Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;brg5658, post: 1259264, member: 29751&quot;]I&#039;ve heard some complaints from long-time Canadian collectors in the same vein.&nbsp; I think this is a classic example of what a previous poster stated as &quot;the grass always seems greener on the other side&quot;.&nbsp; In fact, in another post on another forum site the Royal Canadian Mint was compared to the Franklin Mint (not by me) in that they continue to create less than thoughtful commemorative coins, and they spend more time marketing their multiple strikes of coins than doing the proper design homework (again these sentiments are not my own, as I only dabble in Canadian coins).</p><p><br /></p><p>Now for my own thoughts, I will say that I think there was a huge shift in mentality of the US Mint when they introduced the first &quot;commemorative&quot; type circulation coins of the State Quarters Series in 1999.&nbsp; That move was a substantial one, now producing 5 designs of the quarter in a single calendar year.&nbsp; I was less than impressed with many of the designs (Wyoming, Ohio, and New Mexico come to mind).&nbsp; No longer was the mint focused on minting a classic design, but was aiming to expand the collector base (and ultimately increasing seignorage profits).&nbsp; The pinnacle of this mentality occurred in 2009, when the mint produced 4 cent design, 1 nickel design, 1 dime design, 6 quarter designs, 1 half design, and 5 $1 coin designs (for a whopping 18 different circulating coin designs -- 36 different coins if you separate them into mint marks).&nbsp; Because the mint also was producing the &quot;Satin Finish&quot; collector mint coins in the year 2009, the different designs, mint marks, and finishes (business vs. satin) accounted for 72 different non-proof coins.&nbsp; Needless to say, that kind of output tends to splinter one&#039;s attention into too many pieces.</p><p><br /></p><p>Nonetheless, there are still a few &quot;winners&quot; in my mind.&nbsp; Maybe I&#039;m in the minority, but I like the Sacagawea (and more recent Native American) Dollar series.&nbsp; I thought it was a shame when they supplemented $1 coin production with the somewhat imperialistic Presidential $1 series, and the designs of the Pres. $1 are mostly zombie-looking spaghetti-haired portraits that leave much to be desired.&nbsp; But, the Sac $1 series I like.&nbsp; I also like the new Shield cent.&nbsp; Many call it too simplistic, but honestly it&#039;s no more simplistic than the IHC reverse...and sometimes simple (but well designed) is good.&nbsp; Finally, the Roosevelt dime design has been with us unchanged since 1946, and the Kennedy half dollar has gone unchanged since 1964.&nbsp; So, these two are &quot;classics&quot; among the moderns that I personally like.</p><p><br /></p><p>All in all, I think there is something for everyone in the US Moderns.&nbsp; I don&#039;t like them all, but there are some diamonds in the rough that when you focus on them (as a set) they become very interesting.[/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