A 70 sells for more than a 69 and raw. That’s what’s meant by they go for a premium. I’m not factoring anything else in, period. Sure, we can debate on whether the premium is worth the extra cost of slabbing, etc, but that doesn’t change that in the open market, 70s are worth more.
@jwitten said:
Of course I know how to read. You are now comparing a coin that is over $3,000 to one that is $60. That’s crazy. You did not say a 70 wouldn’t have a large premium, you said it wouldn’t have ANY. Even if most grade 70. That’s just nonsense.
If you know how to read, go back and reread the post. It's only 7 sentences long.
I literally said "I am fairly confident that there will be an ample supply of PR70s, at a significant premium to an already significant premium over intrinsic value." Not they wouldn't have ANY premium. I said "significant premium."
The next paragraph then said, again, verbatim "OTOH, if a substantial majority of them turn out perfect 70, perfect 70s won't carry a premium in the market," and pointed to a recent example where that turned out to be the case, since you asked for data. And finally, the rest of the thought in the post was "so that's not in anyone's interest. ... [s]o that's also unlikely to happen."
Do I seriously have to take you word by word through a post to explain what it means in English? Because your continuing this clearly shows that you, in fact, do not know how to read. Or, maybe, to understand the meaning of what you are reading.
A substantial majority often do grade 70. Look at the new Morgan dollars.
I know. It's exactly what I said.
50-70% is standard for a modern issue. Significantly above that, which I doubt will happen, will result in premiums disappearing for 70s.
As they kind of have for the new Morgan Dollars, and absolutely have for the 2024 ASE bullion, which Magic Mike is trying to give away on TV for less that it would cost a non-bulk submitter to have raw coins slabbed, with no guarantee of 70s. That's my definition of "no premium," and applies when such a high percentage is 70 that there is no reason to attribute a premium to it.
I haven't been paying attention to 2024 Morgans, since the 2024 Morgan and Peace Dollars have been such a bust. So much so that, again, Magic Mike is on TV selling them raw for below Mint issue price.
I just checked -- two MS70s sold today on eBay. One for $96 and one for $86. NGC FDOI and CAC First Delivery. Original Mint price was $91. No premium for the coin, and no premium for the 70.
Maybe an acknowledgement here that I'm right? Or is that too painful to provide, and therefor too much to expect?
You need to compare the 70 price to the 69 price. They almost always carry a premium.
And how is 70% not a "substantial majority"?
Note the premium for the 70s
Great. But, unfortunately, 2023 isn't 2024.
In 2023 they easily sold out the uncircs and RPs. Not so much in 2024, when they just had to raise the price by $15 per coin, because a $45 premium to silver content simply is insufficient to cover the cost of making 275K of anything these days. So they needed a $15 increase to deal with a $5 jump in the price of silver, plus whatever other cost increases they are dealing with.
The end result is no one cares about them anymore, sales decreased from 275K to under 200K in a single year, and 3 months after release, they are selling in the secondary market for the same price the Mint released them at last year, with the 70s now going for a whopping $10 "premium" above that. Likely because the 70 grade through rate is "substantially" above the 70% or so that has become the norm for modern Mint products.
Just like the denizens of Lake Wobegon, when we are all special, none of us is special. Which is the only point I was trying to make, and it's indisputable. Even if you just need to take a shot at disputing every single thing that springs forth from my keyboard.
At a 50-70% rate of 70s, there is still room for dealers to get a premium for them, since a "substantial" minority of coins submitted will not achieve the grade. As that drifts into the 80%s and 90%s, not so much.
If you and your buddy @jwitten want to call recapturing a grading fee to be a "premium," I'm not going to argue, but it's clearly not what a reasonable person would mean. Because no one in their right mind would spend $10 to hopefully get $10 back, and that is certainly not the dealer's modern bulk grading game.
That's a loss when so many come back 70 that the dealer cannot get a premium for them. In 2023, when they bought coins from the Mint for $76 (less their bulk discount) and got $125+ for them after slabbing, that's a premium.
Not $86 on a coin that cost $91 (less bulk discount). Even when the raw is going for $76. Only a "premium" literally, in your mind, for the sole purpose of arguing with me. Because it's not a premium after taking into account the cost of getting it in the slab. And certainly not after taking into account of acquiring the coin in the first place. Period.
The 2023 coins have a 70% 70 population. A substantial majority that you claimed would not carry a premium. And here we are, a year later, and they still carry a premium. You will also find a 70 premium for 2024 coins vs the 69 or raw. But you won't consider the premium large enough to count as a premium. So, I think I'm tapping out along with @jwitten It really doesn't matter other than you end up providing disinformation to any newbie who stumbles across these threads.
Not what I said. Please go back and reread it. Maybe you and @jwitten can go over it together, word by word. Let me know if anything in particular gives you trouble, and I'll try to help.
For the umpteenth time, I very clearly said:
"TBD, but they know what their primary market, Big Boys, demand. So I am fairly confident that there will be an ample supply of PR70s, at a significant premium to an already significant premium over intrinsic value, for anyone desiring to acquire one for their collection. It's reasonable to expect the usual 50-70% rate for modern issues, with no significant decrease due to the additional handling. The Mint knows what it is doing here.
OTOH, if a substantial majority of them turn out perfect 70, perfect 70s won't carry a premium in the market, so that's not in anyone's interest. Other than maybe collectors who just want to buy one from the Mint at issue price and then spend a few bucks to have it slabbed. So that's also unlikely to happen."
If you don't understand that "OTOH" is meant to distinguish what is about to be said from what was said before, and that a "substantial majority" in this context means substantially more than the 50-70% set forth in the previous paragraph, I'm afraid I can't help you. Are you seriously a teacher, given your difficulty understanding the written word?
The ad hominem proves you know you mistated it. That's good enough for me.
@jwitten said:
A 70 sells for more than a 69 and raw. That’s what’s meant by they go for a premium. I’m not factoring anything else in, period. Sure, we can debate on whether the premium is worth the extra cost of slabbing, etc, but that doesn’t change that in the open market, 70s are worth more.
And they always are, even if 95% of the population is 70s. Often, raw even sells for more than 69s which is why there is an active market for empty packaging.
@jwitten said:
A 70 sells for more than a 69 and raw. That’s what’s meant by they go for a premium. I’m not factoring anything else in, period. Sure, we can debate on whether the premium is worth the extra cost of slabbing, etc, but that doesn’t change that in the open market, 70s are worth more.
And they always are, even if 95% of the population is 70s. Often, raw even sells for more than 69s which is why there is an active market for empty packaging.
If you say so. I'm not buying it, and I'm not buying that dealers are in the business of hoping to recapture their slabbing costs, and no more, with 70s.
We will have to agree to disagree with respect to whether a premium consisting of nothing more than the bulk cost of slabbing, and a significant discount to the retail cost of the slab, is a "premium." To me, it is not, but I will respect your right to a different opinion.
@jwitten said:
Of course I know how to read. You are now comparing a coin that is over $3,000 to one that is $60. That’s crazy. You did not say a 70 wouldn’t have a large premium, you said it wouldn’t have ANY. Even if most grade 70. That’s just nonsense.
If you know how to read, go back and reread the post. It's only 7 sentences long.
I literally said "I am fairly confident that there will be an ample supply of PR70s, at a significant premium to an already significant premium over intrinsic value." Not they wouldn't have ANY premium. I said "significant premium."
The next paragraph then said, again, verbatim "OTOH, if a substantial majority of them turn out perfect 70, perfect 70s won't carry a premium in the market," and pointed to a recent example where that turned out to be the case, since you asked for data. And finally, the rest of the thought in the post was "so that's not in anyone's interest. ... [s]o that's also unlikely to happen."
Do I seriously have to take you word by word through a post to explain what it means in English? Because your continuing this clearly shows that you, in fact, do not know how to read. Or, maybe, to understand the meaning of what you are reading.
A substantial majority often do grade 70. Look at the new Morgan dollars.
I know. It's exactly what I said.
50-70% is standard for a modern issue. Significantly above that, which I doubt will happen, will result in premiums disappearing for 70s.
As they kind of have for the new Morgan Dollars, and absolutely have for the 2024 ASE bullion, which Magic Mike is trying to give away on TV for less that it would cost a non-bulk submitter to have raw coins slabbed, with no guarantee of 70s. That's my definition of "no premium," and applies when such a high percentage is 70 that there is no reason to attribute a premium to it.
I haven't been paying attention to 2024 Morgans, since the 2024 Morgan and Peace Dollars have been such a bust. So much so that, again, Magic Mike is on TV selling them raw for below Mint issue price.
I just checked -- two MS70s sold today on eBay. One for $96 and one for $86. NGC FDOI and CAC First Delivery. Original Mint price was $91. No premium for the coin, and no premium for the 70.
Maybe an acknowledgement here that I'm right? Or is that too painful to provide, and therefor too much to expect?
You need to compare the 70 price to the 69 price. They almost always carry a premium.
And how is 70% not a "substantial majority"?
Note the premium for the 70s
Great. But, unfortunately, 2023 isn't 2024.
In 2023 they easily sold out the uncircs and RPs. Not so much in 2024, when they just had to raise the price by $15 per coin, because a $45 premium to silver content simply is insufficient to cover the cost of making 275K of anything these days. So they needed a $15 increase to deal with a $5 jump in the price of silver, plus whatever other cost increases they are dealing with.
The end result is no one cares about them anymore, sales decreased from 275K to under 200K in a single year, and 3 months after release, they are selling in the secondary market for the same price the Mint released them at last year, with the 70s now going for a whopping $10 "premium" above that. Likely because the 70 grade through rate is "substantially" above the 70% or so that has become the norm for modern Mint products.
Just like the denizens of Lake Wobegon, when we are all special, none of us is special. Which is the only point I was trying to make, and it's indisputable. Even if you just need to take a shot at disputing every single thing that springs forth from my keyboard.
At a 50-70% rate of 70s, there is still room for dealers to get a premium for them, since a "substantial" minority of coins submitted will not achieve the grade. As that drifts into the 80%s and 90%s, not so much.
If you and your buddy @jwitten want to call recapturing a grading fee to be a "premium," I'm not going to argue, but it's clearly not what a reasonable person would mean. Because no one in their right mind would spend $10 to hopefully get $10 back, and that is certainly not the dealer's modern bulk grading game.
That's a loss when so many come back 70 that the dealer cannot get a premium for them. In 2023, when they bought coins from the Mint for $76 (less their bulk discount) and got $125+ for them after slabbing, that's a premium.
Not $86 on a coin that cost $91 (less bulk discount). Even when the raw is going for $76. Only a "premium" literally, in your mind, for the sole purpose of arguing with me. Because it's not a premium after taking into account the cost of getting it in the slab. And certainly not after taking into account of acquiring the coin in the first place. Period.
The 2023 coins have a 70% 70 population. A substantial majority that you claimed would not carry a premium. And here we are, a year later, and they still carry a premium. You will also find a 70 premium for 2024 coins vs the 69 or raw. But you won't consider the premium large enough to count as a premium. So, I think I'm tapping out along with @jwitten It really doesn't matter other than you end up providing disinformation to any newbie who stumbles across these threads.
Not what I said. Please go back and reread it. Maybe you and @jwitten can go over it together, word by word. Let me know if anything in particular gives you trouble, and I'll try to help.
For the umpteenth time, I very clearly said:
"TBD, but they know what their primary market, Big Boys, demand. So I am fairly confident that there will be an ample supply of PR70s, at a significant premium to an already significant premium over intrinsic value, for anyone desiring to acquire one for their collection. It's reasonable to expect the usual 50-70% rate for modern issues, with no significant decrease due to the additional handling. The Mint knows what it is doing here.
OTOH, if a substantial majority of them turn out perfect 70, perfect 70s won't carry a premium in the market, so that's not in anyone's interest. Other than maybe collectors who just want to buy one from the Mint at issue price and then spend a few bucks to have it slabbed. So that's also unlikely to happen."
If you don't understand that "OTOH" is meant to distinguish what is about to be said from what was said before, and that a "substantial majority" in this context means substantially more than the 50-70% set forth in the previous paragraph, I'm afraid I can't help you. Are you seriously a teacher, given your difficulty understanding the written word?
The ad hominem proves you know you mistated it. That's good enough for me.
I am sorry for the ad hominem, but I did not misstate anything, and am frustrated by your refusal to read it as it was written.
@jwitten said:
A 70 sells for more than a 69 and raw. That’s what’s meant by they go for a premium. I’m not factoring anything else in, period. Sure, we can debate on whether the premium is worth the extra cost of slabbing, etc, but that doesn’t change that in the open market, 70s are worth more.
Fair enough. But, if you are not going to consider cost when calculating premium, we are right back where we were in arguing over what a sealed package of something with a defined economic value is worth, so there is no arguing with you.
You are right and I am wrong, and the coin that costs $86 to place in a slab that sells for $86 sells at a premium to the same exact coin that costs $76 to not place in a slab that sells for $76.
Does that also apply if it costs a retail submitter $106 to have the coin slabbed? Is it still worth a premium at $86 then? Because, if so, that's an odd way to define "premium," and does not explain why people don't do all sorts of things that cost more than the value they add, since, at the end of the day, they would have something worth a "premium." And who doesn't want that? 😀
@jwitten said:
A 70 sells for more than a 69 and raw. That’s what’s meant by they go for a premium. I’m not factoring anything else in, period. Sure, we can debate on whether the premium is worth the extra cost of slabbing, etc, but that doesn’t change that in the open market, 70s are worth more.
And they always are, even if 95% of the population is 70s. Often, raw even sells for more than 69s which is why there is an active market for empty packaging.
And, when raw sells for more than 69, that's not a case where 95% are 70. That's when the usual 50-70% are 70, and people want to be able to take a shot at turning the raw into a 70. No other reason for a coin in a plain capsule to be worth more than one that has been authenticated in a TPG slab. OGP is fine, and there is a market for it, but the only reason for 69s to sell at a discount is when 70s go for a premium. A premium far in excess of the cost of grading.
When 70s don't even go for enough to cover the cost of slabbing, they are all going for around the same thing, give or take. Again, if you want to split hairs and tell me the person spending $25, plus shipping, in search of a 70 that can be sold for $10 more than a raw coin, thinks they created a premium product, I'm not going to argue.
But they didn't. All they did was lose $15 plus shipping. And the dealer who broke even on the same coin also accomplished nothing, other than lining the pockets of the TPG private equity overlords. Not a premium when the delta between raw and 70 barely covers the cost of grading, or does not cover it at all.
Gobbledygook is an interesting word. I just want the Mint to post an actual coin image of this gold FH when they update the website tonight. One can hope.
@Goldminers said:
Gobbledygook is an interesting word. I just want the Mint to post an actual coin image of this gold FH when they update the website tonight. One can hope.
When it finally appears, I'm sure it will have been worth the wait. Deep cameo devices. Brilliant mirror-like background. Only wish I could say the same for a one ounce gold coin priced above $3,700 with a maximum mintage of 17,500 in November 2024.
@Goldminers said:
The maximum mintage stated is meaningless when items do not sell out.
It is how many are actually minted and sold that will be part of the equation to determine what this coin does in the market.
Speculating ahead of time is futile, but it seems to be the most important thing when reading these threads lately.
True. But, unlike items that have a limited selling window, after which they are pulled, when items can have after market legs if sales are unexpectedly weak, that is not the case for items with unlimited selling windows. They just stay on sale, indefinitely, until the Mint exhausts its inventory.
Those items tend to do nothing in the secondary market, even if final sales are less than the maximum authorized mintage. That will be this, if it doesn't sell out. Unless and until gold goes above $3500 per ounce.
@jwitten said:
A 70 sells for more than a 69 and raw. That’s what’s meant by they go for a premium. I’m not factoring anything else in, period. Sure, we can debate on whether the premium is worth the extra cost of slabbing, etc, but that doesn’t change that in the open market, 70s are worth more.
And they always are, even if 95% of the population is 70s. Often, raw even sells for more than 69s which is why there is an active market for empty packaging.
And, when raw sells for more than 69, that's not a case where 95% are 70. That's when the usual 50-70% are 70, and people want to be able to take a shot at turning the raw into a 70. No other reason for a coin in a plain capsule to be worth more than one that has been authenticated in a TPG slab. OGP is fine, and there is a market for it, but the only reason for 69s to sell at a discount is when 70s go for a premium. A premium far in excess of the cost of grading.
When 70s don't even go for enough to cover the cost of slabbing, they are all going for around the same thing, give or take. Again, if you want to split hairs and tell me the person spending $25, plus shipping, in search of a 70 that can be sold for $10 more than a raw coin, thinks they created a premium product, I'm not going to argue.
But they didn't. All they did was lose $15 plus shipping. And the dealer who broke even on the same coin also accomplished nothing, other than lining the pockets of the TPG private equity overlords. Not a premium when the delta between raw and 70 barely covers the cost of grading, or does not cover it at all.
Actually, that is not really accurate. A low yield of 70s will create OGP value over 69s because you still have a chance to "win".
People, not dealers, slab all kinds of things not worth slabbing. Dealers try to make money on the slab, but they don't control the secondary market. Profitability is separate from whether or not there is a "premium". You can lose money on a coin with 100% premium.
I'm on the fence with the gold Flowing Hair. I generally collect for the design and fun of it and not so much as an investment. However, at the price I expect they'll cost I feel like I have to take into account how much it could depreciate as I don't expect the price of gold to rise forever.
If the mint creates a small population that are special version with either a privy mark or some other change then I will not buy. I thought the whole privy mark thing with the silver medals was fun -- and I wanted one even before I knew that was happening. There's a big difference between $104 and $3800 though. I'm not paying that price only to find I have the regular version that will essentially trade for little more than spot because everyone will focus on the rare version. I'll leave that game to the bulk sellers/corporations.
@Numismetal said:
I'm on the fence with the gold Flowing Hair. I generally collect for the design and fun of it and not so much as an investment. However, at the price I expect they'll cost I feel like I have to take into account how much it could depreciate as I don't expect the price of gold to rise forever.
If the mint creates a small population that are special version with either a privy mark or some other change then I will not buy. I thought the whole privy mark thing with the silver medals was fun -- and I wanted one even before I knew that was happening. There's a big difference between $104 and $3800 though. I'm not paying that price only to find I have the regular version that will essentially trade for little more than spot because everyone will focus on the rare version. I'll leave that game to the bulk sellers/corporations.
I basically agree with your sentiments, but you are losing me by conflating the presence or absence of a privy version with the value of the regular one.
As things stand, there will be 17,500 at around $3800, with no privys. Are you interested in that, at that price and mintage, with no privy, but feel as though the existence of a privy version would detract from its value? Because, if so, I respectfully disagree.
The privys helped the silvers sell out, but did nothing for the value of the ones without the privy, pro or con. The same will be true here.
Except, with no privy at this price and quantity, I do not expect a sell out. If I am wrong and they sell out, they will be winners, even at a $1,000 premium to spot.
Otherwise, they will suck. Creating another lottery would create another sell out, but would do nothing for the after market value of a one ounce gold coin without a privy sold at a $1,000 premium with a mintage of 17,500.
@Numismetal said:
I'm on the fence with the gold Flowing Hair. I generally collect for the design and fun of it and not so much as an investment. However, at the price I expect they'll cost I feel like I have to take into account how much it could depreciate as I don't expect the price of gold to rise forever.
If the mint creates a small population that are special version with either a privy mark or some other change then I will not buy. I thought the whole privy mark thing with the silver medals was fun -- and I wanted one even before I knew that was happening. There's a big difference between $104 and $3800 though. I'm not paying that price only to find I have the regular version that will essentially trade for little more than spot because everyone will focus on the rare version. I'll leave that game to the bulk sellers/corporations.
It is almost always better to delay gratification.
I basically agree with your sentiments, but you are losing me by conflating the presence or absence of a privy version with the value of the regular one.
As things stand, there will be 17,500 at around $3800, with no privys. Are you interested in that, at that price and mintage, with no privy, but feel as though the existence of a privy version would detract from its value? Because, if so, I respectfully disagree.
I do feel that the value of the non privy version would be compromised long term if a privy version was released with a much smaller mintage. If there is no special version then all these coins would have the opportunity to increase or decrease in value with the market. That's just how I feel though -- and I fully accept that may not be the way it turns out. It will be a learning experience for me either way.
I bought the gold Liberty/Britannia coin earlier this year and I absolutely love it despite the fact that most folks hate the design. In terms of cost, I'm almost fully bailed out on losing money on that one because the cost of gold has risen so much that it has come close to consuming the premium I paid. If the price of gold stayed the same since I bought it, I would still not regret it. I can't count on a bailout for the flowing hair or any gold coin going forward.
I could sell my privy silver Flowing Hair to help defray the cost of the gold version--which I'm considering. But of course now that I have it the collector in me wants to keep it despite the huge profit I could make. I would never argue that this is logical.
Otherwise, they will suck. Creating another lottery would create another sell out, but would do nothing for the after market value of a one ounce gold coin without a privy sold at a $1,000 premium with a mintage of 17,500.
IMO These coins will 100% be winners. Mintage is 17500. Not super low but definitely low enough considering the design. I don't understand how you only see this as bullion. These are not gold eagles that have been continually minted for almost 40 years. I'd be surprised if they didn't sell out in the first 36 hours.
Otherwise, they will suck. Creating another lottery would create another sell out, but would do nothing for the after market value of a one ounce gold coin without a privy sold at a $1,000 premium with a mintage of 17,500.
IMO These coins will 100% be winners. Mintage is 17500. Not super low but definitely low enough considering the design. I don't understand how you only see this as bullion. These are not gold eagles that have been continually minted for almost 40 years. I'd be surprised if they didn't sell out in the first 36 hours.
They might or might not sell out. But 90-95% of gold commemoratives do end up being treated as bullion by the market. Will these be in the 5% or so that aren't? Time will tell but 17,500 is not low for a gold commemorative.
Otherwise, they will suck. Creating another lottery would create another sell out, but would do nothing for the after market value of a one ounce gold coin without a privy sold at a $1,000 premium with a mintage of 17,500.
IMO These coins will 100% be winners. Mintage is 17500. Not super low but definitely low enough considering the design. I don't understand how you only see this as bullion. These are not gold eagles that have been continually minted for almost 40 years. I'd be surprised if they didn't sell out in the first 36 hours.
Yes. Please do not get me wrong, or think that I only see it as bullion based on other points I am making to others.
I agree on the design, and I agree that it is a premium numismatic product. It's just that I think the Mint has gotten way too aggressive in its pricing over the past few years. And is being piggy now with the mintage.
The last two American Liberty High Relief gold coins sold out with mintages of 12,500, and have done well on the secondary market. Many people were looking for that mintage on this, or even 10,000. They could probably sell 50,000 if they priced them appropriately, given the one-off nature and the classic design.
That said, gold still has an absolute value. They sold a little over 100,000 2009 Ultra High Relief St. Gaudens Double Eagles at around $1,200. A $300 premium to $900 gold at the time. $1,200. Today, those coins sell for around $3,000. The same $300 premium to now $2,700 gold, and they are not making them anymore.
Classic generic gold shows us that numismatic premiums go down, to approaching zero, as the price of gold rises. They will never be worth less than their gold content, no matter how high gold goes, but a $300 premium to $1,200 gold creates a $1,500 coin. As gold hits $2,700, that is already almost twice as expensive as before for the exact same coin. It's tough to squeeze the extra $300 out of people, so the premium disappears.
The Mint has simply not received that memo. As a result the numismatic premium on their precious metal grid is exactly the same at $2,700 gold as it was at $1,500. As a result, numismatic sales have fallen off a cliff. They don't care. It is what it is.
And what it is, in my opinion, is going to be difficult to sell 17,500 units at a $1,000 premium to $2,700 gold. Not because they are bullion, but because the market will not support that premium for that mintage with the current intrinsic value.
To date, they have sold 8,000 gold proof 2024 Buffalos, 2,600 burnished 2024 AGEs, and 3,100 proof 2024 AGEs at similar, but slightly lower, premiums. I know these are a one-off, which cuts both ways, since there is no built in demand from people building date sets while it is also a unique product, but I am having a difficult time seeing them sell 17,500 when 12,500 is the magic number for the American Liberty series.
I could very well turn out to be wrong, but I'm putting my money where my mouth is, and not chasing it. Even if they do sell out, I honestly don't see a lot of upside at $3,700. And, there is significant downside if gold corrects. YMMV.
They might or might not sell out. But 90-95% of gold commemoratives do end up being treated as bullion by the market. Will these be in the 5% or so that aren't? Time will tell but 17,500 is not low for a gold commemorative.
Comparing the flowing hair gold to this garbage is criminal. Nobody cares about the annual commemoratives. I wouldn't even put this in the commemorative category. This is a reproduction of a coin that most collectors could only dream of owning. If they released a silver coin with similar mintage it would easily sell for north of $1000 probably much higher. 2019 S reverse proof silver eagles are still doing just fine with a mintage of 30k.
They might or might not sell out. But 90-95% of gold commemoratives do end up being treated as bullion by the market. Will these be in the 5% or so that aren't? Time will tell but 17,500 is not low for a gold commemorative.
Comparing the flowing hair gold to this garbage is criminal. Nobody cares about the annual commemoratives. I wouldn't even put this in the commemorative category. This is a reproduction of a coin that most collectors could only dream of owning. If they released a silver coin with similar mintage it would easily sell for north of $1000 probably much higher. 2019 S reverse proof silver eagles are still doing just fine with a mintage of 30k.
Apples and orange. They're are people who collect date/mm rings of eagles.
Like it or not, it is a gold commemorative. And while it will sell more than the Law Enforcement commemorative, it remains true that 17,500 is not scarce for a gold commemorative. My crystal ball is broken, but it is always risky to assume it is "different this time".
Apples and orange. They're are people who collect date/mm rings of eagles.
Like it or not, it is a gold commemorative. And while it will sell more than the Law Enforcement commemorative, it remains true that 17,500 is not scarce for a gold commemorative. My crystal ball is broken, but it is always risky to assume it is "different this time".
I think you're ignoring the fact that the original coin this replicates is completely unobtainable for 99% of collectors. If you don't want one that's fine but I wouldn't dismiss it as just another commem.
Apples and orange. They're are people who collect date/mm rings of eagles.
Like it or not, it is a gold commemorative. And while it will sell more than the Law Enforcement commemorative, it remains true that 17,500 is not scarce for a gold commemorative. My crystal ball is broken, but it is always risky to assume it is "different this time".
I think you're ignoring the fact that the original coin this replicates is completely unobtainable for 99% of collectors. If you don't want one that's fine but I wouldn't dismiss it as just another commem.
I didn't dismiss it. I did, however, include relevant facts. People should consider the risks as well as the rewards.
It may sell out. It may not. $4000 is a big chunk of change, enough to buy a lower grade 1795 $ if you want one.
Just for fun I called the Mint and told the rep they were on BO and I'd like to purchase the Gold 24YG.
She looked for it and couldn't find it. I told her again that it's the 24YG. She found it and said it wasn't for sale until 11-14.
I told her to read about it, she did and said it was a mistake, and they corrected it.
.
.
It also got me wondering.....did the Mint do advanced sells on these and messed up and put on BACKORDER for all to see.
Apples and orange. They're are people who collect date/mm rings of eagles.
Like it or not, it is a gold commemorative. And while it will sell more than the Law Enforcement commemorative, it remains true that 17,500 is not scarce for a gold commemorative. My crystal ball is broken, but it is always risky to assume it is "different this time".
I think you're ignoring the fact that the original coin this replicates is completely unobtainable for 99% of collectors. If you don't want one that's fine but I wouldn't dismiss it as just another commem.
True. But it's available in the original metal for less than $200, so there is no reason to pay a $1,000 premium to intrinsic value to fill a hole in a collection with a tribute in an even more expensive precious metal.
Not just another commem, but also unlikely to break all the rules regarding after market value for modern issues at a given mintage. 12.5K supports the pricing they seek. 17.5K is TBD, but they have not sold 17.5K of anything recently at this price.
In fact, they have never sold any single coin at this price. It will be a new record, given historically high gold prices and the new category in the grid they are likely to create just for this very special release, if the 2024 Liberty & Britannia is any indication.
So, yeah, have to agree with @jmlanzaf on this one. Some will love it and want it at any price. But many won't, at this price and this mintage. I'm taking the under at 17,500, regardless of how much the original coin is worth.
A perfectly beautiful replica, produced by the very same United States Mint, in the original silver, is widely available for less than $200. No need to spend even $2,700, let alone $3,700, to obtain a replica. Even one monetized at $1.
@Bullsitter said:
Just for fun I called the Mint and told the rep they were on BO and I'd like to purchase the Gold 24YG.
She looked for it and couldn't find it. I told her again that it's the 24YG. She found it and said it wasn't for sale until 11-14.
I told her to read about it, she did and said it was a mistake, and they corrected it.
.
.
It also got me wondering.....did the Mint do advanced sells on these and messed up and put on BACKORDER for all to see.
Yes, but it's not worth looking for conspiracies. These are absolutely available through ABPP, since you can already buy one on eBay if you want.
That has nothing to do with Back Order. That was clearly a mistake related to the web update, since there was never an accompanying button on the web to actually place an order.
By the way, that Back Order language is the clearest indication possible that they are not going to be dropping another 25K of the silver medals on us, since it NEVER appeared. They either only made 50K and never intended to make more (HIGHLY UNLIKELY), or the missing 25K were indeed sold, likely to bulk purchasers, and for some reason is not finding its way onto the report.
Comments
A 70 sells for more than a 69 and raw. That’s what’s meant by they go for a premium. I’m not factoring anything else in, period. Sure, we can debate on whether the premium is worth the extra cost of slabbing, etc, but that doesn’t change that in the open market, 70s are worth more.
The ad hominem proves you know you mistated it. That's good enough for me.
And they always are, even if 95% of the population is 70s. Often, raw even sells for more than 69s which is why there is an active market for empty packaging.
If you say so. I'm not buying it, and I'm not buying that dealers are in the business of hoping to recapture their slabbing costs, and no more, with 70s.
We will have to agree to disagree with respect to whether a premium consisting of nothing more than the bulk cost of slabbing, and a significant discount to the retail cost of the slab, is a "premium." To me, it is not, but I will respect your right to a different opinion.
I am sorry for the ad hominem, but I did not misstate anything, and am frustrated by your refusal to read it as it was written.
Fair enough. But, if you are not going to consider cost when calculating premium, we are right back where we were in arguing over what a sealed package of something with a defined economic value is worth, so there is no arguing with you.
You are right and I am wrong, and the coin that costs $86 to place in a slab that sells for $86 sells at a premium to the same exact coin that costs $76 to not place in a slab that sells for $76.
Does that also apply if it costs a retail submitter $106 to have the coin slabbed? Is it still worth a premium at $86 then? Because, if so, that's an odd way to define "premium," and does not explain why people don't do all sorts of things that cost more than the value they add, since, at the end of the day, they would have something worth a "premium." And who doesn't want that? 😀
And, when raw sells for more than 69, that's not a case where 95% are 70. That's when the usual 50-70% are 70, and people want to be able to take a shot at turning the raw into a 70. No other reason for a coin in a plain capsule to be worth more than one that has been authenticated in a TPG slab. OGP is fine, and there is a market for it, but the only reason for 69s to sell at a discount is when 70s go for a premium. A premium far in excess of the cost of grading.
When 70s don't even go for enough to cover the cost of slabbing, they are all going for around the same thing, give or take. Again, if you want to split hairs and tell me the person spending $25, plus shipping, in search of a 70 that can be sold for $10 more than a raw coin, thinks they created a premium product, I'm not going to argue.
But they didn't. All they did was lose $15 plus shipping. And the dealer who broke even on the same coin also accomplished nothing, other than lining the pockets of the TPG private equity overlords. Not a premium when the delta between raw and 70 barely covers the cost of grading, or does not cover it at all.
Gobbledygook is an interesting word. I just want the Mint to post an actual coin image of this gold FH when they update the website tonight. One can hope.
My US Mint Commemorative Medal Set
When it finally appears, I'm sure it will have been worth the wait. Deep cameo devices. Brilliant mirror-like background. Only wish I could say the same for a one ounce gold coin priced above $3,700 with a maximum mintage of 17,500 in November 2024.
The maximum mintage stated is meaningless when items do not sell out.
It is how many are actually minted and sold that will be part of the equation to determine what this coin does in the market.
Speculating ahead of time is futile, but it seems to be the most important thing when reading these threads lately.
My US Mint Commemorative Medal Set
True. But, unlike items that have a limited selling window, after which they are pulled, when items can have after market legs if sales are unexpectedly weak, that is not the case for items with unlimited selling windows. They just stay on sale, indefinitely, until the Mint exhausts its inventory.
Those items tend to do nothing in the secondary market, even if final sales are less than the maximum authorized mintage. That will be this, if it doesn't sell out. Unless and until gold goes above $3500 per ounce.
Actually, that is not really accurate. A low yield of 70s will create OGP value over 69s because you still have a chance to "win".
People, not dealers, slab all kinds of things not worth slabbing. Dealers try to make money on the slab, but they don't control the secondary market. Profitability is separate from whether or not there is a "premium". You can lose money on a coin with 100% premium.
I'm on the fence with the gold Flowing Hair. I generally collect for the design and fun of it and not so much as an investment. However, at the price I expect they'll cost I feel like I have to take into account how much it could depreciate as I don't expect the price of gold to rise forever.
If the mint creates a small population that are special version with either a privy mark or some other change then I will not buy. I thought the whole privy mark thing with the silver medals was fun -- and I wanted one even before I knew that was happening. There's a big difference between $104 and $3800 though. I'm not paying that price only to find I have the regular version that will essentially trade for little more than spot because everyone will focus on the rare version. I'll leave that game to the bulk sellers/corporations.
I basically agree with your sentiments, but you are losing me by conflating the presence or absence of a privy version with the value of the regular one.
As things stand, there will be 17,500 at around $3800, with no privys. Are you interested in that, at that price and mintage, with no privy, but feel as though the existence of a privy version would detract from its value? Because, if so, I respectfully disagree.
The privys helped the silvers sell out, but did nothing for the value of the ones without the privy, pro or con. The same will be true here.
Except, with no privy at this price and quantity, I do not expect a sell out. If I am wrong and they sell out, they will be winners, even at a $1,000 premium to spot.
Otherwise, they will suck. Creating another lottery would create another sell out, but would do nothing for the after market value of a one ounce gold coin without a privy sold at a $1,000 premium with a mintage of 17,500.
It is almost always better to delay gratification.
I do feel that the value of the non privy version would be compromised long term if a privy version was released with a much smaller mintage. If there is no special version then all these coins would have the opportunity to increase or decrease in value with the market. That's just how I feel though -- and I fully accept that may not be the way it turns out. It will be a learning experience for me either way.
I bought the gold Liberty/Britannia coin earlier this year and I absolutely love it despite the fact that most folks hate the design. In terms of cost, I'm almost fully bailed out on losing money on that one because the cost of gold has risen so much that it has come close to consuming the premium I paid. If the price of gold stayed the same since I bought it, I would still not regret it. I can't count on a bailout for the flowing hair or any gold coin going forward.
I could sell my privy silver Flowing Hair to help defray the cost of the gold version--which I'm considering. But of course now that I have it the collector in me wants to keep it despite the huge profit I could make. I would never argue that this is logical.
IMO These coins will 100% be winners. Mintage is 17500. Not super low but definitely low enough considering the design. I don't understand how you only see this as bullion. These are not gold eagles that have been continually minted for almost 40 years. I'd be surprised if they didn't sell out in the first 36 hours.
They might or might not sell out. But 90-95% of gold commemoratives do end up being treated as bullion by the market. Will these be in the 5% or so that aren't? Time will tell but 17,500 is not low for a gold commemorative.
Yes. Please do not get me wrong, or think that I only see it as bullion based on other points I am making to others.
I agree on the design, and I agree that it is a premium numismatic product. It's just that I think the Mint has gotten way too aggressive in its pricing over the past few years. And is being piggy now with the mintage.
The last two American Liberty High Relief gold coins sold out with mintages of 12,500, and have done well on the secondary market. Many people were looking for that mintage on this, or even 10,000. They could probably sell 50,000 if they priced them appropriately, given the one-off nature and the classic design.
That said, gold still has an absolute value. They sold a little over 100,000 2009 Ultra High Relief St. Gaudens Double Eagles at around $1,200. A $300 premium to $900 gold at the time. $1,200. Today, those coins sell for around $3,000. The same $300 premium to now $2,700 gold, and they are not making them anymore.
Classic generic gold shows us that numismatic premiums go down, to approaching zero, as the price of gold rises. They will never be worth less than their gold content, no matter how high gold goes, but a $300 premium to $1,200 gold creates a $1,500 coin. As gold hits $2,700, that is already almost twice as expensive as before for the exact same coin. It's tough to squeeze the extra $300 out of people, so the premium disappears.
The Mint has simply not received that memo. As a result the numismatic premium on their precious metal grid is exactly the same at $2,700 gold as it was at $1,500. As a result, numismatic sales have fallen off a cliff. They don't care. It is what it is.
And what it is, in my opinion, is going to be difficult to sell 17,500 units at a $1,000 premium to $2,700 gold. Not because they are bullion, but because the market will not support that premium for that mintage with the current intrinsic value.
To date, they have sold 8,000 gold proof 2024 Buffalos, 2,600 burnished 2024 AGEs, and 3,100 proof 2024 AGEs at similar, but slightly lower, premiums. I know these are a one-off, which cuts both ways, since there is no built in demand from people building date sets while it is also a unique product, but I am having a difficult time seeing them sell 17,500 when 12,500 is the magic number for the American Liberty series.
I could very well turn out to be wrong, but I'm putting my money where my mouth is, and not chasing it. Even if they do sell out, I honestly don't see a lot of upside at $3,700. And, there is significant downside if gold corrects. YMMV.
Comparing the flowing hair gold to this garbage is criminal. Nobody cares about the annual commemoratives. I wouldn't even put this in the commemorative category. This is a reproduction of a coin that most collectors could only dream of owning. If they released a silver coin with similar mintage it would easily sell for north of $1000 probably much higher. 2019 S reverse proof silver eagles are still doing just fine with a mintage of 30k.
Apples and orange. They're are people who collect date/mm rings of eagles.
Like it or not, it is a gold commemorative. And while it will sell more than the Law Enforcement commemorative, it remains true that 17,500 is not scarce for a gold commemorative. My crystal ball is broken, but it is always risky to assume it is "different this time".
Say what?
.
The "redesigned" website launched today. Looks like a roll out glitch.
I think you're ignoring the fact that the original coin this replicates is completely unobtainable for 99% of collectors. If you don't want one that's fine but I wouldn't dismiss it as just another commem.
I didn't dismiss it. I did, however, include relevant facts. People should consider the risks as well as the rewards.
It may sell out. It may not. $4000 is a big chunk of change, enough to buy a lower grade 1795 $ if you want one.
Just for fun I called the Mint and told the rep they were on BO and I'd like to purchase the Gold 24YG.
She looked for it and couldn't find it. I told her again that it's the 24YG. She found it and said it wasn't for sale until 11-14.
I told her to read about it, she did and said it was a mistake, and they corrected it.
.
.
It also got me wondering.....did the Mint do advanced sells on these and messed up and put on BACKORDER for all to see.
True. But it's available in the original metal for less than $200, so there is no reason to pay a $1,000 premium to intrinsic value to fill a hole in a collection with a tribute in an even more expensive precious metal.
Not just another commem, but also unlikely to break all the rules regarding after market value for modern issues at a given mintage. 12.5K supports the pricing they seek. 17.5K is TBD, but they have not sold 17.5K of anything recently at this price.
In fact, they have never sold any single coin at this price. It will be a new record, given historically high gold prices and the new category in the grid they are likely to create just for this very special release, if the 2024 Liberty & Britannia is any indication.
So, yeah, have to agree with @jmlanzaf on this one. Some will love it and want it at any price. But many won't, at this price and this mintage. I'm taking the under at 17,500, regardless of how much the original coin is worth.
A perfectly beautiful replica, produced by the very same United States Mint, in the original silver, is widely available for less than $200. No need to spend even $2,700, let alone $3,700, to obtain a replica. Even one monetized at $1.
Yes, but it's not worth looking for conspiracies. These are absolutely available through ABPP, since you can already buy one on eBay if you want.
That has nothing to do with Back Order. That was clearly a mistake related to the web update, since there was never an accompanying button on the web to actually place an order.
By the way, that Back Order language is the clearest indication possible that they are not going to be dropping another 25K of the silver medals on us, since it NEVER appeared. They either only made 50K and never intended to make more (HIGHLY UNLIKELY), or the missing 25K were indeed sold, likely to bulk purchasers, and for some reason is not finding its way onto the report.