Another question for old timers. When did sterling coins fall out of favor?

Practically all government issued silver today is 999 or above, with some exceptions, but virtually everything is well above purity of 925. However, a great deal of silver commemoratives and/or bullion from the 70s, 80s, and some in the 90s were still sterling, 925 purity.

When and why did sterling so fall out of favor in silver coins and bullion?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I don't know that it really fell out of favor but had more to do with economics. It simply was not favorable/too expensive to have silver content in circulating coinage. On the other hand, the U.S. probably had something to do with the change in silver content when the first Silver Eagles were issued and backed by the U.S. in 1986. These came to be the go to silver coin for investment and collectability with the beautiful design and other countries had to jump on the bandwagon to insure sales of their own high silver content offerings. JMHO.

 

In my opinion, none of the silver coins minted today are intended to circulate, thus the higher purity and softer metal. Back in the day, need alloy to keep from wearing away. Although modern US silver commemorative dollars are .900 fine. Why Britain used to use sterling (.925) and us with .900, I don't know.

 

It's worth noting that the first global (silver) bullion coin, the Maria Theresa thaler, was nowhere near sterling fineness. It was struck at dozens of mints from its initial issue in Austria, in 1780, through the 1950s, always with the same date, 1780.

It was the favorite store of wealth in the Middle East for many decades, and the date "1780" was maintained because holders would have been suspicious of subsequent "actual" dates and refused them.

Emperor Haile Selassie (1892-1975) of Ethiopia, was said to have 600,000+ on hand. They were 0.833 silver, 28.0000 grams total weight, 0.7516 ASW.

You can still buy plenty of Maria Theresa's on eBay, 1780 prooflikes, for $30-40 or so, but that's a huge premium over silver content.

===========
"It simply was not favorable/too expensive to have silver content in circulating coinage..." This begs the question of why the U.S. adopted 90% instead of (British) sterling 92.5%. There's not much difference between 92.5% and 90%.

In the U.K., the term "sterling" has been around about 800 years.

 

I realize that modern bullion coins didn't even begin to explode until the last 30 years. So, is it simply that the issuance of bullion (which is almost always 999 or above) has simply outpaced production of commemoratives?

In other words: bullion was/is almost always close to 100% purity and commemoratives are more varied? So, it is simply that more people buy bullion so that demand has led to more production of 999+?

 

I disagree. I have about 50 of these restrikes and I bought them all for a lot less than $30-$40. My average price is probably around $20 and that is average over a range of spot from $15 to $35. I am not looking to sell any of them right now because the going price seems to be lower than the average over the last 10 years. I maybe averaged 20% above spot, but I am pretty sure they will maintain that price as spot goes up.

 

Agreed; the actual bullion coins are basically silver (or gold etc.) bars with a denomination. For those pieces, high purity makes sense.

With collector coins (different themes, limited issue volume) that is a little different. In Austria, Ag 925 is the default for €10 and €20 issues now. Germany issues €20 coins at face which are Ag 925. Not that those collector coins actually circulate but they are not bullion either ...

Christian