If I were a top-pop modern collector...

[MikeInFL]

...and I wasn't an expert grader, I would be very concerned after reading this thread:

 

http://forums.collectors.com/messageview.cfm?catid=30&threadid=674290

 

This was a very interesting thread to me, and I wonder if the implications don't extend beyond moderns.

 

Your thoughts?...Mike

 

p.s. This is in no way disparaging top-pop moderns or those who choose to collect them.

 

[michael]

 

the mess is finally hitting the fan with clear favorite bulk high $$$$ submitters and rewarded grades at pcgs

[michael]

and datentype says so in the thread at pcgs

 

i guess you get into a entitlement for grades as he perfectly said on the pcgs boards as he has been handsomely financially rewarded the past 10 or so years for his huge bulk submissions and by saying all this publically on the boards he has gotten arrogant; hence not too careful with his words and/or biting the hand that feeds him

[michael]

also most importantly the arbtrary changing of grading standards and the affect

on top pop grades and their respective prices to the detriment of collectors with previously pcgs low pop modern coins and profits from bulk submitters

 

i bet this thread will not last long on the pcgs boards after the "secret" insider company readers from pcgs read this thread

[just-john]

Numbers can mean anything State Quarters NGC looks like they graded 105,050 with

4,652 grading MS69 -- Graded Proof 513,652 total with graded 358,768 MS69

So to me it looks like over 4% of state quarters grade ms69 and over 40% of the proofs grade ms69

Now only 1 proof graded PF60 so it should be worth a fortune

and the rares of all the state quarters has to be the one graded 40 only 1out of 105,050heck

there's like 9 1933 gold eagles

 

the price of grading all those 25 cent pieces has to be more than their combined value.

but I could be wrong and usually am

[BillJones]

Collecting early coins is too much fun to get all bent out of shape over this modern coin foolishness. As a type collector I buy one PR-69 Ultra Cam or D Cam coin for the type for average of $15 a piece and then get on with the rest of my collection.

 

I have no faith in this modern stuff. Twenty years from now it will be like the Proof sets from the 1970s and ‘80s. Those collectors who wanted the coins will have bought them, and the market for these coins will be in doldrums.

 

[coinman1794]

Numbers can mean anything State Quarters NGC looks like they graded 105,050 with

4,652 grading MS69 -- Graded Proof 513,652 total with graded 358,768 MS69

So to me it looks like over 4% of state quarters grade ms69 and over 40% of the proofs grade ms69

Now only 1 proof graded PF60 so it should be worth a fortune

and the rares of all the state quarters has to be the one graded 40 only 1out of 105,050heck

there's like 9 1933 gold eagles

 

the price of grading all those 25 cent pieces has to be more than their combined value.

but I could be wrong and usually am

 

I'm not defending the long term value of moderns, but I will say that looking at the certified populations and concluding that 4% of state quarters are MS69 is not accurate. You can't say that 4% off coins picked for certification are MS69 is accurate either, because we dont know how many thousands of coins were submitted in bulk and did not meet the minumum grade for cetification, and thus aren't reflected in the pop numbers.

 

The PCGS thread is rather misleading as well. The guy says he examined all these sets, but doesnt say these coins are actually MS69. Rather he concludes that "actuals will be less [fewer]."

 

Here are some quick numbers that i crunched after reviewing in super great detail 600 sets and a total of 16,800 coins for quality.

 

of 16.800 coins 1.27% are worthy of sending in for 69 grade and actuals of course will be less.

States both P & D 6,000 coins 1/4 of 1% (.25) near 69 quality and actual will be less than that i'm sure.

Yuck, Kennedy and Jefferson's about 1/2 of 1% near 69 quality and extremely likely all of them will not make 69

Rooseies in 69 fb?

[just-john]

NGC shows quarters grades some as low as 40 which is hard to imagine a quarter would wear that quickly.Harder to imagine is who sent it in to be graded.IF your getting them graded for a collection or to complete a set it's cool.But for any time in the next 100 yrs

or so to make money ?? there's almost more of them graded than all the other quarters and proof quarters combined going back to 1796

[michael]

sweet

 

i wonder how long the plastic will maintain its value

[just-john]

plastic could become go up in value if all this green save the planet solar-wind -geo thermal

hydrogen stuff catches on ???bet the plastic goes up before the coins

[michael]

:foryou:sweet

[PrezErrors]

This fool loves collecting modern coins as they are the first coins I have ever collected and are readily available. I learn an awful lot from this board good and bad. I often get responses of negativity when I mention the Presidential coins but I won't let that persuade me to stop collecting them but I collect slabbed as I have learned to do so from this board.

I have also sent in many to have slabbed myself and I have received good and bad grades but it is the fun and the excitement of sending them in that also matters (I'm learning).

I have some high pops and quite a number of errors ( don't care about the grade of these) and yes I spend some good money on them but they are fasinating to me as Morgans, Nickles, Standing Liberty's etc. are to you.

This is the first time I have ever gotten into coin collecting and I love it and I am always on the computer learning by checking out new sites and the like, yes including ebay but I am collecting coins that I am really interested in wherever I can find them. So the money is not important to me as the coins I collect and if they go up or down in value so be it, it's the fun of collecting and I choose to collect moderns.

One happy collector. Charlie

[cpm9ball]

This fool loves collecting modern coins as they are the first coins I have ever collected and are readily available. I learn an awful lot from this board good and bad. I often get responses of negativity when I mention the Presidential coins but I won't let that persuade me to stop collecting them but I collect slabbed as I have learned to do so from this board.

I have also sent in many to have slabbed myself and I have received good and bad grades but it is the fun and the excitement of sending them in that also matters (I'm learning).

I have some high pops and quite a number of errors ( don't care about the grade of these) and yes I spend some good money on them but they are fasinating to me as Morgans, Nickles, Standing Liberty's etc. are to you.

This is the first time I have ever gotten into coin collecting and I love it and I am always on the computer learning by checking out new sites and the like, yes including ebay but I am collecting coins that I am really interested in wherever I can find them. So the money is not important to me as the coins I collect and if they go up or down in value so be it, it's the fun of collecting and I choose to collect moderns.

One happy collector. Charlie

 

There is absolutely nothing wrong with you just because you like collecting the moderns. On the contrary, there is something wrong with the person who "looks down" on you because you like to collect moderns. It's called snobbery!

 

Chris

[MikeInFL]

Chris, I don't disagree, but who "looks down" on him? Certainly not me...Mike

[cpm9ball]

Chris, I don't disagree, but who "looks down" on him? Certainly not me...Mike

 

Don't get paranoid on me, Mike!

 

I don't think anyone, here, does it intentionally, but I have read negative comments about the moderns. If it were done intentionally, it would definitely be snobbery.

 

Chris

[PrezErrors]

Hi! Chris, glad it wasn't me that said they looked down on me, I would rather they look up to me, Tee!! Hee!! Charlie

P.S. I also collect other than the Prez and this board got me started on them, I have quite a collection of British and Colonial

[cladking]

Chris, I don't disagree, but who "looks down" on him? Certainly not me...Mike

 

Don't get paranoid on me, Mike!

 

I don't think anyone, here, does it intentionally, but I have read negative comments about the moderns. If it were done intentionally, it would definitely be snobbery.

 

 

When you get down to it many people don't consider any moderns to even be coins. This makes anyone collecting them wasting their money on mere trinkets and tokens. This removes money and attention from real coins in their eyes.

 

Some are never going to change their attitude but many can and have.

[michael]

the confusion is not reading carefully

 

it is not about collecting coins moderns or not

 

it is about the really high grad 69-70 plastic that is around the coins that contributes 100% to the demand and hence prices and if broken out of their respective holders are back to being regular collector coins WITH A HUGE DECREASE IN DEMAND from the same people willing to pay hundreds if not thousands of dollars for them in special plastic holders with the right words and numbers on them

 

 

this thread has nothing bad to say about collecting moderns

 

what it does say is there are a few clever capitalists and their slabbing company pcgs making coins/preying on peoples passions that are submitting these coins costing them face value to a few dollars per coin and then with the right plastic around them selling them for a huge amount and then not willing to make an active two way market in them and when pcgs changes the standards they complain that they do not get their grades and hence profits

 

i am confused i thought you submitted coins and got them back with an opinion??

 

i did not know just because you pay tens of thousands of dollars for submissions of thousands of the same date and demonination of coins you are expected to get a certain amount of specific grades??

 

oh wait

 

i get it

 

 

[cladking]

the confusion is not reading carefully

 

it is not about collecting coins moderns or not

 

it is about the really high grad 69-70 plastic that is around the coins that contributes 100% to the demand and hence prices and if broken out of their respective holders are back to being regular collector coins WITH A HUGE DECREASE IN DEMAND from the same people willing to pay hundreds if not thousands of dollars for them in special plastic holders with the right words and numbers on them

 

 

this thread has nothing bad to say about collecting moderns

 

what it does say is there are a few clever capitalists and their slabbing company pcgs making coins/preying on peoples passions that are submitting these coins costing them face value to a few dollars per coin and then with the right plastic around them selling them for a huge amount and then not willing to make an active two way market in them and when pcgs changes the standards they complain that they do not get their grades and hence profits

 

i am confused i thought you submitted coins and got them back with an opinion??

 

i did not know just because you pay tens of thousands of dollars for submissions of thousands of the same date and demonination of coins you are expected to get a certain amount of specific grades??

 

oh wait

 

i get it

 

 

 

It's funny that I read the linked thread and had a different perspective.

 

[michael]

yes the thread was funny with datentype mad because he did not get his grades and hence his profits which he did well with pcgs in the recent past

 

well i apologise

 

i should have consulted you before i had stated my opinion

 

my perspective is different

[MikeInFL]

FWIW, my own perspective is more similar to Michael's than Clad's (two numismatists I have a great deal of respect for).

 

Here are some interesting posts (to me):

 

Datentype Sunday September 07, 2008 10:50 AM

"I want to make a living as a coin dealer over the long run and i know there are a lot of customers out there that need good "affordable" high end product. here's the problem with the ok-p: if pcgs loosens up around christmas time 1/4 grade they will be plentiful in my opinion.

 

Here's the deal, i might as well expose myself right here and right now: These satin finish coins are not rare in 69

 

Okay, you're all saying where are the coins then? They are right in the million of sets that have not been purchased yet. The problem lies in it not being economically feasible in my opinion to search for them as follows:

1.) face value is $13.82 and cost is $22.95, so you are in the hole $9.13 right off the start assuming the Ebay pieces net to face value after fees.

2.)pcgs has some gravy train formula that they feel is creating a new market for the coins by making people slab 68 coin rather than a minimum 69 grade like last year. The problem with that is there are thousands of over graded coins from last year which is a direct slap in the face to the people that know it. I guess pcgs got tired of putting over graded coins in 9 holders to make a paycheck. Once again an admirable move for the "collector's company". But will these collectors be around when that vein of product comes around or that 1/4 point christmas bonus?3.) I forgot what do you do with your $22,950 investment after you have gone through 1,000 sets? If you had them graded you live in a sea of plastic. if you have a deal with a re-saler you are still in debt and have placed a huge sum of money in coins and plastic that are not rare and will take years to sell."

 

Seriously, just to set the record straight, i do not have any "dirty laundry" with PCGS as we have had a tremendous business relationship for over 10 years and they have made me a happy and very successfull man. There was a complaint about me by someone (guess who) and they do not see anything wrong with anything I have said in any way and there is no dealer violation at all - not an issue closed case. Want some cheese with that whine?"

 

CoinFame Tuesday September 09, 2008 12:17 PM in respones to Datentype

I think you're acting like a clown & have no business being a dealer with your willingness to publicly drag all of your dirtly laundry out. You ought to hang your head in shame instead of getting froggy with the first person to point it out.

 

...a little later...

 

Datentype Tuesday September 09, 2008 3:46 PM

I have also talked to Seth on the phone about the issue in a calm manner and he is in total agreement with the substance of my remarks on this post. The only problem he has is that I said it period. It is true this sort of stance hurts authorized dealers overall - as it makes collectors tentative and unsure of when and how much to pay. That is my whole point though, I do not want someone to pay $1,800 for a coin, like the ok-p, that is less informed. I would just like to educate the public in some sort of way about this situation and let them know how really difficult these coins are in high grade but wait to buy as many have a decent chance to go down. The information is not in, it is early."

 

Reading the above back and forth between two large modern submitters, my perspective is that they know the "game" that top pop moderns are. Given the huge valuation between the "top-pop" and "top-pop minus one", and if the standards fluctuate to the extent suggested in the above coins -- just how much confidence would YOU have in the grade (and therefore valuation) of these coins?

 

I guess it goes without saying, from a certain perspective, that one should be sure of ones grading skills before purchasing high-value coins (i.e. learn to grade & buy the coin, not the holder, and all that jazz) -- but the implication (to me) from this thread is the stakes are much higher and the differences much thinner in top-pop moderns.

 

Just some food for thought...Mike

 

p.s. Clad, what did YOU take from it?

[diehlr-migration]

A Buyer's Two (actually 25) Cents.

 

Most of you know me as "rogerdiehl" on Ebay. I've been collecting the State Quarters. I guess you would have to call me a "Modern Collector" because I don't really have any old coins worth mentioning.

 

This is my opinion of the Satin Finish quarters.

 

I put the Satin Finish quarters in the same category as the clad San Francisco proof quarters. They are not Business Strike quarters and should never be included in a Business Strike set.

 

Put the Satin Finish coins in a set (category) of their own, just like they do the proofs. Business Strikes and Satin Finish are like apples and oranges. Let's be honest the only reason for the Satin Finish coins is so that the Mint can make and the government can keep more money.

 

As a simple comparison, look at the MS69 populations of the 2004 Business Strike quarters and the 2005 Satin Finish quarters. I would probably be correct to offer that most of the 2004 quarters came from Mint Sets, just like the Satin Finish ones of 2005 - Now try to explain the difference

 

It is obvious they aren't being produced anywhere under the same conditions. The Satin Finish planchets are hand picked and hand (bead) polished and the coins are then being carefully pressed. When I look at my pre-2005 Mint Sets, I can't honestly say that the planchets were "hand picked" - they didn't let them bang around after pressing, but you would be hard pressed to find an MS69 in the lot.

 

 

 

 

[cladking]

 

p.s. Clad, what did YOU take from it?

 

I'm naturally inclined to be an early adopter. I love change and like to be the first guy on the block to have something. But there's much too high a price to pay for the privledge in my eyes. I just use "good enough" in my sets until the coins are a few years old and the prices have shaken themselves out.

 

Once in a while the prices will actually go up right from the beginning but if you're paying attention you can spot some of these very early on. If all you're seeing is junk then just go ahead and take a flyer on a high grade coin.

 

I really appreciate the guys who are sticking their necks out getting this stuff on the market and trying to separate the wheat from the chaffe. They perform a valuable function at great risk requiring huge effort. They should be well rewarded but often are not.

 

One thing that might be a little overlooked is that many of the highest grades are made early on. I don't believe this is intentional on the part of the graders but reflects something of a learning curve. It's hard to grade a coin if it's the first time you've seen one. This will partially offset the losses of those who purchase graded coins early.

 

Just as with any coins, collectors of new coin should learn grading and expect value.

[cladking]

 

Put the Satin Finish coins in a set (category) of their own, just like they do the proofs. Business Strikes and Satin Finish are like apples and oranges. Let's be honest the only reason for the Satin Finish coins is so that the Mint can make and the government can keep more money.

 

As a simple comparison, look at the MS69 populations of the 2004 Business Strike quarters and the 2005 Satin Finish quarters. I would probably be correct to offer that most of the 2004 quarters came from Mint Sets, just like the Satin Finish ones of 2005 - Now try to explain the difference

 

It is obvious they aren't being produced anywhere under the same conditions. The Satin Finish planchets are hand picked and hand (bead) polished and the coins are then being carefully pressed. When I look at my pre-2005 Mint Sets, I can't honestly say that the planchets were "hand picked" - they didn't let them bang around after pressing, but you would be hard pressed to find an MS69 in the lot.

 

Mint set coins have been specially made and processed since 1965. They are made on special presses at lower speeds under higher pressure. The dies are swapped out at the first sign of wear. The coins get a little better handling and are washed and dried.

 

We all know that this hardly assured high quality coins until recent years. Many of the mint set coins are banged up or poorly struck. Higher pressure doesn't assure full strikes and coins off the line can be better quality than the old mint set coins. But most of the highest grade coins did originate in mint sets. In some cases there aren't any rolls surviving anyway so they all originated in mint sets. With the new SF quality has improved significantly. The coins are getting better handling as well so high grade coins are much more common in the sets.

 

It's funny that the SF aren't fully embraced yet the circulation issues aren't getting any more attention than they did. There seems to be a huge gap here and a great opportunity.

 

Perhaps a confounding factor is that not all the coins in the mint sets are so obviously SF.

[World Colonial]

I'm one of those that some may consider critical of modern coins or modern coin collectors.

 

In actuality, my primary criticism is of US modern coin PRICES for the ultra-grades in these slabs for two reasons. First, as many others have stated, the buyer is paying what I would describe as these ridiculous premiums for the plastic because if the coin is ever removed from the holder, no one or almost no one is going to pay the same price or anywhere near it. This is true to a lesser extent for other coins also, but not equally true.

 

The second reason is even between graded coins, the price points between two different grades - mostly a 69 or 70 but sometimes also at slightly lower grades depending upon the grade that qualifies as a conditional or near conditional rarity for the issue - I also consider absurd because there is no apparent difference to most collectors and one way that this can be known is because of the inconsistency by the grading services themselves when a coin is resubmitted.

 

On this second item, I have the same opinion on other coins which are primarily US generics but also US classics when it applies. (It can apply to world coins but usually does not but I would have the same opinion here also.)

 

But on another note, I found that PCGS post complaining about the quality of the 2008 US mint sets amusing. If they think this quality is bad, they should take a look at the QEII issues from South Africa that I collect. Those coins are older moderns by comparison but the quality of the strike on them is actually terrible almost all of the time.

[cladking]

I'm one of those that some may consider critical of modern coins or modern coin collectors.

 

In actuality, my primary criticism is of US modern coin PRICES for the ultra-grades in these slabs for two reasons. First, as many others have stated, the buyer is paying what I would describe as these ridiculous premiums for the plastic because if the coin is ever removed from the holder, no one or almost no one is going to pay the same price or anywhere near it. This is true to a lesser extent for other coins also, but not equally true.

 

The second reason is even between graded coins, the price points between two different grades - mostly a 69 or 70 but sometimes also at slightly lower grades depending upon the grade that qualifies as a conditional or near conditional rarity for the issue - I also consider absurd because there is no apparent difference to most collectors and one way that this can be known is because of the inconsistency by the grading services themselves when a coin is resubmitted.

 

There are no US moderns coins made for circulation in MS-70. A person could carry all the MS-69's made by both major services, I believe. I don't understand why people persist in talking about MS-70 moderns when the pop-top might be only MS-67 or MS-66.

 

To suggest there's less difference between high grade moderns than high grade classics is simply absurd. It's primarily liners and classics that get resubmitted many times. To suggest any coin derives its value from the holder is an insult to everyone who can grade.

 

Some of the modern bashers should bust out an old coin that finally came back in the higher grade if they really want to see how much value is in the holder.

 

And what's wrong with collecting MS-70's anyway?

[World Colonial]

I was not completely clear but you did not read my post completely. I should have said that the 69 or 70 grade applied to bullion and commemoratives but I did make a reference to other grades. I simply should have specifically stated that the other grades apply to regular circulating coins..

 

With respect to pricing, the statements you make about raw versus graded are correct but they apply vastly more to US moderns than they do to any other segment that I know of. And the way we can know this is if anyone were to remove the most expensive US moderns, US classics and world coins from the holder, the US moderns would sell for the greatest discount to their slabbed counterparts. In fact, if TPG grading were to disappear tomorrow and collectors no longer had a preference for them, the prices of all coins would almost certainly fall but more expensive US moderns would fall the most proportionately.

 

The reason this would happen is the same reason that TPG provides benefits in greater marketability. Most collectors do not know how to grade well, especially outside of their series, which puts you in the minority of those who do. Second, without TPG grading, there would no registry sets and little reason to pay the premiums that currently exist for many coins, especially modern US coinage. And third, though it is not an issue for US moderns, many collectors do not know how to identify a problem coin either.

 

On your question of collecting MS-70's, there is nothing wrong with it which is why I attempted to limit my prior comments to PRICING and not the merits of the coins themselves. And yes, I do think that the prices of ANY MS 70 is absurd for the reasons I previously stated.

 

The bottom line difference in our prior exchanges here is that I do not consider these coins equal to many others. That is my opinion because I have a hierarchy which I believe I share with MOST other collectors though mine will differ from theirs and yours (if you have one).

 

Though there is no absolute standard to measure desirability, I do not hold the opinion that all coins are equal and I do not believe that anyone else does either. People choose to collect what they do for a variety of reasons but there are at least three reasons that I list below which limit their choices.

 

The first is economics. People do not have funds to buy what they wish they could. Or in some instances such as mine, I could buy a handful of more expensive coins but have chosen to buy a larger number of cheaper ones. The latter is a combination of economics and subjective preference.

 

The second is relative value. People may have the money to buy other coins but have declined to do so because they consider them overpriced. That is definitely partly true in my case. I have primarily declined to buy US coins at all for this reason.

 

The third is lack of knowledge. Partly, this is lack of generic numismatic knowledge such as grading, identification of problem coins and counterfeit detection. But at least for more experienced collectors, I believe it is possibly also due to not knowing what is out there. There is a vast array of collecting possibilities out there and it is simply not posisble to be aware of everything. And for the obscure or less researched issues like mine, there is not a lot or even any reference material. Whatever I know I mostly know through trial and error.

 

I do agree with the concept of to each their own and to my knowledge, I have never said that anyone should not collect them regardless of my opinion of these coins. This thread is about conditional rarities and the example used was US circulating modern. I do not consider conditional rarities of any issue a good relative value and this opinion applies to these coins also.

[just-john]

With them making 4.427 billion 1999 bs state quarters thats more than all the standing liberty quarters combined from 1916 to 1930 by about 4.2 billion""""

They seem to be making it tought to call any rare regradless of grade over 4 billion in one year so what the % mean nothing

[cladking]

 

I do agree with the concept of to each their own and to my knowledge, I have never said that anyone should not collect them regardless of my opinion of these coins. This thread is about conditional rarities and the example used was US circulating modern. I do not consider conditional rarities of any issue a good relative value and this opinion applies to these coins also.

 

 

I don't want to quibble semantics but moderns are really best defined as the era between 1965 and 1999 when people didn't collect or save current coin. More recent dates are better defined as ultra-moderns though the distinction seems to not be great and getting smaller all the time.

 

Be that as it may the SF are not circulating coinage and are treated this way less each year. They are very similar to the old mint set coins but are distinguishable from those made for circulation so are collector issues.

 

So the subjects of the thread are neither circulating nor modern.

 

This may hardly be important, but by dismissing conditional rarities you are dismissing some of the most widely sought of all coins and those which have had the strongest markets for decades. Common Morgan dollars can be worth many thousands of dollars just because they're a little better than the next lower grade. This even applies to issues that are not only excessively common but tend to come extremely nice like the 1878-S.

 

You may consider condition rarity to not be "a good relative value" but the market certainly has for more than 40 years now and has voted with its dollars. Obviously you might well be right but at the risk of pointing out the obvious or putting words in your mouth it matters very little to many collectors just where "value" lies. They collect for many different reasons but profit isn't always one of them. Though when coins go from a dollar or two to many thousands it might be tough to ignore the the increase.

 

There are lots of opportunities now for collectors in all areas. The market is quite strong considering macroeconomic factors and it's not outside the realm of possibility that it might get much stronger. For collectors of average means there are even lots of highly desirable series that have backed off a little in more affordable grades. I agree people should collect what they like but I think this even applies to coins you believe have little relative value. Some of these are among my favorites and some are likely to continue to increase.

 

Anyone buying coins to make a profit is playing a risky game and will most probably fail. You can invest in the hottest series going and lose money and you can collect coins that do poorly and make a profit. The deck is stacked against the greedy and the unknowledgeable. It is not stacked against moderns.

[World Colonial]

Sometimes it might seem like I am giving you a hard time but I promise I am not doing it intentionally if it comes acroos that way.

 

For those who have read my posts, the majority of them by far are related to the economic considerations of collecting or sometimes economic issues generally. I seldom comment about the technical aspects of coins because I do not collect the same issues that most of the collectors on this board collect.

 

On this topic, I do not dismiss the financial potential of modern US coinage entirely even though I do not believe it is a practical choice to try to make any money if someone was trying to do so. (And yes, I know that is not everyone's goal but I will address that shortly.) What I do dismiss is the current prices of conditional rarities and the price variances between the conditional rarities and those slightly below them and this applies to whether we are talking about US moderns or any other coin because I consider both the absolute levels and the relative differences to be absurd in almost all instances.

 

Now it is true that I consider the current price structure of US moderns to display among the greatest relative overvaluation. (The Morgan dollars you used as an example are another one.) But the primary reason for this is because the price levels of the highest grade coins (whatever that may be and yes, I do agree it is generally an MS-66 or MS-67) seem to be much higher on these than most or all others.

 

(I also agree with you that a distiction should be made within US moderns and 1999 seems to be as good a dividing line as any. And if collectors make a distinction for satin finish and have displayed an established willingness to pay premiums for them, I agree that some distinction should be made for them also.)

 

You know better than me but I would absolutely be shocked if the conditional rarity premiums that exist today existed prior to TPG grading or possibly even before set registries, whether moderns or not. Taking a hypothetical example for a US modern where the top grade is an MS-67, this coin might cost $500 (it would depend upon whether it is a PCGS or NGC coin, which series and how many they are), an MS-66 might cost $50 and then an MS-65 might cost $10-$20. I do not believe that any of these coins would have sold anywhere remotely close to their current prices relative to other coins before TPG or registry sets..

 

When it comes to collecting for fun versus economic considerations, yes I understand that not everyone is in it for the money. I am not in it for the money either. But I am also not someone who believes that the two can be separated and this also applies to most collectors.

 

For the sake of illustration only, I am going use hypothetical examples of the economics of a low, middle and high budget collector of US moderns. The same principles also apply to any other series though the relative merits will vary slightly. These are for complete sets.

 

A low budget collector would probably acquire many of the coins from circulation (bank rolls) and pay relatively modest premiums for others. Depending upon the series, they might spend anywhere from a few hundred to one thousand dollars, maybe less. I have no financial opinion on this one way or the other because I consider it a substitute among alternate forms of recreation.

 

The moderate budget collector would presumably collect only mid-mint state coins or better and some or most of these might be NGC or PCGS. Depending upon the series, they might spend one thousand to several thousand dollars which in turn would also depend upon the grade, how many were graded versus raw, the grade and which issues they bought graded.

 

From a financial standpoint, this is already a borderline case in my opinion because already here, much of the market value would probably come from the holder and not the coins. Or at the least, I believe that is the case when it comes to resale for most though not all collectors. I think the primary exception in this scenario would be a specilist like yourself but most others do not fit that description.

 

And another reason I would not recommend it is because I also consider MOST of the collectors in this area to either be new (and therefore less knowledgeable) or of limited means. If the latter, I would not be able to tell them that I think this is a good idea given what I believe to be the resale obstacles to recovering their outlay.

 

I am far from "rich" but the value of my collection is more than most though it is peanuts compared to really valuable collections. But though I would not choose to spend my money this way and not get it back, from a financial standpoint it would not have any noticeable impact. I do not believe that is true for many (or possibly most) of the collectors in this example though obviously personal circumstances vary.

 

The high budget collector I view as one who buys conditional rarities and may also compete for the top slots in registry sets. I do not know how much such a collection would cost but I presume that it could run in the tens of thousands or maybe even six figures. It would also depend upon the variables I listed before and others. But given what I have already stated, there is no way I would consider this to be a recommended way to use this money. Regardless of whether these coins may have decent financial prospects or not overall (and I still believe it only applies to a small minority of them), the only realistic way I could see a conditional rarity buyer making money at today's prices is through the greater fool theory.

 

I hope this helps to clear it up. I could also write another essay to provide a response to some other ideas you raised, but that is another subject for another day.