First spouse numbers and this year’s mega red book.
kiyote
Posts: 5,588 ✭✭✭✭✭
It actually looks like some of the 2014 coins got a downward revision. At first I just thought they were behind on mintages as usual, but the mintages for 2016 appear to be fairly accurate. I wonder where they are getting their numbers from? 
"I'll split the atom! I am the fifth dimension! I am the eighth wonder of the world!" -Gef the talking mongoose.
0
Comments
Now if they could just publish the number of people who collect (no hoard) these things....
That’s easy. Take the final mintage number, halve it, and then divide by 100.
Will that work for my income taxes, too?
i was lucky in that I bought a bunch of 2007 Martha Washington first spouse golds from the mint at a 450 dollar issue price and sold them later on for a profit. I just got lucky spot gold was low in 2007, could of really got burned. never even considered buying later issues
Yes you are lucky because that will be the greatest determining factor in any potential profit on these is the spot gold price going up to cover the big premium. Otherwise, the mintage don’t much matter. Except to a very select few.
Agreed— they’re going to be treated as generic bullion rounds for years to come.
I have not now, nor have I ever, had the slightest bit of interest in these series....nothing, nada, zero, zilch.... Cheers, RickO
How would we know if the 2014, 2015 or the 2016 numbers are accurate, after a revision to the 2014 numbers, four years after the fact? It would indeed be good to know how any of the numbers were derived, and from what original source?
Based on the high level of complacency that has always surrounded these coins, we may never know what the surviving populations will be and the only indicator of relative scarcity might end up being the market prices over time.
I knew it would happen.
There were so many designs that some got overlooked. But other than the liberty subset I really like the Bess Truman reverse.