Imagine what a full set will end up costing you. when the series is done, who will want them and what would they be willing to pay? Almost makes the First Ladies set look desirable. At least with those you would have a nice hoard of Gold bullion to keep you warm at night.
<< <i>I also don't think they should abuse their privilege
That's exactly right. Just stop right there and you have it right.
but if "cost-effective" bullion is what you want it is still available in the American Eagle program. The law in the post really seems to be addressing the AE program.
The law is clear. The ATBs are written into the BULLION law. It is clear, and you want to interpret it to include your order but to exclude those who protested Apmex's gouging program. Just two questions - how many sets did you order at $1,395.00 and were you planning to flip them right away?
It's an honest question. I have nothing against that idea, except for the gouging by Apmex - but it does illustrate a point. If you plan on flipping a coin right away, you don't really care about the price, only the margin. If you plan on keeping a newly-issued coin, you absolutely do care about the issue price.
I ordered one set not to flip at $1000. Thought about more but didn't bite. I realize this is a bullion item but it seems that the post was citing a regulation that clearly addressed the AE program and implied some LEGAL requirement on the ATB coins just because they are bullion. Didn't seem right to me. Now if you are talking about the "spirit" of the regulations I understand.
Gold and silver are valuable but wisdom is priceless.
I won't be collecting the entire series, but probably just the few I find interesting like the Fort McHenry one since I am from Baltimore. I am only interested in this first year because of the low mintage. Next year's most like will be sold at little over melt, if they make 100k of each design.
<< <i>Next year's most like will be sold at little over melt, if they make 100k of each design. >>
Even if the Mint manages to meet that quota. You're forgetting that they will be the "collector" version, either proof or unc., with a Mint mark. You are in a Utopian dream state if you think the Mint is going to sell them a "little over melt."
"Bongo drive 1984 Lincoln that looks like old coin dug from ground."
you are in a Utopian dream state if you think the Mint is going to sell them a "little over melt."
I am referring to the non numismatic versions. If they ramp up production on the non numismatic bullion versions it will kill the specualtion and be in line with what the ASE Bullion sells for plus the costs of producing these special coins. I realize they are not as easy to produce like the ASE's. JMHO.
<< <i>you are in a Utopian dream state if you think the Mint is going to sell them a "little over melt."
I am referring to the non numismatic versions. If they ramp up production on the non numismatic bullion versions it will kill the specualtion and be in line with what the ASE Bullion sells for. JMHO. >>
Ooops hit the enter key to quick.
Lets, assume that the bullion version will only be at 100,000 for each puck. That will also create an instant "rarity" to some degree. Will we have to go through the same bs? A few screamers trying to protect the rest from implied gouging?
"Bongo drive 1984 Lincoln that looks like old coin dug from ground."
A few screamers trying to protect the rest from implied gouging?
I'm not sure exactly what qualifies anyone as a "screamer" other than the notion that you disagree with someone else complaining about a slippery distributor who is unfairly trying to gouge *everyone*. Personally, I don't care if they gouge you, but I do care if they gouge me.
Your willingness to pay $1,395.00 for a set of bullion pieces that's supposed to sell for $2.00/oz. over spot tells me that you had big plans to buy a more than a few of the 5-coin sets for resale and to bail out before the 3rd & 4th tier buyers realized that they bought into one big ol' speculative bubble.
For once, the Mint appears to be doing the right thing. They wouldn't have stepped into the middle of this if someone at the Mint didn't realize that everything wasn't hunky-dory.
There's really no other reason to complain about the Mint responding to a public outcry for more fairness in the distribution & pricing of these, especially since they were short-struck from the original plan. You start looking bad when you start throwing out derisive comments without justification.
Q: Are You Printing Money? Bernanke: Not Literally
<< <i>A few screamers trying to protect the rest from implied gouging?
I'm not sure exactly what qualifies anyone as a "screamer" other than the notion that you disagree with someone else complaining about a slippery distributor who is unfairly trying to gouge *everyone*. Personally, I don't care if they gouge you, but I do care if they gouge me.
Your willingness to pay $1,395.00 for a set of bullion pieces that's supposed to sell for $2.00/oz. over spot tells me that you had big plans to buy a more than a few of the 5-coin sets for resale and to bail out before the 3rd & 4th tier buyers realized that they bought into one big ol' speculative bubble.
For once, the Mint appears to be doing the right thing. They wouldn't have stepped into the middle of this if someone at the Mint didn't realize that everything wasn't hunky-dory.
There's really no other reason to complain about the Mint responding to a public outcry for more fairness in the distribution & pricing of these, especially since they were short-struck from the original plan. You start looking bad when you start throwing out derisive comments without justification. >>
Why should you derisively assume everyone who bought the coins at $1395 was some greedy flipper? Anyone worried about being gouged could have just complained to the offending seller. I think the combined voices of this board and others directed at Apmex would have done more to fix the problem instead of tarring everyone by "screaming" to the Mint.
Gold and silver are valuable but wisdom is priceless.
Why should you derisively assume everyone who bought the coins at $1395 was some greedy flipper?
Because, if you only wanted a single set, you would be glad to see that the pricing will be set lower and you would be glad to see that you have a better chance of obtaining a set if the household limit is set to ONE. Any other explanation is irrational.
Anyone worried about being gouged could have just complained to the offending seller.
That is an irrational assumption. Apmex has no motivation to drop their prices, in fact they act as if $1,395.00 was doing us a favor of some sort.
I think the combined voices of this board and others directed at Apmex would have done more to fix the problem instead of tarring everyone by "screaming" to the Mint.
Calling people "screamers" and "tarring everyone" is a hysterical tactic used in an attempt to discredit without justification. It is irrational to have sour grapes over the issue of price fairness and distribution fairness unless you planned to exploit the price & distribution in the first place.
Q: Are You Printing Money? Bernanke: Not Literally
<< <i>Why should you derisively assume everyone who bought the coins at $1395 was some greedy flipper?
Because, if you only wanted a single set, you would be glad to see that the pricing will be set lower and you would be glad to see that you have a better chance of obtaining a set if the household limit is set to ONE. Any other explanation is irrational.
Anyone worried about being gouged could have just complained to the offending seller.
That is an irrational assumption. Apmex has no motivation to drop their prices, in fact they act as if $1,395.00 was doing us a favor of some sort.
I think the combined voices of this board and others directed at Apmex would have done more to fix the problem instead of tarring everyone by "screaming" to the Mint.
Calling people "screamers" and "tarring everyone" is a hysterical tactic used in an attempt to discredit without justification. It is irrational to have sour grapes over the issue of price fairness and distribution fairness unless you planned to exploit the price & distribution in the first place. >>
So, how many did you intent to order and at what price?
BTW my order was for 2 sets & my cc has been debited. What I or anyone else does with their money or how they spend it, is no ones business but their own. I resent your implication, because I don't agree with your interpretation of a fair price, that my motive was to exploit the price. Yeah, my extra set would have made a difference. Perhaps my verbiage of the word "screamers" should have been modified to cry babies. Seems to me, the ones who did not order any sets, are the ones who are complaining the loudest. I can't wait to see, once the dust settles, what was accomplished.
"Bongo drive 1984 Lincoln that looks like old coin dug from ground."
So, how many did you intent to order and at what price?
BTW my order was for 2 sets & my cc has been debited. What I or anyone else does with their money or how they spend it, is no ones business but their own. I resent your implication, because I don't agree with your interpretation of a fair price, that my motive was to exploit the price. Yeah, my extra set would have made a difference. Perhaps my verbiage of the word "screamers" should have been modified to cry babies. Seems to me, the ones who did not order any sets, are the ones who are complaining the loudest. I can't wait to see, once the dust settles, what was accomplished.
Name-calling is so unbecoming. And yet, you can't seem to resist? I rest my case.
Q: Are You Printing Money? Bernanke: Not Literally
<< <i> Your willingness to pay $1,395.00 for a set of bullion pieces that's supposed to sell for $2.00/oz. over spot tells me that you had big plans to buy a more than a few of the 5-coin sets for resale and to bail out before the 3rd & 4th tier buyers realized that they bought into one big ol' speculative bubble.
>>
Where does it say these are supposed to sell for $2 over spot?
I know that is what the Mint said they would charge the Distibutors, but according to you, the Distributors were not supposed to make any money what so ever.
<< <i>Why should you derisively assume everyone who bought the coins at $1395 was some greedy flipper?
Because, if you only wanted a single set, you would be glad to see that the pricing will be set lower and you would be glad to see that you have a better chance of obtaining a set if the household limit is set to ONE. Any other explanation is irrational. >>
Another odd thing to say.
Apparently it is irrational to buy two or more of something.
Where does it say these are supposed to sell for $2 over spot?
I know that is what the Mint said they would charge the Distibutors, but according to you, the Distributors were not supposed to make any money what so ever.
aficionado, you are correct on that. In fact, the Mint only set a guideline such that the distributors are to sell the coins at prices in line with other bullion.
What you consider bullion may differ from what I consider bullion, but my interpretation is that bullion is sold at a relatively tight spread and at premiums that amount to another $2.00/oz. or so, at these current silver prices. But not at another $20/oz. over spot.
Q: Are You Printing Money? Bernanke: Not Literally
I ordered TWO sets from Monaco at $1375 each. I initially planned to order one, but since they (and I) are in California, the purchase would have been taxable since it's less than $1500. Instead of trying to figure out something else to buy from them to get above $1500, I figured the easiest thing to do was to order an additional set. At the time, I figured I could sell the second set at cost.
I ordered more than one set, but fewer than three. I was hoping to make a killing on these. Rats! I'll probably never get a single one. That's the way it goes.
<< Apparently it is irrational to buy two or more of something.>>
Scroll up. That's not what I said. Don't misquote me.
not in those words, but you did say this:
"you have a better chance of obtaining a set if the household limit is set to ONE. Any other explanation is irrational."
Please quote my entire statement and note the question that I responded to:
<< Why should you derisively assume everyone who bought the coins at $1395 was some greedy flipper?>>
Because, if you only wanted a single set, you would be glad to see that the pricing will be set lower and you would be glad to see that you have a better chance of obtaining a set if the household limit is set to ONE. Any other explanation is irrational.
**If you quote me, please do it in context, and please use the entire statement. Thanks, jmski**
Q: Are You Printing Money? Bernanke: Not Literally
<< <i>Why should you derisively assume everyone who bought the coins at $1395 was some greedy flipper?
Because, if you only wanted a single set, you would be glad to see that the pricing will be set lower and you would be glad to see that you have a better chance of obtaining a set if the household limit is set to ONE. Any other explanation is irrational.
Anyone worried about being gouged could have just complained to the offending seller.
That is an irrational assumption. Apmex has no motivation to drop their prices, in fact they act as if $1,395.00 was doing us a favor of some sort.
I think the combined voices of this board and others directed at Apmex would have done more to fix the problem instead of tarring everyone by "screaming" to the Mint.
Calling people "screamers" and "tarring everyone" is a hysterical tactic used in an attempt to discredit without justification. It is irrational to have sour grapes over the issue of price fairness and distribution fairness unless you planned to exploit the price & distribution in the first place. >>
Me thinks you use the word irrational rashly. Too many assumptions going on here. If your logic is flawless how do you explain that I bought a set and had no plans to flip? Who has determined that the price is going lower? Don't flippers like to buy at lower prices too? Lastly, I do think Apmex would have been pressured to price better if it had a lot of upset customers calling. They have to sell some coins tomorrow.
Gold and silver are valuable but wisdom is priceless.
So that must mean APMEX will need to sell the other 2000 sets of their allocation. I wonder if the one per household will retroactively apply to the 1000 sets they already sold.
As I mentioned before, this is going to create a major clstrfck. If I was a Auth. wholesaler, I would tell the Mint to shove it.
"Most of the US Mint’s primary distributors have not traditionally sold bullion coins to the public in small quantities. Therefore it is possible that some will not purchase their allocation since they are not set up for retail level transactions. In the event that an authorized purchaser does not order their allotment, any excess coins will be available on an allocated basis to remaining active sellers on Monday, December 20, 2010."
And with most new products, probably the 1 per household limit might be withdrawn. I can't complain to much, since my cc will be credited, but unfortunately, the set that I had earmarked as Christmas presents to family members, just won't materialize.
"Bongo drive 1984 Lincoln that looks like old coin dug from ground."
Comments
<< <i>I also don't think they should abuse their privilege
That's exactly right. Just stop right there and you have it right.
but if "cost-effective" bullion is what you want it is still available in the American Eagle program. The law in the post really seems to be addressing the AE program.
The law is clear. The ATBs are written into the BULLION law. It is clear, and you want to interpret it to include your order but to exclude those who protested Apmex's gouging program. Just two questions - how many sets did you order at $1,395.00 and were you planning to flip them right away?
It's an honest question. I have nothing against that idea, except for the gouging by Apmex - but it does illustrate a point. If you plan on flipping a coin right away, you don't really care about the price, only the margin. If you plan on keeping a newly-issued coin, you absolutely do care about the issue price.
I ordered one set not to flip at $1000. Thought about more but didn't bite. I realize this is a bullion item but it seems that the post was citing a regulation that clearly addressed the AE program and implied some LEGAL requirement on the ATB coins just because they are bullion. Didn't seem right to me. Now if you are talking about the "spirit" of the regulations I understand.
Box of 20
<< <i>Next year's most like will be sold at little over melt, if they make 100k of each design. >>
Even if the Mint manages to meet that quota. You're forgetting that they will be the "collector" version, either proof or unc., with a Mint mark. You are in a Utopian dream state if you think the Mint is going to sell them a "little over melt."
I am referring to the non numismatic versions. If they ramp up production on the non numismatic bullion versions it will kill the specualtion and be in line with what the ASE Bullion sells for plus the costs of producing these special coins. I realize they are not as easy to produce like the ASE's. JMHO.
Box of 20
I talk with them the other day and no priceing on these have been set.
<< <i>you are in a Utopian dream state if you think the Mint is going to sell them a "little over melt."
I am referring to the non numismatic versions. If they ramp up production on the non numismatic bullion versions it will kill the specualtion and be in line with what the ASE Bullion sells for. JMHO. >>
Ooops hit the enter key to quick.
Lets, assume that the bullion version will only be at 100,000 for each puck. That will also create an instant "rarity" to some degree. Will we have to go through the same bs? A few screamers trying to protect the rest from implied gouging?
<< <i>I told you the price would fall.
now they have to price them for a cent a set. >>
...plus $1400 shipping
<< <i>I told you the price would fall.
now they have to price them for a cent a set.
>>
So you can flip the set at face value and make $1.24!
I'm not sure exactly what qualifies anyone as a "screamer" other than the notion that you disagree with someone else complaining about a slippery distributor who is unfairly trying to gouge *everyone*. Personally, I don't care if they gouge you, but I do care if they gouge me.
Your willingness to pay $1,395.00 for a set of bullion pieces that's supposed to sell for $2.00/oz. over spot tells me that you had big plans to buy a more than a few of the 5-coin sets for resale and to bail out before the 3rd & 4th tier buyers realized that they bought into one big ol' speculative bubble.
For once, the Mint appears to be doing the right thing. They wouldn't have stepped into the middle of this if someone at the Mint didn't realize that everything wasn't hunky-dory.
There's really no other reason to complain about the Mint responding to a public outcry for more fairness in the distribution & pricing of these, especially since they were short-struck from the original plan. You start looking bad when you start throwing out derisive comments without justification.
I knew it would happen.
<< <i>A few screamers trying to protect the rest from implied gouging?
I'm not sure exactly what qualifies anyone as a "screamer" other than the notion that you disagree with someone else complaining about a slippery distributor who is unfairly trying to gouge *everyone*. Personally, I don't care if they gouge you, but I do care if they gouge me.
Your willingness to pay $1,395.00 for a set of bullion pieces that's supposed to sell for $2.00/oz. over spot tells me that you had big plans to buy a more than a few of the 5-coin sets for resale and to bail out before the 3rd & 4th tier buyers realized that they bought into one big ol' speculative bubble.
For once, the Mint appears to be doing the right thing. They wouldn't have stepped into the middle of this if someone at the Mint didn't realize that everything wasn't hunky-dory.
There's really no other reason to complain about the Mint responding to a public outcry for more fairness in the distribution & pricing of these, especially since they were short-struck from the original plan. You start looking bad when you start throwing out derisive comments without justification. >>
Why should you derisively assume everyone who bought the coins at $1395 was some greedy flipper? Anyone worried about being gouged could have just complained to the offending seller. I think the combined voices of this board and others directed at Apmex would have done more to fix the problem instead of tarring everyone by "screaming" to the Mint.
Because, if you only wanted a single set, you would be glad to see that the pricing will be set lower and you would be glad to see that you have a better chance of obtaining a set if the household limit is set to ONE. Any other explanation is irrational.
Anyone worried about being gouged could have just complained to the offending seller.
That is an irrational assumption. Apmex has no motivation to drop their prices, in fact they act as if $1,395.00 was doing us a favor of some sort.
I think the combined voices of this board and others directed at Apmex would have done more to fix the problem instead of tarring everyone by "screaming" to the Mint.
Calling people "screamers" and "tarring everyone" is a hysterical tactic used in an attempt to discredit without justification. It is irrational to have sour grapes over the issue of price fairness and distribution fairness unless you planned to exploit the price & distribution in the first place.
I knew it would happen.
<< <i>This thread is losing steam, we were on the second page!
Wait until the Mint decides what they are going to do.....the action most definitely will pick up after that
<< <i>Why should you derisively assume everyone who bought the coins at $1395 was some greedy flipper?
Because, if you only wanted a single set, you would be glad to see that the pricing will be set lower and you would be glad to see that you have a better chance of obtaining a set if the household limit is set to ONE. Any other explanation is irrational.
Anyone worried about being gouged could have just complained to the offending seller.
That is an irrational assumption. Apmex has no motivation to drop their prices, in fact they act as if $1,395.00 was doing us a favor of some sort.
I think the combined voices of this board and others directed at Apmex would have done more to fix the problem instead of tarring everyone by "screaming" to the Mint.
Calling people "screamers" and "tarring everyone" is a hysterical tactic used in an attempt to discredit without justification. It is irrational to have sour grapes over the issue of price fairness and distribution fairness unless you planned to exploit the price & distribution in the first place. >>
So, how many did you intent to order and at what price?
BTW my order was for 2 sets & my cc has been debited. What I or anyone else does with their money or how they spend it, is no ones business but their own. I resent your implication, because I don't agree with your interpretation of a fair price, that my motive was to exploit the price. Yeah, my extra set would have made a difference. Perhaps my verbiage of the word "screamers" should have been modified to cry babies. Seems to me, the ones who did not order any sets, are the ones who are complaining the loudest. I can't wait to see, once the dust settles, what was accomplished.
Loves me some shiny!
BTW my order was for 2 sets & my cc has been debited. What I or anyone else does with their money or how they spend it, is no ones business but their own. I resent your implication, because I don't agree with your interpretation of a fair price, that my motive was to exploit the price. Yeah, my extra set would have made a difference. Perhaps my verbiage of the word "screamers" should have been modified to cry babies. Seems to me, the ones who did not order any sets, are the ones who are complaining the loudest. I can't wait to see, once the dust settles, what was accomplished.
Name-calling is so unbecoming. And yet, you can't seem to resist? I rest my case.
I knew it would happen.
<< <i>
Your willingness to pay $1,395.00 for a set of bullion pieces that's supposed to sell for $2.00/oz. over spot tells me that you had big plans to buy a more than a few of the 5-coin sets for resale and to bail out before the 3rd & 4th tier buyers realized that they bought into one big ol' speculative bubble.
>>
Where does it say these are supposed to sell for $2 over spot?
I know that is what the Mint said they would charge the Distibutors, but according to you, the Distributors were not supposed to make any money what so ever.
<< <i>Why should you derisively assume everyone who bought the coins at $1395 was some greedy flipper?
Because, if you only wanted a single set, you would be glad to see that the pricing will be set lower and you would be glad to see that you have a better chance of obtaining a set if the household limit is set to ONE. Any other explanation is irrational.
>>
Another odd thing to say.
Apparently it is irrational to buy two or more of something.
<< <i>Just got a package from APMEX... my annual Christmas popcorn tin and a $5 off coupon! DRAT! I knew that package was too light... >>
Is the tin made of Silver?
Coinfame,Kaelasdad,Type2,UNLVino,MICHAELDIXON
Justacommeman,tydye,78saen,123cents,blue62vette,Segoja,Nibanny
I know that is what the Mint said they would charge the Distibutors, but according to you, the Distributors were not supposed to make any money what so ever.
aficionado, you are correct on that. In fact, the Mint only set a guideline such that the distributors are to sell the coins at prices in line with other bullion.
What you consider bullion may differ from what I consider bullion, but my interpretation is that bullion is sold at a relatively tight spread and at premiums that amount to another $2.00/oz. or so, at these current silver prices. But not at another $20/oz. over spot.
I knew it would happen.
<< <i>
<< <i>Just got a package from APMEX... my annual Christmas popcorn tin and a $5 off coupon! DRAT! I knew that package was too light... >>
Is the tin made of Silver?
Didn't you answer that in your question?
Scroll up. That's not what I said. Don't misquote me.
I knew it would happen.
<< <i>Apparently it is irrational to buy two or more of something.
Scroll up. That's not what I said. Don't misquote me. >>
not in those words, but you did say this:
"you have a better chance of obtaining a set if the household limit is set to ONE. Any other explanation is irrational."
Scroll up. That's not what I said. Don't misquote me.
not in those words, but you did say this:
"you have a better chance of obtaining a set if the household limit is set to ONE. Any other explanation is irrational."
Please quote my entire statement and note the question that I responded to:
<< Why should you derisively assume everyone who bought the coins at $1395 was some greedy flipper?>>
Because, if you only wanted a single set, you would be glad to see that the pricing will be set lower and you would be glad to see that you have a better chance of obtaining a set if the household limit is set to ONE. Any other explanation is irrational.
**If you quote me, please do it in context, and please use the entire statement. Thanks, jmski**
I knew it would happen.
<< <i>Why should you derisively assume everyone who bought the coins at $1395 was some greedy flipper?
Because, if you only wanted a single set, you would be glad to see that the pricing will be set lower and you would be glad to see that you have a better chance of obtaining a set if the household limit is set to ONE. Any other explanation is irrational.
Anyone worried about being gouged could have just complained to the offending seller.
That is an irrational assumption. Apmex has no motivation to drop their prices, in fact they act as if $1,395.00 was doing us a favor of some sort.
I think the combined voices of this board and others directed at Apmex would have done more to fix the problem instead of tarring everyone by "screaming" to the Mint.
Calling people "screamers" and "tarring everyone" is a hysterical tactic used in an attempt to discredit without justification. It is irrational to have sour grapes over the issue of price fairness and distribution fairness unless you planned to exploit the price & distribution in the first place. >>
Me thinks you use the word irrational rashly. Too many assumptions going on here. If your logic is flawless how do you explain that I bought a set and had no plans to flip? Who has determined that the price is going lower? Don't flippers like to buy at lower prices too? Lastly, I do think Apmex would have been pressured to price better if it had a lot of upset customers calling. They have to sell some coins tomorrow.
http://news.coinupdate.com/us-mint-establishes-conditions-for-atb-silver-bullion-coin-distribution-0572/
<< <i>New news from the Mint. I haven't even read it yet.
http://news.coinupdate.com/us-mint-establishes-conditions-for-atb-silver-bullion-coin-distribution-0572/ >>
That's a great news! Let's see what happen. At $850 I could buy one too...
Must sell them ALL....meaning they can't submit them for grading...maybe no cherry picking
<< <i>I wonder if the one per household will retroactively apply to the 1000 sets they already sold. >>
It looks that way....
if prices aren't too insane on eBay I'll likely pick them up there.
1 per household and all are to be sold to the public.
Here's a warning parable for coin collectors...
So the APMEX orders will be filled at that price?
<< <i>anyone know which AP's besides apmex sell to the public? >>
I tried that question already....no response yet
"Most of the US Mint’s primary distributors have not traditionally sold bullion coins to the public in small quantities. Therefore it is possible that some will not purchase their allocation since they are not set up for retail level transactions. In the event that an authorized purchaser does not order their allotment, any excess coins will be available on an allocated basis to remaining active sellers on Monday, December 20, 2010."
And with most new products, probably the 1 per household limit might be withdrawn.
I can't complain to much, since my cc will be credited, but unfortunately, the set that I had earmarked as Christmas presents to family members, just won't materialize.