@HalfDime said:
Anyone buying these sets should flip them and take the money.
You may be right. 21,000 subs still open with a limit of 10. They're not exactly flying, yet Ebay does have a few completed presales for $199. If this product with a 300,000 mintage limit rises in price when everyone rushes to flip them, won't it be the first of the 2026's to do so? The Congrats set stayed pretty consistent at $300-$350 until they released the additional 20,000 this week.
Trust me, the eBay presales are to people who don't know the mintage was raised to 300K, and who don't know they can prebuy up to 10, right now, directly from the Mint for $124.50 each. Stupid sales to stupid people really do not make a market. TBD how many of them end up being canceled by the buyers before fulfillment, given how far out delivery will be.
I agree there’s not enough of those type of buyers to sustain a 199.00 price point once some flippers panic at $1245.00 out of their pocket not coming back quick enough, thereby dropping the secondary price to Mint pricing or below in short order. Granted, there seems to be some current value in breaking the penny out and combining it with the silver set penny, but that won’t hold once the Mint shows us what they really have in mind for the silver set mintage.
@HalfDime said:
Anyone buying these sets should flip them and take the money.
You may be right. 21,000 subs still open with a limit of 10. They're not exactly flying, yet Ebay does have a few completed presales for $199. If this product with a 300,000 mintage limit rises in price when everyone rushes to flip them, won't it be the first of the 2026's to do so? The Congrats set stayed pretty consistent at $300-$350 until they released the additional 20,000 this week.
Trust me, the eBay presales are to people who don't know the mintage was raised to 300K, and who don't know they can prebuy up to 10, right now, directly from the Mint for $124.50 each. Stupid sales to stupid people really do not make a market. TBD how many of them end up being canceled by the buyers before fulfillment, given how far out delivery will be.
Again it's not a mintage when it's a set. It's a product limit.
Stupid sales to stupid people IS the market right now, like it or not. That will change but for now that's what the current market conditions are giving us.
@HalfDime said:
Anyone buying these sets should flip them and take the money.
You may be right. 21,000 subs still open with a limit of 10. They're not exactly flying, yet Ebay does have a few completed presales for $199. If this product with a 300,000 mintage limit rises in price when everyone rushes to flip them, won't it be the first of the 2026's to do so? The Congrats set stayed pretty consistent at $300-$350 until they released the additional 20,000 this week.
Trust me, the eBay presales are to people who don't know the mintage was raised to 300K, and who don't know they can prebuy up to 10, right now, directly from the Mint for $124.50 each. Stupid sales to stupid people really do not make a market. TBD how many of them end up being canceled by the buyers before fulfillment, given how far out delivery will be.
Again it's not a mintage when it's a set. It's a product limit.
Stupid sales to stupid people IS the market right now, like it or not. That will change but for now that's what the current market conditions are giving us.
Again, agree to disagree. Since we already resolved that these are minted differently than the coins entering circulation, and pretty uniformly are of higher quality, the mintage actually IS the mintage when it's a set. Moreover, we are really only talking about the cent that is only available in the set, so again, quibble all you want about the verbiage, but mintage and product limit mean exactly the same thing here.
Stupid sales to stupid people might be the market to you, but not to me, given that nobody has anything available for delivery, and given that the Mint is currently offering and unable to sell tens of thousands via subscription, at a price nearly $100 below what you think is the market, not to mention an additional, unknown quantity on release day.
@Russell12 said:
Please, no offense to anyone in here. A few of the posters here had sub for 20, 30+ sets. Obviously they are for resale and not for collecting. It makes it hard for collectors who want a set for their collection to get one from the mint. Should the mint be a supplier for large orders to wholesalers or small orders to collectors?
Both. For annual mint sets... produce to demand at a fair and reasonable price. Given these are $6 of pocket change the mint has already made seigniorage on and placed in a plastic blister pack, $15/set seems much more fair to me. As for the cent... stop making it.
I agree wholeheartedly..... If you wanna sell the penny , do it independently !
@Russell12 said:
Please, no offense to anyone in here. A few of the posters here had sub for 20, 30+ sets. Obviously they are for resale and not for collecting. It makes it hard for collectors who want a set for their collection to get one from the mint. Should the mint be a supplier for large orders to wholesalers or small orders to collectors?
Both. For annual mint sets... produce to demand at a fair and reasonable price. Given these are $6 of pocket change the mint has already made seigniorage on and placed in a plastic blister pack, $15/set seems much more fair to me. As for the cent... stop making it.
I agree wholeheartedly..... If you wanna sell the penny , do it independently !
Yes, everyone wants the Mint to do what is best for them personally. Maybe the Mint is doing what is best for the Mint.
If you sell millions of cents separately, the value will be nonexistent because they won't be rare. And the value of the Mint sets will be minimal because there is nothing special about them. So you've killed two products in one move. Great for you if you want to pay face value for coins, not so great for the Mint. Also not so great for you, if you ever want to sell the coins for more than have value.
So, by only putting cents in the Mint sets, they are going to sell $37.35 million worth of Mint sets (face value of under $2 million). Great for the Mint. Good for you, if you want them to be worth more than fave value when you sell. Not good for you if you want the cents at face value - get the rest at the bank.
The simple, inconvenient fact is that you can't have both value and easy, inexpensive access. They are incompatible.
Why should the Mint be underwriting my collecting interests? I personally would be fine if the Mint stopped making all collectible coins. It's a waste of resources. But if they are going to make them, I don't see why they shouldn't be a profitable enterprise for THEM.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
@Russell12 said:
Please, no offense to anyone in here. A few of the posters here had sub for 20, 30+ sets. Obviously they are for resale and not for collecting. It makes it hard for collectors who want a set for their collection to get one from the mint. Should the mint be a supplier for large orders to wholesalers or small orders to collectors?
Both. For annual mint sets... produce to demand at a fair and reasonable price. Given these are $6 of pocket change the mint has already made seigniorage on and placed in a plastic blister pack, $15/set seems much more fair to me. As for the cent... stop making it.
I agree wholeheartedly..... If you wanna sell the penny , do it independently !
Yes, everyone wants the Mint to do what is best for them personally. Maybe the Mint is doing what is best for the Mint.
If you sell millions of cents separately, the value will be nonexistent because they won't be rare. And the value of the Mint sets will be minimal because there is nothing special about them. So you've killed two products in one move. Great for you if you want to pay face value for coins, not so great for the Mint. Also not so great for you, if you ever want to sell the coins for more than have value.
So, by only putting cents in the Mint sets, they are going to sell $37.35 million worth of Mint sets (face value of under $2 million). Great for the Mint. Good for you, if you want them to be worth more than fave value when you sell. Not good for you if you want the cents at face value - get the rest at the bank.
The simple, inconvenient fact is that you can't have both value and easy, inexpensive access. They are incompatible.
Why should the Mint be underwriting my collecting interests? I personally would be fine if the Mint stopped making all collectible coins. It's a waste of resources. But if they are going to make them, I don't see why they shouldn't be a profitable enterprise for THEM.
Do you think that the quality of the coins will be good enough to get some graded for a nice set, the circulation stuff is not too impressive, especially with the half dollars. I don't mind buying 5 or 10 sets if I can put together a really nice single graded set from them. If they really aren't going to be much nicer, I'll just go with one at toss it aside.
@Russell12 said:
Please, no offense to anyone in here. A few of the posters here had sub for 20, 30+ sets. Obviously they are for resale and not for collecting. It makes it hard for collectors who want a set for their collection to get one from the mint. Should the mint be a supplier for large orders to wholesalers or small orders to collectors?
Both. For annual mint sets... produce to demand at a fair and reasonable price. Given these are $6 of pocket change the mint has already made seigniorage on and placed in a plastic blister pack, $15/set seems much more fair to me. As for the cent... stop making it.
I agree wholeheartedly..... If you wanna sell the penny , do it independently !
Yes, everyone wants the Mint to do what is best for them personally. Maybe the Mint is doing what is best for the Mint.
If you sell millions of cents separately, the value will be nonexistent because they won't be rare. And the value of the Mint sets will be minimal because there is nothing special about them. So you've killed two products in one move. Great for you if you want to pay face value for coins, not so great for the Mint. Also not so great for you, if you ever want to sell the coins for more than have value.
So, by only putting cents in the Mint sets, they are going to sell $37.35 million worth of Mint sets (face value of under $2 million). Great for the Mint. Good for you, if you want them to be worth more than fave value when you sell. Not good for you if you want the cents at face value - get the rest at the bank.
The simple, inconvenient fact is that you can't have both value and easy, inexpensive access. They are incompatible.
Why should the Mint be underwriting my collecting interests? I personally would be fine if the Mint stopped making all collectible coins. It's a waste of resources. But if they are going to make them, I don't see why they shouldn't be a profitable enterprise for THEM.
Do you think that the quality of the coins will be good enough to get some graded for a nice set, the circulation stuff is not too impressive, especially with the half dollars. I don't mind buying 5 or 10 sets if I can put together a really nice single graded set from them. If they really aren't going to be much nicer, I'll just go with one at toss it aside.
If you are not adept at grading yourself, it will be cheaper and likely with better results to just buy the graded coins on ebay.
@Russell12 said:
Please, no offense to anyone in here. A few of the posters here had sub for 20, 30+ sets. Obviously they are for resale and not for collecting. It makes it hard for collectors who want a set for their collection to get one from the mint. Should the mint be a supplier for large orders to wholesalers or small orders to collectors?
Both. For annual mint sets... produce to demand at a fair and reasonable price. Given these are $6 of pocket change the mint has already made seigniorage on and placed in a plastic blister pack, $15/set seems much more fair to me. As for the cent... stop making it.
I agree wholeheartedly..... If you wanna sell the penny , do it independently !
Yes, everyone wants the Mint to do what is best for them personally. Maybe the Mint is doing what is best for the Mint.
If you sell millions of cents separately, the value will be nonexistent because they won't be rare. And the value of the Mint sets will be minimal because there is nothing special about them. So you've killed two products in one move. Great for you if you want to pay face value for coins, not so great for the Mint. Also not so great for you, if you ever want to sell the coins for more than have value.
So, by only putting cents in the Mint sets, they are going to sell $37.35 million worth of Mint sets (face value of under $2 million). Great for the Mint. Good for you, if you want them to be worth more than fave value when you sell. Not good for you if you want the cents at face value - get the rest at the bank.
The simple, inconvenient fact is that you can't have both value and easy, inexpensive access. They are incompatible.
Why should the Mint be underwriting my collecting interests? I personally would be fine if the Mint stopped making all collectible coins. It's a waste of resources. But if they are going to make them, I don't see why they shouldn't be a profitable enterprise for THEM.
Place a cap on them & don't change it half way though the game !
@Russell12 said:
Please, no offense to anyone in here. A few of the posters here had sub for 20, 30+ sets. Obviously they are for resale and not for collecting. It makes it hard for collectors who want a set for their collection to get one from the mint. Should the mint be a supplier for large orders to wholesalers or small orders to collectors?
Both. For annual mint sets... produce to demand at a fair and reasonable price. Given these are $6 of pocket change the mint has already made seigniorage on and placed in a plastic blister pack, $15/set seems much more fair to me. As for the cent... stop making it.
I agree wholeheartedly..... If you wanna sell the penny , do it independently !
Yes, everyone wants the Mint to do what is best for them personally. Maybe the Mint is doing what is best for the Mint.
If you sell millions of cents separately, the value will be nonexistent because they won't be rare. And the value of the Mint sets will be minimal because there is nothing special about them. So you've killed two products in one move. Great for you if you want to pay face value for coins, not so great for the Mint. Also not so great for you, if you ever want to sell the coins for more than have value.
So, by only putting cents in the Mint sets, they are going to sell $37.35 million worth of Mint sets (face value of under $2 million). Great for the Mint. Good for you, if you want them to be worth more than fave value when you sell. Not good for you if you want the cents at face value - get the rest at the bank.
The simple, inconvenient fact is that you can't have both value and easy, inexpensive access. They are incompatible.
Why should the Mint be underwriting my collecting interests? I personally would be fine if the Mint stopped making all collectible coins. It's a waste of resources. But if they are going to make them, I don't see why they shouldn't be a profitable enterprise for THEM.
Do you think that the quality of the coins will be good enough to get some graded for a nice set, the circulation stuff is not too impressive, especially with the half dollars. I don't mind buying 5 or 10 sets if I can put together a really nice single graded set from them. If they really aren't going to be much nicer, I'll just go with one at toss it aside.
The Mint set coins are usually better than circulation coins, but it's still statistical. So, yes, bl taking the best coins from multiple sets should work. But I don't know whether that will end up being cheaper than buying them already slabbed.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
@Russell12 said:
Please, no offense to anyone in here. A few of the posters here had sub for 20, 30+ sets. Obviously they are for resale and not for collecting. It makes it hard for collectors who want a set for their collection to get one from the mint. Should the mint be a supplier for large orders to wholesalers or small orders to collectors?
Both. For annual mint sets... produce to demand at a fair and reasonable price. Given these are $6 of pocket change the mint has already made seigniorage on and placed in a plastic blister pack, $15/set seems much more fair to me. As for the cent... stop making it.
I agree wholeheartedly..... If you wanna sell the penny , do it independently !
Yes, everyone wants the Mint to do what is best for them personally. Maybe the Mint is doing what is best for the Mint.
If you sell millions of cents separately, the value will be nonexistent because they won't be rare. And the value of the Mint sets will be minimal because there is nothing special about them. So you've killed two products in one move. Great for you if you want to pay face value for coins, not so great for the Mint. Also not so great for you, if you ever want to sell the coins for more than have value.
So, by only putting cents in the Mint sets, they are going to sell $37.35 million worth of Mint sets (face value of under $2 million). Great for the Mint. Good for you, if you want them to be worth more than fave value when you sell. Not good for you if you want the cents at face value - get the rest at the bank.
The simple, inconvenient fact is that you can't have both value and easy, inexpensive access. They are incompatible.
Why should the Mint be underwriting my collecting interests? I personally would be fine if the Mint stopped making all collectible coins. It's a waste of resources. But if they are going to make them, I don't see why they shouldn't be a profitable enterprise for THEM.
Place a cap on them & don't change it half way though the game !
They didn't change it. They never stated it in the first place. We discussed this in January, all the subscription numbers were from last year.
And now you're complaining about a different issue. In fact, the exact opposite issue.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
@Russell12 said:
Please, no offense to anyone in here. A few of the posters here had sub for 20, 30+ sets. Obviously they are for resale and not for collecting. It makes it hard for collectors who want a set for their collection to get one from the mint. Should the mint be a supplier for large orders to wholesalers or small orders to collectors?
Both. For annual mint sets... produce to demand at a fair and reasonable price. Given these are $6 of pocket change the mint has already made seigniorage on and placed in a plastic blister pack, $15/set seems much more fair to me. As for the cent... stop making it.
I agree wholeheartedly..... If you wanna sell the penny , do it independently !
Yes, everyone wants the Mint to do what is best for them personally. Maybe the Mint is doing what is best for the Mint.
If you sell millions of cents separately, the value will be nonexistent because they won't be rare. And the value of the Mint sets will be minimal because there is nothing special about them. So you've killed two products in one move. Great for you if you want to pay face value for coins, not so great for the Mint. Also not so great for you, if you ever want to sell the coins for more than have value.
So, by only putting cents in the Mint sets, they are going to sell $37.35 million worth of Mint sets (face value of under $2 million). Great for the Mint. Good for you, if you want them to be worth more than fave value when you sell. Not good for you if you want the cents at face value - get the rest at the bank.
The simple, inconvenient fact is that you can't have both value and easy, inexpensive access. They are incompatible.
Why should the Mint be underwriting my collecting interests? I personally would be fine if the Mint stopped making all collectible coins. It's a waste of resources. But if they are going to make them, I don't see why they shouldn't be a profitable enterprise for THEM.
Place a cap on them & don't change it half way though the game !
They didn't change it. They never stated it in the first place. We discussed this in January, all the subscription numbers were from last year.
And now you're complaining about a different issue. In fact, the exact opposite issue.
From 190K to 300K ? Also Why would they offer these @ the beginning for $33.00 and change to $124.50 ?
@Russell12 said:
Please, no offense to anyone in here. A few of the posters here had sub for 20, 30+ sets. Obviously they are for resale and not for collecting. It makes it hard for collectors who want a set for their collection to get one from the mint. Should the mint be a supplier for large orders to wholesalers or small orders to collectors?
Both. For annual mint sets... produce to demand at a fair and reasonable price. Given these are $6 of pocket change the mint has already made seigniorage on and placed in a plastic blister pack, $15/set seems much more fair to me. As for the cent... stop making it.
I agree wholeheartedly..... If you wanna sell the penny , do it independently !
Yes, everyone wants the Mint to do what is best for them personally. Maybe the Mint is doing what is best for the Mint.
If you sell millions of cents separately, the value will be nonexistent because they won't be rare. And the value of the Mint sets will be minimal because there is nothing special about them. So you've killed two products in one move. Great for you if you want to pay face value for coins, not so great for the Mint. Also not so great for you, if you ever want to sell the coins for more than have value.
So, by only putting cents in the Mint sets, they are going to sell $37.35 million worth of Mint sets (face value of under $2 million). Great for the Mint. Good for you, if you want them to be worth more than fave value when you sell. Not good for you if you want the cents at face value - get the rest at the bank.
The simple, inconvenient fact is that you can't have both value and easy, inexpensive access. They are incompatible.
Why should the Mint be underwriting my collecting interests? I personally would be fine if the Mint stopped making all collectible coins. It's a waste of resources. But if they are going to make them, I don't see why they shouldn't be a profitable enterprise for THEM.
Place a cap on them & don't change it half way though the game !
They didn't change it. They never stated it in the first place. We discussed this in January, all the subscription numbers were from last year.
And now you're complaining about a different issue. In fact, the exact opposite issue.
From 190K to 300K ? Also Why would they offer these @ the beginning for $33.00 and change to $124.50 ?
Because they saw the secondary market values at 190K, and wanted to capture it for themselves. Why they think demand at that price will be sufficient to support a mintage of 300K is a mystery, but they are taking their shot, and the rest of us will see.
With all due respect to @jmlanzaf, though, the final sales have been consistent at around 190K for the past several years, so it was not unreasonable for us to expect that to be the Product Limit. Particularly when they published it. And particularly when they cut off subscription sales at a level consistent with it.
Nothing stopped them from deleting it if it wasn't accurate, rather than just leaving it up and expecting us to know it as just a BS placeholder. I know I can't prove anything, and @jmlanzaf will never admit he is wrong, even when he is, but the fact that subscription sales resumed when the Mint updated the Product Limit strongly implies that the Product Limit for 2026 was indeed 190K, and that the Mint increased it in a cynical grab for more cash when they saw the demand.
They seem determined to squeeze every last cent (pun intended) out of all of us, and to make sure nothing is a big secondary market winner. Which is yet another reason they should really make a million of them at $35 each, and just allow people to stock up on nice examples of the one year only coins, and the cents that are not available elsewhere, rather than trying to sell 300K at $124.50, killing demand and also not having a secondary market winner.
Do you think that the quality of the coins will be good enough to get some graded for a nice set, the circulation stuff is not too impressive, especially with the half dollars. I don't mind buying 5 or 10 sets if I can put together a really nice single graded set from them. If they really aren't going to be much nicer, I'll just go with one at toss it aside.
If you are not adept at grading yourself, it will be cheaper and likely with better results to just buy the graded coins on ebay.
I can grade them just fine, the question is whether the quality will be worth the cost of buying and submitting. If not, I'll just throw a set back and forget about it.
Not to criticize, but you would never pass the state bar exam in any state if you cannot read the question and answer the question. Many people go off on odd tangents for some reason.
@Russell12 said:
Please, no offense to anyone in here. A few of the posters here had sub for 20, 30+ sets. Obviously they are for resale and not for collecting. It makes it hard for collectors who want a set for their collection to get one from the mint. Should the mint be a supplier for large orders to wholesalers or small orders to collectors?
Both. For annual mint sets... produce to demand at a fair and reasonable price. Given these are $6 of pocket change the mint has already made seigniorage on and placed in a plastic blister pack, $15/set seems much more fair to me. As for the cent... stop making it.
I agree wholeheartedly..... If you wanna sell the penny , do it independently !
Yes, everyone wants the Mint to do what is best for them personally. Maybe the Mint is doing what is best for the Mint.
If you sell millions of cents separately, the value will be nonexistent because they won't be rare. And the value of the Mint sets will be minimal because there is nothing special about them. So you've killed two products in one move. Great for you if you want to pay face value for coins, not so great for the Mint. Also not so great for you, if you ever want to sell the coins for more than have value.
So, by only putting cents in the Mint sets, they are going to sell $37.35 million worth of Mint sets (face value of under $2 million). Great for the Mint. Good for you, if you want them to be worth more than fave value when you sell. Not good for you if you want the cents at face value - get the rest at the bank.
The simple, inconvenient fact is that you can't have both value and easy, inexpensive access. They are incompatible.
Why should the Mint be underwriting my collecting interests? I personally would be fine if the Mint stopped making all collectible coins. It's a waste of resources. But if they are going to make them, I don't see why they shouldn't be a profitable enterprise for THEM.
Place a cap on them & don't change it half way though the game !
They didn't change it. They never stated it in the first place. We discussed this in January, all the subscription numbers were from last year.
And now you're complaining about a different issue. In fact, the exact opposite issue.
From 190K to 300K ? Also Why would they offer these @ the beginning for $33.00 and change to $124.50 ?
190k was on the subscriptions from last year. The 2026 product page has never had a limit stated.
They didn't offer them at $33. Last year's subscription price was $33. You never saw $33 on the 2026 produbt page.
I've been over this multiple times. I seem to be the only one who recognizes the difference between the generic subscription page that lasts for years and the specific product page.
Go look at the Congratulations set subscription page. It says 60,000 and subscriptions now apply to the 2027 issue. Do you think the price and mintage is locked in for 2027?
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
@Russell12 said:
Please, no offense to anyone in here. A few of the posters here had sub for 20, 30+ sets. Obviously they are for resale and not for collecting. It makes it hard for collectors who want a set for their collection to get one from the mint. Should the mint be a supplier for large orders to wholesalers or small orders to collectors?
Both. For annual mint sets... produce to demand at a fair and reasonable price. Given these are $6 of pocket change the mint has already made seigniorage on and placed in a plastic blister pack, $15/set seems much more fair to me. As for the cent... stop making it.
I agree wholeheartedly..... If you wanna sell the penny , do it independently !
Yes, everyone wants the Mint to do what is best for them personally. Maybe the Mint is doing what is best for the Mint.
If you sell millions of cents separately, the value will be nonexistent because they won't be rare. And the value of the Mint sets will be minimal because there is nothing special about them. So you've killed two products in one move. Great for you if you want to pay face value for coins, not so great for the Mint. Also not so great for you, if you ever want to sell the coins for more than have value.
So, by only putting cents in the Mint sets, they are going to sell $37.35 million worth of Mint sets (face value of under $2 million). Great for the Mint. Good for you, if you want them to be worth more than fave value when you sell. Not good for you if you want the cents at face value - get the rest at the bank.
The simple, inconvenient fact is that you can't have both value and easy, inexpensive access. They are incompatible.
Why should the Mint be underwriting my collecting interests? I personally would be fine if the Mint stopped making all collectible coins. It's a waste of resources. But if they are going to make them, I don't see why they shouldn't be a profitable enterprise for THEM.
Place a cap on them & don't change it half way though the game !
They didn't change it. They never stated it in the first place. We discussed this in January, all the subscription numbers were from last year.
And now you're complaining about a different issue. In fact, the exact opposite issue.
From 190K to 300K ? Also Why would they offer these @ the beginning for $33.00 and change to $124.50 ?
Because they saw the secondary market values at 190K, and wanted to capture it for themselves. Why they think demand at that price will be sufficient to support a mintage of 300K is a mystery, but they are taking their shot, and the rest of us will see.
With all due respect to @jmlanzaf, though, the final sales have been consistent at around 190K for the past several years, so it was not unreasonable for us to expect that to be the Product Limit. Particularly when they published it. And particularly when they cut off subscription sales at a level consistent with it.
Nothing stopped them from deleting it if it wasn't accurate, rather than just leaving it up and expecting us to know it as just a BS placeholder. I know I can't prove anything, and @jmlanzaf will never admit he is wrong, even when he is, but the fact that subscription sales resumed when the Mint updated the Product Limit strongly implies that the Product Limit for 2026 was indeed 190K, and that the Mint increased it in a cynical grab for more cash when they saw the demand.
They seem determined to squeeze every last cent (pun intended) out of all of us, and to make sure nothing is a big secondary market winner. Which is yet another reason they should really make a million of them at $35 each, and just allow people to stock up on nice examples of the one year only coins, and the cents that are not available elsewhere, rather than trying to sell 300K at $124.50, killing demand and also not having a secondary market winner.
Again, look at the Congratulations subscription page. It applies to 2027 and states this year's price and mintage. While we may not like this reality, it is better to accept it than keep pretending that number matters.
They sissy recently updated the number for the 2026 silver set from last year's mintage to this year's mintage.
The charge to 300k to 190k is far more likely then updating to reflect the 2026 number from the 2025 number than your more conspiratorial interpretation. Would you like to put your money where your mouth is? I'll bet the 2027 mintage of the congratulations set will not be 60,000.
You can keep ignoring all the mounting evidence, but I'd rather just accept the reality. You don't even have to give me credit for being right. It's not about right or wrong, it's just recognizing the reality.
Should they delete the number from the subscription page instead of leaving the old number? Yes. But they apparently don't. So we should recognize that and not make the same mistake again of assuming last year's number is this year's number.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
@Russell12 said:
Please, no offense to anyone in here. A few of the posters here had sub for 20, 30+ sets. Obviously they are for resale and not for collecting. It makes it hard for collectors who want a set for their collection to get one from the mint. Should the mint be a supplier for large orders to wholesalers or small orders to collectors?
Both. For annual mint sets... produce to demand at a fair and reasonable price. Given these are $6 of pocket change the mint has already made seigniorage on and placed in a plastic blister pack, $15/set seems much more fair to me. As for the cent... stop making it.
I agree wholeheartedly..... If you wanna sell the penny , do it independently !
Yes, everyone wants the Mint to do what is best for them personally. Maybe the Mint is doing what is best for the Mint.
If you sell millions of cents separately, the value will be nonexistent because they won't be rare. And the value of the Mint sets will be minimal because there is nothing special about them. So you've killed two products in one move. Great for you if you want to pay face value for coins, not so great for the Mint. Also not so great for you, if you ever want to sell the coins for more than have value.
So, by only putting cents in the Mint sets, they are going to sell $37.35 million worth of Mint sets (face value of under $2 million). Great for the Mint. Good for you, if you want them to be worth more than fave value when you sell. Not good for you if you want the cents at face value - get the rest at the bank.
The simple, inconvenient fact is that you can't have both value and easy, inexpensive access. They are incompatible.
Why should the Mint be underwriting my collecting interests? I personally would be fine if the Mint stopped making all collectible coins. It's a waste of resources. But if they are going to make them, I don't see why they shouldn't be a profitable enterprise for THEM.
Place a cap on them & don't change it half way though the game !
They didn't change it. They never stated it in the first place. We discussed this in January, all the subscription numbers were from last year.
And now you're complaining about a different issue. In fact, the exact opposite issue.
From 190K to 300K ? Also Why would they offer these @ the beginning for $33.00 and change to $124.50 ?
190k was on the subscriptions from last year. The 2026 product page has never had a limit stated.
They didn't offer them at $33. Last year's subscription price was $33. You never saw $33 on the 2026 produbt page.
I've been over this multiple times. I seem to be the only one who recognizes the difference between the generic subscription page that lasts for years and the specific product page.
Go look at the Congratulations set subscription page. It says 60,000 and subscriptions now apply to the 2027 issue. Do you think the price and mintage is locked in for 2027?
Are you saying the mint set's were not offered @ $33.00 ? in the beginning of this year ?
@Russell12 said:
Please, no offense to anyone in here. A few of the posters here had sub for 20, 30+ sets. Obviously they are for resale and not for collecting. It makes it hard for collectors who want a set for their collection to get one from the mint. Should the mint be a supplier for large orders to wholesalers or small orders to collectors?
Both. For annual mint sets... produce to demand at a fair and reasonable price. Given these are $6 of pocket change the mint has already made seigniorage on and placed in a plastic blister pack, $15/set seems much more fair to me. As for the cent... stop making it.
I agree wholeheartedly..... If you wanna sell the penny , do it independently !
Yes, everyone wants the Mint to do what is best for them personally. Maybe the Mint is doing what is best for the Mint.
If you sell millions of cents separately, the value will be nonexistent because they won't be rare. And the value of the Mint sets will be minimal because there is nothing special about them. So you've killed two products in one move. Great for you if you want to pay face value for coins, not so great for the Mint. Also not so great for you, if you ever want to sell the coins for more than have value.
So, by only putting cents in the Mint sets, they are going to sell $37.35 million worth of Mint sets (face value of under $2 million). Great for the Mint. Good for you, if you want them to be worth more than fave value when you sell. Not good for you if you want the cents at face value - get the rest at the bank.
The simple, inconvenient fact is that you can't have both value and easy, inexpensive access. They are incompatible.
Why should the Mint be underwriting my collecting interests? I personally would be fine if the Mint stopped making all collectible coins. It's a waste of resources. But if they are going to make them, I don't see why they shouldn't be a profitable enterprise for THEM.
Place a cap on them & don't change it half way though the game !
They didn't change it. They never stated it in the first place. We discussed this in January, all the subscription numbers were from last year.
And now you're complaining about a different issue. In fact, the exact opposite issue.
From 190K to 300K ? Also Why would they offer these @ the beginning for $33.00 and change to $124.50 ?
190k was on the subscriptions from last year. The 2026 product page has never had a limit stated.
They didn't offer them at $33. Last year's subscription price was $33. You never saw $33 on the 2026 produbt page.
I've been over this multiple times. I seem to be the only one who recognizes the difference between the generic subscription page that lasts for years and the specific product page.
Go look at the Congratulations set subscription page. It says 60,000 and subscriptions now apply to the 2027 issue. Do you think the price and mintage is locked in for 2027?
Are you saying the mint set's were not offered @ $33.00 ? in the beginning of this year ?
No. That's not what I said. You could get all the 2024 sets you wanted at that price. But the subscription price is and always has been subject to change. Just like all the subscription prices were changed this year when they made the global changes. There was literally NEVER a time when you could buy a 2026 set for $33.
You only have to read the page. Instead of arguing, read the terms on the page:
It's on every page.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
@Russell12 said:
Please, no offense to anyone in here. A few of the posters here had sub for 20, 30+ sets. Obviously they are for resale and not for collecting. It makes it hard for collectors who want a set for their collection to get one from the mint. Should the mint be a supplier for large orders to wholesalers or small orders to collectors?
Both. For annual mint sets... produce to demand at a fair and reasonable price. Given these are $6 of pocket change the mint has already made seigniorage on and placed in a plastic blister pack, $15/set seems much more fair to me. As for the cent... stop making it.
I agree wholeheartedly..... If you wanna sell the penny , do it independently !
Yes, everyone wants the Mint to do what is best for them personally. Maybe the Mint is doing what is best for the Mint.
If you sell millions of cents separately, the value will be nonexistent because they won't be rare. And the value of the Mint sets will be minimal because there is nothing special about them. So you've killed two products in one move. Great for you if you want to pay face value for coins, not so great for the Mint. Also not so great for you, if you ever want to sell the coins for more than have value.
So, by only putting cents in the Mint sets, they are going to sell $37.35 million worth of Mint sets (face value of under $2 million). Great for the Mint. Good for you, if you want them to be worth more than fave value when you sell. Not good for you if you want the cents at face value - get the rest at the bank.
The simple, inconvenient fact is that you can't have both value and easy, inexpensive access. They are incompatible.
Why should the Mint be underwriting my collecting interests? I personally would be fine if the Mint stopped making all collectible coins. It's a waste of resources. But if they are going to make them, I don't see why they shouldn't be a profitable enterprise for THEM.
Place a cap on them & don't change it half way though the game !
They didn't change it. They never stated it in the first place. We discussed this in January, all the subscription numbers were from last year.
And now you're complaining about a different issue. In fact, the exact opposite issue.
From 190K to 300K ? Also Why would they offer these @ the beginning for $33.00 and change to $124.50 ?
Because they saw the secondary market values at 190K, and wanted to capture it for themselves. Why they think demand at that price will be sufficient to support a mintage of 300K is a mystery, but they are taking their shot, and the rest of us will see.
With all due respect to @jmlanzaf, though, the final sales have been consistent at around 190K for the past several years, so it was not unreasonable for us to expect that to be the Product Limit. Particularly when they published it. And particularly when they cut off subscription sales at a level consistent with it.
Nothing stopped them from deleting it if it wasn't accurate, rather than just leaving it up and expecting us to know it as just a BS placeholder. I know I can't prove anything, and @jmlanzaf will never admit he is wrong, even when he is, but the fact that subscription sales resumed when the Mint updated the Product Limit strongly implies that the Product Limit for 2026 was indeed 190K, and that the Mint increased it in a cynical grab for more cash when they saw the demand.
They seem determined to squeeze every last cent (pun intended) out of all of us, and to make sure nothing is a big secondary market winner. Which is yet another reason they should really make a million of them at $35 each, and just allow people to stock up on nice examples of the one year only coins, and the cents that are not available elsewhere, rather than trying to sell 300K at $124.50, killing demand and also not having a secondary market winner.
Again, look at the Congratulations subscription page. It applies to 2027 and states this year's price and mintage. While we may not like this reality, it is better to accept it than keep pretending that number matters.
They sissy recently updated the number for the 2026 silver set from last year's mintage to this year's mintage.
The charge to 300k to 190k is far more likely then updating to reflect the 2026 number from the 2025 number than your more conspiratorial interpretation. Would you like to put your money where your mouth is? I'll bet the 2027 mintage of the congratulations set will not be 60,000.
You can keep ignoring all the minting evidence, but I'd rather just accept the reality. You don't even have to give me credit for being right.
Yes, I'm not looking at the 2027 Congratulations Set. I'm looking at the 2026 uncirculated set. They published 190K. They took orders. They stopped taking orders. They increased the limit. They restarted taking orders. I'm going with my lyin' eyes rather than your generic explanation.
No conspiracy explanation. They didn't change it after they went on sale. It's all good.
They are being pigs, and trying to get as much out of this as they can, rather than trying to actually serve the collecting community. It's a base metal set of special coins commemorating a once in a lifetime event. They should be priced modestly and be widely available, rather than creating an artificial shortage and then taking advantage of a supply/demand imbalance they create.
But don't get too excited, because their overreach in jacking up the mintage by 50%+ in addition to the crazy price increase likely robbed you of your flip. People are all hyped up over the cents, but they had special cents in the past that were only available in sets.
How are they doing today? In fact, how did they do right out of the box?
Granted, based on what happened last year, 190K at $33.25 would have been winners. 190K at $124.50 would have been a much closer call. Right now, the continued availability of the subscriptions, more than 24 hours after this change, indicates these are going to do nothing in the secondary market.
As far as 2027 Congratulations set goes, it's too soon to tell. If it's also a Philly exclusive, the same as this year, I bet it will be 60K, the same as this year. Otherwise, who knows? But the fact remains that the uncirculated set is the same as last year, other than the price, and now the mintage. In normal markets, you don't usually get to increase both. I guess we'll see if this is different.
@Russell12 said:
Please, no offense to anyone in here. A few of the posters here had sub for 20, 30+ sets. Obviously they are for resale and not for collecting. It makes it hard for collectors who want a set for their collection to get one from the mint. Should the mint be a supplier for large orders to wholesalers or small orders to collectors?
Both. For annual mint sets... produce to demand at a fair and reasonable price. Given these are $6 of pocket change the mint has already made seigniorage on and placed in a plastic blister pack, $15/set seems much more fair to me. As for the cent... stop making it.
I agree wholeheartedly..... If you wanna sell the penny , do it independently !
Yes, everyone wants the Mint to do what is best for them personally. Maybe the Mint is doing what is best for the Mint.
If you sell millions of cents separately, the value will be nonexistent because they won't be rare. And the value of the Mint sets will be minimal because there is nothing special about them. So you've killed two products in one move. Great for you if you want to pay face value for coins, not so great for the Mint. Also not so great for you, if you ever want to sell the coins for more than have value.
So, by only putting cents in the Mint sets, they are going to sell $37.35 million worth of Mint sets (face value of under $2 million). Great for the Mint. Good for you, if you want them to be worth more than fave value when you sell. Not good for you if you want the cents at face value - get the rest at the bank.
The simple, inconvenient fact is that you can't have both value and easy, inexpensive access. They are incompatible.
Why should the Mint be underwriting my collecting interests? I personally would be fine if the Mint stopped making all collectible coins. It's a waste of resources. But if they are going to make them, I don't see why they shouldn't be a profitable enterprise for THEM.
Place a cap on them & don't change it half way though the game !
They didn't change it. They never stated it in the first place. We discussed this in January, all the subscription numbers were from last year.
And now you're complaining about a different issue. In fact, the exact opposite issue.
From 190K to 300K ? Also Why would they offer these @ the beginning for $33.00 and change to $124.50 ?
190k was on the subscriptions from last year. The 2026 product page has never had a limit stated.
They didn't offer them at $33. Last year's subscription price was $33. You never saw $33 on the 2026 produbt page.
I've been over this multiple times. I seem to be the only one who recognizes the difference between the generic subscription page that lasts for years and the specific product page.
Go look at the Congratulations set subscription page. It says 60,000 and subscriptions now apply to the 2027 issue. Do you think the price and mintage is locked in for 2027?
Are you saying the mint set's were not offered @ $33.00 ? in the beginning of this year ?
No. That's not what I said. You could not all the 2024 sets you wanted at that price. But the subscription price is and always has been subject to change. Just like all the subscription prices were changed this year when they made the global changes. There was literally NEVER a time when you could buy a 2026 set for $33.
You only have to read the page. Instead of arguing, read the terms on the page:
@mach19 said:
I still say your wrong though ...... they were on sale for $33.00 early in the year. That's why I bought them !
Actually, no. I hate to agree with him, but he is 1,000,000% correct on this. Nothing was "on sale for $33.00 early in the year." It very clearly says "You will be billed when product ships. Based on current year’s price. Price may change over time."
Nothing was offered this year for $33, other than prior year sets before they imposed the price increase. You didn't buy any 2026s at $33.
@mach19 said:
I still say your wrong though ...... they were on sale for $33.00 early in the year. That's why I bought them !
No. The subscriptions were available and they showed a $33 price, along with the note that you would be billed the current price at time of sale. Would you like more screenshot of subscription pages?
There was never a time when you could actually buy a 2026 set for $33.
I give up.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
The product and mintage limits on the subscription page do matter as many put in their subscriptions based on those numbers alone. Yes the mint is playing games with it, and it is not fair to the customers who trusted the mint to be honest about the limits and then they change them later.
The mint also put in fake inventory numbers on the gold buffalo proof, and then minted twice as much as they plugged in. I will not believe their numbers again until the day of sales happen as it has to be locked in at that time.
PS The silver proof set has half the limit of this UNC set, so should be the winner of the sets. However, the mint can change the limit on the silver proof set up until the day of sales or if they announce it earlier. What is on the website is suspect due to the tricks they are playing.
@HalfDime said:
The product and mintage limits on the subscription page do matter as many put in their subscriptions based on those numbers alone. Yes the mint is playing games with it, and it is not fair to the customers who trusted the mint to be honest about the limits and then they change them later.
The mint also put in fake inventory numbers on the gold buffalo proof, and then minted twice as much as they plugged in. I will not believe their numbers again until the day of sales happen as it has to be locked in at that time.
PS The silver proof set has half the limit of this UNC set, so should be the winner of the sets. However, the mint can change the limit on the silver proof set up until the day of sales or if they announce it earlier. What is on the website is suspect due to the tricks they are playing.
Not necessarily on the silver proof sets. Don't forget that, if it's the cents people are chasing, the exact same cents will also be available in the base metal proof sets. So you have to add that mintage in as well.
Still think it's such a winner at $245, with only one cent, and a total mintage for the proof cents of 571,522?
@NJCoin said:
Not necessarily on the silver proof sets. Don't forget that, if it's the cents people are chasing, the exact same cents will also be available in the base metal proof sets. So you have to add that mintage in as well.
Still think it's such a winner at $245, with only one cent, and a total mintage for the proof cents of 571,522?
The silver 50c, quarters and dime are only 151k mintage. They are the only low mintage coins to come out.
@NJCoin said:
Not necessarily on the silver proof sets. Don't forget that, if it's the cents people are chasing, the exact same cents will also be available in the base metal proof sets. So you have to add that mintage in as well.
Still think it's such a winner at $245, with only one cent, and a total mintage for the proof cents of 571,522?
The silver 50c, quarters and dime are only 151k mintage. They are the only low mintage coins to come out.
Understood. But most people are chasing the cents that are unavailable elsewhere. 151K is not an especially low mintage for the silver sets, and $245 is not an especially low price, so I'm not sure there will be that much excitement. They barely sold twice that many each year going back at least a decade, at FAR lower prices.
151K is really not a low mintage NCLT silver coin. How many Morgan and Peace Dollars do they now make each year? Who is chasing them?
@NJCoin said:
151K is really not a low mintage NCLT silver coin. How many Morgan and Peace Dollars do they now make each year? Who is chasing them?
The 2025 silver proof set sells for about $300, and it doesn't have the dual dated coins that the 2026 set has. The 151k mintage will be close to a modern record low for these sets.
The morgan and peace dollars will also be dual dated for 2026 so it is to be seen how much they have in extra demand.
I would not be surprised to see the silver sets sell for $500.
@NJCoin said:
151K is really not a low mintage NCLT silver coin. How many Morgan and Peace Dollars do they now make each year? Who is chasing them?
The 2025 silver proof set sells for about $300, and it doesn't have the dual dated coins that the 2026 set has. The 151k mintage will be close to a modern record low for these sets.
The morgan and peace dollars will also be dual dated for 2026 so it is to be seen how much they have in extra demand.
I would not be surprised to see the silver sets sell for $500.
@NJCoin said:
151K is really not a low mintage NCLT silver coin. How many Morgan and Peace Dollars do they now make each year? Who is chasing them?
The 2025 silver proof set sells for about $300, and it doesn't have the dual dated coins that the 2026 set has. The 151k mintage will be close to a modern record low for these sets.
The morgan and peace dollars will also be dual dated for 2026 so it is to be seen how much they have in extra demand.
I would not be surprised to see the silver sets sell for $500.
how much does the 2024 silver proof set sell for?
$225 or so. The 2023 set is barely above melt.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
@NJCoin said:
Not necessarily on the silver proof sets. Don't forget that, if it's the cents people are chasing, the exact same cents will also be available in the base metal proof sets. So you have to add that mintage in as well.
Still think it's such a winner at $245, with only one cent, and a total mintage for the proof cents of 571,522?
The silver 50c, quarters and dime are only 151k mintage. They are the only low mintage coins to come out.
Understood. But most people are chasing the cents that are unavailable elsewhere. 151K is not an especially low mintage for the silver sets, and $245 is not an especially low price, so I'm not sure there will be that much excitement. They barely sold twice that many each year going back at least a decade, at FAR lower prices.
151K is really not a low mintage NCLT silver coin. How many Morgan and Peace Dollars do they now make each year? Who is chasing them?
The product limit is not 151k. The ATS is 156,000 with we don't know how many subscriptions already sold. It's another example of how the subscription number is not the actual product limit - it's last years number. [If I may continue to beat that particularly deceased equine.]
The cent is also available in the regular prof set, is it not?
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
I really don't understand all the hype of this set - many YouTubers were predicting the cent alone to be a 500-1000 dollar item if graded in 69 or 70. Ridiculous.
THREE HUNDRED THOUSAND! Does that sound scarce even?
Love that Milled British (1830-1960) Well, just Love coins, period.
@7Jaguars said:
I really don't understand all the hype of this set - many YouTubers were predicting the cent alone to be a 500-1000 dollar item if graded in 69 or 70. Ridiculous.
THREE HUNDRED THOUSAND! Does that sound scarce even?
69 or 70 are very unusual for a Mint set coin.
There are no circulation strike cents. 300,000 is almost unheard of except for the SVDB. (Yes, yes, survival rate. )
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
@7Jaguars said:
I really don't understand all the hype of this set - many YouTubers were predicting the cent alone to be a 500-1000 dollar item if graded in 69 or 70. Ridiculous.
THREE HUNDRED THOUSAND! Does that sound scarce even?
You never know, look how much people are paying on EBay for bank wrapper rolls/boxes of all the 2026 coins in circulation. A lot of people are going to learn a tough lesson, and probably not be too interested in future mint products.
It will be interesting to see how long the mint milks this cow -- the non-circulating cent to push set sales at higher prices.
@NJCoin said:
151K is really not a low mintage NCLT silver coin. How many Morgan and Peace Dollars do they now make each year? Who is chasing them?
The 2025 silver proof set sells for about $300, and it doesn't have the dual dated coins that the 2026 set has. The 151k mintage will be close to a modern record low for these sets.
The morgan and peace dollars will also be dual dated for 2026 so it is to be seen how much they have in extra demand.
I would not be surprised to see the silver sets sell for $500.
We'll see. $245 is a lot to pay for something where last year's version sells for about $300. Last year, there was a lot of hype about the last cent. Turns out it wasn't.
And those sets sold for $130 direct from the Mint. If you think extreme price increases don't lead to demand destruction, I think you'll learn otherwise. The market is being flooded with dual dated coins this year. They are going to end up being as special as the bicentennial coins are.
@NJCoin said:
Not necessarily on the silver proof sets. Don't forget that, if it's the cents people are chasing, the exact same cents will also be available in the base metal proof sets. So you have to add that mintage in as well.
Still think it's such a winner at $245, with only one cent, and a total mintage for the proof cents of 571,522?
The silver 50c, quarters and dime are only 151k mintage. They are the only low mintage coins to come out.
Understood. But most people are chasing the cents that are unavailable elsewhere. 151K is not an especially low mintage for the silver sets, and $245 is not an especially low price, so I'm not sure there will be that much excitement. They barely sold twice that many each year going back at least a decade, at FAR lower prices.
151K is really not a low mintage NCLT silver coin. How many Morgan and Peace Dollars do they now make each year? Who is chasing them?
The product limit is not 151k. The ATS is 156,000 with we don't know how many subscriptions already sold. It's another example of how the subscription number is not the actual product limit - it's last years number. [If I may continue to beat that particularly deceased equine.]
The cent is also available in the regular prof set, is it not?
Yes, I agree. Even at 151K, I don't think they are a slam dunk at $245.
Your point about the Product Limit changing is well taken. But, as before I don't think 151K is a placeholder. I think it's where they started.
Whether or not they increase it in a money grab is TBD. But keep mind that the ATS number is not meant for public consumption, and it too bounces all over the place.
So don't assume you are going to see an increase in the Product Limit to 250K just because the ATS is showing 156K. It might happen. Or not. Absolutely no way to know with them now.
Do you think that the quality of the coins will be good enough to get some graded for a nice set, the circulation stuff is not too impressive, especially with the half dollars. I don't mind buying 5 or 10 sets if I can put together a really nice single graded set from them. If they really aren't going to be much nicer, I'll just go with one at toss it aside.
If you are not adept at grading yourself, it will be cheaper and likely with better results to just buy the graded coins on ebay.
I can grade them just fine, the question is whether the quality will be worth the cost of buying and submitting. If not, I'll just throw a set back and forget about it.
Depends on how nice of coins you want to get. If you're OK with 65s & 66s, buying a couple of mint sets and sending in the best one will suit you just fine.
@7Jaguars said:
I really don't understand all the hype of this set - many YouTubers were predicting the cent alone to be a 500-1000 dollar item if graded in 69 or 70. Ridiculous.
THREE HUNDRED THOUSAND! Does that sound scarce even?
I believe they are referring to condition rarity. If there are any MS coins grading PCGS 69 in the mint sets (including the cent), there will likely be only 1 or 2 of them and they will bring mega thousands, just like they have in previous years.
@ProofCollection said:
Depends on how nice of coins you want to get. If you're OK with 65s & 66s, buying a couple of mint sets and sending in the best one will suit you just fine.
I tend to collect MS66 mostly, but have quite a few MS67 or 67+ PCGS.CAC in commemoratives and a few top pop Lincolns, but I just want MS67RD or better. I am not looking for condition rarity, as I do not participate in registry competitions, I collect for me.
So based upon this comment, your conclusion is that out of ten mint sets, the best coins will be MS65-66.
Thanks, I appreciate your definitive answer.
Comments
I agree there’s not enough of those type of buyers to sustain a 199.00 price point once some flippers panic at $1245.00 out of their pocket not coming back quick enough, thereby dropping the secondary price to Mint pricing or below in short order. Granted, there seems to be some current value in breaking the penny out and combining it with the silver set penny, but that won’t hold once the Mint shows us what they really have in mind for the silver set mintage.
Again it's not a mintage when it's a set. It's a product limit.
Stupid sales to stupid people IS the market right now, like it or not. That will change but for now that's what the current market conditions are giving us.
Again, agree to disagree. Since we already resolved that these are minted differently than the coins entering circulation, and pretty uniformly are of higher quality, the mintage actually IS the mintage when it's a set. Moreover, we are really only talking about the cent that is only available in the set, so again, quibble all you want about the verbiage, but mintage and product limit mean exactly the same thing here.
Stupid sales to stupid people might be the market to you, but not to me, given that nobody has anything available for delivery, and given that the Mint is currently offering and unable to sell tens of thousands via subscription, at a price nearly $100 below what you think is the market, not to mention an additional, unknown quantity on release day.
I agree wholeheartedly..... If you wanna sell the penny , do it independently !
Yes, everyone wants the Mint to do what is best for them personally. Maybe the Mint is doing what is best for the Mint.
If you sell millions of cents separately, the value will be nonexistent because they won't be rare. And the value of the Mint sets will be minimal because there is nothing special about them. So you've killed two products in one move. Great for you if you want to pay face value for coins, not so great for the Mint. Also not so great for you, if you ever want to sell the coins for more than have value.
So, by only putting cents in the Mint sets, they are going to sell $37.35 million worth of Mint sets (face value of under $2 million). Great for the Mint. Good for you, if you want them to be worth more than fave value when you sell. Not good for you if you want the cents at face value - get the rest at the bank.
The simple, inconvenient fact is that you can't have both value and easy, inexpensive access. They are incompatible.
Why should the Mint be underwriting my collecting interests? I personally would be fine if the Mint stopped making all collectible coins. It's a waste of resources. But if they are going to make them, I don't see why they shouldn't be a profitable enterprise for THEM.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
Do you think that the quality of the coins will be good enough to get some graded for a nice set, the circulation stuff is not too impressive, especially with the half dollars. I don't mind buying 5 or 10 sets if I can put together a really nice single graded set from them. If they really aren't going to be much nicer, I'll just go with one at toss it aside.
If you are not adept at grading yourself, it will be cheaper and likely with better results to just buy the graded coins on ebay.
Place a cap on them & don't change it half way though the game !
The Mint set coins are usually better than circulation coins, but it's still statistical. So, yes, bl taking the best coins from multiple sets should work. But I don't know whether that will end up being cheaper than buying them already slabbed.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
They didn't change it. They never stated it in the first place. We discussed this in January, all the subscription numbers were from last year.
And now you're complaining about a different issue. In fact, the exact opposite issue.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
From 190K to 300K ? Also Why would they offer these @ the beginning for $33.00 and change to $124.50 ?
It's quiet now ?
Because they saw the secondary market values at 190K, and wanted to capture it for themselves. Why they think demand at that price will be sufficient to support a mintage of 300K is a mystery, but they are taking their shot, and the rest of us will see.
With all due respect to @jmlanzaf, though, the final sales have been consistent at around 190K for the past several years, so it was not unreasonable for us to expect that to be the Product Limit. Particularly when they published it. And particularly when they cut off subscription sales at a level consistent with it.
Nothing stopped them from deleting it if it wasn't accurate, rather than just leaving it up and expecting us to know it as just a BS placeholder. I know I can't prove anything, and @jmlanzaf will never admit he is wrong, even when he is, but the fact that subscription sales resumed when the Mint updated the Product Limit strongly implies that the Product Limit for 2026 was indeed 190K, and that the Mint increased it in a cynical grab for more cash when they saw the demand.
They seem determined to squeeze every last cent (pun intended) out of all of us, and to make sure nothing is a big secondary market winner. Which is yet another reason they should really make a million of them at $35 each, and just allow people to stock up on nice examples of the one year only coins, and the cents that are not available elsewhere, rather than trying to sell 300K at $124.50, killing demand and also not having a secondary market winner.
I can grade them just fine, the question is whether the quality will be worth the cost of buying and submitting. If not, I'll just throw a set back and forget about it.
Not to criticize, but you would never pass the state bar exam in any state if you cannot read the question and answer the question. Many people go off on odd tangents for some reason.
190K x $33.00 equates to 6270000
300K x $ 124.5 equates to 37350000
You can do the math
190k was on the subscriptions from last year. The 2026 product page has never had a limit stated.
They didn't offer them at $33. Last year's subscription price was $33. You never saw $33 on the 2026 produbt page.
I've been over this multiple times. I seem to be the only one who recognizes the difference between the generic subscription page that lasts for years and the specific product page.
Go look at the Congratulations set subscription page. It says 60,000 and subscriptions now apply to the 2027 issue. Do you think the price and mintage is locked in for 2027?
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
Again, look at the Congratulations subscription page. It applies to 2027 and states this year's price and mintage. While we may not like this reality, it is better to accept it than keep pretending that number matters.
They sissy recently updated the number for the 2026 silver set from last year's mintage to this year's mintage.
The charge to 300k to 190k is far more likely then updating to reflect the 2026 number from the 2025 number than your more conspiratorial interpretation. Would you like to put your money where your mouth is? I'll bet the 2027 mintage of the congratulations set will not be 60,000.
You can keep ignoring all the mounting evidence, but I'd rather just accept the reality. You don't even have to give me credit for being right. It's not about right or wrong, it's just recognizing the reality.
Should they delete the number from the subscription page instead of leaving the old number? Yes. But they apparently don't. So we should recognize that and not make the same mistake again of assuming last year's number is this year's number.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
Are you saying the mint set's were not offered @ $33.00 ? in the beginning of this year ?
No. That's not what I said. You could get all the 2024 sets you wanted at that price. But the subscription price is and always has been subject to change. Just like all the subscription prices were changed this year when they made the global changes. There was literally NEVER a time when you could buy a 2026 set for $33.
You only have to read the page. Instead of arguing, read the terms on the page:
It's on every page.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
Note on all subscription pages:
(You will be billed when product ships. Based on current year’s price. Price may change over time.)
Yes, I'm not looking at the 2027 Congratulations Set. I'm looking at the 2026 uncirculated set. They published 190K. They took orders. They stopped taking orders. They increased the limit. They restarted taking orders. I'm going with my lyin' eyes rather than your generic explanation.
No conspiracy explanation. They didn't change it after they went on sale. It's all good.
They are being pigs, and trying to get as much out of this as they can, rather than trying to actually serve the collecting community. It's a base metal set of special coins commemorating a once in a lifetime event. They should be priced modestly and be widely available, rather than creating an artificial shortage and then taking advantage of a supply/demand imbalance they create.
But don't get too excited, because their overreach in jacking up the mintage by 50%+ in addition to the crazy price increase likely robbed you of your flip. People are all hyped up over the cents, but they had special cents in the past that were only available in sets.
How are they doing today? In fact, how did they do right out of the box?
Granted, based on what happened last year, 190K at $33.25 would have been winners. 190K at $124.50 would have been a much closer call. Right now, the continued availability of the subscriptions, more than 24 hours after this change, indicates these are going to do nothing in the secondary market.
As far as 2027 Congratulations set goes, it's too soon to tell. If it's also a Philly exclusive, the same as this year, I bet it will be 60K, the same as this year. Otherwise, who knows? But the fact remains that the uncirculated set is the same as last year, other than the price, and now the mintage. In normal markets, you don't usually get to increase both. I guess we'll see if this is different.
Thank you for setting the record straight
I still say your wrong though ...... they were on sale for $33.00 early in the year. That's why I bought them !
Actually, no. I hate to agree with him, but he is 1,000,000% correct on this. Nothing was "on sale for $33.00 early in the year." It very clearly says "You will be billed when product ships. Based on current year’s price. Price may change over time."
Nothing was offered this year for $33, other than prior year sets before they imposed the price increase. You didn't buy any 2026s at $33.
No. The subscriptions were available and they showed a $33 price, along with the note that you would be billed the current price at time of sale. Would you like more screenshot of subscription pages?
There was never a time when you could actually buy a 2026 set for $33.
I give up.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
k
it's always charged for the price on the day of order not day of subscription
Please cross reference this link, Peace !
https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/1034463/the-forum-needs-a-little-humor#latest
The product and mintage limits on the subscription page do matter as many put in their subscriptions based on those numbers alone. Yes the mint is playing games with it, and it is not fair to the customers who trusted the mint to be honest about the limits and then they change them later.
The mint also put in fake inventory numbers on the gold buffalo proof, and then minted twice as much as they plugged in. I will not believe their numbers again until the day of sales happen as it has to be locked in at that time.
PS The silver proof set has half the limit of this UNC set, so should be the winner of the sets. However, the mint can change the limit on the silver proof set up until the day of sales or if they announce it earlier. What is on the website is suspect due to the tricks they are playing.
Not necessarily on the silver proof sets. Don't forget that, if it's the cents people are chasing, the exact same cents will also be available in the base metal proof sets. So you have to add that mintage in as well.
Still think it's such a winner at $245, with only one cent, and a total mintage for the proof cents of 571,522?
The silver 50c, quarters and dime are only 151k mintage. They are the only low mintage coins to come out.
Understood. But most people are chasing the cents that are unavailable elsewhere. 151K is not an especially low mintage for the silver sets, and $245 is not an especially low price, so I'm not sure there will be that much excitement. They barely sold twice that many each year going back at least a decade, at FAR lower prices.
151K is really not a low mintage NCLT silver coin. How many Morgan and Peace Dollars do they now make each year? Who is chasing them?
The 2025 silver proof set sells for about $300, and it doesn't have the dual dated coins that the 2026 set has. The 151k mintage will be close to a modern record low for these sets.
The morgan and peace dollars will also be dual dated for 2026 so it is to be seen how much they have in extra demand.
I would not be surprised to see the silver sets sell for $500.
how much does the 2024 silver proof set sell for?
.> @MsMorrisine said:
$225 or so. The 2023 set is barely above melt.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
The product limit is not 151k. The ATS is 156,000 with we don't know how many subscriptions already sold. It's another example of how the subscription number is not the actual product limit - it's last years number. [If I may continue to beat that particularly deceased equine.]
The cent is also available in the regular prof set, is it not?
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
I really don't understand all the hype of this set - many YouTubers were predicting the cent alone to be a 500-1000 dollar item if graded in 69 or 70. Ridiculous.
THREE HUNDRED THOUSAND! Does that sound scarce even?
Well, just Love coins, period.
69 or 70 are very unusual for a Mint set coin.
There are no circulation strike cents. 300,000 is almost unheard of except for the SVDB. (Yes, yes, survival rate. )
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
You know what they say . . . "Never trust a skinny cook or anyone on YouTube"
Please correct me if any of these are wrong, but this is what I think I have paid for past Mint sets.
1974 6.00
1975 6.00
1976 6.00
1977 7.00
1978 7.00
1979 8.00
1980 9.00
1981 11.00
1984 7.00
1985 7.00
1986 7.00
1987 7.00
1988 7.00
1989 7.00
1990 7.00
1991 7.00
1992 7.00
1993 8.00
1994 8.00
1995 8.00
1996 8.00
1997 8.00
1998 8.00
1999 14.95
2000 14.95
2001 14.95
2002 14.95
2003 14.95
2004 16.95
2005 16.95
2006 16.95
2007 22.95
2008 22.95
2009 27.95
2010 31.95
2011 31.95
2012 27.95
2013 27.95
2014 27.95
2015 28.95
2016 26.95
2017 20.95
2018 21.95
2019 21.95
2020 25.25
2021 25.25
2022 25.25
2023 29.00
2024 29.00
2025 33.25
You never know, look how much people are paying on EBay for bank wrapper rolls/boxes of all the 2026 coins in circulation. A lot of people are going to learn a tough lesson, and probably not be too interested in future mint products.
It will be interesting to see how long the mint milks this cow -- the non-circulating cent to push set sales at higher prices.
We'll see. $245 is a lot to pay for something where last year's version sells for about $300. Last year, there was a lot of hype about the last cent. Turns out it wasn't.
And those sets sold for $130 direct from the Mint. If you think extreme price increases don't lead to demand destruction, I think you'll learn otherwise. The market is being flooded with dual dated coins this year. They are going to end up being as special as the bicentennial coins are.
Yes, I agree. Even at 151K, I don't think they are a slam dunk at $245.
Your point about the Product Limit changing is well taken. But, as before I don't think 151K is a placeholder. I think it's where they started.
Whether or not they increase it in a money grab is TBD. But keep mind that the ATS number is not meant for public consumption, and it too bounces all over the place.
So don't assume you are going to see an increase in the Product Limit to 250K just because the ATS is showing 156K. It might happen. Or not. Absolutely no way to know with them now.
Depends on how nice of coins you want to get. If you're OK with 65s & 66s, buying a couple of mint sets and sending in the best one will suit you just fine.
I believe they are referring to condition rarity. If there are any MS coins grading PCGS 69 in the mint sets (including the cent), there will likely be only 1 or 2 of them and they will bring mega thousands, just like they have in previous years.
I tend to collect MS66 mostly, but have quite a few MS67 or 67+ PCGS.CAC in commemoratives and a few top pop Lincolns, but I just want MS67RD or better. I am not looking for condition rarity, as I do not participate in registry competitions, I collect for me.
So based upon this comment, your conclusion is that out of ten mint sets, the best coins will be MS65-66.
Thanks, I appreciate your definitive answer.
The Mint is engaging in predatory pricing and abuse of their customer base. It's only become worse over the years.
I knew it would happen.