Author Topic: 1984 Pagoda's  (Read 9312 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Batman

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 248
  • Karma: 11
1984 Pagoda's
« on: February 13, 2012, 08:03:23 PM »
Clark Smith listed a 69/68 set for $3850.  I checked NGC and there are a possible 33 69 sets graded by NGC.  Also, there are at total of about 50 sets graded.  Given a mintage of 260, I personally believe the ratio of graded sets is high compared to the mintage. Then again, most of these medals could have been exported to the US or maybe a number of them have been graded by submitters in China.

Offline Panda Halves

  • Supporter
  • Global Moderator
  • Trade Count: (+9)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1271
  • Karma: 45
Re: 1984 Pagoda's
« Reply #1 on: February 13, 2012, 08:16:55 PM »
Or perhaps there were re-strikes...?

Offline Panda Express

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 153
  • Karma: 2
  • Gender: Male
Re: 1984 Pagoda's
« Reply #2 on: February 13, 2012, 09:07:42 PM »
Panda Halves, do you know whether there have been any documented re-strikes on the 1984 Ancient Pagodas?  Would any numismatic expert be able to identify a re-strike compared to the original coin?  The price of this Pagoda set seems to be very low knowing the fact that there are only 260 sets. There is only one PF68 and the rest of the coins are graded PF69 on this particular set.  As mentioned previously in a prior post that there are only 33 possible PF69 sets as of this time.

Offline SANDAC

  • Supporter
  • Global Moderator
  • Trade Count: (+8)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2244
  • Karma: 118
Re: 1984 Pagoda's
« Reply #3 on: February 13, 2012, 11:58:28 PM »
The price IS very good.  I would definitely go for it if I didn't already have a set.  Even with that I'm tempted...  Don't be surprised if the set disappeared tomorrow.

Offline adamc4

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 616
  • Karma: 2
Re: 1984 Pagoda's
« Reply #4 on: February 14, 2012, 12:05:57 AM »
I do not know what they will be worth, but I do know current fair market value for a raw set is $2000 and $4000 for a full 69 set.

Offline badon

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4487
  • Karma: -81
Re: 1984 Pagoda's
« Reply #5 on: February 14, 2012, 02:58:50 AM »
This happened with the 1995 proof pandas. Someone submitted a bunch of them, and then everybody assumed they were common. They were wrong, and prices quadrupled in about 6 months once supply was gone. The hoard of pagodas were imported by a Chinese dealer in 1984. There are others out there that were also imported by Chinese owners. I'm not aware of them being sold directly to Americans, but the history is not well known yet, so that could have happened too.

Nearly all complete sets I have seen in person were in the possession of the original dealer, and they were unsold since 1984. They have since been dispersed around the USA, with a few more sets being found in China, and also sent to the USA when prices were moving high. Honestly, I think the only thing that saved them from the melting pot was the fancy box. I have heard no reliable reports yet that these were melted, but I would not be surprised if many of them were.

Last I heard, nearly every coin in the hoard was graded all at once. That was about 6 months ago. I have not seen any impressive increases in their population since then. It is possible that the ones we know about now constitute the greater portion of the coins that have survived. If that is true, it will be interesting to watch...

I am not sure how many remain in China, but I think nearly all the ones that were available were sent to the USA. Every dealer that had them found the highest prices in the USA at the time, after many years of them being totally worthless, so they were eager to sell to anyone who would take them.

I will be thoroughly entertained to watch a "Button Gwinnett Effect" unfold for these coins over the next several years.

Offline Panda Express

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 153
  • Karma: 2
  • Gender: Male
Re: 1984 Pagoda's
« Reply #6 on: February 14, 2012, 09:43:17 AM »
To see the 1984 Ancient Pagoda set in a PF69 UC lose approximately 84% of its value from its previous high of $25,000 during a private sale a little over a year ago is totally mind boggling.  Recent sales per coin in a PF 69 has been little over a $1,000. per coin.  So for those collectors and/or investors who are searching for value, now would be an opportunity of a life time to get a rare set like this in investment grade IMHO.  A buy and hold strategy even if it takes a couple of years may realize enormous gains for such a rare set with an actual mintage of 260 sets.  Hopefully we will see this rare set rise to greatness once again in the near future once supply dries up and the medals change hands to collectors willing to hold.  Nice historical data on this thread. I learned a little more on US and Chinese history.    :thumbup1:

Offline pandamonium

  • Supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2029
  • Karma: 26
Re: 1984 Pagoda's
« Reply #7 on: February 17, 2012, 09:41:01 PM »
Clark Smith's pagoda set sold quick........

Offline badon

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4487
  • Karma: -81
Re: 1984 Pagoda's
« Reply #8 on: February 17, 2012, 11:08:18 PM »
I didn't do it, I swear.

Offline mcc168

  • Supporter
  • Trade Count: (+4)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 256
  • Karma: 19
Re: 1984 Pagoda's
« Reply #9 on: February 18, 2012, 12:06:17 AM »
Clark Smith's pagoda set sold quick........
Because he priced toooo looowwww.

Offline Panda Express

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 153
  • Karma: 2
  • Gender: Male
Re: 1984 Pagoda's
« Reply #10 on: February 18, 2012, 03:58:57 AM »
The buyer of the Pagoda Medals was at the right place at the right time.  "Blue Light Special".  There's always a flip-side of the coin to everything....don't you think!

Offline pandamonium

  • Supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2029
  • Karma: 26
Re: 1984 Pagoda's
« Reply #11 on: February 18, 2012, 09:49:44 AM »
$3800 for a set of pagodas that sold for $25,000 (all PF 69)?  Clark's set had (3) PF 69 & (1) PF 68, I think.  The world is buying precious metals.  Buyers are coming into the Chinese coin market.  Supply will drop and the price of the pagoda sets will head back to $20,000+.  What a great investment for $3800...........

Offline KonaJim

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 240
  • Karma: 5
Re: 1984 Pagoda's
« Reply #12 on: February 18, 2012, 12:50:12 PM »
When the price of something drops precipitously there is a reason.  When a stock tanks to this degree there is a huge underlying problem, accounting, inventory, sales, or fraud to name a few.  The Pagoda sets have an issue.  There are too many savvy collectors for prices to make huge swings without reason.  One day we might find out.  My guess is the supply is much greater than suspected.

Underbidder

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: 1984 Pagoda's
« Reply #13 on: February 18, 2012, 02:04:07 PM »
Bingo.


Agreed.

Offline SANDAC

  • Supporter
  • Global Moderator
  • Trade Count: (+8)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2244
  • Karma: 118
Re: 1984 Pagoda's
« Reply #14 on: February 18, 2012, 02:24:17 PM »
Perhaps because medals are not collected as much?  They are not considered legal tenders and probably can be forged with impunity.  Definitely want them certified before buying.

Underbidder

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: 1984 Pagoda's
« Reply #15 on: February 18, 2012, 03:40:03 PM »
I wonder if its possible somehow a digit got accidently dropped from the mintage number. Funnier things have happened.
A mintage figure of 2600 would be way more in line with other silver medals, and with the number of sets graded, as Batman pointed out.  The figure of 260 always seemed odd, out of place, and didn't make sense.

Offline badon

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4487
  • Karma: -81
Re: 1984 Pagoda's
« Reply #16 on: February 18, 2012, 03:53:34 PM »
I wonder if its possible somehow a digit got accidently dropped from the mintage number. Funnier things have happened.
A mintage figure of 2600 would be way more in line with other silver medals, and with the number of sets graded, as Batman pointed out.  The figure of 260 always seemed odd, out of place, and didn't make sense.

That is an interesting possibility. It's speculation for now, but I don't think it can be ruled out. The only thing we can determine for now is that it appears the mintage was never sold and never dispersed. It probably remained concentrated in the hands of a few dealers who bought them from the mint originally. That means there would be several other hoards coming to the market, if the mintage were higher.

We saw that happen with the 1989 3.3 oz silver God of War & wealth. After the first 50-coin hoard hit the market, there were a few other hoards that surfaced also, as prices continued to rise. We haven't seen that happen with the pagodas yet.

In the case of 1989 GoWaW, a significant fraction of the full mintage is not yet accounted for. We will not be surprised to see more of them turn up in the near future. However, the known mintage fraction of the 1984 pagodas is much higher, which decreases the likelihood that additional hoards will come to market, which in turn means that if another hoard does come to market, it will be much more meaningful for the pagodas than it would be for the 1989 GoWaW.

It still wouldn't be conclusive, but it would be an interesting clue. If we see another 30 pagoda sets get dropped on the market, it will be interesting. Before anyone had heard of pagodas, I talked to several dealers in modern Chinese coins who had been in the business for decades. All of them told me they had never seen one in-person before.

If there are significantly more pagodas out there, they must be in the tight hands of only a few people. Otherwise, the career dealers would be telling me they have encountered them at least once in the last 30 years.

Offline pandamonium

  • Supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2029
  • Karma: 26
Re: 1984 Pagoda's
« Reply #17 on: February 18, 2012, 04:16:09 PM »
The mysterious pagado mintage.  Seems many Chinese coins are mysterious.  Makes sense that more sets would have come into the market when prices were high.  For me, it is better to own one then none at all.  Its a good gamble even if mintage were 2600 instead of 260  (PF 68 are for cheap skates like me) :) .........

Offline SANDAC

  • Supporter
  • Global Moderator
  • Trade Count: (+8)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2244
  • Karma: 118
Re: 1984 Pagoda's
« Reply #18 on: February 18, 2012, 05:16:32 PM »
Here are some number to spice up the discussion:
Take a look at NGC 3493608 and 3546002.  They contain a big collection of Chinese medals.  There are 86 Pagoda, 24 gold fish, and 23 GoWaW.  The NGC population contains 216 Pagoda, about 20% of the Mr Ge's population.  The 86 Pagoda in these two NGC submission account for 40% of the 216 Pagoda population.  So an argument can be made that the NGC Pagoda population is warped by the two submission.  For comparison, Mr. Ge says there are 2430 GoWaW actual mintage.  NGC population shows 293, so that's 12% of the actual mintage.  If we remove the 86 coins from the 216 Pagoda population, then ((216-86)/1040) we get 12.5% of the actual Pagoda mintage.  So the ratio of NGC population to actual mintage of Pagoda and GoWaW are comparable if NGC 3493608 and 3546002 are removed.


Offline SANDAC

  • Supporter
  • Global Moderator
  • Trade Count: (+8)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2244
  • Karma: 118
Re: 1984 Pagoda's
« Reply #19 on: February 18, 2012, 05:24:05 PM »
I guess what I tried to say is this:  Both GoWaW and Pagoda are medals.  They both received lots of publicity and experienced great rise in price.  Price have fell for both of them.  Giving the same price exposure and publicity, NGC Pagoda population is 20% of actual mintage whereas GoWaW is 12%.  This would suggest Pagoda's population is actually larger than the published 260/coin.  But I'm making an argument that because Pagoda's population is so small, a large submission or two can warp the ratio, and if these large submission is taken out, then the population become comparable to that of GoWaW.

Of course I'm biased, I happened to own the Pagoda.

Offline badon

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4487
  • Karma: -81
Re: 1984 Pagoda's
« Reply #20 on: February 18, 2012, 05:43:25 PM »
So, in other words, you have no idea how many there actually are :)

Offline badon

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4487
  • Karma: -81
Re: 1984 Pagoda's
« Reply #21 on: February 18, 2012, 05:52:22 PM »
I just had another thought. With the Coin Compendium, not only can we track the specimens using the certification numbers, but we can also use the CC sighting system to find out if they're actually hitting the market or not. A lot of pagodas have been graded, but I have not seen anything even close to that quantity actually being offered for sale. That could be because the people holding them are the same people that submitted them, and they are not willing to sell.

What I claim to have seen can be proven definitively with the Coin Compendium's sighting system. If it is proven, then we have to ask the question, why are they not being sold after grading? If it is dealers that own the coins, how are they making money by sitting on so many rare coins? They must be betting on higher prices. If it is collectors sitting on them, they may not care if prices go higher or not, if they want to keep the coins.

Small collectors like to submit coins with other collectors. I know a lot of people here are saying they own pagodas. Did you get them from a dealer, or did you submit them yourself. Did you submit them together with other collectors or dealers?

The Coin Compendium has a barely functioning inventory system where you can track your collections of coins that you own or want to own. The only way we're going to get good data with that is if collectors add their collections to the CC themselves. Once other tasks are done, I can improve the inventory system to make it fun and easy to showcase your collection on the CC. Hopefully that will get us some more data.

Offline KonaJim

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 240
  • Karma: 5
Re: 1984 Pagoda's
« Reply #22 on: February 18, 2012, 06:10:08 PM »
The bottom line is price is king.  And you are wrong, there are many savvy investors.  I could name you 25 with ease.  Clark Smith knows what he's doing.  He would not sell the set for the price offered if he thought he could get more money for it.  People, I won't name, name's, have been pushing these B.S. Pagoda sets for a while now.  They have been a poor investment...period.

Offline badon

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4487
  • Karma: -81
Re: 1984 Pagoda's
« Reply #23 on: February 18, 2012, 06:20:18 PM »
I honestly cannot think of a single rare modern Chinese coin that has not been widely ridiculed as a poor investment. Pandas were the first, when everybody thought China only cared about culturally significant coins. Some of those coins are now worth over $1 million, up from silver bullion value. Now, everyone is saying the culturally significant coins are a poor investment, and pandas are what's hot.

Because of the Button Gwinnett Effect, if modern Chinese coins remain a popular area of collecting, every coin will get its time to shine. It is only a question of when, and how much. At the lowest of the low, pagodas are still up over 400% from where they started from. If that's a poor investment, then at the very least, I know I'm in the right market.

Offline KonaJim

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 240
  • Karma: 5
Re: 1984 Pagoda's
« Reply #24 on: February 18, 2012, 06:27:12 PM »
A poor investment is something that goes from a price of $ 28,000.00 to $ 3,850.00.  You don't see the 1995 Proof Panda going for $ 3,850.00.  It takes a real man to admit that sometimes he is wrong.

Offline poconopenn

  • Supporter
  • Trade Count: (+7)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2604
  • Karma: 225
Re: 1984 Pagoda's
« Reply #25 on: February 18, 2012, 06:48:24 PM »
http://china-mint.info/forum/index.php?topic=3646.30

My comment in above link will tell the story. IMO, NGC might grade some plated sets as silver set prior to realize the mistake, similar to the fiasco in 1984 silver plated goldfish set.

Offline badon

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4487
  • Karma: -81
Re: 1984 Pagoda's
« Reply #26 on: February 18, 2012, 07:31:48 PM »
A poor investment is something that goes from a price of $ 28,000.00 to $ 3,850.00.  You don't see the 1995 Proof Panda going for $ 3,850.00.  It takes a real man to admit that sometimes he is wrong.

Actually, yes I have seen 1995 1 oz gold proof pandas go for the $3000 price level - They dropped to that level right after I bought them at the $8000 price level, so I bought more. I'm very glad I did.

Also, as far as I know, the only sales of 69 grade pagodas prior to the one that sold for the $25,000 price level were all private, and all of them sold for much, much less. The price at $25k seems to have been too much too soon, and should be considered an outlier that is not statistically significant. At the time, $8000 would probably have been a more reasonable price, which would then have dropped to our current $4000 price level for a 69 grade 4 coin pagoda set.

http://china-mint.info/forum/index.php?topic=3646.30

My comment in above link will tell the story. IMO, NGC might grade some plated sets as silver set prior to realize the mistake, similar to the fiasco in 1984 silver plated goldfish set.

Thanks for posting that poconopenn. I have no doubt that worry about fakes has contributed to the temporary decline in prices for the pagodas. I know of several that were certified by NGC by mistake, which I dutifully reported, and which NGC has now seemed to have prevented from occurring again.

One interesting thing I want to add about my role in the market for pagodas:

At the same time I was talking about pagodas, I was also talking about goldfish. The goldfish went up in value, where they have plateaued. The pagodas went WAY up in value, dropped, and have now plateaued. There's nothing I have done to cause that difference in performance between pagodas and goldfish. They both have similar stories, similar mysteries, and similar problems with fakes.

The only thing that is significantly different is their mintages. The pagodas are known to have a very low mintage. Not so much rarity is currently ascribed to goldfish. Guess which one is more expensive today? The pagodas, of course. The market may be immature, but it is not completely crazy (at the moment). It still makes sense, and all the fundamentals are still in operation. Mintage rarity, grade rarity, relative rarity, popularity, and the Button Gwinnett Effect are all performing their normal roles, with any deviances from expectations well within the bounds of an immature market.

Offline poconopenn

  • Supporter
  • Trade Count: (+7)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2604
  • Karma: 225
Re: 1984 Pagoda's
« Reply #27 on: February 18, 2012, 08:07:51 PM »
Here are some number to spice up the discussion:
Take a look at NGC 3493608 and 3546002.  They contain a big collection of Chinese medals.  There are 86 Pagoda, 24 gold fish, and 23 GoWaW.  The NGC population contains 216 Pagoda, about 20% of the Mr Ge's population.  The 86 Pagoda in these two NGC submission account for 40% of the 216 Pagoda population.  So an argument can be made that the NGC Pagoda population is warped by the two submission.  For comparison, Mr. Ge says there are 2430 GoWaW actual mintage.  NGC population shows 293, so that's 12% of the actual mintage.  If we remove the 86 coins from the 216 Pagoda population, then ((216-86)/1040) we get 12.5% of the actual Pagoda mintage.  So the ratio of NGC population to actual mintage of Pagoda and GoWaW are comparable if NGC 3493608 and 3546002 are removed.



Perhaps, many graded pagoda and goldfish coins sumbitted by these two NGC submission accounts were misgraded. It is known to long term (20 years +) coin collectors that the grading companies tend to grade coin loosely in a coin bull market and tighter in a bear market. I do not believe this is intentional. In a bull market, grading company has to hire more graders who are inexperence and tend to give a higher grade to avoid complain and make many mistakes, while in a bear market, grading companies keep the experence graders and layoff the Jr. graders.   

Offline Panda Halves

  • Supporter
  • Global Moderator
  • Trade Count: (+9)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1271
  • Karma: 45
Re: 1984 Pagoda's
« Reply #28 on: February 18, 2012, 08:17:39 PM »
I fail to see how pagodas are related to this Button Gwinnett phenomenon.
Konajim quite accurately uses the 1995 proof panda as an example of a good investment to refute pagoda performance.
The 1995 Proof panda is the Button Gwinnett of panda dates (irrespective of variety)
Pagodas are a sub-set of the entire modern Chinese coin market. They have a low relative mintage but are no means the lowest.
Button Gwinnett matters to a sub-set of specialty Declaration of Independance signature collectors the way a 1995 proof panda matters to a huge sect of panda collectors. As such, I don't see how a pagoda is a "Button Gwinnett" coin the way say, a 1995 proof panda is.
At best pagodas are the Robert Livingston's of Modern Chinese coins...

http://www.ushistory.org/declaration/related/livingston_r.htm

Offline SANDAC

  • Supporter
  • Global Moderator
  • Trade Count: (+8)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2244
  • Karma: 118
Re: 1984 Pagoda's
« Reply #29 on: February 18, 2012, 08:32:36 PM »
http://china-mint.info/forum/index.php?topic=3646.30

My comment in above link will tell the story. IMO, NGC might grade some plated sets as silver set prior to realize the mistake, similar to the fiasco in 1984 silver plated goldfish set.

I only dimly remembered the discussion on Pagoda so it is quite interesting to re-read that old thread.  This quote from davidt3251 was prescient:

"You know what they say about wanting to buy a rare coin for $1075. First you have to buy the same coin for $6250 (to draw out the supply)"
http://china-mint.info/forum/index.php?topic=3646.msg18241#msg18241

Was he referred to something specific or was that just a number he grabbed out of thin air?  Because you can use that ratio of 6250/1075 and re-write it as:
"You know what they say about wanting to buy a Pagoda set for $4300. First you have to buy the same coin for $25000 (to draw out the supply)"

So it looks like I overpaid by $200 with my $4500 Pagoda purchase.  

Offline SANDAC

  • Supporter
  • Global Moderator
  • Trade Count: (+8)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2244
  • Karma: 118
Re: 1984 Pagoda's
« Reply #30 on: February 18, 2012, 08:34:55 PM »
Sooo, it is probably davidt3251 who bought that $3850 Pagoda set.

Offline Panda Halves

  • Supporter
  • Global Moderator
  • Trade Count: (+9)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1271
  • Karma: 45
Re: 1984 Pagoda's
« Reply #31 on: February 18, 2012, 08:36:32 PM »
It is even wiser to just make it LOOK like a coin sold for 5-6x more to draw out supply.

Offline badon

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4487
  • Karma: -81
Re: 1984 Pagoda's
« Reply #32 on: February 18, 2012, 08:55:21 PM »
Maybe davidt3251 is going to get the last laugh! I know I did. People thought I was crazy to buy the 1995 1 oz gold proof pandas at $8000 when the last ones sold for only around $3500. That always puts a smile on my face :)

I fail to see how pagodas are related to this Button Gwinnett phenomenon.
Konajim quite accurately uses the 1995 proof panda as an example of a good investment to refute pagoda performance.
The 1995 Proof panda is the Button Gwinnett of panda dates (irrespective of variety)
Pagodas are a sub-set of the entire modern Chinese coin market. They have a low relative mintage but are no means the lowest.
Button Gwinnett matters to a sub-set of specialty Declaration of Independance signature collectors the way a 1995 proof panda matters to a huge sect of panda collectors. As such, I don't see how a pagoda is a "Button Gwinnett" coin the way say, a 1995 proof panda is.
At best pagodas are the Robert Livingston's of Modern Chinese coins...

http://www.ushistory.org/declaration/related/livingston_r.htm

The Button Gwinnett Effect is when rarity translates directly into popularity, and thus into price. Rarity is a spectrum, and the BGE affects all coins in the rarity spectrum, regardless of whether they are the rarest or not.

All that is required is for the unpopular Button Gwinnett coin is for it to be part of a popular set. Think of it like the shy kid somehow becoming popular because of one of his siblings is popular. We have some idea of what the rarity is for the pagodas, so the only open question is what popular set the pagoda is connected to. Place your bets, gentlemen!

Here are a few possible sets I have conjured up for myself:

1. All things ancient (historical figures, bronze age, dinosaurs, etc).
2. The pagodas will become a popular set by themselves.
3. Pagodas in general (pandas, pagodas, culturals).
4. China scenery (great wall, pagodas, etc)
5. Early Golden Age modern Chinese coins.
6. Golden Age modern Chinese coins.
7. Modern Chinese coins.

I'm sure there are others we can come up with. As for myself, I really like them just as they are in their own set. All the rest will be a bonus.

Offline exchange

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1178
  • Karma: 20
Re: 1984 Pagoda's
« Reply #33 on: February 18, 2012, 09:31:02 PM »

All that is required is for the unpopular Button Gwinnett coin is for it to be part of a popular set. Think of it like the shy kid somehow becoming popular because of one of his siblings is popular. We have some idea of what the rarity is for the pagodas, so the only open question is what popular set the pagoda is connected to. Place your bets, gentlemen!

Here are a few possible sets I have conjured up for myself:

1. All things ancient (historical figures, bronze age, dinosaurs, etc).
2. The pagodas will become a popular set by themselves.
3. Pagodas in general (pandas, pagodas, culturals).
4. China scenery (great wall, pagodas, etc)
5. Early Golden Age modern Chinese coins.
6. Golden Age modern Chinese coins.
7. Modern Chinese coins.

I never really cared for the Pagodas, I guess if it costed me spot, I would of taken a crack at a set.

In reference to Badon's comments regarding what popular set the pagodas would be connected to, I personally think this set would very well compliment something like an antique Chinese Pagoda painting painted by a Chinese painter (perhaps Xu Beihong which I talked about a few times in the past, and he's got his own coins). How nice would it be to have a beautiful Chinese painting of a Pagoda and displayed underneath are the four medals.
How about an antique Pagoda bronze sculpture hand crafted by a Master Chinese sculpture. I am sure the medal set would compliment very well with the sculpture.

Many people who buy a collectable of a particular field don't necessary collect that exact same field. Many times you need to jump from one field to another to get a perfect match for that same topic.

exchange



Offline SANDAC

  • Supporter
  • Global Moderator
  • Trade Count: (+8)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2244
  • Karma: 118
Re: 1984 Pagoda's
« Reply #34 on: February 18, 2012, 09:38:42 PM »
I place my bet on 2.  Pagoda is popular all by itself.

I am scanning in old 35mm films and slides with a newly purchased Plustek 7600i (yes, a stupid name, but I highly recommend the scanner), I am now onto my 1982 China trip.  I forgot just how many pagodas I've visited and even more pagoda in the pictures that I didn't go see.  The Chinese landscape is absolutely full of pagodas and they are real living buildings that tourists can go visit and have lunch.  They are enthusiasts of pagoda just like there are enthusiasts of old churchs and castles.  It is a cultural thing that outsiders may not appreciate.

Offline pandamonium

  • Supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2029
  • Karma: 26
Re: 1984 Pagoda's
« Reply #35 on: February 19, 2012, 09:49:24 AM »
As a new collector, what do I know?  Willing to learn.  I throw my hat into the pagoda ring from what I read.  The Chinese coins that were expensive last year have come down to Earth.  They should take off again in price and some have.  Those former spendy coins should go up first and maybe highest.  I call this the "beachball underwater effect".  As prices or beach ball went down there are powerful forces to pop it back up.  We are on our way back up and hopefully, gaining speed.  I am fortunate to have participated in a few markets.  The forces that tug and pull on the money ball (wealth) is always interesting.  This Chinese coin market is new, has passionate participants, huge potential for price increase or decrease (Iran war), different factors come into play such as sector rotation, lots to learn, and a truly fascinating, evolving, worldwide market.  Every day has something new to learn or debate.  :)  ..........

Offline Panda Halves

  • Supporter
  • Global Moderator
  • Trade Count: (+9)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1271
  • Karma: 45
Re: 1984 Pagoda's
« Reply #36 on: February 19, 2012, 10:07:09 AM »
Pagodamonium!
Okay so pandamonium's "BUE" effect Beachball Underwater Effect makes more sense in this case than a Button Gwinnett Effect.
I can see Declaration collectors frustrated because they just need the one signature of someone obscure to complete a set but I don't see this with pagodas.
I don't see a large group of Chinese coin collectors who are only missing the pagodas to complete their collections. (and will pay almost any price to obtain them)
Don't get me wrong, as pagodas with low mintage i do believe they have fantastic investment potential.
For Chinese pagoda coin collectors this will certainly always be a must have series.
For analogies, I simply like the Beachball Underwater Effect better with respect to these.

Offline bonke

  • Trade Count: (+2)
  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 418
  • Karma: 28
Re: 1984 Pagoda's
« Reply #37 on: February 19, 2012, 12:34:26 PM »
As a collector, I enjoy the designs on the Pagoda medals.  One day, hopefully in the near future, I will visit the actual pagodas which are shown on the medals.  Until then, I can look at the designs and search the web for more information about each pagoda.

It would be interesting to know the actual number of Pagoda medals owned by forum members.  Also, it would be interesting to know if these forum member/owners are REALLY investors or collectors.  As I read the comments, I get the impression that most of the comments are from investors who are worried whether they have made the correct choices for their investments.  Otherwise, price would not be such an issue.  As time passes, price will take care of itself.  If China continues to prosper and if the people continue to share in the wealth, the demand for all Chinese coins and medals will grow, and the price will follow this demand.  Collectors, as well as investors, will be able to take advantage of this increase in demand and price.

Spend less time placing a value on what you have and more time enjoying it.

Mark Bonke

Offline badon

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4487
  • Karma: -81
Re: 1984 Pagoda's
« Reply #38 on: February 19, 2012, 02:32:56 PM »
Pagodamonium!
Okay so pandamonium's "BUE" effect Beachball Underwater Effect makes more sense in this case than a Button Gwinnett Effect.
I can see Declaration collectors frustrated because they just need the one signature of someone obscure to complete a set but I don't see this with pagodas.
I don't see a large group of Chinese coin collectors who are only missing the pagodas to complete their collections. (and will pay almost any price to obtain them)

This makes perfect sense, especially if we were talking about the American coin market, where there are perhaps only 1 million coin collectors, and maybe only 50,000 "serious" collectors. China is a different thing altogether. The odds of there being more Chinese collectors of pagodas than coins available is very high.

Still, I think I'm going to have to agree that the Beachball Underwater Effect (BUE) is probably more dominant for pagodas than the Button Gwinnett Effect BGE), right now. The BGE is a mature market effect, while the BUE is an immature market effect. After the BUE has had its time, then the BGE will get its chance to shine. So, for right now, BUE is probably the reigning force on the prices of the pagoda sets.

Underbidder

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: 1984 Pagoda's
« Reply #39 on: May 05, 2012, 04:22:17 PM »
A different thread than Peter's so I trust its allowable by the mod for me to comment.

Luck posts here as a forum member.  He might be a source of valuable information about the Goldfish and thus Pagoda medals, plated or not.


        "   Why don't we just ask Luckmoneyro at LUCKPAWNSHOP if he can have his peeps
find us some plated Pagodas to sell us, along with his plated goldfish?

           Maybe he knows the secret !  

           Ya think his mint made medals are legit?"

            http://www.ebay.com/itm/1984-China-of-goldfish-Copper-plating-silver-china-coin-/221007770043?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item337516f1bb

          "No, they are all fake. The mint did not produce those coins, they are not responsible for the packaging either. That seller is well-known for dealing           exclusively in fakes. I have never seen him sell a genuine coin."

I'm not very versed, but at first glance this item offered by Luck appears legit... Too much going on in the way of COA and box to be faked IMHO:
If he sells legit mint made items I wonder what he might tell us about what else he knows about Goldfish and Pagodas?
 ( if we ask nicely?)

http://china-mint.info/forum/index.php?topic=5054.msg28761#msg28761