Best Of

@jmlanzaf said:

@NJCoin said:

@jmlanzaf said:

@NJCoin said:

@jmlanzaf said:

@mach19 said:

@jmlanzaf said:

@jmski52 said:
I've become complacent about most Mint offerings these days, but......................can someone tell me what's special about this one?

Only 60 000 minted

Let's hope that doesn't change !

That one was posted. The uncirculated set never had a mintage limit posted. Actually still doesn't

Actually, this isn't true. Mintage Limits are never posted for them because they are circulating coins with no limit.

But they did publish a Product Limit for the set. It had been 190K, as I'm sure you know.

I also know you loaded up on these, expecting the same excitement we had last year. Did you know they recently raised the limit to 300K, concurrent with subscriptions again becoming available?

Kinda takes a lot of the air out of them at $124.50 each, no?

"Mintage Limit: None
Product Limit: 300,000
Household Order Limit: 10"

At this point, they really should just drop the price down to around $30, and make them to demand. To use the semiquincentennial as an opportunity to maybe stimulate interest in collecting, rather than as a cynical opportunity to profiteer. Killing the golden goose in the process.

Because there is not going to be a ton of interest in 300K base metal sets with $6 worth of coins at $124.50. Even with 600K cents unavailable elsewhere. Quite a premium to pay for NCLT zinc cents when there will be 600K of them floating around, and when they have zero intrinsic value. As evidenced by the fact that the subscriptions are now available and not selling out.

Yes, product limit.

They did NOT publish a product limit. There was a limit on the subscriptions but that has been on place since late last year. The actual item page still doesn't show a product limit. However, if you go to the congratulations set product page, it does say 60,000. We've been assuming (i mentioned this earlier) that the number on the subscription page was the product limit, however the subscription page is generic. In fact, the Congratulations subscription page also says 60,000 now, but that would have to refer to the 2027 coin not the 2026 and there's no reason to think that it has to be the same.

The Mint has been very slow to fill in the specifications for upcoming issues all year.

They might be slow to update, but it is certainly not generic. It is specific to the product.

When they are "slow to fill in the specifications," they are blank. In this case, they absolutely did go from 190K to 300K. As evidenced by the fact that they were unavailable for subscription, basically for months, until they magically became available again today, concurrent with the Product Limit on the subscription page increasing by 110K.

You showed a screenshot with 75 subscriptions. Are you keeping them now? I was in for a few, in spite of gagging on the price and resenting the money grab. Now, at 300K, I REALLY think they are overreaching, and that these will be duds. What do you think?

Still has no stated limits on the PRODUCT page. The subscription page is generic to the series.

I'm not sure why you keep saying this. The subscription is what people are now buying.

The Product Limit is NOT generic to the series. It is specific to the 2026 sets people are signing up for.

It literally changed, TODAY, from the 190K that applied to the 2025 sets, and that they were presumably going to use for this year, based on them stopping accepting subscription orders, until they chose to increase the Product Limit, reduce the HHL, and resume taking orders today.

@Coin Finder said:
Are these First Strike Eligible?

They haven't even been released yet

@cinque1543 said:
...

Now, a week or two later you’re at a coin show, and you see a dealer selling the same date and grade of coin at $1000. I know that no two coins are exactly alike, but do you mention to the seller that recent online sales have been lower?

Can I watch you do this, please?

@CaptHenway said:
The haggler's first offer has to be respectable for there to be any haggling. Some people start with an obscenely low offer fully expecting that they will be able to get the coin exactly midway between the marked price and the first offer.

Using rounding to simplify the math, (and since I retired in 2010), I remember having a $20 priced at $2200 when melt was $2000. Joe Schmuck come up and offers $1800, expecting to get it for $2,000. I put the coin back in the case, lock the case and return to my NYT crossword puzzle. He is offended that I will not haggle with him.

People do that on ebay all the time. They ask for an offer, i give it. They counter. I reject it. They offer to "split the difference". I always counter with the original price. On occasion, I've countered higher and offered to split the difference. They don't find it funny.

Me asking about a coin I'm interested in at a coin show:

Me: I really like the coin, what's your absolute bottom price?
Dealer: $400
Me: thanks, but I'll pass.
Dealer: OK, how about $375?

Obviously $400 wasn't his absolute bottom price. Sometimes a dealer will haggle with himself.

@cinque1543 said:
Based on the great advice from members of this forum, I’m seeing great value in checking recent sales on the Great Collections, Heritage and eBay websites. Let’s say these sites, particularly the first two, show that a 1881-S Morgan MS65 PCGS CAC Green has been selling for around $750 in the last month or two.

Now, a week or two later you’re at a coin show, and you see a dealer selling the same date and grade of coin at $1000. I know that no two coins are exactly alike, but do you mention to the seller that recent online sales have been lower?

Back when I was working I would have told you that you should have bought that other one.

My opinion.........
.

I have serious concerns about anyone who answered $0.03. I don't think they understand the question.