Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;Valentinian, post: 4668057, member: 44316&quot;]We often see the phrase &quot;supply and demand&quot; in the context of price. However, we often consider the concept of rarity to belong only to the supply side. The Steve Album scale under &quot;rare&quot; mentions demand, which is an important factor. There are many late Roman AEs that are &quot;r2&quot; (very rare) or higher in RIC for which there is almost no demand because the type is common and it is only some uninteresting minor variety that qualifies it as r2. </p><p><br /></p><p>Julius Caesar portrait coins are, considering supply alone, common. Nevertheless, considering both supply and demand, Album&#039;s &quot;rare&quot; fits. I imagine over half the CT members would seriously consider buying a Julius Caesar portrait piece if the price were &quot;right.&quot; In Album&#039;s terms, demand outstrips supply. They are rare.</p><p><br /></p><p>In contrast, there are many Roman provincial types of which fewer than ten exist. If they have a temple, or a labor of Hercules, or some other <b>interesting</b> feature, you might well categorize them as &quot;rare&quot; or &quot;very rare.&quot;&nbsp; But, it they don&#039;t have a noticeable special interest, a supply of one per year may meet or even exceed demand. </p><p><br /></p><p>When the book &quot;Marcianopolis&quot; by Hirstova and Jekov came out each type was given a rarity. So far so good. However, they included a page with a table of values for the various rarities, which is useless. An R3 (R3 is common in that book; it goes from R1 to R10) AE17 with a dull reverse does not have the same value a large R3 with the three graces on the reverse. </p><p><br /></p><p>It is my impression that many dealers and collectors are invested in the concept of rarity that only includes supply and not demand. I doubt its usage can be changed at this late date. That usage is fine if you can (and you should) mentally separate rarity and value. Album&#039;s definitions above omit mention of the demand side for &quot;very rare&quot; and &quot;extremely rare.&quot; Do they refer to counting numbers extant, or to comparing supply and demand?&nbsp; Is it intentional that high demand is enough to promote a coin to &quot;rare&quot; but only low supply can promote it to &quot;very rare&quot;?&nbsp; </p><p><br /></p><p>The value of a coin is connected to the story it can tell and how it fits into a collectable series.&nbsp; I wrote about rarity on a web page:</p><p><a href="http://augustuscoins.com/ed/numis/rarity.html" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="http://augustuscoins.com/ed/numis/rarity.html" rel="nofollow">http://augustuscoins.com/ed/numis/rarity.html</a></p><p><br /></p><p>I support Steve Album&#039;s use of the word &quot;rare.&quot; Demand matters. On the other hand, the number extant is interesting and is commonly described using rarity. Just don&#039;t think the number extant has much to do with value unless there is demand for that particular type.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

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