How do you define "RARE" in numismatics?

The speculators went to town on this one and snapped up roll after roll so that only a fraction of the mintage ever saw circulation. Prices for these coins were sky high back in the late fifties and early sixties. When it was revealed what the speculators had done, the price dropped like a stone. I bought one of these back when I was a kid (early sixties) for $24. I bought another one, two years ago, for the same price. Wish I had the 'sixties' money.........

And to answer the question.......no not rare. Everyone who wants one can get one.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

These!

 

I have an uncirculated Jane Pierce $10 gold commemorative. Only around 3000 were minted. I would gladly trade it for a lowly 1909-S VDB in XF45, with a survivorship (at that grade and higher) much higher than 3000, and no bullion value at all. The Pierce wouldn't bring much above melt, $650-700; the Lincoln would go for about a grand.

Rarity is one thing, but when it comes to value, demand always trumps it.

 

"Rare" is a coin with an actually low survival rate. I've done the 1909-S VDB and 1852-O half dime comparison enough times, you know what I mean. But for the newbies, let me reiterate.

The 1909-S VDB is a coin of which 484000 were minted, and according to PCGS survival estimates, 50000 of them have survived the test of time. They were hoarded when they came out, which accounts for a high survival rate. However, demand for this piece is extremely high, even though the coin is not rare. As a result, it sells for extremely high prices.

The 1852-O half dime is a coin of which 260000 were minted, and PCGS says approximately 200 of them have survived. That number seems and is low, but one year after these coins were made, the silver price rose, resulting in a significant portion of these coins being melted by the public. This issue is rare but has very low demand, resulting in extremely low prices in comparison to rarity.

Don't let demand and price fool you. Look at the survival rates. Pretty much what @-jeffB said.

 

I have coins that are much scarcer than a 09-S VDB also worth less or a lot less and I would never trade them for this coin or any other like it, even a straight up trade.

The reason for it is because if I did, the chances are I would never find or have a very difficult time buying a replacement. As an example, I bought the Lissner 1865 Bolivia NGC AU-55 1/5 Boliviano for I believe $155 or near it. My recollection is he bought it in the 70's or 80's. I have never seen one even close to it.

The ANS collection lists one or a few donated by the Norwebs. These might be better (no images) but there is a distinct possibility that few others exist that I would want because most are very low quality.

 

Rare, to me, is less than 50 coins. A coin may have been minted in the millions, but if less than 50 survive, that's rare. I own a coin, that when I bought it, I thought there were only 3. Now, I have been shown that there are at least 6. Still rare. Were millions produced? Perhaps. But only 6 have been shown to survive.

RIC VII 31, listed as R4 (2 or 3 known), but I've seen 6. Still rare in my book.

 

Demand has absolutely no bearing on rarity, even if something is rare and nobody wants it...it's still rare. I have tokens that have an estimated survival rate of less than 5, yet they aren't worth more than $30 or so. Then I have a banknote that is only one of 2, so rare that Heritage refused to place an estimate on it's value because there had never been another one sold at auction. So, rarity is rarity, regardless.

 

I tend to feel that when you get into survival rates under 100, there's rarity. Of course, our depends what you're taking about. A US Mint issue may be rare at 1.2 million.

 

Yes. So if someone really knew the answer, what's in for them if they go public, besides likes? Can't spend likes.

 

Yes, that's absolute rarity. But how about relative rarity? I argue that demand is required in its formulation. Relative rarity also determines value. In fact, relative rarity is nearly if not completely synonymous with the concept of 'supply and demand'. Supply in this case would be its mintage, and demand would be the number of active buyers - those combine to reveal how available a coin is among the population of active buyers for that particular coin, ceteris paribus (e.g. for a particular grade).

If there's only one coin of a given type in the entire world, and "everyone" wants it, then it's both absolutely and relatively rare. If there's 100 million coins of a given type in the world, and 1 billion people want it, then it may not be absolutely rare, but it's probably relatively rare since only 10% (1:10) of the population of buyers will be able to buy one.

My question is, at what relative rarity ratio is something considered rare? And, what is the collector base size of a given type of coin? So for instance, someone brought up the 1950 D nickel. If there are 10 million collectors of US Jefferson nickels looking to complete the series, and there are only a little above 2.63 million of them around in any condition, then there's only about 1 coin for every 4 collectors. Things may become even more rare when we filter it down to require a minimum grade for collecting purposes (i.e. many but likely not all of the 10 million collectors may want one at a particular minimum grade, and there may only be 500,000 coins meeting that criteria). This is a hypothetical example to illustrate the point, so it's not necessarily what it is today. That said, 1:4 ratio sounds rare to me, but so does 1:2, since only half the population of active buyers will be able to get their hands on one. Imagine if only half of all next gen iPhone seekers were able to buy one, if one of those consumers fails to get one by the time production runs out, imagine how rare it will actually be to that person who cannot get his/her hands on one (save for stealing, paying an exorbitant amount making it cost prohibitive to buy, etc.).

Anyway, it may help to look at one's coin buying strategy in that way, since those coins ranking higher in relative rarity will be prioritized and have more time and effort given to them so that you may have a better chance at owning one.

 

I take that as a complement!

 

I agree that rarity exists regardless of demand. But maybe that's wrong. The two don't exist without influencing each other, in some cases to large degrees. The hypothetical example of creating your own silver round tells you that it's absurd to call your piece rare, knowing that there's no demand. Demand has to have involvement in rarity - that's why there's no single answer to what is rare. The level and type of demand is what defines rarity. Rarity doesn't seem to have one definition, out in the market that is and when you get into specifics.

 

I guess we can look at it, too, from this perspective....nothing is rare for the right price. Van Gogh paintings are rare in so far as there are only one of each original paintings, yet anyone can have one if you have the means. So, is that absolute rarity or conditional rarity?

 

Both, for a sufficiently wealthy buyer.

 

^ That is, absolutely rare with a low conditional rarity close to or equal to 0, if the Van Gogh painting is always available but too cost prohibitive to others except the sufficiently wealthy buyer.

 

Demand isn't what makes things rare, in fact, lack of demand is what makes things rare. If I made a million cars and let demand decide which color to paint those cars, the color with the least demand would be rarest. Though @Kentucky was being facetious, the point he made really does fit whether he knew it or not. Cooking a little is rare.

 

Rare is number available. 1 specimen is 1 specimen, demand or not. Demand determines value. Rarity is the availability of said specimen.

 

The examples and reasoning you are using in this post are again in the abstract.

In the case of the Jefferson nickel, there aren't remotely 10 million collectors of the series, unless they are collecting out of pocket change which I do not remotely believe.

But even If there are, there is never going to be the day where this coin is going to be "rare", not in the lifetime of anyone reading my comments. As I was explaining in a prior post, coins like this and much scarcer aren't actually hard to buy, except maybe "grade rare" or some specialization which is actually usually numismatic minutia. I see your definition as you are using it here as just another rationalization to exaggerate the merits of what someone likes.

There is also a difference between rarity and availability, both with coins that most or everyone agrees are rare but also because of price.

As an example, Baker 24a the Peter Getz 1792 Washington half dollar small eagle in silver purportedly has 22 specimens known. This coin is more common than 1804 Class I dollars yet comes up for sale far less frequently, at least publicly. It is a much cheaper coin but hardly cheap. My explanation for it is that these coins are disproportionately held by "strong hands" who concurrently have a very strong affinity for it and don't put it up for sale often, maybe usually by the heirs after they are deceased.

As one post above alluded to, some coins are also much harder to buy than their actual scarcity because their low prices don't provide any incentive to sell it. This is particularly true of world coins and likely true of the coins I collect to some extent.

The mintages provide a reference point on the maximum potential number of survivors but nothing more. What matters is the survival rate and particularly in the quality most collectors want to buy, not the mintage or how many still exist. In another topic, I was comparing the 1796 quarter to the pillar 2R. As a type, the 1796 is much scarcer versus all pillar mints combined. The distinction is that most collectors (I am the exception) do not collect all mints (usually only Mexico) and most of the coins aren't remotely in a quality that particularly US collectors will ever want to buy or if they do, aren't ever going to be worth much. On the other hand, practically ever 1796 quarter (if not all of them) sells for a respectable or strong price.

This is why when I read comments about the supposed "rarity" of some low mintage modern bullion coin like the First Spouse series, I find it amusing. Yes, the mintage is low but the number available in "high" quality is greater than somewhere over 99% of all circulating coins ever struck. None of these coins are actually even remotely scarce. In all likelihood, most of the demand probably comes from speculators who have bought it for its supposed "rarity" as an "investment" versus real collectors who actually want it.

 

There is no such thing as "relative rarity". An item either is rare or it isn't. Demand defines the value of a given item, not the supply itself.

Your hypothetical silver round is rare. Lack of demand makes it inexpensive--not the fact that it is rare. On the other hand, the number of people seeking a 1909-S VDB cent doesn't make it rare, simply expensive despite the fact that oodles of them exist.