World Colonial

52 minutes ago, Quintus Arrius said:

One of the more curious observations made in Mark Salzberg's letter (not yet two month's old at post-time) comes within its closing lines:

"We are only in the earliest stages of the convergence of the collecting and investing worlds, and there are still incredible opportunities for growth." (Emphasis mine.)

Whether you can appreciate the humor in this depends on when you were born and how long you've been collecting.

Yes, you can call it humorous.  I call it ridiculous.

I didn't remember the specific verbiage you extracted but to make this statement after US "collecting" has been substantially financialized decades earlier is ironic to say the least.  I started collecting in 1975 which was at most a few years after it started.

There are no "incredible opportunities" for "growth".  Not unless collecting turns into "widget" trading.

What this letter and anyone who agrees with it totally misses isn't just the practical impossibility of perpetually buying coins as "widgets", but that the current price level only exists because of the much bigger and broader financial asset and credit mania.  I have seen almost zero acknowledgment of this simple fact in any coin discussion. When this mania finally ends and it will "eventually", not only will there be no "growth", the price level is heading for a crash landing, if not in nominal prices then when measured by purchasing power.

11 hours ago, VKurtB said:

My point is that I believe the true “survival rate” of many coins is far far greater than the numismatic community believes. The “community” believes a whole bunch of things that are simply factually untrue, such as that almost all slabable coins already have been. Nonsense.

Believing that is hubris on stilts. It boils down to “if we (the Royal ‘we’) haven’t seen it, it doesn’t exist”. Hogwash. Come to rural Pennsylvania and see some of our ubiquitous offline coin auctions. There are utterly MASSIVE numbers of even high end coins not in plastic to this very day. In a single weekend last winter, a saw a raw 1856 flying eagle cent AND an MS65 1916-D dime, also raw, for sale 20 miles apart, both between Reading and Harrisburg, PA. And yes, professional numismatists, including from major firms, verified both.

TPGS population reports are not just fiction, they should be birdcage linings. They are useless for anything else.

I agree with you when it comes to most US coinage (probably like 95%), but not necessarily others.  It just depends upon which coins anyone has in mind.  You provided two examples, but no US coin like either is even scarce.  Both are also worth noticeable amounts which increases the probability of survival.

The population reports are usually not representative, for a variety of reasons.  In the US, it's due to the owner's preference and the value.  Outside the US, most collectors don't like TPG.

With the coins I collect now, I attribute the scarcity primarily to a lack of local collecting (then and now) and geographic isolation.  There were effectively no local collectors, the coins mostly circulated locally and for a long time, and there was limited travel where the coins could have gone anywhere else.

I also don't just use my personal experience (as most do) to validate my inferences.  I compare my series to one which is better known, in this case the equivalent Liberty Seated denominations.  The estimates may be low in some instances, but enough of the coins are worth enough money where absent hoards, very few of the scarcer dates are likely to be a lot more common where it will make it that much easier to eventually buy it.  If a large multiple actually exist in basal or very low condition, yes the coins are literally available but it isn't relevant to most collectors anyway.

Another input I use is appearances in "name" collections.  In my series, Sellshopp and Patterson are examples.  If a coin is missing or only included in an average or very low quality, it's a very good indication it's actually rare.  Affluent collectors can usually use the dealer network to track down what they want if it's available.  The two examples I gave are pre-internet but still a good just not infallible indication.

In South Africa, there was a change to decimalization in 1961 and also a reduction in the silver content from 80% to 50% in 1951.  There was limited local collecting of the Union (aka, sterling) series, so most of these coins are known to have been melted on both occasions.  Even a coin like the 1959 crown with a combined mintage for PL, proof and circulation strikes of just over 6,000 was probably heavily melted in the late 70's silver boom.  It was specifically requested by collectors yet doesn't appear to be anywhere near as common as the mintage would indicate.

In the US, any actually low mintage coin (even relatively) like the 09-S VDB has a noticeable survival rate but this isn't (necessarily) true where limited collecting existed in the past.  South African circulating coins with mintages from 66 (1931 tickey) to 14,000 (1946 2/6) don't have anywhere near the same survival rates of US coinage with a multiple of these mintages.

It's combination of mintage, local collecting, changes in the monetary system, level of travel,  and geographic isolation.

To get an idea of potential survival rates, need to understand something of the history of the coinage, how it circulated and extent it was collected.

In the example that I used of my primary series, there was a change to decimalization in the mid 19th century, similar to foreign coins remaining legal tender in the US until 1857 (purportedly at least).  But I doubt this or other coinage in Latin America was necessarily heavily melted at the time.  Auction firm Ponterio once told me Bolivia continued to use pillars (and presumably others) until the early 20th century.  Since little coinage was struck between 1909 and 1968, I suspect at least until 1909.

What happened to it or other similar coinage?  Who knows, it could have been melted later.  In 1975 when I was 10, I visited the LaPaz markets once with my late aunt looking for crown sized Bolivianos.  I saw hundreds to thousands in every shop though had no idea of the relative date scarcity and didn't really care.

Now?

Only the 1872 is common in high grades and some of the other dates are readily available in circulated grades but still not often in high grades.  My inference is that the vast majority were exported in the late 1970's silver boom for melting.  Effectively no local collecting and limited demand elsewhere = low numismatic premium = melting pot candidate.

19 hours ago, VKurtB said:

This brings up a philosophical question that has always bugged me about my beloved hobby. People talk of "survival rates". Whiskey Tango Foxtrot? How do coins fail to survive? Really! They merely become misplaced, don't they? Unless they fall prey to the melter's pot, or some cataclysmic fire outside a blacksmith's shop, aren't pretty much all coins still out there (or down there) SOMEWHERE? Or when people talk of "survival rates" are they really talking about "survival in mainstream numismatically acceptable condition"?

Maybe, but it's not much of a distinction when 99%+ of a particular coin aren't available to be bought.  That's the reality for my primary series.  I suppose it's possible that these coins with mintages up to 1MM (1767 Peru 1/2R = 1,040,000) could have the 99%+ somewhere in Peru or Bolivia buried in "change jars" but highly doubt it.  If this were true, I presume I would have seen them all over the place in the tourist markets in LaPaz, collectible condition or not which I never have. 

Seldom show up on eBay either, even in the overwhelmingly awful condition almost always available.  I have a saved eBay search for the last few years receiving notifications of new listings daily.  Very little available.  I believe these coins (and others) exist in noticeably higher numbers than is apparent, but not where anything close to most still exist.

This might be somewhat true of US and European coinage which has the most established tradition of collecting.  Non-collectors would be more likely to save it knowing it has value to collectors.  As an example, Coin Facts survival rates for key and semi-key Liberty Seated dates with "noticeable" mintages seem rather low but not sure it's low by a factor of 50 or 100 in some instances, which it could be while still leaving the survival rate rather low.

17 hours ago, CRAWTOMATIC said:

Last I checked, the Royal Mint has lower mintages on a lot of their commemoratives and non-circulating coins but it doesn't actually translate to inflated value on all of them.  

The flipping culture and high prices on US "low mintage" NCLT is symptomatic of the financialization of US "collecting".  I find myself agreeing with both  @VKurtB and @gmarguliconcurrently.

As for foreign mints, I'm not aware of much flipping.  The only one I know anything about is South Africa where the same culture exists, as their "hobby" has also been financialized and it's mostly due to TPG adoption.  

Otherwise, I suspect that price run ups after issuance might be due to US based buying.  As an example, Heritage sold a UK silver Una & the Lion NCLT last year for a totally crazy price, around $13K.  Yes, I know the design is widely admired but with a mintage of 4,000 (or near it), hardly rare or even scarce. 

Don't know the issue price but I'm fairly confident this type of price isn't supportable without US based buyers.  The coin is far too common and isn't remotely interesting enough to be competitive with other British coinage, 99%+ which sells for less.

2 hours ago, LINCOLNMAN said:

I collect anything in the category of coinage that circulated in the US, although I try to stick to more commonly recognized coins or examples of coins found in archeological digs (e.g. look up Jamestown coins) or by metal detectorists. I also stay with 18th century or earlier examples. In other words, I'm more inclusive than exclusive. I suggest you use a a liberal definition of "US Colonial" - you'll have a lot more fun. Finding these coins isn't always easy and more often than not they're raw and tough to price. 

I'm just describing how most US collectors likely see it.  Most collectors go by reference books.  Nothing to do with how I see it.

Look in the Red Book.  If it's attributed to the French colonies, it's "US colonial".  The more recent Red Books (which I do not have) also include numerous other coins which circulated in the territory which is now part of the US.  Traditionally, these have not been considered "US colonial".  An example is the pillar dollar.

1 hour ago, GoldFinger1969 said:

At FUN, there was a budget section but I believe you weren't forced to go there, they just had about 20-25 dealers who all wanted to congregate together for those who came to FUN with small $$$.

I don't actually know whether dealers were required to be in this section.  My guess is "no" but that they do it for the reason you gave, to make it more convenient for their target customers.

When I go to shows, I don't stop at dealer tables that sell only US or don't appear to have anything I collect.  I never buy on impulse and don't buy anything outside my specialties either, so there is no point to it.  Many of these US coin dealers typically sell coins mostly above my price point anyway.  I'll glance from a distance or as I pass by but that's all.

44 minutes ago, GoldFinger1969 said:

Wasn't aware of this change, thanks.  Most of what I bought on Ebay, coin and currency, was < $100.  I think I bought some Silver Certificates for like $10 or so (maybe less) including S&H.  If there are now minimum fees sellers may have to package multiple items together.  I'll pay $12 for something nice if it really should only sell for $5 but I won't pay mid-$20's.

It's been a couple of years at least.  A PNG member dealer told me they were trying to reduce consignments valued below $250 but I don't know if he actually knows it or just thought so.

Last year, I bought three lots from them for $22, $34 and $34.  So you can see the buyer's fee was almost as much as the winning bid.  These aren't "junk" coins either, just with low demand.  Two are MS-66 Bolivia earlier decimals with one relatively common but the other not.  

Last month, I bought an 1864 PCGS MS-62 1/10 Boliviano from Stacks for $90 or $117 "all-in".  This is effectively an impossible coin to buy and really nice, but few want it.  I saw it in the Sedwick archives selling maybe 10 years ago but missed it.

These Bolivian coin have minimal collector base but the higher fees noticeably reduce the appeal of buying most low priced coins.  You have to really want it and usually be willing to treat it as a consumption expense.  eBay used to be a good outlet to get reasonable prices but the large number of "Buy It Now" listings tell me it isn't anymore.  It's still better than the alternatives for this price range but not what it used to be.

3 minutes ago, GoldFinger1969 said:

I would agree with the thrust of this post.  Ironically, I've used HA mostly for currency -- I think I only have 1 or 2 coins from them.  I've BID alot -- just mostly "stink bids" hoping to get something 30% or so below FMV (no luck ).

The BEST and SIMPLEST way to gauge our hobby is to compare attendance at coin shows (monthlies, regionals, or the Big 3).  It's easy to tell if attendance has been going up or down over time there.  Plus, if you went up the last 5-10 years as the internet exploded, that was an even better sign.  Of course, C-19 disrupted all of this for 2020 and probably parts of 2021, too.

I believe Heritage is a good indicator of the more affluent US based coin buyer but not for the typical one.  Looking at the archives, my inferences include:

There are a lot of sub $100 coins listed but it's my understanding they are trying to get away from that or if not, raising the minimum buyer's fee to $19 should eventually reduce what they offer in this price range noticeably.  Most of the coins I bought from them were below this cut-off but only because I couldn't buy it anywhere else.

At the large coin shows I attended, the "budget" section had a cut-off below $300.  My guess is that as many as 80% of all collectors don't buy above this level or hardly ever, depending upon someone's definition of "collector".  It's this collector predominantly buying sub $100 coins from them, most of are US, and essentially every single one can be bought elsewhere (practically) all of the time.

NCLT is generally a noticeably under represented segment and likely to stay that way.

Most of the more expensive world coins are bought by US collectors.  I infer this because the majority of the high dollar coins are European, most of these buyers don't care for TPG, and even if they care somewhat, the coins are usually common enough where they can buy an essentially identical replacement or a comparable substitute for (a lot) less elsewhere without too much difficulty.  There are a few exceptions (such as Chinese and South Africa) but don't think it's many.

7 hours ago, GoldFinger1969 said:

Did I read somewhere that HA has 900,000 registered users ?  Anybody confirm ?  Anybody know someone at HA who can tell us how many ACTIVE (bidding monthly or buying at least once a year) users there are ?

Users for both GC and Ebay also of interest.

Here are some assumptions:

A noticeable proportion collect another specialty offered by Heritage other than coins.

A low minority are coin collectors based outside the US.

Even if my prior 2MM guesstimate of the US collector base is directionally accurate, a noticeable proportion must be a combination of casual collector or (almost) never buy from them.  Mostly "window shoppers".

I first bought through Heritage at the June 2, 2006 Long Beach auction.  In 14+ years, 39 lots at somewhat over $11,000.  Four lots in the last three years with one for about $1700.  Not much really but probably still above average.

16 minutes ago, Quintus Arrius said:

Making matters more complicated, a comparatively few number were minted.

Last I heard (I guess a quarter-century ago) those silver proofs, alone, were selling for $30,000.  Two minutes ago, 11/09/2020, 1245 hrs., I saw one being offered on eBay for $3,000.  

Last I checked (last year when posting on the ERP), a PCGS PR-70 was around $15K to my recollection.  NGC, around $10K.  PR-69 were selling in the $3K range.

I also recall posts stating the 1995 set was not an immediate sell out which if correct, means few were expecting the subsequent secondary market demand.  By "immediate", referring to a timeframe consistent with phone and mail orders, not internet.

The 1995-W isn't really comparable to other "low mintage" ASE.  Every set collector seems to want it which isn't true of the others.  It's also the only coin I would define as a "key date" since 1982 (dime w/o MM even though this is actually an error or variety).

With only one "key date" in the "basic set", it's presumably within potential financial reach of most ASE collectors.  By current standards of affordability, the set is moderately priced even with this coin included.  It's "low mintage" to be "scarce" enough while being available all the time.

The other coins outside the "basic set"?  These gimmicks increase the cost substantially to the predominant target buyer since there are so many.  There seem to be enough financially motivated buyers (for now) to keep it above issue price but none are likely to be valued like the 95-W proportionately to the mintage.

It's a catch-22.

Usually, supply is greater than demand and buyers dislike the declining price in the secondary market.

With "limited " issue releases, there is rush to buy the moment it becomes available, the servers can't handle all the orders, and there isn't enough supply for every prospective buyer.  Potential buyers complain claiming they wanted the coin but often, it's really because they couldn't cash in on the windfall.

Occasionally, there are exceptions to the above two scenarios but I only recall one or a few.  Since no one knows what the actual demand will be later, seems the only solution is to either issue enough to fill all orders or offer it to the highest bidder at issuance.

I have the sneaking suspicion most wouldn't like either of these two options either.

43 minutes ago, gmarguli said:

I suspect that the SAE will hold up pretty well. It is a popular series and the coin likely won't be too expensive for a lot of people. The mintage, while smaller than normal, will not be enough to keep it priced super high. The only reason I suspect it may stay higher than it should is because of its relationship to the GAE which will be priced out of line for most people and this is a cheap substitute.

I didn't consider buying it as a substitute for the GAE.  It's a valid point.

55 minutes ago, gmarguli said:

The gold seems crazy. While many people might like one for the novelty, how many people are actually putting together a complete set of these and need one? It's crazy to me that a person could have one of these or a PR65 Seated $, an MS64+ 3-Leg or PR67 CAMEO Buffalo, or an XF Flowing Hair $ for the same price. 

I totally agree with you here. 

The likely reality is that they aren't, not as a collectible but as a substitute for other forms of bullion ownership where they anticipate the numismatic premium will increase along with the spot price.

The reason I used the Territorial gold coin (I can never remember exactly which one but I think it's the 1853 $20) is because it's another (approximately) 1oz gold coin selling for potentially a similar price and it's a real coin, not one that I define as just another gimmick.

I would also far prefer to own the examples you listed, but I suspect someone considering this coin would probably buy another gold as an alternative.  Still though, there are many classic US gold that are a lot more interesting.  For starters, some early half eagles around mid AU or the more common mid-grade proof $5s and maybe somewhat lower grade $10s.  Even more if expanded to include world gold, like the 1790 Belgian Insurrection 14 florin up to MS-64 and any number of French or English medieval

On 11/5/2020 at 2:04 PM, GoldFinger1969 said:

Unreal....again, limited supply to create gouging in the secondary market. 

I wasn't even aware of these two coins until recently when I read about it here and ATS.  It will be interesting to see how it performs in the secondary market, as the mintage of 75,000 isn't remotely low for the price forecasts I have seen.

The 2019-S ERP had fallen significantly (on eBay) from my prior reviews but I have not checked lately.  The lowest price I recall was in the low $600s but with a wide variation.  Sure, somewhat different coin but most collectors will still settle for the "regular" proof if it's too expensive and still consider their set "complete".

As for the gold, some of the price forecasts I have seen (high four figures) would make it almost as expensive (within 25% or slightly more) of the most common US Assay Office Territorial gold in nice AU.  That's nothing short of insane.

1 minute ago, GoldFinger1969 said:

Disagree...there are great stories and history associated with many coins, notably Saints and Morgans.

I'm pretty sure RWB would agree -- 'cause he kind of wrote some books about them !! 

Yes, I am aware of it .  But almost no coinage is hardly ever connected to any event of the time hardly anyone knows anything about.  This is my point since literally everything with a past has a history.

I have a reference on my current area of interest Gilboy's "The Milled Columnarios of Central and South America".  It includes the historical context at that time and is well written.  Most of it still doesn't have much of anything to do with the coins.

I first became interested in history at age 13, mostly ancient near east.  Also read Egyptian, Rome and Greece.  I was first interested in coins at age 10.  More recently, I have read up on 19th century British Empire and the 2nd Anglo-Boer War which is related to the South African coinage I used to collect..

My interest in coins never had anything to do with my interest in history and still doesn't .  If it did, I'd collect something else.  For others, maybe it does and maybe it doesn't.   

4 hours ago, comicdonna said:

Back in the 70's I saw an ad in a magazine about the 1943 copper cent.  They were paying 10K at that time.  I have been looking over my change every since.   Although, I think the odds are better at winning the Powerball, than finding one...  

Considering how many cents have been minted, are currently buried in "change jars" and been searched who knows how many times, I'd estimate you are correct.

1 hour ago, GoldFinger1969 said:

FWIW, I used only Ebay for probably a decade while buying coins.  Never even had heard of HA.  Got active in these and other forums and learned about them.  Checked them out, saw stuff within my budget that I could afford, joined and buy from time-to-time, $$$-depending.

Actually, I've bought far more in terms of quantity and $$$ value in currency via HA than coins.  Active in HA for just over a year or so I believe.

Coins only from GC, active there less than a year.

No account at SB or others.

I bought mostly off of eBay from 1998 to 2004 after I resumed collecting.  Found out about Heritage and Goldberg through eBay when it used to include live auctions.  From there gradually found out about other firms eventually finding Sixbid which is an auction portal mostly for foreign (European) firms.

I buy far fewer coins than I did until about 2008, more regularly since from Heritage, Stacks, and Sedwick with occasional purchases elsewhere.  Always on the lookout though because coins I want will show up in unusual places.

40 minutes ago, RWB said:

Rather than lack of awareness, I suspect that few care at all. America is a mercantile culture, built by those out to profit materially, not historically, creatively, or artistically. Our creative background is largely imported and is both brief and minuscule compared to any non-Western Hemisphere culture.

My sentiments, more or less.

The other point I have made is that there isn't much if any actual history associated with coin collecting.  The coin existed and exists and that's about it.  This is even more true of the highest quality and most expensive coinage where the reality is usually nothing more than it sat in a coin cabinet or coin folder for decades or centuries until more recently where it now possibly resides in a TPG holder.  Most of this "history" is actually nothing more than romanticized imaginary fiction.

8 hours ago, GoldFinger1969 said:

HA, SB, and GC should be a good source here as they can tell us how many users they have.....active users.....winning bidders....repeat bidders who win....etc.

They have been pretty active now for a few years each (HA longer, I believe).  But social media took off the last few years so let's see where all the online bidders are by 2024 or so and that might give us some good information.

I believe you are right but that eBay is the most relevant source to measure the participation of the typical collector.  Most collectors don't buy most of the coins in the price range sold by Heritage or Stacks.  GC probably more of an alternative to eBay.

8 hours ago, GoldFinger1969 said:

Eventually....if the pie is getting bigger and the collectors universe is expanding....you should see it show up in both rising coin prices (maybe including gold and silver bullion) and also attendance at premier coin shows (this happened to me).

In the past, I have guesstimated that the US collector base approximates 2MM.  However, eBay currently lists slightly over 2MM listings worldwide.  From this data, my estimate seems far too high.

The reason I have assumed such a large number is because most coins are very common, including many thought by many collectors to be "scarce" or "rare" due to the "low" mintage.   Even though prices are set at the margin, doesn't seem that a much smaller collector base could absorb the potential supply at current prices (using estimates such as Coin Facts where it is at least occasionally directionally accurate), unless there are a lot of hoarders and a noticeable proportion owned by non-collectors.

This especially applies to generics (pre-1933 gold, Morgan dollars, Peace dollars, etc.) where the TPG populations are already in the tens or hundreds of thousands.  Even with my estimate, since only a low proportion are likely to own an individual coin, this would mean somewhere in the vicinity of 90% aren't owned as a collectible.

In another thread, I wrote about the far less visible footprint.  Yes, I know that it's easier than ever to collect anonymously online but if I am wrong about the public's familiarity with the hobby, this is the likely reason.

Other than through eBay, not sure how often the non-collector is exposed to it online.  I see banner adds all the time but that's because of my search history.  I have no idea if  and how often someone who doesn't visit coin related websites sees anything..

It's my inference that there is more research now and recently than ever before but probably depends upon what you collect.  If accurate, seems to support interest by a larger number of hardcore collectors.

ANA and coin club membership?  Heard ANA is flat but don't know about coin clubs.  I consider it somewhat important (more for coin clubs) but don't believe it says much about overall interest.

US Mint sales?  Annual proof and mint set volumes have completely collapsed over the last 30 to 50 years but I attribute this mostly to a decrease by casual and maybe even gift buying by non-collectors.

32 minutes ago, GoldFinger1969 said:

One guy had a collection of foreign and ancient coins in the thousands and had an Excel spreadsheet with all the data, including approximate value, so his stuff didn't sell for too cheap a price.

My collection isn't this large or presumably worth anywhere near the same amount but I follow the same practice.  Current value is a very inaccurate estimate but it does record how much I paid, when I bought it and who I bought it from.  Also where it matters include brief comments and whether I think the coin might be worth keeping financially.  Need to write more detailed instructions at some point.

28 minutes ago, GoldFinger1969 said:

A coin like that is strictly numismatic, collector, or registry needed.  So yeah, big risk.

Now....there may be some risk with a 1907 High Relief Saint, too.  But at least there you are buying a unique coin -- a Double Eagle -- getting 1 ounce of gold ($2,000 today), getting a very famous sculptor's most famous work, getting what some consider the most beautiful coin ever produced by the United States, etc.

I'd be OK buying a premium 1907 HR Saint for $20,000 and then watching it lose half its value if I bought at exactly the wrong time.  I'd be less forgiving if I bought a mass-produced nothing-special quarter or half-dollar etc.

Your description seems to be how most think.  The 1907 HR Saint is the most expensive coin I know for it's availability.  I'm not aware of another that is even close where the number of survivors all sell for at least five figures.

Previously for some reason, I thought the article said it was a semi-key Barber but it does not.  I'm guessing now that it's one of the more common Liberty Seated, better date Barber, or better date SLQ in at least 64 up to 66.

The pool of buyers for any of these coins even at $6,000 is very shallow.  

1 minute ago, GoldFinger1969 said:

I think most Americans, even those in the investor class, are not aware of our rich history and artistry involving our currency and bills.  I know I wasn't and I'm a voracious reader and historian.

I presume most Americans from the traditional collector demographic group are aware collecting exists.  Those from more recent immigrant heavy groups, a lot less or not at all.

Where I differ with many other coin forum participants is that I disagree that any meaningful proportion or number of these people would become collectors if they knew more about it.  Certainly not where they would become so interested they would drive the prices of the coins most forum participants own meaningfully higher.

It isn't a lack of knowledge or awareness, it is a lack of interest.  I can also repeat my prior comments on how this relates to the current US pricing structure but anyone who has read my posts already knows what I think about that.