Undervalued coins/coin series 3 3

[World Colonial]

1 hour ago, cladking said:

What part of "virtually no original rolls" are you missing?   

 

This doesn't matter so much for '69 quarters but rolls of '71-D are fairly elusive as well and these are the only source for the type "h".  

I just don't understand why you believe all moderns are common except in high grade and why you consider condition scarcity to not matter. 

I am not missing anything.  So what if there isn't a single original roll?  I just told you that only a low proportion have any.  How exactly is that of any significance and how does it change anything I told you?  Should I be making a big deal that there aren't any for 18th century Peru pillar coinage?

Why would I think there is any significance to the scarcity of any coin (US circulating moderns collectively) which are more common than 99% of all circulating coins ever struck in equivalent quality?  That's the reality, whether you will admit it or not.

The reason I disagree with you is because I do not find a need to exaggerate practically everything as you do in your claims.  I find no distinction in your scarcity criteria. 

1 hour ago, cladking said:

You are apparently wrong across the board or moderns wouldn't be doing so well.  

What does this have to do with anything I said?  Are you referring to world "moderns" again?  I know you aren't referring to US moderns generically.

[World Colonial]

1 hour ago, GoldFinger1969 said:

I don't know what is included in the Key Dates & Rarities Index, but it has generally been in an uptrend since 1970 and is only down 10% from the ATH a few years ago.

It was about five years ago I pointed this out to the South African collectors I know who were under the impression that coins are such fantastic "investments".  I noticed it's the only sub-index that had held up at the time.  The rest, not so much.

[GoldFinger1969]

22 minutes ago, World Colonial said:

It was about five years ago I pointed this out to the South African collectors I know who were under the impression that coins are such fantastic "investments".  I noticed it's the only sub-index that had held up at the time.  The rest, not so much.

Every other sub-index is boom-superbust.

[Henri Charriere]

1 hour ago, World Colonial said:

So what if there isn't a single original roll?  

I can understand the hoopla if a claim were made that not a single original roll of '64 Kennedy halves remain.  They were 90% silver.  But a roll of clad quarters?  I never those things had any value beyond face.  This hobby sure has changed.

[World Colonial]

1 hour ago, Quintus Arrius said:

I can understand the hoopla if a claim were made that not a single original roll of '64 Kennedy halves remain.  They were 90% silver.  But a roll of clad quarters?  I never those things had any value beyond face.  This hobby sure has changed.

You probably aren't familiar with the past post exchanges I have had with him.  You are actually making part of his point.  Your view is the consensus which is why pre-1999 clad coinage (before SQ which were saved in huge numbers) was saved in lower numbers than 1933-1964 US silver in better quality.

My point is that any "scarcity" based upon the TPG label (the "hobby" marketing angle since the 80's), strike quality (cladking's view) or specialization (also cladking's view) is a pure contrivance.  It's an imaginary scarcity predominantly used to exaggerate the significance and inflate the price level, nothing more. Outside of specialization (e.g., a die variety), I can buy any US modern in practically any quality any day of the week, (almost) always in quantity. 

I'm not trying to single this coinage out either, as this is equally true for most US Mint coins, though the quality and availability differs.  As an example, one poster on the PCGS forum recently claimed the 1916 SLQ and 19th century proof dimes as "scarce".  Right then, I found seven MS-64-MS-66 1916's just on Collector's Corner.  I also found every single 1858 and later proof dime on eBay though I had to go to Collector's Corner for a graded 1862.  For the 1858 which supposedly had a mintage of 100, I found four or five. (The mintage is almost certainly wrong.)

The point I am making is that these classics aren't really that scarce either, or else it wouldn't be so easy to buy.  The higher prices have a lot to do with it (in contrast to much cheaper world coinage of similar scarcity) but no coin which can be bought on demand can sensibly be described as really being scarce.

[GoldFinger1969]

1 hour ago, World Colonial said:

The point I am making is that these classics aren't really that scarce either, or else it wouldn't be so easy to buy.  The higher prices have a lot to do with it (in contrast to much cheaper world coinage of similar scarcity) but no coin which can be bought on demand can sensibly be described as really being scarce.

What's the price range of all or most of these U.S. small face value coins you guys are debating ?  I've kept out of it because I have nothing to add.

If you have to pay $25 or $50 for a very nice graded/slabbed coin that is a big increase over face value for a penny, nickel, or dime....but in absolute terms, compared to most Morgans or Saints, dirt cheap.  From an activity perspective, it tends to stimulate more activity than Morgan or Saint buyers who need larger $$$ funds to buy their coins.

[Henri Charriere]

1 hour ago, World Colonial said:

....no coin which can be bought on demand can sensibly be described as really being scarce.

Truth be told, no offense to CladKing or or any other collector of clads, it was the introduction of genetically-modified "silver" mutants that prompted me to stop out of the hobby when I did.

I have singled out the above snippet of comment as a fine example of unassailable truth which is deserving of special attention... that comes with a string attached: it requires that you exercise caution and due diligence. 

[World Colonial]

2 hours ago, GoldFinger1969 said:

What's the price range of all or most of these U.S. small face value coins you guys are debating ?  I've kept out of it because I have nothing to add.

If you have to pay $25 or $50 for a very nice graded/slabbed coin that is a big increase over face value for a penny, nickel, or dime....but in absolute terms, compared to most Morgans or Saints, dirt cheap.  From an activity perspective, it tends to stimulate more activity than Morgan or Saint buyers who need larger $$$ funds to buy their coins.

Which ones are you specifically referring to?

If the classics in this post, the 1916 SLQ is one of the common 20th century key dates which I claim is one of the most overpriced coins in the world for it's actual numismatic attributes.  Mintage is 52,000.  I forgot the survival estimate or current TPG counts but neither are low.  There is just huge demand.  In G-4, last time I checked, it listed for $3500 though the actual current price might be somewhat less.  It's another coin (like the 01-S quarter) which would be viewed as "dreck" in this quality if it were practically any other.  In MS-64-66, i believe it's a $15K to $40K coin but I would to look it up.  To give you an idea how absurd this is, for $3500, you can buy a medieval English gold Noble in AU and an MS for somewhat more.

The dimes?  Depends which one but none are $25 or $50.  Middle date Liberty Seated dimes (1858 and somewhat later) are at least high 3-figures for any decent one but there is a big price spread as the grades increase.  A PR-63 isn't that expensive but higher grade CAM and DCAM cost a lot more.

Not sure what US coins you have in mind but the only "very nice" slabbed coins I know in the prices you listed are all post-1933.  Those amounts don't buy "squat"  quality wise in US coinage outside of the most common series and haven't for a long time.

[GoldFinger1969]

1 hour ago, World Colonial said:

Which ones are you specifically referring to?.....Not sure what US coins you have in mind but the only "very nice" slabbed coins I know in the prices you listed are all post-1933.  Those amounts don't buy "squat"  quality wise in US coinage outside of the most common series and haven't for a long time.

I guess SLQ's, Franklins, Barbers, various pennies and nickles.  Just wanted to know if any groups stood out.

G-4 ?  I didn't even know such a grade existed !!  I am not sure I have anything lower than the AU's. 

[World Colonial]

5 hours ago, GoldFinger1969 said:

I guess SLQ's, Franklins, Barbers, various pennies and nickles.  Just wanted to know if any groups stood out.

G-4 ?  I didn't even know such a grade existed !!  I am not sure I have anything lower than the AU's. 

Some of the coins you listed are available "nice" for $25 to $50, in better circulated to low MS grades.  Common Lincoln cents higher.  Barbers not the half.

[cladking]

10 hours ago, Quintus Arrius said:

Truth be told, no offense to CladKing or or any other collector of clads, it was the introduction of genetically-modified "silver" mutants that prompted me to stop out of the hobby when I did.

 

You and tens of millions of other collectors stepped out when clads were introduced. The mint and federal government hated coin collectors and did everything possible to discourage it.  They didn't really need the date freezes and other contrivances because just debasing the currency was sufficient for most collectors.  Millions  got out and the ones who didn't had no interest in setting aside rolls of clad coinage.  This is one of the things World colonial simply can't grasp. In his defense he believes that if there are more than a few hundred of a coin then it is "insignificant" and will never be collected  and there are a lot more of most moderns than this.  And to cap off this belief he also believes that varieties and high grade coins don't count even if they are scarce.  

I take no offence because I probably hated clad as much as anyone.  It wasn't just how it wrecked collecting from change "forever" but the metal itself was junk and was supposed to keep the same date forever and not even a mintmark to tell them apart.  I suppose it might be a small part of the reason I sold my buffalo nickel collection in 1968 but the principle reason was I needed the cash.  I didn't return to collecting until the coins in circulation were starting to get interesting again in 1972 and I had read an article in the paper that said the FED was going to start rotating their coin stocks.  Before this it was quite common to get rolls of clad all the way back to 1965 so there was no point in collecting moderns.  Now there are hundreds of different issues in circulation (thousands if you count varieties) and most of them are actually tough in high grade because the FED keeps all the coins in circulation all the time and have for half a century next year.  

But there still aren't large numbers of BU rolls as WC continues to intimate.  There are lots of moderns which are probably wholly non-existent in BU rolls because they are very scarce and there are so few rolls.  

[cladking]

16 hours ago, World Colonial said:

 

What does this have to do with anything I said?  Are you referring to world "moderns" again?  I know you aren't referring to US moderns generically.

Moderns are doing pretty well in several countries including the US.  

Modern collectors are still rare but they outnumber many of the coins.  

[World Colonial]

Just now, cladking said:

Moderns are doing pretty well in several countries including the US.  

As I explained to you, the term "modern" is a US centric term which US collectors (and maybe really you) have applied arbitrarily to non-US base metal coinage covering an arbitrary time period.  The only country I can immediately think of where it legitimately applies is Canada because the change over to base metal mirrored the US and presumably collectors in both countries collected both at the time.

As I also told you, considering that there are at least 50,000 and possibly over 100,000 coins meeting your definition of "modern", neither you nor anyone else can possibly know what you claim.  In the US, moderns may be doing well by your definition, but that's different from how most others are likely to see it.

A very low proportion of it may qualify as "under rated" but the overwhelming majority doesn't and isn't going anywhere financially.

9 minutes ago, cladking said:

Modern collectors are still rare but they outnumber many of the coins.  

Hardly of these collectors are trying to buy the coins you imply, except at rock bottom prices like you will.

[RWB]

Just curious --- what is an "underrated" coin? Popularity? Cost? Availability? Design?

[Henri Charriere]

19 minutes ago, RWB said:

Just curious --- what is an "underrated" coin? Popularity? Cost? Availability? Design?

According to definition it is something that has not received the merit, recognition or praise it deserves. How this would apply to specific coinage would be a matter of opinion and subject to endless debate.  

[GoldFinger1969]

29 minutes ago, RWB said:

Just curious --- what is an "underrated" coin? Popularity? Cost? Availability? Design?

Dunno, but the OP was:  "I just wanted to ask everyone what do you think the most undervalued coin series is(not counting bullion)? Personally, I think the kennedy series is undervalued, and the modern dimes/nickels. Also, add what you think the most overvalued series is: I think it is the presidential dollars (who wants to spend 100+ for a smooth edged coin)." 

I think the OP and subsequent posts were just asking where a particular series might exist that isn't what we call in the business a "crowded trade."  In other words, something that is down in price or not that expensive in absolute terms....not attracting tons of bidders/interest on HA, Ebay, etc.....and maybe you can negotiate prices with your LCS or at a coin show.

Since I only really collect Saints, Morgans, bullion coins, and moderns.....I'm not too well-versed in small face value coinage from post-WW II or pre-WW II vintage.  I just know that is where the demographic dropoff has been most pronounced based on what I have read on many forums (and some articles).

[GoldFinger1969]

5 minutes ago, Quintus Arrius said:

According to definition it is something that has not received the merit, recognition or praise it deserves. How this would apply to specific coinage would be a matter of opinion and subject to endless debate.  

Or maybe is "cheap" that it might attract future interest.  Cheap in absolute terms....or maybe has come down a huge amount from a previous bubble peak.

Interesting that a colleague has stated that he thinks that 12-year bear market in U.S. coins might be ending as seen in the PCGS 3000 Index:

https://www.pcgs.com/prices/coin-index/pcgs3000

We had 14-year bear market after the 1980 bubble, so the entire 40 year move since can be considered one huge basing move, in technical terms.

Edited April 7, 2021 by GoldFinger1969

[Alex in PA.]

On 4/5/2021 at 10:04 AM, World Colonial said:

If the collector doesn't care about the future price of what they buy, then nothing I write on this topic is of any relevance to them. 

It does not matter what the "collector' cares about or doesn't care about.  The price the "collector' pays today or pays next year is based on the market which is controlled by groups of "coin dealers".  The "collector' will pay the cost as set by these "dealers' or the "collector" will do without.  It has been about greed; it has always been about greed. 

Edited April 7, 2021 by Alex in PA.

[GoldFinger1969]

9 minutes ago, Alex in PA. said:

It does not matter what the "collector' cares about or doesn't care about.  The price the "collector' pays today or pays next year is based on the market which is controlled by groups of "coin dealers".  The "collector' will pay the cost as set by these "dealers' or the "collector" will do without.  It has been about greed; it has always been about greed. 

I don't disagree that dealers have some influence on prices, but I don't think they have monopoly power and can dictate prices.  If they could, they'd probably be alot higher and that PCGS 3000 Index would not have had 2 mega-bear markets in the last 40 years.

Where do you see dealers artificially keeping prices high ?

[RWB]

2 hours ago, GoldFinger1969 said:

....what do you think the most undervalued coin series....

For purposes of this thread, it is "value."

The usual answer is "classic commemoratives;" at least that's what I've seen in posts for the past 20-years.

[World Colonial]

2 hours ago, GoldFinger1969 said:

Interesting that a colleague has stated that he thinks that 12-year bear market in U.S. coins might be ending as seen in the PCGS 3000 Index:

https://www.pcgs.com/prices/coin-index/pcgs3000

We had 14-year bear market after the 1980 bubble, so the entire 40 year move since can be considered one huge basing move, in technical terms.

There is no validity to technical analysis in coin prices if that's what this person you refer to thinks.

There isn't a fixed outcome other than collector's ability and willingness to pay.  Concurrently, coins are still collectibles, not hardly ever "widgets".  Most coins are effectively pure consumption alternatives, others are hybrid consumption-"investment", and those tied to bullion are "investment".

The types of coins in the PCGS 3000 index are mostly the first two.  Considering the reckless and unprecedented speculation in every asset class and a few masquerading as one, nothing is "impossible".  Concurrently, any "breakout" from a 40 year "basing period" implies that prices will explode (far) beyond the capacity of the vast majority of current collectors to pay.  

This happened in the 70's because the price level was a very low fraction of current levels and incomes increased noticeably during this period, nominally.

This isn't going to happen now where it will last unless the "hobby" has a large influx of (far) above average affluent collectors or the purchasing unit (USD for US coins) cheapens considerably.  After decades of this country living beyond it's means, the standard of living of the typical American isn't about to increase sufficiently where the current typical collector can afford it.

Many cheaper and mostly lower quality coins cost less now than the 70's, adjusted for price changes but the higher quality (measured by TPG grade) often don't.  The latter is where most of any new money is likely to go, not many collector and collector quality coinage.  This coinage is already often too expensive for probably around 80% of the US collector base, under my assumption that they mostly or entirely don't pay more than $300 for a single coin.

[World Colonial]

11 minutes ago, RWB said:

The usual answer is "classic commemoratives;" at least that's what I've seen in posts for the past 20-years.

Numerous threads on the PCGS forum sharing this opinion.  This coinage is cheap compared to the 1989 bubble peak but then, so are many other US series too.  Besides, this occurred pre-internet.

This claim is based upon the fallacy that most who will buy this coinage actually want to collect the entire series (when they don't) and that the coins are at least somewhat "scarce" due to the low mintage when it isn't.

The coins collectors like most from this series are below the peak but hardly cheap.  Hawaii is a four figure coin and it's one of the most common four figure coins on the entire planet.  Outside of gold coinage, there are very few other coins with as many survivors worth the same price.

The others?  Disproportionately uninteresting themes and average to mediocre designs.  Most collectors either know nothing of the commemorated events (overwhelmingly obscure) or don't care.  Some generate regional interest but no reason to believe for hardly anyone else.

[World Colonial]

2 hours ago, Alex in PA. said:

It does not matter what the "collector' cares about or doesn't care about.  The price the "collector' pays today or pays next year is based on the market which is controlled by groups of "coin dealers".  The "collector' will pay the cost as set by these "dealers' or the "collector" will do without.  It has been about greed; it has always been about greed. 

Coins are an entirely discretionary purchase.  No one needs any coin.  In today's environment, dealers still function as a type of "market maker" to a point and provide price support by holding inventory but no one needs to buy from them or sell to them either.

[Henri Charriere]

2 hours ago, Alex in PA. said:

It does not matter what the "collector' cares about or doesn't care about.  The price the "collector' pays today or pays next year is based on the market which is controlled by groups of "coin dealers".  The "collector' will pay the cost as set by these "dealers' or the "collector" will do without.  It has been about greed; it has always been about greed. 

No, respectfully, not always.  I can distinctly recall a time, B.G., Before Greed.  You've got a few years on QA so I know you too must remember those halcyon days. Remember the old Sy Syms slogan, "an educated consumer is our best customer"? All the greedy dealers in the world cannot do you harm if you refuse to be complicit in their "too good to be true" schemes.

[Henri Charriere]

3 hours ago, GoldFinger1969 said:

Where do you see dealers artificially keeping prices high ?

[In New York City's so-called Diamond District, but that's another matter entirely.]  😉

[Henri Charriere]

32 minutes ago, World Colonial said:

Coins are an entirely discretionary purchase.  No one needs any coin.  

Respectfully, Erasmus said, "when I get a little money, I buy books; and if any is left I buy food and clothes."

QA says, "when I get a little money, I buy Roosters; etc."

What once was discretionary -- it's hard to distinguish between that and irresistible impulse, is now involuntary acquiescence to compulsion.

I want, I need, I must have, the lesser god, Set Registry, has issued a direct ultimatum: either submit to a lifetime of upgrading, or be declared OBSOLETE and ordered to vacate the premises.  

I have no choice in the matter.

😉

[GoldFinger1969]

1 hour ago, RWB said:

For purposes of this thread, it is "value." The usual answer is "classic commemoratives;" at least that's what I've seen in posts for the past 20-years.

Well...for the last 10 years, the Gold & Silver Commemorative subindex of the PCGS 3000 Index has been the 2nd-worst performing sub-index, down 40%.  Pure silver is down 48% from the bubble-peak in 2011.  Here's the complete listing:

Last 10 Years for PCGS 3000 and sub-indices:

PCGS 3000.......................... -18%
Gold Spot.............................. Flat
Generic Gold........................ -28%
Mint State Rare Gold Coin.... -23%
Proof Gold Coin..................... +4%
Mint State Type Coin............ -18%
Proof Type Coin.....................-25%
Silver Spot............................ -48%
Morgan & Peace Dollar......... -20%
Silver & Gold Commem.........-40%
20th Century Coin Index ...... -20%
Key Dates & Rarities ............. -5%

Edited April 7, 2021 by GoldFinger1969

[GoldFinger1969]

1 hour ago, World Colonial said:

There is no validity to technical analysis in coin prices if that's what this person you refer to thinks.

No, they just said it based on 12-years being long enough to drive speculation out of the market and with prices down alot since, both signify that MAYBE the price has bottomed.  Doesn't mean it's going to rebound or that he is a buyer now.

The TA part was me just applying what I've learned from past bubbles that burst. 

1 hour ago, World Colonial said:

There isn't a fixed outcome other than collector's ability and willingness to pay.  Concurrently, coins are still collectibles, not hardly ever "widgets".  Most coins are effectively pure consumption alternatives, others are hybrid consumption-"investment", and those tied to bullion are "investment".  The types of coins in the PCGS 3000 index are mostly the first two.  Considering the reckless and unprecedented speculation in every asset class and a few masquerading as one, nothing is "impossible".  Concurrently, any "breakout" from a 40 year "basing period" implies that prices will explode (far) beyond the capacity of the vast majority of current collectors to pay.  This happened in the 70's because the price level was a very low fraction of current levels and incomes increased noticeably during this period, nominally. This isn't going to happen now where it will last unless the "hobby" has a large influx of (far) above average affluent collectors or the purchasing unit (USD for US coins) cheapens considerably.  After decades of this country living beyond it's means, the standard of living of the typical American isn't about to increase sufficiently where the current typical collector can afford it. Many cheaper and mostly lower quality coins cost less now than the 70's, adjusted for price changes but the higher quality (measured by TPG grade) often don't.  The latter is where most of any new money is likely to go, not many collector and collector quality coinage.  This coinage is already often too expensive for probably around 80% of the US collector base, under my assumption that they mostly or entirely don't pay more than $300 for a single coin.

Check out the sub-indices 10-year performance I posted above.  If I went back to 1970 for most, then you'd have a decent rate of return because....as you stated...the prices for EVERYTHING (bullion and non-bullion) was so cheap pre-1973 that even if you didn't sell something/everything at bubble peaks in 1980 or 1989, you still could have done OK over the last 50 years.

Edited April 7, 2021 by GoldFinger1969

[GoldFinger1969]

1 hour ago, World Colonial said:

Numerous threads on the PCGS forum sharing this opinion.  This coinage is cheap compared to the 1989 bubble peak but then, so are many other US series too.  Besides, this occurred pre-internet.

https://www.pcgs.com/prices/coin-index/silver-and-gold-commemorative

Commemoratives went up 60-fold from 1970-1990.  That's 22% a year -- double what would be an unsustainable rate of return for 99.99% of individual investments, let alone an entire class.

The index sits about 85% below the 1989-90 all-time peak.  Looking at the 50-year chart, it's clear that the bubble into 1980 for precious metals did NOT slow down the Commemorative Bubble over the next 10 years.  No wonder folks are reluctant to throw in the towel.

[Henri Charriere]

1 hour ago, GoldFinger1969 said:

Well...for the last 10 years, the Gold & Silver Commemorative subindex of the PCGS 3000 Index has been the 2nd-worst performing sub-index, down 40%.  Pure silver is down 48% from the bubble-peak in 2011.  Here's the complete listing:

Last 10 Years for PCGS 3000 and sub-indices:

PCGS 3000.......................... -18%
Gold Spot.............................. Flat
Generic Gold........................ -28%
Mint State Rare Gold Coin.... -23%
Proof Gold Coin..................... +4%
Mint State Type Coin............ -18%
Proof Type Coin.....................-25%
Silver Spot............................ -48%
Morgan & Peace Dollar......... -20%
Silver & Gold Commem.........-40%
20th Century Coin Index ...... -20%
Key Dates & Rarities ............. -5%

Ignorance really is bliss.  I was a lot happier before you forced this down my gullet. The myth of "they made out like bandits"  -- exposed!  Nice footwork, GF.