| Author |
 Replies: 27 / Views: 4,180 |
Page 2 of 2
|
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2271 Posts |
Quote:
I think it's a very low premium. For $28.95 for the 2015 you get $13.82 in face value of coins which is a 2.09 markup. OK, that doesn't sound so great, but if you buy from dealers who pull them from rolls, you won't get them as cheap. If you have a connection to a store or bank you might be able to get some of them at face value, but not all of them. Add to this the fact that the coins are struck to higher pressure and are generally in better condition than the ones you can get newly minted out of circulation. So I think the mint sets are a fair value. I agree and think your latter point is critically important even today that there are many Gems issued to circulation. The best examples are almost invariably found in mint sets. If you wanted to search rolls for something like a 2007-D dime you'd find that the rolls are difficult to obtain, are expensive, and Gems are few and far between. Older Gems can be ducedly difficult to find. I believe most mint sets are a steal so long as they aren't corroded or every coin in them isn't mediocre. Two mint sets out of three contain at least one Gem and some will have several. Collectiong moderns without mint sets is extremely difficult. Collecting only from mint sets is impossible. Time don't fly, it bounds and leaps.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2764 Posts |
I guess I have to go back and focus on cherry-pick mint sets from shows..... save the GEM, sell the rest as singles (to recover my cost) then start over again..... I have thought about this approach for sometime but never have the time & focus to do it. I also need the brain/knowledge of cladking (may be 25% would do)....hahaha
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2271 Posts |
Just picking mint sets doesn't really take any expertise. Just look for Gems. If a coin is well made and clean then it's a keeper. If it looks like junk and is all scratched up then it isn't. Most coins are in between and it will require a little experience to adjust your standards for the specific date/ mm.
As a rule of thumb if you aren't finding at least 2% keepers than tyour standards are too high and if you are keeping more than 5% (or so) your standards might be too low.
As a little tip, it's easier selling off the substandard ones if you toss out the 10 to 30% ugliest coins. Many of the coins have no market at all and the best bet is to haul them to the bank. If you're getting the sets at face value then there's no loss. If you buy only the nice sets then there are very few bad coins to get rid of.
Time don't fly, it bounds and leaps.
Edited by cladking
10/14/2015 5:54 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
4868 Posts |
I just scored on ebay... $17.99 for the 2011 mint set. After I put the prezzies in my change jar the set will only have cost $9.99! |
|
Moderator
 United States
188629 Posts |
Excellent!  |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4868 Posts |
I just wish the mint would go back to the old-style packaging. Much easier to open the sets or save singles w/o air leaks.
|
|
Moderator
United States
188629 Posts |
The old packaging was made to be cut part. It seems like the new OGP was made under the assumption that most people want to keep the sets intact, which I find very difficult to believe.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4868 Posts |
People have always busted open sets for high quality specimens for their albums. I believe Canada reverted back to the old packaging.
|
|
Moderator
United States
188629 Posts |
Exactly.  |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
717 Posts |
I would guess that the new packaging probably saved labor in some way, saving the mint $$ in the packaging area. No need to stuff individual sheets and COA's into an envelope, also coins are better protected for shipping, possibly reducing returns. I, for some reason, doubt that the concerns of collectors played any part in the change.
|
|
Moderator
United States
188629 Posts |
I cannot imagine the new OGP costing less than what used before, but I am not sure how they were shipped in the past; that may be something worth consideration.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1913 Posts |
I'm an industrial engineer. There's virtually no way the old packaging would cost more unless the mint was really doing something wrong. The coins would simply be placed on the plastic in their respective locations, another sheet of plastic would be placed on top, and finally a sealing machine would seal them in.
I agree that the old packaging is easier to remove the coins from, but the new packaging looks better and the coins are generally of higher quality.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
717 Posts |
My thought on saving labor was after the coins were sealed. The 2 sheets of coins, a COA, sometimes other forms or a protective cardboard piece are placed in an envelope. With the current packaging, once the coins are sealed in place, the packaging is complete. Eliminating the stuffing of the envelope. It was just a thought, I coach gymnastics, not an engineer. But I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night. :)
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1913 Posts |
For the volume they'd be running, they would almost certainly have a machine stuffing the envelopes. Then again, it is the government. They might make some sort of jobs program out of it.
|
|
Moderator
United States
188629 Posts |
I still think it is an interesting thought. Interesting thoughts are what power discussion. |
|
Page 2 of 2
|
Replies: 27 / Views: 4,180 |
Page 2 of 2
|
First Page
Posted 10/14/2015 3:09 pm
