I thought I'd made that quite plain in other threads Kurt. I believe interest in and participation in the hobby is and has been growing for some time because the evidence says that it is. Really ? Kurt, apparently you don't know or understand anything at all about me. I've helped run and build this forum for over 15 years - never got paid anything, not one cent. To the contrary, I even helped pay the bills for quite a few years until I became disabled and was financially unable to do so. And, many years ago I initiated and ran the successful campaign to get our lawmakers to change US coin designs. And over the years I've written many articles about coins and numismatics, helped others write many articles, even spent 4 years helping to write a book that won the 2016 NLG award for Best Book on World Coins - and did it all for free. And over the years I've helped hundreds of people by teaching them about coins and helping them to assemble their collections, and in fact continue to do so today. I never took a dime for any of it. In other words Kurt, I do what I do in numismatics for one reason and only one reason - to help others. So you'll have to forgive me, but I take that comment as an insult, not only to my integrity but to my very character.
Oh well, I suppose the "feeling insulted" line forms to the rear. My point, though remains only partially refuted. By your post, you reveal how "heavily invested" you are in the success of the Internet segment of numismatics. That kind of multi-decade effort HAS TO skew one's perception somewhat, doesn't it? Look, I've spent the last 20 years trying to keep the Internet COMPLETELY AWAY FROM my collecting activities, and I am QUITE aware my perception is shaped majorly by that emphasis. Not vice versa? C'mon, mannnnn! I mean, how can someone show what you show with the PCGS3000 index yet deny this is a hobby in SOME KIND of difficulty? The two things just don't match up! I see you as a guy who HAS the data at his fingertips, but refuses to draw the inevitable conclusion from that data.
Yet you decline to itemize said evidence OTHER THAN pointing to this site and other Internet aspects. I dunno 'bout you but I see a site with a few dozen real contributors, maybe a 100 frequent lurkers, and a five-figure number of MINO's (members in name only). Hardly much of anything compared to ONE local coin club with a typical attendance of 100 at a meeting.
Internet sales are hard data that doesn’t have to be guessed at. Too many of those occur every day to say it’s a dying hobby especially since the traditional been going to coin clubs for decades type are the least likely to be making those purchases. I do agree though that the Pcgs index is a flawed matrix and not sure why it’s brought up so much. I’m not sure why they even still have it up in all honesty.
I think it's an interesting idea, but it either needs to be heavily tweaked, or there need to be more sub-indicies.
I completely agree. If they broke it up more or reworked what was in it it would be a lot more interesting.
That would be fantastic if you could sort date ranges and even better with grade ranges. At the very least I’d like to see it by series though ideally I’d love to be able to break it down by individual coins in a series. The more searchable they could make it the better.
I don’t believe so. You can do gold and proofs and things like that but I don’t believe you can do infidual issues.
Could very well be. As I talk to LOTS of numismatists, I become more and more convinced the intersections between the meatspace and cyberspace coin markets are exceedingly tiny. So why is that? My theory is that both camps NOT ONLY prefer to deal the way they do, but they largely CAN'T IMAGINE being reliant on the other segment. I do know this - if I can AVOID dealing with collecting using photos, and using shipping services, I sooooooo will!