@HalfDime said:
My problem with these is the size only for the price, as it is like ordering a premium hamburger and they serve you a McD 99 cent cheapie. The mint also has a clever new employee who is dreaming all this stuff up, they should probably have left them to go wild with many more products for this year. According to the court filings they drag out planning and production like they are making NASA spacecraft.
I agree , I like the design .... again I just can't see the price ?
Right. That's the entire problem. People like you who would be attracted to the product are not in a position to buy it, and those with the wherewithal to drop $20K on a gimmicky trinket will have no interest. Which is why it will land with a tremendous thud.
Instead of getting too cute by half, they should have just issued it with the usual mintages at the usual, already excessive pricing. I just don't think there is going to be a market for these.
They also could have made a clad version in a larger issuance for $100 or less. That might have had more appeal.
They also could have the silver version in a larger issuance for a far lower price. Precious metal value is not driving the pricing here, and you know it.
They are testing the waters to see if the market will tolerate very low, but not Stacks auction low, mintages at extremely elevated prices. And doing it with a one-off unique thing like this rather than messing with a variant of a popular series, like a privy on an AGE, because that would like make peoples' heads explode.
If this sells out, then yeah, look for infinite takes on it in the future. Otherwise, the market will have spoken, these will sit on the website unsold for years, and we won't see things like this anymore. After the DC debacle, I am reasonably confident we won't be seeing any more IP licensing deals going forward.
I didn't say it was. But they don't sell anything silver for under $100. The clad halves are $64, i believe.
This is an invoice from the mint from 5 months ago
Yeah. Pre price increase. No more. He's not wrong about that.
But he's out in left field speculating that clad would be the only way to go to sell these at reasonable prices. Or that the price for clad would be any more reasonable than that for a half ounce of silver if they also offered 2026 in clad. And he misses the point that selling a lot more clad would totally destroy what it is they are trying to do with this test.
The idea here was not to be reasonable. It was to test just how unreasonable they could be with 3 similar items with a collective mintage of a little over 6K.
I'm not wrong about anything. I NEVER SAID ANY OF THOSE THINGS.
I didn't say that a cheap clad version fit with their marketing. I didn't say that clad was the only way to make a cheaper product. I never said 2026 in clad, in fact, i specifically said a larger issuance.
You keep putting words in my mouth and then telling me that YOUR words are wrong. Why would you do that other than to create an argument that you want to have?
Really? You never said "2026 in clad"?
@jmlanzaf said:
They also could have made a clad version in a larger issuance for $100 or less. That might have had more appeal.
Who said that? "Clad." "Larger issuance." You said them both. They are both irrelevant, because that's not what this is.
They don't need clad to hit lower price point than $750 on an item with $32 worth of silver in it. That's the point.
And they could easily do a "larger issuance" in silver, gold, platinum, palladium, pewter, whatever, if they so chose. They didn't. They don't want a "larger issuance." They want a tiny issuance, and an astronomical price. So that's what this is.
You saying they COULD have done something else is saying nothing at all. Of course they could. They could ALWAYS do something other than what they end up doing.
The words you put in your own mouth were that clad would be tied to larger issuance to get to $100 or less. Because THAT would be consistent with a price under $100, because that would be consistent with 2026 pricing. A half ounce silver product under $100 would not be, because all one ounce silver product sells for more than $200. Right?
@jmlanzaf said:
But if you simply use their normal 2026 pricing scheme, there is no way (in my humble opinion) they are going to price the silver at under $100. Soooooo...If I wanted a sub-$100 price, it would likely have to be clad.
@HalfDime said:
My problem with these is the size only for the price, as it is like ordering a premium hamburger and they serve you a McD 99 cent cheapie. The mint also has a clever new employee who is dreaming all this stuff up, they should probably have left them to go wild with many more products for this year. According to the court filings they drag out planning and production like they are making NASA spacecraft.
So what would make you happy? A full ounce of silver?
That's really the deal breaker for you at $750? The missing thickness and $32 worth of silver?
The gold is already plenty big at one ounce, and the half ounce is almost the exact same size, just half as thick and half as expensive. And the silver is also the same size.
So again, is that really the problem, or just a nit to pick because you can't bring yourself to agree with those of us who just think it's crazy in general, not because it is a coin sized coin? It would be fine if it was a Mr. T sized trinket, but still priced at the same premium to spot?
No, it's not a 99 cent cheapie. It's just an artificial rarity that isn't really all that rare in relation to its pricing for what it is. Not one of 230 special FH gold coins, but one of 2026 trinkets, times 3, like a PAMP Hot Wheels or Barbie.
Those sell for around $200 each with similar mintages. True they are not official Mint products, but they are no more gimmicky. These are not coins. They are monetized tchotchkes. Attractive to some, but generally not to serious people with serious money to spend on coins.
The price is based on the artificial rarity. Not on the size, or the precious metal content. Clearly, given the wild premiums. TBD.
I agree!
Although I'm still toying with buying the silver - full disclosure.
I have confidence you'll come to your senses when you don't see a buzz materialize pre-release.e
NJ, I’m really just torn here. I can see you being 100% right, but I can also see it going the other way as part of a “greater fools” test. If I was to take a stab at any of these, it would strictly and only be to flip and run away from. In that case, I could end up stuck in it and have it relegated to a bottom corner of a safe somewhere, rarely seen and unloved.
At this point, I don’t love it and don’t want it in my collection. It looks inferior for its price point at this mintage level. Time will tell which way it goes. As much as it infuriates the masses, I find it an intriguing test of Mint decision-making and leadership.
In that case, please don't. Even if there is interest, at these prices the vast majority of the flip is already gone. You will do FAR better using $750 to buy 6 uncirculated sets to break up and have graded, or to just flip as is for whatever you can get.
Do you honestly see the half ounce silver Liberty Bell medal going for $1500, or $3K, in the secondary market? If so, please explain to me why 8300 of 25,000 2.5 ounce Superman medals sit unloved and unsold on the Mint website as we speak. Same with 4K out of 10K half ounce gold coins.
Also very low mintages, albeit admittedly not quite as low. Also very expensive, albeit not nearly as expensive.
Because this is different? I guess we'll see.
Some are salivating because the mintage is tantalizingly low, while ignoring the fact that the prices are eye wateringly high. They analogize to other things with low mintages selling for similar or higher premiums, while dismissing the fact that these are not those.
This is new and unique. Maybe a market develops for these at this mintage and price. Maybe not.
FWIW, I absolutely do not suffer from FOMO with this. As I have said repeatedly in the past, as a taxpayer and collector, I wish the US Mint nothing but success in all of its endeavors.
But this is a game I have no interest in playing. So I am perfectly content to sit on the sidelines, make my predictions, and then either take a victory lap or suffer a public shaming.
But I am not chasing artificial rarities that have nothing to do with the rest of my collection, or why I started collecting in the first place. Sure, if it was a guaranteed home run, I'd step up to the plate and accept the windfall, as I'm sure most of us would. But there are few guarantees in life, and 2,000 of anything at 5x to 23x very elevated intrinsic value are certainly not among them. Keep in mind that gold and silver are still historically very expensive, even after the recent pullback.
As a result, I don't want to have any part of encouraging the Mint to go in this direction. So I'm leaving that to others. I'm happy to sit in the cheap seats and just enjoy the show. Unless you have unlimited money to burn, I humbly suggest you do the same.
I hear you and am certainly leaning away from participating in this offering. I want to see how it plays out, and like you, as a taxpayer and collector I want to see the Mint succeed in producing good quality coins for reasonable profits for the Mint itself. This one seems extreme, but I’m anxious to see how they do. With the proper hype and a media blitz, they could pull it off handsomely and walk away the big winner, while the intial buyer is left holding the bag for some years. Is there a large enough market for these that several thousand willing buyers are shut out and feel compelled to spend double or triple due to FOMO? We are going to find out in relatively short order.
I’m watching the chattering class on YouTube and the consensus is with you for the moment. Presales are happening…..but the legitimacy of some sellers is questionable. That market won’t establish itself until drop day when and if it sells out.
I'm 99.44% sure I will be trying to get one of the Silver medals on release date. I'm closer to 0% on the gold coins. But I will be checking the ATS Numbers on release date and go from there...
@DotStore said:
I'm 99.44% sure I will be trying to get one of the Silver medals on release date. I'm closer to 0% on the gold coins. But I will be checking the ATS Numbers on release date and go from there...
I’m genuinely interested in your thinking. Are you wanting it because it’s a 2026 product that you feel you have to own, or would you be wanting to sell it while the iron is hot? If if if the Mint goes way overboard on marketing this to every media outlet that wants the story, that alone could drive the secondary prices for a few months to some decent flips for sellers, at least on the silver and the 1/2 Oz gold.
@NJCoin said:
TBD whether people care as much about Liberty Bell paperweights as they do about FH privy medals in 2026. I sure don't.
The only drawback to these is the size, they made them like little baby bells. Nobody buying is posting about these as they don't want more buyers,
This may be the only real low mintage product the mint offers for the 250th this year. The prices weren't pulled out of a hat, you may not like them but they did their homework. In order to justify making them they had to raise prices.
I doubt they could have done clad as the metal might have been too hard to strike in quantity. They went low mintage to be sure to make enough to fill the order.
@DotStore said:
I'm 99.44% sure I will be trying to get one of the Silver medals on release date. I'm closer to 0% on the gold coins. But I will be checking the ATS Numbers on release date and go from there...
I’m genuinely interested in your thinking. Are you wanting it because it’s a 2026 product that you feel you have to own, or would you be wanting to sell it while the iron is hot? If if if the Mint goes way overboard on marketing this to every media outlet that wants the story, that alone could drive the secondary prices for a few months to some decent flips for sellers, at least on the silver and the 1/2 Oz gold.
@HalfDime said:
My problem with these is the size only for the price, as it is like ordering a premium hamburger and they serve you a McD 99 cent cheapie. The mint also has a clever new employee who is dreaming all this stuff up, they should probably have left them to go wild with many more products for this year. According to the court filings they drag out planning and production like they are making NASA spacecraft.
I agree , I like the design .... again I just can't see the price ?
Right. That's the entire problem. People like you who would be attracted to the product are not in a position to buy it, and those with the wherewithal to drop $20K on a gimmicky trinket will have no interest. Which is why it will land with a tremendous thud.
Instead of getting too cute by half, they should have just issued it with the usual mintages at the usual, already excessive pricing. I just don't think there is going to be a market for these.
They also could have made a clad version in a larger issuance for $100 or less. That might have had more appeal.
They also could have the silver version in a larger issuance for a far lower price. Precious metal value is not driving the pricing here, and you know it.
They are testing the waters to see if the market will tolerate very low, but not Stacks auction low, mintages at extremely elevated prices. And doing it with a one-off unique thing like this rather than messing with a variant of a popular series, like a privy on an AGE, because that would like make peoples' heads explode.
If this sells out, then yeah, look for infinite takes on it in the future. Otherwise, the market will have spoken, these will sit on the website unsold for years, and we won't see things like this anymore. After the DC debacle, I am reasonably confident we won't be seeing any more IP licensing deals going forward.
I didn't say it was. But they don't sell anything silver for under $100. The clad halves are $64, i believe.
This is an invoice from the mint from 5 months ago
Yeah. Pre price increase. No more. He's not wrong about that.
But he's out in left field speculating that clad would be the only way to go to sell these at reasonable prices. Or that the price for clad would be any more reasonable than that for a half ounce of silver if they also offered 2026 in clad. And he misses the point that selling a lot more clad would totally destroy what it is they are trying to do with this test.
The idea here was not to be reasonable. It was to test just how unreasonable they could be with 3 similar items with a collective mintage of a little over 6K.
I'm not wrong about anything. I NEVER SAID ANY OF THOSE THINGS.
I didn't say that a cheap clad version fit with their marketing. I didn't say that clad was the only way to make a cheaper product. I never said 2026 in clad, in fact, i specifically said a larger issuance.
You keep putting words in my mouth and then telling me that YOUR words are wrong. Why would you do that other than to create an argument that you want to have?
Really? You never said "2026 in clad"?
@jmlanzaf said:
They also could have made a clad version in a larger issuance for $100 or less. That might have had more appeal.
Who said that? "Clad." "Larger issuance." You said them both. They are both irrelevant, because that's not what this is.
They don't need clad to hit lower price point than $750 on an item with $32 worth of silver in it. That's the point.
And they could easily do a "larger issuance" in silver, gold, platinum, palladium, pewter, whatever, if they so chose. They didn't. They don't want a "larger issuance." They want a tiny issuance, and an astronomical price. So that's what this is.
You saying they COULD have done something else is saying nothing at all. Of course they could. They could ALWAYS do something other than what they end up doing.
The words you put in your own mouth were that clad would be tied to larger issuance to get to $100 or less. Because THAT would be consistent with a price under $100, because that would be consistent with 2026 pricing. A half ounce silver product under $100 would not be, because all one ounce silver product sells for more than $200. Right?
@jmlanzaf said:
But if you simply use their normal 2026 pricing scheme, there is no way (in my humble opinion) they are going to price the silver at under $100. Soooooo...If I wanted a sub-$100 price, it would likely have to be clad.
I said "clad in a LARGER ISSUANCE" (emphasis added) not a mintage of 2026 like you suggested. Thank you for proving my point the "2026" refered to the mintage.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
@DotStore said:
I'm 99.44% sure I will be trying to get one of the Silver medals on release date. I'm closer to 0% on the gold coins. But I will be checking the ATS Numbers on release date and go from there...
I’m genuinely interested in your thinking. Are you wanting it because it’s a 2026 product that you feel you have to own, or would you be wanting to sell it while the iron is hot? If if if the Mint goes way overboard on marketing this to every media outlet that wants the story, that alone could drive the secondary prices for a few months to some decent flips for sellers, at least on the silver and the 1/2 Oz gold.
@HalfDime said:
My problem with these is the size only for the price, as it is like ordering a premium hamburger and they serve you a McD 99 cent cheapie. The mint also has a clever new employee who is dreaming all this stuff up, they should probably have left them to go wild with many more products for this year. According to the court filings they drag out planning and production like they are making NASA spacecraft.
I agree , I like the design .... again I just can't see the price ?
Right. That's the entire problem. People like you who would be attracted to the product are not in a position to buy it, and those with the wherewithal to drop $20K on a gimmicky trinket will have no interest. Which is why it will land with a tremendous thud.
Instead of getting too cute by half, they should have just issued it with the usual mintages at the usual, already excessive pricing. I just don't think there is going to be a market for these.
They also could have made a clad version in a larger issuance for $100 or less. That might have had more appeal.
They also could have the silver version in a larger issuance for a far lower price. Precious metal value is not driving the pricing here, and you know it.
They are testing the waters to see if the market will tolerate very low, but not Stacks auction low, mintages at extremely elevated prices. And doing it with a one-off unique thing like this rather than messing with a variant of a popular series, like a privy on an AGE, because that would like make peoples' heads explode.
If this sells out, then yeah, look for infinite takes on it in the future. Otherwise, the market will have spoken, these will sit on the website unsold for years, and we won't see things like this anymore. After the DC debacle, I am reasonably confident we won't be seeing any more IP licensing deals going forward.
I didn't say it was. But they don't sell anything silver for under $100. The clad halves are $64, i believe.
This is an invoice from the mint from 5 months ago
Yeah. Pre price increase. No more. He's not wrong about that.
But he's out in left field speculating that clad would be the only way to go to sell these at reasonable prices. Or that the price for clad would be any more reasonable than that for a half ounce of silver if they also offered 2026 in clad. And he misses the point that selling a lot more clad would totally destroy what it is they are trying to do with this test.
The idea here was not to be reasonable. It was to test just how unreasonable they could be with 3 similar items with a collective mintage of a little over 6K.
I'm not wrong about anything. I NEVER SAID ANY OF THOSE THINGS.
I didn't say that a cheap clad version fit with their marketing. I didn't say that clad was the only way to make a cheaper product. I never said 2026 in clad, in fact, i specifically said a larger issuance.
You keep putting words in my mouth and then telling me that YOUR words are wrong. Why would you do that other than to create an argument that you want to have?
Really? You never said "2026 in clad"?
@jmlanzaf said:
They also could have made a clad version in a larger issuance for $100 or less. That might have had more appeal.
Who said that? "Clad." "Larger issuance." You said them both. They are both irrelevant, because that's not what this is.
They don't need clad to hit lower price point than $750 on an item with $32 worth of silver in it. That's the point.
And they could easily do a "larger issuance" in silver, gold, platinum, palladium, pewter, whatever, if they so chose. They didn't. They don't want a "larger issuance." They want a tiny issuance, and an astronomical price. So that's what this is.
You saying they COULD have done something else is saying nothing at all. Of course they could. They could ALWAYS do something other than what they end up doing.
The words you put in your own mouth were that clad would be tied to larger issuance to get to $100 or less. Because THAT would be consistent with a price under $100, because that would be consistent with 2026 pricing. A half ounce silver product under $100 would not be, because all one ounce silver product sells for more than $200. Right?
@jmlanzaf said:
But if you simply use their normal 2026 pricing scheme, there is no way (in my humble opinion) they are going to price the silver at under $100. Soooooo...If I wanted a sub-$100 price, it would likely have to be clad.
You may be having a stroke.
No, I did not say the clad were "tied" to a larger issuance to get to a lower price point.
I did say, strictly hypothetically, that they COULD HAVE made a clad version in a larger issuance. And I suggested that might have had more appeal. You are creating a bunch of casualties that aren't even implied by what I wrote.
You have made a giant mountain out of a tiny ant hill. I suggested that a lower mintage, cheaper clad coin might have had more appeal than a lower mintage expensive coin. You probably even agree that is true. You are arguing everything except what I said.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
@HalfDime said:
My problem with these is the size only for the price, as it is like ordering a premium hamburger and they serve you a McD 99 cent cheapie. The mint also has a clever new employee who is dreaming all this stuff up, they should probably have left them to go wild with many more products for this year. According to the court filings they drag out planning and production like they are making NASA spacecraft.
I agree , I like the design .... again I just can't see the price ?
Right. That's the entire problem. People like you who would be attracted to the product are not in a position to buy it, and those with the wherewithal to drop $20K on a gimmicky trinket will have no interest. Which is why it will land with a tremendous thud.
Instead of getting too cute by half, they should have just issued it with the usual mintages at the usual, already excessive pricing. I just don't think there is going to be a market for these.
They also could have made a clad version in a larger issuance for $100 or less. That might have had more appeal.
They also could have the silver version in a larger issuance for a far lower price. Precious metal value is not driving the pricing here, and you know it.
They are testing the waters to see if the market will tolerate very low, but not Stacks auction low, mintages at extremely elevated prices. And doing it with a one-off unique thing like this rather than messing with a variant of a popular series, like a privy on an AGE, because that would like make peoples' heads explode.
If this sells out, then yeah, look for infinite takes on it in the future. Otherwise, the market will have spoken, these will sit on the website unsold for years, and we won't see things like this anymore. After the DC debacle, I am reasonably confident we won't be seeing any more IP licensing deals going forward.
I didn't say it was. But they don't sell anything silver for under $100. The clad halves are $64, i believe.
This is an invoice from the mint from 5 months ago
Yeah. Pre price increase. No more. He's not wrong about that.
But he's out in left field speculating that clad would be the only way to go to sell these at reasonable prices. Or that the price for clad would be any more reasonable than that for a half ounce of silver if they also offered 2026 in clad. And he misses the point that selling a lot more clad would totally destroy what it is they are trying to do with this test.
The idea here was not to be reasonable. It was to test just how unreasonable they could be with 3 similar items with a collective mintage of a little over 6K.
I'm not wrong about anything. I NEVER SAID ANY OF THOSE THINGS.
I didn't say that a cheap clad version fit with their marketing. I didn't say that clad was the only way to make a cheaper product. I never said 2026 in clad, in fact, i specifically said a larger issuance.
You keep putting words in my mouth and then telling me that YOUR words are wrong. Why would you do that other than to create an argument that you want to have?
Really? You never said "2026 in clad"?
@jmlanzaf said:
They also could have made a clad version in a larger issuance for $100 or less. That might have had more appeal.
Who said that? "Clad." "Larger issuance." You said them both. They are both irrelevant, because that's not what this is.
They don't need clad to hit lower price point than $750 on an item with $32 worth of silver in it. That's the point.
And they could easily do a "larger issuance" in silver, gold, platinum, palladium, pewter, whatever, if they so chose. They didn't. They don't want a "larger issuance." They want a tiny issuance, and an astronomical price. So that's what this is.
You saying they COULD have done something else is saying nothing at all. Of course they could. They could ALWAYS do something other than what they end up doing.
The words you put in your own mouth were that clad would be tied to larger issuance to get to $100 or less. Because THAT would be consistent with a price under $100, because that would be consistent with 2026 pricing. A half ounce silver product under $100 would not be, because all one ounce silver product sells for more than $200. Right?
@jmlanzaf said:
But if you simply use their normal 2026 pricing scheme, there is no way (in my humble opinion) they are going to price the silver at under $100. Soooooo...If I wanted a sub-$100 price, it would likely have to be clad.
You may be having a stroke.
No, I did not say the clad were "tied" to a larger issuance to get to a lower price point.
I did say, strictly hypothetically, that they COULD HAVE made a clad version in a larger issuance. And I suggested that might have had more appeal. You are creating a bunch of casualties that aren't even implied by what I wrote.
You have made a giant mountain out of a tiny ant hill. I suggested that a lower mintage, cheaper clad coin might have had more appeal than a lower mintage expensive coin. You probably even agree that is true. You are arguing everything except what I said.
No. I'm arguing exactly what you said. You are just obtusely refusing to acknowledge my point.
Which is that clad is not necessary to produce in volume, or to hit a price point far lower than $750. They chose not to.
Not because they can't, but because that would defeat what they are trying to do here. $32 in silver is not why they will be asking $750. Taking that out would not necessitate a reduction in price. Certainly not to less than $100.
They could have made the silver in quantity and sold them for far less than $750. But that's not what they want with these.
So your suggestion that they COULD have turned this into something else is pointless. Because that's not what they wanted to do. And, trust me here, selling clad at less than $100 would kill any interest anyone would otherwise have in a half ounce silver version for $750. That much they know. Unlimited one ounce silver Superman medals likely reduce demand for 25K 2.5 ounce versions.
@HalfDime said:
My problem with these is the size only for the price, as it is like ordering a premium hamburger and they serve you a McD 99 cent cheapie. The mint also has a clever new employee who is dreaming all this stuff up, they should probably have left them to go wild with many more products for this year. According to the court filings they drag out planning and production like they are making NASA spacecraft.
I agree , I like the design .... again I just can't see the price ?
Right. That's the entire problem. People like you who would be attracted to the product are not in a position to buy it, and those with the wherewithal to drop $20K on a gimmicky trinket will have no interest. Which is why it will land with a tremendous thud.
Instead of getting too cute by half, they should have just issued it with the usual mintages at the usual, already excessive pricing. I just don't think there is going to be a market for these.
They also could have made a clad version in a larger issuance for $100 or less. That might have had more appeal.
They also could have the silver version in a larger issuance for a far lower price. Precious metal value is not driving the pricing here, and you know it.
They are testing the waters to see if the market will tolerate very low, but not Stacks auction low, mintages at extremely elevated prices. And doing it with a one-off unique thing like this rather than messing with a variant of a popular series, like a privy on an AGE, because that would like make peoples' heads explode.
If this sells out, then yeah, look for infinite takes on it in the future. Otherwise, the market will have spoken, these will sit on the website unsold for years, and we won't see things like this anymore. After the DC debacle, I am reasonably confident we won't be seeing any more IP licensing deals going forward.
I didn't say it was. But they don't sell anything silver for under $100. The clad halves are $64, i believe.
This is an invoice from the mint from 5 months ago
Yeah. Pre price increase. No more. He's not wrong about that.
But he's out in left field speculating that clad would be the only way to go to sell these at reasonable prices. Or that the price for clad would be any more reasonable than that for a half ounce of silver if they also offered 2026 in clad. And he misses the point that selling a lot more clad would totally destroy what it is they are trying to do with this test.
The idea here was not to be reasonable. It was to test just how unreasonable they could be with 3 similar items with a collective mintage of a little over 6K.
I'm not wrong about anything. I NEVER SAID ANY OF THOSE THINGS.
I didn't say that a cheap clad version fit with their marketing. I didn't say that clad was the only way to make a cheaper product. I never said 2026 in clad, in fact, i specifically said a larger issuance.
You keep putting words in my mouth and then telling me that YOUR words are wrong. Why would you do that other than to create an argument that you want to have?
Really? You never said "2026 in clad"?
@jmlanzaf said:
They also could have made a clad version in a larger issuance for $100 or less. That might have had more appeal.
Who said that? "Clad." "Larger issuance." You said them both. They are both irrelevant, because that's not what this is.
They don't need clad to hit lower price point than $750 on an item with $32 worth of silver in it. That's the point.
And they could easily do a "larger issuance" in silver, gold, platinum, palladium, pewter, whatever, if they so chose. They didn't. They don't want a "larger issuance." They want a tiny issuance, and an astronomical price. So that's what this is.
You saying they COULD have done something else is saying nothing at all. Of course they could. They could ALWAYS do something other than what they end up doing.
The words you put in your own mouth were that clad would be tied to larger issuance to get to $100 or less. Because THAT would be consistent with a price under $100, because that would be consistent with 2026 pricing. A half ounce silver product under $100 would not be, because all one ounce silver product sells for more than $200. Right?
@jmlanzaf said:
But if you simply use their normal 2026 pricing scheme, there is no way (in my humble opinion) they are going to price the silver at under $100. Soooooo...If I wanted a sub-$100 price, it would likely have to be clad.
You may be having a stroke.
No, I did not say the clad were "tied" to a larger issuance to get to a lower price point.
I did say, strictly hypothetically, that they COULD HAVE made a clad version in a larger issuance. And I suggested that might have had more appeal. You are creating a bunch of casualties that aren't even implied by what I wrote.
You have made a giant mountain out of a tiny ant hill. I suggested that a lower mintage, cheaper clad coin might have had more appeal than a lower mintage expensive coin. You probably even agree that is true. You are arguing everything except what I said.
No. I'm arguing exactly what you said. You are just obtusely refusing to acknowledge my point.
Which is that clad is not necessary to produce in volume, or to hit a price point far lower than $750. They chose not to.
Not because they can't, but because that would defeat what they are trying to do here. $32 in silver is not why they will be asking $750. Taking that out would not necessitate a reduction in price. Certainly not to less than $100.
They could have made the silver in quantity and sold them for far less than $750. But that's not what they want with these.
So your suggestion that they COULD have turned this into something else is pointless. Because that's not what they wanted to do. And, trust me here, selling clad at less than $100 would kill any interest anyone would otherwise have in a half ounce silver version for $750. That much they know. Unlimited one ounce silver Superman medals likely reduce demand for 25K 2.5 ounce versions.
No, you're not because I NEVER said they needed a large issuance to hit that price point. Again, you are arguing casuality when "clad", "larger issuance" and "sub $100" price t ag were 3 separate properties not 3 connected properties.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
@HalfDime said:
My problem with these is the size only for the price, as it is like ordering a premium hamburger and they serve you a McD 99 cent cheapie. The mint also has a clever new employee who is dreaming all this stuff up, they should probably have left them to go wild with many more products for this year. According to the court filings they drag out planning and production like they are making NASA spacecraft.
I agree , I like the design .... again I just can't see the price ?
Right. That's the entire problem. People like you who would be attracted to the product are not in a position to buy it, and those with the wherewithal to drop $20K on a gimmicky trinket will have no interest. Which is why it will land with a tremendous thud.
Instead of getting too cute by half, they should have just issued it with the usual mintages at the usual, already excessive pricing. I just don't think there is going to be a market for these.
They also could have made a clad version in a larger issuance for $100 or less. That might have had more appeal.
They also could have the silver version in a larger issuance for a far lower price. Precious metal value is not driving the pricing here, and you know it.
They are testing the waters to see if the market will tolerate very low, but not Stacks auction low, mintages at extremely elevated prices. And doing it with a one-off unique thing like this rather than messing with a variant of a popular series, like a privy on an AGE, because that would like make peoples' heads explode.
If this sells out, then yeah, look for infinite takes on it in the future. Otherwise, the market will have spoken, these will sit on the website unsold for years, and we won't see things like this anymore. After the DC debacle, I am reasonably confident we won't be seeing any more IP licensing deals going forward.
I didn't say it was. But they don't sell anything silver for under $100. The clad halves are $64, i believe.
This is an invoice from the mint from 5 months ago
Yeah. Pre price increase. No more. He's not wrong about that.
But he's out in left field speculating that clad would be the only way to go to sell these at reasonable prices. Or that the price for clad would be any more reasonable than that for a half ounce of silver if they also offered 2026 in clad. And he misses the point that selling a lot more clad would totally destroy what it is they are trying to do with this test.
The idea here was not to be reasonable. It was to test just how unreasonable they could be with 3 similar items with a collective mintage of a little over 6K.
I'm not wrong about anything. I NEVER SAID ANY OF THOSE THINGS.
I didn't say that a cheap clad version fit with their marketing. I didn't say that clad was the only way to make a cheaper product. I never said 2026 in clad, in fact, i specifically said a larger issuance.
You keep putting words in my mouth and then telling me that YOUR words are wrong. Why would you do that other than to create an argument that you want to have?
Really? You never said "2026 in clad"?
@jmlanzaf said:
They also could have made a clad version in a larger issuance for $100 or less. That might have had more appeal.
Who said that? "Clad." "Larger issuance." You said them both. They are both irrelevant, because that's not what this is.
They don't need clad to hit lower price point than $750 on an item with $32 worth of silver in it. That's the point.
And they could easily do a "larger issuance" in silver, gold, platinum, palladium, pewter, whatever, if they so chose. They didn't. They don't want a "larger issuance." They want a tiny issuance, and an astronomical price. So that's what this is.
You saying they COULD have done something else is saying nothing at all. Of course they could. They could ALWAYS do something other than what they end up doing.
The words you put in your own mouth were that clad would be tied to larger issuance to get to $100 or less. Because THAT would be consistent with a price under $100, because that would be consistent with 2026 pricing. A half ounce silver product under $100 would not be, because all one ounce silver product sells for more than $200. Right?
@jmlanzaf said:
But if you simply use their normal 2026 pricing scheme, there is no way (in my humble opinion) they are going to price the silver at under $100. Soooooo...If I wanted a sub-$100 price, it would likely have to be clad.
You may be having a stroke.
No, I did not say the clad were "tied" to a larger issuance to get to a lower price point.
I did say, strictly hypothetically, that they COULD HAVE made a clad version in a larger issuance. And I suggested that might have had more appeal. You are creating a bunch of casualties that aren't even implied by what I wrote.
You have made a giant mountain out of a tiny ant hill. I suggested that a lower mintage, cheaper clad coin might have had more appeal than a lower mintage expensive coin. You probably even agree that is true. You are arguing everything except what I said.
No. I'm arguing exactly what you said. You are just obtusely refusing to acknowledge my point.
Which is that clad is not necessary to produce in volume, or to hit a price point far lower than $750. They chose not to.
Not because they can't, but because that would defeat what they are trying to do here. $32 in silver is not why they will be asking $750. Taking that out would not necessitate a reduction in price. Certainly not to less than $100.
They could have made the silver in quantity and sold them for far less than $750. But that's not what they want with these.
So your suggestion that they COULD have turned this into something else is pointless. Because that's not what they wanted to do. And, trust me here, selling clad at less than $100 would kill any interest anyone would otherwise have in a half ounce silver version for $750. That much they know. Unlimited one ounce silver Superman medals likely reduce demand for 25K 2.5 ounce versions.
No, you're not because I NEVER said they needed a large issuance to hit that price point. Again, you are arguing casuality when "clad", "larger issuance" and "sub $100" price t ag were 3 separate properties not 3 connected properties.
If you say so. You said it all in one sentence. I did what normal people do and connected them.
@jmlanzaf said:
They also could have made a clad version in a larger issuance for $100 or less. That might have had more appeal.
If you are going to admit that your posts are nothing more than word salad, they are probably not worth paying attention to.
Sentences are groups of words strung together to convey thoughts. Are you really saying
@jmlanzaf said:
No, you're not because I NEVER said they needed a large issuance to hit that price point. Again, you are arguing casuality when "clad", "larger issuance" and "sub $100" price t ag were 3 separate properties not 3 connected properties.
meant anything other than
@jmlanzaf said:
They also could have made a clad version in a larger issuance for $100 or less. That might have had more appeal.
?????
If so, while I realize that you can never admit you are wrong, and can never publicly concede a point or lose an argument, you should understand how anyone else reading what you wrote would take it. And how utterly ridiculous you now sound trying to parse your own words, rather than just admit what you said. After all, it is here for all to see.
The 75th anniversary privy gold eagle marking the end of World War II was a much better deal
Still kicking myself over that one
I’m really disliking these instant rarities.
I was OK with the gold Sacajawea dollars that were flown into space because those were made for a purpose.
I feel like I’m going to wake up tomorrow and find out the mint is going to issue ten 2027 Eisenhower dollars for $200k each and my Ike collection will never be complete
"I'll split the atom! I am the fifth dimension! I am the eighth wonder of the world!" -Gef the talking mongoose.
@kiyote said:
The 75th anniversary privy gold eagle marking the end of World War II was a much better deal
Still kicking myself over that one
The 2020-W V75 Gold was a difficult one to get at 1,945 stated mintage; I managed to get one on Day 1.
There was a Sunday morning in late November, 2020 where additional coins not sold on Day 1 popped at 7:30am in the morning and a family member scored 2.
This release of Liberty Bell coins is really a money grab - greed - they should have just priced slightly above grid for the extra r&d work to release this issue.
The silver will be very tough to get with 2,026 available and a $750 price tag. The traffic generated for that one offering will clog the pipes for those going after the gold. In short - the pricepoint of the silver; even though a stupid premium, will allow for some growth - possibly doubling soon after release. The gold is already at a huge pricepoint, maybe if the issue was restricted to 250 coins you might be able to justify a price that high......
@kiyote said:
The 75th anniversary privy gold eagle marking the end of World War II was a much better deal
Still kicking myself over that one
The 2020-W V75 Gold was a difficult one to get at 1,945 stated mintage; I managed to get one on Day 1.
There was a Sunday morning in late November, 2020 where additional coins not sold on Day 1 popped at 7:30am in the morning and a family member scored 2.
I know I've said this before, but your post triggered my PTSD. It was the Sunday after Thanksgiving. I had checked religiously every single day except that one thinking there was no way in heck it would be that day. Only to check the forum and see how easy it was for the people that were there. Ugh!!!
At least I got one.
I'll never get over missing a second on the literal only day that I didn't check.
@NJCoin@jmlanzaf I respect both of yours knowledge and opinions, and would definitely buy a ticket if you were to ever meet and debate in person, as long as it wasn't a cheap and gimmicky debate with egregiously overpriced tickets.
@Survivor50 said: @NJCoin@jmlanzaf I respect both of yours knowledge and opinions, and would definitely buy a ticket if you were to ever meet and debate in person, as long as it wasn't a cheap and gimmicky debate with argregiously overpriced tickets.
The mint releasing all three of these on the same day at the same time is pretty dumb, especially since they have a rickety website that can't handle any traffic. Some people will probably want to own all three, and good luck getting them with the website the way it is.
These so far are the only true low mintage 250th coins and medal being released, and are priced accordingly. The mint was hampered by themselves and time in getting these out, probably sweating it just to make it in July.
I can't believe some think these won't sell, but we find out soon enough.
@kiyote said:
The 75th anniversary privy gold eagle marking the end of World War II was a much better deal
Still kicking myself over that one
The 2020-W V75 Gold was a difficult one to get at 1,945 stated mintage; I managed to get one on Day 1.
There was a Sunday morning in late November, 2020 where additional coins not sold on Day 1 popped at 7:30am in the morning and a family member scored 2.
Every time someone mentions this coin, I get that "my girl ran away with another guy" feeling. sniff sniff :'(
Lol.
Had 1 in the cart and pthpthpthp she was gone.
@HalfDime said:
The mint releasing all three of these on the same day at the same time is pretty dumb, especially since they have a rickety website that can't handle any traffic. Some people will probably want to own all three, and good luck getting them with the website the way it is.
These so far are the only true low mintage 250th coins and medal being released, and are priced accordingly. The mint was hampered by themselves and time in getting these out, probably sweating it just to make it in July.
I can't believe some think these won't sell, but we find out soon enough.
I honestly can't believe you are letting yourself get so worked up over these, but, whatever. The Mint has now properly scaled the capacity of its website, with the waiting room modulating traffic.
The website is now the exact opposite of rickety. The release of 7, count 'em, 7 FIFA products PLUS the Mercury Dime BOM on June 4th, without so much as a website hiccup, proves as much.
The only thing that truly makes no sense about this release, other than the crazy pricing and intentionally artificially insane mintage, is that the mintage is exactly the same across 3 wildly divergent price points. We have never seen that before.
So, yeah, you might have a point that people suffering from terminal FOMO might chase a $750 half ounce of silver because they can't afford the other options and it has the same low mintage as them.
But, unless and until these are released, sell out, and take off in the secondary market, there is no evidence that there will actually be organic demand for any of them. As though people have been waiting all their lives to acquire one of 2,026 paperweights produced by the one and only US Mint, and this will be their one and only opportunity to obtain one, at any price, so they will be storming the website all at once to get their grubby little hands on one before they are gone forever.
Try not to forget that the Mint makes plenty of things in small quantities no one cares about. And others in large quantities that just don't sell even this many, and at far lower prices. So it will not be crazy to see the market reject 2,026 half ounce silver Liberty Bells at $750, even though it gobbled up 1,794 FL silver privy medals at $104 before having the secondary market price rocket to $5K.
Only 6500 2.5 ounce Wonder Woman medals have been grabbed so far. At $400, not $750. Containing $162 worth of silver, not $32. 8900 Batmans, 16,000 Supermans. 25K was a modest mintage limit for all of them, and demand is shrinking. Not increasing, or even stabilizing.
Your eyes are glazing over over 2026. You might be right. But there has to be demand for a reason other than they are extremely limited, so therefore they must be great.
If it turns out that they could have sold 100K of them at $170, then, yeah, you'll be onto something with them limiting supply to 2026, and letting people kill each other to get their hands on one at $750 before the market takes off. But if people would not have cared about them if they were easy to get, and I can assure you, just like people don't care about Superman, many don't care about the Liberty Bell, then, no, I think people chasing them banking on the greater fool are going to get burned.
You could be right in that $1300 for them will be the steal of the century. We will know soon enough, and ahead of release.
If dealers and buying clubs start hitting people with offers to buy, then you are right and I am wrong. Otherwise, it's going to be a big snooze, and I hope you enjoy your $750 mini Liberty Bell. Haven't seen or heard of a single buy offer yet, with 3 weeks to go.
@Survivor50 said: @NJCoin@jmlanzaf I respect both of yours knowledge and opinions, and would definitely buy a ticket if you were to ever meet and debate in person, as long as it wasn't a cheap and gimmicky debate with argregiously overpriced tickets.
" If you push something hard enough, it will fall over. " The 1st Law of Opposition from The Firesign Theater
@Survivor50 said: @NJCoin@jmlanzaf I respect both of yours knowledge and opinions, and would definitely buy a ticket if you were to ever meet and debate in person, as long as it wasn't a cheap and gimmicky debate with argregiously overpriced tickets.
@mach19 said:
OK i'm gonna try for the half ounce silver medal , call me crazy..... however, if I don't have any success , I'm not gonna loose sleep
I wish you luck with that. It sounds like you’ll be in a dogfight for those.
Again .... call me crazy !
Okay, Crazy -- why do want one? Because you REALLY want a half ounce silver Liberty Bell for $750, or because you think it will be coveted by others, and therefore be worth far more than what you pay for it? If you buy anything for the wrong reasons, you are likely to get exactly what you deserve.
@NJCoin said:
The website is now the exact opposite of rickety. The release of 7, count 'em, 7 FIFA products PLUS the Mercury Dime BOM on June 4th, without so much as a website hiccup, proves as much.
The only thing that truly makes no sense about this release, other than the crazy pricing and intentionally artificially insane mintage, is that the mintage is exactly the same across 3 wildly divergent price points. We have never seen that before.
The mint never really fixed their website, it is just like it was before with the crashes. The only change was to limit how many people can enter to keep it stable and running with a waiting room.
As far as who is worked up about these, you have practically wrote a hemingway novel about the Liberty Bells. You could condense it all into a book and sell copies.
@NJCoin said:
The website is now the exact opposite of rickety. The release of 7, count 'em, 7 FIFA products PLUS the Mercury Dime BOM on June 4th, without so much as a website hiccup, proves as much.
The only thing that truly makes no sense about this release, other than the crazy pricing and intentionally artificially insane mintage, is that the mintage is exactly the same across 3 wildly divergent price points. We have never seen that before.
The mint never really fixed their website, it is just like it was before with the crashes. The only change was to limit how many people can enter to keep it stable and running with a waiting room.
As far as who is worked up about these, you have practically wrote a hemingway novel about the Liberty Bells. You could condense it all into a book and sell copies.
I honestly don't know why you are saying that. It used to crash on me all the time before the waiting room. Not once since. And they never sold out anything as quickly as the recently sold out the EU AGE.
So they have both seem to have scaled their ability to process transactions and control access to the site sufficient to prevent it from crashing. So I don't know why you think "it is just like it was before with the crashes," since absolutely nothing about it is the same as before.
@mach19 said:
OK i'm gonna try for the half ounce silver medal , call me crazy..... however, if I don't have any success , I'm not gonna loose sleep
I wish you luck with that. It sounds like you’ll be in a dogfight for those.
Again .... call me crazy !
Okay, Crazy -- why do want one? Because you REALLY want a half ounce silver Liberty Bell for $750, or because you think it will be coveted by others, and therefore be worth far more than what you pay for it? If you buy anything for the wrong reasons, you are likely to get exactly what you deserve.
The ones bashing this coin the most are the ones who will be using Friends and family, multiple credit cards and addresses to get as many as they can to flip. They hope to tamp down interest to shorten sell out time however these bells will be gone in a flash.
Be locked and loaded when on sale comes.
If you snooze you lose.
" If you push something hard enough, it will fall over. " The 1st Law of Opposition from The Firesign Theater
@mach19 said:
OK i'm gonna try for the half ounce silver medal , call me crazy..... however, if I don't have any success , I'm not gonna loose sleep
I wish you luck with that. It sounds like you’ll be in a dogfight for those.
Again .... call me crazy !
Okay, Crazy -- why do want one? Because you REALLY want a half ounce silver Liberty Bell for $750, or because you think it will be coveted by others, and therefore be worth far more than what you pay for it? If you buy anything for the wrong reasons, you are likely to get exactly what you deserve.
Both of those seem like they could be the “right” reason to want one.
There’s a bunch of space at the end of the year for the Mint to drop something that more of us would be pleased with. Maybe even something to rid the palette of the sour taste of this one for some? Hopefully something else is in the works.
@mach19 said:
OK i'm gonna try for the half ounce silver medal , call me crazy..... however, if I don't have any success , I'm not gonna loose sleep
I wish you luck with that. It sounds like you’ll be in a dogfight for those.
Again .... call me crazy !
Okay, Crazy -- why do want one? Because you REALLY want a half ounce silver Liberty Bell for $750, or because you think it will be coveted by others, and therefore be worth far more than what you pay for it? If you buy anything for the wrong reasons, you are likely to get exactly what you deserve.
Both of those seem like they could be the “right” reason to want one.
Agree.
There's nothing wrong with wanting one.
There's also nothing wrong with speculating on profit. He could be wrong, but so what?
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
@mach19 said:
OK i'm gonna try for the half ounce silver medal , call me crazy..... however, if I don't have any success , I'm not gonna loose sleep
I wish you luck with that. It sounds like you’ll be in a dogfight for those.
Again .... call me crazy !
Okay, Crazy -- why do want one? Because you REALLY want a half ounce silver Liberty Bell for $750, or because you think it will be coveted by others, and therefore be worth far more than what you pay for it? If you buy anything for the wrong reasons, you are likely to get exactly what you deserve.
Both of those seem like they could be the “right” reason to want one.
TBD, but, in my experience, buying overpriced crap, counting on someone else taking it off my hands for more, has backfired more often than it has worked out. OTOH, I have never been sorry buying anything I actually want to keep.
@HATTRICK said:
The ones bashing this coin the most are the ones who will be using Friends and family, multiple credit cards and addresses to get as many as they can to flip. They hope to tamp down interest to shorten sell out time however these bells will be gone in a flash.
Be locked and loaded when on sale comes.
If you snooze you lose.
Not me. I PROMISE you. No matter how well they do.
@mach19 said:
OK i'm gonna try for the half ounce silver medal , call me crazy..... however, if I don't have any success , I'm not gonna loose sleep
I wish you luck with that. It sounds like you’ll be in a dogfight for those.
Again .... call me crazy !
Okay, Crazy -- why do want one? Because you REALLY want a half ounce silver Liberty Bell for $750, or because you think it will be coveted by others, and therefore be worth far more than what you pay for it? If you buy anything for the wrong reasons, you are likely to get exactly what you deserve.
Both of those seem like they could be the “right” reason to want one.
TBD, but, in my experience, buying overpriced crap, counting on someone else taking it off my hands for more, has backfired more often than it has worked out. OTOH, I have never been sorry buying anything I actually want to keep.
Just because you think a coin is crap doesn’t mean others do. Coin dealers make a living buying overpriced crap counting on others to take it off their hands for more.
Loose is most commonly used as an adjective meaning not tight or free or released from fastening, attachment, or restraint, as in a loose screw or Let him loose! Lose is a verb most commonly meaning to fail to win or to misplace something, as in I hate to lose in chess or Don’t lose your key. Loose ends with an s sound and rhymes with moose.
@mach19 said:
OK i'm gonna try for the half ounce silver medal , call me crazy..... however, if I don't have any success , I'm not gonna loose sleep
I wish you luck with that. It sounds like you’ll be in a dogfight for those.
Again .... call me crazy !
Okay, Crazy -- why do want one? Because you REALLY want a half ounce silver Liberty Bell for $750, or because you think it will be coveted by others, and therefore be worth far more than what you pay for it? If you buy anything for the wrong reasons, you are likely to get exactly what you deserve.
Both of those seem like they could be the “right” reason to want one.
TBD, but, in my experience, buying overpriced crap, counting on someone else taking it off my hands for more, has backfired more often than it has worked out. OTOH, I have never been sorry buying anything I actually want to keep.
Just because you think a coin is crap doesn’t mean others do. Coin dealers make a living buying overpriced crap counting on others to take it off their hands for more.
Absolutely. And, as I said, anyone who thinks a half ounce silver Liberty Bell for $750 is a great way to commemorate the 250th should absolutely go grab themselves one.
But anyone jumping because 2,026 of them means someone else is going to want it, for more, will deserve exactly what they get if the market fails to materialize. I would have zero interest at $100 if the Mint made 75K of them, so I am not going to jump like a Pavlovian dog just because Hollis is ringing a bell 2,026 times.
You guys should enjoy. You'll have one less person to fight off with a stick at release. There are certain things I would be tempted to chase. A Liberty Bell paperweight is not one of them.
@NJCoin said:
I honestly don't know why you are saying that. It used to crash on me all the time before the waiting room. Not once since. And they never sold out anything as quickly as the recently sold out the EU AGE.
They didn't fix the website, they just limited how many could shop on it at the same time. Do you like sitting in a waiting room?
There is no reason we shouldn't all be able to log in and buy a product if it is available without any restrictions. No waiting room should be needed period.
@NJCoin said:
I honestly don't know why you are saying that. It used to crash on me all the time before the waiting room. Not once since. And they never sold out anything as quickly as the recently sold out the EU AGE.
They didn't fix the website, they just limited how many could shop on it at the same time. Do you like sitting in a waiting room?
There is no reason we shouldn't all be able to log in and buy a product if it is available without any restrictions. No waiting room should be needed period.
They DID fix the website. It doesn't crash, and it processes lots of transactions per second. What else are you looking for?
For it to allow 20 million unique visitors to hit it at once? No one does that.
Not Ticketmaster when Taylor Swift tickets go on sale, and not the Mint when you want to buy a coin. If it did, you would be as likely to be shut out on a hot coin as you are now if you get stuck in the waiting room and the coin sells out before you can enter the website.
Because, at the end of the day, if more people chase something than the amount they make available for sale, some people are going to end up disappointed. Maybe even you. The fix the Mint implemented is perfectly acceptable and legitimate.
If they had the capacity to allow 50,000 unique visitors to enter the website at exactly 12:00 noon, all wanting to buy one of 6,000 coins, 44,000 are going to end up with nothing, whether it takes 5 minutes, with 44,000 people never making it out of the waiting room, or 5 seconds, with 44,000 being beaten out by the 6,000 with the fastest bots.
It really is 6 of one and a half dozen of the other, because they did fix what was broken, and the website now works insofar as it randomizes everyone waiting to enter at noon, and then processes transactions with no crashes until either things calm down or the hot items sells out, which comes first.
@NJCoin said:
They DID fix the website. It doesn't crash, and it processes lots of transactions per second. What else are you looking for?
A website without a waiting room, is that too much to ask for? I never get that at any other online place I shop at, only the US Mint. And no, adding a waiting room isn't a fix, it's just a patch job.
They went the cheapo route on this instead of actually fixing the problem.
@NJCoin said:
They DID fix the website. It doesn't crash, and it processes lots of transactions per second. What else are you looking for?
A website without a waiting room, is that too much to ask for? I never get that at any other online place I shop at, only the US Mint. And no, adding a waiting room isn't a fix, it's just a patch job.
They went the cheapo route on this instead of actually fixing the problem.
Yes, it is too much to ask for. The waiting room is not only a cost effective option for the Mint that solves the problem, but it also democratizes the process.
Rather than giving an advantage to those with access to, and the resources to acquire, the fastest possible internet connection and fastest possible third party bots, everyone has an equal shot by having access to the site randomized at release, and then allowing them the time necessary to manually complete a transaction by controlling access to the site.
I don't know where else you shop, but any other internet site that releases hot, limited quantity product at a pre-announced date and time either employs similar technology or deals with site crashes. Or allows bots to grab everything before humans have a chance.
This waiting room was not developed specifically for the Mint. Because pretty much no one has the resources to infinitely scale website capacity to meet very occasional super high demand. And, it isn't necessary, since this works. Other than for you, because you apparently want to press an advantage that this system denies you.
@mach19 said:
OK i'm gonna try for the half ounce silver medal , call me crazy..... however, if I don't have any success , I'm not gonna loose sleep
I wish you luck with that. It sounds like you’ll be in a dogfight for those.
Again .... call me crazy !
Okay, Crazy -- why do want one? Because you REALLY want a half ounce silver Liberty Bell for $750, or because you think it will be coveted by others, and therefore be worth far more than what you pay for it? If you buy anything for the wrong reasons, you are likely to get exactly what you deserve.
Both of those seem like they could be the “right” reason to want one.
There is also the fact it is,and will likely remain, the highest denomination US coin. That could be considered a right reason.
If I was going to assemble a 21st century type set, wouldn't I need to include these?
Comments
🫢🫣🤫🤫🤫😁
Really? You never said "2026 in clad"?
Who said that? "Clad." "Larger issuance." You said them both. They are both irrelevant, because that's not what this is.
They don't need clad to hit lower price point than $750 on an item with $32 worth of silver in it. That's the point.
And they could easily do a "larger issuance" in silver, gold, platinum, palladium, pewter, whatever, if they so chose. They didn't. They don't want a "larger issuance." They want a tiny issuance, and an astronomical price. So that's what this is.
You saying they COULD have done something else is saying nothing at all. Of course they could. They could ALWAYS do something other than what they end up doing.
The words you put in your own mouth were that clad would be tied to larger issuance to get to $100 or less. Because THAT would be consistent with a price under $100, because that would be consistent with 2026 pricing. A half ounce silver product under $100 would not be, because all one ounce silver product sells for more than $200. Right?
I hear you and am certainly leaning away from participating in this offering. I want to see how it plays out, and like you, as a taxpayer and collector I want to see the Mint succeed in producing good quality coins for reasonable profits for the Mint itself. This one seems extreme, but I’m anxious to see how they do. With the proper hype and a media blitz, they could pull it off handsomely and walk away the big winner, while the intial buyer is left holding the bag for some years. Is there a large enough market for these that several thousand willing buyers are shut out and feel compelled to spend double or triple due to FOMO? We are going to find out in relatively short order.
I’m watching the chattering class on YouTube and the consensus is with you for the moment. Presales are happening…..but the legitimacy of some sellers is questionable. That market won’t establish itself until drop day when and if it sells out.
I'm 99.44% sure I will be trying to get one of the Silver medals on release date. I'm closer to 0% on the gold coins. But I will be checking the ATS Numbers on release date and go from there...
I’m genuinely interested in your thinking. Are you wanting it because it’s a 2026 product that you feel you have to own, or would you be wanting to sell it while the iron is hot? If if if the Mint goes way overboard on marketing this to every media outlet that wants the story, that alone could drive the secondary prices for a few months to some decent flips for sellers, at least on the silver and the 1/2 Oz gold.
The only drawback to these is the size, they made them like little baby bells. Nobody buying is posting about these as they don't want more buyers,
This may be the only real low mintage product the mint offers for the 250th this year. The prices weren't pulled out of a hat, you may not like them but they did their homework. In order to justify making them they had to raise prices.
I doubt they could have done clad as the metal might have been too hard to strike in quantity. They went low mintage to be sure to make enough to fill the order.
The world will survive this, don't worry.
Just want to have one for my collection
I said "clad in a LARGER ISSUANCE" (emphasis added) not a mintage of 2026 like you suggested. Thank you for proving my point the "2026" refered to the mintage.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
I truly wish you the best of luck getting one!
You may be having a stroke.
No, I did not say the clad were "tied" to a larger issuance to get to a lower price point.
I did say, strictly hypothetically, that they COULD HAVE made a clad version in a larger issuance. And I suggested that might have had more appeal. You are creating a bunch of casualties that aren't even implied by what I wrote.
You have made a giant mountain out of a tiny ant hill. I suggested that a lower mintage, cheaper clad coin might have had more appeal than a lower mintage expensive coin. You probably even agree that is true. You are arguing everything except what I said.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
🤐🤐😴😴🤫🤫😊
They will be crazy about them for about 15 days.
Will those who buy them and flip make money - I absolutely think so - the $1000-$1500 range is definitely in the cards.
Buy and hold longer - risk losing any premium and probably holding the bag and maybe never getting issue price.
Good luck to all who wants one.
No. I'm arguing exactly what you said. You are just obtusely refusing to acknowledge my point.
Which is that clad is not necessary to produce in volume, or to hit a price point far lower than $750. They chose not to.
Not because they can't, but because that would defeat what they are trying to do here. $32 in silver is not why they will be asking $750. Taking that out would not necessitate a reduction in price. Certainly not to less than $100.
They could have made the silver in quantity and sold them for far less than $750. But that's not what they want with these.
So your suggestion that they COULD have turned this into something else is pointless. Because that's not what they wanted to do. And, trust me here, selling clad at less than $100 would kill any interest anyone would otherwise have in a half ounce silver version for $750. That much they know. Unlimited one ounce silver Superman medals likely reduce demand for 25K 2.5 ounce versions.
No, you're not because I NEVER said they needed a large issuance to hit that price point. Again, you are arguing casuality when "clad", "larger issuance" and "sub $100" price t ag were 3 separate properties not 3 connected properties.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
If you say so. You said it all in one sentence. I did what normal people do and connected them.
If you are going to admit that your posts are nothing more than word salad, they are probably not worth paying attention to.
Sentences are groups of words strung together to convey thoughts. Are you really saying
meant anything other than
?????
If so, while I realize that you can never admit you are wrong, and can never publicly concede a point or lose an argument, you should understand how anyone else reading what you wrote would take it. And how utterly ridiculous you now sound trying to parse your own words, rather than just admit what you said. After all, it is here for all to see.
Getting back to the release specs, IMO this thread would have ended pages ago if this was not a compelling conversational topic.
And those who are on the high horse, realize this modern merch is auctioned by your bosom buddies at all the auction houses. Deal with it.
The 75th anniversary privy gold eagle marking the end of World War II was a much better deal
Still kicking myself over that one
I’m really disliking these instant rarities.
I was OK with the gold Sacajawea dollars that were flown into space because those were made for a purpose.
I feel like I’m going to wake up tomorrow and find out the mint is going to issue ten 2027 Eisenhower dollars for $200k each and my Ike collection will never be complete
The 2020-W V75 Gold was a difficult one to get at 1,945 stated mintage; I managed to get one on Day 1.
There was a Sunday morning in late November, 2020 where additional coins not sold on Day 1 popped at 7:30am in the morning and a family member scored 2.
This release of Liberty Bell coins is really a money grab - greed - they should have just priced slightly above grid for the extra r&d work to release this issue.
The silver will be very tough to get with 2,026 available and a $750 price tag. The traffic generated for that one offering will clog the pipes for those going after the gold. In short - the pricepoint of the silver; even though a stupid premium, will allow for some growth - possibly doubling soon after release. The gold is already at a huge pricepoint, maybe if the issue was restricted to 250 coins you might be able to justify a price that high......
IMO - they all will sellout.
I know I've said this before, but your post triggered my PTSD. It was the Sunday after Thanksgiving. I had checked religiously every single day except that one thinking there was no way in heck it would be that day. Only to check the forum and see how easy it was for the people that were there. Ugh!!!
At least I got one.
I'll never get over missing a second on the literal only day that I didn't check.
@NJCoin @jmlanzaf I respect both of yours knowledge and opinions, and would definitely buy a ticket if you were to ever meet and debate in person, as long as it wasn't a cheap and gimmicky debate with egregiously overpriced tickets.
Edited to correct my outrageously poor spelling 🤣
argregiously???????
Now listen boy, I'm tryin' to teach you sumthin' . . . . that ain't an optical illusion, it only looks like an optical illusion.
My mind reader refuses to charge me. . . . . . .
The mint releasing all three of these on the same day at the same time is pretty dumb, especially since they have a rickety website that can't handle any traffic. Some people will probably want to own all three, and good luck getting them with the website the way it is.
These so far are the only true low mintage 250th coins and medal being released, and are priced accordingly. The mint was hampered by themselves and time in getting these out, probably sweating it just to make it in July.
I can't believe some think these won't sell, but we find out soon enough.
Every time someone mentions this coin, I get that "my girl ran away with another guy" feeling. sniff sniff :'(
she was gone.
Lol.
Had 1 in the cart and pthpthpthp
I honestly can't believe you are letting yourself get so worked up over these, but, whatever. The Mint has now properly scaled the capacity of its website, with the waiting room modulating traffic.
The website is now the exact opposite of rickety. The release of 7, count 'em, 7 FIFA products PLUS the Mercury Dime BOM on June 4th, without so much as a website hiccup, proves as much.
The only thing that truly makes no sense about this release, other than the crazy pricing and intentionally artificially insane mintage, is that the mintage is exactly the same across 3 wildly divergent price points. We have never seen that before.
So, yeah, you might have a point that people suffering from terminal FOMO might chase a $750 half ounce of silver because they can't afford the other options and it has the same low mintage as them.
But, unless and until these are released, sell out, and take off in the secondary market, there is no evidence that there will actually be organic demand for any of them. As though people have been waiting all their lives to acquire one of 2,026 paperweights produced by the one and only US Mint, and this will be their one and only opportunity to obtain one, at any price, so they will be storming the website all at once to get their grubby little hands on one before they are gone forever.
Try not to forget that the Mint makes plenty of things in small quantities no one cares about. And others in large quantities that just don't sell even this many, and at far lower prices. So it will not be crazy to see the market reject 2,026 half ounce silver Liberty Bells at $750, even though it gobbled up 1,794 FL silver privy medals at $104 before having the secondary market price rocket to $5K.
Only 6500 2.5 ounce Wonder Woman medals have been grabbed so far. At $400, not $750. Containing $162 worth of silver, not $32. 8900 Batmans, 16,000 Supermans. 25K was a modest mintage limit for all of them, and demand is shrinking. Not increasing, or even stabilizing.
Your eyes are glazing over over 2026. You might be right. But there has to be demand for a reason other than they are extremely limited, so therefore they must be great.
If it turns out that they could have sold 100K of them at $170, then, yeah, you'll be onto something with them limiting supply to 2026, and letting people kill each other to get their hands on one at $750 before the market takes off. But if people would not have cared about them if they were easy to get, and I can assure you, just like people don't care about Superman, many don't care about the Liberty Bell, then, no, I think people chasing them banking on the greater fool are going to get burned.
You could be right in that $1300 for them will be the steal of the century. We will know soon enough, and ahead of release.
If dealers and buying clubs start hitting people with offers to buy, then you are right and I am wrong. Otherwise, it's going to be a big snooze, and I hope you enjoy your $750 mini Liberty Bell. Haven't seen or heard of a single buy offer yet, with 3 weeks to go.
Almost $20,000 for the one ounce gold Liberty Bell now. The US Mint is quickly becoming a rich man’s game.
A good lesson learned to proof read a post first.
OK i'm gonna try for the half ounce silver medal , call me crazy..... however, if I don't have any success , I'm not gonna loose sleep
I wish you luck with that. It sounds like you’ll be in a dogfight for those.
Again .... call me crazy !
Okay, Crazy -- why do want one? Because you REALLY want a half ounce silver Liberty Bell for $750, or because you think it will be coveted by others, and therefore be worth far more than what you pay for it? If you buy anything for the wrong reasons, you are likely to get exactly what you deserve.
The mint never really fixed their website, it is just like it was before with the crashes. The only change was to limit how many people can enter to keep it stable and running with a waiting room.
As far as who is worked up about these, you have practically wrote a hemingway novel about the Liberty Bells. You could condense it all into a book and sell copies.
I honestly don't know why you are saying that. It used to crash on me all the time before the waiting room. Not once since. And they never sold out anything as quickly as the recently sold out the EU AGE.
So they have both seem to have scaled their ability to process transactions and control access to the site sufficient to prevent it from crashing. So I don't know why you think "it is just like it was before with the crashes," since absolutely nothing about it is the same as before.
Yeah , I'm an IDIOT....
you can "Quote" me on that !
Luv ya man
The ones bashing this coin the most are the ones who will be using Friends and family, multiple credit cards and addresses to get as many as they can to flip. They hope to tamp down interest to shorten sell out time however these bells will be gone in a flash.
Be locked and loaded when on sale comes.
If you snooze you lose.
Both of those seem like they could be the “right” reason to want one.
Time will tell, again I'm not going to loose sleep if I don't receive one
There’s a bunch of space at the end of the year for the Mint to drop something that more of us would be pleased with. Maybe even something to rid the palette of the sour taste of this one for some? Hopefully something else is in the works.
Agree.
There's nothing wrong with wanting one.
There's also nothing wrong with speculating on profit. He could be wrong, but so what?
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
TBD, but, in my experience, buying overpriced crap, counting on someone else taking it off my hands for more, has backfired more often than it has worked out. OTOH, I have never been sorry buying anything I actually want to keep.
Not me. I PROMISE you. No matter how well they do.
Just because you think a coin is crap doesn’t mean others do. Coin dealers make a living buying overpriced crap counting on others to take it off their hands for more.
Gawd, this drives me crazy!
Loose is most commonly used as an adjective meaning not tight or free or released from fastening, attachment, or restraint, as in a loose screw or Let him loose! Lose is a verb most commonly meaning to fail to win or to misplace something, as in I hate to lose in chess or Don’t lose your key. Loose ends with an s sound and rhymes with moose.
mbogoman
https://pcgs.com/setregistry/collectors-showcase/classic-issues-colonials-through-1964/zambezi-collection-trade-dollars/7345Asesabi Lutho
Absolutely. And, as I said, anyone who thinks a half ounce silver Liberty Bell for $750 is a great way to commemorate the 250th should absolutely go grab themselves one.
But anyone jumping because 2,026 of them means someone else is going to want it, for more, will deserve exactly what they get if the market fails to materialize. I would have zero interest at $100 if the Mint made 75K of them, so I am not going to jump like a Pavlovian dog just because Hollis is ringing a bell 2,026 times.
You guys should enjoy. You'll have one less person to fight off with a stick at release. There are certain things I would be tempted to chase. A Liberty Bell paperweight is not one of them.
They didn't fix the website, they just limited how many could shop on it at the same time. Do you like sitting in a waiting room?
There is no reason we shouldn't all be able to log in and buy a product if it is available without any restrictions. No waiting room should be needed period.
They DID fix the website. It doesn't crash, and it processes lots of transactions per second. What else are you looking for?
For it to allow 20 million unique visitors to hit it at once? No one does that.
Not Ticketmaster when Taylor Swift tickets go on sale, and not the Mint when you want to buy a coin. If it did, you would be as likely to be shut out on a hot coin as you are now if you get stuck in the waiting room and the coin sells out before you can enter the website.
Because, at the end of the day, if more people chase something than the amount they make available for sale, some people are going to end up disappointed. Maybe even you. The fix the Mint implemented is perfectly acceptable and legitimate.
If they had the capacity to allow 50,000 unique visitors to enter the website at exactly 12:00 noon, all wanting to buy one of 6,000 coins, 44,000 are going to end up with nothing, whether it takes 5 minutes, with 44,000 people never making it out of the waiting room, or 5 seconds, with 44,000 being beaten out by the 6,000 with the fastest bots.
It really is 6 of one and a half dozen of the other, because they did fix what was broken, and the website now works insofar as it randomizes everyone waiting to enter at noon, and then processes transactions with no crashes until either things calm down or the hot items sells out, which comes first.
A website without a waiting room, is that too much to ask for? I never get that at any other online place I shop at, only the US Mint. And no, adding a waiting room isn't a fix, it's just a patch job.
They went the cheapo route on this instead of actually fixing the problem.
Yes, it is too much to ask for. The waiting room is not only a cost effective option for the Mint that solves the problem, but it also democratizes the process.
Rather than giving an advantage to those with access to, and the resources to acquire, the fastest possible internet connection and fastest possible third party bots, everyone has an equal shot by having access to the site randomized at release, and then allowing them the time necessary to manually complete a transaction by controlling access to the site.
I don't know where else you shop, but any other internet site that releases hot, limited quantity product at a pre-announced date and time either employs similar technology or deals with site crashes. Or allows bots to grab everything before humans have a chance.
This waiting room was not developed specifically for the Mint. Because pretty much no one has the resources to infinitely scale website capacity to meet very occasional super high demand. And, it isn't necessary, since this works. Other than for you, because you apparently want to press an advantage that this system denies you.
There is also the fact it is,and will likely remain, the highest denomination US coin. That could be considered a right reason.
If I was going to assemble a 21st century type set, wouldn't I need to include these?