World Colonial

On 10/28/2023 at 3:21 PM, zadok said:

...im not sure they r widgets, many "investors" buy gold in its various forms not expecting those purchases to make money but to preserve money, the premium is just the cost of ownership....

I wouldn't consider an MS-65 with the premiums it has (now or previously) to be a wealth preservation asset.  So, while I agree with you the buyer typically fits your profile, I consider it a less than optimal choice for this purpose. My assumption has always been that most buyers are buying it to capitalize on both higher spot prices and premiums, for speculation.

I call it a widget because the most common dates have tens of thousands even in this grade.  There certainly is no reason to believe there are anywhere near this many buyers buying it as a collectible.

I've thought about buying lower mintage AGE proofs for a similar reason but see the same drawback.  It's likely to underperform low premium bullion in an environment of much higher spot prices because no, the coin isn't that interesting as a collectible to maintain the current premium.

Example is the 2022 AGE proof 1/2oz which has a mintage of about 1700.  It's low for a US coin but only compared to circulating coinage or modern US proofs.  As a collectible, the number of survivors (presumably 100% now) is not actually low for any coin in this price range in any condition approaching this quality.  Similar idea for any number of modern US NCLT gold, palladium, or platinum.

On 10/28/2023 at 1:11 PM, GoldFinger1969 said:

The charts -- and my post -- were refencing Saints or similar coins with maybe 20-30% numismatic value:  not pure gold, but not a multiple of gold, either.  I think the charts for MS-65 and MS-62 capture it well (62 is just above or at the level of a bullion coin).

If the price of gold takes off, I'd rather buy AGE or similar type than any bullion type US classic gold which includes the common Saint dates in MS-65.

The problem with a coin like this one is that the coins are too common and not interesting enough to maintain higher premiums at much higher gold spot.  A label on a holder doesn't change that, especially as I anticipate that financial assets will perform poorly with it, reducing the fake "wealth" available to inflate prices.

That's why it's a widget.

On 10/28/2023 at 12:38 AM, GoldFinger1969 said:

Premiums are "historically" low so those could expand too for investment-grade coins.

What is the current premium and how does it compare to somewhat recent history?  (Last 20 years or near it.)  I don't track it, since I'm not looking to buy it.

What you are describing are bullion substitute widgets, though US collectors and "investors" have convinced themselves it differs from any number of actually somewhat less common "world" gold.

As "investment", I'd rather own AGE or similar substitutes.

On 10/25/2023 at 2:03 AM, GoldFinger1969 said:

The jury is still out on if we are reversing the 40-year tailwinds we had for keeping inflation low.  China, demographics, and free trade are being slowly unwound.  India and other Asian countries may or may not pick up the slack.  AI may be a great productivity enahancer which could be the equivalent of cheap energy after 1981 but we'll have to see.

No "fundamentals" explain interest rates or any other market price during this manic period.  It's a rationalization.  The "fundamentals" aren't and weren't actually better versus your prior reference period (1942-1966) either but even if it was, the differences in market prices are completely disproportionate.

I've explained to you why I don't use "fundamentals" to try to predict market prices.  It's because you're left to predict your own indicators when the supposed predictive indicator mostly or entirely doesn't have anything to do with the price covered by the forecast.

On 10/25/2023 at 2:03 AM, GoldFinger1969 said:

That said, we went from 2% to 4% from 1946 to 1966 on the 20-year Treasury.  The 1970's came much later.  Even if we eventually hit double-digits on rates, it will probably be many years or even a decade from now.  We're not going straight up in a short time period.

Even if your precedent was correct, we've already had your baseline period of low rates, 2008-2020 if not back to 2001 or 2002.  Believing we're going to have another multiple decades of artificially cheap money with the current (sub) basement level credit standards we've had the entire time makes no sense.  (Yes, I know Japan had it, doesn't have anything to do with the US.  US commentators selectively cherry pick results they like from elsewhere while ignoring those they don't.)

On 10/25/2023 at 2:03 AM, GoldFinger1969 said:

Stocks should be good investments and durations of 5-7 years will serve most well in fixed-income.

The US stock market is still in its biggest bubble ever with your preferred indicator (the P/E ratio) distorted by a fake economy from deranged fiscal and monetary policy.  However, I'm not convinced it's over, yet.  Long-term optimism is still pinned to the ceiling and performance is fractured (both of which are bearish) but the primary averages have held up anyway, again.

Someone will probably do ok with a duration of 5-7 years at current levels, but any surprises should be to the downside.

On 10/24/2023 at 2:21 AM, GoldFinger1969 said:

We've already had a a record rise in Fed Funds and the 10-year Treasury yield.  From 0.25% and 0.5% a few years ago.  Even if you use the 10-year rate from 18 months ago....it's doubled.  Those are BIG moves percentage-wise and in absolute terms, too.

"Highest rates in 15 or more years" is something we haven't said/seen in decades. 

Yes, and this is only the beginning if the cycle actually ended in 2020 as it almost certainly did.

Any inference that a 39-year cycle (1981-2020) ended or fully "corrected" with a measly 3+ year advance especially when the actual "fundamentals" are mediocre to terrible is nonsensical.  It's a complete fantasy.

I also know it's contrary to the personal preference of most of the US population but there you have it.

Interest rates aren't "high". Current rates are more typical of what existed prior to the late 60's (or near it) when lending standards and credit quality were actually "normal", except that both are now at (sub-)basement levels in the aggregate.  "Normality" completely ended with deranged fiscal and monetary policy starting no later than 2008.  (It was hardly "normal" prior to that either.)

The primary reason this increase hasn't impacted the economy as many expected is precisely because lending standards are still very lax meaning it isn't actually hard to borrow, for hardly anyone.

That's coming later.

Maybe buyers had a reverse epiphany where they collectively realized there isn't a dime's worth of practical difference between coins with the different labels in your examples and that it's all financialization and marketing?

Probably not, but that would make a lot more sense.

On 10/20/2023 at 8:30 PM, GoldFinger1969 said:

I remember having lunch with Bill Dudley, Goldman's chief economist and later president of the NY Fed, years ago....he said some trends were simply uninvestable, like a slow gradual rise in rates like we saw from 1945-1966.  Unless you use leverage, you can get the direction right and still find it hard to profit.

Agree, except that when the next phase of the rate cycle takes off, I'll take the "over" on rates moving faster than what's happened since 2020.

I expect it to coincide with the recognition of the actually mediocre to awful "fundamentals" which substantially exist now.

On 10/20/2023 at 10:55 AM, GoldFinger1969 said:

Actually, most of the "junk" bonds are higher-quality junk as opposed to stuff we saw in the past.  Credit quality is actually pretty good

That's because everyone is looking in the rear-view mirror.

Debt coverage is or at least was generally good, thanks to artificially low borrowing costs and inflated earnings from a fake economy, mostly from government deficit spending.

Wait and see how great this credit quality looks with much higher rates and lower earnings.  

On 10/20/2023 at 10:55 AM, GoldFinger1969 said:

It is hard to talk about blowing past a 15% 10 or 30-year bond yield. 

It's a process, not an event.  No market moves in a straight line forever.  We've been in a bond bear market for over three years.  

There will be a partial retracement lasting maybe up to a few years, maybe even longer but I doubt it.  I don't think the next rising phase will take UST rates to 15% but double digits are definitely feasible.

Most people don't believe this is likely or possible because they look at the environment and it looks good to "ok", depending upon the person's perception from their personal circumstances.

The "fundamentals" never look terrible at or near market peaks and vice versa because that's not how markets actually work.  

I can speculate on the type of environment which might exist in a future of much higher rates.  Both are the result of negative psychology, rates entirely since no one who knows what they are talking about can claim rates since at least 2008 are the result of the positive "fundamentals".  It's a mania.

The actual credit quality of the USG is the worst since at least WWII.  (My explanation for it is extensive economic and social decay, an attempt to prevent falling living standards and a belief in something for nothing.)  This is the benchmark for all other rates.  So yes, when this is widely acknowledged, it's easy to see how rates are destined to "blow out".

On 10/20/2023 at 10:55 AM, GoldFinger1969 said:

The Bond Vigilantes -- remember them ? -- may rise yields enough to slow GDP growth such that inflation and even real rates do not jack up nominal yields.

 

You seem to be describing some form of "equilibrium".  There is no such thing.

On 10/19/2023 at 11:57 PM, GoldFinger1969 said:

5% 10-Year Treasury Bond:  Forget about default, the surging supply has resulted in the long yields ripping higher.  Lots of good values in bond funds and fixed-income vehicles, if anybody is interested post below or start a new thread in the appropriate section where we can discuss financial investments.

Temporary value, depending upon the maturity/duration and credit quality.

There has been a "blood bath" in USG bonds, with TLT ETF losing over 50% (not including interest payments) since the peak in 2020.  That's as bad as the S&P during the GFC.

The bond mania almost certainly peaked in 2020 after a 39=year bull market.  This means rates are destined to "blow out" past the 1981 high years from now, as the economic "fundamentals" are actually mediocre to awful.

So, yes, closer to an interim peak in yields and low in prices, for higher quality debt, not necessarily "junk" which is actually most of what's out there given the extended history of sub-basement credit standards masquerading as "prudent".

On 10/11/2023 at 10:12 PM, The Neophyte Numismatist said:

I recently flirted with the idea of diving deep into Civil War Tokens.  I bought the books, and a few tokens.  I love the tokens I bought.  However, I decided I cannot move further.  

This decision is predicated on the fact that I cannot price them well, and the pricing of tokens is much more complicated than coins.  There are no real price guides, so one cannot simply look at Greysheet and TPG retail to estimate a value.  Auctions are even more perplexing, as one can see the auction battle that drove a token high in one auction, and see a significant dip in price in the next auction.  Pricing is all over the place.

If I have these challenges, how could my wife and kids have any chance of knowing what it's worth?  I could try to keep copious records and update them monthly, but this would both be highly administrative, and still challenging for my wife to decipher after my death.

This is why I win most coins in my primary collection.  Virtually no one else likes it enough to lose money on it.

1752 Peru 4R, if it exists.  One is claimed but not publicly. confirmed.  

On 10/4/2023 at 1:17 PM, Mike Meenderink said:

google it

I wasn't questioning your Google search. I'm questioning the accuracy of whoever posted it on Google.

I don't believe it's possible to measure this accurately due to lack of data, accuracy of available data, and the methodology used, probably the USG if this was the source.

$900 isn't "squat" today or in the recent past while $37 was decent money back then since it was close to two DE.

Not trying to derail this thread.  We can start another one if anyone wants to discuss it further.

On 10/4/2023 at 1:58 AM, robec1347 said:

But, the value of those proof coins would bring multiple value above what today’s purchasing power of $901.58 is. 

I don't believe $901 in 2023 is worth the same as $37 in 1882 either.  Depends how it's measured.

On 9/26/2023 at 12:50 PM, The Neophyte Numismatist said:

*I understand that there may be some who see this MS62 as "damaged" and not worth the price of an unmarked MS62.  Not looking to debate whether counterstamped coins should be straight-or-details graded.  However, I will call-out the nuance to note my appreciation and understanding.

I think it's more than "some".  I'd say "most" and it's not limited to this coin or series either.

Somewhat different, but I consider chop marked coins damaged while I understand it's more widely collected or at least accepted now versus previously, including at least in some instances by the TPG.

In my series, it's substantially who did it.  So, when Britain did it with 1758 undated Jamaican coinage, it's not damage.  Since these are collected by both British and pillar collectors and the counterstamped (or countermarked) coin is usually scarcer, it's worth noticeably more.

I'd like to have a denomination set as a supplement, eventually.

On 10/1/2023 at 4:28 PM, gmarguli said:

Facebook Shareholders: They must have done some marketing or research work that said that there were lots of potential users of the Metaverse.

This gets my vote as the stupidest idea in business, ever.

There is truth to the idea that supply creates its own demand, but not with a pretend world where people are going to spend huge amounts for it.  Those who have paid stupid amounts for "real estate" in it are just like those buying an NFT.

It's another aspect of the asset mania where people have collectively lost their minds.

On 10/1/2023 at 11:19 AM, GoldFinger1969 said:

They must have done some marketing or research work that said that there were lots of potential buyers of classic/modern coins but they were confused by the grading scale.  Honestly, I think the hurdles to learning about coins are far less than those about buying a house, learning about real estate, investing in the financial markets, etc.

Hey, maybe NGC saw a niche opportunity and went for it.  Dunno......

Someone saw what they wanted to see, even when it isn't there.

Learning the minutia in the differences between one-point increments in the Sheldon scale takes some effort.  It takes no effort for the non-collector novice to comprehend the Sheldon scale, especially when they overwhelmingly only concern themself with two numbers.

That's a "69" and a "70".

On 9/23/2023 at 7:07 PM, Sandon said:

 What they don't understand is that what a person likes to collect is an individual taste. One is either interested in coins--or certain coins--or isn't.

This marketing effort is targeted to NCLT where the predominant buyer spending any meaningful money seems to be predominantly "stacking" or buying it for other financial reasons.  They aren't hobbyist collectors since there isn't any substance to this collecting.  Anyone with the money can buy any of these coins or sets in as little as one day, except maybe with some arbitrary holder and label combination.  Unlike circulating coinage, there isn't even any variation in appearance for something like 98% or 99% of it either.

It's the ultimate widget buying.

On 9/9/2023 at 6:32 PM, Henri Charriere said:

• Previous Page
• Next Page

• Previous Page
• Next Page

Perhaps then, you can potentially save me a lot of time, trouble and expense if you would be so kind as to decipher the following overture I received yesterday from Heritage Auctions:  You are invited to a special State of the Market Commentary, Unlocking the Secrets of the World & Ancient Coins Market: What You Need to Know Now... [which includes the following reference, among others, to]... 2023 November 3.  THE OTAH COLLECTION OF PHYSICAL CRYPTOCURRENCY  PLATINUM SESSION AND SIGNATURE AUCTION  PART 1  3112.

---

• Previous Page
• Next Page

• Previous Page
• Next Page

Stacks conducts intermittent cryptocurrency auctions on their site too, though I wasn't aware of it by Heritage.  With the quick prior look I made of the Stack's listings, apparently, someone did create physical "coins" representing actual Bitcoin at minimum.  I haven't read up on it so can't provide any specifics, as I have zero interest in it.

I'd guess these physical versions might sell at nominal premiums to the electronic Bitcoin and higher premiums for those like XRP which last I checked were valued at less than $1.

Given the widespread use of "crypto", it's feasible for these physical representations to trade as a form of collectible, but to a point only.

A physical coin version of Bitcoin isn't interesting enough to sell at substantial premiums as a collectible longer-term, unless the supply is very limited or the underlying "currency" completely collapses.  At $25,000+ now, it's hopelessly uncompetitive as a collectible, except to financially motivated "widget" buyers which is speculation.

This should hardly be shocking to anyone who will evaluate the topic impartially.  The same principle applies to a lesser extent to NCLT (more so the bullion type collectible coins) and also somewhat to common pre-1933 US classic and most common "world" gold. 

It applies less to ASE and Morgan dollars despite the (likely) substantial financially related buying because most of these coins are a lot cheaper.

On 8/16/2023 at 9:20 AM, zadok said:

...my personal take on personal economical due diligence in this country is that it has continued to collapse ever since the introduction of social security...

I'd attribute it to the apparently more widespread belief that society won't let them financially fail.  The incentive structure incentivizes people to take big risks.  If you are a portfolio manager, it's not your money, so underperforming your benchmark means customer leave while there is "safety" in being wrong if this house of cards collapses.

At the individual level, it's even worse now after mortgage moratoriums, rent and student loan forbearance, and paying some people more not to work than when they were working.  It's completely insane.

There is a manic mentality that seemingly no matter what happens, the irresponsible should always expect to get bailed out.  The only thing that is going to change this widespread thinking is extended widespread actual austerity, not doing without something trivial like cable TV or a smart phone.

On 8/16/2023 at 9:20 AM, zadok said:

....another personal take is that if all of the wealth in this country was equally dispersed among the population that within a generation or two it would for the most part be back to where it started...

Read that too, and there is quite a bit of truth to it.

On 8/16/2023 at 9:20 AM, zadok said:

....my personal opinions n takes r worth approx the value of a Po-01 two cent pc....

Worth somewhat more than that

On 8/29/2023 at 11:36 AM, GoldFinger1969 said:

Crypto/Bitcoin seems to be trading inversely to interest rates lately.  When rates were super-low at the short and long-end, the opportunity cost was nil.

Now when you can get 5.4% on a 6-month T-Bill or 6-8% on bonds and bond funds....you have to consider the cost of buying a non-interest earning asset.

Same thing could be said of gold, silver, or coins.

The difference though is that crypto is actually literally nothing.  

On 9/8/2023 at 11:49 AM, RaritiesValue.com said:

We are adding the ability to add custom sets in the next batch of updates (coming in a week or two). You are already able to add anything to the inventory table view, but the sets will only work for US coins at the moment. Give us a week or two to get that updated!

We are definitely focused more on dealers from a business model perspective, but I wanted to create something for collectors as well. There will be optional features that collectors or dealers can pay for, but I anticipate a free plan will be available for some time. 

For me, the biggest gap in what dealers offer their buyers is timely updated inventory.  If anyone could ever make it economically feasible to dealers at scale, it would certainly have potential value to me as a collector of coinage which is difficult to find.

Aside from eBay, there are other aggregator sites like VCoins and MA Shops but it's limited.  I presume more dealers don't participate because the value proposition isn't there for them.  Don't know how it does or may differ from your effort.

Excel

I also don't collect any US coins, if your product is built around that.

Also, if you eventually intend to market it for a fee, the landing page seems to indicate it's more for coin dealers versus collectors. 

I don't see much of a market from collectors, unless it's free and you intend to generate revenue from advertising.

Here are some facts on the Liberty nickel series from an independent source, the Heritage Archives as of mid-2022.  I covered the Heritage Archives in a prior thread last year though cannot remember the exact date.

This thread included some disclaimers on the data limitations which I will not repeat here.

                                    Circulation strikes                  Proofs

$200-$500                          29/84                                28/84

$501-$2,500                       40/99                                34/99

$2,501-$10,000                  49/108                              52/108

$10,001-$50,000                77/108                              93/108

$50,001-$100,000              No sales                           T-86 (last with a sale)

$100,000+                          No sales                           T-68/81 (three 1913 sales)

I didn't evaluate below $200, as it isn't financially meaningful, but presume the ranking is higher since a noticeable of the 112 series aren't available below this price point.

Depends what kind of collection you or anyone else wants.

I don't make impulse purchases and hardly ever buy anything for my "side collections" anymore either.  I did just buy one of the tougher dates in the Boliviano series though.  It's a set I intend too eventually complete.

I'm also looking to sell coins from discontinued "side collections" and past impulse purchases.

However, I recognize that most others prefer to have broader variety than I do.

One way I look at it when contemplating a sale is whether I would buy the same or similar coin for about the same money (in my case, if available).  If the answer is "no", time to sell.

What exactly are you trying to accomplish?

If you contacted this source to communicate a "want list" for an already existing MS-67, this might work.

If you contacted them to find a candidate MS-67 ungraded where they will submit the coin to "make" the grade for you, I'm predicting you're going to be waiting a long time.  As in, you're never going to hear back from them.

The return for the time effort isn't there for any seller.

Something else?  If so, what?