I have often seen on various forums people either being critical of someone trying to put together the "best" collection of a various series or at least implying that is not what collecting is all about. I always found it odd and thought I would post this thread.
I agree that there is not one way to collect coins. There is nothing wrong about collecting coins out of circulation. It certainly can be rewarding to put together a collection without spending any serious money. But to be fair, there is also nothing wrong with someone who only wants to buy top pop coins or condition census coins. Neither type of collector is wrong or "loves" coins more.
I think a good analogy is golf. There are millions of golfers who love golf, enjoy playing and don't really care if they ever break 100. There are other golfers who want to be the best and want to play on the pga tour. They both love golf, they both are doing what is best for them, and have their own challenges.
Some people thrive on competition and for them buying top pops, the registry, etc is fun. Others achieve great satisfaction putting together a Franklin Half collection and not spending more than $20 on any coin. Both are fine. Just my thoughts...
Comments
Buying the top pops when you are loaded does not seem as fun to me. I can't prove that though!
I've put together a few registry sets, and working on one currently. My goal is never to be the best, but among the best with nice for the grade coins within my budget. For one set I can say "I want to crack the top 5", or "If I'm inside top 20 all-time I'll be happy".
I doubt anyone will look at my TurtleCat sets on PCGS registry and be in awe or envy of much, lol.
In coins, the finest coins usually look the best . To own a perfect PR TD or Early Gold coin-WOW!
The coins are:
For people that have seen all three, how would you rank them? Which one is the "best"?
Define your individual collecting goals and budget then stick to it.
Collect to please YOURSELF and you will be more satisfied and enjoy collecting more at the end of the day.
If mine ends up being in the top 5 I am elated. If it has a great pedigree then I know I did good having another great set of eyes appreciate it too 100 years ago and then when you add that historic nature into the equation it never hurts only enhances. Couple that with an old holder and top it off with a CAC sticker and you got the Trifecta of coins.
As far as the Registry goes, couldn't give a rat's arse. I don't compete and only care about what I like & collect. But a fully respect others choosing to be in the registry, just not for me. And maybe someday when the comp calms down I will reconsider.
Other than that, I imagine you'd need to consider the individual coins and it may be more nuanced. An overgraded coin may still be the "best", even if it's not stickered.
I think about it this way, what super well-known collection is all CAC? Pogue was not all CAC. Tyrant is not all CAC. Stewart's Lincoln collection isn't all CAC. Hansen has a number of all CAC collections but they are a subset of his larger mixed collection. Even Bruce has purchased non-CAC coins, like the Dunham-Dexter Dollar which was part of his Early Dollars and Trinity collections. Is any major, top collection all CAC?
From looking at it this way, I think the best sets are first about the coins. The grades and stickers help a lot but are not the end all. The collectors of the best collections know how to use stickers (and grades) to help their collections, not be a "slave" to them.
I fully agree each of us can choose to collect what WE EACH want, and I honestly believe there’s nothing wrong with that! But I think some people may be fooling themselves in thinking this great number of meaningful and attractive coins each have the merits of getting CAC’s, but they just don’t have them!
Perhaps I’m fooling myself for thinking as I do?