What if the U.S. Mint started their OWN Grading Service?

[braddick]

"Coins made to order". Imagine ordering coin through the Mint that were already holdered by a Service the MINT either contracts out to (like ANACS?) or their own. If the grades were credible and market accepted, it would allow NGC and PCGS more time to grade all the other coins.

[nwcs]

I know we talked about this on the CU forum, but I'll take two perspectives here.

 

1. It would be great for the hobby. You'd likely get premium pieces easily without all the fuss, muss, and coin doctoring.

 

2. The cost would be ^^^^ way up there because the manual overhead needed to oversee this would be very high.

 

I wonder, though, if it would create any conflicts of interest? I mean, the US already claims a sovereignty on every coin produced for under face value...

 

Neil

[braddick]

Why would the cost be high? The MINT takes its time with Proof sets (most being around PR69DCAMS) and they sell pretty cheap.

It would be cool to own a real MS70 clad Kennedy, for example and the MINT could provide this for us.

 

At the minimum, forget the "on-site grading service" and just go with SMS type of coins that have the same quality as the MS Commemoratives ('quality' refering to grade, not design).

[keithdagen]

How about a "Strike-your-own" program at the Mints???

 

Let you select the planchet and strike the thing 2 or 3 times before you get possession of the piece. I think Denver has something that strikes a token or medal for you. Why not expand that to striking your own Mint Set?

[shirohniichan]

Can we make our own mules?

[Gunsmoke]

What would it do to the value of the coins and the fun of collecting? If the Mint can crank out an unlimited number of MS 70 coins would the pop be high and thus, the value low?

 

Also, at least for me, a big part of the thrill is searching for the right coin at the right price.

[Hoot]

This would suck. This would send the hobby of collecting modern coins straight into the crapper. Determining the worth of a high grade modern is already onerous. Imagine the Mint, mind you, the same Mint that already makes multiple errors on order, bad coins, etc., etc., deciding that they have some level of coin that they are sending to their back-pocket grading service (BPGS), having it graded as needed, then sent to your home! Come on! Can you also imagine the ties that the Government Services Contract would lay out for the grading service? No fully objective reasoning could even begin to touch THAT. The objective quality of the grading services can already be questionable, but BPGS would be the WORST - I'd rather buy ACG.

 

Hoot

[braddick]

Ok, I read what you guys are writing. How about (and I'm just brainstorming here-) knowing the MINT wouldn't mint anything prior to 2002, thus the "thrill of the hunt" is still on.

 

Also, step two: How about if the MINT only produced a very limited number of these special MS coins (kind of like the 1998-S SMS Kennedy)? Maybe 50,000 sets a year of MS70 quality coins?

 

All I know is if the MINT can easily produce MS69+ modern Commemoratives with relative ease, why not high quaility circulation coinage?

Like I said, it would be killer to own a Real MS70 Clad Kennedy. I don't want the proof version, I want mine MintState. I think this would work out well for everyone.

 

(I am also abandoning the "on site grading" idea right here, right now.)

[snizzenfixit]

Wouldn't this leave the door open to potentially produce error coins deliberately, as a way of making money?

 

Phil

 

[nwcs]

Well, I see this being costly for two reasons:

 

1. The cost of overhead in the production, personnel, and handling

2. The cost of rejects and such because of handling and people's preferences.

 

Most of the mint's operations are designed not totally for the money supply but also as an accounting trick to hide the costs of manufacturing. That is why the cent is still produced, the sheer volume hides the cost of manufacturing higher denominational coinage.

 

I think the mint would be opening the doors to much abuse, too. Historically the money supply has always been a key to power for national entities and if there is too much monkey business, it can lead to other problems. Especially if there later was a change of power that thought it went too far and became ultrarestrictive with the mint. Not likely, but possible.

[mark]

NWCS:

 

There might well be other reasons to oppose Pat Braddick's initial suggestion, but controlling the money supply isn't a major concern. The mint's contribution to the money supply is small. The vast majority of money is created and/or controlled by the Federal Reserve, which, aside from ordering coins from the mint, has nothing to do with the mint. So, if you want to worry about abusing the money supply, which at times might be a reasonable concern, in the United States concentrate on the Federal Reserve.

 

Mark