Once Red-Hot....Now, They're Not: Fallen Stars 1 1

[GoldFinger1969]

On 7/11/2023 at 3:12 PM, World Colonial said:

Not really, considering the size of the GSA hoard. Also, the vast majority of US coins from the late 19th century forward are either common or very common, even in grades close to at this level.  Not mostly common compared to these Morgan dollars but still common.

I meant it was astounding that the numbers were taken as Gospel 30 years ago.  They clearly were way off when you have that kind of increase over the years.

Now....I would be SHOCKED if we saw any kind of multiple-fold increase in those population numbers in 30 years from today.  In fact, I believe the rate of change for most coins HAS slowed....population additions have slowed even with resubmissions, gradeflation, etc.

[GoldFinger1969]

On 7/11/2023 at 3:16 PM, World Colonial said:

Me either.  I've stated here before that the most common dates are actually bullion coins, even in a grade like MS-65.  In "high" quality, no way anywhere near enough actual collectors for the supply.  Hundreds of thousands to over 1MM for many dates. With .7236oz of silver, maybe $50 tops and only that due to the ridiculous premiums on ASEs now.

I agree.  But at MS-67 and MS-67+ or MS-68, I do think the populations have definitely NOT shown the increase that you see at lower grades, meaning price weakness should be LESS at the higher grades.

I don't know why MS-65 coins -- to use one popular grade with plenty of coins -- traded up at such a premium.  They must have thought that there were many fewer coins out there....OR...it would take a long time for the TPGs to get them and certify them.

Edited July 11, 2023 by GoldFinger1969

[GoldFinger1969]

WC, Kurt, anybody else ....you guys were active back 30 years ago, I wasn't.  Was anybody saying that the then-prices for the coins -- even AFTER the bubble burst and they remained elevated -- was based on population numbers that were bound to explode to the upside and thus would have to fall further ?  

They had to know that in the examples I cited they wouldn't be adding 2 or 3 or 5 coins a year to the grade....they'd be adding HUNDREDS every year if not more.  That's why 30 year later, today, we have totals up 10 or 20 or 30 fold.

Edited July 11, 2023 by GoldFinger1969

[World Colonial]

On 7/11/2023 at 3:29 PM, GoldFinger1969 said:

I meant it was astounding that the numbers were taken as Gospel 30 years ago.  They clearly were way off when you have that kind of increase over the years.

Now....I would be SHOCKED if we saw any kind of multiple-fold increase in those population numbers in 30 years from today.  In fact, I believe the rate of change for most coins HAS slowed....population additions have slowed even with resubmissions, gradeflation, etc.

Depends what coins you are talking about.

No, you're not going to see a 30-fold increase in Morgan dollar populations but for some dates, still potentially more outside of a holder than in one.

For lower priced 20th century US coinage other than Morgan, and Peace dollars + US classic gold, there is a huge multiple not in a holder versus in one most of the time.

Also true for the lopsided proportion of world coinage.

[VKurtB]

On 7/11/2023 at 2:27 PM, GoldFinger1969 said:

I think with a few thousand population in the early-1990's you could make a case for a "common" Morgan selling for a few hundred dollars, maybe even low-4 figures.  Remember, you have TENS of thousands of Morgan collectors (maybe more) so if your population is only a few hundred or a few thousand, price is going to have to spike.  OTOH, with TENS of thousands -- and those above are just NGC Populations -- demand gets satiated.

Remember, we have 3 levels of collectors:  registry players (who want the best and many will pay up).....type and serious collectors (who are more price sensitive with specific coins or in the aggregate)...and the investment group (folks who pay minimally for numismatic premium and are more into the bullion itself).

How many of each determines how high pricing can go for select coins.

In the immortal words of Tonto, “What you mean ‘we’, paleface?”

[VKurtB]

On 7/11/2023 at 2:36 PM, GoldFinger1969 said:

WC, Kurt, anybody else ....you guys were active back 30 years ago, I wasn't.  Was anybody saying that the then-prices for the coins -- even AFTER the bubble burst and they remained elevated -- was based on population numbers that were bound to explode to the upside and thus would have to fall further ?  

They had to know that in the examples I cited they wouldn't be adding 2 or 3 or 5 coins a year to the grade....they'd be adding HUNDREDS every year if not more.  That's why 30 year later, today, we have totals up 10 or 20 or 30 fold.

Commoditization, just like ANY fad in coins, simply HAD TO crash. I knew it. Many friends did not. Some literally hanged themselves. They bet HARD on a one-way trip to the stratosphere. You have to grasp the sheer enormity of the “in canvas bags for decades” supply. You want to talk about hoards? Now THOSE were HOARDS!! They’re STILL a supply overhang on the Morgan market. 

Edited July 11, 2023 by VKurtB

[World Colonial]

On 7/11/2023 at 3:29 PM, GoldFinger1969 said:

I meant it was astounding that the numbers were taken as Gospel 30 years ago.  They clearly were way off when you have that kind of increase over the years.

On 7/11/2023 at 3:36 PM, GoldFinger1969 said:

WC, Kurt, anybody else ....you guys were active back 30 years ago, I wasn't.  Was anybody saying that the then-prices for the coins -- even AFTER the bubble burst and they remained elevated -- was based on population numbers that were bound to explode to the upside and thus would have to fall further ?  

Responding to both comments.

I don't know for US coinage, but I suspect the answer is the opposite of what you infer.

When I used to debate South African based collectors, they would repeatedly claim the TPG populations were mostly complete and a few claimed overstated due to resubmissions.  The reason they did this is because they thought that by exaggerating the scarcity, the prices would be a lot higher.  They didn't recognize that only collectors derive utility from collecting and that the vast majority aren't interested in trying to collect a coin or series when there is virtually nothing meeting their minimum quality standards.

My guess is that dealers peddling US coins as "investments" would claim something similar at the time.

[VKurtB]

On 7/11/2023 at 2:58 PM, World Colonial said:

Responding to both comments.

I don't know for US coinage, but I suspect the answer is the opposite of what you infer.

When I used to debate South African based collectors, they would repeatedly claim the TPG populations were mostly complete and a few claimed overstated due to resubmissions.  The reason they did this is because they thought that by exaggerating the scarcity, the prices would be a lot higher.  They didn't recognize that only collectors derive utility from collecting and that the vast majority aren't interested in trying to collect a coin or series when there is virtually nothing meeting their minimum quality standards.

My guess is that dealers peddling US coins as "investments" would claim something similar at the time.

Yep, investing (as if …) and commoditization can and do create huge market distortions of the collecting field.  The only thing even MORE evil is “flipping”.

Edited July 11, 2023 by VKurtB

[World Colonial]

On 7/11/2023 at 3:31 PM, GoldFinger1969 said:

I agree.  But at MS-67 and MS-67+ or MS-68, I do think the populations have definitely NOT shown the increase that you see at lower grades, meaning price weakness should be LESS at the higher grades.

The price of Morgan dollars in these grades has little if anything to do with actual collecting.  It's the result of the asset mania.

No one would pay these ridiculously inflated prices for what are actually such ordinary and uninteresting coins as a collectible.  They didn't in the US previously and they don't now anywhere else.

[VKurtB]

On 7/11/2023 at 3:02 PM, World Colonial said:

and they don't now anywhere else.

This!!!!! Nowhere else in the world plays this meshuga “one point equals thousands of dollars” game. 

[VKurtB]

On 7/11/2023 at 2:36 PM, GoldFinger1969 said:

.you guys were active back 30 years ago, I wasn't.

Yeah, 28 years ago I was buying GSA holdered Carson City dollars for around 50 dollars. This market is a bigger “bubble” than that Chinese balloon that overflew us. 

[World Colonial]

On 7/11/2023 at 3:27 PM, GoldFinger1969 said:

I think with a few thousand population in the early-1990's you could make a case for a "common" Morgan selling for a few hundred dollars, maybe even low-4 figures.  

No, because that wasn't the actual supply.  Real collectors don't pretend coins outside of a TPG holder don't exist.

On 7/11/2023 at 3:27 PM, GoldFinger1969 said:

Remember, you have TENS of thousands of Morgan collectors (maybe more) so if your population is only a few hundred or a few thousand, price is going to have to spike.  OTOH, with TENS of thousands -- and those above are just NGC Populations -- demand gets satiated.

I'd estimate at least 100,000 collecting the series in some format.  But you need to remember that the most common dates currently have over 500,000 in a holder where there are a large number ungraded and maybe still more outside of a holder than in one.  Some of these dates purportedly have over 1MM in UNC or BU.  No matter how you add it up, there is no possibility of this supply being mostly owned by collectors.  It would require 50%, one-third, or some proportion near it of the collector base owning an 1881-S or one these dates.  There is no reason to believe it.  It has to be substantially if not mostly financial buying.

On 7/11/2023 at 3:27 PM, GoldFinger1969 said:

IRemember, we have 3 levels of collectors:  registry players (who want the best and many will pay up).....type and serious collectors (who are more price sensitive with specific coins or in the aggregate)...and the investment group (folks who pay minimally for numismatic premium and are more into the bullion itself).

How many of each determines how high pricing can go for select coins.

I think there has to be substantial "investment" buying by non-collectors even for the "scarcer" semi-key dates though I'm in no position to prove it.  These coins are just too common, regardless of the "popularity" of the series.

I'd guess fewer type collectors than set collectors.  Most owned by collectors are presumably by those who don't collect the series or putting together a type set. Most collectors own numerous unrelated coins in their collections.  They see a coin they like and buy it, whether it "fits" their collection or not.

Edited July 11, 2023 by World Colonial

[VKurtB]

On 7/11/2023 at 3:17 PM, World Colonial said:

  Real collectors don't pretend coins outside of a TPG holder don't exist.

Badda bow, badda bing. Remember, guys like me who show slabs something close to zero respect, are out here cracking more common date stuff OUT of slabs than having them put in. And no, I don’t send the labels from coins I crack out back to the TPGS firms, nor will I. You want to believe in pop reports? Your problem, not mine. It’s been YEARS since I even looked at a Morgan pop report. I simply do not care. 
 

Remember, relatively speaking, “nobody” cared about silver dollars up though the 1960’s and a little beyond. They traded at face, and people SPENT THEM TO GET RID OF THEM. (Northeastern USA). They were literally the Sacagawea dollars of their time.

Edited July 11, 2023 by VKurtB

[VKurtB]

Keep this in mind always. Slabbing meant something fundamentally different in its earlier years than it means today. It was important “back in the day”. There were tight restrictions on what COULD BE slabbed by the major firms. Now, any verkocte piece of garbage ends up in a plastic prison. It has become a psychopathology. And not a cute or attractive one, either. And ALL the firms are laughing all the way to the bank. The “basement slabbers” are the worst. Yes, the prices are lower, but not as low as the value provided. 
 

I was at the Bessemer, Alabama show on Saturday. So much junky material. So many ridiculously high asking prices. Insane. No one serious would EVER pay those asking prices for common dreck. But business was being done. I picked up several nations’ 2023 silver ounces, plus a gorgeous 1942 BU Fiji shilling and a 1957 BU Austrian 25 Schilling. I got my first Chucky the Turd Britannia 2 pound. 

Edited July 11, 2023 by VKurtB

[cladking]

On 7/10/2023 at 5:35 PM, World Colonial said:

You asked me a rhetorical question.  I will now ask you one.

You have two possibilities (and only two) from which to choose, as there is no third option.  Which one is it?

Marketing and financialization as I have written for years.

Or

Collectors are a lot more "sophisticated" since the late 80's and/or experienced a collective epiphany when they miraculously discovered that these coins (those with one a few more points on a label) are so much better than their predecessors believed.

No, these aren't actual questions.  That's why it is rhetorical.

No.  It wasn't really a rhetorical question.  People grade coins because the demand for the coin warrants the cost.  

People collect coins they like.  Some like beauty, historical importance, quality, or virtually any attribute including potential for increased pricing. For the main part all these characteristic impact each of us in varying amounts.  

 

One thing virtually all collectors treasure, even in beanie babies is scarcity.  '60-D cents are not scarce.  Most of the coins you believe are so common are not!!!  The '60-D sm dt cent is not only common relative demand but common relative some other dates of the era.  Supply dwarfs demand but in 1960 demand exceeded supply.   The price was in a downward spiral from 1960 to about 2008.  Relative inflation it is still dropping.  Relative increasing postal rates that are relevant since the coins have to be shipped they are still dropping.  

[cladking]

On 7/10/2023 at 5:56 PM, World Colonial said:

 

This "scarcity" is a US invention, as in "made up".  That's part of what I am was getting at in my last post replying to yours.  Any coin is "rare" or "scarce" if the criteria is narrow or arbitrary enough.  This "scarcity" uses the most liberal scarcity standards on the planet (those in US collecting) combined with a comparison to coins that are literally among the most common coins on the planet (1933-1964 US coinage).  It's "participation trophy" just for showing up.

 

No!!!  It is not an "invention".  These things are true by definition.  "FS" has a set definition and the mint didn't make more than a couple dozen '68-D nickels in FS.  Today there are probably fewer than 5 survivors with fewer known.  Across the board 1965 to 1999 nickels and most other coins are very very scarce to unknown in MS-67.  Coins like the '76 Ike is simply unknown in such high grade and painfully scarce in MS-66.  Indeed, if you want a nice example of this coin you better figure on buying one because you aren't going to find them in rolls and '75 mint sets.  You imagine moderns are all common and like many you publish your opinions.  Then the opinion that the coins are common is the reason that people don't collect them.  The low prices listed in catalogs then discourage in would be collectors because you can't actually buy them for catalog prices.  

You talk about the commonness of the hoarded coins but then ignore the fact that coin collecting in the US is still very robust.  Of course it's not robust enough to absorb all the rolls of '55-S cents and '50-D nickels but some of these very "common" coins are not common in high grade.  Try finding really nice '51-S nickels or high end '41-S half dollars.  The '51-S 5c is tough even in nice gemmy condition.  There aren't that many collectors so it's not well known.  Sure they are hardly "rare" by your standards but it would only take 10,000 collectors to get get interested and push the price sharply higher.  Like many moderns they are simply tough in truly nice MS-64 and better.  

"10,000" is an extraordinary number to you but in 1965 there were 25 million collectors and the '50-D nickel went for $300 in today's money.   

 

People will collect what they choose and while it's entirely possible collectors will forever concentrate in bust halfs and morgan dollars, don't be too surprised if other much scarcer coins get some attention.  

[VKurtB]

On 7/11/2023 at 4:41 PM, cladking said:

high end '41-S half dollars

Yup, that’s a tough one. Up to AU? Common. True MS? Not so easy. Ditto a really strong 1934-D Buffalo nickel. 

[cladking]

Quote

The only thing remarkable about the price history of this coin is that it ever sold for $20 per roll.

It is remarkable such a common coin got so much attention.  I feel sorry for the later buyers who paid several dollars per roll.

I acquired ten very very gemmy rolls back in the '90's for about $1/ roll.  I bought them because there were so many Gems and I was hoping for some good varieties since they had obviously been gleaned from many bags of '60-D cents.  But I dumped a lot of coins a few years back and almost all of these went to the bank.  There were four or five high grade and ten or twelve very minor varieties.  I might never get my money back much less the opportunity costs.  

How can the finest twenty coins in bags and bags of '60-D cents have no market value at this time?  This is a very unnatural situation but you act as though no coin made for the last 90 years should have any value beyond face or metallic content!!!

[cladking]

Quote

Ditto a really strong 1934-D Buffalo nickel. 

This coin is underappreciated even in XF with a nice solid strike and even wear.  For some reason Uncs are far scarcer than the '35 and later coins.  

[cladking]

On 7/10/2023 at 6:02 PM, GoldFinger1969 said:

The 1950-D Nickel and now the 1960-D "Small Date" Penny seem to be ones mentioned frequently here.  If you have any articles on these that discuss their story, please post links.  Otherwise, I will hit my Red Book and also Google and try and get up to speed on their story (I am already familiar with the 1903/4-O MSD's once the Treasury released silver dollars in the early-1960's).

As I remember the '60 sm dt cent was found first and was relatively "common" in bags but few bags had been released yet.  The '60-D was found shortly later and was only about twice as common.  But as the year went on the proportion of the Philly issue decreased and the proportion of the Denver soared.  By the end of 1960 the Denver had lost most of its value and the Philly retained much of its.  

By 1970 even the Philly was going for only a few dollars each and the new '70-S sm dt could be had for a song.  Over the years the '60 has kept dropping and the '70 is now up to about $50 each.   Of course the '70 has the problem that most come from the mint set and most are tarnished.  There were a couple hundred thousand in the mint set initially but there was a great deal of attrition because the sm dt was ignored until the 1990's.  Then most of the survivors are tarnished now.  

[zadok]

On 7/11/2023 at 4:12 PM, VKurtB said:

Yeah, 28 years ago I was buying GSA holdered Carson City dollars for around 50 dollars. This market is a bigger “bubble” than that Chinese balloon that overflew us. 

...n a few decades before i remember standing in line to buy a $1000 bag for, wait...yep $1000....

[cladking]

On 7/11/2023 at 2:10 PM, VKurtB said:

There’s nothing hard to understand here. In the past, there were quite a few dates of Morgan dollars that were (correctly) deemed not worthy of being graded. As time and marketing have marched on, there’s no longer such a thing. If it’s a Morgan, any piece of common garbage ends up in plastic. I still don’t get why. Never will. 

I collected these back in the '70's and sought Gems before they got popular.  I couldn't believe how interest kept building and building so I sold way too early (1980).  It made sense to me to buy Gems at 150 to 200% of silver spot but the mania that ensued in the '80's was just stunning.  It seems there are always coins that go for far more than could be predicted and some that sell for far less.  There's always opportunity in every series but some series certainly seem fully priced.  

[VKurtB]

On 7/11/2023 at 5:11 PM, cladking said:

I collected these back in the '70's and sought Gems before they got popular.  I couldn't believe how interest kept building and building so I sold way too early (1980).  It made sense to me to buy Gems at 150 to 200% of silver spot but the mania that ensued in the '80's was just stunning.  It seems there are always coins that go for far more than could be predicted and some that sell for far less.  There's always opportunity in every series but some series certainly seem fully priced.  

A whole lot of U.S. coins seem “fully priced” to me, and perhaps then some.

[World Colonial]

On 7/11/2023 at 5:22 PM, cladking said:

No.  It wasn't really a rhetorical question.  People grade coins because the demand for the coin warrants the cost.  

It's financialization or marketing.  That's why I told you it's a rhetorical question.  You just agree with the pretense in US collecting that there is significance to this numismatic minutia.

No, US collectors are not more "sophisticated" than their predecessors or versus collectors elsewhere in the world now.  They also haven't experienced a collective epiphany to miraculously discover that these coins are so much better.  Any such belief (what US collecting implicitly claims) is utterly absurd.

On 7/11/2023 at 5:22 PM, cladking said:

People collect coins they like.  Some like beauty, historical importance, quality, or virtually any attribute including potential for increased pricing. For the main part all these characteristic impact each of us in varying amounts.  

Except that they don't like these coins as much as US collecting implies.  Collectors don't pay much higher prices today and in the last multiple decades because they like these coins so much more than their predecessors.  That's also completely absurd.  Only a low proportion would pay current prices above a "nominal" level without the expectation of recovering most of their cost.  You aren't one either.

On 7/11/2023 at 5:22 PM, cladking said:

 Most of the coins you believe are so common are not!!! 

No, I don't just believe it.  I know it.

What you claim is "scarce" or "rare" is common.  Reread what I told you in our last message exchanges on the PCGS forum.  You exaggerate the scarcity of the coins you like which are more common than up to 99% of all coins ever struck, calling it "scarce".  You also rely on your unrepresentative experience which you insist is representative, claiming to know what no one can possibly know. 

There is also no significance to scarcity in specialization, as it's the norm.  Most of these practices are US centric and the best explanation for it is an attempt to make this collecting more interesting since these coins are so easy to buy otherwise.

[GoldFinger1969]

On 7/11/2023 at 3:39 PM, World Colonial said:

Depends what coins you are talking about.

Any of the popularly-traded Small Denomination US coins post-1900 and certainly post-1930.  And also MSDs and gold coins, including Saints.  I don't know what the population numbers were for some Saints in the early-1990's (I have prices but not pops) but they had to have been much lower than today, even if we didn't see the multiple increase we saw for MSDs.

On 7/11/2023 at 3:39 PM, World Colonial said:

No, you're not going to see a 30-fold increase in Morgan dollar populations but for some dates, still potentially more outside of a holder than in one. For lower priced 20th century US coinage other than Morgan, and Peace dollars + US classic gold, there is a huge multiple not in a holder versus in one most of the time. Also true for the lopsided proportion of world coinage.

Raws can be significant in quantity, I wonder about quality, though.  Good points, WC. 

[World Colonial]

On 7/11/2023 at 5:41 PM, cladking said:

No!!!  It is not an "invention".  These things are true by definition.  "FS" has a set definition and the mint didn't make more than a couple dozen '68-D nickels in FS. 

Big whoop.

Notice how US collectors are the only ones who practice this type of contrivance?  Notice that they didn't do it in the past?  Ever ask yourself why?

Let me answer it for you.

It's because these coins are so easy to buy even in "high" quality, the entire series could be completed in one day, depending upon how arbitrary the standards used. 

Collectors who collect (somewhat) actually hard to buy or complete series don't do this, now or previously.  It's hard enough to find the coins at all or in "decent" quality.

I'm not singling out US moderns either.  It's true of every US classic series in the 20th century, except for Saints and Indian Head eagles, as a circulation strike.  It's also true of IHC, FE cents, Barber nickels, Barber Quarters, Barber halves, Morgan dollars, and probably a few earlier ones.  Maybe for Barber dimes too though very few (like the 95-O) might not be available in MS today.  Possibly true of the later dated half cents and large cents plus capped bust half dimes and maybe capped bust halves (maybe not the 1815).

You aren't aware of what I am telling you because you aren't aware of the actual availability of hardly any coinage, including US moderns.  Your posts demonstrate no knowledge of the TPG populations (for any coins) or even eBay, much less anywhere else.  

On one occasion, I literally found every single proof Liberty Seated dime on eBay back to 1858 with a few earlier dates too.  Yes, available the same day.  Heritage recently had FIVE 1798 MS dimes in their Marketplace.  Collector's Corner had FIVE 1830 QE listed at one time, though I can't remember the grades now, but I think MS.  Might still be there.

That you don't see as many of a coin as you think you should Indicates virtually nothing of the scarcity.  If the coins and series I listed here are easy to buy (and they can be bought in "high" quality any day of the week or virtually so), the coins you call "scarce" aren't, except due to modern contrivances in US collecting or one you just made up, like your strike criteria for US moderns which you won't even pay for.

[World Colonial]

On 7/11/2023 at 5:41 PM, cladking said:

You imagine moderns are all common and like many you publish your opinions.  Then the opinion that the coins are common is the reason that people don't collect them.  The low prices listed in catalogs then discourage in would be collectors because you can't actually buy them for catalog prices.  

Total BS.

I back up my opinions with much better claims than you do.  Read my last reply to you.  As for catalog prices, are you referring to world or US coinage?  Not that your post even demonstrate that you know what these coins are actually worth anyway, since you rely on outdated catalog values when coins sell within a price range and not a fixed value anyway.

If anyone is "discouraged" by what I write, then that just means they don't like the coins that much.  

On 7/11/2023 at 5:41 PM, cladking said:

You talk about the commonness of the hoarded coins but then ignore the fact that coin collecting in the US is still very robust.  

I've never ignored what you claim here.  I disagree with you.  When I tell you a coin is common, it's because it's easy to buy and that's a fact.  This is independent of the price.

On 7/11/2023 at 5:41 PM, cladking said:

 Try finding really nice '51-S nickels or high end '41-S half dollars.  The '51-S 5c is tough even in nice gemmy condition.  There aren't that many collectors so it's not well known.  

Except that if I wanted one, I'd buy one on eBay right now.  PCGS has graded about 1600 51-S nickels.  NGC, closer to 900.  That's about 2500. 

eBay has multiples for sale in grades of MS-64 or better right now.  This is supposed to be hard to find?  These coins meet the quality criteria for at least 95% of the collector base, whether it meets yours or not.

Any other arbitrary coin you'd like to claim as 'scarce"?

On 7/11/2023 at 5:41 PM, cladking said:

 Sure they are hardly "rare" by your standards but it would only take 10,000 collectors to get get interested and push the price sharply higher.  Like many moderns they are simply tough in truly nice MS-64 and better.  

"10,000" is an extraordinary number to you but in 1965 there were 25 million collectors and the '50-D nickel went for $300 in today's money.   

Except that these 25MM (assuming it's even close to accurate) were almost exclusively collecting at FV which means this isn't relevant to your claim.

The price of the 50-D nickel was a bubble, I've told you this before, you know it, and yet you bring it up repeatedly to support your claims anyway.  It's irrelevant to your claims, as there isn't a single example of a common coin like this one which increased exponentially to any actually noticeable value decades later.  That's what you are implying now.

No, the coins aren't "tough" to find or buy in the quality most collectors will accept.  The vast majority of the 2500 51-S nickels graded are MS-64 or better.  You just aren't familiar with the TPG data.

There aren't ever going to be 10,000 new buyers for a coin like the 51-S nickel at much higher prices, except maybe by your standards which aren't material.  Besides, the supply is almost certainly much higher than you infer or believe.  As an example, in one of your PCGS "Raw Moderns" threads, Wonder Coin stated he has a SDB vault full of US coinage dated from the late 30's onward,.  He didn't quantify it but it's not a few.  He also stated knowing other dealer and even some collectors with large volumes of this coinage.  Read his post for yourself since you don't believe anything I tell you.  Most of this coinage isn't visible because there is no point in selling it in large volume due to the price.  Lack of visibility does not = not existing.

Edited July 11, 2023 by World Colonial

[World Colonial]

On 7/11/2023 at 5:50 PM, cladking said:

How can the finest twenty coins in bags and bags of '60-D cents have no market value at this time?  

It has value, just less than you think it should.  20 bags is how many coins?  100,000?  Why would such a common coin be worth more than now, especially with so many more available in somewhat lower quality?

On 7/11/2023 at 5:50 PM, cladking said:

This is a very unnatural situation but you act as though no coin made for the last 90 years should have any value beyond face or metallic content!!!

Nope, never said what you claim.  There is also nothing unusual about it.

Yes, I have said that the vast majority of US coins dated 1933 and later should be worth no more than the TPG fee or nominal premiums to silver spot.  That's because the coins are both very common and have a (very) low preference.  I state this because I infer the supply is higher or much higher than you believe.

[VKurtB]

On 7/11/2023 at 5:50 PM, World Colonial said:

n

 

[World Colonial]

On 7/11/2023 at 6:57 PM, GoldFinger1969 said:

Any of the popularly-traded Small Denomination US coins post-1900 and certainly post-1930.  And also MSDs and gold coins, including Saints.  I don't know what the population numbers were for some Saints in the early-1990's (I have prices but not pops) but they had to have been much lower than today, even if we didn't see the multiple increase we saw for MSDs.

Barber series are much scarcer than the later ones of the same denomination or otherwise.  Also a big difference starting around 1933 versus previously.  This is evident both in the prices and the TPG data, though some of the earlier date counts are hardly low even in MS.