Community Voice Responses (09/20/2011)

From the Aug. 26 Numismatic News E-Newsletter:

Is putting an “S” mint coin in the silver Eagle 25th anniversary set a good idea?

I think putting an “S” on a silver Eagle is a good idea. It adds to the variety and interest in coin collecting.
James C. Parker Dawsonville, Ga.
Yes, I think it would be a great idea for the 25th anniversary set to include an “S” mintmarked silver Eagle.
Charles Landess Evensville, Tenn.
Yes, I feel putting an “S” mintmark on the coin in the silver Eagle 25th anniversary set is a good idea. It’s better than just putting it on the lead seal on the band that wraps around that “giant green monster box,” and having some third party grader add it to the slab, “saying it’s from San Francisco, Calif.”
People will be excited, like they were with the 2006 reverse proof. I would buy it if they come out from the U.S. Mint.
Chuck Schroeder St. Petersburg, Fla.

The Mint should, by law, put a mintmark on all coins. This makes them more collectible, and identifies the manufacture site. The Mint will make more sales to collectors, who will want to collect specimens from different mints.
The slabs with the pedigree from San Francisco are just another gimmick of the grading firms. Why there are premiums on different slabs, with the same coins, from the same graders and from the same company, is marketing genius, and in my opinion, a rip-off. What happened to “buy the coin, not the slab?”
I’ll buy an “S” coin when it has a mintmark. I’d be happy to have a coin with a mark from the mint it comes from. I don’t buy bullion coins in slabs. Grading firms are on thin ice with designer slabs. That practice, to me, looks a lot like the big guys getting special grading.
Donald Cantrell Address Withheld
No, they should not include this so called “S” mint Eagle in the set. It is a bullion coin that does not carry a mintmark. I personally feel there is no such thing as an “S” mint silver Eagle. It’s a bullion coin, and it don’t matter where they make them, that’s why there is no mintmark on them to begin with.
David Tortorice Buffalo, N.Y.

Editor’s note: The upcoming set has an uncirculated collector Eagle with the “S” mintmark on it as one of five coins in the set.
The silver Eagle silver anniversary set should have an “S” mintmarked coin. After all, the “S” is predominant in the name! Why not have a larger set? The San Francisco Mint authorities should have insisted that any coins minted there bear the “S” mintmark. The graded coins say San Francisco Mint on the label, but lacking a mintmark seems to diminish them when compared to other coins that bear the mark of their mint.
John Lowenthal Address withheld

Certainly there should be an “S” Eagle. The only Eagle that shouldn’t have a mintmark is one that comes from Philadelphia, since their coins traditionally lack mintmarks. The coins should also carry the “double date” to show the 25th year, or have the current year with “25th YEAR ANNIVERSARY” incorporated somewhere in the design for that year.
Bill Tuttle Cleveland, Ohio

Yes, it would be a good idea, so long as the Mint didn’t try to take advantage of the people by raising the price more.
George Conner Rogersville, Mo.

Yes, as long as it is not done again until the 50th anniversary. It needs to be unique, not an annual issue.
Richard Carlucci Egg Harbor, N.J.

Yes, it is a great idea, and instead of the bullion coin they should have put in a Denver coin.
W. Lavalley Waterford, Conn.

I think it’s a good idea to put the “S” mintmark on the silver Eagles. I think that the buyers ought to know where their coins were minted, and it also opens a new collecting line.
Of course, the Mint has to think about the mintages, so that some year wouldn’t have just a handful of “S” silver Eagles, that would make them too expensive for the average collector.
Ossi Halme Finland

I think it would be a good idea for the 25th anniversary silver Eagle coin to have an “S” mintmark, if it was produced at the San Francisco Mint.
Larry W. Young Tyrone, Ga.

I like the idea of an “S” mintmark on the silver Eagle, and I am in favor of the change.
Larry Hamler Eau Claire, Wis.

As a collector of silver Eagles, I like the idea of an “S” mintmarked Eagle in my collection. I recently purchased a “no-S” silver bullion Eagle at a slight premium to bullion. It is an NGC slabbed coin, and it cannot be deslabbed to put into an album without it’s authenticity being questioned in the future.
Eric Draper Address withheld

I think putting an “S” coin out would be a good idea. It would give collectors another first to add to their collections, and I would certainly love to have one
Bernard Narcy Aubrey, Texas

I think it is a great idea. I don’t know why they didn’t put it on the San Francisco Eagles that they minted this year anyway. I can’t wait to get the set!
Gary Frischen Austin, Texas

I think it’s a bad idea. West Point has been making the silver Eagle coins for years. Moving production back to San Francisco just to get the “S” mintmark on the coins is wrong.
Del Dulaney Address Withheld

I think it’s a great idea! I got very lucky when the “W” mintmark was put on a previous Eagle, and I acquired a couple of sets before the Mint took the mintmark off in 1995.
Ed MacDonald Kansas City, Mo.

Putting the “S” on the coins will certainly be good for the U.S. Mint. Another coin collectors will need to complete the set. That means more orders for the Mint.
Mark Pollachek Springfield, N.J.

I think including an “S” mintmark silver Eagle in the 25th anniversary five coin set is a great idea.
Phil McNeil Victoria, Australia

I’m all for it. It would constitute a great set for collectors and the general public alike to acquire.
Bryan New Columbia, Ky.

Putting the “S” mintmark on the silver Eagle for the 25th anniversary set is just another way for Mint to suck the life out of the collector.
If they can’t put it on the coins they are already striking in California, why include one in the anniversary set?
Steve Rieger Maple Shade, N.J.