Options
Recent Coin World editorial.....
Hoodlatch
Posts: 310
I just received my Coin World with the big "Record Sellout" article on the Spouse Coins.
A writer posted an editorial lambasting the US Mint for setting ridiculously low mintages for the First Spouse coins, but what he doesn't realize is,
the mintages were not, and should not have been too low if it wasn't for the high profile marketeers that get around the limits by getting all of their
comrades to help them acquire as many coins as possible of limited mintages. Plus the pure flippers that are only in it fot a fast buck also cut into the
sales. Don't get me wrong, I also buy multipules of said product direct from the Mint so as to have the ones I keep at a discounted rate, so I have no
problem with that scenerio. I guess what bothers me the most about this persons editorial is that, Himself and others like him only start complaning about
said sellout AFTER the fact, without One bit of research into what may transpire during the initial sales period. Hell, most of these whiners never even
know the coins have been authorized until they have sold out! I have No sympathy for anyone that doesn't use all of the resourses provided to them
ahead of time as to whether they should attempt to purchase low mintage issues such as the 2006 Anniversary Eagles and the 2007 First Spouse Series.
After all, the coins were authorized last year, and there's no excuse, whatsoever for not knowing about them.
A writer posted an editorial lambasting the US Mint for setting ridiculously low mintages for the First Spouse coins, but what he doesn't realize is,
the mintages were not, and should not have been too low if it wasn't for the high profile marketeers that get around the limits by getting all of their
comrades to help them acquire as many coins as possible of limited mintages. Plus the pure flippers that are only in it fot a fast buck also cut into the
sales. Don't get me wrong, I also buy multipules of said product direct from the Mint so as to have the ones I keep at a discounted rate, so I have no
problem with that scenerio. I guess what bothers me the most about this persons editorial is that, Himself and others like him only start complaning about
said sellout AFTER the fact, without One bit of research into what may transpire during the initial sales period. Hell, most of these whiners never even
know the coins have been authorized until they have sold out! I have No sympathy for anyone that doesn't use all of the resourses provided to them
ahead of time as to whether they should attempt to purchase low mintage issues such as the 2006 Anniversary Eagles and the 2007 First Spouse Series.
After all, the coins were authorized last year, and there's no excuse, whatsoever for not knowing about them.
Audentes fortuna juvat
0
Comments
I knew it would happen.
Now, that's DEEP!
<< <i>It's a situation that involves both artificial supply and artificial demand. The Mint shouldn't be trying to manipulate either one. >>
Good point. The Mint is intentionally constraining supply in order to induce demand that wouldn't otherwise be there.
As for the comment the OP made about "whiners," yes, if someone wants one badly enough they would know when these are being issued. But some people have important business to attend to and can't be on the phone or on the website right as they are being offered for sale. And they may not want to leave their credit card info with someone else to do it for them. Saying it's their fault for not being able to get in during the first two HOURS is, IMO, unreasonable. If people whine about a sellout of an item that's available for weeks or months, that's another story.
Yes, artificial supply by "limiting the mintage" and artificial demand (allegedly) by speculators who buy more than they intend to keep in their collections.
The result: and artificial supply and demand curve! You guess where the price will end up, because I sure can't.
I knew it would happen.
This first year will be good for them but subsequent years all may not sell out.
Box of 20
<< <i>There were 4 different coins offered. The average order was for 3 coins according to the Mint. Not even 1 of each. I don't know where people are getting the idea that a vast army of flippers vacuumed all of these up with huge orders. It just isn't true and the numbers bear this out. >>
AVERAGE order was three. I'm sure there were quite a few collectors that could only afford one, as the asking price is over 400 bucks. when you average that out with all the sleezly TV "dealers" that order their full boat's worth, and had their staff do the same, the average pans out. we are also assuming the Mint is being honest in their numbers reported; they may be miffed about the dealers sucking these up by the handful, and they made up the more tolerable number of 'an average of 3' per household so the real collectors wouldn't stage an all out revolt to the Mint and their products.
would it be a surprise to anyone that a government entity would blatantly lie or flub the numbers to keep up a 'sense of fairness'?
<< <i>I just received my Coin World with the big "Record Sellout" article on the Spouse Coins.
A writer posted an editorial lambasting the US Mint for setting ridiculously low mintages for the First Spouse coins, but what he doesn't realize is,
the mintages were not, and should not have been too low if it wasn't for the high profile marketeers that get around the limits by getting all of their
comrades to help them acquire as many coins as possible of limited mintages. Plus the pure flippers that are only in it fot a fast buck also cut into the
sales. Don't get me wrong, I also buy multipules of said product direct from the Mint so as to have the ones I keep at a discounted rate, so I have no
problem with that scenerio. I guess what bothers me the most about this persons editorial is that, Himself and others like him only start complaning about
said sellout AFTER the fact, without One bit of research into what may transpire during the initial sales period. Hell, most of these whiners never even
know the coins have been authorized until they have sold out! I have No sympathy for anyone that doesn't use all of the resourses provided to them
ahead of time as to whether they should attempt to purchase low mintage issues such as the 2006 Anniversary Eagles and the 2007 First Spouse Series.
After all, the coins were authorized last year, and there's no excuse, whatsoever for not knowing about them. >>
I somewhat disagree. I don't have a problem with low mintages but I do believe the Mint, in these cases, should limit purchases to 1 or 2 per buyer in order to assure a more distribution.
I'm not a fan of flipping. Frankly, I'd have no problem with the Mint doing its best to put big crimps in their business. The average person who just wants 1 for themselves or their kids, should not have to feel like they are calling for concert tickets against someone with multiple modems and dozens of people waiting in line. Just one guy's humble opinion.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
<< <i>Saying it's their fault for not being able to get in during the first two HOURS is, IMO, unreasonable. >>
Is that what you tell your boss when you're two hours late for work?
<< <i>Is there a law they can't increase the mintage now? >>
Congress has raised the minage limits in the past so it could happen.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
<< <i>
<< <i>Saying it's their fault for not being able to get in during the first two HOURS is, IMO, unreasonable. >>
Is that what you tell your boss when you're two hours late for work? >>
You wouldn't be "two hours late" for work if you lived on the east coast; you'd be more like 4-5 hours late. Or else you'd be working for two hours and then taking a very long lunch.
Plus, what if you have a meeting with a big client that day, or are up against a tight deadline? Yeah, in those situations a "couple hours late" can be a career-killer. "Sorry, Boss, but I'm gonna have to blow off that meeting about the three million dollar Smith deal. I have to be ready to place a personal order with the Mint."
Plus, there are accidental reasons for blowing off work, and intentional, non work-related reasons. Oversleeping, car breaking down, kids getting sick...these things happen and are largely out of our intentional control. It seems silly that someone should have to ask their boss for a couple hours off to get their order to the Mint on time.
I have a pretty flexible job and a pretty cool boss, so if I wanted to jump on this and ignore work for a while I could. And I had plenty of opportunity to get in; I just chose not to. And I still think the way they did it stinks. I think a guaranteed 1-2 week window for orders is the best way to go about it.
said sellout AFTER the fact, without One bit of research into what may transpire during the initial sales period. Hell, most of these whiners never even
know the coins have been authorized until they have sold out! I have No sympathy for anyone that doesn't use all of the resourses provided to them
ahead of time as to whether they should attempt to purchase low mintage issues such as the 2006 Anniversary Eagles and the 2007 First Spouse Series.
There are a lot of casual collectors who are interested enough in coins to buy them, but not interested enough to to try to beat out the crowd of "collectors" who need 5 of each coin for their "collection". Unfortunately, by shutting people out from buying from the Mint because they did not place the order within the first two hours, there is a good chance they will not come back to the series and possibly not back to coins.
I also like Perry Hall's suggestion.
<< <i>It's a situation that involves both artificial supply and artificial demand. The Mint shouldn't be trying to manipulate either one. >>
IMHO, that's just good business sense. It's a gimmick, but it works time after time.
There is nothing unfair about creating artficial demand. If you're gullible enough
to buy into the hype, then it's your fault-- caveat emptor, etc. etc.
The Mint is a business, not a charity. Without the flippers/speculators, they
would probably fall way short of their sales projections. The demand simply
would not be there without the 'limited mintage' tag. They have to balance the
fine line between appearing to be fair, and not shooting their noses off to
spite their faces.
ahead of time as to whether they should attempt to purchase low mintage issues
-----------
good stuff! i totally agree. i am a casual collector of comics. i goto the
store once every 3 months or so. i miss a ton of books, but that is life
and i will not seek them out later on. i could have joined their club
and reserved a copy, but i choose not to.
same goes for coins. those who are into it will always get the better
opportunities then those who collect lazily.
Moral of the Story:
Do not covet thy president's wife !!!
``https://ebay.us/m/KxolR5
<< <i> have No sympathy for anyone that doesn't use all of the resourses provided to them
ahead of time as to whether they should attempt to purchase low mintage issues >>
What time did those things go on sale? 10:00 am Eastern time? That's 4:00 am in Hawaii. Sold out by 7:00 am Hawaii time. Yeah, that's a sensible way for the Mint to do business with the public. And why are they intentionally making low mintage coins anyway? How does it serve the public if people are closed out before the sun rises?
CG
<< <i>
<< <i> have No sympathy for anyone that doesn't use all of the resourses provided to them
ahead of time as to whether they should attempt to purchase low mintage issues >>
What time did those things go on sale? 10:00 am Eastern time? That's 4:00 am in Hawaii. Sold out by 7:00 am Hawaii time. Yeah, that's a sensible way for the Mint to do business with the public. And why are they intentionally making low mintage coins anyway? How does it serve the public if people are closed out before the sun rises?
CG >>
Actually it was 12:00 EDT which is 7am in Hawaii and 8am in Alaska. Oh by the way the stock market opens at 9:30am ET. Think stockbrokers in Hawaii are up?
<< <i>I just received my Coin World with the big "Record Sellout" article on the Spouse Coins.
A writer posted an editorial lambasting the US Mint for setting ridiculously low mintages for the First Spouse coins, but what he doesn't realize is.............................................................................
..............................................................................
After all, the coins were authorized last year, and there's no excuse, whatsoever for not knowing about them. >>
I agree with you!!!
I missed the boat on the 2006 ASE's I had to pay extra.
.
CoinsAreFun Toned Silver Eagle Proof Album
.
Gallery Mint Museum, Ron Landis& Joe Rust, The beginnings of the Golden Dollar
.
More CoinsAreFun Pictorials NGC
I commend them for their successes.
<< <i>Heaven forbid a business try to make money.
I commend them for their successes. >>
The Mint is not a business. And how much did they leave on the table by not issuing enough coins to meet demand?
Maybe next time they should sell the whole issue to Halliburton below cost and let them handle distriubtion to the public. That would be a business making money.
CG
<< <i>Heaven forbid a business try to make money. >>
The Mint's primary charter isn't to make money at any cost. In terms of the collector, it's supposed to serve the collector. Not the speculator. Not the flipper. The collector. It makes a profit on all the commemorative and NCLT stuff it sells.
Shutting out a lot of individuals 2-3 hours after something goes on sale is NOT serving the collector.
<< <i>
<< <i>Heaven forbid a business try to make money. >>
The Mint's primary charter isn't to make money at any cost. In terms of the collector, it's supposed to serve the collector. Not the speculator. Not the flipper. The collector. It makes a profit on all the commemorative and NCLT stuff it sells.
Shutting out a lot of individuals 2-3 hours after something goes on sale is NOT serving the collector. >>
Hurry..... Time's Running Out
``https://ebay.us/m/KxolR5
<< <i>Hurry..... Time's Running Out >>
Heh. Obviously, there's a happy medium in there somewhere...
There are a lot of casual collectors who are interested enough in coins to buy them, but not interested enough to to try to beat out the crowd of "collectors" who need 5 of each coin for their "collection". Unfortunately, by shutting people out from buying from the Mint because they did not place the order within the first two hours, there is a good chance they will not come back to the series and possibly not back to coins.
I also like Perry Hall's suggestion.
Maybe the Mint's primary mission has changed from the manufacture of coinage into a profit center, and I don't know if that's all bad - but most for-profit enterprises also consider how best to serve their market, rather than simply to exploit it. It's in the Mint's best interest as a marketer to not alienate too many of their customers at the same time.
Perry Hall's suggestion is eminently fair.
I knew it would happen.
<< <i>And why are they intentionally making low mintage coins anyway? How does it serve the public if people are closed out before the sun rises? >>
To create demand. If the Mint had unlimited mintages on everything they make, very few people would be interested anymore. It's the same reason game console makers never make enough consoles to satisfy Christmas rush. Do you really think a multi-billion dollar company like Sony was incapable of making ten times the PS3s that they made during the Thanksgiving to Christmas buying season last year? The point is to generate huge demand--get people talking about it, get newspapers and TV news shows doing stories about it, etc. Sometimes you have to make a little less money in the short term to make a lot more money in the long term. It's the same reason Best Buy marks some of their merchandise down to cost after Thanksgiving. Sure, they aren't making anything off those TVs they're selling, but they're making a crapload off the high priced merchandise that their customers have to walk past to get to the TVs.
<< <i>The Mint's primary charter isn't to make money at any cost. In terms of the collector, it's supposed to serve the collector. Not the speculator. Not the flipper. The collector. It makes a profit on all the commemorative and NCLT stuff it sells. >>
People on this forum have an incredibly short memory. I posted the Mint's mission statement a few weeks ago. It says nothing about "serving the collector" and quite a bit about "making a profit."
To wit:
"The mission of the United States Mint is to manufacture the highest quality circulating, numismatic, and bullion coins at the lowest possible cost and to deliver them in a timely manner...to expand our markets through exceptional customer service, product development, and innovative marketing...to sell numismatic and bullion products at a reasonable price and profit, and to provide security over assets entrusted to us."
The above quoted text (link)--which is the official mission statement of the U.S. Mint, can be broken down into two parts:<B[/IMG]
a) "To expand our markets through exceptional customer service, product development, and innovative marketing."
In other words, to be nice to people on the phone, make new types of products, and improve marketing (now that these coins sold out in two hours, how hot do you think the demand will be for the next two in August? It's innovative marketing--akin to store using "loss leaders" to draw in customers).
b) "To sell numismatic and bullion products at a reasonable price and profit."
In other words, to make money.
The entire mission of the U.S. Mint is a) to get more customers, and b) to make a profit. I don't see anything in there about "serving collectors" or "ensuring fair distribution of product" or any other such crap.
<< <i>Here's a better way to handle new mint issues----have unlimited mintages but limit the order period to two weeks. Then strike only enough coins to fill all orders. Keep the mintages secret until the ordering period closes. It would be fair to all and there would still be opportunities for low mintage issues. >>
There are a few of problems with this. First, the Mint can't do jack squat without Congressional approval.
Second, the Mint is both a business AND a government agencies. As a government agency, it has an obligation to be as transparent as possible (since National Security is obviously not a factor). Democracies can only function when there is great transparency within the government.
Third, no limited mintage means no feeding frenzy. Most forum members seem to agree that the sellout was driven by speculative buying, and that within a few months you'll be able to purchase these on eBay for melt. If that's true, then the Mint's order limits made them a *lot* more money than they would have made without limits. No limits mean no speculative purchases--you have to rely exclusively on collector interest. If collector interest on these issues is as low as is generally believed, it can be demonstrated that the Mint made more money by selling a limited mintage item to speculators than they would selling an unlimited mintage item to collectors. Also, given the quick sellout, how many people who weren't planning on buying First Spouse coins will change their mind? This is the scenario I envision: TJ and Dolly Madison (40k each) sell out within an hour. Next year, the mintage is upped to 80,000. Because the first four coins were such big winners on the secondary market (at least in the short term), even more speculators line up to place orders. It's a slingshot effect.
So you have three obstacles to your proposal:
a) Law (easy to overcome, Congress just passes different laws)
b) Principle (not so easy to overcome, given the aggressive nature of the press, and the cynical nature of our citizens)
c) Business sense. Sometimes you have to limit profits on one item to increase profits on later items.
<< <i>There were 4 different coins offered. The average order was for 3 coins according to the Mint. Not even 1 of each. I don't know where people are getting the idea that a vast army of flippers vacuumed all of these up with huge orders. It just isn't true and the numbers bear this out. >>
Wrong!
I just heard of a dealer that actually pays his hoard of buyers $20 per coin plus shipping for limited mintage items from the US Mint. With a 10 coin per household limit, his buyers are earning $200!
Just because the mint reports an average order does not mean that each of those orders are NOT ending up in the flippers hands....................
The name is LEE!
<< <i>
<< <i>Heaven forbid a business try to make money.
I commend them for their successes. >>
The Mint is not a business. And how much did they leave on the table by not issuing enough coins to meet demand?
Maybe next time they should sell the whole issue to Halliburton below cost and let them handle distriubtion to the public. That would be a business making money.
CG >>
yeah, let's just farm out the Mint's work to Halliburton, they get all of our money anyway
The Mint's primary charter isn't to make money at any cost. In terms of the collector, it's supposed to serve the collector.
Again, i disagree. Sorry Ziggy-this may be the first time i disagree with you.
The mint's primary charter is to make coins for commerce-Not collectors. Up until about 1982 this was their view also. Eventually things changed and now they are a business in a lot of repects. Still the primary reason they exist is to make coins for circulation. They have the advantage of monopoly. Congress dictates to them.
I personally, do not collect any NCLT issues, but this thread has some excellent comments. You cant make everyone happy--So where to draw the line is interesting-especially in this case-where i did not see nearly anyone admit here, prior to the sale, that they would buy these. (President's wives issues). JMHO. Bob
Edited to add--->> BTW whatever happened the "First Hags" designation.Haven't seen this much lately. Guess they aren't too bad after all. How quickly things can change. They seem to be much better looking than the presidental dollar coins.
<< <i>no matter what Congress and the US Mint decide and implement, people will be unhappy, it is just a fact and will never change. People should get over it. >>