Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;benveniste, post: 8236438, member: 25547&quot;]I have a 2-3 dozen of them, including an 1984-D and the proof 1995-1996 Olympic set.&nbsp; I don&#039;t think it&#039;s just that the coins are common.&nbsp; After all, many of the $10 First Spouse coins have tiny mintages and they aren&#039;t popular either.</p><p><br /></p><p>Two of the reasons are fatigue and pricing.&nbsp; If I&#039;m reading my history correctly, buyer fatigue was also an issue in the 1930&#039;s for classic commemoratives, as the mint just kept pumping out the things.&nbsp; And with, what 200 or so issues?&nbsp; It&#039;s just too daunting a task to be a completist.&nbsp; Another possible reason is the aging of the hobby.&nbsp; </p><p><br /></p><p>But the main reason I see is design, and that comes in several flavors. A few coins are simply unattractive (Jackie Robinson $5).&nbsp; Others are impossibly busy (2015 Marshalls Service).&nbsp; Still others rely on contrast between polished and matte areas to make up for the lack of relief (1995-1996 Olympic Set).&nbsp; In some cases, the 3-coin sets lacked design coherency (Mt. Rushmore comes to mind).&nbsp; Others are simply strange to my eye.&nbsp; Some have two, three, or even four sets of detracting initials on them.</p><p><br /></p><p>Take the 2011-S $1 US Army coin as an example.&nbsp; On the obverse, due to the lack of perspective and relief, you have what appear to be soldiers sharing their body from the shoulders down.&nbsp; Plus you have a globe in the background that&#039;s somehow missing any land masses.&nbsp; The helmets are of two different designs for no apparent reason.&nbsp; On the reverse, you have two concentric circles, 20 words, and an eagle that looks squashed horizontally to make room for another design component.&nbsp; Counting the mint mark, there are 3 or 4 fonts used, and the obligatory 2 sets of initials.&nbsp; And once again design coherency across the set is missing.&nbsp; </p><p><br /></p><p>But my main beef is that with the exception of those derived from classic coins, almost all of them look like they were designed by committee.&nbsp; That&#039;s only partially correct -- they were vetted by at least <b>two </b>committees, and as far as I can tell the committees only got to look at drawings rather than minted patterns.&nbsp; The WWI Centennial $1 coin chose a great theme, but apparently the committee felt that the barbed wire had to be reduced to an afterthought, and the pose of the doughboy is anatomically bizarre if not outright impossible.&nbsp; (Not to mention the 4 sets of initials).</p><p><br /></p><p>If you disagree with my opinion of the coins, I&#039;m cool with that.&nbsp; But perhaps it&#039;s telling that &quot;reruns&quot; like the &quot;Buffalo Dollar&quot; or the 2021 Silver Dollars sold out quickly while so many other issues didn&#039;t come close to their limits.[/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