When this article was originally published, Atlanta Gold & Coin regularly met people making a first silver-coin purchase. Many raised the same questions: they were considering their first investment and also wanted to understand whether they could sell or trade the coins later, if the need arose. New buyers often leaned first toward one-ounce silver coins or bullion, while 90% silver coins, commonly called junk silver, did not always come immediately to mind as an investment choice. The term “junk” understandably carried an unfavorable impression, and some people were also concerned because these coins were not pure silver. The original article said Atlanta Gold & Coin’s role included explaining the silver-investment options then available and discussing the advantages and disadvantages of each. Although the coins’ 90% silver content could seem like a disadvantage, the article identified several favorable features worth considering. It set out to describe the positive investment characteristics of 90% silver coins and explain why previously circulated pieces were far from “junk.”
Recognizable
A major appeal of 90% silver coins is their familiar appearance. The article explained that 90% silver dimes, quarters, and half dollars minted in 1964 & earlier looked just like the coinage used at the time of publication. Their difference was slightly greater weight, because silver rather than nickel-copper made up most of the coin, along with solid silver edges rather than the edges on post 1964 coins. Familiar objects tend to make people more comfortable, and the article said that pattern also applied to coins and numismatics. Some customers at publication worried that 1964 Roosevelt dimes, Washington quarters, and Kennedy half dollars might be identifiable as silver only to collectors. For readers with that concern, the article suggested coin types made earlier, including Mercury dimes, Standing Liberty quarters, Franklin half dollars, and Walking Liberty half dollars.
Liquidity
First-time silver-coin purchasers are often especially interested in liquidity. Even when buying for the long term, they want to know whether a broad, active market may exist should they later decide to sell their coins. As noted earlier in the original article, 90% silver coins were recognizable, a characteristic presented as increasing the pool of possible future buyers. Another benefit identified was that 90% silver coins were issued by a government. The article said many silver-coin investors felt a little more comfortable buying government-issued pieces than privately made silver rounds or bars. That observation was not intended to deny a strong market for privately produced bullion; rather, it described a modest preference for government coinage. One more quality making 90% silver coins appealing, the article continued, was their smaller size, addressed in the following section.
Size
Most silver-coin and bullion choices begin at one ounce and increase from there. At the time this article was written, silver was about $16 per ounce, which the article described as affordable for many people. It also noted that silver had been much more expensive in the past, reaching $50 per ounce in 1980 and $49 per ounce in April 2011. At publication, some industry observers expected silver to revisit its former high relatively soon, while others thought it might reach $100 or more within several years. At $100 an ounce, the article reasoned, many people then buying silver might no longer afford larger units or would need to reduce later purchases substantially. A useful feature of 90% silver coins was their fractional denomination. Approximately 14 dimes, 5.6 quarters, or 2.8 half dollars equal one troy ounce of silver. Even at $100 per ounce, the article estimated a silver dime at about $7 each, remaining within reach for many investors.
Barter
The smaller size of 90% silver coins was presented as making them affordable to more people and potentially suitable for bartering. When the article was originally published, some customers bought silver coins expecting that they might someday use them in barter. Their concerns included rising national debt, substantial annual deficits, the present value of future unfunded liabilities (estimated to be over $200 trillion), and the Federal Reserve’s loose monetary policies. The article described their belief that these conditions would eventually cause the dollar to collapse and require silver coins for barter until another currency was established. As previously outlined, 90% silver coins were recognizable, liquid, government issued, and fractional—qualities the article considered useful for possible bartering.
Real Money
At the time of original publication, the article described the following: Finally, the original article characterized 90% silver coins as real money. Its point was that silver coins were not valuable simply because a government declared them money. Currency issued by the Treasury at publication was described as fiat currency: it was not backed by gold, silver, or another commodity, but depended instead on people’s faith in the issuing government. If people lost faith in the dollar, the article said, it could depreciate quickly. Silver, by contrast, had served as money for thousands of years and was regarded as valuable around the world. In an earlier Atlanta Gold & Coin article, Coin Week, Atlanta Gold & Coin had discussed four qualities of real money: durability, portability, divisibility, and intrinsic value. The article concluded that silver, like gold, met those four qualities and was also a suitable candidate for the other reasons described above.
Conclusion
At the time of original publication, the article described the following: In summary, the original article gave five reasons it regarded 90% silver coins as worthwhile investment options. First, they were recognizable because they looked like coinage used at publication. Second, that recognition was said to support liquidity, since people are generally more comfortable buying familiar items. Third, their size was attractive because the coins were fractional and, the article suggested, could remain affordable even if silver rose considerably from the prices then current. Fourth, their size was presented as helpful for bartering. Finally, 90% silver coins were described as having intrinsic value and qualifying as real money. Silver had been viewed as money for thousands of years and, the article predicted, would probably continue to be seen that way. The article concluded that 90% silver coins were far from “junk.” At publication, readers were invited to consider investing in these appealing coins.
