Mint Should Secretly Create Mint Errors Every Year or 2
thevolcanogod
Posts: 270 ✭✭✭
Lots of talk about why new collectors aren't entering the hobby. Maybe part of the reason is that coins are minted to near-perfect standards. Many of the new collectors are coming from those who get into history (which there aren't enough of) or those who inherit collections. Need some excitement to get the public into coins - what better way than a fairly major mint error. When's the last one that went widely-public? 1995? I don't think there was quite the reaction with the 2009 extra finger cents but I remember the public hunting 1995 cent rolls carefully.
Might not be the most popular opinion but someone high up inside the mint should "manufacture" a major mint error every now and then. If the public thinks there's something to be found in modern coin rolls, they'll get back to looking at coins rather than just dumping them in the jar. Want someone to get excited about something? Tell them there's treasure to be found. Lately, there's been no treasure in modern coins. No hunt. Only boring perfection.
Comments
If it is made on purpose, it's not an error; it's a gimmick. We already have loads of gimmicks every year that can cost collectors tens of thousands of dollars annually if they want to keep up with them.
The best "new collector program" was the State Quarters series. Coming up with another great idea like that is a challenge, but it part of the solution to getting new collectors.
Yea but gimmicks sell. Even the Wisconsin high and low leaves still sell well.
Only gimmicks we have now days are easily got - just have to have your CC and wait for the countdown on the mint website. Statehood quarters captured attention for a few years. Now they’re worthless and people have lost interest.
Do people still pay premiums for 1955 cent rolls? Or 1972s? Or 1995s?
People will come for the gimmick - for the chance at finding a treasure - and some will stay for the party.
Just an opinion.
Maybe they do, and it's a secret.
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution
Much of the interest in Mint error coins has to do with the essential randomness and accidental nature of the phenomena, and the interest in unraveling the mystery behind them ("How did that happen?")
I think the deliberate, contrived nature of Mint-generated errors would feel just that way: deliberate and contrived.
I expect you're correct, that lots of people would search through their coins hoping to win the "lottery." But I also expect it wouldn't do much for actual collecting since the quest would be based on the contrivance, and not the coins. And then, of course, it isn't the Mint that would be paying out the "prize money," but rather the poor old exploited collector community that would have to go along with the deal for it to work.
Of course, contrived value in numismatics is not unheard of from other quarters (stickers, slabs, Early Release/First Strike, signatures on slabs, etc.)
I wouldn't join in such a thing at this point of my jaded numismatic career, but it's a fair question:
Would any of the rest of you pay a premium for such a piece?
Here's a warning parable for coin collectors...
While errors have always intrigued me, I have not collected them. I did have three 1955 DDO's as a youngster...then I joined the Navy and my Mom cleaned out my room.... likely bought a loaf of bread with them. And, I do have a blank cent planchet... other than that, I just read about the errors. Cheers, RickO
If someone found a memo indicating that the 1955 ddo was manufactured and not a true mistake, would it decrease the value or popularity?
I’m not saying they should create mint errors and then tell everyone. Should create some and hide it. Make it random too - just like a real error only manufactured.
How difficult would it be to create a major ddo today? Deactivate the QA detectors and have a handful of people look the other way for a while?
Have to commend you on the "out of the box" suggestion. While the points made by others that these would not be definitional "errors" is one I would have to agree with, there is a certain appeal to the Mint releasing into circulation something unique and collectible on its own terms. Sort of the random prize in the cereal box model. Maybe the Mint could offer as a reward that they would take back their "tagged coin" in exchange for a multiple of the subject coin.
The U.S. Mint would never make errors
on purpose and sell them 'retail' to collectors.
It would never happen but still. Would like to see them released into the wild instead of sold as an error by the manufacturer. If the mint actually sold errors then yea they would be worthless imo.
I have suspected this has been done many times over the years.
I've caught a couple of 'em 'in the wild'.
It's no secret........... the Mint makes plenty of errors EVERY year! (the whole ATB series comes to mind....)