When the program with the new finish began in 2005, I ordered 15 of the Uncirculated Mint Sets. Upon examination, I found that the vast majority of the 2005 coins would grade MS69 or MS70. It was then that I decided I would not want to collect the Mint Sets. If all of the coins were going to be near-perfect, what would be the point? They would be as common as dirt. Lately, some people have mentioned that the quality of the Mint Sets seems to have taken a nosedive. Would any of you who still collect these sets mind giving us some feedback on them? Has the quality really gone downhill? Are any of you submitting them for grading? If so, would you mind sharing the results of your submissions? Thanks! Chris
I have noticed that the quality has gone down...but don't know if it is poor enough to pique your interest!
It's idle curiosity more than anything. I'm just wondering if the supposed drop in quality can be substantiated by submission results. Chris
Doubtful. For one, submissions seem to indicate quite the opposite. But that calls into question the grading of the TPGs. Back in '05 69s were the exception not the rule. prior to '09 they were pretty much unheard of. Today fully 50-60% of submissions result in a 69 in some cases. That seems to indicate one of two things - either quality has drastically improved. Or grading standards have gotten a whole lot looser. I don't think quality has improved much in the last 5 years. Given your own comments, it has gotten worse.
Prior to 2005, the best chance for getting a high-grade business strike was via the Uncirculated Mint Sets. You were very lucky if you got an MS68. I realize that with the implementation of the satin finsh also came "special handling" procedures which were only surpassed by those used for proof coins. So, it came as no surprise to me that MS69's would become more prevalent in that first year. But, I've heard more than one person here say that the quality has gotten worse, and I was wondering if those comments were just casual and unsubstantiated or if they were supported by actual submission results. If the quality has gotten worse, is it because the Mint is tiring a little of the "special handling" they once required for the satin finish mint sets? Is it because the cost for processing them by hand has increased and they want to cut back on the costs at the expense of the collector? I'd really like to hear from those who have submitted sets, 2006 or later, to see what trend there may be. Chris
Haven't submitted any sets, but I've looked at a lot of them. Seemed like every 2005 & 2006 set I looked at had at minimum 68 & 69 coins. Starting in 2007 the coins looked like they where handled like business strikes (lots of bag marks/breaks in the satin finish), especially the halves & dollars.
But it really didn't - in that first year. Yeah, there were more 69s than there were before, but when there weren't any before that's not hard to do. In '05 people complained all over the forums about the poor quality of the mint sets. A large portion of them didn't even have the satin finish because the mint was over-using the dies that first year. It really wasn't until '06 and '07 after the mint had started listening to all of the complaints that the quality improved. Now has it gone hill since then ? Maybe. All I can say is that I have not seen the complaints voiced that I used to see. But what I have seen is a huge increase in the numbers of 69s in the pop reports. But like I said, I attribute that increase more to the TPGs loosening standards than I do an in increase in quality from the mint. What I'm telling you is that the pop reports would be a very bad gauge to use in order to judge the quality of the coins for that reason. The best way to judge the quality would be to go to a show and look at a whole lot of sets with your own eyes.
When I searched my 2005 sets, I set aside about 175 coins (out of 300) that will grade either 69 or 70. I was so surprised that I reexamined all of them under the microscope to make sure I wasn't missing anything. I never bothered submitting them because I figured the results would be the same for most everyone else. If what you say is true about the overall poor quality of the 2005 sets, maybe I should consider submitting them. You mentioned that the satin finish dies were overused in 2005, and I just wanted to add that I noticed that a lot of the business strikes for 2005 were produced using worn satin finish dies that had been polished. The business strikes were terrible looking. Chris
Exacly, I've noticed a lot of circulation pieces that look like they're from worn satin dies. Kinda sucks if you have one of those and you're trying to show someone the difference between a satin and a business strike. Maybe the mint will confirm that someday, like I think they did about using worn proof dies for business strikes for other series.
The only difference there is the surface finish of the fields. Other than that you could not tell one from the other anyway. If memory serves they did confirm it.
