ANA election 1 1

[World Colonial]

1 hour ago, VKurtB said:

If a collector has an annual "coin budget" of less than $500, that collector is more in need of numismatic education than I can possibly relate here. Maybe they need (badly) to collect less junk and invest more in educational opportunities. If my coin budget were $500, I'd buy or acquire nearly nothing but books, travel, and seminar attendance.

You are missing my entire point.  The type of collecting you described isn't how most collectors collect and has no appeal to them at all.  Most collectors are coin buyers, not numismatists and the hobby isn't connected to their social life either.

I don't believe they need the type of numismatic education you imply because it's not relevant to their collecting.  It's either mostly or purely recreational activity or anything more is (far) beyond their financial capacity.

They do not buy the types of coins mostly profiled here or the PCGS forum, though maybe similar to a noticeable minority on Coin Talk.  I presume they mostly buy lower priced US Mint products, silver world NCLT, lower priced US 20th century classics and moderns, and low priced world coinage.

In using a $500 annual budget, I was also being VERY generous.  $500 a year implies a large collector base with mid four to lower five figure valued collections consisting mostly of the coins I described accumulated over their lifetime.  Outside of NCLT, I don't believe this happens much at all.  Their annual budgets are likely either noticeably less or vary substantially from year to year.

Do you disagree with me?  If you do, what's your description?

If you agree with me, the better question is, why would you believe the "average" collector would want to spend 10% or more of their annual budget each and every year on ANA dues?  It's a waste of money to them.

[DWLange]

If you agree with me, the better question is, why would you believe the "average" collector would want to spend 10% or more of their annual budget each and every year on ANA dues?  It's a waste of money to them.

I suspect the ANA's annual dues are much less than 10% of the average collectors budget, unless you're describing people who collect coins from circulation alone. Membership may not be for everyone, but I've never regretted joining. I converted to life membership so long ago that I paid for it in gold doubloons. 

[Henri Charriere]

[This is probably the saddest thread I have ever read and, in my official capacity as unlicensed chiffonnier, I have had the great misfortune of picking up some of the sorriest looking loose threads known to man.]

[VKurtB]

1 hour ago, DWLange said:

If you agree with me, the better question is, why would you believe the "average" collector would want to spend 10% or more of their annual budget each and every year on ANA dues?  It's a waste of money to them.

I suspect the ANA's annual dues are much less than 10% of the average collectors budget, unless you're describing people who collect coins from circulation alone. Membership may not be for everyone, but I've never regretted joining. I converted to life membership so long ago that I paid for it in gold doubloons. 

I pay MUCH MORE annually to NGC than to the ANA, and I consider BOTH to be indispensable expenditures. Have you even read The Numismatist lately? It is a treasure trove of eclectic numismatic scholarship!

Edited May 7, 2021 by VKurtB

[Henri Charriere]

1 hour ago, VKurtB said:

Have you even read The Numismatist lately? It is a treasure trove of eclectic numismatic scholarship!

Attn: @RWB Aside from your feelings about top management at ANA, do you have any thoughts about their publication? 

[World Colonial]

2 hours ago, DWLange said:

I suspect the ANA's annual dues are much less than 10% of the average collectors budget, unless you're describing people who collect coins from circulation alone. Membership may not be for everyone, but I've never regretted joining. I converted to life membership so long ago that I paid for it in gold doubloons. 

I described what I consider to be the "typical"; collector, whether you want to call them "average" or not.  I also described the types of coins I believe they predominantly buy.  If they aren't buying the coins I described, then what are they mostly buying?

I don't believe those who submit to TPG are representative and neither are those you see attending coin shows in your role at NGC.  If they are, then the collector base is a  fraction of what I previously claimed.  Most other coins affordable to most collectors are

1. Usually lower quality, frequently less marketable and with a lower preference;

2. Require more specialized knowledge which less knowledgeable collectors buy in much lower proportion

I don't think $500 is anywhere near a low assumption of the typical collector's annual budget.  My assumption is that most collectors are somewhat but not substantially more affluent than the median income US household.   Older than the general population with more disposable income but hardly "flush" with cash.

I see your motivation for membership similar to Kurt's.  It's your livelihood so yes, it makes sense for you to be a member.  But then, neither of you are representative of the "typical" collector anymore than I am with my collecting.

[VKurtB]

11 minutes ago, World Colonial said:

I described what I consider to be the "typical"; collector, whether you want to call them "average" or not.  I also described the types of coins I believe they predominantly buy.  If they aren't buying the coins I described, then what are they mostly buying?

I don't believe those who submit to TPG are representative and neither are those you see attending coin shows in your role at NGC.  If they are, then the collector base is a  fraction of what I previously claimed.  Most other coins affordable to most collectors are

1. Usually lower quality, frequently less marketable and with a lower preference;

2. Require more specialized knowledge which less knowledgeable collectors buy in much lower proportion

I don't think $500 is anywhere near a low assumption of the typical collector's annual budget.  My assumption is that most collectors are somewhat but not substantially more affluent than the median income US household.   Older than the general population with more disposable income but hardly "flush" with cash.

I see your motivation for membership similar to Kurt's.  It's your livelihood so yes, it makes sense for you to be a member.  But then, neither of you are representative of the "typical" collector anymore than I am with my collecting.

The typical “accumulator” is not a numismatist. It’s not called the American Coin Accumulation Association for very valid reasons. 

[VKurtB]

17 minutes ago, Quintus Arrius said:

Attn: @RWB Aside from your feelings about top management at ANA, do you have any thoughts about their publication? 

Would that be the same management which has metaphorically both honored AND “slapped around” Roger?

[RWB]

21 minutes ago, Quintus Arrius said:

Attn: @RWB Aside from your feelings about top management at ANA, do you have any thoughts about their publication? 

Not especially. They seem to be paying more attention to accuracy, but I don't know what resources they have for content editing.

Organizational management and publication quality are different and not always concordant. Assuming generalizations is usually a futile exercise.

Edited May 7, 2021 by RWB

[Henri Charriere]

1 minute ago, VKurtB said:

The typical “accumulator” is not a numismatist. It’s not called the American Coin Accumulation Association for very valid reasons. 

Kurt, you got it all wrong! World Colonial is a "collector," as am I, of world coins having previously collected U.S. coins.  You're the accumulator and have a double hernia now to prove it, after the move to points south.

[VKurtB]

4 minutes ago, Quintus Arrius said:

Kurt, you got it all wrong! World Colonial is a "collector," as am I, of world coins having previously collected U.S. coins.  You're the accumulator and have a double hernia now to prove it, after the move to points south.

But my numismatic library, even after “deaccession”, still outweighs my collection. Anyone who believes The Numismatist is U.S.-centric needs to think again. It is the best numismatic publication out there, although I will admit it was even better about 20-25 years ago, in the smaller format. 

Edited May 7, 2021 by VKurtB

[World Colonial]

1 hour ago, VKurtB said:

I pay MUCH MORE annually to NGC than to the ANA, and I consider BOTH to be indispensable expenditures. Have you even read The Numismatist lately? It is a treasure trove of eclectic numismatic scholarship!

To be clear, I am not "knocking the ANA or anyone for being a member

What makes non sense to me though is why anyone would be surprised that more collectors aren't ANA members.  This shouldn't be a surprise, except to those who attribute motives to others which are similar to theirs.

Some segment of the collector population probably is unaware of the benefits of membership and might change their mind if better informed.  I believe this to be a very low minority.

It's my opinion that the vast majority who aren't members now (such as myself) either know full well what they can receive from it or even if they don't, wouldn't change their mind anyway. 

As to whether ANA membership and submitting to TPG are indispensable, it depends upon each individual's collecting.  I only submit to NGC and do to improve the marketability of my collection.  My collection and the coins I buy are of sufficient value where it is beneficial.  At the financial level I believe most collect at, I do not believe either meet this definition.

[VKurtB]

8 minutes ago, RWB said:

Not especially. They seem to be paying more attention to accuracy, but I don't know what resources they have for content editing.

A dedicated staff, for one thing. 

[VKurtB]

1 minute ago, World Colonial said:

To be clear, I am not "knocking the ANA or anyone for being a member

What makes non sense to me though is why anyone would be surprised that more collectors aren't ANA members.  This shouldn't be a surprise, except to those who attribute motives to others which are similar to theirs.

Some segment of the collector population probably is unaware of the benefits of membership and might change their mind if better informed.  I believe this to be a very low minority.

It's my opinion that the vast majority who aren't members now (such as myself) either know full well what they can receive from it or even if they don't, wouldn't change their mind anyway. 

As to whether ANA membership and submitting to TPG are indispensable, it depends upon each individual's collecting.  I only submit to NGC and do to improve the marketability of my collection.  My collection and the coins I buy are of sufficient value where it is beneficial.  At the financial level I believe most collect at, I do not believe either meet this definition.

Agree with the last sentence, yet many treat “sending in” coins as some bizarre “rite of passage”.

[VKurtB]

One note: in August of 2014, literally THOUSANDS of new members joined the ANA for a year in order to be eligible to spend the night on cold concrete to buy the gold Kennedy half - the most overbought coin in modern history. 

[World Colonial]

13 minutes ago, VKurtB said:

The typical “accumulator” is not a numismatist. It’s not called the American Coin Accumulation Association for very valid reasons. 

Yes, I agree with you and believe this describes most collectors.  I am not a typical accumulator but probably not a numismatist by your definition either.  I do not call myself a numismatist.  I would categorize myself into a third group which I believe is representative of most members here and PCGS.

I am most interested in knowledge/research directly related to the areas I collect.  I actively look for and will pay for this knowledge.  I am interested in knowledge in many areas outside my interest, but I won't pay a cent for most of it.

[VKurtB]

6 minutes ago, World Colonial said:

Yes, I agree with you and believe this describes most collectors.  I am not a typical accumulator but probably not a numismatist by your definition either.  I do not call myself a numismatist.  I would categorize myself into a third group which I believe is representative of most members here and PCGS.

I am most interested in knowledge/research directly related to the areas I collect.  I actively look for and will pay for this knowledge.  I am interested in knowledge in many areas outside my interest, but I won't pay a cent for most of it.

I allow my voluminous reading of widely varied numismatic literature inform what series I am interested in collecting seriously, not vice versa. That said, my formal training in economics makes it impossible for me to ever be a fan of monetary gold.

Edited May 8, 2021 by VKurtB

[World Colonial]

1 minute ago, VKurtB said:

I allow my voluminous reading of widely varied numismatic literature inform what series I am interested in collecting seriously, not vice versa.

I am aware of what exists, most of it anyway, from the Krause manuals and know enough about many (though obviously not all) series to arrive at my choice.

I now collect one broader series almost exclusively for two reasons.  One, I don't have the budget for more.  And two, there isn't another series or coins I would rather own, so paying for unrelated reference material isn't going to change my collecting. 

My primary goal is to have as complete a collection in this area as possible considering availability and a flexible quality standard. .Completing this 104 coin set covering two mints and five denominations is possibly several hundred thousand.  I'm unlikely to ever make this outlay, much less have anything left over for anything else.

Paying for recurring unrelated collecting expenditures possibly means buying one or more coins I could otherwise have bought.  One example is a lifetime ANA membership versus several coins up for sale next week.

[VKurtB]

4 minutes ago, World Colonial said:

Paying for recurring unrelated collecting expenditures possibly means buying one or more coins I could otherwise have bought.

I’ve often read of people having this “other costs may prevent me from getting another coin” viewpoint. You’re far from alone. I’ve always considered it unbelievably short-sighted.

[World Colonial]

2 minutes ago, VKurtB said:

I’ve often read of people having this “other costs may prevent me from getting another coin” viewpoint. You’re far from alone. I’ve always considered it unbelievably short-sighted.

How exactly is it short sighted when the collector already knows they don't want to prioritize anything else?  

I would agree with you if I were choosing to buy coins instead of the reference material for my series but that's not what I do.  I own the three best books and the three best auction catalogs.  If I can find more, I'll buy it too.  If there were a club dedicated to my series, I would join it but there is not.

Your thinking makes sense if a collector wants to pursue multiple sets, collects by type, or by theme.  I'm not that kind of collector. 

I buy Bolivia and Peru pillar coinage because I prefer this coinage over everything else.  Having been a collector on and off for 46 years and knowing a lot more about coins than most, it's not like I don't have a clue what the alternatives are and chose my interest out of ignorance. 

To do anything else would mean buying coins I like less than those I buy now.  Why would anyone do that?

[Henri Charriere]

2 hours ago, VKurtB said:

But my numismatic library, even after “deaccession”, still outweighs my collection. Anyone who believes The Numismatist is U.S.-centric needs to think again. It is the best numismatic publication out there, although I will admit it was even better about 20-25 years ago, in the smaller format. 

Fair enough, now that the plaque PCGS awarded me says, "Best French Set - 2020, ranking it #1 of all 600+ French coin Set Registrants including Roosters) maybe now would be a good time for me to learn something about a hobby I basically know little or nothing about.  For example, when you think "DDD," as mentioned elsewhere in another thread, is an extra large soutien gorge cup size, it's time to get some formal instruction. And if the Numismatist is not U.S.-centric maybe they will surprise me with a special Rooster feature or at least allow me to search their digital archives, if such exists. 

[VKurtB]

10 hours ago, Quintus Arrius said:

Fair enough, now that the plaque PCGS awarded me says, "Best French Set - 2020, ranking it #1 of all 600+ French coin Set Registrants including Roosters) maybe now would be a good time for me to learn something about a hobby I basically know little or nothing about.  For example, when you think "DDD," as mentioned elsewhere in another thread, is an extra large soutien gorge cup size, it's time to get some formal instruction. And if the Numismatist is not U.S.-centric maybe they will surprise me with a special Rooster feature or at least allow me to search their digital archives, if such exists. 

Their digital archives both exist and are lavishly indexed. What I do NOT know is whether it is available to non-members. I remember much debate over that precise question. I do not know which viewpoint carried the day. 

[DWLange]

What I do NOT know is whether it is available to non-members.

It is not and states so at the website: https://www.money.org/thenumismatist/digitalarchives

The Newman Numismatic Portal is available to anyone and offers a search engine for articles in The Numismatist, but the publication in its entirety is available online solely to members. I use it frequently, but then, as WC pointed out, I'm not a "typical" collector.

Part of the argument made by some against the ANA is that it is too political and not responsive enough to the general membership and its needs. This is true at times, though I believe the more glaring examples are well behind us now. I've found that such claims sometimes are true about the hierarchy of many non-numismatic organizations to which I belong, as well, but then I derive enough benefit to not become dissuaded by it. I've long been a member of the U. S. Naval Institute, Smithsonian Associates, MENSA, the Colonial Williamsburg Foundation and others, yet I derive little benefit beyond reading their excellent publications. It's entirely my own choice to not take full advantage of the services they offer, go to social gatherings, etc., yet I value my membership just the same.

[Henri Charriere]

@VKurtB@DWLange... many thanks for your input!

[VKurtB]

8 hours ago, DWLange said:

What I do NOT know is whether it is available to non-members.

It is not and states so at the website: https://www.money.org/thenumismatist/digitalarchives

The Newman Numismatic Portal is available to anyone and offers a search engine for articles in The Numismatist, but the publication in its entirety is available online solely to members. I use it frequently, but then, as WC pointed out, I'm not a "typical" collector.

Part of the argument made by some against the ANA is that it is too political and not responsive enough to the general membership and its needs. This is true at times, though I believe the more glaring examples are well behind us now. I've found that such claims sometimes are true about the hierarchy of many non-numismatic organizations to which I belong, as well, but then I derive enough benefit to not become dissuaded by it. I've long been a member of the U. S. Naval Institute, Smithsonian Associates, MENSA, the Colonial Williamsburg Foundation and others, yet I derive little benefit beyond reading their excellent publications. It's entirely my own choice to not take full advantage of the services they offer, go to social gatherings, etc., yet I value my membership just the same.

Too many people use the adjective “political” as an epithet or a complaint. Having made my living for over 13 years EXCLUSIVELY working in the political field, I find it amusing to hear it thought of in that way.

[Henri Charriere]

1 minute ago, VKurtB said:

Too many people use the adjective “political” as an epithet or a complaint. Having made my living for over 13 years EXCLUSIVELY working in the political field, I find it amusing to hear it thought of in that way.

Do you deny the decision to send Sheldon Silver back to federal prison after being out only two days wasn't made at the highest levels of the U.S. Department of Justice? "Political" can mean those who carry out their duties directly and run the gamut to appointees like parole commissioners who are expected to toe the line. If the State of Alabama refuses to run its prisons in compliance with minimal standards of care (citing financial concerns) the Federal Government elects to do the job for them. The term "Political" is not always used in a pejorative sense; it is simply an acknowledgment of reality. Today, the proliferation of mobile visual devices is exerting an influence on political decisions.  The ANA'S history and structure suggests it's a political creature and not a grocery chain. Who would argue otherwise? Governors Ross Barnett, George Wallace and Lester Maddox were all controversial political figures to the core. Hey, maybe that wave after wave of severe weather sweeping thru the South is political?

[VKurtB]

16 minutes ago, Quintus Arrius said:

Do you deny the decision to send Sheldon Silver back to federal prison after being out only two days wasn't made at the highest levels of the U.S. Department of Justice? "Political" can mean those who carry out their duties directly and run the gamut to appointees like parole commissioners who are expected to toe the line. If the State of Alabama refuses to run its prisons in compliance with minimal standards of care (citing financial concerns) the Federal Government elects to do the job for them. The term "Political" is not always used in a pejorative sense; it is simply an acknowledgment of reality. Today, the proliferation of mobile visual devices is exerting an influence on political decisions.  The ANA'S history and structure suggests it's a political creature and not a grocery chain. Who would argue otherwise? Governors Ross Barnett, George Wallace and Lester Maddox were all controversial political figures to the core. Hey, maybe that wave after wave of severe weather sweeping thru the South is political?

When I was the Director of Elections in my county of Pennsylvania in 2005, the County Manager told me my job was to make the elected Commisioners look good. I disagreed. My job was to see to it that the state’s Election Code was followed scrupulously and without fail. He disagreed. He won. I was soon fired. There was no way to make what those clowns were doing look good.

Edited May 8, 2021 by VKurtB

[Henri Charriere]

17 hours ago, VKurtB said:

When I was the Director of Elections in my county of Pennsylvania in 2005, the County Manager told me my job was to make the elected Commisioners look good. I disagreed. My job was to see to it that the state’s Election Code was followed scrupulously and without fail. He disagreed. He won. I was soon fired. There was no way to make what those clowns were doing look good.

Quintus Arrius is proud of you.  (Policy before politics)  Being a man of principle is a good thing. Years ago, when my sister with an MBA joined the city Department of Investigation, she was assigned to investigate corruption and was handed a file.  When she, and her colleagues, discovered the evidence led to City Hall, the case she was working on was immediately withdrawn and when she objected she was shown the door. Working for the government can be hazardous duty.  (She actually had the last word. They threatened to fire her for insubordination and she countered with, "That won't be necessary. I quit." And she did.  Her boss called her the first no b---s--- "person" (not woman) I have ever met!  She took that as a compliment.)

Edited May 9, 2021 by Quintus Arrius
Word substitution; adding closing parenthesis