World Colonial

More likely they are done buying coins for good. This is the potential harm financializing collecting causes. It's what I also saw in South African "collecting" up until the 2011 price peak except it wasn't predominantly by telemarketers but by those selling on their version of eBay and engaging in hype on their coin forum. They claimed they were promoting "collecting" but it's evident they were only interesting in maximizing a potential windfall as soon as possible.

NYC has more than a few cultural venues, it's just that most people have never heard of most. I agree with you the cost makes it less than ideal for family vacations but don't see crime as a problem as long as the person uses common sense. I was there last December for two weeks (for work) but first time since 2006. Used to go a lot up until then. Spent months to more than half the year every year (mostly in downtown Manhattan) between 1999 and 2005 and really liked it. (I was on an expense account, not my own dime except during 2004.) However, I wouldn't put the ANA museum there because of the cost and it's home to the ANS.

The NFL Hall Of Fame is located in Canton, OH. I don't know about the NBA. The College Football HOF moved to Atlanta from South Bend, IN several years ago, presumably for a similar reason but I have never been there even though it's the only sport I closely follow and live about 10 miles away. It's situated near Centennial Olympic Park, CNN Center, the Atlanta Aquarium, World of Coca-Cola and a few other attractions. I have no idea how many visit any of these. All I can tell you is that I see no parallel for any of them with any stand-alone museum for coins. All of these sports have a much broader cultural appeal and in many instances are more interesting even to coin collectors. It's not like the NNC which is part of a much bigger attraction; the Smithsonian. If the NNC were moved somewhere else by itself to a less visited destination, the visitor count would also collapse. This isn't a knock on coins or any of these collections, it's just reality.

You have some good points. I'd locate it more centrally, like Dallas or Chicago due to the market size and airport facilities. Ultimately though, I don't think most collectors really care about the ANA because it's not relevant to their collecting. When they think of the hobby or their participation in it, it doesn't even cross their mind. Can the ANA improve or play a bigger role? Sure, I think it can and should attempt to do so if that's what its members want. But in the internet age, it's easier than ever to have a completely satisfactory collecting experience without it.

I make a clear distinction between "great" collections under more recent criteria and those of the past, as in prior to the mid-1970's. I don't assign any "greatness" to any collection where much, most or all of the distinction is mostly due to the quality for what are predominantly actually common coins. Some collections of common coins I consider distinctive; some better early US federal type would be one. This coinage has been expensive and highly perceived since before I was born and prior to widespread "investing" in US coinage.

I agree but to many "collectors" is considered the equivalent of heresy. Much of what passes for "collecting" in US "numismatics" is actually financialization.

I suspect the ANS is a lot more successful at raising money but maybe I just have a much higher opinion of the organization. Since it is more relevant to advanced collectors, I also believe their membership (though presumably notably smaller) is a lot more affluent and geographically distributed. Back in 2004 when I temporarily lived in NYC, I looked into joining the ANS. The corporate secretary of investment bank Bear Stearns was the board chairman (or equivalent role) and their reception dinners to my recollection were $500 per person. The membership was affordable but the other activities were and are not. I want the ANA to survive and succeed, but I care a lot more about the ANS.

I understand this is very common of museums generally and not just for coins. I went to the British Museum once, in February 1999. A few coin displays but more recently, I read it has one of the largest collections in the world. Don't know if it is true but if so, most of it is archived and never sees the light of day. As for research, don't know if it's available at the ANA but is at the ANS. I intend to visit for my area of interest eventually.

To me, this is a perfect example of how this coin and coin collecting would have been more prominent culturally at the time. I wasn't living in the US when the series aired and have never seen the episode. I doubt most under maybe age 50 know of this episode. Similar line of reasoning more broadly. Before I moved back to the US in 1975, I have read posts about department stores with coin sections. I never saw one. During the gaps in my collecting up to 1998, I would still buy or read coins books and coin magazines at Walden Books or B. Dalton Booksellers. I'd also see coin folders. Now, Barnes & Noble may still have a coin section but know nothing about it and their footprint and customer traffic has collapsed, even assuming someone is looking for it which they mostly aren't. The number of B&M coin shops has also decreased, noticeably. The point is, the internet has expanded the hobby's reach mostly for those who are consciously looking for it. If you aren't one of these people, it's far less likely to be on your "radar" and might effectively be almost invisible.

Agree For what I would describe as a financially marginal organization, it probably doesn't make any sense. Presumably requires increased donations to cover the cost difference which is far from a sure thing. Last time I was able to visit the Met in NYC (2006 to my recollection), there was a big renovation in process. Even with a far from free admission fee, I presume they rely heavily on donations to stay open and this is one of the best and most famous museums in the world.

It sells a lot more often than any other (prominent) coins with a similar scarcity that I know. Or even rare but still noticeably more available coins. No, it's not every year but still seems to be about no more than five years between sales. Other actually rare coins with a very high collector preference are frequently held for decades and seldom become available but these are often in more "esoteric areas". Take a look at the sales history for the CSA half dollar, 1850 Baldwin & Co "Horseman" $10 and 1792 silver Getz pattern half dollar. Or even 1854-S half eagle. It's possible what you infer is accurate, as I really don't know what it takes for most collectors to take notice. The 1913 LHN is about as close to a "headline" maker among more casual collectors since it's as close to famous as any coin can be. Concurrently, I don't believe those who buy it really find it that interesting or else it would be harder to buy. It also seems to be a lot less interesting to the type of collector who posts here or ATS. All I know is, it takes a lot more for me to think it's a big deal than anyone else I have encountered on coin forums and no, it isn't just because of what I collect.

Agree What do they have that fits this description? Don't see the 1804 dollar and 1913 LHN doing that, as these coins aren't really that hard to buy despite the rarity. Both sell often enough that it's not really that much of a headline maker.

I agree with you, but I doubt increasing visitor count is considered that important. My assumption is the board doesn't care enough or hasn't been pressured to do it. So they won't. There is no profit motive, so it's usually the path of least resistance. They could also try a multi-option approach. Display the more prominent parts of the collection at ANA and maybe other large national shows that don't compete with theirs. Split the collection and relocate some of it to a location fitting your description. However, this would probably negatively impact the budget. They may be able to charge an admission fee (for non-members) but I doubt it could be high enough to cover their costs. The rest of the collection could stay in Colorado Springs.

Agree, to a point. Unfortunately, I don't believe it has the same weight it did in the past. The 1804 dollar and 1913 LHN are IMO still the most prominent coins from anywhere, but not like before when collecting was a lot more pervasive in the general culture. Most others no matter how supposedly "famous" to US collectors. almost no one who isn't a collector is likely to even know it exists. Or if they do, know or remember nothing about it. I'd be curious to hear how the ANA tries to attract the non-collecting public to coin shows. I see coin internet banner and pop-up ads, but that's because Google sees my searches. I still don't recall seeing even one for a coin show though maybe I did. Someone who doesn't go to coin related websites isn't likely to see any, doesn't read the numismatic press or coin forums, and reaching them through local media is a cr*apshoot. It's the equivalent of a tree falling in the forest with no one to hear it. Agree it likely has a more immediate and definitely tangible financial impact.

Yes, at minimum. Most likely more Same could be said of any or at least many coins It comes down to the design being highly preferred and it's a large gold coin which attracts a lot of big budget buyers, many of whom are potentially buying it also for financial reasons. Might be bought as a sub-type too but this is an assumption.

The reason I don't believe it holds any interest for longer term or "advanced" collectors is because there isn't much actual collecting to it. Anyone with the money can buy the entire series in one day except for a low number of PCGS 70 if they want that holder which takes somewhat but not much longer. With more recent US circulating coinage, it's all common as well but collectors have adopted multiple forms of specialization to make it more interesting to them. It's very limited with the ASE.

Yes, but that's because you are active in a way which is only representative of a low fraction of the collector base. I don't collect US anymore which is probably why I don't recognize many names. I didn't perform a count but it's probably somewhere around half I never heard their name.

Agree, decades from now, many on this list will be completely forgotten.

My prior questions had nothing to do with my preference, pro or con. The example you are using is different in that it's targeted predominantly to existing collectors which I think is a better or at least more realistic use of the collection. Those who aren't collectors aren't going out of their way to Colorado Springs in any meaningful numbers to see the collection. I have no idea what the proportion of non-collector attendance is at major coin shows but I would describe total attendance as "modest" which means they aren't exactly going out of their way to see these coins either.

@GoldFinger1969 I'll giver you my answer to your question. For the Saints, it can't be a lack of supply, as anyone with the money could probably buy at least 100 decent ones right now. For the supply, it's the most expensive coin in the world bar none in the sense that no other coin has this many survivors selling for an equivalent price, that I know. For the other two "key dates", I attribute it to a "reputational premium" from when collecting was predominantly out of circulating change, up to maybe the late 60's. However, take a look at the price trends since 1965 and you will see that the relative preference for the 09-S VDB has collapsed. It isn't cheap for the supply but it's far more affordable to a much more affluent collector base now versus 1965. The 16-D seems about stable from my review.

No if by this question you are asking if it should be worth substantially more. Most of the supply isn't even owned by collectors or at least for collecting purposes. It's predominantly owned by "silver stackers" in bulk and by collectors as a collectible form of silver at immaterial premiums. There are nowhere near 5MM+ collectors who will ever want to pay any noticeable premium for it and of those who will, only as exists now as an MS-70. The ASE is one of the most "popular" series measured by the size of the collector base, but this doesn't mean they like it that much at much higher prices. It's competitive for the low budget collector because it's relatively cheap and extremely common which means anyone with the money can complete the series if they choose. For collectors of more substantive means, it's almost certainly mostly a sideline (casual or secondary) collection, unless they are also mostly buying other NCLT. For everyone else, the series isn't interesting enough as a collectible. 5MM+ isn't a low mintage. It only appears low relative to circulating change. It's the same error made by those who think mintages on modern US commemoratives are or seem low. Given the sentiments I read on coin forums, it's probable that a noticeable proportion of the demand for these "low" mintage coins is by those who expect to sell it for more later, not because they really want it.

How much is the estimated value of the collection? For coins on loan, who is paying for insurance and any other costs? The ANA or the owner? How much of the collection is even on display? How many visitors does it receive and how does this contribute to the ANA's mission, other than just exposing the public to collecting? (I doubt the museum does much to either increase the collector base or membership.)

Unlikely unless the ANA would relocate with it. My guess is that most if not all of the ANA staff wouldn't be in favor of moving so it will never happen.

None of these coins are rare or even scarce. It all depends upon how badly you want one in this box, as that's what you are paying extra to obtain. As to whether the premium will hold, I don't follow it. I recall seeing data from the hoard at some point and some of the dates are low ("box rare") if it's what you want. As time marches on, I wouldn't count on those who don't remember when it was released caring either way. I remember seeing these soon after I started collecting (late 70's) and thought it was kind of neat at the time. Now, I just see it as another form of marketing.

Seems to be a US centric survey. I don't recognize any name from anywhere else. Apparently, no one from anywhere else is worthy to make the list. Second observation, a few seem to be included simply because they have a large wallet. I'd be interested to know the criteria and how the people on this list meet it. As an example, John Albanese founded both NGC and CAC. TPG and CAC are more connected to the financial side of "collecting" but undoubtedly, he has had an impact on how coins are bought and sold.