A New Coin Set From The Mint On 8-1-17, Eu 225th Anniversary Set

211,273 sold as of Aug20. That's 12,037 less than last week. Returns, return, returns... The question is, are returned sets being offered again?

Maybe they shouldn't allow bulk orders to have returns, or only allow them a certain percentage of returns? That might help things a little.

I haven't had issues returning stuff even when past the seven day period (10 -14 days).

The sets I returned got there last Tuesday (according to UPS website). Still no mint confirmation that they received them or refund.

That's strange as it usually takes 1-2 days max before I get their acknowledgement email. But then it's another 4-5 business days before you get your money back...

After receiving new post notifications for this thread every few minutes, all activity stopped 4 days ago with no time to detox.

I still think at $3 a Coin (purchased 4 sets) for 2017s dated EU Mint State Coins, I can't find any reason to post anything negative on these sets, I'm even OK with the higher than normal Mintages.

As for High Grade Slabs, my negative experience on purchasing MS & PR 69 & 70 Coins for resale, most of them turned in the Holder's when experiencing temperature changes in the Winter Months (going from a 70° environment to below freezing) when loading vehicle the night before going to Shows.

I consider it a valuable lesson in "How Not To" and at the same time have lost all desire to spend extra money on high graded coins when my eyes can't distinguish between a 69 & 70, or even a well struck 68 against a 70 late stage Die Strike.

I would think all my Coins if Certified, would Grade between 69 & 70 and would leave that decision to whomever ownes them in the future.

There is no guarantee if your MS70s were cracked out and resubmitted that those 70s would come back as 70s. Being a former science teacher in a day where science is polluted by a lot of non-verifiable facts when the actual data is examined, I tend to be of a mindset I require absolutes where possible. These absolutes have to be repeatable, verifiable, and anyone dealing with the data/system has got to be totally accountable by being willing to make an open explanation as to how they handle the data - specifics being most important.

There is too much room for corruption otherwise.

If a system would be instituted whereby an MS70 would always be an MS70, an MS69 always an MS69, etc., then I would agree a verifiable merit is inherent in to the system.

I *believe* any honorable and totally legitimate company, realizing their word will influence people to assign hundreds of dollars more for a coin assigned a perfect score, would want to expressly become accountable in the minutest details as to why a coin does or does not make MS70. There certainly would have to be a guarantee that a coin would always be graded as MS70 (provided no damage is done after cracking etc). But no such guarantee exists, and the companies are tight lipped about why they give out a certain grade.