5oz Quarters Delayed
Bremick
National Parks "quarters". Supposedly, the Mint is concerned over
skyrocketing silver prices that have lead to the wild pre-release prices
being asked by the "authorized dealers" who will be receiving the coins(?)
from the Mint at $9.75 over spot and then demanding a hefty premium from
frantic collectors. Only 33,000 of each design are being minted, as
opposed to the 100,000 originally announced. I'm not sure what the Mint's
pause is intended to accomplish. The news release didn't speculate.
Beanie
"Bremick" <rem...@cox.net> wrote in message
news:idmsg0$ts9$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
I always resented the Mint's "authorized dealer" mechanism for this series.
It's wide open for price gouging and there's absolutely no reason that, in this
day and age, the Mint can't sell directly to the public at the same markup over
spot.
Ditto for the rest of the bullion coins also.
Wonder which Senator's brother-in-law is making a killing on this fiasco?
Michael Benveniste
> I'm not sure what the Mint's pause is intended to accomplish.
> The news release didn't speculate.
Since I speculated on the coins themselves, I'll also speculate
on the pause.
The Mint is looking for a way out. As things stand now,
they've created instant scarcities -- no matter what happens,
these hockey pucks will likely never trade as buillion. Yet
Public Law 110-456 clearly states that the coins are supposed
to be bullion investment products, and if the Mint only sells
them on their website at a higher premium, there will be
lawsuits.
There will also be "flash crowd roulette" as the servers are
overwhelmed by collectors and speculators alike. Remember,
APMEX sold all 1,000 sets they were offering at $1395 within
19 hours.
Failing that, the Mint may decide only to ship coins to
distributors who agree to a price cap. That would make for
some very interesting anti-trust cases.
The easiest way out is to convince the National Park Service
to buy out the whole issue and sell them through those
channels. The NPS can set any price it wants and keep the
profit within the government coffers.
If that doesn't work, the Mint might be able to squeeze
through a bill in Congress allowing them an extension on
deadlines, allow them to mint more and sell them in 2011.
The worst case is that SecTreas determines the "appropriate
number" to be exactly 1 coin per design, melts the rest,
and gives the surviving unique coins to the Smithsonian.
--
Mike Benveniste -- m...@murkyether.com (Clarification Required)
Its name is Public opinion. It is held in reverence. It settles
everything. Some think it is the voice of God. -- Mark Twain
Bremick
"Michael Benveniste" <m...@murkyether.com> wrote in message
news:8m9kot...@mid.individual.net...
Although it would not be possible with these particular "coins", I always
thought that if the Mint truly was intent on producing "bullion" coins, e.g.
gold and silver eagles, they could have produced one standard design with no
date. Sorta like the Maria Theresa. But by playing with annual date
changes and various "premium" iterations of each year's issue, they're just
getting what they asked for, IMO.
Michael Benveniste
> Although it would not be possible with these particular
> "coins", I always thought that if the Mint truly was intent
> on producing "bullion" coins, e.g. gold and silver eagles,
> they could have produced one standard design with no date.
Unfortunately, sometimes we all have to do what the little
voices tell us to do, and in this case the little voice
that the U.S. Mint has to listen to is called the U.S. Code.
31 USC 5112(d)(1) explicity requires, in part, "The coins
have an inscription of the year of minting or issuance.
However, to prevent or alleviate a shortage of a
denomination, the Secretary may inscribe coins of the
denomination with the year that was last inscribed on coins
of the denomination."
So the Mint _might_ be able to get away with not changing
the date from year-to-year, but there would have to be a
date.
Bremick
> "Bremick" <rem...@cox.net> wrote:
>
>> Although it would not be possible with these particular
>> "coins", I always thought that if the Mint truly was intent
>> on producing "bullion" coins, e.g. gold and silver eagles,
>> they could have produced one standard design with no date.
>
> Unfortunately, sometimes we all have to do what the little
> voices tell us to do, and in this case the little voice
> that the U.S. Mint has to listen to is called the U.S. Code.
>
> 31 USC 5112(d)(1) explicity requires, in part, "The coins
> have an inscription of the year of minting or issuance.
> However, to prevent or alleviate a shortage of a
> denomination, the Secretary may inscribe coins of the
> denomination with the year that was last inscribed on coins
> of the denomination."
>
> So the Mint _might_ be able to get away with not changing
> the date from year-to-year, but there would have to be a
> date.
Interesting. Maybe 1986 would have worked. Still, making limited quanties
of each year's issue using different striking methods (proof, burnished,
etc.) opened the Mint to the type of dilema it faces today. At least those
"authorized dealers" weren't involved here. Was the Mint also required to
produce these premium versions or was that its own idea?
Michael Benveniste
> Interesting. Maybe 1986 would have worked. Still, making
> limited quanties of each year's issue using different striking
> methods (proof, burnished, etc.) opened the Mint to the type
> of dilemma it faces today. At least those "authorized dealers"
> weren't involved here. Was the Mint also required to produce these
> premium versions or was that its own idea?
You're going to see a lot of finger pointing on the dilemma posed by
these 5 oz. coins. As far as I can tell:
-- Congress specified a non-standard size for 5 oz. silver rounds.
-- The Mint didn't have either the equipment and didn't start
working out how to make the coins until after passage of the
law. This, combined with the sales deadline, led to a short
mintage run.
-- The idea to split the issue into bullion grade and collector
grade issues had to be approved by SecTreas, at least in theory.
-- 300,000 coins isn't sufficient to meet demand at near-bullion
prices, no matter how it's chopped up.
I've been saying for years that for non-circulating issues,
whether bullion or commemorative, the United States should only
produce one finish for each design, purely for aesthetic
reasons. But this is an area where the mint can't win, as
we saw when they skipped 2009 proof SAE's.
This particular story made me aware of an oddity. Uncirculated
First Spouse coins are trading at only a small premium to spot
despite having some tiny mintages. For example, the mintage on
the Anna Harrison coin is 3,537. In comparison, the MS Jackie
Robinson Commemorative has a mintage of 5,174.
MKW
over production costs. Yet Wal Mart price gouges everyday with every
product, with margins far greater than any coin...on boring daily
household products. Dealers and marketers of coins have the right to
charge whatever someone is willing to pay. Anything less would be bad
business. The FTC doesn't understand this either with the push for
dealers of bullion to have to disclose their internal costs etc. If
applied to coin dealers the same should be applied to every other
business in the USA.
Bremick
"MKW" <mwelb...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:54ca7748-0e37-4250...@z9g2000yqz.googlegroups.com...
You ought to find a different WalMart if the one you shop at is gouging you
on every product. The prices at the WalMarts around here are usually lower
than at their competitors.
In the case here, I begrudge the Mint for not allowing individuals to be
able to order a 5oz silver quarter, instead allowing the whole press run to
go to selected "middleman" companies at spot+ $9.75, and who will indeed be
reselling them at huge markups to a captive collector market. If
individuals can order commemortatives and most other bullion/special issues
from the Mint, why not these?
Is there some reason why coin/bullion dealers per se should be allowed to
hide their business costs from the tax man? Do you believe that all other
businesses are exempt from any regulations a coin/bullion dealer must abide
by?
MKW
tell the public their exact profit margin and the costs per product.
Wal Mart sells a cheaper product for less yes. Wal Mart will sell you
something for $4.95 that costs 1 cent to make. Others may sell you
something for $7.95 that costs $2 to make. I can guarantee that Wal
Marts margins are some of the highest out there. And they aren't
being forced to tell the customer what those margins are. Why should
a coin marketer?
Michael Benveniste
> In the case here, I begrudge the Mint for not allowing individuals to be
> able to order a 5oz silver quarter, instead allowing the whole press run
> to go to selected "middleman" companies at spot+ $9.75, and who will
> indeed be reselling them at huge markups to a captive collector market.
One small problem. They aren’t allowing the whole press run to go to
the distributors. Only 55% of them. The Mint is going to offer the
rest sometime in 2011.
> If individuals can order commemoratives and most other bullion/special
> issues from the Mint, why not these?
One small problem. Individuals can’t order most bullion-grade American
Eagle coins directly from the mint either.
In fact, had the National Park Service been a little more savvy, they
could have bought out the entire run and shared the proceeds with
_their_ vendors.
Commemoratives have mandated mintages in their enabling legislation.
It’s fairly rare for demand to be so high as to create a quick sellout;
the Buffalo Dollars are the only example I can think of. Had the Mint
made even 200,000 copies of each coin instead of 60,000, I’m not sure
we’d be having this discussion today.
Bremick
Michael makes some good clarifying points about the distribution.
If Wal Mart is selling an item for $4.95 that costs one cent to make, what
do other retailers sell that same item for? What other retailers will tell
customers what their profit margin is? You obviously have something against
Wal Mart in particular. But no big deal; you're apparently not alone.
Coin marketers have to keep books the same as any other business. Unless
you have a coin dealer who is a personal friend, I doubt any of them will
tell *you* what they paid for the coin you buy from them. Unlike coin
dealers, most major bullion dealers *will* tell you up front what their buy
and sell price is at any moment.
Beanie
I think the main difference is that Walmart is not selling government produced
merchandise as avirtual monopoly.
The Mint should sell these items thru their web site and direct sales office, to
avoid any appearance of political corruption.
MKW
profift margins on common goods are most lilely higher than margins on
coins at HSN or other marketers,
About revealing costs, I am referring to the legislation that some
want passed aimed at forcing dealers of bullion to reveal all margins
to the customer. Trying to protect the uninformed purchaser who is
dumb and thinks they can get rich quick with coins. But taken on its
face the law would apply to any retailer of coins. Who is to say
collector gold is different from bullion...the proposed law sees no
difference. Why should someone selling a marketed collection of
gold coins have to tell the customer and competitor their margins and
all internal costs. Why should Franklin Mint have to tell Danbury
Mint their production costs? Same goes for any number of large coin
dealers who compete with others. If you tell a consumer what your
markup is they will always fell like the item should sell for less.
MKW
ahead and sell them normally they might do okay.
Beanie
>Nothing against Wal Mart per se but just making a point that their profift
>margins on common goods are most lilely higher than margins on coins at HSN or
>other marketers,
Coin marketers on cable TV typically charge more than Red Book prices for
inferior material.
Jimmy Gerstel and his pal with the squinty eyes are particularly egregious but
they are hardly alone.
Wal-Mart operates at a low per-item profit margin, making their money on their
tremendous volume.
Their grocery department sells items for far less than my local chain
supermarket (Stop & Shop), and the profit margin for supermarkets in notoriously
low, so clearly Wal-Mart is not making a high profit margin as you continue to
maintain.
MKW
more of a panel type collection for those such as myself who like
that. Or an exclusive piece created for a foreign nation NCLT? I
dont think a private company should have to tell the public their
profit margins...only to protect those buyers who are NOT REAL
COLLECTORS collecting for enjoyment but only because they think it is
some type of financial investment. How many people are buying gold
bullion now only for investment and not for apreciation of coinage art
and history. Any loss is their own fault.
Bremick
<snip>
How many people are buying gold
> bullion now only for investment and not for apreciation of coinage art
> and history. Any loss is their own fault.
95% ? or more?
oly
>
> - Show quoted text -
The United States Mint is a government entity, not involved in
anything particularly related to national security, and all that it
does - including income, costs. expenditures. salaries, benefits,
wasteful spending by its personnel and windfalls to the favored
parties it does business with - should be entirely transparent. When
the Mint loses money, as it probably does routinely, citizens have to
pick up the tab. Citizens have the right to know it ALL.
That's how government should work in a democarcy.
Don't compare apples and oranges; the Mint isn't a private coin
dealer.
oly
MKW
not. Gold Eagles are works of art to be appreciated.
The US mint is definitly non-profit and most of its programs are
perhaps subsidized. My post was referring to the proposed law that a
coin dealer must turn over his or her books for the public (customer)
to see. That is wrong. Just over eager legislation to protect those
who are only buying bullion to get rich. Same type of laws that
force American cars to be overbuilt to protect people who don't wear
seatbelts.
Wal Mart as does Lowes etc etc sell entirely different lines of items
that are made just for them in China that look a lot like the same
thing that is better. Like Moen faucets in Lowes...cheap made in
China with plastic parts...one can get a nice made in USA brass
construction Moen Faucet at a nicer specialty plumbing store. Lowes
and Wal Mart may sell one example of the better product but the
majority is the low end bottom feeder stuff. You get what you pay
for.
MKW
MKW
bullion piece lack a mint mark which make them unique to themselves.
oly
I agree with the first sentiment MOL, although I have always felt that
the reverse design of the AGE is pathetic, absolutely pathetic.
While I don't especially advocate it, I might like to suggest to the
Obama administration that perhaps they should order the restrike of
the 1995-W One Ounce Proof Silver Eagle and all those silly reverse
proof and whatever proof American silver eagles from a few years
back.
The coin speculators all hate the Obama people, MOL. The Obama
administration could turn some of the speculators' biggest winners
into instant losers. IMHO, it would be real justice for the folks who
prostitute coins.
oly
oly
>
> - Show quoted text -
And I'd be very very extremely pleased to see a well-executed official
restrike of the 1909-S V.D.B. Lincoln Cent.
That probably should have been done long before now.
oly
MKW
of the NP bullion proves the mint production is subsidized. The
production costs alone would outweight the price of the metal used.
Just like with jewelry, Rolex watches, etc.
oly
A coin is a relatively simple product and is supposed to be mass-
produced, which spreads fixed production costs over many many
thousands of pieces. OTOH, the best jewelry is hand-did, and
traditional mechanical watches aren't made in as large a quantity as
most coins.
I would guess the ASE is closer to a breakeven proposition for the
Mint after charges to the authorized vendors.
Why not make official restrikes some of the most popular U.S. coins of
the past??? Official restrikes have a long, valid and valuable
tradition in numismatics. It would be good for hobbyists.
oly
Michael Benveniste
> So will these be avail in UNC version direct from the mint? The
> bullion piece lack a mint mark which make them unique to themselves.
Supposedly, the Mint will offer 27,000 sets with a "P" mintmark
sometime in 2011.
As of this moment, I'm not sure anyone is accepting new orders
for the "bullion" version of these coins. As Mr. Remick notes
in a later post, the Mint established new rules for the resale
of these coins. They'll still only be sold to primary
distributors, but those distributors must agree to resell all
of the coins at retail (1 set per household) and at no more than
a fixed markup.
Of the 11 primary distributors, most are wholesalers. I can't
think of one besides APMEX that's really set up for that type
of sale, and the last time I checked the are still showing
"sold out" on their website. I did check with CNT here in
Massachusetts -- they haven't decided whether to participate
or not.
oly
The Gold Center in Springfield, Illinois certainly does retail, over-
the-counter business in ASE, although they must do a lot of wholesale
too.
oly
MKW
set of historic Australian legal tender restrikes. Most Jewelry
is hand made but in a large scale. The mold are created for the wax
casting and the precious metal cast using the lost wax process. Or
electroformed depending on the complexity. Maybe not bullion coins
but many art medals like the Masterpieces of Rodin that Franklin Mint
made in 1985 have to be struck maybe six times each from very
expensive tooling.
From what I have read, the tooling for the large NP quarters was also
very expensive. All those collars, dies, etc. Dies wear quick with
larger pieces. Also tough to get good relief when the surface is so
big yet the blank so thin. These are really large pieces to be just 5
ounces.
Michael Benveniste
> The Gold Center in Springfield, Illinois certainly does
> retail, over-the-counter business in ASE, although they
> must do a lot of wholesale too.
I looked for their website but couldn't find one. Are
they set up for mail order? If not, the lines are going
to get a bit long.
(Half a lifetime ago, I lived in Central Illinois).