2008 royal arms or 1988 £1

[scott]

firstly, which would you have, i have got this from the royal mint site

mintage

1988 --- 7,118,825

2008 --- 3,910,000 (Royal Arms)

so the 2008 has half the mintage of the 1988 (well more) yet i havn't seen a 1988 in a few years, i'm hording these based on those figures (strangly enough i have 4 of them and only have 2 of the other type...)

so would keeping these £1's be more desirable in the future then the 88's as people do not know about the rarity yet? or will it be that 1988's will always be more desirable

[1949threepence]

Oddly enough I got a 1988 in my change the other day. Usually get one every few months or so. Always liked the one off design.

Hadn't realised the 2008 mintage was so low. I've actually had a few of these over the last few months.

[mint_mark]

Oddly enough I got a 1988 in my change the other day. Usually get one every few months or so. Always liked the one off design.

Hadn't realised the 2008 mintage was so low. I've actually had a few of these over the last few months.

Has anyone seen a 2008 britannia 50p in change? The mintage is even lower on the RM site.

[scott]

havn't seen many 2008's recently, never seen the brittania 50p though i'm too busy going for that 20p, even though it seems everywhere is running out of 20ps....

[The Dark Numismatist]

Oddly enough I got a 1988 in my change the other day. Usually get one every few months or so. Always liked the one off design.

Hadn't realised the 2008 mintage was so low. I've actually had a few of these over the last few months.

I've always liked this one-off 1988 reverse too and have always put them aside, and never knowingly spent one. I managed to amass quite a number in their early years and have a small bag of really bright ones, but of course over the years the ones in circulation have become really quite worn, but I still keep them to one side! About a month ago I picked one up in my change and was very surprised to find it was counterfeit. It is undetectable as a fake at a glance, and it even stands closer scrutiny. The legend around the edge is correct, but in the smaller typeface introduced in 1989 (although that legend (DECUS ET TUTAMEN) did not actually appear in that type style until 1991).

[1949threepence]

Oddly enough I got a 1988 in my change the other day. Usually get one every few months or so. Always liked the one off design.

Hadn't realised the 2008 mintage was so low. I've actually had a few of these over the last few months.

I've always liked this one-off 1988 reverse too and have always put them aside, and never knowingly spent one. I managed to amass quite a number in their early years and have a small bag of really bright ones, but of course over the years the ones in circulation have become really quite worn, but I still keep them to one side! About a month ago I picked one up in my change and was very surprised to find it was counterfeit. It is undetectable as a fake at a glance, and it even stands closer scrutiny. The legend around the edge is correct, but in the smaller typeface introduced in 1989 (although that legend (DECUS ET TUTAMEN) did not actually appear in that type style until 1991).

I wish I'd saved a few early ones. Nearly all those 1980's and 1990's pound coins are very well worn now. Indeed, on some of the 1985 ones, the date is almost rubbed away completely.

[scott]

there is something about 1985 coins.. the legend seems slightly smaller.

i would love one of those 1988 £1's in shiny..

my best find was a 1983 £1 with lustre (not full bright more like a brightness) but that was a few years ago now

been luckier on other fronts.

both types of 1992 20p (those are the hardest date to get either way lol)

and a dot to dot 10p 1992 lol

[Peckris]

firstly, which would you have, i have got this from the royal mint site

mintage

1988 --- 7,118,825

2008 --- 3,910,000 (Royal Arms)

so the 2008 has half the mintage of the 1988 (well more) yet i havn't seen a 1988 in a few years, i'm hording these based on those figures (strangly enough i have 4 of them and only have 2 of the other type...)

so would keeping these £1's be more desirable in the future then the 88's as people do not know about the rarity yet? or will it be that 1988's will always be more desirable

My own 5 cents' worth is this : hoarding coins (especially moderns) based on mintage figures is not recommended. There are so many examples where this has proved futile...

1965S shillings

1981 10 pence

1970 50 pence

1985 50 pence

1978 proof sets

1979 proof sets

1984 1/2 pence

virtually any 'sets only' item (with the exception of 1970 and 1972)

and those are just the obvious examples

Apart from the 1970 50p, every item I've listed is rarer than both the items you mention, yet I cannot dispose of my stock of them unless I price WAY under book price. Bear in mind that coins acquire value based not only on 'rarity' (and nearly 4 million can not be considered in any way rare) but also on popularity and availability. The market for modern (decimal era) coins is separate from the pre-decimal one, and the proof of this is in the vast quantity of commemorative issues. These sell well and provide a good income for the Royal Mint. But if you examine the 'secondary market' (where these commemoratives are sold on), you see a very different story - the market is glutted with proof sets and £5 coins in folders, even piedforts (which are genuinely scarce if you look only at mintage figures). Dealers will pay very little for them as they can only sell them on if they price cheap.

You're making the same mistake as I made when I was just a collector : you're looking at RELATIVE rarity. You're thinking that if a coin's mintage is only 1/10 of a typical year, then "it must be worth more". But if that figure is still in the millions, then it really isn't rare, and there will always be many more coins than collectors. The bottom line is supply and demand.

If you want to speculate, and you can afford to, by all means put aside a stock of the coins you mention - you at least have one advantage in that the face value will never drop below £1. But don't put off that pension plan, because those £1 coins aren't it!

[scott]

i'm basing it more on future value rather then current, most people spend these so they won't check for rarity and as a result probably not, but in the future...

[Peckris]

i'm basing it more on future value rather then current, most people spend these so they won't check for rarity and as a result probably not, but in the future...

You could be proved right - in the long term.

As a study it would be interesting to compare the 2008 £1 and the 1965S shilling (mintage 2,000,000+).

1965S shilling : current value £1, current availability - plentiful, future prospects - not good as so many BU were put aside in the coin collecting fever of the late 60s

2008 £1 : current availability - plentiful, future prospects uncertain - not many people will bother to collect the circulation issue BUT don't forget there will be commemorative versions and proofs in RM folders which will probably satisfy demand for years to come.

One further warning - an interim mintage figure for 1976 50 pences was issued in 1978 which showed a mintage of well under 1,000,000. Many people started to collect them. Final mintage figure? 43,000,000! Bear in mind that your 2008 figure MAY not be final.

But good luck with it, anyway.

[£400 for a Penny ?]

That's a part of numismatics that fascinates me. 1988 is a low mintage, attractive, distinctive unique design. So we all hoard it and in 100 years time, because we have looked after them, people say "oh not another one of THOSE"

Meanwhile a 1983 in BU probably is as rare as rocking horse poo.

Pennies are my thing, and it seems to me that it is rather harder to find a 1915 or 1916 in the best condition, yet the mintage figures either side are 1913:65m, 1914:50m, 1915:47m: 1916:86m, 1917:107m, 1918: 87m inc H.

I don't know if anyone else has found the same to be true ? But for me the interesting thing is that I reckon all the people who would have hoarded '15 and '16's were busy on the battlefields of France, or times were too tough to put a penny aside, so nearly 100 years later, they are rarer than their mintage figures suggest they should be. And that is before one considers subsequent reclamation and meltdown.

With the £1 it's harder, increasingly sophisticated fakes, re-strikes, copies, silver proofs, piedforts....

I don't know of course, and never will, but I'm willing to bet that the rarest £1 from circulation in 100 years time isn't the one with the lowest mintage ?

The 1988 is the best though, comfortably.

[Peckris]

Pennies are my thing, and it seems to me that it is rather harder to find a 1915 or 1916 in the best condition, yet the mintage figures either side are 1913:65m, 1914:50m, 1915:47m: 1916:86m, 1917:107m, 1918: 87m inc H.

I don't know if anyone else has found the same to be true ? But for me the interesting thing is that I reckon all the people who would have hoarded '15 and '16's were busy on the battlefields of France, or times were too tough to put a penny aside, so nearly 100 years later, they are rarer than their mintage figures suggest they should be. And that is before one considers subsequent reclamation and meltdown.

Those are an interesting two years for pennies. It's no coincidence that you often find the 'recessed ear' variety for 1915 and 1916 which MAY (or may not lol) have been an early attempt to do something about ghosting on reverses. Either way, this variation might well explain why they are harder to find in BU. In fact, I'm not sure I've ever seen one? Yet I've seen every other date BU (not counting H and KN) - even 1913.