@Pmarsh said:
I ordered my Best of the Mint (4) 1804 last Thursday at 3 pm. It is still showing as backordered. Was advised that it would change on Sep 2. Does anyone have an idea of when I can expect it. Will I have to wait for them to release a huge batch at a time or for more sales before delivery? US Mint customer service doesn't seem to have a clue. Y
I ordered mine on the release date. It showed in processing for three or four days so I called last Monday discovered I had a problem with my credit card that they never told me about. So I re-ordered last Monday and it arrived today., I tried to cancel the original order to try to save $100 on Wednesday but they told me since it was in processing. I couldn’t do anything to change it. Anyway, it showed up today Saturday, 9/5 and it is a beautiful coin and the medal very nice. I did save $10 when I complained that I should be getting free shipping. Supposedly they updated my account and I have to call in and they will credit my charge card $10.
Really disappointed in the gold coin I received. It has two prominent spots below the the obverse (in the field below the face) and a scratch in the upper right field. I'm returning it tomorrow. I don't think I've give it another try as I suspect my chances of getting another return with similar problems is higher than I'd like.
@chaparralian said:
Really disappointed in the gold coin I received. It has two prominent spots below the the obverse (in the field below the face) and a scratch in the upper right field. I'm returning it tomorrow. I don't think I've give it another try as I suspect my chances of getting another return with similar problems is higher than I'd like.
@Raufus said:
Thinking on it, while it's of course totally subjective, I agree that this is one of the nicest looking gold coins - ever I think. I think that the original, UHR is tops, then the 1907 HRs, then this. I think that the reverse of the FH gold is just amazing, but not the obverse. Of course, this is true for the original that it is made to emulate. I think that the 2009 UHR is nice looking. However, it's so small that it really takes away from what it could be had it been the size of the original.
I bought the 2009 Saint Gaudens Ultra High Relief coin the year it was issued. I don't rate it as highly as this year's 1804 silver dollar gold coin because the Saint Gaudens coin renders Lady Liberty face-on. I've mentioned somewhere in another thread that the face-on perspective of Liberty on the Saint Gaudens coin is less bad than most because Liberty is rendered full body so the face details are lost due to the smallness of the head which is made smaller by the relative smallness of the coin. The Mint might have been able to make the 2009 Saint Gaudens Ultra High Relief my favorite coin by going all out and making it a two troy ounce coin or maybe even larger if necessary. Considering today's gold prices, doubling or tripling the asking price of the Saint Gaudens coin in 2009 is nothing.
I will be buying the 1907 Best of the Mint high relief Saint Gaudens coin to complete the Best of the Mint set. Due to its slightly larger size, I might like it even more than the 2009 Ultra High Relief Saint Gaudens. Nothing I have beats the packaging of the 2009 UHR, though. I love the nice wooden box and the hardback booklet.
I don't have the Flowing Hair because I wasn't aware of its release. I almost certainly would have purchased it had I known. America's early coins are kind of funny in retrospect. The artist who drew Lady Liberty was not that good a portrait artist and the bald eagle looks more like a wild turkey than an eagle.
I think that the RP Gold Buff is great looking as well.
I have one of those, too, as well the regular proof strike. I'm one of those people who likes the regular proof strike more than the reverse proof strikes. To my eyes, the details of the image (the man on the obverse and the bison on the reverse) stand out more when they have a frosty finish on a shiny background (proof) versus a shiny finish on a frosty background (reverse proof). But the Fraser design is terrific and I purchased a fair number of the bullion coins too back in the day.
It will be interesting to see how the 1907 HR looks later this month. The privy marks really hurt the BOMs. Not so much the dime as it's so small, but the others.
mm
I might be seeing things, but the specs on the 1907 Best on the mint description page says the coin is 30.61 mm (same as the 1804 gold Best). That's got to be wrong as the Saint Gaudens is a couple mm more than that.
I might be seeing things, but the specs on the 1907 Best on the mint description page says the coin is 30.61 mm (same as the 1804 gold Best). That's got to be wrong as the Saint Gaudens is a couple mm more than that.
Metal content. Original Saint is 90% gold. BoM Saint is 99.99% gold.
@chaparralian said:
Really disappointed in the gold coin I received. It has two prominent spots below the the obverse (in the field below the face) and a scratch in the upper right field. I'm returning it tomorrow. I don't think I've give it another try as I suspect my chances of getting another return with similar problems is higher than I'd like.
I don't want to be a "Debbie downer" and not implying that onto chapparral- but aside from my already mentioned 'lack of interested heirs' as a 'con' toward this otherwise much desired purchase opportunity, I also recalled the TWO 2025 Sunflower Gold coins that I bought from US Mint. Both were flawed and net cost for the prank was $75 registered return shipping.
Twice bitten, many fold shy.
My personal confidence level was too low. I did not want to repeat this disappointment.
Guys like Raufus, that bought at the US Mint store and spent quality time inspecting are a sure bet way to buy!
Some other person in this thread shared pictures of a flawed 1804 gold coin.
There is always the risk that by now, returns are being recycled to new buyers and perhaps the dies are not up to snuff like they were for the first wave of minting.
For those that hit the "70" quality mark on their 1804 coins, an absolute hats off to ya !!
@Raufus said:
Thinking on it, while it's of course totally subjective, I agree that this is one of the nicest looking gold coins - ever I think. I think that the original, UHR is tops, then the 1907 HRs, then this. I think that the reverse of the FH gold is just amazing, but not the obverse. Of course, this is true for the original that it is made to emulate. I think that the 2009 UHR is nice looking. However, it's so small that it really takes away from what it could be had it been the size of the original.
I bought the 2009 Saint Gaudens Ultra High Relief coin the year it was issued. I don't rate it as highly as this year's 1804 silver dollar gold coin because the Saint Gaudens coin renders Lady Liberty face-on. I've mentioned somewhere in another thread that the face-on perspective of Liberty on the Saint Gaudens coin is less bad than most because Liberty is rendered full body so the face details are lost due to the smallness of the head which is made smaller by the relative smallness of the coin. The Mint might have been able to make the 2009 Saint Gaudens Ultra High Relief my favorite coin by going all out and making it a two troy ounce coin or maybe even larger if necessary. Considering today's gold prices, doubling or tripling the asking price of the Saint Gaudens coin in 2009 is nothing.
I will be buying the 1907 Best of the Mint high relief Saint Gaudens coin to complete the Best of the Mint set. Due to its slightly larger size, I might like it even more than the 2009 Ultra High Relief Saint Gaudens. Nothing I have beats the packaging of the 2009 UHR, though. I love the nice wooden box and the hardback booklet.
I don't have the Flowing Hair because I wasn't aware of its release. I almost certainly would have purchased it had I known. America's early coins are kind of funny in retrospect. The artist who drew Lady Liberty was not that good a portrait artist and the bald eagle looks more like a wild turkey than an eagle.
I think that the RP Gold Buff is great looking as well.
I have one of those, too, as well the regular proof strike. I'm one of those people who likes the regular proof strike more than the reverse proof strikes. To my eyes, the details of the image (the man on the obverse and the bison on the reverse) stand out more when they have a frosty finish on a shiny background (proof) versus a shiny finish on a frosty background (reverse proof). But the Fraser design is terrific and I purchased a fair number of the bullion coins too back in the day.
It will be interesting to see how the 1907 HR looks later this month. The privy marks really hurt the BOMs. Not so much the dime as it's so small, but the others.
mm
I might be seeing things, but the specs on the 1907 Best on the mint description page says the coin is 30.61 mm (same as the 1804 gold Best). That's got to be wrong as the Saint Gaudens is a couple mm more than that.
Not a mistake. It's going to be made on exactly the same planchet. This is not an original St. Gaudens. It's a 2026 restrike.
@chaparralian said:
Really disappointed in the gold coin I received. It has two prominent spots below the the obverse (in the field below the face) and a scratch in the upper right field. I'm returning it tomorrow. I don't think I've give it another try as I suspect my chances of getting another return with similar problems is higher than I'd like.
Sorry u got an unacceptable coin. What are the requirements for a return? Does it have to be mailed registered? I see sometimes the mint will prove free rerun shipping but I don’t know how they decide who gets free rerun shipping
The medal is really quite nice, which is really good to see since I did not like most of the other medals. The coin is terrific and I think some of the negative comments about its size might be due to the fact that it is packaged with the medal and the medal is a bit larger, which can make the coin appear smaller. I have two observations about the coin that would make it better. The first is that if it were struck in proof it would be a monster and the second is that the privy really does take away from the overall feel or flow of the design. Even if the privy were to have been incorporated on the reverse, tucked between the wording and the wings, it would have been a better presentation.
@TomB said:
Just received the first of my two pieces.
The medal is really quite nice, which is really good to see since I did not like most of the other medals. The coin is terrific and I think some of the negative comments about its size might be due to the fact that it is packaged with the medal and the medal is a bit larger, which can make the coin appear smaller. I have two observations about the coin that would make it better. The first is that if it were struck in proof it would be a monster and the second is that the privy really does take away from the overall feel or flow of the design. Even if the privy were to have been incorporated on the reverse, tucked between the wording and the wings, it would have been a better presentation.
I intend to keep mine.
I agree completely about the privy. It cheapens the design. Even if they would have at least moved it to the left side of the obverse instead of at the point of her chin. Once you notice how distracting it is, you'll never be able to unsee it.
@TomB said:
Just received the first of my two pieces.
The medal is really quite nice, which is really good to see since I did not like most of the other medals. The coin is terrific and I think some of the negative comments about its size might be due to the fact that it is packaged with the medal and the medal is a bit larger, which can make the coin appear smaller. I have two observations about the coin that would make it better. The first is that if it were struck in proof it would be a monster and the second is that the privy really does take away from the overall feel or flow of the design. Even if the privy were to have been incorporated on the reverse, tucked between the wording and the wings, it would have been a better presentation.
I intend to keep mine.
None of the BOMs shoukd have privys. So unfortunate.
@TomB said:
Just received the first of my two pieces.
The medal is really quite nice, which is really good to see since I did not like most of the other medals. The coin is terrific and I think some of the negative comments about its size might be due to the fact that it is packaged with the medal and the medal is a bit larger, which can make the coin appear smaller. I have two observations about the coin that would make it better. The first is that if it were struck in proof it would be a monster and the second is that the privy really does take away from the overall feel or flow of the design. Even if the privy were to have been incorporated on the reverse, tucked between the wording and the wings, it would have been a better presentation.
I intend to keep mine.
I agree completely about the privy. It cheapens the design. Even if they would have at least moved it to the left side of the obverse instead of at the point of her chin. Once you notice how distracting it is, you'll never be able to unsee it.
Or, just don't have one. I don't know how anyone could not have realized how distracting it would be.
@TomB said:
Just received the first of my two pieces.
The medal is really quite nice, which is really good to see since I did not like most of the other medals. The coin is terrific and I think some of the negative comments about its size might be due to the fact that it is packaged with the medal and the medal is a bit larger, which can make the coin appear smaller. I have two observations about the coin that would make it better. The first is that if it were struck in proof it would be a monster and the second is that the privy really does take away from the overall feel or flow of the design. Even if the privy were to have been incorporated on the reverse, tucked between the wording and the wings, it would have been a better presentation.
I intend to keep mine.
None of the BOMs shoukd have privys. So unfortunate.
But then they would not be tied to the semisesquicentennial. Which was the whole idea in the first place.
They didn't just do these this year for no reason at all. They are not dual dated. The 250 privy is the only tie to the purpose behind the program. So you have to just get over the distraction. Or take a pass on the series.
They realized. They did it intentionally anyway. It's to differentiate the coins from the originals, in addition to the change in metal. And, as I said, to tie them to the semisesquicentennial.
@TomB said:
Just received the first of my two pieces.
The medal is really quite nice, which is really good to see since I did not like most of the other medals. The coin is terrific and I think some of the negative comments about its size might be due to the fact that it is packaged with the medal and the medal is a bit larger, which can make the coin appear smaller. I have two observations about the coin that would make it better. The first is that if it were struck in proof it would be a monster and the second is that the privy really does take away from the overall feel or flow of the design. Even if the privy were to have been incorporated on the reverse, tucked between the wording and the wings, it would have been a better presentation.
I intend to keep mine.
None of the BOMs shoukd have privys. So unfortunate.
But then they would not be tied to the semisesquicentennial. Which was the whole idea in the first place.
They didn't just do these this year for no reason at all. They are not dual dated. The 250 privy is the only tie to the purpose behind the program. So you have to just get over the distraction. Or take a pass on the series.
They realized. They did it intentionally anyway. It's to differentiate the coins from the originals, in addition to the change in metal. And, as I said, to tie them to the semisesquicentennial.
But, there was zero need to tie them.
Like the prior dime & walker, could have just done them
The privy really defeats the purpose of reproducing these amazing designs.
@chaparralian said:
Really disappointed in the gold coin I received. It has two prominent spots below the the obverse (in the field below the face) and a scratch in the upper right field. I'm returning it tomorrow. I don't think I've give it another try as I suspect my chances of getting another return with similar problems is higher than I'd like.
Sorry u got an unacceptable coin. What are the requirements for a return? Does it have to be mailed registered? I see sometimes the mint will prove free rerun shipping but I don’t know how they decide who gets free rerun shipping
In my return I checked the product was damaged box. They provided a postage paid return label. I sent it back this morning.
@chaparralian said:
Really disappointed in the gold coin I received. It has two prominent spots below the the obverse (in the field below the face) and a scratch in the upper right field. I'm returning it tomorrow. I don't think I've give it another try as I suspect my chances of getting another return with similar problems is higher than I'd like.
I don't want to be a "Debbie downer" and not implying that onto chapparral- but aside from my already mentioned 'lack of interested heirs' as a 'con' toward this otherwise much desired purchase opportunity, I also recalled the TWO 2025 Sunflower Gold coins that I bought from US Mint. Both were flawed and net cost for the prank was $75 registered return shipping.
Twice bitten, many fold shy.
My personal confidence level was too low. I did not want to repeat this disappointment.
Guys like Raufus, that bought at the US Mint store and spent quality time inspecting are a sure bet way to buy!
Some other person in this thread shared pictures of a flawed 1804 gold coin.
There is always the risk that by now, returns are being recycled to new buyers and perhaps the dies are not up to snuff like they were for the first wave of minting.
For those that hit the "70" quality mark on their 1804 coins, an absolute hats off to ya !!
Concur. After dropping it off at the PO this morn, I decided not to try again and buy another.
I've been disappointed over the coin quality from the Mint the over last couple years. There were blemishes on the 2025 gold Sacagawea dollar they sent me, but I didn't think they would impact the grading. Wrong. PCGS graded it a 69. Lessons learned.
@TomB said:
Just received the first of my two pieces.
The medal is really quite nice, which is really good to see since I did not like most of the other medals. The coin is terrific and I think some of the negative comments about its size might be due to the fact that it is packaged with the medal and the medal is a bit larger, which can make the coin appear smaller. I have two observations about the coin that would make it better. The first is that if it were struck in proof it would be a monster and the second is that the privy really does take away from the overall feel or flow of the design. Even if the privy were to have been incorporated on the reverse, tucked between the wording and the wings, it would have been a better presentation.
I intend to keep mine.
None of the BOMs shoukd have privys. So unfortunate.
But then they would not be tied to the semisesquicentennial. Which was the whole idea in the first place.
They didn't just do these this year for no reason at all. They are not dual dated. The 250 privy is the only tie to the purpose behind the program. So you have to just get over the distraction. Or take a pass on the series.
They realized. They did it intentionally anyway. It's to differentiate the coins from the originals, in addition to the change in metal. And, as I said, to tie them to the semisesquicentennial.
But, there was zero need to tie them.
Like the prior dime & walker, could have just done them
The privy really defeats the purpose of reproducing these amazing designs.
Except there was. Because none of these were done due to anniversaries of the coins. All of them were done due to 250th anniversary of the country.
The privy is actually the key. The designs are just the designs selected via a survey. The only constant is the privy.
The prior dime, quarter and walker were not just "done." They commemorated the 100th anniversary of the coins.
Sorry you are unhappy, but the 1804 gold dollar was not made to commemorate the 222nd anniversary of that silver dollar. And it was not made for no reason at all. Which is one reason you won't be seeing one next year to commemorate the 170th anniversary of the Flying Eagle Cent.
It was made as part of a 5 coin "Best of the Mint" set to commemorate the 250th anniversary of the country. How do we know that? The little 250 privy mark on each coin. That's how.
@TomB said:
Just received the first of my two pieces.
The medal is really quite nice, which is really good to see since I did not like most of the other medals. The coin is terrific and I think some of the negative comments about its size might be due to the fact that it is packaged with the medal and the medal is a bit larger, which can make the coin appear smaller. I have two observations about the coin that would make it better. The first is that if it were struck in proof it would be a monster and the second is that the privy really does take away from the overall feel or flow of the design. Even if the privy were to have been incorporated on the reverse, tucked between the wording and the wings, it would have been a better presentation.
I intend to keep mine.
None of the BOMs shoukd have privys. So unfortunate.
But then they would not be tied to the semisesquicentennial. Which was the whole idea in the first place.
They didn't just do these this year for no reason at all. They are not dual dated. The 250 privy is the only tie to the purpose behind the program. So you have to just get over the distraction. Or take a pass on the series.
They realized. They did it intentionally anyway. It's to differentiate the coins from the originals, in addition to the change in metal. And, as I said, to tie them to the semisesquicentennial.
But, there was zero need to tie them.
Like the prior dime & walker, could have just done them
The privy really defeats the purpose of reproducing these amazing designs.
Except there was. Because none of these were done due to anniversaries of the coins. All of them were done due to 250th anniversary of the country.
The privy is actually the key. The designs are just the designs selected via a survey. The only constant is the privy.
The prior dime, quarter and walker were not just "done." They commemorated the 100th anniversary of the coins.
Sorry you are unhappy, but the 1804 gold dollar was not made to commemorate the 222nd anniversary of that silver dollar. And it was not made for no reason at all. Which is one reason you won't be seeing one next year to commemorate the 170th anniversary of the Flying Eagle Cent.
It was made as part of a 5 coin "Best of the Mint" set to commemorate the 250th anniversary of the country. How do we know that? The little 250 privy mark on each coin. That's how.
But, they dont have a 100th anniv privy. It looks terrible and hugely detracts from the design. It seems a lot of people feel same.
@tahbb143 said:
1804 silver dollar minted in 1834 [and later], not 1804, so 2026 is the 192nd anniversary of its first minting, not the 222nd anniversary
why do I know this? mostly because of the gold restrike to commemorate this country's 250th anniversary lol
😎
Point well taken, but this takes nothing away from my point. Which is that the coin is dated 1804, and that the restrike does not commemorate that. Or 1834. Or later. It commemorates 1776, and is marked by the privy.
@Raufus said:
To add, before 2019 the Mint didn't use privy marks yet that never held them back.
So what? Now they do, and lots of people like them.
People also found them distracting in the FH silver medals, and whined about them when they first thought they would be on all the medals. Once they learned that they would be severely limited and randomly distributed among the population, they became highly sought after, and expensive. No one buying or selling them then minded the presence of the privy.
The same would be the case for you if only 250 had the privy, randomly distributed among the 15K, and if you happened to score one. So maybe just stop whining about something you can't control, and enjoy the coin for what it is, rather than wishing it was something that it is not.
There are stars next to our user names, used to be counts, there are counts for agrees, likes, LOLs, maybe a new count category is needed for harsh, demeaning, and condescending. I thought the purpose here was to exchange information and opinions. If someone doesn't like a design element or thinks it is the greatest thing ever, their opinion is just as valid, as are theories on how the USM may have mishandled a distribution of privy mark items in the past.
@Raufus said:
To add, before 2019 the Mint didn't use privy marks yet that never held them back.
So what? Now they do, and lots of people like them.
People also found them distracting in the FH silver medals, and whined about them when they first thought they would be on all the medals. Once they learned that they would be severely limited and randomly distributed among the population, they became highly sought after, and expensive. No one buying or selling them then minded the presence of the privy.
The same would be the case for you if only 250 had the privy, randomly distributed among the 15K, and if you happened to score one. So maybe just stop whining about something you can't control, and enjoy the coin for what it is, rather than wishing it was something that it is not.
My point is that they could have simply done a BOM series absent anything to do w the 250th & they would have looked far better.
On these coins, which were chosen for epic designs, the privy looks terrible.
Obviously, I'd love a coin w/a privy if the privy in and off itself made it worth tens if thousands. That has nothing to do with the aesthetics, but just straight money, which is why people liked those.
If they randomly distributed a privy with any of the BOMs, that was a mule's butt , and there was very few of them , and they increased the value 1000% I'd love one. But, that's just about the $ . But that has nothing to do with this , because , in this case , they just take away from the design.
They're not all bad. They looked good on the V75, the 2026 Buff, etc. But, certainly not on these.
@Raufus said:
To add, before 2019 the Mint didn't use privy marks yet that never held them back.
So what? Now they do, and lots of people like them.
People also found them distracting in the FH silver medals, and whined about them when they first thought they would be on all the medals. Once they learned that they would be severely limited and randomly distributed among the population, they became highly sought after, and expensive. No one buying or selling them then minded the presence of the privy.
The same would be the case for you if only 250 had the privy, randomly distributed among the 15K, and if you happened to score one. So maybe just stop whining about something you can't control, and enjoy the coin for what it is, rather than wishing it was something that it is not.
My point is that they could have simply done a BOM series absent anything to do w the 250th & they would have looked far better.
On these coins, which were chosen for epic designs, the privy looks terrible.
Obviously, I'd love a coin w/a privy if the privy in and off itself made it worth tens if thousands. That has nothing to do with the aesthetics, but just straight money, which is why people liked those.
If they randomly distributed a privy with any of the BOMs, that was a mule's butt , and there was very few of them , and they increased the value 1000% I'd love one. But, that's just about the $ . But that has nothing to do with this , because , in this case , they just take away from the design.
They're not all bad. They looked good on the V75, the 2026 Buff, etc. But, certainly not on these.
I understand. What you are not understanding is that there is no BOM without 250.
Never was before. Never will be again. They are inextricably linked, for better or worse.
@Raufus said:
But, zero reason it had to be that way.
They could have simply done a BOM series. Then, no privys to screw them up.
Irrelevant of course as its done. Just amazing that when the goal was to somewhat reproduce the most epic designs that they'd screw them up w privys.
Again, you are missing the point. The "goal" was to honor the semisesquicentennial by reproducing the most epic designs.
No honoring the semisesquicentennial without the privies. It's like you are saying they ruined a perfectly good birthday party by having a cake and singing Happy Birthday.
So it's not "zero reason." It's the very reason. You like the coins but hate the privy, and are ignoring the fact that but for the occasion, as marked by the privy, there would be no coins.
You ignore the fact that these were not done to commemorate an anniversary of the coins themselves, as with the 100th anniversary of 3 iconic, if not quite epic, classic coins 10 years ago, or Kennedy in 2014, or even Sacagawea. And then 2 years ago, when commemorating the 230th anniversary of the first silver dollar, it had a privy.
It is what it is. Just accept it for what it is. A series in honor of the nation's 250th. Denoted with privy marks on the coins.
The mint has certainly got a lot of mileage and made money using the privy. I don’t like or hate it on the BOMs but if had a choice would prefer it gone. The only ones I liked it on were the v75 and military eagles. Who would have bought out Trump coin without the July 4th. It’s getting to be like when I was young and bought Cracker Jacks for the prize but at least with cracker jacks always got a prize. 😊
@Raufus said:
But, zero reason it had to be that way.
They could have simply done a BOM series. Then, no privys to screw them up.
Irrelevant of course as its done. Just amazing that when the goal was to somewhat reproduce the most epic designs that they'd screw them up w privys.
Again, you are missing the point. The "goal" was to honor the semisesquicentennial by reproducing the most epic designs.
No honoring the semisesquicentennial without the privies. It's like you are saying they ruined a perfectly good birthday party by having a cake and singing Happy Birthday.
So it's not "zero reason." It's the very reason. You like the coins but hate the privy, and are ignoring the fact that but for the occasion, as marked by the privy, there would be no coins.
You ignore the fact that these were not done to commemorate an anniversary of the coins themselves, as with the 100th anniversary of 3 iconic, if not quite epic, classic coins 10 years ago, or Kennedy in 2014, or even Sacagawea. And then 2 years ago, when commemorating the 230th anniversary of the first silver dollar, it had a privy.
It is what it is. Just accept it for what it is. A series in honor of the nation's 250th. Denoted with privy marks on the coins.
Sorry , I think we're talking past each other a bit.
I understand that they were to honor the 250th.
My only point is that these should have just been done as a separate project as the privy marks just kill the amazing designs that the coins recreate.
There is so much done to honor the 250th already. The should have been left out of it and just made a separate series , which would have looked even more beautiful w o the marks.
@Mark1010 said:
The mint has certainly got a lot of mileage and made money using the privy. I don’t like or hate it on the BOMs but if had a choice would prefer it gone. The only ones I liked it on were the v75 and military eagles. Who would have bought out Trump coin without the July 4th. It’s getting to be like when I was young and bought Cracker Jacks for the prize but at least with cracker jacks always got a prize. 😊
Agree re the V75s. It was great for them. Should have left it there.
This coin looks amazing in hand and the medal is a sweet bonus. To me the privy is no big deal. I am just glad the Mint used this "1804" design. It is second only to my 2024 FH gold coin as far as my favorite modern coin. My wife actually says she likes the silver medal more than the gold coin. Some days I have to agree with her as the silver medal obverse design is stunning in my opinion. I am very happy that I purchased it, even at a crazy premium.
@Raufus said:
But, zero reason it had to be that way.
They could have simply done a BOM series. Then, no privys to screw them up.
Irrelevant of course as its done. Just amazing that when the goal was to somewhat reproduce the most epic designs that they'd screw them up w privys.
Again, you are missing the point. The "goal" was to honor the semisesquicentennial by reproducing the most epic designs.
No honoring the semisesquicentennial without the privies. It's like you are saying they ruined a perfectly good birthday party by having a cake and singing Happy Birthday.
So it's not "zero reason." It's the very reason. You like the coins but hate the privy, and are ignoring the fact that but for the occasion, as marked by the privy, there would be no coins.
You ignore the fact that these were not done to commemorate an anniversary of the coins themselves, as with the 100th anniversary of 3 iconic, if not quite epic, classic coins 10 years ago, or Kennedy in 2014, or even Sacagawea. And then 2 years ago, when commemorating the 230th anniversary of the first silver dollar, it had a privy.
It is what it is. Just accept it for what it is. A series in honor of the nation's 250th. Denoted with privy marks on the coins.
Sorry , I think we're talking past each other a bit.
I understand that they were to honor the 250th.
My only point is that these should have just been done as a separate project as the privy marks just kill the amazing designs that the coins recreate.
There is so much done to honor the 250th already. The should have been left out of it and just made a separate series , which would have looked even more beautiful w o the marks.
Understood. But they wouldn't be a separate project. If you'll notice, every project has a trigger. There is no independent trigger for restriking the 1804 dollar in gold in 2026 other than this. So you get a coin with a privy, or no coin at all.
Same with the others. In fact, they are so out of fresh ideas that 4 of the 5 coins are coins that have been done in the recent past.
Understood. But they wouldn't be a separate project. If you'll notice, every project has a trigger. There is no independent trigger for restriking the 1804 dollar in gold in 2026 other than this. So you get a coin with a privy, or no coin at all.
Same with the others. In fact, they are so out of fresh ideas that 4 of the 5 coins are coins that have been done in the recent past.
I wish they'd done the incuse half/quarter eagle design.
Understood. But they wouldn't be a separate project. If you'll notice, every project has a trigger. There is no independent trigger for restriking the 1804 dollar in gold in 2026 other than this. So you get a coin with a privy, or no coin at all.
Same with the others. In fact, they are so out of fresh ideas that 4 of the 5 coins are coins that have been done in the recent past.
I wish they'd done the incuse half/quarter eagle design.
Right? There were some 20 ideas voted on. I would have thought the Indian Head gold eagle and or the half/quarter eagle would have scored above some of the 4 designs that had been recently done.
Understood. But they wouldn't be a separate project. If you'll notice, every project has a trigger. There is no independent trigger for restriking the 1804 dollar in gold in 2026 other than this. So you get a coin with a privy, or no coin at all.
Same with the others. In fact, they are so out of fresh ideas that 4 of the 5 coins are coins that have been done in the recent past.
I wish they'd done the incuse half/quarter eagle design.
Right? There were some 20 ideas voted on. I would have thought the Indian Head gold eagle and or the half/quarter eagle would have scored above some of the 4 designs that had been recently done.
“Best of the Mint 2027: The Also-rans”. Maybe we do them next? 🤣
Understood. But they wouldn't be a separate project. If you'll notice, every project has a trigger. There is no independent trigger for restriking the 1804 dollar in gold in 2026 other than this. So you get a coin with a privy, or no coin at all.
Same with the others. In fact, they are so out of fresh ideas that 4 of the 5 coins are coins that have been done in the recent past.
I wish they'd done the incuse half/quarter eagle design.
Right? There were some 20 ideas voted on. I would have thought the Indian Head gold eagle and or the half/quarter eagle would have scored above some of the 4 designs that had been recently done.
“Best of the Mint 2027: The Also-rans”. Maybe we do them next? 🤣
Nice, maybe 2028 though for the anniversary and they won't have the obligatory 250 privy mark.
Understood. But they wouldn't be a separate project. If you'll notice, every project has a trigger. There is no independent trigger for restriking the 1804 dollar in gold in 2026 other than this. So you get a coin with a privy, or no coin at all.
Same with the others. In fact, they are so out of fresh ideas that 4 of the 5 coins are coins that have been done in the recent past.
I wish they'd done the incuse half/quarter eagle design.
Right? There were some 20 ideas voted on. I would have thought the Indian Head gold eagle and or the half/quarter eagle would have scored above some of the 4 designs that had been recently done.
“Best of the Mint 2027: The Also-rans”. Maybe we do them next? 🤣
Nice, maybe 2028 though for the anniversary and they won't have the obligatory 250 privy mark.
I think they're now addicted to privy marks. As much as I liked them on the V75s, I wish they'd have never started with them. It's gotten beyond overdone.
Understood. But they wouldn't be a separate project. If you'll notice, every project has a trigger. There is no independent trigger for restriking the 1804 dollar in gold in 2026 other than this. So you get a coin with a privy, or no coin at all.
Same with the others. In fact, they are so out of fresh ideas that 4 of the 5 coins are coins that have been done in the recent past.
I wish they'd done the incuse half/quarter eagle design.
Right? There were some 20 ideas voted on. I would have thought the Indian Head gold eagle and or the half/quarter eagle would have scored above some of the 4 designs that had been recently done.
“Best of the Mint 2027: The Also-rans”. Maybe we do them next? 🤣
Nice, maybe 2028 though for the anniversary and they won't have the obligatory 250 privy mark.
I think they're now addicted to privy marks. As much as I liked them on the V75s, I wish they'd have never started with them. It's gotten beyond overdone.
They really missed out this year. Think of what they coukd have done with colorized coins 🤣 There could have been red, white, and blue versions of everything.
Understood. But they wouldn't be a separate project. If you'll notice, every project has a trigger. There is no independent trigger for restriking the 1804 dollar in gold in 2026 other than this. So you get a coin with a privy, or no coin at all.
Same with the others. In fact, they are so out of fresh ideas that 4 of the 5 coins are coins that have been done in the recent past.
I wish they'd done the incuse half/quarter eagle design.
Right? There were some 20 ideas voted on. I would have thought the Indian Head gold eagle and or the half/quarter eagle would have scored above some of the 4 designs that had been recently done.
“Best of the Mint 2027: The Also-rans”. Maybe we do them next? 🤣
Nice, maybe 2028 though for the anniversary and they won't have the obligatory 250 privy mark.
I think they're now addicted to privy marks. As much as I liked them on the V75s, I wish they'd have never started with them. It's gotten beyond overdone.
They really missed out this year. Think of what they coukd have done with colorized coins 🤣 There could have been red, white, and blue versions of everything.
OMG! Please don't give them any ideas!
Next year we'll end up w America 251 $251 (highest denomination ever) colorized Liberty Bells w/0.1% having 251 privys to be auctioned off by Stacks along w a story about how difficult they were to make.
Comments
Thanks! I'll check it out.
Got it! Looks like they've sold two in the past 5 hrs.
@safari_dude pointed out, but my easy way is to look for big block of text, and ats is right below that
Awesome! Thanks!
I ordered mine on the release date. It showed in processing for three or four days so I called last Monday discovered I had a problem with my credit card that they never told me about. So I re-ordered last Monday and it arrived today., I tried to cancel the original order to try to save $100 on Wednesday but they told me since it was in processing. I couldn’t do anything to change it. Anyway, it showed up today Saturday, 9/5 and it is a beautiful coin and the medal very nice. I did save $10 when I complained that I should be getting free shipping. Supposedly they updated my account and I have to call in and they will credit my charge card $10.
Really disappointed in the gold coin I received. It has two prominent spots below the the obverse (in the field below the face) and a scratch in the upper right field. I'm returning it tomorrow. I don't think I've give it another try as I suspect my chances of getting another return with similar problems is higher than I'd like.
it takes some weeks to process a return.
I'd return for a replacement and feel ok
I might be seeing things, but the specs on the 1907 Best on the mint description page says the coin is 30.61 mm (same as the 1804 gold Best). That's got to be wrong as the Saint Gaudens is a couple mm more than that.
Metal content. Original Saint is 90% gold. BoM Saint is 99.99% gold.
I don't want to be a "Debbie downer" and not implying that onto chapparral- but aside from my already mentioned 'lack of interested heirs' as a 'con' toward this otherwise much desired purchase opportunity, I also recalled the TWO 2025 Sunflower Gold coins that I bought from US Mint. Both were flawed and net cost for the prank was $75 registered return shipping.
Twice bitten, many fold shy.
My personal confidence level was too low. I did not want to repeat this disappointment.
Guys like Raufus, that bought at the US Mint store and spent quality time inspecting are a sure bet way to buy!
Some other person in this thread shared pictures of a flawed 1804 gold coin.
There is always the risk that by now, returns are being recycled to new buyers and perhaps the dies are not up to snuff like they were for the first wave of minting.
For those that hit the "70" quality mark on their 1804 coins, an absolute hats off to ya !!
Not a mistake. It's going to be made on exactly the same planchet. This is not an original St. Gaudens. It's a 2026 restrike.
Sorry u got an unacceptable coin. What are the requirements for a return? Does it have to be mailed registered? I see sometimes the mint will prove free rerun shipping but I don’t know how they decide who gets free rerun shipping
Repeat deleted
Just received the first of my two pieces.
The medal is really quite nice, which is really good to see since I did not like most of the other medals. The coin is terrific and I think some of the negative comments about its size might be due to the fact that it is packaged with the medal and the medal is a bit larger, which can make the coin appear smaller. I have two observations about the coin that would make it better. The first is that if it were struck in proof it would be a monster and the second is that the privy really does take away from the overall feel or flow of the design. Even if the privy were to have been incorporated on the reverse, tucked between the wording and the wings, it would have been a better presentation.
I intend to keep mine.
In honor of the memory of Cpl. Michael E. Thompson
I agree completely about the privy. It cheapens the design. Even if they would have at least moved it to the left side of the obverse instead of at the point of her chin. Once you notice how distracting it is, you'll never be able to unsee it.
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. . . . . . .
None of the BOMs shoukd have privys. So unfortunate.
Or, just don't have one. I don't know how anyone could not have realized how distracting it would be.
But then they would not be tied to the semisesquicentennial. Which was the whole idea in the first place.
They didn't just do these this year for no reason at all. They are not dual dated. The 250 privy is the only tie to the purpose behind the program. So you have to just get over the distraction. Or take a pass on the series.
They realized. They did it intentionally anyway. It's to differentiate the coins from the originals, in addition to the change in metal. And, as I said, to tie them to the semisesquicentennial.
But, there was zero need to tie them.
Like the prior dime & walker, could have just done them
The privy really defeats the purpose of reproducing these amazing designs.
In my return I checked the product was damaged box. They provided a postage paid return label. I sent it back this morning.
Concur. After dropping it off at the PO this morn, I decided not to try again and buy another.
I've been disappointed over the coin quality from the Mint the over last couple years. There were blemishes on the 2025 gold Sacagawea dollar they sent me, but I didn't think they would impact the grading. Wrong. PCGS graded it a 69. Lessons learned.
Except there was. Because none of these were done due to anniversaries of the coins. All of them were done due to 250th anniversary of the country.
The privy is actually the key. The designs are just the designs selected via a survey. The only constant is the privy.
The prior dime, quarter and walker were not just "done." They commemorated the 100th anniversary of the coins.
Sorry you are unhappy, but the 1804 gold dollar was not made to commemorate the 222nd anniversary of that silver dollar. And it was not made for no reason at all. Which is one reason you won't be seeing one next year to commemorate the 170th anniversary of the Flying Eagle Cent.
It was made as part of a 5 coin "Best of the Mint" set to commemorate the 250th anniversary of the country. How do we know that? The little 250 privy mark on each coin. That's how.
1804 silver dollar minted in 1834 [and later], not 1804, so 2026 is the 192nd anniversary of its first minting, not the 222nd anniversary
why do I know this? mostly because of the gold restrike to commemorate this country's 250th anniversary lol
😎
But, they dont have a 100th anniv privy. It looks terrible and hugely detracts from the design. It seems a lot of people feel same.
To add, before 2019 the Mint didn't use privy marks yet that never held them back.
Point well taken, but this takes nothing away from my point. Which is that the coin is dated 1804, and that the restrike does not commemorate that. Or 1834. Or later. It commemorates 1776, and is marked by the privy.
So what? Now they do, and lots of people like them.
People also found them distracting in the FH silver medals, and whined about them when they first thought they would be on all the medals. Once they learned that they would be severely limited and randomly distributed among the population, they became highly sought after, and expensive. No one buying or selling them then minded the presence of the privy.
The same would be the case for you if only 250 had the privy, randomly distributed among the 15K, and if you happened to score one. So maybe just stop whining about something you can't control, and enjoy the coin for what it is, rather than wishing it was something that it is not.
There are stars next to our user names, used to be counts, there are counts for agrees, likes, LOLs, maybe a new count category is needed for harsh, demeaning, and condescending. I thought the purpose here was to exchange information and opinions. If someone doesn't like a design element or thinks it is the greatest thing ever, their opinion is just as valid, as are theories on how the USM may have mishandled a distribution of privy mark items in the past.
My point is that they could have simply done a BOM series absent anything to do w the 250th & they would have looked far better.
On these coins, which were chosen for epic designs, the privy looks terrible.
Obviously, I'd love a coin w/a privy if the privy in and off itself made it worth tens if thousands. That has nothing to do with the aesthetics, but just straight money, which is why people liked those.
If they randomly distributed a privy with any of the BOMs, that was a mule's butt , and there was very few of them , and they increased the value 1000% I'd love one. But, that's just about the $ . But that has nothing to do with this , because , in this case , they just take away from the design.
They're not all bad. They looked good on the V75, the 2026 Buff, etc. But, certainly not on these.
I understand. What you are not understanding is that there is no BOM without 250.
Never was before. Never will be again. They are inextricably linked, for better or worse.
But, zero reason it had to be that way.
They could have simply done a BOM series. Then, no privys to screw them up.
Irrelevant of course as its done. Just amazing that when the goal was to somewhat reproduce the most epic designs that they'd screw them up w privys.
I really don't mind the privys and greatly prefer them to dual dated coins (which was probably another choice and would have been much worse IMO).
chopmarkedtradedollars.com
Again, you are missing the point. The "goal" was to honor the semisesquicentennial by reproducing the most epic designs.
No honoring the semisesquicentennial without the privies. It's like you are saying they ruined a perfectly good birthday party by having a cake and singing Happy Birthday.
So it's not "zero reason." It's the very reason. You like the coins but hate the privy, and are ignoring the fact that but for the occasion, as marked by the privy, there would be no coins.
You ignore the fact that these were not done to commemorate an anniversary of the coins themselves, as with the 100th anniversary of 3 iconic, if not quite epic, classic coins 10 years ago, or Kennedy in 2014, or even Sacagawea. And then 2 years ago, when commemorating the 230th anniversary of the first silver dollar, it had a privy.
It is what it is. Just accept it for what it is. A series in honor of the nation's 250th. Denoted with privy marks on the coins.
ats : 2222 🪽
The mint has certainly got a lot of mileage and made money using the privy. I don’t like or hate it on the BOMs but if had a choice would prefer it gone. The only ones I liked it on were the v75 and military eagles. Who would have bought out Trump coin without the July 4th. It’s getting to be like when I was young and bought Cracker Jacks for the prize but at least with cracker jacks always got a prize. 😊
I'm sick of privys in general. They are way overdone.
That said, I think they did work on the buff & the enhanced AGE, both dual dates.
I think they are just awful on the BOMs, as they're a huge distraction to the amazing designs.
Sorry , I think we're talking past each other a bit.
I understand that they were to honor the 250th.
My only point is that these should have just been done as a separate project as the privy marks just kill the amazing designs that the coins recreate.
There is so much done to honor the 250th already. The should have been left out of it and just made a separate series , which would have looked even more beautiful w o the marks.
Agree re the V75s. It was great for them. Should have left it there.
This coin looks amazing in hand and the medal is a sweet bonus. To me the privy is no big deal. I am just glad the Mint used this "1804" design. It is second only to my 2024 FH gold coin as far as my favorite modern coin. My wife actually says she likes the silver medal more than the gold coin. Some days I have to agree with her as the silver medal obverse design is stunning in my opinion. I am very happy that I purchased it, even at a crazy premium.
Understood. But they wouldn't be a separate project. If you'll notice, every project has a trigger. There is no independent trigger for restriking the 1804 dollar in gold in 2026 other than this. So you get a coin with a privy, or no coin at all.
Same with the others. In fact, they are so out of fresh ideas that 4 of the 5 coins are coins that have been done in the recent past.
Finally under 2000 ATS.
Do you remember the number? Thanks. I’m tracking it.
1984 lol wow
https://www.usmint.gov/on/demandware.store/Sites-USM-Site/default/Product-Variation?pid=26BM4
I wish they'd done the incuse half/quarter eagle design.
Right? There were some 20 ideas voted on. I would have thought the Indian Head gold eagle and or the half/quarter eagle would have scored above some of the 4 designs that had been recently done.
“Best of the Mint 2027: The Also-rans”. Maybe we do them next? 🤣
Nice, maybe 2028 though for the anniversary and they won't have the obligatory 250 privy mark.
I think they're now addicted to privy marks. As much as I liked them on the V75s, I wish they'd have never started with them. It's gotten beyond overdone.
They really missed out this year. Think of what they coukd have done with colorized coins 🤣 There could have been red, white, and blue versions of everything.
OMG! Please don't give them any ideas!
Next year we'll end up w America 251 $251 (highest denomination ever) colorized Liberty Bells w/0.1% having 251 privys to be auctioned off by Stacks along w a story about how difficult they were to make.