How are these Numismatics posts?

I have wondered the last year or so why SS has a numismatic section that people post modern limited edition coins in.. arent these just PROOF silver coins.

I TOTALLY disagree that these are numismatics and think the terms parameters need refining.

Nothing Perth mint, franklin mint or anything powercoin IT sells is numismatic.

"Numismatics is the study or collection of currency, including coins, tokens, paper money, and related objects"

Although they are legal tender they were never intended to be in circulated which is what a numismatist is a student of.

I use numismatics to describe old coinage taken from cirulcation that is has historical signifigance based on the time the coin was in circulation.

Sorry but the Modern huge RRP coins are just limited edition proof legal tender.. but nothing to study.. no history of circulation, no ties to economic booms or depressions, no signifigance "godless" victoria, 8 reales "pirate treasure"

Please stop dumbing down numismatics and making it a term tied to modern junk with no history and with nothing to study.. it would be a crap term if it only referred to specs.. MINTAGE, RRP, Face value? thats it.. no study to be done.. no research possible.

a 1961 shilling is numismatica, a 2000 Proof dragon is NOT

I accept meaning change but the new meaning is the bastard child of the old meaning, probably to benefit GRADING companies who profit from turning a hobby more expensive by encasing coins in petrol (plastic) and giving it a subjective grade (like i dont have eyes) and then slapping huge premiums creating a coin-hobby bubble.. or recently a bullion hobby bubble.. LOL>. a 2007 MS-70 koala, i think the carded version is superior - but go ahead and throw away the card, send and get graded.. thats it!

1for1

 

For the sake of ease we call them that..

Maybe we should put it to vote what we call these modern packaged silver coins.

Coin (this is what PM calls them)- this is how i differentiate them on my site like Perth Mint does

BULLION (still coins but low premium and not limited edition or proff or encased or with a COA) or COINs (proof coins)

I just know i reserve numismatics for studying history and i doubt these MODERN high RRP will ever be worthy of study.. therefore they will not pass the test of time and will never be considered true numismatics..

Really i wanted to point out that we need to define these better as im VERY interested in numismatics and not at all interested in modern high premium coins.

cheers,

1for1

 

I try not to get tied up in what a particular term means because there's too many variations.

Take the term Specimen Coin?

Crikey! A bloke could go to half a dozen publications that describe a specimen coin differently; even The Perth Mint are confused by the term "Specimen" (As we have seen with their carded Koala's and confusion with the coloured bullion coins.

As far as numismatics go, I like to call our modern coins, Modern Numismatics.

The reason I like to call them that is because coins like the series 2 lunars, have certain coins that have numismatic value.

An example would be the 2oz and 5oz silver bullion Mouse.

The coins of today are the antique coins of tomorrow and imo, regardless if they were circulated, proof, bullion or other nomenclature there will be collectors and investors who study the coins.

So I suppose, if a bloke studies modern coins, he would be studying Modern Numismatics.

H

 

True SPECIMEN is ambiguous.

But we are not calling a catagories specifmens...

Cant we have one thread for OLD SILVER COINS (numismatics) for the janky modern high RRP stuff.. cant people post that in SILVER COINS.. (as thats the popular place for them)

the other sub-catagories seem to be for the more specialised subjects.. obviously banknotes goes without saying.. i just think that we should specify the threads Silver Coins and Numismatics so that one is pure bullion and 999 limited edition (silver coins) and Numismatics be reserved for old circulated historical silver.. 3d, 6d, pesos, pesata, francs, crowns, florin, annas, rupee, trade dollars, shilling, reales etc..

maybe if the catagories are better defined we can be more certain that the posts are grouped correctly.. not that im the nazi wanting complete uniformity.. its just the modern proof stuff will never interested other than being pretty art and id rather the numi section have strictly numi stuff rather then one post old coinage and correct, the next.. a powercoin IT promo ad for the latest overpriced jank with silver being an irralevant componant of the price. (even though high grade proper numis are the same)

1for1

 

I strongly agree. No one can dictate what is and what isn't a numismatic coin because there is no universal consensus. A numismatic item is not relegated ONLY to old circulating coins that have historical value...that's rather a most silly definition for a number of reasons one of which would be who will be the person who determines what exactly qualifies for "old". I could give examples of modern coins and medals that would be considered numismatic items to many people but there will always be some who have some personal subjective bias against agreeing with that evaluation.

As there is no category here that I can see named "Semi-numismatic", I think that discussions on any coin or medal that is not strictly a bullion coin or medal ought to be considered as perfectly allowable here.

 

Hi, that is not the definition just two points i noted, i already listed the definition, the part i like to focus on is money in circulation, none of this modern stuff will ever be in circulation, but yeah if the term is extremely broad and used in any situation to describe any coin then its futile trying to convert the masses into use the term correctly, if you cant beat them join them...

1for1

 

An old sovereign is numismatic, is a new sovereign numismatic or modern jank?

It has tradition on its side but that is all.

I think this is subjective, I think the Series 2 lunars have no numismatic value but lots of potential to go up in money value. There is nothing to study in my opinion and collecting is not the same as studying.

The red coloured Poppy $2, the first $2 with a different design. Does that make it significant or is it just modern jank? Is the non coloured version more significant because it sees limited circulation?

The original coloured Poppy from Canada in 2004, the coin that caused upset in the USA as a "spy" coin and the first circulating coloured coin in the world, does that make it numismatic? http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,270413,00.html

Does that have an effect on the numismatic status of the Australian poppy coin, which is just a copy of someone else's idea?

I think the term numismatic covers all these areas, much as I don't like to think that any trinkets churned out by the Franklin Mint have anything to do with my hobby that is probably just elitism on my behalf. Our coin club is just that, a coin club, it is not a Numismatic Society. We just have a group of people who collect coins, and two or three people in the club who have written text books on the subject and get phonecalls from museums asking for identification etc.

 

Bottom line: there is no universal consensus therefore numismatic is NOT only limited to certain and personal vague, subjective, and even arbitrary criteria suggested by some individual or small exclusive group. A person can pout all they want but until there is specific universal consensus, it's up to educated collectors to determine for themselves, what has and what doesn't have numismatic value to them.

 

This is a good thread,

I would like to see a section where it is defined.
Admittedly, when I think of Numismatic coins I think more in the line of "Old Coin Rareities"
Not 'New Rounds or Modern Coin Rarities".

We already have Lunar , Panda, sections.
Why not keep Numismatics for pre-decimal & other old coins not including Sovereigns, because we already have a section for them?
Otherwise, the Numismatic section just becomes a mismatch.
Just my thoughts on the subject.

Cheers markcoinoz

 

Wouldn't anything with value above it's intrinsic worth be numismatic? The reasons could vary - art can add value, or it's age, rarity or even just some little bit of fame like "it belonged to x".

But essentially if it's worth more than spot plus a reasonable spread, then isn't it tecnically numismatic?

 

I am not interested in collecting circulating currency and couldn't care less if a sovereign has or hasn't got a dot above or below the queen's nose or wherever they might be found.
I am interested in bullion coins and the shiny proof stuff because they look nice and appeal to me.

Many so called 'numismatists' choose to look down on people like me as not being real collectors.
I certainly get that impression from many coin dealers and some have even said so quite openly.

But fact of the matter is that "numismatics" becomes whatever the majority is interested in.
If there are far more collectors like me, then numismatics includes the collection of shiny new proof stuff - because that is where the demand is.
The Perth Mint and others mints would not produce the stuff if there was no demand for it.

You collect 1961 shillings and I'm happy to collect 2000 proof dragons
I don't think less of you - I don't see why you should think less of me

 

My head hurts lol!

 

There is a section devoted to Dragons - the "lunar section"

Its not about looking down on anyone (although i think you need your head checked paying those absurd prices for modern perth mint junk).

I just think the sections need redifining so people dont post anything anywhere.. this morning i see another janky post about a powercoin overpriced peice of rubbish.. surely that can go in the silver coins section?

I wonder why we even have this section when most belong in the silver coin section..

is it ok if i post a 1910 florin post in silver coins? or would numismatics be more appropriate?

To me numismatics is about getting items AT FACE VALUE, and then the appreciation over the face value is the NUMISMATIC premium.. when you buy a $1 legal tender coin that RRP's at $110 not only are you risking a huge price decrease.. you are not buying a coin for its face value so its not really a circulated coin (although legal tender).

Its not a power struggle.. just an interpretation of Numismatics and how the term was indended.. yes proofs are included but it was when there was a regular circulating version and a collectors issue proof polished die version.. the term has surel been bastardised since..

1for1