+1 And, as long as we’re talking the 2009 Satin Cents, let's throw in all the other low mintage satin coins issued in mint sets from 2005 through 2010. Since most of their mintages are lower than the 1931-s cent and most of the 1931-s cents were saved and they are expensive in any grade, Satins will be expensive down the road, maybe sooner if there’s a run on them. Interesting how, although “grade rarity” has been mentioned, low mintage is the predominant factor mentioned for a key coin. I agree with the majority. Although I believe a higher grade coin should command a premium, the crazy prices paid for high grade common, high mintage coins is a result of TPG’ers marketing their services. I simply do not believe these prices will hold as neither will interest in high mintage coins – for me to get excited about a coin, it has to be low mintage.
These statements are just plain wrong and untrue. You helped your point with the numerous examples you gave and some I could even agree with, but please don't associate only what you collect and consider key as the only correct answer to this highly subjective question.
........You can lead a horse to water, but can't make him drink.......... In case this needs an explanation, 2 of the 3 examples I gave earlier in THIS thread were circulation coins.
So you are making me work for it. Ok, fair enough. I agree with 2 out of 3 coins that you have up there. The 1970D is questionable because there are now lower mintage Kennedy's - of course all of which are available in mint sets. The other two coins are keys - but only if you are collecting those complete sets. As I mentioned in a previous post, depending on what set you are collecting determines what are the keys. You and I appear to collect all the IKE varieties, so the Type II is one of a few Keys for that set. Same goes with the SBA Wide rim. They are the keys because the mintage is less than their normal counterparts making them harder to find in circulation. But if you were only collecting the basic UNC IKE set, the 73 now becomes key and that is only available in mint sets, thus supporting my claim that MOST - not all - keys are available in special or collectible mint sets. And because it was only available in mint sets, it has a lower mintage than the rest which in turn makes it the key. Am I wrong about this?
Lol, Hey..I'm not making you do anything. I just typically read the entire thread before disagreeing with someone. I think where we disagree is that "the key" coin being ONLY available in special sets versus being -also- available in sets. Or better yet, I'll say most people will agree with YOU, not me. I don't accept the 1973 Ike as a key coin.......There were simply too many made..and kept.. and will thus NEVER be a rare or unavailable coin. I'll give the 1973 Proof Ike as another example. People consider it key because it's the lowest mintage and almost always sells for a premium. The problem is that every dealer I know of (that deals in IKE's) hoards every single 1973 they get but melt the 1974's if not sold within weeks. I can't prove it, but I would bet my house there are more 1973's left around than 74's. I just don't see a coin collector 50 years from now saying " Well I already have the 19XX P, D, S --insert coin here-- but I need a 19XX satin reverse proof --whatever-- that was only made in the special mint sets offered from Hunts Ketchup at Nascar races. They are a novelty OR people horded them because they were SUPPOSED to be rare and thus never will be. Key to me has more to do with rarity and desire than mintage numbers. And when it come to desire, people are sheep and do what others (like TPG's and Cherry Pickers Guide) tell them to. Conditional rarities are very similar but because of mankind's inherent competitiveness, people will always want a coin that's "better than yours".
Love them or hate them, it will be interesting to see which of the National Parks quarters will become the series key. These are produced in historically low mintages (for Washington quarters), they do not circulate nearly as well as the State Quarters, and there is also potential for conditional rarity as the ones sold by the mint are often not the best quality even for the premium. TC
I love the new quarters, but I wish they had put Teddy Kennedy on the Obverse. Of course, they would have to stop calling them "Washington" quarters.
That is an interesting thought. It is something that me and my fellow coin club members often discuss. Technically, they are a totally different coin seperate from the business strikes, but many collectors....maybe most collectors don't see it that way. For my SAC registry set, I have to have both coins - business strike and satins, but for my albums I don't care what I have as long as it is unc. The same could be said for the copper lincolns. Why aren't more collectors making a big deal about these!? These are totally seperate from the zincs. But when you ask most collectors if they collect both, they will probably say they only collected the zincs for their books. I have both in my books, because unlike the satin finish, these are a completely different composition.
If you have a question, please ask. Remember, there are no stupid questions....just stupid people who ask questions." What was the question?
Interesting...the Redbook and NGC make no mention (as near as I can tell) of the satin finish coins 2005-2010. PCGS has a separate section for Special Proofs (SP) in their Proof section. These are completely different, lower mintage coins and deserve recognition (imo). Definately a collectable sub-set...and beautiful coins! Kudos PCGS :hail:
Yak, The Numismatic News Monthly price guide - Coin Market lists them for all denominations with the exception of the Lincoln cent and Sac dollars. They used to do those, but maybe space was an issue. Looking at the half dollars the satin finish are going for a $1-$1.5 more than the regular business strikes. So somebody obviously sees a value in them.
I had a conversation with Whitman about the lack of recognition in the Red Book & coin folders/albums and their response was the Satins are too specialized for recognition. Sounds like a crock to me, when most collectors recognize their uniqueness and they're all part of circulating coin series. Oh well, I believe they’ll have their day, since most are low mintage.
Realizing that not every DDO or variety is needed to complete a LMC collection. Those coins which are of two types as the transition cents are, I feel are absolutely necessary to complete the series. I mean isn't the 70S small date a part of the set and a key ? For example, a 72D DDO, is a 72D of the doubled die. However, a 1988 RDV006 is a 1988 Obverse with a 1989 reverse. The 1992 CAM is a 92 obverse with a 91 reverse. That's what makes the difference, in my opinion. Of course each of us collects and builds sets of what we want to have in them. But I don;t think a LMC set is completed without the 4 transition cents. IMHO
