Reply to Thread

Message:: [QUOTE="Vess1, post: 7545980, member: 13650"]OMG!! OMG!!  LOL  you guys make me laugh.   That 2.67 grams (0.0858 troy oz) of missing copper is just devastating to so many....   That just ruins it! Wa!  AWaa!  AWhaa!  LOL      Again, I would have liked them either way.  I accept the fact that the mint took a hard fork in the road and went with all .999 for everything two years ago and that's just what it is now.    I could MAYBE understand the anger if 90% blanks were sitting there and they decided to instead go .999.   But probably still wouldn't be upset over it.    For a 100th anniversary I think anything goes, as we saw with the 2016s which I was a fan of.   They're using pure silver!  It's not like it's pot metal!    People love .999 ASEs.  These are going to be similar.   I would say original composition is the least of the real issues with this release.  But some people gotta find a reason to whine and justify to themselves not buying them.   Ok, do what you gotta do to convince yourself.   Overpriced?  Meh...yeah, ok.  Maybe they are but look around!  WTH isn't overpriced these days?    Maybe I've just been beaten down by price increases but I was happy they're going to be released under a hundred.  People are going to pay much more than that for them on the aftermarket......soooo I guess they're not really overpriced either...     Some people are just stuck in 1997 OR, think that every mint issue is supposed to match spot price of silver to some extent when it's released.   I agree, it'd be great but those days are gone.[/QUOTE]

Log in or Sign up

Reply to Thread

Useful Searches