Is this coin fake or real?

Agreed. I enjoy the rarity of my coins, however, like as you collect: I have no plans to liquidate my collection. They will either go to my Grandkids or to my grave.

Now, if you equate rarity to NEED, ie, you are stranded on an island, and you had a choice of owning the Hope Diamond or receiving a basket of food each day, I know which one I would choose...

There are so many "rare" things in life that I have access to that I would NEVER purchase. I could care less about them or their rarity.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

The flaw in this logic, in the ancient coin-collecting arena, is that unique and nearly unique coins aren't rare. In fact, they're fairly common. Uniqueness in and of itself is not a property of ancient coins that is considered collectible. It is extremely unlikely that this will ever change.

Historical significance, artistry, condition, etc. are all much more important indicators of a coin's desirability and thus have much more impact on its demand than uniqueness or semi-uniqueness.

A stone that I find in the desert is very likely unique, but it's also very likely worthless. If it contains a million-year-old fossil, it will be worth more, but ultimately even a fossil's value is based on the supply and demand for that particular fossil.

 

Alright. You all win. I can see validity in what you say. I suppose you're right that no matter how rare something is, if nobody wants it then no value. I guess I get that. I think I'd agree with one being in a better position to sell something rare simply because there is only x number of that rarity. My point is that you can't manufacture rarity simply out of demand. I may want my particular collection of widgets to be more valuable but not possible simply because three is demand for it when you can simply manufacture more of said object. To me, if only x number of things are available, then it's more likely (although not guaranteed) that said object may become rare someday. If you can simply produce more of something then how does it become more valuable in the long term is the point I guess I'm deferring to. Mood ring or pet rocks for example I guess could be considered rare now but of little (if any) value today. Point taken. I guess I believe in 'sleepers' in coins. What actually drives demands can be a bit tricky I understand but, if 1909s-vdbs are only x number in production (as an example) then I can easily see why it would become more and more valuable. Just like I don't understand why certain mintages are NOT rare when it seems that they ought to be. 100 years from now we find out that 1938s Jefferson nickels were relatively rare all along but despite their relatively low mintage numbers, nobody deemed them as rare for some reason. Granted Jefferson nickels aren't a super popular thing to collect in general but years from now, who knows? I guess that's what I'm driving at. There are only x number of them and more cannot be produced. To me, things like that seem inevitably bound to rise in value if you're very patient. I may be dead by the time they're valuable but my guess is they're likely to one day become more valuable. Understand? This was fun (and I still believe I'm right despite being outclassed in expert knowledge). You can't produce rarity and hence, you can't produce demand in the long run. This seeks logical despite me not being able to articulate it completely.

 

A lot of us ancient collectors here also collected modern coins at one point in our lives. Until you actually start collecting ancient coins, it's hard to truly understand why uniqueness and almost-uniqueness (or rarity, if that's more understandable) aren't really factors in determining collectibility of ancients.

I wish I could articulate this better but I'm at a loss. Maybe others could do a better job than I.

BTW, my attempts at elucidation aren't meant to be adversarial or argumentative, but simply explanatory.

 

No and I didn't take it that way and I appreciate the ongoing education. I think there is a certain validity on both sides of the issue. Rare means unique and unique doesn't mean rare. I get that. I just know what I've learned thus far and obviously, I've still much to learn.

 

It seem this subject regarding ancients has been fully explored and answered and I completely agree with Doug, Brian, Ken Dorney and IOM etc......

I'll only add that individual perception of rarity can influence demand to some degree. But fundamentally it always comes down to basic economic demand, particularly for the reasons IOM already mentioned.