| Author |
 Replies: 19 / Views: 3,006 |
Page 2 of 2
|
|
|
|
Moderator
 United States
23522 Posts |
Quote:
Surely the Mint should have it's own legal power to simply market it's numismatic products within it's own legal regulatory framework.
Not in the US. Here, Congress tells the Mint what to do, or approves their suggestions. I'm taking the point about "keeping up with the Joneses" regarding silver content for bullion, and changing my position on the issue. |
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
17884 Posts |
Quote:
Why does the Mint need a new Law to do that for? Because the current law specifies they be 900 fine. And this proposal has been floated several times before. Edited by Conder101
04/08/2015 10:05 am
|
|
Moderator
United States
190060 Posts |
Would be interesting. I foresee a year when both .900 and .999 versions of the silver proof coins exist, hopefully in error and not a deliberate decision to make further expand collector options.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
4596 Posts |
And the only way to tell is a $10k xrf or a TPG label... -----Burton 50+ year / Life / Emeritus ANA member (joined 12/1/1973) Life member: Numismatics International, CONECA Member: TNA, FtWCC, NETCC, EveryCountry (online) coin club Owned by three cats and a wife of 40+ years (joined 1983) Author: 3rd Edition of the Sample Slabs book, https://www.sampleslabs.info/ |
|
Moderator
United States
190060 Posts |
I was not even thinking that far ahead.  |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1247 Posts |
bstrauss3, one of your statements confuses me.. Quote:and has to alloy it *back* to 0.900 before manufacturing the blanks that become planchets that become your 2015 ASE which sell as bullion as 0.999. the silver in the ASE's is .999, not the 90% standard used for coinage. It isn't the same as the AGE's which are .900 but by weight contain 1 oz .999 gold, (once it is purified again). I think that is correct. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4596 Posts |
SV: right, but the bill is not changing the .999 fine ASE but rather the .900 fine regular commems. like this year's US Marshall's coins... -----Burton 50+ year / Life / Emeritus ANA member (joined 12/1/1973) Life member: Numismatics International, CONECA Member: TNA, FtWCC, NETCC, EveryCountry (online) coin club Owned by three cats and a wife of 40+ years (joined 1983) Author: 3rd Edition of the Sample Slabs book, https://www.sampleslabs.info/ |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2734 Posts |
The 90% composition was designed to improve the wear characteristics of business strike silver coins, and since modern 90% silver strikes (1982-up commemoratives, 1992-up Silver Proof coins) are NIFC, there's no reason why future issues thereof shouldn't be .999 fine.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
17884 Posts |
Quote:And the only way to tell is a $10k xrf or a TPG label.. There would probably also be a weight difference, and a SG test could tell them apart as well. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
7390 Posts |
Ohh, ive wanted an xrf bad but can't justify the expense. I wonder when the tech level will have them at the $1,000 retail mark? It might just change the hobby!
|
|
Moderator
United States
190060 Posts |
Hopefully this will not be a problem.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
 United States
12866 Posts |
One would like to think that if the mint saves money by making our proof silvers and commems in .999 that they'd pass it on to us... but one would most likely be incorrect.
|
|
Moderator
United States
190060 Posts |
 I have never laughed so hard. Pass the savings. Yeah, right.   |
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
12866 Posts |
haha - glad to make you chuckle on a Monday morning, jbuck. Welcome to the work week!  |
|
Moderator
United States
190060 Posts |
Thank you. I needed it. Puts the mood right for fighting (figurative) fires.  |
|
Page 2 of 2
|
Replies: 19 / Views: 3,006 |
Page 2 of 2
|
First Page
Posted 04/08/2015 09:54 am
