Letters to the Editor (March 19, 2019)

Mint reused 1968 envelope

I have attached a photo (at right) from a recent purchase of a 1969 U.S. Mint Set. As you can see in the picture, the mint used an envelope originally intended for a 1968 U.S. Mint Set. I doubt that these are rare; I just found it interesting and something I had never run across before. It certainly reflects a different era, one when they were so cost conscious that they chose to re-use the previous year’s envelope. Probably not something that would happen today.

Bob Missel
Fremont, Neb.

‘Little guy’ defends Mint

Once again I just read a letter from a reader lamenting the idea that the U.S. Mint takes care of its larger customers first while ignoring the “little guy.” Well, I am a “little guy,” and I don’t know if the Mint actually follows that practice or not, nor do I care. I have never had a problem in ordering what I want from the Mint’s website, I have never had a problem receiving what I ordered, and I have never had a problem with the quality of what I received.

Imagine that you work for a company that sells toasters. You have customers who order one toaster at a time, and you have customers who order thousands of toasters at a time. Who are you going to give the best service and best prices to? The bulk buyer.

The Mint is no different. The casual collector who spends $100 every three months is not going to keep the lights on at the Mint. And as far as the coins for sale on TV go, we don’t know if the sellers even have possession of the merchandise yet. They may just be taking orders.

Peter Glassman
Schaumburg, Ill.

Political slur unappreciated

I just read the letter you published in the 2/26 issue from Ron Thompson. I find it very offensive that you published this letter since it contained a slur at President Trump. Political slurs don’t belong in your fine newspaper. I expect you use more discretion it the future.

R. Grant
Geneva, Ill.

Editor’s Note: We apologize for the unflattering reference.

New series spark interest

In reference to “Letters,” Innovation Dollar Coin a Flop (NN Feb. 12, 2019).

I believe that the coin collecting community values the introduction of new coins and coin series. I have personally witnessed the favorable interest in the dollar coin. These coins (SBA, Sac., Innovation) have also sparked an interest with the younger collectors as well.

Recent articles in coin publications have mentioned our hobby is dying and new interest was needed from young collectors to continue our hobby.

As for the dollar bill, which are printed in the billions and outlasting the coin. The dollar coin stopped being minting for circulation in 2009. [It is] now being minted for collectors and can be purchased from the U.S. Mint. I do not believe that there is a circulating issue.

Without the continuation of new coins for collectors, our hobby could fade away as we know it.

Jeffery E. Wagner
Fruita, Colo.

1975-D doubled die cent

I am writing you about the doubled die 1975 penny [after] reading your article about [how] two men went to the Denver Mint. While they were there, an employee came over and made a statement that the 1975-D doubled die was made on purpose.

Now, I want to know were the 1975-D doubled dies all made with the doubled die marks. I have found five so far. Using my small magnifying glass and with a floater on my eye, I really can’t tell if they are a double stripe.

Also, many collectors are in their 70s and 80s, so [for] anyone like me that has eye problems and hearing problems, could you make available a cell phone number where we can text you about coins.

George A. Parks
Kaplan, La.

Let demand set mintages

The U.S. Mint has to be the most inept-led company in the world. Any business would want to maximize sales and profits. To do so, you make your products to meet public demand. The idea of limiting a potentially popular program such as the Apollo 11 commemoration is the sheer definition of lunacy (pun intended!). I have supported the commemoratives for several years, but if I can’t get the 19CF two-coin set, which includes the limited edition of the Kennedy half, I will swear off this program and all new ones in the future.

When will the Mint wake up. Don’t set mintage limits! Some commemoratives will bomb, like the 2018 Breast Cancer program. But others will strike a universal chord that will prove to sell more than anticipated. What if more people want an Apollo coin than allowed? Let the consumer demand dictate the mintages! Sales may double more than anyone thought.

I wouldn’t mind waiting if the Mint has to strike more of a coin than planned. And if the Mint had an ordering period for the pre-sales or intro price, without a “Household Order Limits may apply on all products for the first 24 hours of availablility,” who knows what sales would rack up?

If the Mint would have no mintage limits set, no collector or investor would have anybody to blame but themselves if they passed an opportunity get a coin. The Mint would look pretty good! No complaints aimed at them! Come on, Mint, wake up! What I suggested is win-win for the future sales of commemorative (or any other) coins and the consumer. It would make me happy, and I wouldn’t have to write a letter like this.

Tom Robbins
Oquawka, Ill.

Block Island coins in Tenn.

Just a note on the last 2018 Block Island quarters. I live in west Tennessee, and yesterday was the first time this quarter appeared in my change. It was a Philadelphia coin. Usually we get Denver quickly, but none has appeared for me.

Regarding the innovator gold coin, I had to get some as it was inaugural issue and I liked the design. Jury still out on what will be offered in the future.

Dennis Owen Onks
Address withheld

Are coins just medals with denominations?

There’s an irony in the low sales of official medals compared to commemorative “coins” put out by our mints (the situation applies here in New Zealand) – yet looking at them objectively, what are our precious-metal commemorative “coins” now if not official medals that happen to have a denomination as part of the design? They are extremely unlikely to circulate, and their function is almost entirely medallic, yet take away those couple of words that claim they are somehow “one dollar,” “five dollars,” “ten dollars,” etc., and collector interest plummets.

Martin Purdy
New Zealand

CSNS exhibit correction

In the “Viewpoint” in the Jan. 22, 2019, issue, I expressed my concern about the changes to the exhibits at Central States. Unfortunately, I did not do a good job of separating fact from rumor. CSNS President Mitch Ernst set the record straight in his Feb. 12 “Viewpoint.” My apologies to President Ernst, CSNS, and your readers for the misinformation.

This is no way lessens my concern for the future of Central States.

Bob Fritsch
Nashua, N.H.

‘D’ cent in California

Just to let you know I received a 2019-D cent in change at our local Walgreens today, Feb. 13. (I was buying a Valentines Day card for my wife).

Klaus Schwalfenberg
Torrance, Calif.

Open order basis for 2019 palladium reverse proof?

This past Friday, I filled out a survey from the Mint. In it, I was asked if I would be interested in buying the 2019 palladium reverse proof coin for $1,850. It also said that the coin would be available on an open order basis, meaning they will make coins for as many people who want to get one. I don’t know if they were fishing or if this is their intended game plan.

I have a 2017 MS70 and a 2018 PF70UC. I bought them because they were rare and unique, as only 15,000 of each were minted. I replied that I would not be interested at that price point, especially if they are going to start stamping them out like American Eagles.

Bill Rodgers
Dallas-Fort Worth, Texas