Modern Coins Vs. "Classic Coins Only" Snobs.

Because there are more smarter people now.

I enjoy collecting both. I get a big kick out of finding something in circulation that I can add to my collection, while at the same time, I find great satisfaction in holding a classic coin in my hand and thinking about the journey it took over the decades or even centuries in order to wind up in my hands.
I have had people make some critical remarks once or twice about modern coins I've found in circulation, but didn't think anything bad about their comments. It's just an opinion they have, and I realize they're entitled to theirs just like I'm entitled to mine. I just take it in stride, don't pass judgement, say g'day, and move on.

Why is the ASE a copy of the Walking Liberty?
There are other moderns that are just copies of a classic.

People have always criticized new coin designs.

" Barber dimes were not widely collected in their own time or for years afterward. Lack of enthusiasm about the design was mostly to blame.
The Numismatist said it was probably the most that could be expected of institutional art.
Writing in the Whitman Numismatic Journal in the 1960's, Lawrence Block (now the author of best selling mystery novels) said that dealers were uninterested in purchasing Barber coins, new collectors did not bother with them, and the new corps of investors ignored them entirely."
-Tom LaMarre, Budget Buyer Column, Coins Magazine, February 2009

the Morgan dollar was heavily criticized in its time. Many considered it to be artistically uninspired and they thought the eagle looked more like a turkey or buzzard. As a matter of fact people diparrigngly nicknamed them buzzard dollars at the time.

"...a terrestrial fowl, striding or marching on the ground like a turkey.and with as much dignity as one."
-Frank Chapman, Ornithologist, criticism of the eagle on the reverse of the Walking Liberty half dollar, 1916

Those are just a few examples. I'm sure in time I could find more.

No, but it could happen. Luckily 98% or more of collectors and dealers are helpful and friendly. But in all areas of life there are people who seem to have the uncontrollable need to say something condescending. It's like some kind of compulsive vocal tick that snobs have.




That's kind of my point. People have a tendency to not appreciate things until they're gone.

I know I would.

There is no more Liberty. It makes no sense to me. Why is everyone suddenly into boring ugly mugs of dead presidents as a replacement for the hope and comfort that this living image invokes? Also, who wouldn't prefer the beauty and feminine allure of such designs over, uh.. boring ugly mugs? Why has nobody missed her?

If they brought Liberty back IN ADDITION to incorporating higher-relief designs on circulating coinage, I might get interested in some moderns. Throw in a solid copper version of some denomination, and that would seal the deal for me.

The only coin series I actively collect dated after 1964 are Eisenhower dollars and 40% Kennedy halves. To each their own.

I love the design on the State Quarters/ATB/NP, and I love the design of ASE's, gold Eagles and Buffalos, but I do not actively collect any of the above.

A few thoughts about "modern" coin collecting (since about the 1990s)

- Coins which are valuable only because of a TPG grade, which may become worthless any moment when another coin with the same grade is discovered among the multiple billions of those coins minted

- There are very few mintage scarcities; almost, but not all, scarcity in modern coins is in the condition, and very few modern coins ever wear out to the extent their bronze, copper, and silver predecessors did.

- The technical superiority of modern Mint-struck coins along with the crazy mintages has eliminated lots of the "treasure hunt" / "album filling" aspect that defined American numismatics throughout the first 70 years of the 20th century, when silver could still be found in change from time to time, and there were still rare errors, low mintage keys and semi-keys, and other elusive hole-fillers to keep you hunting.

- The "Model T" problem: the inability to change circulating modern coin designs on a yearly basis (or even every 5 years) means that apart from the occasional incremental changes (the Jeffersons in 04-06, the Lincoln boyhood/etc cents, the quarters from 1999) we see the exact same obverses and/or reverses for 20+ or even 50+ years. (Would you buy a new car if it was exactly the same in every way as the same model you bought 20 years ago?)

- With a few exceptions (speared bison, 1995 DDO LMC, the Wide AM's, missing edge lettering on $1's, and traditional errors and die varieties such as clashes/cracks/broadstrikes/blanks/wrong metal/OC's), hyping microscopic "doubling" visible only under magnification, and other pseudo-"errors", as rare, valuable investment coins worth spending more than their face value to acquire. Okay, great, your 1996 Zincoln has a minutely doubled column on the reverse. Congrats, it's one of hundreds of thousands or millions or even more that have similar "errors." This really gets my goat because it absolutely kills off so many newbie collectors when they find out their "rare" eroded-die Roosevelt dime isn't worth the $49 they paid some loser on ebay to buy it, or that their "special" LMC with a P mintmark is not a rare and valuable coin and a great future investment.

As far as modern coin designs, a few observations:

The ASE uses a design from 1916.
The silver commemorative and gold bullion Buffaloes use a design from 1913.
The Gold Eagle uses a design from 1907.
The three most recent "sellout" gold commemoratives were struck to honor three designs from 1916.

I would be most thrilled if they got rid of Presidents off our circulating coinage and replaced them with designs symbolic of or paying homage to America's numismatic past.

Just my humble opinion.