Should the US Mint Reduce their Product Selection and Mintages?

I personally think they sell too many different types of coins. I would like to see the Mint reduce the number of different items and make the items higher quality. I would also like for them to reduce the mintage numbers of each item.

Yes all these things will substantially increase prices to maintain current revenue (or increase revenue), but I think that would be good. Anyone else agree?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I would also like to see them do away with 1 oz silver eagles and make 2 oz. Or both with overall reduced mintage.

 

Yes, I agree. However, I heard compelling arguments on both sides of the issue on a similar post recently. I am still somewhat on the fence, though, as to what I would most prefer from the mint. My favorite modern coins have been the state quarters, the 4 piece platinum set, and the 1986 statue of liberty set. How about you?

 

The issue is, I believe, one of legislation authorizing the mintings.

 

I do think they should reduce their offerings. I would like them to focus on new designs. I am not pleased they are trotting out old designs again. Enough already. We have the WLH in the form of an ASE, we have Gold Buffaloes and St. Gaudens.

If they increased prices so maintain a flat revenue (assuming they reduce offerings), then they would be hurting much of the collecting public.

You can't tell me there aren't talented artists available to come up with something new. I've liked some of the recent designs that were/are being considered for some of the bullion offerings.

 

no

 

What's the best thing for the mint to do to increase revenue for itself, or to generate want and value for the collector. I think those are two different approaches and answers. There is some common ground, just not enough of it. And then there are the politicians who are the overlords. They think in ways that are not always logical. I did not vote because I can't fully agree, either way, with the question.

 

To me, the reason I don't buy products from the mint is that I just don't like the designs.

Mintage, variety...these (to me) are meaningless if the coins are ugly and/or poorly made (just thinking of the new Kennedy Halves I used to buy in rolls that looked like they'd been thrown off the roof, picked up, and rolled before being sent to me.)

 

A "hell" to the "yes"

 

Yes on both counts. There was the day that the annual proof sets were a true event. Then the mint started producing a jillion of them a year. Today, a lot of them sell for virtually nothing and it would be hard to give some of them away.

 

No but yes they should cut down on the product selection. Montages mean little to me as a collector. I don't buy hoping one release will be scarce due to low mintage.

 

I don't really care what they make, I'm still only going to get what I want and leave the rest for the flippers. I would rather that they went back to the old way of making proof coins though. The laser etch trash that they make now is a far cry from the from the beautiful proofs that they were able to produce in the 1830s.

 

99.9% of the problem with the US Mint, what they produce and how many is due to all coinage must be signed into law. And that means Congress is involved. I'm not trying to be political but that's the way it works and as we all know, anytime Congress is involved things are screwed up.

 

To those that want to reduce the number of items that the mint sells, which products do you think should be eliminated?

 

I would imagine many of the die engravers are now gone from the mint payroll. The mint looks for the fastest cheapest way to produce coins. Beauty and workmanship is no longer their criteria. I think this is part of the reason our new designs are so poor. The give up detail and appearance in favor of speed and die endurance, so they keep the looks of new coinage simple.

 

I will start this: Do away with uncirculated versions of their special proofs.

I concede there is little chance of that since Congress apparently wants the Mint to be a revenue source for the federal government.

 

Design is one thing, too many suits in the room for an artist to shine. But I was talking about the process of making a proof. They are doing a laser etch technique now which is designed to make every proof a cameo, but the cost of this is detail of the devices. To me this completely disregards the point of a proof coin. I would rather that they went back to the old way of making them and forget about the thought that every coin must be a cameo.

 

No. There is something for everybody. Don't like? Don't buy.

 

I can't help but to detect a certain amount of greed in this question. Who cares whether they sell 100 or 100000 of something except for the greedy. If you like it enough to justify the price, buy it. If 10 years down the road you see that everyone else likes it too, then you can decide if you still like it enough to keep.
On another note, I would like to see them revert back to true artistic design and get away from the computer generated stuff they sell now. They have no competition, so why is there a need to try and do it cheaper, it only makes for a cheap appearance.

 

Obviously if it's something you don't like then you don't buy it. Do you buy stuff you don't like? I don't.

Only talking about the exclusivity of the stuff I like enough to buy. Nothing wrong with saying you would like for a product to be more exclusive. Then I would like it more.