Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;Tjust, post: 1940373, member: 54632&quot;]I had an interesting situation with mintproducts recently.&nbsp; They have a product listed as a ATB Shenandoah &quot;Special specimen finish&quot;. Naturally this piqued my interest as maybe there were some shenandoah&#039;s with an alternate rarer finish (like the 2010 Grand Canyon) so I purchased one from MP at around $160 shipped (free shipping promo at the time). </p><p><br /></p><p>I receive it in great shape, and compared it to my US MINT version.....and no difference. I grabbed my loupe and studied the finish on both sides for a good 10 minutes until I was convinced they are identical. I then contacted MP to ask what gives.</p><p><br /></p><p>After 5 minutes of back and forth, it hit me that MP had probably listed the standard Mint vapor blast version as a &quot;Special specimen finish&quot;, which IMO is completely misleading.&nbsp; I guess their rationale is, compared to the bullion version, it&#039;s a special specimen finish. Either way, it should be listed as &quot;Uncirculated&quot; or simply &quot;Vapor blasted collectors version&quot;.&nbsp; The word specimen implies a one-off or not-intended-for-distribution product (at least to me).</p><p><br /></p><p>It was a little comical to hear the CS reps reasoning, such as &quot;Specimen means vapor blasted in the industry&quot;.&nbsp; She also quoted the mint verbiage about the vapor blasting process, I guess to imply the vapor blasting is what makes the coin a specimen. </p><p><br /></p><p>In any case, even though I have a sub for one puck at a time from the Mint, I figured I paid pretty much the same as the non sub price from the mint so nothing lost.&nbsp; I hope they change their labeling for the product.</p><p><br /></p><p>I guess I should have known this product can&#039;t be anything different from what&#039;s available from:</p><p><br /></p><p>-Price, at $159 it&#039;s pretty much retail, if it indeed was an alternate finish, it would have been priced much higher I&#039;m sure.</p><p><br /></p><p>-The earlier alternate light finishes occurred due to equipment retrofitting (vapor blasting meant for 3&quot; medals), so most likely this only occurred during that time period back in 2010 and once the proper equipment was implemented, the problem, most likely, will not be seen again.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in