Author Topic: EPCC 2014 Numistacker Baby Panda Brass (200) and Panda Lunar Monkeys (499/99)  (Read 13628 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline badon

Also, what should one go on with fiat coins? The mintage, the survivors, the mint sales?

For now, we're only accepting membership for coins with known mintages. In the future we might be able to accept membership based on estimated or known surviving populations. For example, the 1996 1 oz gold panda proof has an authorized mintage of 1500, but the known surviving population is only a few more specimens than the 1995 1 oz gold panda proof that has an actual mintage of 555 (about 100 specimens survived). We would need to make a decision as a club if either of those coins should be worth more points than their mintages warrant. Since there are a lot of eligible pandas that are far far cheaper that can easily beat both of them in rarity, there hasn't been any compelling reason to make that decision yet.

We do probably need an eligible panda list, just to make it easier for people to figure out what they should get to achieve their goals for membership, or higher points, etc. I will probably take some of the old lists we have made and discussed about the rarest pandas.

* Lists of panda coins that might be a good investment.
* 2014 baby panda speculative investment potential comparison.
« Last Edit: 2016 May 17, 03:15:54 AM by badon »
 

Offline badon

it would be significantly harder to earn points with fiat coins as opposed to non-fiat coins since the natural mintages are so much higher.



I noticed you used the phrase "natural mintages" to describe the fiat panda mintages. I assume you did that because you have been misled to believe the much lower non-fiat panda mintages are "artificial", and thus less desirable. I'm guessing you got that idea from poconopenn's "mintage trap" propaganda that says the mintage of all of the low-mintage pandas combined is higher than the multi-million mintage fiat pandas (16 million for the debased fiat 2016 30 g silver panda), which is supposed to dilute the importance of the low-mintage coins. Except, that is a ridiculously obvious lie.

For example, in your photo the mintage for all 5 of those panda types combined, from 3 years of production, is only 1097 specimens. It would require 14'586 years of production for all 5 of those types combined to match the 16 million mintage of ONLY ONE YEAR of the debased fiat 2016 30 g silver pandas. If pandas and people are still around 14'000+ years hence, we can worry about the "mintage trap" then :P
 

Offline badon

Here are the 5 types in your photo, minted for 3 years during 2014, 2015, and 2016:

99 2015 2 oz silver lunar goat panda matte antiqued
99 2016 2 oz silver lunar monkey panda matte antiqued
200 2014 brass baby panda
200 2014 30 g silver baby panda
499 2016 2 oz silver lunar monkey panda

Total mintage of all 5 types: 1097
 

Offline numistacker

Here are the 5 types in your photo, minted for 3 years during 2014, 2015, and 2016:

99 2015 2 oz silver lunar goat panda matte antiqued
99 2016 2 oz silver lunar monkey panda matte antiqued
200 2014 brass baby panda
200 2014 30 g silver baby panda
499 2016 2 oz silver lunar monkey panda

Total mintage of all 5 types: 1097

When you do think about mintages and you have numbers like 99, 299, 499 and when the quality is really to high in terms of the work that has gone into designing and minting these non-fiat coins - it causes one to pause and think. To think what? Perhaps how ineffectual coin medal marketing is or how "safe" collectors are. Perhaps how risk adverse? Flock followers? There seems to be a fear of non-fiat and even a fear of premiums - when non fiat often means interesting and artistic and premium is only to be feared if it is undeserved.
 
Edit by badon: medal = non-fiat coin.
« Last Edit: 2016 May 17, 04:46:08 AM by badon »
 

Offline badon

That is an interesting question. I have decided the days the ultra-low mintages are doomed to end, in favor of high mintages instead. The China mint increasingly only cares about profits. Artistic glory is still something they take pride in, but the China mint is no longer the underdog with something to prove, like they were in the 1980's when they minted - and ended - their finest hand engraved coin designs like the 1984 pagodas. Today, the mint has no trouble selling an extra few million pandas, even if they're debased!

When the mint can get away with shaving some grams off of their fiat pandas, and still sell 16 million of them, there isn't much incentive to spend months or years in training and preparation just for designing an artistic masterpiece that can't even match the income from just a few hours or days of production of high-mintage coins. This same progression occurs at all of the world's mints.

The USA is a young country, so the days of much diversity and artistic excellence were not so long ago. Iconic designs like the buffalo nickel, the Saint Gaudens gold, and the Walking Liberty silver half dollar are all being imitated in high-mintage designs today. In particular, the USA 1 oz silver eagle is one of the world's most popular and recognizable bullion coins, and it takes its design from the Walking Liberty half dollar. On the other hand, the UK is an old country, and mints like the ones in Canada and Australia that claim direct descent from the UK tend to mint all their coins with the exact same image of the Queen on all of them. Attractive, yes. Impressive art, no.

Still, one thing all of those mints have in common is they do not produce ultra-low mintage coins anymore. In terms of population, the entire nation of Canada or Australia could fit into one metropolitan area of an average city of China...but China still expends time, space, and other resources to tool-up to mint a measly 99 coins that most people complain is too expensive, that they refuse to buy! At a hypothetical price of around $500 each, the mint is only bringing in around $50'000 for a coin with a mintage of 99. Meanwhile, with only a small amount of additional effort, the China mint can produce 100 million low-quality coins, and sell them for $4 each, to bring in $400 million, which is almost pure profit (each coin probably costs less than $0.10 to produce).

So, you see, the China mint is doing us a favor by selling us ultra-rare coins that not only hold their value, but tend to rise eventually. Why would the mint want to deal with a small $50'000 project and all the complaining about the price being too high, when they can earn $400 million on an easier project instead? It's all about the money in a simple numbers game, so the China mint could at any moment tell everybody they can quit their whining, because China is not going to mint the expensive coins anymore.

But, even if the China mint does continue to mint low mintage coins, as I mentioned already, it would take many thousands of years for the low-mintage coins to match just one year of high-mintage coins. After the rest of the world realizes that prices keep going up, China might decide they want a bigger piece of the pie, and they'll raise prices. If that happens, then strictly speaking they ARE still producing low mintages, but if the coins cost $100'000 each, they're out of reach, and a lot more risky as an investment.

One thing that might surprise everybody, including me, is the potential for art pricing. For the first time in the history of numismatics, coins are being treated like art. They still have "numismatic prices", which means their prices are dictated by their rarity and the fundamentals of supply and demand, which keeps the best prices way below the heights that the best art can achieve. $100 million for art can and does happen, but few coins are worth more than $3 million, and none of those coins are valuable because of the name of the artist that designed them.

If we get art pricing, the mintage rarity and the metal it's made of will be a lot less important than the name of the artist that designed them. We have already seen hints of imminent art pricing in the form of COA's that either do, or conspicuously do not mention the artist's names. It hasn't happened yet, and maybe it will never happen, but all signs consistently indicate that things could be moving in that direction now, while we speak. Then, people will REALLY regret ignoring the good advice to buy the rarest coins they can afford!
 

Offline badon

Another one for the EPCC ...

Panda Lunar 2015 Goat Silver Antique Medal from Shenyang Mint
Mintage a cool and rarified 99

I borrowed one of your photos for this post: Re: 2017 lunar rooster panda design proposal. Nice job on the photography, I couldn't find any other photos as nice as yours.
 

Offline numistacker

I am not officially requesting my new EPCC score with this... but it might be interesting adding it up.

Not all of these are mine personally as I have gathered together mine plus those I am in the process of grading for SilverForum members.

Its a nice sight and one you wont see too often I would imagine.

 
The following users thanked this post: SquarepegRoundcoin

Offline Jens

Well according to the rules you could request it.
I would be shouting "unfair" of course but secretly i would be thankful because it would force badon to show of more of his collection to regain first place  ;)  8)
"You have to choose (as a voter) between trusting to the natural stability of gold and the natural stability of the honesty and intelligence of the members of the Government.
And, with due respect for these gentlemen, I advise you, as long as the Capitalist system lasts, to vote for gold."   - George Bernard Shaw -
 

Offline numistacker

Well according to the rules you could request it.
I would be shouting "unfair" of course but secretly i would be thankful because it would force badon to show of more of his collection to regain first place  ;)  8)

That's what I thought )) the pandas would come out of the closet but I could not do that to badon... could I?

Offline badon

Can you list all the coins and their mintages? It will save me some time from trying to look them up.

Edit: I'm going to make the list myself of the coins and mintages and calculate points :)
« Last Edit: 2017 Jan 12, 03:33:35 PM by badon »
 

Offline badon

I am not officially requesting my new EPCC score with this... but it might be interesting adding it up.

Not all of these are mine personally as I have gathered together mine plus those I am in the process of grading for SilverForum members.

Its a nice sight and one you wont see too often I would imagine.

Well according to the rules you could request it.
I would be shouting "unfair" of course but secretly i would be thankful because it would force badon to show of more of his collection to regain first place  ;)  8)

That's the purpose for the rules. By allowing weird things like this, we get to see some incredible sights we would never ever ever be able to see. It worked perfectly.
 

Offline badon

[...] it would force badon to show of more of his collection to regain first place  ;)  8)

Don't worry about me, I still have first place for rarity rank :) I'll need to dig up more coins for photos if I'm going to get back in the top spot for points rank. I probably have enough coins to do this, but I'm not 100% sure. Yikes, that's a big photo numistacker has!
 

Offline SquarepegRoundcoin

My goodness numistacker. What is the cumulative value total of that photograph?
 

Offline badon

I am not officially requesting my new EPCC score with this... but it might be interesting adding it up.

Not all of these are mine personally as I have gathered together mine plus those I am in the process of grading for SilverForum members.

Its a nice sight and one you wont see too often I would imagine.

I just realized you have to flip all those over to get a shot of the other side of the coins with your note to be eligible for points from them. That's step #2. Can you make another pair of photos?

EPCC official rules 2016-05-26
1. Make a note with "Elite Panda Coin Club" and your CCF username on it.
2. Put the note next to your elite panda and take photos of them together, for both the obverse and the reverse (2 photos total).

[...]

Final rule

* We Just Make Them Up As We Go. JMTUAWG ("Jim Tuawg") is our judge.

We could waive that requirement under the final rule, if the other EPCC members agree to it, but it might be easier to just make another pair of photos :)
 

Offline badon

If you make another pair of photos, maybe some of your friends at TheSilverForum.com would like to have their names on your note too. Or maybe they will have to make their own notes, haha.
 

Offline numistacker

My goodness numistacker. What is the cumulative value total of that photograph?

Expensive ))

Offline numistacker


Well I put the original pic up half tongue in cheek however since you guys have nudged me in this direction here goes.





Offline numistacker


And here is the calculation


Offline badon

Maybe you can put the spreadsheet on Google Sheets?

https://www.google.com/sheets/about/

That might be a good way to keep track of things with quick calculations so I don't have to do it manually.
 

Offline badon

Congratulations numistacker, you have more points than all the other EPCC members combined :D

Re: EPCC: Member rarity ranking (quality) and collection points ranking (quantity)

I'm going to have to make some photos...
 

Offline Jens

Wow, just Wow.
"You have to choose (as a voter) between trusting to the natural stability of gold and the natural stability of the honesty and intelligence of the members of the Government.
And, with due respect for these gentlemen, I advise you, as long as the Capitalist system lasts, to vote for gold."   - George Bernard Shaw -
 

Offline numistacker

Wow, just Wow.

A couple are on eBay this week ))