Collection Sharing: Malaysia Commemorative Coin, Kuala Lumpur City, 1972

Technical Information

Theme: Conferment of Kuala Lumpur as status of city
Mintage: 500 pcs
Material: Copper Nickel
Weight: 16.5 g
Diameter: 33.30 mm
Thickness: 2.55 mm

Background of Kuala Lumpur City

From a small town Kuala Lumpur has grown to become the nation’s Capital City and the biggest city in Malaysia. Kuala Lumpur City has become the centre for many socio-economic various activities including business, finance, administration, education, religion, culture and sports.

Since 1961, Kuala Lumpur has been governed by one single corporate entity that was then known as the office of the Federal Capital Commissioner. On the 1st February 1972, Kuala Lumpur was officially conferred the status of a city. With this, the Federal Capital Commissioner became the Mayor of KL. Tan Sri Dato’ Lokman Yusof the former Federal Capital Commissioner was elected as the first Mayor of Kuala Lumpur. When he passed away on 15.5.1972, he was succeeded by Tan Sri Yaakob Latiff who served for a period of 10 years. The third Mayor of KL was Tan Sri Dato’ Elyas Omar who took office on 1.2.1981.

The fourth Mayor was Dato’ Dr Mazlan Ahmad whose appointment was on 17.11.1992. Tan Sri Dato’ Kamarruzaman Shariff then took over as the fifth Mayor and served between 14.12.1995 and 13.12.2001. He was then replaced by Y Bhg Kol. Datuk Hj Mohmad Shaid b Mohd Taufek whose appointment was on 14.12.2001. Then from 14.12.2004 until 13.12.2006 the post of the seventh Mayor was held by Y Bhg Dato’ Hj Ruslin bin Hj Hasan. The office of the eight Mayor was held by Y Bhg Dato’ Ab Hakim bin Borhan. He was then replaced by Y Bhg Tan Sri Ahmad Fuad bin Ismail whose appointment was on 14.12.2008. The current and tenth Mayor of the city is Y Bhg Datuk Seri Hj. Ahmad Phesal bin Hj. Talib who has been in office since 18.7.2012.

Figure 1: Jalan H.S.Lee, Kuala Lumpur in 1960

Numismatic View

In general, I have faith in most of numismatic collectors do agree that this coin is really tough to hunt for especially those pieces which are still well preserved until nowadays. According to the unofficial information inherited from the senior collectors, most of the limited commemorative proof coins were not opened for public subscription in 1970s, they were always used to be a souvenir gift for the VIPs in that time such as Malaysia Parliament Proof Set 1967, Bank Negara Anniversary 1969 and Tunku Abdul Rahman 1971.

I started the treasure hunt for this coin since 2008 and used to hold several pieces on palm view before, the inferior conditions always made me disappointed until I managed to hunt a piece (as above) 3 years after in 2011. Most of them were exposed to serious tarnishing, hairlines or damages. As we all know the moist climate and low awareness about coin preservation are the main tricky issues in local numismatic landscapes especially the numismatic items issued in 1960s -1970s. They are unlikely the international coinages collection theme such as Straits, Malaya, Sarawak or British Borneo in which you may able to find a piece of good condition from foreign countries. This coin has experienced a long-term of undervaluation, it may also a reason why it was not well preserved and proper kept by the old collectors. 

The population report of established grading companies may provide us some guidance about rarity and high condition variance of this coin. 

Have a nice reading and start your treasure hunt if you keen with it!

Numis Galleries House

29 May 2015

Collection Sharing: Malaya 20 cents dated 1939

Technical information:

Mintage: 8,000,000

Weight: 5.43 g (0.1309 oz)

Diameter: 23.2mm

Edge: Milled

Do you know that the Malaya coinages dated in 1939-1941 are made by 75% of silver which was highest in silver content since Straits Settlements? According to the information from some senior collectors that it was a trend for people to collect the high silver content coins (due to the hiking in silver price) to hedge the inflation and economic uncertainty in that time because the melt value was used to higher than denomination value once upon a time. It caused the coinages were seriously insufficient and forced the Malaya government issued banknote in cents denomination.

The coin as above is one of best in NGC population registry (updated 28/05/2015), it illustrats a frosty and luster surface with minimal hairlines has been notified. Thanks to the high silver content makes it attractively in eye appeal.

Numis Galleries House
28 May 2015

Certificate still a big matter?

(Photo Credit to SL collector)

If you were Malaysia commemorative proof collector since 7-8 years ago, it may not strange to you that the commemorative proof coin collection principle was pertaining to the completeness for the whole set of coin (which includes the packaging box and certificate) over the condition of the coin itself. It is not surprising that you may find some person willing to fork up a premium price to grab a piece of certificate with "fancy number" such as 88,99 or last serial number.

An incidence that I still manage to dig out from my memory, in 2009, that was a piece of Thomas Cup Silver Coin 2000 (in fine condition) which with box but without cert was only asked about half of the market value in that time but it took about few months of time to let go after further price deduction compared to another same piece in complete set in the same time which are sold with 20% premium than the current market value. Since that time, that is a question mark unavoidably raised in my mind, is it certificate a big deal? 

I believe a number of people may have the same queries as me especially the arising of coin grading practice which gains the awareness of the collectors about the coin condition is ultimate measurement for a coin.  

It is nothing about true or wrong. For me, you must clear about your collection hypothesis such as:

Hypothesis A:  I am collecting commemorative proof set 

or

Hypothesis B:  I am collecting commemorative proof coin

or 

Hypothesis C: I want everything in perfect!

If you clear about collection hypothesis as above mentioned, such issue shall not be a controversial again. 

If you preferred Hypothesis A, it means you put the completeness of whole set as same in ranking. in other words, you may more concern about the presence of the all accessories rather than condition. If you are type Hypothesis B, it means you rank the coin condition higher than others, the presence of other accessories may not a big deal for you.

How about type Hypothesis C? If you willing pay everything for perfect, surely not a big deal.

However, if you were collector typed hypothesis A and C, some facts you may have to know:

1. BNM proof cert has no any security features, it is just a piece of common printing card and easily falsified by any intended party. The printing cost may even lower than your name card if bulk printing. 
2. The commemorative coin box can tailor-made by yourself. Unless those boxes which are fine artworks such as pewter or porcelain made which may worthy in collection. For example, Songket Set, Millenium Set or Thomas cup Set.

So, have you decided for your collection hypothesis? 

Numis Galleries House

28 May 2015

The following are some discussion among the collector in Malaysia Commemorative Proof Coin Medallion Token Pewter & Collectibles, Facebook at 26/11/2015.

Does the silver coin has any oxidation defects?

"Does the silver coin has any oxidation defects?" 

I believe this kind of question is quite common for us especially you are enthusiastically in commemorative coin collection which is always claimed as the new growing collection theme in our nation.

What is oxidation?  Oxidation is defined as the interaction between oxygen molecules and all the different substances they may contact, from metal to living tissue. Although, I can't deny the possibility of oxidation may happen on silver, but as we know that silver is actually a kind of noble metal. In other words, silver is less reactive with other elements in general and silver oxide is always appeared in grey. Thus, white stain defects on the surface of silver coin is likely not because of oxidation. 

Therefore, "oxidation" may not the right term that reflects the real ground. This kind of symptom is always known as "milk spot" in Numismatic Bibliography. 

Lets us have a read on how the industry players' comment regarding this issue:

• Milk spots are very common on silver coins and bars, it happens when condensation reaches the silver.  (Silver Gold Bull) 
• Milk spots are opaque, cloudy blemishes that can appear on silver coins after they have left the mint. Milk spots have been attributed to a range of potential causes. In our experience the exact reason is difficult to pinpoint, with recent analysis effectively ruling out crucible contamination and water quality issues. (The Perth Mint Australia)
• Planchet cleaning and preparation process may be the causes for milk spots on its coins. (Royal Canadian Mint)

In conclusion, there is no any solid evidence insofar which manage to describe the root cause of milk spot. Milk spot is not merely found on silver, it may also illustrated on gold and copper coins. In general, silver and copper are more frequent in facing in problem compared to gold coin.

How the "milk spots" affect the numismatic value? Professional Coin Guarantee Service, PCGS  has given us the best answer.

"Spots on gold coins, spots on copper coins, and "milk spots" on silver coins are not really part of eye appeal, but they are part of the grade and grade deductions are made similar to those made for marks or hairlines. In all three instances above we have minimum/maximum grade guidelines for spots. Note that in some instances, spots can appear subsequent to grading. In the case of copper coins, the spots would result in a grading deduction, and, since there are often environmental factors beyond our control, PCGS does not guarantee against downgrades for spotting on copper coins. For modern silver issues, spotting is a Mint acknowledged problem that is also beyond the control of PCGS. For modern silver coins, it is possible for two coins to have the same technical grade and one be spotted and one be spot-free. In these instances, the spotted coins will command a lesser price in the marketplace. "

How to define rarity?

How to define rarity? Rarity is always a crucial parameter which determines the value of a collection item. I do believe the "rare" terminology is not an unfamiliar word for us, you may always see or heard this term while someone would like to let go their collection item. However, do they tell the real story of "rare"? That is always a question mark for us.

According to my personal point of view, most of the Malaysian collectors may conceive a wrong perception about the rare definition. For coin or paper money collection, rarity should not be measured according to its mintage volume, although the mintage volume may proportionally related to its rarity but it is not absolutely correct. The right way to assess the rarity should base on the number of exists found in moment of decision making. In other words, the rarity prescription may subject to change if another number of new founds realised. Few years ago, such definition was always be claimed as academic views rather than practical reference due to the limited of information to assess its number of existence.

The whole numismatic market context was altered, after the awareness of grading coin/paper money was substantially increasing. The registry population reports gave us a reliable statistics on how to explore the volume of existence for difference varieties of numismatic items and the statistics are transparent to the collectors. However, the registry report also embeds some weaknesses in which it failed to capture the number of coins or paper money cross-over between the different grading companies. With the assumption made that the cross-overed volume is not significant in general, the statistics is still playing its role as a great reference to us.

Insofar, there are few parameter of measurements on how to define the rarity of a numismatic item. Although, there are seem differently with each other’s but they are holding the similar principle indeed on the philosophy of define the rarity.

Let looks at how Shelton defines rarity.

收藏财经（二）：行情低迷与收藏观是否有关联？

近来很多卖家及买家也许都有心中疑惑，为什么前两年节节上升的热捧藏品，竟然在近期里跌了几个价位，甚至跌破四五年前的水平。正所谓：外行人凑热闹，内行人看门道。有些东西说多了，会让很多人吃到辣椒。太详细的买卖交易或近来的网络拍卖效应，我就不说了。

本地钱币藏家很多都是看市场反应来选择藏品而不是以正规的收藏判断。市场反应未必是正确和长远的，那些人气逼天，可是摆在面前的存世量数据往往让你看不透或解释不来，都有可能性因为背后有人囤积期货，背后操市，散播流言，制造人气等等。谁管得了那么多？什么主题可以隔夜涨价，一年涨两三倍甚至以上，就会见到一窝蜂地追，要是拿到一个67，68分简直是光宗耀祖的，放出来人人喊：一级棒！问题是这是否真正地反应了现实吗？你要是见到任何东西或主题涨幅得太快，就需要更小心的判断。

另外一个现象，有些东西要是拿到64分或以下，这简直就是恶梦！很多人还自卑的把分数盖掉，或者只敢展示背面图。要是网友们看见只是64，63分，谁瞧你一眼？没人赏识代表着你手上的是劣货？关键是你把你的东西放在大部分的人不懂赏识的区域内，你能够要求些怎么样的回复？殊不知有些时候你手上的64分其实论存世量甚至比那些67，68分的近代热货来的更有收藏意义。你的自卑驱使你倒不如贱卖掉，换个67，68分的热货，突然掌声响起，暗爽数天。这就正正反映了为什么很多64分的好东西被人抛弃，论为低级货。内行人就会检这些宝，外行人就在一旁凑热闹。当然如果普通的不得了的东西，你还去追？跌下来，怪得了谁？还有一点，“通货”也应该有一个等级，你必须懂得判断什么东西其实是历史背景及极品相比较少的，可以把玩得 ; 什么东西其实是“嘴巴说少”而已，实际上是人人在卖，卖了几十年从不断货。

行情低迷的时候，正是给大家一个检讨的空间，多看藏家们的收集观点，再拟定自己的收藏大纲去物色值得把玩的藏品。


收藏的长远之道，不是在乎它现在的人气有多大，一件藏品的生命价值是在乎于他的“老, 珍, 稀”。你会常常看见有珍稀老品面对严重地市场波动影响？为什么它们的抗跌能力那么好？因为真金不怕红炉火。珍稀老品不代表就是很昂贵的东西，在乎于你是否有做功课而已。收藏本来就是一个研究雅赏过程，你满脑子都是想着市场现在流行什么，有没有收到什么内幕消息的又或者在乎别人对于你的藏品评论，那么扪心自问你有真正的享受到收藏的过程吗？这也同时告诉了你为什么会是这一次风暴的受害者。

以上言论纯属个人意见，请勿作为投资，买卖或评论有关的参考。

2014年12月

未来收藏观: 过去三年谈起 （一）

谈起这个话题，笔者曾经数次要著写类似的课题。但碍于信心不够，未来的收藏生态肯定充满变数，笔者也很难给予一个准确的探测。多次的心理战斗最终使笔者终于提起胆子，不在恰于束博的去完成这个话题。也许笔者需要更多的资料和观察才能更宏观的看待这个《未来观》的标准。故此，这是一編一直在更新的文章，绝对不会因现在的几百字就盖棺定论了未来的趋势。

谈起“未来”这个俗词，可以涵盖一段非常遥远的时间空间，到底要多远才能说准呢？笔者就把这片文章的“未来”定于未来五年的收藏，换句话说就是五年内的收藏生态到底是怎么样的一回事？

笔者曾经有一段很影像深刻的收藏闲聊聚会，那时候大概是2012初，当时我们一伙子就应了Wan Thiam Teik 前辈的一个约会，就在时代广场的一个茶餐厅闲聊了数个小时。当时前辈就抛下了一句话：“我相信钱币评分就是未来收藏的一个不可缺乏的重要指标，很多收藏品的价值都会被评分的分数高低左右了它的买卖价格。我们现在（当时）广用的品相标准太笼统了，单单一个BU其实可以分很多个等级，你不妨看看外国，别人就已经为品相鉴定拟定了一个很严格的标准。”

有一点，大家必须了解的是2012年初，钱币评分在本国乃是一件非常新鲜的事，这个评分文化大概是在2013年的时候，才真正的盛行起来。当时我们一伙人听了前辈，就意思意思地点点头，就抱着一种应酬一下也无妨的态度。其实这是很难免的，当初这确实很难说服当时的我们，不外是当时的评分成本很高，那时候本地都没有官方代理的，东西都必须送往最近的新加坡才有人代办。这都是这几年的事，大家都不会没有影像吧？ 你试想想，当时很多硬币的价格平均都是几十块钱到几百块钱左右，纸币就比较高一些，有些平均还可到几百至几千块钱。这已经是很难卖了，你还说要附加这个评分费用，当时的评分成本起码都要RM150-180，这怎么吃得消？

还记得吗？当初评级风气刚刚吹起的时候，有很多老藏家或老币商也突然没办法接受这个趋势的降临。当初，笔者还常常听见很多老币商大大声喊道，评级这些东西是给那些钱太多的人玩得，我的东西好好的为什么无端端要送去评级？玩精制币的，很多人喊道我喜欢原汁原味，原装盒子证件之类的......最后怎么样了？

从在2013至今天的演变，足足证明了当时的我们比前辈短视多了。评分文化确实改变了整个收藏生态，它使钱币收藏这门学问搞得容易多了。同时，也把多年来要死不活的古硬币收藏给变得有活力起来。众所周知，古硬币相比其他纸币玩起来确实比较棘手一些，单单只是鉴定真假就有够你受的，品相评级也充满了不确定性。纸币通常面对的问题是卖家隐藏了品相的真相，特别是网络买卖盛行的年代，往往从照片你是很难看得出端倪。钱币评分正正填补了这些市场交易的不足，一切得品相鉴定和真假问题获得鉴定公司的保障。这样的保障前提下，买的人有信心，卖的人也不需要浪费唇舌，我的东西放出来，清楚展示了评级分数，大家就只需要关注价位的问题。相反地，评分确实的把很多东西反而变得更受欢迎，更多人愿意加入这个以往认为很难玩得嗜好，正因为它确确实实解决了很多行内的不确定性。同时，也证明了大家似乎不是很在乎这个额外的评分费用，而是更愿意花多一点钱来取得保障。

说了这么多，这一切都是过去的景象，那么未来又是一个怎么样的生态？欢迎大家给予笔者意见，那么我们就可以下一片的文章里取得更多的共识。

未来收藏观：如何从现在看未来（二）

谈起这个“现在”， 大家脑子里务必都会出现很多的感叹，现在的币市实在让人很难透气，很多以往大家追棒的藏品，至今甚至跌破五六年前的价位。昔日的追高再追高，直线上升的景象都好像变了样，和以往的整个行情趋势都脱轨了。可能大家都和笔者一样，心中总有一个疑惑，这到底发生了什么事？笔者个人的观察，这一次的行情萧条大概是从去年2014年中期开始，到现在应该都有一年的时间，似乎没有多大的变化。简单而言，行情的低迷已经不是单单的供需买卖纠结，笔者倒认为币市已经进入“结构性调整”。

何谓“结构性调整”？就是说现在的币市生态已经和以往的市场模式有了很大的差别。我们不能把现在的问题和以往的经验凑在一块。

笔者举个例，四五年前，你要是展示一张第四代50元UNC出来炫一炫 (那时候FB藏友平台还不普遍，很多都是在论坛或部落格交流)，很快的你就感受到很多藏友羡慕的眼光。现在，你要是做同样的东西，要是没有起码66分的品相，别人还懒得给你comment。再深入的探讨，你就会发现很多牵涉在钱币收藏的人都变了，什么变了？ 口味变了！通讯和资讯的急速发达正正是改变大家口味的主凶。（关于这方面的讨论，笔者往后再和大家探讨）

玩收藏的人（包括笔者）往往都会有一种心态，就是很享受别人认同的你眼光，藏品或者见解。当大家不停地在分享好东西（特别是那些以往都被标签是具有潜能的藏品），纵然是三珍海味，每天吃你也会腻吧？大家的口味随着盘山蹈海的分享，只有不停的往上攀。当大家的口味慢慢的提升，普品间接地就面对严峻的考验，渐渐地开始被人嫌弃。尤其是前阵子，为数不少的人砸了不少银子，囤积了大量的普货，以为可以卖个好价钱套利，刚开始的时候倒是好，FB平台出货还快过实体店，久而久之藏友们的口味又晋级了，开始看不上这些每天都在卖的普货。大量的现金被压着，最后也是要兑现周转才是，亏本也得出货。当然，这同时也开启了另一扇门，这就是考验我们智慧的时候，理性的分析是必然的，有些古品虽说是普货其实好品相的不多，再加上起码这已是半世纪的古品，把它们收下来，又何乐而不为呢？说白了这才是真正符合低买高卖的原理，藏界依然会有未来新晋，关键是你在什么价位购入而已。真正最可悲的就是眼高手低的人，口味是挺高端的，可是出手往往与他的口味差得多，眼睛看着价值数万元的东西，可是出手还不到一半，守株待兔地要等东西跌下来。万一真的跌下来的时候，反倒是第一个跑腿的人。这些人往往在收藏的领域里很难有一番大作为，真正缺乏的就是果断和信心。有哪一位资深藏家不曾被套？被套，被骗，被误导根本就是藏家的家常便饭，关键在于每一次的失败，你的收藏炼历是否有提升？没办法经历波浪，在什么领域也很难有一番成就。

当然，市场是多元化的交易生态，它的变化绝对不是单方面的因素就能主导的。除了藏友口味的晋级以外，“钱币评分激情后遗症”也是其中一个主因。大家可能摸不着脑袋，这是什么疾病学名？ 这确确实实是众多本地藏友患上的流感。  还记得2012-2014，钱币评分文化刚刚风靡本地的时候，有多少人为它疯狂？不管什么低级普货或者根本谈不上藏品的东西，只要送去评分回来要是66/67/68分以上顿时身价暴涨，买的人几乎都是抢的，大家都在竞力谁lock的最快。这样的不良现象为很多人制造传手套利的机会，也解释了为什么突然诞生这么多网络卖家，很多根本就不是玩收藏的也参了一腿进来。市场突然蓬勃起来，说白了其实就是买家与卖家或者卖家与卖家的彼此“割货”现象。不到一年半载，大家开始腻了，藏家也开始对评分这回事有一定的了解，寒风就开始刮起了。总的来说，这一次的结构性调整正正是给“这一个板块的藏品”带来极为严重的致命伤。就犹如笔者常说的：把好的东西去送评，叫锦上添花；把低级普品去送评，难听一点叫山鸡变凤凰。如果你卖得是“像凤凰的山鸡”，却想卖一个凤凰的价格，最重要的前提是你得必须怂恿或者制造一种气氛让买家去相信它有一天会变凤凰，或者当下就相信它已经是凤凰。试问老手们就多少人真的会去相信那些FB comments? 类似的买卖往往锁定的都是新晋玩家，原因简单就是价位符合新晋玩家的愿付范围。山鸡始终是山鸡，骗得一时，过不了一世。这种不良的买卖交易，也促使很多新晋黯然退场，整个市场突然损失很多新血的支撑，也同时为整个收藏市场带来严重的祸害。很多中高级普品，罕品或珍品也间接地受到拖累，大家开始信心不足了。

城门失火，殃及池鱼。这句话正正恰到此处。

但是，有时候你总会看见例外，好像在拍场都没有感觉笔者描述的寒风？要是老树盘根的珍稀藏品，那怕是十号台风？说的不就是藏品本身的真价值与实力。也有一部份的资深钱币玩家评论这一次的市场萧条是因为外围因数所导致的，就好像短期经济的不稳定性，马币汇率疲弱，消费税课题等等。笔者个人确实不否认外围因数也有可能是其中的原因，但是钱币市场内部的因数更不能忽视。

总结来说，这一次的结构性调整打击的就是大家的信心：

1. 初哥们对这个市场的太多变数失去了信心，黯然离场。
2. 由于市场冷淡的期间超越预期，老手们的信心指数也开始受到摇摆，很多都是抱着观望的态度。
3. 网络或实体卖家对于市场恢复没有信心，大量沽货。

这样情况，我们必须如何走下去？ 下一轮我们在详谈。