Burning Maple Leaf Fire Black Ruthenium

He is probably collector of the expensive items, cars, horses etc....but purchasing one (or two ) most expensive RCM coins doesn't make him coin collector (he might be coin collector as well, but not due to the "table").


seems to me, that you will like this coin less, if it'll drop in value.
So might be, sell it now for CDN 200, while it hot, cause if the silver will not raise in value, after 2 years you will be offered $50 for it, and people will not understand, why did you pay $100.

Thanks Solidifier.
Picture is way better, the coin is the same.

Looks like they did mess with COAs.

With this I will agree.

In future I see it "unmovable"
the asking price might to rise, but people will not be interested, and the seller will not sell for less. And many other coins, this style or other NCLT and bullion - will just drag away people's attention.
No interest, no numismatic value, limited production (not mintage) of "something" - all of these will not contribute to the coin.

Commems have just used correct language, proper words and more clear explain, to the same that I tried to express.

"The latest thing"
I already see flood of "Mintage 1000" coins.
Visit "The Coin Shoppe" and see.
No, the are not bad, it personal collector's taste...but they are many...all innovative...glamour and gimmick...and of cause limited editions.

I can see your guys point.... but I would still stick with my thought and opininon that this one of those handful of coins that continue to hold their value even after years go by.

I say this because its following the same pattern and trend of coins that were well received on their initial release, then continued a steady grind higher on the secondary market.

I put my full confidence in the price and trending action of such coins in the secondary market.

In the MCF forum someone also posted a comment about how using the term limited mintage for these coins is kind of improper. Hard to explain but I agree with him.

I copy and post it here also

Chuck wrote -

"Just my personal take...it's NOT fair to alter a coin with a 30 million mintage and claim there were only 1000 of the alterations "minted." That's deceiving. There were 30 million some-odd coins "minted" - of those, 1,000 were "altered" - "enhanced" - "changed" whatever you want to call it, but the coin itself was a part of a 30 million (some-odd) mintage.

You do not change the mintage of an item by altering it. That would be akin to me spray painting ten 2015 Lincoln cents and selling them as a "rare mintage of only 10 coins" - it's deceiving and should not be allowed.

Bottom line - "Mintage" is a count of all pieces in an issue that were the same when they were made - not when they were painted, enameled, radiated, spit on or whatever. Using "mintage" to describe the number of decals you had to stick onto a coin is deceiving, and it's wrong...whatever the process involved, it was not done by the mint, thus it doesn't change the "mintage." "

"Its not fair" Lol what are we in grade school here now?

It is fair that a painter takes a canvas and paints his pictures , canvas is unlimited supply

Personally I dislike enhanced coins/bullion etc , but this coin looked great to me so I bought a few, so sue me lol.

In the end the market controls the price, not what someone thinks is fair or not. Its not "fair" all these fakes are on the market but they dont appear to be leaving any time soon if ever, same with these enhanced coins/bullion.

Ya they may drop in value, after the hype dies down, nothing new here, look at most of the coins released in the last few years, dropped below issue. Fancy Paper weights now

Seems like you're assuming a narrow definition of the word 'fair'.

In this case it refers to a degree of 'honesty' and clearly, claiming that PMD (or an enhancement) creates a new 'mintage' number is dishonest at worst and inaccurate at best.

The issuer of these coins didn't mint anything. At least not in numismatic terms with means stamping metal to produce a coin.