World Colonial

On 4/14/2024 at 9:18 AM, cladking said:

Yes!  Exactly.  Most collectors hear words like "rare coins" and they're expecting coins with five figure price tags.  But the reality is even rare moderns are not going to have as high a price as comparably rare classics for many decades.  It takes time for markets to shake out.  

What coins are you comparing now?

The market does not need any more time.  Relative preference between series is and has been established longer than practically most reading this thread have been alive and definitely collecting.  For any series collectively, it's entirely due to cultural perception from the coin attributes.

The US moderns which have high prices currently are due to similar reasons as older coinage.  Coins like the FDR "no S" proofs, 1969-S DDO and 1972 DDO cent, and 1982 with NMM dime.  It's more than just some narrow rarity, since the last two in my list aren't even scarce.

Other US moderns you have claimed as "rare" or "scarce" which most US collectors consider as having (somewhat) higher prices are almost entirely due to the TPG label.

On 4/13/2024 at 9:41 PM, Henri Charriere said:

I am truly sorry you compromised your integrity to acknowledge the likes of me.  I do not wish to jeopardize your station on this Forum by sacrificing your reputation and credibility for me.

What you say is true. To me, U.S. coinage ceased to exist after 1964.  Gnashing of teeth and wringing of hands over "flaws," visible to the unaided eye, back then, was unheard of. The '43 "copper" penny and '55 DDO "variety" were well known. 

I did not use the term obsolete because the term has lost its utility. Those coins have attained numismatic value. I do not believe any such coin (or currency for that matter) would be refused by a merchant unless proffered as face value. 

Your point is well taken. I shall no longer use the term Modern anymore.  One last thing... how will you refer to "any coin from any country introduced after the withdrawal of silver from circulation."

 

Modern applies to US coinage because it's distinctly part of the collecting culture.

It doesn't apply in anything close to the same context elsewhere.

On 4/12/2024 at 4:47 PM, VKurtB said:

The American Numismatic Association has a definition, to which I subscribe. Their exhibit rules (I am a member of the Exhibiting Committee) for Class 4 - Modern Coins and Medals, the John Esbach Award, endowed by the Red Rose Coin Club of Lancaster, PA (of which I am a past President) states that the line of demarcation is 1960, not any other date. It applies to ALL countries, not just the U.S. 

By the way, Britain went off .925 silver in 1920, and off 50% silver in 1947. 1964 is just soooo Amerocentric thinking 

Using the metal content as the defining factor is nonsensical.

On 4/12/2024 at 9:26 AM, cladking said:

I believe a better definition is "modern coins" are any coin from any country introduced after the withdrawal of silver from circulation.  After WW II one country after another quit producing silver coins.  The US was one of the last to do it in 1964.   

Other than low denominations in no country were the "moderns" saved in significant quantities by collectors.  

"Modern" in the context of non-US collecting is a US centric term. There is no such thing as world "moderns" and it has zero relevance to how most collectors collect.  US collectors don't even make that distinction either, except maybe in the context of "bargain bin" B&M inventory which isn't necessarily tied to the metal content.  I've never heard a single person use this term or make this distinction other than you.

It's not used outside the US that I know and if it is, they got it from here, not locally.  It's meaningless in Europe or Asia with up to thousands of years to collect.  In Europe, "modern" is anything after 1500.  In Latin America, the native population never struck their own coinage and in most of it, there is limited if any organized collecting.  In Africa, same thing but not what US collectors would consider organized collecting except in South Africa, where I know as fact their collector base had never heard of the US definition until I mentioned it.

Maybe a very few countries have coinage that can legitimately be considered to have a distinct separation between series to meet the US definition of "modern" but it's no more than that.  The primary one is Canada, and I can see China PRC as a second.  I can't think of a single other one.

On 4/13/2024 at 7:19 PM, GoldFinger1969 said:

Even if they are worth 50x FV, what are we talking about ?  We're not talking 3-figure or 4-figure coins even in high-MS grade.

Most of these coins currently sell for somewhat above or below the cost of grading in MS-66.

My prediction remains the same as before.  Decades from now, the majority of post 1933 US coinage should sell for nominal premiums to silver spot or near or below the cost of grading in grades up to MS-66.

On 4/13/2024 at 7:17 PM, GoldFinger1969 said:

But WHAT IS the market ?

It's financially immaterial and no reason to believe this will ever change. 

The coin market isn't about to grow exponentially and the collector preference for this coinage isn't about to increase sufficiently to result in another outcome.

On 4/13/2024 at 6:12 PM, Sandon said:

 I can provide a scenario that is just as likely and is based upon my own observations.

I agree with your general theme.

There isn't any basis to claim that this segment consisting of hundreds of coins is going to experience a future leap in collector preference (not popularity).  

The price estimates provided near the top of this thread aren't financially meaningful either and the market will never be large enough where more than a very low number or proportion of the collector base will make it up by volume.

On 4/13/2024 at 6:12 PM, Sandon said:

 Of course, if people who don't know better can be persuaded that they are scarce or rare and to pay high prices for them, as is the case with common date Morgan and Peace dollars, anything is possible. 

Totally different kind of buyer.  Given how common many Morgan and Peace dollars are, my assumption is that most of the (most) common dates are owned for financial reasons.  There are very unlikely enough collectors buying it for sets or as type coins.  eBay has tons of it.  This isn't ever going to happen with a base metal coin in volume because "investors" don't buy this type of coin.

On 4/13/2024 at 4:58 PM, cladking said:

It's a drop in the bucket for a mass market. 

You can interpret my reply as you wish, even telling me the coins don’t actually exist if that's what you want to do

I’m not interested in getting into another pointless debate with you to experience Ground Hog Day, so don’t even start that.  It’s not even entertaining.

So, carry on financially promoting this coinage.

There isn't a reliable number.  It's also substantially dependent upon definition of "collector".

The starting point to me is the number of mint and proof sets sold by the US Mint but it isn't a one-to-one ratio.  Same idea for US Mint NCLT sales.

On 4/13/2024 at 1:04 PM, cladking said:

Nobody has 500 1969 mint sets and if they did nobody is going to go to all the work to restore the dimes and sell them for 20C wholesale.  

1969 UNCIRCULATED Genuine U.S. MINT SET ISSUED BY U.S. MINT | eBay

572 sold so far by this seller with more than 10 still available.

1969 U.S. MINT SET. ISSUED BY US MINT. Envelope Sealed / Unopened | eBay

Another 170 sold by the same seller, also with more than 10 still available.

No, I don't know what these sets look like.  It's good enough for whoever bought it.

On 4/13/2024 at 12:20 PM, GoldFinger1969 said:

Even if true, that supply could swamp existing demand.

Obviously

On 4/13/2024 at 11:53 AM, VKurtB said:

I fear, genuinely FEAR a second American Civil War. That’d do it. 

No, that would end US coin collecting as we know it.

On 4/13/2024 at 12:17 PM, GoldFinger1969 said:

Then the question becomes:  does demand surge for some reason such that the price RISES which is what we normally associate with a "rare" coin ? 

For that to happen, the supply must be short relative to demand.  As some of you have said here, the MCMVII High Relief is not "rare" but on price it does trade as a rare coin even at the AU and low-60's MS levels.  That is in part from demand from people who are absolutely NOT coin collectors (they might not own any other coin).

The question then becomes:  if out of those surviving mint/proof sets ONLY (nothing from regular mintage), how many are collectors seeking them ?  It's not the 1950's or 1960's when most kids were collectors.  Add in sales by existing holders (mint/proof sets, regular mintage collectors over the decades, etc.) and the question is how many NEW collectors meet that supply and if not, how big is the demographic imbalance ?

That's how I see it, if not from a veteran or expert collector perspective, but a simple supply-demand analysis. 

Collectors don't collect in a vacuum.  The idea that collectors will suddenly find a series so interesting to leave all others which compete with it in the dust price wise isn't plausible.  We're not talking about crypto or some share of stock.  It's a collectible.

This isn't just true of US moderns, but practically all coins.  It happens with the most expensive highest preferred coinage because the few buyers are more prone to ignore the prices of other coins.  Also for specific dates or segments for the same reason.

Generally though, if the price increases by a "meaningful" multiple, it will be priced to compete with coinage with a much higher collector preference where it isn't competitive because preferences aren't an accident.

On 4/12/2024 at 8:03 PM, cladking said:

Things like rare '84 cents that no one knows about and no albums are EVIDENCE.  Coins routinely selling at 15X catalog are EVIDENCE.  You have nothing but contention and opinion where I have experience and EVIDENCE.  

So VKurt's and zadok's observations aren't evidence but yours is, right?  Are you going to call their experience "hearsay" again like you did earlier in this thread? 

What about wondercoin's in the "raw moderns" thread on PCGS?

Why is your experience any better than theirs?  Am I supposed to believe you over them?  Am I supposed to believe it's only them and no one else who has this experience?  Out of all the collectors in the world, your experience is uniquely representative?

Ever heard of comparative analysis?  Read up on it.

Throughout this thread, I've been using criteria which accounts for the survival and quality distribution for coinage generally, not using premises like yours which have nothing to do with anything in coin collecting.

That's how I conclude this coinage is more common than you infer, since you haven't even given an estimate.  I already gave you mine, likely 200,000 minimum for any date in TPG MS-64 or better.  Why would I believe this is either scarce or it's less than that?

It's possible (key word) the survival rates are lower on US moderns than one or more examples I gave earlier in low or very low proportion.  As a general principle, there isn't any reason to believe it's more than that, regardless of what you saw.

On 4/12/2024 at 8:48 PM, VKurtB said:

Ironic note: the two countries for which my collection consists of the highest percentage of BU aluminum coins: the Vatican and North Korea. 

Like practically every other hobbyist collector (as opposed to "investor"), I'll buy any metal if I like the other coin attributes.  I only own one gold coin, so I must hate gold too.

With the Bolivia coinage, silver and copper-nickel were issued simultaneously in the 1890's for the 5C and 10C and then in copper-nickel until 1909.

I prefer the copper nickel because it's scarcer.  I haven't been able to find all of it in good enough quality.

On 4/12/2024 at 8:38 PM, VKurtB said:

They’re all coins to me. I don’t give a rip what they’re made of. Condition is my game. My Vatican coins are mostly aluminum. 

I buy base metal coins too.  I just bought a 1918 Bolivia 10C, first "BU" I've seen since 2006, though I haven't looked hard.

I also own these:

On 4/12/2024 at 8:03 PM, cladking said:

NYou can just keep repeating these coins and their collectors are everywhere but you have not shown any evidence.  

What are you talking about?  Are you referring to my claims about the supply again?

I look at the TPG data, but it isn't just for US moderns.  It's across all types of coinage.

I've already told you about the supply of other coinage in the TPG data, the TPG data you know nothing about.  Collectors outside the US disproportionately don't even like TPG, so I conclude from this that the supply of this coinage too is proportionately or absolutely a lot higher than what's visibly evident.

Am I supposed to believe that the examples of the non-US coinage I used exist in this supply and probably higher, but of all the coins in the world, it's only those you collect that are an outlier? 

Why would I believe anything so absurd as that just because you do?

On 4/12/2024 at 8:03 PM, cladking said:

Not as many new people hate moderns.  Indeed, Very very few new collectors hate moderns.  

This nonsense is at the root of your error.  Do you hate your collection?  If you don't, then no one does either.  Do you hate coins you don't buy?  If you don't, no one does either.

You keep on repeating the same ridiculous fallacies which are contrary to how collectors actually collect.

No one has to agree with you, on anything.  If every collector literally disagrees with you, there is nothing unusual about it.  That's all this "hate claim is, collective perception disagreeing with you.

On 4/12/2024 at 10:15 AM, Jason Abshier said:

not sure if some collectors are worried that market is shifting with newer millennials collectors focusing on modern coinage stuff and abandoning classical coinage ? 

The price level doesn't change the actual merits of any coin as a collectible, though it is somewhat (at least) of a reflection of relative collective perception.

Most of the money going into modern coins is NCLT, not circulating coinage (including proofs).  I know you know that but just clarifying.

If you are referring to US classics, it's got the advantage of collectively being more liquid than all but NCLT but it's also very overpriced relatively for the collectible attributes in the higher TPG labels.  Classic US coinage is a broad field, so some are and some aren't and varies too, but it's not competitive vs. non-US coinage.

Biggest risks I see are longer term finance and economics (not getting into that again here) and demographic trends.  Population composition is changing, native born birth rate among the primary collector demographic is below replacement, and forecasted population increases are by groups who have either no cultural tradition of collecting or a much weaker one.  Where they have a propensity to collect, it's going to be in (far) lower proportion for most US coinage, especially post-1933 circulating coinage which has been the primary focus of US collecting over the life of everyone reading this thread.

Demographics alone might not have a noticeable impact for the duration of my collecting due to my age, but it's likely to for those who are much younger.

On 4/12/2024 at 8:55 AM, cladking said:

I can't predict the future.   All I am saying is that if moderns ever get any attention from collectors they will find that they must compete with one another for a lot of moderns that are in extremely short supply.  I don't know if this demand will ever develop or its magnitude if it does but there is a potential to have many times as many collectors as there are coins.  

I don't disagree that much with the price claims you made above.

It's that your claims don't take into consideration how collectors or even people generally perceive coin collecting.  That's what I am always telling you.

Since all prices are set by the marginal buyer and we're talking about "inefficient" markets, it doesn't take that much incremental buying to result in disproportionate price increases.  I get that.

This still doesn't mean that enough collectors are going to completely disregard the existing alternatives in the same price range because that's the only way most of your prior price claims and inferences are going to happen.

There won't be a multiple of collectors to US moderns in the quality we're discussing because 1) The coins are almost certainly (a lot) more common than you claim or imply.  2)  It's never happened before even once for such common coins, including with 1933-1964 US coinage. 3)  Due to the minimal market size, the collector base you are inferring would send the prices into the stratosphere because that's the result of so many buyers in such a limited and illiquid market.  I used to tell South African based collectors the same thing repeatedly and that's when it was my primary collecting interest.

On 4/12/2024 at 1:50 AM, GoldFinger1969 said:

But their prices AREN'T that high and folks like Zadok are saying they buy hundreds or even THOUSANDS of these coins, solo or in sets, without much difficulty.

You don't need too many people collecting in bulk to have lots of supply.  If only a few hundred thousand Americans collected a few dozen or so sets, that's alot of potential supply, right ?  

 

Apparently not

On 4/11/2024 at 10:13 PM, cladking said:

I find it fascinating that for someone who deals only in what abstractions that others have told him that you would doubt it when they say you can't predict the future.  

Me, I don't believe in anything except that cycles will always exist so what is hot will in the future be not and what is not will in the future be hot.  

That would be a good subject for a thread; what was hot  ...now they're not.

No, nothing I write is only from what others have told me.  That's more BS.  For these topics, I'm looking at prices, the TPG data, auction results, and yes, the behavior of collectors from coin forum posts.  

So, I'm supposed to believe that "mass market" roll "collecting" is believable because of what you've told me?  This even though your assumptions don't have virtually anything in common with how virtually anyone collects?

What's next, that some or all of your prior claims on aggregate collecting are feasible too?

No, I do not believe any of it, because it's contrary to aggregate collector behavior and public perception.  You've never provided a single believable reason for the changes you claim.

There are no cycles as you have claimed either.  I told you that earlier in this thread and previously.  There are numerous examples of coins that have "soared" initially and then "crashed", but no evidence that coins or series regularly go in and out of favor as you infer. 

There has been movement for individual coins generally or in specific quality but no change in the order of collector preference between US series at least since the beginning of modern collecting (1930s).  It's not an accident or a coincidence.  It's the cultural view toward the coin attributes.  I can compare the coin attributes between any two series where the two compete as alternatives and its usually plainly evident why collectors prefer one over the other.

On 4/11/2024 at 8:06 PM, cladking said:

To date all movements in modern coins have been explosive.  This is because there is no supply and no demand.  When demand materializes changes are explosive.  

It mostly depends upon the cost of competing alternatives because virtually no one collects in a vacuum.

In the past, you've posted all kinds of prices where it often would make the coin completely uncompetitive with the likely alternatives.  

1969-P in MS-66 I consider feasible @$100 because it's considered somewhat of a semi-key date.  Or some other coin in isolation.

The price forecasts you provided in one prior PCGS thread will never happen because it would make far too many US moderns completely uncompetitive.

On 4/11/2024 at 8:59 PM, cladking said:

Yes.  There are hundreds more, even thousands more.  

But potential collectors number in the millions and attractive 1976 Ikes number in the thousands or, at most, tens of thousands.  

No, there aren't. 

There isn't a single coin outside of bullion NCLT bought at this price by anywhere near this number of collectors and then only ASE.  The collector base will never come close to your inference or what you have claimed/inferred in the past because there is no evidence that the public finds collecting that interesting.

Collecting in the 60's certainly doesn't fit this profile, as it was overwhelmingly at FV or near it.

On 4/11/2024 at 8:59 PM, cladking said:

I haven't seen them but I'd wager any MS-68 is a true Gem even for '82-P quarters.  Probably some of the lower grades are true Gems as well.  

I've been told that most of the high grades come from souvenir sets.  I know these sets.  And I know you can't find a true Gem in them on the basis of the fact I've seen so many and nothing even comes close.  

 If the MS-68 doesn't meet your criteria, one doesn't exist.

On 4/10/2024 at 6:59 PM, The Neophyte Numismatist said:

Tour concept on clad coins is an interesting one.  I think a few things have to change to make your scenario true.  First, as stated, demand needs to increase for clad coins.  This may occur as future generations see moderns as not-so-modern.  But, I also think the whole market needs to increase.  If modern coin prices increase to a level of classic/silver coins, I would surmise that many collectors would rather spend comparable money on the classic coin.  For this reason, I do think that the classics will continue to keep a lid on the moderns.

I could be wrong.  I am still learning the hobby... but, that's what my gut says.

If you are actually interested in this topic, look at the collecting culture.  I've read many times from numerous sources (coin forums, coin articles, and probably books too) that future collector preferences are supposedly a mystery.

You know what these claims have in common?

Every claim or inference is always abstract.  I've never read even one believable explanation supporting anything of the sort.  I've never actually read one at all, only that it's "possible".

Collector preferences aren't a mystery.  It's mostly the coin attributes: origin, design, coin size, scarcity and availability, metal content, quality preference, relative marketability, and how if at all it fits into collections.

The ones I have checked (mid-60's to mid-70's) sell for a (low) fraction of Krause list.