I know some people don't like modern commemorative designs, but...

I take it you meant dessert, with a double s, for, I'll have a double serving?

Hey, what does this thread have to do with modern commems? Yeah, kick them now, like they did with the classic commem half dollars when they were issued, yet, many have beautiful designs, and many have done well. Granted, the mint is gouging on these, so unless it's commemorates a popular subject, few are ordered - all the better, creating some rarities. Can you image inheriting a full set of high grade classic half dollar commems? Same thing will happen for our kids/grandkids with the moderns.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I was thinking either Ripple or Thunderbird.
Since having been in the meat and deli business for sometime head cheese as well souse are two items that are a required taste.
And as the saying goes everything on the pig is used except the squeal

 

How are you defining this allegation exactly? You are aware, of course, that the Mint is required BY LAW to internally pay for ALL costs associated with making their numismatic programs, including but NOT LIMITED TO, packaging, marketing, amortization of equipment, a share of building costs, etc.

And these costs must be paid for by ONLY the numismatic section. Circulating coinage and bullion products are NOT allowed to subsidize.

Since fixed costs ARE included in the mix, if sales continue to slide, you CAN EXPECT AND PLAN ON the fact that prices WILL rise.

 

Well it's all about typos...either on porpoise or by spell check souse loaf aka head cheese... as pictured is far from being a first spouse coin as you can see.

 

@Paddy54
I want snoot holes in my piece please!

 

Hmm, when silver was $3 for 3/4 ounce, these sold for around $20 - minus the $10 donation, the mint was able to produce the silver dollar for around $10, so apparently around $7 over the cost of the silver.

Fast forward to today, $12 for 3/4 ounce of silver + $7 production cost + $10 donation = $29. Production cost may have increase or decreased slightly. Bottom line, the mint is applying a markup to the increased cost of silver.

 

NO!!!! Production costs HAVE increased GREATLY! Why? Because the rules of cost accounting for these products have CHANGED IMMENSELY! See - Government Accounting Standards Bureau.

What you wrote above in post #26 is a prime example of the type of Internet-found baloney that has me manually receding my stinking hairline!

 

Tell me about the rule changes, I've been retired for 12 years.

 

Absolutely EVERYTHING that POSSIBLY CONCEIVABLY could ARGUABLY (even CREATIVELY) be charged against the numismatic division IS charged against it and appears in the pricing. 'Twas not ever so, back in the day. It is now. The idea is to have the taxpayers on the hook for NOTHING for the numismatic division whatsoever, and for collectors to pay out the wazoo as a result. Don't you feel good knowing not one red cent of your federal tax bill goes to the Mint's numismatic offerings? Hmmm?

I highly recommend using the Mint's website for more than ordering. There are reports to be found in there. I read them - cover to cover, line by line.

The most recent accounting change happened when clad commem halves jumped from just a tad over 10 bucks to well over 20.

 

I'd say, maybe a little too creatively. The bottom line is actual costs, other than silver, probably has not increased significantly. I can't believe every cost the mint incurred wasn't allocated to these coins in earlier years. What is the source of your contention, do you have a cite/link?

 

The Mint's annual reports. I don't archive links. "I don't roll like that." I read stuff and remember it. Old school.

 

Then explain non-silver clad price increases which, on a percentage basis, DWARF the silver ones. This is the federal government we're talkin' here! You know, UNIONS and stuff. Fancy schmancy obscenely expensive Swiss CNC machines, mondo-huge expensive specialty coin presses. The sky is the limit, dude.

Look at a date set of bullion ASE's. The date they went all frosty marks a HUGE cost increase event.

 

I've read the mint's annual reports, I don't remember the kind of detail one would need to compare multi year cost allocations. Hmm, was your assertion internet baloney?

 

Yeah, they're really gouging on the half dollars, it should be silver at their price. So, you're saying, they're wasting costs on technology that produces lower quality coins? I don't know, it's not beyond the government to waste money, but, hard to believe this new technologies doesn't produce coins cheaper & faster, they sure look like it.

 

Either way, the customer sees a larger markup for a product that is no better quality than previous issues ====> Just one reason for lower sales.

Of course other reasons for low sales include some lousy designs and dislike for the program being honored. I like these reasons =====> low mintage. Like I've always said, they could put a turd on a coin and if it were low enough mintage, it would sell for moon money.

 

Have you LOOKED at recent year commem halves? The quality is UNPRECEDENTED! Designs, I can't speak to. Meh on steroids. But the execution has NEVER been THIS good.

By the way, probably the BIGGEST reason for the Mint price increases in the last few years can be traced to implementation of the "PAYGO" Act of 2010.

 

I've ordered many multiples of every modern commem since 1982, I see the quality declining. I ordered the Boys Town unc dollar several times over the last year and had to return more than half of them. Granted, in the very early days of the program, the quality wasn't great, but somewhere in the middle, I received mostly ms70's, in the last several years, I return more than I keep and I only return if they're less than ms69's.

Aside from the commems, look at the Satin Unc Sets. Toward the end of the program, the quality went through the floor.

 

I can honestly report I have not received even ONE commem half in the last 10 years that wasn't, in my opinion, AT LEAST a 69. I can't even imagine what kind of mess a 68 might even be. I NEVER get them slabbed. I can't imagine a world in which I'd want to.

 

Yep, sure did, but I diagnosed the problem as primarily packaging process issues in those semi-hard sheets. YUCK! The underlying coins, once you subtracted obvious packaging process damage, seemed pretty nice.

 

I don't slab them either, I'm waiting for the old days, when collectors trusted their own grading skills, a small market at this time. Less than 69 = visible with the naked eye, scratches, dings and those cleaning solution brown spots.