10 best coins to buy now for possible appreciation in next 10 years

I am betting against the US economy, in the sense that most people will be better off in the future. Its my opinion but an easily supportable one. The last century and one half when most economic progress occurred is an aberration as far as I am concerned and there isn't necessarily any reason to believe that most people will or should be better off over time most or all of the time.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Correct. And to be clear, I was not trying to "knock" the '55 DDO cent in my last two posts or singling out this opinion. It's an opinion I hold for coins generally but especially for a high percentage of US such as these.

The biggest problem financially for these "key" dates is that their prices are totally out of line with their numismatic merits. Not only are they not "rare", they are frequently not even the scarcest coins in their series because the "low" mintages resulted in (much) higher survival rate, especially in better quality. (An example being the 09-S VDB.) My opinion is that the existing perception is mostly a leftover from a time (60's or 70's and earlier) when collectors had far fewer choices than they do now and predominantly collected out of pocket change.

Most collectors seem to have a cultural preference for coins from their country of origin. This is certainly true of US collectors, equally true in South Africa and seems to be equally true from the listings in foreign auctions on Sixbid.

I agree most US collectors will continue to prefer the coins they do now, except that I don't believe they will be able to pay current prices across the board.

There are also many US collectors (maybe low proportion but high number absolutely) who buy these "key" dates for a variety of reasons, even when they don't collect the series. These are the primary collectors I expect to choose other coins and from this reduced marginal demand, I expect lower prices.

 

Duplicate post

 

I'm all for the idea. It's just that after decades of experience, I've learned that there's no reliable way of doing it.

 

The type set type of collector seems to be becoming far more the norm than the exception now a days. Makes sense to go to for the "keys" or the "best one" when you are only going to have one or two of them.

I find myself agreeing and disagreeing at the same time with the point you are making. The part I disagree with is that many of the current buyers are likely to change their views on those keys. They grew up with them being the keys, spent their collecting time with them being the keys, to most they are the keys. I don't see that much changing with most of the collecting base right now given how much we all know that collectors love change lol.

But I do completely agree with the notion that some of these keys really aren't and the internet has exposed their availability front and center. I could very easily see the perception of these "keys" change over time with newer collectors and collectors who do a large part on the internet especially. It's hard to defend that something should be the key when I can find hundreds if not thousands in five minutes online yet other dates may take me 6 months or longer to locate a nice example. Over the long term I have a hard time believing that key status will hold for the long haul. We may all be gone by the time that perception change occurs, but I do think it will happen.

 

As much as I love Seated coins, 2/3 cent coins, Liberty Head gold coins, and gold dollars I just don't see them increasing in value. They are too criminally underrated for the collector base to notice them. Maybe a long time in the future, people will finally start appreciating the low mintages and survival rates of these coins and prices will rise. Not to mention Spanish milled reales on the world coin side, I only have one coin but I love it. It was cheap. (They circulated in the States until 1857, so I guess they count as US coins.)

Increase in value? Probably AU-MS Buffalo Nickels--especially the teens and 20s with mint mark.
I also see a good future for IHCs.

 

I agree that type collecting will increase at the expense of set collecting. It enables a collector to buy a wider variety of more interesting coins for the same money.

However, I don't believe type collectors will usually opt for the "key" dates because they are a poor relative numismatic value, even if they can afford them, and from what I have heard (since I have never owned any of them and have no intention of doing so) at least some are usually poorly made, like the 1916 SLQ.

For the type collector, it makes a lot more sense to buy a much cheaper more common date that looks the same or better for much less money.

 

People care creatures of habit. In another topic, someone brought up the 1950-D Jefferson nickel which is practically as common as dirt but it still sells for (large) multiple over other much scarcer (but still common) dates in the series. Of the 2,150,000 minted, there could easily be 1MM "BU" remaining because the coin was hoarded almost from day one and hardly circulated.

Most people are also really lazy. When I resumed collecting in 1998, I evaluated what I could afford on my prospective budget which I projected at $250 per month - maximum. I quickly came to the conclusion that I would never be able to put together what I considered a distinctive collection.

So instead, I looked at the 18th, 19th and 20th century Krause manuals to see what was available. I have since adjusted what I collect but only slightly and by looking at the TPG population reports, live auctions, dealer websites and eBay have a pretty decent idea (generally) what things cost and how scarce coins generally are.

I believe that the primary change will happen with those who do not collect these sets and didn't collect these "keys" out of pocket change. It won't likely be a large percentage for a long time but since prices are set at the margin, absent an across the board bull market (which I absolutely do not see any time soon) will be enough to reduce demand, certainly in lower grades.

 

To me it seems to depend on the series for which way people go. With seated material with how hard it is to locate nice keys and how pricey they are if you are lucky enough to find one most people do tend to stray towards the nicest common date they can find. But then with other series where the "keys" are readily available there seems to be a lot that go for the S VDB or the 16-D dime. Series like those I agree that an underrated date or harder to find one would be more satisfying and a better value.

 

I agree. It will be a shift over time. I am not sure the prices will really drop much but could certainly see them stop climbing. Given how hard it is to resell one of those readily available at any time keys I think we have already started to see the popularity of them decline as a lot of the internet buyers have realized how easy they are to locate. Very few of them are unique enough where you would have to act at that moment or miss out.

 

My comments were not intended to apply to a series like seated coinage. I'm not sure how many type set collectors opt for "key" dates and it probably depends upon one's definition. By my definition, the few I think of as keys are certainly scarce and sometimes rare but I don't see type set collectors preferring them.

The reason I make this comment is because some of the pre-1858 proofs are rare even by my definition but the ones in lower grades are "cheap" by US standards in lower grades. An example is the 1857 quarter which has a mintage of 40 and I understand about 25 exist today. In PR-63, I think it is worth about $5000.

Far more common dates (as in mintages of somewhat over 500) in grades of 65 CAM seem to sell for the same or more. I might not have the specifics correct but anyone can verify this claim generically. I presume most seated proof buyers are either type set collectors or just buy one example in isolation and prefer these better more common coins over the scarcer lower quality examples.

 

I believe they will "eventually" drop a lot over time, but probably a long time. In writing my prior posts here, I checked a few Lincoln cents in the 1965 Red Book. They are only listed in "UNC" but looking at the Heritage archives, I'd say most of the "keys" and "semi keys" in this series have been financial losers in grades up to 63 though maybe this is only BN or RB which is roughly equivalent to many 1965 "UNC". This is in "real" money and not nominal prices since a 2016 dollar is worth a small fraction from 51 years ago. The '55 DDO cent was one of the few winners.

A few examples include the 26-S at $140, 14-D at $700, 09-S VDB at $335 and the '55 DDO at $250.. Heritage records recent sales of the 26-S in 63 BN for less than $300 and the 14-D in 63 RB at about $3000. I didn't check the 09-S VDB but don't believe it's worth more than $1200. The DDO cent I believe is about $2000.

In 1965, these coins were very expensive for the typical collector, relative to income and net worth. There were also many coins which sold for somewhat more or less that have left these coins in the dust. An example is the 1815/12 Bust Half which was listed at $500 in UNC.

What I am describing, this is the performance over half a century of mostly relatively prosperous times and a massive asset bubble with the loosest credit conditions, ever. I rate the chances of an economic repeat with similar financial conditions where the masses will share equivalently in any future prosperity (which I think will be much less and at some points, negative) at essentially zero.

Combined with the internet revolution, this economic combination isn't remotely likely to lead to the outcome where such common coins with inflated prices and mediocre numismatic attributes are likely to perform well financially.

 

Reminds me of the Monty Python skit for the "Society For Putting One Thing On Top Of Another Thing". The punch-line was something like "Oh...I never thought of it that way...OK...disbanded forever."

 

That is actually surprising to me considering it is a variety. I may differ but to me I wouldn't feel the need for one to complete a set though I can see the draw for someone only having a few for type set.

I suspect we will be seeing a lot of price adjustments over the next few decades as larger portions of the collecting base came about from the internet age with no preconceived notions. Obviously only time will tell but I do agree we will see those common keys stall except the grad rarity ones and see more of those sleeper type actually hard to find examples pick up. It's a pretty safe bet at this point if someone can't find what they are looking for on the internet in under a couple weeks it is a fairly hard coin to locate or they all reside in strong collections.

 

I've done that with my type set. Either a tougher date or a coin with great eye appeal. Why I have so many proofs. And coins like my no motto seated dollar (1850 pcgs xf 40) and 20 cent (1876 ngc 58 cac) both are much much rarer than a 09 s vdb or a 16-d. The original mintages of both are less than the surviving population.

 

Was this a comment on the prevalence of fakes, or are you comparing mintages of your two coins to survivors of the two "keys"?

 

Was comparing my two. The original mintage of the 1850 dollar was 7500 the 20 cent 14k

 

If these series were more popular these coins would go for thousands. Unfortunately seated dollars are out of my budget as of now. I want to get one at the October Portland show, but I also want to get a gold dollar. It's a hard choice.

 

Not for me. I love seated dollars. If it wasn't for the trade dollars and the early dollars if try to collect them. I think they're finally getting a little more respect and I'm trying to have as many with good original surfaces in stock as possible

 

I go for cheaper coins, but I don't want to buy something for $100 and three years later find that I can only get $25 for it. Two of the intriguing issues I find are half-dimes and half-cents. Even in lower grades, these seem to appreciate slowly.