@NeophyteNumismatist said:
In the grand scheme of this hobby, ANA membership is nothing. If I didn't get the Numismatist for free, I would definitely join for that alone. Ordering one year of Rolling Stone Magazine will cost you $44.95, and you get nothing else.
Yeah, it's clearly nothing, as evidenced by your failure to support them, even though you receive a complimentary magazine that has value to you. Believe me, the vast majority of collectors do not join for that alone, and raising the price by 20% is only going to induce more people to join you on the non-membership list.
You apparently don't value membership at all, other than for a magazine you get for free. Maybe you'd pay $55 a year for it, maybe you wouldn't. Talk is cheap when you are currently paying nothing.
@Elmhurst said:
I let mine lapse, and have not noticed any negative affect.
My point exactly. People who are not motivated to lock in current prices before the increase are going to find that a 20% easier decision to arrive at.
@Elmhurst said:
I let mine lapse, and have not noticed any negative affect.
I have noticed recently that ANA membership is required for some other services, like Hugh Wood insurance and ShipAndInsure.com so there may be some benefit after all if these other services are important to you.
@Elmhurst said:
I let mine lapse, and have not noticed any negative affect.
I have noticed recently that ANA membership is required for some other services, like Hugh Wood insurance and ShipAndInsure.com so there may be some benefit after all if these other services are important to you.
Nothing is ever "required." The question will be whether there is a discount available through ANA membership that is unavailable elsewhere that justifies the membership. That is strictly YMMV. The biggest benefit to me, other than the magazine, was the NGC direct submission privileges, which they took away last year.
For those who let your membership lapse or are upset with the value of membership, what services would you like to see the ANA provide? What would convince you that membership is worth the cost?
@Elmhurst said:
I let mine lapse, and have not noticed any negative affect.
I have noticed recently that ANA membership is required for some other services, like Hugh Wood insurance and ShipAndInsure.com so there may be some benefit after all if these other services are important to you.
Nothing is ever "required." The question will be whether there is a discount available through ANA membership that is unavailable elsewhere that justifies the membership. That is strictly YMMV. The biggest benefit to me, other than the magazine, was the NGC direct submission privileges, which they took away last year.
I don't know what you're insinuating - that perhaps there is a workaround? - but in the email I got today from Hugh Wood:
Please note - our coin program is for members of the American Numismatic Association (ANA) only.
@Project Numismatics said:
For those who let your membership lapse or are upset with the value of membership, what services would you like to see the ANA provide? What would convince you that membership is worth the cost?
I bet if they arranged a discount with NGC, PCGS, or CAC for ANA members it would help. And it wouldn't have to be a real discount either, but perhaps a surcharge for non-members.
@Elmhurst said:
I let mine lapse, and have not noticed any negative affect.
I have noticed recently that ANA membership is required for some other services, like Hugh Wood insurance and ShipAndInsure.com so there may be some benefit after all if these other services are important to you.
Nothing is ever "required." The question will be whether there is a discount available through ANA membership that is unavailable elsewhere that justifies the membership. That is strictly YMMV. The biggest benefit to me, other than the magazine, was the NGC direct submission privileges, which they took away last year.
I don't know what you're insinuating - that perhaps there is a workaround? - but in the email I got today from Hugh Wood:
Please note - our coin program is for members of the American Numismatic Association (ANA) only.
Not insinuating anything. Flat out saying most businesses are in business to make money, and they need to do business to do that.
Maybe they have a contract with ANA that says they are not allowed to sell insurance on coins to anyone not participating in that specific program, maybe not. And maybe that program has the best price they will make available to anyone, and maybe not.
All I know is the AAA price I see on the Marriott website is not always the lowest available, and I sure as hell do not need to be a AAA member to book a room at a Marriott. Just sayin'.
Hugh Wood seems to have a huge insurance business that transcends the ANA. I have zero doubt that if I gave Hugh Wood a call and told them I wanted to insure a coin collection that they would not tell me they are not allowed to talk to me unless I first become an ANA member, so I should either go get myself an ANA membership or just take my business elsewhere. And, I'll take it a step further and speculate that, if I had enough business to send their way, that I'd be able to meet or beat whatever is offered through the ANA's program. This is based on nothing other than a general understanding of how the world works.
@Project Numismatics said:
For those who let your membership lapse or are upset with the value of membership, what services would you like to see the ANA provide? What would convince you that membership is worth the cost?
I bet if they arranged a discount with NGC, PCGS, or CAC for ANA members it would help. And it wouldn't have to be a real discount either, but perhaps a surcharge for non-members.
NGC is the Official Grading Service of the ANA, and I am sure NGC pays the ANA a fee for that designation. It used to include a basic membership that allowed ANA members to make direct grading submissions without paying for a NGC membership, but NGC took that away last year.
The grading services all have thriving businesses that primarily cater to large dealers. The direct collector business is a small piece. How do you propose getting a private business to impose a surcharge on customers who are not members of a third party organization?
PCGS apparently sees no value in paying ANA for an official designation, and does what it needs to do to market itself at shows. Not being the ANA's "Official Grading Service" does not seem to have adversely impacted its business or standing in the marketplace in the slightest.
The TPGs do not need to give discounts to ANA members to attract business. Apparently the same way ANA does not need to hold the line on membership fee increases. 😁
NGC currently gives a small, one time discount on a membership that used to be totally free. That's it. And that's all we are getting.
@BStrauss3 said:
There already is a first-year membership discount with NGC, IIRC, it's like $15.
Not "already." Period. That discount was 100% up until last year. So that $25 membership that is $10 for the first year only used to be totally free.
Not a huge deal, and I'm sure not ANA's fault, but, still. One more chip away at the value of a membership to a small collector. ANA makes deals wherever it can.
If a vendor wants to offer discounts to ANA members, they are certainly free to do so, and ANA is happy to charge whatever for access to its membership. If NGC is willing to pay for an "official" designation but doesn't feel the need to offer more than a nominal one-time discount to the membership, the ANA isn't in a position to do anything about that.
NGC apparently did not feel they need to offer free basic memberships to ANA members in order to compete with PCGS, ANACS and ICG. That was NGC's call to make. It diminishes the value of an ANA membership, and ANA was impotent to stop it.
I think the low level membership used to be something like $39, and getting it for free basically paid for the ANA membership. That was just too good a deal, at the expense of NGC, so NGC lowered its basic membership price to $25 for everyone and eliminated the freebie for ANA members, replacing it with a one time $15 discount good on any of its memberships. Better than a sharp stick in the eye, but not exactly a reason to sign up for a lifetime ANA membership.
PCGS apparently sees no value in paying ANA for an official designation, and does what it needs to do to market itself at shows. Not being the ANA's "Official Grading Service" does not seem to have adversely impacted its business or standing in the marketplace in the slightest.
I infer this to be true of many coin dealers being members now too. It has no bearing on whether I will buy from them.
Like I said, I get the magazine for free. If I could no longer get the magazine for free, I would buy it. The ANA is about the price of other subscriptions. Honestly, I am not sure how else I would utilize the ANA outside of the magazine, but the Numismatist is a good read and I do enjoy it.
I am a newer collector (started April 2020), and I primarily focus on U.S. Half Cents and Type Coins. Early copper is my favorite.
PCGS apparently sees no value in paying ANA for an official designation, and does what it needs to do to market itself at shows. Not being the ANA's "Official Grading Service" does not seem to have adversely impacted its business or standing in the marketplace in the slightest.
I infer this to be true of many coin dealers being members now too. It has no bearing on whether I will buy from them.
EXACTLY!!! The designation seems to have some value to NGC when the TV guys use it as a big selling point while hawking NGC slabs, but all the TPGs sponsor all the major organizations, ANA, FUN, etc. by setting up at their shows, buying sponsorships and ads in their publications, etc. in order to gain access to their memberships and the attendees at their shows.
So there is just apparently no need to do any more in order to enhance the value of an ANA membership from the perspective of the TPGs. So no discounts for ANA members, other than a one time $15 coupon from NGC. And the ANA lacks the market power or leverage to force them to do more. In other words, the ANA needs the TPGs and their marketing dollars a lot more than the TPGs need access to its shows or membership.
I agree, the industry has changed and at this point neither PCGS, NGC, or CAC need or benefit from a relationship with ANA (although that probably wasn't always the case), but ANA could certainly benefit from a deal with one of these three which probably would drive membership to ANA, such as the NGC membership deal mentioned above.
@NJCoin said:
Not insinuating anything. Flat out saying most businesses are in business to make money, and they need to do business to do that.
Maybe they have a contract with ANA that says they are not allowed to sell insurance on coins to anyone not participating in that specific program, maybe not. And maybe that program has the best price they will make available to anyone, and maybe not.
All I know is the AAA price I see on the Marriott website is not always the lowest available, and I sure as hell do not need to be a AAA member to book a room at a Marriott. Just sayin'.
Hugh Wood seems to have a huge insurance business that transcends the ANA. I have zero doubt that if I gave Hugh Wood a call and told them I wanted to insure a coin collection that they would not tell me they are not allowed to talk to me unless I first become an ANA member, so I should either go get myself an ANA membership or just take my business elsewhere. And, I'll take it a step further and speculate that, if I had enough business to send their way, that I'd be able to meet or beat whatever is offered through the ANA's program. This is based on nothing other than a general understanding of how the world works.
I'm not saying that for a big enough deal they wouldn't bend their rules, but if I had to guess, the ANA requirement is a small measure to try to keep the fraudsters away and to ensure they are working with legit coin collectors. Not that obtaining an ANA membership isn't something a fraudster wouldn't do, but every obstacle helps. The email quote I provided was very specific that this applied only to their coin program. Any collector with a collection worth insuring is probably not going to balk at the ANA membership requirement, especially if there aren't any viable coin insurance competitors at a comparable insurance rate. I am sure that in this case the relationship for ANA and HW works well as HW needs the advertising/marketing and ANA needs the advertising revenue and memberships.
@ProofCollection said:
I agree, the industry has changed and at this point neither PCGS, NGC, or CAC need or benefit from a relationship with ANA (although that probably wasn't always the case), but ANA could certainly benefit from a deal with one of these three which probably would drive membership to ANA, such as the NGC membership deal mentioned above.
@NJCoin said:
Not insinuating anything. Flat out saying most businesses are in business to make money, and they need to do business to do that.
Maybe they have a contract with ANA that says they are not allowed to sell insurance on coins to anyone not participating in that specific program, maybe not. And maybe that program has the best price they will make available to anyone, and maybe not.
All I know is the AAA price I see on the Marriott website is not always the lowest available, and I sure as hell do not need to be a AAA member to book a room at a Marriott. Just sayin'.
Hugh Wood seems to have a huge insurance business that transcends the ANA. I have zero doubt that if I gave Hugh Wood a call and told them I wanted to insure a coin collection that they would not tell me they are not allowed to talk to me unless I first become an ANA member, so I should either go get myself an ANA membership or just take my business elsewhere. And, I'll take it a step further and speculate that, if I had enough business to send their way, that I'd be able to meet or beat whatever is offered through the ANA's program. This is based on nothing other than a general understanding of how the world works.
I'm not saying that for a big enough deal they wouldn't bend their rules, but if I had to guess, the ANA requirement is a small measure to try to keep the fraudsters away and to ensure they are working with legit coin collectors. Not that obtaining an ANA membership isn't something a fraudster wouldn't do, but every obstacle helps. The email quote I provided was very specific that this applied only to their coin program. Any collector with a collection worth insuring is probably not going to balk at the ANA membership requirement, especially if there aren't any viable coin insurance competitors at a comparable insurance rate. I am sure that in this case the relationship for ANA and HW works well as HW needs the advertising/marketing and ANA needs the advertising revenue and memberships.
Sure. But if their deal works like most similar deals, they pay a fee to ANA in return for their mailing list, and they promise some kind of exclusive deal in order to drive business to ANA. I don't think it has anything to do with fraudsters.
Whether or not it's truly exclusive always depends. You didn't get free direct NGC submission privileges without an ANA membership. That was truly exclusive, and served to drive business to ANA, since you were getting a free $39 NGC membership in addition to your full ANA membership for $46. But you were certainly free to buy any level of NGC membership and submit coins to them without being an ANA member. I'm honestly not sure why the $25 is now so important to NGC that they killed that deal.
I can't say whether a collector or dealer with a collection or inventory worth insuring wouldn't already be an ANA member, but I'm pretty damn sure Hugh Wood wouldn't deny preferential pricing to someone bringing them 4, 5 or 6 figures worth of insurance business merely because they weren't coming in with an ANA membership. Even if that meant the insurance broker paying $35 for the membership out of his or her own pocket if their contract with ANA required it. In this case the debate is kind of pointless, since the value of service Hugh Wood offers dwarfs the value of an ANA membership. It also is just unlikely that Hugh Wood refuses to insure coins other than via its ANA Coin Program.
For insurance purposes, insurance plans may also require coverage to be a part of an "association". Association plans are a way for the insurer to pool risk. I am not saying that this is the rationale behind the relationship, but I am saying that it makes sense for insurers to pool risk in these ways and require membership to do so.
I am a newer collector (started April 2020), and I primarily focus on U.S. Half Cents and Type Coins. Early copper is my favorite.
I have never really thought much about my ANA membership, not something I ever considered giving up. I do have a life membership, not to save money, I just don't like paying bills.
@NJCoin said:
Did anyone happen to catch details in the new issue of The Numismatist? Is there anyone left besides me who even cares?
I appreciate the fact that they held the line for a while, but an across the board 20% increase at a time of declining membership is not going to do anything to turn things around, no matter how much costs are going up. Maybe senior staff should consider pay cuts, or they should consider other ways to cut costs or reduce or eliminate certain services, like the smaller shows if they don't at least break even?
Is the Board really this insular, or do they just not care about the risk of pushing the organization further into irrelevance? I don't know what the situation is with raising money from the industry that benefits most from its existence, but asking an aging, shrinking membership to stomach a 20% fee increase doesn't seem like a winner to me. Most significantly, increasing the lifetime membership break points for discounts from age 55 to 65 seems like a total non-starter.
I totally understand people making charitable contributions to whatever non-profit they choose, but asking a 65+ year old to prepay 20 years worth of dues to avoid future price increases, while ignoring the time value of money, is insulting to the intelligence of anyone looking for value for their money while also wanting to support the organization.
Who on the Board thought this was a good idea? I can only assume they raise little to no money from this subset of lifetime membership, in which case they should have just eliminated it rather than offering a lifetime membership for ages 65+ at $1,100 when current annual memberships cost $50. A 20 year break even for a 55 year old is not a crazy proposition for someone with the means who wants to support the ANA. But raising the age to 65 after increasing the price from $900 to $1,100 just seems stupid.
Concerning the senior staff taking a pay cut, that's just silly. Like most non-profits, you don't work at the ANA to become rich. I was the Education Director there until this past November and I worked there for almost 17 years. I can assure you my salary was not equal to what other Education Directors pulled in. I'm not complaining because I loved my job but money was not the honey.
If your goal is to reduce the operating budget, the most logical thing to do would be to get rid of Summer Seminar and the National Money Show. Both are money losers. Governors are against cancelling both, especially Summer Seminar because the ANA's mandate is education. Even though I am no longer on staff, I will be teaching both weeks and this will be the 17th year in which I have participated The ANA is paying for my travel to Colorado Springs (economy) and room and board (a dorm room on the college campus) but I am volunteering my expertise and time, as all instructors do. If I had to teach on m y own dime, I could not afford to do so.
The ANA is working to cut costs by hosting the NMS in Colorado Springs on a semi-regular basis. This cuts down on the travel cost for employees who work the show. The cost is significant.
@NJCoin said:
Sure. But if their deal works like most similar deals, they pay a fee to ANA in return for their mailing list, and they promise some kind of exclusive deal in order to drive business to ANA. I don't think it has anything to do with fraudsters.
I know this is certainly true with a lot of companies and non-profits but I've been a member of the ANA for 3 years and I've gotten zero numismatic related mail or emails from companies that don't already have my info (i.e. I've bought from them before). I don't believe what you said above to be true about the ANA contract with Hugh Woods, NGC, or Great Collections. I think those companies likely make the fee they pay the ANA back many times over by the affliation with the organization. Usually those types of things are openly competed and it's my understanding that Hugh Woods and NGC have been the chosen insurance and grading company for quite some time. If it wasn't profitable the companies wouldn't submit a bid.
@logger7 said:
Can ANA members still submit to a major grading service through them?
Through who? ANA does not facilitate submissions.
You either have to go through a dealer, purchase a membership with the grading service, or use a grading service like ANACS or ICG that does not require memberships. Other than the one-time $15 discount at NGC, no one offers any incentive for ANA members to join, and you do not need to be an ANA member to use any service.
@logger7 said:
Can ANA members still submit to a major grading service through them?
Through who? ANA does not facilitate submissions.
You either have to go through a dealer, purchase a membership with the grading service, or use a grading service like ANACS or ICG that does not require memberships. Other than the one-time $15 discount at NGC, no one offers any incentive for ANA members to join, and you do not need to be an ANA member to use any service.
They used to offer that service, my first submission to NGC was through the ANA. Also they used to partner with Hugh Wood for insurance.
@tcollects said:
The Numismatist is great, but whenever I think about the rest of the organization, I puke a little in my mouth. I don't miss my membership.
I'm going to make a wild guess and say you've never been to an ANA convention or Summer Seminar, never visited their museum and library in Colorado Springs, or spent any time recently exploring the greatly expanded content on their website. Am I close?
Andy Lustig
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
@tcollects said:
The Numismatist is great, but whenever I think about the rest of the organization, I puke a little in my mouth. I don't miss my membership.
I'm going to make a wild guess and say you've never been to an ANA convention or Summer Seminar, never visited their museum and library in Colorado Springs, or spent any time recently exploring the greatly expanded content on their website. Am I close?
I worked there and went to 10 summer seminars, so you're off by a bit
@tcollects said:
The Numismatist is great, but whenever I think about the rest of the organization, I puke a little in my mouth. I don't miss my membership.
I'm going to make a wild guess and say you've never been to an ANA convention or Summer Seminar, never visited their museum and library in Colorado Springs, or spent any time recently exploring the greatly expanded content on their website. Am I close?
I worked there and went to 10 summer seminars, so you're off by a bit
I guess so! And given some of the staffing and management issues they've had over the past couple of decades, I have no doubt that you have some less than fond memories of your time there. But seriously, do you not appreciate all of the great things the organization does? Or do you just prefer to dwell on less pleasant thoughts?
Andy Lustig
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
@tcollects said:
The Numismatist is great, but whenever I think about the rest of the organization, I puke a little in my mouth. I don't miss my membership.
I'm going to make a wild guess and say you've never been to an ANA convention or Summer Seminar, never visited their museum and library in Colorado Springs, or spent any time recently exploring the greatly expanded content on their website. Am I close?
I worked there and went to 10 summer seminars, so you're off by a bit
I guess so! And given some of the problems the staffing and management issues they've had over the past couple of decades, I have no doubt that you have some less than fond memories of your time there. But seriously, do you not appreciate all of the great things the organization does? Or do you just prefer to dwell on less pleasant thoughts?
you have a good point as usual, I had fun there even through the craziness, maybe it's a functional organization nowadays, but it seems to me from afar to be about the same, and increasingly irrelevant as more information is available on the net like this forum and other websites
@tcollects said:
The Numismatist is great, but whenever I think about the rest of the organization, I puke a little in my mouth. I don't miss my membership.
I'm going to make a wild guess and say you've never been to an ANA convention or Summer Seminar, never visited their museum and library in Colorado Springs, or spent any time recently exploring the greatly expanded content on their website. Am I close?
I worked there and went to 10 summer seminars, so you're off by a bit
I guess so! And given some of the problems the staffing and management issues they've had over the past couple of decades, I have no doubt that you have some less than fond memories of your time there. But seriously, do you not appreciate all of the great things the organization does? Or do you just prefer to dwell on less pleasant thoughts?
you have a good point as usual, I had fun there even through the craziness, maybe it's a functional organization nowadays, but it seems to me from afar to be about the same, and increasingly irrelevant as more information is available on the net like this forum and other websites
I know nothing about how smoothly things run at HQ. And no doubt the internet has made it easier to get by without joining the organization. But if a collector isn't getting his money's worth out of ANA membership, it's only because he's not trying. Sort of like me and my membership at the local gym, but I don't blame the gym.
Andy Lustig
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
@logger7 said:
Can ANA members still submit to a major grading service through them?
Through who? ANA does not facilitate submissions.
You either have to go through a dealer, purchase a membership with the grading service, or use a grading service like ANACS or ICG that does not require memberships. Other than the one-time $15 discount at NGC, no one offers any incentive for ANA members to join, and you do not need to be an ANA member to use any service.
They used to offer that service, my first submission to NGC was through the ANA. Also they used to partner with Hugh Wood for insurance.
No, actually they didn't. ANA membership allowed you to receive a free basic membership from NGC, but that was it. ANA never handled submissions.
@tcollects said:
The Numismatist is great, but whenever I think about the rest of the organization, I puke a little in my mouth. I don't miss my membership.
I'm going to make a wild guess and say you've never been to an ANA convention or Summer Seminar, never visited their museum and library in Colorado Springs, or spent any time recently exploring the greatly expanded content on their website. Am I close?
I worked there and went to 10 summer seminars, so you're off by a bit
I guess so! And given some of the problems the staffing and management issues they've had over the past couple of decades, I have no doubt that you have some less than fond memories of your time there. But seriously, do you not appreciate all of the great things the organization does? Or do you just prefer to dwell on less pleasant thoughts?
you have a good point as usual, I had fun there even through the craziness, maybe it's a functional organization nowadays, but it seems to me from afar to be about the same, and increasingly irrelevant as more information is available on the net like this forum and other websites
I know nothing about how smoothly things run at HQ. And no doubt the internet has made it easier to get by without joining the organization. But if a collector isn't getting his money's worth out of ANA membership, it's only because he's not trying. Sort of like me and my membership at the local gym, but I don't blame the gym.
Fair points. But, rather than expecting people to try harder to be able to squeeze every last cent out of a membership dollar, the organization should be doing more to mitigate dues increases at a time that a membership is increasingly unnecessary in order to fully participate in the hobby.
That's MY point. Holding the line for years before and during a pandemic was great. Recognizing the reality of their situation, that membership is a "nice to have" rather than a necessity, and finding ways to avoid an across the board 20%+ dues increase would have been greater still.
True believers and old timers locked into lifetime memberships are certainly entitled to the opinion that the organization should do whatever it believes it needs to do, but they are not the ones who are going to bail when they get the bill.
@tcollects said:
The Numismatist is great, but whenever I think about the rest of the organization, I puke a little in my mouth. I don't miss my membership.
I'm going to make a wild guess and say you've never been to an ANA convention or Summer Seminar, never visited their museum and library in Colorado Springs, or spent any time recently exploring the greatly expanded content on their website. Am I close?
I worked there and went to 10 summer seminars, so you're off by a bit
I guess so! And given some of the problems the staffing and management issues they've had over the past couple of decades, I have no doubt that you have some less than fond memories of your time there. But seriously, do you not appreciate all of the great things the organization does? Or do you just prefer to dwell on less pleasant thoughts?
you have a good point as usual, I had fun there even through the craziness, maybe it's a functional organization nowadays, but it seems to me from afar to be about the same, and increasingly irrelevant as more information is available on the net like this forum and other websites
I know nothing about how smoothly things run at HQ. And no doubt the internet has made it easier to get by without joining the organization. But if a collector isn't getting his money's worth out of ANA membership, it's only because he's not trying. Sort of like me and my membership at the local gym, but I don't blame the gym.
Fair points. But, rather than expecting people to try harder to be able to squeeze every last cent of a a membership dollar...
Gold membership, which includes all other benefits but only a digital version of The Numismatist, is currently priced at $30 a year. Doesn't take too much squeezing to get your money's worth.
@tcollects said:
The Numismatist is great, but whenever I think about the rest of the organization, I puke a little in my mouth. I don't miss my membership.
I'm going to make a wild guess and say you've never been to an ANA convention or Summer Seminar, never visited their museum and library in Colorado Springs, or spent any time recently exploring the greatly expanded content on their website. Am I close?
I worked there and went to 10 summer seminars, so you're off by a bit
I guess so! And given some of the problems the staffing and management issues they've had over the past couple of decades, I have no doubt that you have some less than fond memories of your time there. But seriously, do you not appreciate all of the great things the organization does? Or do you just prefer to dwell on less pleasant thoughts?
you have a good point as usual, I had fun there even through the craziness, maybe it's a functional organization nowadays, but it seems to me from afar to be about the same, and increasingly irrelevant as more information is available on the net like this forum and other websites
I know nothing about how smoothly things run at HQ. And no doubt the internet has made it easier to get by without joining the organization. But if a collector isn't getting his money's worth out of ANA membership, it's only because he's not trying. Sort of like me and my membership at the local gym, but I don't blame the gym.
Fair points. But, rather than expecting people to try harder to be able to squeeze every last cent of a a membership dollar...
Gold membership, which includes all other benefits but only a digital version of The Numismatist, is currently priced at $30 a year. Doesn't take too much squeezing to get your money's worth.
Also doesn't have a ton of value to someone who wants a printed magazine, has plenty of other websites to visit to gather all the information they can handle, doesn't need a $15 one time discount at NGC, etc. And it's going up to $35, a 17% increase. A lot of people pay zero for tons of online content, and won't pay $35 for online access to The New York Times or The Wall Street Journal, let alone The Numismatist.
Don't get me wrong, if my comments have made my opinion of ANA unclear. I like the organization. I don't get involved in the politics, so I have no ax to grind. I'm just observing, as a current member observing the market, that large price increases after periods of no price increases, are very difficult for markets to absorb when you are not dealing with necessities.
Oil price shocks lead to recessions. Beef price shocks lead to people trading down to chicken. Platinum membership price shocks are more likely to lead to people trading down to exploring how millions of other collectors enjoy the hobby without an ANA membership than trading down to a Gold membership and accessing The Numismatist online.
And some paying $30 for online access will wonder if it's worth $35. We all need energy to function in the world. We don't all need an ANA membership to collect coins. How many people attend the Summer Seminar, borrow from the library, etc.? That's the core audience that will be price insensitive.
Strip them, current lifetime members and club members out, and every other membership is at risk when people get hit with a 20% price increase. Some will hold their nose and pay it. Others will marvel at the great bargain they have been receiving all along, and happily pay it. And others will decide they don't need it.
My prediction is that, when the dust settles, the amount they lose from people dropping will make the extra revenue from those who don't relatively meaningless, and that they should have held the line at 5-10% and looked harder for other ways to hit their numbers. You won't see it right away. In fact, you'll see a bump in membership revenue as people push renewal forward to avoid the increase. But then the increase will hit, and new members won't replace old members leaving.
I was able to sit in on the board meeting where the decision was made to make the increase. Like everything today, the cost of printing and postage has skyrocketed. The board understood there would be hardships for some with the increase however, the increase was necessary. As some have noted above, the price increase is not dramatic.
The ANA offers a lot of educational benefits to new and experienced collectors. It is supportive of both collectors and dealers. Dealers and collectors need each other. That is a simple fact. Additionally, the ANA spends a great deal of time and money promoting the hobby to young numismatists. We need YNs and younger adults to find the hobby and then embrace it.
The percentage of collectors who are actually ANA members is small. If a majority of collectors joined the ANA, more programs and benefits would be available as the increased revenue would help support these efforts. I paid my $1200 lifetime membership gladly as I viewed it as an investment in our hobby's future.
Anecdotally, I belong to five local clubs. On average, only 1/5 of each club's membership are ANA members. These members are passionate about numismatics and still only 1 in 5 have joined the ANA. As I noted above, the majority of other non-club collectors are not ANA members. To me this is short sighted. We should all want the ANA to thrive.
These are my personal views and I do not speak for the ANA.
American Numismatic Association Governor 2023 to 2025 - My posts reflect my own thoughts and are not those of the ANA.My Numismatics with Kenny Twitter Page
I am an ANA Life Member. My biggest gripe is board members who have and are going to attend the convention taking expense money for travel and lodging from the ANA. If they are going to attend if they were not on the board, why take expense money? I know of at least 2 former board members who did not take any expense money from the ANA while they were on the board. Years ago, there were at least two other board members that milked the ANA for expenses for years. I just do not think that is right.
@ksammut said:
I was able to sit in on the board meeting where the decision was made to make the increase. Like everything today, the cost of printing and postage has skyrocketed. The board understood there would be hardships for some with the increase however, the increase was necessary. As some have noted above, the price increase is not dramatic.
The ANA offers a lot of educational benefits to new and experienced collectors. It is supportive of both collectors and dealers. Dealers and collectors need each other. That is a simple fact. Additionally, the ANA spends a great deal of time and money promoting the hobby to young numismatists. We need YNs and younger adults to find the hobby and then embrace it.
The percentage of collectors who are actually ANA members is small. If a majority of collectors joined the ANA, more programs and benefits would be available as the increased revenue would help support these efforts. I paid my $1200 lifetime membership gladly as I viewed it as an investment in our hobby's future.
Anecdotally, I belong to five local clubs. On average, only 1/5 of each club's membership are ANA members. These members are passionate about numismatics and still only 1 in 5 have joined the ANA. As I noted above, the majority of other non-club collectors are not ANA members. To me this is short sighted. We should all want the ANA to thrive.
These are my personal views and I do not speak for the ANA.
Thanks for taking the time to give us an insider's perspective. The price increase is not dramatic, unless viewed in percentage terms, in which case a 20% increase is violent in a world of heightened 4% inflation. Again, ANA membership is not food, fuel or shelter. Many have already chosen to do without. A 20% increase is not going to shrink that number.
Congratulations on the $1,200 investment you made in your career, hobby and future. Did you consider that raising that 25%, to $1,500, and raising the age for a discount from 55 to 65, is going to cause that revenue stream to disappear, to the extent it ever existed, from people over age 54? Good investment for you. No-brainer to avoid for a 55-64 year old after a $600 increase, from $900 to $1,500 (67%, the very definition of dramatic). Asking a 65 year old to pay a discounted $1,100 for that investment that you paid $1,200 for at age 20-something is simply obnoxious. I seriously think they either need to rethink raising the age for the discount OR eliminating it entirely, because doing what they did just insults the intelligence of a 65 year.
You are making my point about wanting the ANA to thrive. The way to do that, and to induce a portion of the 80% of club members and 99.99% of the collecting public who are not already members to join, is not by voting 20% dues increases and blaming them on printing and postage costs. Did any of your 5 clubs do that in any single year since you joined?
Blame it on a failure of imagination to develop other revenue streams and a failure to bring costs in line with the value delivered. If the perceived value was there, the 100% of club members who pay club dues would happily join, as would a tiny fraction of the millions of casual collectors who don't bother today.
Hopefully you'll have the opportunity to bring some fresh thinking to the Board, and will take advantage of that opportunity. If you are just going to be younger version of what is already there, echoing and mimicking what they say and do, you'll just be another in a long line of stewards of a sinking enterprise.
@golden said:
I am an ANA Life Member. My biggest gripe is board members who have and are going to attend the convention taking expense money for travel and lodging from the ANA. If they are going to attend if they were not on the board, why take expense money? I know of at least 2 former board members who did not take any expense money from the ANA while they were on the board. Years ago, there were at least two other board members that milked the ANA for expenses for years. I just do not think that is right.
Yes and no. I assume they are not paid for their Board service, correct? If so, I don't begrudge anyone a little perk in return for their time and service.
More power to anyone generously willing to forgo that benefit, but I don't think micromanaging expense reimbursements is the answer. Do you really think a litmus test to determine whether someone would attend anyway would be appropriate, and to deny one Board member a reimbursement offered to another?
At that point, why not just go all the way and weed out anyone not truly dedicated by eliminating all expense reimbursements for everything for all Board members, not just attendance at shows? And then we can look into not reimbursing staff for Board related expenses!
@ksammut said:
I was able to sit in on the board meeting where the decision was made to make the increase. Like everything today, the cost of printing and postage has skyrocketed. The board understood there would be hardships for some with the increase however, the increase was necessary. As some have noted above, the price increase is not dramatic.
The ANA offers a lot of educational benefits to new and experienced collectors. It is supportive of both collectors and dealers. Dealers and collectors need each other. That is a simple fact. Additionally, the ANA spends a great deal of time and money promoting the hobby to young numismatists. We need YNs and younger adults to find the hobby and then embrace it.
The percentage of collectors who are actually ANA members is small. If a majority of collectors joined the ANA, more programs and benefits would be available as the increased revenue would help support these efforts. I paid my $1200 lifetime membership gladly as I viewed it as an investment in our hobby's future.
Anecdotally, I belong to five local clubs. On average, only 1/5 of each club's membership are ANA members. These members are passionate about numismatics and still only 1 in 5 have joined the ANA. As I noted above, the majority of other non-club collectors are not ANA members. To me this is short sighted. We should all want the ANA to thrive.
These are my personal views and I do not speak for the ANA.
Thanks for taking the time to give us the insiders perspective. The price increase is not dramatic, unless viewed in percentage terms, in which case a 20% increase is violent in a world of heightened 4% inflation. Again, ANA membership is not food, fuel or shelter. Many have already chosen to do without. A 20% increase is not going to shrink that number.
Congratulations on the $1,200 investment you made in your career, hobby and future. Did you consider that raising that 25%, to $1,500, and raising the age for a discount from 55 to 65, is going to cause that revenue stream to disappear, to the extent it ever existed, from people over age 54? Good investment for you. No-brainer to avoid for a 55 year old after a $300 increase (the opposite of not dramatic). Asking a 65 year old to pay a discounted $1,100 for that investment that you paid $1,200 at age 20-something is simply obnoxious. I seriously think they either need to rethink raising the age for the discount OR eliminating it entirely, because doing what they did just insults the intelligence of a 65 year.
You are making my point about wanting the ANA to thrive. The way to do that, and to induce a portion of the 80% of club members and 99.99% of the collecting public to join, is not by voting 20% dues increases and blaming them on printing and postage costs.
Blame it on a failure of imagination to develop other revenue streams and a failure to bring costs in line with the value delivered. If the perceived value was there, the 100% of club members who pay club dues would happily join, as would a tiny fraction of the millions of casual collectors who don't bother today.
Hopefully you'll have the opportunity to bring some fresh thinking to the Board, and will take advantage of that opportunity. If you are just going to be younger version of what is already there, echoing and mimicking what they say and do, you'll just be another in a long line of stewards of a sinking enterprise.
Your feedback is what every board and future board should want to hear. One reason I am running is the next board and future ANA boards need to think outside the box. In the recent ANA candidate forum on youtube, I shared just a few of my ideas. The ANA needs to be a body that all collectors want to join and that is thru innovation.
Everyone's finances are different, when I paid the $1200 for membership at the age of 18, it was a burden however I believed in the goals of the association. I considered going annually, but as you noted, it made financial sense to go with a life membership for me as I knew back then, I would be a supporter of the ANA for the rest of my life. My father, who is now 67, has been an annual member taking advantage of some of the renewal offers the ANA has offered over the past ten years. That made sense for him. He is also a very big supporter of the ANA. Someone who is 65 or so may not think it makes financial sense for them to become a LM unless they see the cost as a way to support the ANA. With that said, the next board should look into your ideas.
The ANA's most recent fund raiser took place in the past year - The George F. Health Society. I became a charter member for the same reason's I wrote out the check for my LM, I believe in the mission of the ANA.
To your point about inducing passionate collectors to join, the ANA has offered local coin club members nationally a much reduced one-year membership to join. Few accepted the offer which tells me future boards need to create additional exciting reasons for new members to want to join as well has bringing back old members and keeping present ones. When something is valuable, cost many times becomes less of an issue. You are right on with your comment about perceived value.
Presently, I am not a board member however, I am sure the board members have a fiduciary responsibility to the association, and they look at every line item and have to make financial decisions. I do know the decision was not made lightly regarding the increase.
If elected, my goal is to think outside the box so a great deal revenue and exposure is generated through partnerships so the mission of the association is greatly enhanced.
Whether I am elected or not, share your ideas and concerns with board members and staff. All ANA members should take ownership in the Association.
American Numismatic Association Governor 2023 to 2025 - My posts reflect my own thoughts and are not those of the ANA.My Numismatics with Kenny Twitter Page
@ksammut said:
I was able to sit in on the board meeting where the decision was made to make the increase. Like everything today, the cost of printing and postage has skyrocketed. The board understood there would be hardships for some with the increase however, the increase was necessary. As some have noted above, the price increase is not dramatic.
The ANA offers a lot of educational benefits to new and experienced collectors. It is supportive of both collectors and dealers. Dealers and collectors need each other. That is a simple fact. Additionally, the ANA spends a great deal of time and money promoting the hobby to young numismatists. We need YNs and younger adults to find the hobby and then embrace it.
The percentage of collectors who are actually ANA members is small. If a majority of collectors joined the ANA, more programs and benefits would be available as the increased revenue would help support these efforts. I paid my $1200 lifetime membership gladly as I viewed it as an investment in our hobby's future.
Anecdotally, I belong to five local clubs. On average, only 1/5 of each club's membership are ANA members. These members are passionate about numismatics and still only 1 in 5 have joined the ANA. As I noted above, the majority of other non-club collectors are not ANA members. To me this is short sighted. We should all want the ANA to thrive.
These are my personal views and I do not speak for the ANA.
Thanks for taking the time to give us the insiders perspective. The price increase is not dramatic, unless viewed in percentage terms, in which case a 20% increase is violent in a world of heightened 4% inflation. Again, ANA membership is not food, fuel or shelter. Many have already chosen to do without. A 20% increase is not going to shrink that number.
Congratulations on the $1,200 investment you made in your career, hobby and future. Did you consider that raising that 25%, to $1,500, and raising the age for a discount from 55 to 65, is going to cause that revenue stream to disappear, to the extent it ever existed, from people over age 54? Good investment for you. No-brainer to avoid for a 55 year old after a $300 increase (the opposite of not dramatic). Asking a 65 year old to pay a discounted $1,100 for that investment that you paid $1,200 at age 20-something is simply obnoxious. I seriously think they either need to rethink raising the age for the discount OR eliminating it entirely, because doing what they did just insults the intelligence of a 65 year.
You are making my point about wanting the ANA to thrive. The way to do that, and to induce a portion of the 80% of club members and 99.99% of the collecting public to join, is not by voting 20% dues increases and blaming them on printing and postage costs.
Blame it on a failure of imagination to develop other revenue streams and a failure to bring costs in line with the value delivered. If the perceived value was there, the 100% of club members who pay club dues would happily join, as would a tiny fraction of the millions of casual collectors who don't bother today.
Hopefully you'll have the opportunity to bring some fresh thinking to the Board, and will take advantage of that opportunity. If you are just going to be younger version of what is already there, echoing and mimicking what they say and do, you'll just be another in a long line of stewards of a sinking enterprise.
Your feedback is what every board and future board should want to hear. One reason I am running is the next board and future ANA boards need to think outside the box. In the recent ANA candidate forum on youtube, I shared just a few of my ideas. The ANA needs to be a body that all collectors want to join and that is thru innovation.
Everyone's finances are different, when I paid the $1200 for membership at the age of 18, it was a burden however I believed in the goals of the association. I considered going annually, but as you noted, it made financial sense to go with a life membership for me as I knew back then, I would be a supporter of the ANA for the rest of my life. My father, who is now 67, has been an annual member taking advantage of some of the renewal offers the ANA has offered over the past ten years. That made sense for him. He is also a very big supporter of the ANA. Someone who is 65 or so may not think it makes financial sense for them to become a LM unless they see the cost as a way to support the ANA. With that said, the next board should look into your ideas.
The ANA's most recent fund raiser took place in the past year - The George F. Health Society. I became a charter member for the same reason's I wrote out the check for my LM, I believe in the mission of the ANA.
To your point about inducing passionate collectors to join, the ANA has offered local coin club members nationally a much reduced one-year membership to join. Few accepted the offer which tells me future boards need to create additional exciting reasons for new members to want to join as well has bringing back old members and keeping present ones. When something is valuable, cost many times becomes less of an issue. You are right on with your comment about perceived value.
Presently, I am not a board member however, I am sure the board members have a fiduciary responsibility to the association, and they look at every line item and have to make financial decisions. I do know the decision was not made lightly regarding the increase.
If elected, my goal is to think outside the box so a great deal revenue and exposure is generated through partnerships so the mission of the association is greatly enhanced.
Whether I am elected or not, share your ideas and concerns with board members and staff. All ANA members should take ownership in the Association.
Thank you very much for your thoughtful response. You are saying and doing all the right things, and I will be shocked if you are not elected. You are the future.
One last point about life memberships, and I honestly cannot tell you why I am so hung up on it, other than it seems like such a tone deaf decision made in a star chamber where everyone's brilliant thoughts are supported by the room without question.
Your observation about mid and late career people wanting to financially support the organization is very well taken, and they would very likely find a way to do so, with or without a life membership that comes with a $400 discount, from $1,500 to $1,100 at age 65. That discount, at that price, at that age, is ridiculous, because that membership has no value at that price.
Right now, the pricing makes sense. For you at $1,200, and at a $300 discount to $900 at age 55. Raising the prices to $1,500 and $1,100 is, I believe, ill advised, but consistent with what they are doing across the Board.
Whoever decided to raise the age for the discount from 55 to 65 just wasn't thinking, and apparently it wasn't properly challenged at the Board level. Eliminate the discount if you don't want to offer it, and kill the incentive to become a life member as people hit a certain age. But asking a 65 year old to prepay 20 years' worth of dues to avoid future price increases is just crazy. The Board's failure to recognize that causes me, as a member, to question the quality of every other decision made by the Board.
I joined as a life member in 1997. It cost $750 and they let me pay in 3 annual installments.
The purchasing power of that $750 today is about $1400. Not much more than the new cost of a life membership. And the full online access to the entire run of The Numismatist is certainly worth that extra $100.
I don’t have a problem with the new pricing and I expect many others feel likewise.
@pruebas said:
I joined as a life member in 1997. It cost $750 and they let me pay in 3 annual installments.
The purchasing power of that $750 today is about $1400. Not much more than the new cost of a life membership. And the full online access to the entire run of The Numismatist is certainly worth that extra $100.
I don’t have a problem with the new pricing and I expect many others feel likewise.
That's fine. How old were you in 1997, if you don't mind my asking? If you were 55 or above, congratulations on your long and hopefully healthy life that hopefully has many more years left to go.
My observations are focused much less on the pricing level per se, but on the huge 20% increase announced for this September. As far as lifetime memberships, the increase is consistent ($1,200 to $1,500 and $900 to $1,100), so there is no issue there, other than the general objection to the 20%+ increase.
The objection is to the raising of the age from 55 to 65 to be eligible for the lower price. Unless you were 55-64 when you paid your $750 in 1997, it is irrelevant to what I am complaining about. No doubt someone in their 20s, 30s or 40s gets good value from a lifetime membership at any of these prices.
The point is that the organization realized that a 55 year old, on average, had 20 less years to enjoy a lifetime membership than a 35 year old, so they offered a discount to make it an attractive proposition. Raising that break point to 65, but keeping the discount the same, is just stupid, because a 65 year old is unlikely to live long enough to receive value from the membership, on average, unless the discount is significantly larger, practically to the point of giving it away.
Telling anyone, 20 or 65, that they could lock in today's price by prepaying anything up to age 85 is just stupid. Kenny's membership would have cost $3,685 if he did that. How does that compare to the $1,200 he paid, or the $750 you paid back in 1997? That's what the ANA is going to be asking people age 65+ to do by discounting the $1,500 to $1,100 for them in September, while taking away the discount at age 55, when people would still have some time, on average, to get some value from a lifetime membership.
@ksammut said:
I paid my $1200 lifetime membership gladly as I viewed it as an investment in our hobby's future.
Anecdotally, I belong to five local clubs.
Now you have a tough decision. As an ANA member of an ANA Member club, $5 is donated back to a single club you designate.
As an ANA Life Member, you can designate TWO ANA Member clubs for the $5 donation. Each.
Which clubs do you like MORE?????
-----Burton ANA 50 year/Life Member (now "Emeritus")
@ksammut said:
I paid my $1200 lifetime membership gladly as I viewed it as an investment in our hobby's future.
Anecdotally, I belong to five local clubs.
Now you have a tough decision. As an ANA member of an ANA Member club, $5 is donated back to a single club you designate.
As an ANA Life Member, you can designate TWO ANA Member clubs for the $5 donation. Each.
Which clubs do you like MORE?????
There is one club that truly mentored me all the way back when I was ten. The other clubs were also supportive so the Wilmington (DE) club is the one I always designate and rotate with the others. Fortunately, most of the clubs have enough ANA members to have a free membership in the ANA.
**Thank you for bringing this up. Some clubs forget to let the ANA know how many of their members are also ANA members. As you noted, the Club's membership fee is reduced by $5.00 per ANA member.
**
American Numismatic Association Governor 2023 to 2025 - My posts reflect my own thoughts and are not those of the ANA.My Numismatics with Kenny Twitter Page
For anyone submitting more than a handful of coins each year, this membership is essentially free (i.e., the credit covers the cost of membership). It just doesn't involve the ANA.
For anyone submitting more than a handful of coins each year, this membership is essentially free (i.e., the credit covers the cost of membership). It just doesn't involve the ANA.
BINGO!!!! Not as good as before, because it requires $150 in annual spending, not including insurance, shipping, etc. But it has the virtue of not requiring an ANA membership. Yet another reason a 20% dues increase might be a hard sell.
Comments
Yeah, it's clearly nothing, as evidenced by your failure to support them, even though you receive a complimentary magazine that has value to you. Believe me, the vast majority of collectors do not join for that alone, and raising the price by 20% is only going to induce more people to join you on the non-membership list.
You apparently don't value membership at all, other than for a magazine you get for free. Maybe you'd pay $55 a year for it, maybe you wouldn't. Talk is cheap when you are currently paying nothing.
My point exactly. People who are not motivated to lock in current prices before the increase are going to find that a 20% easier decision to arrive at.
After reading this post I just found out I'm going to live another 29 years and that coin collectors have budgets. I guess i'm in trouble now.
USN & USAF retired 1971-1993
Successful Transactions with more than 100 Members
I have noticed recently that ANA membership is required for some other services, like Hugh Wood insurance and ShipAndInsure.com so there may be some benefit after all if these other services are important to you.
http://ProofCollection.Net
Nothing is ever "required." The question will be whether there is a discount available through ANA membership that is unavailable elsewhere that justifies the membership. That is strictly YMMV. The biggest benefit to me, other than the magazine, was the NGC direct submission privileges, which they took away last year.
For those who let your membership lapse or are upset with the value of membership, what services would you like to see the ANA provide? What would convince you that membership is worth the cost?
I don't know what you're insinuating - that perhaps there is a workaround? - but in the email I got today from Hugh Wood:
Please note - our coin program is for members of the American Numismatic Association (ANA) only.
http://ProofCollection.Net
I bet if they arranged a discount with NGC, PCGS, or CAC for ANA members it would help. And it wouldn't have to be a real discount either, but perhaps a surcharge for non-members.
http://ProofCollection.Net
There already is a first-year membership discount with NGC, IIRC, it's like $15.
ANA 50 year/Life Member (now "Emeritus")
Not insinuating anything. Flat out saying most businesses are in business to make money, and they need to do business to do that.
Maybe they have a contract with ANA that says they are not allowed to sell insurance on coins to anyone not participating in that specific program, maybe not. And maybe that program has the best price they will make available to anyone, and maybe not.
All I know is the AAA price I see on the Marriott website is not always the lowest available, and I sure as hell do not need to be a AAA member to book a room at a Marriott. Just sayin'.
Hugh Wood seems to have a huge insurance business that transcends the ANA. I have zero doubt that if I gave Hugh Wood a call and told them I wanted to insure a coin collection that they would not tell me they are not allowed to talk to me unless I first become an ANA member, so I should either go get myself an ANA membership or just take my business elsewhere. And, I'll take it a step further and speculate that, if I had enough business to send their way, that I'd be able to meet or beat whatever is offered through the ANA's program. This is based on nothing other than a general understanding of how the world works.
NGC is the Official Grading Service of the ANA, and I am sure NGC pays the ANA a fee for that designation. It used to include a basic membership that allowed ANA members to make direct grading submissions without paying for a NGC membership, but NGC took that away last year.
The grading services all have thriving businesses that primarily cater to large dealers. The direct collector business is a small piece. How do you propose getting a private business to impose a surcharge on customers who are not members of a third party organization?
PCGS apparently sees no value in paying ANA for an official designation, and does what it needs to do to market itself at shows. Not being the ANA's "Official Grading Service" does not seem to have adversely impacted its business or standing in the marketplace in the slightest.
The TPGs do not need to give discounts to ANA members to attract business. Apparently the same way ANA does not need to hold the line on membership fee increases. 😁
NGC currently gives a small, one time discount on a membership that used to be totally free. That's it. And that's all we are getting.
Not "already." Period. That discount was 100% up until last year. So that $25 membership that is $10 for the first year only used to be totally free.
Not a huge deal, and I'm sure not ANA's fault, but, still. One more chip away at the value of a membership to a small collector. ANA makes deals wherever it can.
If a vendor wants to offer discounts to ANA members, they are certainly free to do so, and ANA is happy to charge whatever for access to its membership. If NGC is willing to pay for an "official" designation but doesn't feel the need to offer more than a nominal one-time discount to the membership, the ANA isn't in a position to do anything about that.
NGC apparently did not feel they need to offer free basic memberships to ANA members in order to compete with PCGS, ANACS and ICG. That was NGC's call to make. It diminishes the value of an ANA membership, and ANA was impotent to stop it.
I think the low level membership used to be something like $39, and getting it for free basically paid for the ANA membership. That was just too good a deal, at the expense of NGC, so NGC lowered its basic membership price to $25 for everyone and eliminated the freebie for ANA members, replacing it with a one time $15 discount good on any of its memberships. Better than a sharp stick in the eye, but not exactly a reason to sign up for a lifetime ANA membership.
I infer this to be true of many coin dealers being members now too. It has no bearing on whether I will buy from them.
Like I said, I get the magazine for free. If I could no longer get the magazine for free, I would buy it. The ANA is about the price of other subscriptions. Honestly, I am not sure how else I would utilize the ANA outside of the magazine, but the Numismatist is a good read and I do enjoy it.
I am a newer collector (started April 2020), and I primarily focus on U.S. Half Cents and Type Coins. Early copper is my favorite.
EXACTLY!!! The designation seems to have some value to NGC when the TV guys use it as a big selling point while hawking NGC slabs, but all the TPGs sponsor all the major organizations, ANA, FUN, etc. by setting up at their shows, buying sponsorships and ads in their publications, etc. in order to gain access to their memberships and the attendees at their shows.
So there is just apparently no need to do any more in order to enhance the value of an ANA membership from the perspective of the TPGs. So no discounts for ANA members, other than a one time $15 coupon from NGC. And the ANA lacks the market power or leverage to force them to do more. In other words, the ANA needs the TPGs and their marketing dollars a lot more than the TPGs need access to its shows or membership.
I agree, the industry has changed and at this point neither PCGS, NGC, or CAC need or benefit from a relationship with ANA (although that probably wasn't always the case), but ANA could certainly benefit from a deal with one of these three which probably would drive membership to ANA, such as the NGC membership deal mentioned above.
I'm not saying that for a big enough deal they wouldn't bend their rules, but if I had to guess, the ANA requirement is a small measure to try to keep the fraudsters away and to ensure they are working with legit coin collectors. Not that obtaining an ANA membership isn't something a fraudster wouldn't do, but every obstacle helps. The email quote I provided was very specific that this applied only to their coin program. Any collector with a collection worth insuring is probably not going to balk at the ANA membership requirement, especially if there aren't any viable coin insurance competitors at a comparable insurance rate. I am sure that in this case the relationship for ANA and HW works well as HW needs the advertising/marketing and ANA needs the advertising revenue and memberships.
http://ProofCollection.Net
If you are a member, you can help answer that question by how you vote in the upcoming Board of Governors election.
Sure. But if their deal works like most similar deals, they pay a fee to ANA in return for their mailing list, and they promise some kind of exclusive deal in order to drive business to ANA. I don't think it has anything to do with fraudsters.
Whether or not it's truly exclusive always depends. You didn't get free direct NGC submission privileges without an ANA membership. That was truly exclusive, and served to drive business to ANA, since you were getting a free $39 NGC membership in addition to your full ANA membership for $46. But you were certainly free to buy any level of NGC membership and submit coins to them without being an ANA member. I'm honestly not sure why the $25 is now so important to NGC that they killed that deal.
I can't say whether a collector or dealer with a collection or inventory worth insuring wouldn't already be an ANA member, but I'm pretty damn sure Hugh Wood wouldn't deny preferential pricing to someone bringing them 4, 5 or 6 figures worth of insurance business merely because they weren't coming in with an ANA membership. Even if that meant the insurance broker paying $35 for the membership out of his or her own pocket if their contract with ANA required it. In this case the debate is kind of pointless, since the value of service Hugh Wood offers dwarfs the value of an ANA membership. It also is just unlikely that Hugh Wood refuses to insure coins other than via its ANA Coin Program.
For insurance purposes, insurance plans may also require coverage to be a part of an "association". Association plans are a way for the insurer to pool risk. I am not saying that this is the rationale behind the relationship, but I am saying that it makes sense for insurers to pool risk in these ways and require membership to do so.
I am a newer collector (started April 2020), and I primarily focus on U.S. Half Cents and Type Coins. Early copper is my favorite.
I have never really thought much about my ANA membership, not something I ever considered giving up. I do have a life membership, not to save money, I just don't like paying bills.
Concerning the senior staff taking a pay cut, that's just silly. Like most non-profits, you don't work at the ANA to become rich. I was the Education Director there until this past November and I worked there for almost 17 years. I can assure you my salary was not equal to what other Education Directors pulled in. I'm not complaining because I loved my job but money was not the honey.
If your goal is to reduce the operating budget, the most logical thing to do would be to get rid of Summer Seminar and the National Money Show. Both are money losers. Governors are against cancelling both, especially Summer Seminar because the ANA's mandate is education. Even though I am no longer on staff, I will be teaching both weeks and this will be the 17th year in which I have participated The ANA is paying for my travel to Colorado Springs (economy) and room and board (a dorm room on the college campus) but I am volunteering my expertise and time, as all instructors do. If I had to teach on m y own dime, I could not afford to do so.
The ANA is working to cut costs by hosting the NMS in Colorado Springs on a semi-regular basis. This cuts down on the travel cost for employees who work the show. The cost is significant.
I know this is certainly true with a lot of companies and non-profits but I've been a member of the ANA for 3 years and I've gotten zero numismatic related mail or emails from companies that don't already have my info (i.e. I've bought from them before). I don't believe what you said above to be true about the ANA contract with Hugh Woods, NGC, or Great Collections. I think those companies likely make the fee they pay the ANA back many times over by the affliation with the organization. Usually those types of things are openly competed and it's my understanding that Hugh Woods and NGC have been the chosen insurance and grading company for quite some time. If it wasn't profitable the companies wouldn't submit a bid.
Can ANA members still submit to a major grading service through them?
Through who? ANA does not facilitate submissions.
You either have to go through a dealer, purchase a membership with the grading service, or use a grading service like ANACS or ICG that does not require memberships. Other than the one-time $15 discount at NGC, no one offers any incentive for ANA members to join, and you do not need to be an ANA member to use any service.
The Numismatist is great, but whenever I think about the rest of the organization, I puke a little in my mouth. I don't miss my membership.
They used to offer that service, my first submission to NGC was through the ANA. Also they used to partner with Hugh Wood for insurance.
I'm going to make a wild guess and say you've never been to an ANA convention or Summer Seminar, never visited their museum and library in Colorado Springs, or spent any time recently exploring the greatly expanded content on their website. Am I close?
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
I worked there and went to 10 summer seminars, so you're off by a bit
I guess so! And given some of the staffing and management issues they've had over the past couple of decades, I have no doubt that you have some less than fond memories of your time there. But seriously, do you not appreciate all of the great things the organization does? Or do you just prefer to dwell on less pleasant thoughts?
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
you have a good point as usual, I had fun there even through the craziness, maybe it's a functional organization nowadays, but it seems to me from afar to be about the same, and increasingly irrelevant as more information is available on the net like this forum and other websites
.
I know nothing about how smoothly things run at HQ. And no doubt the internet has made it easier to get by without joining the organization. But if a collector isn't getting his money's worth out of ANA membership, it's only because he's not trying. Sort of like me and my membership at the local gym, but I don't blame the gym.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
No, actually they didn't. ANA membership allowed you to receive a free basic membership from NGC, but that was it. ANA never handled submissions.
Fair points. But, rather than expecting people to try harder to be able to squeeze every last cent out of a membership dollar, the organization should be doing more to mitigate dues increases at a time that a membership is increasingly unnecessary in order to fully participate in the hobby.
That's MY point. Holding the line for years before and during a pandemic was great. Recognizing the reality of their situation, that membership is a "nice to have" rather than a necessity, and finding ways to avoid an across the board 20%+ dues increase would have been greater still.
True believers and old timers locked into lifetime memberships are certainly entitled to the opinion that the organization should do whatever it believes it needs to do, but they are not the ones who are going to bail when they get the bill.
Frankly, my dear......................................
Gold membership, which includes all other benefits but only a digital version of The Numismatist, is currently priced at $30 a year. Doesn't take too much squeezing to get your money's worth.
https://info.money.org/join
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
Also doesn't have a ton of value to someone who wants a printed magazine, has plenty of other websites to visit to gather all the information they can handle, doesn't need a $15 one time discount at NGC, etc. And it's going up to $35, a 17% increase. A lot of people pay zero for tons of online content, and won't pay $35 for online access to The New York Times or The Wall Street Journal, let alone The Numismatist.
Don't get me wrong, if my comments have made my opinion of ANA unclear. I like the organization. I don't get involved in the politics, so I have no ax to grind. I'm just observing, as a current member observing the market, that large price increases after periods of no price increases, are very difficult for markets to absorb when you are not dealing with necessities.
Oil price shocks lead to recessions. Beef price shocks lead to people trading down to chicken. Platinum membership price shocks are more likely to lead to people trading down to exploring how millions of other collectors enjoy the hobby without an ANA membership than trading down to a Gold membership and accessing The Numismatist online.
And some paying $30 for online access will wonder if it's worth $35. We all need energy to function in the world. We don't all need an ANA membership to collect coins. How many people attend the Summer Seminar, borrow from the library, etc.? That's the core audience that will be price insensitive.
Strip them, current lifetime members and club members out, and every other membership is at risk when people get hit with a 20% price increase. Some will hold their nose and pay it. Others will marvel at the great bargain they have been receiving all along, and happily pay it. And others will decide they don't need it.
My prediction is that, when the dust settles, the amount they lose from people dropping will make the extra revenue from those who don't relatively meaningless, and that they should have held the line at 5-10% and looked harder for other ways to hit their numbers. You won't see it right away. In fact, you'll see a bump in membership revenue as people push renewal forward to avoid the increase. But then the increase will hit, and new members won't replace old members leaving.
I was able to sit in on the board meeting where the decision was made to make the increase. Like everything today, the cost of printing and postage has skyrocketed. The board understood there would be hardships for some with the increase however, the increase was necessary. As some have noted above, the price increase is not dramatic.
The ANA offers a lot of educational benefits to new and experienced collectors. It is supportive of both collectors and dealers. Dealers and collectors need each other. That is a simple fact. Additionally, the ANA spends a great deal of time and money promoting the hobby to young numismatists. We need YNs and younger adults to find the hobby and then embrace it.
The percentage of collectors who are actually ANA members is small. If a majority of collectors joined the ANA, more programs and benefits would be available as the increased revenue would help support these efforts. I paid my $1200 lifetime membership gladly as I viewed it as an investment in our hobby's future.
Anecdotally, I belong to five local clubs. On average, only 1/5 of each club's membership are ANA members. These members are passionate about numismatics and still only 1 in 5 have joined the ANA. As I noted above, the majority of other non-club collectors are not ANA members. To me this is short sighted. We should all want the ANA to thrive.
These are my personal views and I do not speak for the ANA.
Instagram - numismatistkenny
My Numismatics with Kenny Blog Page Best viewed on a laptop or monitor.
ANA Life Member & Volunteer District Representative
2019 ANA Young Numismatist of the Year
Doing my best to introduce Young Numismatists and Young Adults into the hobby.
I am an ANA Life Member. My biggest gripe is board members who have and are going to attend the convention taking expense money for travel and lodging from the ANA. If they are going to attend if they were not on the board, why take expense money? I know of at least 2 former board members who did not take any expense money from the ANA while they were on the board. Years ago, there were at least two other board members that milked the ANA for expenses for years. I just do not think that is right.
Thanks for taking the time to give us an insider's perspective. The price increase is not dramatic, unless viewed in percentage terms, in which case a 20% increase is violent in a world of heightened 4% inflation. Again, ANA membership is not food, fuel or shelter. Many have already chosen to do without. A 20% increase is not going to shrink that number.
Congratulations on the $1,200 investment you made in your career, hobby and future. Did you consider that raising that 25%, to $1,500, and raising the age for a discount from 55 to 65, is going to cause that revenue stream to disappear, to the extent it ever existed, from people over age 54? Good investment for you. No-brainer to avoid for a 55-64 year old after a $600 increase, from $900 to $1,500 (67%, the very definition of dramatic). Asking a 65 year old to pay a discounted $1,100 for that investment that you paid $1,200 for at age 20-something is simply obnoxious. I seriously think they either need to rethink raising the age for the discount OR eliminating it entirely, because doing what they did just insults the intelligence of a 65 year.
You are making my point about wanting the ANA to thrive. The way to do that, and to induce a portion of the 80% of club members and 99.99% of the collecting public who are not already members to join, is not by voting 20% dues increases and blaming them on printing and postage costs. Did any of your 5 clubs do that in any single year since you joined?
Blame it on a failure of imagination to develop other revenue streams and a failure to bring costs in line with the value delivered. If the perceived value was there, the 100% of club members who pay club dues would happily join, as would a tiny fraction of the millions of casual collectors who don't bother today.
Hopefully you'll have the opportunity to bring some fresh thinking to the Board, and will take advantage of that opportunity. If you are just going to be younger version of what is already there, echoing and mimicking what they say and do, you'll just be another in a long line of stewards of a sinking enterprise.
Yes and no. I assume they are not paid for their Board service, correct? If so, I don't begrudge anyone a little perk in return for their time and service.
More power to anyone generously willing to forgo that benefit, but I don't think micromanaging expense reimbursements is the answer. Do you really think a litmus test to determine whether someone would attend anyway would be appropriate, and to deny one Board member a reimbursement offered to another?
At that point, why not just go all the way and weed out anyone not truly dedicated by eliminating all expense reimbursements for everything for all Board members, not just attendance at shows? And then we can look into not reimbursing staff for Board related expenses!
Your feedback is what every board and future board should want to hear. One reason I am running is the next board and future ANA boards need to think outside the box. In the recent ANA candidate forum on youtube, I shared just a few of my ideas. The ANA needs to be a body that all collectors want to join and that is thru innovation.
Everyone's finances are different, when I paid the $1200 for membership at the age of 18, it was a burden however I believed in the goals of the association. I considered going annually, but as you noted, it made financial sense to go with a life membership for me as I knew back then, I would be a supporter of the ANA for the rest of my life. My father, who is now 67, has been an annual member taking advantage of some of the renewal offers the ANA has offered over the past ten years. That made sense for him. He is also a very big supporter of the ANA. Someone who is 65 or so may not think it makes financial sense for them to become a LM unless they see the cost as a way to support the ANA. With that said, the next board should look into your ideas.
The ANA's most recent fund raiser took place in the past year - The George F. Health Society. I became a charter member for the same reason's I wrote out the check for my LM, I believe in the mission of the ANA.
To your point about inducing passionate collectors to join, the ANA has offered local coin club members nationally a much reduced one-year membership to join. Few accepted the offer which tells me future boards need to create additional exciting reasons for new members to want to join as well has bringing back old members and keeping present ones. When something is valuable, cost many times becomes less of an issue. You are right on with your comment about perceived value.
Presently, I am not a board member however, I am sure the board members have a fiduciary responsibility to the association, and they look at every line item and have to make financial decisions. I do know the decision was not made lightly regarding the increase.
If elected, my goal is to think outside the box so a great deal revenue and exposure is generated through partnerships so the mission of the association is greatly enhanced.
Whether I am elected or not, share your ideas and concerns with board members and staff. All ANA members should take ownership in the Association.
Instagram - numismatistkenny
My Numismatics with Kenny Blog Page Best viewed on a laptop or monitor.
ANA Life Member & Volunteer District Representative
2019 ANA Young Numismatist of the Year
Doing my best to introduce Young Numismatists and Young Adults into the hobby.
Thank you very much for your thoughtful response. You are saying and doing all the right things, and I will be shocked if you are not elected. You are the future.
One last point about life memberships, and I honestly cannot tell you why I am so hung up on it, other than it seems like such a tone deaf decision made in a star chamber where everyone's brilliant thoughts are supported by the room without question.
Your observation about mid and late career people wanting to financially support the organization is very well taken, and they would very likely find a way to do so, with or without a life membership that comes with a $400 discount, from $1,500 to $1,100 at age 65. That discount, at that price, at that age, is ridiculous, because that membership has no value at that price.
Right now, the pricing makes sense. For you at $1,200, and at a $300 discount to $900 at age 55. Raising the prices to $1,500 and $1,100 is, I believe, ill advised, but consistent with what they are doing across the Board.
Whoever decided to raise the age for the discount from 55 to 65 just wasn't thinking, and apparently it wasn't properly challenged at the Board level. Eliminate the discount if you don't want to offer it, and kill the incentive to become a life member as people hit a certain age. But asking a 65 year old to prepay 20 years' worth of dues to avoid future price increases is just crazy. The Board's failure to recognize that causes me, as a member, to question the quality of every other decision made by the Board.
I joined as a life member in 1997. It cost $750 and they let me pay in 3 annual installments.
The purchasing power of that $750 today is about $1400. Not much more than the new cost of a life membership. And the full online access to the entire run of The Numismatist is certainly worth that extra $100.
I don’t have a problem with the new pricing and I expect many others feel likewise.
That's fine. How old were you in 1997, if you don't mind my asking? If you were 55 or above, congratulations on your long and hopefully healthy life that hopefully has many more years left to go.
My observations are focused much less on the pricing level per se, but on the huge 20% increase announced for this September. As far as lifetime memberships, the increase is consistent ($1,200 to $1,500 and $900 to $1,100), so there is no issue there, other than the general objection to the 20%+ increase.
The objection is to the raising of the age from 55 to 65 to be eligible for the lower price. Unless you were 55-64 when you paid your $750 in 1997, it is irrelevant to what I am complaining about. No doubt someone in their 20s, 30s or 40s gets good value from a lifetime membership at any of these prices.
The point is that the organization realized that a 55 year old, on average, had 20 less years to enjoy a lifetime membership than a 35 year old, so they offered a discount to make it an attractive proposition. Raising that break point to 65, but keeping the discount the same, is just stupid, because a 65 year old is unlikely to live long enough to receive value from the membership, on average, unless the discount is significantly larger, practically to the point of giving it away.
Telling anyone, 20 or 65, that they could lock in today's price by prepaying anything up to age 85 is just stupid. Kenny's membership would have cost $3,685 if he did that. How does that compare to the $1,200 he paid, or the $750 you paid back in 1997? That's what the ANA is going to be asking people age 65+ to do by discounting the $1,500 to $1,100 for them in September, while taking away the discount at age 55, when people would still have some time, on average, to get some value from a lifetime membership.
You can sign-up with NGC for an associates (no grading voucher) membership for a one-time $15 discount.
ANA 50 year/Life Member (now "Emeritus")
Now you have a tough decision. As an ANA member of an ANA Member club, $5 is donated back to a single club you designate.
As an ANA Life Member, you can designate TWO ANA Member clubs for the $5 donation. Each.
Which clubs do you like MORE?????
ANA 50 year/Life Member (now "Emeritus")
There is one club that truly mentored me all the way back when I was ten. The other clubs were also supportive so the Wilmington (DE) club is the one I always designate and rotate with the others. Fortunately, most of the clubs have enough ANA members to have a free membership in the ANA.
**Thank you for bringing this up. Some clubs forget to let the ANA know how many of their members are also ANA members. As you noted, the Club's membership fee is reduced by $5.00 per ANA member.
**
Instagram - numismatistkenny
My Numismatics with Kenny Blog Page Best viewed on a laptop or monitor.
ANA Life Member & Volunteer District Representative
2019 ANA Young Numismatist of the Year
Doing my best to introduce Young Numismatists and Young Adults into the hobby.
Re - the formerly free NGC membership through the ANA
Currently, the "premium" NGC membership costs $149, and comes with a $150 credit.
Source: https://www.ngccoin.com/join/
For anyone submitting more than a handful of coins each year, this membership is essentially free (i.e., the credit covers the cost of membership). It just doesn't involve the ANA.
It seems I always got the best grades when paying directly; less so with grading vouchers.
BINGO!!!! Not as good as before, because it requires $150 in annual spending, not including insurance, shipping, etc. But it has the virtue of not requiring an ANA membership. Yet another reason a 20% dues increase might be a hard sell.