Community Voice Responses (08/21/12)

From the July 31st Numismatic e-newsletter: Should the Mint have issued more 2012-S proof silver Eagles in the BEP set? Here are some answers sent from our e-newsletter readers to Editor Dave Harper.

I am very mad about the Mint issuing more 2012-S silver Eagles. I waited until near the end of the ordering period to buy the two proof coins. The mintage was low enough that I figured in a few years the price for these coins would be high enough that I could sell them and get back the money I paid for them. Issuing another 100,000 proof 2012-S Eagles means the values of these coins are unlikely to ever be high enough to recover my investment. Next time I will wait a couple of years and buy them from a dealer.
As a collector, I do not much care about the reverse proof coins. I think the reverse proof coins are a gimmick to sell coins. I feel like I have been scammed.
Bert Eskridge
Asheville, N.C.

Yes, I think the Mint should have minted more of the subject sets. But, like everything the Mint does, it just screws the collectors since it will make their big profit anyway.
Griff Carnes
Kerrville, Texas

The decision is undisputedly at the sole discretion of the U.S. Mint, but the way it handled it is despicable.
The Mint deliberately did not mention the planned release of the BEP set during the four week sales window of the two coin silver Eagle sets. This omission left collectors with the impression that these sets would be the only way to acquire either of the coins. The silver Eagle sets were over-priced, but collectors bought over 251,000 of them based on the false impression deliberately created by the U.S. Mint.
Now the Mint offers the BEP sets, looking to cash in further on the popularity of the silver Eagle series, with the hope that collectors are too stupid to notice how they are being manipulated by the Mint. We noticed, and we are not pleased.
After the way collectors were treated by the Mint during the sale of the 2011 silver Eagle sets, combined now with this latest rip-off, the Mint just might have killed the golden goose, or in this case the silver Eagle goose. The American collectors have been used and betrayed, and it is now clear that you can’t trust anyone in the government.
Richard Graff
Hillsboro, Ore.

Absolutely not. Why be so manipulative and dishonest when it wasn’t necessary? Any over-production of both proof and reverse proof 2012-S ASE left over or returned from the two-coin set could have had the vapor blasted surface applied just like the unc. 5-ounce ATB.
The Mint already has the equipment and experience to do so. This would have produced another “must-have” variant and pushed sales of the Making America C&C set the highest selling of the series. Who knows, this surface could have proven to be the most desirable ASE finish, surpassing the regular proof finish.
So why the deliberate subterfuge? To what purpose? The Mint put some effort into the wording for the two-coin set to not say what it actually planned to do. This stinks of fraud or a con job. But why? How has the Mint benefited? We, the customers, will never notice. Really? With the Internet, Twitter and collector-focused forums discussing every decision and product of the Mint in detail?
The contempt shown toward its customer base is beyond comprehension. I would really like to hear an explanation of what the Mint was thinking when this scam was conceived. Whoever thought it up, and whoever approved it, should both be fired for gross dishonesty.
Doug Clemann
Kihei, Hawaii