World Colonial

Barber series are much scarcer than the later ones of the same denomination or otherwise. Also a big difference starting around 1933 versus previously. This is evident both in the prices and the TPG data, though some of the earlier date counts are hardly low even in MS.

It has value, just less than you think it should. 20 bags is how many coins? 100,000? Why would such a common coin be worth more than now, especially with so many more available in somewhat lower quality? Nope, never said what you claim. There is also nothing unusual about it. Yes, I have said that the vast majority of US coins dated 1933 and later should be worth no more than the TPG fee or nominal premiums to silver spot. That's because the coins are both very common and have a (very) low preference. I state this because I infer the supply is higher or much higher than you believe.

Total BS. I back up my opinions with much better claims than you do. Read my last reply to you. As for catalog prices, are you referring to world or US coinage? Not that your post even demonstrate that you know what these coins are actually worth anyway, since you rely on outdated catalog values when coins sell within a price range and not a fixed value anyway. If anyone is "discouraged" by what I write, then that just means they don't like the coins that much. I've never ignored what you claim here. I disagree with you. When I tell you a coin is common, it's because it's easy to buy and that's a fact. This is independent of the price. Except that if I wanted one, I'd buy one on eBay right now. PCGS has graded about 1600 51-S nickels. NGC, closer to 900. That's about 2500. eBay has multiples for sale in grades of MS-64 or better right now. This is supposed to be hard to find? These coins meet the quality criteria for at least 95% of the collector base, whether it meets yours or not. Any other arbitrary coin you'd like to claim as 'scarce"? Except that these 25MM (assuming it's even close to accurate) were almost exclusively collecting at FV which means this isn't relevant to your claim. The price of the 50-D nickel was a bubble, I've told you this before, you know it, and yet you bring it up repeatedly to support your claims anyway. It's irrelevant to your claims, as there isn't a single example of a common coin like this one which increased exponentially to any actually noticeable value decades later. That's what you are implying now. No, the coins aren't "tough" to find or buy in the quality most collectors will accept. The vast majority of the 2500 51-S nickels graded are MS-64 or better. You just aren't familiar with the TPG data. There aren't ever going to be 10,000 new buyers for a coin like the 51-S nickel at much higher prices, except maybe by your standards which aren't material. Besides, the supply is almost certainly much higher than you infer or believe. As an example, in one of your PCGS "Raw Moderns" threads, Wonder Coin stated he has a SDB vault full of US coinage dated from the late 30's onward,. He didn't quantify it but it's not a few. He also stated knowing other dealer and even some collectors with large volumes of this coinage. Read his post for yourself since you don't believe anything I tell you. Most of this coinage isn't visible because there is no point in selling it in large volume due to the price. Lack of visibility does not = not existing.

Big whoop. Notice how US collectors are the only ones who practice this type of contrivance? Notice that they didn't do it in the past? Ever ask yourself why? Let me answer it for you. It's because these coins are so easy to buy even in "high" quality, the entire series could be completed in one day, depending upon how arbitrary the standards used. Collectors who collect (somewhat) actually hard to buy or complete series don't do this, now or previously. It's hard enough to find the coins at all or in "decent" quality. I'm not singling out US moderns either. It's true of every US classic series in the 20th century, except for Saints and Indian Head eagles, as a circulation strike. It's also true of IHC, FE cents, Barber nickels, Barber Quarters, Barber halves, Morgan dollars, and probably a few earlier ones. Maybe for Barber dimes too though very few (like the 95-O) might not be available in MS today. Possibly true of the later dated half cents and large cents plus capped bust half dimes and maybe capped bust halves (maybe not the 1815). You aren't aware of what I am telling you because you aren't aware of the actual availability of hardly any coinage, including US moderns. Your posts demonstrate no knowledge of the TPG populations (for any coins) or even eBay, much less anywhere else. On one occasion, I literally found every single proof Liberty Seated dime on eBay back to 1858 with a few earlier dates too. Yes, available the same day. Heritage recently had FIVE 1798 MS dimes in their Marketplace. Collector's Corner had FIVE 1830 QE listed at one time, though I can't remember the grades now, but I think MS. Might still be there. That you don't see as many of a coin as you think you should Indicates virtually nothing of the scarcity. If the coins and series I listed here are easy to buy (and they can be bought in "high" quality any day of the week or virtually so), the coins you call "scarce" aren't, except due to modern contrivances in US collecting or one you just made up, like your strike criteria for US moderns which you won't even pay for.

It's financialization or marketing. That's why I told you it's a rhetorical question. You just agree with the pretense in US collecting that there is significance to this numismatic minutia. No, US collectors are not more "sophisticated" than their predecessors or versus collectors elsewhere in the world now. They also haven't experienced a collective epiphany to miraculously discover that these coins are so much better. Any such belief (what US collecting implicitly claims) is utterly absurd. Except that they don't like these coins as much as US collecting implies. Collectors don't pay much higher prices today and in the last multiple decades because they like these coins so much more than their predecessors. That's also completely absurd. Only a low proportion would pay current prices above a "nominal" level without the expectation of recovering most of their cost. You aren't one either. No, I don't just believe it. I know it. What you claim is "scarce" or "rare" is common. Reread what I told you in our last message exchanges on the PCGS forum. You exaggerate the scarcity of the coins you like which are more common than up to 99% of all coins ever struck, calling it "scarce". You also rely on your unrepresentative experience which you insist is representative, claiming to know what no one can possibly know. There is also no significance to scarcity in specialization, as it's the norm. Most of these practices are US centric and the best explanation for it is an attempt to make this collecting more interesting since these coins are so easy to buy otherwise.

No, because that wasn't the actual supply. Real collectors don't pretend coins outside of a TPG holder don't exist. I'd estimate at least 100,000 collecting the series in some format. But you need to remember that the most common dates currently have over 500,000 in a holder where there are a large number ungraded and maybe still more outside of a holder than in one. Some of these dates purportedly have over 1MM in UNC or BU. No matter how you add it up, there is no possibility of this supply being mostly owned by collectors. It would require 50%, one-third, or some proportion near it of the collector base owning an 1881-S or one these dates. There is no reason to believe it. It has to be substantially if not mostly financial buying. I think there has to be substantial "investment" buying by non-collectors even for the "scarcer" semi-key dates though I'm in no position to prove it. These coins are just too common, regardless of the "popularity" of the series. I'd guess fewer type collectors than set collectors. Most owned by collectors are presumably by those who don't collect the series or putting together a type set. Most collectors own numerous unrelated coins in their collections. They see a coin they like and buy it, whether it "fits" their collection or not.

The price of Morgan dollars in these grades has little if anything to do with actual collecting. It's the result of the asset mania. No one would pay these ridiculously inflated prices for what are actually such ordinary and uninteresting coins as a collectible. They didn't in the US previously and they don't now anywhere else.

Responding to both comments. I don't know for US coinage, but I suspect the answer is the opposite of what you infer. When I used to debate South African based collectors, they would repeatedly claim the TPG populations were mostly complete and a few claimed overstated due to resubmissions. The reason they did this is because they thought that by exaggerating the scarcity, the prices would be a lot higher. They didn't recognize that only collectors derive utility from collecting and that the vast majority aren't interested in trying to collect a coin or series when there is virtually nothing meeting their minimum quality standards. My guess is that dealers peddling US coins as "investments" would claim something similar at the time.

Depends what coins you are talking about. No, you're not going to see a 30-fold increase in Morgan dollar populations but for some dates, still potentially more outside of a holder than in one. For lower priced 20th century US coinage other than Morgan, and Peace dollars + US classic gold, there is a huge multiple not in a holder versus in one most of the time. Also true for the lopsided proportion of world coinage.

Me either. I've stated here before that the most common dates are actually bullion coins, even in a grade like MS-65. In "high" quality, no way anywhere near enough actual collectors for the supply. Hundreds of thousands to over 1MM for many dates. With .7236oz of silver, maybe $50 tops and only that due to the ridiculous premiums on ASEs now.

Not really, considering the size of the GSA hoard. Also, the vast majority of US coins from the late 19th century forward are either common or very common, even in grades close to at this level. Not mostly common compared to these Morgan dollars but still common.

Meant to comment on this post but forgot. Quite confident what you are describing was the result of a communication limitation which has since been eliminated. Prior to "mature" TPG population reports and the internet, the vast majority of US collectors presumably badly underestimated survival (rates), including in better quality. It's the same sentiments I read from South African based collectors for their coinage when Union (1923-1960) was my primary interest. Much of this coinage is legitimately scarce or at least hard to buy, but not nearly as scarce as they thought or as hard to buy as it used to be. The first few years (maybe somewhat more than five) after I resumed collecting, I'd see "old" (mostly 18th century but some earlier too) world coinage from Europe in "gem" or "choice UNC' and thought it must be at least scarce due to the age. But it isn't. Much or most of it is quite common. South Africa had its own TPG bubble (which has since burst - in 2011) for essentially the same reason as the US in 1989. Other countries haven't due to a lack of financialization of their collecting, though I'm not that familiar with China which may yet burst. But generically, only a very low proportion are nearly as scarce as most people seem to think or believe.

There isn't a 68 for the 50-D at either service, yet. I don't believe there are many duplicates for this type of coin. For the 50-D, the price difference between a 66(+) and a 67 isn't that large.

This is an example of a "low" mintage that isn't actually low. Considering how common any "W" quarter actually is, the prices you quote are hardly cheap. It's more common than over 99% of all coins ever struck in equivalent quality.

Depends what you mean by "hoards". Seems you are thinking in the context of Morgan dollars or common US classic gold. Supposedly, some dealer (or dealers) tried to buy up most of the 31-S cents, but I don't know if the story is true. Otherwise, it's predominantly a large number (thousands to hundreds of thousands) setting aside individual coins to a few rolls. Remember, it was predominantly low budget collectors doing it (presumably), though presumably also financial speculators for a few.

There was widespread roll hoarding up to the early 60's to my recollection though rolls of all (or at least most) 1933-1964 US coins were and in many instances still are available. Much of the supply of high quality coinage (most IMO) comes from this practice. Otherwise, some of it was due to supposedly "low" mintages. (No, these mintages aren't actually low. Try counting to these numbers.) The 50-D is one example. In the 80's, I also read this of the 1955 quarter and half (maybe a few others), though this was mostly from rolls. I don't remember if it was the P, D, or both. Morgan dollars was a UST hoard, totally different. 1931-S cent for one. Mintage is 866,000. I'd guess the average grade is AU now (minimum) with most of the original mintage (the vast majority) still around. I haven't heard of any others prior to 1933 outside of Morgan dollars and US gold which were for different reasons. Post-1965, I'd place the '72 DDO cent, '82P no MM dime, and Wisconsin Leaf SQ in the same category too, but only the last coin experienced a bubble which has burst. The other two have a stable price history.

NGC and PCGS have graded over 2000 in 67(FS). Where are you looking? I have never heard of even one US coins with this supply being hard to buy.

See my prior post. The last MS 67 FS listed in Coin Facts sold for $360. 67+ FS, $1100+. There are going to be some duplicates in the data but even the PCGS raw numbers alone aren't low for a coin in a specific grade for a "grade rarity". That's 54 at PCGS now. NGC has graded 1888 as a 67 and 130 more as a 67+. 5570 and 380 for these two grades w/out FS as a 66.

I can agree with this comment. So has every US modern since 1999. Some between 1965-1998 too. Yes, that's what you keep telling me. This "scarcity" is a US invention, as in "made up". That's part of what I am was getting at in my last post replying to yours. Any coin is "rare" or "scarce" if the criteria is narrow or arbitrary enough. This "scarcity" uses the most liberal scarcity standards on the planet (those in US collecting) combined with a comparison to coins that are literally among the most common coins on the planet (1933-1964 US coinage). It's "participation trophy" just for showing up. The only thing remarkable about the price history of this coin is that it ever sold for $20 per roll. It's only a matter of degree versus the 1950-D nickel. There are potentially millions of CH BU or better of these cents still left. The opportunity cost of owning it now and recently is immaterial. There is nothing unusual about it, especially since the price differences between the lopsided proportion of post 1933 US coins are immaterial. Except for US invented specializations, none of these coins are scarce though some TPG labels meet this definition.

You asked me a rhetorical question. I will now ask you one. You have two possibilities (and only two) from which to choose, as there is no third option. Which one is it? Marketing and financialization as I have written for years. Or Collectors are a lot more "sophisticated" since the late 80's and/or experienced a collective epiphany when they miraculously discovered that these coins (those with one a few more points on a label) are so much better than their predecessors believed. No, these aren't actual questions. That's why it is rhetorical.

Since the initial bubble in the early 60's, to my knowledge it has, though not adjusted for price changes. Except for the price of the "grade rarity" MS-67 FS which has crashed and burned but is still way overpriced. I just checked the PCGS pop report since it seems to be preferred for modern US coinage. Maybe 10 years ago, this coin in MS-67 FS was a pop 6 and one sold for $17K at some point on Heritage, an astronomically ridiculous price for such a common coin. Now, the count is 44 with 10 more as a 67+ whereas before, there were none. (Can't even remember when "+" was introduced.) There were also 513 in MS-66. Now the count is 991 with 48 more as a "+". Several thousand more as a 66 without FS. Sure, some duplicates but can't be that many proportionately since the price difference has shrunk dramatically. Probably more in 67 looking for a 68 which will probably appear at some point. Coin Facts lists a 4/22 sale as a 67 at $360, only a 98% decrease from the Heritage sale at $17K. A 67+ at $1110 in 7/21. $75 to $164 in 66 in the last year. This is why I don't think any should sell for more than the grading fee. It's an extremely common coin and there isn't any practical difference between any of these grades (or a few lower) either, whether with FS or without it.

Like other similar period key and semi-key dates, I don't consider the price low for the supply. Last I checked, PCGS had graded over 500 FS MS-66 and there is a huge supply in lower grades, more graded by NGC, and probably far more outside of a holder than in one for all grades except MS-67. This was many years ago, but it was a $100+ coin at the time. Like practically every post 1933 non-commemorative US coin, it's one I expect to sell for less than the grading fee or a nominal premium to silver spot decades from now.

I assume someone like Garrett is actually interested in true collecting, but it's a distant second to the business side. Read his and other articles on Coin Week. The problem is trying to make what is usually actually uninteresting appear interesting. They are still more interested in inflating the price level than actual collecting, and at some point, the cost of buying these coins exceeds the appeal as a collectible which is why it turns into marketing.

Buffalo dollar has a mintage of 500,000 to my recollection, though that may be for both proof and UNC. I presume it's still "popular", but still don't think there are enough collectors for the supply. I don't even remember the National Community Service coin but it's an uninteresting theme to most collectors. It's a coin destined to be lost in obscurity in the future and whatever the mintage, plenty of others since near it or lower. I remember when the 1998 SP half went for a few hundred. I recall it's also collected as part of the series and the prior price was due to an incorrect perception of the "low" mintage. Sure, the mintage is much lower than all other Kennedy halves. It's also still more common than over 99% of all coins ever struck in equivalent quality. It's also from a series overwhelmingly composed of low budget collectors and where it isn't, still mostly bought as a "side collection". It's not an "investor" coin and lacks the appeal for the supply and collectible merits to support the prior price.

I don't remember specific prices but yes, a bubble.