Reply to Thread

Message:: [QUOTE="tedmurlap, post: 1092983, member: 29006"]Soaring Eagle,Your quote "a specialized minting process, which begins by manually feeding burnished coin blanks into presses fitted with special dies. The coin is struck multiple times so the softly frosted, yet detailed"refers to proof coins. I'm not talking about proof coins.For the plain bullion coins I'm talking about, remember the actual numbers: five cents per golden dollar covers ALL of the mint's costs for it except for the raw metals, but the mint claims that covering a gold eagle's costs requires 800 times as much money. Besides that, my point isn't the absolute costs, but that the fact that the mint's claimed costs for gold eagles have far outpaced inflation over the past decade, and that the mint's own statements that the price it charges for gold eagles is proportional to the costs of the raw metals, indicate that the mint is exceeding the prices which it's authorized to charge.  I didn't say the mint is ripping us off. In fact its coins are priced competitively with private gold rounds, such as the apmex rounds which GDJMSP pointed out here in another thread. The difference is that apmex is authorized to make a profit on its rounds, but the mint is not authorized to make a profit on gold eagles.  Soaring Eagle and JeffB,Yes, securing gold costs a lot of money. That's just another one of the mint's expenses. Securing more gold because there are more coins doesn't affect the per-coin expense. Securing more value because the price of gold goes up does increase the per-coin expense, but at a far lower rate than linear proportion, so this doesn't justify the mint's linearly proportional increase in coin prices.  Medoraman,Thank you for addressing the actual issue I raised! (You're the only person to have done so.) As saddening as your explanation is, it's still probably the right one.[/QUOTE]

Log in or Sign up

Reply to Thread

Useful Searches