Can someone explain what this statement about "modern bashers" means?

[goose3]

I cut/pasted from another board. My first impression is that I need to go and get some hipwaders on.

 

The only reason I see, for the few determined foes of "the discussions about PCGS registry sets - building them, buying them, selling them, collecting them," who put down "modern coins" at every opportunity, is that some of these forum members feel fear, as they think that they see a dwindling supply of quality nineteenth and early twentienth century coins.

[supertooth]

Hey goose 3 ----I see this as a statement from a "modern" collector who may be trying to gloat that the "original" supply of pre 1940 coins is running out. But he feels that "his" coins are not in any danger of short supply. He seems to be angry that the "modern" coins do take some hits from those who do not collect them. He is right in that the "earlier coins" are indeed dwindling in numbers---especially the "original" ones. Bob [supertooth ]

[IGWT]

The "Us" versus "Them" threads always get a lot of play. I don't think that it's fear of a dwindling supply of coins that creates "modern bashers"; it's just good old fashioned snootiness.

[EZ_E]

a dwindling supply of quality nineteenth and early twentienth century coins.

 

Duh, that's a no-brainer. That guy wasn't too bright, was he?

[jtryka]

I really can't make much logical sense of the statement above, it just seems to be saying some of us bash moderns because older material is disappearing. Why that would motivate anyone to bash moderns is a mystery to me. Most of us probably just scratch our heads at people paying so much for coins with a mintage high enough that everyone on the planet could have one.

 

In an interesting aside, Q. David Bowers' column in this week's Coin World touched tangentially on this subject noting that, "Key dates and rarities now take a back seat to common-date coins that are in 'ultra' grades such as MS-68 and MS-69, especially if they appear to be rare in the combined population reports issued by the three grading services..." He goes on to say, "...it is much easier to put together a set of modern Proof coins in ultra grades from Proof 68 to 70 that it is a set of Barber half dollars 1892 to 1915 in , say, MS-62. In fact, I would probably pay full retail value for a high quality set of nicely matched Barbers in this grade. I would not think of paying full retail for a set of coins minted in the last 20 years, all in MS-69 or MS-70 grades."

 

Now don't get me wrong, Mr. Bowers was not bashing moderns, but highlighting the virtues of being a contrarian in coins, it's just that the limelight is now on high grade moderns, so they are the group to be contrary to. He has done numerous studies of cycles in the coin market going back to the 1850s, and the current cycle is no different than the rest. He noted that in 1990, if you spent $100,000 on a representative selection of late 19th and early 20th century MS-65 and Proof-65 coins, today you would be in a loss position! Those were in the limelight 15 years ago. If you took that same investment and bought obsolete paper money (F-XF), or hard times tokens (XF-MS) or Indian Head cents (F-XF) you would be in a profit position. The same thing happened with BU rolls in the 1960s, gold coins in the early 1980s, Gem Morgan dollars in the late 1980s and early 1990s, and some would say modern coins today. The point is not that moderns are bad, but that they are hot right now, so astute and budget conscious collectors should turn to those areas currently being overlooked by the market (like the Barber halves, or shield nickels). Eventually, like all the cycles before, the spotlight will shift to some other area of the market and ultra grade moderns will come back to earth. In the meantime, many of us have chosen to avoid the crowd and pursue other interest that are not the focus of such attention and wild prices.

[IGWT]

Now don't get me wrong, Mr. Bowers was not bashing moderns, but highlighting the virtues of being a contrarian in coins, it's just that the limelight is now on high grade moderns, so they are the group to be contrary to.

 

All of what you wrote makes perfect sense to me, Jtryka; but, as you say, QDB's observations don't amount to "bashing" modern collectors. Although I wouldn't pay high dollars for ultra high-grade moderns (for various reasons), I certainly don't have anything negative to say about those who chose to collect in this way. To each his own.

 

I believe that there are some collectors of modern issues (e.g., Cladking) who are so knowledgeable that they are putting together sets that will prove rare -- and not rare based just on condition -- with longlasting value. They know enough, I suspect, to be contra-contrarian; or, maybe a better way to put it, they will do well by insightful purchases of what they know and like.

[cladking]

...but highlighting the virtues of being a contrarian in coins, it's just that the limelight is now on high grade moderns, so they are the group to be contrary to. .

 

ROFL.

 

There are dozens of "serious" collectors now days and the rarities still go for a small fraction of what the classic rarities sell for.

 

...and there are millions collecting them from circulation and at the bank.

[IGWT]

Hi Cladking -- We were each posting a response to Jtryka at the same time. You're response is a little too vague for me to understand fully. What do you mean by distinguishing between "rarities" and "classic rarities"? Please clue me in; otherwise, I'll have to start bashing you modern collectors

[Leothelion]

The interesting thing about all this sporadulous spending, unless, of course, you know what you're doing, it's all going to come to an end! What will trigger such an event is unknown but when it comes panic time to unload who will be there to sort out the mess!

Anyone here like cherry pie?

 

Leo

[cladking]

Hi Cladking -- We were each posting a response to Jtryka at the same time. You're response is a little too vague for me to understand fully. What do you mean by distinguishing between "rarities" and "classic rarities"?

 

It doesn't matter whether you're talking about rare moderns or conditionally rare moderns, they sell for a small fraction of what an equally rare classic sells for.

 

Obviously there's no certainty that they'll ever be worth as much as the older coins but they could increase substantially more and still sell for a small fraction of what the old coins go for. This would certainly imply that the numbers are collecting the Morgan dollars and older coins. Indeed, just a casual look at any of the coin publications will show page after page of advertising and feature stories concerning classics. This isn't to say they don't deserve the attention, simply that these are the coins that are in demand.

[IGWT]

Thanks for the response. True enough. BTW, the number of your last post scares me.

[EZ_E]

Beautiful, educated, well-thought out post, Jeff! Thanks.

 

 

 

 

 

Just read this quote in Numismatist :

 

Call to coin shop: "Er, um, when did they stop making the old coins?"

 

[DonHeath]

Jeff,

 

Good reply. I think one of the things that influence set builders initial focus is the feasability of completion in a grade that's aesthetically pleasing. $5 Indians are relatively low mintage coins, with many date/mm's under 1,000,000 pieces, with much lower survival rates, and gold is very popular with the metals crowd. A complete date/mm collection in high AU can be assembled for around $15,000. There are only two difficult coins, and they are offered fairly regularly. The series is almost 100 years old. It's a great design. Most of the coins can be purchased close to bullion value. Dealers don't like them, and I have purchased nice AU coins for as little as $150. The truth is, most collectors don't like them in AU. There are only three sets on the PCGS registry that are over 50% complete, and if the one wished to dominate the registry, they could move to 4th place with $2000 worth of gold. They could storm the top 10 with $800. Being honest, there are only a few series that interest set builders in low grade. Barbers come to mind, as do Morgans, because they are relatively attractive in medium grade. Lots of collectors build boxes of 20, and many more build type sets, but collectors like attractive coins. Absolute or relative rarity doesn't attract as much collector money as attractive, hence moderns are having their day. A $300 key date SLQ is an ugly coin. JMO Demand determines price, and right now there is broader demand for attractive than there is for rare. Coins that posess both fetch moon money.

[Oldtrader3]

IMHO, many modern sets are received looked at briefly and relegated to a drawer. I don't crack my modern sets for submission. I just look at them and put them away. I think many thousands of sets are just put away without much thought. How many coins from these sets would grade at registry coin levels is conjectural, but surely some would. Someday these sets will be sold or looked at more carefully and some additional high grade coins will surely be discovered.

 

On the other hand, when I buy a Barber dime, quarter or half, I study it very carefully before putting it away. My educated guess is that there are not too many high grade Barbers out there that are not TPG graded or undiscovered. In fact there are not too many Barber coins of many dates and MM's period! I doubt that too many hoards of new high grade Barber coins are going to surface.

 

Some classical coins (i.e. Morgans) have pretty high populations, considering their prices. Because of their higher pops, Morgans have a wide collector base, are heavily promoted and have high prices. However, many classic series have very limited high grade coin populations and these coins are always going to be expensive. As David Bowers stated, classic coins are perhaps a safer bet for these reasons. Also, all markets have cycles including moderns and classics.

 

Projecting future pricing on modern coins is a little like telling fortunes. Maybe this pricing potential will materialize, maybe not when economic cycles and population variability are considered.

[cpm9ball]

To me, it's a good thing that we have "classic" collectors, "rarity" collectors, "modern" collectors......high-grade, mid-grade, low-grade, or whatever. If most of us were to try to collect everything, we would have to have awfully deep pockets. If all of us were to collect the same things, there wouldn't be enough to go around.

 

The nice thing about a venue such as we have, here, is that a collector who specializes in one area can benefit from the knowledge of specialists in other areas. I always look forward to the insights from Hoot, Tooth, EZ, Michael, Greg (Yes, Greg!), Tom, KC, OT3, Billy.................the list goes on and on!

 

There are many newcomers who simply cannot afford to collect 18th, 19th and early 20th century coinage. For them, the only alternative lies with the moderns, and the U.S. Mint programs offer them many opportunities. Should they be viewed as "inferior" collectors? Some of you may remember the post-WWII ad hype of "keeping up with the Joneses". Why should we discourage anyone from collecting what they can afford for something that they can't afford? I always have to chuckle when I read about someone complaining of the Mint's outrageous prices. Do they really think it will be cheaper through a dealer or on eBay? I consider myself fortunate that coin-collecting is not a business for me. I don't have to view it from the bottom line of a P&L Statement. I don't have to worry about fluctuations in the market and how it may affect my "assets". No matter what, I'm buying!

 

Chris

[supertooth]

Chris----You put it very well. As a collector, I do not have the patience to look at "modern" coins for very long. I get disinterested fairly quickly. Yet I find Chris"s 73D penny [currently on another thread] very interesting. It would not be there if Chris were like I am. That penny would be in a change jar or spent at a store. So, my hat is off to Chris for being interested enough to look for such errors. Wonderful find, my friend!! Another well made point was about money. Most of us have to collect within our means. Eventually we pick an area that we especially enjoy. And, for many people, rolls of modern coins straight from our local banks are a prime source of hours of fun and education. I say----"more power to them" and "good luck with the hunt". Bob [supertooth]

[Oldtrader3]

I agree that all of us should collect what appeals to us and what we are able to afford. I was just generalizing about monetary appreciation. I also have some modern sets that I am working on and have fun with (i.e. War Nickels, '40's Merc's etc.). Plus, some of these coins have become suprisingly expensive ('49-P Cents for example).

[jtryka]

I've had many heated debates with Cladking in the past, but I've come to agree with him on some things. Certainly clad coinage of the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s were not saved to the extent that more recent issues were, so solid BU examples may someday appreciate significantly. That's not to say that a VG 85-D nickel will ever be worth more than a nickel in my lifetime, but some Unc. coins are already appreciating. I have a whole bunch of BU rolls of coins I saved from the 80s and early 90s, and I was surprised to learn how much they were going for. I have several rolls of 86-D cents, and was surprised to see an ad in Coin World from a dealer offering $35 a roll for them. Now current coins, where dealers and collectors are buying them from the mint by the bag, well on those I think we'll have enought MS-65 examples for the next 300 years! I question the wisdom (read: folly) of paying hundreds or thousands of dollars for an MS-70 Delaware quarter, but there are many coins minted since 1965 that are likely a lot more scarce than many collectors think.

[michael]

I really can't make much logical sense of the statement above, it just seems to be saying some of us bash moderns because older material is disappearing. Why that would motivate anyone to bash moderns is a mystery to me.

 

well for me it is not about coin collecting and modern bashing

 

IT IS ABOUT PUTTING collectible available modern COINS IN GA-GA HIGH GRADE PLASTIC HOLDERS WHERE THE HOLDER MAKES up 90% 95% 99% of the demand of the COIN CRACK THE COIN OUT OF ITS HOLDER AND all this demand goes away

 

 

 

IT IS NOT ABOUT MODERN BASHING

 

IT IS ABOUT BASHING THE LIVELY HOOD OF A MODERN COIN plastic PROMOTER/demand maker

 

 

if you want to collect coins be it moderns or older coinage or much older coinage fine i love it!!!!!!!!

 

i think jtryka sums it up well when he says

 

 

8888

 

I really can't make much logical sense of the statement above, it just seems to be saying some of us bash moderns

 

88888

 

NOT TRUE

 

 

please put it into the correct context

 

no one has bashed moderns...............

 

but the plastic strumpts that are adding demand and PROMOTION which makes up 99% of the price of the coin by ga-ga HIGH grade tags and plastic

 

as when you make an accusation of pointing a finger remember that four are pointing at yourself and your mistaken misunderstanding of accusing the wrong person

 

point the finger at the plastic ga-ga grade tag maker AND PROMOTER not the collector

 

buy the coin not the holder

 

if you want to collect ga-ga high grade plastic holdered moderns where demand makes up 99% of the value of the coin so be it

 

but do not let your guilty conscience let you attack others for your insecurities

 

collect what you like with money you can afford to lose

 

 

[EZ_E]

Why should we discourage anyone from collecting what they can afford for something that they can't afford?

 

I think that you're a little off base there, partner, if that is what you're inferring from classic collectors. I have a complete run of proof sets clad and silver and have all of the modern silver dollar commems but 10. However, the mindset of paying huge, huge premiums for PR-70 or MS-70 coins is ridiculous. Especially for modern coins which are standardly produced in extremely high grades. The plastic should never, ever set a premium so high that it is stupid! The coin should speak for itself and proclaim its own merit without the official sanction of some grader who glanced at it for 3-5 seconds. Man, that is some power!

[cladking]

The coin should speak for itself and proclaim its own merit without the official sanction of some grader who glanced at it for 3-5 seconds. Man, that is some power!

 

Obviously this is very true and applies to all coins whether they are normally nice or normally awful, whether they are rare in all grades or only rare as specific varieties or grades. It's not as though graders spend less time on coins that always come nice or or are rare as gems.

 

Not only should the coin speak for itself but the collector must learn to hear it.

 

This is what collecting is about.

[EZ_E]

The coin should speak for itself and proclaim its own merit without the official sanction of some grader who glanced at it for 3-5 seconds. Man, that is some power!

 

Obviously this is very true and applies to all coins whether they are normally nice or normally awful, whether they are rare in all grades or only rare as specific varieties or grades. It's not as though graders spend less time on coins that always come nice or or are rare as gems.

 

Not only should the coin speak for itself but the collector must learn to hear it.

 

This is what collecting is about.

 

 

 

Very well stated, CladKing!

[cpm9ball]

Why should we discourage anyone from collecting what they can afford for something that they can't afford?

 

I think that you're a little off base there, partner, if that is what you're inferring from classic collectors. I have a complete run of proof sets clad and silver and have all of the modern silver dollar commems but 10. However, the mindset of paying huge, huge premiums for PR-70 or MS-70 coins is ridiculous. Especially for modern coins which are standardly produced in extremely high grades. The plastic should never, ever set a premium so high that it is stupid! The coin should speak for itself and proclaim its own merit without the official sanction of some grader who glanced at it for 3-5 seconds. Man, that is some power!

 

Victor, you've taken this statement totally out of context. In that paragraph, there is neither a reference to classic collectors nor PR70 or MS70 coins. I guess you're just too young to have heard about "keeping up with the Joneses", but in today's world it is commonly referred to as "peer pressure".

 

Chris

[jtryka]

I think michael put in a whole lot of important ideas in way that only he could. It is an incredibly important distinction between the value of the coin, and the value of the plastic case from a TPG. There is a very wide gulf between classics and moderns in this regard, as I cannot think of a single classic coin where the value more than doubles based on the coin being slabbed (granted, there are some classics where a single bump in grade creates a large price gap, but I don't really like that much either!). Yet this seems quite common for ultra-grade moderns, where a coin that might even have been purchased at face value suddenly becomes the top graded coin and worth hundreds or thousands of dollars. Now maybe the coin itself really is worth that, but I doubt it, as I doubt many of the folks buying these coins have enough faith in their own grading skills to pay that sort of money for a raw MS-69 modern coin. I think that is what most irks us classic collectors, as this really smells like a scam to us. For just a moment, I wish these collectors accusing some of us of modern bashing would take a step back, look at what they are doing and see what we see: you buy a bag of unc coins from the mint, look through them, send the few best examples to be graded, and voila! you now have a few coins worth more than the entire bag! Doesn't that look the slightest bit fishy to you?

 

I don't think any of us would bash any collector for choosing to collect modern coins. I have many modern commems, proof sets and mint sets, and I also have complete sets of all circulating coins. The difference is that mine are all in Dansco or Whitman albums or in the packaging from the mint. By all means, folks should collect what they like, and it seems there are many modern ultra grade collectors, otherwise the prices would not be as they are. As classic collectors, we only worry about the newbie collectors who might buy such coins with lack of knowledge of the intricacies of the modern grade rarity game. I shudder to think what might happen to the many new collectors should this market collapse, but I take some solace in the wisdom of Mr. Bowers' thoughts mentioned above, and of course Yogi Berra, "It's like deja-vu, all over again."

[cladking]

I think michael put in a whole lot of important ideas in way that only he could. It is an incredibly important distinction between the value of the coin, and the value of the plastic case from a TPG. There is a very wide gulf between classics and moderns in this regard, as I cannot think of a single classic coin where the value more than doubles based on the coin being slabbed (granted, there are some classics where a single bump in grade creates a large price gap, but I don't really like that much either!). Yet this seems quite common for ultra-grade moderns, where a coin that might even have been purchased at face value suddenly becomes the top graded coin and worth hundreds or thousands of dollars. Now maybe the coin itself really is worth that, but I doubt it, as I doubt many of the folks buying these coins have enough faith in their own grading skills to pay that sort of money for a raw MS-69 modern coin. I think that is what most irks us classic collectors, as this really smells like a scam to us. For just a moment, I wish these collectors accusing some of us of modern bashing would take a step back, look at what they are doing and see what we see: you buy a bag of unc coins from the mint, look through them, send the few best examples to be graded, and voila! you now have a few coins worth more than the entire bag! Doesn't that look the slightest bit fishy to you?

 

Thank you for translating the earlier post.

 

It may seem that moderns are more dependent on the plastic than the older coins but actually they are probably less dependent! There is very little danger of alterred and doctored coins with moderns. There isn't so much difficulty with grading many of them because of heavy toning hiding all the types os surfaces which have developed over many decades. There are very few moderns with a little rub or problems simply because when these go into circulation they almost always stay in circulation. It's not as though there have been hundreds or thousands of people collecting from circulation until only recently.

 

Apparently what is being referred to is the greater dependence of moderns on their grade, level of preservation, or quality of manufature. A modern is more likely than most other coins to have large jumps at the high end of the scale simply because many are only rare at the high end of the scale. But you can see these exact same jumps at the high end of the scale for indian cents and Morgan dollars. They are caused by supply of the lower grades being adequate and the fact that many collectors seek the finest coins.

 

If you have one of the finest Morgans or moderns then it will still sell raw but it will have to be very solid for the grade or many potential purchasers will fear it will come back in a lower grade of much lower value. A collector of either of these coins may not be nearly so concerned with the grade if he recognizes the coin as the finest and will pay accordingly. There are some collectors who aren't concerned with slabbing and there are many who collect raw moderns since they are so easy to grade and cherry pick.

[DonHeath]

I cannot think of a single classic coin where the value more than doubles based on the coin being slabbed

 

 

Sure they don't.

[IGWT]

Apparently what is being referred to is the greater dependence of moderns on their grade, level of preservation, or quality of manufature. A modern is more likely than most other coins to have large jumps at the high end of the scale simply because many are only rare at the high end of the scale.

 

Do you agree, Cladking, that a collector who purchases an ultra-grade modern issue for a substantial amount of money takes a significant risk due to the unknown supply of coins in like condition?

 

On a different note, it seems that collectors of classic coinage might fail to appreciate the differences in condition among coins above, say, MS-68. I collect coins from the mid-19th century, and my grading skills do not work well above MS-65 (so, generally speaking, I won't purchase above that grade without help). I couldn't tell the difference between a MS-68 and an MS-69 with an electron microscope. On the one hand, perhaps collectors of classic coinage, instead of acknowledging a gap in their grading skills, choose to think that the one- or two-point differences at the apex of the grading scale are largely illusory. Or, on the other hand, perhaps they're right.

[cladking]

 

Do you agree, Cladking, that a collector who purchases an ultra-grade modern issue for a substantial amount of money takes a significant risk due to the unknown supply of coins in like condition?

 

 

 

Yes and no. There's no doubt that a smaller percentage of most moderns have been graded than most classics. In some isolated cases there could well be small quantities of coins that someone set aside in the year of issue. This applies far more to varieties than to high grade but there are probably at least a few small hordes of high grade coins. This danger is vastly overblown though. Most of these coins are simply too hard to find and would have required incredible luck or a huge amount of effort to set aside a lot of gems.

 

There is also a little tendency for many people to attach too much importance to the pop numbers. This is seen for the current year most readily. When the first coin for the year comes back high grade it immediately commands a high price. Those seeking the coins know that in many cases this price simply isn't justified because the coin was typically well made and is fairly "common" in top grades. There have been numerous coins in the past which have rocketed up in price when they start getting submittred only to fall back pretty hard. This is no surprise to the people collecting these coins. Look at the proofs back many years ago. These coins were not made in small quantities and 2 1/2 to 4 million are typical mintages. Generally around 2% of a proof issue stands out as being especially nice. 2% of 2,000,000 is still a fairly substantial number. I don't pretend to know what such a coin should sell for but those buying any modern should have some basic idea of how hard they are to find. A $100 premium for a top grade proof may or may not be out of line but $100 would go a long way toward finding the best 2% still in the holder.

 

Those collecting moderns don't need to become experts on the coins but they should have a good general idea of what's out there. This is made more difficult by the fact that there is no or very scant literature in most of these areas. But the opportunity exists to look at coins.

 

Keep in mind that these coins have been getting submitted since 1998 now. That is seven years!!! It was 1993 before the Morgans had been graded so long and one never heard talk about the dangers of buying Morgans since there were more out there.

 

In time it is quite possible that there will be more ways to get burned on moderns but those who are collecting these rather than speculating in them are likely to mostly avoid the potential pitfalls. Those seeking coins for collections will acquire enough better pieces that any potentially overrated pieces will be an insignificant portion of their "holdings".

 

It not nearly as much about the amount one spends as it is about importance and scarcity. There are some high priced coins that are likely to fall at least a little and there are some which appear to be very undervalued.

[Prethen]

Any way you cut it, modern coins in ga-ga grades going for stupid money is....well....silly (at a minimum). Michael is 100% correct, the plastic makes most of the money wrapped around most of today's modern coins. It reminds me of tulips for some reason.

 

Seriously, look at a MS/PF 69/70. First, can you honestly tell the difference? If not, then why the hell are you paying bookoo bucks? Second, does a 67 or 68 have similar eye appeal to you? Betcha like the price a lot more, too!

 

Imagine yourself breaking that 69/70 coin out of the holder and trying to sell it to someone for silly money. Good luck, it won't happen.

 

The plastic is the money on the coin, period...not the coin itself.

 

Personally, I don't care for moderns (anything after 1930) because they're common, common, common. I mainly stick with coins pre-1890. Yeah, the modern ga-ga grades might be "scarcer" and/or fetch a ton of dough, but so what? Enjoy the coin, enjoy the hobby. Don't chase after expensive plastic.

 

 

 

[cladking]

[q]Any way you cut it, modern coins in ga-ga grades going for stupid money is....well....silly (at a minimum). Michael is 100% correct, the plastic makes most of the money wrapped around most of today's modern coins. It reminds me of tulips for some reason.[/q]

 

Tulip bulbs were heavily promoted and caught on among

the general population. Modern coins on the other hand

are widely ridiculed by most mainstream collectors.

[q]

Seriously, look at a MS/PF 69/70. First, can you honestly tell the difference? If not, then why the hell are you paying bookoo bucks? Second, does a 67 or 68 have similar eye appeal to you? Betcha like the price a lot more, too!

 

Imagine yourself breaking that 69/70 coin out of the holder and trying to sell it to someone for silly money. Good luck, it won't happen.[/q]

 

There are no MS-69 or MS-70's of many modern coins.

The modern arena is much larger than whatever tiny seg-

ment you're thinking of when you talk about these grades.

 

It's very easy to tell the difference between the finest

and nearly the finest of most modern issues. In fact you

can even teach a raw novice to do it in a few minutes.

 

[q]

The plastic is the money on the coin, period...not the coin itself.[/q]

 

People have been collecting moderns and paying high

prices for them since before the grading companies ever

started.

[q]

Personally, I don't care for moderns (anything after 1930) because they're common, common, common. I mainly stick with coins pre-1890. Yeah, the modern ga-ga grades might be "scarcer" and/or fetch a ton of dough, but so what? Enjoy the coin, enjoy the hobby. Don't chase after expensive plastic.

[/]

 

Many moderns are unique. Some are rare and many are

scarce. Most of the circulating coins are rare in high grade.

Calling them common never put a coin into an album and

calling them overpriced doesn't raise the supply nor lower

the demand.

 

You're hardly alone in your disdain of modern coins. In-

deed this has been a world wide phenomenon and espec-

ially affects the 1950 and later base metal coinage. Many

of these coins are nearly unavailable in any condition since

people have found them to be so uncollectible.