Key And Semi-Key Confusion!

Wow, I have 1444 posts. I will not hit this symmetry again until 2222.

Waitaminnut. Drat.

When it comes to key and semi-key dates in any series it gets confusing. For instance, in the Peace dollar series the 1934s is the key date with a mintage just over one million while semi-key dates, like the 1934 which boasts a similar mintage of 954,057 and is a semi-key. Why this becomes confusing, I think, is that for the 1934s in grades from AU and above become scarce while the Philadelphia boast slightly better strikes.

Going one step further, switching to the Seated Liberty dime series, extreme low mintage (under 100)proofs in PF66/66 more often than not appear for a few thousand dollars. Again, same year mint state 64's bring similar pricing with mintages triple or more than those in proof version. The point being, despite a proof reference, mintage numbers do not always mean a key date. Case in point pointing the 1909s cent which falls under this conundrum of sorts.

That probably wouldn't be of much help, because the key dates are usually submitted (and re-submitted) more often than more common ones, which skews the distribution.

Keys that I remember off the top of my head....1909-SVDB cent, 1878-S half, 1877 cent, 1901-S quarter, 1846 Half Dime, 1916-D Mercury dime...it does seem to be one per series....

On the other hand, there are some series that contain multiple stoppers, like seated dimes/quarters/halves/dollars and Liberty Half Eagles and eagles. Almost every 1870-CC coin is a stopper. The stoppers are rarer than almost every coin that I remember as a key.

I don't know, isn't that more of a function of supply and demand?

There will be hundreds, if not thousands, of 1944 Mercury dimes at a show for every 1916-D Mercury. Which makes it a relative rarity in the series.

How about basing "keys" on numbers available, compared to the other coins within a series?

Just look at it this way.
If you buy a coin and you get the feeling that you just dropped your wallet in a puddle; that's a semi-key purchase. If you buy a coin and it feels like you just dropped your wallet on a fragment grenade; then that's a 'key' date purchase.

I hope this explains everything!

The concept of keys comes from the time that you could find the coins in circulation. My dad was proud of getting a 1931-S Lincoln in circulation. By my time, it was finding a 1939-D Jefferson in circulation. The key Lincoln dates had all been picked out well before the 1960's.....finding a 1909-SVDB was as likely as finding an 1804 dollar.....or even a CC dollar, which had also disappeared by then.

I cannot remember ever getting an Indian cent or a Barber coin in change. They had all gone into someone's Whitman folder. Today, those old folders are the source of our collectable coins. Mostly low grade.

Just my Two Cents here.

The key versus semi-key debate is only part of the collecting spectrum. I think there are at least five categories of coins, not all of which exist in every series.

The base of the mountain are the commons, the coins that either exist in the wild or can be purchased anywhere for little premium. For example most clad coinage would be common, and an average beginning collector could easily complete a Philadelphia and Denver set of clad Washington 1965-1998 Quarters from circulation.

The next level up would be the toughies. These are the dates and mints that may require some searching or a modest investment to purchase. Examples of these might include the "W" Quarters, 1960 small date Lincoln, or 1950-D or 2009-P or 2009-D Jeffersons.

Most series have at least the first two levels.

The next level would be the semi-keys. I agree with those who see price as the driver for this designation. The issue would be determining the price point, and that likely depends on the collector's financial ability. When I was a kid in the early 1960s, I used my paper route money for several weeks to buy a 1931-S Lincoln for around $4. Believe me, for me at that stage in life, it was a semi-key or more. We can quibble over the price range, but some price range that is more than nominal and less that excruciatingly painful would probably be semi-key. In some grade, they should be within the reach of many normal collectors. A lot of series have at least semi-keys.

We get above the tree line with keys. These coins are the ones we need to ponder for quite a while before buying. They consume time with research, looking at multiple examples, and budgeting for the splurge. When we acquire them, we feel we have made a major step toward finishing a collection. They may be out of the reach of most collectors, but with lots of effort and commitment a low-grade example might be within reach of some dedicated collectors who have good incomes. Some coins are obvious keys, both for scarcity and price. Consider the 1870-CC or 1871-CC Seated quarters or 1901-S Barber quarter as examples. Not all series have real keys.

(I agree with the upthread comments that some coins may act like keys in certain grades (a 1918-D/1917-D Buff, for example), but generally some example in some grade is theoretically available within a humanly possible price range, just not in the desired grade. I consider these to be semi-keys because there is still a generous supply on the market, sufficient to meet most of the demand. The 1889-CC and 1894 Morgans, 1877 Indian, 1909-S-VDB Lincoln, and 1916-D Merc are examples, available in AG-3 and G-4 at prices that are at least possible for many collectors.)

The numismatic summit consists of the AGHs. What is an "AGH" you ask? It's an ain't gonna happen. At least unless your last name is Rockefeller or Vanderbilt. These are the coins of legend, known by the "ex-" collections. They include the 1804 Dollar, 1870-S Seated dollar, 1884 and 1885 proof-only Trade dollars, the 1913 Liberty nickel. These are the coins described in shorthand as "the Eliasberg specimen" or "the Newman collection example." These are the coins we normal people read about and sometimes gawk at in a National Money Show or the ANA museum or the Smithsonian, but never, ever will hold in hand, much less own.