A commemorative set i can get behind...

http://www.coinnews.net/2015/06/19/us-mint-2016-centennial-gold-coin-mock-ups/

"...24-karat gold coins to commemorate the centennial designs of the 1916 Mercury dime, 1916 Standing Liberty quarter, and 1916 Walking Liberty half-dollar."

"...it appears that the U.S. Mint is leaning heavily toward business strikes only, meaning no proof or uncirculated versions."

Depending on how they look once they are minted, I might want one of each. They'll be esspensive tho...

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I like this idea. And having the sizes approximate the original coins makes it very attractive. wonder what the target prices will be?
The only downside is that you know they will be hawked on the TV shopping networks for 2-3x times the issue price

 

So, the mint still has to admit defeat and can only make money by reproducing old coins. Haven't they beat this horse to death with reusing WL half, SG double eagle, and buffalo nickel designs already?

Good god, are we so pathetic that two entire generations of artists are simply incapable of producing anything of artistic merit? I say that because its not true. We have fabulous artists in this country, but a horrific mint. They go through multiple rounds of committees for "input", (of course you know every brilliant idea has always come from a committee), and then produce the resulting artistically inferior design in the lowest possible relief, using computer gimmicks to cheaply replicate things like frosting on proof coins. Then, of COURSE, the problem has to be our artists just suck and that is why no one buys their crap products except for tv pitchmen using TPG grades to overly hype and screw the public.

How about they let real artists produce stunning original designs, produce the coins in the relief the artist intended, and, heaven forbid, produce products that collectors love and will buy instead of cheaply hawking old designs and by definition lower the value of older coins produced in the past.

I know, I am a dreamer......

 

I agree wholeheartedly! But let us not forget the dummies in congress that won't act to change coinage designs, including the stupid law pushed thru by the Virginia delegation to require that only Jefferson could be on the nickel in perpetuity.

 

I was sent a survey from the mint recently about these coins ... they said the price would be based on current gold prices at the time they are offered, but based on current gold prices the dime would be $170, the quarter would be $375 and the half dollar would be $790. They are considering a 3 coin set and if they offered it it would be priced at $1375 ... they are also considering a "special packaging" that could add $20-$40 more dollars to the price. I told them I don't want their "special packaging" and that the standard box for a $1 extra would suffice.

 

Good man. I'm interested in coins, not wood and velvet. If I want a fancy box, I'll go to a fancy-box specialist.

 

I agree wholeheartedly as well here.

But, I do wonder this...even if Congress could quit stepping on their own....well this is a family venue...so I'll say get out of the way of their own egos, even if the artists were given true full reign in designs, and even if the designs were to harken back to the allegorical representations of Lady Liberty on our coinage, I wonder if the product would be as beautiful as the original pieces. I wonder, just how much the modern mechanics of coin production would keep what would be minted from being as beautiful as what once was.

Maybe its in the eye of the beholder, but to me, sure the designs of our old coinage are beautiful and nothing has come close since, but it was also the variation of production, die polish lines, the old die cracks, the die gouges, the truly doubled dies due to double squeezing while creating the working dies, true mint luster of the old gold, silver and copper coinage that made\makes the old stuff so interesting and beautiful. We all know that the creation of hubs, master dies, working hubs and working dies is all together different. In fact, I think I was reading somewhere that in some cases we go straight from computer design to working hub. All the in between is no longer done. Master hubs are CNC routed now rather than pressed from master dies, which were pressed from a master hub, which was created from a portrait lathe. All this is done to reduce the human error element.

I know our coinage today can exhibit some of these variations but it just seems to me that as time has gone on and technology has "improved" you do get closer to a "perfect" coin, which leaves less room for errors and variety...and it seems to take the spice out of our coinage.

Just my thoughts.

 

The public wants the old design and there are many that never seen them before so it's new to many

 

I do notice they have the gold weight and purity struck on them .

 

It would be nice if they sold them individually too , as I'd be interested in the SLQ , in the '16 design .

 

Might be more interest if they were done in the original silver rather than gold. As such I have no interest in the set whatsoever.

 

I might have interest if they struck alternative designs instead. I don't care so much about the metal, but would be more interested in other designs, or maybe even a earlier sketch, of what the artist envisioned before the mint got a hold of their design.

 

The mock ups look OK, and even though I'm looking forward to the set I'm not expecting them to look fantastic. Anyone who's looked at a recent gold eagle in the smaller sizes should be able to get an idea what these are going to look like. These designs aren't going to look good flat and lifeless imo, which even the current proof gold eagles suffer from. My mint survey gave the impression they were considering gold and platinum offerings both as separate coins and 3 coin sets and different finishes despite what the article says. Does anyone really think the mint isn't going to milk these and produce them in all kinds of finishes? They should have gotten legislation to mint them in the original 90% silver. Or at least mint them as medals in silver and remove the denominations for that matter.

 

???

 

The Mint says, "...Another goal of the Mint is to match each gold coin to the size and diameter of their companion silver coin from 1916."

This being the case, the gold coins won't be any more difficult to look at than the original silver issues. If the mint is true to its word, the diameters will be the same as the original but the thicknesses will have to be be adjusted to acheive the 1/10, 1/4 and 1/2 ounce targets for the three. They may wind up thinner and more fragile.

 

I think they can mint them in 90% silver. They can make it some kind of commemorative coin or a low mintage bullion coin.

 

Except the minting process is completely different than it was when the originals were minted. They may get the size and weight correctly matching the originals but the relief is what's going to matter. Judging by the low reliefs they produce for even the proof gold eagles; which started around the same time they started producing the 'snakeskin' look proofs. I personally don't believe they will mint these coins any differently and they will have that same flat low relief computer designed look.

 

They cannot without legislation allowing them to do so. They could probably mint medals in the design but not actual silver coinage.

 

Oh, man, I would love to see them use the SLQ pattern with the dolphins, or any of the WL or Mercury patterns.

 

Why gold? These 20th century classic coins were issued in .900 fine silver for circulation!

The prospect of a gold Mercury dime, gold Standing Liberty quarter and gold Walking Liberty half dollar is counter-intuitive, especially when the Walking Liberty design was and still is in extensive use since 1986 on the obverse of the silver Eagle! We also have to remember the gold Kennedy half dollar has been a moderately successful coin issue with lots of controversy.

Keeping the possibility of issuing the coins only in an uncirculated finish is fine. They just have to be silver.

There is a "silver lining" if you will pardon the pun, it does get away from the prospect of issuing laser-frosted proofs for these centennial designs which was impossible 99 years ago and would not look nice on such classics (modern Eagles exempted). Matte proofs, similar to the era, would be a more appropriate proof finish.