My New Weekly Column At Coinweek: Thoughts On Modern Coinage

Good read. I didn't know Eliasberg had any "pocketchange".

This is a thought provoking article.

I know where my own feelings (note that word) on modern coins originates. I was growing up in the time when some money was actually made of metal with intrinsic value.

I enjoyed, as a kid, trying to fill up those old Whitman coin folders. Even though I knew the clad, backed-by-nothing coins would never be worth what the silver ones of the series were, it was fun to fill the holes and put away a few of the clads with lower mintages.

Then came the TPGs!. We could not foresee these organizations would basically eliminate the fun of viewing each coin for its mintage. The TPG's leveled the field so that anything not exceptional and not key date would lose its attraction as being anything but "melt" or common junk. Back then I saw TPGs as commercialization (and sill hold that opinion - although one aspect I like about them is that they serve to authenticate genuine coins)

Then came the brilliant idea the RCM had to increase their profit by expanding the mint's realm of being just a specie maker (with a few very numismatic products), to a make-a-new-collectible-to-sell/market-for-every-possible-thing-you-can-imagine factory.

Their new idea worked so well the US mint saw what was happening and decided to get their fingers into the pie also. Hence the State Quarter theme was born. After all the states had been made, they had to find something else to keep the series going and expanded on it. Hey! You cannot blame them... they were making money (pun intended).

To myself, andbesdeis the commercialism aspect, the variety of new issues just seemed to cheapen what the word commemorative used to mean. I remember in 1976, how fascinating it was to see the new REVs. Even non collectors were saying things like, "Hey did you see the cool looking design on the '76 coins?!" It seemed everyone was stashing these away b/c of how "special" they were.

The modern issuing of a new REV/OBV for every time someone famous sneezes killed the excitement of seeing a different design. Making new designs common again just impacted me as another way commercialization was infiltrating the coins hobby.

However, I also understand the flip side of all of this. Newer collectors who were brought up in the era when everything was fiat money an exciting world opened to them when new designs became commonplace. Collecting new designs is a lot of fun for a lot of people.

So it might be that after those of us who have been around for awhile are gone, then the clad-era people will also have their heyday. But, and I might be wrong, I think the clad-only era collectors would rather have the old silver coins rather than the new ones - if given the choice. The old ones - even the common dates - will always hold their more expensive value. The clad pieces do not have this to fall back on. So I personally do not think I will live to see the day when the average clad pieces, unless a rare issue, ever command the same attention as the old stuff. Although if the day comes when PMs make all the intrinsically valuable coins to be too far out of reach of the wallets of the average collector, I can see the clad market being evaluated more on a fair standard.

It might just all boil down to how many people are in coins for the fun + value vs. just in it for fun. The people only in it for the fun are more likely the ones excited with the clad coins.

I am also in the hobby for the fun. My collection is not just about value. But I also, being a father, am motivated to keep an eye to what I can pass onto my kids when the time comes. I personally think my kids would be better off with me giving them a circulation-issue set of Franklins than a circulation-issue set of Kennedy's. I have to wonder if my mindset is not a common one and may be why clad pieces are not as well scrutinized/valued.

BTW - I do have clad stuff - a lot of it. But have pretty much quit seriously trying to get much past 2000. Although some of the new designs are great looking, I cannot get past the commercialism aspect (whether my impression is right or wrong) enough to get thrilled about collecting one of each anymore. I needed a cut off date and Y2K was a pretty round number. So pretty much, with a few exceptions, my collection stops at this year and I have no desire to obtain much past that.

Sorry if this is choppy - it was written in installments!

If you are going to base your collecting preference on the intrinsic value of the metal the coin is printed on- why pay so much for them? The value of the metal for all but gold coins is nominal. I understand the conventional wisdom- I just don't understand the rationale.

Hey, some video games are good for you . . .

Geek-aside aside, I think it's a mutually destructive two-way street: in my first post on this forum someone commented on the "'cool factor' of old silver coins" for kids, and I don't think that ends with just kids. I adore my little stash of "birth year" coins (for each of the women in direct line in my family: 1929, 1959, 1978, 1988, 2008), but while I like the appeal of giving my niece a set of 1978s where she can go "whoa, these are as old as my mom!", it doesn't have--that's exactly the right phrase--the "cool factor" or "wow factor" of, say . . . my first Buffalo nickel. What vendor is going to stock a bunch of coins that don't "wow" anybody (just like no philatelist vendor would stock a bunch of Forever stamps, no craft vendor would have an 8' display of gray and pea-green yarn, no antique store is going to carry a bunch of 1950s electronics, etc.)? Space comes at a premium, and you could be holding onto that coin with no "wow value" for years.

But then the newer collectors come along and they don't see any Ikes, 1971 Kennedys, SABs, etc. in the cases and they go "huh, must not be worth anything." We don't want to be laughed at (I say "we" because I'm still a relatively new collector and feel just plain dumb when I encounter something in the native language that I don't know), so we go for the old classics: the Morgans, the Indianheads, the wheats, etc. Until I stumbled onto this forum, I had no idea there were other people who stashed Ike dollars (I like to think they'll be fascinating to my littles someday), or that the Ben Franklin half even existed. I think that's where the "commemorative money" that's such a thing recently has come from (although I agree with Earle, it's getting way, way too over the top)--trying to get people excited about the coin in their pocket again.

Wonderful article. :-)

Not to completely depart on a tangent, but I find the irony that your name is "Morgan" genuinely amusing in context of your specialty within the hobby. (Although I'd wager you've probably heard that one before.) :-)

I don't!

But maybe an answer of sorts...

If I started to collect all of the modern Jefferson nickels (including proofs and specifically leaving out the silver ones for sake of PM vs non-PM), the money I spent buying all the proofs could be put towards maybe bettering a classic that will never lose its value. The better the grade of the coin, the more value it will hold down the line - especially if it is PM.

At least this is my thinking.

An valid argument that I could enjoy collecting the silver modern issues may be valid. But, again that commercialism angle seems to factor into it for me (right or wrong!). The classics are classics b/c they are part of history. The newer issues (although I do collect ASEs - classic design though!) seem to me to be a way they are trying to "make" history to collect.

In the end, and I will use an example from another area I saw commercialism take over, is that the original Star Wars action figures are worth a lot to collectors of them (not me). So when the Phantom Menace came out, people were buying them by the bushel b/c hey knew Star Wars collectibles would appreciate in value. The marketing places took advantage of this and kept making more and more. I cannot see the newer ones ever being worth much at all b/c everyone had them.

If my example is correct or not, I cannot say. But in my mind this is just how I think.

If I were starting out right now - I probably would LOVE all the new varieties. But I am also of an age I am looking to the future; concerned about the economy and my kids future; and think PMs will be better all the way around.

If I can have fun collecting coins, my preference is to have the best of both worlds and collect something with intrinsic value as a main focus.

CC along the lines of Ikes being over graded do you think that was something from the past where they would now be more hesitant to grade a 69 or they just over grade them in general.

I have a 73 s that I would love nothing more than to get a 69 label on (coin does look real good but I'm no expert on grading so all I can say is it would at least be a 65) that I've been debating taking a long shot on.

Thanks for the alert about your site and article. I bookmarked it