| Author |
Topic  |
|
|
realpenny
New Member
 22 Posts |
Posted - 05/16/2010 : 15:16:25
|
|
I can get pre 1968 Proof like sets under spot but silver Maples are a lot more than spot. My understanding is a Proof like set is 1.1oz silver in total and a silver Maple is 1oz. So what would be the better deal? Are the silver Maples easier to move or is it because they are pure that they are worth more? I guess I'm confused about which is the better deal - any insights are most welcome.
|
|
|
Wanderer
New Member

Canada
16 Posts |
Posted - 05/16/2010 : 20:42:50
|
I hope you mean 1961-1967 Proof-Like Sets... Canada did issue some 50% silver dimes and quarters in 1968, but not in the Proof-Like Sets - they're all nickel.
Another thing to remember is the 1.1 oz Proof-Like sets are 80% pure whereas the Maples are 99.99%. |
 |
|
|
Bluegill
1000+ Penny Miser Member
    

USA
1964 Posts |
Posted - 05/16/2010 : 21:43:54
|
In '67 the dimes and quarters were either 80% or 50%, with no practical way of telling them apart. I always assume these two coins for '67 are 50%.
The PL sets for '67 could be either 1.03 or 1.11 T. Oz.
Ask yourself this, would you rather get 1.11 Oz. for under spot? Or 1 Oz. for over spot? Plus you get a Ni nickel and a Cu penny in the deal. Admittedly, not much, but they add up when you can get these sets cheap from myopic, xenophobic Americans.
I have collected 28 of them so far and I have yet to reach the $17.00 number for a set. Who is gonna be sittin' pretty when the price of Ag eventually fulfills it's destiny and goes through the roof. When all physical Ag is getting the same price (and premiums go out the window) when supply is exceeded exponentially by demand. 
Just my 2 Canadian Cu cents. 
|
 |
|
|
Nickelmeister
Penny Hoarding Member
   

Canada
588 Posts |
Posted - 05/16/2010 : 22:21:26
|
| It is my understanding that all 1967 PL sets cointain exclusively 80% coins (quarter and dime). |
www.WinnipegGoldBuyer.com
Standing offer for sale of quality, second-hand solid gold jewellery:
<$100 USD worth - spot +25%, plus actual shipping $101-500 worth - spot +20%, plus actual shipping $501-1,000 worth - spot +15%, plus actual shipping $1,001+ worth - spot +10%, plus actual shipping |
 |
|
|
realpenny
New Member

22 Posts |
Posted - 05/17/2010 : 00:12:56
|
Wanderer: Yes, 1961-1967 Proof-Like Sets in the pliofilm. Though the 1954-1960 are included but they seem to carry a big collector premium.
Bluegill: I was under the impression what Nickelmeister said is right, though I don't know a source to prove it. Does anyone know a reference if all dime and quarters in a PL Sets are 80% or that it might be a mix? (It may be a mute point as 1.03 oz > 1.00 oz anyways, plus I like looking at six coins than the one Silver Maple).
I would prefer to get 1.11 oz of silver as is silver to me. Don't think the PL Sets or Silver Maples would be really melted anyways. Hey, free nickel and copper to boot!
Are you saying you buy them for under $17.00 a set?
I was thinking of getting some Silver Maples for the wife, but I think she likes the PL Sets better. The PL Sets seem to be the better price, plus there might be a higher collectable value one day (uninformed guess). On the downside I guess Silver Maples are purer and have a higher face value. Does that about sound right?
Cheers |
 |
|
|
Bluegill
1000+ Penny Miser Member
    

USA
1964 Posts |
Posted - 05/17/2010 : 13:27:32
|
I honestly don't know if the '67 PL sets got the 80% exclusively or not. So far, I haven't seen anything that says one way or another.
Yes, I get these PL sets for under $17. I picked up a '67 for $14 a few weeks ago at a local coin show. I picked up a pair of '65's about a month ago for $32. Picked up another '65 for $16.50 at the Michigan National Numismatic Society spring meet a few weeks ago.
The common denominator was that the dealers didn't want to be bothered with anything that wasn't U.S. in origin. Amazingly, the other patrons were walking right buy these deals, instead, buying ugly overpriced American junk.
I have picked up quite a few of them on ebay. Shipped to my door in the $15 to high $16 range. But, I think the smarter members of the public are catching on. It is getting harder and harder to get them on ebay at those prices anymore.
In my parts, you're paying $22 or better for a ML. That is .045 T. oz. per dollar. $4.4 for every $1 Face.
If you shop around you can get a PL set for $17 or less. That is .065 T. Oz. per dollar. $8.9 for every $1 face.
Like everything else in life, there are trade offs. If you think there is a real chance the price of Ag will go through the floor, and stay there, and you want to minimize your losses, the ML (premiums and all) is the better choice. You will at least still have a $5 coin, versus $1.91 with a PL set. Ag would have to drop to less that $5 a T. Oz. Personally, I don't see that ever happening.
If you believe in the long run Ag is only going up, then IMHO the PL sets are the better choice.
|
 |
|
|
CoastalEdge
New Member

USA
20 Posts |
Posted - 05/21/2010 : 07:34:10
|
Not that it means a whole lot, but here is something else to think about..........
The Maple Leaf has a monetized value of $5 CDN, whereas the P/L set has a face value of only $1.86 CDN. |
 |
|
|
1945V
Penny Pincher Member
 

Canada
153 Posts |
Posted - 05/21/2010 : 08:16:44
|
quote: Originally posted by Nickelmeister
It is my understanding that all 1967 PL sets cointain exclusively 80% coins (quarter and dime).
I would bet the quarters and dimes in the 1967 sets are 80% silver. The PL sets were produced early in the year to accommodate the influx of visitors to 1967 summer EXPO in Montreal and the celebration of Canada's 100th anniversary on July 1st, 1967.
The switch to 50% silver for dimes and quarters take place later on in the year. |
 |
|
|
realpenny
New Member

22 Posts |
Posted - 05/22/2010 : 18:15:13
|
Thanks again for more info Bluegill (take it the panfish - maybe not?).
CoastalEdge: Yes, lower face value and purity were the cons for PL sets that I could think of.
1945V: I haven't found a reliable source that states that. I and a few others seem to think that though. |
 |
|
| |
Topic  |
|