About the current Mint products....................
keets
Posts: 25,351 ✭✭✭✭✭
In an age when the collector community leans toward a focus on ultra-perfection enhanced by multiple grading services and a highly visible marketing network, don't you think we're a bit overly critical of what we expect from the Mint?? Don't get me wrong, I'm somewhat the same and just as appreciative of beauty and perfection as anyone, but it often gets ridiculous when the monetary reward is waiting like DHeath's low hanging fruit. We all bemoan the waiting period for shipment, we criticize the design elements and the necessary low relief to accomplish high speed, high tonnage presses, and then when something new comes along like the current Satin Finish on Mint Set coins, well, it's just another target for the shooting gallery.
To top it off, we have sophisticated imaging equipment and editting programs to enhance even the slightest flaw, flaws which oftentimes aren't visible to our unaided eyes. This only leads to a further critiquing of an already suspect and disliked product from a perceievd adversary, the Mint, and holdered by a sometime sworn enemy, WXY(Z) grading company, only to be hawked at bogus auction sites and venues by those who would bleed the last drop of water from their well.
Am I the only one who feels this way??
To top it off, we have sophisticated imaging equipment and editting programs to enhance even the slightest flaw, flaws which oftentimes aren't visible to our unaided eyes. This only leads to a further critiquing of an already suspect and disliked product from a perceievd adversary, the Mint, and holdered by a sometime sworn enemy, WXY(Z) grading company, only to be hawked at bogus auction sites and venues by those who would bleed the last drop of water from their well.
Am I the only one who feels this way??
0
Comments
From what I have read, the Mint is very profitable. If so, where do these proceeds get invested? Certainly not into quality control or improved customer relations.
As consumers, if we have easy access to equipment that can detect flaws in their product, then the Mint certainly does as well. And why can't high relief coins be produced for collectors anyway?
I'm mostly a lurker, but I thought I would chime in here. IMO any critcism the Mint receives they bring on themselves.
Didn't wanna get me no trade
Never want to be like papa
Working for the boss every night and day
--"Happy", by the Rolling Stones (1972)
Gator, the relief complaint is oft repeated. i always try to remember that our coinage is struck solely for commerce and anything after that, well, the Mint is catering to an aftermarket that has become a source of profit..................and a source of complaints. ironically, whenever/whatever they do, there will always be complaints from someone. my take on all the recent circulation problems----actually, lack of curculation problems----is that the Mint may well be overproducing, that is to say that the coinage they're making may not be needed in the volume they're producing for commerce to run smoothly. with the advent of the internet and electronic transfers of funds for everything the use of coinage certainly has to be less than what it was 10 years ago, yet the mintages haven't slowed.
Proof coinage was originally intended for the collector community's appetite. does that mean the Mint is wrong in failing to meet our demand for special quality MS coins or are we wrong to be demanding that a circulation coin be pristine, only to complain when it isn't?? certainlt a level of quality should be expected if a premium is being paid, but if the quality is absent(and known to all), why keep paying the premium, for the right to complain??
if the quality doesn't justify your paying a premium, stop ordering. that was my approach along with selling a set run of both MS/PR from the 1950's through 2001. the sets are always, always, always available in the aftermarket.
troublemaker!!!!!!!!!!!!
sets are a case in point; we finally get the kind of quality that we've been demanding and there's
soming moaning about needing extra coins for the set and new pages for the albums. Some peo-
even claim it's all a conspiracy to get us to spent more money. While this is a real wild card the fact
remains it really is an improvement and it's great for people collecting current coin right now. Yes, it
is difficult to predict what affect this will have on older mint set coins (if any) but that shouldn't be the
point. Nor is it really important just how many coins will be needed for a complete 50 states quarter
set. It's up to the individual and always has been.
We complained for years about date freezes, static designs and denominations, lack of mint marks,
the cessation of proof sets and twice of mint sets. We've complained about the lack of commems
and coins that don't circulate. When we get most of what we ask for then we complain about too
many commems and too many types of proof sets and other mint products. Afterall who ever asked
for spoons or coin jewelry. Then we complain when the prices go up on the secondary market.
I don't think it's misplaced to complain about circulating coin quality though. These still are not nearly
as goog of quality as they can be or as good as some other major countries. Sure it's great having
crappy standards since it allows people to look through rolls to find nice examples and make a profit
but there's just no point in having such poor quality on the whole. Even the best examples often leave
much to be desired.
It may cost the mint a lot of time, effort and even some money to improve these but with the kind of
money they generate and the large number of very talented people they already employ they can
do better. They use some of the most modern equipment and now have many top artists.
I think the new finish is cool but, i would have bought a few sets no matter what they did to them (except holograms
I don't rush them off to a grading service and then get ulcers waiting for results.
Just not my thing right now.