Reply to Thread

Message:: [QUOTE="cladking, post: 1890475, member: 68"]I'm not sure it really works this way.  A lot of people figure that moderns siphon off dollars that would otherwise go to classics but there are several facts that argue against this belief very strongly. The most obvious one is that some modern collectors wouldn't buy any coins at all if there weren't moderns.  But the really big reasons are that a rising tide lifts all the boats.  In other words successes in moderns are often expressedas successes in classics.  People use money they make in the markets and buy all sorts of coins.  In the long run collectors almost always branch out but this even happens in the short term.  When dealers sell coin tubes or scrap silver it doesn't matter whether it's related to BU moderns or XF indians.  It doesn't matter if they profit on modern silver or large cents; the profit goes to stock the coins that actually sell.  This is mostly classics now days and it's dealer demand even more than collector demand that sets prices in the short term.    To me a 1969 quarter is no less historic than a 1909 cent.  The quarter might have sat in Neil Armstrong's locker at Cape Canaveral as he took his journey to the moon. It's pretty unlikely the '09 cent did or that it was used to buy the roll-on deodorant that became the prototype for the mouse we use on our computers.  I like old coins as much as the next guy and have collected most of them at one time or another.  It wouldn't bother me if everyone collected them and it often seems they do.  <img src="styles/default/xenforo/clear.png" class="mceSmilieSprite mceSmilie2" alt=";)" unselectable="on" unselectable="on" />[/QUOTE]

Log in or Sign up

Reply to Thread

Useful Searches