World Colonial

The risk was different then versus now. There was greater risk of buying fakes or over graded coins. Today, it's easier to avoid both but when a mistake is made on one of the higher or highest graded coins, it is a lot more expensive than it ever was then. This is a function of the much higher price level and price spreads between grades. The confidence buyers have to pay "recent" prices (varies with the coin) where it is "material" (to them) is overwhelmingly contingent on the buyer's belief that they can recover most, all, or more than all of their money back. Part of it is related to TPG (or CAC) and part of it is due to other reasons such as "investment" buying. The "reason" doesn't matter, only that they believe it. Without this belief, there is no possibility the price level would be anywhere near its current level because too many coins sell for prices which are "too high" for the collectible merits where hardly any buyer will pay it as an alternative consumption expenditure. A small proportion (which I will get to in my next reply) are also dependent upon the asset mania. The buyer presumably (usually) finds it interesting enough as a collectible, but not anywhere near its current or recent price. Look at the 1933 Saint or 1822 half eagle, as it's no different than high priced art. The asset mania is the only explanation for these inflated prices. Without it, prices would be a low fraction.

I wasn't expressing an opinion on whether it is "better" or "worse" in my last post. Only stating (once again) that these price differences aren't actually based upon collecting, but financially motivated marketing. I have stated numerous times on coin forums but there are a lot of collectors and "investors" who have no clue of it. If anyone wants to spend their money that way, great. Just don't believe the fallacy that it's because the buyer likes it that much as a collectible because the anecdotal evidence (mostly from coin forums) demonstrates they don't. This is exactly what common sense leads anyone to believe, as there isn't a dime's worth of practical difference between many and sometimes most of these coins. And it isn't just Saints or US coins either, as evidenced by some of the examples I have documented here with coins I have owned. Your last point is also a function of the internet, not my prior reply. This is an improvement (undoubtedly) but a separate consideration entirely. It's also easier to sell anything generally on eBay.

I will agree with you on one thing. It would be the end of financialized "collecting". The "numismatic" value is in the label. Most buyers can't grade most coins in these grades "accurately" outside the holder and most would not pay these premiums without the expectation of getting most of their money back. I'll grant you more of those who buy these specific coins (in 65 or better) can on occasion, but that's because of money. No one cared enough before. You're aware of how these coins were priced up to the early 70's I assume? The change in the pricing is due to the financialization of "collecting" (buying coins as "investments") in the 70's and marketing (TPG labels, CAC stickers, and registry sets) starting in the 80's. It's the same coin now it was then. For the consensus to be true, here's what someone has to believe. Until the 1970's, prior buyers were operating out of ignorance by treating the coins essentially equal. At some point starting in the 70's (or maybe the late 80's for Saints), buyers experienced a collective epiphany where they miraculously discovered the merits which no none knew before. Sorry, but nothing of the sort ever happened. It's nonsensical. When the asset mania collapses (which it will "eventually"), buyers will collectively forget this epiphany to once again mostly or entirely view these coins as their predecessors. That's what happens when the price of a collectible is (totally) disconnected from the actual collectible merits.. I also wasn't trying to single out Saints. This is equally true any most series where buyers have the same or similar motives.

Since the grades mean nothing to me, I'd consider every one of those bullion coins. Large to big premiums for a label on a piece of plastic.

I have been there several times. I like it.

Don't know the timing yet but if it ever happens, somewhere in the Orlando area.

No, but if I move to central FL as I might early next year, I might consider it later if I can free up the time.

I suspect cost and lack of interest rank first and second, in that order.

What I meant is that I believe collectors would find it more interesting if fewer coins were issued but this isn't directly connected to the mintages. Look at the majority of US modern commemoratives. How many collectors would even notice if most of these coins never existed? They would notice if the program was terminated (as it was in 1954) or the Mint skipped one or more years but not because of the themes. If a collector treats their collection primarily as an alternative consumption expense, financially it doesn't matter. Above some unspecified level which varies by collector, they usually do care. I don't know how many have "noticeable" amounts "invested" in NCLT but don't believe that they wouldn't have an issue if the price declines "noticeably" below their cost. That's a lot more likely with this endless flood of "product" and what I believe will happen in the future, outside of changes to the spot price.

Not sure where you disagree. Obviously, all NCLT is owned by someone unless it's literally lost. I'd describe the US classic commemorative series collector as predominantly a hole filler. A large series where the majority of coins have little if any actual connection, disproportionately uninteresting themes which most people have never heard of or know nothing about, and which isn't even close to being scarce. A full set still sells for over five figures in practically any decent quality (like an MS-63) which is hardly cheap for what is actually being bought. The mintage of most NCLT is not actually low. The mintages of US classic commemoratives aren't low either. It isn't low because the relevant comparison isn't circulating coinage but other NCLT or maybe proofs. Virtually no one is buying any NCLT as a substitute for circulated circulating coinage. In "high quality", most NCLT is not scarcer outside of the most common circulating coinage. Outside of US proofs dated from 1950 onwards, only a very low proportion have comparable mintages to most NCLT. As for "forgotten", I was also speaking in a financial context. Virtually none of this coinage "stands out" and I expect most of it to sell for nominal premiums to the spot price decades from now, once the asset bubble ends because that's the primary if not only factor holding it up now, especially on 70's.

Other than to make money, why does the US or any other mint have to strike so many coins? I believe that collectors would find a particular theme, coin, or series more interesting and meaningful if it wasn't buried in a sea of endless mediocrity. Decades from now, most NCLT is destined to be relegated to the dustbin of obscurity and mostly forgotten.

The reverse is not as nice as St. George slaying the dragon but still like it. I don't like the current portrait or the prior two.

Your 1979 FOREX data must be off or you are comparing two different sources. No way FOREX volume was only $1B daily. It must have been almost entirely off exchanges at the time. There is some displacement as you indicate, but it's not remotely reflected in the numbers you gave. The increase is mostly if not almost entirely for speculation or commercial transactions such as hedging debt exposure. In many countries, residents hold USD currency notes as a store of value and since it circulates parallel to the local currency. This was true in Argentina in the early 90's when the currency board was in place. USD notes also circulated in Bolivia on my visits up to 2007 but since then, have not seen it even once. The Boliviano has been stable at about 7:1 since then. Non-US residents in developing countries also tend to have most of their financial assets in one of the "hard" currencies. Local capital markets are usually relatively illiquid and it's also done for geographic/political diversification. Or, they own foreign real estate. What they own locally is held in a private business or real estate. If you are rich in a country like Colombia where my sister and her husband live, the financial markets are presumably mostly for institutions, though many shares and bonds are listed on foreign exchanges too (maybe most). This is my inference and my brother-in-law (who is from there) agreed with me. That's why Miami is the financial capital of Latin America, maybe along with NY. Outside of metal bugs and coin collectors, I doubt very many developed world residents own physical gold or silver. To the extent they do, it's overwhelmingly immaterial. Most metal bugs and coin collectors don't own material amounts either. In the developing world, I know both are owned as jewelry but it's impractical to own as coin collectors do in the US. It's not readily available in coin and bar form, certainly in any quantity, it's presumably (noticeably) less liquid with wider buy-sell spreads and it's a high(er) risk proposition to store and transport. I'd also question whether it can usually be insured, at all. I did see an advertisement in the LaPaz or Santa Cruz airport (in Bolivia) for a gold storage program on my recent visits, so maybe it's somewhat more available now than I believe or it used to be. I don't know what locals think of it but see no purpose in it. I'd own it elsewhere as I have no interest and see no advantage in storing metals in a country like that..

Correct, this is my prior experience.

I prefer the coin to look the way it is "supposed" to look which varies by series. For my primary series, I prefer toned though I do own some that are not.

Like every other asset, it's ultimately psychological. No one can support the current market price of any asset based upon the so-called "fundamentals" because the outcome isn't based upon a formula. We can only compare relative prices over time versus other assets. This tells us whether the asset is relatively cheap or expensive but nothing more. This should be evident given current valuations which should make it obvious that today's environment is the biggest aggregate bubble in the history of civilization. For gold, any attempt to measure valuation by its utility is also destined to fail. The psychological component comes from it's role as a monetary substitute. Concurrently, this doesn't mean that just because of unprecedented "printing", that gold is currently "cheap" or destined to head "to the moon" either. The ultimate purpose of money isn't to acquire other forms of money (gold for fiat currency) but tangible goods and services that people need and want. By this standard, gold isn't cheap but on balance, expensive.

Raw coins - my understanding is that they will submit it for the consignor to NGC or PCGS at a reduced rate but have not done it myself. I have sold through them twice. I sold with no reserve so everything sold. However, my recollection is that if you place a reserve, those that do not sell are included in subsequent sales though don't remember the number of times. I don't recall if there is a fee for unsold lots. There was a $3 fee to list each coin.

Yes, I was assuming OP only meant shipping the coins but covered both anyway. More generally, for the US based collector with any collection of "meaningful" value,. I don't think it makes much sense to sell it outside the US either. There may be exceptions but I do not know any. Most coins are as or more liquid and easier to sell in the US than anywhere else. Personally, unless I was going to die with it elsewhere, I'd leave it in the US or sell it. One other point, if I did move my collection, I'd consider hand carrying the coins I liked most. Drawback is that it would probably increase the likelihood of paying import duty. With the OP coins though (since I now remember what he collects), this might be to his advantage.by declaring the sheet value for untoned coins if he chooses. Can't do that if shipping unless you want to take the risk if the coins are lost or stolen.

Do you have to pay an import duty? You might want to confirm first. I don't collect US coins (at all) but if leaving the US, would not bother with a US collection. (Not sure I would even move mine.) You'll just have the trouble of shipping it back if you move again to the US. In Europe, you could also consign to a European auction firm but you should assume you will realize a lower price, maybe a noticeably lower price because very few aside from Americans collect US coinage above a nominal value, Since they do not, there is no market for US coinage at anywhere near US prices outside the US. The other reason I wouldn't bother is because there are very few US coins which are actually hard to buy back, outside of arbitrary criteria. There is usually going to be "slippage" in selling and then buying back, so I would consider this first before any prospective sale. If you do decide to ship, I would use USPS Registered Mail and ship it to yourself, using private insurance if necessary.

Not to me. I did read prices were higher earlier before the coins shipped but each has a (minimum) mintage of 175,000, which is comparable to the TPG counts for the most common real Morgan and Peace dollars. Slightly scarcer but the difference isn't meaningful and presumably (as I have not checked) comparably priced up to MS-65. The above prices aren't cheap for what is actually being bought.

That might work if travel costs are limited or minimal. My understanding is that most dealers make their money off bullion sales and buying cheap from walk-in traffic in their local store. When I was a YN in the late 70's, local B&M supposedly paid 60% of Red Book with one noticeably lower. Economics differ for on-line sellers and very with type of material.

Last year at the Atlanta ANA, I had dealers ask for the first time, though I hadn't been to a show in seven years, since the last Atlanta ANA. I did bring some coins but asked too much and received no counteroffers. (None of it is US.) In today's market, I don't think I'd have much trouble selling what I want to get rid of, except for South Africa which I wouldn't sell to a dealer anyway. I'd rather try to sell to another collector and avoid the intermediary.

Sounds rather expensive for someone new and part time. Partly depends upon location for travel costs but table fees are presumably (noticeably) higher.

What you are describing is a function of the outlier price level. By traditional criteria (such as Red Book rarity), there are a large number but low proportion of rare or scarce US coinage but most or all are hopelessly beyond the financial reach of practically all collectors. This thread has gone off topic (again) but by any sensible standard, no coin which can be bought any day of the week is even close to being rare. Any coin which can be bought near "market value" (not at a "stupid money" price) on "relatively short notice" is at most modestly scarce. This is to be expected since coins are mass produced objects and those which are somewhat less so are almost always made for collectors (proofs, NCLT). The coins I collect which are a lot more difficult to buy than practically any US (partly due to price) aren't absolutely rare either.

DUPLICATE