| Author |
 Replies: 54 / Views: 6,317 |
|
|
|
Valued Member
Canada
135 Posts |
Quote:
In hand this coin feels good, and looks good. Amazing series. @Canadian_coins: couldn't agree more... I was a "late-adopter" of this series, but I'm glad I picked it up. The coins "feel" right, both in terms of size and weight, the theme is growing on me, and the coins look like "actual" coins (no color, no fancy shapes... just traditional coins). Edit: ...and forgot to mention - there's actually a Canadian tie-in with this contiguous theme. A huge plus for me! Unlike the $20 for $20 series which features themes all-over-the-map, or the Star Trek coins featuring questionable Canadian relevance, this series has a nicely shared "ecosystem" / "landscape" motif that is uniquely Canadian. Edited by Wandering Eskimo
08/19/2016 8:25 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2408 Posts |
Quote:
But what causes the black specs on the Queen, particularly her hair and necklace? Good eye. Yes, these are actually caused by smooth areas (missing frost). It is very difficult to see with the naked eye but the camera picked it up. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2408 Posts |
Quote:
@Canadian_coins: couldn't agree more... I was a "late-adopter" of this series, but I'm glad I picked it up. The coins "feel" right, both in terms of size and weight, the theme is growing on me, and the coins look like "actual" coins (no color, no fancy shapes... just traditional coins). We are aligned. Hopefully the RCM will continue the series. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2408 Posts |
Hi folks,
I just received the 2016 Charlton Standard Catalogue (Volume 2) and BTW what an amazing catalogue! Almost 500 pages with tons of info and beautiful images.
Interestingly, Charlton categorized $200 for $200 in the "coin section" while the $20 for $20 is in the bullion section.
That's when I realized that the $50 for $50, $100 for $100 and $200 for $200 do not have any mention of silver content while the $20 for $20 (and $25 for $25) have "FINE SILVER 9999" in the legend. I don't think it makes much difference in terms of their value... it's just an observation.
I am happy with the low mintage (19,695) of the first 2014 $200 for $200. Though I would have preferred < 5,000...
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
6768 Posts |
Quote:
I am happy with the low mintage (19,695) of the first 2014 $200 for $200. Though I would have preferred < 5,000... This is very nice coin, Canadian_coins, but I wouldn't say that it even close to "low mintage" ... only if refer to it as bullion, and it is not, imo. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2408 Posts |
^^ Low mintage is relative, I agree.
Since this is the first coin of the series we will not know what "low" mintage really means until we see how many of the other ones were minted.
I do feel good about the number compared with 20 for 20.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
2845 Posts |
Quote:
I am happy with the low mintage (19,695) of the first 2014 $200 for $200.
Just one thing to remember when observing Quantity Sold in Charlton Catalogues -- the numbers are obtained from RCM Annual Reports, year ending December of each year but not released until well into the following year. RCM sells their releases for 12 months, so other than January releases, total quantity sold will be the total from two sequential Annual Reports, therefore for current year releases, quantity sold results published by Charlton are at a one year lag. The first $200for$200 may have been selling into 2015? If so, Charlton 2017 will be updated to include 2015 results (assuming RCM releases the 2015 quantity sold data soon.) |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2408 Posts |
Good point AB.
Do we know the mintage for the other $200 for $200 yet?
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
2845 Posts |
I'm not sure what other $200 for $200 were released but I often just google the name of the coin, which usually brings the archived RCM listing to the top, with mintage information. For example, $200 for $200 Towering Forests 2014: http://www.mint.ca/store/coins/200-....V8uKo-vOerUIf you're intending to ask about Quantity Sold (not reading your mind, but I continually refer to one meaning the other) RCM released no NCLT quantity sold data in their 2015 Annual report (for the period of Jan 1 -Dec 31 ,2015) Why that is, I don't think anyone knows for sure. Edited by wildflowerAB
09/03/2016 10:57 pm
|
| |
Replies: 54 / Views: 6,317 |
First Page
Previous Page
Posted 08/19/2016 9:58 pm
