction costs of using ebay/paypal, I believe some found it more profitable to simply sell as bullion (making a nice profit over the issue price). As noted by others, the logic employed was simple: cash out by selling the largest coin of the 4 coin set for $2,000+, and keep the low mintage (2,577 -- 2,676 -- 3,544) smaller coins, which at all times kept a nice premium over melt.
It IS pretty amazing to think of a coin with a 3,000 mintage being sold as melt, but when platinum broke the $2,000/oz barrier, we effectively reached equilibrium between numismatic and non-numismatic demand.
It doesn't reflect unfavorably on the coins; clearly SOME numismatic demand exists even at those levels, as evidenced by 2008 sales --453 4 coin sets and 599 1 ounce coins sold by July 2008 at issue prices over $2000 an ounce.
No different than 100 year old gold coins that basically sell for melt when gold is at $900/oz or BU rolls of 1964 silver selling for melt at $30/oz; high bullion prices offset and sometimes overcome numismatic premiums.
This debate will be going on forever. The dictionary (thefreedictionary.com) definition of a coin is "A small piece of metal, usually flat and circular, authorized by a government for use as money." Purists (I am one) believe a coin should be used as money, but there is a denomination on these critters, isn't there? So it certainly could be used as money. And I'll definitely exchange it for something, some day, which is how money is used, as a medium of exchange. So maybe collectors of Eagles ought to be cut some slack. Coins or not, they sure are collectible, and that's what counts around here.
As for the 2006-W, I certainly hope that some were melted, since I still have this one
Good deals with: goldman86 mkman123 Wingsrule wondercoin segoja Tccuga OKCC LindeDad and others.
There are modern collectors, collectors (like me) who collect classics and moderns, and a few angry classic-only collectors who draw arbitrary lines in the sand.
As someone with a foot in both camps, I understand the distinction between coins intended for circulation and special issues. Part of the joy of classic collecting is the sense of history. A classic coin is a link to the past. You can hold an early large cent and ponder where it's been. Maybe it spent time in the pocket of one of the great figures of our history. Maybe not; but whoever circulated it certainly lived under much different circumstances than we do now.
I understand the complaint that modern coins are for the most part uninspired designs, lacking the romance of the coins you might find in circulation through 1964. Clad coins and zinc cents further removed any aspect of actual value from our circulating coinage.
I understand the comments that recent bullion coins are disconnected from commerce. The non-changing reverse AGEs, APEs, ASEs... they're certainly a series, but primarily issued as a way to handle bullion. The collectible versions, marketed to collectors, mintmarked, or with a proof or other special finish... are essentially the same. That said, they are largely nice-looking coins with designs that hold up, and the effort and investment of assembling a complete set of them is really no different than assembling a set of Peace Dollars or any other coin. The platinum proofs and w-uncirculateds are set apart by the changing reverse... they are like a special commemorative program; high value bullion with what I believe are some really great designs (frequently better and more timeless than many recent and early commemoratives).
Crack open a redbook and compare the platinum coins to so many uninspired designs on commemoratives since 1982....The 1991 USO $1 obverse, which looks like an arcade token. The 1992 White House 200th anniversary $1 reverse. The 1994 Women in Mililary Service $1. The 1995 Special Olympics $1. The 1996 Smithsonian $5. The 1997 Jackie Robinson $1 reverse. The platinum proof designs, at least until now, are more thematic than the special interest commemoratives and compare favorably as a result. The low mintages further set them apart from most moderns. Part of what classic collectors dislike about moderns is the fact that the numbers are SO high that it creates perceptions of scarcity that are disconnected from reality.
Classic coins were circulated, lost, melted... we talk of many of the best in terms of surviving populations, with a finite number of high end coins. There are only so many people who can own an 1794 silver dollar because few exist. Most circulated moderns, on the other hand, have mintages that are so high that it's hard to really think of any of them as scarce. Even the relatively low mintage coins: can 2008 Sacs really be thought of as "scarce" at 1.8M? With the platinum proofs, especially since 2003, it's a different story; most have mintages well under 10,000. The 2006-2008 w uncirculated coins, with a coherent 3 year design, have mintages of under 6,000 across the board, and some lower than 3,000. These numbers further distinguish them from most other modern coins.
Detractors continue to point to the low mintages as evidence of low demand. They are right, but short-sighted. Very few high mintage coins can hold a premium for long; the collector base has to exceed the supply to justify a premium. Proof sets with mintages of 800,000 can enjoy a premium if there are a million proof set collectors. 1995w silver eagle proofs enjoy significant premiums as long as there are a few hundred thousand silver eagle collectors competing for one.
The platinum proofs and unc-ws, on the other hand, are tortises in this race. Slow starters with low demand. The primary thing holding them back is the very thing that makes them more valuable... bullion content. As platinum rose to $2,000+ an ounce, it drove what few collectors there were out of the market-- the darn things were just too expensive. For the moment, with platinum basically at parity with gold, it's relatively affordable. The longer than continues, the more the base will expand. Some of the people who would otherwise spend $2000 on a 4 coin set of AGEs will crossover and spend the same $2000 to buy a lower mintage platinum set. Some of larger base of long term AGE collectors are likely to give the platinum coins a look; a discrete 12 year series, lower mintages than gold, strong bullion content (with, based on recent history, perhaps more upside) and similarly priced. A 2006-w uncirculated $100 1 ounce platinum coin, with a mintage of 3,068 and perhaps under 3,000 surviving, starts to look like a bargain priced at $1400-$1500 when many higher mintage moderns (such as the Jackie Robinson $5 gold or the 1995w proof silver eagle) sell at multiples of that.
Anyway, as with many of my posts, this turned into an essay when no essay is required. Just look at the coins--many with mintages under 8,000--in the first post. They speak for themselves.
A picture is worth a thousand words and nyconsuel provided a dozen pictures, but sometimes illiteracy extends to the reading of pictures. Nice "essay" on the last post ny.
When photographed with gold, silver, copper, nickel, clad, brass, or any other type of coin, platinum is uniquely different. Hopefully someone could photograph some of these metal orbs altogether.
If a picture paints a thousand bucks which coin would you prefer ?
Comments
1 head like
2 tail like
3 edge like
4 feels like
5 looks like
6 weight like
7 costs like
8 market like
9 registry like
10 grades like
11 appreciation and
12...everything a lot of coin collectors like.
https://acoinshop.com/ —-> https://ebay.us/m/KxolR5
Got any documentation that any of my examples ever circulated as coins? I'm using YOUR criteria, not mine.
"My definition of a coin is something spent as money." (Direct Quote)
It is my understanding that the 1933 Saints never circulated. And certainly the Matte Proofs and 1936 Proof Walking Liberty were not intended to circulate, even if a few did.
I've never heard the rationale to the effect that: "such and such is a coin because all of them are". (Paraphrased) No offense intended, but that doesn't cut it as the definition of a coin.
As for my numismatic knowledge, I'll let the readers decide whether they think that I know what I'm talking about. Do you consider all patterns to be coins? (fyi, the 1856 Cent is a pattern) What about issues that were unofficially struck but never authorized by the Treasury to be struck (1913 Nickel, 1804 Silver Dollar)?
I thought I made my point fairly well. Sorry if I got too smug. But, if I'm mistaken in a meaningful way, please someone correct me. What makes me laugh is that the "Old Guard" seems to make up their own sets of rules and definitions to suit, in spite of the facts.
I knew it would happen.
A $100 Platinum coin will always be worth at least $100, even if the platinum goes to $50 an oz.
San Diego, CA
<< <i>I think some of these proofs will trade for close to bullion and a few of them won't, and if platinum prices went high enough all of them would trade for bullion. We saw 2006 w unc being melted in the platinum price spike and they were key coins so the bullion aspect is one reason to OWN the coins, not avoid them.
Also modern silver eagles are very much like the old Morgan dollars, you can call the silver eagles of today that get spotting "circulated". LOL. >>
Is this fact or supposition? If you have a sales # of 2,577 and some/many are melted, WOW...
Also modern silver eagles are very much like the old Morgan dollars, you can call the silver eagles of today that get spotting "circulated". LOL. >>
Is this fact or supposition? If you have a sales # of 2,577 and some/many are melted, WOW...
Any melting that took place on the 2006-ws would have been limited to the $100 coins. Those had a mintage of 3,068.
As platinum rose to $2300 an ounce, the numismatic premium that the MS69 coins enjoyed was eroded to the point where they didn't carry much, if any, premium to melt. Although they might have enjoyed a small premium to melt on ebay, given the transaction costs of using ebay/paypal, I believe some found it more profitable to simply sell as bullion (making a nice profit over the issue price). As noted by others, the logic employed was simple: cash out by selling the largest coin of the 4 coin set for $2,000+, and keep the low mintage (2,577 -- 2,676 -- 3,544) smaller coins, which at all times kept a nice premium over melt.
It IS pretty amazing to think of a coin with a 3,000 mintage being sold as melt, but when platinum broke the $2,000/oz barrier, we effectively reached equilibrium between numismatic and non-numismatic demand.
It doesn't reflect unfavorably on the coins; clearly SOME numismatic demand exists even at those levels, as evidenced by 2008 sales --453 4 coin sets and 599 1 ounce coins sold by July 2008 at issue prices over $2000 an ounce.
No different than 100 year old gold coins that basically sell for melt when gold is at $900/oz or BU rolls of 1964 silver selling for melt at $30/oz; high bullion prices offset and sometimes overcome numismatic premiums.
As for the 2006-W, I certainly hope that some were melted, since I still have this one
my early American coins & currency: -- http://yankeedoodlecoins.com/
As someone with a foot in both camps, I understand the distinction between coins intended for circulation and special issues. Part of the joy of classic collecting is the sense of history. A classic coin is a link to the past. You can hold an early large cent and ponder where it's been. Maybe it spent time in the pocket of one of the great figures of our history. Maybe not; but whoever circulated it certainly lived under much different circumstances than we do now.
I understand the complaint that modern coins are for the most part uninspired designs, lacking the romance of the coins you might find in circulation through 1964. Clad coins and zinc cents further removed any aspect of actual value from our circulating coinage.
I understand the comments that recent bullion coins are disconnected from commerce. The non-changing reverse AGEs, APEs, ASEs... they're certainly a series, but primarily issued as a way to handle bullion. The collectible versions, marketed to collectors, mintmarked, or with a proof or other special finish... are essentially the same. That said, they are largely nice-looking coins with designs that hold up, and the effort and investment of assembling a complete set of them is really no different than assembling a set of Peace Dollars or any other coin. The platinum proofs and w-uncirculateds are set apart by the changing reverse... they are like a special commemorative program; high value bullion with what I believe are some really great designs (frequently better and more timeless than many recent and early commemoratives).
Crack open a redbook and compare the platinum coins to so many uninspired designs on commemoratives since 1982....The 1991 USO $1 obverse, which looks like an arcade token. The 1992 White House 200th anniversary $1 reverse. The 1994 Women in Mililary Service $1. The 1995 Special Olympics $1. The 1996 Smithsonian $5. The 1997 Jackie Robinson $1 reverse. The platinum proof designs, at least until now, are more thematic than the special interest commemoratives and compare favorably as a result. The low mintages further set them apart from most moderns. Part of what classic collectors dislike about moderns is the fact that the numbers are SO high that it creates perceptions of scarcity that are disconnected from reality.
Classic coins were circulated, lost, melted... we talk of many of the best in terms of surviving populations, with a finite number of high end coins. There are only so many people who can own an 1794 silver dollar because few exist. Most circulated moderns, on the other hand, have mintages that are so high that it's hard to really think of any of them as scarce. Even the relatively low mintage coins: can 2008 Sacs really be thought of as "scarce" at 1.8M? With the platinum proofs, especially since 2003, it's a different story; most have mintages well under 10,000. The 2006-2008 w uncirculated coins, with a coherent 3 year design, have mintages of under 6,000 across the board, and some lower than 3,000. These numbers further distinguish them from most other modern coins.
Detractors continue to point to the low mintages as evidence of low demand. They are right, but short-sighted. Very few high mintage coins can hold a premium for long; the collector base has to exceed the supply to justify a premium. Proof sets with mintages of 800,000 can enjoy a premium if there are a million proof set collectors. 1995w silver eagle proofs enjoy significant premiums as long as there are a few hundred thousand silver eagle collectors competing for one.
The platinum proofs and unc-ws, on the other hand, are tortises in this race. Slow starters with low demand. The primary thing holding them back is the very thing that makes them more valuable... bullion content. As platinum rose to $2,000+ an ounce, it drove what few collectors there were out of the market-- the darn things were just too expensive. For the moment, with platinum basically at parity with gold, it's relatively affordable. The longer than continues, the more the base will expand. Some of the people who would otherwise spend $2000 on a 4 coin set of AGEs will crossover and spend the same $2000 to buy a lower mintage platinum set. Some of larger base of long term AGE collectors are likely to give the platinum coins a look; a discrete 12 year series, lower mintages than gold, strong bullion content (with, based on recent history, perhaps more upside) and similarly priced. A 2006-w uncirculated $100 1 ounce platinum coin, with a mintage of 3,068 and perhaps under 3,000 surviving, starts to look like a bargain priced at $1400-$1500 when many higher mintage moderns (such as the Jackie Robinson $5 gold or the 1995w proof silver eagle) sell at multiples of that.
Anyway, as with many of my posts, this turned into an essay when no essay is required. Just look at the coins--many with mintages under 8,000--in the first post. They speak for themselves.
Nice "essay" on the last post ny.
If a picture paints a thousand bucks
which coin would you prefer ?
https://acoinshop.com/ —-> https://ebay.us/m/KxolR5