• seperator

Don't forget we're collectors

The numismatic staff finished working this week on a special project. It is an online-only magazine called Precious Metals.

It’s purpose is obvious. With gold at record highs and silver at 30-year highs, they are front and center.

However, as with anything we do, there is a numismatic twist.

Pat Heller suggests where gold might be heading while David Ganz and Eric Jordan suggest coins to consider that are not only made of precious metals, but have the low-mintage numismatic kick to them.

Mintages don’t mean much in the present frenzy. But they will. That means if you are buying precious metal coins, why not give your purchases that extra punch?

There are also some cautionary tales, because we don’t want you to get carried away.

Check it out and see what you think. Here is the link:

http://www.numismaster.com/ta/inside_numis.jsp?page=precious-metals-magazine

This entry was posted in Buzz. Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to Don't forget we're collectors

  1. Kevin Dickey says:

    Why is it that there are discrepancies on mintage numbers for US Minted coins? For instance, the above referenced interesting article on modern commemoratives lists the 1999 Dolley Madison mintages as: MS: 22,948 Prf: 158,247

    This matches my 2006 Standard Catalog of World Coins book.

    However, other sites suggest a much higher mintage of the Dolley coin. For instance, moderncommemoratives.com has mintages of: MS: 89,104 Prf: 224,403

    I have found the higher MS mintage number of 89k at many sources. The discrepancy of 3.9x seems rather significant on the MS coins.

    Based on a quick review of eBay prices, the coin world doesn’t believe the lower mintage numbers…

    So what’s the truth?

    Thanks, I appreciate the blog and the new magazine, Kevin

  2. Kevin Dickey says:

    I think I just answered my own question.

    224,403 – 158,247 = 66,156
    89,104 – 22,948 = 66,156

    My bet is that there were 66,156 two coin sets. This brings up a new question. If the objective of the Precious Metals article was that low mintage MS modern commemoratives have upside value, why would the author use the 22,948 mintage number for the MS coins instead of the 89,104 true mintage number? Surely the true mintage of a coin would be the total mintage number…

  3. Randall Finet says:

    The collecting hunt was enjoyable for many years, but not so much any more. Your post title of "Don’t forget we’re collectors" is a bit feeble when used to introduce yet another element in the trend that’s taking the fun out of it.

    I appreciate the info you impart, and the new PM magazine will be informative as well I’m sure, but for those of us who ARE collectors, it appears to be just another of the incremental blows to the hobby. All the knowledge we acquired and brought to bear in our buying decisions over the years is for naught. Knowing how to tell an XF from a VF and to be able to cherry-pick an Unc from a group of AUs is becoming useless information. Ninety percent of our collections are now only bullion!
    RSF

Leave a Reply