Somethings happening to me...

[DC Dawg]

Here's what I do with some "real coins"

Oh... I see... you like your "real coins" raw and not encased in plastic!

 

Now I understand... and agree!

 

Scott

[James_OldeTowne]

Here's what I do with some "real coins"

Oh... I see... you like your "real coins" raw and not encased in plastic!

 

Now I understand... and agree!

 

Scott

Well... when they're this affordable, anyhow !

[IGWT]

I thought that Mike's OP rant was about colorful coins being unmanly.

[michael]

I guess I am surprised at what some of us do and do not consider "real" coins.

 

The vast majority of the money I have invested in my collection is for coins that would likely fall under the "real" category as described above, but I don't believe I would ever crack these pieces out of their holders. These would be gunky, largely original, attractive, problem-free, circulated early Federal pieces or wonderfully toned, largely original, superb nineteenth century type. Would I crack these pieces out of their holders? No. Does that make them less "real"? Not in my opinion.

 

These pieces represent too large a financial investment for me to jeopardize their surfaces through additional handling or placement in albums. Also, regardless if one wants to ignore this aspect or not, the liquidity of expensive coinage drops once this coinage is removed from its certified holder. This is not to say that these coins have no market for them as raw pieces, but they may take more to move at the same price. Their continued certification, in my opinion, acts as one layer or inexpensive insurance for my family.

 

These coins are "special", in my opinion, but must not fit the category of "real" since they are certified and will continue to be certified as long as I am the caretaker for them-

 

 

[McKinley-migration]

"real coins" is subjective isn't it...? this thread may last forever

 

 

(but a 1999 pf69 dcam state quarter isn't a real coin gimme a '72 two cent piece )