Log in or Sign up
Coin Talk
Home
Forums
>
Coin Forums
>
US Coins Forum
>
How much stock should one put in historical behavior?
>
Reply to Thread
Message:
<p>[QUOTE="yakpoo, post: 729002, member: 18157"]It sounds like you're mostly interested in whether or not the First Spouse series is worth an investment...given the low mintage figures. I'm a First Spouse collector and this is my take on the issue. I'll start out with what sounds like pretty basic stuff...but I get to a point eventually, I promise.</p><p> </p><p>Most any coin (on its own merit) is only worth the going rate of its bullion...or in the case of fiat currency, one's confidence in the "promise" that backs it up. With that said, there is a community of collector's that value coins for a number of reason other those just stated. </p><p> </p><p>For instance, factors such as a coin's design, condition, subject matter, or place in history play a large role in determining value to a collector. Each of these factors define a particular coin's "Collector Base". It's the Collector Base...relative to a coin's potential and actual availability that determines its value...what someone is willing to pay.</p><p> </p><p>Widely distributed coins hold their value better than the same number of coins concentrated in fewer hands. The beginning of the First Spouse series saw a great deal of the coins sold to dealers. The actual Collector Base for the First Spouse series never materialized and many coins were sold off at near spot prices.</p><p> </p><p>Rising gold prices coupled with the Mints 25% premium continues to suppress the serie's collector base. It would take an act of Congress to end the series early so the Mint continues producing them. I think it's the subject matter that collectors find uninspiring. Personally, I like many of the designs and am reading my history books all over again as I collect them.</p><p> </p><p>At the present time, the collector base is nearly nonexistant. However, I believe that once we get up to the Elenor Roosevelt and the Jackie Kennedy coins, interest in this series will explode. New collectors will be looking for the best specimens to build a collection and there just won't be many of the early issues (the 2009 issues) available...and that should push prices up.</p><p> </p><p>This theory is based on a "guess" that the Collector Base will expand sometime in the future...maybe it will, maybe it won't. That's why coin collecting is a hobby and not an investment. Worse case scenario, I'll end up with some really nice artwork pressed into pure gold by the US Government...that's gotta be worth something.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>
[QUOTE="yakpoo, post: 729002, member: 18157"]It sounds like you're mostly interested in whether or not the First Spouse series is worth an investment...given the low mintage figures. I'm a First Spouse collector and this is my take on the issue. I'll start out with what sounds like pretty basic stuff...but I get to a point eventually, I promise. Most any coin (on its own merit) is only worth the going rate of its bullion...or in the case of fiat currency, one's confidence in the "promise" that backs it up. With that said, there is a community of collector's that value coins for a number of reason other those just stated. For instance, factors such as a coin's design, condition, subject matter, or place in history play a large role in determining value to a collector. Each of these factors define a particular coin's "Collector Base". It's the Collector Base...relative to a coin's potential and actual availability that determines its value...what someone is willing to pay. Widely distributed coins hold their value better than the same number of coins concentrated in fewer hands. The beginning of the First Spouse series saw a great deal of the coins sold to dealers. The actual Collector Base for the First Spouse series never materialized and many coins were sold off at near spot prices. Rising gold prices coupled with the Mints 25% premium continues to suppress the serie's collector base. It would take an act of Congress to end the series early so the Mint continues producing them. I think it's the subject matter that collectors find uninspiring. Personally, I like many of the designs and am reading my history books all over again as I collect them. At the present time, the collector base is nearly nonexistant. However, I believe that once we get up to the Elenor Roosevelt and the Jackie Kennedy coins, interest in this series will explode. New collectors will be looking for the best specimens to build a collection and there just won't be many of the early issues (the 2009 issues) available...and that should push prices up. This theory is based on a "guess" that the Collector Base will expand sometime in the future...maybe it will, maybe it won't. That's why coin collecting is a hobby and not an investment. Worse case scenario, I'll end up with some really nice artwork pressed into pure gold by the US Government...that's gotta be worth something.[/QUOTE]
Your name or email address:
Do you already have an account?
No, create an account now.
Yes, my password is:
Forgot your password?
Stay logged in
Coin Talk
Home
Forums
>
Coin Forums
>
US Coins Forum
>
How much stock should one put in historical behavior?
>
Home
Home
Quick Links
Search Forums
Recent Activity
Recent Posts
Forums
Forums
Quick Links
Search Forums
Recent Posts
Competitions
Competitions
Quick Links
Competition Index
Rules, Terms & Conditions
Gallery
Gallery
Quick Links
Search Media
New Media
Showcase
Showcase
Quick Links
Search Items
Most Active Members
New Items
Directory
Directory
Quick Links
Directory Home
New Listings
Members
Members
Quick Links
Notable Members
Current Visitors
Recent Activity
New Profile Posts
Sponsors
Menu
Search
Search titles only
Posted by Member:
Separate names with a comma.
Newer Than:
Search this thread only
Search this forum only
Display results as threads
Useful Searches
Recent Posts
More...