Why the heck would they make the denomination $100 for a one ounce coin? That makes no sense. Good grief, at least keep consistency and make all one ounce gold coins the same nominal value. I kept looking to see if it was a 2 ounce coin. The reverse looks fine, the obverse looks like a lady from the 1960's playing Roman dress up. Lame.
On the fence. Not sure I like the design and that's a lot of 'jing' to part with on something that I'm not really in love with.
I'm with you. I do not love it, and do not feel like it will go up in value. However, I would have for it to take off like the last one, and I didn't get one.
I had the UHR for a few years and then released it back into 'collector circulation'. With the proceeds I bought more commems.........
Even more, why bother to put a denomination on it at all? It is NOT a coin; it is a bullion round--nothing more.
In TC's thread I said "I'm liking it more as I look at it and realize it's an updated version of the original St.G -- Full Liberty figure with torch (flag added), with her olive branch moved to the reverse in the westward flying eagle's talons." All the initials on it would seem to indicate it was designed by committee. In my view it's an interesting coin of our time with a nod to the past.
Let me offend half the members here, this is modern, mass produced, bullion crap being sold as a collectible. I don't consider anything with a mintage of "however many we think we can sell + 40%" as collectible. It is pretty and it is gold so if you like it, go for it but for me this is another giant No.