Is the Clad Quarter Market Strong?

[numisport]

A high grade set of quarters is up for sale at Heritage Long Beach auction and includes clad issues. These could be tracked for market purposes if you wish. Looks like there is a nice '36 proof quarter there also but out of my league. (there is a couple NGC coins in Pf 67 that look like that and could be had for half the price that one sells for if available, I'm just sayin).

[Mohawk]

On ‎2‎/‎10‎/‎2018 at 11:31 PM, cladking said:

  Time marches on but a lot of older collectors are still in 1964.  

In surprisingly few years younger collectors will own virtually all the collections that exist today. 

That is so true Cladking.  And about those collections that younger collectors will inherit.....I actually doubt that the younger generation of collectors will actually want such collections.  If they don't like full sets of Morgan dollars now, what will they think when such a thing gets dropped on them, for want of a better term.  And what about a non-collector inheriting a full set of Morgans or any other US Classic?  I think that the long term trends for US Classics are looking like downward price corrections.  Many of these sets will be sold off, and all within a similar timeframe.......no demand with a lot of supply....bad news pricewise.  I guess like yourself Cladking, I'll have to wait and see if my projections are correct

[cladking]

On ‎2‎/‎10‎/‎2018 at 10:23 PM, World Colonial said:

 

The time for the series came and went with the SQ program.  If that couldn't lift its prospects which the price level proves hasn't happened since about 2006, what else is going to do it?

This is a very good argument and, quite frankly, I believe it's the only good argument against much higher prices for clad quarters.  But it is hardly conclusive for the future of these coins and moderns in general.  The simple fact is that in collectables the only real determinant of price is demand.  When the demand exceeds the supply the price will increase but it usually requires many people coming to desire the same coins for prices to move dramatically.  This "piling on" is to a large extent natural (the coin's time has come) and to a large extent unnatural. Most collectors are thinking in terms of investing and speculation and when they see the latest hot thing they don't want to be left out.  Demand ratchets up many fold as more people want to get in on it.  

So why didn't this happen in 2000?  It appeared to me that it was getting very close but there were some ducks still not in a row.  Even the tougher coins like a nice chBU '69 still existed in 1000's of mint sets.  There was no collector base and no infrastructure.  There weren't even any good quality albums for the coins and folders were hard to find.  Meanwhile the hobby was a chorus telling everybody that states quarters and everything made after 1964 was junk that would never be collected.   

You'd be surprised how little has really changed since 2000 in clad quarters except there's a huge difference now; there are millions of new young collectors and most are outside the main hobby because mainstream never really accepted them.   Rather than deal with people who tell them moderns are junk and "NCLT" aren't even really coins they are on social media and eBay. 

The big difference between now and 2000 is that now all the I's are crossed and the T's are dotted.   The difference is that now appears to be the time. 

[cladking]

10 hours ago, Mohawk said:

That is so true Cladking.  And about those collections that younger collectors will inherit.....I actually doubt that the younger generation of collectors will actually want such collections.  If they don't like full sets of Morgan dollars now, what will they think when such a thing gets dropped on them, for want of a better term.  And what about a non-collector inheriting a full set of Morgans or any other US Classic?  I think that the long term trends for US Classics are looking like downward price corrections.  Many of these sets will be sold off, and all within a similar timeframe.......no demand with a lot of supply....bad news pricewise.  I guess like yourself Cladking, I'll have to wait and see if my projections are correct

I don't disagree with a single word you said.

But classics are all great coins and I believe they will be collected as long as coins are collected.  Some are going to undergo massive dips as the new collectors will desire them in smaller quantities but even these will rebound in time.  Other classics may not dip at all and actually increase if new collectors embrace them.  

The hobby will look much different in twenty years.  It will be more diverse, less focused, and far more inclusive.   It will value coins relative to the interests of a new generation.  We older collectors have come to think of it as natural that so few collectors joined the ranks between 1964 and 1999.  It was in no way natural and now time is going to catch up with each of us.  It was a mistake to exclude newbies all those years and this will catch up with us as well. 

[World Colonial]

54 minutes ago, cladking said:

This is a very good argument and, quite frankly, I believe it's the only good argument against much higher prices for clad quarters.  But it is hardly conclusive for the future of these coins and moderns in general.  The simple fact is that in collectables the only real determinant of price is demand.  When the demand exceeds the supply the price will increase but it usually requires many people coming to desire the same coins for prices to move dramatically.  This "piling on" is to a large extent natural (the coin's time has come) and to a large extent unnatural. Most collectors are thinking in terms of investing and speculation and when they see the latest hot thing they don't want to be left out.  Demand ratchets up many fold as more people want to get in on it.  

So why didn't this happen in 2000?  It appeared to me that it was getting very close but there were some ducks still not in a row.  Even the tougher coins like a nice chBU '69 still existed in 1000's of mint sets.  There was no collector base and no infrastructure.  There weren't even any good quality albums for the coins and folders were hard to find.  Meanwhile the hobby was a chorus telling everybody that states quarters and everything made after 1964 was junk that would never be collected.   

You'd be surprised how little has really changed since 2000 in clad quarters except there's a huge difference now; there are millions of new young collectors and most are outside the main hobby because mainstream never really accepted them.   Rather than deal with people who tell them moderns are junk and "NCLT" aren't even really coins they are on social media and eBay. 

The big difference between now and 2000 is that now all the I's are crossed and the T's are dotted.   The difference is that now appears to be the time. 

The extract that you quoted, it isn't remotely the only good argument against your claims.  Every single one I raised both in this thread and previously applies, to one extent or another.  You just claim otherwise by putting forth the non-credible premise that the future is totally unpredictable, despite all the evidence and arguments I provided which is much better than anything you have ever included in reply.

Aside from your almost complete disregard for all available evidence, the other reason we don't get anywhere in these discussions is because the specifics get lost, for both of us in our posts and replies.

As one example only, if your definition of "much higher" prices is what you described before, or $8 to $20 in 30 to 40 years from now (in 2048 or 2058 money) for an MS-60 to MS-63, I'll concede that to you right now.  That's likely to be about the same as one of these coins selling for a $1 or $2 today when it was worth face value at issuance in the 1960's or 1970's.  It is financially irrelevant and today, these coins don't compete with anything other than common circulated US classics and common world coinage which no one really wants either. 

The same principle applies to your implied price forecasts for higher grades in this series, except maybe "grade rarities" as I already conceded to you in the past.  It also applies to all other US circulating modern series generically with minor differences that I can or have explained previously.

On the other hand, if these two numbers are supposed to be in 2018 money or you claim (much) higher prices, I'm going to stick with what I told you in my prior posts and in the past.  These coins which are common to incredibly common, have among the lowest preference among all US coinage and disproportionately aren't even high quality by your own admission aren't about to appreciate substantially even to this immaterial level and won't be collected by anywhere near 500,000 to 1MM collectors.  Not in the future with what I told you about the internet, as there no basis to believe this coinage will be viewed as more competitive for either the collector's time or money.

Given what you have written in this thread and previously which doesn't remotely correspond to reality except in your mind, the idea that all the "Is" and "Ts" have been crossed is just another fiction of your invention.

[World Colonial]

12 hours ago, Mohawk said:

That is so true Cladking.  And about those collections that younger collectors will inherit.....I actually doubt that the younger generation of collectors will actually want such collections.  If they don't like full sets of Morgan dollars now, what will they think when such a thing gets dropped on them, for want of a better term.  And what about a non-collector inheriting a full set of Morgans or any other US Classic?  I think that the long term trends for US Classics are looking like downward price corrections.  Many of these sets will be sold off, and all within a similar timeframe.......no demand with a lot of supply....bad news pricewise.  I guess like yourself Cladking, I'll have to wait and see if my projections are correct

I agree with your general premise here but with some qualifications.

The Morgan dollar which I know you only used as an example has demand from an outsized proportion of financial buyers.  I don't see that this will change at all though I do agree that the premiums should decrease substantially for most though not necessarily every single date/MM in every grade.  So as an example, if an MS-63 or MS-64 sells for about $50 today, I'd say a more sustainable price is probably $25 to $30 because the most common dates currently have hundreds of thousands graded and maybe more out of the population reports than in it.

Generically though, I believe you are spot on.  Strictly from demographics and the internet, the demand for common US classics is likely to drop noticeably, even without any of the other factors I described.  And by demographics, I am referring to the ethnic composition of the population, not the collector's age which has zero demonstrated correlation to collector preferences.

It's possible that the demand will increased for US moderns outside of NCLT somewhat.  I haven't claimed otherwise though I can easily see it remaining stagnant indefinitely since it's obvious the collector preference for this series is practically non-existent and the internet certainly doesn't provide any reason to believe it will increase at all

[cladking]

3 hours ago, World Colonial said:

  Not in the future with what I told you about the internet, as there no basis to believe this coinage will be viewed as more competitive for either the collector's time or money.

 

I do not understand how you don't see I've responded to all of your points 1000 times. 

I've told you this story before but let me try again.  I belonged to a neat little club in the '80's called Globe collectors and traders.  I signed up for the newsletter and the opportunity to trade coins with people in other countries.  One  of my favorite countries at the time for coins was the Soviet Union.  I corresponded with several members of the Moscow Coin Club.  I was willing to trade scarce world silver coins of any country for circulating Soviet junk.  I couldn't get it. Some were willing to send coins straight from the bank but I was interested in BU's and mint sets.  I wanted collectible Soviet moderns but the Moscow Coin Club couldn't provide a single specimen at any price.   Now ALL of the pre-1975 15 kopeks go for prices up to $100 in VF!!!!  Many of the Russian moderns go for prices way over $100 for BU's.  

Of course a lot has changed since 1985 but the biggest changes are that the government is no longer suppressing the Moscow Coin Club for political reasons and people inside and outside Russia are trying to find these coins.  Most were never saved just like US moderns and then almost all the coins were melted when the Soviet Union collapsed.  

Now if you want these coins they're a little easier to find but they cost thousands of times as much. 

All your predictions mean nothing if you're wrong and you will be wrong if people ever collect modern US coins. 

I believe they will and the process is underway. 

 

[cladking]

Globe Collectors and Traders Club (GCTC) faded out around 1992 or so.   I corresponded not only with collectors across the Soviet Union but others as well.  The one thing I learned was it was virtually impossible to secure moderns from any country except western Europe and even these were often difficult (like Swiss, Italy, Hungary, et al).   They could supply all the old coins you wanted though sometimes the prices were out of line but you couldn't get moderns.  

Now a lot of these coins are simply gone.  They have been eliminated through wear, mutilation, and melting.   Indians used up all their circulating nickel to make razor blades and then started in on the cu/ ni before the government demonetized them and issued new smaller coins.   Across the globe it's the same thing; silver and gold were removed from circulation after WW II and people quit collecting the new debased coins.   They were just junk made in huge numbers and of inferior quality.  Rather than seeking nice specimens collectors just ignored them.  

People weren't collecting them in 1985 but now you can see which ones are collected because they have high price tags.   Few are collected but prices have soared on the ones which are. 

[World Colonial]

7 hours ago, cladking said:

I do not understand how you don't see I've responded to all of your points 1000 times. 

I've told you this story before but let me try again. 

All your predictions mean nothing if you're wrong and you will be wrong if people ever collect modern US coins. 

I am aware that you have responded "1000 times", with your own anecdotal stories just like the one you included in this post.  So what? Now you are back to a story about world coinage which has absolutely nothing to do with this thread or our prior post exchanges here.  My comment was directed toward Clad quarters and US moderns, not world "moderns" though I can speak to that as well.

Why would you believe that your experience or that of this club of yours is remotely representative of the scarcity of these Soviet coins or any of these other world "moderns?   I have already provided a specific explanation describing why personal experience is NOT representative of the actual availability or scarcity.

What makes your claims even more absurd is that this story precedes the internet age.  Have you even tried to look on eBay consistently over any period of time for these "moderns"?  Have you done it for a large number?  Let me guess, the answer is no.

Let me tell you some facts about the scarcity of world coinage.  There is every reason to believe that the  world "classics" that most collectors actually want to buy are predominantly scarcer than these coins you consider so scarce.  This should be apparent due to the more recent vintage, larger mintages from economics and population, more widespread travel and much cheaper and improved communication.  

I don't know exactly what coins are in your collection or what you have tried to buy but my generic response to your post is that you don't know what scarce means.  When I tell you the coins I collect are at least somewhat scarce or rare, it's evident that my claim is true.  Lower mintages, very limited travel, no collector base.  The low number of coins which survived did so effectively by random chance.

The price level creates some uncertainty but the most prominent collections disproportionately have average circulated grades, damaged coins or "dreck".  For Pillars, Rudman's collection had more high quality specimens than any other I know but a minority or very few proportionately. 

The Patterson collection reportedly had 6000, but the catalog lists very few decent examples for Bolivia, Guatemala and Peru and of these only one Peru date not graded by NGC or PCGS.  Maybe the Norweb (now ANS) collection has others but if so, it doesn't change my claims.  The Gilboy reference manual disproportionately contained "dreck" as the plate coins.

Like I also told you once before, the NGC and PCGS population for the 1751 Mexico half real in MS-60+ is 27.  It is 11 for the 1733 Mexico 8 reales.  Last I checked, nine for the 1683 or 1684 Spain 4 reales.  If these coins exist in this supply under the limitations I described, these Soviet coins must exist in multiples by the hundreds or far more, and so does the majority of the other coins that you cannot find but consider scarce.

Lastly as I told you, the prices you cite don't remotely imply that these coins should have "come out of the woodwork" because your posting history demonstrates that you have no idea what these coins are actually worth.  You are once again referring to the value in Krause which you know is wrong yet you use it as evidence anyway.  Under your claims, you selectively use the data to suit your purposes where you ignore the inflated prices (such as that 1954 India proof set) and complain about those which you claim are too low.

On one occasion, I checked eBay for these 1970's Soviet 15 or 20 kopek dates.  I didn't find every date in "BU" or maybe even "UNC" but many were listed.  It's evident from my one search that the Krause prices you cite aren't remotely accurate because those I "watched" sat there unsold for months until finally dropping off my list.  The only exception was one that sold for something like $3.25 when the catalog price was a big multiple to it.  

As for my predictions being wrong, I am virtually 100% certain I will be wrong to some degree.  I am also 100% certain that this fantasy you have presented as the future will also be 100% wrong.  Lack of accuracy on my part doesn't remotely equate to any on yours.

Now, do have anything relevant to discuss on this subject of this thread?  Or should we end the conversation?

[World Colonial]

8 hours ago, cladking said:

  Now ALL of the pre-1975 15 kopeks go for prices up to $100 in VF!!!!  Many of the Russian moderns go for prices way over $100 for BU's.  

\

https://www.ebay.com/itm/Original-Soviet-USSR-Coin-15-Kopeks-1972-Rare-Coin-Bregnev-Era/331705916911?hash=item4d3b369def:g:wyAAAOSweuxWQ9cN

 

[cladking]

12 hours ago, World Colonial said:

https://www.ebay.com/itm/Original-Soviet-USSR-Coin-15-Kopeks-1972-Rare-Coin-Bregnev-Era/331705916911?hash=item4d3b369def:g:wyAAAOSweuxWQ9cN

 

So what is your point here?

Are you really trying to tell me that a nice attractive AU coin with a face value of about 20c during the 1970's selling for $250 is "financially irrelevant".  I could literally pull these out of junk boxes at eight for a dollar back in the '80's but I was only looking for uncs and not finding many. 

I don't understand why you find staggering increases as being "irrelevant".  I don't understand why you believe these new higher prices won't become even higher if demand continues to increase. 

I'm well aware there are some of these in the woodwork and they're coming out even now.  I know even higher prices may dislodge even more.  But I also know that the coins weren't saved and the demand is still tiny.   There simply aren't enough in the woodwork plus collections like mine to have that much affect on total supply.  People not only didn't save these in the '70's but also in the '80's, '90's, and in most of this century.  It is collectors who save coins for the future and the collectors in the past dropped the ball.  

The future is here not only for Russian 20c pieces but also for clad quarters. 

[coinman1794]

Clads of the early 1980s were very poorly made. Further, they are quickly deteriorating due to improper storage and die grease coatings. Streaks, spots, and corrosion are the norm. Every year, fewer of these supposedly hiding coins will qualify for high grades.

[numisport]

On ‎2‎/‎15‎/‎2018 at 10:14 PM, World Colonial said:

https://www.ebay.com/itm/Original-Soviet-USSR-Coin-15-Kopeks-1972-Rare-Coin-Bregnev-Era/331705916911?hash=item4d3b369def:g:wyAAAOSweuxWQ9cN

These are among the most unattractive and uninspiring coins I have ever seen in 45 years of collecting. I would say even worse than Susan B Anthony dollars !

[cladking]

20 hours ago, coinman1794 said:

Clads of the early 1980s were very poorly made. Further, they are quickly deteriorating due to improper storage and die grease coatings. Streaks, spots, and corrosion are the norm. Every year, fewer of these supposedly hiding coins will qualify for high grades.

Indeed!

Even coins that were saved are sometimes ruined by poor storage or grease from dies.   Many of these were ugly when they came off the press.  

There weren't many to start with and now they are being destroyed at an alarming rate.

[cladking]

14 minutes ago, numisport said:

These are among the most unattractive and uninspiring coins I have ever seen in 45 years of collecting. I would say even worse than Susan B Anthony dollars !

Here's a tiny little aluminum coin I find even uglier but the right date is worth... ...er... ...lists at $1300.00

[cladking]

These coins were rare in the 1970's and they are rarer today.  The only reason they don't have high values is that people perceive them as common so they don't collect them.  I think we're going to see more and more high values on a lot more moderns going forward and right now it's time for clads.  

[World Colonial]

On ‎2‎/‎16‎/‎2018 at 11:07 AM, cladking said:

So what is your point here?

Are you really trying to tell me that a nice attractive AU coin with a face value of about 20c during the 1970's selling for $250 is "financially irrelevant".  I could literally pull these out of junk boxes at eight for a dollar back in the '80's but I was only looking for uncs and not finding many. 

I don't understand why you find staggering increases as being "irrelevant".  I don't understand why you believe these new higher prices won't become even higher if demand continues to increase. 

I'm well aware there are some of these in the woodwork and they're coming out even now.  I know even higher prices may dislodge even more.  But I also know that the coins weren't saved and the demand is still tiny.   There simply aren't enough in the woodwork plus collections like mine to have that much affect on total supply.  People not only didn't save these in the '70's but also in the '80's, '90's, and in most of this century.  It is collectors who save coins for the future and the collectors in the past dropped the ball.  

The future is here not only for Russian 20c pieces but also for clad quarters. 

Notice how you didn't respond to my prior post which provided an extensive rebuttal to your claims?  I didn't think so.  As usual, your claims are a total exaggeration.  

This was an example to illustrate that the coins aren't hard to find, since you claimed otherwise.  Since I knew you would dispute my claims which are obviously evident to anyone who bothers to look into the subject with any minimal effort, I performed a more extensive search after my last post.

If you know some of these coins are coming "out of the woodwork", then why did you claim these coins are "scarce" when it obviously isn't, except maybe by the contrived standards US collectors use which you share?

For this post, I performed an eBay search on each of these dates.  With only one search, I was able to find every single one between 1966-1974 in high quality.  Most are in mint sets but its apparent all aren’t remotely hard to buy.  For the 1973 which Krause lists at $220 in MS-63, one seller has five sets on offer for $230 and another seven for $247, with some since sold.  

There are also many high quality single coins but I cannot definitively determine if it is a circulation strike or proof/PL.  Excluding single coins that might not be circulation strikes, I was able to locate about 30 in total with most apparently in choice MS or better. This excludes the presumably more common  (1967-1969 and 1974) dates.  This is one search, yet you claim your experience and of this club covering many years is representative.  I also observed many other denominations from the same dates which, going by the ask and Krause prices, I can anticipate in advance you also consider “scarce” or “rare”.  If you don’t believe me, you can find these listings yourself, right now. 

There is nothing significant about your inability or anyone else’s to find most coins, especially (world) moderns.  The price level reduces the visibility where it appears at public auction infrequently (if ever), most dealers don’t have an established client base for it and the probability any particular collector will be aware of most coins when offered for sale is (very) low.  So why exactly do think your experience especially prior to the internet age signifies anything about the scarcity?

As for the price increases, once again I said nothing about in my comment here but you intentionally chose to bring it up anyway just to start an argument.  Obviously, since the coins were initially at face value in the 1970's, the price increases have been large proportionately.  The prices are concurrently far lower (as in a fraction of Krause) than you claim and you don't even know what the value is anyway.  And if you claim otherwise, you should go buy every eBay listing of the better examples to realize your windfall, right now.

[World Colonial]

On ‎2‎/‎16‎/‎2018 at 11:07 AM, cladking said:

 There simply aren't enough in the woodwork plus collections like mine to have that much affect on total supply.  People not only didn't save these in the '70's but also in the '80's, '90's, and in most of this century.  It is collectors who save coins for the future and the collectors in the past dropped the ball.  

Common sense and the evidence I provided to you from my one eBay search indicates that these particular 15 Kopek exist at minimum by the thousands in high quality, even if most are from mint sets.  Even if only a low proportion survive now, it's still likely either higher or not that noticeably different from the more common Russian Imperial coinage, at least in better grades.  None of these coins are remotely scarce either.

The idea that its only collectors who account for the survival of most coinage is nonsense, especially for recent coinage such as these.  Many of the scarcer coins you call "moderns" are presumably mint sets as you state but there is absolutely no reason in most instances even more are sitting forgotten in change jars all over the planet.  If the 1937 Bolivia 50c which you consider scarce almost certain exists with at least several hundred in UNC, then the vast majority of others will have more.

It's apparent you aren't familiar with the availability of many coins.  The first Jewish Revolt, medieval French deniers and English pennies, 8^th century Visigoth Spanish gold, 1540’s Mexico Carlos & Johanna 4 reales, the hoard of 1754 Mexico pillar dollars….all of these coins are available in noticeable supply in “high” quality but according to you, noticeable proportions of these “moderns” supposedly are not.  I have also seen higher quality Byzantine silver and bronze in larger number than I thought existed. 

My examples managed to survive for centuries or almost 2000 years but somehow under your claims, the 1966-1974 Soviet 15 kopek practically disappeared within 15 years or less and many Western European “moderns” are also “scarce”.

[World Colonial]

On ‎2‎/‎17‎/‎2018 at 9:38 AM, numisport said:

These are among the most unattractive and uninspiring coins I have ever seen in 45 years of collecting. I would say even worse than Susan B Anthony dollars !

The design is hardly inspiring but at least it is distinctive, even if in a negative connotation.  I still think it's better than the SBA which I rank as one of the worst designs ever, from anywhere.

Also, I suspect that Russian collectors find it somewhat more attractive than we do, since it's their home country coinage, just like US collectors do for the abysmal currently circulating coinage.

[cladking]

9 minutes ago, World Colonial said:

Common sense and the evidence I provided to you from my one eBay search indicates that these particular 15 Kopek exist at minimum by the thousands in high quality, even if most are from mint sets.  Even if only a low proportion survive now, it's still likely either higher or not that noticeably different from the more common Russian Imperial coinage, at least in better grades.  None of these coins are remotely scarce either.

The idea that its only collectors who account for the survival of most coinage is nonsense, especially for recent coinage such as these.  Many of the scarcer coins you call "moderns" are presumably mint sets as you state but there is absolutely no reason in most instances even more are sitting forgotten in change jars all over the planet.  If the 1937 Bolivia 50c which you consider scarce almost certain exists with at least several hundred in UNC, then the vast majority of others will have more.

It's apparent you aren't familiar with the availability of many coins.  The first Jewish Revolt, medieval French deniers and English pennies, 8^th century Visigoth Spanish gold, 1540’s Mexico Carlos & Johanna 4 reales, the hoard of 1754 Mexico pillar dollars….all of these coins are available in noticeable supply in “high” quality but according to you, noticeable proportions of these “moderns” supposedly are not.  I have also seen higher quality Byzantine silver and bronze in larger number than I thought existed. 

My examples managed to survive for centuries or almost 2000 years but somehow under your claims, the 1966-1974 Soviet 15 kopek practically disappeared within 15 years or less and many Western European “moderns” are also “scarce”.

Yes.  I never disputed that thousands of '66 to '74 15k Soviet coins still exist in Unc.  But the simple fact is that collectors are being told these are more common than grains of sands on the beach and the reality is they are difficult to find in any condition.  If you consider "thousands" to be common then, yes, they are common.  And with the now high prices the survivors will get proper protection and they'll still be common in fifty years.  But I don't find thousands to be at all common with hundreds of millions of people alive who used or saw these coins in circulation.  I don't find them common now and didn't find them common in the '80's when I was the only one looking.  The only difference is that now they can be found with search engines and many more are for sale.   I don't find them "common" and refuse to argue semantics. 

Of course by your standards they truly are "common".  But the reality remains that logically there will be more people who want coins from the '70's and 80's than any specific coin from the 1540's and this will likely be true for at least a few decades.  Of course I'm presuming the species doesn't become extinct and that all the wealth in the world doesn't fall into the hands of a few.  I'm presuming that billions of people will still have some leisure time.  

The FED and mint began rotating coin stocks in 1972 so that the first coins in storage were the first to be reissued.   This has had the effect of grinding all the coins down evenly.   The only thing to stop it is if a collector intentionally removes it from the system.  Most of the coins removed from the system inadvertently like falling into the woodwork are just junk like almost all the coins the mint used to make.  These don't survive forever either but merely removes them from further wear for some period of time.  Of course tourists came to this country even in the '70's and many took home coins but remember that most tourists would try to spend the larger denominations before they left and many of those that were taken home have since been repatriated.  Tourists didn't look for nice BU rolls of 1974 quarters to take home. 

I've never suggested there was a certainty that collectors would demand nice attractive clad in the future.  I've merely said that if collectors ever desire nice attractive clad they are going to find that it is not at all common.  At least not "common" in the sense that a mass market can exist for them.  If demand gets so high then we'll see XF's and AU's start developing significant premiums.  We might even see F's and VF's getting some premiums because coins like nice attractive 1971 quarters are not common even in Fine condition.  Of course they are common by your definition but the definition must be adapted to the perspective and from the perspective of high demand '71 quarters are tough. 

[cladking]

53 minutes ago, World Colonial said:

 

There are also many high quality single coins but I cannot definitively determine if it is a circulation strike or proof/PL.  Excluding single coins that might not be circulation strikes, I was able to locate about 30 in total with most apparently in choice MS or better. This excludes the presumably more common  (1967-1969 and 1974) dates.  This is one search, yet you claim your experience and of this club covering many years is representative.  I also observed many other denominations from the same dates which, going by the ask and Krause prices, I can anticipate in advance you also consider “scarce” or “rare”.  If you don’t believe me, you can find these listings yourself, right now. 

 

 

Mint set coins and regular issue Soviet coins are even more easily distinguished than US coins.  The differences in US tend to be far more subtle.  Soviet mint set coins are more like proofs and the regular issues were even lower quality than US regular issue.  One thing you may not realize is that large percentages of the Soviet mint set coins have carbon spots.  It's not unusual to see entire sets affected.   Of course, without knowing mintages it's not especially meaningful that more than a third are ruined.  

I have picked up and picked out circulation strikes over the years but began only after I came to suspect these were even tougher than the mint sets.  They are especially tough in BU.  I've not seen enough of these to make any sort of global statements about them and their availability.  The few I have tend to be the most common dates. 

With Soviet coins it's very difficult to know what's out there and what isn't using the process that I've used.   But this same process was pretty much the only one available in the past.  I'm quite confident that a specialist in Soviet coins could have learned a great deal more but there probably were no specialists and no more than a handful of buyers.  The mint sets often just ended up in junk boxes because they simply wouldn't sell. 

In most ways I'd say clad has been treated much worse than Soviet coins. 

[World Colonial]

22 minutes ago, cladking said:

Yes.  I never disputed that thousands of '66 to '74 15k Soviet coins still exist in Unc.  But the simple fact is that collectors are being told these are more common than grains of sands on the beach and the reality is they are difficult to find in any condition.  If you consider "thousands" to be common then, yes, they are common.  And with the now high prices the survivors will get proper protection and they'll still be common in fifty years.  But I don't find thousands to be at all common with hundreds of millions of people alive who used or saw these coins in circulation.  I don't find them common now and didn't find them common in the '80's when I was the only one looking.  The only difference is that now they can be found with search engines and many more are for sale.   I don't find them "common" and refuse to argue semantics. 

Of course by your standards they truly are "common".  But the reality remains that logically there will be more people who want coins from the '70's and 80's than any specific coin from the 1540's and this will likely be true for at least a few decades.  Of course I'm presuming the species doesn't become extinct and that all the wealth in the world doesn't fall into the hands of a few.  I'm presuming that billions of people will still have some leisure time.  

The FED and mint began rotating coin stocks in 1972 so that the first coins in storage were the first to be reissued.   This has had the effect of grinding all the coins down evenly.   The only thing to stop it is if a collector intentionally removes it from the system.  Most of the coins removed from the system inadvertently like falling into the woodwork are just junk like almost all the coins the mint used to make.  These don't survive forever either but merely removes them from further wear for some period of time.  Of course tourists came to this country even in the '70's and many took home coins but remember that most tourists would try to spend the larger denominations before they left and many of those that were taken home have since been repatriated.  Tourists didn't look for nice BU rolls of 1974 quarters to take home. 

I've never suggested there was a certainty that collectors would demand nice attractive clad in the future.  I've merely said that if collectors ever desire nice attractive clad they are going to find that it is not at all common.  At least not "common" in the sense that a mass market can exist for them.  If demand gets so high then we'll see XF's and AU's start developing significant premiums.  We might even see F's and VF's getting some premiums because coins like nice attractive 1971 quarters are not common even in Fine condition.  Of course they are common by your definition but the definition must be adapted to the perspective and from the perspective of high demand '71 quarters are tough. 

Scarcity is independent of demand and you know it.  Scarcity is a relative term but nothing which can be bought essentially on demand can remotely be considered "scarce".  There is also no reason to believe that coins which are as common as these 15 kopek will ever be hard to buy, regardless of the future demand.  This is self-evident in the availability of much scarcer coins which aren't hard to buy either.  You just misrepresent this concept in an attempt to confuse the issue.

I also never stated these coins as common "as a grain of sand on the beach".  I have a lot better perspective than you do on which coins are and aren't common and I reserve statements like this one for coins which are very common using any sensible interpretation of the available evidence, such as these clad quarter below the highest grades which you misrepresented earlier in this thread.

The reason you received my prior replies is because you exaggerated your data, again.  This is aside from the fact that these coins have nothing to do with the topic of this thread and I didn't even say anything about it.  The only reason I can come up with to explain why you chose to interject this side discussion is to confuse the issue on the original topic which is clad quarters.

There is also one point I want to clarify on the prices of coins such as these Soviet 15 kopek.  Whether the Krause prices are (directly) accurate or not (which it isn't), these coins and practically all others aren't going to "explode" in any meaningful sense from current prices.  The reason it isn't going to happen is because it will either:

One: Price out the prospective collector base; or

Two:  Make it uncompetitive with the alternatives.

In this example, if 15 kopek appreciate in a noticeable multiple, the market price will be a lot higher than earlier Imperial Russian coins.

[World Colonial]

3 minutes ago, cladking said:

Mint set coins and regular issue Soviet coins are even more easily distinguished than US coins.  The differences in US tend to be far more subtle.  Soviet mint set coins are more like proofs and the regular issues were even lower quality than US regular issue.  One thing you may not realize is that large percentages of the Soviet mint set coins have carbon spots.  It's not unusual to see entire sets affected.   Of course, without knowing mintages it's not especially meaningful that more than a third are ruined.  

I have picked up and picked out circulation strikes over the years but began only after I came to suspect these were even tougher than the mint sets.  They are especially tough in BU.  I've not seen enough of these to make any sort of global statements about them and their availability.  The few I have tend to be the most common dates. 

With Soviet coins it's very difficult to know what's out there and what isn't using the process that I've used.   But this same process was pretty much the only one available in the past.  I'm quite confident that a specialist in Soviet coins could have learned a great deal more but there probably were no specialists and no more than a handful of buyers.  The mint sets often just ended up in junk boxes because they simply wouldn't sell. 

In most ways I'd say clad has been treated much worse than Soviet coins. 

Check this page out if your haven't.

www.gxseries.com/numis/sovietset/sovietset.htm#1970

The reason I made this comment is because the NGC World Coin Price Guide (Krause) doesn't list proofs.  The NGC Census has no proofs (or even a category for it) but PL.  The PCGS Population Report only lists proofs, but no PL.  The web link above states that PL were included in mint sets starting in 1974.

So the reason I made this statement was to avoiding misrepresenting my claims.  

Based upon this web page, I interpret that the mint sets are all equivalent to circulation strikes and if so, then the single coins I saw on eBay "raw" are not PL or Proof, though they look PL to me and are probably from mint sets.

[cladking]

2 hours ago, World Colonial said:

Scarcity is independent of demand and you know it.  Scarcity is a relative term but nothing which can be bought essentially on demand can remotely be considered "scarce".  There is also no reason to believe that coins which are as common as these 15 kopek will ever be hard to buy, regardless of the future demand.  This is self-evident in the availability of much scarcer coins which aren't hard to buy either.  You just misrepresent this concept in an attempt to confuse the issue.

 

Your definition of scarce might be fine in the computer age but I'm a child of the '50's with an 1890's mentality.   Where I come from when demand greatly exceeds supply it simply doesn't matter if the supply is more numerous than grains of sand on the beach.  

As brief a time as Soviet 15k coins have been collected it seems certain that varieties and types are yet to be discovered.  As collectors become more advanced they will make discoveries and add to their collections.  In every case they will have to compete with other collectors for the same coins.  We can't really tell at this point what if any scarcities might or might not exist but we still know that demand greatly exceeds supply. 

In all the years of searching I found only a single 1970 mint set and a couple of coins were missing from it.  I doubt I paid a dollar for this partial set with some original packaging.  I'd love to have rolls and rolls of BU coins and lots of mint sets but I couldn't find them despite diligent searching.  I found five or ten of most of the common date mint sets and that is most of what I have.  I also picked up and XF or better older coins which were mostly available for a dollar or two with little regard to low mintages.  

I could find the old Russian coins by the buckets full and sometimes nice BU silver (late date) at less than melt.   But which coins have increased by many multiples?  Silver has increased 10 fold and cu/ ni by hundreds fold.   Soviet coins are scarce because they weren't saved.  They are "scarce" in the sense that they are far less common than older coins and have far more demand than supply. 

Again I don't want to argue semantics.  If you want me to say they are common then I can.  They are less common than the demand exactly as 1804 US dollars are less common than the demand.  It doesn't matter how common or rare something is.  What matters is the relative demand to that supply.  This is why clad is going higher right now; there is more demand than the supply.  It's also interesting to note that few people realize how small the supply is or how great the potential demand.   We're just going to have to wait a while and see if my assessment of this market is correct or not.  I watch the market but then anyone can be wrong and I have been wrong before.  People who want to watch might keep an eye on the price for BU '69(P).  Other dates will be affected more by quality considerations but this date is simply tough in attractive BU.  As goes the '69 so go clad quarters.  

[cladking]

3 hours ago, World Colonial said:

Check this page out if your haven't.

www.gxseries.com/numis/sovietset/sovietset.htm#1970

The reason I made this comment is because the NGC World Coin Price Guide (Krause) doesn't list proofs.  The NGC Census has no proofs (or even a category for it) but PL.  The PCGS Population Report only lists proofs, but no PL.  The web link above states that PL were included in mint sets starting in 1974.

So the reason I made this statement was to avoiding misrepresenting my claims.  

Based upon this web page, I interpret that the mint sets are all equivalent to circulation strikes and if so, then the single coins I saw on eBay "raw" are not PL or Proof, though they look PL to me and are probably from mint sets.

Thank you.

I certainly bookmarked this one. 

[Six Mile Rick]

6 hours ago, cladking said:

Your definition of scarce might be fine in the computer age but I'm a child of the '50's with an 1890's mentality.   Where I come from when demand greatly exceeds supply it simply doesn't matter if the supply is more numerous than grains of sand on the beach.  

As brief a time as Soviet 15k coins have been collected it seems certain that varieties and types are yet to be discovered.  As collectors become more advanced they will make discoveries and add to their collections.  In every case they will have to compete with other collectors for the same coins.  We can't really tell at this point what if any scarcities might or might not exist but we still know that demand greatly exceeds supply. 

In all the years of searching I found only a single 1970 mint set and a couple of coins were missing from it.  I doubt I paid a dollar for this partial set with some original packaging.  I'd love to have rolls and rolls of BU coins and lots of mint sets but I couldn't find them despite diligent searching.  I found five or ten of most of the common date mint sets and that is most of what I have.  I also picked up and XF or better older coins which were mostly available for a dollar or two with little regard to low mintages.  

I could find the old Russian coins by the buckets full and sometimes nice BU silver (late date) at less than melt.   But which coins have increased by many multiples?  Silver has increased 10 fold and cu/ ni by hundreds fold.   Soviet coins are scarce because they weren't saved.  They are "scarce" in the sense that they are far less common than older coins and have far more demand than supply. 

Again I don't want to argue semantics.  If you want me to say they are common then I can.  They are less common than the demand exactly as 1804 US dollars are less common than the demand.  It doesn't matter how common or rare something is.  What matters is the relative demand to that supply.  This is why clad is going higher right now; there is more demand than the supply.  It's also interesting to note that few people realize how small the supply is or how great the potential demand.   We're just going to have to wait a while and see if my assessment of this market is correct or not.  I watch the market but then anyone can be wrong and I have been wrong before.  People who want to watch might keep an eye on the price for BU '69(P).  Other dates will be affected more by quality considerations but this date is simply tough in attractive BU.  As goes the '69 so go clad quarters.  

So True!!  The clad era is at a stage of needing more submitters to send in GREAT strikes. I can't even hold onto a top pop modern more than a day after it is graded. By the time NGC sends my submissions back to me the top pops are already sold and get repackaged to ship. Yes --- I'd say that they are doing VERY WELL!!

[World Colonial]

2 hours ago, Six Mile Rick said:

So True!!  The clad era is at a stage of needing more submitters to send in GREAT strikes. I can't even hold onto a top pop modern more than a day after it is graded. By the time NGC sends my submissions back to me the top pops are already sold and get repackaged to ship. Yes --- I'd say that they are doing VERY WELL!!

What you are describing is an imbalance or potential imbalance between demand and the supply of graded coins in a particular TPG grade.  It is evident that this occur with US moderns.   Invariably though, the demand is satisfied through adjustment in the market price, usually lower as the TPG counts increase.

[World Colonial]

8 hours ago, cladking said:

Again I don't want to argue semantics.  

I understand your point in this post.

What you are describing is an adjustment in the market price to balance supply and demand.

With most coins, there is enough supply available to satisfy the collector demand through either an increase or a decrease in the price.  Particularly with US coinage, collectors also compromise by buying lower graded coins for a lower price if the grade higher is not affordable to them or for "grade rarities", if they are "locked out" and the coin(s) isn't available and owned by another collector who doesn't want to sell it (at the market or offered price).

There are also times though when the absolute supply constricts demand simply because enough coins don't exist.  If two collectors are willing to pay $X million for the 1822 half eagle, only one can own it because only one is available in private hands.  It doesn't matter what the demand is based upon your definition.

This is exactly what applies with many of the coins I collect and in many world coin series and markets, though not to this extreme.  This is also what is going to limit the scale in collecting though I know you don't agree.  And no, I am not interested in rehashing this point either.

In South Africa, I have attempted to explain this limitation to them for the Union series but they just don't get it.  Of course, in theory the collector base and the price level could be somewhat or a lot higher if buyers would pay (a lot) more for lower grade coins (as in below MS-60) but it's obvious they aren't going to do that.  With some of the coins such as the 1931 3P, florin and half crown, it wouldn't matter if they did because even under my estimate of maybe 10,000 active hobbyists (as opposed to financial buyers), only an irrelevant fraction can own it.

This is exactly what I was describing for the pillar minors from Bolivia, Guatemala, Mexico and Peru.  I don't know what the absolute supply is though I believe for all mints except Mexico it's less than Gilboy estimated.  I'd like to complete Bolivia and Peru for one or more denominations in AU or better.  I don't believe I'll ever be able to do it because I don't think the coins either exist or if so, are available for public sale but locked in nonprofit collections.  I can probably eventually buy the dates I don't have in lower circulated grades but the number of collectors who can do so is almost certainly very low, an immaterial number that's less than the membership in most coin clubs.

[World Colonial]

9 hours ago, cladking said:

In all the years of searching I found only a single 1970 mint set and a couple of coins were missing from it.  I doubt I paid a dollar for this partial set with some original packaging.  I'd love to have rolls and rolls of BU coins and lots of mint sets but I couldn't find them despite diligent searching.  I found five or ten of most of the common date mint sets and that is most of what I have.  I also picked up and XF or better older coins which were mostly available for a dollar or two with little regard to low mintages.  

I can understand that this was your experience prior to the internet age.  Now with the internet, you see how available these coins are per my one search.  This is why I explained that our experience is generally not representative.  Even today with the internet, most coins that are hard to buy don't have a high enough profile where you or I will be aware of it if offered for sale.  They almost always appear to be (a lot) scarcer than the actual supply.

What you are describing, it's exactly the reason the common US classic "key" dates have their hugely inflated perception today.  During the era when album collecting was at it's peak (up to 1965 or slightly later I presume) and most collectors completed their collections out of circulation finds, "key" dates were seldom and most likely never seen by most collectors.  Coins like the 09-S and 14-D cent, 16-D dime.  In a prior post, I estimated that maybe 13 of these coins have 2500 or more survivors valued at $2500 or more.  It's obvious none of these coins are remotely scarce since early in the TPG era, yet the inflated perception persist and particularly among older collectors I presume.

[cladking]

10 minutes ago, World Colonial said:

I can understand that this was your experience prior to the internet age.  Now with the internet, you see how available these coins are per my one search.  This is why I explained that our experience is generally not representative.  Even today with the internet, most coins that are hard to buy don't have a high enough profile where you or I will be aware of it if offered for sale.  They almost always appear to be (a lot) scarcer than the actual supply.

What you are describing, it's exactly the reason the common US classic "key" dates have their hugely inflated perception today.  During the era when album collecting was at it's peak (up to 1965 or slightly later I presume) and most collectors completed their collections out of circulation finds, "key" dates were seldom and most likely never seen by most collectors.  Coins like the 09-S and 14-D cent, 16-D dime.  In a prior post, I estimated that maybe 13 of these coins have 2500 or more survivors valued at $2500 or more.  It's obvious none of these coins are remotely scarce since early in the TPG era, yet the inflated perception persist and particularly among older collectors I presume.

I've always imagined there will be enough demand in the future to absorb these coins without dramatic price changes.   I agree though that this is hardly a certainty and a great deal depends both on the number of collectors and their ability to afford coins and have enough leisure time to pursue them.   I don't think a coin like an '09-S VDB will have to lose its mystique just because it's a new generation that never sought them in circulation and has less interest in date sets.  

But it still seems certain that collecting will change even if these changes are largely unpredictable and depend on a whole new set of collectors and on their interests.   It will certainly be fascinating to watch.  I'm going to continue to be fascinated by watching the quarters in circulation no matter what happens.  I hope to be around long enough that finding a nice attractive but heavily worn 1965 is an unusual occurrence. 

I think one thing is certain; the hobby will be more diverse and less focused on a single era of a single country.