Test Your Heart: If the Mint reduced the 25th Anniversary HH limit to 4
Neocoin
Posts: 62
...so that others on the wait list would have some would you be ticked?
0
Comments
bob
<< <i>Yes, very. A deal is a deal. They offered and I accepted and PAID.
bob >>
Well, technically you have not paid until they debit your account.
I would go from feeling anxious, apprehensive, elated, relieved, guilty, and ashamed to feeling ticked, pi$$ed, angry, put upon and disappointed.
Someone cue 'Feelings' for me.
"Inspiration exists, but it has to find you working" Pablo Picasso
<< <i>
<< <i>Yes, very. A deal is a deal. They offered and I accepted and PAID.
bob >>
Well, technically you have not paid until they debit your account. >>
A good heart. I tested mine and would give up 4, so long as the mint paid me a substantial premium over what I locked in at
jdimmick;Gerard;wondercoin;claychaser;agentjim007;CCC2010;guitarwes;TAMU15;Zubie;mariner67;segoja;Smittys;kaz;CARDSANDCOINS;FadeToBlack;
jrt103;tizofthe;bronze6827;mkman;Scootersdad;AllCoinsRule;coindeuce;dmarks;piecesofme; and many more
San Diego, CA
Would have made it tougher for the F&F networks.
<< <i>how many people have family & friend orders that are on the wait list, reducing the HH to 4 to fill wait list orders may result in some folks getting even more sets
On the other hand, how many "friends and family" made it through for a full 5? They would have fewer.
<< <i>No problem at all with that. I actually think they should do that. No offense, but anybody who has a problem with getting "only" 4 sets instead of 5 sets(especially if a collector on the wait list benefits from this) has more problems than just being greedy. >>
So everyone who has traded or sold their 5 sets; everyone who has made a deal they have committed to following through on is greedy?
I don't think so.....
"Inspiration exists, but it has to find you working" Pablo Picasso
<< <i>how many people have family & friend orders that are on the wait list, reducing the HH to 4 to fill wait list orders may result in some folks getting even more sets
If the mint reduces the limit from 5 to 4, then those benefitting from this move should be limited to ONE SET MAX and no more. If the mint cancels your order for irregularities then your allocation should be passed on to the next in line as is.
<< <i>...so that others on the wait list would have some would you be ticked? >>
Prolly wouldn't be too happy, but who would? Wonder how this would affect the agreements some made to pre-sell their sets to the big dealers? I'm sure some are counting on a certain number of sets for bulk submission purposes.
The Mint should do some minimal market research to assess demand, produce enough material to supply that demand, and create a process whereby people who want a set or two can get their product without having to take a day off from work (or skip class) and without having to spent countless hours on the phone or internet. It really is not that complicated, but everytime this happens, about once per year, it clearly shows the ineptitude of the people in charge of it and really makes you wonder if these are the same caliber of people who are running more important government functions: defense, medicare/medicaid, education, emergency response, etc.
Frankly, if they are going to make it a lottery, it would be more fair if they ran it by mail and allowed everyone interested to send a check (or CC information), and the first 100,000 (or whatever number works) names drawn, gets the item(s), with duplicate entries being disqualified. It's a little bit 1970's'ish, but I think it would work more fairly than the more cutting edge
Hoard the keys.
<< <i>...so that others on the wait list would have some would you be ticked? >>
No, but then I'm not as greedy as some of you guys.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
<< <i>
<< <i>No problem at all with that. I actually think they should do that. No offense, but anybody who has a problem with getting "only" 4 sets instead of 5 sets(especially if a collector on the wait list benefits from this) has more problems than just being greedy. >>
So everyone who has traded or sold their 5 sets; everyone who has made a deal they have committed to following through on is greedy?
I don't think so..... >>
How do you trade or sell something that you do NOT have yet (much less even confimed to get)? At this point NOBODY is confirm to get 5 sets, even if you got your order in at 12:01 pm. So yes, I DO think so!
I guess it is like everything in life, where do you draw the line?
Personally, I'm glad I don't have to make those decisions on everything for everybody else!
edited for typo. again!
Jim
<< <i>Don't you imagine all of the tv coin dealers let every one of their employees off to stay home and order including the janitor. >>
As a general rule (yes, I'm sure there are exceptions), dealers make a living by buying for $X and selling for $X+Y. I would imagine most dealers would not consider the aggravation of trying to get a bunch of orders submitted from a bunch of people worth the trouble. Regardless of the price the coins end up at, they'll buy from resellers at a level that will allow them to make a profit.
IMO, the overwhelming number of buyers from the mint are individuals looking to get some extras to flip for a profit, not dealers.
Not that there's anything wrong with that (as long as you're not a dealer, of course).
<< <i>What about all those that tried then gave up before they even knew there would be a wait list? The mint will do what they will do and I won't get bent out of shape but my guess is this is done. It's a lose/lose for the mint. >>
Except that they made $30 million in 4 hours.
would be an appropriate mintage and that 5 per household will be proper. Now if they had a
one per household would they be sitting on 50,000 sets leftover? I think that they have a pretty
good idea of what will sell and how many to mint. After all they do have a track record and folks
in place to determine this, right?
bob
<< <i>Some have said it's greed. WTH is that? The Mint made the rules and determined that 100,000
would be an appropriate mintage and that 5 per household will be proper. Now if they had a
one per household would they be sitting on 50,000 sets leftover? I think that they have a pretty
good idea of what will sell and how many to mint. After all they do have a track record and folks
in place to determine this, right?
bob
Exactly right! The Mint does not nor does any business want to spend the time or the costs to store product. It's best to produce and sell. As long as the Mint made these rules all orders not on the wait list will be honored. Think about all of those ATB's sitting on the shelf not going to sell.
For example, think about the small dealer who decided that he needed 25 of these sets. Under the current sale, he just needed to contact 4 other friends/relatives to dial in and/or log in to compete with the other dealers/collectors in getting sets. If there was a one per household limit, would that same dealer have not tried to get as many sets?? Actually, knowing the issue was harder to accumulate in quantity, he may have tried harder to get even more sets!! But let's say that 25 was still his goal, then he'd have to work just a little bit harder and find 24 friends/relatives to order sets for him. Instead of only 4 extra folks to compete with, collectors would have 24 people competing with them on the phone lines and the website.
Multiply that by the many flippers/dealers who wanted quantity and it's easy to see that the traffic on the Mint phone lines and website would have been far worse w/ a 1 per household limit as many more non-collectors would have been employed to help with bulk orders. Sure, it may have taken longer for the Mint to sell out, but I don't think it would have been any easier for a collector to get their set, and might have even been more difficult.
Michael Kittle Rare Coins --- 1908-S Indian Head Cent Grading Set --- No. 1 1909 Mint Set --- Kittlecoins on Facebook --- Long Beach Table 448
<< <i>
<< <i>...so that others on the wait list would have some would you be ticked? >>
No, but then I'm not as greedy as some of you guys.
I ONLY ORDERED 3
Today would be a perfect day to do it, since we've been told that the world's population is now exactly 7 billion!
My Adolph A. Weinman signature
The whining should have begun on August 20th, 2011.
Not after folks found out that the product had been sold out.
Folks had TWO FULL MONTHS to prepare for this event. Those that could not be bothered to prepare need to accept the fact that those who "prepared ahead of time" are asking premiums for the set.
You all knew it would happen yet failed to insure that you got an order in.
The name is LEE!
If they announced they were going to mint 10,000,000 sets I wouldn't care...but I doubt they'd sell even another 100k.
As mentioned in another thread, there seem to be a lot of flippers out there. There are too many for me. It's crossed the line into something more like scalping. Maybe next time I forewarn them on something so obvious.
<< <i> I did commit to sell mine, but I can't sell them if I don't get them.
If they announced they were going to mint 10,000,000 sets I wouldn't care...but I doubt they'd sell even another 100k. >>
Whether you get them from the mint may not matter. What matters is exactly what was offered and what you agreed to. If you simply agreed to provide 5 sets and the mint doesn't deliver, then you may be obligated to get them on the open market. Once the mint sends them out, they [the mint] are not the only source for these.
............................
In this offer, if the mint doesn't deliver or you couldn't order you are off the hook.
Here is the deal:
1) You buy 5 complete 5 pc 25th anniversary sets (A25) from the mint on the first order day (October 27th) provide me the confirmation #
2) request expedited shipping (which is a free upgrade)
3) Once the sets arrive, you ship them to me (still sealed - if they are opened, the deal is null and void)
they sold 250k of the 20th ann. and those sold out.
they could have sold 250k of these at least.
<< <i>doubt they could sell another 100k?
they sold 250k of the 20th ann. and those sold out.
they could have sold 250k of these at least. >>
I fully agree with this but for whatever reason, they evidently did not.
Have folks forgotten so quickly that proofs and uncs were unavailable in 2009?
Have folks forgotten that uncs were unavailable in 2010?
Given the activity on the silver bullion market, I think we're lucky that the US Mint even produced these since, as was proven in 2009 and 2010, they are under no obligation to do so.
The name is LEE!
The whining should have begun on August 20th, 2011.
Not after folks found out that the product had been sold out.
I agree with you on that much. Most folks had to figure that it would be a hot'n heavy sellout. I'm pretty sure that I missed out, but that's only because I tried a few times for several hours, but I didn't sit on the comp for 5 hours straight through. That's how it goes, sometimes.
But, I do have problems with the ones who are so absolutely driven by greed that they MUST circumvent the Mint's rules in order to grab every last shot at making a quick buck. It's just so inconsiderate and wrong, but again - that's how it goes.
The Mint might have done better with a different set of rules for order acceptance. Maybe so- but it's over, folks. Kudos to the ones who did it right.
I knew it would happen.
<< <i>I believe that 100,000 would have been plenty if they hadn't announced the limit. I am a market researcher and that's likely what their research told them. The actual collector demand for complete sets of ASEs is probably around 100,000. The hype and fast money is what caused the furor. I don't have a problem with them cutting the allotments, as long as it's done loudly and publicly. I did commit to sell mine, but I can't sell them if I don't get them.
If they announced they were going to mint 10,000,000 sets I wouldn't care...but I doubt they'd sell even another 100k. >>
The mint has frequently made large errors in calculating demand, all we have to look back at is the 2008 number of gold, platinum and silver issues they did, or the number of UHR gold coins they overproduced. In both cases they way over calculated demand so with this set they went and had a limited set to not have a lot of excess inventory.
I think it is too late for the mint to alter the orders and change the rules, I think most of the people that couldn't order had never ordered from the mint before and it was not really the time to learn the system on this set. In a way this may help the mint because many people now know they can order from the mint directly instead of buying off the TV.
I had some family relatives try and order from the site and over the phone and failed, and they called the experience "exciting". For those that could order I am sure they got the big sigh of relief and happiness from completing an order, those that couldn't got burned by Microsoft and Internet Explorer, not the US Mint.
The Mint should be thanked for giving us another precious coin set like they have done over the past few years, those that have been aboard from the start of this have done very well buying from them.
I imagine the mint has many more followers after this, and will have even more interested in buying on future issues. As a business that is the aim, so the mint has done well with this set. Yes it was a nasty ordering process, but it was going to be nasty no matter what.
PS I don't think anyone who had a bad ordering experience in the past was swayed not to try and order this set. This whole issue about the website doesn't matter because the customers keep coming back.
<< <i>The US Mint adopted and announced an order limit of 5 per houshold with a maximum mintage of 100,000 sets on August 19th, 2011.
The whining should have begun on August 20th, 2011.
Not after folks found out that the product had been sold out.
I agree with you on that much. Most folks had to figure that it would be a hot'n heavy sellout. I'm pretty sure that I missed out, but that's only because I tried a few times for several hours, but I didn't sit on the comp for 5 hours straight through. That's how it goes, sometimes.
But, I do have problems with the ones who are so absolutely driven by greed that they MUST circumvent the Mint's rules in order to grab every last shot at making a quick buck. It's just so inconsiderate and wrong, but again - that's how it goes.
The Mint might have done better with a different set of rules for order acceptance. Maybe so- but it's over, folks. Kudos to the ones who did it right. >>
So your saying that Heritage, ModernCoinMart and James Sego are greedy?
The name is LEE!
<< <i>As mentioned in another thread, there seem to be a lot of flippers out there. There are too many for me. It's crossed the line into something more like scalping. >>
I don't think that a US government agency should be taking actions that encourage speculation of this nature.
60 years into this hobby and I'm still working on my Lincoln set!
<< <i>
<< <i>As mentioned in another thread, there seem to be a lot of flippers out there. There are too many for me. It's crossed the line into something more like scalping. >>
I don't think that a US government agency should be taking actions that encourage speculation of this nature. >>
I agree completely with this. It seam to me to be the perfect storm for the flippers and the mint could have taken a few small steps to prevent it but they didn't.