Let's see some low mintage. 2 2

[Rollo Tomassi]

1802 Quarter Eagle   3,045  minted.

 

1796 Quarter    6,146 minted.

 

 

1899 Half Eagle Proof       99 struck.

 

[zadok]

and here i thought low mintage meant single digits....who knew?

[physics-fan3.14]

Morocco, Benduqi, AH 1277. 5 known examples (original mintage unknown)

[gmarguli]

1967 Congo Likuta trial strikes. First is a die trial strike in copper. Second is a die trial strike using two obverse dies. Both examples are believed unique. 

 

1921 Finland Markka in proof/specimen. One of two known. 

 

AH1308-A (1890) Comoros 5 Centimes in proof/specimen. Only example I've been able to locate. 

 

1982 Seychelles 10 Cent Mule (1982 Design KM-48.1 with 1981 Design KM-44). Believed unique.

 

1925 Bulgaria Lev (Brussels Mint) in proof/specimen. Mintage unknown. Only 3 examples ever certified. 

 

1946 Luxembourg "John The Blind" 100 Francs in proof. Mintage of 100. While a couple of other examples have been certified, I've never seen another one for sale. 

 

A couple of German states Pfennigs in proof. While some of the mintages on 19th century proof German coins are known, most are not. Typically only a handful minted. 

[GoldFinger1969]

Low mintage can be relative or absolute.  The 1908-S Saint-Gaudens has a mintage of 22,000 which is 1% or less of some of the other coins from the 1920's minted in the millions.

[World Colonial]

18 minutes ago, GoldFinger1969 said:

Low mintage can be relative or absolute.  The 1908-S Saint-Gaudens has a mintage of 22,000 which is 1% or less of some of the other coins from the 1920's minted in the millions.

What you seem to be referring to is the perceived significance of the mintage.

Most if not every proof issued outside the US has a low mintages compared to practically any US proof dated from the early or at most mid-50's.   There is nothing unusual in low mintages for patterns; it's the norm.  Someone will eventually probably illustrate some die variety or error.  All errors are low mintage by definition and same applies to most die varieties, certainly compared to more recent coins as a generic date.

Many circulation strikes were also "made rare" or at least "made scarce".  This applies to many 19th century US classic gold for a variety of reasons.  Most world coinage is low mintage by US standards, predominantly due to population and economics.

The consensus perceived significance of the scarcity is subjective but is mostly reflected in the price.  What's also often equally significant though generically isn't the mintage but the survival and survival rate, including in better quality.  Many "low" mintage dates are (a lot) more common than those with much higher mintages.  The mintage creates a ceiling for availability but these coins are often not hard to buy and by my standards, rather common..

Edited May 6, 2021 by World Colonial

[Coinbuf]

Some nice examples so far, sorry to say that I have nothing that is remotely low mintage to post.

[Rollo Tomassi]

I originally intended (for no reason) to feature US coins.

When I delve into my foreign, there ARE some really low numbers.

 

1679 Brunswick-Luneberg 2/3 Thaler

Can find 2 in auction results.  Both from 2008,

 

 

Going even more obscure.... 1792 France 2 Sol  

NGC pop indicates 2 in all grades.  ?

[jtryka]

Lowest mintage is different than lowest survival, but this one straddles the fence...

 

[RWB]

International Nickel Corp (INCO) private test piece from experiments for replacement to 90% silver coinage.

This piece: pure silver 24.35 mm, 6.94 grams, RB-1025. Two known: one in Smithsonian, one in private collection.

Edited May 8, 2021 by RWB

[Rollo Tomassi]

3 hours ago, jtryka said:

Lowest mintage is different than lowest survival, but this one straddles the fence...

 

So some of the metal itself can have a survival problem?

[AcesKings]

My lowest, 1864 Proof est. between 150-190.

1866 Proof 725

[The 12th Denticle]

1905 US-Philippines one peso, Proof. With only 471 minted, it is the rarest of all the USPI Proof peso coins.

[Henri Charriere]

@World Colonialhas come closest to defining this phenomenon.

Mintage is affected by mass meltings, hoards, shipwrecks, unsolved thefts and the like.  Plenty of "scarce" coinage is simply unwanted with zero demand. There are notable exceptions, the '33 Double Eagle, 1804 dollar and the five 1913 V-nickels.

By contrast, condition rarity, particularly certified specimens, are far more meaningful whether we know their precise whereabouts or not.  I've a bunch of Roosters but fortunately for me, though essentially rare in Mint State, they are not widely sought. That can be a good thing when you're collecting and prices are low.  It can also be a bad thing when you're getting ready to sell.

[World Colonial]

2 hours ago, Quintus Arrius said:

By contrast, condition rarity, particularly certified specimens, are far more meaningful whether we know their precise whereabouts or not.  

This isn't exactly what I had in mind,

[jtryka]

Here are two that are what @GoldFinger1969 referred to.  The first has a mintage of only 22,000 with a few hundred survivors.  The second is the flip side, mintage of 3,049,500 but probably fewer than a thousand survived (Akers 2nd edition estimates 700-750 in mint state).

 

[Henri Charriere]

[I would just like to say at the outset that there is, as you shall shortly and surely see, no relation between the sober reflections made in a comment by World Colonial above, who IMHO, has a good grasp of the subject matter at hand, and the discombobulated rant that follows...]

Low mintage?  My wife and I pledged our marginal lives, our sub-subsistence fortunes and our somewhat sacred honor to each other, apparently for naught according to members here who regard official U.S. Mint coin output as sacrosanct. Grading be damned.

Seven of the sixteen Rooster dates I own are P-graded, MS-64 thru 67, with none graded higher. That counts for nothing. (Visualize, if you will, Alex fr PA's large yawning, ho-hum emoji).

Three, the 1st a 1911, 2d rarest in the series (MS-67) is 3/0, the 2nd due in New York tomorrow from Germany after an intensive two-year search that left no stone unturned, is a 1902, (MS-64) also 3/0. The 3rd, is a 1903, (MS-65) 2/0.

Can grading numbers change?  Of course they can. Do mintage numbers change?  Yes, with mass meltings (authorized or not) and, according to a recent unrelated post, car washes, scrap metal junk yards, subway grates -- and undiscovered hoards, abandoned safe-deposit/storage boxes, shipwrecks and old-time accumulators who did not know how to go about computerizing their inventory which consisted of linotype machines, Civil War-era newspapers old coins domestic and foreign they knew nothing about and things you would ordinarily find in museums, relying on their fading memories instead.

One day I will own a one-of-a-kind (unique) coin, 1/0, millions of which will have been made, which will be worth next to nothing. Know why?  Simple. Lack of prestige. Lack of interest. Lack of demand. You name it. This will come as no surprise to those who've already suffered such an indignity.

Numismatically speaking, anybody know exactly what was lost when Mt. St. Helens. erupted? How about the Mississippi flood of 1927 or hurricanes and tornadoes and cyclones?

If Low Mintage becomes a significant factor, the hobby manufactures its own what with the expansion of the Sheldon Scale, fancy Limited editions: No. 37 of 500, First Days, First Strikes, Six Steps, Tripled Dies, Impossible sleight-of-hand, three-card monte, musical chairs-like planchet renditions that go-to numismatists will dismiss out of hand or debate endlessly on Forums like this one.

******* ******* *******

 

[zadok]

6 hours ago, Quintus Arrius said:

[I would just like to say at the outset that there is, as you shall shortly and surely see, no relation between the sober reflections made in a comment by World Colonial above, who IMHO, has a good grasp of the subject matter at hand, and the discombobulated rant that follows...]

Low mintage?  My wife and I pledged our marginal lives, our sub-subsistence fortunes and our somewhat sacred honor to each other, apparently for naught according to members here who regard official U.S. Mint coin output as sacrosanct. Grading be damned.

Seven of the sixteen Rooster dates I own are P-graded, MS-64 thru 67, with none graded higher. That counts for nothing. (Visualize, if you will, Alex fr PA's large yawning, ho-hum emoji).

Three, the 1st a 1911, 2d rarest in the series (MS-67) is 3/0, the 2nd due in New York tomorrow from Germany after an intensive two-year search that left no stone unturned, is a 1902, (MS-64) also 3/0. The 3rd, is a 1903, (MS-65) 2/0.

Can grading numbers change?  Of course they can. Do mintage numbers change?  Yes, with mass meltings (authorized or not) and, according to a recent unrelated post, car washes, scrap metal junk yards, subway grates -- and undiscovered hoards, abandoned safe-deposit/storage boxes, shipwrecks and old-time accumulators who did not know how to go about computerizing their inventory which consisted of linotype machines, Civil War-era newspapers old coins domestic and foreign they knew nothing about and things you would ordinarily find in museums, relying on their fading memories instead.

One day I will own a one-of-a-kind (unique) coin, 1/0, millions of which will have been made, which will be worth next to nothing. Know why?  Simple. Lack of prestige. Lack of interest. Lack of demand. You name it. This will come as no surprise to those who've already suffered such an indignity.

Numismatically speaking, anybody know exactly what was lost when Mt. St. Helens. erupted? How about the Mississippi flood of 1927 or hurricanes and tornadoes and cyclones?

If Low Mintage becomes a significant factor, the hobby manufactures its own what with the expansion of the Sheldon Scale, fancy Limited editions: No. 37 of 500, First Days, First Strikes, Six Steps, Tripled Dies, Impossible sleight-of-hand, three-card monte, musical chairs-like planchet renditions that go-to numismatists will dismiss out of hand or debate endlessly on Forums like this one.

******* ******* *******

 

there is true rarity n then there is condition rarity...i own both n i know which gives me the most satisfaction....the former seldom changes n the latter can change on a whiff....how many eggs should one put in one basket?....

[Henri Charriere]

6 hours ago, zadok said:

there is true rarity n then there is condition rarity...i own both n i know which gives me the most satisfaction....the former seldom changes n the latter can change on a whiff....how many eggs should one put in one basket?....

Wisdom demands diversification but asking me to change course now would be akin to ordering a MAERSK cargo ship from China filled to the brim with full containers to make that hairpin turn beyond the Bayonne Bridge headed to Port Newark at Full Speed Ahead. Ain't gonna happen.

[World Colonial]

15 hours ago, Quintus Arrius said:

[I would just like to say at the outset that there is, as you shall shortly and surely see, no relation between the sober reflections made in a comment by World Colonial above, who IMHO, has a good grasp of the subject matter at hand, and the discombobulated rant that follows...]

Please see the examples below from my own collection for an idea of what I am talking about.

The link below is to my 1752 Peru 2R.  (The coin is actually noticeably better than the image.) According to Yonaka's reference, the mintage is supposed to be 208.  I state "supposed to be", as I have seen this coin enough where I consider this unlikely.  It's still a very scarce coin and the second best example I have seen (by far) but the actual mintage in IMO is likely to be at least 10 times the number recorded.

Verify NGC Certification | NGC (ngccoin.com)

The image below is to the obverse of my 1763 Peru 1R.  The recorded mintage is 253,296 which is hardly low.  It is more common but still not common at all (maybe hundreds survive based upon estimates for Liberty seated coinage) and this one is one of the few (and maybe only one) in this quality or near it.

So which is more significant? 

It's a toss up depending upon each collector's preference.  99.9999% of US collectors aren't interested in this coin or series (most don't even know it exists), even though this date and practically every other are likely scarcer either in total and definitely in comparable quality than every single US dime (approximately same FV and size), except for the 73-CC No Arrows (a minor design variation) or 1894-S (a non-circulating "trophy" coin).

[RWB]

Nice of PCGS to state on the slab that the Peruvian silver coin is "Real."

Edited May 10, 2021 by RWB

[World Colonial]

5 hours ago, World Colonial said:

The image below is to the obverse of my 1763 Peru 1R.  The recorded mintage is 253,296 which is hardly low.  It is more common but still not common at all (maybe hundreds survive based upon estimates for Liberty seated coinage) and this one is one of the few (and maybe only one) in this quality or near it.

So which is more significant? 

It's a toss up depending upon each collector's preference.  99.9999% of US collectors aren't interested in this coin or series (most don't even know it exists), even though this date and practically every other are likely scarcer either in total and definitely in comparable quality than every single US dime (approximately same FV and size), except for the 73-CC No Arrows (a minor design variation) or 1894-S (a non-circulating "trophy" coin).

To clarify my comments, this coin is likely more common than the 1874CC dime (10,817) due to the lopsided difference in the mintage but I doubt in better quality.  The dime has an estimated 80 survivors per Coin Facts with four or five MS.  My coin will have more than 80, though almost certainly not as many MS or in better grades.  Similar idea versus the 1871CC and 1872CC which have more estimated survivors but the same or fewer estimated MS.  In Yonaka's survey, 23% of the 133 Peru 1R (for all dates) were also holed.

[The 12th Denticle]

So....back to seeing some low mintage coins:

This one’s probably the lowest mintage coin in my collection. From the Republic of the Philippines, a 1982 Proof 25 Piso NCLT Commemorative. Only 250 struck.

[Hoghead515]

5 minutes ago, The 12th Denticle said:

So....back to seeing some low mintage coins:

This one’s probably the lowest mintage coin in my collection. From the Republic of the Philippines, a 1982 Proof 25 Piso NCLT Commemorative. Only 250 struck.

That's very cool. That's a beautiful coin. And my birth year. 

[Henri Charriere]

1 hour ago, RWB said:

Nice to PCGS to state on the slab that the Peruvian silver coin is "Real."

One Spanish Real [Ree-ALL]; Two Spanish Reales [Ree-ALLS]... to those unfamiliar with the denomination (Not to RWB, who obviously does).

[RWB]

1 hour ago, RWB said:

Nice of PCGS to state on the slab that the Peruvian silver coin is "Real."

I bet an even larger silver coin will say "Too Real" on the slab....

[Dark Chameleon]

On 5/7/2021 at 7:27 PM, jtryka said:

Lowest mintage is different than lowest survival, but this one straddles the fence...

 

Weren't all those plugged?

[Henri Charriere]

1 hour ago, Dark Chameleon said:

Weren't all those plugged?

I don't know if they were or were not but I would like to know whY the Y in LibertY was obliterated on the obverse and routine root canal work on the reverse resulted in the removal of at least 22.5% of the denticles between 6:30 and 9:30.  Truth be told, I want my money back -- and I didn't even buy the thing!

[jtryka]

20 hours ago, Dark Chameleon said:

Weren't all those plugged?

Not that I am aware of, there may be adjustment marks or plugs on individual coins based on weight, but that's a different issue.

[Star City Homer]

I'm always looking for an excuse for this guy!  

Total 1926 mintage for the 1926 Prince Skanderbeg 20 FrA of all types 6000.

Total mintage for the 1926 Prince Skanderbeg 20 FrA with the fasces mark 100.

Total estimated survival 10.  (90 were reported as melted)