Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;synoptic12, post: 1275874, member: 32885&quot;]<b>State quarter Guy (25th Anniversary)</b></p><p><br /></p><p>That was then, this is today. Your semi-thesis, is realistic in the realm of reality. However, you have equated your figure with percentage issues, adjusted to the premium expected. This, very well could be somewhat unrealistic, due to the declining of silver. If you have read my recent &#039;thread&#039;, I &quot;estimated&quot; the set at $279.95, &quot;including the wood box&quot;; really! I also made mention that silver would decline prior to the release of this set, in which it did, significantly. This, by no means would be an excuse for the U.S. Mint to lower cost, but the U.S. Mint must stay in certain boundaries. The bottom line is that there is a limited number of sets being produced, the U.S. Mint knows who the &quot;collectors&quot; are (players), and for that specific reason, I would imagine everyone paying a premium. They are in the business to make money. I have also stated in my prior thread that silver would increase after the issue of this set, yet to be realized or seen. Anyways, let me present a question to you. Just a thought, only a thought. Is it at all possible that the U.S. Mint will suspend indefinitely the production of the silver proof, and uncirculated eagles, if the metals remain low, below, i.e. (market)? Also, have you ever heard of the U.S. Mint stopping production of certain coins, (such as the 2011 eagles), and &#039;melt&#039; the remaining sum? I equate this,as to a market that is not able to increase in value. A reply would be most appreciated.[/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