These 2023's are very nice looking, and I did get a couple plus a pre-sale graded 70, but the sandblasted cameos just seem too "modern". I also would like to know how they are actually made. What does the silver planchet look like before striking? Is it sandblasted or polished?
Regardless, I keep looking at this photo, and sure wish the Mint would actually do a "historic" version like the real ones they did 125 years ago. This one just is absolutely stunning, and I sure wish I could afford it. Nothing today seems to even come close.
@Goldminers said:
but the sandblasted cameos just seem too "modern".
Laser-etched dies to achieve the frosted devices.
I also would like to know how they are actually made. What does the silver planchet look like before striking? Is it sandblasted or polished?
Polished.
Thanks. I wish they would just engrave the dies correctly and forget about the laser etching. Then there would be an actual variety of regular, CAM or DCAM versions like other proofs.
@coiner said:
I was at the ANA and had a “few” items signed by current USM Director.
I will emphasize “a few”, meaning less than 5.
There were others who overloaded her with what seemed to be 50+ or more of the Morgan/Peace COAs to sign.
All I could say is HOG.
No matter where you go there is always a HOG.
Limits should be placed on these characters who obviously only intend to market the signature for profit.
Mine will go to family members who have interest-along with the coins.
I know what you mean. Go over to “Modern Morgan and Peace Dollars “ on Facebook and see these “Hogs” bragging about it and selling them with their coins and pumping them up to be something special. Sad part is there are sucker that believe them and buy them.
So I got my shipment of 3 Peace and 3 Morgans in the mail today. Of course today when I'm expecting these coins and other the mail doesn't get here until 6pm! Regardless, Aside from being packaged in a Terrycloth factory, I initially thought my Morgans were all defective, but it looks to be a shortcoming in the laser frosting process as all 3 Morgans are the same. See the red circle for what looks like a nick in the surface but is probably just normal.
I intend to ship this to PCGS tomorrow, I hope they do not hold that against the grade.
@Goldminers said:
but the sandblasted cameos just seem too "modern".
Laser-etched dies to achieve the frosted devices.
I also would like to know how they are actually made. What does the silver planchet look like before striking? Is it sandblasted or polished?
Polished.
Thanks. I wish they would just engrave the dies correctly and forget about the laser etching. Then there would be an actual variety of regular, CAM or DCAM versions like other proofs.
Can you imagine? People today return coins because they don't think they will grade 70. Under your scenario, anyone who did not get a DCAM would want a refund.
The good old days really weren't that good. There is absolutely no reason for the Mint to not fully leverage today's technology to ensure that everyone gets a DCAM. So they do just that. And, no, like everyone else, you wouldn't wish to be on the receiving end of anything other than the finest proof available. Nor should you have to, given today's technology.
finally got my proof 2023 morgan today, it seems like forever since i got my peace dollar then the morgan was processing for like forever until i called the mint asking about it then miraculously it shipped that day. imagine that.. squeaky wheel gets oiled.
@Goldminers said:
but the sandblasted cameos just seem too "modern".
Laser-etched dies to achieve the frosted devices.
I also would like to know how they are actually made. What does the silver planchet look like before striking? Is it sandblasted or polished?
Polished.
Thanks. I wish they would just engrave the dies correctly and forget about the laser etching. Then there would be an actual variety of regular, CAM or DCAM versions like other proofs.
Can you imagine? People today return coins because they don't think they will grade 70. Under your scenario, anyone who did not get a DCAM would want a refund.
The good old days really weren't that good. There is absolutely no reason for the Mint to not fully leverage today's technology to ensure that everyone gets a DCAM. So they do just that. And, no, like everyone else, you wouldn't wish to be on the receiving end of anything other than the finest proof available. Nor should you have to, given today's technology.
It depends on how the coins are marketed. You expect to get what you pay for. If the marketing showed DCAM reliefs, that is what I would expect.
All true about expectations, but if 300,000 + think they have or deserve all 70 dcams, that is why there is no upside longer term. As a few other experienced folks point out, these are like most modern mint items that don't have immediate sellouts, prices will fade until the next common shiny toy comes out.
@Goldminers said:
All true about expectations, but if 300,000 + think they have or deserve all 70 dcams, that is why there is no upside longer term. As a few other experienced folks point out, these are like most modern mint items that don't have immediate sellouts, prices will fade until the next common shiny toy comes out.
Well I wouldn't say the expectation is all 70's. But I would say the expectation is no readily identifiable flaws. I have tons of 69s where I cannot identify why it is not a 70. That may just be a lack of skill, but I would set that as the standard. 69+ if you will.
@ProofCollection said:
I have tons of 69s where I cannot identify why it is not a 70.
I agree with this and the sad thing is that I have quite a few 70s lately that definitely should not be. I had some that truly are. The last few years the majority of the 70s I'm getting have minor flaws, scratches, or dings that should render them 69 at least.
@Goldminers said:
but the sandblasted cameos just seem too "modern".
Laser-etched dies to achieve the frosted devices.
I also would like to know how they are actually made. What does the silver planchet look like before striking? Is it sandblasted or polished?
Polished.
Thanks. I wish they would just engrave the dies correctly and forget about the laser etching. Then there would be an actual variety of regular, CAM or DCAM versions like other proofs.
Can you imagine? People today return coins because they don't think they will grade 70. Under your scenario, anyone who did not get a DCAM would want a refund.
The good old days really weren't that good. There is absolutely no reason for the Mint to not fully leverage today's technology to ensure that everyone gets a DCAM. So they do just that. And, no, like everyone else, you wouldn't wish to be on the receiving end of anything other than the finest proof available. Nor should you have to, given today's technology.
It depends on how the coins are marketed. You expect to get what you pay for. If the marketing showed DCAM reliefs, that is what I would expect.
I respectfully disagree. If DCAMs are available, that's what you will want. That's what everyone will want. So, why should the Mint go out of its way to manufacture anything other than what everyone will want, when it has the ability to make every coin a DCAM at no additional cost?
@Goldminers said:
but the sandblasted cameos just seem too "modern".
Laser-etched dies to achieve the frosted devices.
I also would like to know how they are actually made. What does the silver planchet look like before striking? Is it sandblasted or polished?
Polished.
Thanks. I wish they would just engrave the dies correctly and forget about the laser etching. Then there would be an actual variety of regular, CAM or DCAM versions like other proofs.
Can you imagine? People today return coins because they don't think they will grade 70. Under your scenario, anyone who did not get a DCAM would want a refund.
The good old days really weren't that good. There is absolutely no reason for the Mint to not fully leverage today's technology to ensure that everyone gets a DCAM. So they do just that. And, no, like everyone else, you wouldn't wish to be on the receiving end of anything other than the finest proof available. Nor should you have to, given today's technology.
It depends on how the coins are marketed. You expect to get what you pay for. If the marketing showed DCAM reliefs, that is what I would expect.
I respectfully disagree. If DCAMs are available, that's what you will want. That's what everyone will want. So, why should the Mint go out of its way to manufacture anything other than what everyone will want, when it has the ability to make every coin a DCAM at no additional cost?
I would rather have the old look than the laser etched perfect stuff that you get now. There is no character in these coins one clone after another. The only thing that give them some
Character (to some) ore labels. Heck even the 70s and 69s are well for the most part a toss up
So not everyone likes the laser frosting
It would be the mints version of VB
I would even be ok with the flimsy cello with the plastic mint ID like the UNC Ike’s
Rant over
Martin
i think you will find most of the flaws to be smudges on inside of capsule along with spots of stuff on and in the capsule but the coin itself is as near to perfect as they can make it. IMHO
@Goldminers said:
but the sandblasted cameos just seem too "modern".
Laser-etched dies to achieve the frosted devices.
I also would like to know how they are actually made. What does the silver planchet look like before striking? Is it sandblasted or polished?
Polished.
Thanks. I wish they would just engrave the dies correctly and forget about the laser etching. Then there would be an actual variety of regular, CAM or DCAM versions like other proofs.
Can you imagine? People today return coins because they don't think they will grade 70. Under your scenario, anyone who did not get a DCAM would want a refund.
The good old days really weren't that good. There is absolutely no reason for the Mint to not fully leverage today's technology to ensure that everyone gets a DCAM. So they do just that. And, no, like everyone else, you wouldn't wish to be on the receiving end of anything other than the finest proof available. Nor should you have to, given today's technology.
It depends on how the coins are marketed. You expect to get what you pay for. If the marketing showed DCAM reliefs, that is what I would expect.
I respectfully disagree. If DCAMs are available, that's what you will want. That's what everyone will want. So, why should the Mint go out of its way to manufacture anything other than what everyone will want, when it has the ability to make every coin a DCAM at no additional cost?
We had one poster here return 8 out of 10 for minor marks. If there were differences in frost, as you say, returns would be astronomical.
@Goldminers said:
but the sandblasted cameos just seem too "modern".
Laser-etched dies to achieve the frosted devices.
I also would like to know how they are actually made. What does the silver planchet look like before striking? Is it sandblasted or polished?
Polished.
Thanks. I wish they would just engrave the dies correctly and forget about the laser etching. Then there would be an actual variety of regular, CAM or DCAM versions like other proofs.
Can you imagine? People today return coins because they don't think they will grade 70. Under your scenario, anyone who did not get a DCAM would want a refund.
The good old days really weren't that good. There is absolutely no reason for the Mint to not fully leverage today's technology to ensure that everyone gets a DCAM. So they do just that. And, no, like everyone else, you wouldn't wish to be on the receiving end of anything other than the finest proof available. Nor should you have to, given today's technology.
It depends on how the coins are marketed. You expect to get what you pay for. If the marketing showed DCAM reliefs, that is what I would expect.
I respectfully disagree. If DCAMs are available, that's what you will want. That's what everyone will want. So, why should the Mint go out of its way to manufacture anything other than what everyone will want, when it has the ability to make every coin a DCAM at no additional cost?
We had one poster here return 8 out of 10 for minor marks. If there were differences in frost, as you say, returns would be astronomical.
Personally, I don't think the Mint should tolerate this abuse of returns. They should not promise frosty 70s nor should buyers expect frosty 70 only coins. They should Institute a restocking fee
@Goldminers said:
but the sandblasted cameos just seem too "modern".
Laser-etched dies to achieve the frosted devices.
I also would like to know how they are actually made. What does the silver planchet look like before striking? Is it sandblasted or polished?
Polished.
Thanks. I wish they would just engrave the dies correctly and forget about the laser etching. Then there would be an actual variety of regular, CAM or DCAM versions like other proofs.
Can you imagine? People today return coins because they don't think they will grade 70. Under your scenario, anyone who did not get a DCAM would want a refund.
The good old days really weren't that good. There is absolutely no reason for the Mint to not fully leverage today's technology to ensure that everyone gets a DCAM. So they do just that. And, no, like everyone else, you wouldn't wish to be on the receiving end of anything other than the finest proof available. Nor should you have to, given today's technology.
It depends on how the coins are marketed. You expect to get what you pay for. If the marketing showed DCAM reliefs, that is what I would expect.
I respectfully disagree. If DCAMs are available, that's what you will want. That's what everyone will want. So, why should the Mint go out of its way to manufacture anything other than what everyone will want, when it has the ability to make every coin a DCAM at no additional cost?
We had one poster here return 8 out of 10 for minor marks. If there were differences in frost, as you say, returns would be astronomical.
@HATTRICK said:
Received my box of two Peace Proofs today. There is number 302 in pen on the label. Could it mean that golden ticket #302
Can you show us a photo for this number?
It is just a number in pen to the right of my name and address. Most likely something by the post office or mailman. I get a lot of UPS packages with writing in pen on them.
Still fun to dream of a big score.
Is your house number 302? Or part of your zip code?
I have packages show up at my home, with my house number written on it all the time.
I have just assumed it was whatever sorting system my local carrier was using to help him make his daily deliveries.
It could be the mail route number. I often have that number written by the post office on my packages.
@HATTRICK said:
Received my box of two Peace Proofs today. There is number 302 in pen on the label. Could it mean that golden ticket #302
Can you show us a photo for this number?
It is just a number in pen to the right of my name and address. Most likely something by the post office or mailman. I get a lot of UPS packages with writing in pen on them.
Still fun to dream of a big score.
Is your house number 302? Or part of your zip code?
I have packages show up at my home, with my house number written on it all the time.
I have just assumed it was whatever sorting system my local carrier was using to help him make his daily deliveries.
It could be the mail route number. I often have that number written by the post office on my packages.
Not either one of thoes. I also get many packages with my house number in large black marker. It helps the driver find them faster on the truck than trying to read the labels. Sometimes even the street name
" If you push something hard enough, it will fall over. " The 1st Law of Opposition from The Firesign Theater
@Goldminers said:
but the sandblasted cameos just seem too "modern".
Laser-etched dies to achieve the frosted devices.
I also would like to know how they are actually made. What does the silver planchet look like before striking? Is it sandblasted or polished?
Polished.
Thanks. I wish they would just engrave the dies correctly and forget about the laser etching. Then there would be an actual variety of regular, CAM or DCAM versions like other proofs.
Can you imagine? People today return coins because they don't think they will grade 70. Under your scenario, anyone who did not get a DCAM would want a refund.
The good old days really weren't that good. There is absolutely no reason for the Mint to not fully leverage today's technology to ensure that everyone gets a DCAM. So they do just that. And, no, like everyone else, you wouldn't wish to be on the receiving end of anything other than the finest proof available. Nor should you have to, given today's technology.
It depends on how the coins are marketed. You expect to get what you pay for. If the marketing showed DCAM reliefs, that is what I would expect.
I respectfully disagree. If DCAMs are available, that's what you will want. That's what everyone will want. So, why should the Mint go out of its way to manufacture anything other than what everyone will want, when it has the ability to make every coin a DCAM at no additional cost?
We had one poster here return 8 out of 10 for minor marks. If there were differences in frost, as you say, returns would be astronomical.
Personally, I don't think the Mint should tolerate this abuse of returns. They should not promise frosty 70s nor should buyers expect frosty 70 only coins. They should Institute a restocking fee
What level of quality should the consumer expect? If you asked the mint director what level of quality we should expect, do you think they would tell their customers that some coins will have blemishes and flaws or that all are perfect?
@Goldminers said:
but the sandblasted cameos just seem too "modern".
Laser-etched dies to achieve the frosted devices.
I also would like to know how they are actually made. What does the silver planchet look like before striking? Is it sandblasted or polished?
Polished.
Thanks. I wish they would just engrave the dies correctly and forget about the laser etching. Then there would be an actual variety of regular, CAM or DCAM versions like other proofs.
Can you imagine? People today return coins because they don't think they will grade 70. Under your scenario, anyone who did not get a DCAM would want a refund.
The good old days really weren't that good. There is absolutely no reason for the Mint to not fully leverage today's technology to ensure that everyone gets a DCAM. So they do just that. And, no, like everyone else, you wouldn't wish to be on the receiving end of anything other than the finest proof available. Nor should you have to, given today's technology.
It depends on how the coins are marketed. You expect to get what you pay for. If the marketing showed DCAM reliefs, that is what I would expect.
I respectfully disagree. If DCAMs are available, that's what you will want. That's what everyone will want. So, why should the Mint go out of its way to manufacture anything other than what everyone will want, when it has the ability to make every coin a DCAM at no additional cost?
We had one poster here return 8 out of 10 for minor marks. If there were differences in frost, as you say, returns would be astronomical.
Personally, I don't think the Mint should tolerate this abuse of returns. They should not promise frosty 70s nor should buyers expect frosty 70 only coins. They should Institute a restocking fee
What level of quality should the consumer expect? If you asked the mint director what level of quality we should expect, do you think they would tell their customers that some coins will have blemishes and flaws or that all are perfect?
Expectations and reality are two different issues.
These are mass produced items, at an affordable price. You aren't buying patek phillippe watches, more like seiko. That being said, if the coin has obvious blemishes or nicks, scratches. send it back.
@Goldminers said:
but the sandblasted cameos just seem too "modern".
Laser-etched dies to achieve the frosted devices.
I also would like to know how they are actually made. What does the silver planchet look like before striking? Is it sandblasted or polished?
Polished.
Thanks. I wish they would just engrave the dies correctly and forget about the laser etching. Then there would be an actual variety of regular, CAM or DCAM versions like other proofs.
Can you imagine? People today return coins because they don't think they will grade 70. Under your scenario, anyone who did not get a DCAM would want a refund.
The good old days really weren't that good. There is absolutely no reason for the Mint to not fully leverage today's technology to ensure that everyone gets a DCAM. So they do just that. And, no, like everyone else, you wouldn't wish to be on the receiving end of anything other than the finest proof available. Nor should you have to, given today's technology.
It depends on how the coins are marketed. You expect to get what you pay for. If the marketing showed DCAM reliefs, that is what I would expect.
I respectfully disagree. If DCAMs are available, that's what you will want. That's what everyone will want. So, why should the Mint go out of its way to manufacture anything other than what everyone will want, when it has the ability to make every coin a DCAM at no additional cost?
We had one poster here return 8 out of 10 for minor marks. If there were differences in frost, as you say, returns would be astronomical.
Personally, I don't think the Mint should tolerate this abuse of returns. They should not promise frosty 70s nor should buyers expect frosty 70 only coins. They should Institute a restocking fee
What level of quality should the consumer expect? If you asked the mint director what level of quality we should expect, do you think they would tell their customers that some coins will have blemishes and flaws or that all are perfect?
If you asked the Mint Director, this question 50 years ago when I bought my first proof sets what would they say?
i accidently switched off the checkmark on my two piece set of reverse proof morgan and peace dollars and it took me three days to get the enrollement active again it kept telling me emrollement had exceeded quantity i knew eventually someone else would cancel one so i persisted and finally got the enrollment for the reverse proofs active again. so i guess what in saying is tread carefully on the subscription page
i have read a little bit of the mint news and i personally have never heard or read where the mint guaranteed everyone a perfect 70 all i have read was their promise to try to put out the nicest possible product.
as to what the planchets for these morgans look like i would like to have a dump truck load of the ase planchets for my own at one oz each thats alot of oz's of pure silver
@Goldminers said:
but the sandblasted cameos just seem too "modern".
Laser-etched dies to achieve the frosted devices.
I also would like to know how they are actually made. What does the silver planchet look like before striking? Is it sandblasted or polished?
Polished.
Thanks. I wish they would just engrave the dies correctly and forget about the laser etching. Then there would be an actual variety of regular, CAM or DCAM versions like other proofs.
Can you imagine? People today return coins because they don't think they will grade 70. Under your scenario, anyone who did not get a DCAM would want a refund.
The good old days really weren't that good. There is absolutely no reason for the Mint to not fully leverage today's technology to ensure that everyone gets a DCAM. So they do just that. And, no, like everyone else, you wouldn't wish to be on the receiving end of anything other than the finest proof available. Nor should you have to, given today's technology.
It depends on how the coins are marketed. You expect to get what you pay for. If the marketing showed DCAM reliefs, that is what I would expect.
I respectfully disagree. If DCAMs are available, that's what you will want. That's what everyone will want. So, why should the Mint go out of its way to manufacture anything other than what everyone will want, when it has the ability to make every coin a DCAM at no additional cost?
We had one poster here return 8 out of 10 for minor marks. If there were differences in frost, as you say, returns would be astronomical.
Personally, I don't think the Mint should tolerate this abuse of returns. They should not promise frosty 70s nor should buyers expect frosty 70 only coins. They should Institute a restocking fee
What level of quality should the consumer expect? If you asked the mint director what level of quality we should expect, do you think they would tell their customers that some coins will have blemishes and flaws or that all are perfect?
If you asked the Mint Director, this question 50 years ago when I bought my first proof sets what would they say?
Manufacturing had a totally different approach and mindset back then. They wouldn't have made the promises and guarantees that manufacturers make/claim today.
@Goldminers said:
but the sandblasted cameos just seem too "modern".
Laser-etched dies to achieve the frosted devices.
I also would like to know how they are actually made. What does the silver planchet look like before striking? Is it sandblasted or polished?
Polished.
Thanks. I wish they would just engrave the dies correctly and forget about the laser etching. Then there would be an actual variety of regular, CAM or DCAM versions like other proofs.
Can you imagine? People today return coins because they don't think they will grade 70. Under your scenario, anyone who did not get a DCAM would want a refund.
The good old days really weren't that good. There is absolutely no reason for the Mint to not fully leverage today's technology to ensure that everyone gets a DCAM. So they do just that. And, no, like everyone else, you wouldn't wish to be on the receiving end of anything other than the finest proof available. Nor should you have to, given today's technology.
It depends on how the coins are marketed. You expect to get what you pay for. If the marketing showed DCAM reliefs, that is what I would expect.
I respectfully disagree. If DCAMs are available, that's what you will want. That's what everyone will want. So, why should the Mint go out of its way to manufacture anything other than what everyone will want, when it has the ability to make every coin a DCAM at no additional cost?
We had one poster here return 8 out of 10 for minor marks. If there were differences in frost, as you say, returns would be astronomical.
Personally, I don't think the Mint should tolerate this abuse of returns. They should not promise frosty 70s nor should buyers expect frosty 70 only coins. They should Institute a restocking fee
What level of quality should the consumer expect? If you asked the mint director what level of quality we should expect, do you think they would tell their customers that some coins will have blemishes and flaws or that all are perfect?
@HATTRICK said:
Received my box of two Peace Proofs today. There is number 302 in pen on the label. Could it mean that golden ticket #302
for the proofs is inside and it is a warning to submit sealed? Anyone else get a box with a penned number on the label?
Will leave sealed for a few days to see if anything pops up.
received someone else's box today. Had street # in sharpie on it. box of chocolates.
all joking aside because this observation will kill it: aren't there only 200 golden tickets?
i think there is some way to enhance the old etching to make the frosting more durable. Considering the pieces pressed, couldn't they also just use more dies?
@HATTRICK said:
Received my box of two Peace Proofs today. There is number 302 in pen on the label. Could it mean that golden ticket #302
for the proofs is inside and it is a warning to submit sealed? Anyone else get a box with a penned number on the label?
Will leave sealed for a few days to see if anything pops up.
received someone else's box today. Had street # in sharpie on it. box of chocolates.
all joking aside because this observation will kill it: aren't there only 200 golden tickets?
Yes but the theory behind my post was these are the next 200 special issues numbered 301 to 400
" If you push something hard enough, it will fall over. " The 1st Law of Opposition from The Firesign Theater
Well I got my Morgan's yesterday and opened them today with my dad. They all looked great. One coin has some light green stuff along the rim. Just popped open the holder and it was on the holder, not the coin. Wiped off the inside of the holder and now it looks great again. Super happy with the quality of the coin and can't wait for my Peace Dollars to show up later this week.
My orders of 2 Morgan and 2 Peace dollars came in Monday. The coins look great. One Morgan had flaws on the rim. Looks like some abrasions, and some foldover? above the TE of STATES.
Throw a coin enough times, and suppose one day it lands on its edge.
Comments
INYNWHWeTrust-TexasNationals,ajaan,blu62vette
coinJP, Outhaul ,illini420,MICHAELDIXON, Fade to Black,epcjimi1,19Lyds,SNMAN,JerseyJoe, bigjpst, DMWJR , lordmarcovan, Weiss,Mfriday4962,UtahCoin,Downtown1974,pitboss,RichieURich,Bullsitter,JDsCoins,toyz4geo,jshaulis, mustanggt, SNMAN
These 2023's are very nice looking, and I did get a couple plus a pre-sale graded 70, but the sandblasted cameos just seem too "modern". I also would like to know how they are actually made. What does the silver planchet look like before striking? Is it sandblasted or polished?
Regardless, I keep looking at this photo, and sure wish the Mint would actually do a "historic" version like the real ones they did 125 years ago. This one just is absolutely stunning, and I sure wish I could afford it. Nothing today seems to even come close.
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
The closest we get is the 2023 Morgan—it doesn’t match the old proofs, but, it still is a beautiful coin
Laser-etched dies to achieve the frosted devices.
Polished.
Thanks. I wish they would just engrave the dies correctly and forget about the laser etching. Then there would be an actual variety of regular, CAM or DCAM versions like other proofs.
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
My order for 3 Morgan & 3 Peace Proofs just got delivered.
All coins look great, no problems.
Very happy!
@coiner glad to have your input back on the boards I have wondered where 7 over 8 went
Martin
I know what you mean. Go over to “Modern Morgan and Peace Dollars “ on Facebook and see these “Hogs” bragging about it and selling them with their coins and pumping them up to be something special. Sad part is there are sucker that believe them and buy them.
So I got my shipment of 3 Peace and 3 Morgans in the mail today. Of course today when I'm expecting these coins and other the mail doesn't get here until 6pm! Regardless, Aside from being packaged in a Terrycloth factory, I initially thought my Morgans were all defective, but it looks to be a shortcoming in the laser frosting process as all 3 Morgans are the same. See the red circle for what looks like a nick in the surface but is probably just normal.
I intend to ship this to PCGS tomorrow, I hope they do not hold that against the grade.
Can you imagine? People today return coins because they don't think they will grade 70. Under your scenario, anyone who did not get a DCAM would want a refund.
The good old days really weren't that good. There is absolutely no reason for the Mint to not fully leverage today's technology to ensure that everyone gets a DCAM. So they do just that. And, no, like everyone else, you wouldn't wish to be on the receiving end of anything other than the finest proof available. Nor should you have to, given today's technology.
finally got my proof 2023 morgan today, it seems like forever since i got my peace dollar then the morgan was processing for like forever until i called the mint asking about it then miraculously it shipped that day. imagine that.. squeaky wheel gets oiled.
It depends on how the coins are marketed. You expect to get what you pay for. If the marketing showed DCAM reliefs, that is what I would expect.
All true about expectations, but if 300,000 + think they have or deserve all 70 dcams, that is why there is no upside longer term. As a few other experienced folks point out, these are like most modern mint items that don't have immediate sellouts, prices will fade until the next common shiny toy comes out.
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
Well I wouldn't say the expectation is all 70's. But I would say the expectation is no readily identifiable flaws. I have tons of 69s where I cannot identify why it is not a 70. That may just be a lack of skill, but I would set that as the standard. 69+ if you will.
I agree with this and the sad thing is that I have quite a few 70s lately that definitely should not be. I had some that truly are. The last few years the majority of the 70s I'm getting have minor flaws, scratches, or dings that should render them 69 at least.
I respectfully disagree. If DCAMs are available, that's what you will want. That's what everyone will want. So, why should the Mint go out of its way to manufacture anything other than what everyone will want, when it has the ability to make every coin a DCAM at no additional cost?
@NJCoin > @NJCoin said:
I would rather have the old look than the laser etched perfect stuff that you get now. There is no character in these coins one clone after another. The only thing that give them some
Character (to some) ore labels. Heck even the 70s and 69s are well for the most part a toss up
So not everyone likes the laser frosting
It would be the mints version of VB
I would even be ok with the flimsy cello with the plastic mint ID like the UNC Ike’s
Rant over
Martin
mine has no such nick it looks perfect to me
i think you will find most of the flaws to be smudges on inside of capsule along with spots of stuff on and in the capsule but the coin itself is as near to perfect as they can make it. IMHO
We had one poster here return 8 out of 10 for minor marks. If there were differences in frost, as you say, returns would be astronomical.
Everything is up this morning.
Successful transactions with forum members commoncents05, dmarks, Coinscratch, Bullsitter, DCW, TwoSides2aCoin, Namvet69 (facilitated for 3rd party), Tetromibi, ProfLizMay, MASSU2, MWallace, Bruce7789, Twobitcollector, 78saen, U1chicago
Personally, I don't think the Mint should tolerate this abuse of returns. They should not promise frosty 70s nor should buyers expect frosty 70 only coins. They should Institute a restocking fee
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
One visible luster(frost) break=69
Morgan Unc not available.
edited to add: 12 Peace available
It could be the mail route number. I often have that number written by the post office on my packages.
Not either one of thoes. I also get many packages with my house number in large black marker. It helps the driver find them faster on the truck than trying to read the labels. Sometimes even the street name
What level of quality should the consumer expect? If you asked the mint director what level of quality we should expect, do you think they would tell their customers that some coins will have blemishes and flaws or that all are perfect?
These are Not good numbers for the Pumpers…
2023 MORGAN SILVER DOLLAR PROOF (S) 292,189 +292,189
2023 MORGAN SILVER DOLLAR PROOF (S) – 40 COIN 286 + 286
2023 PEACE SILVER DOLLAR PROOF (S) 274,156 +274,156
2023 PEACE SILVER DOLLAR PROOF (S) – 40 COIN 295 +295
Expectations and reality are two different issues.
These are mass produced items, at an affordable price. You aren't buying patek phillippe watches, more like seiko. That being said, if the coin has obvious blemishes or nicks, scratches. send it back.
For those that continue to purchase the 2023 Morgan Proof and 2023 Peace Proof...
The United States Mint Thanks You.
The taxpayers of the United States Thanks You...
Your welcome.
looks like they will be for sale the entire year and more then likely into next year
If you asked the Mint Director, this question 50 years ago when I bought my first proof sets what would they say?
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
i accidently switched off the checkmark on my two piece set of reverse proof morgan and peace dollars and it took me three days to get the enrollement active again it kept telling me emrollement had exceeded quantity i knew eventually someone else would cancel one so i persisted and finally got the enrollment for the reverse proofs active again. so i guess what in saying is tread carefully on the subscription page
i have read a little bit of the mint news and i personally have never heard or read where the mint guaranteed everyone a perfect 70 all i have read was their promise to try to put out the nicest possible product.
as to what the planchets for these morgans look like i would like to have a dump truck load of the ase planchets for my own at one oz each thats alot of oz's of pure silver
Manufacturing had a totally different approach and mindset back then. They wouldn't have made the promises and guarantees that manufacturers make/claim today.
Of interest is the ABPP took fewer proof boxes than unc boxes:
- Ike Group member
- DIVa (Designated Ike Varieties) Project co-lead and attributor
Comparing Launch week to Launch week...
2023 MORGAN SILVER DOLLAR UNC NO MINT MARK - 40 COIN 210 + 210
2023 PEACE SILVER DOLLAR UNC NO MINT MARK - 40 COIN 194 +194
2023 MORGAN SILVER DOLLAR PROOF (S) - 40 COIN 286 + 286
2023 PEACE SILVER DOLLAR PROOF (S) - 40 COIN 295 +295
69
received someone else's box today. Had street # in sharpie on it. box of chocolates.
all joking aside because this observation will kill it: aren't there only 200 golden tickets?
i think there is some way to enhance the old etching to make the frosting more durable. Considering the pieces pressed, couldn't they also just use more dies?
Yes but the theory behind my post was these are the next 200 special issues numbered 301 to 400
Just hit my email
and cleveland had what hand i these?
Well I got my Morgan's yesterday and opened them today with my dad. They all looked great. One coin has some light green stuff along the rim. Just popped open the holder and it was on the holder, not the coin. Wiped off the inside of the holder and now it looks great again. Super happy with the quality of the coin and can't wait for my Peace Dollars to show up later this week.
Here is my Washington Quarter Variety Registry Set
This is my Washington Quarter Proof Variety Registry Set
Not in the least bit concerned. Numbers are thru Sunday 8/13.
Only cover first 5 days of sales.
My orders of 2 Morgan and 2 Peace dollars came in Monday. The coins look great. One Morgan had flaws on the rim. Looks like some abrasions, and some foldover? above the TE of STATES.
Throw a coin enough times, and suppose one day it lands on its edge.
My Director's Strike Peace $1 is still in the OGP.
These ladies were sent to our host.....Aren't they purdy?