Two Interesting Perspectives on the Challenges facing the Hobby

[physics-fan3.14]

I was catching up on articles on CoinWeek today. If you don't regularly read CoinWeek, I suggest you give it a shot - there are some really interesting articles posted there. I came across two different articles dealing with the challenges facing the hobby today (especially as related to outreach, growing the hobby, and younger collectors). 

The first was by Jeff Garrett, the outgoing president of the ANA. He sounded the tired horn that the collector base is aging and new collectors aren't joining. People have been saying that for a hundred years, so I don't really buy it, but I recommend you read his article here: http://www.coinweek.com/coin-clubs/coin-collecting-expanding-hobby/

The second article offers a bit of a different perspective. Charles Morgan (editor of CoinWeek) discusses the challenges facing the hobby today, and how technology is changing things. He talks about the disconnect between the older collectors and the younger generation. You can read his article here: http://www.coinweek.com/opinion/at-the-ana-many-attempts-to-bridge-the-coin-collecting-divide/

I am very interested to hear y'all's thoughts on these articles. 

[LINCOLNMAN]

I think collectors are born, not made. Few people I know collect anything, none collect coins, outside of my contacts in our small numismatic community. This has been so for as long as I have collected. The only coin collectors I've ever encountered even casually either were interested in Morgans or mint products; none of them struck me as long term prospects based on their shallow level of knowledge and interest (lots of blank looks).  The ANA has had 25-35,000 members for as long as I remember, so we're discussing a very small portion of the population, and this has always been the case. I believe the trick is getting coins or other numismatic items in the public's eye, to hook those few who have the collector gene. I'm unconvinced that age has much to do with this. Publicizing coin finds with a financial punchline will grab some - I started collecting as a sort of treasure hunt as a kid, when treasures of sorts could be found daily. Articles about the connection of  history and coins, again as related to finds or big dollar sales should  help. Certainly the YN efforts are a very good thing in their own right. But, if the "industry" is after collectors with substantial disposable income, focusing on YN's will require a lot of patience. I say let the ANA spend its efforts on educating all levels of collectors, as I believe they do admirably; let the "industry" focus its efforts on publicity. I see enough numismatic news in the general press that I suspect this may already be a substantial organized effort. If a greater publicity effort is possible, maybe a few sports memorabilia, comic book, or commercial art collectors could be turned. Not sure about the disconnect thing. The internet has permanently changed our buying habits and the amount and quality of information, including real scarcity, available to buyers. Looks to me that most dealers have adapted. 

[asdfgh]

I agree that collecting anything is an OCD type of thing. I collect because I love filling in missing coins and trying to increase my registry scores. I too do not know a single person who collects coins.  Only one grand child seems to have the coin collecting bug. I give all my grand kids coins for special occasions and am met with a ho hum. I keep trying. (2 children, 5 grand kids)

[World Colonial]

14 minutes ago, LINCOLNMAN said:

I think collectors are born, not made.

I agree with your entire post but with this statement in particular.

Measuring the popularity of the hobby is subjective.  Predominantly, I believe those who attempt to do so are most interested in the financial aspects of collecting, either from "industry" to sell "product" or existing collectors contemplating future resale.

My opinion of the popularity today is somewhat bifurcated.  On the one hand, I believe the number of more serious collectors (yes, this is also subjective) is larger now than the past and I conclude this from the volume of research and publications which I have either seen first hand or understand exists but have not read.  I don't know for a fact it's greater than the past, but it appears to be.  So I'd say the "hard core" collector base is larger now or in the recent past versus when most people presumably consider it to have been most popular, back in the 1960's..

There is also a substantial mostly hidden collector base who can easily collect anonymously because of the internet.  I know there were anonymous collectors before but it's much easier to do that now if you choose to do so.  Concurrently though, I also believe that much of the collector base is substantially composed of financial buyers (aka, "investors"), either exclusively or where the money aspect is a lot more important in how they collect and what they buy versus the past.  I see this inferred in posts on this forum and on PCGS all the time.  This is only logical because there are a large number of people with "investments" which most collectors will consider substantial.

Since it's impossible to actually quantify the size of the collector base and I believe most who are asking this question care more about supporting the price level, this is what I believe is attempting to be measured.  From this aspect, I believe the popularity will decrease for the numerous reasons I have provided in prior posts.

[LINCOLNMAN]

19 minutes ago, World Colonial said:

There is also a substantial mostly hidden collector base who can easily collect anonymously because of the internet.

Me mostly. Maybe one show a year. 

[World Colonial]

1 hour ago, LINCOLNMAN said:

Me mostly. Maybe one show a year. 

Likewise, if it wasn't for coin forums, no one else would know that I collect or what I collect.

[cladking]

Leave them alone.  Make information available.  They'll be along soon enough.
 

Quote

 

 Prices do not dictate the viability of the coin market. The fascination of coins and related objects does.

Even our youngest "numismatists" know that. It is on us to always present a welcoming environment, a call to participate, and a community worthy of their talent and time.

 

Leaders are created by voids, not intent.

[Afterword]

I do not believe that there is a problem. ANA may have a problem with membership, but I do not see how that translates to a low interest in collecting coins. No one knows how many collectors there are, let alone how many are presently becoming or will become interested in collecting coins.

It seems to me that a lot of coins are being bought and sold on a regular basis. On Proxibid and Ebay a lot of coins are being bought and sold daily and at Great Collections weekly.  Then you have the auctions, both large and small, from Heritage to Scotsman to local auctions and estate sales across the country. There are other venues as well.

I think using ANA and turnout for coin shows as indicators of a lack of interest in collecting coins, at best, misleading. It only indicates a lack of interest in ANA and coin shows.

I also think the idea that coin collecting is going to wither and die baseless and born out of fear of losing money when it comes time to sell - nothing more than a phantom.  

[jtryka]

These were interesting articles, but ultimately I fear our beloved hobby is in jeopardy not because of a lack of youngsters or our inability to communicate with them, but ultimately because what we collect will gradually cease to exist.  Look at stamps and I fear you see the future for coins.  People I know look at me like I'm crazy as I'm still one of the few people that actually buy stamps so i can mail in checks for my bills every month, no one buys stamps anymore because no one mails letters anymore!  Soon everything we buy or sell, how we are paid and how we pay will all be electronic digits on our phones or some computer somewhere, we will no longer hand money to a cashier and get change (more likely we'll walk out with whatever we want and there will be no cashier, just an RFID reader to determine how much to deduct from our bank accounts), or everything will just be delivered by drone.  When there is no more physical cash, what will coin collectors collect?  How then will we relate to future collectors when coins are something they've never seen in use?

[Afterword]

I am probably missing something but I have never understood how the failure of the US mints to produce new coinage would harm coin collecting. Bullion would still be a desirable investment and, as many cannot afford large bars of silver, gold and platinum, the accommodating sizes which coinage comes in would be a logical means of selling same to the masses at prices they could afford. 

I see no reason why the failure of the US mint to produce new coinage would make the collecting of coins less of an investment than it is today. Those who lean toward collecting new coinage will embrace bullion, while those who embrace old coinage will continue to do so.

Nothing of relevance will really have changed at all. 

As a side note: interest in collecting/investing in old coinage, for some, I suspect, comes from an initial interest in bullion. It did for me, when I clicked on a coin related advertisement while visiting a bullion related website, which eventually led me to Heritage auctions. 

But, as I stated above, I am probably missing something.

[World Colonial]

3 minutes ago, Afterword said:

I am probably missing something but I have never understood how the failure of the US mints to produce new coinage would harm coin collecting. Bullion would still be a desirable investment and, as many cannot afford large bars of silver, gold and platinum, the accommodating sizes which coinage comes in would be a logical means of selling same to the masses at prices they could afford. 

I see no reason why the failure of the US mint to produce new coinage would make the collecting of coins less of an investment than it is today. Those who lean toward collecting new coinage will embrace bullion, while those who embrace old coinage will continue to do so.

Nothing of relevance will really have changed at all. 

As a side note: interest in collecting/investing in old coinage, for some, I suspect, comes from an initial interest in bullion. It did for me, when I clicked on a coin related advertisement for Heritage auctions while visiting a bullion related website. 

I believe it matters at the margin, but concurrently admit that it's only one of many factors which will determine the outcome.

For the financial buyer, it will matter a lot less.  The US Mint (and others) will almost certainly continue to strike NCLT and commemoratives as long as permitted by Congress.

For other potential collectors, if there is no circulating coinage, I believe it will negatively impact the collector base because collecting coins will be less visible than the competing alternatives.  I believe most collectors try to get value for their money but still predominantly view it as an alternative consumption expense because the outlay is nominal.  I don't believe collecting represented by participants here and on PCGS is typical of the US based collector.  For most collectors, there are a lot more recreational alternatives for their money versus the past.

[Afterword]

4 hours ago, World Colonial said:

For other potential collectors, if there is no circulating coinage, I believe it will negatively impact the collector base because collecting coins will be less visible than the competing alternatives.

How does circulating coinage make collecting coins more visible? I carried change in my pockets for many years (now I do not - nor do I carry cash) and was never motivated to collect coins.

I see what is essentially bullion coins advertised on television and in magazines fairly frequently and find them a much more likely means of attracting potential collectors than a pocket full of change. They at least introduce to potential collectors the notion that some coins are worth buying and not just spending. It might also lead them to the discovery of the coin collecting market at large, as was the case with me. 

 

[Conder101]

Most collectors get started by finding something unusual in their pocket change.  Something they haven't seen before, an error, an unusually old coin etc.  Look at how many started because of the state quarters.  Most people alive had never really seen anything except the "standard" Washington quarter in their entire life  Suddenly here was something different and it attracted their attention and they started looking for more.  Many put together collections.  Some went dormant, and some expanded their interests and began collecting other coins.  Some of the dormant ones will return someday.  But without that "sparK" from their packet change the vast majority never would have started.  No one carries books of matches anymore.  (How often do you even see a book of matches?)If they smoke or for some reason need a flame on a regular basis they carry a butane lighter. How many people today get into the field of matchbook collecting?  A field that used to be very popular.  Button hooks used to be widely used and collected.  No one uses them anymore. and I would venture to say the ranks of button hook collectors is probably pretty small as well.

[World Colonial]

6 hours ago, Afterword said:

How does circulating coinage make collecting coins more visible? I carried change in my pockets for many years (now I do not - nor do I carry cash) and was never motivated to collect coins.

I see what is essentially bullion coins advertised on television and in magazines fairly frequently and find them a much more likely means of attracting potential collectors than a pocket full of change. They at least introduce to potential collectors the notion that some coins are worth buying and not just spending. It might also lead them to the discovery of the coin collecting market at large, as was the case with me. 

 

I believe that your statement on new collectors getting a start from bullion is correct but so is Condor's below yours.

Since the ASE and AGE only started in 1986, presumably since this introduction the proportion who start this way is larger than before it.  I'd say bullion buyers are more likely to transition to the coins collected by members on this forum and PCGS and it's part of the reason I consider them financial buyers or a combination of financial buyer and collector.  I make this comment because it should be apparent that the sums many forum members (and others who fit this profile) aren't necessarily an alternative to other forms of consumption, not considering what is being bought.

As a complete guess, I also speculate that the overwhelming percentage of collectors in the US today (my prior guesstimate has been maybe 2MM) have an annual budget of $500 or less, maybe a lot less.  Some of these are completing sets of ASE, world silver NCLT and modern commemoratives but I don't believe it's what they mostly buy.  I believe they are mostly buying proof sets, mint sets, low priced world coinage and circulated US classics.

How they get started now, I don't know.  I was introduced to collecting by my aunt's world coinage which my father gave her from our international travel when I was growing up.  But like you, I never did collect out of US circulating coinage when I moved back to the US in 1975 even though I was only 10.

[Afterword]

I have no doubt state quarters sparked some interest in collecting, but it turned has many or more away from collecting because of their lack of investment potential. They were never going to be worth more than face value. For most it was simply something to do to pass the time, like collecting bottle caps or match boxes. Novelties come and go.

The silver and gold content of older coinage and bullion coins is the main reason coin collecting exists today, as other than the sole domain of a few rare collectors who enjoy coinage mostly from a historic perspective and those who collect inexpensive coinage (pocket change) to pass the time. 

And I am not saying the history of coinage is unimportant. 

[World Colonial]

On ‎8‎/‎14‎/‎2017 at 0:40 PM, Afterword said:

I have no doubt state quarters sparked some interest in collecting, but it turned has many or more away from collecting because of their lack of investment potential. They were never going to be worth more than face value. For most it was simply something to do to pass the time, like collecting bottle caps or match boxes. Novelties come and go.

The silver and gold content of older coinage and bullion coins is the main reason coin collecting exists today, as other than the sole domain of a few rare collectors who enjoy coinage mostly from a historic perspective and those who collect inexpensive coinage (pocket change) to pass the time. 

And I am not saying the history of coinage is unimportant. 

I agree your description is fairly accurate but with a slight difference of opinion, as I consider collector motivation more complicated than you described.  

In addition to the three groups you listed (casual, financial buyer and "hard core"/numismatist), I would still add the fourth I did in my prior post.  I don’t believe this collector is equivalent to most who collect predominantly or exclusively from circulation, I don't see them as financial buyers (generally) and they may or may not be "hard core".  For this collector who I believe represents most though likely a much lower proportion than in the past due to the much higher price level, I consider it an alternative consumption expense because there are other comparable hobbies and recreational activities in cost where no one expects to get their money back either.  When it’s spent, it’s gone and this is how I presume this collector group generally views their participation.  They can and are willing to do so because the outlay is immaterial, whether my $500 cutoff is accurate or not.  (It may be somewhat more but probably less.)

My interpretation of your last post is that you believe most collectors actually have a (very) weak affinity both for collecting generally and what they buy specifically.  if you are correct, then the “hobby” is in even bigger trouble than I believe and I’m not exactly the most optimistic on it’s future prospects, especially financially.

The casual collector obviously has a very weak affinity.  So does the predominant financial buyer.  For everyone else, I believe it is substantially (though not exclusively) a function of the numismatic substance of what they collect, measured by the preference scale versus the amount paid, whether for a single coin or their entire collection.  This is a generalization and doesn't apply to every collector but almost certainly to most.

I suspect this is both an unpopular opinion and one which is not generally accepted but it is an entirely logical claim.  There is no reason to believe that hardly anyone who predominantly collects coins with limited numismatic appeal or where the price paid is (completely) disproportionate to the coin’s merits will have anything other than a (very) weak affinity for the hobby, except to the extent it is competitive (to them) with alternative recreational activities or “investment” opportunities.

When  I look at the affinity for different coins, it should be evident that those such as ancients, medieval, colonial (US and Spanish) and US Territorial gold have much strong collector affinity versus practically all others.  Early US federal coinage is also relatively high generically.

Conversely, i apply this relatively low affinity to "grade rarities” and the highest TPG grades where much or most of the value is dependent on the current financial bubble, existence of TPG or the TPG label.  Second, other specialization in vogue in the US for what are actually common coins at (hugely) inflated prices.  And third, other coins where the price level is also (disproportionately) inflated versus the merits as a collectible.  The same applies to the emphasis on “+” grades and CAC “beans”, neither of which have anything to do with the hobby aspects of collecting whatsoever.  If the inflated prices of these coins decline or crash as I believe they mostly will (in constant prices at least), a lot of these collectors are going to abandon the "hobby", as did the outsized percentage of financial buyers in South Africa since 2011, even though I believe interest in the hobby here is much greater than there.

As specific examples, though both are “trophy” coins, I don’t believe affinity for either the 1804 dollar or the 1913 LHN is particularly high, certainly not in the context of their value.  Both are prominent coins but actually a lot less interesting to experienced collectors than many cheaper ones which sell for a (miniscule) fraction.  Both seem to sell fairly regularly for the scarcity.  By comparison, I have seen both the 1861 CSA half and the Peter Getz 1792 Washington half small eagle in silver (Baker 24a) offered for sale far less frequently (essentially never) during my collecting tenure, even though the latter coin is more common.

If you are right that the financial aspect is as important as you state, it should be evident that it is inevitable that the popularity of the “hobby” is destined to decline and likely substantially, even without the economic considerations I previously described elsewhere.  This should be a self-evident reality because the coins which most collectors actually want to buy cannot continue to increase in value at a greater rate than their financial capacity indefinitely, not without turning the “hobby” into “widget” trading through even greater financialization than exists today.

Lastly for the recreational collector, I don’t believe coins are remotely viewed as they were during the “golden age” because the hobby has been substantially displaced by competing alternatives which didn’t exist in the past.  So yes, I also expect the hobby’s popularity to continue to decline with this segment of the current collector base.

[Afterword]

2 hours ago, World Colonial said:

My interpretation of your last post is that you believe most collectors actually have a (very) weak affinity both for collecting generally and what they buy specifically.  if you are correct, then the “hobby” is in even bigger trouble than I believe and I’m not exactly the most optimistic on it’s future prospects, especially financially.

 

Only weak in comparison to the financial aspect, but this does not equate to a total lack of interest in collecting coins in general or collecting coins that are satisfying on levels other than profit. The two are not mutually exclusive. After all, there are much more efficient means of investment available. If one chooses coin collecting it is obviously about more than financial gain. 

In my opinion, the hobby would basically be dead if not for this marriage, save perhaps for a comparably few casual collects and diehard enthusiasts. It is this marriage, if anything, that will prevent the relative obscurity that would otherwise engulf coin collecting.

TPGs and CAC are far from perfect, but, in terms of coin collecting participates, I do not believe there would be near as many without them.

 

 

[Afterword]

4 hours ago, World Colonial said:

For this collector who I believe represents most though likely a much lower proportion than in the past due to the much higher price level, I consider it an alternative consumption expense because there are other comparable hobbies and recreational activities in cost where no one expects to get their money back either.  When it’s spent, it’s gone and this is how I presume this collector group generally views their participation.

I think this is a bit exaggerated, even collectors of modest means should realize a return on their investment. Unless, of course, they leave it to relatives. 

If you want to insure that your coin collection realizes a profit, just leave it to your relatives. To them, whatever your coins bring in will be considered a profit.

[kidrootbeer]

you think the Numismatic community is doldruming? Take a look at modern Philately..

[World Colonial]

On ‎8‎/‎16‎/‎2017 at 1:28 AM, Afterword said:

I think this is a bit exaggerated, even collectors of modest means should realize a return on their investment. Unless, of course, they leave it to relatives. 

If you want to insure that your coin collection realizes a profit, just leave it to your relatives. To them, whatever your coins bring in will be considered a profit.

I didn't mean that collectors I describe as hobbyists don't try to get value for their money.  I believe most everyone tries to do so.  What I meant is that they will still buy coins even if they later lose money on them unlike the coins where it is obvious (or should be) that the buyer predominantly buys it for financial reasons or wouldn't buy it at all if they believed they would lose a substantial proportion of their outlay, 

I don't see how this conclusion can be avoided because most collectors aren't buying the coins profiled on this forum or PCGS, whether the coin is low priced or not.  The pricing is weak but someone has to collect all of the other coins that aren't discussed on these two forums which is most  and these coins aren't disproportionately owned by non-collectors.

[World Colonial]

On ‎8‎/‎16‎/‎2017 at 1:02 AM, Afterword said:

 

Only weak in comparison to the financial aspect, but this does not equate to a total lack of interest in collecting coins in general or collecting coins that are satisfying on levels other than profit. The two are not mutually exclusive. After all, there are much more efficient means of investment available. If one chooses coin collecting it is obviously about more than financial gain. 

In my opinion, the hobby would basically be dead if not for this marriage, save perhaps for a comparably few casual collects and diehard enthusiasts. It is this marriage, if anything, that will prevent the relative obscurity that would otherwise engulf coin collecting.

TPGs and CAC are far from perfect, but, in terms of coin collecting participates, I do not believe there would be near as many without them.

 

 

You might be right on this point also.

However, to my knowledge, this wasn't the mentality of most collectors before the mid 1970's when financialization really took off and turned the hobby into a quasi-alternative asset class. I don't expect collectors to have no financial motive now either, particularly given the price level. 

I'm not sure what most US collectors believe but I suspect that they misjudge actual collector interest to be greater or much greater than it actually is.  No one likes to lose money.  I don't like to lose money either and that's partly why I buy at a lower level than I otherwise would, as the financial aspect would then outweigh collecting for me too.   

I also predominantly buy coins that I believe most collectors would agree have better numismatic credentials than most others for the price I pay, even though they collect or like others better.  So if the coin loses value, it doesn't bother me that much whereas in general, I see no reason to believe most collectors think likewise for what they collect. 

I have made mistakes (for various reasons) but would generally still buy the coins I have whereas for most others, I wouldn't and don't believe they will either because the overwhelming percentage can be bought either on demand or short notice.  They wouldn't make an outlay equivalent to mine but would wait to buy them later for less.  With many coins I try to buy, I can't do that because when a coin I want becomes available, I have to buy it then or potentially wait a long time for a second opportunity.  A few I didn't buy I haven't seen a second or comparable coin at all.

.

[World Colonial]

On ‎8‎/‎16‎/‎2017 at 7:33 AM, kidrootbeer said:

you think the Numismatic community is doldruming? Take a look at modern Philately..

I have heard that too.  My pessimism doesn't run nearly that deep.

[Afterword]

1 hour ago, World Colonial said:

I have made mistakes (for various reasons) but would generally still buy the coins I have whereas for most others, I wouldn't and don't believe they will either because the overwhelming percentage can be bought either on demand or short notice.  They wouldn't make an outlay equivalent to mine but would wait to buy them later for less.  With many coins I try to buy, I can't do that because when a coin I want becomes available, I have to buy it then or potentially wait a long time for a second opportunity.  A few I didn't buy I haven't seen a second or comparable coin at all.

 

Such is the nature of coin collecting - the desire to be financially responsible and the desire to possess, constantly at odds with one another.  A study in compromise.

[cladking]

In the near term there is only one challenge facing the hobby and my warnings about it have fallen on deaf ears for nearly twenty years now: We need to welcome the new generation of coin collectors.  Instead we do such a good job of chasing them off that most are congregating on social media rather than message boards which are more heavily influenced by baby boomers. 

This gets to the heart of the challenge.  Most living coin collectors, especially as defined by the aggregate value of their coins, are older people.  Baby boomers in the US own about 95% of all numismatic  value and this group is nearing retirement and an age where collectors traditionally sell  their collections.  There are plenty of individuals who want the collections and would buy them but in aggregate they don't nearly have the capital to do it. 

Traditionalists paint a dire picture but the reality is there are many coins whose prices are soaring and this is happening because young collectors worldwide are attracted to coins that have never had any demand in the past.  A young Indian professional might not be able to afford rare old US coins but he can afford nice high grade Indian Republic coins so that's what he's buying.  Aluminum and other base metal coins that never had any interest are now being collected and it turns out many of them are actually scarce or rare. 

The same thing is going on here in the US and it's why many people have coins like graded eagles and proof sets instead of collections of mid-grade buffalo nickels or Gem bust halfs. 

It's not the lack of new collectors that is the problem but rather the unwillingness of established collectors to welcome them into the fold. 

[Afterword]

Some older people can be gruff, insensitive and set in their ways (some in concrete) and, as you say, their interests are mostly confined to classic US coinage. Considering these factors, it is not surprising that they have little in common with younger people who do not share their interest in classic US coinage. It is also understandable why younger people would be put off by the intolerance of some older people who find their presence intrusive and misguided. 

It could be that the title US Coins is too inclusive. Perhaps someone should petition NGC to provide separate forums for Modern US Coins and Classic US Coins. I believe a forum for world coinage already exists.

 

 

[cladking]

2 hours ago, Afterword said:

Some older people can be gruff, insensitive and set in their ways (some in concrete) and, as you say, their interests are mostly confined to classic US coinage. Considering these factors, it is not surprising that they have little in common with younger people who do not share their interest in classic US coinage. It is also understandable why younger people would be put off by the intolerance of some older people who find their presence intrusive and misguided. 

It could be that the title US Coins is too inclusive. Perhaps someone should petition NGC to provide separate forums for Modern US Coins and Classic US Coins. I believe a forum for world coinage already exists.

 

 

There are other sites that do this and it does help a little... ...not much. 

Most of the participants on the modern forums are just older collectors with an interest in moderns and they still don't have a great deal in common with younger collectors. 

I don't think there's a simple answer for the divide other than merely the passage of time unless that just turns more of us into curmudgeons.  But I do believe that narrowing this gulf is very important to the future of the hobby.  Young people will naturally gravitate to older coins in time but the longer it takes the more damage that could be inflicted to collectors and their coins.  Don't get me wrong here; I don't expect to see nice indian cents going back into circulation but it's not difficult to imagine things like low grade buffalos and Jeffersons circulating again.  The real damage could be done in popular areas that have to compete with high silver values or even high face value.  The real damage could be done by rising metals prices in a vacuum of demand for numismatic coins. 

I believe coin collecting is safe for at least another half a century until the countless millions of new collectors start facing retirement decisions.  If, unlike us, they are able to keep new generations interested then they'll be OK too. 

[LINCOLNMAN]

21 hours ago, Afterword said:

 

Such is the nature of coin collecting - the desire to be financially responsible and the desire to possess, constantly at odds with one another.  A study in compromise.

Well said. Applies as well to all forms of collecting. Might not be as satisfying if one could afford not to be responsible (would like to find out though).

[Afterword]

6 hours ago, cladking said:

Most of the participants on the modern forums are just older collectors with an interest in moderns and they still don't have a great deal in common with younger collectors. 

The gulf between old and young has always been wide. I suspect this is true in coin collecting as well. It is a problem, but I suspect it is one we will all have to live with.

It is possible, however, that without this generational divide separating, to a degree, the established ideas of the old from the yet to be formed ideas of the young, that change and the possibility of improvement would not occur as readily. 

4 hours ago, LINCOLNMAN said:

Might not be as satisfying if one could afford not to be responsible (would like to find out though).

I think you would discover it is not nearly as satisfying. It is always the more difficult accomplishment that satisfies the most.

At least, it has always been that way for me.

[Conder101]

22 hours ago, cladking said:

Most living coin collectors, especially as defined by the aggregate value of their coins, are older people. 

Most living coin collectors have always been older people, and probably always will be.

 

22 hours ago, cladking said:

this group is nearing retirement and an age where collectors traditionally sell  their collections.  There are plenty of individuals who want the collections and would buy them but in aggregate they don't nearly have the capital to do it. 

So eventually prices will decline to the point where they DO have the capital and more collectors will start buying the older coins.

[cladking]

16 minutes ago, Conder101 said:

Most living coin collectors have always been older people, and probably always will be.

 

 

I phrased that poorly. 

What I meant to convey was that among the more advanced collectors most of us are older.  There were many millions of young new collectors when I was a boy just as there are now.  Of course newbies don't attend coin shows just like as has always been the case.  My point was chiefly that the young people might be less prepared to own "all" the coins than they were in the '50's and '60's since the aggregate value of all coins is many multiples of the aggregate value of the coins in those days. Inflation has increased ten fold but the value of all coins has increased fifty fold.  Let's just say it's been a good 70 years! The number of boomers who collect today is pretty high since we are collecting later in life and we are such an enormous demographic.  But in few areas is this demographic more profound than in coin collecting whether seen in terms of numbers or in terms of the total value of the coins we own compared to the total value of coins owned by other age groups in this country. 

Like everything numismatics requires a lifetime to acquire significant expertise.  Older people will always have some advantages and prominence over younger people in most walks of life.  They'll always have had more time to have acquired, knowledge, wisdom, wealth, and coins.  They might always be more visible in coin collecting though there was a time when this current crop of oldsters were quite visible as beginners because there were so many of us.