Is the phrase "condition rarity" appropriate for pre-modern coins?

[Zoins]

I've seen the phrase "condition rarity" most often used for ultra-moderns when discussing 70s vs 69s. Is the phrase also appropriate for pre-modern coins that have limited survivors in uncirculated and AU conditions but are abundant in lower conditions, say G - EF?

[TomB]

I would think so. Just look at the 1884-S Morgan dollar in MS.

[WinstonWare]

Yes, that’s the way that the term is used in the Double Eagle book that I am reading.

[SuperDave]

The only Modern "conditional rarity" is MS68 and below.

[jtryka]

I think it can be used and often is used. In Saints, the biggest example I can think of off the top of my head is the 1920, it's fairly common up to MS-63 and often sells for the same price as the more common philly issues of the 1920s, but above that, they are much more rare. Looking at the Heritage archives, the MS-63 routinely sells for about $800-900, but in MS-64 it jumps to between $2500-3000. Above MS-64 they are exceedingly rare, the Eliasburg specimen (MS-65) sold at Heritage in January for over $109K!

[coinman1794]

...Only if the coins in question are conditionally rare

[Wihlborg]

Yes, the phrase is appropriate for any coin that is a 'condition rarity' regardless of when they were minted.

 

John

[Wihlborg]

The only Modern "conditional rarity" is MS68 and below.

 

 

John

[World Colonial]

Yes, it is appropriate. There are many pre-modern coins that are common or very common that fit this description. Morgan Dollars are the first ones that come to mind. I believe it is the 1886-O Dollar that has a listed value of about $250,000 in MS-65 DMPL and sells for $15 in VF. Even some key dates could qualify depending upon ones perspective. Goldberg had a small group of 1894 and 1893-S Dollars last year. These coins are thought of as scarce but are still not that hard to find.

[James_OldeTowne]

"Condition rarity" is yet another one of those slick marketing terms that has a lot more to do with hyping prices than promoting numimatics. In other words, it isn't good enough that a tough coin is just plain tough - say an 1815 Bust half. Now, the "condition" is yet another curve ball thrown at you to make you feel that if you don't buy a coin in a high enough grade, then your collection is somehow suffering because of it. At least that's how I see it.

 

The marketing strategy becomes most effective though with modern coins. Hypesters know that nobody in their right mind is going to pay a premium for a 2006 Lincoln cent grading MS-67 when there are millions of them in pocket change waiting to be found. I mean, hey, there are only 47,256 graded MS-67 with just 1,720 higher, so it's a "condition rarity" in MS-68. Better get one of those MS-68s so your collection can be something really special! Oh, you settled on an MS-67? Well, you're just not a real collector, now, are you?

[MikeKing]

I agree both in fact and principle with what James said.

 

Condition rarity so far as I'm concerned is moot, when the reality is that if you crack the coin out of it's expensive holder and send it in to the same company that graded it, there is NO guarantee it will either get the same grade OR be body bagged for artificial toning (if such coin were toned). It's an un-arguable reality.

[jtryka]

Mike and James, I don't disagree with your sentiments on the modern condition rarities, especially since I doubt many people can really tell the difference between an MS-67 and MS-68 (certainly I can't). I think the concept of condition rarity on older series occurs at less stratospheric grade levels, thus making it feasible for people to tell the difference between those grades where the breakpoint to "condition rarity" occurs. In my example, I can pretty well tell the difference between an MS-63, MS-64 and MS-65 Saint, so raw or slabbed, the 1920 in MS-64 and higher is genuinely rarer than those in MS-63 and below, and most collectors of the series would be willing to pay up for a 64 that was all there with or without the plastic to back it up.

[michael]

"Condition rarity" is yet another one of those slick marketing terms that has a lot more to do with hyping prices than promoting numimatics. In other words, it isn't good enough that a tough coin is just plain tough - say an 1815 Bust half. Now, the "condition" is yet another curve ball thrown at you to make you feel that if you don't buy a coin in a high enough grade, then your collection is somehow suffering because of it. At least that's how I see it.

 

The marketing strategy becomes most effective though with modern coins. Hypesters know that nobody in their right mind is going to pay a premium for a 2006 Lincoln cent grading MS-67 when there are millions of them in pocket change waiting to be found. I mean, hey, there are only 47,256 graded MS-67 with just 1,720 higher, so it's a "condition rarity" in MS-68. Better get one of those MS-68s so your collection can be something really special! Oh, you settled on an MS-67? Well, you're just not a real collector, now, are you?

 

 

[michael]

Re: Is the phrase "condition rarity" appropriate for pre-modern coins?

 

yes if for pre and current modern coins if.......IF you talk about ms and proof 69 70 grades first strike knew release

[DonHeath]

"Condition rarity" is yet another one of those slick marketing terms that has a lot more to do with hyping prices than promoting numimatics.

 

I always think of moderns like the one below when I hear the term. It's mine, and not one I'll sell, so I suppose my calling it conditionally rare would be hard to classify as hype. JMO

 

[texasrichard]

I understand both sides but to me its gets to a "grey area" on some coins....

 

For example: A 1955 D Washington Quarter is a very common coin. However, try to find one graded (or that would grade) MS66 or higher. Not an easy task as these coins were not struck very well. Would this not be a "condidtion rarity"?

[World Colonial]

The NGC census lists 330 1955-D Washington quarters in MS-66 and 29 in MS-67. I do not have access to the PCGS census and there may be some duplicates but that is a large number. So no, a coin with a population of 330 is not a condition rarity.

[texasrichard]

PCGS shows 126 at MS66 with none higher.

 

I guess your right.

[al_e_gator]

So no, a coin with a population of 330 is not a condition rarity.

 

I've been actively looking for a 55D Quarter in MS66 for 6 months. I have only run across 3 of them, but not at the price that I was willing to pay. I'll just be happy with my MS65 for now.

 

At what population point would you consider "condition rarity" to take place?

[cladking]

"Condition rarity" is yet another one of those slick marketing terms that has a lot more to do with hyping prices than promoting numimatics.

 

I always think of moderns like the one below when I hear the term. It's mine, and not one I'll sell, so I suppose my calling it conditionally rare would be hard to classify as hype. JMO

 

 

 

Some of the posters in this thread would be very surprised to know how few coins like this one exist at all. You could spend a lot of time talking about its weak points but when the final tally is done it is a very attractive coin and there are precious few that are better. It is of a date that is exceedingly tough in any sort of attractive condition.

 

There may be half a billion in circulation but most of them aren't very attractive either and they are all worn. Coins used to survive for decades in pristine condition because the FED didn't rotate their stocks and people collected the coins. The FED has been rotating their stocks for decades and people didn't save these coins. The few that did get saved are almost always ugly and struck from misaligned and tired dies.

 

Go ahead and claim moderns can't be condition rarities for one reason or another since it allows new collectors to acquire sets for a song and a few old timers to sock away junk that will always be common as dirt.

[World Colonial]

So no, a coin with a population of 330 is not a condition rarity.

 

I've been actively looking for a 55D Quarter in MS66 for 6 months. I have only run across 3 of them, but not at the price that I was willing to pay. I'll just be happy with my MS65 for now.

 

At what population point would you consider "condition rarity" to take place?

 

I do not know that there is a "right number" because as this example illustrates, just because a coin has a high population in a particular grade does not mean that it is availbile.

 

I am surprised to hear tha a coin with 330 in grade is not available more often. But in the world coins that I collect and others that I follow, there is frequently either little or no correlation between the two. A prior post used the 1935 New Zealand proof Crown as an example of a rare coin. It has a mintage of 364 which seems low but I see that coin for sale very often in major auctions.

 

The only explanation I have for it is that some series must have collectors who just tend to hold onto their coins whether they are rare, relatively common or supposedly so.. One reason for this is probably because a coin that is perceived to be common and/or has a low value in the price guides is not worth selling in the eyes of many collectors.

[Oldtrader3]

I have only owned one coin that I would call a condition rarity. It was an 1845-O/horizontal O, no drapery, seated liberty, half dollar graded NGC, AU58 (FS-002.5). There was only (1) coin graded and I bought it for less than $700. I sold it and now this coin is no longer in the NGC census. I wonder where it went?

[Bruceswar]

I understand both sides but to me its gets to a "grey area" on some coins....

 

For example: A 1955 D Washington Quarter is a very common coin. However, try to find one graded (or that would grade) MS66 or higher. Not an easy task as these coins were not struck very well. Would this not be a "condidtion rarity"?

 

The 1955 D is a great one. I challenge anybody here on the forums to find me a RAW coin that will grade MS 66 at PCGS or NGC. NGC tends to be a bit loser in my mind on this series and thus a PCGS MS 67 coin of this date will bring $10,000 or more if and when slabbed and sold. I am not joking about that price as well. I have been looking at hundreads of 1955 D Quarters just to find one for my set. The 1955 D is the late Key Date in anything past MS 64. Lowest Mintage of the 50's Quarters with under 4 million. I rate it as the number 4 Quarter as far as the Keys go in MS 65 and up. 32 S, 32 D, and 36 D are ahead of it with 37 S and 34 D not far behind. Those NGC pop reports are scewed a bit as well from the crack out and resubmit for a higher grade. The 1955 D is notorious for that. I would supect you could also chop the numbers in half for MS 65 and MS 66.

[al_e_gator]

I understand both sides but to me its gets to a "grey area" on some coins....

 

For example: A 1955 D Washington Quarter is a very common coin. However, try to find one graded (or that would grade) MS66 or higher. Not an easy task as these coins were not struck very well.

 

The 1955 D is a great one. I challenge anybody here on the forums to find me a RAW coin that will grade MS 66 at PCGS or NGC. NGC tends to be a bit loser in my mind on this series and thus a PCGS MS 67 coin of this date will bring $10,000 or more if and when slabbed and sold. I am not joking about that price as well. I have been looking at hundreads of 1955 D Quarters just to find one for my set. The 1955 D is the late Key Date in anything past MS 64.

 

Speaking of which...

 

[Dcoin]

I think every year and mint mark has its own condition rarity. There is always that point where the price rises in multiples for each grade point higher. I have noticed that the price dramatically spikes at a certain grade (depending on the coin, of course). After this spike, is what I would consider to be the starting point of condition rarity. At least from a financial stand point.

[World Colonial]

The original question on this post was whether the term conditional rarity applies to pre-moderns. The answer is that it can apply to any coin although the grade which is recognized as rare will vary. On modern coins, it is usually MS-70 for the more recent proofs and closer to 70 for recent business strikes. On "older" moderns and classics, it may be a mid-MS grade such as a "65". Finally on other classics, world or ancient coins it may be a mid-circulated grade or even lower because that is all that is available.

 

On these prices though such as $10,000 for an MS-67 1955-D quarter in MS-67, whoever is a recent buyer at that price is almost certainly going to have financial regrets. I do not know when the current coin market cycle will end but in the most recent ones, coins with huge price multiples to those in a grade one or two points lower were among the biggest financial losers. I do not know offhand how much a "65" or a "66" costs but I would guess that it is small fraction of that price. And when the market is not as good, there will be plenty of collectors who will settle and be perfectly satisfied with a slightly inferior but much cheaper specimen and almost no one who is even going to consider that kind of price.

 

It is up to each collector what they want to buy and how much they want to pay. I do not collect US coins but if I did, I would much rather have a classic such as an high AU or low MS Drapped Bust Half Dollar for $10K. Or I would buy a Liberty Seated cameo proof set among many other items. I could then buy an MS-65 1955-D quarter with whatever was left over if I wanted one.

[DonHeath]

World Colonial, that's a reasonable way to collect. If, on the other hand, you're a U.S.coin set builder hoping not to spend $10,000 for every coin, odds are you'd choose a different approach. If you collected a series (such as Washingtons) in which the vast majority were readily available in gem+, you might even choose to try and match the set, choosing to buy the few condition rarities required to complete it. I respect collectors who take that approach, who know what they're buying, and who pay what their experience tells them is a fair premium for the quality they DO see. To each his/her own.

 

BTW - $10,000 for a 55-D is crazy talk.

[al_e_gator]

On modern coins, it is usually MS-70 for the more recent proofs and closer to 70 for recent business strikes.

Certain select modern coins, YES. The majority, NO ... a PF70 state coin is nothing special and very common.

With the MS/non-proof coins, conditional rarity is driven by population and on some modern coins it can start as early as MS-66 if a particular year/mint was hard to come by in better condition. I've said it before in other posts and have gotten much debate, but IMO moderns scare me from an investment stand-point, especially ultra-moderns.

 

On "older" moderns and classics, it may be a mid-MS grade such as a "65".

With classics, excluding most "older moderns", the market has been around for quite some time in the 'raw' form and it has been 'relatively' stable, with certain exceptions. I would like to think, but I could be wrong, that most of the nicer specimens have been slabbed by now. Populations are more well known and will probably not spike on the high side. I also think that some of the pricing increases in the classic series are driven by the 'new' blood in the hobby which was brought on by the public's interest in the ultra-mods.

 

Finally on other classics, world or ancient coins it may be a mid-circulated grade or even lower because that is all that is available.

I don't know anything about world or ancients, so I'll not comment.

 

On these prices though such as $10,000 for an MS-67 1955-D quarter in MS-67, whoever is a recent buyer at that price is almost certainly going to have financial regrets.

I agree. A NGC MS67 1955-D quarter just recently sold for $1,200. However, the PCGS population is 0 on that grade (I believe). So there are people out there would would blindly buy the coin for double/triple/quadruple the money of the NGC coin because it is a pop 1 coin for that TPG.

 

I do not know offhand how much a "65" or a "66" costs but I would guess that it is small fraction of that price.

I mis-spoke in my early post here saying that I would be happy with my MS-65 for now. Turns out that I do have a 66, pictured above. The 55D was on my Quarter upgrade list because it's an ugly one IMO, so I assumed without looking that it was on there because it was a 65.

Price that I paid for the 66 was $112. Would I pay even $1200 for one bump in grade, NOPE. The 'value' to me for a 67 would be about $250. Will I ever get one at that price, I seriously doubt it, unless it is a cherry-picked 66.

[World Colonial]

It was a typo on my part. I know that most modern coins (even recent ones) do not grade an MS-70.

 

On the pricing of Classic conditional rarities, I still consider some of the prices absurd, but hey it isn't my money. I just do not get why prices on these conditional rarities are as high or even higher than coins that are scarce or rare in any grade. One recent example I saw on a dealer website was an 1857 NGC PR-63 quarter which they claimed had a mintage of 40. Their ask price was $4600. They also had another quarter (cannot remember exact date but I believe is was between 1866 and 1872) that was PR-65 (maybe it was a 66 or 67, I cannot remember) cameo with a mintage of 600. Ask price was $5850.

 

On the prices you paid, I would also pay $112 for that coin if I collected that series. Its reasonable to acquire one of the better specimens.

[jom]

Some of the posters in this thread would be very surprised to know how few coins like this one exist at all. You could spend a lot of time talking about its weak points but when the final tally is done it is a very attractive coin and there are precious few that are better. It is of a date that is exceedingly tough in any sort of attractive condition.

 

Yeah, but isn't that somewhat different than the hyped modern (or "classic") that you can find just as well in MS65 when it's supposedly "rare" in MS66 due to some POP report?

 

There's a difference in trying to find a high grade 82-P Washington and trying to find an MS65 in some series that has plently of nice MS64 quality coins to choose from. The difference being that the 82-P in ANY high grade is hard to find but there are countless dates/series that get over-hyped above a certain grade because the POP report says there are 10,341 in MS65 but 3 in MS66. That to me is bogus since I believe the TPG's will avoid the next up grade altogether due to the price jump. Hence, a self-created rarity.

 

I see hype all over the spectrum when it comes to condition rarity though. For example, the so-called strike condition coins (FB, FH, FBL etc etc) are over-hyped condition rarities too.

 

jom