New $20 4 $20

C_C: Yes, but you can read that statement in different ways.





First, Eric Riley could be wrong as far as the law is concerned or he might not know what he is talking about.
(This is what everyone is trying to figure out. Legally are NCLT play tokens or are they legal tender? Enforcement is a different matter for now. The first thing that needs to be established is do NCLT fall under the currency act or not? My reading of the law is yes they do. Thus the banks are breaking the law. If the RCM's official position is NCLT are not legal tender, then the banks aren't breaking the law. Where though in the legal system has this been decided though? I would like to see something more than a customer service representatives email so that when I tell people that NCLT aren't legal tender I have something real to go on. An official decision must be in writing somewhere).

Second, The 50 cents legal tender valve is symbolic on a 1/25th gold coin because the gold coin is worth more than 50 cents. (Depends how you read/look at the statement and it's context). This makes sense. If golds valve goes to less than 50 cents though for the coin does the legal tender aspect kick in or not?

Basically, what is the law regarding NCLT's? are they legal tender - YES or NO?

If YES - the banks are breaking the law.

If NO - the RCM outright lied when selling this coin.

Ugly: I follow you on your first paragraph fully.

Your issue is my issue. You can't pick and choose. Banks can choose (more power and money for them). Taxpayers can't (less power and money for them). Government doesn't care (imagine having a job where you get paid the best benefits and you don't even have to perform your duties).

So...
NCLT's are legal tender. (But laws regarding legal tender are worth less than the paper bills the government promises are worth something - glad they got rid of the gold standard :P).

The banks are not following the laws regarding legal tender though (well hopefully the banks post even bigger profits this year after all they have less burden to deal with and I hope all banking fees go up as well - I don't want the banks to suffer :P).

The RCM will not try to enforce the law, by any means, letters, talking to the minister etc... but will use legal tender as a selling point even though they know how they are selling it to you isn't true in reality. (I hope the RCM gives itself enough rope in it's blind pursuit of a bottom line).

Granny bait... I love company's that prey on people. RCM's new tag line: Preying on your grandmother since 1935/1973... (pick a date for the first real year of granny bait). Or how about a tv ad like this for the RCM: "Don't think your taxes are high enough? Then buy an RCM product and impose more taxes on yourself. Help fill the government conifers with real "legal tender" dollars in exchange for RCM "legal granny bait" dollars... uhmm... tokens... uhmm... disks of metal uhmm... beanie babies."

-Ibgolden- I was about to reply to your post you deleted.
Got distracted with the Curling!
---I'm guessing you looked at the 2011 Charlton, sad isn't it! only $30 for ms65. I need my glasses too!
---I like a little humor, Ibimpressed you checked your facts!
And in response to your new post, people will collect this coin regardless maybe your Mom is seeing the controversy this coin has generated thinking it is a turning point and might represent that to her or maybe just it's beauty like it is to some, like you say!

Thanks -canadian_coins- Then I guess I mist it, probably while I was cleaning my glasses and wiping my tearing eyes from reading all the...to see better?
---So why all this debate? Now a mute point! I mist it otherwise I would have Quoted it too! but some must have just ignored it, not accepting the facts. What I'm seeing is that some just cant accept it!
---The coins are still nice!
but wont support the ( RCM) for there tactics, ever!
---As I've said the ( RCM) has played us all with there campaigned sales pitch, with a play on words that meant nothing! To fight it is futile!

Actually, I misconstrewed the meaning of one of your paragraphs where the Olympic coins were mentioned along with this new $20 coin, whereas I originally interpretted it to be a $20 Olympic coin you were speaking of, and then upon more careful disection of your wording realized what you meant ... I don't wear glasses and I own quite a few Olympic silvers... bought for less than face when silver was away down.

I got three of these new $20 silvers because of the controversy... me mom wants one because she received a "blow in" flyer in her junk mail advertising this thing. Her colourized quarter collection, and roll hunting for commemorative quarters and such, well, all this controversy plays no part in it for her. Indeed, granny bait!

Now, sold out you say... well, there goes one of mine.

In case anyone was wondering, or hadn't deduced as yet, I had deleted a post on the value of Olympic silvers... ahh, but I am tired

>>> edited to change coin(s) to Coin(s)...

-Ugly- It appears that you have a good knowledge of the system. In response-
---The Bank would not refuse the new polymer notes because it would be indorsed by the Bank of Canada and its Governor (M.Carney) Key point (Bank of Canada).
---Only those with that endorsement will be accepted by the Bank's other than that, Banks have the choice (power).
---They stated that this $20 coin was "Authorized by the Government of Canada" that means nothing! There are allot of offices in the government, we can just pick one! Just another play with words just as legal tender, they ( RCM) have no intension and agree with you, they wont want or I suspect have the desire to face off with neither the Banks, nor the Minister of Finance, for this?
---That would mean a real waist of tax payers money, it will never happen! And would have far more protests!

-Canadian_coins- you said!
"So then, the bigger question: what is good cash? The Mint may be playing a silent game here regarding the Legal Tender aspect of this coin. Partly because of their advertised "exchange" $20 for $20 which invites such a debate. For me, this is hardly a rant but a concern."

---First, what is good cash, that's what the Banks say is? If they say no that's it, end of the road. I'm not suggesting your ranting, your opinions are valued!
---I agree with your concern! But there is nothing we can do about it, it's a game that big business plays all the time, the ( RCM) is no small player!
---The exchange of $20 for $20 play is just that, playing us for fools and that upsets me to! It may imply something else, but that's intentional and by definition, to imply is to indicate or suggest without being explicitly stated: all they're saying is give me $20 an ill give you a coin with $20 marked on it, nothing more in this case.
---Not ever stating that it was redeemable anywhere for $20 despite the term Legal Tender, witch now has no legs to stand on.

- realpenny- This is a fight that you should take up with the ( RCM), and not try to entice others to fight with you and telling people to give the Banks a hard time and saying "We should make this as painful for the banks as much as possible." On page 22. ---That's bad advice, IMO.
---I remember a post (02-16-2011) page 17, in witch you said this thread was getting boring and needed some controversy.


---You should Email the ( RCM) telling them your thoughts and tell them that Eric Riley's opinion is worthless, and get back to us with the results.
---Come on, if you think this guy spoke without direction, think again! That is only wishful thinking! About your saying that the ( RCM) lied, you should also call them out on that too. (That would be controversial and be interesting).
---A lie? I say not so! They just elaborated on the truth, they found a crack to wiggled through and know that the Banks control the money and could technically accept it; but don't want to, they ( RCM) have no power to dictate or force the Banks and know that!
---IMO, true, but not a lie! Just convenient! So if you can't accept it, don't ask us to answer those questions, Email and ask them!
---To your last post, really! That's real funny!
---You must have meant Eric Riley not M. Riley for Prime Minister, if you want to sell it?
---I might vote for him, given our choices, but pop can tabs for currency, please!
---With that, I guess youll agree plastic coins aren't so far off now, Ah!

You are right Ugly in that fighting the RCM is a waste of time. Public perception is what matters. As it becomes known that the coin isn't a straight forward $20 for $20 exchange the public may never look at an RCM product again. Only if the RCM's bottom line hurts will the RCM find the "ability" to make things happen. The RCM is well connected.
---
De facto the coin is legal tender. The RCM sold this coin to the general public though as a "simple" $20 for $20 and played up the legal tender aspect. No worries right? Even the customer service reps at the RCM know off loading the coin isn't so easy. The RCM may be all within their rights, but they have sold this coin using dirty tactics. Go check out all the other forums that mention this coin. It is clear the general public thinks this coin is just like a $20 paper bill. It is not. The RCM is not all innocent here - far from it. The RCM can sit on it's hands and play dumb all it wants. I don't think the public will buy this. The banks are clearly to blame as well.

From a general public point of view who know little about NCLT's, the RCM marketing was to lower the general publics guard. Even if the general public looked into matters, looked at the currency act, everything seems straight forward. The RCM knows this isn't so though and never mentioned the "de facto" and in fact down played it.

Hook, line and sinker... and do you know what the RCM uses for bait on the end of their hooks?

GRANNY BAIT.

As of Feb 28, 2011 @ 3:30 pm Arizona Time,
this coin is sold out on the Mint's web site.

I thought there was a limit of 3 per customer....