What do you think of KP's World catalogues??

[joes2001]

What do you think of Krause's Standard Catalog of World Coins? I don't mean one century in particular, but in general. I have the 2013 for 1901-2000. I think it's weird and annoying that some countries are missing, like Spain for example in this book (at least in the 2013 guide i have). I've mentioned elsewhere that the newer guide doesn't even have proof and mint set prices listed anymore. That is a horrible mistake in my opinion. I have to say that it's nice having a big book with most countries in it, and that I use it a lot. What do you think?

[cladking]

I have a poor opinion of it and love to hate it.

 

The thing that most bothers me is their refusal to update prices especially on 1945 to date coinage. Few collectors realize just how remarkably wrong many of these prices are so the coins are being snapped up and taken out of the US by collectors who know what they are really worth. These are the coins I'm most interested in and collect.

 

By the time increases are recognized the price can increase by thousands and thousands of percent in a single year.

 

The errors and political correctness are also vexing. Listings used to be easy to find and then they separated countries into various issuing authorities and currency changes. They lose and move countries. More silver should be listed at bullion value but then when silver decreases the old price should come back. To some extent krause sets prices so when they are wrong it's often unknown to buyers and sellers which distorts the markets and allows some to manipulate them.

 

Sometimes it seems like they try and other times not so much. They do better with some of their other products but prices are rarely updated in most of them. I tend to refer to my hardbound 1986 edition more than any other issue than the 1980 (not distorted by silver increases) or the current issue.

 

The 2014 edition has all the countries back but almost no price changes outside of India. I guess it's the fact that it is indispensible because most people think that's what the coins are worth that makes me love to hate it.

[joes2001]

nicely said. I am interested in what countries and coins you have in mind when you collect the ones no priced rightly, and how you know if the prices are incorrect. Please let me know only what you're willing, because I know sometimes coin collectors might want to keep certain things secret or whatnot. I am not too familiar with what you mean by the distortion of the silver prices. I do know that not too long ago silver prices were very low, compared to know, but i'm not sure how that would factor in to prices. Also, what if you have a coin that is AU 53, and prices are only listed for XF40 and Unc? Is it in between somewhere? Lastly, why are prices for coins, sometimes scarce ones, in the 19th century for Britain and France for example only have prices for coins starting at VF 20? Why not G, VG, etc? I hate that!

[cladking]

Chinese aluminum from the mid-'50's is unavailable in any grade. Back thirty yearsago when they were rarely seen they were worn. 1968 to 1973 Japanese cu/ ni in nice condition is barely available. A lot of the later date Soviet coins still list for nothing but they aren't all common. Irish decimals can be very elusive and bring high prices in Ireland. Icelandic coins appear underpriced.

 

There are hundreds of other examples but they are off-beat countries or series that might not be collected yet so scarcity might have no bearing. Fijian cu/ ni is generally tough but especially higher denominations after 1984.

 

Moderns tend to come in two types; distressingly common or very scarce.

 

Anytime coins are priced too high or two low and neither the buyer nor seller has access to proper information it can result in sales that don't or should have happened. People who would collect a series at almost any price might not buy a single coin if they're all priced at ten times catalog. For markets to work and be efficient it's important that all parties have an idea of valuations. Instead coins are being bought up by those who know the true values much more than by collectors. Collectors are the bedrock of true value but it only works when the price guides are reasonably accurate. There must be huge numbers of these coins (as well asmany under-priced older coins) being picked up cheap and sold in their countries of origin. This may or may not be good for collectors or markets in the short term but it's bad in the long term. It's unfair to sellers and a windfall for buyers.

[joes2001]

It's hard to figure it all out. I started mainly with US coins years ago, but now i mostly buy foreign coins. Even modern, i mean from the 70s and up, foreign coins are quite scarce at times as you've mentioned. You really can't find the same kind of thing going on with recent US coins. And I also like the abundance of different artistry and history involved with world coins. I got some of the coins you mentioned sitting in a box that I prepared for selling, since i've been going by the priceguide. Maybe i need to rethink this and look deeper into actual scarcity like you've mentioned. Thanks

[JKK]

Don't forget to look in the Additional Listings section. My 2013 Krause CD has China (puppet states), ROC/Taiwan, Congo Democratic Republic, Panama, South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands, South Arabia, Southern Rhodesia, Spain/Civil War all clumped into there. Find it after Zimbabwe on the main country list.

 

I have no idea why they did it that way, but that's how mine is.

[joes2001]

Oh good to know. However, I don't have the CD so I guess I can't see those countries. Yeah, I don't know why they did it like that. Thanks though

[physics-fan3.14]

While Krause has a lot of problems, it is also usually a really good starting point for research. It is like the Red Book for US coins - go to it to get a general idea, and then look in a specialist book for more detail. I don't want to buy, or have access to, the specialist books for every country or series (which I would expect to have the most accurate and detailed information). I mean, its a pretty Herculean task to catalogue every coin ever minted from every county for the past 400 years, with reasonable pictures for most of them, updated prices, all the most up to date information, and keep up with new research besides. I think they do a fairly decent job, putting out a new shelf of phone-book sized editions every year.

 

Also, if there are errors, or you have a recent transaction, contact Krause directly. They are very good about responding, and if you report something they will correct or update it (they also accept photo submissions, if you have a better picture than what they have). They can't be expected to continuously monitor millions of transactions (at least, I don't expect them to).

[World Colonial]

Cladking is right that some modern world coins are scarce or rare. But there is no possibility of knowing which ones that are still priced cheap unless you have tried to find them yourself. This is what I discovered with South Africa Union except that these are not moderns.

 

However, you also need to consider a couple of other things. First, simply because you can't find a coin doesn't mean it is scarce or rare. Maybe it is but I would not assume so unless I had additional evidence to support it.

 

My opinion is that the primary reason most coins (regardless of origin) are hard to find is because their prices are low and below their "real" values. What I mean by this is that more may be (and almost certainly are) out there than believed but the low prices do not provide any incentive for the current owners to sell them. This is what I believe existed with Union until about 2006 when the Spinks Remick sale provided "price discovery" so that any collector who chose to do so could become aware that the coins were actually worth a lot more than the price guides claimed.

 

A second possiblity is that the current owners don't know what they have, since it is highly likely that a disproprotionate number of them are held by those who do not, including non-collectors. I have done that myself until I evaluated the coins again later.

 

The third possibility is that "no one" really wants most of these coins, regardless of how rare. Or to the extent someone does, it may be one or a handful who want them now but then "no one" will want them later except at a much lower price. Of the examples Cladking has used in the past, I would expect that those from India and Germany should retain their popularity but I would not count on it for any number of other countries with weak demand or collecting cultures such as Fiji or Indonesia.

 

To conclude on this post, the best indication of whether a coin is actually rare is if the price is "high" but the supply remains "low". There are many high priced (disproportionately US) coins which are common. Most low priced coins are also common. But if the price of coin increases "a lot" and the supply remains "low", its a good bet the coin is actually hard to find.

[JKK]

One of Krause's biggest weaknesses is coin physical properties. For very many coins, they lack them. They make sure to get all the silver, but the rest, not so much. By contrast, Numista always has those in my experience. There isn't much excuse for it, because the weight of a given past issue doesn't exactly fluctuate from year to year, and if they once get the data they can use it for the foreseeable future.

 

Why they left some countries off the print book and included them in the CD probably has to do with physical space in the enormous book, which isn't really a good excuse. I'd think it were more important to have Spain listed than some of those that made it.

[joes2001]

Yeah, probably the size of the book is a big factor. I agree that some other countries shouldn't have made it before Spain or Panama, etc. As far as rare and scarce modern coins, i once bought two 1985 (i think it was that date or somewhere around there) Russian mint sets. They were two dollars each at an antique market. The first one I sold on ebay went for 170, the other one 70 or 80 bucks. There are great finds out there, and while most collect US coins here there are still many people in this country with diverse backgrounds who collect other countries. Thank you know who for ebay! I also got a East german proof set in the 80s or 90s that sold for over 100 that i got for 5 bucks!

[cladking]

It's hard to figure it all out. I started mainly with US coins years ago, but now i mostly buy foreign coins. Even modern, i mean from the 70s and up, foreign coins are quite scarce at times as you've mentioned. You really can't find the same kind of thing going on with recent US coins. And I also like the abundance of different artistry and history involved with world coins. I got some of the coins you mentioned sitting in a box that I prepared for selling, since i've been going by the priceguide. Maybe i need to rethink this and look deeper into actual scarcity like you've mentioned.

 

Actually almost no modern coins from anywhere are being widely collected.

 

Yes, there are millions of modern collectors in the US alone but they are collecting mostly states quarters and bullion issues as well as proofs and modern commems. What very few people anywhere in the world are collecting is modern circulating coins. Everyone imagines that when a modern Greek coin goes to $1000 it must be low mintage or high grade or there is widespread demand but this simply isn't the case with the coins I'm talking about. These are extremely high mintage coins with very very little demand. They are skyrocketing in price because everyone forgot to save them and they are very elusive today. Collectors simply stopped the systematic saving (collecting) of coins after the silver disappeared. A few moderns were saved in enormous numbers anyway to help make poundage or for promotions but these tended to be low denominations. High denominations like one drachma Greek cu/ ni from the 50's simply weren't saved at all and now a few collectors want them. If the demand for these were high then it would be obvious because then the AU's and XF's which are nearly as scarce would also have a high price. These aren't common until you hit a low end VF and most are F or less. I believe the majority were melted but this is always difficult to determine.

 

Everytime a few people start competing for a country's moderns the price explodes because most of them are scarce. US modern aren't cheap because they are common but because there are still almost no collectors. If there were collectors they would be clamoring for coins like 1972-D type b quarters and the price would go through the roof in all grades but especially above F.

 

I wouldn't sell any modern based on Krause price unless it's gone up a few thousand percent. I would certainly buy any inexpensive modern that is no question Unc and not one of the common coins at Krause prices.

 

People simply don't realize how few of some of these coins exist. The 1950-E E German 10 p was always considered just another piece of modern junk but something funny happened. They were recalled and redeemed at par when Germany reunited but very few of these came in. The few that did come in were in atrocious condition at best and then they were melted. When people wanted to collect these they didn't find them. There were almost none in any condition except those that escaped redemption which were horrid. Most were badly worn, bent, and gouged. A nice XF goes for $160 now and like all moderns has very very little demand. A nice Unc goes for $1300 and who knows what the value of a Gem is if any exist at all.

 

Krause is part of the reason that moderns aren't more widely collected. This is still the biggest market in the world for many world coins and all US coins and their valuations are all over the map. It's difficult to keep up with pricing on extremely thin markets where there are very few coins and very little demand. That the demand often isn't sophisticated complicates it further. Most of these collectors are newer, younger, and less experienced so are less likely to know what to bid. I have some sympathy for their task but if they researched just one series per day they could get the catalog mostly up to date in a year or two.

 

Soon we'll see demand starting in Brazil and some of these moderns aren't common. South America used to export an entire modern freighter full of coins to Japan every couple weeks for destruction. Many of the circulating coins of the continent will be destroyed nearly in their entirety to make autos and appliances. I don't know what's left and it's far easier for me to google current prices than it is to try to deduce them from Krause publications. I just wouldn't have any use for these at all except I need to know what people think they are worth.

 

It certainly is an interesting time to collect coins.

[joes2001]

Wow. What you are saying is very interesting. I've started really getting into world coins in the past year. I've taken note of what you are saying but I have some questions. You said it's prudent to buy any inexpensive modern coins that are unciculated, but you also said something about their price and if they are common in Krause, like to avoid specific ones. So in general, do you think it would be a good idea to keep all or most Uncs and AUs of most countries if they're from the 60s or so to now? For example, I got the following coins:

- 1975 Iceland Krona, XF, 10.5 million minted, worth like .10 or .20 cents (based on Krause)

- Guernsey 1971 1/2 new penny, unc, 2 million minted, worth around .20 cents

-Spain 1959 10 centimos, BU, 900 million minted!, worth only .35 cents

- 1983 10 Ore Sweden, BU, 773 Million made, worth under a dollar i think

 

Now, would you say keep all these? Or would you say the ones with mintages in the hundreds of millions aren't worth keeping? I'm just curious, and I really appreciate your input. Thanks

[cladking]

However, you also need to consider a couple of other things. First, simply because you can't find a coin doesn't mean it is scarce or rare. Maybe it is but I would not assume so unless I had additional evidence to support it.

 

My opinion is that the primary reason most coins (regardless of origin) are hard to find is because their prices are low and below their "real" values. What I mean by this is that more may be (and almost certainly are) out there than believed but the low prices do not provide any incentive for the current owners to sell them. This is what I believe existed with Union until about 2006 when the Spinks Remick sale provided "price discovery" so that any collector who chose to do so could become aware that the coins were actually worth a lot more than the price guides claimed.

 

A second possiblity is that the current owners don't know what they have, since it is highly likely that a disproprotionate number of them are held by those who do not, including non-collectors. I have done that myself until I evaluated the coins again later.

 

The third possibility is that "no one" really wants most of these coins, regardless of how rare. Or to the extent someone does, it may be one or a handful who want them now but then "no one" will want them later except at a much lower price. Of the examples Cladking has used in the past, I would expect that those from India and Germany should retain their popularity but I would not count on it for any number of other countries with weak demand or collecting cultures such as Fiji or Indonesia.

 

To conclude on this post, the best indication of whether a coin is actually rare is if the price is "high" but the supply remains "low". There are many high priced (disproportionately US) coins which are common. Most low priced coins are also common. But if the price of coin increases "a lot" and the supply remains "low", its a good bet the coin is actually hard to find.

 

All your points are good.

 

I knew Indian and Russian moderns could be scarce or rare because most were sold in the US and they weren't readily available here. I also knew they weren't collected or available in their home markets meaning many of them that weren't saved by accident (like a pallet full at the central bank) would be hard to come by. I know the Fijian coins are scarce based on second hand accounts and good anecdotal evidence. There are reasons other than scarcity that you might not see coins. The Chinese coins I'm merely assuming are rare because so few are seen (even dated after the Nixon visit) and they tend to be worn.

 

I don't think this should discourage collectors since the risk is small on low priced coins. Collecting the ones that have gone up recently is safer in the sense that the value is now recognized but the potential drop is enormous if more appear. So far I've seen very few coins that I consider common going higher than five or ten dollars. I consider these the riskiest since if I've found them at several sources than others have as well. I usually trade these off.

 

Any coin that lists for less than a fair value is unlikely to trade much. One of these days I'm going to find a source for the SA moderns but so far it's mostly just a mint set now and then. I doubt many are tough but they probably aren't all common. Mint set mintages can be pretty low for such a major country.

[cladking]

- 1975 Iceland Krona, XF, 10.5 million minted, worth like .10 or .20 cents (based on Krause)

- Guernsey 1971 1/2 new penny, unc, 2 million minted, worth around .20 cents

-Spain 1959 10 centimos, BU, 900 million minted!, worth only .35 cents

- 1983 10 Ore Sweden, BU, 773 Million made, worth under a dollar i think

 

I don't know.

 

As a rule I only like nice solid no question Unc. Most foreign collectors won't pay Unc money for any coin without 100% luster and not too ugly. There are some exceptions for rarities but I prefer these in Unc unless AU or XF is the best available.

 

Look up the availability of coins in quantity. All of these should be exclude.

 

Icelandic coins after 1939 need to be Unc. Some of the 50's and '60's low denominations used to be available in quantity. Guernsy is probably all hoarded but most in relatively small quantities. Future demand might not appear for a long time. Low mintage mint set years and none mint set years are a little more interesting. The Spanish 10c is a hoarde coin. Surprisingly it might be interesting in Gem since these tend to be low luster. Even in Gem I don't want to pay much more than catalog (35c). Swedish cu/ ni is very interesting and generally underpriced. 1983 may be a little too late date. Interest was starting to appear and mint set mintages were soaring. You could set aside a lot of 10 Ore coins at little cost.

 

This is the biggest key to rarity in moderns though; mint set mintages.

 

Coins that don't appear in mint sets are far more likely to be scarce. Even a mintage of a couple thousand mint sets is pretty substantial compared to demand. Becomefamiliar with the mint sets though since some like the French mint sets of the '60's or mid-'70's Japanese sets have not survived because of packaging. Some sets have been devastated by attrition since the coins are considered too common and they are cut up. Indian sets have suffered this way. Even large mintages might not mean much due to corrosion or attrition.

 

Here's one that will surprise you; virtually every single 1968 penny in the US mint set is destroyed by corrosion (carbon spots). Gem examples of this in rolls are not common. If people ever start collecting memorial pennies they'll be surprised at the difficulty of finding nice examples of several dates or Gems of several others.

[joes2001]

Very good advice. I've never thought of looking and mint set mintages for world coins and linking that with possible price increases in the near future. Thanks for emphasizing that. However, I've known about this phenemenon with US coins; consider 1982 and 1983 when no mint sets were made, excluding the low amount of soveneir sets. This has resulted in the 1983 p quarter being scarce and valuable in higher mint states. I actually have a 1983 p quarter spitting eagle variety. Got lucky on that one. Anyways, thanks again. I got to do more research. I've amassed all these world coins, but haven't really organized them enough.

[World Colonial]

If you want to collect coins cheaply just for collecting, buy what you can find and like. But from a financial standpoint, most of these coins are going nowhere.

 

The fact that the coins Cladking mentions as examples are very scarce is an impediment to their future price appreciation, not a strength. This is not to say that none of them will not appreciate or increase a lot (as some already have), but I do not believe even a large number of them will, no matter how rare they are. It is a topic which I discussed on the Bid Or Buy Coin Forum in a series of posts. I used Union coinage as the primary example because it shares the same characteristics that the examples Cladking used, though the scarcity of this series varies versus these world moderns. (In my opinion, it is vastly scarcer than most of them.).

 

To understand why, you first need to know why US coins are as expensive as they are and then you can compare how any other coins are collected to this baseline.

 

To simplify it, my theory is that collectors in "large" numbers are not going to pursue coins that are essentially impossible to buy. I believe this is true of most of the coins I collect and equally true of any others that are like them.

 

If you look at most US coins, they are mostly available in large numbers and this is also true for the grade distribution. Even many "key" dates in a series are not really scarce at all, except in the narrow (and in my opinion) arbitrary sense of "conditional" rarity, die variety, color or special designation strikes. But then, this type of collecting mostly does not even exist outside the US.

 

What I just described, it enables a large number of US collectors of the "perennial collector favorites" (Morgan dollars, IHC, Lincons, Buffalo nickels, Mercury dime, SLQ, WLH) to buy most or the full set IF they will compromise on the grade. It also provides the challenge and opportunity to upgrade, even for very minor differences in quality. (And yes, the splitting of hairs between two MS grades is minor.)

 

However, what would happen if these sets or most US coins contained a disproportionate percentage of "key" dates but where the coins were not available most of the time? My answer is that it would be like collecting the Capped head (1813-1834) $5 half eagle. Few buy this series except as a type coin. Now of course, the coins are very expensive, but even if they were much cheaper, it wouldn't make any difference because the coins simply do not exist to be collected in large number except for a few dates, regardless of how many people would like to buy them.

 

This is what I believe exists today with all of the series I collect, resulting in the paradox of coins which are much scarcer than most US coins but that cost much less. This is a simplification of reality (covered in more detail in my posts in that other forum) but I believe entirely consistent with how most collectors actually collect.

 

[cladking]

There probably are some moderns that won't be collected because they are too rare. And it's more likely that there are quite a few that will never be collected in Unc because they are too scarce unworn. But most moderns, even those which have been recalled and melted, still exist in some quantity in lower grades. Something like an East German 1982-A aluminum 2 M coin will have been destroyed nearly in its entirety probably since the coin was worth a dollar and a half after being redeemed but nothing if saved. Most of these were still in good condition when they were recalled and I doubt there was much collecting of them. But even here foreign visitors would have carried a few home between 1982 and 1990 and these largely will still exist today. E German tourism was not extensive.

 

Right now it's only Unc coins where demand is being met with no supply but there's lots of anecdotal evidence there is and has been a little more demand for circulated examples. Much of this is none specific demand from "one per country" collectors who scour poundage and junk. It doesn't matter if the 2 Mark is rare because they'll just find an older beat up 10p or the like. This nonspecific demand is actually pretty great in aggregate and there will be highly desirable coins being found in these collections for the next century. Of course what won't be getting found is the 2 Mark in Unc or very many of any rarities in Unc (except where the collector focuses on Uncs).

 

But the point is that most moderns are still common in lower grades even if they've been destroyed. This might be called the tyranny of numbers since it is the result of the enormous mintages. You just can't spread tens of millions of any coin to the four winds and expect them all to come back when you call. They get lost in the woodwork and taken home by tourists. High denominations are much more likely to be found, redeemed, or spent so will be much tougher but low denominations can be virtually worthless after many years of circulation and inflation so they are less likely to be destroyed. They are more likely to exist in hoardes and in tourists' mementos but most in low grade.

 

Perhaps no specific demand will materialize for very many moderns. But I've always been told that it won't materialize for any of them and every year a few more are under great price pressure caused by new demand. This demand wants a 1950-E 10p in Unc and is willing to compete with the rest of the demand for this specific coin. Some collectors get priced out of the Unc coin and decide to seek a nice AU instead. Where the supply is low in lower grades the price will respond to the increasing demand.

 

This demand might never appear for a Fijian 20c but I believe it must. A cu/ ni 1940 Fiji half penny is worth $60 in chU so why can't enough demand arise to push the much scarcer 1990 cu/ ni 20c to the same level?

 

Nothing fundamentally changed in the nature of Fiji or coin collectors in the half century that elapsed between 1940 and 1990. Fiji is a far wealthier country with a larger population and the number of potential collectors world wide has soared. The "queen" of England is still on the coins. The real difference is that the newer coin is readily available in circulation while the half penny is not readily available in any condition. The number of VF's could actually serve as a means to entice more demand since they will be very inexpensive for the foreseeable future. Collectors can assemble sets of these for very low cost if they don't demand Unc.

[World Colonial]

"This demand might never appear for a Fijian 20c but I believe it must. A cu/ ni 1940 Fiji half penny is worth $60 in chU so why can't enough demand arise to push the much scarcer 1990 cu/ ni 20c to the same level."

 

I have no argument with this comment of yours because $60 is still actually a nominal price. Buying a coin at this price is essentially an alternative to another form of consumption. But I would disagree that more than a few of these coins will be worth substantially more for the reasons I have given, By "substantially more", I am referring to thousands or tens of thousands of USD in today's purchasing power which is still less than a substantial number of US moderns.

 

Let me take a few examples to explain what I am talking about.

 

Taking a country like Iceland per a prior example you provided, I know nothing about its coin collecting. I am not aware though that there is any depth to that market whatsoever. With a population of only 250,000, that is less than a single county in the ATL metro area where I live and I would expect that there are ever fewer collectors, maybe far fewer. So where exactly is the collecting demand going to come from longer term, since even a small number of buyers can temporarily increase prices substantially?

 

Maybe it will come from expats or from other Scandinavian countries (due to similar cultures), but other than that, it is overwhelmingly going to be just randomly which is hardly a basis to make any kind of forecast. The same is true of most other countries where established collecting does not exist today. Fiji is slightly different because there are generic Commonwealth collectors but I doubt it will even be as much as Southern Rhodesia is today, a country which is numismatically extinct since it is not equivalent to Zimbabwe.

 

I also believe there is a clear distinction between countries with established collecting and those without it. So in countries even where the coins are more common than others, I can see it happening if US practices are adopted. Canada, Australia, the UK, Germany and China are examples of such countries.

 

One of the biggest obstacles to non-locals buying most moderns is that they are going to be competing against any number of alternatives and on this score, most consider them overwhelmingly inferior, even if they are scarcer. It is the same thing I have told South Africans who are hoping that foreigners such as myself are going to pay "stupid money" for their coins. This is one of my primary series but I am not going to pay the same (much less more) for these coins than others which I think are better, such as the pillars. It is never going to happen for me because it doesn't make any sense. Some such as you may buy these moderns simply because they are scarcer or you like them but you are in the minority because most people are not in the habit of buying coins they do not actually like.

 

This scarcity is the problem with a series like the Spanish colonial pillars where the Mexico 8R is probably in the top five or at least top 10 in terms of international collecting. The Mexico 8R is available and is probably collected actively by at least several hundred and by thousands as a type coin. The others, hardly at all.

 

Numismatically, the minors I collect are comporable to the US flowing hair, drapped bust and capped bust of the same size and in some instances, superior. And if not to US collectors, certainly to others. If these coins were as available as their US counterparts, I don't think it would a stretch to predict that in 50 years, they would be worth more or a lot more. Your demographic argument would be a big reason. But they are not which is why I do not believe it will ever happen except in isolation and I believe the same applies to other coins that share the same or similar characteristics.

[joes2001]

I find both of your responses interesting. I think your collecting strategy--to buy quite scarce coins that are comparatively cheap--is very smart. You would think that at some point in the future these kind of coins would jump greatly in value. Where do you find these South African coins and other ones you collect? Do you constantly check ebay new listings? I primarily buy coins on ebay, but also ocassionally from coin shops. I think Fiji coins are also interesting and have several of the lower mintage coins in the 50s andn to now. I also collect any other country with low mintages, but i always wonder if I'd be better off buying more US coins since there always seems to be demand here. But as far as collecting just for the fun of it, I much prefer world coins. I guess you could lump US coins in there as well, so i'm a fan of everything! It's hard to tame the coin collecting bug once you get it!

[World Colonial]

There is no "correct" strategy, at least from the standpoint of collecting as a hobby. And from a financial standpoint, it is partly guesswork.

 

I have primarily bought my coins at public auction and eBay because dealers seldom have them. (Some dealers of course sell through eBay.)

 

South African coins are cheap compared to US coins, but they are not absolutely cheap anymore in many instances, at least by my standards. You can buy some of them for nominal prices (primarily Republic Of South Africa or RSA which are world moderns) but not most better grade Union or ZAR.

 

By world coin standards, Union and ZAR are more expensive than most for any better grade scarcer issue. I prefer "key" date AU-58 and sometimes lower grades because collectors there ignore most coins below MS and therefore, the price spreads are absurd when the difference in actual quality is not that great. To give you an example, I recently bought a 1930 NGC AU-58 6P for about $250 on BidOrBuy (South Africa's eBay). An NGC MS-64 sold for almost $4000 in a recent DNW auction. That makes no sense at all but is typical of this series.

 

But you need to be aware that I DO NOT believe that coins like these are going to experience any "quantum leap" in value as I have attempted to explain in these posts. They WERE dirt cheap when I started collecting them but the "window of opportunity" I believe is mostly over. I used to be able to buy really scarce coins for very low prices but its not possible anymore, except on occasion.

 

My reason for collecting my current series is mostly personal but generically, i also prefer coins that are very hard to find. Almost no US coins are actually scarce and I cannot afford to buy very many of them that I really want because they are not affordable.

 

I am not sure where you are in your collecting, but when I resumed the hobby in 1998, I evaluated what I thought I could afford to spend and what it would buy. Initially, I mostly wanted to collect US coins but abandoned the idea when I concluded that I would never be able to afford anything that I considered to have any real substance.

 

The collection I have today, it isn't for everyone but to any impartial observer, it is easily better than any US centric collection of the same value. I do not see any basis of comparison whatsoever. I have almost no gold and only a small number of crown sized coins, but it is composed of a lot of scarce or very scarce coins and many of them are very high quality, especially for what is available or even exists.

[cladking]

Taking a country like Iceland per a prior example you provided, I know nothing about its coin collecting. I am not aware though that there is any depth to that market whatsoever. With a population of only 250,000, that is less than a single county in the ATL metro area where I live and I would expect that there are ever fewer collectors, maybe far fewer. So where exactly is the collecting demand going to come from longer term, since even a small number of buyers can temporarily increase prices substantially?

 

I believe the current situation in numismatics is a perversion of history or more precisely it's an unwinding of a massive numismatic perversion. Coin collecting has always been the "hobby of kings" because only kings were able to afford to tie up vast wealth in silver, gold, and rare old coins. But most of these kings set aside modern coins for future collectors because numismatists understand better than most that we are here only briefly and are merely caretakers of our coins. Collecting became more common in the 19th century with the growing influence of the middle class. People had money for such pursuits and metals had become quite cheap compared to incomes. Still collectors set aside modern coins for the same reasons they had always been set aside. Then came mass communications and ever increasing numbers of the middle class. Collecting began exploding during the depression of all times because coin collecting was inexpensive with penny boards and people had lots of time on their hands through unemployment or underemployment. It was at this time, 1931, that people not only saved modern coins but began saving them by the roll and bag. It was no longer simply posterity they worked for but their own prosperity since they expected profits. This accelerated right up through 1964 with the collapse of the roll and bag boom caused by the announcement of the date freeze.

 

Collecting in 1964, even world coin collecting, was primarily American as most collectors of almost all world and US coins were Americans. But in every country collectors both domesticate and US simply quit saving new coins when silver was removed. There was a perception that the new junk was too common and much too worthless to ever be worth anything or even to ever be worth collecting. Little changed over the years until the internet and coin graders could put any coin into any hands that could afford it.

 

This is essentially where we are now. The world is new but nothing ever really changes other than the virtual nonexistence of many modern coins. What won't likely change are the patterns and cycles that have always been in place. People get older and they get nostalgic and collectors seek items from their youth. When we see huge increases in something like Russian moderns it is easy to attribute it to high demand but this can't be so because the very common czarist coinage has tripled and quadrupled in price showing that this is where the Russian demand is focused. The moderns never had much demand and still don't. Explosive price increases are caused by scarcity rather than demand. In other words there must be millions of new collectors in Russia. This same thing is going on in India and China and it's spreading as the middle class explodes all over the world.

 

One of the things that has always been true and is likely to be true in the future is that it's older collectors who collect world coins. Less seasoned collectors normally stick to their own country. In 1964 the US had a middle class of 80,000,000 and accounted for well over half of world coin demand. Now the middle class numbers over a quarter of a billion of mostly less seasoned collectors. They are collecting old coins of their own countries for the main part. In a quarter century there could be half a billion in the middle class and many coin collectors will have great experience and some will have large profits in moderns.

 

I'd be surprised if some of this money not only goes into 1990 Fijian coins but the 1940 issues as well. In a quarter century most valuable bust half dollars will still be around but there will be even fewer 1990 20c's because they list for nothing and even end up in poundage. If the circulating coins still survive they'll be even lower grade.

 

Most moderns are long term plays but the long term is up for more and more each year. I believe even those which have exploded are good investments but when you're talking about spending a lot of money for any coin you'd best think like a collector because investing in collectibles is highly risky.

 

Yes, most moderns are never going to many thousands of dollars unless the pendulum swings much further than I can predict. But a 60c coin going to $60 is the same percentage gain as a $500 coin going to $50,000.

 

There are some moderns that could attract widespread interest and have potential of going to very high prices but these will be very much the exception. It's the $2 coins going to $800 that are my targets if I can find them. Identifying these coins is usually easier than finding them.

[World Colonial]

I do not know how scarce the moderns you are talking about are as a series. You know better than I do. I agree with some of your comments (both here and elsewhere) but I believe you are overestimating the appeal of these coins to more than a miniscule percentage of collectors, whether current or prospective.

 

The $2 coin shooting to $800 is more feasible but the problem anyone is going to have is first, that those who own them either forgot about them or if they do know what they have, they aren't about to sell them for $2 or anywhere near it because it is pointless. And second, while $2 to $800 is a huge percentage increase, I do not believe that more than a handfull of collectors are ever going to be able to find enough of them to make the absolute profit meaningful.

 

On the number of collectors in other countries, I do not believe that there are ever going to be anywhere near the numbers you seem to be implying, especially if the coins are not even available to be bought because it also contradicts what I see in collector behaviour. If this was reflective of how collectors actually behaved, I would expect that the coins I collect would be a lot more popular than they are because they are overwhelmingly considered superior to any modern.

 

Nostalgia matters somewhat but it only goes so far. If you take the US, its only specialists who show the preferences you imply. These are the collectors of "conditional" rarities, die varieties, special designation strikes, toned coins and errors. These are the ones who will pay what I describe as exorbitant prices.

 

The same is almost certainly going to be true for world moderns. In the 38 years I have been a collector, I am not aware of any change in the order of popularity between US series, not even one. The WLH is still more popular than the Kennedy and Franklin, the SLQ more than the Washington quarter, the Mercury dime more than FDR, the Buffalo nickel more than the Jefferson and even the Wheat Back cent over the Memorial. And within current series, the silver coins are more popular than the clad. Yes, the relative prices have changed but I attribute it to these specialization practices and the concurrent fact that every circulating coin starts out with a zero premium.

 

In other words, despite the fact that every US collector under the age of 55 (I am 48) grew up with clad coinage, they still overwhelmingly prefer their silver counterparts and classics. Under your apparent view, if any collectors should prefer these coins, it should be these yet they do not except as I just described. I do not see that there is going to be any mass preference change toward any moderns except for the specialist, as I just described. To take specific examples, this is true of South Africa where practically every single RSA issue is ignored and I believe it is equally true of the Russian coins you just mentioned, even though some moderns have appreciated substantially.

[cladking]

In other words, despite the fact that every US collector under the age of 55 (I am 48) grew up with clad coinage, they still overwhelmingly prefer their silver counterparts and classics. Under your apparent view, if any collectors should prefer these coins, it should be these yet they do not except as I just described. I do not see that there is going to be any mass preference change toward any moderns except for the specialist, as I just described. To take specific examples, this is true of South Africa where practically every single RSA issue is ignored and I believe it is equally true of the Russian coins you just mentioned, even though some moderns have appreciated substantially.

 

Pendulums swing, trends change and the tides come and go. In all real ways nothing at all is eternal. But the closest thing to it is attitudes and beliefs. People are married to the status quo because no matter how bad things are they are always afraid they could be worse. At one time I was the biggest modern basher of all but I changed when I saw that all the new coins were getting worn out in circulation. In reality this wasn't actually even a change in me because what always attracted me to the wonderful silver coins in circulation was the degree to which they circulated freely. Of course it wasn't truly free because rare dates were specifically picked out by collectors and high grades were missing as well. When I saw ALL the clads circulated freely and they began getting interesting with more and more dates and varieties I simply learned to love them.

 

This is the point. While people don't change the people that make up a population do. We all get older and eventually retire or pass on leaving our charges (the coins) to a new generation. It was somewhat "natural" for our generation to disdain clad because of the debasement, huge mintages, and terrible quality. And this is all beside the fact that it drove our beloveed silver coins from circulation and "ruined" collecting. The hobby added very few new collectors between 1965 and 1998 for this very reason.

 

In twenty years all the modern bashers are going to be gone. We'll have sold our collections or they will be sold for us. The newer generations don't hate moderns as evidenced by the few Russians and Indians who are driving prices up. Yes, there are numerous reasons other than nostalgia to collect and most of these will tend to direct collectors to seek older coins which is exactly what's happening. Some of the other reasons to collect will drive people straight into moderns. Things like the desire for scarcity or the ability to find coins in circulation or at low prices. The desire for quality and something different as well as the desire to collect something that is ubiquitous or something that has been always held in disdain. There's also a huge component in many collectors to have coins that increase in value. For these reasons many younger collectors will go into moderns. They'll want to specialize in a country or perhaps a single metal like aluminum. Aluminum might be the last frontier in coin collecting. Collectors tend to do very well financially with their collections and those who are in explosive markets could have enormous profits to plow back into it.

 

Again though, I don't see a coin like a Gem 1957 Greek 1 D going to tens of thousands of dollars (if one exists) because there will not be this sort of demand for moderns in the foreseeable future. But if you project out ten or twenty years then the foreseeable fulture could include extremely high prices for "common" circulation issues.

 

I'm not suggesting people should buy any coin, least of all a modern, for investment. I'm simply suggesting that one of the things holding these markets back is the lack of access to more accurate pricing. Eventually this problem will be solved by one means or another and these markets will mature more quickly and many prices will be far higher.

[World Colonial]

Yes, the collector composition changes as people age, leave the hobby and are replaced by new collectors. It isn't that I "hate" moderns (though you might think that I do based upon some of my prior posts) but I don't see any convincing case that this is going to result in the outcome you apparently claim where these coins are going to become substantially more popular.

 

This is the reason I used the trend in popularity with US coins since 1975 when I started collecting as a basis of comparison. The point I was trying to make is that despite what you state, this has not translated into any disproportionate increase in the popularity in US moderns. Even though collectors (at least those who spend more money) are usually older, I believe that there has been plenty of time for the trends you apparently believe are going to happen in the future to have occurred by now in the US. I do not see that a disproportionate percentage of US collectors aged 55 or under today can possibly be described as modern "haters" given that they exclusively used base metal coinage in circulation. They simply prefer other coins more or a lot more.

 

It hasn't happened except in the specialties I listed but I do not believe it is just because of the metal content. I believe that it is a combination of reasons with the first or maybe second being the perceived artistic inferiority of these coins. (If US moderns had better designs, I believe they would be a lot more popular. I consider them abysmal) Something I might add, that I do not expect to change substantially if at all. I see an absolutely zero chance that demographics is going to make any disproportionate percentage of US collectors change their relative opinions of (for example only) the Mercury and FDR dimes. I believe the exact same reasoning applies to practically every single country except where "classics" are not available because they were never issued.

 

With world coins, it is going to depend upon the specific collecting culture and what else is available to be bought. In countries without "classics", yes I can see these coins more or less reflecting the outcome you describe. But in saying this, this assumes that collecting becomes a lot more popular than it is today and I doubt that is going to be true in many places.

 

Personally, I do not believe that collecting is really that popular in that many countries, though I am not in a position to know more than a few of them. And even in those where an extended tradition apparently exists, in most of them the prices are really low, like France.

 

The US is unique among all of them from what I can see. The next strongest markets appear to be Australia, Canada, the UK and maybe Germany. Even though many Russian coins are now expensive and so are the low mintage Chinese moderns, I am dubious that collecting WITHIN both these countries is really that popular even though it appears to be more so than most.

 

The one I know best (South Africa) has a far more established collecting culture from what I can see than most others, yet I describe it as very weak. Whether 50 or 100 years from now, I do not believe anyone can make any compelling case whatsoever that the relative preference between RSA and their "classics" (ZAR and Union) is going to change substantially at all. At most, since South Africa appears to be attempting to copy the US, it will be the same specialty practices which exist here now.

[cladking]

Yes, the collector composition changes as people age, leave the hobby and are replaced by new collectors. It isn't that I "hate" moderns (though you might think that I do based upon some of my prior posts) but I don't see any convincing case that this is going to result in the outcome you apparently claim where these coins are going to become substantially more popular.

 

It's simply my contention that the increase in the number of collectors in the next few decades will closely correlate to the huge and continuing increase in the size of the middle class. Yes, a five fold increase is likely to result in huge increases in the demand and prices for many coins and especially world coins. The lion's share of this new demand will focus on older coins for reasons already mentioned and apparent. But what you're missing is that there has been virtually no demand at all for moderns. Even a few hundred collectors enterring these markets can have a huge effect because it's a many fold increase in existing demand. We're talking potentially tens of millions of new collectors so millions of new modern collectors rather than hundreds.

 

The point I was trying to make is that despite what you state, this has not translated into any disproportionate increase in the popularity in US moderns.

 

Yes, indeed, the US modern market is lagging behind other modern markets. This is largely a demographic issue and the state of the US market. The recession of '08 forced huge numbers of raw moderns onto the market which are not yet absorbed.

 

Even though collectors (at least those who spend more money) are usually older, I believe that there has been plenty of time for the trends you apparently believe are going to happen in the future to have occurred by now in the US.

 

I agree it's overdue.

 

I do not see that a disproportionate percentage of US collectors aged 55 or under today can possibly be described as modern "haters" given that they exclusively used base metal coinage in circulation. They simply prefer other coins more or a lot more.

 

There's far less modern bashing among the under 55 crowd. This is because they grew up with clad so have less reason to hate it. But remember this group formed very "unnaturally". Very few collectors joined between 1965 and 1998 because the conception was there was nothing of value in circulation. This simply isn't natural and resulted in the smaller than typical group of the demographic. These collectors were also selected to an extent by the degree to which they could collect moderns and find information about them and be encouraged by older collectors. Older collectors did not encourage modern collecting. The hobby press avoided stories about moderns, and there were few collectors to meet, buy, sell, and trade moderns. Many would-be modern collectors simply dropped out leavimg a group that has no interest in moderns but who hate the coins much less than older people.

 

It hasn't happened except in the specialties I listed but I do not believe it is just because of the metal content. I believe that it is a combination of reasons with the first or maybe second being the perceived artistic inferiority of these coins. (If US moderns had better designs, I believe they would be a lot more popular. I consider them abysmal) Something I might add, that I do not expect to change substantially if at all.

 

The evidence does not bear this out. Many countries maintained the exact same design across the change and people invariably quit saving the new coin. Some of these designs are simply stunning. Now despite the fact that the base metal mintages were far far higher and there are far far fewer collectors for the base metal coins it's the base metal coins with higher prices because they were not saved and the silver was.

 

The percieved quality of art always has had a large component of time. People always hate new coin designs and always love the old designs. I wouldn't bet this would change though I do agree that many moderns are less than high art and don't stack up to older designs. Let's see what the future says.

 

I see an absolutely zero chance that demographics is going to make any disproportionate percentage of US collectors change their relative opinions of (for example only) the Mercury and FDR dimes. I believe the exact same reasoning applies to practically every single country except where "classics" are not available because they were never issued.

 

I think you're wrong. Future collectors won't be composed largely of modern bashers. Future collectors will see clad roosies that were new when their grandparents were born and desire a memento. They see clad quarters that might have been left in a locker at NASA while its owner flew to the moon. There won't be a bug-a-boo to collecting moderns after their value increases. Do you think Russian collectors of late-Soviet era coinage are hiding their heads at coin shows and club meetings? Many of them have enormous profits and might be considering using this money to buy older Russians coinage or even something from Fiji.

 

It seems rather obvious to me that this is merely the early part of a trend. It's really not all that early any longer and it's been a couple decades since Krause began listing some moderns at greatly increased prices.

 

With world coins, it is going to depend upon the specific collecting culture and what else is available to be bought. In countries without "classics", yes I can see these coins more or less reflecting the outcome you describe. But in saying this, this assumes that collecting becomes a lot more popular than it is today and I doubt that is going to be true in many places.

 

There aren't too many "new" countries from a numismatic perspective. While Indians have driven up the prices of their proof sets many fold they are also buying the older coins that were used in India. Most of these older coins are pretty common so the demand doesn't show up a lot yet but it, no doubt, will.

 

The US is unique among all of them from what I can see. The next strongest markets appear to be Australia, Canada, the UK and maybe Germany. Even though many Russian coins are now expensive and so are the low mintage Chinese moderns, I am dubious that collecting WITHIN both these countries is really that popular even though it appears to be more so than most.

 

I have no special knowledge here but I've never met a Russian collector in the US. I know there are a few but this demand seems to be centered in Russia where there is a burgeoning middle class.

 

The one I know best (South Africa) has a far more established collecting culture from what I can see than most others, yet I describe it as very weak. Whether 50 or 100 years from now, I do not believe anyone can make any compelling case whatsoever that the relative preference between RSA and their "classics" (ZAR and Union) is going to change substantially at all. At most, since South Africa appears to be attempting to copy the US, it will be the same specialty practices which exist here now.

 

Long range predictions are risky even when the variables are known. My guess is that British Empire coins will do relatively well and have demand from all over the old empire. This is simply a long term trend and how all the forces play out against it is unforeseeable.

[cladking]

Italian stainless steel were some of the first coins for which Krause jumped the price much higher. At the time I didn't believe the increases were justified because I had never had a great difficulty locating nice examples. It wasn't that I had substantial quantities but that I had acquired them at numerous sources. It's the number of sources which is probably determinative of availability of moderns.

 

Because I didn't believe the increases were real I traded them all off. I was only able to get a small fraction of the new price but it was still a handsome "profit" taken in other moderns. It was a mistake to get rid of them. Apparently Unc, slider, and nice AU stainless steel isn't difficult at all but true Uncs that are nice are difficult.

 

It's extremely difficult to know what's available by just looking. I've done research on a few countries so have a little better idea for countries like Russia, India, and Great Britain but many others are very difficult to establish connections. How do you get a hold of a Fijian who knows about the state of the coin market there? Numismatic News (and World Coin News) used to run extensive stories about the state of a few country's numismatics and a lot of information was included. This was mostly Central America.

 

My opinion is and has long been that collectors collect coins and there's no justifiable reason to believe they won't eventually collect all coins. Eventually collectors will look at all moderns and won't find some of them; I know I haven't even though I've had the field almost to myself for decades.

 

People don't list $2 coins and this is part of the difficulty in finding them but if youlook through a lot of dealer stock and don't find them then odds are good they just don't exist anywhere or they exist only in their country of issue. Try finding something "easy" like nice Unc Libyan cu/ ni. If you can't find it try corresponding with a coin shop in Libya to find out why. This actually could be doable today with the internet but it certainly wasn't twenty years ago and these coins are much less common today than they were then.

[joes2001]

You guys were talking about the growing middle classes but I think an interesting thing to think about in the US is perhaps how the middle class seems to be shrinking, and how that affects coin collectors. I for one am 32, well educated, but there's been a few times since I've been married where I had to sell off coins I wanted to keep. I no longer own any gold coins, for example. Times are tough, maybe everywhere especially because of the recent recession. Overall though we see growth of the middle classes in countries like China and India, but at least in the US there's a growing gap between the rich and poor. I like South Africa coins, but i'm not very familiar with them. I don't know what time period the Union was in, or what ZAR is. I like the look of there coins though, especially silver ones often seen on ebay.

As far as Fiji, and other places where there's probably a weak collector base, I think collectors primarily in the US collect their coins. I can't imagine a lot of people collecting coins where a majority face poverty, and probably a small fraction of those who have some discretionary money collect coins. It seems demand has to come from elsewhere, like the US where the collector base and standard of living is higher.

[JKK]

ZAR, I presume, refers to the South African Rand or the Republic of South Africa. Some years after the Boer War, South Africa became the Union of South Africa. It later left the Commonwealth and became the Republic of South Africa, or in Afrikaans, Republiek van Suid-Afrika. Their domain suffix is .za, and I have never quite grasped how Suid-Afrika translated to ZA, unless referring to the Xhosa name: iRiphabliki yomZantsi Afrika.

[World Colonial]

"It's simply my contention that the increase in the number of collectors in the next few decades will closely correlate to the huge and continuing increase in the size of the middle class. Yes, a five fold increase is likely to result in huge increases in the demand and prices for many coins and especially world coins. The lion's share of this new demand will focus on older coins for reasons already mentioned and apparent. But what you're missing is that there has been virtually no demand at all for moderns. Even a few hundred collectors enterring these markets can have a huge effect because it's a many fold increase in existing demand. We're talking potentially tens of millions of new collectors so millions of new modern collectors rather than hundreds. "

 

I agree that there can be hundreds of collectors buying these coins (in the aggregate) but this still makes it a niche market. However, in most instances, even as scarce as the coins you have used as examples likely are, I still believe that there will be more supply than demand. Even if only 25 of a particular coin exist, in most instances, there will probably be 10 collectors or some similar number who want it.

 

"Yes, indeed, the US modern market is lagging behind other modern markets. This is largely a demographic issue and the state of the US market. The recession of '08 forced huge numbers of raw moderns onto the market which are not yet absorbed. "

 

I do not believe it is a demographic issue at all, contrary to what you have repeatedly claimed. If 38 years isn't enough to support your position, how much time do you need? In actuality, it has been more than 38 years, since this is the 50th year of clad coinage. Moderns series (excluding temporary recent changes) date back to 1932. Except for some one like Eric Newman, every single collector alive has seen these coins in circulation from the beginning and most have only used them. The fact of the matter is that they just do not like them as much as you do or think they should.

"I agree it's overdue."

 

And I do not believe it is going to happen anywhere near to the extent that you do, not in my lifetime. I both do not believe these coins are particularly cheap given their generic scarcity today and I see no basis to believe that the specialization practices which you have disproportionately used as examples are going to become anything more than niche markets.

 

For example, I believe that a coin like the 1983-P quarter has thousands in a grade like MS-65 (498 in the PCGS census last time I checked) and is at most a Judd scale medium to low R-2 in MS-66 (over 200 in PCGS last time I checked). These numbers are just too common for coin like this to sell for a substantially higher price compared to other coins.

 

The die varieties you have used as examples, I do not believe anyone can make a case that this type of collecting is going to become as popular as Large Cent or Capped Bust half variety collecting. And yes, this is what I believe this is what it would take for these coins to sell at the very high premiums which your prior posts imply.

 

"There's far less modern bashing among the under 55 crowd. This is because they grew up with clad so have less reason to hate it. But remember this group formed very "unnaturally". Very few collectors joined between 1965 and 1998 because the conception was there was nothing of value in circulation. This simply isn't natural and resulted in the smaller than typical group of the demographic. These collectors were also selected to an extent by the degree to which they could collect moderns and find information about them and be encouraged by older collectors. Older collectors did not encourage modern collecting. The hobby press avoided stories about moderns, and there were few collectors to meet, buy, sell, and trade moderns. Many would-be modern collectors simply dropped out leavimg a group that has no interest in moderns but who hate the coins much less than older people."

 

I do not believe what you call modern bashing is usually bashing at all. Simply because someone or most like other coins more and will not collect them does not make it so. I admit that I do not care for them and have made some comments that give this impression, but I made them because I consider the premiums on the most expensive absurd. It was not because I did not think anyone should collect them. However, I consider the premiums on many classics equally absurd, I just did not concurrently say so at the time but have since many times.

 

"The evidence does not bear this out. Many countries maintained the exact same design across the change and people invariably quit saving the new coin. Some of these designs are simply stunning. Now despite the fact that the base metal mintages were far far higher and there are far far fewer collectors for the base metal coins it's the base metal coins with higher prices because they were not saved and the silver was.

 

The percieved quality of art always has had a large component of time. People always hate new coin designs and always love the old designs. I wouldn't bet this would change though I do agree that many moderns are less than high art and don't stack up to older designs. Let's see what the future says."

 

I was referring to US coins in this quote. If you take a country like Switzerland where the designs have remain unchanged for about 130 years, I would agree that what you state is true

 

"I think you're wrong. Future collectors won't be composed largely of modern bashers. Future collectors will see clad roosies that were new when their grandparents were born and desire a memento. They see clad quarters that might have been left in a locker at NASA while its owner flew to the moon. There won't be a bug-a-boo to collecting moderns after their value increases. Do you think Russian collectors of late-Soviet era coinage are hiding their heads at coin shows and club meetings? Many of them have enormous profits and might be considering using this money to buy older Russians coinage or even something from Fiji.

 

It seems rather obvious to me that this is merely the early part of a trend. It's really not all that early any longer and it's been a couple decades since Krause began listing some moderns at greatly increased prices."

 

How much time do you need to disprove your thesis? Is 69 years not enough because that is how long the FDR dime has been around and the Mercury dime has been more popular the entire time?

 

Someone can buy an FDR dime as a "momento" by paying 50c or a few dollars for it. They do not need to buy a "conditional" rarity, "monster" toned coin or die variety for hundreds or thousands of dollars. The examples you just gave are anecdotal as are a disproportionate number of those you have provided in the past and do not provide any compelling reason to expect higher prices for these coins except in isolation.

 

I see no basis of comparison whatsoever between the Soviet example you gave and US moderns, none at all. Those coins are presumably actually scarce while their US counterparts are not. Moreover, having achieved the same result with South Africa Union, I can tell you that in most instances, the window of opportunity is mostly over. It is mostly over because to believe otherwise is to concurrently believe that these coins are then going to become more expensive than their classic counterparts and there is no reason to believe this whatsoever except in isolation.

"There aren't too many "new" countries from a numismatic perspective. While Indians have driven up the prices of their proof sets many fold they are also buying the older coins that were used in India. Most of these older coins are pretty common so the demand doesn't show up a lot yet but it, no doubt, will. "

 

I do not know what you mean by this. Obviously, since post WWII political entities occupy the same geography, they are not new from that standpoint but this isn't what I meant.

 

Israel dates back to 1948. Using this as an example only, they have no classics unless you happen to know that they have a preference for Ottoman, Byzantine or Roman coinage which I doubt. I assume they have an affinity for the Jewish Revolt coinage and are likely among the buyers who have paid recent record prices for them. These are the only "classics" that I see for one of these collectors.

 

For a country like Zimbabwe or one like it, I see no chance that they will favor Southern Rhodesia or any other colonial coinage. Of course, I do not believe collecting is going anywhere in this countries but that is another issue entirely. The same applies to the South African majority which I do not expect to have any real interest in apartheid era coinage. I do not believe post 1994 coinage is going anywhere either.

 

"I have no special knowledge here but I've never met a Russian collector in the US. I know there are a few but this demand seems to be centered in Russia where there is a burgeoning middle class. "

 

I haven't either but I do not believe it is necessary. We can look at pricing, auction appearances and apparent availability to infer this conclusion. I know from reviewing foreign auctions that non-US collectors disproportionately do not care about TPG (regardless of self promotion by NGC and PCGS to the contrary) and will not pay outsized premiums as US collectors do. Since they do not, I conclude that it must be mostly US collectors who are buying these coins at these prices.

 

"Long range predictions are risky even when the variables are known. My guess is that British Empire coins will do relatively well and have demand from all over the old empire. This is simply a long term trend and how all the forces play out against it is unforeseeable. "

 

This was an example only but I simply disagree with your conclusion that collectors are going to change their preferences as much as you apparently believe, except in isolation. RSA has been around for slightly over 50 years and I see nothing to support that future collectors will prefer them to Union or ZAR just as US collectors do not favor their moderns today. In this specific instance, I do not see RSA as British empire coinage and I do not believe Commonwealth collectors do either. You are the first that I have ever heard classify them as such.