@thebigeng said:
Shoot at this rate of falling prices I may ave to resubmit my 69 and try for a 70 through guaranteed resubmission!
If the coin had a flaw before, it will still be there when you send it in again.
Do you think the graders go blind after they look at 4,000 of these?, or do you think they learn to look more carefully where the tiny faults usually are?
I am a member at all three and got a 69 at one and am going to resubmit to another. If I come up two strikes, will put it up on the bay and take my lumps
I was just trying to help save you some money, the odds of our hosts upgrading any recently slabbed 69 from another service to a 70 are less than 1%.
I agree 100. Gonna crack it
I worked with Gene Henry (rest in peace) about 20 years ago. He would take the slab in his hand and very carefully slam it flat as hard as he could on the floor to crack it out. The one I remember vividly was an expensive pine tree shilling. Just in case you wanted a suggestion on how to crack it out NOT!!! ( but the story is true)
Edit : Man am I old.....not 20 years ago, 30 years ago.
I wrap it in a static free cloth and rotate and tap three with ballpean hammer three times on all sides. Then I snip the corners. Then gloves and transfer to mint plastic case until ready to ship. Fingers crossed but in for a penny in for a pound now
100% positive transactions with SurfinxHI, bigole, 1madman, collectorcoins, proofmorgan, Luke Marshall, silver pop, golden egg, point five zero,coin22lover, alohagary, blaircountycoin,joebb21
@JimTyler said:
You are right many will be shut out no matter what the distribution method but lottery is the fairest in my opinion. You can get all your friends to sign up so you have more chances but if one of your friends win the lottery that shouldn't benefit you if they're your friend.
The way most dealers do it is to hire people to buy the coin and pay them a premium for the coin. A lottery, as you describe it, would most likely put MORE coins in the hands of dealers and people with money. One dealer hired 200 actors to stand in line in Baltmore. With an online lottery, EVERY DEALER could hire 200 or more people to put their name in the hat.
I teach at a college. You don't think I could get 500 or 1000 students to sign up with the Mint for the chance to make $500 if they "win" the lottery? If they had had such a lottery for this last coin, instead of getting ready for Spring Semester, I'd be retiring.
@JimTyler said:
You are right many will be shut out no matter what the distribution method but lottery is the fairest in my opinion. You can get all your friends to sign up so you have more chances but if one of your friends win the lottery that shouldn't benefit you if they're your friend.
The way most dealers do it is to hire people to buy the coin and pay them a premium for the coin. A lottery, as you describe it, would most likely put MORE coins in the hands of dealers and people with money. One dealer hired 200 actors to stand in line in Baltmore. With an online lottery, EVERY DEALER could hire 200 or more people to put their name in the hat.
I teach at a college. You don't think I could get 500 or 1000 students to sign up with the Mint for the chance to make $500 if they "win" the lottery? If they had had such a lottery for this last coin, instead of getting ready for Spring Semester, I'd be retiring.
Yep, there is NO system that would be completely "fair" to collectors and hobbyists. 99% of the population don't care about coins and so if someone (ie a dealer) offered them maybe $50 for an hour of their time, most would probably take it.
Well, actually I take it back. The only way to have a fair system would be to invent a mind-reading device and have a pre-sale ONLY to collectors.
@Archemia said:
Well, actually I take it back. The only way to have a fair system would be to invent a mind-reading device and have a pre-sale ONLY to collectors.
What's fair about excluding everybody but collectors? Anyway, that would appear to require that the mint ignore their own mission statement:
About the United States Mint
The mission of the U.S. Mint is to serve the American people by manufacturing and distributing circulating, precious metal and collectible coins and national medals, and providing security over assets entrusted to us.
This whole conversation is nothing more than pseudo analytic throat clearing as the mint will likely repeat with a lower mintage and then dealers can trade them amongst themselves as they will be the ones who can afford them
100% positive transactions with SurfinxHI, bigole, 1madman, collectorcoins, proofmorgan, Luke Marshall, silver pop, golden egg, point five zero,coin22lover, alohagary, blaircountycoin,joebb21
@Archemia said:
Well, actually I take it back. The only way to have a fair system would be to invent a mind-reading device and have a pre-sale ONLY to collectors.
What's fair about excluding everybody but collectors? Anyway, that would appear to require that the mint ignore their own mission statement:
About the United States Mint
The mission of the U.S. Mint is to serve the American people by manufacturing and distributing circulating, precious metal and collectible coins and national medals, and providing security over assets entrusted to us.
Some people think that collectors and hobbyists are getting shafted, which is why I put fair in quotation marks at first. We live in a capitalist society; people are going to look for profits. I could see where the collectors are coming from though.
Did you know that every time I check the mint website to see if they are now magically available, an angel gets his wings? I think I will keep checking, we need more angels with wings.
I’m fine with the rat race to get a coin the second it’s released. I’m okay if I lose, that’s how it goes. What I don’t like is having to start over again because of the 1990’s system they have.
@JimTyler said:
You are right many will be shut out no matter what the distribution method but lottery is the fairest in my opinion. You can get all your friends to sign up so you have more chances but if one of your friends win the lottery that shouldn't benefit you if they're your friend.
The way most dealers do it is to hire people to buy the coin and pay them a premium for the coin. A lottery, as you describe it, would most likely put MORE coins in the hands of dealers and people with money. One dealer hired 200 actors to stand in line in Baltmore. With an online lottery, EVERY DEALER could hire 200 or more people to put their name in the hat.
I teach at a college. You don't think I could get 500 or 1000 students to sign up with the Mint for the chance to make $500 if they "win" the lottery? If they had had such a lottery for this last coin, instead of getting ready for Spring Semester, I'd be retiring.
You really are a glass half empty kind of person, you find a problem with everything. It really worked out last time didn't it ? Come up with something other than free for all or lottery. I'm all for a good idea.
From the 'I've got to have one' collectors point of view the good idea is make 100,000 of them and have a household limit of 1 for 48 hours. Based on last couple years sales that appears to be the number where everyone who wants one gets one.
buying Rhode Island Nationals please email, PM or call 401-295-3000
@RINATIONALS said:
From the 'I've got to have one' collectors point of view the good idea is make 100,000 of them and have a household limit of 1 for 48 hours. Based on last couple years sales that appears to be the number where everyone who wants one gets one.
That's probably about it other than free for all or lottery. It removes profit motivation but is fair.
@RINATIONALS said:
From the 'I've got to have one' collectors point of view the good idea is make 100,000 of them and have a household limit of 1 for 48 hours. Based on last couple years sales that appears to be the number where everyone who wants one gets one.
That's probably about it other than free for all or lottery. It removes profit motivation but is fair.
Which was my earlier point. The only way to avoid a run is to overproduce. [Does that make my glass half full?]
If you want a run, which the Mint did, you're going to under produce. Then, it really doesn't matter how you distribute, you are going to have the same problem: an INTENTIONAL shortage.
I don't think that makes it half-full or half- empty, iit's just the way it is.
There is no system that will seem “fair” to everyone, especially if you miss out. Obviously as an initial matter the Mint needs to improve their web-buying experience and ability to stop bots. But in terms of distribution strategy beyond a lottery, the Mint might consider not revealing mintage in advance for some coins. And then periodically (but not too often) create a “low” mintage product that is likely to do well on the secondary market. By not pre-announcing mintage, large buyers, speculators, and flippers would have less incentive to hire actors, or otherwise invest too heavily in “hoarding.” Collectors would quickly be incentivized to act early on any new product release, but would presumably have less competition. Done properly over several years, I expect overall Mint sales and collector interest would increase, and help reverse the long term trend of fewer collectors and sales.
There is no system that will seem “fair” to everyone, especially if you miss out. Obviously as an initial matter the Mint needs to improve their web-buying experience and ability to stop bots. But in terms of distribution strategy beyond a lottery, the Mint might consider not revealing mintage in advance for some coins. And then periodically (but not too often) create a “low” mintage product that is likely to do well on the secondary market. By not pre-announcing mintage, large buyers, speculators, and flippers would have less incentive to hire actors, or otherwise invest too heavily in “hoarding.” Collectors would quickly be incentivized to act early on any new product release, but would presumably have less competition. Done properly over several years, I expect overall Mint sales and collector interest would increase, and help reverse the long term trend of fewer collectors and sales.
Why would anyone jump in and buy coins that might have unlimited mintages? Collectors would not be "incentivized", they would just be de-incentivized. And, from a Mint perspective, this strategy would only work if there were NO FREE RETURNS. Otherwise, what is stopping "collectors" from buying and then returning it when it becomes clear that the coin will be available in the secondary market for less than the issue price?
People need to realize that the Mint's customers are NOT coin collectors but ALL U.S. CITIZENS. The Mint does not, nay SHOULD NOT, be catering to collectors. It should be attempting to market to the entire citizenry. All these suggestions designed to increase the odds of "collectors" getting what they want is at odds with the actual mission of the MInt.
And do you really think that "collectors" are not going to complain about being asked to buy yet another commemorative without complete information? You want "fair", make everything unlimited mintage. But "collectors" don't want that, do they? Because that guarantees that the peak value of the coin is the issue price.
@thebigeng said:
Shoot at this rate of falling prices I may ave to resubmit my 69 and try for a 70 through guaranteed resubmission!
If the coin had a flaw before, it will still be there when you send it in again.
Do you think the graders go blind after they look at 4,000 of these?, or do you think they learn to look more carefully where the tiny faults usually are?
I am a member at all three and got a 69 at one and am going to resubmit to another. If I come up two strikes, will put it up on the bay and take my lumps
I have sent in NGC Proof 70 coins to PCGS several times and never would PCGS cross them over. DNC> @taciturn said:
There is no system that will seem “fair” to everyone, especially if you miss out. Obviously as an initial matter the Mint needs to improve their web-buying experience and ability to stop bots. But in terms of distribution strategy beyond a lottery, the Mint might consider not revealing mintage in advance for some coins. And then periodically (but not too often) create a “low” mintage product that is likely to do well on the secondary market. By not pre-announcing mintage, large buyers, speculators, and flippers would have less incentive to hire actors, or otherwise invest too heavily in “hoarding.” Collectors would quickly be incentivized to act early on any new product release, but would presumably have less competition. Done properly over several years, I expect overall Mint sales and collector interest would increase, and help reverse the long term trend of fewer collectors and sales.
Why would anyone jump in and buy coins that might have unlimited mintages? Collectors would not be "incentivized", they would just be de-incentivized. And, from a Mint perspective, this strategy would only work if there were NO FREE RETURNS. Otherwise, what is stopping "collectors" from buying and then returning it when it becomes clear that the coin will be available in the secondary market for less than the issue price?
People need to realize that the Mint's customers are NOT coin collectors but ALL U.S. CITIZENS. The Mint does not, nay SHOULD NOT, be catering to collectors. It should be attempting to market to the entire citizenry. All these suggestions designed to increase the odds of "collectors" getting what they want is at odds with the actual mission of the MInt.
You never seem to read or understand the concept of unpublished mintage. It does not mean unlimited mintage. There would be an established mintage limit, but known only to the Mint. Occasionally the limit would be reached unexpectedly and the coin would become more valuable to your secondary market.
This would allow people who want the coin to get one. This would allow speculators who have done their homework and are willing to take some risk, to fill their inventory.
And yes, I think we all agree that the Mint needs to tighten up their return policy.
There is no system that will seem “fair” to everyone, especially if you miss out. Obviously as an initial matter the Mint needs to improve their web-buying experience and ability to stop bots. But in terms of distribution strategy beyond a lottery, the Mint might consider not revealing mintage in advance for some coins. And then periodically (but not too often) create a “low” mintage product that is likely to do well on the secondary market. By not pre-announcing mintage, large buyers, speculators, and flippers would have less incentive to hire actors, or otherwise invest too heavily in “hoarding.” Collectors would quickly be incentivized to act early on any new product release, but would presumably have less competition. Done properly over several years, I expect overall Mint sales and collector interest would increase, and help reverse the long term trend of fewer collectors and sales.
Why would anyone jump in and buy coins that might have unlimited mintages? Collectors would not be "incentivized", they would just be de-incentivized. And, from a Mint perspective, this strategy would only work if there were NO FREE RETURNS. Otherwise, what is stopping "collectors" from buying and then returning it when it becomes clear that the coin will be available in the secondary market for less than the issue price?
People need to realize that the Mint's customers are NOT coin collectors but ALL U.S. CITIZENS. The Mint does not, nay SHOULD NOT, be catering to collectors. It should be attempting to market to the entire citizenry. All these suggestions designed to increase the odds of "collectors" getting what they want is at odds with the actual mission of the MInt.
You never seem to read or understand the concept of unpublished mintage. It does not mean unlimited mintage. There would be an established mintage limit, but known only to the Mint. Occasionally the limit would be reached unexpectedly and the coin would become more valuable to your secondary market.
This would allow people who want the coin to get one. This would allow speculators who have done their homework and are willing to take some risk, to fill their inventory.
And yes, I think we all agree that the Mint needs to tighten up their return policy.
Not disclosing the mintage, you could be sure someone would have connections inside the mint and would know what items to corner in the market.
Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value. Zero. Voltaire. Ebay coinbowlllc
There is no system that will seem “fair” to everyone, especially if you miss out. Obviously as an initial matter the Mint needs to improve their web-buying experience and ability to stop bots. But in terms of distribution strategy beyond a lottery, the Mint might consider not revealing mintage in advance for some coins. And then periodically (but not too often) create a “low” mintage product that is likely to do well on the secondary market. By not pre-announcing mintage, large buyers, speculators, and flippers would have less incentive to hire actors, or otherwise invest too heavily in “hoarding.” Collectors would quickly be incentivized to act early on any new product release, but would presumably have less competition. Done properly over several years, I expect overall Mint sales and collector interest would increase, and help reverse the long term trend of fewer collectors and sales.
Why would anyone jump in and buy coins that might have unlimited mintages? Collectors would not be "incentivized", they would just be de-incentivized. And, from a Mint perspective, this strategy would only work if there were NO FREE RETURNS. Otherwise, what is stopping "collectors" from buying and then returning it when it becomes clear that the coin will be available in the secondary market for less than the issue price?
People need to realize that the Mint's customers are NOT coin collectors but ALL U.S. CITIZENS. The Mint does not, nay SHOULD NOT, be catering to collectors. It should be attempting to market to the entire citizenry. All these suggestions designed to increase the odds of "collectors" getting what they want is at odds with the actual mission of the MInt.
You never seem to read or understand the concept of unpublished mintage. It does not mean unlimited mintage. There would be an established mintage limit, but known only to the Mint. Occasionally the limit would be reached unexpectedly and the coin would become more valuable to your secondary market.
This would allow people who want the coin to get one. This would allow speculators who have done their homework and are willing to take some risk, to fill their inventory.
And yes, I think we all agree that the Mint needs to tighten up their return policy.
You never seem to understand the concept of unpublished mintage - EVERYONE WOULD BE FORCED TO ASSUME UNLIMITED because it is far riskier to assume that the mintage is limited. I'm certainly not going to jump in and buy an undeclared mintage because it MIGHT only be 30,000 or 100,000
There is no system that will seem “fair” to everyone, especially if you miss out. Obviously as an initial matter the Mint needs to improve their web-buying experience and ability to stop bots. But in terms of distribution strategy beyond a lottery, the Mint might consider not revealing mintage in advance for some coins. And then periodically (but not too often) create a “low” mintage product that is likely to do well on the secondary market. By not pre-announcing mintage, large buyers, speculators, and flippers would have less incentive to hire actors, or otherwise invest too heavily in “hoarding.” Collectors would quickly be incentivized to act early on any new product release, but would presumably have less competition. Done properly over several years, I expect overall Mint sales and collector interest would increase, and help reverse the long term trend of fewer collectors and sales.
Why would anyone jump in and buy coins that might have unlimited mintages? Collectors would not be "incentivized", they would just be de-incentivized. And, from a Mint perspective, this strategy would only work if there were NO FREE RETURNS. Otherwise, what is stopping "collectors" from buying and then returning it when it becomes clear that the coin will be available in the secondary market for less than the issue price?
People need to realize that the Mint's customers are NOT coin collectors but ALL U.S. CITIZENS. The Mint does not, nay SHOULD NOT, be catering to collectors. It should be attempting to market to the entire citizenry. All these suggestions designed to increase the odds of "collectors" getting what they want is at odds with the actual mission of the MInt.
You never seem to read or understand the concept of unpublished mintage. It does not mean unlimited mintage. There would be an established mintage limit, but known only to the Mint. Occasionally the limit would be reached unexpectedly and the coin would become more valuable to your secondary market.
This would allow people who want the coin to get one. This would allow speculators who have done their homework and are willing to take some risk, to fill their inventory.
And yes, I think we all agree that the Mint needs to tighten up their return policy.
Not disclosing the mintage, you could be sure someone would have connections inside the mint and would know what items to corner in the market.
Exactly. This is just another solution that actually guarantees MORE coins go to the moneyed players. Joe Schmo will be forced to assume that there is an unlimited mintage while Mr. Coin Money knows from his Mint contact that there is only 50,000 available. In the normal sequence of distribution - 24 hr HHL followed by no limit - you might well have a coin where 15,000 or 20,000 go to collectors and the other 30,000 end up in the hands of the bulk buyers on day 2.
The ONLY solution to eliminate speculators is to have actual unlimited mintages because then coin dealers and speculators won't want any part of it. But then you've also killed all interest in commemoratives as collectibles.
@jmlanzaf said:
The ONLY solution to eliminate speculators is to have actual unlimited mintages because then coin dealers and speculators won't want any part of it. But then you've also killed all interest in commemoratives as collectibles.
How about limiting the ordering window to two weeks? It wouldn't eliminate speculators, but neither would it shut out collectors or anyone else who wants the coin. It worked for the 1998 Kennedy two-coin silver set, which included the set-only 1998-S burnished silver Kennedy half. Final mintage was about 62,000.
There is no system that will seem “fair” to everyone, especially if you miss out. Obviously as an initial matter the Mint needs to improve their web-buying experience and ability to stop bots. But in terms of distribution strategy beyond a lottery, the Mint might consider not revealing mintage in advance for some coins. And then periodically (but not too often) create a “low” mintage product that is likely to do well on the secondary market. By not pre-announcing mintage, large buyers, speculators, and flippers would have less incentive to hire actors, or otherwise invest too heavily in “hoarding.” Collectors would quickly be incentivized to act early on any new product release, but would presumably have less competition. Done properly over several years, I expect overall Mint sales and collector interest would increase, and help reverse the long term trend of fewer collectors and sales.
"Mint might consider not revealing mintage in advance for some coins".
You're asking for Less transparency than we have how.
You're asking for the Insiders to run the show More than we do now...
There is no system that will seem “fair” to everyone, especially if you miss out. Obviously as an initial matter the Mint needs to improve their web-buying experience and ability to stop bots. But in terms of distribution strategy beyond a lottery, the Mint might consider not revealing mintage in advance for some coins. And then periodically (but not too often) create a “low” mintage product that is likely to do well on the secondary market. By not pre-announcing mintage, large buyers, speculators, and flippers would have less incentive to hire actors, or otherwise invest too heavily in “hoarding.” Collectors would quickly be incentivized to act early on any new product release, but would presumably have less competition. Done properly over several years, I expect overall Mint sales and collector interest would increase, and help reverse the long term trend of fewer collectors and sales.
Why would anyone jump in and buy coins that might have unlimited mintages? Collectors would not be "incentivized", they would just be de-incentivized. And, from a Mint perspective, this strategy would only work if there were NO FREE RETURNS. Otherwise, what is stopping "collectors" from buying and then returning it when it becomes clear that the coin will be available in the secondary market for less than the issue price?
People need to realize that the Mint's customers are NOT coin collectors but ALL U.S. CITIZENS. The Mint does not, nay SHOULD NOT, be catering to collectors. It should be attempting to market to the entire citizenry. All these suggestions designed to increase the odds of "collectors" getting what they want is at odds with the actual mission of the MInt.
You never seem to read or understand the concept of unpublished mintage. It does not mean unlimited mintage. There would be an established mintage limit, but known only to the Mint. Occasionally the limit would be reached unexpectedly and the coin would become more valuable to your secondary market.
This would allow people who want the coin to get one. This would allow speculators who have done their homework and are willing to take some risk, to fill their inventory.
And yes, I think we all agree that the Mint needs to tighten up their return policy.
"There would be an established mintage limit, but known only to the Mint."
That's kinda like the Insiders at the Mint NOT spending day after day chasing coins that do NOT appear until those on the inside Know when they will appear...And then They show up...
There is no system that will seem “fair” to everyone, especially if you miss out. Obviously as an initial matter the Mint needs to improve their web-buying experience and ability to stop bots. But in terms of distribution strategy beyond a lottery, the Mint might consider not revealing mintage in advance for some coins. And then periodically (but not too often) create a “low” mintage product that is likely to do well on the secondary market. By not pre-announcing mintage, large buyers, speculators, and flippers would have less incentive to hire actors, or otherwise invest too heavily in “hoarding.” Collectors would quickly be incentivized to act early on any new product release, but would presumably have less competition. Done properly over several years, I expect overall Mint sales and collector interest would increase, and help reverse the long term trend of fewer collectors and sales.
Why would anyone jump in and buy coins that might have unlimited mintages? Collectors would not be "incentivized", they would just be de-incentivized. And, from a Mint perspective, this strategy would only work if there were NO FREE RETURNS. Otherwise, what is stopping "collectors" from buying and then returning it when it becomes clear that the coin will be available in the secondary market for less than the issue price?
People need to realize that the Mint's customers are NOT coin collectors but ALL U.S. CITIZENS. The Mint does not, nay SHOULD NOT, be catering to collectors. It should be attempting to market to the entire citizenry. All these suggestions designed to increase the odds of "collectors" getting what they want is at odds with the actual mission of the MInt.
You never seem to read or understand the concept of unpublished mintage. It does not mean unlimited mintage. There would be an established mintage limit, but known only to the Mint. Occasionally the limit would be reached unexpectedly and the coin would become more valuable to your secondary market.
This would allow people who want the coin to get one. This would allow speculators who have done their homework and are willing to take some risk, to fill their inventory.
And yes, I think we all agree that the Mint needs to tighten up their return policy.
Not disclosing the mintage, you could be sure someone would have connections inside the mint and would know what items to corner in the market.
Wow, so much worry about insiders and the big guys cheating.
The Mint has proven to be even less transparent than the FBI! Even our crack numis-media can't pry even unimportant facts out of them.
Those of us who are not consumed by suspicion or paranoia, who can imagine the occasional unpublished mintage limit coin scenario playing out over several years, know how it would be beneficial to the hobby and the market while avoiding the chaos.
@jmlanzaf said:
The ONLY solution to eliminate speculators is to have actual unlimited mintages because then coin dealers and speculators won't want any part of it. But then you've also killed all interest in commemoratives as collectibles.
How about limiting the ordering window to two weeks? It wouldn't eliminate speculators, but neither would it shut out collectors or anyone else who wants the coin. It worked for the 1998 Kennedy two-coin silver set, which included the set-only 1998-S burnished silver Kennedy half. Final mintage was about 62,000.
It might. But, again, I think this is essentially the equivalent of an unlimited mintage.
Wow, so much worry about insiders and the big guys cheating.
The Mint has proven to be even less transparent than the FBI! Even our crack numis-media can't pry even unimportant facts out of them.
Those of us who are not consumed by suspicion or paranoia, who can imagine the occasional unpublished mintage limit coin scenario playing out over several years, know how it would be beneficial to the hobby and the market while avoiding the chaos.
"Those of us who are not consumed by suspicion or paranoia"
@jmlanzaf said:
The ONLY solution to eliminate speculators is to have actual unlimited mintages because then coin dealers and speculators won't want any part of it. But then you've also killed all interest in commemoratives as collectibles.
How about limiting the ordering window to two weeks? It wouldn't eliminate speculators, but neither would it shut out collectors or anyone else who wants the coin. It worked for the 1998 Kennedy two-coin silver set, which included the set-only 1998-S burnished silver Kennedy half. Final mintage was about 62,000.
It might. But, again, I think this is essentially the equivalent of an unlimited mintage.
Limiting the ordering period to two weeks limits the mintage to the number ordered during that time. Mintage could further be controlled by limiting the quantity allowed to be ordered by a single individual or account. It's more important for collectors to be able to obtain new Mint issues for their sets, than for the Mint to concern itself about what speculators might or might not do.
@jmlanzaf said:
The ONLY solution to eliminate speculators is to have actual unlimited mintages because then coin dealers and speculators won't want any part of it. But then you've also killed all interest in commemoratives as collectibles.
How about limiting the ordering window to two weeks? It wouldn't eliminate speculators, but neither would it shut out collectors or anyone else who wants the coin. It worked for the 1998 Kennedy two-coin silver set, which included the set-only 1998-S burnished silver Kennedy half. Final mintage was about 62,000.
It might. But, again, I think this is essentially the equivalent of an unlimited mintage.
Limiting the ordering period to two weeks limits the mintage to the number ordered during that time. Mintage could further be controlled by limiting the quantity allowed to be ordered by a single individual or account. It's more important for collectors to be able to obtain new Mint issues for their sets, than for the Mint to concern itself about what speculators might or might not do.
I disagree. It’s more important to grow the tent than shrink the tent. You look at demographics in general for the U.S. and demographics in specific for Mint customers and you see the Mint is in a world of hurt. The Mint shouldn’t be engaging in class warfare and deciding who should or shouldn’t be purchasing coins. The Mint should do everything in its power to quit hemorrhaging customers and hemorrhaging profits...
@jerseyralph said:
I do mind competing with a computer.
Why?
I feel this is a technology advantage that most collectors do not have access to. I have no idea how to even going about to create a bot, nor who to contact for these services, nor do I want to contact anyone about getting a bot. Based upon the success of this limited mintage coin, I think the bot problem will only get worse next time.
I'm sorry to change the subject but my son just gave me this silver eagle enhanced reverse proof dollar for Christmas! He had told me that he wasn't able to get one on the day of their release, that he got into an endless refresh mode and got shut out in the end. What a fantastic feeling to open that gift box and see the mint issued shipping box inside! He had opened it to check contents but I would have myself anyway. I looked it over and think it has that 70 look so I might send it in for grading. I don't think they'll put a first strike designation or print the coa number on the label. I'll call tomorrow and get some guidance on that. I just wanted to share what a generous gift he gave me, especially because I've been apprising him of the values since their release because I had the good fortune to get one for myself on the initial release date. Merry Christmas to all!
That is awesome....absolutely awesome!!! Congratulations. You obviously raised that boy right!
100% positive transactions with SurfinxHI, bigole, 1madman, collectorcoins, proofmorgan, Luke Marshall, silver pop, golden egg, point five zero,coin22lover, alohagary, blaircountycoin,joebb21
@jmlanzaf said:
The ONLY solution to eliminate speculators is to have actual unlimited mintages because then coin dealers and speculators won't want any part of it. But then you've also killed all interest in commemoratives as collectibles.
How about limiting the ordering window to two weeks? It wouldn't eliminate speculators, but neither would it shut out collectors or anyone else who wants the coin. It worked for the 1998 Kennedy two-coin silver set, which included the set-only 1998-S burnished silver Kennedy half. Final mintage was about 62,000.
It might. But, again, I think this is essentially the equivalent of an unlimited mintage.
Limiting the ordering period to two weeks limits the mintage to the number ordered during that time. Mintage could further be controlled by limiting the quantity allowed to be ordered by a single individual or account. It's more important for collectors to be able to obtain new Mint issues for their sets, than for the Mint to concern itself about what speculators might or might not do.
I disagree. It’s more important to grow the tent than shrink the tent. You look at demographics in general for the U.S. and demographics in specific for Mint customers and you see the Mint is in a world of hurt. The Mint shouldn’t be engaging in class warfare and deciding who should or shouldn’t be purchasing coins. The Mint should do everything in its power to quit hemorrhaging customers and hemorrhaging profits...
If the Mint treats its existing customers shabbily (as in the recent ASE debacle) it's hard to see how it's going to retain a solid customer base long-term. I would be perfectly happy with a one-month to three-month ordering period with no quantity limit. The aftermarket can take care of itself.
100% positive transactions with SurfinxHI, bigole, 1madman, collectorcoins, proofmorgan, Luke Marshall, silver pop, golden egg, point five zero,coin22lover, alohagary, blaircountycoin,joebb21
@jerseyralph said:
I feel this is a technology advantage that most collectors do not have access to.
Not everybody has high speed internet access. Would you propose prohibiting using that, too?
No I would not prohibit that. In my opinion, the difference in use of high speed internet is not that significant for a single user than a bot creating many simultaneous users trying to snag these limited coins. I admit I may not understand how a bot works, so I could be mistaken.
@jmlanzaf said:
The ONLY solution to eliminate speculators is to have actual unlimited mintages because then coin dealers and speculators won't want any part of it. But then you've also killed all interest in commemoratives as collectibles.
How about limiting the ordering window to two weeks? It wouldn't eliminate speculators, but neither would it shut out collectors or anyone else who wants the coin. It worked for the 1998 Kennedy two-coin silver set, which included the set-only 1998-S burnished silver Kennedy half. Final mintage was about 62,000.
It might. But, again, I think this is essentially the equivalent of an unlimited mintage.
Limiting the ordering period to two weeks limits the mintage to the number ordered during that time. Mintage could further be controlled by limiting the quantity allowed to be ordered by a single individual or account. It's more important for collectors to be able to obtain new Mint issues for their sets, than for the Mint to concern itself about what speculators might or might not do.
I disagree. It’s more important to grow the tent than shrink the tent. You look at demographics in general for the U.S. and demographics in specific for Mint customers and you see the Mint is in a world of hurt. The Mint shouldn’t be engaging in class warfare and deciding who should or shouldn’t be purchasing coins. The Mint should do everything in its power to quit hemorrhaging customers and hemorrhaging profits...
If the Mint treats its existing customers shabbily (as in the recent ASE debacle) it's hard to see how it's going to retain a solid customer base long-term. I would be perfectly happy with a one-month to three-month ordering period with no quantity limit. The aftermarket can take care of itself.
If you want to Continue hemorrhaging customers and hemorrhaging profits then your idea accomplishes both. What the Mint has been doing in the past is not currently working.
The horse that gets you in the ditch isn’t the horse that gets you out of the ditch.
The only thing the Mint can do now to save itself is Expand it’s customer base and the release of the 2019-S Enhanced Reverse Proof American Silver Eagle accomplished that goal...
I was up early to send the wifey off to work. I checked only because I happened to think about it. There was no release today. Kliao, I hand the baton back over to you.
"What we are never changes, but who we are ... never stops changing."
The mint is a government agency. Every tax payer in this country should have equal opportunity to buy anything the mint releases regardless of whether its the last piece to ones collection or the very first purchase you make at the mint. The way they did it for the ERP is the only way they should do it. You want to complain about their out of date cart system or ordering system and failure for the servers to be able to handle the load i'm right there with you. If you want to complain about something complain about the youtubers who hyped this coin for a month before it was released. I didnt know about this sale until Youtube suggested it to me while i was searching for silencer reviews. You really want a lottery? A lottery means everyone buys into the lottery and then winners are picked. So how do you like this, everyone who wants a coin pays $100 and then the winners are picked. If you loose you loose your $100 just like a real lottery. How many times would people do that for? By the looks of this thread we need not worry about children getting into collecting coins, there seems to be plenty of them.
@coinnoob782 said:
The mint is a government agency. Every tax payer in this country should have equal opportunity to buy anything the mint releases regardless of whether its the last piece to ones collection or the very first purchase you make at the mint. The way they did it for the ERP is the only way they should do it. You want to complain about their out of date cart system or ordering system and failure for the servers to be able to handle the load i'm right there with you. If you want to complain about something complain about the youtubers who hyped this coin for a month before it was released. I didnt know about this sale until Youtube suggested it to me while i was searching for silencer reviews. You really want a lottery? A lottery means everyone buys into the lottery and then winners are picked. So how do you like this, everyone who wants a coin pays $100 and then the winners are picked. If you loose you loose your $100 just like a real lottery. How many times would people do that for? By the looks of this thread we need not worry about children getting into collecting coins, there seems to be plenty of them.
You don't pay for a coin lottery just sign up. It works in Australia, I got one of their low mintage Kangaroo gold coins that way. I guess even if it works perfectly we could still find reason to complain.
@coinnoob782 said:
The mint is a government agency. Every tax payer in this country should have equal opportunity to buy anything the mint releases regardless of whether its the last piece to ones collection or the very first purchase you make at the mint. The way they did it for the ERP is the only way they should do it. You want to complain about their out of date cart system or ordering system and failure for the servers to be able to handle the load i'm right there with you. If you want to complain about something complain about the youtubers who hyped this coin for a month before it was released. I didnt know about this sale until Youtube suggested it to me while i was searching for silencer reviews. You really want a lottery? A lottery means everyone buys into the lottery and then winners are picked. So how do you like this, everyone who wants a coin pays $100 and then the winners are picked. If you loose you loose your $100 just like a real lottery. How many times would people do that for? By the looks of this thread we need not worry about children getting into collecting coins, there seems to be plenty of them.
You don't pay for a coin lottery just sign up. It works in Australia, I got one of their low mintage Kangaroo gold coins that way. I guess even if it works perfectly we could still find reason to complain.
Australia is significantly smaller than the U.S. And are you actually telling me that no one in Australia complains about the lottery system?
I would SELFISHLY love a lottery system. I would have likely ended up with dozens if not hundreds of these coins. But I'm not naive enough to think that you wouldn't hear even more complaining on this board.
How does Australia prevent crowdsourcing overrunning the lottery? It's actually easier to game the lottery than the current system. Under the current system, you have to line up your suppliers and have them all online at 12:00 and have them patient enough to go through the process. In a lottery, you can have your suppliers line up at any time during the lottery registration and then you know pre-release exactly how many you are getting. It would be great for dealers and people with large networks. Anybody who works in a large office could have had all their co-workers register.
@jmlanzaf said:
The ONLY solution to eliminate speculators is to have actual unlimited mintages because then coin dealers and speculators won't want any part of it. But then you've also killed all interest in commemoratives as collectibles.
How about limiting the ordering window to two weeks? It wouldn't eliminate speculators, but neither would it shut out collectors or anyone else who wants the coin. It worked for the 1998 Kennedy two-coin silver set, which included the set-only 1998-S burnished silver Kennedy half. Final mintage was about 62,000.
It might. But, again, I think this is essentially the equivalent of an unlimited mintage.
Limiting the ordering period to two weeks limits the mintage to the number ordered during that time. Mintage could further be controlled by limiting the quantity allowed to be ordered by a single individual or account. It's more important for collectors to be able to obtain new Mint issues for their sets, than for the Mint to concern itself about what speculators might or might not do.
I disagree. It’s more important to grow the tent than shrink the tent. You look at demographics in general for the U.S. and demographics in specific for Mint customers and you see the Mint is in a world of hurt. The Mint shouldn’t be engaging in class warfare and deciding who should or shouldn’t be purchasing coins. The Mint should do everything in its power to quit hemorrhaging customers and hemorrhaging profits...
If the Mint treats its existing customers shabbily (as in the recent ASE debacle) it's hard to see how it's going to retain a solid customer base long-term. I would be perfectly happy with a one-month to three-month ordering period with no quantity limit. The aftermarket can take care of itself.
If you want to Continue hemorrhaging customers and hemorrhaging profits then your idea accomplishes both. What the Mint has been doing in the past is not currently working.
The horse that gets you in the ditch isn’t the horse that gets you out of the ditch.
The only thing the Mint can do now to save itself is Expand it’s customer base and the release of the 2019-S Enhanced Reverse Proof American Silver Eagle accomplished that goal...
Most members of the Mint’s “expanded customer base” were unable to complete their orders, just as most existing collectors were. How many of them enjoyed the experience and are eager to do business with the Mint again? (For that matter, how many successful buyers will show up at the Mint’s website again, except to participate in the next guaranteed flip?)
Coin collecting as a hobby has been losing members for a long time, and for reasons that have nothing to do with the quality of the Mint’s customer service. Treating existing customers shabbily will not improve the Mint’s long-term customer retention, it will likely have the opposite effect.
Less than 5 percent of the Mint’s net income is derived from Numismatic products, so maintaining its profitability in this sector is not a life-or-death matter. Nor should it be. But the Mint should strive to make ordering its Numismatic products a pleasant experience for both new and existing customers. Gimmicks such as the recent ASE release do not accomplish this goal.
Comments
I wrap it in a static free cloth and rotate and tap three with ballpean hammer three times on all sides. Then I snip the corners. Then gloves and transfer to mint plastic case until ready to ship. Fingers crossed but in for a penny in for a pound now
100% positive transactions with SurfinxHI, bigole, 1madman, collectorcoins, proofmorgan, Luke Marshall, silver pop, golden egg, point five zero,coin22lover, alohagary, blaircountycoin,joebb21
The way most dealers do it is to hire people to buy the coin and pay them a premium for the coin. A lottery, as you describe it, would most likely put MORE coins in the hands of dealers and people with money. One dealer hired 200 actors to stand in line in Baltmore. With an online lottery, EVERY DEALER could hire 200 or more people to put their name in the hat.
I teach at a college. You don't think I could get 500 or 1000 students to sign up with the Mint for the chance to make $500 if they "win" the lottery? If they had had such a lottery for this last coin, instead of getting ready for Spring Semester, I'd be retiring.
Yep, there is NO system that would be completely "fair" to collectors and hobbyists. 99% of the population don't care about coins and so if someone (ie a dealer) offered them maybe $50 for an hour of their time, most would probably take it.
Well, actually I take it back. The only way to have a fair system would be to invent a mind-reading device and have a pre-sale ONLY to collectors.
What's fair about excluding everybody but collectors? Anyway, that would appear to require that the mint ignore their own mission statement:
About the United States Mint
The mission of the U.S. Mint is to serve the American people by manufacturing and distributing circulating, precious metal and collectible coins and national medals, and providing security over assets entrusted to us.
https://www.usmint.gov/about
This whole conversation is nothing more than pseudo analytic throat clearing as the mint will likely repeat with a lower mintage and then dealers can trade them amongst themselves as they will be the ones who can afford them
100% positive transactions with SurfinxHI, bigole, 1madman, collectorcoins, proofmorgan, Luke Marshall, silver pop, golden egg, point five zero,coin22lover, alohagary, blaircountycoin,joebb21
Some people think that collectors and hobbyists are getting shafted, which is why I put fair in quotation marks at first. We live in a capitalist society; people are going to look for profits. I could see where the collectors are coming from though.
Did you know that every time I check the mint website to see if they are now magically available, an angel gets his wings? I think I will keep checking, we need more angels with wings.
I’m fine with the rat race to get a coin the second it’s released. I’m okay if I lose, that’s how it goes. What I don’t like is having to start over again because of the 1990’s system they have.
You really are a glass half empty kind of person, you find a problem with everything. It really worked out last time didn't it ? Come up with something other than free for all or lottery. I'm all for a good idea.
From the 'I've got to have one' collectors point of view the good idea is make 100,000 of them and have a household limit of 1 for 48 hours. Based on last couple years sales that appears to be the number where everyone who wants one gets one.
That's probably about it other than free for all or lottery. It removes profit motivation but is fair.
https://ebay.com/itm/New-2019-S-1-ENHANCED-REVERSE-PROOF-SILVER-EAGLE-NGC-PF69-FIRST-RELEASE-PR-69-/164001270381
Ouch, PF69 for $198.99. Nice Christmas gift for someone. Seems to be a good seller. Keen to know if the seller will fulfil the transaction.
Which was my earlier point. The only way to avoid a run is to overproduce. [Does that make my glass half full?]
If you want a run, which the Mint did, you're going to under produce. Then, it really doesn't matter how you distribute, you are going to have the same problem: an INTENTIONAL shortage.
I don't think that makes it half-full or half- empty, iit's just the way it is.
Obviously forgot an extra 1 at the beginning of the price, the only seller I'd excuse for cancelling their sale
Not sure but he has another four (4) of them for sale so he is not hurting!
No release today
Merry Christmas and happy holidays!
Collector
87 Positive BST transactions buying and selling with 53 members and counting!
instagram.com/klnumismatics
Santa did not appear at the Mint today...only The Grinch!
Merry Christmas.
There is no system that will seem “fair” to everyone, especially if you miss out. Obviously as an initial matter the Mint needs to improve their web-buying experience and ability to stop bots. But in terms of distribution strategy beyond a lottery, the Mint might consider not revealing mintage in advance for some coins. And then periodically (but not too often) create a “low” mintage product that is likely to do well on the secondary market. By not pre-announcing mintage, large buyers, speculators, and flippers would have less incentive to hire actors, or otherwise invest too heavily in “hoarding.” Collectors would quickly be incentivized to act early on any new product release, but would presumably have less competition. Done properly over several years, I expect overall Mint sales and collector interest would increase, and help reverse the long term trend of fewer collectors and sales.
Why would anyone jump in and buy coins that might have unlimited mintages? Collectors would not be "incentivized", they would just be de-incentivized. And, from a Mint perspective, this strategy would only work if there were NO FREE RETURNS. Otherwise, what is stopping "collectors" from buying and then returning it when it becomes clear that the coin will be available in the secondary market for less than the issue price?
People need to realize that the Mint's customers are NOT coin collectors but ALL U.S. CITIZENS. The Mint does not, nay SHOULD NOT, be catering to collectors. It should be attempting to market to the entire citizenry. All these suggestions designed to increase the odds of "collectors" getting what they want is at odds with the actual mission of the MInt.
And do you really think that "collectors" are not going to complain about being asked to buy yet another commemorative without complete information? You want "fair", make everything unlimited mintage. But "collectors" don't want that, do they? Because that guarantees that the peak value of the coin is the issue price.
I have sent in NGC Proof 70 coins to PCGS several times and never would PCGS cross them over. DNC> @taciturn said:
This is probably where the price will end up after the new year, for a Proof 69.
You never seem to read or understand the concept of unpublished mintage. It does not mean unlimited mintage. There would be an established mintage limit, but known only to the Mint. Occasionally the limit would be reached unexpectedly and the coin would become more valuable to your secondary market.
This would allow people who want the coin to get one. This would allow speculators who have done their homework and are willing to take some risk, to fill their inventory.
And yes, I think we all agree that the Mint needs to tighten up their return policy.
Not disclosing the mintage, you could be sure someone would have connections inside the mint and would know what items to corner in the market.
Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value. Zero. Voltaire. Ebay coinbowlllc
You never seem to understand the concept of unpublished mintage - EVERYONE WOULD BE FORCED TO ASSUME UNLIMITED because it is far riskier to assume that the mintage is limited. I'm certainly not going to jump in and buy an undeclared mintage because it MIGHT only be 30,000 or 100,000
Exactly. This is just another solution that actually guarantees MORE coins go to the moneyed players. Joe Schmo will be forced to assume that there is an unlimited mintage while Mr. Coin Money knows from his Mint contact that there is only 50,000 available. In the normal sequence of distribution - 24 hr HHL followed by no limit - you might well have a coin where 15,000 or 20,000 go to collectors and the other 30,000 end up in the hands of the bulk buyers on day 2.
The ONLY solution to eliminate speculators is to have actual unlimited mintages because then coin dealers and speculators won't want any part of it. But then you've also killed all interest in commemoratives as collectibles.
There is no ordering system that would allow the 250,000 people who want a coin to get one when the mint only makes 30,000 of them.
How about limiting the ordering window to two weeks? It wouldn't eliminate speculators, but neither would it shut out collectors or anyone else who wants the coin. It worked for the 1998 Kennedy two-coin silver set, which included the set-only 1998-S burnished silver Kennedy half. Final mintage was about 62,000.
My Adolph A. Weinman signature
"Mint might consider not revealing mintage in advance for some coins".
You're asking for Less transparency than we have how.
You're asking for the Insiders to run the show More than we do now...
"There would be an established mintage limit, but known only to the Mint."
That's kinda like the Insiders at the Mint NOT spending day after day chasing coins that do NOT appear until those on the inside Know when they will appear...And then They show up...
Wow, so much worry about insiders and the big guys cheating.
The Mint has proven to be even less transparent than the FBI! Even our crack numis-media can't pry even unimportant facts out of them.
Those of us who are not consumed by suspicion or paranoia, who can imagine the occasional unpublished mintage limit coin scenario playing out over several years, know how it would be beneficial to the hobby and the market while avoiding the chaos.
It might. But, again, I think this is essentially the equivalent of an unlimited mintage.
"Those of us who are not consumed by suspicion or paranoia"
Not suspicion or paranoia. Fact...
Limiting the ordering period to two weeks limits the mintage to the number ordered during that time. Mintage could further be controlled by limiting the quantity allowed to be ordered by a single individual or account. It's more important for collectors to be able to obtain new Mint issues for their sets, than for the Mint to concern itself about what speculators might or might not do.
My Adolph A. Weinman signature
I disagree. It’s more important to grow the tent than shrink the tent. You look at demographics in general for the U.S. and demographics in specific for Mint customers and you see the Mint is in a world of hurt. The Mint shouldn’t be engaging in class warfare and deciding who should or shouldn’t be purchasing coins. The Mint should do everything in its power to quit hemorrhaging customers and hemorrhaging profits...
I feel this is a technology advantage that most collectors do not have access to. I have no idea how to even going about to create a bot, nor who to contact for these services, nor do I want to contact anyone about getting a bot. Based upon the success of this limited mintage coin, I think the bot problem will only get worse next time.
Not everybody has high speed internet access. Would you propose prohibiting using that, too?
I'm sorry to change the subject but my son just gave me this silver eagle enhanced reverse proof dollar for Christmas! He had told me that he wasn't able to get one on the day of their release, that he got into an endless refresh mode and got shut out in the end. What a fantastic feeling to open that gift box and see the mint issued shipping box inside! He had opened it to check contents but I would have myself anyway. I looked it over and think it has that 70 look so I might send it in for grading. I don't think they'll put a first strike designation or print the coa number on the label. I'll call tomorrow and get some guidance on that. I just wanted to share what a generous gift he gave me, especially because I've been apprising him of the values since their release because I had the good fortune to get one for myself on the initial release date. Merry Christmas to all!
That is awesome....absolutely awesome!!! Congratulations. You obviously raised that boy right!
100% positive transactions with SurfinxHI, bigole, 1madman, collectorcoins, proofmorgan, Luke Marshall, silver pop, golden egg, point five zero,coin22lover, alohagary, blaircountycoin,joebb21
If the Mint treats its existing customers shabbily (as in the recent ASE debacle) it's hard to see how it's going to retain a solid customer base long-term. I would be perfectly happy with a one-month to three-month ordering period with no quantity limit. The aftermarket can take care of itself.
My Adolph A. Weinman signature
Concur.
100% positive transactions with SurfinxHI, bigole, 1madman, collectorcoins, proofmorgan, Luke Marshall, silver pop, golden egg, point five zero,coin22lover, alohagary, blaircountycoin,joebb21
No I would not prohibit that. In my opinion, the difference in use of high speed internet is not that significant for a single user than a bot creating many simultaneous users trying to snag these limited coins. I admit I may not understand how a bot works, so I could be mistaken.
Bot = technology that not everybody has access to = not okay to use
High speed internet = technology that not everybody has access to = okay to use
Got it.
If you want to Continue hemorrhaging customers and hemorrhaging profits then your idea accomplishes both. What the Mint has been doing in the past is not currently working.
The horse that gets you in the ditch isn’t the horse that gets you out of the ditch.
The only thing the Mint can do now to save itself is Expand it’s customer base and the release of the 2019-S Enhanced Reverse Proof American Silver Eagle accomplished that goal...
No one checked this morning ? Have we finally accepted it's time to put a fork in it ?
I woke up late
Collector
87 Positive BST transactions buying and selling with 53 members and counting!
instagram.com/klnumismatics
36 pages....how long will this string go on?
Congrats @Onedollarnohollar , that is a great ending to this season!!!!!!!
I was up early to send the wifey off to work. I checked only because I happened to think about it. There was no release today. Kliao, I hand the baton back over to you.
The mint is a government agency. Every tax payer in this country should have equal opportunity to buy anything the mint releases regardless of whether its the last piece to ones collection or the very first purchase you make at the mint. The way they did it for the ERP is the only way they should do it. You want to complain about their out of date cart system or ordering system and failure for the servers to be able to handle the load i'm right there with you. If you want to complain about something complain about the youtubers who hyped this coin for a month before it was released. I didnt know about this sale until Youtube suggested it to me while i was searching for silencer reviews. You really want a lottery? A lottery means everyone buys into the lottery and then winners are picked. So how do you like this, everyone who wants a coin pays $100 and then the winners are picked. If you loose you loose your $100 just like a real lottery. How many times would people do that for? By the looks of this thread we need not worry about children getting into collecting coins, there seems to be plenty of them.
You don't pay for a coin lottery just sign up. It works in Australia, I got one of their low mintage Kangaroo gold coins that way. I guess even if it works perfectly we could still find reason to complain.
Australia is significantly smaller than the U.S. And are you actually telling me that no one in Australia complains about the lottery system?
I would SELFISHLY love a lottery system. I would have likely ended up with dozens if not hundreds of these coins. But I'm not naive enough to think that you wouldn't hear even more complaining on this board.
How does Australia prevent crowdsourcing overrunning the lottery? It's actually easier to game the lottery than the current system. Under the current system, you have to line up your suppliers and have them all online at 12:00 and have them patient enough to go through the process. In a lottery, you can have your suppliers line up at any time during the lottery registration and then you know pre-release exactly how many you are getting. It would be great for dealers and people with large networks. Anybody who works in a large office could have had all their co-workers register.
Most members of the Mint’s “expanded customer base” were unable to complete their orders, just as most existing collectors were. How many of them enjoyed the experience and are eager to do business with the Mint again? (For that matter, how many successful buyers will show up at the Mint’s website again, except to participate in the next guaranteed flip?)
Coin collecting as a hobby has been losing members for a long time, and for reasons that have nothing to do with the quality of the Mint’s customer service. Treating existing customers shabbily will not improve the Mint’s long-term customer retention, it will likely have the opposite effect.
Less than 5 percent of the Mint’s net income is derived from Numismatic products, so maintaining its profitability in this sector is not a life-or-death matter. Nor should it be. But the Mint should strive to make ordering its Numismatic products a pleasant experience for both new and existing customers. Gimmicks such as the recent ASE release do not accomplish this goal.
My Adolph A. Weinman signature
