| Author |
 Replies: 19 / Views: 4,569 |
Page 2 of 2
|
|
|
|
Valued Member
 Australia
301 Posts |
OH forgot to mention that is over 4 million extra 1968 coins including counting the 1969 mint sets which have all been spoilt buy PVC.
So I really still find it hard to swallow, 12mill VS 16 mill and to me the mint sets are irrelevant as they were included in my figures and spoilt as well.
Reasons given seem to defy logic common sense and I have not found a mint 1969 2 cent any easy to find in high grade than a 1968, both are quite hard to find in a mint state.
Unless you visit fee Bay and pay handsomely for it.
Anyways thank you for replying its nice to hear what others think.
Edited by sweetap
07/08/2014 09:12 am
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Australia
539 Posts |
I recently picked up 2x69 2 cent coins graded ms64rd and ms65rd both pcgs for under $100 delivered. imho that is cheap for such a low mintage easy toning coin and I consider them sleepers in high grade here is one for sale from a reputable dealer http://www.sterlingcurrency.com.au/...-pcgs-ms64rd |
|
Valued Member
Australia
301 Posts |
I agree serial, I think the 69 is under rated and the stories why the 68 is worth more just don't stack up imho.
I would pay that for them to. I think in time they will only have to go up in value as well.
I just bought a jar of 69 2 cents for 12 bucks at a auction last week , It contained exactly 118 coins and in that only one had any original lustre left on it.
But for 12 bucks I'm not complaining. I will stick the jar with the others I have and my grand kids and kids can have them and hopefully all my coins have gained some value buy that time for them.
I also got a bag of 10 1972 5 cent coins and there was 1 in there that was near mint condition. So that made me happy.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Australia
552 Posts |
I actually agree with your comments - there is no valid reasoning why 1968 coins should be worth more than 1969 But I have found over the years that it is demand that drives the worth of a coin and in today's market, coin collectors have in their heads that 1968 2c coin is more valuable than 1969 Things have settled down a little in the last 2 years when it comes to decimal coins rarities anyways (except for choice grades) Have noticed prices paid for 1968 2c + 1972 5c + 1966 20c wavy + 50c fed issues have come down on ebay (generally) - only the mule seems to have kept its value Could even be a cyclic trend where collectors jump on a particular group of coins - then they are replaced by another group less interested so their values drops - only to see such coins increase in value again when a new group comes on the scene Ultimately, only time will tell |
|
Valued Member
Australia
301 Posts |
I couldn't agree more MRCRUISE. Spot on comments. Thank you.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Australia
762 Posts |
Quote:
I actually agree with your comments - there is no valid reasoning why 1968 coins should be worth more than 1969 I disagree The lack of a 1968 mint set is a BIG reason why the 1968 2c is worth more than the 1969 2c. There are 30,000 1969 mint sets. Thats 30,000 people who don't need to get a 1969 2c from general circulation or mint rolls. Sure, some of the mint sets will have PVC damage but coins from mint rolls are often "baggy" as well. |
|
Pillar of the Community
Australia
7096 Posts |
|
|
Valued Member
Australia
301 Posts |
That's fair enough MOR but from what I have read all early mint sets were set in PVC and all will suffer some damage if left in them longer than a few years which most would not have even been sold buy then not to mention most still being sold on ebay in there original wallets, I don't to many would have escaped un harmed. That does not mean the 68 is not rare it obviously is that is why I asked the question. But I fail to see how 30,000 measly sets which must have been damaged buy there pvc retainers can out way 4.000,000 extra coins. There has to be a more valid reason and I think MrCruise is on the money. If you think of the 1972 5 cent coin they were rare but of late there has been a lot of mint rolls appearing on ebay being broken up. But I still like your opinion its nice to hear what others think may be the reasons. And you may very well be right. |
|
Pillar of the Community
Australia
552 Posts |
MobOfRoos, based on your reasoning why doesn't the 1967 2c coin attract the same attention as 1968? More were minted, yes, but no mint set |
|
Valued Member
Australia
301 Posts |
Hi again thought I would post these pics of a 1969 and 1971 mint set to show what the PVC does , As you can see there discoloured and lost there original lustre completely. I don't think there would be to many that would have survived. I took these from current listings on Fee bay and every early set I looked at was spoilt. So I really don't get how the mint sets carry any weight what so ever I have circulated coins that look better. Just my opinion of course. But really 30,000 measly contaminated mint sets vs more than 4,020,000 more minted in 1968 and it hold the prize , Hmm I think MRCRUISE has it spot on , buyers perception is what it is. But MOR , you may still be right who knows really I actually don't that's why I'm asking it just to me don't add up.   |
|
Pillar of the Community
Australia
541 Posts |
The 1968 Two Cent coin left the mint in sacks, not rolls. The 1969 Two Cent was rolled at the mint. |
|
Valued Member
Australia
301 Posts |
Thank you wwwww that is great info but still rolled or sacked new coins in 1968 were still more than 4 million more , I'm sure there's plenty hiding in old tins and bank vaults.
And as many here have said before just because there in rolls don't make them any better than a bagged coin they still get knocked around , spat out the machine landing in a stillage full of other coins scooped out for packing etc , So I still don't get where the 1968 can be rarer than 1969, It logically defies reasoning and common sense.
I still go with MRCRUISE his comment seems to me to be the more common sense answer , buyer perception if they hear see or feel a particular coin is either rare or could become rare it is snapped up. Modern day coronation $2 coin is a prime example I don't believe in long term it will be worth any more than it is now. Why because everyone has 3 mint rolls at least in there cupboard. But who knows.
My point is no matter how they left the bank mint or anywhere else fact is there is only 16 million 1968 2 cent coins and only 12 million 1969 coins no matter how you try to ASSUME that one had a better chance of remaining in MINT state that is a big call, I'm sure there are still plenty of 1968 mint coins left in old bank vaults etc , more chance of it being 1968 than 1969 simply because there were 4 million more minted in the first place.
The debate on bagged and rolled coins will always be around but at the end of the day does it really matter a mint coin is a mint coin no matter where you get it from.
Sorry guys I don't buy the mint set and bagged vs rolled theories it just makes no sense when one is more than 25% more volume produced than the other and can be called the rarest of its kind it clearly is not.
I guess Ill just have to except that maybe it is just a combination of things , maybe even though these coins were minted but may never left the mint and were recycled, I know that happens. Anyway its been good to hear all the different ideas on it. Thank you.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Australia
541 Posts |
When measuring the scarcity of a coin in mint state, rolls surfacing are far more accurate than mintages. Mintages can largely be ignored for most coins, e.g. 1917I half pennies have a mintage of over 5 million, the 1912H has a mintage of 2.4 million and yet the 1912H is 10-20x more common in higher mint state grades because mint rolls surfaced while no mint rolls of 1917I 1/2Ds surfaced. The 1964 penny (with a mintage of 10 million) is readily available in full red mint state because hundreds of mint rolls surfaced, the 1964-Y (with a mintage of 55 million) was bagged at the mint so only bank rolls surfaced making the coin extremely rare in full red mint state. A coin's scarcity in mint state has a far greater relation to the number and type of surfacing rolls than anything else (including the mintage figure). |
|
Pillar of the Community
Australia
762 Posts |
Quote:MobOfRoos, based on your reasoning why doesn't the 1967 2c coin attract the same attention as 1968? More were minted, yes, but no mint set It does. The catalog value of a 1967 2c is almost double that of the 1969 2c despite having a mintage of 73 million which is about 6x as many. I think what people have to do is separate circulation mintages from NCLT mintages as they mean very different things. NCLT (which mint sets basically are) are collectors items so pretty much the entire mintage will survive. Circulation coins on the other hand go out into the public domain and over time many of them will be lost, destroyed or damaged beyond repair. This is especially the case in the 60s and 70s when decimal coins weren't seen as collectable. |
|
Valued Member
Australia
301 Posts |
All very interesting, So from what we have so far the 69 is believed to be less rare in high grade simply because of 30,000 mint sets and they were rolls in stead of bagged like the 68.
OK so why is every other decimal coin the low mintages are most definitely considered the hardest and most valued coins and some of those were not as low as the 69 2 cent.
Very interesting lots of varied views guess we can consider it may just be a total combination of all things mentioned , altogether it would probably make good reasoning. Thanks everyone .
Just like to mention a secret Gov memo has been circulating Canberra, They are seriously looking at ending all currency buy 2050, What are all your thoughts on this.
Do you believe it will happen.
Do you think it is right.
Do you agree with it.
How will this effect you.
What about those who don't have mobile phones and computers etc.
Is it a good idea.
My answers are.
Yes
No
No
It will have little effect on me simply because little chance of me being here still buy then, And I simply don't like authority big business and Governments who are more crooked than the black market which I believe will have zero to little effect on. Many reasons for this.
It is a simple as If your not like us we don't care so get with the times from the powers in charge. It will be devastating to the older community. Bit like trying to teach an old dog a new trick when he is just to old tired and over it all. The elderly will understand what I'm saying there. But I guess buy 2050 all us non tech oldies wont be a problem anyway.
Good Idea? well I can not answer that one simply because it will take time to know if it is a good decision or not but my feeling is there is no way this can be a good idea, I feel it is BIG HUGE step towards socialism. If this goes ahead in 50 years after that you will be left with things like 3 colour choices of garments 3 choices of food 2 types of dwellings to choose from, take one shut up and be grateful we rich fed you at all. That is what I can only see coming from such dictatorship controlling decision.
It appears Gillard and Dudd may have been chucked out but there socialist agenda has not. All I can say thank god my turn is nearly over this place will never be the same again. I feel so sorry for the future generations, they will be treated just like the Chinese Russians etc. They love there country but not there lives so why on earth follow them. Also are you all aware it was America who convinced the Chinese Gov to become Communist in 1940,s and in 1949 after strategic help from America Mao Zedong announced Communist China. Funny that we are heading in a similar direction only not to mention it was America that also pushed the Chinese to become westernised and it was the Americans who started the push for all manufacturing to be placed there. I really feel we are being had.
Sorry for my rant I guess it is a coin forum but I think its all part of it. Electronic money is a way of control and knowing what you have where you spend it and why.
We will be categorised and labelled. No doubt about it.
Edited by sweetap
07/13/2014 8:13 pm
|
|
Page 2 of 2
|
Replies: 19 / Views: 4,569 |
Page 2 of 2
|
First Page
Posted 07/08/2014 10:49 am
