Girl scouts commem makes history! are you surprised?

Bochiman

Noticed in the online Coin World, dated 1/6/14, that they will NOT be getting any funds from the surcharge because of how dismally they failed to sell....ie, did not cover costs.

Given the design, and the political correctness, that showed on the coin, I am not surprised. I did not want one. I did not buy one. I still don't want one. May be a flipping chance to those who did, but not my bag.
Article goes on to say that only 35% of the authorized numbers were sold.

This is the 1st time in the commem history, the quote goes on to say, that the recipient organization was not eligible to get any monies from the coin due to lack of covering production cost (hmmm.... maybe they should also look at their production costs and see if they are reasonable......)




<< <i>The Girl Scouts of the USA will not be receiving any surcharges from the U.S. Mint because sales of the 2013-W Girl Scouts of the USA Centennial commemorative silver dollars failed to cover production costs. >>

MGLICKER

Unfortunate but a good lesson about government funding.

lostincoins

They should have included a box of caramel delights every one would have sold. Was this because of marketing or just because of the coin it self?

sparky64

<< <i>They should have included a box of caramel delights every one would have sold. >>


Make it a box of Thin Mints and I'd be a buyer. Otherwise......pass.

MsMorrisine

If the online and print ads say $10 goes to the fund, then $10 should go to the fund. Perhaps they should footnote future statements. Also, if the gub-mint doesn't pay who's going to sue?


Edit: it looks like just the PR mentions the surcharge.

Jinx86

They should have had girl scouts design it, would have been more attractive by far.

I didn't order any, never had a single person walk in our doors asking for one either.

keyman64

I'm not surprised. What are the final mint figures?

CoinMiner1

The Girl Scouts should have sold the coins door to door (in front of the supermarkets) - no brainer!

(my kid starts her first cookie campaign next month)

MsMorrisine

surcharge mention

all surcharges collected shall be paid (that means must be paid)

FullStrike

Coins and Girl Scouts were always a bad match. The design was almost offensive in appearance.

This Coin was doomed from day one.



Ditto the BS Coin.

MsMorrisine

<< <i>surcharge mention

all surcharges collected shall be paid (that means must be paid) >>



Oh carp

I need a law degree here.

Public law 104-208 from before this coin's act apparently is overriding the wording of the commemorative coin's law.


The mint has a nice little summary that states costs must be recovered. In the next section they state this is federal aid and the recipients must comply with discrimination law. Heh, Boy Scouts comply?

MGLICKER

Thin Mint sales were the problem.

keyman64

<< <i>Thin Mint sales were the problem. >>

magikbilly

<< <i>

<< <i>Thin Mint sales were the problem. >>

>>




But it is so cold outside they must be frozen? You think they'd sell better

Eric

lostincoins

shall in legal terms at state level is absolute and supported by federal law. Look at Blacks Law.

MsMorrisine

<< <i>shall in legal terms at state level is absolute and supported by federal law. Look at Blacks Law. >>




Well, I don't know enough about law to understand why a law passed in 1996 and updated in 2003, supersedes language of a law signed into law in 2009.


Apparently the mint says it does. Says to me I need more education here.

WildIdea

The Boy Scouts coin is so politically correct there is a Girl Scout on it.

GritsMan

<< <i>They should have had girl scouts design it, would have been more attractive by far.

. >>



Great idea!

WillieBoyd2

I can not find year-end sales figures, found these for September 24.

2013 Girl Scouts Centennial Commemorative Coins sales as of September 24, 2013:
Proof Silver 81,507
Uncirculated Silver 30,252
Young Collectors Set 4,063

7over8

From the info I have read. USM anticipated higher sales levels and produced too many coins in thier first run that now need to be melted.

AnkurJ

<< <i>Thin Mint sales were the problem. >>

MsMorrisine

<< <i>

<< <i>Thin Mint sales were the problem. >>



>>



It was excellent potd


The second story that makes me wonder how much it costs to waffle and melt a coin.

kiyote

Now the Girl Scouts owe the US Government millions of dollars.

291fifth

How to make money on new issue commemorative coins:

1. One e-mail notice to current mint customers followed by another e-mail notice when the coins actually go on sale. No other promotional expenses.

2. Strike to order only.

3. No expensive special packaging.

4. No returns.

19Lyds

<< <i>The Girl Scouts should have sold the coins door to door (in front of the supermarkets) - no brainer!

(my kid starts her first cookie campaign next month) >>

Except for the minor fact that they would have had to buy them upfront before they could sell them.

Not to mention the security that would be needed for each Girl Scout Troop.



No, I don't think they would have wanted to get into this aspect.

However, I DO think that their National Office dropped the ball. Fairly lackluster sales.

Justlooking

Another milestone worthy of commemoration ... and another opportunity botched by a gosh-awful design.

thisnamztaken

I didn't even consider buying one because of its ugly design. Apparently many others came to the same conclusion.

ambro51

Don't melt the unsolds. Throw them in canvas sacks and store them in a vault. Release them in 100 years replete with beautiful toning.

LindeDad

For once in recent memory I didn't step in that hole.

mbogoman

Lessons to be learned for the mint:

1) Less is more. There once was a time when I bought every issue put out in a year, just to keep my collection complete. It finally got to the point where that was just too much, so I stopped and now only purchase the issues that interest me (or look like they may be a good flip). I'm sure there are a lot of others out there who have done the same..

2) Quality over quantity. Similar to the above, but with emphasis on the appeal and looks of an issue. Most of the recent mint designs are simply "meh" at best and often gawdawful PC boring or flat out "flat". IMO, only some of the proof Plats approach the ideal. The 5 oz. pucks also have some very nice designs and the larger size of the puck makes the design look far better than on the quarters they are copied from.

Neither of these are new thoughts. They have been expressed countless times on this board. But I guarantee you that nothing will change at the mint. The inertia and politics are far too entrenched...

ricko

Just another example of poor design and pandering to a select, narrow, market. Cheers, RickO

kimber45ACP

The reverse has that 70's cartoon look to it.

SaorAlba

I can just see the vocal defecations emanating from the HSN and QVC coin hawkers on TV. "Beyond rare, derned near unique" etc.

Davideo

<< <i>Don't melt the unsolds. Throw them in canvas sacks and store them in a vault. Release them in 100 years replete with beautiful toning. >>



Interesting idea. I like it.

kimber45ACP

<< <i>I can just see the vocal defecations emanating from the HSN and QVC coin hawkers on TV. "Beyond rare, derned near unique" etc. >>



"Get on the phone now! We have less than one per state remaining!"

Cameonut

More government promises broken. Classic bait and switch if the program doesn't go as planned.

Yet another reason why I won't buy anything direct from the mint.

sparky64

I heard about pending legislation that would require the Boy Scouts to surrender 1/3 of their coin profits to the Girl Scouts because a Girl Scout was one of the three scouts featured on the Boy Scout coin.

CaptHenway

So, have there been any more U.S. commemorative coin programs that failed to pay their surcharges to the beneficiary due to the Mint's expenses exceeding the surcharges collected?

WillieBoyd2

The Girl Scout organization is selling them:



http://www.girlscoutshop.com/S...AL-PROOF-SILVER-DOLLAR

ScarsdaleCoin

Sadly in speaking to very active troup leaders at the time they had no idea that the coin was even available. So basically it seems that the organization failed to let its girls know about the coin. Should have sold well had they done so. Meantime I thought this would be / could be and but a bunch away in our vault. Time will tell

ScarsdaleCoin

Sadly in speaking to very active troup leaders at the time they had no idea that the coin was even available. So basically it seems that the organization failed to let its girls know about the coin. Should have sold well had they done so. Meantime I thought this would be / could be a sleeper and but a bunch away in our vault. Time will tell

19Lyds

On Jan 2, 2013, silver was sitting at $31.13 per oz (bid) and the coin was a 90% Silver alloy so total silver value was $24.07 per coin.

The coin price at the US Mint was $55.95 for a difference of $31.88



Soooooooooooo, if the US Mint was charging "ME" a $10.00 surcharge per coin which was intended for the GSA, this means that I was over charged by $10.00 per coin presuming that I purchased or ordered the coin specifically so that the GSA could get their $10. This still would have left $21.88 per coin to cover the Mint's overhead costs which sounds like a lot to me until you factor in Congressional Salaries for passing the Law in the first place.



As a comparison, in May the 2013-W SAE went on sale for only $48.95 per coin and these contained a full ounce of silver where, presumably, the same $31.13 per ounce price was paid (if not more) since acquisition of Silver for the Eagles occurs well before actual production. (Blanks are acquired from the same source as the bullion version but handled differently for the burnished production)



Any chance I can get my $10.00 back?



Personally, I believe that if the US Mint (aka Treasury Department) is going to charge the $10.00 "surcharge" per coin upfront to its customers then that $10 should be forwarded to the intended recipients regardless of sales quantities since the coin wasn't cheap by any means at $55.95 per coin.

CaptHenway

@19Lyds....I don't know how in the heck the Mint lost money at those markups.

telephoto1

Curious-Does the Girl Scout organiztion even offer badges, etc. promoting numismatics like the BSA does?

AUandAG

I saw no advertising for this issue, so to speak. So, I bit the bullet and bought a proof (I haven't even looked at it yet). Did I pick a winner????







bob

johnny9434

no surprises here.

19Lyds

Originally posted by: Hydrant

The reverse design looks like a Euro coin. Ridiculous and plug ugly.

The "Reverse" design reflects the current GSA Logo friend.

RichieURich

I believe the law that requires forfeiting of surcharges, is intended to address the fact that every organization that wants a commemorative coin believes that it will be a huge seller.



But of course, many commemorative coins are not big sellers. It appears to me that for a commemorative coin to be a big seller, it needs a good topic and an attractive design. Many don't.

TomB

I have no idea how much it costs the US Mint to bring a coin to market or how they do their accounting. However, if we take the $21.88 premium that 19Lyds mentioned along with the late September, 2013 numbers written earlier in the thread then the US Mint would have profited about $2.5M over the cost of the bullion alone.

TwoSides2aCoin

Am only surprised that she fared better on the Boy Scout coin than the Girl Scout coin and that Bruce (Caitlyn) Jenner got woman of the year, last year. How about a transgendered special olympic coin next ?