Presidential Dollar Coin Availability at Banks?

[astrostu]

I'm pretty sure this has sorta been discussed, but I don't think it's been specifically asked: Will these coins be available from banks in general? It'd be soooo much cheaper to buy 'em for face at banks than the 50% markup that the Mint has been charging for the Sacagawea dollars.

[MunkyMan95]

Yep. Should be. Mint is supposed to try to circulate them.

[LuvToCollect]

I asked today at my bank and they had no clue the coin was in the works. The teller that actually handled my transaction seemed eager to see one though.

[astrostu]

I asked today at my bank and they had no clue the coin was in the works. The teller that actually handled my transaction seemed eager to see one though.

 

The first sentence is pretty disappointing. And then the second is hopeful.

 

I suppose I could ask at my bank (that's taking the easy way out, though, as opposed to waiting for folks on here to reply) when I go in today or this weekend and ask about buying a box of cents.

[cpm9ball]

I'm really not sure what will happen. There has been no indication from the Mint that the Sacagawea would be retired, but I can't believe there will be two $ coins in circulation.

 

Chris

[cpm9ball]

I just checked the Mint Product Schedule and the first Presidential Dollar (George Washington) bags and rolls are scheduled for release on February 15. The Golden Dollar bags and rolls are scheduled for release on February 20.

 

Has this ever happened before, two totally different designs for the same denomination circulated by the Mint during the same year? I don't mean an overlap where one design is replacing another either.

 

Has there ever been a time when one person, in this case Washington, was represented on two dirculating coins (excluding commems) of different denominations at the same time?

 

Chris

[astrostu]

Has this ever happened before, two totally different designs for the same denomination circulated by the Mint during the same year? I don't mean an overlap where one design is replacing another either.

 

Has there ever been a time when one person, in this case Washington, was represented on two dirculating coins (excluding commems) of different denominations at the same time?

 

Yes to the first question. I can think of two cases, the first was the dollar, where the gold $1 was circulated for many decades (1849-89) while a silver dollar coin was also circulated. The other example is the half dime which was minted through 1873 and the shield nickel which started to be struck in 1866.

 

As to the second question, I can't think of an example. There's the case of the NJ state quarter where Washington is featured on the obverse and reverse and the Lincon cent where Lincoln is on the obverse and reverse, but I can't think of an example where the same person was on two different coins at the same time, other than commemoratives.

[cpm9ball]

Has this ever happened before, two totally different designs for the same denomination circulated by the Mint during the same year? I don't mean an overlap where one design is replacing another either.

 

Has there ever been a time when one person, in this case Washington, was represented on two dirculating coins (excluding commems) of different denominations at the same time?

 

Yes to the first question. I can think of two cases, the first was the dollar, where the gold $1 was circulated for many decades (1849-89) while a silver dollar coin was also circulated. The other example is the half dime which was minted through 1873 and the shield nickel which started to be struck in 1866.

 

As to the second question, I can't think of an example. There's the case of the NJ state quarter where Washington is featured on the obverse and reverse and the Lincon cent where Lincoln is on the obverse and reverse, but I can't think of an example where the same person was on two different coins at the same time, other than commemoratives.

 

Sorry, I should have been more specific. It should have read, "....two totally different designs for the same denomination & composition...."

 

Were the half dime and the shield nickel of the same composition?

 

Chris

[Zoins]

It's not like any of the dollar coins will get widespread circulation so, from a circulating design perspective, you can basically treat them all like commems, even the Sac

[astrostu]

Sorry, I should have been more specific. It should have read, "....two totally different designs for the same denomination & composition...."

 

Short answer: No.

 

Long answer: Liberty Seated half dime was 1.34 gms, 90% silver and 10% copper. Shield nickel was 5 gms, 75% copper and 25% nickel.

 

So, for your more specific question, as far as I know, this is unprescedented in US history.

[MunkyMan95]

Unpresidented

 

Sorry for the lame pun

[just-john]

friend is a vp with Bank of America asker to get rolls of the new dollar coins when they come out.He said What.I said new presidental dollar coinsagain he said What new coins

Went to the mint web site and showed him.First he's heard of themso now my orders are done 2 rolls each.Nice to know a banker for once.NOW are there going to be mint markd d-p-and s

[DC Dawg]

I'm really not sure what will happen. There has been no indication from the Mint that the Sacagawea would be retired, but I can't believe there will be two $ coins in circulation.

Chris, the Mint has no say so in this. According to the Presidential $1 Coin Act (Public Law 109-145), the law states

 

the Secretary (of the Treasury) annually shall mint and issue such 'Sacagawea-design' $1 coins for circulation in quantities of no less than 1/3 of the total (Presidential) $1 coins minted and issued under this subsection.

 

Dollar coins do not circulate because the public, given the choice, chooses paper over coinage. Even though nearly every other country in the world has stopped producing their unit currency in paper, the United States holds to the quaint notion that the people won't like it. According to the Federal Reserve Board (see it here)

 

On June 30, 2006, Reserve Banks held more than $94 million in dollar coins, or enough inventory to meet current transactional demand for more than eighteen months. In addition, the Mint holds inventory of about 115 million Sacagawea dollars. Together, these inventories of dollar coins would meet current demand for the next three-and-a-half years. If this program does not spark broad use of dollar coins for everyday transactions, we expect Reserve Bank inventories will further increase with the issuance of each Presidential $1 Coin design.

 

Every one is worried about the Mint loosing money on the cost to produce the cent and nickel, what about the seignorage not earned on the potential $115 million in already produced coinage sitting around and doing nothing?! According to the US Mint's 2004 Annual Report (the last one online), the cost to produce the Sac Dollar is 0.2114. Not counting for inflation or the costs of when those $115 million coins were produced, the Mint has an investment of $24.3 million in inventory with a potential profit of over $90 million unrealized. That money could offset the higher costs of producing lower denomination coins if the inventory can be circulated. This does not account for the costs of storing and securing this inventory.

 

Remember, the Federal Reserve pays face value for the coins it purchases from the Mint. So they are managing the storage of $94 million in inventory whose value changes only with the strength of the US dollar. Since the dollar is weaker and has been getting weaker over the last four years than it was in 2004, much of that $94 million is LOOSING value.

 

The George Washington $1 coin will be released on February 15. The Fed says that it will take 2-3 weeks for orders to be fulfilled by the Mint and the coins to be distributed to member banks. But remember, for every three of the new $1 coins that will be distributed, there will be one Sac Dollar being added to the Fed's inventory to sit there and lossing value--that's if they are ordered from the Mint's inventory. Then, the coins sit in the Mint's warehouses as a near complete loss to the government.

 

This is the fault of congress. They are the onese who write the laws. Congrss, the successors of the those brilliant statesmen (he says sarcastically) who gave use the Coinage Act of 1873 (also known as the Crime of 1873), the Sherman Silver Purchase Act, the Bland-Allison Act, and so many other non-sensical laws that go beyond coinage. Remember, if pro is the opposite of con, then is progress the opposite of congress? So, if you do not like the policy, contact your member of congress and let them know what you think!

 

Ok... I will get off my soapbox now!

 

Scott

[astrostu]

I asked today at my bank and they had no clue the coin was in the works. The teller that actually handled my transaction seemed eager to see one though.

 

The first sentence is pretty disappointing. And then the second is hopeful.

 

I suppose I could ask at my bank (that's taking the easy way out, though, as opposed to waiting for folks on here to reply) when I go in today or this weekend and ask about buying a box of cents.

 

Thought I'd quote myself here. I went to my bank today and I spoke with their vault teller and she had no idea what I was talking about. Sigh ...

 

I did buy $50 of cents (yes, that's 5000 1¢ coins) that I'm about 40% of the way through now, and will be posting a picture of one of the interesting finds in a few minutes (on another thread).

[cpm9ball]

I'm really not sure what will happen. There has been no indication from the Mint that the Sacagawea would be retired, but I can't believe there will be two $ coins in circulation.

Chris, the Mint has no say so in this. According to the Presidential $1 Coin Act (Public Law 109-145), the law states

 

the Secretary (of the Treasury) annually shall mint and issue such 'Sacagawea-design' $1 coins for circulation in quantities of no less than 1/3 of the total (Presidential) $1 coins minted and issued under this subsection.

 

Dollar coins do not circulate because the public, given the choice, chooses paper over coinage. Even though nearly every other country in the world has stopped producing their unit currency in paper, the United States holds to the quaint notion that the people won't like it. According to the Federal Reserve Board (see it here)

 

On June 30, 2006, Reserve Banks held more than $94 million in dollar coins, or enough inventory to meet current transactional demand for more than eighteen months. In addition, the Mint holds inventory of about 115 million Sacagawea dollars. Together, these inventories of dollar coins would meet current demand for the next three-and-a-half years. If this program does not spark broad use of dollar coins for everyday transactions, we expect Reserve Bank inventories will further increase with the issuance of each Presidential $1 Coin design.

 

Every one is worried about the Mint loosing money on the cost to produce the cent and nickel, what about the seignorage not earned on the potential $115 million in already produced coinage sitting around and doing nothing?! According to the US Mint's 2004 Annual Report (the last one online), the cost to produce the Sac Dollar is 0.2114. Not counting for inflation or the costs of when those $115 million coins were produced, the Mint has an investment of $24.3 million in inventory with a potential profit of over $90 million unrealized. That money could offset the higher costs of producing lower denomination coins if the inventory can be circulated. This does not account for the costs of storing and securing this inventory.

 

Remember, the Federal Reserve pays face value for the coins it purchases from the Mint. So they are managing the storage of $94 million in inventory whose value changes only with the strength of the US dollar. Since the dollar is weaker and has been getting weaker over the last four years than it was in 2004, much of that $94 million is LOOSING value.

 

The George Washington $1 coin will be released on February 15. The Fed says that it will take 2-3 weeks for orders to be fulfilled by the Mint and the coins to be distributed to member banks. But remember, for every three of the new $1 coins that will be distributed, there will be one Sac Dollar being added to the Fed's inventory to sit there and lossing value--that's if they are ordered from the Mint's inventory. Then, the coins sit in the Mint's warehouses as a near complete loss to the government.

 

This is the fault of congress. They are the onese who write the laws. Congrss, the successors of the those brilliant statesmen (he says sarcastically) who gave use the Coinage Act of 1873 (also known as the Crime of 1873), the Sherman Silver Purchase Act, the Bland-Allison Act, and so many other non-sensical laws that go beyond coinage. Remember, if pro is the opposite of con, then is progress the opposite of congress? So, if you do not like the policy, contact your member of congress and let them know what you think!

 

Ok... I will get off my soapbox now!

 

Scott

 

Thanks, Scott! It wasn't my intention to imply that the Mint is the decision-maker in this regard. It would have been better if I had used "press release" instead of "indication" which was rather vague. With that said, I hope you never decide to relegate your soapbox to the status of "I only use it when I need to get something from the top shelf". You have always provided us with a wealth of information on a variety of SuBjecTs. Keep up the good work!

 

Chris

[MercP]

I also asked mt bank officer about them about a month ago. She had no idea what I was talking about. After I gave her a 15 min. lesson she called the banks main vault to ask about them. She was told them would be out in mid to late Feb and they had already had several requests. She added my name to the list. So, hopefully I will be able to get at least a few rolls at face value.

[Conder101]

Sorry, I should have been more specific. It should have read, "....two totally different designs for the same denomination & composition...."

 

Short answer: No.

Short answer is wrong.

1793 cent three different designs that year

1796 cent two differnt designs

1909 cent two differnt designs

 

1883 nickel two totally different designs with the second one coming with two different reverse designs

1938 nickel two differnet designs

2004 and 2005 nickels two designs each year but may not count obverses were the same each year

 

half dimes 1837

 

dimes 1837 and again in 1916

 

quarters 1838 and 1916

 

half dollars 1807, 1839

 

silver dollar 1795, 1798, 1873, 1878, 1921

 

gold dollar 1854 but size changed as well

 

quarter eagle 1834

 

half eagle 1807, 1834, 1908

 

eagle 1797 (maybe), 1907

 

double eagle 1907

[richbeat]

.Most bank branches have not received any written or verbal correspondence yet concerning the presidential dollar coins. This is why most of them have no clue when asked. Whether any such correspondence is received by February 15 remains to be seen.

[DC Dawg]

According to the Houston Chronicle, Houston and Chicago will be the first to receive the new dollar coins. They also had a picture of the coin:

 

 

Scott

[astrostu]

Short answer: No.

 

Short answer is wrong.

1793 cent three different designs that year

1796 cent two differnt designs

1909 cent two differnt designs

 

1883 nickel two totally different designs with the second one coming with two different reverse designs

1938 nickel two differnet designs

2004 and 2005 nickels two designs each year but may not count obverses were the same each year

 

half dimes 1837

 

dimes 1837 and again in 1916

 

quarters 1838 and 1916

 

half dollars 1807, 1839

 

silver dollar 1795, 1798, 1873, 1878, 1921

 

gold dollar 1854 but size changed as well

 

quarter eagle 1834

 

half eagle 1807, 1834, 1908

 

eagle 1797 (maybe), 1907

 

double eagle 1907

 

The original question was: "Has this ever happened before, two totally different designs for the same denomination circulated by the Mint during the same year? I don't mean an overlap where one design is replacing another either."

 

I interpreted that as different obverse and reverse, and, as stated, not just one design going into another. So, I was mostly correct:

 

The 1793 Flowing Hair had two different reverses, which I count as one design because the obverse remained the same .. but, the Liberty Cap was also in 1793, but it was a transition year from the flowing hair to the liberty cap since the liberty cap was made through 1796, but even then, the reverse was a simple modification of the Wreath Reverse ... so this MIGHT count.

 

The 1796 was a transitional year from Liberty Cap to Draped Bust cent so does not count. Same with 1909, Indian Head to Lincoln was a transition/overlap year. Same with the 1883 5¢ coin was an overlap of shield to Liberty Head, and with the reverse change in Liberty Head used the same obverse so it is still the same coin. Same with 1938 (Buffalo to Jefferson was overlap year) and the 2004-05 used the same obverse for the two coins in each year, so was not a completely different design if we go by a unique obverse and reverse.

 

And the same goes for half dimes in 1837 (Capped Bust to Liberty Seated design overlap year), dimes in 1837 and 1916 (Barber to Mercury). And quarters in 1838 and 1916, half dollars in 1807 and 1837, etc. etc. etc.

 

So, the short answer was NOT wrong. There has never been a time in US coinage when there have been two distinct designs - different obverse and reverse - minted in the same year, of the same denomination and composition, that was not due to a design overlap / transition year. The ONLY possible exception I can find is for the 1¢ coin in 1793, but it depends upon how strict you want to be.

[astrostu]

Getting back to my original question, I don't think that just-john's situation should be unique, nor should we have to have a special contact at a bank. I realize this could be a stupid question, but how much leverage do you think we actually have to go up to a teller, explain what the dollars are, and insist that they order them for us? After all, we choose to store our money at the bank, effectively giving them hundreds, thousands, tens of thousands, etc. (depending upon how rich you are) of dollars to do with as they please until we need it, so shouldn't the whole service model give us some bargaining power?

 

I was thinking of going in this week and asking to speak with a banker (not just a teller) about it and request they order 'em for me and not leave unless they do or give me a satisfactory answer as to why they won't. I'd be willing to buy 'em in a box of $250 or whatever as long as they cost me $250 since I'd just spend 'em, but I have zero desire to buy 40x2 rolls from the mint for 142% of face value plus shipping over the life of the program ... that's an extra $840 (without shipping).

 

Any ideas on this?

[DC Dawg]

Getting back to my original question, I don't think that just-john's situation should be unique, nor should we have to have a special contact at a bank. I realize this could be a stupid question, but how much leverage do you think we actually have to go up to a teller, explain what the dollars are, and insist that they order them for us? After all, we choose to store our money at the bank, effectively giving them hundreds, thousands, tens of thousands, etc. (depending upon how rich you are) of dollars to do with as they please until we need it, so shouldn't the whole service model give us some bargaining power?

 

I was thinking of going in this week and asking to speak with a banker (not just a teller) about it and request they order 'em for me and not leave unless they do or give me a satisfactory answer as to why they won't. I'd be willing to buy 'em in a box of $250 or whatever as long as they cost me $250 since I'd just spend 'em, but I have zero desire to buy 40x2 rolls from the mint for 142% of face value plus shipping over the life of the program ... that's an extra $840 (without shipping).

 

Any ideas on this?

The Fed has said it will circulate the $1 coins in the same manner as the 50 State Quarters. This means that rather than pull from stock (first in-first out), they will distribute new coins first (last in-first out). Since the start of the 50 State Quarters program, you can go to the bank and order a roll of new quarters, you should be able to go to the bank and do the same for the new dollars when they come out.

 

Since the Mint is required by law to produce 1 Sac dollar for every 3 of the presidential dollars, the Sac dollars will be distributed AFTER the supply of presidential dollars are exhausted. However, reports from the Fed indicate that this is not likely to happen.

 

I plan to wait until after the release by the Mint to order rolls. I intend to spend those dollars and get them circulated. I will probably do this for each new coin that is issued. I don't care if the person has never heard of the coin. It's legal tender and I plan to use it!

 

Scott

[richbeat]

astrostu:

 

If you want to pick up a box from the bank, the dollar coins come in boxes of $1000. They'll want you to take the whole box if you ask for one....at face value, of course. It's possible that, depending on the source, they could be boxed some other way, but every box I've ever seen is $1000.

[astrostu]

astrostu:

 

If you want to pick up a box from the bank, the dollar coins come in boxes of $1000. They'll want you to take the whole box if you ask for one....at face value, of course. It's possible that, depending on the source, they could be boxed some other way, but every box I've ever seen is $1000.

 

Yikes! Um, I may need to think a bit harder on that one, then.

[cpm9ball]

Did anyone read the latest Coin World "Letters to the Editor"? Apparently, the new dollars are being distributed in Mint-wrapped rolls rather than in bulk for the coins to be rolled (OBW) at a later time and place. Interesting!

 

Chris