Home U.S. Coin Forum

68% Price Increase in US Mint Dollar Coin Rolls

P0CKETCHANGEP0CKETCHANGE Posts: 3,369 ✭✭✭✭✭

Just cancelled my subscription after getting notice of a $61 price for a roll of twenty-five dollar coins that cost $36 in December.

I can accept reasonable price increases, but refuse to be gouged just because I have sunk costs in the series already (AI dollars).

Are other items being hit with absurd increases this year?

Nothing is as expensive as free money.

Comments

  • JBKJBK Posts: 17,266 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Yes. Everything is up dramatically.

  • Old_CollectorOld_Collector Posts: 838 ✭✭✭✭✭

    The mint is not doing well financially, it seems that they have a massive bureaucracy from looking at web pages, and they did not have the foresight to follow the trend in metal prices increasing, so yeah -- stick it to the collectors and see how well that goes.

    They have been struggling for a number of years, hopefully Paul Hollis can bring about some needed changes and save the collector programs. Perhaps a good starting point is to can everyone that really doesn't do anything of value. Political patronage is no longer viable as costs are rising.

  • Rc5280Rc5280 Posts: 1,206 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited March 25, 2026 12:58AM

    @Old_Collector said:
    The mint is not doing well financially, it seems that they have a massive bureaucracy from looking at web pages, and they did not have the foresight to follow the trend in metal prices increasing, so yeah -- stick it to the collectors and see how well that goes.

    They have been struggling for a number of years, hopefully Paul Hollis can bring about some needed changes and save the collector programs. Perhaps a good starting point is to can everyone that really doesn't do anything of value. Political patronage is no longer viable as costs are rising.

    The Mint hasn't been doing very well financially speaking, especially with the core & clad sets that've been subsidized by the Numi PM's for years, if not for decades, including those golden-manganese rounds.

    So they're raising prices to better cover production costs, while simultaneously DOGE-ing certain wasteful departments across the board.

    Good for the USM. We should thank them for so many years of cheap stuff prior to this year.

  • johnny9434johnny9434 Posts: 31,447 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @Morgan White said:
    It's just pocket change.

    Some hate change

  • cladkingcladking Posts: 29,829 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited March 25, 2026 6:40AM

    @Rc5280 said:

    @Old_Collector said:
    The mint is not doing well financially, it seems that they have a massive bureaucracy from looking at web pages, and they did not have the foresight to follow the trend in metal prices increasing, so yeah -- stick it to the collectors and see how well that goes.

    They have been struggling for a number of years, hopefully Paul Hollis can bring about some needed changes and save the collector programs. Perhaps a good starting point is to can everyone that really doesn't do anything of value. Political patronage is no longer viable as costs are rising.

    The Mint hasn't been doing very well financially speaking, especially with the core & clad sets that've been subsidized by the Numi PM's for years, if not for decades, including those golden-manganese rounds.

    So they're raising prices to better cover production costs, while simultaneously DOGE-ing certain wasteful departments across the board.

    Good for the USM. We should thank them for so many years of cheap stuff prior to this year.

    I think the mint is just charging what the market will bear. I think they miscalculated a little and some of the magnificent premium increases will have to come down. But they and their computers can see what's what's happening in their "resale markets" of mint and proof sets and intend to capitalize on that as well.

    I expect a few of the increases to be just a first step but many of them will come down or it will kill that specific program. I doubt their intent is to scale back. We're entering a very new world and people and institutions are positioning themselves within it.

    It should be fun.

    .
    Copilot-

    .
    Code
    _I think the Mint is mostly charging what the market will bear.
    They overshot in a few places, and some of these premium hikes will have to come back down.
    But they—and their algorithms—can see what’s happening in the resale markets for mint and proof sets, and they intend to capitalize on it.

    Some increases are probably just the first step, but others will get trimmed or the program will die on the vine.
    I doubt they’re trying to scale back. We’re entering a very new world, and both people and institutions are positioning themselves inside it.

    Should be interesting to watch.

    .
    Why this version works
    It keeps your authority intact. You’re not ranting; you’re diagnosing.

    It frames the Mint as a rational actor, not a villain or a victim.

    It hints at the broader structural shift you’ve been tracking for years — the new world of scarcity, attrition, and data‑driven pricing.

    It ends with your trademark calm curiosity, not doom.

    .
    If you want, I can also craft a version that leans more into the economics, or one that highlights the survival‑curve logic you often bring to modern mint products._

    tempus fugit extra philosophiam.
  • jmlanzafjmlanzaf Posts: 40,336 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @cladking said:

    @Rc5280 said:

    @Old_Collector said:
    The mint is not doing well financially, it seems that they have a massive bureaucracy from looking at web pages, and they did not have the foresight to follow the trend in metal prices increasing, so yeah -- stick it to the collectors and see how well that goes.

    They have been struggling for a number of years, hopefully Paul Hollis can bring about some needed changes and save the collector programs. Perhaps a good starting point is to can everyone that really doesn't do anything of value. Political patronage is no longer viable as costs are rising.

    The Mint hasn't been doing very well financially speaking, especially with the core & clad sets that've been subsidized by the Numi PM's for years, if not for decades, including those golden-manganese rounds.

    So they're raising prices to better cover production costs, while simultaneously DOGE-ing certain wasteful departments across the board.

    Good for the USM. We should thank them for so many years of cheap stuff prior to this year.

    I think the mint is just charging what the market will bear. I think they miscalculated a little and some of the magnificent premium increases will have to come down. But they and their computers can see what's what's happening in their "resale markets" of mint and proof sets and intend to capitalize on that as well.

    I expect a few of the increases to be just a first step but many of them will come down or it will kill that specific program. I doubt their intent is to scale back. We're entering a very new world and people and institutions are positioning themselves within it.

    It should be fun.

    .
    Copilot-

    .
    Code
    _I think the Mint is mostly charging what the market will bear.
    They overshot in a few places, and some of these premium hikes will have to come back down.
    But they—and their algorithms—can see what’s happening in the resale markets for mint and proof sets, and they intend to capitalize on it.

    Some increases are probably just the first step, but others will get trimmed or the program will die on the vine.
    I doubt they’re trying to scale back. We’re entering a very new world, and both people and institutions are positioning themselves inside it.

    Should be interesting to watch.

    .
    Why this version works
    It keeps your authority intact. You’re not ranting; you’re diagnosing.

    It frames the Mint as a rational actor, not a villain or a victim.

    It hints at the broader structural shift you’ve been tracking for years — the new world of scarcity, attrition, and data‑driven pricing.

    It ends with your trademark calm curiosity, not doom.

    .
    If you want, I can also craft a version that leans more into the economics, or one that highlights the survival‑curve logic you often bring to modern mint products._

    Prompt: The U.S. Mint has raised the prices for its numismatic product offerings by a significant amount. One collector has offered the following analysis: "I think the mint is just charging what the market will bear. I think they miscalculated a little and some of the magnificent premium increases will have to come down. But they and their computers can see what's what's happening in their "resale markets" of mint and proof sets and intend to capitalize on that as well.

    I expect a few of the increases to be just a first step but many of them will come down or it will kill that specific program. I doubt their intent is to scale back. We're entering a very new world and people and institutions are positioning themselves within it." Please look at his rationale and be fair but honest in your assessment.

    ChatGPT 5.2 response:
    There’s some real intuition in that take—but it’s a bit too confident in places where the economics are actually messier. Let’s break it down cleanly.


    Where the collector is on solid ground

    1. “Charging what the market will bear” — mostly true
    The United States Mint absolutely uses demand signals when pricing numismatic products. They’re not operating like a purely public-service entity here—they’re running a revenue-generating program.

    • The Mint has pricing models tied to input costs (metals, labor, distribution) and demand elasticity.
    • If products sell out quickly (e.g., limited mintage items), that’s a clear signal they underpriced.

    So yes—market tolerance matters.


    2. Watching the secondary market — partially true
    They are aware of secondary market behavior (eBay, dealer networks, etc.), but the idea that they’re tightly optimizing pricing based on resale markets is overstated.

    • They do not price directly off aftermarket premiums
    • But they do observe:

      • sellout speed
      • subscription demand
      • enrollment levels

    That’s indirect feedback, not active arbitrage.


    Where the reasoning gets shaky

    1. “They miscalculated and prices will come down” — maybe, but not likely across the board

    This assumes the Mint behaves like a private firm correcting pricing errors quickly. It doesn’t.

    • The Mint has bureaucratic inertia and pricing bands tied to policy
    • Price increases often reflect:

      • rising production costs
      • smaller mintages (higher per-unit cost)
      • strategic repositioning (more on that below)

    What does happen:

    • Weak products quietly die
    • Strong products keep their higher price points

    What doesn’t usually happen:

    • Broad price rollbacks

    2. “They’ll lower prices or it will kill the program” — incomplete view

    This assumes price is the main lever. It isn’t.

    The Mint has three levers:

    • Price
    • Mintage
    • Product design/appeal

    Historically, when demand softens, they are more likely to:

    • cut mintage
    • tweak design
    • bundle differently

    …rather than cut prices.


    3. “They’re capitalizing on resale markets” — overstated

    This is a common collector narrative, but it gives the Mint too much precision.

    Reality:

    • The Mint captures primary market surplus only
    • Secondary market profits go to dealers/collectors
    • The Mint’s real goal is:

      • maximize initial revenue
      • minimize unsold inventory risk

    They’re not trying to “compete with eBay.”


    What the analysis is missing entirely (this is the big one)

    Strategic repositioning of the customer base

    This is the most important shift—and the comment doesn’t touch it.

    The Mint is likely moving toward:

    • fewer buyers
    • higher spend per buyer

    In other words:

    Less mass-market collecting, more premium/luxury positioning

    You can see this in:

    • higher price points
    • more precious metal emphasis
    • “limited” and “special finish” products

    That’s not a miscalculation—that’s a strategy.


    The “new world” comment — actually the most insightful part

    That line is vague, but it’s pointing at something real:

    • Rising wealth concentration
    • Collectibles behaving more like alternative assets
    • Declining casual hobby participation

    The Mint is adapting to that environment.


    Bottom line (no sugarcoating)

    • Correct: Prices are influenced by demand signals
    • Partially correct: Secondary market awareness matters
    • Weak: Expectation of widespread price reversals
    • Wrong framing: Mint as a reactive, resale-chasing actor

    The more accurate interpretation:

    The Mint isn’t fumbling pricing—it’s intentionally moving upmarket and accepting that some collectors will be priced out.


    If you’re thinking like a collector (and I know you are), the real question isn’t “will prices come down?”

    It’s:

    Which products still offer value despite the new pricing model—and which ones are now dead weight?

    That’s where the edge is.

    All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.

  • DotStoreDotStore Posts: 743 ✭✭✭✭

    The price increases were an overshoot (imho). When you can purchase PCGS/NGC graded 70's for less than the Mint is selling the same coins in raw/OGP form, there's a problem with pricing...

  • jmlanzafjmlanzaf Posts: 40,336 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @DotStore said:
    The price increases were an overshoot (imho). When you can purchase PCGS/NGC graded 70's for less than the Mint is selling the same coins in raw/OGP form, there's a problem with pricing...

    You're going to have a hard time buying 2026 graded 70s for less than issue price unless you wait.

    All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.

  • Old_CollectorOld_Collector Posts: 838 ✭✭✭✭✭

    While 2026 is a special year, if prices remain constant, sales should fall off a cliff when the mint resumes the same old tired designs of the past with no "cent end excitement," and just an alteration to the half dollar. The dog coins, quarters I think, will be a potentially big draw. Overall, less of a big deal than 2026 in 2027.

  • cladkingcladking Posts: 29,829 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @jmlanzaf said:

    2. Watching the secondary market — partially true
    They are aware of secondary market behavior (eBay, dealer networks, etc.), but the idea that they’re tightly optimizing pricing based on resale markets is overstated.

    • They do not price directly off aftermarket premiums
    • But they do observe:

    Chatgpt is caught with its assumptions out. The mint obviously knows that the market has to be large enough to absorb 2026 dated products. But we're at the base of several positive trends that favor the coin collecting hobby massively while growing robustly. This is the market into which they sell so the health of this market affects long term planning and current pricing. Yes, it is entirely possible that this wasn't a major factor in all the reasons for implementation and pricing.

    Imagine though if they had announced such increases during covid when the markets began expanding.

    Say what you will about future production of special issues but very large percentages of them will survive. It is more efficient. Why make 2 million 1974 mint set quarters and have so few survive?

    tempus fugit extra philosophiam.
  • cladkingcladking Posts: 29,829 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Copilot-

    ChatGPT is caught in its assumptions here.
    The Mint obviously knows the market has to be large enough to absorb the 2026‑dated products.
    And we’re sitting at the base of several positive trends that are pushing the hobby forward, fast and broadly.
    That’s the market they sell into, so the health of that market affects both long‑term planning and current pricing.

    It’s entirely possible this wasn’t the main driver behind the increases,
    but it’s naïve to think they aren’t watching the ecosystem they depend on.

    Imagine if they had announced these hikes during COVID,
    right when the markets were expanding and collectors were flooding in.

    Say what you will about future special issues,
    but a very large percentage of them will survive — it’s simply more efficient now.
    Why make two million 1974 mint‑set quarters only to have so few survive?

    The Mint is adjusting to a world where survival curves, demand, and data all look different.
    That’s the real context.

    tempus fugit extra philosophiam.
  • jmlanzafjmlanzaf Posts: 40,336 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited March 25, 2026 10:16AM

    @cladking said:

    @jmlanzaf said:

    2. Watching the secondary market — partially true
    They are aware of secondary market behavior (eBay, dealer networks, etc.), but the idea that they’re tightly optimizing pricing based on resale markets is overstated.

    • They do not price directly off aftermarket premiums
    • But they do observe:

    Chatgpt is caught with its assumptions out. The mint obviously knows that the market has to be large enough to absorb 2026 dated products. But we're at the base of several positive trends that favor the coin collecting hobby massively while growing robustly. This is the market into which they sell so the health of this market affects long term planning and current pricing. Yes, it is entirely possible that this wasn't a major factor in all the reasons for implementation and pricing.

    Imagine though if they had announced such increases during covid when the markets began expanding.

    Say what you will about future production of special issues but very large percentages of them will survive. It is more efficient. Why make 2 million 1974 mint set quarters and have so few survive?

    Actually, that statement is true, even if you are trying to twist it. They do not price off the secondary market directly or the cost of 2024 proof sets would be $25 not $125.

    I don't know why you keep posting Copilot echoes of yourself. Those echo chamber queries supply no new information and we all know what you're saying without the echo.

    All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.

  • cladkingcladking Posts: 29,829 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @jmlanzaf said:

    @cladking said:

    @jmlanzaf said:

    2. Watching the secondary market — partially true
    They are aware of secondary market behavior (eBay, dealer networks, etc.), but the idea that they’re tightly optimizing pricing based on resale markets is overstated.

    • They do not price directly off aftermarket premiums
    • But they do observe:

    Chatgpt is caught with its assumptions out. The mint obviously knows that the market has to be large enough to absorb 2026 dated products. But we're at the base of several positive trends that favor the coin collecting hobby massively while growing robustly. This is the market into which they sell so the health of this market affects long term planning and current pricing. Yes, it is entirely possible that this wasn't a major factor in all the reasons for implementation and pricing.

    Imagine though if they had announced such increases during covid when the markets began expanding.

    Say what you will about future production of special issues but very large percentages of them will survive. It is more efficient. Why make 2 million 1974 mint set quarters and have so few survive?

    Actually, that statement is true, even if you are trying to twist it. They do not price off the secondary market directly or the cost of 2024 proof sets would be $25 not $125.

    I don't know why you keep posting Copilot echoes of yourself. Those echo chamber queries supply no new information and we all know what you're saying without the echo.

    This isn't a question of how you say they can see the retail market. This is a question of to what extent do booming premiums on old coins affect current pricing. And, conversely, could they have had much of a chance getting higher prices without a strong secondary market?

    tempus fugit extra philosophiam.
  • jmlanzafjmlanzaf Posts: 40,336 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @cladking said:

    @jmlanzaf said:

    @cladking said:

    @jmlanzaf said:

    2. Watching the secondary market — partially true
    They are aware of secondary market behavior (eBay, dealer networks, etc.), but the idea that they’re tightly optimizing pricing based on resale markets is overstated.

    • They do not price directly off aftermarket premiums
    • But they do observe:

    Chatgpt is caught with its assumptions out. The mint obviously knows that the market has to be large enough to absorb 2026 dated products. But we're at the base of several positive trends that favor the coin collecting hobby massively while growing robustly. This is the market into which they sell so the health of this market affects long term planning and current pricing. Yes, it is entirely possible that this wasn't a major factor in all the reasons for implementation and pricing.

    Imagine though if they had announced such increases during covid when the markets began expanding.

    Say what you will about future production of special issues but very large percentages of them will survive. It is more efficient. Why make 2 million 1974 mint set quarters and have so few survive?

    Actually, that statement is true, even if you are trying to twist it. They do not price off the secondary market directly or the cost of 2024 proof sets would be $25 not $125.

    I don't know why you keep posting Copilot echoes of yourself. Those echo chamber queries supply no new information and we all know what you're saying without the echo.

    This isn't a question of how you say they can see the retail market. This is a question of to what extent do booming premiums on old coins affect current pricing. And, conversely, could they have had much of a chance getting higher prices without a strong secondary market?

    There are no booming premiums on anything but 2025 sets because of the cents. And, again, you are changing the point of the statement. There is no DIRECT pricing to the secondary market.

    All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.

  • BillJonesBillJones Posts: 35,654 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited March 25, 2026 11:51AM

    I can live without them. I just paid a fairly heavy price for a nice Bitish gold noble minted in the 1400s. I would rather have my money there.

    A few years from now, nobody will care about this stuff. There too much of it to keep following it. I gave up on the modern commemorative coins a few years ago.

    Retired dealer and avid collector of U.S. type coins, 19th century presidential campaign medalets and selected medals. In recent years I have been working on a set of British coins - at least one coin from each king or queen who issued pieces that are collectible. I am also collecting at least one coin for each Roman emperor from Julius Caesar to ... ?
  • rooksmithrooksmith Posts: 1,289 ✭✭✭✭

    This thread is getting a little redundant, thanks to Chatty Kathy, aka Copilot. ;) If the Mint is literally making money on making money, cant they just make fewer coins and cause a feeding frenzy on the buyers who think that scarcity=rare, and that rarity alone is what creates demand? :#

    “When you don't know what you're talking about, it's hard to know when you're finished.” - Tommy Smothers
  • rooksmithrooksmith Posts: 1,289 ✭✭✭✭
    edited March 25, 2026 12:11PM

    The mint is attempting to 'create demand' for its own products. That is what I think is happening with the 2026 coinage. For example, product limits which dont tell you the final mintage. etc. It completely controls the supply and number of designs, mintmarks, and strikes, mintage and it can price its products as it sees fit, after demand has been artificially created. The more of a fake scarcity they can create, the more demand. The more demand, the more they can sneak in a price increase of 20-40%, and cause more tulip-mania in the coin market. If scarcity plus cool designs were king, our man Dan Carr, @dcarr would be a trillionaire! (right Dan?)

    “When you don't know what you're talking about, it's hard to know when you're finished.” - Tommy Smothers
  • rooksmithrooksmith Posts: 1,289 ✭✭✭✭

    This isn't a question of how you say they can see the retail market. This is a question of to what extent do booming premiums on old coins affect current pricing. And, conversely, could they have had much of a chance getting higher prices without a strong secondary market?

    Point well taken, but what I think happens is the attention on the new and shiny objects, fake scarcity etc is taking money away from the old coins that are not truly rare. Check the PCGS price history of coins that used to sell for much higher premiums back in the day. Some that were not truly rare or collectible have fallen. At the same time really rare and desirable, collectibility sells are a higher premium. (especially if the population is in the triple digits or less.

    What is rare? Can you tell me if you know... If it is truly rare the coming years will show!

    “When you don't know what you're talking about, it's hard to know when you're finished.” - Tommy Smothers
  • cladkingcladking Posts: 29,829 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited March 25, 2026 12:51PM

    @rooksmith said:
    This thread is getting a little redundant, thanks to Chatty Kathy, aka Copilot. ;) If the Mint is literally making money on making money, cant they just make fewer coins and cause a feeding frenzy on the buyers who think that scarcity=rare, and that rarity alone is what creates demand? :#

    I hardly disagree with what you say here except that despite widespread opinion to the contrary these are collectibles and the nature of collectibles is for scarcity to create demand. I think this statement is clear enough we don't need "Chatty Kathy". I'll see what it says.

    Copilot disagrees-

    _I hardly disagree with what you’re saying, except for one thing:
    despite the popular belief that “scarcity doesn’t matter,” these *are* collectibles,
    and the nature of collectibles is that scarcity creates demand.

    That point is clear enough on its own — no need for Chatty Kathy to weigh in.
    But I’ll check what it says anyway, just for the entertainment value._

    tempus fugit extra philosophiam.
  • cladkingcladking Posts: 29,829 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @rooksmith said:

    This isn't a question of how you say they can see the retail market. This is a question of to what extent do booming premiums on old coins affect current pricing. And, conversely, could they have had much of a chance getting higher prices without a strong secondary market?

    Point well taken, but what I think happens is the attention on the new and shiny objects, fake scarcity etc is taking money away from the old coins that are not truly rare. Check the PCGS price history of coins that used to sell for much higher premiums back in the day. Some that were not truly rare or collectible have fallen. At the same time really rare and desirable, collectibility sells are a higher premium. (especially if the population is in the triple digits or less.

    What is rare? Can you tell me if you know... If it is truly rare the coming years will show!

    Many nice chBU and gemmy moderns issued for circulation are quite "rare". Of course rarity is a sliding scale and some of these exist in significant numbers in chBU. But many are highly elusive if you demand nice well struck and well preserved coins. Coins like nice 1974 quarters simply do not exist at scale. There's nowhere you can go to buy nice MS-65 examples. Even BU rolls are highly elusive.

    tempus fugit extra philosophiam.
  • cladkingcladking Posts: 29,829 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited March 25, 2026 1:46PM

    @rooksmith said:
    Point well taken, but what I think happens is the attention on the new and shiny objects, fake scarcity etc is taking money away from the old coins that are not truly rare. Check the PCGS price history of coins that used to sell for much higher premiums back in the day. Some that were not truly rare or collectible have fallen. At the same time really rare and desirable, collectibility sells are a higher premium. (especially if the population is in the triple digits or less.

    Another thing here though.

    Yes, raising their prices takes money away from these markets. So doer grading. So do supplies. But each participant has some limited control over how much it affects them.

    And there is no such thing as "bad" publicity.

    tempus fugit extra philosophiam.
  • jmlanzafjmlanzaf Posts: 40,336 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @rooksmith said:
    This thread is getting a little redundant, thanks to Chatty Kathy, aka Copilot. ;) If the Mint is literally making money on making money, cant they just make fewer coins and cause a feeding frenzy on the buyers who think that scarcity=rare, and that rarity alone is what creates demand? :#

    Yes

    All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.

  • Project NumismaticsProject Numismatics Posts: 1,829 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @johnny9434 said:

    @Morgan White said:
    It's just pocket change.

    Some hate change

    A numismatist is never afraid of change.

  • Cougar1978Cougar1978 Posts: 9,573 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited March 25, 2026 5:54PM

    Seems a lot of items hit with increase.

    Investor
  • 7Jaguars7Jaguars Posts: 7,947 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Real simple, IMHO they have lost track of their buyers and the supply/DEMAND curve, with emphasis on the latter. I think that demand will fall off a cliff for a huge number of their products. Could be wrong but severely doubt it. Their choice and I know they care nought for most of their base, which I would imagine will come around to bite them severely.

    Love that Milled British (1830-1960)
    Well, just Love coins, period.
  • cladkingcladking Posts: 29,829 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @7Jaguars said:
    Real simple, IMHO they have lost track of their buyers and the supply/DEMAND curve, with emphasis on the latter. I think that demand will fall off a cliff for a huge number of their products. Could be wrong but severely doubt it. Their choice and I know they care nought for most of their base, which I would imagine will come around to bite them severely.

    They could be in for a rude awakening but I suspect they just want to trim back their product line a little and capitalize on emerging markets. Some of these increases are simply astounding. They increased the premium on dollar coin rolls from $11 to $36 or more than triple. These coins are now costing their customers nearly $2.50 each and many are just seeking Gem or varieties. If you retain only five coins from a roll and spend the rest you have $15/ coin tied up in it.

    I have to believe some of this year's offers will be the last.

    tempus fugit extra philosophiam.
  • Batman23Batman23 Posts: 5,270 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I remember when they sold rolls of the dollar coins at face, with free shipping. It was supposed to me a means to get the coins out for circulation. I would pick out the best couple coins from the box to save and spend the rest. People thought they were pretty neat.

  • cladkingcladking Posts: 29,829 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @Batman23 said:
    I remember when they sold rolls of the dollar coins at face, with free shipping. It was supposed to me a means to get the coins out for circulation. I would pick out the best couple coins from the box to save and spend the rest. People thought they were pretty neat.

    Another thought occurs to me. Most banks will not save new coins for customers and haven't since 1964. It's bank policy. Perhaps curtailing some of this will get banks to put some effort in matching coins with customers just as they did a few generations ago.

    Imagine being able to request 2026 dimes and other current coinage at the bank!

    tempus fugit extra philosophiam.
  • Batman23Batman23 Posts: 5,270 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @cladking said:

    @Batman23 said:
    I remember when they sold rolls of the dollar coins at face, with free shipping. It was supposed to me a means to get the coins out for circulation. I would pick out the best couple coins from the box to save and spend the rest. People thought they were pretty neat.

    Another thought occurs to me. Most banks will not save new coins for customers and haven't since 1964. It's bank policy. Perhaps curtailing some of this will get banks to put some effort in matching coins with customers just as they did a few generations ago.

    Imagine being able to request 2026 dimes and other current coinage at the bank!

    I have a family member that used to work at banks. I had asked her if she could find a source for the new dimes, she has friends still working at the banks. She told me that they used to be able to order the new coins for their customers. She asked around and learned that after COVID, things changed and they can no longer request the new coinage. So even with the special 250th coins, she was unable to find a source.

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Emoji
Image
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file