| Author |
 Replies: 154 / Views: 20,881 |
|
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
13014 Posts |
Quote:
The fact is that none of the sets minted over 200,000 if memory serves. They both finished around 230k when all the cancellations were counted. Maybe a little less but both got over 200k. Quote:
That does not change how many were minted. The 2011 set was capped at 100,000. The 12 and 13 sets had mintages of what, 50,000 more or so? All the squealing heard from people over the 2011 set at 100,00 and a mere 50,000 more engenders the sky is falling responses and market influence? Really? Sorry, but that to me is jacked up thinking. They had mintages of over 100k more. The people that complained were likely the same people who stayed away when it was released this way, they were just mad they didnt get a sure winner. I was never one of those people. Mintage really doesn't matter though. If I have 10 of something no one wants it doesn't matter, just like if I have 1 million of something that 2 million people want those 1 million will sell very well. The 01 buffalo has a mintage of almost twice as much and sells well over issue price. The gold spouse coins have a non existent mintage but dont have premiums reflecting that. Mintage only matters in the sense that lower can mean its easier for supply to outstrip the demand, but in the end the demand has to be greater than the supply. The mintage itself wasnt the issue, if they said limited to 200k it would have been a hotter item. Not limiting it cheapens the product which is really what the biggest issue was. The point about the resellers was that easily 1/3rd of the mintage (likely more) was put right on the market for a product perceived to be easy to acquire in the first place. The significant percentage of the mintage being bought for resale when the people who wanted it already bought it is reflected in the nonexistent price movement. I actually believe the real demand is somewhere right around 100k for the die hard must have crowd. Theres probably another 100k that like it and want to buy it but arent in any rush. Over that youre mostly talking impulse purchases or the having 1 is enough crowd as its obvious at this point that most ASE collectors dont feel the need to add them to their set. Quote:
A curved baseball mitt coin? YES, that is a gimmick. That is pretty much the definition of gimmick. You stand alone on that one, everyone else sees it as the commemorative with a unqiue design which it is. The Limited Silver Proof sets on the other hand that would be a gimmick. I dont have a problem with those at all, but if were throwing around the gimmick word lets be accurate with what it lands on. Quote:
The only people who will have any interest in this product at all are baseball fans. And a year or two from now it will only be numismatic baseball fans. About the same as pet rocks. Aside from an PM value. More like the 01 buffalo where a year from now it will still have a strong premium from its beautiful design of a highly popular issue. Its nice to see some excitement about a commemorative for once after the last two absolute duds that have been released with that awful generic design. Quote:
I have seen an awful lot of squealing about the limits the mint set on the coin. Limiting sales and mintages Which should be ignored. That just means the mint put out a winner. Things that require effort not only end up being more valuable but end up more satisfying too. If their goal is to destroy any form of modern collecting and they want to see their sales consistently mimic the Civil Rights dollar asking congress for a mint to demand on Commemeratives would accomplish that goal. If they want people to actually care then they need to stick with the limits and keep picking great designs like this one Edited by basebal21
04/11/2014 11:21 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
899 Posts |
It should be pointed out that the people didn't like the household limit the mint implemented... the reason was because most thought they left the limit too high. The large resellers still managed to manipulate their purchases via surrogate buyers. I think many would prefer a graduated purchase limit. Instead of starting with 50 and 100 coin purchase limits - start with 1 or even 5 and go up weekly, and after 4 weeks remove the limits.
|
|
Valued Member
United States
406 Posts |
Nearly a month has gone by. Back to topic, has anyone heard any updates on what the Mint is actually planning to launch? Is the gold Kennedy 1964-2014 confirmed? Other options being considered? Exciting times lie ahead, I hope.    Given our extensive Kennedy half Registry Sets I wonder how the various issues will fit, or not, into the current set definitions. Best Regards,  George |
|
Bedrock of the Community
 United States
12845 Posts |
From one of the weekly coin emails I get: Quote:
Later in the year, the U.S. Mint will present a special 50th anniversary 1964-2014 Kennedy half-dollar in 24-karat gold. The Mint released mockup images of the gold coin in early February. The bureau will also offer unique 50th anniversary sets with the coins produced at different U.S. Mint facilities and in varying finishes and compositions. I don't see anything on the Mint website yet though. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
730 Posts |
Coin World sent out weekly update stating that the gold will be released physically on August 5th at the ANA World's Fair of Money in Rosemont IL. Three quarter ounce. 1964 higher relief obverse. Dual dated. Also 2 special sets with various mint marks and finishes. A 4 coin set and a 2 coin set. The 4 coin set will not be released at Rosemont (Proof, Rev Proof, Enhanced Uncirc, Uncirc). Other details as to when regular ordering is to begin, mintage limits (if any) etc. not yet released.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1795 Posts |
I'm buying all the mint's Kennedy offerings. Not thinking of the potential ownership down the road but just because I like the Kennedy Coin.
|
|
Valued Member
United States
406 Posts |
I'm in for the whole shootin' match too! So far I have five of the two-piece clad sets and total six of the gold Kennedys.
Best Regards,
George
|
|
Valued Member
United States
84 Posts |
Quote: Given our extensive Kennedy half Registry Sets I wonder how the various issues will fit, or not, into the current set definitions. Best Regards, George George, Considering that PCGS does not include the 1964 Accented Hair Proof or the 1998 S silver Mattie Finish in the Basic Set(s) but in the Major Variety Set(s), I imagine PCGS will treat the new issues of 2014 in the same manor. Personally, I would like PCGS to consider the two coin (P & D) "50th Anniversary Kennedy half dollar Uncirculated Coin Set" treated as a Type 2 and the coins found in regular Mint Sets, rolls and bags treated as Type 1 and require them both in the Basic Set. The 1964 â€" 2014 W Gold Kennedy half dollar, I have mixed feeling regarding inclusion in the PCGS Registry. I ordered one on August 5th and it arrived last week. The coin is simply gorgeous and I will probably order some more before the year is over. Some folks collect Kennedy half dollars not just because they like the design but because they are affordable. If PCGS makes the gold half dollar part of the Registry set(s), that might discourage some collectors from continuing or collecting the series. Right now, I'm leaning towards the idea of PCGS having two set(s) in the Registry for those sets which the gold Proof coin would fit; one with the gold and the other set without the gold (this way the individual collector can decide how they want to collect the series). Congratulations on getting the "Best of the Registry" award this year at PCGS on your set "Kennedy Half Dollars Complete Variety Set, Circulation Strikes (1964 â€" Present"). I realize that your set reflects the many years of dedication in searching for and funds tied up to put together a set of this magnitude, job well done. JMHO on the subject, Tim |
|
Valued Member
United States
406 Posts |
Thanks for your note, Tim. I actually tied with another Top Notch set that you know well, so the congratulations should be shared. And I think the only plaque I am getting is on my teeth. Oh well. I don't disagree with your sentiments regarding inclusion or not of the gold Kennedys from the Registry Sets, but I'm not sure that PCGS has ever been that democratic in their approach to set definitions. I guess we shall see with time. The gold Kennedys are certainly outliers: I can't think of another modern parallel to a gold striking of a series that was previously all silver ... I suppose way back when, the introduction of the 1915-S Pan Pac fifties to the commemorative series, which was previously either silver half dollars or gold dollars, was somewhat similar. Just my opinion as well, and you know what they say about those ... Best Regards, George |
|
Valued Member
United States
84 Posts |
Quote:
The gold Kennedys are certainly outliers: I can't think of another modern parallel to a gold striking of a series that was previously all silver ... I suppose way back when, the introduction of the 1915-S Pan Pac fifties to the commemorative series, which was previously either silver half dollars or gold dollars, was somewhat similar. George, With the early commemorative 1915 S Pan - Pac coins, at least the Mint changed the design, size and denomination between the silver and gold pieces. The Norse Medals the Mint kept the same design; silver was thin or thick plus a gold issue. The 1922 Grant the Mint kept the same design for the gold as the silver but the size and denominations were different. Rumor has it that the Mint produces some 2000 Sac dollars with the base metal being gold (not just the color) but I noticed that those are not required in the Registry Set(s). Yes, I really like the Kennedy series and have been know to put my money were my mouth is on the subject. But I really think the US Mint "messed up" on this one with the gold half dollar. The US Mint should have treated the gold Kennedy the same way they did with the 1922 Grant commemorative by having the gold version a different size and denomination. I mean for three quarter of an ounce of gold, it should have been either a ‘TEN DOLLAR' or 'FIFTEEN DOLLAR' face value coin. If the US Mint wanted to make a 'HALF DOLLAR' face value Kennedy coin out of gold then it should have been half the size of the early ‘ONE DOLLAR' gold coins. What is the US Mint going to do in 2017 with the 100 anniversary of JFK'S birth coming up, make a ‘HALF DOLLAR' out of platinum or maybe have a diamond embedded in the back of the head denoting the entry wound of one of the fatal shots? Where does the US Mint draw the line? Where do collectors draw the line? I bought one of the gold Kennedy half dollars the first day the US Mint sold them and it sure is pretty, before the year is over I may buy another one or two of them but in my opinion these coins are really pushing the envelope on what should be included in a complete collection of the series. Again, just my humble opinion on the subject, Tim Edited by taclough
08/29/2014 12:08 am
|
|
Valued Member
United States
406 Posts |
Good points all, Tim. It is getting weird at the Mint. I wonder if the Washington quarter folks are having trouble pushing those five-ounce pure-silver America the Beautiful hockey pucks into their album holes as well, denomination 25 cents.  I too thought the proper denomination (face value) for the gold Kennedy would be much higher. Best Regards, George |
|
Valued Member
United States
84 Posts |
Quote: It is getting weird at the Mint. I wonder if the Washington quarter folks are having trouble pushing those five-ounce pure-silver America the Beautiful hockey pucks into their album holes as well, denomination 25 cents. I too thought the proper denomination (face value) for the gold Kennedy would be much higher. George, That is a great point, I never thought about it but you are 100 percent correct. Those five ounce pucks are the same design and denomination as the other " Washington quarter Commemorative Series" coins. If PCGS puts the gold Kennedy half dollar into the competitive sets then I will have to give B.J. or Cosetta Robbins a call and ask about the consistency of inclusion based on the "America the Beautiful Hockey Pucks". Right now, I'm thinking the best way for PCGS to handle the 1964 - - " 2014 W gold Proof Kennedy half dollar in the Registry set(s) is to treat it the same way that NGC treats the Norse - - " American Medal in the "1892 - - " 1954 Complete Silver Commemoratives Set" by having a slot in the set for the coin / medal but no points. This way the individual collector can decide whether or not to include the gold coin in their set(s) with no penalty if they decide not too. It will be interesting to see how PCGS handles this situation. Tim Edited by taclough
08/29/2014 11:40 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1795 Posts |
 Got mine today. Beautiful coin and packed in a really nice box but for the price it should be. If I do submit it to a grading company PCGS or NPG I have no reservations that it should be a 70 Ultra Cameo thats how good it looks and worse case 69 Ultra Cameo. Hopefully I can keep it in the mint packaging and buy a slabbed one later on at a reasonable price. I paid 1282.45 from the mint. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1037 Posts |
Edited by welder
09/04/2014 6:30 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1795 Posts |
I've bought all the mint's 2014 offerings of the 50th Anniversary Kennedy. I very well believe that they will all be highly collectable and key issues of the set. I also believe that the Kennedy set won't be complete without these included.
|
| |
Replies: 154 / Views: 20,881 |
First Page
Previous Page
Posted 04/12/2014 08:24 am
