If you actually knew what you were talking about you would be dangerous.......
Since you know so much, can you tell me the winning POWERBALL numbers for the next drawing? That would be more helpful.
These numbers confirm absolutely nothing. They dont support any sales numbers, in fact, in most cases they blow sales figures away.....which actually indicates the sales figures could be a bigger crock of sh&t than we actually think they are.
Can't you even see what is being placed before your eyes........
The sales, order, whatever weekly report (that you CHERISH) that is published is garbage. Your NEW maximum coins extant is RIGHT here on the COINS STRUCK report.
That should be a little scary to you given your cheering for the UNC and PRF Buffs, AGE's, some Proof PLATS, etc. Those numbers are SKY HIGH.
In fact, the only coins that HAVEN'T been REDICULOUSLY higher in numbers were the UNC PLATS (as a series).
7/8 didn't you read the disclaimer they gave with those numbers? It is clear those are NOT total final mintages and are not meant to be interpreted as such.
This is hardly rocket science, if you struck 10,000 coins, 2500 are damaged in striking, you sell 7500 but get returns for 500 then what is the final mintage?
No, it isn't 10,000.
******************That should be a little scary to you given your cheering for the UNC and PRF Buffs********
Yes I am terrified every time I look at completed Ebay auctions for the buffaloes. A one ounce went yesterday for over $2700.
Again. Not paying attention. This seems to be a continual issue with you.
Like I said - this is the NEW MAXIMUM coins extant. I didn't say MINTAGE anywhere in my post. They could be lower, but they cant be higher.
But it BLOWS AWAY the thought that the weekly "whatever" report indicated the worst case scenario.
I made a nice buck on Buff's too, taken the money OFF the table. With those new MAXIMUM coins extant in that series as well as others, that might be the best move out there.
7/8 it doesn't matter if they struck 5 trillion buffalo coins, if they only sold 10,000 and destroyed the rest then that is all that is available in the market.
The maximum doesn't matter a hill of beans now.
Are all those old gold and silver coins that were melted heavily still trading at the earlier mintages? I think not.
All the FOIA shows is what the highest possible numbers of coins available for sale were assuming a perfect strike on all coins [which they say didn't happen] but nothing else.
Let's take that and use it with the proof plats.
What 2008 proof plat have the fewest coins struck?
4884 1/4 size
That guarantees it is the new key as the lowest sales were the 2004 at 5063. With fewer coins struck that means no way could they have sold more than 2004 as they didn't strike enough coins to do it.
That is what the FOIA was suppose to show.
It is clear to me what this all means, no conflicts and interpretation needed.
Sorry you find all of it so confusing.
It also shows that your theory on the 2008 w unc plats being short struck was wrong, plain and simple. Had they been short struck then you would have been right and shouting it from mountain tops, but it didn't happen and the FOIA report shows that you were wrong.
Keep repeating your jargon to yourself over and over
Maybe it'll be true, ooopss......I just woke up........
Get Real........smelling the coffee.........aaahhhh
VERY UNLIKELY they wasted half the striking of Buff Gold..........if you believe that to be true, can I have some of that special stuff you're adding to your coffee?
Maybe waste percentages weren't very big this year? Just how do you know that they weren't?
Thought so. I'm not confused at all.
Just trying to impart some wisdom so that you can learn.
Keep repeating your jargon to yourself over and over
Maybe it'll be true, ooopss......I just woke up........
Get Real........smelling the coffee.........aaahhhh
Just trying to impart some wisdom so that you can learn.
lol. this from 7over8, a person who (1) insisted for months that 2008 plat unc w sales would come in under 2006 numbers despite all evidence to the contrary and (2) responded to FloridaBill's post by admitting he had received the same numbers a week prior (but apparently did not see fit to share them the way Bill did).
The FOIA raw data are good to have, but of limited usefulness -- just like the sales figures, they are only clues to what the final audited numbers will be. As far as I can see, nothing in the FOIA data supports the theory that 2008ws will come in lower than 2006ws.
As for 7over8's comment: You should be thanking the members that made phone call after phone call, kept on the issue for months, in order to get the details.
I have thanked FloridaBill for taking the initiative with the request (which I helped draft) and for sharing the result. I've made a few calls myself, and the Mint is simply not organized enough to be responsive. As for the "details" we've received, unfortunately the response provided was not the data requested-- we were hoping to receive the final audited numbers, not raw data. The information provided is interesting but not entirely relevant.
Not to worry, all this extra inventory of buff and eagles that doesn't show on the sales report will be offered up in a "mint close-out sale" when they relocate from Pitney Bowes to some other fulfillment vendor in 2011 or 2012.
Let's also assume that in addition to damage during production, that a coin is also destroyed whenever it's returned with a stated "defect" by a customer (real or imagined)...and all of the final plat numbers decrease by 20%...where would that put us in regards to rarities vs. prior years?
I only ask because I can easily imagine quite a few returns going back for "quality" issues (aka...not qualifying as an MS70) by the more an*l retentive flippers out there (present company excluded, of course)...even if a coin was fine otherwise. Let's not forget that quite a few of these coins made several round trips as the precious metals tides were ebbing and flowing last fall! >>
As far as returns go there were massive returns of the 2008-W burnished uncirculated APEs in July/August 2008. I would guess 60-75% at the minimum. Now were these destroyed or re-entered into stock. How did this effect reported sales numbers??
<< <i>As for the "details" we've received, unfortunately the response provided was not the data requested-- we were hoping to receive the final audited numbers, not raw data. The information provided is interesting but not entirely relevant. >>
Yeah the information received is interesting but of limited value. Kinda like finding out how much paint an artist purchased to try and figure out how many paintings they produced.
Keep repeating your jargon to yourself over and over
Maybe it'll be true, ooopss......I just woke up........
Get Real........smelling the coffee.........aaahhhh
VERY UNLIKELY they wasted half the striking of Buff Gold..........if you believe that to be true, can I have some of that special stuff you're adding to your coffee?
Maybe waste percentages weren't very big this year? Just how do you know that they weren't?
Thought so. I'm not confused at all.
Just trying to impart some wisdom so that you can learn. >>
7/8 you posted that at 3:30 in the morning? Were you sleepwalking?
Like I said earlier, what they sold matters now, not how many were struck unless the number struck is less than the lowest sales in the series of coins.
I also like the way you are shifting to the buffalo coins now that you were completely wrong about the 2008 w unc plats. I take it you are saying that numbers will be revised way up for the buffaloes.
Well based on your track record on the plats, I don't think anyone is holding their breath on what you say. The sales report has been very close to what the final mintages are in the past and I don't see anything in the FOIA report to change things.
Had there been you would have been the first to come screaming to all of us how right you were. Instead you are sleepwalking at night over this it has you so flustered.
Get your facts straight. We all dont live on the West Coast. You were quoting PST.
I'm not shifting anything. I still am a big fan of the 2008-w Plat Unc's, and they were short struck. Taking 60% profits with ease on the dimes and 30% or more on the qtrs and halves isn't something to be ashamed of......
What they sold matters? Huh. Quite the contrary.
What they PRODUCED MATTERS. What they STRUCK matters. You have NO idea if the sales report is a good indicator of where the mintage will come in THIS YEAR..........or if they'll have a big LAST CHANCE sale next year, Half - you have NO IDEA. Nothing is IMPOSSIBLE.
I have commented on the Buffs and AGE's and some PLAT PROOFS, because they were the golden children for many on this forum, let me stress they "WERE"........with so many more struck that imagined, the possibility exists for those final mintages to be SKY HIGH, and some of those to be reduced to mere bullion in pricing.....time to unload.....
I received my FOIA last week. Last week was the same week Florida Bill received his request. I rec'd mine on Friday, March 27th.
I have spoken personally to Bill many times over the past few months. I gave him key contacts at the Disclosure Office to call. He worked on his end with his request, I worked mine as well. He requested much more data on many more issues, I requested it only for one issue. The request was essentially the same. The numbers received were the same.
I spent many hours on the phone with lots of different people trying to get data.
And you picked up the phone once? Come 'on. Give it a break.
You can think of the data any way you want. Whether you think it supports nothing, or it is meaningful, that's up to you. One thing it does tell us - these numbers reflect the highest possible amount of coins available for each issue. So some of these issues previously thought to be ultra LOW - like the Buffs, AGE's, some Proof PLATS - dont seem to be anymore.
"We don't know what this data means, how do we interpret it, does it correlate with any other data points we have, etc.?"
And now a day later you say this:
"One thing it does tell us - these numbers reflect the highest possible amount of coins available for each issue. So some of these issues previously thought to be ultra LOW - like the Buffs, AGE's, some Proof PLATS - dont seem to be anymore."
One day you don't know, the next day you interpret how you wish it was.
Just so you don't forget, remember that sales matter, let me repeat that, sales matter.
If they struck 500,000 coins and only sold 5000 then do you think there are 500,000 coins in the marketplace? I hope not.
And for you now to say that the 2008 w unc plats were short struck when they weren't is ludicrous. Short struck would be a strike below the 2006 plats and that didn't happen.
You were telling us last October the 2008 w unc plats were the lowest mintage period, and they aren't. They struck less 2006 w unc and the numbers you got showed that.
Anyway I am not sure what your issue is but I am concerned you may have permanent memory lapses. Seriously please get a checkup.
If you can't remember before today then things are not on the train tracks as they say. Anyway it is to the point that I won't discuss these coins anymore because it is a broken record even though these numbers prove you were wrong.
2008 w unc plats were not short struck, not last year, not ever. No , no, and no.
The sales report seems accurate to me and I expect final mintages to be close to the released numbers. The FOIA report changes nothing IMO.
You can fantasize all you want about the 2008 w uncs but that is all it is, a fantasy.
Now have a happy evening and get well. I mean that as a friend.
You've got alot to learn about this market........you still hold out hope that the Sales Report is close to the final numbers, and represents the worst case scenario for the numbers.
However, right before your eyes an official report states that the worst case scenario for these issues is much worse that the Sales Report indicated.......
Quoting your post "If they struck 500,000 coins and only sold 5000 then do you think there are 500,000 coins in the marketplace? I hope not."
HOPE is the key word. Holding onto hope.
What it really means is "If they struck 500,000 coins and only sold 5000 then there may be another 495,000 sold and not properly recorded, or possibly yet to be sold, or........"
It is clearly evident that you have dug in your heels and just can't accept this information for what it is.......
I must draw the line somewhere and cease discussing these concepts with someone who clearly is not able to understand the material.
As for producing more than some stated limit, the mint will do this in the normal course of production. The pieces are struck in batches, not daily. They have to be prepared for returns, exchanges and lost shipments. It is only after these things are accounted for that the mint can give reasonably accurate sales figures.
(Aside – in the “old days” the mint reported collectors’ proofs by quantity struck, not by quantity sold. This avoided having to change quantities several times as shipments were returned or lost.)
I'm thinking that all this debate is not really telling us much, and it has the flavor of "who can flip the 2008 issues most efficiently" to get the "I told you so award of the year".
Fact is, the 2006-W Plat Uncs are on top until proven otherwise - like it, or not.
The 2008-W Fractional Gold Buffs are a smashingly popular design and will retain their premiums regardless of the final numbers - especially in light of the fact that they are a one year phenom.
The 2008-W Plat Proofs are not all the lowest mintage Plats, but they will be considered desireable probably on the same level as the 2004-W Proof Plats - certainly the 1/4 ozer and the 1 ozer are top candidates. (Thanks to the Mint once again for mucking up yet another series by discontinuing the fractional proofs.)
The 2008-W 1/4 oz. AGE is probably good for the long run as a scarce date but I'm not sure that it's low enough mintage to be singled out as the KING OF THE GOLD SERIES.
I'm willing to wait & see how all this shakes out in the next few years. Nobody knows the attrition numbers for these coins, during the melting of 2008 or even during the production, sales and distribution cycles. If the economy gets bad enough, they all might lose their numismatic premiums and they all might be worth more as bullion. At this point, it's all conjecture.
Q: Are You Printing Money? Bernanke: Not Literally
<< <i>I'm thinking that all this debate is not really telling us much, and it has the flavor of "who can flip the 2008 issues most efficiently" to get the "I told you so award of the year".
Fact is, the 2006-W Plat Uncs are on top until proven otherwise - like it, or not.
The 2008-W Fractional Gold Buffs are a smashingly popular design and will retain their premiums regardless of the final numbers - especially in light of the fact that they are a one year phenom.
The 2008-W Plat Proofs are not all the lowest mintage Plats, but they will be considered desireable probably on the same level as the 2004-W Proof Plats - certainly the 1/4 ozer and the 1 ozer are top candidates. (Thanks to the Mint once again for mucking up yet another series by discontinuing the fractional proofs.)
The 2008-W 1/4 oz. AGE is probably good for the long run as a scarce date but I'm not sure that it's low enough mintage to be singled out as the KING OF THE GOLD SERIES.
I'm willing to wait & see how all this shakes out in the next few years. Nobody knows the attrition numbers for these coins, during the melting of 2008 or even during the production, sales and distribution cycles. If the economy gets bad enough, they all might lose their numismatic premiums and they all might be worth more as bullion. At this point, it's all conjecture. >>
Amen ... someone who actually knows what they are talking about!
1) Has there every been an instance where the final, audited sales numbers were actually higher than the last reported sales numbers?
2) When do the final, audited sales numbers for the previous year usually come out?
3) Where is Ericj96? I would LOVE to get his take on the FOIA numbers vs. sales numbers vs. finial, audited numbers. If you're out there Eric, we'd love to hear from you.
Comments
If you actually knew what you were talking about you would be dangerous.......
Since you know so much, can you tell me the winning POWERBALL numbers for the next drawing? That would be more helpful.
These numbers confirm absolutely nothing. They dont support any sales numbers, in fact, in most cases they blow sales figures away.....which actually indicates the sales figures could be a bigger crock of sh&t than we actually think they are.
Had the 2008 numbers come in under 2006 sales numbers then 2008 would be the new kings.
That didn't happen. It wasn't even close. I see nothing to be confused about.
The question now is what are the audited sales and that you didn't get because it probably hasn't happened.
However the FOIA request settled the bigger question: Were the 2008 w unc plats short struck as some claimed?
The answer is no, no, and double no.
Can't you even see what is being placed before your eyes........
The sales, order, whatever weekly report (that you CHERISH) that is published is garbage. Your NEW maximum coins extant is RIGHT here on the COINS STRUCK report.
That should be a little scary to you given your cheering for the UNC and PRF Buffs, AGE's, some Proof PLATS, etc. Those numbers are SKY HIGH.
In fact, the only coins that HAVEN'T been REDICULOUSLY higher in numbers were the UNC PLATS (as a series).
This is hardly rocket science, if you struck 10,000 coins, 2500 are damaged in striking, you sell 7500 but get returns for 500 then what is the final mintage?
No, it isn't 10,000.
******************That should be a little scary to you given your cheering for the UNC and PRF Buffs********
Yes I am terrified every time I look at completed Ebay auctions for the buffaloes. A one ounce went yesterday for over $2700.
I am shaking.
Again. Not paying attention. This seems to be a continual issue with you.
Like I said - this is the NEW MAXIMUM coins extant. I didn't say MINTAGE anywhere in my post. They could be lower, but they cant be higher.
But it BLOWS AWAY the thought that the weekly "whatever" report indicated the worst case scenario.
I made a nice buck on Buff's too, taken the money OFF the table. With those new MAXIMUM coins extant in that series as well as others, that might be the best move out there.
The maximum doesn't matter a hill of beans now.
Are all those old gold and silver coins that were melted heavily still trading at the earlier mintages? I think not.
All the FOIA shows is what the highest possible numbers of coins available for sale were assuming a perfect strike on all coins [which they say didn't happen] but nothing else.
Let's take that and use it with the proof plats.
What 2008 proof plat have the fewest coins struck?
4884 1/4 size
That guarantees it is the new key as the lowest sales were the 2004 at 5063. With fewer coins struck that means no way could they have sold more than 2004 as they didn't strike enough coins to do it.
That is what the FOIA was suppose to show.
It is clear to me what this all means, no conflicts and interpretation needed.
Sorry you find all of it so confusing.
It also shows that your theory on the 2008 w unc plats being short struck was wrong, plain and simple. Had they been short struck then you would have been right and shouting it from mountain tops, but it didn't happen and the FOIA report shows that you were wrong.
2008-W $10 plat uncs will be decreased in final mintage report.
Reported sales exceed reported raw coins struck.
FloridaBill
Keep repeating your jargon to yourself over and over
Maybe it'll be true, ooopss......I just woke up........
Get Real........smelling the coffee.........aaahhhh
VERY UNLIKELY they wasted half the striking of Buff Gold..........if you believe that to be true, can I have some of that special stuff you're adding to your coffee?
Maybe waste percentages weren't very big this year? Just how do you know that they weren't?
Thought so. I'm not confused at all.
Just trying to impart some wisdom so that you can learn.
Maybe it'll be true, ooopss......I just woke up........
Get Real........smelling the coffee.........aaahhhh
Just trying to impart some wisdom so that you can learn.
lol. this from 7over8, a person who (1) insisted for months that 2008 plat unc w sales would come in under 2006 numbers despite all evidence to the contrary and (2) responded to FloridaBill's post by admitting he had received the same numbers a week prior (but apparently did not see fit to share them the way Bill did).
The FOIA raw data are good to have, but of limited usefulness -- just like the sales figures, they are only clues to what the final audited numbers will be. As far as I can see, nothing in the FOIA data supports the theory that 2008ws will come in lower than 2006ws.
As for 7over8's comment: You should be thanking the members that made phone call after phone call, kept on the issue for months, in order to get the details.
I have thanked FloridaBill for taking the initiative with the request (which I helped draft) and for sharing the result. I've made a few calls myself, and the Mint is simply not organized enough to be responsive. As for the "details" we've received, unfortunately the response provided was not the data requested-- we were hoping to receive the final audited numbers, not raw data. The information provided is interesting but not entirely relevant.
The mintage was 30,000 sets maximum, how could there be more ?
We saw the final figure recently and it was 19,583 or something. Was there really that many re-struck ?
OH wait, remember they had the tornados and FLOOD.. coins were washed out onto the street.. this would explain it..
Ain't that the truth! The more science is put into this, the more likely they'll be back from the dead!!!
<< <i>I'll just add my 10 cents...
Let's also assume that in addition to damage during production, that a coin is also destroyed whenever it's returned with a stated "defect" by a customer (real or imagined)...and all of the final plat numbers decrease by 20%...where would that put us in regards to rarities vs. prior years?
I only ask because I can easily imagine quite a few returns going back for "quality" issues (aka...not qualifying as an MS70) by the more an*l retentive flippers out there (present company excluded, of course)...even if a coin was fine otherwise. Let's not forget that quite a few of these coins made several round trips as the precious metals tides were ebbing and flowing last fall! >>
As far as returns go there were massive returns of the 2008-W burnished uncirculated APEs in July/August 2008.
I would guess 60-75% at the minimum.
Now were these destroyed or re-entered into stock.
How did this effect reported sales numbers??
<< <i>As for the "details" we've received, unfortunately the response provided was not the data requested-- we were hoping to receive the final audited numbers, not raw data. The information provided is interesting but not entirely relevant. >>
Yeah the information received is interesting but of limited value.
Kinda like finding out how much paint an artist purchased to try and figure out how many paintings they produced.
<< <i>Halfstrike
Keep repeating your jargon to yourself over and over
Maybe it'll be true, ooopss......I just woke up........
Get Real........smelling the coffee.........aaahhhh
VERY UNLIKELY they wasted half the striking of Buff Gold..........if you believe that to be true, can I have some of that special stuff you're adding to your coffee?
Maybe waste percentages weren't very big this year? Just how do you know that they weren't?
Thought so. I'm not confused at all.
Just trying to impart some wisdom so that you can learn. >>
7/8 you posted that at 3:30 in the morning? Were you sleepwalking?
Like I said earlier, what they sold matters now, not how many were struck unless the number struck is less than the lowest sales in the series of coins.
I also like the way you are shifting to the buffalo coins now that you were completely wrong about the 2008 w unc plats. I take it you are saying that numbers will be revised way up for the buffaloes.
Well based on your track record on the plats, I don't think anyone is holding their breath on what you say. The sales report has been very close to what the final mintages are in the past and I don't see anything in the FOIA report to change things.
Had there been you would have been the first to come screaming to all of us how right you were. Instead you are sleepwalking at night over this it has you so flustered.
Get your facts straight. We all dont live on the West Coast. You were quoting PST.
I'm not shifting anything. I still am a big fan of the 2008-w Plat Unc's, and they were short struck. Taking 60% profits with ease on the dimes and 30% or more on the qtrs and halves isn't something to be ashamed of......
What they sold matters? Huh. Quite the contrary.
What they PRODUCED MATTERS. What they STRUCK matters. You have NO idea if the sales report is a good indicator of where the mintage will come in THIS YEAR..........or if they'll have a big LAST CHANCE sale next year, Half - you have NO IDEA. Nothing is IMPOSSIBLE.
I have commented on the Buffs and AGE's and some PLAT PROOFS, because they were the golden children for many on this forum, let me stress they "WERE"........with so many more struck that imagined, the possibility exists for those final mintages to be SKY HIGH, and some of those to be reduced to mere bullion in pricing.....time to unload.....
You didn't read my post properly.
I received my FOIA last week. Last week was the same week Florida Bill received his request. I rec'd mine on Friday, March 27th.
I have spoken personally to Bill many times over the past few months. I gave him key contacts at the Disclosure Office to call. He worked on his end with his request, I worked mine as well. He requested much more data on many more issues, I requested it only for one issue. The request was essentially the same. The numbers received were the same.
I spent many hours on the phone with lots of different people trying to get data.
And you picked up the phone once? Come 'on. Give it a break.
You can think of the data any way you want. Whether you think it supports nothing, or it is meaningful, that's up to you. One thing it does tell us - these numbers reflect the highest possible amount of coins available for each issue. So some of these issues previously thought to be ultra LOW - like the Buffs, AGE's, some Proof PLATS - dont seem to be anymore.
"We don't know what this data means, how do we interpret it, does it correlate with any other data points we have, etc.?"
And now a day later you say this:
"One thing it does tell us - these numbers reflect the highest possible amount of coins available for each issue. So some of these issues previously thought to be ultra LOW - like the Buffs, AGE's, some Proof PLATS - dont seem to be anymore."
One day you don't know, the next day you interpret how you wish it was.
Just so you don't forget, remember that sales matter, let me repeat that, sales matter.
If they struck 500,000 coins and only sold 5000 then do you think there are 500,000 coins in the marketplace? I hope not.
And for you now to say that the 2008 w unc plats were short struck when they weren't is ludicrous. Short struck would be a strike below the 2006 plats and that didn't happen.
You were telling us last October the 2008 w unc plats were the lowest mintage period, and they aren't. They struck less 2006 w unc and the numbers you got showed that.
Anyway I am not sure what your issue is but I am concerned you may have permanent memory lapses. Seriously please get a checkup.
If you can't remember before today then things are not on the train tracks as they say. Anyway it is to the point that I won't discuss these coins anymore because it is a broken record even though these numbers prove you were wrong.
2008 w unc plats were not short struck, not last year, not ever. No , no, and no.
The sales report seems accurate to me and I expect final mintages to be close to the released numbers. The FOIA report changes nothing IMO.
You can fantasize all you want about the 2008 w uncs but that is all it is, a fantasy.
Now have a happy evening and get well. I mean that as a friend.
You've got alot to learn about this market........you still hold out hope that the Sales Report is close to the final numbers, and represents the worst case scenario for the numbers.
However, right before your eyes an official report states that the worst case scenario for these issues is much worse that the Sales Report indicated.......
Quoting your post "If they struck 500,000 coins and only sold 5000 then do you think there are 500,000 coins in the marketplace? I hope not."
HOPE is the key word. Holding onto hope.
What it really means is "If they struck 500,000 coins and only sold 5000 then there may be another 495,000 sold and not properly recorded, or possibly yet to be sold, or........"
It is clearly evident that you have dug in your heels and just can't accept this information for what it is.......
I must draw the line somewhere and cease discussing these concepts with someone who clearly is not able to understand the material.
(Aside – in the “old days” the mint reported collectors’ proofs by quantity struck, not by quantity sold. This avoided having to change quantities several times as shipments were returned or lost.)
Fact is, the 2006-W Plat Uncs are on top until proven otherwise - like it, or not.
The 2008-W Fractional Gold Buffs are a smashingly popular design and will retain their premiums regardless of the final numbers - especially in light of the fact that they are a one year phenom.
The 2008-W Plat Proofs are not all the lowest mintage Plats, but they will be considered desireable probably on the same level as the 2004-W Proof Plats - certainly the 1/4 ozer and the 1 ozer are top candidates. (Thanks to the Mint once again for mucking up yet another series by discontinuing the fractional proofs.)
The 2008-W 1/4 oz. AGE is probably good for the long run as a scarce date but I'm not sure that it's low enough mintage to be singled out as the KING OF THE GOLD SERIES.
I'm willing to wait & see how all this shakes out in the next few years. Nobody knows the attrition numbers for these coins, during the melting of 2008 or even during the production, sales and distribution cycles. If the economy gets bad enough, they all might lose their numismatic premiums and they all might be worth more as bullion. At this point, it's all conjecture.
I knew it would happen.
Within ALL the coins contained in this report, there is only ONE in which the reported sales exceed the reported raw numbers.
FloridaBill
You are correct, but i'm not sure what that tells us.
Wait for mintages.
<< <i>I'm thinking that all this debate is not really telling us much, and it has the flavor of "who can flip the 2008 issues most efficiently" to get the "I told you so award of the year".
Fact is, the 2006-W Plat Uncs are on top until proven otherwise - like it, or not.
The 2008-W Fractional Gold Buffs are a smashingly popular design and will retain their premiums regardless of the final numbers - especially in light of the fact that they are a one year phenom.
The 2008-W Plat Proofs are not all the lowest mintage Plats, but they will be considered desireable probably on the same level as the 2004-W Proof Plats - certainly the 1/4 ozer and the 1 ozer are top candidates. (Thanks to the Mint once again for mucking up yet another series by discontinuing the fractional proofs.)
The 2008-W 1/4 oz. AGE is probably good for the long run as a scarce date but I'm not sure that it's low enough mintage to be singled out as the KING OF THE GOLD SERIES.
I'm willing to wait & see how all this shakes out in the next few years. Nobody knows the attrition numbers for these coins, during the melting of 2008 or even during the production, sales and distribution cycles. If the economy gets bad enough, they all might lose their numismatic premiums and they all might be worth more as bullion. At this point, it's all conjecture. >>
Amen ... someone who actually knows what they are talking about!
1) Has there every been an instance where the final, audited sales numbers were actually higher than the last reported sales numbers?
2) When do the final, audited sales numbers for the previous year usually come out?
3) Where is Ericj96? I would LOVE to get his take on the FOIA numbers vs. sales numbers vs. finial, audited numbers. If you're out there Eric, we'd love to hear from you.
Thanks!