The three 2026 Annual Mint sets question
mbr33
Posts: 294 ✭✭✭
I may have missed this discussion (if it happened) but I hadn’t noticed until now that the Mint is claiming the sets will have the Liberty Bell privy as well. I had cancelled my uncirculated sets, but if the privy is in fact on them, I would maybe reconsider that action.
The circulating semi-Q coins, while having the dual date, do not have the privy. That makes these a bit more interesting, if in fact true. The Mint rep I spoke to about it couldn’t confirm it or deny it, but I also suspect that said representative couldn’t have told me the date of the week if pressed to do so. Maybe I’ll try again next week.
0
Comments
The images on the website don't show privy marks, so I'm pretty sure that is just sloppy editing. The coins are not going to be different than what is being released for circulation, and the stars are still going to be the cents that are unavailable elsewhere.
They are not all going to be unavailable elsewhere, because they are all going to have privy marks only available in the sets. That would indeed be special if true, but, no, you did not miss anything, and that would have been widely discussed if it was a thing. Pretty sure this is just a case of whoever is writing copy for the Mint not understanding that not all the dual date coins have privy marks.
Since the images on the website are not usually pictures, how do we know the "sloppy editing" isn't the pictures rather than the text?
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
Wild guess, since the images on the website are indeed images of the coins, sans privy mark, which we know, from the coins we have already seen in the wild, are accurate representations.
Yes, of course, you can argue about anything. And yes, of course, they can always do whatever they want.
But don't you think, if this was actually a special thing they were specifically, intentionally doing, we would have heard about it from something other random text in a generic descriptor for the 2026 annual sets? Maybe?
So, until further notice, I'm going with the copywriter not understanding that every 2026 coin does not come with a dual date and a 250 privy mark. I'll leave you to speculate on all the unlikely permutations.
I don't need to speculate on anything other than we really can't know.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
Correct. But you DID speculate that the sloppy editing might be in the pictures rather than the text.
A question was asked, and this forum is all about going back and forth with information and speculation. So I threw my 2 cents in. As with everything else, we'll see!
I respect you both…very much…as valued forum posters. I appreciate reading your back and forth every single time you debate. The fact (whatever that is) in this situation is you’re both right. It very well could be a copy editor being sloppy, or it could be (as is often from the Mint) that every new issue isn’t really properly discussed or disclosed until an email just before release remind us it’s coming and what it has in its favor, etc.
Since it’s in the written form on their site, and since I want to base a purchase off of what they’re telling me in writing, I wanted to confirm from the source. Sadly, that source couldn’t tell me if what I’m reading is correct or not. I think it’s something we should know one way or the other, before we base a purchase decision.
While we indeed cannot know, the photos have not changed since first showing up, but the text change is recent.
While that does not provide any real proof, it is an observation.
And I for one think that it would make the sets more desirable.
I can certainly agree with you that the images haven’t changed, which brings up another debate over AI and the actual photos of real coins that the Mint will ship to our homes.
I almost always receive something far better in person than I’ve seen on the site asking me to buy it.
The text change is recent. If it’s accurate, I regret cancelling some of my subs. If it’s not, then I don’t want to be fooled into buying something from the Mint that they won’t deliver on.
It would definitely make them much more desirable. Which is why, if they were doing it, one would think it would be with more fanfare than burying it in some generic text.
As always, anything is possible. I'm placing my bet on the text being mistaken, as so much other Mint text has been mistaken lately.
They mention the cents only being available in the sets. They don't say anything about special privy marks only available in the sets. I'm reading it as saying the dual dates and privy marks go together, when we all know that is not necessarily the case. TBD.
Except you post your speculation with cocksure certainty when your track record doesn't warrant it.
The mint loves to do things like this and because they are charging such a high premium for sets now, the price certainly warrants this minimal extra effort to create something special to justify the higher price.
So what? I put myself out there. Maybe this will rehabilitate my track record, which is better than you let on, since you dwell on the losses and ignore the wins. Maybe not.
Just understand that "the higher price" applies to every past issue in their catalog, so they certainly don't feel like they need to exert "this minimal extra effort to create something special to justify the higher price." I'm pretty cocksure certain about that as well.
The proofs are unique because they are proofs, so they don't need a privy mark to set them apart. The uncirculateds used to get their own special finish to set them apart. With no surcharge.
Now they are special because they receive special handling, and are in better condition than the coins sent to banks. So again, no need for a privy to make them special. In any event, Mint pricing nowadays is divorced from "creating something special."
Always remember "The Mint is like a box of chocolates. You never know what you will get."
toss a coin in the air and Forget about it !!!!
You bet! In the case of the uncirculated set though, I wanna see how that coin comes to rest……heads or tails….to decide if I want to be a buyer or just an observer.
I questioned your absolute certainty that the problem was the text. I did not speculate on anything other yikes that there was more than one possible explanation.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
I agree. That's why I'm unwilling to draw any definitive conclusion that there is an error in the text.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
That's why I keep the subscriptions open until the last minute
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
They’re adding the privy to the coins to allow me say “thank you” after the price and mintage reamings.
It's almost too much to hope for. It won't effect the value of the cents. However, it would make every other coin into a lower mintage variety.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
coins pulled from circ strikes are without the privy. there's no room for a privy with 250 in it
I was evaluating what I wanted to do with the June slate of offerings and was convinced by the higher mintages of the uncirculated sets that it wasn’t something I was interested in, so I cancelled. I’ve renewed my subscription for it until such time as there is clarity on the issue/debate. I have about 4 weeks to decide. I’m hopeful that the Mint won’t let the issue/answer slide until their promo-reminder email just prior to processing the subscription.
And what if they don't pull them from circ strikes? None of the proof coins are pulled from circ strikes and those are also "annual sets". There is an inconsistency on the Mint website. I have no idea what the right answer is.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
Here’s the inconsistency and the out of date website information that truly needs an update soon! The 2025 set is the lead on this page, but the one at the top of the thread is the teaser for subscription information on this years subscription set offerings. One is right or wrong, and the other is simply out of date.
Jmlanzaf has pointed out multiple times that the mintages you aee advertised for months on end are last year’s numbers. For proof of that, see next years subscription page (which is now live) for next years Kennedy half. It states a mintage limit of 100,000….exactly what they’ve moved the 2026 limit to most recently.
There is room on the gold Mercury dime for a privy, so there is room on any coin in any of the sets, although the printed information intimates that there is not a privy of the Lincoln cent. But then again, that is trying to make sense of mint-speak, slightly less reliable than understanding what my dog is barking about when nothing is there.