2021 Morgan Dollars 1 1

[VKurtB]

1 minute ago, World Colonial said:

Wouldn't be because he doesn't want to understand , would it?  No, that would never happen.

He is transitioning into becoming a political ideologue. 

[Conder101]

11 hours ago, FrogHopper said:

I doubt this. Collectors & dealers are a massive money generator for the mint. They just don’t want to deal with “people” in general because...well they’re government

They probably make more money though from the 12 or so distributors than they do from the direct sales to collectors.

 

10 hours ago, VKurtB said:

When they decided to say out loud that the gold dime, quarter, and half dollar would be 1/10, 1/4, and 1/2 ounce respectively but be the same size as their historical counterpart, I knew they were talking crazy, because the specific gravity of gold makes that impossible.

Could be done, but you would probably have problems striking up the coins due to the thinness of the planchets.

 

5 hours ago, gmarguli said:

Come on, we all know that they intentionally under-produced these to create demand.

175,000 per mintmark/privy mark, and 200,000 for the Peace dollar is underproduction?  For most of your commemorative dollar coins those would be HIGH mintages.

[jtryka]

I think the more realistic view is that they make far more money from one customer than all the collectors and dealers combined.  Think of it this way, let's assume there are maybe 2 million "collector" coins sold by the mint per year (not mint or proof sets, but things like the Morgan dollars and commems, the stuff that is a pain to produce).  If they make $100 each from those coins, you're talking total "profit" of $200 million.  That's a big assumption as it would assume sellouts of every coin, but let's be generous.

In 2020, they minted a total of 498 million American Samoa quarters, 280 million Weir Park quarters, 1.095 billion Salt River quarters, 650 million Marsh Quarters and 243 million Tallgrass quarters, just at Philly and Denver, for a total of 2.766 billion quarters.  Last I read it costs the mint about 6 cents to make a quarter, but being conservative let's assume inflation has caused that to rise to 10 cents.  So, 15 cents in profit x 2.766 billion = $415 million in profit from one customer, the Federal Reserve which buys all the coins for distribution through the regional banks.  So, which would you care more about?

[Alex in PA.]

20 hours ago, jtryka said:

so there is no silver shortage!

I can find none.  What I do find is Bullion Dealers who will sell you 500 Silver rounds for $34.00 a piece and 'No Limit'.  Bars too.  I believe what we have witnessed is another Government 'excuse' for the Mint's ineptitude.   

[Alex in PA.]

7 minutes ago, jtryka said:

they make far more money from one customer than all the collectors and dealers combined.

Exactly!  And come September or October we will see a few EBay or private dealers selling the Morgan CC Privy by the hundreds.  Causes people to think "How did they get so many?

Edited June 3, 2021 by Alex in PA.
Add information

[Alex in PA.]

11 hours ago, Conder101 said:

175,000 per mintmark/privy mark, and 200,000 for the Peace dollar is underproduction? 

The lowest year of production of the Morgan Dollar at Carson City was 228,000 in 1885.  Why is this, so called privy mark, coin any less?  Is this the wonderful US Mint rarity creating?  Also, the more you sell the greater your profit.  Maybe the Mint only manufactures for the pleasure of a few and has no worries about making profit?

[gmarguli]

3 hours ago, Alex in PA. said:

The lowest year of production of the Morgan Dollar at Carson City was 228,000 in 1885.  Why is this, so called privy mark, coin any less?  Is this the wonderful US Mint rarity creating?  Also, the more you sell the greater your profit.  Maybe the Mint only manufactures for the pleasure of a few and has no worries about making profit?

The Mint is in a bad position. Basically a no-win position. 

A) Mint manufactures to demand (no limit): Aftermarket price will fall below initial sale price. We see this all the time with most of their products that have no mintage limit. Buyers will wonder why they bother purchasing from the Mint and many will wait to buy from resellers.

B) Mint manufactures to low limit (75,000 V75 SAE): Everyone suddenly wants one. Aftermarket price goes up. People who didn't get one from Mint complain it's a rigged system. 

C) Mint manufactures to high limit (350,000 for commems): No aura of scarcity and few people will buy. Aftermarket price stays somewhat close to issue price. 

What they need to do is something they probably never will. They need to set a mintage limit slightly below demand so that the aftermarket holds up, but doesn't dramatically jump in value.

[Alex in PA.]

2 hours ago, gmarguli said:

They need to set a mintage limit slightly below demand so that the aftermarket holds up, but doesn't dramatically jump in value.

Absolutely correct!  However, how could we, the average collector, convince them this is the direction they should be taking?

[World Colonial]

3 hours ago, gmarguli said:

What they need to do is something they probably never will. They need to set a mintage limit slightly below demand so that the aftermarket holds up, but doesn't dramatically jump in value.

I don't see how the Mint would be in a position to know the "correct" number.  A few but only a few of the coins had limits too low, such as the 2019-S ERP ASE but it's an outlier.

It's hard to know the "correct" number when so much current demand (maybe most of it much of the time) is from speculators and flippers.

I agree with the rest of your post.  The combination of the scenarios you outlined make it plainly evident that most (potential) buyers don't really like US Mint products that much.

It's my opinion that most of the (supposedly) low mintage products are actually bought mostly for financial reasons, in the hope that demand will increase later to increase the price (noticeably).  Comments on coin forums imply that this appears to be true with a noticeable percentage of buyers, First Spouse being the best example.  It's a numismatically mediocre series which has essentially zero collector demand selling at an uncompetitive price due to the metal content.

The other primary buyers appear to be those who buy US Mint products through rote habit.

With these particular coins (and the Peace dollar), there is legitimate collector interest, but it isn't a better or more interesting collectible than a real Morgan or Peace dollar.  It's a novelty (for now) but one that is almost certain to lose much of it's appeal later, definitely if either turn into a on-going series.

[zadok]

15 minutes ago, World Colonial said:

I don't see how the Mint would be in a position to know the "correct" number.  A few but only a few of the coins had limits too low, such as the 2019-S ERP ASE but it's an outlier.

It's hard to know the "correct" number when so much current demand (maybe most of it much of the time) is from speculators and flippers.

I agree with the rest of your post.  The combination of the scenarios you outlined make it plainly evident that most (potential) buyers don't really like US Mint products that much.

It's my opinion that most of the (supposedly) low mintage products are actually bought mostly for financial reasons, in the hope that demand will increase later to increase the price (noticeably).  Comments on coin forums imply that this appears to be true with a noticeable percentage of buyers, First Spouse being the best example.  It's a numismatically mediocre series which has essentially zero collector demand selling at an uncompetitive price due to the metal content.

The other primary buyers appear to be those who buy US Mint products through rote habit.

With these particular coins (and the Peace dollar), there is legitimate collector interest, but it isn't a better or more interesting collectible than a real Morgan or Peace dollar.  It's a novelty (for now) but one that is almost certain to lose much of it's appeal later, definitely if either turn into a on-going series.

it is what it is....but personally, im just going to wait until the 1821 dollar comes out...

[Alex in PA.]

9 minutes ago, World Colonial said:

that most (potential) buyers don't really like US Mint products that much.

Agreed.  Some decades ago I was a buyer of products developed by the US Mint.  Proof and Mint Sets.  Then, for whatever reason I drifted away.  I believe the advent of EBay gave me a better venue for collecting.  Why should I pay the price the US Mint is asking when I can get it cheaper from EBay.  And that happened.  On several occasions I asked the US Mint why their price for a certain coin was so high and that I could buy the exact same coin from an EBay seller for less.  I never did get a satisfactory answer so we parted ways.  I feel today, as I did then, that the US Mint does not produce for the common ordinary citizen. 

[World Colonial]

8 minutes ago, zadok said:

it is what it is....but personally, im just going to wait until the 1821 dollar comes out...

True

But in addition to the complaints commonly aired, there is another negative financial factor which I almost never read but which numerous others must know exists.

All US Mint products take "share of wallet" from previously existing coinage.  If the supply collectively is "limited" and the collector base or financial inflow is increasing, it isn't noticed.

But in a stagnant market which is the reality I read for US coinage collectively until the last year, not only are buyers mostly losing money on their Mint purchases, the flood of US and world NCLT elsewhere is also depressing the value of their existing collections.  Many of the buyers are buying one or the other (NCLT or everything else) but many buy both.

Edited June 3, 2021 by World Colonial

[gmarguli]

1 hour ago, World Colonial said:

I don't see how the Mint would be in a position to know the "correct" number.  A few but only a few of the coins had limits too low, such as the 2019-S ERP ASE but it's an outlier.

It's hard to know the "correct" number when so much current demand (maybe most of it much of the time) is from speculators and flippers.

I think we could come up with pretty good estimates of demand for a lot of the coins. This is especially true if they were honest with themselves. Commemoratives that appeal to white men (50K), to all Americans (100K), to the woke (10K), or that feature women/women's subjects (12.5K). 

Or perhaps the mintage could be set at 2X or 3X the amount sold to dealers through their bulk program? 

Or perhaps the Mint set a number and after a month the remaining mintage gets sold to the bulk dealers. Require these dealers to buy the remaining coins or get kicked out of the program? 

 

1 hour ago, World Colonial said:

All US Mint products take "share of wallet" from previously existing coinage.  If the supply collectively is "limited" and the collector base or financial inflow is increasing, it isn't noticed.

But in a stagnant market which is the reality I read for US coinage collectively until the last year, not only are buyers mostly losing money on their Mint purchases, the flood of US and world NCLT elsewhere is also depressing the value of their existing collections.  Many of the buyers are buying one or the other (NCLT or everything else) but many buy both.

I question how much of a relationship there is between NCLT and "classic" coin collectors. I don't know too many collectors that collect new stuff from the Mint that also spend significant money on classic coins. Usually they stick to cheaper classic coins. 

[World Colonial]

13 minutes ago, gmarguli said:

I think we could come up with pretty good estimates of demand for a lot of the coins. This is especially true if they were honest with themselves. Commemoratives that appeal to white men (50K), to all Americans (100K), to the woke (10K), or that feature women/women's subjects (12.5K). 

It's a reasonable proposal but the lower mintages in your examples would likely still result in flippers trying to buy most of the supply, with a coin like these at least..

If the mintage is "low", I don't see another option other than the Mint offering it to the highest bidder at auction.  Many collectors might be priced out, many would complain (mostly because the profit would be eliminated), but anyone who wanted it who has the money would get one.

17 minutes ago, gmarguli said:

Or perhaps the mintage could be set at 2X or 3X the amount sold to dealers through their bulk program? 

Or perhaps the Mint set a number and after a month the remaining mintage gets sold to the bulk dealers. Require these dealers to buy the remaining coins or get kicked out of the program? 

One of these might work, depending upon the mintage and coin.

18 minutes ago, gmarguli said:

I question how much of a relationship there is between NCLT and "classic" coin collectors. I don't know too many collectors that collect new stuff from the Mint that also spend significant money on classic coins. Usually they stick to cheaper classic coins. 

You have more direct insight through your selling on eBay.

Anecdotally, I see the same thing you do for the ASE and modern US gold NCLT.  Same goes for world equivalents.  This is mostly from coin forum posts but also an inference on how I read collector preferences based upon the coin attributes.  I don't see these buyers as primarily (if at all)) collecting.  The reason I do not is because these aren't "real" coins.

For silver US modern commemoratives, I infer that there is a lot more cross over but don't know this as fact. I infer this coinage is competing with world NCLT in the same price range, ASE, and US classic coinage which is the closest substitute: common Morgan and Peace dollars, late date Walkers, cheaper classic commemoratives, and maybe the Franklin half.

[FroggyHopper]

On 6/2/2021 at 11:01 AM, World Colonial said:

Are US Mint employees compensated on profits and if so, is it meaningful to them?

Never heard that they are and if so, doubt it makes much difference to their compensation.  I don't believe they care about the profitability, except to the extent that it gets someone else off their back.

My guess is that they would rather deal with dealers and wholesalers because there are fewer of them and presumably less of an annoyance.

Reading coin forums and posts in Coin Week, I wouldn't want to deal with the collecting public either.  Mostly complaints where I see no possibility to satisfy most of them.  The buyers want the impossible.  They want low(er) mintage coins which are always available to them (often in multiple for "flipping") and don't lose value in the secondary market.  

That’s just people in general, whiners. Most people want it easy, the rest realize you have to prepare ahead and fight for anything worthwhile. Their gripes are the same as any business who deals with high traffic customers. So, like those they despise, they’re whiners… If they aren’t appreciative of the job security, i’m sure there are many willing to take their place.

Plus they have excellent insurance benefits at the US Mint, better than 90% of the rest of us, so they won’t get any sympathy from me. 

[Conder101]

On 6/3/2021 at 12:31 PM, gmarguli said:

They need to set a mintage limit slightly below demand so that the aftermarket holds up, but doesn't dramatically jump in value.

Problem is how do you determine well ahead of time what the actual demand is going to be?  Get it wrong on either the high or low side by too much and here come the complaints again.

 

On 6/3/2021 at 8:17 AM, Alex in PA. said:

The lowest year of production of the Morgan Dollar at Carson City was 228,000 in 1885.  Why is this, so called privy mark, coin any less?

Of that 228,000 1885 CC, A little over 150,000 of them still exist in MS (almost all from the GSA hoard) and it has the the 4th highest survival rate in MS.  So the CC privy mark coins has more MS "survivors" than 10 of the 13 CC Morgans.  I don't see that as "underproduction"

[Alex in PA.]

2 minutes ago, Conder101 said:

So the CC privy mark coins has more MS "survivors" than 10 of the 13 CC Morgans. 

Okay but.............These newly made Mint Creations are not, and never were, made for circulation where as the 1885 CC Morgan Dollar was made for use by the general public as working currency.  The fact that nearly all the bags of this issue were never used does not change the fact the 1885 CC Dollar was a Business Strike and the 2021 CC Privy Mark is not.  It is made solely for the purpose of collecting.  Many of the 'held' CC 1885 Dollars were paid out in the 1950's when you could exchange your Silver Certificate for an actual Silver Dollar thus putting the 1885 CC Dollar in 'circulation'.

I asked the question "why is this any less" because it's hard to understand why an agency would create 175,000 items when it has 250,000 +or- customers waiting for that product.  That is not a sound business position.  However, if you wish to 'create a rarity' as the US Mint has been doing; and place profit to the side, so be it.  

[zadok]

set up a time-frame window to place orders, 10-20-30 days, whatever...open to individuals, dealers, wholesalers, distributors, whomever...establish demand...mint demand plus 10%-20% for future collectors...eliminate immediate speculation, price gouging, massive complaints(except distributors)...everyone that wants one gets one,some speculation remains due to future collectors, minimal storage issue for the surplus, mint makes same amount of money...nclt issues werent intended to create speculation frenzy or cash cows for just a few at expense of many ???...

[VKurtB]

1 hour ago, Alex in PA. said:

Okay but.............These newly made Mint Creations are not, and never were, made for circulation where as the 1885 CC Morgan Dollar was made for use by the general public as working currency.  The fact that nearly all the bags of this issue were never used does not change the fact the 1885 CC Dollar was a Business Strike and the 2021 CC Privy Mark is not.  It is made solely for the purpose of collecting.  Many of the 'held' CC 1885 Dollars were paid out in the 1950's when you could exchange your Silver Certificate for an actual Silver Dollar thus putting the 1885 CC Dollar in 'circulation'.

I asked the question "why is this any less" because it's hard to understand why an agency would create 175,000 items when it has 250,000 +or- customers waiting for that product.  That is not a sound business position.  However, if you wish to 'create a rarity' as the US Mint has been doing; and place profit to the side, so be it.  

Let me put it in plain English: the people who are decision makers at the Mint are really dumb. Amazingly stupid. Sometimes quantities are NOT their fault. They’re in the legislation. But imagine this: people who DO occasionally make quantity decisions at the Mint are dumber than Congressmen. Whoa!

[Alex in PA.]

1 hour ago, VKurtB said:

are dumber than Congressmen.

I didn't think that was possible.  

[Conder101]

It is also possible they looked at these as being similar to the commemorative dollars.  Assuming they see it as a commemorative, with the same weight, fineness, and finish as the business strike commem dollars, a mintage of 175,000 would be considered a high mintage.  Very few Unc commem dollars have sold that many coins.

[VKurtB]

3 minutes ago, Conder101 said:

It is also possible they looked at these as being similar to the commemorative dollars.  Assuming they see it as a commemorative, with the same weight, fineness, and finish as the business strike commem dollars, a mintage of 175,000 would be considered a high mintage.  Very few Unc commem dollars have sold that many coins.

Well they are saying they are NOT commemoratives. But since 2019, what dollars are? .999 silver is NOT standard silver dollar specs.

[Conder101]

They say they aren't commemoratives to get around the no more than two commemorative programs per year law.  Andif they manage to morph this into an annual program they won't be commemoratives either.

[Henri Charriere]

On 5/26/2021 at 9:49 AM, VKurtB said:

Pffft! And you were going to get ME one?!?

In point of fact... I did!

No, not thru the Mint which brushed me off effortlessly, but on eBay monitoring a dozen sites until I could get a handle on the action. (I learned that from my 🐓 forays: wait for the clock to run out at 2 or 3 in the morning, then go high enough to defeat the next three bids. Results? A resounding success.)

Problem is in a subsequent comment posted during my exile after 3 Warnings popped up I knew nothing about until after the fact, I learned you had obtained both with no difficulty but had no way to make my intentions known.

I never wanted the Morgans until one of our Goodfellas unobtrusively pointed out they were smaller than the originals -- and not even minted at [New] O, or CC. To make matters worse, My Cousin Vinny (not unlike Coinbuf) publicly declared he was not interested in them.

The die was cast.  I paid a pretty penny [cent] for coins I don't like, never wanted, had no intention of keeping, for no other reason than to vex our learned colleague. I was even hoping to get them quickly with toning but as the Great Zadok would have observed, that is a moot point where new silver is concerned.

Oh, and to add insult to injury, he casually disclosed his interest in V-nickels -- on my post!

You could say I am an unhappy camper, an uncredentialed chiffonnier and a failed dummy. And I am wearing the army of Moderators' patience thin.  Very thin.

Edited June 9, 2021 by Quintus Arrius
Clarifications

[VKurtB]

12 minutes ago, Quintus Arrius said:

In point of fact... I did!

No, not thru the Mint which brushed me off effortlessly, but on eBay monitoring a dozen sites until I could get a handle on the action. (I learned that from my 🐓 forays: wait for the clock to run out at 2 or 3 in the morning, then go high enough to defeat the next three bids. Results? A resounding success.)

Problem is in a subsequent comment posted during my exile after 3 Warnings popped up I knew nothing about until after the fact, I learned you had obtained both with no difficulty but had no way to communicate make my intentions known.

I never wanted them one until one of our Goodfellas unobtrusively pointed out they were smaller than the originals -- and not even minted at [New] O, or CC. To make matters worse, My Cousin Vinny (not unlike Coinbuf) publicly declared he was not interested in them.

The die was cast.  I paid a pretty penny [cent] for coins I don't like, never wanted, had no intention of keeping, for no other reason than to vex our learned colleague. I was even hoping to get them quickly with toning but as the Great Zadok would have observed, that is a moot point where new silver is concerned.

Oh, and to add insult to injury, he casually discloses his interest in V-nickels -- on my post!

You could say I am an unhappy camper, an uncredentialed chiffonnier and a failed dummy. 

Wait, the size on THESE is off? I hadn’t seen that. The silver content is off, so the weight is off, but I was sure the volume was correct.

The sick part is that old presses still exist at both the old New Orleans mint building AND the old Carson City mint building, and a little dedication and imagination could have made both possible, but no.

So, how long do you think it will take for 2021 Morgan dollars to show up with rainbow toning? My prediction is WAAAAAAY too soon to be legit, but someone will pay out the schnozz regardless.

I only tried for one CC privy and got it, but I am selling it at cost to a numismatic blogger with whom I have a weird admiration/disgust relationship. When they do the next round, I’ll be “heck bent for leather” trying for a Denver one.

Edited June 9, 2021 by VKurtB

[Henri Charriere]

21 hours ago, VKurtB said:

Wait, the size on THESE is off? I hadn’t seen that. The silver content is off, so the weight is off, but I was sure the volume was correct.

It is possible, just possible, the reference made was to the distinctions between the new Morgans and A.S.E.s, Diameters:  38.10 mm (1-1/2") same as old Morgans vs 40.6 mm for the A.S.E.s.   Weights:  26.73 g vs 31.103 g Thicknesses:  2.4 mm vs 2.98 mm.

Edited June 10, 2021 by Quintus Arrius
Inadvertent omission

[VKurtB]

2 hours ago, Quintus Arrius said:

It is possible, just possible, the reference made was to the distinctions between the new Morgans and A.S.E.s, Diameters:  38.10 mm (1-1/2") same as old Morgans vs 40.6 mm for the A.S.E.s.   Weights:  26.73 g vs 31.103 g Thicknesses:  2.4 mm vs 2.98 mm.

Yes, the 2021’s will be the metallic purity of ASE’s, but the SIZE of classic silver dollars, therefore a silver weight BETWEEN the two. 

[Conder101]

On 6/9/2021 at 7:47 PM, VKurtB said:

Wait, the size on THESE is off? I hadn’t seen that.

The diameter and weight are the same as the originals, but they are .999 fine so to keep the weight the same they are slightly thinner, and the silver weight is slightly higher.

 

On 6/9/2021 at 7:47 PM, VKurtB said:

The sick part is that old presses still exist at both the old New Orleans mint building AND the old Carson City mint building,

I know the old #1 press is at Carson City, I wasn't aware of a press at New Orleans, at least not on old one.

[VKurtB]

15 hours ago, Conder101 said:

The diameter and weight are the same as the originals, but they are .999 fine so to keep the weight the same they are slightly thinner, and the silver weight is slightly higher.

 

I know the old #1 press is at Carson City, I wasn't aware of a press at New Orleans, at least not on old one.

If you look at the originals, they LOOK of slightly different thicknesses depending on the mint. The reeding is absolutely different. I saw a press in 2016 at New Orleans, after taking the Sunset Limited from LA to New Orleans after the 2016 ANA show in Anaheim.

Edited June 11, 2021 by VKurtB

[Conder101]

You can't judge thickness by looking at the edge of the struck coin because the thickness of the final coin is based on the striking pressure and somewhat on the edge upsetting.  But the BLANK of the 2021 dollars will be slightly thinner than the BLANK used for the original Morgan and Peace dollar (by 1.5%).  Most likely the edge on the finished product will be fairly indistingushable in thickness from the originals.