Would love to see the number of people that have a certain coin by type or by year when you click on the coins page. It would add some context to the rarity rating, which while being mildly useful, isn't as effective as it could be.
Yes, we see that. We can also see which members have the concerned year line.
Which is something I believe should not be open to public, as scammer would certanly use such feature to bombard people with gold/rare coins wtih messages etc... which in turn would make people wary of even entering the coin into their collection.
Quote: "Jarcek"Yes, we see that. We can also see which members have the concerned year line.
Which is something I believe should not be open to public, as scammer would certanly use such feature to bombard people with gold/rare coins wtih messages etc... which in turn would make people wary of even entering the coin into their collection.
Let me be clear - I don't think we should be able to see WHICH Numista users have the coins. Just the number.
Rarity 97 = 1 user
Rarity 50 = 100 users
Rarity 1 = 5.000 users
Would help.
I always check the rarity when adding coins to collection, I have numbers like NRI 7 "ok this coin is super cheap everyone have", NRI 12 "this coin is somewhat little special, maybe...", NRI 20 "omg this is almost rare!", NRI 38 "Yeah! This is awesome!".
I have only cheap coins I guess.
Am I the only one?
It would be useful to know how many users (a number, not who!) have listed in their collection that specificic line.
Mainly in coins with different years lines or proofs lines, that would be also useful - when in doubt which line would you fill - while you add it to your collection.
Also, for those who collect by year, it would be interesting to know in most issues if you are likely to get that coin or not - as most of times it cames without mintage figures (!!!!).
The Numista Rarity Index is by entry and not by line.
An example:
Coin A:
1977 X (210 users own)
1978 X (199 users own)
1979 - (85 users own)
For coin A, I would be looking for this missing year, so I have a gap that I might fill.
For coin B, I assume that most likely is a rare coin for everyone and even if I see it in a swap list, it might be a mistake. In my collection, I would leave it as it is, no gap needed. Well, of course this is my personal point of view, others might get actively searching for the missing coin B...
Here I think it's better to do more what Colnect are doing, than using a weird system no one knows how to read. Instead of using the NR (Numista rarity) there should simply say "members who owns this coin: 562", for example. There's no need to list all the members who has it, like Colnect do, but this way you'll get an idea how common the specific coin is - among the Numista members.
Hi, just a question, when you say rarity, do you mean world wide or on this site? I thought the rarity of a coin is world wide. Thanks. Learning something new every day. Helps me keep up my collection. (Just a beginner.)
I think it is impossible to determine a global rarity of a coin, this site is the closest we can get, since I guess is the larger in users cataloguing coins, there are several voices against the Numista Rarity, but I see no better way to approach the matter. For example, of course we would get (for same value) a coin Rarity 70 instead of a coin rarity 12, even knowing most of the users are french and the coin can be from whatever country, at least we have a better idea of the scarcity of a coin, better a bit of information than no information of all.
Also I do not see why the secrecy in the Numista rarity calculation, of course the user names should be anomymous, but what is the bad thing about knowing "only 10 users have this coin"?
An open number will help when the value of coins will be introduced, since we could have a more realistic value when knowing how many users entered the value in the coin.
The Numista rarity index is only for the coin type population of this site. It is irrelevant if you have a coin 255 times if you are the only one owning them the rarity will be 97. If we get the project with the values running we will at least have an indicator for the scarcity of a coin preferably year/subtype of a coin.
I think it's a brilliant idea. To be clear, to show the number of users who own a coin by year, not which user.
At the moment the rarity index is not even indicative. For example one of my coins has a rarity index of 41, and I doubt 27,500 numista users have a coin which had a mintage of 100k 120 years ago.
The other thing I'd like to see is a 'rarity by grade' - A great example of this is older pennies. They are common as coal in lower grades, but in excellent grades are extremely rare.
I think both of those items would be more useful than the valuations, which couldn't really be implemented efficiently for many coins anyway.
Quote: "oggy"At the moment the rarity index is not even indicative. For example one of my coins has a rarity index of 41, and I doubt 27,500 numista users have a coin which had a mintage of 100k 120 years ago.
I disagree, we do not know what the rarity index 41 means in terms of user numbers, we do not know how many users have that coin, we only know it is not a common coin, for sure it is more difficult to have than a rarity 1-20 coin, it is indicative that few users have.
I guess after cataloguing lots of coins, we can see a pattern of rarity, I am sure no one knows a coin of rarity 70 that have more than 2 users willing to swap, but any coin rarity 8 will have tons of users throwing away.
So IT IS indicative of something.
Would you swap your coin rarity 70 for one of mines rarity 11?
Quote: "oggy"At the moment the rarity index is not even indicative. For example one of my coins has a rarity index of 41, and I doubt 27,500 numista users have a coin which had a mintage of 100k 120 years ago.
I disagree, we do not know what the rarity index 41 means in terms of user numbers, we do not know how many users have that coin, we only know it is not a common coin, for sure it is more difficult to have than a rarity 1-20 coin, it is indicative that few users have.
I guess after cataloguing lots of coins, we can see a pattern of rarity, I am sure no one knows a coin of rarity 70 that have more than 2 users willing to swap, but any coin rarity 8 will have tons of users throwing away.
So IT IS indicative of something.
Would you swap your coin rarity 70 for one of mines rarity 11?
Sometimes, yes absolutely. Rarity index is not indicative of either value or rarity of the actual coin.
Quote: "oggy"At the moment the rarity index is not even indicative. For example one of my coins has a rarity index of 41, and I doubt 27,500 numista users have a coin which had a mintage of 100k 120 years ago.
I disagree, we do not know what the rarity index 41 means in terms of user numbers, we do not know how many users have that coin, we only know it is not a common coin, for sure it is more difficult to have than a rarity 1-20 coin, it is indicative that few users have.
I guess after cataloguing lots of coins, we can see a pattern of rarity, I am sure no one knows a coin of rarity 70 that have more than 2 users willing to swap, but any coin rarity 8 will have tons of users throwing away.
So IT IS indicative of something.
Would you swap your coin rarity 70 for one of mines rarity 11?
Sometimes, yes absolutely. Rarity index is not indicative of either value or rarity of the actual coin.
An example is this coin. https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces578.html
It has a rarity of 5, but the 1919KN version is worth several thousands in highish grades, as it's a very rare coin.
Would you swap an uncirculated 1919KN penny (rarity 5) for one of my coins with a rarity of 90+?
In your example you are absolutely right. It works for date collectors better than type collectors.
And examples can be find with low rarity index coins that have scarce dates, but when searching high rarity numbers that are common coins, the things get more complicated.
What I want to say is, people get excited when owning a rarity 90 coin, and they deserve some excitment.
Quote: "oggy"At the moment the rarity index is not even indicative. For example one of my coins has a rarity index of 41, and I doubt 27,500 numista users have a coin which had a mintage of 100k 120 years ago.
I disagree, we do not know what the rarity index 41 means in terms of user numbers, we do not know how many users have that coin, we only know it is not a common coin, for sure it is more difficult to have than a rarity 1-20 coin, it is indicative that few users have.
I guess after cataloguing lots of coins, we can see a pattern of rarity, I am sure no one knows a coin of rarity 70 that have more than 2 users willing to swap, but any coin rarity 8 will have tons of users throwing away.
So IT IS indicative of something.
Would you swap your coin rarity 70 for one of mines rarity 11?
Sometimes, yes absolutely. Rarity index is not indicative of either value or rarity of the actual coin.
An example is this coin. https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces578.html
It has a rarity of 5, but the 1919KN version is worth several thousands in highish grades, as it's a very rare coin.
Would you swap an uncirculated 1919KN penny (rarity 5) for one of my coins with a rarity of 90+?
In your example you are absolutely right. It works for date collectors better than type collectors.
And examples can be find with low rarity index coins that have scarce dates, but when searching high rarity numbers that are common coins, the things get more complicated.
What I want to say is, people get excited when owning a rarity 90 coin, and they deserve some excitment.
Haha, most of my high rarity coins are that way because nobody else is silly enough to collect them as they have little to no numismatic value.
Quote: "oggy"At the moment the rarity index is not even indicative. For example one of my coins has a rarity index of 41, and I doubt 27,500 numista users have a coin which had a mintage of 100k 120 years ago.
I disagree, we do not know what the rarity index 41 means in terms of user numbers, we do not know how many users have that coin, we only know it is not a common coin, for sure it is more difficult to have than a rarity 1-20 coin, it is indicative that few users have.
I guess after cataloguing lots of coins, we can see a pattern of rarity, I am sure no one knows a coin of rarity 70 that have more than 2 users willing to swap, but any coin rarity 8 will have tons of users throwing away.
So IT IS indicative of something.
Would you swap your coin rarity 70 for one of mines rarity 11?
Sometimes, yes absolutely. Rarity index is not indicative of either value or rarity of the actual coin.
An example is this coin. https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces578.html
It has a rarity of 5, but the 1919KN version is worth several thousands in highish grades, as it's a very rare coin.
Would you swap an uncirculated 1919KN penny (rarity 5) for one of my coins with a rarity of 90+?
In your example you are absolutely right. It works for date collectors better than type collectors.
And examples can be find with low rarity index coins that have scarce dates, but when searching high rarity numbers that are common coins, the things get more complicated.
What I want to say is, people get excited when owning a rarity 90 coin, and they deserve some excitment.
Haha, most of my high rarity coins are that way because nobody else is silly enough to collect them as they have little to no numismatic value.
The very simple solution is to keep the rarity index (as it is quite fun) and to implement the user count too!
If we have both of these things we have a huge amount of information available to us. Plus, if possible, we can have more accurate rankings for rarity based on number of users, as 1-100 is not a fine enough scale to accurately see how rare a coin is at the lower levels. 1-1000 might work better.
Quote: "AngHol"The very simple solution is to keep the rarity index (as it is quite fun) and to implement the user count too!
If we have both of these things we have a huge amount of information available to us. Plus, if possible, we can have more accurate rankings for rarity based on number of users, as 1-100 is not a fine enough scale to accurately see how rare a coin is at the lower levels. 1-1000 might work better.
It's actually 1-97 lol. 100 means 0 users have it, and 97 means only you have it!
Quote: "AngHol"The very simple solution is to keep the rarity index (as it is quite fun) and to implement the user count too!
If we have both of these things we have a huge amount of information available to us. Plus, if possible, we can have more accurate rankings for rarity based on number of users, as 1-100 is not a fine enough scale to accurately see how rare a coin is at the lower levels. 1-1000 might work better.
It's actually 1-97 lol. 100 means 0 users have it, and 97 means only you have it!
Quote: "AngHol"The very simple solution is to keep the rarity index (as it is quite fun) and to implement the user count too!
If we have both of these things we have a huge amount of information available to us. Plus, if possible, we can have more accurate rankings for rarity based on number of users, as 1-100 is not a fine enough scale to accurately see how rare a coin is at the lower levels. 1-1000 might work better.
It's actually 1-97 lol. 100 means 0 users have it, and 97 means only you have it!
oh how interesting!
Is some sort of log scale in use?
Not 100% sure, but it would be fairly easy to work out.
Quote: "AngHol"Would love to see the number of people that have a certain coin by type or by year when you click on the coins page. It would add some context to the rarity rating, which while being mildly useful, isn't as effective as it could be.
