@Halfpence said:
It doesn’t matter why people want to know the names of the companies involved, and it doesn’t matter whether we agree with people upset with this program. What matters is that the Federal government be transparent where they should be. I can tell you with decades of experience, exemption 4 of FOIA (protecting trade secrets) does not apply to the company names of those involved with this program. I anticipate that the appeal will not be successful (because the Mint Director was undoubtedly already involved in this decision, so his decision on the appeal will be no different). But a lawsuit would easily win. The Mint is not accustomed to being held accountable through FOIA, so this is the beginning of their testing the limits of transparency. I hope Coin World pushes this to the courts. Their court fees would be paid by the Mint when they win.
So, should I be able to get your order history via FOIA request?
The FOIA request did not ask for order history; it asked for names.
And names gives you the minimum dollar value of your order.
Would you care if the Mint released just your name?
Maybe you name and just the dollar value of your purchases?
Maybe we could just request the names of all loyalty program beneficiaries. That seems fair
What are grounds for a lawsuit? That we are owed information about a private company because a private company does business with a government agency? Good luck.
Sorry that bots prevented everyone from ordering what they wanted. The Mint has tried to alleviate the bot issue. The last orders went through much better for me, I am sure others can attest. The Mint can prove that they have improved access, so what are the potential damages?
@Halfpence said:
It doesn’t matter why people want to know the names of the companies involved, and it doesn’t matter whether we agree with people upset with this program. What matters is that the Federal government be transparent where they should be. I can tell you with decades of experience, exemption 4 of FOIA (protecting trade secrets) does not apply to the company names of those involved with this program. I anticipate that the appeal will not be successful (because the Mint Director was undoubtedly already involved in this decision, so his decision on the appeal will be no different). But a lawsuit would easily win. The Mint is not accustomed to being held accountable through FOIA, so this is the beginning of their testing the limits of transparency. I hope Coin World pushes this to the courts. Their court fees would be paid by the Mint when they win.
So, should I be able to get your order history via FOIA request?
The FOIA request did not ask for order history; it asked for names, but because you seem to like arguing, I'll anticipate that your next question is if someone could FOIA my name. The answer to that is also no.
The Mint is offering an exclusive program to select companies using criteria that are not entirely objective. Counter to what you've said above, simply spending a large amount of money will not qualify you. Below is an excerpt from their program:
The United States Mint seeks only the most well-established, industry-recognized, and sufficiently capitalized precious metal wholesalers/market-makers to aid in the primary distribution of its silver bullion coin products. Requiring that its APs be highly capitalized ensures that the applying firm will be capable in both up and down markets to actively support a continuous two-way market in large volumes of silver bullion coins during both stable and volatile market conditions. Merely providing a two-way, buy-and-sell retail market in the purchase and sale of silver bullion coins does not in itself satisfy the spirit and intent of this aspect of the criteria. Rather, applying firms should be widely recognized in the silver bullion trading industry as being significant market-makers/wholesalers in the trading of physical silver bullion coin/products. This should, in part, be demonstrated by applicant-provided precious metals trading and bank references. The United States Mint reserves the right to contact these references to validate claims made by the applicant. The United States Mint will conduct the review of a Dun & Bradstreet report on all applicants as part of its credit and financial review of the applicant. The United States Mint reserves the right to consult with other international mints which produce and distribute similar types of silver bullion coins in an attempt to verify the applicant’s industry “market-maker” claims.
This is no different than the Federal government entering a contract with any company, and the contract, dollar amount, and name of the company are all FOIAble.
Is this the authorized purchasers for bullion or the bulk purchaser criteria?
By the way, you do know that PCGS offers preferential pricing to bulk dealers, pricing WELL BELOW what you pay. One person I know who gets PCGS bulk pricing gets under $10 per coin on moderns. Maybe you'd like to take a shot at that practice and let our hosts know how unfair you think it is.
When PCGS starts collecting my tax dollars and involuntary payments from me, I'll gladly take the same position. Until then you are comparing apples to oranges.
@Halfpence said:
It doesn’t matter why people want to know the names of the companies involved, and it doesn’t matter whether we agree with people upset with this program. What matters is that the Federal government be transparent where they should be. I can tell you with decades of experience, exemption 4 of FOIA (protecting trade secrets) does not apply to the company names of those involved with this program. I anticipate that the appeal will not be successful (because the Mint Director was undoubtedly already involved in this decision, so his decision on the appeal will be no different). But a lawsuit would easily win. The Mint is not accustomed to being held accountable through FOIA, so this is the beginning of their testing the limits of transparency. I hope Coin World pushes this to the courts. Their court fees would be paid by the Mint when they win.
So, should I be able to get your order history via FOIA request?
The FOIA request did not ask for order history; it asked for names, but because you seem to like arguing, I'll anticipate that your next question is if someone could FOIA my name. The answer to that is also no.
The Mint is offering an exclusive program to select companies using criteria that are not entirely objective. Counter to what you've said above, simply spending a large amount of money will not qualify you. Below is an excerpt from their program:
The United States Mint seeks only the most well-established, industry-recognized, and sufficiently capitalized precious metal wholesalers/market-makers to aid in the primary distribution of its silver bullion coin products. Requiring that its APs be highly capitalized ensures that the applying firm will be capable in both up and down markets to actively support a continuous two-way market in large volumes of silver bullion coins during both stable and volatile market conditions. Merely providing a two-way, buy-and-sell retail market in the purchase and sale of silver bullion coins does not in itself satisfy the spirit and intent of this aspect of the criteria. Rather, applying firms should be widely recognized in the silver bullion trading industry as being significant market-makers/wholesalers in the trading of physical silver bullion coin/products. This should, in part, be demonstrated by applicant-provided precious metals trading and bank references. The United States Mint reserves the right to contact these references to validate claims made by the applicant. The United States Mint will conduct the review of a Dun & Bradstreet report on all applicants as part of its credit and financial review of the applicant. The United States Mint reserves the right to consult with other international mints which produce and distribute similar types of silver bullion coins in an attempt to verify the applicant’s industry “market-maker” claims.
This is no different than the Federal government entering a contract with any company, and the contract, dollar amount, and name of the company are all FOIAble.
Is this the authorized purchasers for bullion or the bulk purchaser criteria?
Good catch. That is indeed the bullion criteria. The criteria for the authorized bulk purchase program are first to be a member of the numismatic bulk purchase program, and also to spend $500k. The numismatic bulk purchase program requirements are:
To purchase numismatic products through the Numismatic Bulk Purchase Program, an applicant must attest to the fact that it is one of the following:
-a licensed full–time "coin dealer" (any state–licensed firm or company engaged in the commercial sale of coins via storefront, coin shows or online)
-a licensed business involved in the precious metals or numismatic coin industry
-a licensed retailer, bank, credit union or other financial institution willing to expand its business into the numismatic coin industry
By the way, you do know that PCGS offers preferential pricing to bulk dealers, pricing WELL BELOW what you pay. One person I know who gets PCGS bulk pricing gets under $10 per coin on moderns. Maybe you'd like to take a shot at that practice and let our hosts know how unfair you think it is.
When PCGS starts collecting my tax dollars and involuntary payments from me, I'll gladly take the same position. Until then you are comparing apples to oranges.
It's the retail wing of an unsubsidized federal agency so it is more like red delicious vs. Yellow delicious.
During FY 2019, the Mint’s numismatic program
generated $349.6 million in revenue and $1.7 million in
net earnings. This represents an improvement of 19.3%
for revenue and 111.1% for earnings over the previous
year. These impressive results were a key reason the Mint
was able to transfer $540 million to the Treasury General
Fund at the end of FY 2019.
I agree the mint is set up like a business and is completely within it's right to have preferred customers. The fact any of the good stuff trickles to real collectors directly is a small miracle. This is more bigger flippers squeezing out smaller flippers or at least limiting the number of products they can add markup at the right point in the hoopla cycle
I really can't take the lack of logic of some of the posters (ie j.........). These purchaser directly affect access to mint products and take a large cut.
They do NOT pay their 500k for anything, but rather for limited issue products that they alone have access to and then charge what they feel for that product. The 5% is a pittance compared to what they charge - which is their business, but NOT on items that they had unfair access to. Many want only a single specimen for their collection and are NOT flipping so profit is not the motive at all for them. Individual purchasers of a specimen for their collection are NOT in the same group as those with privileged access that are using that access to their advantage.
That Paradise Mint fellow was past the pale and his illogic nearly comical.
If they want the privileges, let them be known.
Love that Milled British (1830-1960) Well, just Love coins, period.
@7Jaguars said:
I really can't take the lack of logic of some of the posters (ie j.........). These purchaser directly affect access to mint products and take a large cut.
They do NOT pay their 500k for anything, but rather for limited issue products that they alone have access to and then charge what they feel for that product. The 5% is a pittance compared to what they charge - which is their business, but NOT on items that they had unfair access to. Many want only a single specimen for their collection and are NOT flipping so profit is not the motive at all for them. Individual purchasers of a specimen for their collection are NOT in the same group as those with privileged access that are using that access to their advantage.
That Paradise Mint fellow was past the pale and his illogic nearly comical.
If they want the privileges, let them be known.
I don't know if we can assume that the majority of people who buy the special stuff directly form the mint only buy 1 example to keep. I don't see how that can be true and the huge mintages could sell out in mins. I suspect there are more mouths to feed than actual collectors with these things and most collectors buy from resellers.
@7Jaguars said:
I really can't take the lack of logic of some of the posters (ie j.........). These purchaser directly affect access to mint products and take a large cut.
They do NOT pay their 500k for anything, but rather for limited issue products that they alone have access to and then charge what they feel for that product. The 5% is a pittance compared to what they charge - which is their business, but NOT on items that they had unfair access to. Many want only a single specimen for their collection and are NOT flipping so profit is not the motive at all for them. Individual purchasers of a specimen for their collection are NOT in the same group as those with privileged access that are using that access to their advantage.
That Paradise Mint fellow was past the pale and his illogic nearly comical.
If they want the privileges, let them be known.
Simply not true. Most of their purchases are likely unlimited products because this program DID NOT EXIST IN THE TWO PREVIOUS YEARS AT ALL.
And I don't think 10% of a product is a "large cut". In fact, Mint subscribers might well have gotten a larger cut of ASE's before you non-subscribers were allowed to purchase them. Let's see some hatred for the subscribers.
So, yes, the lack of logic and information is annoying.
@7Jaguars said:
I really can't take the lack of logic of some of the posters (ie j.........). These purchaser directly affect access to mint products and take a large cut.
They do NOT pay their 500k for anything, but rather for limited issue products that they alone have access to and then charge what they feel for that product. The 5% is a pittance compared to what they charge - which is their business, but NOT on items that they had unfair access to. Many want only a single specimen for their collection and are NOT flipping so profit is not the motive at all for them. Individual purchasers of a specimen for their collection are NOT in the same group as those with privileged access that are using that access to their advantage.
That Paradise Mint fellow was past the pale and his illogic nearly comical.
If they want the privileges, let them be known.
I don't know if we can assume that the majority of people who buy the special stuff directly form the mint only buy 1 example to keep. I don't see how that can be true and the huge mintages could sell out in mins. I suspect there are more mouths to feed than actual collectors with these things and most collectors buy form resellers.
You are correct. It's simply not true. Virtually every one of the people who call themselves "true collectors" were buying extras to sell to defray the cost of the one they were keeping.
How many people bought 1 instead of the HHL of 3 for the Morgan and Peace $s?
@7Jaguars said:
I really can't take the lack of logic of some of the posters (ie j.........). These purchaser directly affect access to mint products and take a large cut.
They do NOT pay their 500k for anything, but rather for limited issue products that they alone have access to and then charge what they feel for that product. The 5% is a pittance compared to what they charge - which is their business, but NOT on items that they had unfair access to. Many want only a single specimen for their collection and are NOT flipping so profit is not the motive at all for them. Individual purchasers of a specimen for their collection are NOT in the same group as those with privileged access that are using that access to their advantage.
That Paradise Mint fellow was past the pale and his illogic nearly comical.
If they want the privileges, let them be known.
I don't know if we can assume that the majority of people who buy the special stuff directly form the mint only buy 1 example to keep. I don't see how that can be true and the huge mintages could sell out in mins. I suspect there are more mouths to feed than actual collectors with these things and most collectors buy form resellers.
You are correct. It's simply not true. Virtually every one of the people who call themselves "true collectors" were buying extras to sell to defray the cost of the one they were keeping.
How many people bought 1 instead of the HHL of 3 for the Morgan and Peace $s?
Me. One for the peace and one S Morgan, missed out on the CC as I was fishing
100% positive transactions with SurfinxHI, bigole, 1madman, collectorcoins, proofmorgan, Luke Marshall, silver pop, golden egg, point five zero,coin22lover, alohagary, blaircountycoin,joebb21
"Approved bulk purchase customers must place at least two qualifying orders of $10,000
(spending at least $20,000) in each fiscal year to maintain membership in the program."
"Approved bulk purchase customers must place at least two qualifying orders of $10,000
(spending at least $20,000) in each fiscal year to maintain membership in the program."
And there are discounts.
Per CoinWorld, there are 18 dealers in the ABPP. Link
"United States Mint Authorized Bulk Purchase Program applicants must be active members in the Mint’s existing Numismatic Bulk Purchase Program (NBPP) in good standing for at least two years, have a two-year revenue average with the NBPP of at least $500,000 annually, and have a history of full compliance with the Mint’s excessive returns policy." Source
The linked application is for the 'Numismatic Bulk Purchase Program' (NBPP);
this thread is about the 'Authorized Bulk Purchase Program' (ABPP).
Applicants for the ABPP must:
~ "be active members in the Mint’s existing Numismatic Bulk Purchase Program (NBPP) in good standing for at least two years";
~ "have a two-year revenue average with the NBPP of at least $500,000 annually";
~ "and have a history of full compliance with the Mint’s excessive returns policy". Source
@MetroD said:
The linked application is for the 'Numismatic Bulk Purchase Program' (NBPP);
this thread is about the 'Authorized Bulk Purchase Program' (ABPP).
If you note what I copy/pasted from the mint's website, it says "For information about the Authorized Bulk Purchase Program, please visit..." with a link.
If the mint's website is in error, that's on them.
edited to add... I would not be at all surprised to learn there are inconsistencies on their website.
@MasonG said:
If you note what I copy/pasted from the mint's website, it says "For information about the Authorized Bulk Purchase Program, please visit..." with a link.
If the mint's website is in error, that's on them.
NOT trying to start an argument.
Merely pointing out that:
~ the document that opens when one clicks the Mint link is for the NBPP, not the ABPP;
~ the dollar requirements for the two programs are different.
"Approved bulk purchase customers must place at least two qualifying orders of $10,000
(spending at least $20,000) in each fiscal year to maintain membership in the program."
@MasonG said:
If you note what I copy/pasted from the mint's website, it says "For information about the Authorized Bulk Purchase Program, please visit..." with a link.
If the mint's website is in error, that's on them.
NOT trying to start an argument.
Merely pointing out that:
~ the document that opens when one clicks the Mint link is for the NBPP, not the ABPP;
~ the dollar requirements for the two programs are different.
By the way, you do know that PCGS offers preferential pricing to bulk dealers, pricing WELL BELOW what you pay. One person I know who gets PCGS bulk pricing gets under $10 per coin on moderns. Maybe you'd like to take a shot at that practice and let our hosts know how unfair you think it is.
When PCGS starts collecting my tax dollars and involuntary payments from me, I'll gladly take the same position. Until then you are comparing apples to oranges.
It's the retail wing of an unsubsidized federal agency so it is more like red delicious vs. Yellow delicious.
Unfair trade practices raise interesting qupotential issues under
Limited out on Mangrove Snapper and one bull shark
100% positive transactions with SurfinxHI, bigole, 1madman, collectorcoins, proofmorgan, Luke Marshall, silver pop, golden egg, point five zero,coin22lover, alohagary, blaircountycoin,joebb21
I know I haven't been on the forums for the last few months, but it seems not much has changed.
A lot of people are still busybodies....
Someone posts about something, then people just jumping on them, even when what was posted about will NOT affect those people 1 iota. Not even.
No one can ever live and let live around here, still.
If government agencies get a FOIA request, then there really isn't much reason, from a business standpoint, of turning it down, imo. If someone gets ANY benefit from working in a special type of way, which this is, with any government agency, unless there is national security reason, which there isn't, then it should be given.
These are all modern products and, unless they are stagnate, and nearing ending of their "life", then first and foremost consideration should be given to anyone using the normal means to procure them...not specialized backdoors to get them. If a dealer can't "live" without that, then maybe they shouldn't be a dealer.....dealers have been around for a long time by being able to buy low and sell high from actual collectors (non-USMint people).
End of the day, though, I am one of the few that will be honest to say upfront that this is interesting to me but has ZERO impact on me, end of day (other than maybe not being able to get a product or two), in knowing who is who on this and therefore, unlike some, I won't be arguing or chastising others here about it or continuing to post about it in this thread.
Comments
And names gives you the minimum dollar value of your order.
Would you care if the Mint released just your name?
Maybe you name and just the dollar value of your purchases?
Maybe we could just request the names of all loyalty program beneficiaries. That seems fair
Actually, I just wrote my senators and congressman demanding that they end the loyalty program as an unfair federal subsidy.
I think they should also immediately end the subscription service as that gave preferential early access to limited addition products.
See above.
Good for you. At a minimum, I'm guessing that your complaints are cathartic for you.
What are grounds for a lawsuit? That we are owed information about a private company because a private company does business with a government agency? Good luck.
Sorry that bots prevented everyone from ordering what they wanted. The Mint has tried to alleviate the bot issue. The last orders went through much better for me, I am sure others can attest. The Mint can prove that they have improved access, so what are the potential damages?
Is this the authorized purchasers for bullion or the bulk purchaser criteria?
My Ebay Store
When PCGS starts collecting my tax dollars and involuntary payments from me, I'll gladly take the same position. Until then you are comparing apples to oranges.
Good catch. That is indeed the bullion criteria. The criteria for the authorized bulk purchase program are first to be a member of the numismatic bulk purchase program, and also to spend $500k. The numismatic bulk purchase program requirements are:
To purchase numismatic products through the Numismatic Bulk Purchase Program, an applicant must attest to the fact that it is one of the following:
-a licensed full–time "coin dealer" (any state–licensed firm or company engaged in the commercial sale of coins via storefront, coin shows or online)
-a licensed business involved in the precious metals or numismatic coin industry
-a licensed retailer, bank, credit union or other financial institution willing to expand its business into the numismatic coin industry
It's the retail wing of an unsubsidized federal agency so it is more like red delicious vs. Yellow delicious.
Never mind
From the US Mint's 2019 Annual Report:
During FY 2019, the Mint’s numismatic program
generated $349.6 million in revenue and $1.7 million in
net earnings. This represents an improvement of 19.3%
for revenue and 111.1% for earnings over the previous
year. These impressive results were a key reason the Mint
was able to transfer $540 million to the Treasury General
Fund at the end of FY 2019.
I agree the mint is set up like a business and is completely within it's right to have preferred customers. The fact any of the good stuff trickles to real collectors directly is a small miracle. This is more bigger flippers squeezing out smaller flippers or at least limiting the number of products they can add markup at the right point in the hoopla cycle
11.5$ Southern Dollars, The little “Big Easy” set
I really can't take the lack of logic of some of the posters (ie j.........). These purchaser directly affect access to mint products and take a large cut.
They do NOT pay their 500k for anything, but rather for limited issue products that they alone have access to and then charge what they feel for that product. The 5% is a pittance compared to what they charge - which is their business, but NOT on items that they had unfair access to. Many want only a single specimen for their collection and are NOT flipping so profit is not the motive at all for them. Individual purchasers of a specimen for their collection are NOT in the same group as those with privileged access that are using that access to their advantage.
That Paradise Mint fellow was past the pale and his illogic nearly comical.
If they want the privileges, let them be known.
Well, just Love coins, period.
I don't know if we can assume that the majority of people who buy the special stuff directly form the mint only buy 1 example to keep. I don't see how that can be true and the huge mintages could sell out in mins. I suspect there are more mouths to feed than actual collectors with these things and most collectors buy from resellers.
11.5$ Southern Dollars, The little “Big Easy” set
Simply not true. Most of their purchases are likely unlimited products because this program DID NOT EXIST IN THE TWO PREVIOUS YEARS AT ALL.
And I don't think 10% of a product is a "large cut". In fact, Mint subscribers might well have gotten a larger cut of ASE's before you non-subscribers were allowed to purchase them. Let's see some hatred for the subscribers.
So, yes, the lack of logic and information is annoying.
You are correct. It's simply not true. Virtually every one of the people who call themselves "true collectors" were buying extras to sell to defray the cost of the one they were keeping.
How many people bought 1 instead of the HHL of 3 for the Morgan and Peace $s?
Successful transactions with : MICHAELDIXON, Manorcourtman, Bochiman, bolivarshagnasty, AUandAG, onlyroosies, chumley, Weiss, jdimmick, BAJJERFAN, gene1978, TJM965, Smittys, GRANDAM, JTHawaii, mainejoe, softparade, derryb
Bad transactions with : nobody to date
But that's only two more per person. No big deal, right?
BTW- how many individual orders were there?
I'm actually surprised that only 18 people qualified or cared to enter the program. $500k is a pretty low threshold.
Me. One for the peace and one S Morgan, missed out on the CC as I was fishing
100% positive transactions with SurfinxHI, bigole, 1madman, collectorcoins, proofmorgan, Luke Marshall, silver pop, golden egg, point five zero,coin22lover, alohagary, blaircountycoin,joebb21
According to the application, it's not even $500k...
From here: https://catalog.usmint.gov/on/demandware.static/-/Sites-USM-Library/default/dw85484988/images/PDFs/bulk-purchase-agreement-form.pdf
"Approved bulk purchase customers must place at least two qualifying orders of $10,000
(spending at least $20,000) in each fiscal year to maintain membership in the program."
And there are discounts.
Per CoinWorld, there are 18 dealers in the ABPP. Link
"United States Mint Authorized Bulk Purchase Program applicants must be active members in the Mint’s existing Numismatic Bulk Purchase Program (NBPP) in good standing for at least two years, have a two-year revenue average with the NBPP of at least $500,000 annually, and have a history of full compliance with the Mint’s excessive returns policy."
Source
Didn't read the Coin World article, the quote from my previous post came from the mint's website:
For information about the Authorized Bulk Purchase Program, please visit https://catalog.usmint.gov/on/demandware.static/-/Sites-USM-Library/default/dw85484988/images/PDFs/bulk-purchase-agreement-form.pdf
The linked application is for the 'Numismatic Bulk Purchase Program' (NBPP);
this thread is about the 'Authorized Bulk Purchase Program' (ABPP).
Applicants for the ABPP must:
~ "be active members in the Mint’s existing Numismatic Bulk Purchase Program (NBPP) in good standing for at least two years";
~ "have a two-year revenue average with the NBPP of at least $500,000 annually";
~ "and have a history of full compliance with the Mint’s excessive returns policy".
Source
If you note what I copy/pasted from the mint's website, it says "For information about the Authorized Bulk Purchase Program, please visit..." with a link.
If the mint's website is in error, that's on them.
edited to add... I would not be at all surprised to learn there are inconsistencies on their website.
NOT trying to start an argument.
Merely pointing out that:
~ the document that opens when one clicks the Mint link is for the NBPP, not the ABPP;
~ the dollar requirements for the two programs are different.
That's a different program.
You are correct.
All the more reason that more information should be divulged.
Disagree and disagree.
But, you already knew that. LOL.
Many for and against arguments makes me wonder if a poll could have been added to thread.
https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/u-s-coins/quarters/PCGS-2020-quarter-quest/album/247091
I was fishing
Catch anything?
Limited out on Mangrove Snapper and one bull shark
100% positive transactions with SurfinxHI, bigole, 1madman, collectorcoins, proofmorgan, Luke Marshall, silver pop, golden egg, point five zero,coin22lover, alohagary, blaircountycoin,joebb21
Good thing you didn't catch no crabs
https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/u-s-coins/quarters/PCGS-2020-quarter-quest/album/247091
Crabs are better than fish.
Lobster season opens here in one week
I know I haven't been on the forums for the last few months, but it seems not much has changed.
A lot of people are still busybodies....
Someone posts about something, then people just jumping on them, even when what was posted about will NOT affect those people 1 iota. Not even.
No one can ever live and let live around here, still.
If government agencies get a FOIA request, then there really isn't much reason, from a business standpoint, of turning it down, imo. If someone gets ANY benefit from working in a special type of way, which this is, with any government agency, unless there is national security reason, which there isn't, then it should be given.
These are all modern products and, unless they are stagnate, and nearing ending of their "life", then first and foremost consideration should be given to anyone using the normal means to procure them...not specialized backdoors to get them. If a dealer can't "live" without that, then maybe they shouldn't be a dealer.....dealers have been around for a long time by being able to buy low and sell high from actual collectors (non-USMint people).
End of the day, though, I am one of the few that will be honest to say upfront that this is interesting to me but has ZERO impact on me, end of day (other than maybe not being able to get a product or two), in knowing who is who on this and therefore, unlike some, I won't be arguing or chastising others here about it or continuing to post about it in this thread.
I've been told I tolerate fools poorly...that may explain things if I have a problem with you. Current ebay items - Nothing at the moment