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

[zadok]

On 4/12/2024 at 2:21 PM, VKurtB said:

I still have not cracked open my bottle of Dalwhinee I brought back from Scotland. 

...15 or 18?....

[VKurtB]

On 4/12/2024 at 1:25 PM, zadok said:

...15 or 18?....

When I travel I do not go cheap. 18. Travel is about sampling the culture. 

Edited April 12 by VKurtB

[cladking]

On 4/12/2024 at 7:49 AM, cladking said:

Original rolls are very unusual and some dates have almost no chance of having any nice chBU coins anyway.  Original rolls have little effect on the supply of clads.  

Most all the non-current 1965-'99 eagle reverse cu/ni clad copper quarter rolls I've seen since 1970 are mint set rolls.   

If I had gone out specifically seeking original rolls this would not be true.  Perhaps some people can't tell an original roll from a mint set roll.  It's really pretty easy though.  If the coins are weakly struck from bad dies it is an original roll.  

[World Colonial]

On 4/11/2024 at 10:13 PM, cladking said:

I find it fascinating that for someone who deals only in what abstractions that others have told him that you would doubt it when they say you can't predict the future.  

Me, I don't believe in anything except that cycles will always exist so what is hot will in the future be not and what is not will in the future be hot.  

That would be a good subject for a thread; what was hot  ...now they're not.

No, nothing I write is only from what others have told me.  That's more BS.  For these topics, I'm looking at prices, the TPG data, auction results, and yes, the behavior of collectors from coin forum posts.  

So, I'm supposed to believe that "mass market" roll "collecting" is believable because of what you've told me?  This even though your assumptions don't have virtually anything in common with how virtually anyone collects?

What's next, that some or all of your prior claims on aggregate collecting are feasible too?

No, I do not believe any of it, because it's contrary to aggregate collector behavior and public perception.  You've never provided a single believable reason for the changes you claim.

There are no cycles as you have claimed either.  I told you that earlier in this thread and previously.  There are numerous examples of coins that have "soared" initially and then "crashed", but no evidence that coins or series regularly go in and out of favor as you infer. 

There has been movement for individual coins generally or in specific quality but no change in the order of collector preference between US series at least since the beginning of modern collecting (1930s).  It's not an accident or a coincidence.  It's the cultural view toward the coin attributes.  I can compare the coin attributes between any two series where the two compete as alternatives and its usually plainly evident why collectors prefer one over the other.

Edited April 12 by World Colonial

[World Colonial]

On 4/12/2024 at 1:50 AM, GoldFinger1969 said:

But their prices AREN'T that high and folks like Zadok are saying they buy hundreds or even THOUSANDS of these coins, solo or in sets, without much difficulty.

You don't need too many people collecting in bulk to have lots of supply.  If only a few hundred thousand Americans collected a few dozen or so sets, that's alot of potential supply, right ?  

 

Apparently not

[cladking]

On 4/12/2024 at 4:15 PM, World Colonial said:

For these topics, I'm looking at prices, the TPG data, auction results, and yes, the behavior of collectors from coin forum posts.  

Not as many new people hate moderns.  Indeed, Very very few new collectors hate moderns.  

As recently as just five years ago no company made an album to hold just 1965 to date clad quarters!!!   Imagine that.  It would be like there being no folders for Jefferson nickels in 1964.   You can just keep repeating these coins and their collectors are everywhere but you have not shown any evidence.  Things like rare '84 cents that no one knows about and no albums are EVIDENCE.  Coins routinely selling at 15X catalog are EVIDENCE.  You have nothing but contention and opinion where I have experience and EVIDENCE.  

[VKurtB]

On 4/12/2024 at 7:03 PM, cladking said:

As recently as just five years ago no company made an album to hold just 1965 to date clad quarters!!!

And why would they? The only thing sillier than STOPPING a collection at 1964 is STARTING one at 1965. 

[cladking]

On 4/12/2024 at 7:18 PM, VKurtB said:

And why would they? The only thing sillier than STOPPING a collection at 1964 is STARTING one at 1965. 

I just wanted to quote this for posterity.  

[VKurtB]

On 4/12/2024 at 7:34 PM, cladking said:

I just wanted to quote this for posterity.  

They’re all coins to me. I don’t give a rip what they’re made of. Condition is my game. My Vatican coins are mostly aluminum. The nasty part is finding nice zinc and steel European coins. Wanna talk about tough?

Edited April 13 by VKurtB

[World Colonial]

On 4/12/2024 at 8:03 PM, cladking said:

NYou can just keep repeating these coins and their collectors are everywhere but you have not shown any evidence.  

What are you talking about?  Are you referring to my claims about the supply again?

I look at the TPG data, but it isn't just for US moderns.  It's across all types of coinage.

I've already told you about the supply of other coinage in the TPG data, the TPG data you know nothing about.  Collectors outside the US disproportionately don't even like TPG, so I conclude from this that the supply of this coinage too is proportionately or absolutely a lot higher than what's visibly evident.

Am I supposed to believe that the examples of the non-US coinage I used exist in this supply and probably higher, but of all the coins in the world, it's only those you collect that are an outlier? 

Why would I believe anything so absurd as that just because you do?

On 4/12/2024 at 8:03 PM, cladking said:

Not as many new people hate moderns.  Indeed, Very very few new collectors hate moderns.  

This nonsense is at the root of your error.  Do you hate your collection?  If you don't, then no one does either.  Do you hate coins you don't buy?  If you don't, no one does either.

You keep on repeating the same ridiculous fallacies which are contrary to how collectors actually collect.

No one has to agree with you, on anything.  If every collector literally disagrees with you, there is nothing unusual about it.  That's all this "hate claim is, collective perception disagreeing with you.

Edited April 13 by World Colonial

[World Colonial]

On 4/12/2024 at 8:38 PM, VKurtB said:

They’re all coins to me. I don’t give a rip what they’re made of. Condition is my game. My Vatican coins are mostly aluminum. 

I buy base metal coins too.  I just bought a 1918 Bolivia 10C, first "BU" I've seen since 2006, though I haven't looked hard.

I also own these:

[VKurtB]

On 4/12/2024 at 7:43 PM, World Colonial said:

I buy base metal coins too.  I just bought a 1918 Bolivia 10C, first "BU" I've seen since 2006, though I haven't looked hard.

I also own these:

Ironic note: the two countries for which my collection consists of the highest percentage of BU aluminum coins: the Vatican and North Korea. 

[World Colonial]

On 4/12/2024 at 8:48 PM, VKurtB said:

Ironic note: the two countries for which my collection consists of the highest percentage of BU aluminum coins: the Vatican and North Korea. 

Like practically every other hobbyist collector (as opposed to "investor"), I'll buy any metal if I like the other coin attributes.  I only own one gold coin, so I must hate gold too.

With the Bolivia coinage, silver and copper-nickel were issued simultaneously in the 1890's for the 5C and 10C and then in copper-nickel until 1909.

I prefer the copper nickel because it's scarcer.  I haven't been able to find all of it in good enough quality.

[World Colonial]

On 4/12/2024 at 8:03 PM, cladking said:

Things like rare '84 cents that no one knows about and no albums are EVIDENCE.  Coins routinely selling at 15X catalog are EVIDENCE.  You have nothing but contention and opinion where I have experience and EVIDENCE.  

So VKurt's and zadok's observations aren't evidence but yours is, right?  Are you going to call their experience "hearsay" again like you did earlier in this thread? 

What about wondercoin's in the "raw moderns" thread on PCGS?

Why is your experience any better than theirs?  Am I supposed to believe you over them?  Am I supposed to believe it's only them and no one else who has this experience?  Out of all the collectors in the world, your experience is uniquely representative?

Ever heard of comparative analysis?  Read up on it.

Throughout this thread, I've been using criteria which accounts for the survival and quality distribution for coinage generally, not using premises like yours which have nothing to do with anything in coin collecting.

That's how I conclude this coinage is more common than you infer, since you haven't even given an estimate.  I already gave you mine, likely 200,000 minimum for any date in TPG MS-64 or better.  Why would I believe this is either scarce or it's less than that?

It's possible (key word) the survival rates are lower on US moderns than one or more examples I gave earlier in low or very low proportion.  As a general principle, there isn't any reason to believe it's more than that, regardless of what you saw.

[Henri Charriere]

On 4/12/2024 at 8:48 PM, VKurtB said:

Ironic note: the two countrihies for which my collection consists of the highest percentage of BU aluminum coins: the Vatican and North Korea. 

🐓:  Are you sure Kurt wrote this???  North Korea? Isn't he the member who wrote disparagingly about their neighbor to the NW?

Q.A.  Beats me.  I  take credit for suggesting Trump go to North Korea. I believe in keeping the lines of communication open. Do me a favor, hide that giant bronze cash, and promise me you'll never mention it on the Foum.  I would like to submit it but still haven't been able to figure out just what it is. Hey, maybe we ought to send Kurt that brand-new 500 Won note we got a few years back. Too bad I never won that giant lottery.  I am more a giver than a taker. I know exactly who's partial to what.  I could make a while lot of collectors happy.  Ah, well... c'est la vie!  

***

🐓  :   Incidentally, any comment on the ongoing WC / CK heavyweight bout?  

Q.A.:  You mean besides hashng their differences at the White House over a beer?  None.  🤣

[cladking]

On 4/12/2024 at 7:38 PM, VKurtB said:

They’re all coins to me. I don’t give a rip what they’re made of. Condition is my game. My Vatican coins are mostly aluminum. The nasty part is finding nice zinc and steel European coins. Wanna talk about tough?

I find Austria and Belgium zinc easy enough.  The others are all tough.  German iron can be found with effort.

Edited April 13 by cladking

[VKurtB]

On 4/12/2024 at 8:22 PM, Henri Charriere said:

🐓:  Are you sure Kurt wrote this???  North Korea? Isn't he the member who wrote disparagingly about their neighbor to the NW?

Q.A.  Beats me.  I  take credit for suggesting Trump go to North Korea. I believe in keeping the lines of communication open. Do me a favor, hide that giant bronze cash, and promise me you'll never mention it on the Foum.  I would like to submit it but still haven't been able to figure out just what it is. Hey, maybe we ought to send Kurt that brand-new 500 Won note we got a few years back. Too bad I never won that giant lottery.  I am more a giver than a taker. I know exactly who's partial to what.  I could make a while lot of collectors happy.  Ah, well... c'est la vie!  

***

🐓  :   Incidentally, any comment on the ongoing WC / CK heavyweight bout?  

Q.A.:  You mean besides hashng their differences at the White House over a beer?  None.  🤣

China is orders of magnitude more obnoxious than is North Korea. I stand by that. Besides, the DPRK uses wildlife themes on some of their coins. China, on the other hand, uses the goose merely to teach stepping. I have stated that the PRC is THE locus of global evil, and I stand by that. The communist iconography is what the PRC is all about. 

Edited April 13 by VKurtB