I can't believe.......

The point is, even with full and complete knowledge that people DO collect "regular" coins, EVEN SO, the Mint saw fit to recommend AGAINST it for Eagle bullion coins. That speaks to me. Not you? It tells me that ultimate quality was not going to be a priority, at least.

Buuuuut, the need to market to "sheeple" by the TPGS's won out anyway, as usual.

To answer your question, though, I'd say about every modern commem, every proof set, every uncirculated set, yadda yadda ... See the diff?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Perhaps not for the Mint; but all of us should know that "ultimate quality" is something important for all things.

 

I assume you're aware that the Mint sees themselves as having three entirely separate divisions - Circulation, Numismatic, and Bullion, and to them, pretty much "never any of them shall meet". They treat the strikes, and the NEEDS, in each completely unlike the other two.

When you think about it, that's why there are even two types of 5 oz. "pucks".

I will never fault the Mint for failing to do something they never intended to do.

 

I am only aware of this: How the Mint sees themselves and how we see things has absolutely nothing to do with the reality of the situation.

 

Not one bit to me. They weren't giving collecting advice they were just saying that that they won't accept returns. If the silver content is right they fulfilled their duties as far as they are concerned regardless of quality.

 

More then likely. Hard to blame them for stuff that develops afterwards

 

True, we believe what we want to believe. We're all guilty of that sometimes. I've read some of the arguments about gradeflation (is that the a used term?) and have seen some evidence of it. However, not all series are affected to the same extent, and it doesn't always occur every time in any area. Also, I'll just throw this out there - and the only evidence would be looking at standards, testimony, etc - that maybe grading has gotten more accurate. Stricter or more conservative, maybe these are irrelevant if grades are closer in line with ANA's standards, market standards here, or any other authority's standards because they aren't universal as we all know. My guess is many collectors in other countries like the UK or Canada might view our grading as being too lenient overall, and has been for too long. You and others raise the issue of a perceptible slide to leniency in the past decades. In both cases, there's a negative judgement going on here. Perhaps this observation of yours is true, because I honestly haven't been collecting as long or as studious of this aspect of the hobby, but I'm wondering why is it problematic? I think Americans obsess enough between the main adjectives in our grading system. Loosening up this control and attention on grading minutiae might be a plus to the hobby, in my opinion. Just thinking aloud

 

I have the hat and the suit, but I shaved off the 'stache. Oh, he has a much deeper tan than I do.