@jmlanzaf said:
Under the current system, you have to line up your suppliers and have them all online at 12:00 and have them patient enough to go through the process. In a lottery, you can have your suppliers line up at any time during the lottery registration...
Exactly. I don't try to order coins like the ERP because I don't want to screw around with the hassle of ordering online in what's guaranteed to be a circus and I certainly wouldn't try to convince anybody else to do so for me. If I could have sent in an order in a lottery, I would have done so without hesitation and I'd have gotten a few others to to the same. If a lottery had been used here, there'd have been more competition for the coins, for sure. How much more? 2X? 3X? And at the end of the day, people would have still complained.
Post Xmas crankiness ensues; get it out!!
Thank you US Mint for an early gift.
This remains the number one thread topic for the number one coin release.
And at the end of the day, people would have still complained.
Lotteries, random chances, long straw, short straw, frequent flyers, first in, website speeds, bots, long term customers, new collectors, high paying dealers, flippers, rock paper scissors, oldest, youngest, shortest, tallest....any system you can think of will produce thousands of losers who will complain and think of a more fair system (one that they could win). Limited mintage= limited ownerships. Not everyone can have this new rare coin. Not everyone can have a 95 W...why aren't there more complaints on that? Just sayin'
I'm actually surprised at the difficulties some had. What I find interesting was when I was waiting at the Baltimore show to get mine. There were 3 guys in their early 20's there on their I-phones. While it took a few tries..all 3 of them were able to buy another on the Mint Website!
@jmlanzaf said:
The ONLY solution to eliminate speculators is to have actual unlimited mintages because then coin dealers and speculators won't want any part of it. But then you've also killed all interest in commemoratives as collectibles.
How about limiting the ordering window to two weeks? It wouldn't eliminate speculators, but neither would it shut out collectors or anyone else who wants the coin. It worked for the 1998 Kennedy two-coin silver set, which included the set-only 1998-S burnished silver Kennedy half. Final mintage was about 62,000.
It might. But, again, I think this is essentially the equivalent of an unlimited mintage.
Limiting the ordering period to two weeks limits the mintage to the number ordered during that time. Mintage could further be controlled by limiting the quantity allowed to be ordered by a single individual or account. It's more important for collectors to be able to obtain new Mint issues for their sets, than for the Mint to concern itself about what speculators might or might not do.
I disagree. It’s more important to grow the tent than shrink the tent. You look at demographics in general for the U.S. and demographics in specific for Mint customers and you see the Mint is in a world of hurt. The Mint shouldn’t be engaging in class warfare and deciding who should or shouldn’t be purchasing coins. The Mint should do everything in its power to quit hemorrhaging customers and hemorrhaging profits...
If the Mint treats its existing customers shabbily (as in the recent ASE debacle) it's hard to see how it's going to retain a solid customer base long-term. I would be perfectly happy with a one-month to three-month ordering period with no quantity limit. The aftermarket can take care of itself.
If you want to Continue hemorrhaging customers and hemorrhaging profits then your idea accomplishes both. What the Mint has been doing in the past is not currently working.
The horse that gets you in the ditch isn’t the horse that gets you out of the ditch.
The only thing the Mint can do now to save itself is Expand it’s customer base and the release of the 2019-S Enhanced Reverse Proof American Silver Eagle accomplished that goal...
Most members of the Mint’s “expanded customer base” were unable to complete their orders, just as most existing collectors were. How many of them enjoyed the experience and are eager to do business with the Mint again? (For that matter, how many successful buyers will show up at the Mint’s website again, except to participate in the next guaranteed flip?)
Coin collecting as a hobby has been losing members for a long time, and for reasons that have nothing to do with the quality of the Mint’s customer service. Treating existing customers shabbily will not improve the Mint’s long-term customer retention, it will likely have the opposite effect.
Less than 5 percent of the Mint’s net income is derived from Numismatic products, so maintaining its profitability in this sector is not a life-or-death matter. Nor should it be. But the Mint should strive to make ordering its Numismatic products a pleasant experience for both new and existing customers. Gimmicks such as the recent ASE release do not accomplish this goal.
I Disagree. The Mint didn't treat any customers shabbily. Everyone had a fighting chance to get a coin. I was on the website for 18 minutes and I never thought I was treated any other way than I thought would happen when you have 260,000 customers going after 30,000 coins. This coin was Not a Gimmick. Just a limited mintage on the Most Popular coin the Mint is currently selling...
@coinnoob782 said:
The mint is a government agency. Every tax payer in this country should have equal opportunity to buy anything the mint releases regardless of whether its the last piece to ones collection or the very first purchase you make at the mint. The way they did it for the ERP is the only way they should do it. You want to complain about their out of date cart system or ordering system and failure for the servers to be able to handle the load i'm right there with you. If you want to complain about something complain about the youtubers who hyped this coin for a month before it was released. I didnt know about this sale until Youtube suggested it to me while i was searching for silencer reviews. You really want a lottery? A lottery means everyone buys into the lottery and then winners are picked. So how do you like this, everyone who wants a coin pays $100 and then the winners are picked. If you loose you loose your $100 just like a real lottery. How many times would people do that for? By the looks of this thread we need not worry about children getting into collecting coins, there seems to be plenty of them.
You don't pay for a coin lottery just sign up. It works in Australia, I got one of their low mintage Kangaroo gold coins that way. I guess even if it works perfectly we could still find reason to complain.
"I guess even if it works perfectly we could still find reason to complain."
I'm Not complaining. The Launch worked just like the Mint wanted it to work. A Very Successful Launch...
@jmlanzaf said:
The ONLY solution to eliminate speculators is to have actual unlimited mintages because then coin dealers and speculators won't want any part of it. But then you've also killed all interest in commemoratives as collectibles.
How about limiting the ordering window to two weeks? It wouldn't eliminate speculators, but neither would it shut out collectors or anyone else who wants the coin. It worked for the 1998 Kennedy two-coin silver set, which included the set-only 1998-S burnished silver Kennedy half. Final mintage was about 62,000.
It might. But, again, I think this is essentially the equivalent of an unlimited mintage.
Limiting the ordering period to two weeks limits the mintage to the number ordered during that time. Mintage could further be controlled by limiting the quantity allowed to be ordered by a single individual or account. It's more important for collectors to be able to obtain new Mint issues for their sets, than for the Mint to concern itself about what speculators might or might not do.
I disagree. It’s more important to grow the tent than shrink the tent. You look at demographics in general for the U.S. and demographics in specific for Mint customers and you see the Mint is in a world of hurt. The Mint shouldn’t be engaging in class warfare and deciding who should or shouldn’t be purchasing coins. The Mint should do everything in its power to quit hemorrhaging customers and hemorrhaging profits...
If the Mint treats its existing customers shabbily (as in the recent ASE debacle) it's hard to see how it's going to retain a solid customer base long-term. I would be perfectly happy with a one-month to three-month ordering period with no quantity limit. The aftermarket can take care of itself.
If you want to Continue hemorrhaging customers and hemorrhaging profits then your idea accomplishes both. What the Mint has been doing in the past is not currently working.
The horse that gets you in the ditch isn’t the horse that gets you out of the ditch.
The only thing the Mint can do now to save itself is Expand it’s customer base and the release of the 2019-S Enhanced Reverse Proof American Silver Eagle accomplished that goal...
"Less than 5 percent of the Mint’s net income is derived from Numismatic products, so maintaining its profitability in this sector is not a life-or-death matter. "
That's just Not a true statement. The Mint has No Net Income on the circulating side. The Mint only has seigniorage on circulating coins. The Mint had a Net Loss of $21.2 Million for FY2018 and my Guesstimate is that the Mint will lose even more in FY2019...
@MilesWaits said:
Post Xmas crankiness ensues; get it out!!
Thank you US Mint for an early gift.
This remains the number one thread topic for the number one coin release.
LOL
It's been so much fun - even with the complaining.]
Anyone want to weigh in on why the House Hold Limit of 1 is unfair because you can't buy one for each of the grandkids?
@jmlanzaf said:
The ONLY solution to eliminate speculators is to have actual unlimited mintages because then coin dealers and speculators won't want any part of it. But then you've also killed all interest in commemoratives as collectibles.
How about limiting the ordering window to two weeks? It wouldn't eliminate speculators, but neither would it shut out collectors or anyone else who wants the coin. It worked for the 1998 Kennedy two-coin silver set, which included the set-only 1998-S burnished silver Kennedy half. Final mintage was about 62,000.
It might. But, again, I think this is essentially the equivalent of an unlimited mintage.
Limiting the ordering period to two weeks limits the mintage to the number ordered during that time. Mintage could further be controlled by limiting the quantity allowed to be ordered by a single individual or account. It's more important for collectors to be able to obtain new Mint issues for their sets, than for the Mint to concern itself about what speculators might or might not do.
I disagree. It’s more important to grow the tent than shrink the tent. You look at demographics in general for the U.S. and demographics in specific for Mint customers and you see the Mint is in a world of hurt. The Mint shouldn’t be engaging in class warfare and deciding who should or shouldn’t be purchasing coins. The Mint should do everything in its power to quit hemorrhaging customers and hemorrhaging profits...
If the Mint treats its existing customers shabbily (as in the recent ASE debacle) it's hard to see how it's going to retain a solid customer base long-term. I would be perfectly happy with a one-month to three-month ordering period with no quantity limit. The aftermarket can take care of itself.
If you want to Continue hemorrhaging customers and hemorrhaging profits then your idea accomplishes both. What the Mint has been doing in the past is not currently working.
The horse that gets you in the ditch isn’t the horse that gets you out of the ditch.
The only thing the Mint can do now to save itself is Expand it’s customer base and the release of the 2019-S Enhanced Reverse Proof American Silver Eagle accomplished that goal...
"Less than 5 percent of the Mint’s net income is derived from Numismatic products, so maintaining its profitability in this sector is not a life-or-death matter. "
That's just Not a true statement. The Mint has No Net Income on the circulating side. The Mint only has seigniorage on circulating coins. The Mint had a Net Loss of $21.2 Million for FY2018 and my Guesstimate is that the Mint will lose even more in FY2019...
Here's the annual report if anyone wants to read it.
This is why I often say that as a taxpayer, I wish the Mint would get out of the collectible coin business. Net loss of $15 million on $293 million in sales.
In fact, they should probably get out of the bullion business with a 1% margin. They lost money on both platinum and palladium (2017 bullion). They also should definitely stop making cents and probably nickels!
How are the prices on the 69's and 70's holding? Have not been following this to much as I sold my one and only and I am happy to report the buyer received his new coin 1 day before Christmas which is amazing since I sent in a few days before christmas from Alaska to DC! Thats a long trip one of the longest I had to send. But they left me a nice feedback rating on Ebay.
@jmlanzaf said:
The ONLY solution to eliminate speculators is to have actual unlimited mintages because then coin dealers and speculators won't want any part of it. But then you've also killed all interest in commemoratives as collectibles.
How about limiting the ordering window to two weeks? It wouldn't eliminate speculators, but neither would it shut out collectors or anyone else who wants the coin. It worked for the 1998 Kennedy two-coin silver set, which included the set-only 1998-S burnished silver Kennedy half. Final mintage was about 62,000.
It might. But, again, I think this is essentially the equivalent of an unlimited mintage.
Limiting the ordering period to two weeks limits the mintage to the number ordered during that time. Mintage could further be controlled by limiting the quantity allowed to be ordered by a single individual or account. It's more important for collectors to be able to obtain new Mint issues for their sets, than for the Mint to concern itself about what speculators might or might not do.
I disagree. It’s more important to grow the tent than shrink the tent. You look at demographics in general for the U.S. and demographics in specific for Mint customers and you see the Mint is in a world of hurt. The Mint shouldn’t be engaging in class warfare and deciding who should or shouldn’t be purchasing coins. The Mint should do everything in its power to quit hemorrhaging customers and hemorrhaging profits...
If the Mint treats its existing customers shabbily (as in the recent ASE debacle) it's hard to see how it's going to retain a solid customer base long-term. I would be perfectly happy with a one-month to three-month ordering period with no quantity limit. The aftermarket can take care of itself.
If you want to Continue hemorrhaging customers and hemorrhaging profits then your idea accomplishes both. What the Mint has been doing in the past is not currently working.
The horse that gets you in the ditch isn’t the horse that gets you out of the ditch.
The only thing the Mint can do now to save itself is Expand it’s customer base and the release of the 2019-S Enhanced Reverse Proof American Silver Eagle accomplished that goal...
Most members of the Mint’s “expanded customer base” were unable to complete their orders, just as most existing collectors were. How many of them enjoyed the experience and are eager to do business with the Mint again? (For that matter, how many successful buyers will show up at the Mint’s website again, except to participate in the next guaranteed flip?)
Coin collecting as a hobby has been losing members for a long time, and for reasons that have nothing to do with the quality of the Mint’s customer service. Treating existing customers shabbily will not improve the Mint’s long-term customer retention, it will likely have the opposite effect.
Less than 5 percent of the Mint’s net income is derived from Numismatic products, so maintaining its profitability in this sector is not a life-or-death matter. Nor should it be. But the Mint should strive to make ordering its Numismatic products a pleasant experience for both new and existing customers. Gimmicks such as the recent ASE release do not accomplish this goal.
I Disagree. The Mint didn't treat any customers shabbily. Everyone had a fighting chance to get a coin. I was on the website for 18 minutes and I never thought I was treated any other way than I thought would happen when you have 260,000 customers going after 30,000 coins. This coin was Not a Gimmick. Just a limited mintage on the Most Popular coin the Mint is currently selling...
Really? Suppose a private company were to issue a popular collectible and have hundreds of thousands of happy customers buying each new one as it comes out, to keep their sets current and complete. All of a sudden the company announces that the latest collectible in the set will be limited to a number far below known demand. Collectors will have to fight speculators and other collectors to have a chance at owning one, and those that miss out will have to pay big bucks in the aftermarket to keep their sets complete. Do you think, after this experience, most of the existing collectors will feel the same way about the company, or will have the same desire to continue adding to their sets?
@jmlanzaf said:
The ONLY solution to eliminate speculators is to have actual unlimited mintages because then coin dealers and speculators won't want any part of it. But then you've also killed all interest in commemoratives as collectibles.
How about limiting the ordering window to two weeks? It wouldn't eliminate speculators, but neither would it shut out collectors or anyone else who wants the coin. It worked for the 1998 Kennedy two-coin silver set, which included the set-only 1998-S burnished silver Kennedy half. Final mintage was about 62,000.
It might. But, again, I think this is essentially the equivalent of an unlimited mintage.
Limiting the ordering period to two weeks limits the mintage to the number ordered during that time. Mintage could further be controlled by limiting the quantity allowed to be ordered by a single individual or account. It's more important for collectors to be able to obtain new Mint issues for their sets, than for the Mint to concern itself about what speculators might or might not do.
I disagree. It’s more important to grow the tent than shrink the tent. You look at demographics in general for the U.S. and demographics in specific for Mint customers and you see the Mint is in a world of hurt. The Mint shouldn’t be engaging in class warfare and deciding who should or shouldn’t be purchasing coins. The Mint should do everything in its power to quit hemorrhaging customers and hemorrhaging profits...
If the Mint treats its existing customers shabbily (as in the recent ASE debacle) it's hard to see how it's going to retain a solid customer base long-term. I would be perfectly happy with a one-month to three-month ordering period with no quantity limit. The aftermarket can take care of itself.
If you want to Continue hemorrhaging customers and hemorrhaging profits then your idea accomplishes both. What the Mint has been doing in the past is not currently working.
The horse that gets you in the ditch isn’t the horse that gets you out of the ditch.
The only thing the Mint can do now to save itself is Expand it’s customer base and the release of the 2019-S Enhanced Reverse Proof American Silver Eagle accomplished that goal...
Most members of the Mint’s “expanded customer base” were unable to complete their orders, just as most existing collectors were. How many of them enjoyed the experience and are eager to do business with the Mint again? (For that matter, how many successful buyers will show up at the Mint’s website again, except to participate in the next guaranteed flip?)
Coin collecting as a hobby has been losing members for a long time, and for reasons that have nothing to do with the quality of the Mint’s customer service. Treating existing customers shabbily will not improve the Mint’s long-term customer retention, it will likely have the opposite effect.
Less than 5 percent of the Mint’s net income is derived from Numismatic products, so maintaining its profitability in this sector is not a life-or-death matter. Nor should it be. But the Mint should strive to make ordering its Numismatic products a pleasant experience for both new and existing customers. Gimmicks such as the recent ASE release do not accomplish this goal.
I Disagree. The Mint didn't treat any customers shabbily. Everyone had a fighting chance to get a coin. I was on the website for 18 minutes and I never thought I was treated any other way than I thought would happen when you have 260,000 customers going after 30,000 coins. This coin was Not a Gimmick. Just a limited mintage on the Most Popular coin the Mint is currently selling...
Really? Suppose a private company were to issue a popular collectible and have hundreds of thousands of happy customers buying each new one as it comes out, to keep their sets current and complete. All of a sudden the company announces that the latest collectible in the set will be limited to a number far below known demand. Collectors will have to fight speculators and other collectors to have a chance at owning one, and those that miss out will have to pay big bucks in the aftermarket to keep their sets complete. Do you think, after this experience, most of the existing collectors will feel the same way about the company, or will have the same desire to continue adding to their sets?
Actually, yes. The difficulty of acquiring it usually enhances interest.
About 30 years ago, a regional department store had a limited edition Christmas village set. They released one each Sunday for about 2 months with very limited numbers at each store. The ladies lined up every week at opening and raced to the sales area - my mother included - elbowing each other and fighting for the boxes. LOL. Every week, there were just as many people or more. They were trophies and the competition fueled their desire, it didn't diminish it.
@Onastone said:
Not everyone can have a 95 W...why aren't there more complaints on that? Just sayin'
There were plenty of complaints about the 1995-W when it was launched. But it didn't sell out, and everyone willing to pay the price ($999 for the 4-coin Gold Eagle proof set with the 1995-W Silver Eagle) was able to obtain one. Single coins were available in the aftermarket for about $250 during Mint sales of the set and for sometime thereafter. Even so, the creation of an artificial rarity probably led some collectors to quit collecting proof Silver Eagles, and diminished the popularity of the Mint and its coin programs.
@jmlanzaf said:
The ONLY solution to eliminate speculators is to have actual unlimited mintages because then coin dealers and speculators won't want any part of it. But then you've also killed all interest in commemoratives as collectibles.
How about limiting the ordering window to two weeks? It wouldn't eliminate speculators, but neither would it shut out collectors or anyone else who wants the coin. It worked for the 1998 Kennedy two-coin silver set, which included the set-only 1998-S burnished silver Kennedy half. Final mintage was about 62,000.
It might. But, again, I think this is essentially the equivalent of an unlimited mintage.
Limiting the ordering period to two weeks limits the mintage to the number ordered during that time. Mintage could further be controlled by limiting the quantity allowed to be ordered by a single individual or account. It's more important for collectors to be able to obtain new Mint issues for their sets, than for the Mint to concern itself about what speculators might or might not do.
I disagree. It’s more important to grow the tent than shrink the tent. You look at demographics in general for the U.S. and demographics in specific for Mint customers and you see the Mint is in a world of hurt. The Mint shouldn’t be engaging in class warfare and deciding who should or shouldn’t be purchasing coins. The Mint should do everything in its power to quit hemorrhaging customers and hemorrhaging profits...
If the Mint treats its existing customers shabbily (as in the recent ASE debacle) it's hard to see how it's going to retain a solid customer base long-term. I would be perfectly happy with a one-month to three-month ordering period with no quantity limit. The aftermarket can take care of itself.
If you want to Continue hemorrhaging customers and hemorrhaging profits then your idea accomplishes both. What the Mint has been doing in the past is not currently working.
The horse that gets you in the ditch isn’t the horse that gets you out of the ditch.
The only thing the Mint can do now to save itself is Expand it’s customer base and the release of the 2019-S Enhanced Reverse Proof American Silver Eagle accomplished that goal...
Most members of the Mint’s “expanded customer base” were unable to complete their orders, just as most existing collectors were. How many of them enjoyed the experience and are eager to do business with the Mint again? (For that matter, how many successful buyers will show up at the Mint’s website again, except to participate in the next guaranteed flip?)
Coin collecting as a hobby has been losing members for a long time, and for reasons that have nothing to do with the quality of the Mint’s customer service. Treating existing customers shabbily will not improve the Mint’s long-term customer retention, it will likely have the opposite effect.
Less than 5 percent of the Mint’s net income is derived from Numismatic products, so maintaining its profitability in this sector is not a life-or-death matter. Nor should it be. But the Mint should strive to make ordering its Numismatic products a pleasant experience for both new and existing customers. Gimmicks such as the recent ASE release do not accomplish this goal.
I Disagree. The Mint didn't treat any customers shabbily. Everyone had a fighting chance to get a coin. I was on the website for 18 minutes and I never thought I was treated any other way than I thought would happen when you have 260,000 customers going after 30,000 coins. This coin was Not a Gimmick. Just a limited mintage on the Most Popular coin the Mint is currently selling...
Really? Suppose a private company were to issue a popular collectible and have hundreds of thousands of happy customers buying each new one as it comes out, to keep their sets current and complete. All of a sudden the company announces that the latest collectible in the set will be limited to a number far below known demand. Collectors will have to fight speculators and other collectors to have a chance at owning one, and those that miss out will have to pay big bucks in the aftermarket to keep their sets complete. Do you think, after this experience, most of the existing collectors will feel the same way about the company, or will have the same desire to continue adding to their sets?
It has been Estimated that there are ~ 20,000 people that have a complete set of the American Silver Eagles. That means that there were 20,000 in line for 30,000 coins that actually Needed the coin. The REST are like you and me, Looking for a coin that will be worth More on the Secondary market than you paid for it. Plain and Simple. Even IF you are One of the 20,000, you had the same odds as the other 260,000 people on the site...
The Secondary Market is WHY this coin is so valuable and why this coin was such a LAUNCH SUCCESS and why People like you are so upset. You are Probably Not One of the 20,000, you are Probably One of the 260,000...
@jmlanzaf said:
The ONLY solution to eliminate speculators is to have actual unlimited mintages because then coin dealers and speculators won't want any part of it. But then you've also killed all interest in commemoratives as collectibles.
How about limiting the ordering window to two weeks? It wouldn't eliminate speculators, but neither would it shut out collectors or anyone else who wants the coin. It worked for the 1998 Kennedy two-coin silver set, which included the set-only 1998-S burnished silver Kennedy half. Final mintage was about 62,000.
It might. But, again, I think this is essentially the equivalent of an unlimited mintage.
Limiting the ordering period to two weeks limits the mintage to the number ordered during that time. Mintage could further be controlled by limiting the quantity allowed to be ordered by a single individual or account. It's more important for collectors to be able to obtain new Mint issues for their sets, than for the Mint to concern itself about what speculators might or might not do.
I disagree. It’s more important to grow the tent than shrink the tent. You look at demographics in general for the U.S. and demographics in specific for Mint customers and you see the Mint is in a world of hurt. The Mint shouldn’t be engaging in class warfare and deciding who should or shouldn’t be purchasing coins. The Mint should do everything in its power to quit hemorrhaging customers and hemorrhaging profits...
If the Mint treats its existing customers shabbily (as in the recent ASE debacle) it's hard to see how it's going to retain a solid customer base long-term. I would be perfectly happy with a one-month to three-month ordering period with no quantity limit. The aftermarket can take care of itself.
If you want to Continue hemorrhaging customers and hemorrhaging profits then your idea accomplishes both. What the Mint has been doing in the past is not currently working.
The horse that gets you in the ditch isn’t the horse that gets you out of the ditch.
The only thing the Mint can do now to save itself is Expand it’s customer base and the release of the 2019-S Enhanced Reverse Proof American Silver Eagle accomplished that goal...
Most members of the Mint’s “expanded customer base” were unable to complete their orders, just as most existing collectors were. How many of them enjoyed the experience and are eager to do business with the Mint again? (For that matter, how many successful buyers will show up at the Mint’s website again, except to participate in the next guaranteed flip?)
Coin collecting as a hobby has been losing members for a long time, and for reasons that have nothing to do with the quality of the Mint’s customer service. Treating existing customers shabbily will not improve the Mint’s long-term customer retention, it will likely have the opposite effect.
Less than 5 percent of the Mint’s net income is derived from Numismatic products, so maintaining its profitability in this sector is not a life-or-death matter. Nor should it be. But the Mint should strive to make ordering its Numismatic products a pleasant experience for both new and existing customers. Gimmicks such as the recent ASE release do not accomplish this goal.
I Disagree. The Mint didn't treat any customers shabbily. Everyone had a fighting chance to get a coin. I was on the website for 18 minutes and I never thought I was treated any other way than I thought would happen when you have 260,000 customers going after 30,000 coins. This coin was Not a Gimmick. Just a limited mintage on the Most Popular coin the Mint is currently selling...
Really? Suppose a private company were to issue a popular collectible and have hundreds of thousands of happy customers buying each new one as it comes out, to keep their sets current and complete. All of a sudden the company announces that the latest collectible in the set will be limited to a number far below known demand. Collectors will have to fight speculators and other collectors to have a chance at owning one, and those that miss out will have to pay big bucks in the aftermarket to keep their sets complete. Do you think, after this experience, most of the existing collectors will feel the same way about the company, or will have the same desire to continue adding to their sets?
Actually, yes. The difficulty of acquiring it usually enhances interest.
About 30 years ago, a regional department store had a limited edition Christmas village set. They released one each Sunday for about 2 months with very limited numbers at each store. The ladies lined up every week at opening and raced to the sales area - my mother included - elbowing each other and fighting for the boxes. LOL. Every week, there were just as many people or more. They were trophies and the competition fueled their desire, it didn't diminish it.
In that case, the popularity was tied to the fact that it was a limited edition from the outset, with trophies and competition being part of the "game". Proof Silver Eagles are a different story. Most collectors enjoy their sets for their own sake, and are not all that interested in trophies or competition. Turning their collector interests into a gladiator competition will not encourage them to continue collecting the series.
interesting reading about how to make this more fair, but my idea is a mix of many previously stated. How about for low mintage releases we do a 24 hour open period - you checkout and everything, but that only gets you to the main event. After the 24 hours, the mint does a cursory check on things like same address, etc (assumes the mint upgrades their servers /database ability) and throws those orders away. Then when the list is scrubbed, the remaining orders are picked at random for fulfillment. Combines the lottery option with the free for all option.
@3stars said:
interesting reading about how to make this more fair, but my idea is a mix of many previously stated. How about for low mintage releases we do a 24 hour open period - you checkout and everything, but that only gets you to the main event. After the 24 hours, the mint does a cursory check on things like same address, etc (assumes the mint upgrades their servers /database ability) and throws those orders away. Then when the list is scrubbed, the remaining orders are picked at random for fulfillment. Combines the lottery option with the free for all option.
ANYTIME you have ANY type of lottery system it HELPS the dealers or anyone able to get get more entries in the process...
@jmlanzaf said:
The ONLY solution to eliminate speculators is to have actual unlimited mintages because then coin dealers and speculators won't want any part of it. But then you've also killed all interest in commemoratives as collectibles.
How about limiting the ordering window to two weeks? It wouldn't eliminate speculators, but neither would it shut out collectors or anyone else who wants the coin. It worked for the 1998 Kennedy two-coin silver set, which included the set-only 1998-S burnished silver Kennedy half. Final mintage was about 62,000.
It might. But, again, I think this is essentially the equivalent of an unlimited mintage.
Limiting the ordering period to two weeks limits the mintage to the number ordered during that time. Mintage could further be controlled by limiting the quantity allowed to be ordered by a single individual or account. It's more important for collectors to be able to obtain new Mint issues for their sets, than for the Mint to concern itself about what speculators might or might not do.
I disagree. It’s more important to grow the tent than shrink the tent. You look at demographics in general for the U.S. and demographics in specific for Mint customers and you see the Mint is in a world of hurt. The Mint shouldn’t be engaging in class warfare and deciding who should or shouldn’t be purchasing coins. The Mint should do everything in its power to quit hemorrhaging customers and hemorrhaging profits...
If the Mint treats its existing customers shabbily (as in the recent ASE debacle) it's hard to see how it's going to retain a solid customer base long-term. I would be perfectly happy with a one-month to three-month ordering period with no quantity limit. The aftermarket can take care of itself.
If you want to Continue hemorrhaging customers and hemorrhaging profits then your idea accomplishes both. What the Mint has been doing in the past is not currently working.
The horse that gets you in the ditch isn’t the horse that gets you out of the ditch.
The only thing the Mint can do now to save itself is Expand it’s customer base and the release of the 2019-S Enhanced Reverse Proof American Silver Eagle accomplished that goal...
Most members of the Mint’s “expanded customer base” were unable to complete their orders, just as most existing collectors were. How many of them enjoyed the experience and are eager to do business with the Mint again? (For that matter, how many successful buyers will show up at the Mint’s website again, except to participate in the next guaranteed flip?)
Coin collecting as a hobby has been losing members for a long time, and for reasons that have nothing to do with the quality of the Mint’s customer service. Treating existing customers shabbily will not improve the Mint’s long-term customer retention, it will likely have the opposite effect.
Less than 5 percent of the Mint’s net income is derived from Numismatic products, so maintaining its profitability in this sector is not a life-or-death matter. Nor should it be. But the Mint should strive to make ordering its Numismatic products a pleasant experience for both new and existing customers. Gimmicks such as the recent ASE release do not accomplish this goal.
I Disagree. The Mint didn't treat any customers shabbily. Everyone had a fighting chance to get a coin. I was on the website for 18 minutes and I never thought I was treated any other way than I thought would happen when you have 260,000 customers going after 30,000 coins. This coin was Not a Gimmick. Just a limited mintage on the Most Popular coin the Mint is currently selling...
Really? Suppose a private company were to issue a popular collectible and have hundreds of thousands of happy customers buying each new one as it comes out, to keep their sets current and complete. All of a sudden the company announces that the latest collectible in the set will be limited to a number far below known demand. Collectors will have to fight speculators and other collectors to have a chance at owning one, and those that miss out will have to pay big bucks in the aftermarket to keep their sets complete. Do you think, after this experience, most of the existing collectors will feel the same way about the company, or will have the same desire to continue adding to their sets?
It has been Estimated that there are ~ 20,000 people that have a complete set of the American Silver Eagles. That means that there were 20,000 in line for 30,000 coins that actually Needed the coin. The REST are like you and me, Looking for a coin that will be worth More on the Secondary market than you paid for it. Plain and Simple. Even IF you are One of the 20,000, you had the same odds as the other 260,000 people on the site...
The Secondary Market is WHY this coin is so valuable and why this coin was such a LAUNCH SUCCESS and why People like you are so upset. You are Probably Not One of the 20,000, you are Probably One of the 260,000...
And how many people are working on a complete set of Silver Eagles, with the hope of completing it someday? And of this number, how many will quit trying to complete their collection after this fiasco, and will no longer place orders with the Mint? Most collectors aren't interested in participating in mad scrambles on the internet.
@3stars said:
interesting reading about how to make this more fair, but my idea is a mix of many previously stated. How about for low mintage releases we do a 24 hour open period - you checkout and everything, but that only gets you to the main event. After the 24 hours, the mint does a cursory check on things like same address, etc (assumes the mint upgrades their servers /database ability) and throws those orders away. Then when the list is scrubbed, the remaining orders are picked at random for fulfillment. Combines the lottery option with the free for all option.
ANYTIME you have ANY type of lottery system it HELPS the dealers or anyone able to get get more entries in the process...
This.
The more hurdles you put in their to make it "fair", the more it benefits the people willing to throw money at the coin.
I had 26 coins. How? I offered people $500 WEEKS BEFORE the release to sell to me. I had 80 people/coins locked in and 26 carried through. And I'm a small fish.
@jmlanzaf said:
The ONLY solution to eliminate speculators is to have actual unlimited mintages because then coin dealers and speculators won't want any part of it. But then you've also killed all interest in commemoratives as collectibles.
How about limiting the ordering window to two weeks? It wouldn't eliminate speculators, but neither would it shut out collectors or anyone else who wants the coin. It worked for the 1998 Kennedy two-coin silver set, which included the set-only 1998-S burnished silver Kennedy half. Final mintage was about 62,000.
It might. But, again, I think this is essentially the equivalent of an unlimited mintage.
Limiting the ordering period to two weeks limits the mintage to the number ordered during that time. Mintage could further be controlled by limiting the quantity allowed to be ordered by a single individual or account. It's more important for collectors to be able to obtain new Mint issues for their sets, than for the Mint to concern itself about what speculators might or might not do.
I disagree. It’s more important to grow the tent than shrink the tent. You look at demographics in general for the U.S. and demographics in specific for Mint customers and you see the Mint is in a world of hurt. The Mint shouldn’t be engaging in class warfare and deciding who should or shouldn’t be purchasing coins. The Mint should do everything in its power to quit hemorrhaging customers and hemorrhaging profits...
If the Mint treats its existing customers shabbily (as in the recent ASE debacle) it's hard to see how it's going to retain a solid customer base long-term. I would be perfectly happy with a one-month to three-month ordering period with no quantity limit. The aftermarket can take care of itself.
If you want to Continue hemorrhaging customers and hemorrhaging profits then your idea accomplishes both. What the Mint has been doing in the past is not currently working.
The horse that gets you in the ditch isn’t the horse that gets you out of the ditch.
The only thing the Mint can do now to save itself is Expand it’s customer base and the release of the 2019-S Enhanced Reverse Proof American Silver Eagle accomplished that goal...
Most members of the Mint’s “expanded customer base” were unable to complete their orders, just as most existing collectors were. How many of them enjoyed the experience and are eager to do business with the Mint again? (For that matter, how many successful buyers will show up at the Mint’s website again, except to participate in the next guaranteed flip?)
Coin collecting as a hobby has been losing members for a long time, and for reasons that have nothing to do with the quality of the Mint’s customer service. Treating existing customers shabbily will not improve the Mint’s long-term customer retention, it will likely have the opposite effect.
Less than 5 percent of the Mint’s net income is derived from Numismatic products, so maintaining its profitability in this sector is not a life-or-death matter. Nor should it be. But the Mint should strive to make ordering its Numismatic products a pleasant experience for both new and existing customers. Gimmicks such as the recent ASE release do not accomplish this goal.
I Disagree. The Mint didn't treat any customers shabbily. Everyone had a fighting chance to get a coin. I was on the website for 18 minutes and I never thought I was treated any other way than I thought would happen when you have 260,000 customers going after 30,000 coins. This coin was Not a Gimmick. Just a limited mintage on the Most Popular coin the Mint is currently selling...
Really? Suppose a private company were to issue a popular collectible and have hundreds of thousands of happy customers buying each new one as it comes out, to keep their sets current and complete. All of a sudden the company announces that the latest collectible in the set will be limited to a number far below known demand. Collectors will have to fight speculators and other collectors to have a chance at owning one, and those that miss out will have to pay big bucks in the aftermarket to keep their sets complete. Do you think, after this experience, most of the existing collectors will feel the same way about the company, or will have the same desire to continue adding to their sets?
It has been Estimated that there are ~ 20,000 people that have a complete set of the American Silver Eagles. That means that there were 20,000 in line for 30,000 coins that actually Needed the coin. The REST are like you and me, Looking for a coin that will be worth More on the Secondary market than you paid for it. Plain and Simple. Even IF you are One of the 20,000, you had the same odds as the other 260,000 people on the site...
The Secondary Market is WHY this coin is so valuable and why this coin was such a LAUNCH SUCCESS and why People like you are so upset. You are Probably Not One of the 20,000, you are Probably One of the 260,000...
And how many people are working on a complete set of Silver Eagles, with the hope of completing it someday? And of this number, how many will quit trying to complete their collection after this fiasco, and will no longer place orders with the Mint? Most collectors aren't interested in participating in mad scrambles on the internet.
Actually, in round numbers, I think zero. Maybe 6. But probably zero.
It is very easy to rationalize NOT including this coin in your set. It also doesn't necessarily bother people to have an aspirational goal. How many Lincoln collectors have an empty s-VDB or 55/55 slot in their collection? They don't just throw away the rest of it because they can't afford to complete it.
Far more people stop collecting when they discover that their "investment" is going down in value. This goosing of interest in the set may well keep a few people from abandoning their collection than it will encourage people to abandon their collection.
@JimTyler said:
No one checked this morning ? Have we finally accepted it's time to put a fork in it ?
Actually, I check every morning. I just don't feel the need to inform everyone else since most of you are probably doing the same.
I wouldn't be surprised if we've seen the last of them, but I suspect there may be one more small release, although it could be weeks from now.
You are a grouchy old dude period. No doubt a baby boomer.
100% positive transactions with SurfinxHI, bigole, 1madman, collectorcoins, proofmorgan, Luke Marshall, silver pop, golden egg, point five zero,coin22lover, alohagary, blaircountycoin,joebb21
@jmlanzaf said:
The ONLY solution to eliminate speculators is to have actual unlimited mintages because then coin dealers and speculators won't want any part of it. But then you've also killed all interest in commemoratives as collectibles.
How about limiting the ordering window to two weeks? It wouldn't eliminate speculators, but neither would it shut out collectors or anyone else who wants the coin. It worked for the 1998 Kennedy two-coin silver set, which included the set-only 1998-S burnished silver Kennedy half. Final mintage was about 62,000.
It might. But, again, I think this is essentially the equivalent of an unlimited mintage.
Limiting the ordering period to two weeks limits the mintage to the number ordered during that time. Mintage could further be controlled by limiting the quantity allowed to be ordered by a single individual or account. It's more important for collectors to be able to obtain new Mint issues for their sets, than for the Mint to concern itself about what speculators might or might not do.
I disagree. It’s more important to grow the tent than shrink the tent. You look at demographics in general for the U.S. and demographics in specific for Mint customers and you see the Mint is in a world of hurt. The Mint shouldn’t be engaging in class warfare and deciding who should or shouldn’t be purchasing coins. The Mint should do everything in its power to quit hemorrhaging customers and hemorrhaging profits...
If the Mint treats its existing customers shabbily (as in the recent ASE debacle) it's hard to see how it's going to retain a solid customer base long-term. I would be perfectly happy with a one-month to three-month ordering period with no quantity limit. The aftermarket can take care of itself.
If you want to Continue hemorrhaging customers and hemorrhaging profits then your idea accomplishes both. What the Mint has been doing in the past is not currently working.
The horse that gets you in the ditch isn’t the horse that gets you out of the ditch.
The only thing the Mint can do now to save itself is Expand it’s customer base and the release of the 2019-S Enhanced Reverse Proof American Silver Eagle accomplished that goal...
Most members of the Mint’s “expanded customer base” were unable to complete their orders, just as most existing collectors were. How many of them enjoyed the experience and are eager to do business with the Mint again? (For that matter, how many successful buyers will show up at the Mint’s website again, except to participate in the next guaranteed flip?)
Coin collecting as a hobby has been losing members for a long time, and for reasons that have nothing to do with the quality of the Mint’s customer service. Treating existing customers shabbily will not improve the Mint’s long-term customer retention, it will likely have the opposite effect.
Less than 5 percent of the Mint’s net income is derived from Numismatic products, so maintaining its profitability in this sector is not a life-or-death matter. Nor should it be. But the Mint should strive to make ordering its Numismatic products a pleasant experience for both new and existing customers. Gimmicks such as the recent ASE release do not accomplish this goal.
I Disagree. The Mint didn't treat any customers shabbily. Everyone had a fighting chance to get a coin. I was on the website for 18 minutes and I never thought I was treated any other way than I thought would happen when you have 260,000 customers going after 30,000 coins. This coin was Not a Gimmick. Just a limited mintage on the Most Popular coin the Mint is currently selling...
Really? Suppose a private company were to issue a popular collectible and have hundreds of thousands of happy customers buying each new one as it comes out, to keep their sets current and complete. All of a sudden the company announces that the latest collectible in the set will be limited to a number far below known demand. Collectors will have to fight speculators and other collectors to have a chance at owning one, and those that miss out will have to pay big bucks in the aftermarket to keep their sets complete. Do you think, after this experience, most of the existing collectors will feel the same way about the company, or will have the same desire to continue adding to their sets?
It has been Estimated that there are ~ 20,000 people that have a complete set of the American Silver Eagles. That means that there were 20,000 in line for 30,000 coins that actually Needed the coin. The REST are like you and me, Looking for a coin that will be worth More on the Secondary market than you paid for it. Plain and Simple. Even IF you are One of the 20,000, you had the same odds as the other 260,000 people on the site...
The Secondary Market is WHY this coin is so valuable and why this coin was such a LAUNCH SUCCESS and why People like you are so upset. You are Probably Not One of the 20,000, you are Probably One of the 260,000...
And how many people are working on a complete set of Silver Eagles, with the hope of completing it someday? And of this number, how many will quit trying to complete their collection after this fiasco, and will no longer place orders with the Mint? Most collectors aren't interested in participating in mad scrambles on the internet.
"And how many people are working on a complete set of Silver Eagles, with the hope of completing it someday?"
Out of 20,000 I would guess Less than 1%. That would be Less than 200. I would say you've Gained Thousands by this Successful Launch BECAUSE of the Secondary Market Potential...
@jmlanzaf said:
The ONLY solution to eliminate speculators is to have actual unlimited mintages because then coin dealers and speculators won't want any part of it. But then you've also killed all interest in commemoratives as collectibles.
How about limiting the ordering window to two weeks? It wouldn't eliminate speculators, but neither would it shut out collectors or anyone else who wants the coin. It worked for the 1998 Kennedy two-coin silver set, which included the set-only 1998-S burnished silver Kennedy half. Final mintage was about 62,000.
It might. But, again, I think this is essentially the equivalent of an unlimited mintage.
Limiting the ordering period to two weeks limits the mintage to the number ordered during that time. Mintage could further be controlled by limiting the quantity allowed to be ordered by a single individual or account. It's more important for collectors to be able to obtain new Mint issues for their sets, than for the Mint to concern itself about what speculators might or might not do.
I disagree. It’s more important to grow the tent than shrink the tent. You look at demographics in general for the U.S. and demographics in specific for Mint customers and you see the Mint is in a world of hurt. The Mint shouldn’t be engaging in class warfare and deciding who should or shouldn’t be purchasing coins. The Mint should do everything in its power to quit hemorrhaging customers and hemorrhaging profits...
If the Mint treats its existing customers shabbily (as in the recent ASE debacle) it's hard to see how it's going to retain a solid customer base long-term. I would be perfectly happy with a one-month to three-month ordering period with no quantity limit. The aftermarket can take care of itself.
If you want to Continue hemorrhaging customers and hemorrhaging profits then your idea accomplishes both. What the Mint has been doing in the past is not currently working.
The horse that gets you in the ditch isn’t the horse that gets you out of the ditch.
The only thing the Mint can do now to save itself is Expand it’s customer base and the release of the 2019-S Enhanced Reverse Proof American Silver Eagle accomplished that goal...
Most members of the Mint’s “expanded customer base” were unable to complete their orders, just as most existing collectors were. How many of them enjoyed the experience and are eager to do business with the Mint again? (For that matter, how many successful buyers will show up at the Mint’s website again, except to participate in the next guaranteed flip?)
Coin collecting as a hobby has been losing members for a long time, and for reasons that have nothing to do with the quality of the Mint’s customer service. Treating existing customers shabbily will not improve the Mint’s long-term customer retention, it will likely have the opposite effect.
Less than 5 percent of the Mint’s net income is derived from Numismatic products, so maintaining its profitability in this sector is not a life-or-death matter. Nor should it be. But the Mint should strive to make ordering its Numismatic products a pleasant experience for both new and existing customers. Gimmicks such as the recent ASE release do not accomplish this goal.
I Disagree. The Mint didn't treat any customers shabbily. Everyone had a fighting chance to get a coin. I was on the website for 18 minutes and I never thought I was treated any other way than I thought would happen when you have 260,000 customers going after 30,000 coins. This coin was Not a Gimmick. Just a limited mintage on the Most Popular coin the Mint is currently selling...
Really? Suppose a private company were to issue a popular collectible and have hundreds of thousands of happy customers buying each new one as it comes out, to keep their sets current and complete. All of a sudden the company announces that the latest collectible in the set will be limited to a number far below known demand. Collectors will have to fight speculators and other collectors to have a chance at owning one, and those that miss out will have to pay big bucks in the aftermarket to keep their sets complete. Do you think, after this experience, most of the existing collectors will feel the same way about the company, or will have the same desire to continue adding to their sets?
It has been Estimated that there are ~ 20,000 people that have a complete set of the American Silver Eagles. That means that there were 20,000 in line for 30,000 coins that actually Needed the coin. The REST are like you and me, Looking for a coin that will be worth More on the Secondary market than you paid for it. Plain and Simple. Even IF you are One of the 20,000, you had the same odds as the other 260,000 people on the site...
The Secondary Market is WHY this coin is so valuable and why this coin was such a LAUNCH SUCCESS and why People like you are so upset. You are Probably Not One of the 20,000, you are Probably One of the 260,000...
And how many people are working on a complete set of Silver Eagles, with the hope of completing it someday? And of this number, how many will quit trying to complete their collection after this fiasco, and will no longer place orders with the Mint? Most collectors aren't interested in participating in mad scrambles on the internet.
Actually, in round numbers, I think zero. Maybe 6. But probably zero.
It is very easy to rationalize NOT including this coin in your set. It also doesn't necessarily bother people to have an aspirational goal. How many Lincoln collectors have an empty s-VDB or 55/55 slot in their collection? They don't just throw away the rest of it because they can't afford to complete it.
Far more people stop collecting when they discover that their "investment" is going down in value. This goosing of interest in the set may well keep a few people from abandoning their collection than it will encourage people to abandon their collection.
The 1909-S VDB cent wasn't an intentional rarity and the 1955/1955 cent was an error. The 2019-S ERP was an intentional rarity and the process to distribute it was deeply flawed. Same with the 1995-W.
Anyone wanting to continue striving for a complete set of Silver Eagles will have to cope with the real possibility that the Mint will repeat its "successful" release of an artificial rarity and make it that much more difficult and expensive to maintain a complete set.
@jmlanzaf said:
The ONLY solution to eliminate speculators is to have actual unlimited mintages because then coin dealers and speculators won't want any part of it. But then you've also killed all interest in commemoratives as collectibles.
How about limiting the ordering window to two weeks? It wouldn't eliminate speculators, but neither would it shut out collectors or anyone else who wants the coin. It worked for the 1998 Kennedy two-coin silver set, which included the set-only 1998-S burnished silver Kennedy half. Final mintage was about 62,000.
It might. But, again, I think this is essentially the equivalent of an unlimited mintage.
Limiting the ordering period to two weeks limits the mintage to the number ordered during that time. Mintage could further be controlled by limiting the quantity allowed to be ordered by a single individual or account. It's more important for collectors to be able to obtain new Mint issues for their sets, than for the Mint to concern itself about what speculators might or might not do.
I disagree. It’s more important to grow the tent than shrink the tent. You look at demographics in general for the U.S. and demographics in specific for Mint customers and you see the Mint is in a world of hurt. The Mint shouldn’t be engaging in class warfare and deciding who should or shouldn’t be purchasing coins. The Mint should do everything in its power to quit hemorrhaging customers and hemorrhaging profits...
If the Mint treats its existing customers shabbily (as in the recent ASE debacle) it's hard to see how it's going to retain a solid customer base long-term. I would be perfectly happy with a one-month to three-month ordering period with no quantity limit. The aftermarket can take care of itself.
If you want to Continue hemorrhaging customers and hemorrhaging profits then your idea accomplishes both. What the Mint has been doing in the past is not currently working.
The horse that gets you in the ditch isn’t the horse that gets you out of the ditch.
The only thing the Mint can do now to save itself is Expand it’s customer base and the release of the 2019-S Enhanced Reverse Proof American Silver Eagle accomplished that goal...
Most members of the Mint’s “expanded customer base” were unable to complete their orders, just as most existing collectors were. How many of them enjoyed the experience and are eager to do business with the Mint again? (For that matter, how many successful buyers will show up at the Mint’s website again, except to participate in the next guaranteed flip?)
Coin collecting as a hobby has been losing members for a long time, and for reasons that have nothing to do with the quality of the Mint’s customer service. Treating existing customers shabbily will not improve the Mint’s long-term customer retention, it will likely have the opposite effect.
Less than 5 percent of the Mint’s net income is derived from Numismatic products, so maintaining its profitability in this sector is not a life-or-death matter. Nor should it be. But the Mint should strive to make ordering its Numismatic products a pleasant experience for both new and existing customers. Gimmicks such as the recent ASE release do not accomplish this goal.
I Disagree. The Mint didn't treat any customers shabbily. Everyone had a fighting chance to get a coin. I was on the website for 18 minutes and I never thought I was treated any other way than I thought would happen when you have 260,000 customers going after 30,000 coins. This coin was Not a Gimmick. Just a limited mintage on the Most Popular coin the Mint is currently selling...
Really? Suppose a private company were to issue a popular collectible and have hundreds of thousands of happy customers buying each new one as it comes out, to keep their sets current and complete. All of a sudden the company announces that the latest collectible in the set will be limited to a number far below known demand. Collectors will have to fight speculators and other collectors to have a chance at owning one, and those that miss out will have to pay big bucks in the aftermarket to keep their sets complete. Do you think, after this experience, most of the existing collectors will feel the same way about the company, or will have the same desire to continue adding to their sets?
It has been Estimated that there are ~ 20,000 people that have a complete set of the American Silver Eagles. That means that there were 20,000 in line for 30,000 coins that actually Needed the coin. The REST are like you and me, Looking for a coin that will be worth More on the Secondary market than you paid for it. Plain and Simple. Even IF you are One of the 20,000, you had the same odds as the other 260,000 people on the site...
The Secondary Market is WHY this coin is so valuable and why this coin was such a LAUNCH SUCCESS and why People like you are so upset. You are Probably Not One of the 20,000, you are Probably One of the 260,000...
And how many people are working on a complete set of Silver Eagles, with the hope of completing it someday? And of this number, how many will quit trying to complete their collection after this fiasco, and will no longer place orders with the Mint? Most collectors aren't interested in participating in mad scrambles on the internet.
Actually, in round numbers, I think zero. Maybe 6. But probably zero.
It is very easy to rationalize NOT including this coin in your set. It also doesn't necessarily bother people to have an aspirational goal. How many Lincoln collectors have an empty s-VDB or 55/55 slot in their collection? They don't just throw away the rest of it because they can't afford to complete it.
Far more people stop collecting when they discover that their "investment" is going down in value. This goosing of interest in the set may well keep a few people from abandoning their collection than it will encourage people to abandon their collection.
The 1909-S VDB cent wasn't an intentional rarity and the 1955/1955 cent was an error. The 2019-S ERP was an intentional rarity and the process to distribute it was deeply flawed. Same with the 1995-W.
Anyone wanting to continue striving for a complete set of Silver Eagles will have to cope with the real possibility that the Mint will repeat its "successful" release of an artificial rarity and make it that much more difficult and expensive to maintain a complete set.
I don’t see that happening. The Mint accomplished what they intended to do. They Wanted Secondary Market pricing. A continuation of lower mintages circumvents that process...
@jmlanzaf said:
The ONLY solution to eliminate speculators is to have actual unlimited mintages because then coin dealers and speculators won't want any part of it. But then you've also killed all interest in commemoratives as collectibles.
How about limiting the ordering window to two weeks? It wouldn't eliminate speculators, but neither would it shut out collectors or anyone else who wants the coin. It worked for the 1998 Kennedy two-coin silver set, which included the set-only 1998-S burnished silver Kennedy half. Final mintage was about 62,000.
It might. But, again, I think this is essentially the equivalent of an unlimited mintage.
Limiting the ordering period to two weeks limits the mintage to the number ordered during that time. Mintage could further be controlled by limiting the quantity allowed to be ordered by a single individual or account. It's more important for collectors to be able to obtain new Mint issues for their sets, than for the Mint to concern itself about what speculators might or might not do.
I disagree. It’s more important to grow the tent than shrink the tent. You look at demographics in general for the U.S. and demographics in specific for Mint customers and you see the Mint is in a world of hurt. The Mint shouldn’t be engaging in class warfare and deciding who should or shouldn’t be purchasing coins. The Mint should do everything in its power to quit hemorrhaging customers and hemorrhaging profits...
If the Mint treats its existing customers shabbily (as in the recent ASE debacle) it's hard to see how it's going to retain a solid customer base long-term. I would be perfectly happy with a one-month to three-month ordering period with no quantity limit. The aftermarket can take care of itself.
If you want to Continue hemorrhaging customers and hemorrhaging profits then your idea accomplishes both. What the Mint has been doing in the past is not currently working.
The horse that gets you in the ditch isn’t the horse that gets you out of the ditch.
The only thing the Mint can do now to save itself is Expand it’s customer base and the release of the 2019-S Enhanced Reverse Proof American Silver Eagle accomplished that goal...
Most members of the Mint’s “expanded customer base” were unable to complete their orders, just as most existing collectors were. How many of them enjoyed the experience and are eager to do business with the Mint again? (For that matter, how many successful buyers will show up at the Mint’s website again, except to participate in the next guaranteed flip?)
Coin collecting as a hobby has been losing members for a long time, and for reasons that have nothing to do with the quality of the Mint’s customer service. Treating existing customers shabbily will not improve the Mint’s long-term customer retention, it will likely have the opposite effect.
Less than 5 percent of the Mint’s net income is derived from Numismatic products, so maintaining its profitability in this sector is not a life-or-death matter. Nor should it be. But the Mint should strive to make ordering its Numismatic products a pleasant experience for both new and existing customers. Gimmicks such as the recent ASE release do not accomplish this goal.
I Disagree. The Mint didn't treat any customers shabbily. Everyone had a fighting chance to get a coin. I was on the website for 18 minutes and I never thought I was treated any other way than I thought would happen when you have 260,000 customers going after 30,000 coins. This coin was Not a Gimmick. Just a limited mintage on the Most Popular coin the Mint is currently selling...
Really? Suppose a private company were to issue a popular collectible and have hundreds of thousands of happy customers buying each new one as it comes out, to keep their sets current and complete. All of a sudden the company announces that the latest collectible in the set will be limited to a number far below known demand. Collectors will have to fight speculators and other collectors to have a chance at owning one, and those that miss out will have to pay big bucks in the aftermarket to keep their sets complete. Do you think, after this experience, most of the existing collectors will feel the same way about the company, or will have the same desire to continue adding to their sets?
It has been Estimated that there are ~ 20,000 people that have a complete set of the American Silver Eagles. That means that there were 20,000 in line for 30,000 coins that actually Needed the coin. The REST are like you and me, Looking for a coin that will be worth More on the Secondary market than you paid for it. Plain and Simple. Even IF you are One of the 20,000, you had the same odds as the other 260,000 people on the site...
The Secondary Market is WHY this coin is so valuable and why this coin was such a LAUNCH SUCCESS and why People like you are so upset. You are Probably Not One of the 20,000, you are Probably One of the 260,000...
And how many people are working on a complete set of Silver Eagles, with the hope of completing it someday? And of this number, how many will quit trying to complete their collection after this fiasco, and will no longer place orders with the Mint? Most collectors aren't interested in participating in mad scrambles on the internet.
Actually, in round numbers, I think zero. Maybe 6. But probably zero.
It is very easy to rationalize NOT including this coin in your set. It also doesn't necessarily bother people to have an aspirational goal. How many Lincoln collectors have an empty s-VDB or 55/55 slot in their collection? They don't just throw away the rest of it because they can't afford to complete it.
Far more people stop collecting when they discover that their "investment" is going down in value. This goosing of interest in the set may well keep a few people from abandoning their collection than it will encourage people to abandon their collection.
The 1909-S VDB cent wasn't an intentional rarity and the 1955/1955 cent was an error. The 2019-S ERP was an intentional rarity and the process to distribute it was deeply flawed. Same with the 1995-W.
Anyone wanting to continue striving for a complete set of Silver Eagles will have to cope with the real possibility that the Mint will repeat its "successful" release of an artificial rarity and make it that much more difficult and expensive to maintain a complete set.
I don’t see that happening. The Mint accomplished what they intended to do. They Wanted Secondary Market pricing. A continuation of lower mintages circumvents that process...
I haven't seen any statements by Mint officials that they accomplished what they intended to do, or that they wanted higher prices on the secondary market.
I am one of the rare 1% silver eagle set collectors mentioned above who happens to collect all of them. I feel so special now LOL
I am bidding on one of these very soon, around $2,000, to keep my set complete. It is not anything other than an addiction, and like most addictions quite enjoyable for a while.
I would have liked getting a graded PCGS 70 coin direct from the Mint, but that just did not happen. The challenge of actually getting top examples of these makes it all the more fun to me no matter all the various methods proposed. Bots, and all.
@3stars said:
interesting reading about how to make this more fair, but my idea is a mix of many previously stated. How about for low mintage releases we do a 24 hour open period - you checkout and everything, but that only gets you to the main event. After the 24 hours, the mint does a cursory check on things like same address, etc (assumes the mint upgrades their servers /database ability) and throws those orders away. Then when the list is scrubbed, the remaining orders are picked at random for fulfillment. Combines the lottery option with the free for all option.
ANYTIME you have ANY type of lottery system it HELPS the dealers or anyone able to get get more entries in the process...
And the current system prevented that? Dealers have the networks and resources to beat the little guy in every scenario.
say, for 6 months. and then stops making it.
everyone wins this way
Or everyone loses. The secondary market will be non-existent. All Mint issues will drop in value. That's NEVER good for business.
It would also create production issues. You couldn't strike the coins in advance of the issue. If you struck a limited number in advance, you would end up with backorders. That might make some lucky people First Strike winners at the expense of others.
It will certainly be "fair" but it won't do much for collectors of commems. I'd almost rather see them stop making them altogether for 5 or 10 years.
@3stars said:
interesting reading about how to make this more fair, but my idea is a mix of many previously stated. How about for low mintage releases we do a 24 hour open period - you checkout and everything, but that only gets you to the main event. After the 24 hours, the mint does a cursory check on things like same address, etc (assumes the mint upgrades their servers /database ability) and throws those orders away. Then when the list is scrubbed, the remaining orders are picked at random for fulfillment. Combines the lottery option with the free for all option.
ANYTIME you have ANY type of lottery system it HELPS the dealers or anyone able to get get more entries in the process...
And the current system prevented that? Dealers have the networks and resources to beat the little guy in every scenario.
No, the current system doesn't "prevent" it. A lottery, however, would make it worse. It is much harder to marshall hundreds of people all available at 12:00 on Thursday than it would be to marshall thousands of people available at any old time.
The big difference between complaining now and complaining in the past...is the internet...and the ability of a relatively few cranks to amplify their crankiness.
Can you imagine if the internet existed in the 1960s when the silver dollar coin bags were leaving the vaults and only those near a major Treasury outlet were able to back up the truck and buy thousands of potentially rare silver coins at face value!
@RichR said:
The big difference between complaining now and complaining in the past...is the internet...and the ability of a relatively few cranks to amplify their crankiness.
Can you imagine if the internet existed in the 1960s when the silver dollar coin bags were leaving the vaults and only those near a major Treasury outlet were able to back up the truck and buy thousands of potentially rare silver coins at face value!
There's a local octagenarian who went down with a few friends. He still tells the story about once per year. They each had just about enough money for one bag and the trip. After they went through the line, a dealer was out front who paid them to go through the line again for him. They went through several times and paid for the trip off the profits. One of the bags the dealer got was a bag of seated dollars.
So...nothing much has changed, it's just faster and easier now!
@Overdate said:
For those who think the Mint's process was "fair", please read the following (including the comment at the bottom).
It says it all.
Clicked the link, but will admit to not finishing the article as the whining got to be too much. I did read the comment, which ended like this:
"It was then I realized I will never have the means to log in for every special release and now only collect classic coins."
You can buy one of these eagles right now for about 20x issue price. I'm curious which classic coins the writer is collecting, that won't set him back at least 20x face value (issue price).
What would be the issue with publishing the mintage but Ryder retains ability to mint more should conditions merit? Whether he ever did it or not wouldn’t matter. I’d think large scale flipping gets scary if that threat exists.
@Overdate said:
For those who think the Mint's process was "fair", please read the following (including the comment at the bottom).
It says it all.
Clicked the link, but will admit to not finishing the article as the whining got to be too much. I did read the comment, which ended like this:
"It was then I realized I will never have the means to log in for every special release and now only collect classic coins."
You can buy one of these eagles right now for about 20x issue price. I'm curious which classic coins the writer is collecting, that won't set him back at least 20x face value (issue price).
Affordability is not calculated as a percentage of issue price. A collector could obtain a nice head start on a circulated 19th century type set for the price of one PR69 2019-S reverse proof silver eagle.
@3stars said:
interesting reading about how to make this more fair, but my idea is a mix of many previously stated. How about for low mintage releases we do a 24 hour open period - you checkout and everything, but that only gets you to the main event. After the 24 hours, the mint does a cursory check on things like same address, etc (assumes the mint upgrades their servers /database ability) and throws those orders away. Then when the list is scrubbed, the remaining orders are picked at random for fulfillment. Combines the lottery option with the free for all option.
ANYTIME you have ANY type of lottery system it HELPS the dealers or anyone able to get get more entries in the process...
And the current system prevented that? Dealers have the networks and resources to beat the little guy in every scenario.
The current system mitigated it to some extent. The dealers didn’t get what they initially wanted, thus the High pricing on the Secondary Market...
@bombtech25 said:
What would be the issue with publishing the mintage but Ryder retains ability to mint more should conditions merit? Whether he ever did it or not wouldn’t matter. I’d think large scale flipping gets scary if that threat exists.
It would be dishonest. What is a mintage limit when it is not a limit?
Imagine the following scenario: Coin sells out. Collectors start buying on the secondary market for 20%, 50%, 100% more than the issue price. Then, the Mint announces another 100k are being minted. Secondary market collapses and you've just fleeced all your precious "real collectors" out of real money.
This actually happened with the 2017 Enhanced uncirculated set. It sold out on the 1st day. Secondary market prices went from $30 issue price to $60 to $90 on the secondary market. But then one of the big players canceled their order for 15,000 units. This created a cascade of returns reaching close to 40,000. The market price plummeted back to the issue price and never recovered even after it eventually sold out again.
All of these games would only serve to remove buyer confidence in the Mint and discourage anyone from buying Mint products.
@bombtech25 said:
What would be the issue with publishing the mintage but Ryder retains ability to mint more should conditions merit? Whether he ever did it or not wouldn’t matter. I’d think large scale flipping gets scary if that threat exists.
It would be dishonest. What is a mintage limit when it is not a limit?
Imagine the following scenario: Coin sells out. Collectors start buying on the secondary market for 20%, 50%, 100% more than the issue price. Then, the Mint announces another 100k are being minted. Secondary market collapses and you've just fleeced all your precious "real collectors" out of real money.
This actually happened with the 2017 Enhanced uncirculated set. It sold out on the 1st day. Secondary market prices went from $30 issue price to $60 to $90 on the secondary market. But then one of the big players canceled their order for 15,000 units. This created a cascade of returns reaching close to 40,000. The market price plummeted back to the issue price and never recovered even after it eventually sold out again.
All of these games would only serve to remove buyer confidence in the Mint and discourage anyone from buying Mint products.
My 2 cents: I get the frustration of people who didn't get the coin, but I think this was good for ASE collecting in general. The increased interest this release generated translates into higher demand (and profit/value if that's your thing). If you aren't one of the 20k who have a complete set, but you got this, then maybe you feel better about the possibility of being able to complete the set. If it kills interest, maybe that makes it easier for ME to complete the set ;-)
The following are statistics for the Last 1,000 sold (Ending December 27, 2019) verifiable prices of the OGP 2019-S Enhanced Reverse Proof American Silver Eagles sold on eBay.
I only used the Last 1,000 sold verifiable prices because I wanted to catch the Slope pre peak and the Slope post peak.
Peak pricing came for both the Mean and Median on Wednesday, December 11, 2019
Mean Price of the 2019-S Enhance Reverse Proof American Silver Eagle:
Mean Sales price of the 1st decile of the Last 1,000 sold = $1,235.12
Mean Sales price of the 2nd decile of the Last 1,000 sold = $1,331.01
Mean Sales price of the 3rd decile of the Last 1,000 sold = $1,330.02
Mean Sales price of the 4th decile of the Last 1,000 sold = $1,349.85
Mean Sales price of the 5th decile of the Last 1,000 sold = $1,441.29
Mean Sales price of the 6th decile of the Last 1,000 sold = $1,524.43
Mean Sales price of the 7th decile of the Last 1,000 sold = $1,638.86
Mean Sales price of the 8th decile of the Last 1,000 sold = $1,714.32
Mean Sales price of the 9th decile of the Last 1,000 sold = $1,572.16
Mean Sales price of the 10th decile of the Last 1,000 sold = $1,442.60
Median Price of the 2019-S Enhance Reverse Proof American Silver Eagle:
Median Sales price of the 1st decile of the Last 1,000 sold = $1,259.50
Median Sales price of the 2nd decile of the Last 1,000 sold = $1,354.17
Median Sales price of the 3rd decile of the Last 1,000 sold = $1,344.45
Median Sales price of the 4th decile of the Last 1,000 sold = $1,381.00
Median Sales price of the 5th decile of the Last 1,000 sold = $1,491.50
Median Sales price of the 6th decile of the Last 1,000 sold = $1,558.97
Median Sales price of the 7th decile of the Last 1,000 sold = $1,649.00
Median Sales price of the 8th decile of the Last 1,000 sold = $1,750.00
Median Sales price of the 9th decile of the Last 1,000 sold = $1,567.50
Median Sales price of the 10th decile of the Last 1,000 sold = $1,437.50
The following are statistics for the Last 50 sold (Ending December 27, 2019) Auction Only prices (under $2,500.00) of the PCGS PR70 vs. NGC PF70 for the 2019-S Enhanced Reverse Proof American Silver Eagles sold on eBay.
Mean Sales price for the Last 50 eBay Sold Auction Only ( under $2,500.00) PCGS PR70 = $2,280.43
Mean Sales price for the Last 50 eBay Sold Auction Only ( under $2,500.00) NGC PF70 = $2,048.13
Median Sales price for the Last 50 eBay Sold Auction Only (under $2,500.00) PCGS PR70 = $2,275.38
Median Sales price for the Last 50 eBay Sold Auction Only (under $2,500.00) NGC PF70 = $2,034.35
so the point is that PCGS graded 70's are considered by collectors/buyers to be the superior and more discerning grading company. that's why I went with PCGS for my first grading experience. I know that the 70 I received was not taken lightly by the graders. re-sale value, from my experience, has always been enhanced by the PCGS label being attached - no matter what coin that's encased. thanks for the update on this coin's recent activity. I have seen a few PCGS 70's go for $1999-2099 in the last few days so it looks like a downward trend, at least until after the new year, where we will know for sure which way the wind blows.
Comments
Exactly. I don't try to order coins like the ERP because I don't want to screw around with the hassle of ordering online in what's guaranteed to be a circus and I certainly wouldn't try to convince anybody else to do so for me. If I could have sent in an order in a lottery, I would have done so without hesitation and I'd have gotten a few others to to the same. If a lottery had been used here, there'd have been more competition for the coins, for sure. How much more? 2X? 3X? And at the end of the day, people would have still complained.
Post Xmas crankiness ensues; get it out!!
Thank you US Mint for an early gift.
This remains the number one thread topic for the number one coin release.
And at the end of the day, people would have still complained.
Lotteries, random chances, long straw, short straw, frequent flyers, first in, website speeds, bots, long term customers, new collectors, high paying dealers, flippers, rock paper scissors, oldest, youngest, shortest, tallest....any system you can think of will produce thousands of losers who will complain and think of a more fair system (one that they could win). Limited mintage= limited ownerships. Not everyone can have this new rare coin. Not everyone can have a 95 W...why aren't there more complaints on that? Just sayin'
I'm actually surprised at the difficulties some had. What I find interesting was when I was waiting at the Baltimore show to get mine. There were 3 guys in their early 20's there on their I-phones. While it took a few tries..all 3 of them were able to buy another on the Mint Website!
I Disagree. The Mint didn't treat any customers shabbily. Everyone had a fighting chance to get a coin. I was on the website for 18 minutes and I never thought I was treated any other way than I thought would happen when you have 260,000 customers going after 30,000 coins. This coin was Not a Gimmick. Just a limited mintage on the Most Popular coin the Mint is currently selling...
"I guess even if it works perfectly we could still find reason to complain."
I'm Not complaining. The Launch worked just like the Mint wanted it to work. A Very Successful Launch...
How about this. Everyone on here that contn> @Overdate said:
That's just Not a true statement. The Mint has No Net Income on the circulating side. The Mint only has seigniorage on circulating coins. The Mint had a Net Loss of $21.2 Million for FY2018 and my Guesstimate is that the Mint will lose even more in FY2019...
LOL
It's been so much fun - even with the complaining.]
Anyone want to weigh in on why the House Hold Limit of 1 is unfair because you can't buy one for each of the grandkids?
Here's the annual report if anyone wants to read it.
https://usmint.gov/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/2018-Annual-Report-ADA.pdf
This is why I often say that as a taxpayer, I wish the Mint would get out of the collectible coin business. Net loss of $15 million on $293 million in sales.
In fact, they should probably get out of the bullion business with a 1% margin. They lost money on both platinum and palladium (2017 bullion). They also should definitely stop making cents and probably nickels!
How are the prices on the 69's and 70's holding? Have not been following this to much as I sold my one and only and I am happy to report the buyer received his new coin 1 day before Christmas which is amazing since I sent in a few days before christmas from Alaska to DC! Thats a long trip one of the longest I had to send. But they left me a nice feedback rating on Ebay.
Really? Suppose a private company were to issue a popular collectible and have hundreds of thousands of happy customers buying each new one as it comes out, to keep their sets current and complete. All of a sudden the company announces that the latest collectible in the set will be limited to a number far below known demand. Collectors will have to fight speculators and other collectors to have a chance at owning one, and those that miss out will have to pay big bucks in the aftermarket to keep their sets complete. Do you think, after this experience, most of the existing collectors will feel the same way about the company, or will have the same desire to continue adding to their sets?
My Adolph A. Weinman signature
Actually, yes. The difficulty of acquiring it usually enhances interest.
About 30 years ago, a regional department store had a limited edition Christmas village set. They released one each Sunday for about 2 months with very limited numbers at each store. The ladies lined up every week at opening and raced to the sales area - my mother included - elbowing each other and fighting for the boxes. LOL. Every week, there were just as many people or more. They were trophies and the competition fueled their desire, it didn't diminish it.
Actually, I check every morning. I just don't feel the need to inform everyone else since most of you are probably doing the same.
I wouldn't be surprised if we've seen the last of them, but I suspect there may be one more small release, although it could be weeks from now.
There were plenty of complaints about the 1995-W when it was launched. But it didn't sell out, and everyone willing to pay the price ($999 for the 4-coin Gold Eagle proof set with the 1995-W Silver Eagle) was able to obtain one. Single coins were available in the aftermarket for about $250 during Mint sales of the set and for sometime thereafter. Even so, the creation of an artificial rarity probably led some collectors to quit collecting proof Silver Eagles, and diminished the popularity of the Mint and its coin programs.
My Adolph A. Weinman signature
@Overdate said:
It has been Estimated that there are ~ 20,000 people that have a complete set of the American Silver Eagles. That means that there were 20,000 in line for 30,000 coins that actually Needed the coin. The REST are like you and me, Looking for a coin that will be worth More on the Secondary market than you paid for it. Plain and Simple. Even IF you are One of the 20,000, you had the same odds as the other 260,000 people on the site...
The Secondary Market is WHY this coin is so valuable and why this coin was such a LAUNCH SUCCESS and why People like you are so upset. You are Probably Not One of the 20,000, you are Probably One of the 260,000...
In that case, the popularity was tied to the fact that it was a limited edition from the outset, with trophies and competition being part of the "game". Proof Silver Eagles are a different story. Most collectors enjoy their sets for their own sake, and are not all that interested in trophies or competition. Turning their collector interests into a gladiator competition will not encourage them to continue collecting the series.
My Adolph A. Weinman signature
interesting reading about how to make this more fair, but my idea is a mix of many previously stated. How about for low mintage releases we do a 24 hour open period - you checkout and everything, but that only gets you to the main event. After the 24 hours, the mint does a cursory check on things like same address, etc (assumes the mint upgrades their servers /database ability) and throws those orders away. Then when the list is scrubbed, the remaining orders are picked at random for fulfillment. Combines the lottery option with the free for all option.
ANYTIME you have ANY type of lottery system it HELPS the dealers or anyone able to get get more entries in the process...
And how many people are working on a complete set of Silver Eagles, with the hope of completing it someday? And of this number, how many will quit trying to complete their collection after this fiasco, and will no longer place orders with the Mint? Most collectors aren't interested in participating in mad scrambles on the internet.
My Adolph A. Weinman signature
This.
The more hurdles you put in their to make it "fair", the more it benefits the people willing to throw money at the coin.
I had 26 coins. How? I offered people $500 WEEKS BEFORE the release to sell to me. I had 80 people/coins locked in and 26 carried through. And I'm a small fish.
Actually, in round numbers, I think zero. Maybe 6. But probably zero.
It is very easy to rationalize NOT including this coin in your set. It also doesn't necessarily bother people to have an aspirational goal. How many Lincoln collectors have an empty s-VDB or 55/55 slot in their collection? They don't just throw away the rest of it because they can't afford to complete it.
Far more people stop collecting when they discover that their "investment" is going down in value. This goosing of interest in the set may well keep a few people from abandoning their collection than it will encourage people to abandon their collection.
You are a grouchy old dude period. No doubt a baby boomer.
100% positive transactions with SurfinxHI, bigole, 1madman, collectorcoins, proofmorgan, Luke Marshall, silver pop, golden egg, point five zero,coin22lover, alohagary, blaircountycoin,joebb21
"And how many people are working on a complete set of Silver Eagles, with the hope of completing it someday?"
Out of 20,000 I would guess Less than 1%. That would be Less than 200. I would say you've Gained Thousands by this Successful Launch BECAUSE of the Secondary Market Potential...
For those who think the Mint's process was "fair", please read the following (including the comment at the bottom).
It says it all.
https://numismaticnews.net/article/features/enhanced-reverse-proof-sale-a-fiasco
My Adolph A. Weinman signature
Just Another example of Sour Grapes...
The 1909-S VDB cent wasn't an intentional rarity and the 1955/1955 cent was an error. The 2019-S ERP was an intentional rarity and the process to distribute it was deeply flawed. Same with the 1995-W.
Anyone wanting to continue striving for a complete set of Silver Eagles will have to cope with the real possibility that the Mint will repeat its "successful" release of an artificial rarity and make it that much more difficult and expensive to maintain a complete set.
My Adolph A. Weinman signature
how about..........
mint makes all products to demand.
say, for 6 months. and then stops making it.
everyone wins this way
I don’t see that happening. The Mint accomplished what they intended to do. They Wanted Secondary Market pricing. A continuation of lower mintages circumvents that process...
I haven't seen any statements by Mint officials that they accomplished what they intended to do, or that they wanted higher prices on the secondary market.
My Adolph A. Weinman signature
I am one of the rare 1% silver eagle set collectors mentioned above who happens to collect all of them. I feel so special now
LOL
I am bidding on one of these very soon, around $2,000, to keep my set complete. It is not anything other than an addiction, and like most addictions quite enjoyable for a while.
I would have liked getting a graded PCGS 70 coin direct from the Mint, but that just did not happen. The challenge of actually getting top examples of these makes it all the more fun to me no matter all the various methods proposed. Bots, and all.
National Commemorative Medals of the U.S. Mint:
https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/u-s-coins/medals-tokens/national-commemorative-medals-united-states-mint-1940-present/alltimeset/195526
And the current system prevented that? Dealers have the networks and resources to beat the little guy in every scenario.
Or everyone loses. The secondary market will be non-existent. All Mint issues will drop in value. That's NEVER good for business.
It would also create production issues. You couldn't strike the coins in advance of the issue. If you struck a limited number in advance, you would end up with backorders. That might make some lucky people First Strike winners at the expense of others.
It will certainly be "fair" but it won't do much for collectors of commems. I'd almost rather see them stop making them altogether for 5 or 10 years.
No, the current system doesn't "prevent" it. A lottery, however, would make it worse. It is much harder to marshall hundreds of people all available at 12:00 on Thursday than it would be to marshall thousands of people available at any old time.
The big difference between complaining now and complaining in the past...is the internet...and the ability of a relatively few cranks to amplify their crankiness.
Can you imagine if the internet existed in the 1960s when the silver dollar coin bags were leaving the vaults and only those near a major Treasury outlet were able to back up the truck and buy thousands of potentially rare silver coins at face value!
There's a local octagenarian who went down with a few friends. He still tells the story about once per year. They each had just about enough money for one bag and the trip. After they went through the line, a dealer was out front who paid them to go through the line again for him. They went through several times and paid for the trip off the profits. One of the bags the dealer got was a bag of seated dollars.
So...nothing much has changed, it's just faster and easier now!
Clicked the link, but will admit to not finishing the article as the whining got to be too much. I did read the comment, which ended like this:
"It was then I realized I will never have the means to log in for every special release and now only collect classic coins."
You can buy one of these eagles right now for about 20x issue price. I'm curious which classic coins the writer is collecting, that won't set him back at least 20x face value (issue price).
What would be the issue with publishing the mintage but Ryder retains ability to mint more should conditions merit? Whether he ever did it or not wouldn’t matter. I’d think large scale flipping gets scary if that threat exists.
Affordability is not calculated as a percentage of issue price. A collector could obtain a nice head start on a circulated 19th century type set for the price of one PR69 2019-S reverse proof silver eagle.
My Adolph A. Weinman signature
The current system mitigated it to some extent. The dealers didn’t get what they initially wanted, thus the High pricing on the Secondary Market...
apparently there was no release today.
Apparently, you are correct...[goes back to making coffee]
It would be dishonest. What is a mintage limit when it is not a limit?
Imagine the following scenario: Coin sells out. Collectors start buying on the secondary market for 20%, 50%, 100% more than the issue price. Then, the Mint announces another 100k are being minted. Secondary market collapses and you've just fleeced all your precious "real collectors" out of real money.
This actually happened with the 2017 Enhanced uncirculated set. It sold out on the 1st day. Secondary market prices went from $30 issue price to $60 to $90 on the secondary market. But then one of the big players canceled their order for 15,000 units. This created a cascade of returns reaching close to 40,000. The market price plummeted back to the issue price and never recovered even after it eventually sold out again.
All of these games would only serve to remove buyer confidence in the Mint and discourage anyone from buying Mint products.
That was actually one of the biggest contributors to the collapse of the sport card market. Creating rarities and eaking more into the marketplace.
My 2 cents: I get the frustration of people who didn't get the coin, but I think this was good for ASE collecting in general. The increased interest this release generated translates into higher demand (and profit/value if that's your thing). If you aren't one of the 20k who have a complete set, but you got this, then maybe you feel better about the possibility of being able to complete the set. If it kills interest, maybe that makes it easier for ME to complete the set ;-)
The following are statistics for the Last 1,000 sold (Ending December 27, 2019) verifiable prices of the OGP 2019-S Enhanced Reverse Proof American Silver Eagles sold on eBay.
I only used the Last 1,000 sold verifiable prices because I wanted to catch the Slope pre peak and the Slope post peak.
Peak pricing came for both the Mean and Median on Wednesday, December 11, 2019
Mean Price of the 2019-S Enhance Reverse Proof American Silver Eagle:
Median Price of the 2019-S Enhance Reverse Proof American Silver Eagle:
if I thought I wasn't a numbers man before, this solidifies it for me. holy moly,
No release today
Collector
75 Positive BST transactions buying and selling with 45 members and counting!
instagram.com/klnumismatics
The following are statistics for the Last 50 sold (Ending December 27, 2019) Auction Only prices (under $2,500.00) of the PCGS PR70 vs. NGC PF70 for the 2019-S Enhanced Reverse Proof American Silver Eagles sold on eBay.
Mean Sales price for the Last 50 eBay Sold Auction Only ( under $2,500.00) PCGS PR70 = $2,280.43
Mean Sales price for the Last 50 eBay Sold Auction Only ( under $2,500.00) NGC PF70 = $2,048.13
Median Sales price for the Last 50 eBay Sold Auction Only (under $2,500.00) PCGS PR70 = $2,275.38
Median Sales price for the Last 50 eBay Sold Auction Only (under $2,500.00) NGC PF70 = $2,034.35
so the point is that PCGS graded 70's are considered by collectors/buyers to be the superior and more discerning grading company. that's why I went with PCGS for my first grading experience. I know that the 70 I received was not taken lightly by the graders. re-sale value, from my experience, has always been enhanced by the PCGS label being attached - no matter what coin that's encased. thanks for the update on this coin's recent activity. I have seen a few PCGS 70's go for $1999-2099 in the last few days so it looks like a downward trend, at least until after the new year, where we will know for sure which way the wind blows.
I'll take the under....
Well, just Love coins, period.