Please don't call my pre 64 silver JUNK!

Not sure if this offends anyone else, but I am tired of people calling my coins junk. The people over at KITCO are starting to bother me. They just refer to our pre 64 Silver as just junk and not worth anything but spot. In the mind of a silver investor, I can see were 90% is worse that 99 or 100%, but 90% isn't junk. I like to believe that I'm protecting myself as a collector and as an investor. If silver goes down I still have the value of the coin to help me out.

If you tell someone they are sick and if they they take a pill that will increase there chances of getting better to 90% instead of 50% if they don't. That 90% isnt such a bad number is it? JUNK MY edited, sure its not 99 or 100 but you will take it wont you?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Did you try selling some of your 90% and were offered a price based on melt? Is that when someone called your coins junk?

If not, then no one's calling your coins junk (except maybe you?). As Doug says it's just a pejorative terms. There's no shame to it.

I sold the last of my 90% junk on Friday, BTW. But I still have some 40% junk that my B&M dealer didn't want.
Lance.

 

I understand everything you guys say, and its true, but I just don't like the term. Sorry

 

"Junk" is really meaning no numismatic premium. It was most commonly used on crummy, low grade or damaged coins. Its only as silver has risen that it has incorporated better and better coins.

I hear what you are saying OP, no one likes to hear someone call thier coins junk. Just remember that its more of a classification term than an insult. If it helps, just substitute "bullion value" in your mind every time you hear "junk", as they are the same.

Btw, buying coins at silver value is not a bad idea at all. If you like silver at this price level, you are right that buying coins will give you some downside protection, especially if you cherrypick better coins at silver melt cost.

 

You are not alone in disputing the use of term "junk" silver. As a longtime collector from circulation, even when the last of the these coins were almost gone in the late 1960s (and Canadian during the early 1970s), I preferred to call them circulation silver.

 

If that bothers you, wait until they start calling your 1921 PDS Morgans "widgets".

Chris

 

I agree that it is not a derogatory term, per se, but a more appropriate term would be "spot" perhaps. Spot silver coins sounds better than "junk," but it doesn't offend me....

 

One man's junk is another man's treasure.

 

Doug's right on.
Sorry the term upsets you, but thats just the way it is.

 

Low grade common silver coins are junk that sell at or around melt. Although most of it has been cherry picked for high grades, in times like these, when silver value is high, some higher grade material is “shaken” loose from long time collectors. I recently purchased a roll of 64 Kennedy’s at melt from a long time collector who claimed he had cherry picked them in the 60’s. I’d say the roll contains nothing below ms64/65 and there may even be some ms66’s & ms67’s.

 

Let's see those MS67s!

I've sold many MS '64 Kennedy's for melt, lately. But nothing that would be close to 67. Good for you!
Lance.

 

It's not just the pre-1964 silver that is referred to as "junk"; it also includes 1964. (Or as some call it - pre-1965.)

 

If "junk" is used to describe common 90% silver coins that are sold based on their silver value regardless of their date, condition, etc., then "junk" is not a pejorative (derogatory) term. Thus, if a dealer describes my Whitman folder of 1937-1947 Walking Liberty halves (minus the '38-D) that I assembled from 90% rolls as "junk" halves, I wouldn't take offense, because that's what I bought them as and all of them are in "average circulated" condition. However, if the dealer described my 19th century type coin collection as "junk", I would take it as a pejorative/derogatory/demeaning/offensive term.

 

Great point. I have always said this, I had a great time buying "junk' silver bags assembled in 1980. In the future, if silver goes back down, "junk" bags assembled now will be great items to pick up if you are a coin collector. I am having the opposite problem, I have silver I cherrypicked that I am only being offered melt for. The items are things like: Complete silver sets of roosevelts, (46 coins, mostly AU), with another 54 coins of scarcer S mints like 25 1949s, XF WL halves, XF mercuries, XF/AU Franklins, etc. Right now all of this is bullion priced, so I am not very excited about selling them.

"Better" coins are only worth silver melt, and even though I am hesitant to sell for that, many others are pitching these things in the bullion bags.

 

Ive never thought of it that way.Hey but say junk a bunch and it starts sounding weird. Kinda like bubble.Bubble,bubbley,bubbling.

 

I know what you mean. I sold most of my junk, but I have 2 rolls of AU/MS mercury dimes (later years) that I couldn't sell for spot. I will hang on to them for now. They are just too nice to go into a junk bag.

 

Agreed. I didn't like the term when I first heard it, but I've gotten used to it, and accept it for what it is without getting offended. I have even walked into the local shop with a bag of coins in my hand, and had the owner say "What ya got for me today?" and responded "Oh, just some junk silver"
I never thought I'd be calling any of my coins junk, but its just some business lingo that doesn't bother me at all now that I'm used to it.

And cpm9ball, about the term widget, I really hate that one.

 

A term of endearment. Especially when you can pick something out of a dealer's junk bin that ain't junk......

 

I will not use the term Junk Silver again - at least not with my wife, she was so proud of herself the other day when she brought home a silver quarter and a silver 1/2 dollar, she asked if she got a good deal and I proceeded to tell her - well you paid over spot and they are considered junk, ouch - I am still back pedaling. They are now my most prized 2 coins in my collection.