| Author |
 Replies: 15 / Views: 2,120 |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
974 Posts |
Poll Question
Not really  but you have to wonder what's next!  Since the Mint decided to acknowledge the 47,000 Reverse of 2007 SAEs and continued to send them out weeks after their discovery, I am reviving this pollWith all the errors making it out into circulation with the Presidential dollars, which spurred interest, I wonder if the US Mint will ever follow the ways of Sports Cards and begin placing "Rare Limited Mintage and Numbered" coins into random rolls each year to spur consumer/collector interest?  So my question is: What are your thoughts...Do you think the US Mint will resort to random inserts into rolls/bags in the future?  I think they already are...either that or their Quality Control team needs to be better trained!  Quote:
Here are the Original results:
Results:
Heck ya they will! [3%] 1 votes
They might and I'd love it! [5%] 2 votes
If they did it would be great for the hobby! [13%] 5 votes
Will they? They already are! [11%] 4 votes
They might and I'll hate it! [0%] 0 votes
No that would ruin the hobby! [5%] 2 votes
No I don't think that will happen! [63%] 24 votes
Edited by Nelrak
05/27/2008 2:06 pm
|
|
|
|
Moderator
 United States
187671 Posts |
I answered "Will they? They already are!" because I do not think it is really outside the realm of possibilities. Think of the urban legends of mint workers making their own errors to give to friends for sale on the outside. What if it were true, but they also thought of a way to cover their tracks by throwing a few bones to the general public? Now imagine they got caught, but the mint decided it was not a bad idea to spur interest and increase sales? I'm not really saying it is true, but...
Edited by jbuck
01/16/2008 6:09 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4867 Posts |
I sure hope not. It would become very difficult to complete your sets.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2443 Posts |
Nope, it seems like too much work for the mint. Plus, they can't their normal operations right so they have too much to work on.
|
|
Valued Member
United States
473 Posts |
Great title...wish I had a picture of my face when I first read it--my jaw almost hit the floor haha I voted "Will they? They already are!" I agree with Amazon99 that the mint would never go as far as individual numbering for coins, as that would simply be too much hassle for the mint to pull off with probably not enough positive feedback. I don't think it would generate all that many new collectors, as the odds of finding one of, say 10,000 out of 7,000,000,000, are not that great. The new collectors they do pick up most likely would lose interest after the first year. I think the market for something like that among non-collectors wouldbe similar to Pokemon cards or Bionicle LEGOs--a fad that lasts a year or so then quickly fades to nothingness. Even among collectors it wouldn't work--imagine the price one of them would get off ebay? I know I wouldn't be able to afford one and I doubt many on this board would be able to either. That said, I do honestly believe the mint has started making errors amonst the State Quarters on purpose. Average people are genuinely interested in collecting them all (I work at a cash register and people are always lookign at there quarters) and I think the mint is playing the part, kinda feeding the flames while they can. I'm sure if we looked hard enough, and error would be found for nearly all of the 45 states released thus far. Its to perfect. Got to be planned. |
|
Valued Member
United States
342 Posts |
You mean like the plain edge dollar coins?
|
|
Valued Member
United States
253 Posts |
How much money do you think they have made off Statehood Quarters pulled from circulation then dimes nickels and quarters pulled each year to fill books? all still on the books but not in circulation. I'd like it in my account that's for sure. Jeff |
|
Member
United States
3242 Posts |
I said no.
but there's one thing that don't seam right with the Sac with the letter rim. the person who found it lives less than 5 mile from the Denver mint. I would bet the farm on this he told a a mint worker about the $10,000 reward + the money they would get after they sell it and the worker didn't take a brake one day a made it
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1934 Posts |
I agree with Amazon. (It's seems remotely plausible that they would intentionally; but I think there are far bigger fish the mint fries. ) |
|
Moderator
Australia
16806 Posts |
I voted "No", for several reasons.
1. Too technically difficult. The mint would have to stop what they're doing, strike the limited number run, then restart the regular run again. Then they'd have to find some means of randomly distributing the "rarities" among the rolls of regular coins. Sure, they could overcome these technical hurdles, but it would be expensive. Which leads to point #2...
2. Not enough ROI. Doing as you've suggested would be expensive, for no immediate financial gain for the mint. That is, after all, the mint's primary numismatic objective - to squeeze as much money out of the suckers discerning collectors as possible. But the mint would be selling these super-rare coins for the same face value as the common ones. What would the mint get out of it? Sure, it might create a spurt of interest, but there's zero certainty that the people who would be interested in that sort of thing would then turn around and buy more stuff from the mint.
3. If they decided to go to all that trouble and effort, they wouldn't keep it a secret. If the publicity (either good or bad) they'd generate from doing it would be their only fringe benefit, they'd milk it for all it was worth.
I could believe a mint worker making a few "specials" on the side, pocketing them and then selling them for personal gain - that sort of thing has been going on for centuries. But a planned, premeditated mint policy of deliberately creating and releasing errors and rarities just doesn't make sense.
Don't say "infinitely" when you mean "very"; otherwise, you'll have no word left when you want to talk about something really infinite. - C. S. Lewis
|
|
Moderator
United States
23478 Posts |
That would take brains and a marketing plan
We are talking about the Mint.
|
|
Valued Member
United States
168 Posts |
i don't think it's a planned event, but there are those employees who like to keep things interesting
|
|
Moderator
United States
187671 Posts |
Quote:
Since the Mint decided to acknowledge the 47,000 Reverse of 2007 SAEs and continued to send them out weeks after their discovery, I am reviving this poll I cannot vote again since I already voted! |
|
Spammer
4 Posts |
This is one instance where the distinction between error and variety becomes important. Varieties are a natural part of the Mint process and the Mint typically does not try to pull them. Errors on the other hand are mistakes and the Mint does take efforts to prevent them from entering circulation. Blank planchets, missing edge letters and the like are errors. The 2008 ASE with reverse of 2007 is a variety. It is similar to the several other reverse die changes (e.g., in the Morgan and Jefferson series). It is also similar to the type 2 mint marks of 1979 and 1981 and the small dates of 1960, 1970 and 1982 to name a few. Often the mint tries to make these minor design changes between dates but sometimes it doesn't happen. This creates a variety, not an error. Razi |
|
Member
United States
3242 Posts |
We all would like to think our Government or US Mint would not do lie about what happen rggoodie was right it would take a plan.  but marketing would done by its self as the 2 type's showed up in the marketplace.  I can help but feel our US Mint did it to enhance there silver sale and justify the cost & operation after all this is an elections this year  |
|
Valued Member
United States
128 Posts |
Sap  you hit the nail right on the head!  I couldn't have written /said it bettor! Actually I could have, but just don't have the time   |
| |
Replies: 15 / Views: 2,120 |
|
Posted 01/16/2008 7:44 pm
