Kennedy halves the "New Morgans?" Possibly

Is it an article, or is it a sales pitch?

Either way, it is not 100% factual. The Cherrypickers' Guide denotes the 1964 FS-103 only as the DDO-015 Accented Hair proof, the Guide used the FS-401 as the generic number for all the other dies used for striking the Accented Hair type. Plus like someone else mentioned, the US Mint produced Satin Finish coins for the 2010 uncirculated sets.

I did find it humorous about the “Lion of the Senate” being on a commemorative coin, I wonder if the reverse will have a car going off over the “bridge at Chappaquiddick”? In ten days, July 19[SUP]th[/SUP], will mark the 43[SUP]rd[/SUP] anniversary of the death of Mary Jo Kopechne. I also wonder if President Jimmy Carter might have another name for Teddy Kennedy instead of the “Lion of the Senate”? :devil:

Sorry for getting off topic. Sorry, but with the lack of silver content in the coins, the Kennedy half dollar will never be in the same league as the Morgan silver dollars. I say this regrettably for I do enjoy collecting the Kennedy series with all of its die varieties and errors. :smile

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

If silver is the concern, what about the '64 to '69 JFKs, and 1992-present silver proofs? I'd be curious to read what those sub-series' collectors think.

 

My two cents:

I collect Kennedy halves. Most of my common dates are pulled from circulation (I only pull coins that are high AU or better, except of course the 1987's and 2002-present.) I'd just like to point out that, after searching through about $50,000 worth of Kennedy Half rolls...the seem to be pretty worn for coins that "don't ever circulate." I maybe MAYBE find 3 or 4 better condition coins in a $500 box.

As far as demand goes, I'm fine with them being under the radar right now (along with Jefferson Nickels and foreign coins.) I'm still building my collection.

FWIW, I don't own a single Morgan dollar - I've always hated the design. I might pick up a few here or there and keep a couple, if they were really nice...but in reality I'd start on Peace dollars first. I'm not saying that the design on the Kennedy half is all that to shout about...nothing like my Buffalos or Walkers...but it's my collection, so I can put whatever I want in it! That's the fun part...

Thanks for the link to the article!

 

Do you mean a sub set like this one::devil:

http://www.pcgs.com/SetRegistry/publishedset.aspx?s=19341


I only link one of our number 1 sets to show that I'm not knocking the Kennedy series, it is just not in the same league as the Morgan silver dollars. To prove this point, would you compare the sub set linked above with let us say a complete sub set of high grade "CC" Morgan dollars?

I think the OP was comparing the entire collection of Morgans series to the Kennedy series, there is just more "dead wood" in the Kennedy series.

 

H8 modern may hate moderns, but he has an extremely good point.

 

I agree about the "dead wood" principle: just wanted elaboration. THX!

 

No, I'm not pushing PMs, just saying that when coins
are too plentiful and not made of some PM, they're not worth much.
For comparison with the Kennedy's possible future, I just bought a
Portuguese 1763 10 reis in VG for $1.85.

 

I think it may be helpful to recall some of the history of the Morgan dollar. The Treasury had kept large quantities of them (and to some extent, the Peace dollar) in reserve for decades. If you held a (paper) silver certificate note, according to law, you could redeem it for a silver dollar, so the Treasury needed to maintain a sufficient inventory of the coins. Once fewer silver certificates were in circulation, the Treasury began selling off Morgan and Peace dollars in 1962 at greater than face value because the price of silver in the coins was by now worth more than $1.00. The government then withdrew the coins from sale in March, 1964 because: A) collector demand (especially hunting for rare dates and mints) was overwhelming, and B) the law requiring redemption for silver certificates was revoked. The surplus coins were then transferred to the General Services Administration, and about 3 million were sold between 1972-1980 (again) at greater than face value for $107,000,000.00. All of which were uncirculated. And all of which gave every coin collector a fairly even playing field in trying to obtain a set of Mint State coins without having to hope that a well-to-do Grandpa had put aside some bank fresh Morgan dollar rolls from every year and every mint back in the day.

IMHO, It was the need to distinguish between various AU and MS grades of uncirculated Morgans all hitting the market in a short space of time that really drove the introduction of TPG and slabbing in the 1980's.

This is a very different story from the collecting context for the Kennedy half. The Kennedys were minted each year by the hundred millions through 1976 and tens of millions through 1986 and put into circulation. It is a very easily available clad coin. Collectors and hoarders have been pulling them aside and out of circulation since Day 1. There are enough Kennedys to more than meet collector demand.

And since there will be no new significant stock of uncirculated Kennedys held by the Treasury for up to 80 years that can be sold to collectors at greater than face value (since their intrinsic value is below their face value, and there is no pent up collector demand) then I cannot see how Kennedy halves will suddenly gain the collectible status of the Morgan dollar series.

Kennedy halves are certainly collectible and should hold their value as well or better than any contemporary US coin for all the reasons given in the article from the OP. But in terms of value of purchase price, I would expect $1000 spent on choice, high grade Morgan dollars to be a better investment than the same $1000 spent on choice, high grade Kennedy halves.

 

That was an interesting and informative article. I've always liked Kennedy halves, and Morgans for that matter. If I may quote from the article the similiarities between the two series are:

• Span two different centuries and have endured much longer than predicted.
• Begin with a popular proof variety (the 1964 Accented Hair and the 1878
  Seven and Eight Tailfeathers).
• Feature many common issues from multiple mints, with a sprinkling of
  low-mintage and condition rarities.
• Feature a low-mintage S-mint key (1893-S and 1998-S SMS).
• Include many noncirculating issues, unwanted in commerce.
• Are technically completable, although difficult and costly in the highest
  collector grades.

However I think the big thing that still differentiates the two series is cost.
A complete set of Kennedy's in BU including proofs can still be had for under a grand, whereas a complete set of Morgans in XF will easily run you north of $10K, with most of that cost concentrated in just three coins; 93S, 89 CC and the 94 P. And that's not even including the 95 proof.

 

KTO,

You had me with you until your last paragraph

I'm not sure if you have been following pricing on the Kennedy half dollars but choice - high grade coins maintain their value with a good return if held long term.​

 

Like anything, you get what you pay for or able to find. I have several single Kennedy half dollars which the price individually is north of $ 1,000 each

​

 

Your Kennedy set is no doubt much nicer than mine.

My point is still that it's an apples to oranges comparison as it relates to cost. Many collectors could spend out of their price range on a high MS set of Kenndys.

Then again, you could spend ad nearly ad infinitum (well OK, $200K plus) to put together a complete set of Morgans in MS 62 if you could even find them all in that grade.

 

I sure hope they increase in value since I collect what Kennedy Halves I can.

But I think what carries the Morgan dollars besides collectibility is the silver content. Even culls can be sold for around PM values. While if a JFK Half is in the same grade most collectors don't even want it. Unless they're going for a special low grade set.

 

Caleb,

You raise some good points, so let me clarify my statement. By "better investment", I mean that it is less speculative and more of sure thing in the same way that I would say that blue chip stock like Eli Lily or Coca-Cola is a "better investment" than certainly Groupon or Facebook, and may be even Apple. A more speculative stock (or coin) might pay off more handsomely...or it might not.


Yes, high grade Kennedys could (and probably will) increase in value. And since the price for individual Kennedys are much lower on average than Morgan dollars, I agree that there is much more price potential for a higher return on investment (for example, if the price for an individual Kennedy increases by 20% from $25 to $30, it is not likely out of a buyer's price range, whereas if a Morgan increases 20% from $1500 to $1800, it may lose more potential buyers).


On the other hand, let's say that high grade Kennedy sets continue to gain in popularity and price. If the price gets high enough, who knows how many of the hundreds of millions will start to find their way out of the rolls and boxes and drawers and folders and piggy banks where they have been hiding and pour into the coin marketplace? Some of those coins will be high grade, but they will not likely ever be submitted to a TPG until prices are higher and it is more cost effective to pay for grading. Even the few condition rarities in Kennedy halves ought to be considered as tenuous because such a small percentage of all the halves have been slabbed and counted, compared to millions of Kennedys issued in just the uncirculated Mint Sets.


If someone wants to collect high grade Kennedys, I say more power to you. And if someone states that they will not only increase in value but out perform other series in the coin market, I say you may well be right because the Kennedy series has good potential and a good record so far. But I also say that spending significant amounts on high grade Kennedy halves comes with more risk than the same amount spent on Morgan dollars (or US large cents, as another example).


My line of reasoning is that $1000 spent on choice, high grade Morgan dollars would be a "better investment" because so much is known about the supply side for Morgans, such as, how many coins you can estimate to be available in each grade for each year, each mint, and variety. Like a blue chip stock, Morgan dollars can expect at least some increase in value with less long term risk than most other series in coin collecting.

 

Not true. I just did a high grade set of JFK halves.. This is the problem with generalizing. Some people want high grade sets of whatever they collect.

 

Especially since none of the clad ones are getting melted, and almost none of them are sustaining significant circulation wear.

There will likely come a day when the face value of a clad dime, quarter or half is less than its melt value. Let that be true for fifty or so years, and maybe we'll start to see some general appreciation of the ones that are left.

 

1964 Kennedy Half dollar at the 1st day of banks all over the USA could release the coin there were lines of hole town's stand at bank door to get a coin or a roll or 2.
Each year since then I have had time to wounder when this coin going to the next level?

 

Give it time, Jello. The Morgan was extremely unpopular for years and years--people thought it large, ugly, and clunky. It took 40-50 years (exclude the 1921, as that was a bizarre issue), and figure from 1904 through the 1950's, there was little interest in Morgans. Morganmania began in the 1950s-1960s, and is at a fever pitch even today. So, the same thing could happen with Kennedys 40 years after mintage ceases completely. I see them going way up in the future, especially the 1964 high grade MS, the less common clad dates, of course, all of the SMS and Matte coins, and the Silver proofs.

 

Big differences:

Clad for most of series vs Silver
1/2 Dollar vs Dollar
Found in high grades easily vs not as easy
Few key dates vs Many key dates
Late 1900s technology vs Late 1800s technology
Few die varieties vs VAMs and a lot more varieties
Minted in tens and hundreds of millions vs Minted in a few million most of the time
Many different styles and minting techniques vs Business Strikes and Proofs
Minted at a time when coin collecting was at its peak vs Minted at a time with very few collectors
Used less vs Used more

 

I'm in general agreement except on this point. The people who are looking to slab Kennedy's know where to look and a very significant percentage of the coins have been checked. The simple fact is that Kennedys are even more common than Morgans. Every date of Kennedy has a high mintage and high survival rate so far but most of the coins are like what you see in the rolls from banks. These coins are simply circulated, most of them lightly circulated but still circulated. Unlike other clads there can be substantial numbers of rolls but these roll coins tend to be inferior.

Morgans are very heavily and widely collected and must maintain a large market.

The numbers of Morgans released in the '60's is a fairly well known number as is the percentage of gems. The relative incidence of the different dates before the release is also well known through price guides. What isn't well known is the percentage of gems of the various dates that existed before 1962. Collectors didn't differentiate much between different levels of uncirculated so this is largely conjecture based on current availability. Kennedy halfs can be much better estimated since the number of rolls, %age of Gems, and incidence of Gems in mint sets can all be well estimated.


I personally don't see a mass exodus of collectors from Morgans to Kennedys ever happening. Most silver dollar collectors like big silver coins and aren't likely to change. There is much more likely to be a demographic change over the years though. Newer and younger collectors like silver but not to as large a degree as older collectors. They'll probably like big coins as well. Many will collect Morgans. But there might well be a diminuation in the demand if historical trends hold true. This doesn't necessarily suggest Kennedys will benefit but there is such a tiny number of collectors now that it seems improbable it could possibly hurt.