<< <i>Part of the absurdity is that those who picked up the phone advocating new distribution rules have the nerve to complain now about the obvious chain of events that they created------------------BigE >>
I could not disagree more.
First, I was not so much complaining about the chain of events as I was just marveling at how utterly screwed up this whole thing is. It's really somewhat entertaining. It would be hard for The Mint to have screwed this up so severely even if they had tried specifically to do so.
That said, the original gouging was simply unacceptable. I work WAY to freaking hard to have my tax dollars used via The Mint's and the Legislature's lack of insight and poor planning to result in some totally unfair distribution scheme whereby a few companies profit in the multi-seven figure range just for totally abusing their agreement that they made w/The Mint.
Beyond that, I don't think that the current chain of events was obvious at all. I don't see any posts made prior to the new rules which predicted the current foolishness.
My little rant was just a reflection of my amazement at the Govt's ability to screw things up from the outset.
This abuse of the AP agreement had to be nipped in the bud or it would have never ended and may well have gotten worse.
In the end, we'll all be better our w/o the massive gouging.
I think that, in the end, those on this thread - i.e., likely the most informed people in the nation about this issue - will get their coins and will do so at a far lower cost, for this and future issues, then would have been the case otherwise.
On another note, why are so many of your posts so personally obnoxious and toxic?? This is a hobby for crying out loud.
<< <i>Part of the absurdity is that those who picked up the phone advocating new distribution rules have the nerve to complain now about the obvious chain of events that they created------------------BigE >>
I could not disagree more. The original gouging was simply unacceptable. I work WAY to freaking hard to have my tax dollars used to by The Mint's and the Legislature's lack of insight and poor planning to result in some totally unfair distribution scheme whereby a few companies profit in the multi-seven figure range just for totally abusing the agreement that they made w/The Mint.
Beyond that, I don't think that the current chain of events was obvious at all. I don't see any posts made prior to the new rules which predicted the current foolishness.
My little rant was just a reflection of my amazement at the Govt's ability to screw things up.
This abuse of the AP agreement had to be nipped in the bud or it would have never ended.
In the end, we'll all be better our w/o the massive gouging.
I think that in the end those on this thread - i.e., likely the most informed people in the nation about this issue, will get their coins and will do so at a far lower cost - for this and future issues - than would have been the case otherwise.
Why are so many of your posts so personally obnoxious and toxic?? This is a hobby for crying out loud. >>
This result was predicted over 1500 posts ago, if you didnt read it, your problem
So there would be massive gouging in the future? Guess you think they will be making issues of 30,000 again?
Personally, I find whining about rules that have worked just fine for 20 years obnoxious
How could you not see what would happen by advocating household limits upon Authorized Purchasers that have no retail outlets?---------BigE
<< <i>Part of the absurdity is that those who picked up the phone advocating new distribution rules have the nerve to complain now about the obvious chain of events that they created------------------BigE >>
I could not disagree more. The original gouging was simply unacceptable. I work WAY to freaking hard to have my tax dollars used to by The Mint's and the Legislature's lack of insight and poor planning to result in some totally unfair distribution scheme whereby a few companies profit in the multi-seven figure range just for totally abusing the agreement that they made w/The Mint.
Beyond that, I don't think that the current chain of events was obvious at all. I don't see any posts made prior to the new rules which predicted the current foolishness.
My little rant was just a reflection of my amazement at the Govt's ability to screw things up.
This abuse of the AP agreement had to be nipped in the bud or it would have never ended.
In the end, we'll all be better our w/o the massive gouging.
I think that in the end those on this thread - i.e., likely the most informed people in the nation about this issue, will get their coins and will do so at a far lower cost - for this and future issues - than would have been the case otherwise.
Why are so many of your posts so personally obnoxious and toxic?? This is a hobby for crying out loud. >>
This result was predicted over 1500 posts ago, if you didnt read it, your problem
So there would be massive gouging in the future? Guess you think they will be making issues of 30,000 again???
Personally, I find whining about rules that have worked just fine for 20 years obnoxious
How could you not see what would happen by advocating household limits upon Authorized Purchasers that have no retail outlets?---------BigE >>
What on G-d's Earth are you talking about??
Who knows what will be in the future? Just because The Mint screwed up the once means that they won't again???
The rules may have worked for 20 years w/bullion w/essentially unlimited mintage. They clearly didn't work with these. The fact that these rules HAVE worked is irrelevant now that they so glaringly DO NOT - at least for this issue.
Can you kindly copy the post(s) that appears over 1500 posts ago which predicted this?
<< IMHO, the mint cannot interrupt what is going on at this point, but who knows what they will do in the future. Bound to mess up and make things even easier for the savvy collector ------------------BigE >>
Why not? Everything was a pre-sale. Product can't be delivered so all pre-sales effectively cancelled. >>
Because they would cause a legal mess, a logistic mess ad create havoc, and how could they remedy by the legal deadline 3 weeks away? --------------BigE
I think we are both aggravated with the system. I would rather have paid the 1395 and got my coins a week ago. You thought you could get them for less and probably will, but because of that this mess is to be expected. Have a good night--------------------BigE
<< IMHO, the mint cannot interrupt what is going on at this point, but who knows what they will do in the future. Bound to mess up and make things even easier for the savvy collector ------------------BigE >>
Why not? Everything was a pre-sale. Product can't be delivered so all pre-sales effectively cancelled. >>
Because they would cause a legal mess, a logistic mess ad create havoc, and how could they remedy by the legal deadline 3 weeks away? --------------BigE >>
I don't see where "this result" - i.e., the specifics of the current situation, are predicted above. The first quote seems contradictory. It ends with "...bound to mess up and make things even easier for the savvy collector."
Again, who was advocating for the HH limits?? I must have missed that post as well. Surely it is over 1500 posts back...
APMEX has not canceled the pre-sales (assuming that you're talking about APMEX and not Ebay pre-sellers). I think that they will still be honored, except likely at the 1 / HH limit.
How could they remedy? Simply enforce the markup (or the concept of what is an acceptable markup) in the AP agreement and leave the rest alone. Doesn't seem too complex.
Edited to add: I didn't see your last post prior to my posting this one. I can certainly understand your sentiments as stated above in your last post. Have a good night as well.
I have not weighed in on this, FUBAR is right, from the perspective of the customer, however, saying it's a poor business decision to sell a single coin of a hot item, because of lack of a retail market for any of the dealers, is naive. First off, its not hard to do web based retail sales, ok, it's not. Second, if you wanted to do retail, what would be better, 3000 names (set sales) or 15,000? I am a business owner and think that it's not a bad idea, if my goal was to get a retail market and grow my business, in fact I could not ask for a better opportunity to build a retail market. Look at it from the other side, a more than five fold customer base, whats not to like?
<< <i>Part of the absurdity is that those who picked up the phone advocating new distribution rules have the nerve to complain now about the obvious chain of events that they created------------------BigE >>
leave me out of this one.
I'm thinking either Fidelitrade doesn't understand the directives, or maybe they do and that's just how they want to sell them.
If they want to sell them 1 at a time, I guess that's the way it is.
<< <i>If they want to sell them 1 at a time, I guess that's the way it is. >>
Good morning everyone! If they want to sell them one at a time, I don't think they'll sell out, not in a million years. They're going to get stuck with quite a few Arkansas bidets and maybe a few Mt. Hoods. The other three should do ok - I'll have to decide whether I want another Yosemite or Grand Canyon. FWIW, the Yosemite, GC and Jellystone pucks seem to have been garnering a premium over the others on Ebay pre-sales.
<< Part of the absurdity is that those who picked up the phone advocating new distribution rules have the nerve to complain now about the obvious chain of events that they created------------------BigE >>
I could not disagree more.
I could disagree more, and I did! We've been through that, and BigE doesn't get it that the authorizing legislation was ignored, so the Mint changed its policy in response and that's when people got pissed. They only got pissed because someone else demanded fairness in a screwed-up situation. Obviously, more people wanted the fairness than not. It wasn't just this website - every other coin website had an overwhelming negative reaction to Apmex's price gouging and the fallout from it.
I won't get the 3 sets I wanted. I might have gone for even 5 sets if the Mint hadn't screwed this up, so I was affected every bit as much as the poor old flippers who can't target these coins now. But, BigE - you haven't seen me complain about it once. Did I mention that you were **wrong** in your comments? (see your comments, above)
On the other hand, it's going to take the opportunistic, greedy, non-collecting price scalpers alot more work to benefit at someone else's expense now. Not my problem. At least the distribution will be somewhat fair. If the price runs up, it won't be because the flippers are first in, first out - leaving the collectors to pay through the nose.
Part of the enjoyment I find in Modern Bullion is in picking a winner. I pay my hard-earned money in order to speculate on what might be a good investment, based on good information and good analysis. Most people enjoy that sort of thing, especially when it works out. There was no picking or analysis involved here. Just greed, especially on the parts of those who wanted to be FIRST IN at any price because they wanted to EXPLOIT the initial price spike and get out quickly in order to take their money and run. Of course, everyone else loses in that scenario, but that is not their concern. And then, they have "the nerve" to start calling people names for having demanded fairness. Step back and see what you are saying for a minute. It truly is about fairness.
In addition, this is (at least partly) a collector issue, is it not? As a speculator or investor, I don't get to play now. Fine, I'm a big boy and I will find another speculation or investment. As a collector, I agree with Raufus - this hasn't done much to persuade me to collect these coins. Why collect a set that is limited by an artificial supply constraint for the first issues? It relegates the rest of the series to bullion status. Oh, wait - maybe that was the intention of the Mint? Maybe this was all in the plan to make sure that these weren't hoarded! Well, as far as I'm concerned the plan is working so far.
Q: Are You Printing Money? Bernanke: Not Literally
The new Coins n Things (not the Canadian imposter!) website now has am image of the 5 pucks and a note that they will be accepting orders beginning Jan 3.
And I hope the APs all wait to sell these until AFTER January 1...after all, it's not like we'll have any other holiday distractions between now and then.
<< <i>The new Coins n Things (not the Canadian imposter!) website now has am image of the 5 pucks and a note that they will be accepting orders beginning Jan 3.
1) The few AP's that are retail selling do not want the extra workload during the holiday week between Christmas and New Years, and/or
2) They want to push their profits from the sale of ATB's into a new calendar year thus delaying increased tax liabilities for another year.
"In the absence of the gold standard, there is no way to protect savings from confiscation through inflation [...] Gold stands in the way of this insidious process. It stands as a protector of property rights." - Alan Greenspan
<< <i>The new Coins n Things (not the Canadian imposter!) website now has am image of the 5 pucks and a note that they will be accepting orders beginning Jan 3.
1) The few AP's that are retail selling do not want the extra workload during the holiday week between Christmas and New Years, and/or
2) They want to push their profits from the sale of ATB's into a new calendar year thus delaying increased tax liabilities for another year. >>
nah... the real reason is to keep all you kids occupied with this stupid azz thread and off the streets...
Re: Slabbed coins - There are some coins that LIVE within clear plastic and wear their labels with pride... while there are others that HIDE behind scratched plastic and are simply dragged along by a label. Then there are those coins that simply hang out, naked and free
<< The new Coins n Things (not the Canadian imposter!) website now has am image of the 5 pucks and a note that they will be accepting orders beginning Jan 3. http://atb.cntofma.com/ >> Maybe the reasons for the delayed sale date are: 1) The few AP's that are retail selling do not want the extra workload during the holiday week between Christmas and New Years, and/or 2) They want to push their profits from the sale of ATB's into a new calendar year thus delaying increased tax liabilities for another year. >>
In addition to the possibilities above...
As I understand it, they do/did not have a web site. They need some time to have it developed.
They are launching the site the same day the Coins go on sale.
Positive transactions with Cladiator, Meltdown, ajbauman, LeeG, route66,DennisH,Hmann,FilamCoins,mgoodm3,terburn88,MrOrganic, weg,dcarr,guitarwes,Zubie,Barndog,wondercoin,braddick,etc...
Ladies and gentlemen, let us all take a deep beath, let it out, and relax. This is not the end of the world we are talking about here. Try to keep some perspective. They are just coins. Please keep the anger in a little box up in your personal attic. TD
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
<< <i>Ladies and gentlemen, let us all take a deep beath, let it out, and relax. This is not the end of the world we are talking about here. Try to keep some perspective. They are just coins. Please keep the anger in a little box up in your personal attic. TD >>
I keep trying to take a deep "beath," but my brain don't know what to do?
"Bongo drive 1984 Lincoln that looks like old coin dug from ground."
That Debbie Bradley sure has a fine-looking picture on her column!
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
Don't want to read the entire thread -- I may not live that long. Has anyone suggested yet that we contact Dan Carr and have him produce a bunch of these? He might give the Mint a run for their money on quality, and the distribution system won't be 20 pages long.
Tom, I did what you said, took a deep beath, but they made me give it back.
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
According to Dave Harper's column today, 7 of the APs have now ordered their full 3000 set allotments from the mint:
<< <i>Today is the deadline by which each of the Mint’s 11 authorized purchasers must make their intentions known as to whether they will take their 3,000-set allotment. As of yesterday, seven said they would. >>
<< <i><< Part of the absurdity is that those who picked up the phone advocating new distribution rules have the nerve to complain now about the obvious chain of events that they created------------------BigE >>
I could not disagree more.
I could disagree more, and I did! We've been through that, and BigE doesn't get it that the authorizing legislation was ignored, so the Mint changed its policy in response and that's when people got pissed. They only got pissed because someone else demanded fairness in a screwed-up situation. Obviously, more people wanted the fairness than not. It wasn't just this website - every other coin website had an overwhelming negative reaction to Apmex's price gouging and the fallout from it.
I won't get the 3 sets I wanted. I might have gone for even 5 sets if the Mint hadn't screwed this up, so I was affected every bit as much as the poor old flippers who can't target these coins now. But, BigE - you haven't seen me complain about it once. Did I mention that you were **wrong** in your comments? (see your comments, above)
On the other hand, it's going to take the opportunistic, greedy, non-collecting price scalpers alot more work to benefit at someone else's expense now. Not my problem. At least the distribution will be somewhat fair. If the price runs up, it won't be because the flippers are first in, first out - leaving the collectors to pay through the nose.
Part of the enjoyment I find in Modern Bullion is in picking a winner. I pay my hard-earned money in order to speculate on what might be a good investment, based on good information and good analysis. Most people enjoy that sort of thing, especially when it works out. There was no picking or analysis involved here. Just greed, especially on the parts of those who wanted to be FIRST IN at any price because they wanted to EXPLOIT the initial price spike and get out quickly in order to take their money and run. Of course, everyone else loses in that scenario, but that is not their concern. And then, they have "the nerve" to start calling people names for having demanded fairness. Step back and see what you are saying for a minute. It truly is about fairness.
In addition, this is (at least partly) a collector issue, is it not? As a speculator or investor, I don't get to play now. Fine, I'm a big boy and I will find another speculation or investment. As a collector, I agree with Raufus - this hasn't done much to persuade me to collect these coins. Why collect a set that is limited by an artificial supply constraint for the first issues? It relegates the rest of the series to bullion status. Oh, wait - maybe that was the intention of the Mint? Maybe this was all in the plan to make sure that these weren't hoarded! Well, as far as I'm concerned the plan is working so far. >>
The mint screws up and creates a rarity, so, "in fairness" they must be made affordable and be widely distributed, lol
I am not a flipper, and all I have said all along is exactly what is written in the Numismatic news article above. Some may say its worth the 400. bucks, my opinion is it isn't. The "new rules" people advocated caused this additional mess and wont change the end price to collectors anyway, period, end of discussion.
jmski52, you have my position on this all messed up--------BigE
<<The mint screws up and creates a rarity, so, "in fairness" they must be made affordable and be widely distributed, lol>>
Except that the spirit (and probably letter) of the existing Mint rules regarding fair and equitable distribution by the APs directly to the public were not being followed.
Let's put this another way...let's say all the APs got together and bought the entire supply of 2010 silver bullion eagles and decided to melt them all down, except for...let's say 10,000 coins. Then they took this newly created rarity and tried to re-sell them for $10,000/coin...do you think the Mint might take issue with that process? I bet they would.
I think this was a simple case of attempted market manipulation...and they got called on it...and everyone who now gets a coin...or five...for considerably less (and that would be people like us), will benefit. So what's the downside here...unless you're a disappointed flipper or a burned re-seller?
Dealers Confused by New America the Beautiful Sale Rules By Debbie Bradley, Numismatic News - December 16, 2010 This article was originally printed in Numismatic News. >> Subscribe today!
Dealers say new rules imposed by the U.S. Mint on the sale of 5-ounce silver bullion coins are far from clear.
“I think there is some question on exactly how those rules apply, and we don’t have answers to the questions,” said Michael Haynes, CEO of American Precious Metals Exchange, one of 11 companies authorized by the Mint to sell the new America the Beautiful coins. APMEX has ordered 3,000 sets, the maximum allowed per distributor. “We have ordered them. That’s good. We’re players, but we need to understand the rules,” Haynes said.
New rules say the authorized companies can only sell one coin of each design to a household to ensure wide distribution of coins to the public. And they are to be sold according to a price structure set by the Mint.
“We understand we can sell one coin, but we don’t know what public means,” Haynes said. “We think it means citizens of the United States, but we are awaiting further clarification.”
The new rules just won’t work, said Ross Hansen, CEO of Northwest Territorial Mint, which sells bullion coins, but is not one of the 11 authorized purchasers. “The U.S. Mint has made a mess of this,” Hansen said. There are 11 authorized purchasers of the 5-ounce coins, but all but one of them are wholesalers, he said. They aren’t set up to sell individual orders to the public. Then there’s the matter of price fixing, Hansen said. The Mint said the authorized purchasers can’t sell the coins for more than 10 percent above the price at which they acquire them from the Mint. “But this is bullion and price fluctuates with the price of bullion,” Hansen said. “So they’re trying to enforce a fixed cost with a commodity whose price is always in flux.”
An authorized purchaser who ordered the coins when they were first offered on Dec. 10 would pay the Dec. 13 bullion price of $29.33 an ounce for the coins. That would put the cost of a set of five coins, one of each design, at $782 when the $9.75 per coin premium set by the Mint is added in. Add to that the 10 percent markup allowed to the distributors and it puts the cost for each set at $860.20 plus shipping.
“You can give manufacturers a suggested retail price, but you can’t control what your retailers ultimately sell their product for,” Hansen said. “I can’t do that as a wholesaler and neither can the U.S. Mint. But the Mint does, and that’s just arrogance, Hansen said. “They don’t communicate well with their retailers,” Hansen said. “They just say, this is the way it is. They don’t make partners out of their distributors and retailers, and that’s what they need to do, make them viable partners.” Hansen said this confusion could have been solved with a 10-minute conversation between all involved. “But they’re not working with their authorized purchasers as true partners,” Hansen said. “That’s one reason I’ve never signed up with them. They’re such pain in the rear ends to deal with.”
The new sales rules are “ridiculous,” said Bill Hodges, owner of Southern Coin Investments in Atlanta, Ga., who sells numismatic and bullion coins. “I strongly feel that some distributors won’t handle them at all, and I don’t blame them,” he said. It’s tantamount to price fixing, Hodges said. When dealers were first allowed to place orders with the 11 distributors, Hodges signed up for 20 sets at $1,500 each from one wholesaler. But that deal no longer is valid because of the Mint’s new rules. Hodges called Mint officials and told them that if the Mint wants wide distribution of the coins, restricting coins to the 11 authorized purchasers isn’t the way to do it. “They are shutting out our company and hundreds of companies around the country,” Hodges said. “We’re getting calls from hundreds of people, and we keep telling them, we can’t help you.” That’s what is really frustrating, Hodges said. “The U.S. Mint needs to employ some people with business and marketing experience to help decide the best means of doing distribution,” Hansen said. The current plan isn’t working, he said. “We have 35,000 people in our database, which means we could distribute the coins widely, but we have no opportunity, Hodges said. “What I hate the most is all the people who call us and we can’t help.” =================================================================================
And regarding the previous post...so the APs are suddenly losing their ability to read and understand contract terms and the English language...DO YOU HEAR ME LAUGHING OUT LOUD?
It's great to see bullion dealers now acting like typically sleazy bankers and Wall Street types..."Oh these rules are bad...they can't work...I can't make my 50% profit...oh this is Socialism...I won't be able to buy my new BMW this year"
What crap...just suck it up and sell the da*n coins with the 10% mark-up, plus shipping!
Another for Jan 3 - just posted on the Dillon Gage website:
<< <i>NOTICE ABOUT AMERICA THE BEAUTIFUL 5 OUNCE SILVER COINS: We have placed our order through the United States Mint in accordance with their guidelines. All Mint orders are subject to approval. If confirmed by the Mint, we expect to begin pricing and accepting orders January 3, 2011. If more information becomes available before then, we will post it on this website. >>
<< <i>Why do I think they are ALL waiting for 2011 to sell these beasts???
There has to be a reason..... >>
Couple of reasons.
As of now, they don't know if they will be getting 3,000 sets, or 7/11ths of 33,000 sets, or what. Why send the armored car to pick up 3,000 sets and then be told to come back next week for an addional 1,700+ sets? Just wait and get them all at the same time.
By waiting until January, they can pick them up along with their 2011-dated gold and silver eagles.
TD
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
<< <i>Why do I think they are ALL waiting for 2011 to sell these beasts???
There has to be a reason..... >>
Couple of reasons.
As of now, they don't know if they will be getting 3,000 sets, or 7/11ths of 33,000 sets, or what. Why send the armored car to pick up 3,000 sets and then be told to come back next week for an addional 1,700+ sets? Just wait and get them all at the same time.
By waiting until January, they can pick them up along with their 2011-dated gold and silver eagles.
TD >>
But, but but............they are going to allow the notorious Flipper Gang time to mastermind a raid on The Armored Puck Transport convoy---------------BigE
I wonder also if the AP's are waiting until after the first of the year so that they can be sure the Mint doesn't announce a surprise last-minute mintage.
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
Sounds like they're pissed that the USM actually made them follow a code of ethics and are now dragging their feet like kindergarteners.
APs: Just mark up 10% from whatever the mint charged you, put some sort of rudimentary household limit code into your database and ship 'em out. Enough is enough.
Successful transactions with keepdachange, tizofthe, adriana, wondercoin
<< <i>Why do I think they are ALL waiting for 2011 to sell these beasts???
There has to be a reason..... >>
Because they are going to tell the Mint to get stuffed, they will sell them at market. The Mint will scream, but what can they do? Demand they return the coins? OK, then the sets are "un-sold", it is 2011, and the Mint cannot sell the puckers. So the Mint melts them...
The unclaimed pucks can be purchased by the AP that want them starting Monday the 20th.
So figure all next week for the mint to have all the orders and the pucks ready to go.
Then figure the week of the 27th for the AP's to get them, get organized, whatever. Toss in a couple Holiday's and
BOOM, Jan 3rd.
Of course, considering APMEX already is set up and has good orders, they might be ready to go. However, they'll have to figure out how to cross reference the HH limit, although that shouldn't be to tough.
<< <i>The Mint will scream, but what can they do? >>
Dump them as an AP, that's what the mint can do. Then they lose their privileged status as an AGE and ASE wholesaler - surely a much bigger and more important part of their business than a micro-allotment of pucks. There is nothing nefarious going on, so all conspiracy buffs can take a rest. The simple fact is that all but one or two of the APs were strictly wholesalers and had no retail arms before this - it takes time to set up. Couple this with the fact that we are in the holiday season when typically very little new development gets done (speaking from experience of 25 years in software), and you have your delay. Lastly, as others have stated, they are all probably waiting until after the final distribution of the remainder on the 20th so they only have to send the Brinks truck once.
Comments
<< <i>Part of the absurdity is that those who picked up the phone advocating new distribution rules have the nerve to complain now about the obvious chain of events that they created
I could not disagree more.
First, I was not so much complaining about the chain of events as I was just marveling at how utterly screwed up this whole thing is. It's really somewhat entertaining. It would be hard for The Mint to have screwed this up so severely even if they had tried specifically to do so.
That said, the original gouging was simply unacceptable. I work WAY to freaking hard to have my tax dollars used via The Mint's and the Legislature's lack of insight and poor planning to result in some totally unfair distribution scheme whereby a few companies profit in the multi-seven figure range just for totally abusing their agreement that they made w/The Mint.
Beyond that, I don't think that the current chain of events was obvious at all. I don't see any posts made prior to the new rules which predicted the current foolishness.
My little rant was just a reflection of my amazement at the Govt's ability to screw things up from the outset.
This abuse of the AP agreement had to be nipped in the bud or it would have never ended and may well have gotten worse.
In the end, we'll all be better our w/o the massive gouging.
I think that, in the end, those on this thread - i.e., likely the most informed people in the nation about this issue - will get their coins and will do so at a far lower cost, for this and future issues, then would have been the case otherwise.
On another note, why are so many of your posts so personally obnoxious and toxic?? This is a hobby for crying out loud.
wait for it....
swizzle styx
"Keep your malarkey filter in good operating order" -Walter Breen
<< <i>
<< <i>Part of the absurdity is that those who picked up the phone advocating new distribution rules have the nerve to complain now about the obvious chain of events that they created
I could not disagree more. The original gouging was simply unacceptable. I work WAY to freaking hard to have my tax dollars used to by The Mint's and the Legislature's lack of insight and poor planning to result in some totally unfair distribution scheme whereby a few companies profit in the multi-seven figure range just for totally abusing the agreement that they made w/The Mint.
Beyond that, I don't think that the current chain of events was obvious at all. I don't see any posts made prior to the new rules which predicted the current foolishness.
My little rant was just a reflection of my amazement at the Govt's ability to screw things up.
This abuse of the AP agreement had to be nipped in the bud or it would have never ended.
In the end, we'll all be better our w/o the massive gouging.
I think that in the end those on this thread - i.e., likely the most informed people in the nation about this issue, will get their coins and will do so at a far lower cost - for this and future issues - than would have been the case otherwise.
Why are so many of your posts so personally obnoxious and toxic?? This is a hobby for crying out loud. >>
This result was predicted over 1500 posts ago, if you didnt read it, your problem
So there would be massive gouging in the future? Guess you think they will be making issues of 30,000 again?
Personally, I find whining about rules that have worked just fine for 20 years obnoxious
How could you not see what would happen by advocating household limits upon Authorized Purchasers that have no retail outlets?---------BigE
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>Part of the absurdity is that those who picked up the phone advocating new distribution rules have the nerve to complain now about the obvious chain of events that they created
I could not disagree more. The original gouging was simply unacceptable. I work WAY to freaking hard to have my tax dollars used to by The Mint's and the Legislature's lack of insight and poor planning to result in some totally unfair distribution scheme whereby a few companies profit in the multi-seven figure range just for totally abusing the agreement that they made w/The Mint.
Beyond that, I don't think that the current chain of events was obvious at all. I don't see any posts made prior to the new rules which predicted the current foolishness.
My little rant was just a reflection of my amazement at the Govt's ability to screw things up.
This abuse of the AP agreement had to be nipped in the bud or it would have never ended.
In the end, we'll all be better our w/o the massive gouging.
I think that in the end those on this thread - i.e., likely the most informed people in the nation about this issue, will get their coins and will do so at a far lower cost - for this and future issues - than would have been the case otherwise.
Why are so many of your posts so personally obnoxious and toxic?? This is a hobby for crying out loud. >>
This result was predicted over 1500 posts ago, if you didnt read it, your problem
So there would be massive gouging in the future? Guess you think they will be making issues of 30,000 again???
Personally, I find whining about rules that have worked just fine for 20 years obnoxious
How could you not see what would happen by advocating household limits upon Authorized Purchasers that have no retail outlets?---------BigE >>
What on G-d's Earth are you talking about??
Who knows what will be in the future? Just because The Mint screwed up the once means that they won't again???
The rules may have worked for 20 years w/bullion w/essentially unlimited mintage. They clearly didn't work with these. The fact that these rules HAVE worked is irrelevant now that they so glaringly DO NOT - at least for this issue.
Can you kindly copy the post(s) that appears over 1500 posts ago which predicted this?
Who advocated for AP household limits?
<< IMHO, the mint cannot interrupt what is going on at this point, but who knows what they will do in the future. Bound to mess up and make things even easier for the savvy collector ------------------BigE >>
Why not? Everything was a pre-sale. Product can't be delivered so all pre-sales effectively cancelled. >>
Because they would cause a legal mess, a logistic mess ad create havoc, and how could they remedy by the legal deadline 3 weeks away? --------------BigE
<< <i>Here you go:
<< IMHO, the mint cannot interrupt what is going on at this point, but who knows what they will do in the future. Bound to mess up and make things even easier for the savvy collector ------------------BigE >>
Why not? Everything was a pre-sale. Product can't be delivered so all pre-sales effectively cancelled. >>
Because they would cause a legal mess, a logistic mess ad create havoc, and how could they remedy by the legal deadline 3 weeks away? --------------BigE >>
I don't see where "this result" - i.e., the specifics of the current situation, are predicted above. The first quote seems contradictory. It ends with "...bound to mess up and make things even easier for the savvy collector."
Again, who was advocating for the HH limits?? I must have missed that post as well. Surely it is over 1500 posts back...
APMEX has not canceled the pre-sales (assuming that you're talking about APMEX and not Ebay pre-sellers). I think that they will still be honored, except likely at the 1 / HH limit.
How could they remedy? Simply enforce the markup (or the concept of what is an acceptable markup) in the AP agreement and leave the rest alone. Doesn't seem too complex.
Edited to add: I didn't see your last post prior to my posting this one. I can certainly understand your sentiments as stated above in your last post. Have a good night as well.
<< <i>I have not contributed to this epic thread so, here it is....
wait for it....
swizzle styx >>
I thought you were going to say tulips.
if they want to do that, do it on their own time and dime.
follow the rules. 1 set per HH.
no more bs.
they just lost a customer.
<< <i>Part of the absurdity is that those who picked up the phone advocating new distribution rules have the nerve to complain now about the obvious chain of events that they created
leave me out of this one.
I'm thinking either Fidelitrade doesn't understand the directives, or maybe they do and that's just how they want to sell them.
If they want to sell them 1 at a time, I guess that's the way it is.
<< <i>If they want to sell them 1 at a time, I guess that's the way it is. >>
Good morning everyone! If they want to sell them one at a time, I don't think they'll sell out, not in a million years. They're going to get stuck with quite a few Arkansas bidets and maybe a few Mt. Hoods. The other three should do ok - I'll have to decide whether I want another Yosemite or Grand Canyon. FWIW, the Yosemite, GC and Jellystone pucks seem to have been garnering a premium over the others on Ebay pre-sales.
mbogoman
https://pcgs.com/setregistry/collectors-showcase/classic-issues-colonials-through-1964/zambezi-collection-trade-dollars/7345Asesabi Lutho
I could not disagree more.
I could disagree more, and I did! We've been through that, and BigE doesn't get it that the authorizing legislation was ignored, so the Mint changed its policy in response and that's when people got pissed. They only got pissed because someone else demanded fairness in a screwed-up situation. Obviously, more people wanted the fairness than not. It wasn't just this website - every other coin website had an overwhelming negative reaction to Apmex's price gouging and the fallout from it.
I won't get the 3 sets I wanted. I might have gone for even 5 sets if the Mint hadn't screwed this up, so I was affected every bit as much as the poor old flippers who can't target these coins now. But, BigE - you haven't seen me complain about it once. Did I mention that you were **wrong** in your comments? (see your comments, above)
On the other hand, it's going to take the opportunistic, greedy, non-collecting price scalpers alot more work to benefit at someone else's expense now. Not my problem. At least the distribution will be somewhat fair. If the price runs up, it won't be because the flippers are first in, first out - leaving the collectors to pay through the nose.
Part of the enjoyment I find in Modern Bullion is in picking a winner. I pay my hard-earned money in order to speculate on what might be a good investment, based on good information and good analysis. Most people enjoy that sort of thing, especially when it works out. There was no picking or analysis involved here. Just greed, especially on the parts of those who wanted to be FIRST IN at any price because they wanted to EXPLOIT the initial price spike and get out quickly in order to take their money and run. Of course, everyone else loses in that scenario, but that is not their concern. And then, they have "the nerve" to start calling people names for having demanded fairness. Step back and see what you are saying for a minute. It truly is about fairness.
In addition, this is (at least partly) a collector issue, is it not? As a speculator or investor, I don't get to play now. Fine, I'm a big boy and I will find another speculation or investment. As a collector, I agree with Raufus - this hasn't done much to persuade me to collect these coins. Why collect a set that is limited by an artificial supply constraint for the first issues? It relegates the rest of the series to bullion status. Oh, wait - maybe that was the intention of the Mint? Maybe this was all in the plan to make sure that these weren't hoarded! Well, as far as I'm concerned the plan is working so far.
I knew it would happen.
http://atb.cntofma.com/
mbogoman
https://pcgs.com/setregistry/collectors-showcase/classic-issues-colonials-through-1964/zambezi-collection-trade-dollars/7345Asesabi Lutho
<< <i>The new Coins n Things (not the Canadian imposter!) website now has am image of the 5 pucks and a note that they will be accepting orders beginning Jan 3.
http://atb.cntofma.com/ >>
Maybe the reasons for the delayed sale date are:
1) The few AP's that are retail selling do not want the extra workload during the holiday week between Christmas and New Years, and/or
2) They want to push their profits from the sale of ATB's into a new calendar year thus delaying increased tax liabilities for another year.
<< <i>
<< <i>The new Coins n Things (not the Canadian imposter!) website now has am image of the 5 pucks and a note that they will be accepting orders beginning Jan 3.
http://atb.cntofma.com/ >>
Maybe the reasons for the delayed sale date are:
1) The few AP's that are retail selling do not want the extra workload during the holiday week between Christmas and New Years, and/or
2) They want to push their profits from the sale of ATB's into a new calendar year thus delaying increased tax liabilities for another year. >>
nah... the real reason is to keep all you kids occupied with this stupid azz thread and off the streets...
From the Coin Network:
NGC Giant slabs
In addition to the possibilities above...
As I understand it, they do/did not have a web site. They need some time to have it developed.
They are launching the site the same day the Coins go on sale.
This is not the end of the world we are talking about here. Try to keep some perspective.
They are just coins. Please keep the anger in a little box up in your personal attic.
TD
<< <i>Ladies and gentlemen, let us all take a deep beath, let it out, and relax.
This is not the end of the world we are talking about here. Try to keep some perspective.
They are just coins. Please keep the anger in a little box up in your personal attic.
TD >>
I keep trying to take a deep "beath," but my brain don't know what to do?
<< <i>interesting article Numismaster Article >>
More info in that article than APMEX has released in the last two weeks.
<< <i>interesting article Numismaster Article >>
That Debbie Bradley sure has a fine-looking picture on her column!
we contact Dan Carr and have him produce a bunch of these? He might give the Mint a run for their
money on quality, and the distribution system won't be 20 pages long.
Tom, I did what you said, took a deep beath, but they made me give it back.
<< <i>
<< <i>interesting article Numismaster Article >>
That Debbie Bradley sure has a fine-looking picture on her column!
Wowzer!!
<< <i>
<< <i>interesting article Numismaster Article >>
That Debbie Bradley sure has a fine-looking picture on her column!
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>interesting article Numismaster Article >>
That Debbie Bradley sure has a fine-looking picture on her column!
She is a handsome man!
<< <i>interesting article Numismaster Article >>
Looks like Hansen has some sour grapes.
<< <i>
<< <i>interesting article Numismaster Article >>
Looks like Hansen has some sour grapes.
Is he one of the Hansen Brothers?
Could explain his puck envy!!!!
<< <i>Today is the deadline by which each of the Mint’s 11 authorized purchasers must make their intentions known as to whether they will take their 3,000-set allotment. As of yesterday, seven said they would. >>
http://blog.numismaticnews.net/buzz/2010/12/17/VisionsOfSilverProfitsDanceInTheirHeads.aspx
mbogoman
https://pcgs.com/setregistry/collectors-showcase/classic-issues-colonials-through-1964/zambezi-collection-trade-dollars/7345Asesabi Lutho
<< <i><< Part of the absurdity is that those who picked up the phone advocating new distribution rules have the nerve to complain now about the obvious chain of events that they created------------------BigE >>
I could not disagree more.
I could disagree more, and I did! We've been through that, and BigE doesn't get it that the authorizing legislation was ignored, so the Mint changed its policy in response and that's when people got pissed. They only got pissed because someone else demanded fairness in a screwed-up situation. Obviously, more people wanted the fairness than not. It wasn't just this website - every other coin website had an overwhelming negative reaction to Apmex's price gouging and the fallout from it.
I won't get the 3 sets I wanted. I might have gone for even 5 sets if the Mint hadn't screwed this up, so I was affected every bit as much as the poor old flippers who can't target these coins now. But, BigE - you haven't seen me complain about it once. Did I mention that you were **wrong** in your comments? (see your comments, above)
On the other hand, it's going to take the opportunistic, greedy, non-collecting price scalpers alot more work to benefit at someone else's expense now. Not my problem. At least the distribution will be somewhat fair. If the price runs up, it won't be because the flippers are first in, first out - leaving the collectors to pay through the nose.
Part of the enjoyment I find in Modern Bullion is in picking a winner. I pay my hard-earned money in order to speculate on what might be a good investment, based on good information and good analysis. Most people enjoy that sort of thing, especially when it works out. There was no picking or analysis involved here. Just greed, especially on the parts of those who wanted to be FIRST IN at any price because they wanted to EXPLOIT the initial price spike and get out quickly in order to take their money and run. Of course, everyone else loses in that scenario, but that is not their concern. And then, they have "the nerve" to start calling people names for having demanded fairness. Step back and see what you are saying for a minute. It truly is about fairness.
In addition, this is (at least partly) a collector issue, is it not? As a speculator or investor, I don't get to play now. Fine, I'm a big boy and I will find another speculation or investment. As a collector, I agree with Raufus - this hasn't done much to persuade me to collect these coins. Why collect a set that is limited by an artificial supply constraint for the first issues? It relegates the rest of the series to bullion status. Oh, wait - maybe that was the intention of the Mint? Maybe this was all in the plan to make sure that these weren't hoarded! Well, as far as I'm concerned the plan is working so far.
The mint screws up and creates a rarity, so, "in fairness" they must be made affordable and be widely distributed, lol
I am not a flipper, and all I have said all along is exactly what is written in the Numismatic news article above. Some may say its worth the 400. bucks, my opinion is it isn't. The "new rules" people advocated caused this additional mess and wont change the end price to collectors anyway, period, end of discussion.
jmski52, you have my position on this all messed up
Except that the spirit (and probably letter) of the existing Mint rules regarding fair and equitable distribution by the APs directly to the public were not being followed.
Let's put this another way...let's say all the APs got together and bought the entire supply of 2010 silver bullion eagles and decided to melt them all down, except for...let's say 10,000 coins. Then they took this newly created rarity and tried to re-sell them for $10,000/coin...do you think the Mint might take issue with that process? I bet they would.
I think this was a simple case of attempted market manipulation...and they got called on it...and everyone who now gets a coin...or five...for considerably less (and that would be people like us), will benefit. So what's the downside here...unless you're a disappointed flipper or a burned re-seller?
<< <i>interesting article Numismaster Article >>
Dealers Confused by New America the Beautiful Sale Rules
By Debbie Bradley, Numismatic News - December 16, 2010
This article was originally printed in Numismatic News. >> Subscribe today!
Dealers say new rules imposed by the U.S. Mint on the sale of 5-ounce silver bullion coins are far from clear.
“I think there is some question on exactly how those rules apply, and we don’t have answers to the questions,”
said Michael Haynes, CEO of American Precious Metals Exchange, one of 11 companies authorized by the Mint
to sell the new America the Beautiful coins. APMEX has ordered 3,000 sets, the maximum allowed per distributor.
“We have ordered them. That’s good. We’re players, but we need to understand the rules,” Haynes said.
New rules say the authorized companies can only sell one coin of each design to a household to ensure wide
distribution of coins to the public. And they are to be sold according to a price structure set by the Mint.
“We understand we can sell one coin, but we don’t know what public means,” Haynes said.
“We think it means citizens of the United States, but we are awaiting further clarification.”
The new rules just won’t work, said Ross Hansen, CEO of Northwest Territorial Mint,
which sells bullion coins, but is not one of the 11 authorized purchasers. “The U.S.
Mint has made a mess of this,” Hansen said. There are 11 authorized purchasers of
the 5-ounce coins, but all but one of them are wholesalers, he said. They aren’t set
up to sell individual orders to the public. Then there’s the matter of price fixing,
Hansen said. The Mint said the authorized purchasers can’t sell the coins for more
than 10 percent above the price at which they acquire them from the Mint. “But this
is bullion and price fluctuates with the price of bullion,” Hansen said. “So they’re
trying to enforce a fixed cost with a commodity whose price is always in flux.”
An authorized purchaser who ordered the coins when they were first offered on Dec. 10
would pay the Dec. 13 bullion price of $29.33 an ounce for the coins. That would put the
cost of a set of five coins, one of each design, at $782 when the $9.75 per coin premium
set by the Mint is added in. Add to that the 10 percent markup allowed to the distributors
and it puts the cost for each set at $860.20 plus shipping.
“You can give manufacturers a suggested retail price, but you can’t control what your retailers
ultimately sell their product for,” Hansen said. “I can’t do that as a wholesaler and neither can
the U.S. Mint. But the Mint does, and that’s just arrogance, Hansen said. “They don’t
communicate well with their retailers,” Hansen said. “They just say, this is the way it is.
They don’t make partners out of their distributors and retailers, and that’s what they need to do,
make them viable partners.” Hansen said this confusion could have been solved with a 10-minute
conversation between all involved. “But they’re not working with their authorized purchasers as
true partners,” Hansen said. “That’s one reason I’ve never signed up with them.
They’re such pain in the rear ends to deal with.”
The new sales rules are “ridiculous,” said Bill Hodges, owner of Southern Coin Investments in Atlanta, Ga.,
who sells numismatic and bullion coins. “I strongly feel that some distributors won’t handle them at all,
and I don’t blame them,” he said. It’s tantamount to price fixing, Hodges said. When dealers were first
allowed to place orders with the 11 distributors, Hodges signed up for 20 sets at $1,500 each from one
wholesaler. But that deal no longer is valid because of the Mint’s new rules. Hodges called Mint officials
and told them that if the Mint wants wide distribution of the coins, restricting coins to the 11 authorized
purchasers isn’t the way to do it. “They are shutting out our company and hundreds of companies around
the country,” Hodges said. “We’re getting calls from hundreds of people, and we keep telling them,
we can’t help you.” That’s what is really frustrating, Hodges said. “The U.S. Mint needs to employ some
people with business and marketing experience to help decide the best means of doing distribution,”
Hansen said. The current plan isn’t working, he said. “We have 35,000 people in our database, which
means we could distribute the coins widely, but we have no opportunity, Hodges said.
“What I hate the most is all the people who call us and we can’t help.”
=================================================================================
It just keeps getting more and more interesting!!
It's great to see bullion dealers now acting like typically sleazy bankers and Wall Street types..."Oh these rules are bad...they can't work...I can't make my 50% profit...oh this is Socialism...I won't be able to buy my new BMW this year"
What crap...just suck it up and sell the da*n coins with the 10% mark-up, plus shipping!
Now I'm getting angry.
HE>I
“The U.S. Mint needs to employ some people with business and marketing experience to help decide the best means of doing distribution.”
The people complaining in that article are NOT AP's.
<< <i>NOTICE ABOUT AMERICA THE BEAUTIFUL 5 OUNCE SILVER COINS: We have placed our order through the United States Mint in accordance with their guidelines. All Mint orders are subject to approval. If confirmed by the Mint, we expect to begin pricing and accepting orders January 3, 2011. If more information becomes available before then, we will post it on this website. >>
mbogoman
https://pcgs.com/setregistry/collectors-showcase/classic-issues-colonials-through-1964/zambezi-collection-trade-dollars/7345Asesabi Lutho
There has to be a reason.....
<< <i>Why do I think they are ALL waiting for 2011 to sell these beasts???
There has to be a reason..... >>
Couple of reasons.
As of now, they don't know if they will be getting 3,000 sets, or 7/11ths of 33,000 sets, or what. Why send the armored car to pick up 3,000 sets and then be told to come back next week for an addional 1,700+ sets? Just wait and get them all at the same time.
By waiting until January, they can pick them up along with their 2011-dated gold and silver eagles.
TD
<< <i>
<< <i>Why do I think they are ALL waiting for 2011 to sell these beasts???
There has to be a reason..... >>
Couple of reasons.
As of now, they don't know if they will be getting 3,000 sets, or 7/11ths of 33,000 sets, or what. Why send the armored car to pick up 3,000 sets and then be told to come back next week for an addional 1,700+ sets? Just wait and get them all at the same time.
By waiting until January, they can pick them up along with their 2011-dated gold and silver eagles.
TD >>
But, but but............they are going to allow the notorious Flipper Gang time to mastermind a raid on The Armored Puck Transport convoy
APs: Just mark up 10% from whatever the mint charged you, put some sort of rudimentary household limit code into your database and ship 'em out. Enough is enough.
<< <i>Why do I think they are ALL waiting for 2011 to sell these beasts???
There has to be a reason..... >>
Because they are going to tell the Mint to get stuffed, they will sell them at market. The Mint will scream, but what can they do? Demand they return the coins? OK, then the sets are "un-sold", it is 2011, and the Mint cannot sell the puckers. So the Mint melts them...
The unclaimed pucks can be purchased by the AP that want them starting Monday the 20th.
So figure all next week for the mint to have all the orders and the pucks ready to go.
Then figure the week of the 27th for the AP's to get them, get organized, whatever. Toss in a couple Holiday's and
BOOM, Jan 3rd.
Of course, considering APMEX already is set up and has good orders, they might be ready to go. However, they'll have to figure out how to cross reference the HH limit, although that shouldn't be to tough.
<< <i>The Mint will scream, but what can they do? >>
Dump them as an AP, that's what the mint can do. Then they lose their privileged status as an AGE and ASE wholesaler - surely a much bigger and more important part of their business than a micro-allotment of pucks. There is nothing nefarious going on, so all conspiracy buffs can take a rest. The simple fact is that all but one or two of the APs were strictly wholesalers and had no retail arms before this - it takes time to set up. Couple this with the fact that we are in the holiday season when typically very little new development gets done (speaking from experience of 25 years in software), and you have your delay. Lastly, as others have stated, they are all probably waiting until after the final distribution of the remainder on the 20th so they only have to send the Brinks truck once.
It's Friday - have a
mbogoman
https://pcgs.com/setregistry/collectors-showcase/classic-issues-colonials-through-1964/zambezi-collection-trade-dollars/7345Asesabi Lutho
<< <i>It's Friday - have a
....on #2 already
Box of 20