Short, Shameful Realization (And Confession)

This reminds me... I need to check my humidity... we should all get together for a smoke sometime...

They did not get the message, but your follow-up was well said.


Yes, I threw that word in there to get your attention!

I have to agree with that.

One man's trash is another man's treasure.....

Obviously..... I LOVE Moderns, which is why I mostly hang out on the Modern section of the forum ! It's a place for those with common interests to talk about them and/or learn about them.
I love Classic coins too. I have an almost equal amount of passion for them as well...but I don't "hate" any "era" of coin collecting. It is a hobby of "commonality" that brings us all together here I believe. So, I would caution those who vehemently dislike a classification or era of coins, to just be wary that we do live in a new "era" of coin collecting, and it could be a little troubling for newbies or folks who like ALL coins to observe this extreme dislike. Or at least so described in a way to belittle "their" passion. Opinions are fine.....but I would caution in going TOO far in venting a "hatred" of a particular era of our hobby. (I'm not saying that's happened right here in this thread.....but it does come up time and again)
Just my .02 worth.....

I like moderns.

Even if the slot machines paid out in Morgans, the dollar had value back then and would be spent the same as bills. So you wouldn't really hit the jackpot unless you were a variety collector with a lot of money already.

First a quick apology. I know from from reading their posts here that I was one of those who posted negative comments about the coins on Eaglefoot's thread regarding "who is going to collect the Nation Park series quarters". It was never my intention to be rude or to belittle anyone's interests in collecting. The point is well made and taken that my comments were misplaced and I will be more considerate going forward. Again, please accept my apologies.

When I have enough time, I will added to this post and discuss my frustrations with the mint. It was these reasons, hopefully well founded, that caused me to hijack Eaglefoot's thread.

Jim

My frustration is with the mint, not so much modern coins. Unfortunately, they are where the mint problems manifest themselves.

I suspect the mint would say that the things that collectors find disappointing in modern coinage is caused by an attempt to control costs. Surely they would cite the Zincoln as an example of what is necessary. They would probably suggest that low reliefs and uninspired designs that remind some of arcade tokens were also examples.

At first blush you might accept this. However, consider that the most cost effect way to mint coins is by making no changes. Take the Lincoln as example. it lasted more or less in the same form for 100 yrs with only one major design change on the reverse. Can you think of a more cost effective way to produce. As long as the master dies hold up, you just keep making product. No design, engineering and material testing costs.

This is where my problem with the mint develops. Why all these costly design changes. Is it because the general public has demanded it? Go up to Startbucks and ask anyone there if they can name the four reverses on the 2009 Lincoln or what is on the back of the 2010. They do not know and don't care. All that matters is if they can spend it. No, all these changes are aimed directly at us. And, the cost savings efforts directly effect those that they are aiming at. At least they could make coins that inspire like one of my favorites, the Merc.

My problem is, as long as we are willing to run to the alter of "new issue" the mint will not change. If collectors as a group would stop spending until the mint changed it's approach, I suspect that everyone here that does not like modern coins would have a change of attitude. It is not the collecting of new coins, but the quality and constant changing that turns us off. These changes are designed to make you spend more money! My dealer made the comment to me the other day that the Philly LP-4 2009 Lincoln was the key coin because it only had a minting of about 130 million. What the heck would the 1909-S VDB be worth if it's mintage was 100 million.

It is the young collector that I worry about. As the population grows and classic coins disappear and age, becoming more expensive, what will they collect. I surely would not start if my collection was primarily based on Zinc coins.

No, if they want to give collector value, make a coin of high quality on sound material and limit the production. Lets say 25 million into circulation with another 2 mil in proofs and special sets. Now, we have value and true collectible qualities. At least, give us higher quality.

Sorry for rambling,
Jim

I enjoy the moderns. Collecting circulated sets of all the modern coinage has enabled me to practice my grading skills, educate myself on important rarities, and enjoy this hobby on a daily basis. Of course I'd rather search through piles of classic coins, but I just do not have access to them.

I can understand the quality issue of the penny but the reality is, we still have one. The penny could very easily be considered obsolete. With Nickel production costs rising what would you rather see happen? Change the composition to something cheaper or eliminate it? Costs of production are not in the design. They are in the composition.

I think the moderns are great for new collectors. The State Quarters are undeniable in their contribution to the hobby. Hand any young collector a few rolls of pennys, nickels, or quarters and think of all the conversations on history one could have! Just over ten years ago there would be Lincoln, Jefferson, & Washington.