Tim May <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote : > >On Wednesday, July 3, 2002, at 08:50 AM, Michael Motyka wrote: >> IIRC many of the wealthy were quick enough to ship huge amounts of gold >> to Europe. That is one reason I have heard given that the St Gauden's >> $20 gold pices of that era are possibly poor investments - there is a >> reservoir of them overseas. > >But St. Gaudens coins were readily available during the time when gold >ownership was banned. > >(Let me be overly careful: They were purchasable from coin stores and >mail order places in the mid-1960s. I know because I used to see them >listed at a price I clearly remember: $49.50.) > >I assume they did not just suddenly become available at the time I >happened to be paying attention, and that they were purchasable in 1960, >1950, 1940, etc. The exemption for numismatic value, of course. > The opinion I am repeating ( not mine, but seems plausible ) is that the supply of numismatic quality St. Gauden's may be such that the current premiums are not justified.
>Owning coins for collector, or numismatic, value, is of course a >different kettle of fish than owning gold as bullion. > The premium over the bullion value is a very large component of the price. I've tried to learn a bit about coin collecting but I find myself hesitant to plunge right into it. It's just like any other "investment", subject to bubbles, busts and shady operators. I don't know enough to feel comfortable with it. Having watched bullion prices for a while it appears to have two major factors : a bet on fear ( peaked during the India/Pakistan prick wagging contest ) and against a strong dollar. Yet another trading option. >--Tim May Mike
