2016 SLQ Gold...Boom, or Bust?

Outhaul · September 12, 2016 1:44AM

I know it's still early, but judging by the fact that they are still available, it's looking like a bust. If you purchased at issue price you will probably be okay. But, if you are one of the pre-sale speculators who purchased on eBay, you may have a long time to wait. Just my opinion.

Other opinions?

Cheers

Bob

PerryHall · September 12, 2016 1:52AM

I don't care either way. I wanted one for my collection because I like the design and I have no plans to ever sell it.

PaleElf · September 12, 2016 2:00AM

With a HH limit of 1 and a mintage of 100k, I don't think most people were buying them because they believed they would immediately appreciate in value.

TomB · September 12, 2016 2:04AM

The images make it look like a nice piece, which is why I purchased one.

HalfStrike · September 12, 2016 2:11AM

It was easy to predict this was a bust, too many coins for too few buyers. Hopefully they drop the mintage on the remaining coin.

jdimmick · September 12, 2016 2:24AM

I bought one just to get one, but figured the way the released this one, it was going to be a bust. A buddy of mine, just ordered one from the mint site sat late, and they were still there.

2ltdjorn · September 12, 2016 2:33AM

I like it. I bought 2. goal is to have 2 sets one in 69 and 70.

I think its an interesting piece, and may draw a new crowd into the world of numismatics.

anything that opens up the hobby, is a good thing.

fishteeth · September 12, 2016 2:55AM

was the first thing I ever ordered from the mint in 30 years of collecting. I will add the half dollar and then figure out some way to put the three in a holder

PerryHall · September 12, 2016 3:03AM

Eventually the mint will eliminate the household limit and they will sell out.

291fifth · September 12, 2016 3:18AM

In five years it will just be another "made for collectors" collectible that is on the trash heap of numismatic history. At least it has some gold content but that is about I can say about it that is good.

bestday · September 12, 2016 3:19AM

Originally posted by: Outhaul
I know it's still early, but judging by the fact that they are still available, it's looking like a bust. If you purchased at issue price you will probably be okay. But, if you are one of the pre-sale speculators who purchased on eBay, you may have a long time to wait. Just my opinion.

Other opinions?

Cheers

Bob

Not a bust for Mint.. Folks .. Mint not going to underprice, low mintage their new products for flippers to make big money..

DIMEMAN · September 12, 2016 3:34AM

Originally posted by: 291fifth
In five years it will just be another "made for collectors" collectible that is on the trash heap of numismatic history. At least it has some gold content but that is about I can say about it that is good.

MFH · September 12, 2016 3:52AM

It's all well and good that they resurrected these great designs - and I appreciate
the Mint's efforts to make us happy. I for "one" wouldn't sink that kind of money
they're asking for these "coins". If they had made them in an affordable metal,
ie: .999 Silver, then maybe I would have bit.

I don't normally collect gold, and only have a few early Commems - 1903 Louisiana
Purchase (Mc Kinley) and a 1917 McKinley One Dollar coin(s). I only have these as
they were a Barber Design.

BryceM · September 12, 2016 4:06AM

I'd say bust for all three. They're great designs, but reproductions are hardly ever as captivating as the originals. In fact, many date/mms in the original issues have far smaller extant populations. I see more downside than upside when it comes to long term potential. The original designs are sharper and classier. Pure bullion is cheaper. These are caught in the middle.

sparky64 · September 12, 2016 4:51AM

I bet if they'd be a boom if they were silver at the same mintage.....

Yes / no?

golden · September 12, 2016 5:27AM

Originally posted by: 291fifth
In five years it will just be another "made for collectors" collectible that is on the trash heap of numismatic history. At least it has some gold content but that is about I can say about it that is good.

Outhaul · September 12, 2016 5:45AM

Originally posted by: sparky64
I bet if they'd be a boom if they were silver at the same mintage.....
Yes / no?

I'd say they would be a boom if the mint changed the design for the 2016 GW quarter to the 1916 design in clad and also struck a silver unc and proof all dated 2016. Now THAT'S how to commemorate a past design!

Cheers

Bob

ricko · September 13, 2016 12:46AM

In five years it will just be another "made for collectors" collectible that is on the trash heap of numismatic history. At least it has some gold content but that is about I can say about it that is good.

This is likely true...but many people who have purchased them simply like the design and it is even more attractive in gold. These people will be happy, the flippers, probably not so much.

Cheers, RickO

Overdate · September 13, 2016 1:58AM

Originally posted by: bestday
Not a bust for Mint.. Folks .. Mint not going to underprice, low mintage their new products for flippers to make big money..

Like they just did with the American Liberty silver medals?

COCollector · September 13, 2016 2:24AM

Definitely a bust for flippers & other speculators. Maybe a bust for dealers too.

And my crystal ball predicts a bust for anyone hoping for long-term appreciation.

OTOH, I think it's a nice collectible commemorative -- especially for folks who collect quarters.

lcoopie · September 13, 2016 2:30AM

Nice profit margin for the us mint for a bullion item.

grip · September 13, 2016 2:35AM

Maybe a proof?

TwoSides2aCoin · September 13, 2016 2:39AM

Boom on the early flipper's side. Find the people who have the most and see them set the price. Bust : as a two way market is concerned, and most will attest to. It's barely out of the chute.

topstuf · September 13, 2016 3:23AM

After initial program announcement I knew the ONLY one I would order would be the SLQ.

Just like the design.

The gdime is too little and the gquarter is at least seeable.

Hafta think more on the Walker. Don't particularly like the WL design so that should tell you I am a dummy.

Cougar1978 · September 13, 2016 4:37AM

The would be appealing at the same premium over melt as AGE, but beyond that no interest. BUST - big time.

I do believe they need intermediate bullion gold in between the .10 AGW to .25 AGW range but these should be original designs compatible with that size coin. A gold dime or quarter restrike coin makes no sense to me except something I might pay 97% of melt (the refiner pays 98%). Why not just make 2016 restrikes of $2.50 Indian, etc?

If they really want to commem the SLQ, why not make circulation strikes in cupro nickel (could be sold by the roll like state quarter and KH) and collector issues in silver (not gold). Then everyone could afford and enjoy these. They could have done so much with this to promote the hobby instead of such a one dimensional approach.

mbogoman · September 13, 2016 5:18AM

If they really want to commem the SLQ, why not make circulation strikes in cupro nickel (could be sold by the roll like state quarter and KH) and collector issues in silver (not gold). Then everyone could afford and enjoy these. They could have done so much with this to promote the hobby instead of such a one dimensional approach.

Simple answer: Because you need an Act of Congress to make any change to circulating coinage. The gold commems can be done at the Mint Director's whim without any "help" or approval of Congress.

2016 SLQ Gold...Boom, or Bust?

Comments

Leave a Comment