United States Mint lifts the curtain on designs for the 2019 America the Beautiful Quarters Program

Background photo by AgnosticPreachersKid.

Philadelphia — The United States Mint revealed the official designs for the 2019–dated coins in the America the Beautiful Quarters Program. The designs were unveiled at the American Numismatic Association’s World’s Fair of Money in the Philadelphia Convention Center.

Designers in the Mint’s Artistic Infusion Program (AIP) created the new designs which will be displayed on the reverse (tails side) of quarters honoring Lowell National Historical Park (Massachusetts), American Memorial Park (Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands), War in the Pacific National Historical Park (Guam), San Antonio Missions National Historical Park (Texas), and Frank Church River of No Return Wilderness (Idaho). The designs were sculpted by the Mint’s sculptor-engravers.

Lowell National Historical Park

  • Designer: Joel Iskowitz
  • Sculptor-Engraver: Phebe Hemphill

Hover to zoom.

This design depicts a mill girl working at a power loom with its prominent circular bobbin battery. A view of Lowell, including the Boott Mill clock tower, is seen through the window. Inscriptions are LOWELLMASSACHUSETTS2019, and E PLURIBUS UNUM.

American Memorial Park

  • Designer: Donna Weaver
  • Sculptor-Engraver: Phebe Hemphill

This design depicts a young Chamorro woman in traditional dress at the front of the Flag Circle and Court of Honor. She is resting her hand on the plaque whose text honors the sacrifice of those who died in the liberation of Saipan. Inscriptions are AMERICAN MEMORIAL PARKN. MARIANA ISLANDS2019, and E PLURIBUS UNUM.

War in the Pacific National Historical Park

  • Designer: Joel Iskowitz
  • Sculptor-Engraver: Michael Gaudioso

This design portrays American forces coming ashore at Asan Bay, strengthening the number of troops on the island in the fight for Guam and its eventual liberation. Inscriptions are WAR IN THE PACIFICGUAM2019, and E PLURIBUS UNUM.

San Antonio Missions National Historical Park

  • Designer: Chris Costello
  • Sculptor-Engraver: Joseph Menna

This design depicts elements of the Spanish Colonial Real coin to pay tribute to the missions. Within the quadrants are symbols of the missions: wheat symbolizes farming, the arches and bell symbolize community, a lion represents Spanish cultural heritage, and a symbol of the San Antonio River represents irrigation methods and life-sustaining resources. Inscriptions are SAN ANTONIO MISSIONSTEXAS2019, and E PLURIBUS UNUM.

Frank Church River of No Return Wilderness

  • Designer: Emily Damstra
  • Sculptor-Engraver: Renata Gordon

This design depicts a piloted drift boat on the rushing river encompassed by the trees and rock formations of the Wilderness. Inscriptions are RIVER OF NO RETURNWILDERNESSIDAHO2019, and E PLURIBUS UNUM.

The obverse (heads) of the 2019 quarters will continue to feature the restored 1932 portrait of George Washington by sculptor John Flanagan. Required obverse inscriptions are UNITED STATES OF AMERICALIBERTYIN GOD WE TRUST, and QUARTER DOLLAR.

Line art of the designs is available here.

2019 will mark the 10th year of the America the Beautiful Quarters Program, which is authorized by Public Law 110-456—the America’s Beautiful National Parks Quarter Dollar Coin Act of 2008. The Act directs the Mint to design, mint, and issue quarter-dollar coins emblematic of a national park or another national site in each state, the District of Columbia, and the five U.S. territories. As stipulated by the Act, the Mint is issuing five new quarters per year until 2020. The quarters will be issued in the order in which each honored site was first established. The final coin will be released in 2021.

About the United States Mint
Congress created the United States Mint in 1792 and the Mint became part of the Department of the Treasury in 1873. As the Nation’s sole manufacturer of legal tender coinage, the Mint is responsible for producing circulating coinage for the Nation to conduct its trade and commerce. The Mint also produces numismatic products, including Proof, Uncirculated, and commemorative coins; Congressional Gold Medals; silver and bronze medals; and silver and gold bullion coins. Its numismatic programs are self-sustaining and operate at no cost to taxpayers.

Press release courtesy of the United States Mint.

Follow us on Facebook and Twitter!

Facebook Twitter Email

BEFORE YOU COMMENT:

  1. Mint News Blog is not a retail website. If you wish to buy a coin or banknote, you should contact a reputable dealer. One of our sponsors (see ads at left and top of page) may also have what you’re looking for, so be sure to check out their websites.
  2. Per policy, we do not advise on the value, authenticity, or rarity of readers’ coins and banknotes. For this kind of assistance, you should contact a reputable dealer, preferably one who’s certified by the American Numismatic Association and/or the Professional Numismatists Guild.
  3. Vulgar and/or abusive comments will not be tolerated. Nor will trolls.
  4. Allegations of fraudulent or criminal activity against a named party, when said activity has not been proven in a court of law, will be removed.

Comments

  1. cagcrisp says

    @CaliSkier,” 17RC 2017 LIMITED EDITION SILVER PROOF SET 49314 10/29/2017

    I’m guessing you’re using the last numbers you’d stored and there at some point was an updated sales number? ”

    Yes…

  2. Louis says

    There is a new, detailed article on Coin World about the interview they did with Ryder. One of things mentioned is he asked for a second set of designs for the 2018 innovation dollars, which is exactly what I recommended in my commentary in the current issue of Coin World. He has a lot of good ideas, and I think he will be an excellent director. I recommend checking out the interview article.

  3. cagcrisp says

    17RC 2017 LIMITED EDITION SILVER PROOF SET 48,901
    17RF 2017 CONGRATULATIONS SET 74,898

    @CaliSkier, I did use the Wrong number for the Congratulation Sets…

  4. cagcrisp says

    From the Coin World interview that Louis mentioned:

    “Ryder, at the American Numismatic Association World’s Fair of Money, said the Mint will also be developing limited-edition numismatic products that collectors will want to collect.”

    limited-edition numismatic products = Higher Pricing and Lower Mintages…

    …hmmm….Where have I heard that before?…

  5. cagcrisp says

    From the Coin World interview that Louis mentioned:

    ” The West Point Mint has been storing more than 4 million foreign gold coins for decades that were repatriated from World War II, including nearly 2,000 pre-1930 U.S. gold coins. Ryder said that, in 1992, while serving as the 34th Mint director, he wanted to empty the coffers and put the coins into the numismatic marketplace.

    Ryder said he received opposition from several people who collected examples of the coins being held in Mint vaults, who didn’t want the stored coins released for fear it would drive down the value of their own coins.

    “I think it would be great to be able to do something with those coins because each has a story to tell,” Ryder said.”

    Win for the Mint because they Need the Money
    Win for Mint Stakeholders IF the price is reasonable
    Loss for those that will get Diluted on the coins they currently own…

    Bottom Line the Mint Needs the Money….

  6. just another dave in pa says

    The birds of 2018 are a high water mark in the atb series.

    I may just end it there as there are no good designs that elicit a sense of place in any of the remaining coins.

    The gimmick (innovation) dollars are simply a rushed afterthought chosen by a committee void of ideas to replace the Presidential coins that nobody really wanted.

    I was going to finish the atb series but now I’m free to explore other options.

  7. cagcrisp says

    Let’s See…

    “including nearly 2,000 pre-1930 U.S. gold coins.”

    1. Anyone want to say HOW 2,000 pre-1930 U.S. gold coins SHOULD be dispersed in a FAIR manner?

    …AND…

    2. Anyone want to say HOW the 2,000 pre-1930 U.S. gold coins WILL be dispersed?

    Something tells me that the Answer to #1. and #2. will NOT be the Same Answer….

  8. cagcrisp says

    From the Coin World Interview:

    “To address the cost of the cent, Ryder said the Mint is working with the Federal Reserve to prompt the American public to put the billions of cents stored in jars, dresser drawers and the like back into circulation, resulting in lowering necessity for new coin production.”

    I hope that’s Not his idea of thinking “outside the box.”

    Someone from the Federal Government asking the American public to “put billions of cents stored in jars, dresser drawers and the like back into circulation”

    I can already tell you that what is Currently being stored will Increase with a statement like that…

  9. Ryan says

    I don’t like the androgynous man/woman in the raft on the frank church coin BUT I’m glad they didn’t pick a design with a stupid wild on it!!! Also the San Antonio coin design is weak, many of the other mission designs were better IMO

  10. earthling says

    Can you imagine the disruption a bag of 33 Saints would cause in the Numisverse if found? Like a Nuclear Detination by little Rockey Guy.

  11. cagcrisp says

    @earthling,”Can you imagine the disruption a bag of 33 Saints would cause in the Numisverse if found? Like a Nuclear Detination by little Rockey Guy.”

    IF there every was a bag of 33 Saints…

    …They ain’t there Now…

  12. earthling says

    I think I like the Lowell design. Can’t wait to see it as a 5 Oz Mint Marked BU. But what going on with the 60’s Olds Rocket 88 Hubcap? Leave it to the Mint to throw in something odd.

  13. cagcrisp says

    Palladium now over $900

    A rumor got out that Trump is going to meet with Xi in November…

  14. CaliSkier says

    I@Cag & others, Cag says: “To address the cost of the cent, Ryder said the Mint is working with the Federal Reserve to prompt the American public to put the billions of cents stored in jars, dresser drawers and the like back into circulation, resulting in lowering necessity for new coin production.”

    I hope that’s Not his idea of thinking “outside the box.””

    Someone from the Federal Government asking the American public to “put billions of cents stored in jars, dresser drawers and the like back into circulation”

    I stumbled into this press release from the US Mint(1975!) regarding the $.01 “Penny”!!!! Check out the link, then comment about “thinking outside the box!!! Shrug(Steve)….

    https://www.usmint.gov/learn/history/historical-documents/letters-sent-to-school-principals-about-penny-retrieval-program

  15. CaliSkier says

    Ryan says: “Also the San Antonio coin design is weak, many of the other mission designs were better IMO”

    Ryan you’re too kind! That design absolutely sucks!!! My guess is that picture is from someone’s kindergartner, at the US Mint? That might even be a complement, non deserving, of this boring, non-artistic design! SERIOUSLY, this is the best the US Mint could come up with and actually was signed off on, by the powers that be??? WTH….not Shrugging on this one!!! Hands up in the air, red card, yellow flag, disqualified, etc!!! Damn….

    Put, San Antonio Mission Park into a google search and the 2 pics that come up would have been WAY better in my opinion!!! Or even a variation of pics on the website to the park!

    https://www.nps.gov/saan/index.htm

  16. Barry says

    The Texas design looks like “Clip Art” . Maybe spend some of that money being turned over to the Treasury on better designs. The best thing would be to spend accrued surpluses and give the Treasury one dollar when the time comes.

  17. CaliSkier says

    Ryan says: “I don’t like the androgynous man/woman in the raft on the frank church coin“. Interesting! Reminds me of a really “funny” Saturday Night Live skit! Pat/It’s Pat! “Pat was selected as #17 of “The 30 Best Saturday Night Live Characters” by Paste magazine in 2012”

    In this line art(?) drawing it also appears the boat is going to get “Wedged” between the two rocks! That would mean that the look on the Androgynous helmsman should have a really alarmed look on their face , as the Mighty Salmon River is no joke!!! Especially when it is first open to rafting, after the winter thaw!

  18. CaliSkier says

    Cag says: “1. Anyone want to say HOW 2,000 pre-1930 U.S. gold coins SHOULD be dispersed in a FAIR manner?

    Perhaps a ballot/Lottery similar to what the Australian mint has done with some of their limited, low mintage, special offerings?

    Mail in over the course of one year, one per household, verifiable existing previous US Mint customers! Maybe break the sales out into 4 separate lottery’s, one every 3 months, after the close of registration. BTW, No dealers, middleman, duplicates or shenanigans!!! If a dealer wants one, they enter the lottery like the rest of us!

  19. CaliSkier says

    Cag says: “2. Anyone want to say HOW the 2,000 pre-1930 U.S. gold coins WILL be dispersed?”

    Perhaps, the same way they sell bullion, through the Authorized Purchaser channel? With a similar lottery situation???

    However, due to how the 2010 ATB 5oz Bullion Coins were handled, that would probably prove to be too much responsibility and they’’d be too tempted to do the WRONG thing and only their friends or family would end up with the limited and valuable coins???

  20. CaliSkier says

    Cags 2nd question: Maybe some sort of non-linked Arbitrator of sorts??? Ponder, this would be a BIG responsibility and there would be GLOBAL interest in obtaining a specimen for sure!!!

  21. Buzz Killington says

    Re: Ideas to sell gold coin stash

    Offer them for sale at current numismatic value, with some kind of simple “GSA” type mylar packaging.

    Let people buy them to have graded, and mylar packaging will allow pedigree labels.

    Keep them up for the long haul, and adjust prices with the market.

    Why keep making new product to sell, when you can just sell product you already have? Would simplify all of these dumb series and too many products.

  22. Ron says

    The TEXAS coin could have been the Alamo, probably not politically correct, but it is a mission.

  23. Jerry Diekmann says

    Ron – technically the Alamo was not a mission – anymore, at least, at the time of the battle of the Alamo. It had been founded as a mission in 1718 (51 years before Fr. Junipero Serra’s founding of his first mission, San Diego de Alcala, in 1769. The Alamo’s original name was Mission San Antonio de Valero, but it was abandoned in 1793, long before the Texians (not Texans) held the strategic building for two weeks in early 1836 against being vastly outnumbered by the Mexican army and then massacred. After Sam Houston’s decisive victory over General Antonio Santa Anna at the battle of San Jacinto later that year, the Texians declared Texas as a republic, and it existed as a separate nation for nine years, until the republic joined the Union in 1845.

    I’m not sure how the mission got the name “Alamo”, but I believe it would be in reference to “los alamos” (the poplars) or cottonwoods that grew along the San Antonio river. A small picture of the Alamo is shown on the obverse of the 100th anniversary of the Texas republic issued for several years during the 1930s, and at all three mints. The actual anniversary would have been 1936, but the first coins were issued in 1934.

    I think it helps to appreciate coins if you know a little of the history of why the coin is being minted.

  24. Jerry Diekmann says

    If Ryder wants to dispose of these coins, I would suggest he wait until after Treasury Secretary Munchkin is out of office. He is a billionaire who once foreclosed on a home with a debt of 88 cents owing, and he is an avaricious 1%’er who would make sure he got the moist valuable coins and he would not want to pay more than face value for them. Another of the swamp creatures in DC.

  25. CaliSkier says

    just another dave in pa, says: “The gimmick (innovation) dollars are simply a rushed afterthought chosen by a committee void of ideas to replace the Presidential coins that nobody really wanted.”

    You are so, spot on with this comment/thought!!!

  26. So Krates says

    Just sell the $20s like they sell everything else – Wednesday at high noon. Extra GSA type packaging could work but isn’t necessary as the TPGs (which weren’t around during the GSA hoard release) can just accept sealed mint packages and then indicate the pedigree on the label.

    As for the request for cents, it might be a precursor for the long awaited elimination.

  27. HarryB says

    @cag: as to sale of the “pre 1930 US gold coins” in storage, the Mint needs an auction function added to their web site, and auction all stored gold coins, will net highest return for the Mint, and be the only fair and transparent process. Using a lottery, prepricing, limiting to only previous customers, etc would all create a great opportunity for lawyers. Harry

  28. Anthony says

    The mint should melt all of the pre 1930 U.S. gold coins to make a limited edition of gold American Innovation dollars.

  29. cagcrisp says

    @Buzz Killington

    2018 Palladium Proof…

    Mintage Limit : 15,000
    Product Limit: 15,000
    HHL of 1…

  30. cagcrisp says

    Let’s See…

    Concerning the Gold coins being kept in the West Point Mint Facility…

    FOREIGN COINS: 4,686,358 Gold coins = 991,855.139 FTO ( Gold @ ~ $1,200 Spot = $1.19 Billion)

    4,141 bags of coins, most containing 1,000 coins.

    Most of the 1,000 coin bags are British Sovereigns containing ~ 235.000 FTO (Gold @ ~ $1,200 Spot = $282,000/bag)

    US GOLD COINS: (No Idea why the Mint broke the coins down in the following manner or the FTO that was arrived at)

    Coin years range from 1850 – 1929: Denomination; Pieces; FTO

    $1.00 = 3; .117 FTO
    $2.50 = 53; 6.381 FTO
    $5.00 = 188; 45.297 FTO
    $10.00 = 117; 56.448 FTO
    $20.00 = 1,291; 1,247.634 FTO
    Various Type = 97; 63.442 FTO

    Subtotal 1,749 coins; 1,419.319 FTO

    Coin years range from 1856 – 1919: Denomination; Pieces; FTO

    $3.00 = 1; .100 FTO
    $5.00 = 18; 4.500 FTO
    $10.00 = 18; 9.000 FTO
    $20.00 = 50; 50.000 FTO

    Subtotal 87 coins; 63.600 FTO

    TOTALS; 1,836 coins; 1,482.919 FTO…

  31. sharks2th says

    A couple of these designs are ok. At least they are not another bunch of birds like the designs of this year.

    OT – Check out the discoloration on this gold buffalo Heritage is auctioning:

    https://coins.ha.com/itm/modern-bullion-coins/2008-w-5-tenth-ounce-gold-buffalo-9999-fine-gold-pr70-deep-cameo-pcgs-pcgs-population-552-ngc-census-1985-/a/131834-26043.s?ctrack=1103408&type=featured-5-coinus–close-131834–tem081718

    Either the holder (or label in the holder) is offgassing some type of sulfur compound or the gold is not as pure as the mint states. I know we’ve had posters here with the same problem in recent years. Someone should determine what is causing this discoloration in these holders because it should not be occurring on .999 gold this quickly.

  32. Malco says

    What is the potential for price appreciation for the palladium proof eagle? How long before it sells out?

  33. HarryB says

    @cag: addressing disposition of the Mints holdings of foreign gold coins, it would seem wise to package the common dates and price at some factor above spot and list them for order on the web, sorting the rarer items and the US gold in an auction format…

  34. Buzz Killington says

    @cag — Count me in for one Pd Proof. I think they will NOT sell out the first day, but they will sell out fairly quickly.

  35. cagcrisp says

    @HarryB,” addressing disposition of the Mints holdings of foreign gold coins, it would seem wise to package the common dates and price at some factor above spot and list them for order on the web, sorting the rarer items and the US gold in an auction format…”

    There are No dates listed for the Foreign Gold. Most of the bags are 1,000 coin bags and I would Assume that there is some indication on the bag as to dates, just not listed. There are some bags of 3,000 coins with ~ 293.000 FTO

    My guess is that there will be NO Foreign coins that every appear on the Mint’s website. I wouldn’t think they would break out the 1,000-3,000 coin bags so that would eliminate everybody except the Big Boys.

    IF I was the Mint I would list a Few of the US Gold pieces on the Mint’s website. The Mint is going to spend $9.50 Million on promoting their coins in FY18.

    They would get a LOT of free publicity/traffic IF they listed some of these pre-1930 US Gold pieces.

    How better to prove to the public that a $20 Gold piece could be sold for $X,xxx?…

  36. cagcrisp says

    @Buzz Killington,” I think they will NOT sell out the first day, but they will sell out fairly quickly.”

    That’s what makes a Market.

    At least you’ve got the cojones to make a call Before the fact and not redboard the call…

  37. CaliSkier says

    I’m sorry to go there again Cag, I know you’ve expressed a concern that the numismatic side would be eliminated, however due to continually as a whole being very much in the back, year in and year out, how is it that the,

    “Bottom Line the Mint Needs the Money….”?

    Straight from the US Mint 2016 Annual Report:
    “Due to the success of each product line, the Mint was able to transfer more than $550 million to the Treasury General Fund this year. In FY 2016, the Mint transferred $611 million to the Treasury General Fund from the PEF.”
    “Straight from the US Mint 2017 Annual Report:
    “In FY 2017, the Mint transferred $269 million to the Treasury General Fund from the United States Mint Public Enterprise Fund.”

    How is it that the Mint needs the money? I know you’ve tried before and continue to say they NEED the money, but they are transferring HALF A BILLION dollars after ALL expenses, overhead, operating costs, etc have been covered!!!

  38. cagcrisp says

    @CaliSkier,”

    I’m sorry to go there again Cag, I know you’ve expressed a concern that the numismatic side would be eliminated, however due to continually as a whole being very much in the back, year in and year out, how is it that the,

    “Bottom Line the Mint Needs the Money….”?

    Straight from the US Mint 2016 Annual Report:
    “Due to the success of each product line, the Mint was able to transfer more than $550 million to the Treasury General Fund this year. In FY 2016, the Mint transferred $611 million to the Treasury General Fund from the PEF.”
    “Straight from the US Mint 2017 Annual Report:
    “In FY 2017, the Mint transferred $269 million to the Treasury General Fund from the United States Mint Public Enterprise Fund.”

    How is it that the Mint needs the money? I know you’ve tried before and continue to say they NEED the money, but they are transferring HALF A BILLION dollars after ALL expenses, overhead, operating costs, etc have been covered!!!”

    The Vast Vast majority of the money that you mentioned is Seigniorage from Circulating Coinage, NOT Net Income from the numismatic side.

    In FY17 Net Income for the numismatic side was $9.0 Million and in FY16 Net Income for the numismatic side was $8.9 Million.

    Net Income has NOTHING to do with Seigniorage. ZERO. NADDA. ZILCH.

    The Mint needs to make Net Income on the numismatic side…And…$9.0 Million is cutting it Close on Revenue that continues to Decline Year/Year/Year…

  39. CaliSkier says

    What is so hard about the artwork being accurate and vetted out before actually releasing their numismatics commemoratives or ATB coinage?

    Someone else here on MNB commented recently about the left handed WW I commemorative! Now the picture/line art above in the War of the Pacific coin from Guam has not 1, but 2 lefties!!! One could argue they are just carrying that way, however their left hand is on the trigger??? Can’t they flip the image relatively easy? Art, and sculpting isn’t my specialty, nor are weapons or firearms, but…..?

    Check out this blog and the first few comments regarding left handed military bolt rifles! One commenter, even goes into modern issues and very, Very unlikely to have left handed issued rifles and for that matter, unlikely a soldier in the field and or under or returning fire would use a left handed technique! Just saying…….

    https://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=411065

  40. earthling says

    Too bad the Mint doesn’t leak the news about those Gold Treasures in the Vaults. They were actually recovered off Greenland in 2006 from a sunken Freighter that sank in 1934 while heading to London. As recovered Sunken Gold there could be a huge Premium associated with this loot.

  41. CaliSkier says

    Cag says: “The Vast Vast majority of the money that you mentioned is Seigniorage from Circulating Coinage, NOT Net Income from the numismatic side.”

    Also that: “Net Income has NOTHING to do with Seigniorage. ZERO. NADDA. ZILCH.

    WHO CARES, which part of the lines of operations generates the 1/2 a $BILLION$ dollars???? The US Mint, the Secretary of the Treasury, nor US Government care where or which part of the Mints revenue comes from! As long as that, as a whole there is NO COST to the taxpayers!!! As long as they keep doing so & the $$$$ keeps flowing, at no cost, then their is NO PROBLEM!

    I’m sure you’ll say the same thing, just as sure as I will also? Where’s the proof that the money can’t be used for whichever part of their lines of operations that needs it?

    Established in 1792, the Mint is the world’s largest coin manufacturer. Since Fiscal Year (FY) 1996, the Mint has operated under the Public Enterprise Fund (PEF) (31 U.S.C. § 5136). The PEF enables the Mint to operate without an appropriation. The Mint generates revenue through the sale of circulating coins to the Federal Reserve Banks (FRB), numismatic products to the public, and bullion coins to authorized purchasers. Revenue in excess of amounts required by the PEF is transferred to the United States Treasury (Treasury) General Fund.

    SEIGNIORAGE AND NET INCOME
    Seigniorage is the difference between the face value and cost of producing circulating coinage. The Mint transfers seigniorage to the Treasury General Fund to help finance national debt. Net income from bullion and numismatic operations can also fund Federal programs.

    2017 Annual Report:
    “THE UNITED STATES MINT AT A GLANCE

    UNITED STATES MINT (MINT)

    The Mint has the following lines of operation: Circulating, Bullion, and Numismatic.”

    The Mint has both circulating coin seigniorage and net income both, at their disposal to fulfill what ever part of their above “lines of operations”! They all fall under the One Mint. If not could you please copy and post where the US Mint says that the funds are not able to be used in any one of their lines of operations, no matter which part of their lines of operations the $money$ comes from? Thanks…..

    In case anyone would like to help out Cag or me in settling this deal, here’s the link!!! Cry me a river!

    Better yet, SHOW me where it says anywhere anything about Cag’s comment: “Bottom Line the Mint Needs the Money….”

    I’m calling BS till someone or ANYONE can post where it says the funds, prior to leaving the mint or being transferred, CAN NOT be used for which or whatever costs involved in operating THE MINT???

    I’ll take it back and apologize, however until then ZIP It about THE MINT NEEDING Money!

  42. 20th Century Variety Collector says

    @ So Krates
    Did the writer use MarkInFla’s find/pic? It stated Mark in the article 🙂
    Mike, says AUGUST 17, 2018 AT 12:06 AM, found one too!
    I hope I find one this weekend!! Bought 90 more.
    🙂

  43. CaliSkier says

    Not that anyone cares, however I’ll be ordering or trying to order the Palladium 1oz coin on Sept, 6th!

    How about you Cag, since the mint NEEDS the money?

  44. CaliSkier says

    @ 20th Century: “I hope I find one this weekend!! Bought 90 more.”

    Your comment reminds me of at least brings to mind the original 1971 Willy Wonka & the Chocolate Factory!

    I’ve got a golden ticket, I’ve got a golden ticket…..

  45. CaliSkier says

    Moreover this also seemingly implies what I’ve been saying as well!

    “Since FY 1996, the United States Mint has been operating under the United States Mint’s Public Enterprise Fund (PEF). As authorized by Public Law 104-52 (31 U.S.C. § 5136), the PEF eliminates the need for appropriations. Proceeds from the sales of circulating coins to the Federal Reserve Banks and numismatic items to the public are the source of funding for operations.”

    Specifically the part that’s says:

    “Proceeds from the sales of circulating coins to the Federal Reserve Banks and numismatic items to the public are the source of funding for operations.”!

  46. earthling says

    I’ll be watching the Palladium Parade from the sidelines. I’m expecting to see a sellout by 8 PM. Based on premiums for last years “Bullion” BU , this proof will be a good bet. Better than the Platinum Proof for sure.

  47. cagcrisp says

    @CaliSkier,”The Mint has the following lines of operation: Circulating, Bullion, and Numismatic.”

    The Mint has both circulating coin seigniorage and net income both, at their disposal to fulfill what ever part of their above “lines of operations”! They all fall under the One Mint. If not could you please copy and post where the US Mint says that the funds are not able to be used in any one of their lines of operations, no matter which part of their lines of operations the $money$ comes from? Thanks…..”

    The Mint follows General Accepted Accounting Practices…

    • Seigniorage is ONLY from circulating coins and products sold on the numismatic side that contain circulating coins (Mostly “S” quarters and NA $1)

    • Seigniorage is a Non Budget item sent to the Treasury from the Mint

    • Seigniorage can NOT be used to pay down the Federal Debt NOR can it be used for currently funded Federal programs

    • Net Income from numismatic coins that is transferred to the Treasury is a budget item and (There is NO Net Income for circulating coins) can ONLY be used for Federal budget items or pay down the Federal budget deficit

    • Thus…Unlike Seigniorage, Net Income from the numismatic side CAN be used to operate the Federal Government OR pay down the Federal budget deficit

    • Thus…Seigniorage can ONLY be used as a Non Budget line item to offset borrowing costs that the Treasury has to borrow to pay interest on the national debt

    • Thus…Seigniorage is a Non Budget Item and Net Income is a Budget Item

    • Thus…Seigniorage and Net Income are completely different items and used completely differently from general accepted accounting practices…

  48. CaliSkier says

    @ Cag regardless of your thus’s And Generally accepted accounting practices, SHOW me where it say that the US Mint CAN NOT use the money interchangeably to fund thei OPERATIONS!!!

    “Proceeds from the sales of circulating coins to the Federal Reserve Banks and numismatic items to the public are the source of funding for operations”!

    “prior to leaving the mint or being transferred, CAN NOT be used for which or whatever costs involved in operating THE MINT???”

    You can’t because it’s not true! If it is, please show me where your proof is besides your own analysis or attemp to confuse or mis-direct or use of RED HERRINGS?

  49. 20th Century Variety Collector says

    oops, not verbatim on his vid. Now I can’t find the comment 🙁
    But I did see the comment about “unfinished Proof Dies” in the comments:-)

  50. cagcrisp says

    @CaliSkier ,’@ Cag regardless of your thus’s And Generally accepted accounting practices, SHOW me where it say that the US Mint CAN NOT use the money interchangeably to fund thei OPERATIONS!!!”

    You Would have an argument IF the Mint only had One line of business. They Don’t. They have Three lines of business and the Mint is audited annually by KPMG and KPMG signs off that they are following general accepted accounting practices and having Three lines of business MEANS Three lines of business; that is Not One line of business…

  51. CaliSkier says

    What is so confusing besides our lying Government?

    “ Proceeds from the sales of circulating coins to the Federal Reserve Banks and numismatic items to the public are the source of funding for operations.”

    Let’s break it down:

    1. Proceeds from the sales. Proceeds,in this case is $money$, made off or made from the sales of circulation coins to the FRB & sales of collectibles and other numismatic offerings.

    2. Sales is the exchange of $money$, for goods or services. In this case coins from BOTH Circulating and Numismatic offerings.

    3. Source, is where the money/funding is coming from. Which, again comes from the sales.(see #2)

    4. NOWHERE does it say that the $money$(see #1) from sales(see #2) can ONLY(NOWHERE) be used on the individual operations in question.

    5. It says “the source of funding for operations.”. Which entails ALL costs of operating the MINT.

    6. SHOW ME THE QUOTE! If not Zip it!!!

  52. cagcrisp says

    @CaliSkier,”What is so confusing besides our lying Government?”

    It’s Not confusing to me…

  53. CaliSkier says

    Here’s more ammo for you to try and manipulate:

    All circulating and numismatic operating expenses, and capital investments incurred for the Mint’s operations and programs, are paid out of the PEF. By law, all funds in the PEF are available without fiscal year limitation. Revenues determined to be in excess of the amount required by the PEF are transferred to the United States Treasury General Fund as non-budgetary amounts or capital transfers. Non-budget amounts consist of seigniorage (the net income from circulating operations) which in the Federal budget is used to reduce the government’s need to borrow. The net income from numismatic program operations, including bullion coin program operations, is recorded as budgetary offsetting collections in the Federal budget, and is available to be used to fund other Federal Government operations and programs.”

    SHOW ME WHERE IT SAYS THAT THE MONEY GENERATED, regardless of the operation can only be used either for circulating or numismatic offerings?

    Please, oh please, so I can stop looking for the information you’re seemingly unable to produce? Then I can graciously & gladly apologize……

    https://www.treasury.gov/about/budget-performance/CJ17/26.%20Mint%20FY%202017%20CJ.PDF

  54. 20th Century Variety Collector says

    @ Caliskier
    No golden ticket for me 🙁
    I looked at 46, the other 44 are in a US Mint sealed box which I won’t open until necessary 🙂

  55. CaliSkier says

    Darn 20th Century, seems like you should have gotten at least 1?

    Keep us posted on when “necessary” comes up and the results of
    your search!

    Perhaps those lucky to find one of these elusive errors could post their order number or partial order number to see if there is a correlation to when these were shipped or if receiving these errors
    are completely random?

    I seem to recall that the 2008 Reverse of 2007 ASE errors were all shipped early during sales?

  56. CaliSkier says

    Wow, what a difference from 10’ 11 years ago re: ASE PF $1! Through only 5 mos!!!

    https://mintnewsblog.com/2007-2008-proof-silver-eagle-mintage/

    As compared to last sales report.

    AMERICAN SILVER EAGLE PROGRAM
    16EA 2016 1-oz. ASE $1 PF Coin 591,292 591,427 135
    17EG 2017 1-oz. ASE $1 Unc. Coin 176,632 176,739 107 Sold out
    17EA 2017 1-oz. ASE $1 PF Coin 382,154 382,355 201

    18EG 2018 1-oz. ASE $1 Unc. Coin 112,009 113,390 1,381
    18EA 2018 1-oz. ASE $1 PF Coin (S) 293,104 295,968 2,864

    It has taken 2 1/2 years to sell only 45,000(roughly) more than the 2008 sold in 5 months!!!

  57. Dave swfl says

    I fail to see why the mint cannot run their numismatic division at a loss. At the end of the day there would still be a net gain over all three divisions and the proceeds could still be distributed for appropriate use.

    That said, maybe if the numismatic. division were to lose money, maybe someone would wake up and shut down that division!

  58. 20th Century Variety Collector says

    @ Caliskier
    It will be necessary in a year or two, or if the variety(Unfinished Proof Die 2018-S Silver Reverse Proof Kennedy Half) starts to sell over $300 🙂

    This batch was much better than the previous 86 purchased. Only around 20% had the scratches at the base of the two right quarters. The Kennedy’s had MUCH FEWER marks on the cheek and neck. BUT, these had a lot more foggy coins, especially on the Thorpe Dollar, Halves, and Nickels…but probably less than 5% of the coins had it with minimal “fogginess”.

  59. Tom says

    In my opinion, the 2018 reverse proof , is testament to the LACK of quality control at the mint. I believe the dies were over used before being changed out. It reminds me of the proof coins from 1950 – 1970. The mint used the same dies countless times. That is why those that were struck first have superb cameo devices The more struck from the same die received less cameo contrast.
    How this years goof pans out is anybody’s guess. I’m reading about other sets that have rust spots and some coins having a weak reverse finish. My suggestion is to leave holder intact and wait.

  60. CaliSkier says

    Please wake up and read this excerpt and the ENTIRE text contained in the link provided after the excerpt!! Cag, Dave swfl, and any other non believers!

    The funds(Seigniorage & Net Profits) are co-mingled in the US Mint Public Enterprise Fund and able to be used for ALL US Mint, ALL operations w/out limitations! No need to worry about the numismatic side, as no matter what the program is Circulation, Bullion, Numismatic, the US Mint as a whole is covered! The US Mint and it’s entirety and ANY & ALL operations Are funded by the PEF!!! PERIOD; with HUNDREDS of Millions to spare and deposit yearly to the General Fund. When the PEF sends the Money to the US Treasury General Fund, it is then and only then separated and earmarked, with the Seigniorage portion to be used to pay down public debt(National Debt) and the Net Profit portion can be used to fund whatever the Secretary of the Treasury decides to fund including the National Debt if he or she chooses!

    From the Government Publishing Office. Technical, YES, CLEAR as a bell, YES, End of subject, PRICELESS!!!

    Ҥ5136. United States Mint Public Enterprise Fund
    There shall be established in the Treasury of the United States, a United States Mint Public Enterprise Fund (the ‘‘Fund’’) for fiscal year 1996 and hereafter: Provided, That all receipts from Mint operations and programs, including the production and sale of numismatic items, the production and sale of circulating coinage, the protection of Government assets, and gifts and bequests of property, real or personal shall be deposited into the Fund and shall be avail- able without fiscal year limitations: Provided further, That all expenses incurred by the Sec- retary of the Treasury for operations and pro- grams of the United States Mint that the Sec- retary of the Treasury determines, in the Sec- retary’s sole discretion, to be ordinary and rea- sonable incidents of Mint operations and pro- grams, and any expense incurred pursuant to any obligation or other commitment of Mint op- erations and programs that was entered into be- fore the establishment of the Fund, shall be paid out of the Fund: Provided further, That not to ex- ceed 6.2415 percent of the nominal value of the coins minted, shall be paid out of the Fund for the circulating coin operations and programs in fiscal year 1996 for those operations and pro- grams previously provided for by appropriation:”

    https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/USCODE-2011-title31/pdf/USCODE-2011-title31-subtitleIV-chap51-subchapIII-sec5136.pdf

  61. CaliSkier says

    See below, copied from “US Mint. Gov” Pg 21 of 70.

    Link:

    https://www.usmint.gov/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/2016AnnualReport.pdf

    “PEF EARNINGS AND TRANSFERS TO THE TREASURY GENERAL FUND
    As required by 31 U.S.C. § 5136, the Mint deposits all receipts from operations and programs into the PEF. Periodically, the Mint transfers amounts in the PEF determined to be in excess of amounts required to support ongoing operations and programs. The circulating, bullion, and numismatic program data exclude costs for the protection of custodial assets activity. Consolidated earnings are discussed below to provide a status of the entirety of the PEF compared to prior periods.

    FY 2016 Protection costs increased by 10.6 percent to $45.0 million compared to $40.7 million last year. FY 2016 PEF earnings after Protection costs decreased to $623.5 million compared to $628.0 million last year, driven by increased depreciation in Protection.
    The Mint made two transfers to the Treasury General Fund this fiscal year totaling $6 1 million. In FY 2015, the Mint transferred $561 million. The Mint makes two types of transfers. Non-budget transfers from the PEF consist of seigniorage, which is not treated as a budgetary receipt to the Government, but as a means of financing. Budget transfers to the Treasury General Fund from the PEF usually consist of numismatic net income and can be treated as a budgetary receipt to the Government.

    In December 2015, the Mint made a budget transfer of $61 million from numismatic and bullion earnings to the Treasury General Fund, compared to $11 million transferred last year. On September 30, 2016, the Mint made a non-budget transfer of $550 million to the Treasury General Fund, the same amount that was transferred last year.”

  62. CaliSkier says

    @20th Century, I’ll have to look at my 4 sets closer, for some of the noted flaws, scratches, fogginess you’ve mentioned on the quarters, etc.

    I did notice a fairly large spot right in front of Kenney’s Hair on one of my 2 regular Silver PF sets that definitely detracts from the field, which should be completely mirrored! Not sure is it’s a water spot or what???

  63. KML in KY says

    @MarkinFlorida. Good luck with your reverse proof Kennedy error. If you submit it or sell it. Please let us know how it works out.

  64. cagcrisp says

    If the Palladium Proof was an IPO, it would be pulled. IPO’s are pulled all the time when market conditions are not favorable

    15,000 is a Lot of coins under these market conditions…

  65. cagcrisp says

    Earlier this year Louis Golino wrote an article “Top 10 modern coins of 2017”, 5 of those coins were from the US Mint.

    He would have a hard time finding 1 winner from the US Mint for 2018.

    The only 2 offerings that had Any Potential for 2018 was the San Fransisco Reverse Silver Proof that struck out with Dismal sales of 106,108 Launch Day and Now we have the upcoming 15,000 mintage Palladium Proof that is coming to market at a Dismal time with a mintage that is Pushing the Limit…

  66. Buzz Killington says

    @cag —

    I actually think 15K is the right number, but HHL of 1 is NOT the right number. I think the success of the first issue with a similar mintage will ultimately sell these out, though.

    If more & more gimmicks are coming (and I agree with you they are) we should consider ourselves lucky that the mintage isn’t 2,500 with a markup of double the melt value.

  67. cagcrisp says

    @Buzz Killington,”I actually think 15K is the right number, but HHL of 1 is NOT the right number. I think the success of the first issue with a similar mintage will ultimately sell these out, though.”

    NO question these would be gone in a heart beat with a Higher HHL

    “If more & more gimmicks are coming (and I agree with you they are) we should consider ourselves lucky that the mintage isn’t 2,500 with a markup of double the melt value.”

    When Ryder said “the Mint will also be developing limited-edition numismatic products that collectors will want to collect.”

    That’s What he Means…That’s the Future…

  68. CaliSkier says

    Today’s excellent word of the day is “positive”!

    A word combo, no one should desire is “numismatic negatron”, with the plural being negative negatrons”!!! If one wants to have fun with words, one could also combine and come up with the acronym NNNN, which would be, “numerous naysaying numismatic new negatrons”!!!! Or shorten to just NNN, meaning “numerous numismatic negatrons”!!!

    Hmmm……

    Another way of looking or Thinking about today’s word “positive”, is equivalent to positron. The positron was discovered by Carl D. Anderson, August 2nd 1932! That’s 86 years ago this month!

    Although, negatron is virtually obsolete and the preferred word is now electron, they are one in the same! A negatively charged particle!

    The Urban Dictionary uses the word Negatron, quite appropriately! See for yourself! There’s an excellent entry, on August 19, 2006!!!

    https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=negatron

  69. earthling says

    We’ve seen reissues of Classic Designs already. Of course they were in the wrong metal (Gold instead of Silver) and off in other areas like size and detail. A reissue of the 1921 Hi Relief Peace Dollar would seem to be a given at this point but how will that release be butchered? To expect a fully struck and fully detailed Coin in Silver would be a lost cause. But could we at least get it in Palladium or Platinum? Probably not.

  70. So Krates says

    From the above 18th century link

    January 06, 1793 : A “Dog for the Yard” is purchased for $3 by the Mint as protection.

  71. CaliSkier says

    I wonder where the US Mint gets their seemingly, arbitrary face values for their PM’s numismatic offerings?

    There has been more than a few comments regarding this! Although they are numismatic collectibles, shouldn’t they have face values at least 1/3 up to 1/2 of the current spot? After all they are monetized! I

    know melt/spot fluctuates. However if the US Mint treasury thinks face value would at some point be more than melt, “We the People” are in deep, Deep, DEEP, Feces!!! More than we’ve been led to believe, meaning NASA, POTUS, Military, Homelands Security, Federal Reserve, Secretary of The Treasury, etc are withholding MAJOR Earth shattering news that will possibly cause catostrophic, irreversible, irreparable, irreplaceable damage to “We the People” & the USA as we know it today!

  72. CaliSkier says

    Face values @ $25, $50 & even $100 dollars for Au, Pt, & Pd coins, are ridiculous IMHO.

  73. CaliSkier says

    IMHO. I find it hard to believe that the mint hasn’t decided on a price or are unwilling to share in regards to the 2018 Pd PF???

    Especially with less than 3 weeks until it’s release. They should know quite well, already the cost to produce and the markups! For the US Mint, to not already have the coin added to the pricing grid or at the very least priced on the product page, adds to another lack of credibility and or transparency by them!

  74. CaliSkier says

    Damn, I just had an alarming thought! What if the Mint decided to not add the new 2018 Palladium Proof on to the PM pricing grid at all???
    What if they just made up the price with not much rhyme or reason, like their silver offerings?

    In that case, especially since the price may come in as Cag wishes, @ $600 or even more over spot! In that case, for sure count me OUT, and this coin will for sure not sell out on September 6 and possibly by years end neither!

    Lastly this IMHO, would also be counter to what the US Mint says re: it’s priority to “Prepare and distribute recurring numismatic and bullion products and sets, as well as other numismatic items, in quantities sufficient to make them accessible, available, and affordable to Americans who choose to purchase them.”

    Depending on the price, first day sales being limited to 1 per HH makes cents(PI)!

  75. CaliSkier says

    Interesting/Intriguing press release on the Us Mint website pertaining to gold and GSA! Here’s a small tidbit and the link.

    “The sales will also further the U.S. desire to continue progress toward the elimination of the international monetary role of gold.”

    Many comments have been made on MNB regarding gold PM price, being manipulated!

    Press release from US Mint on April 17, 1978

    https://www.usmint.gov/learn/history/historical-documents/sale-of-gold-by-us-treasury

  76. MarkInFlorida says

    Governments have a habit of dumping their gold just before a price rise. Like Britain selling its gold at something like $250 a couple decades back.

  77. sharks2th says

    The palladium proof should follow closely the platinum proof in regards to the premium since it’s a similar metal with a proposed similar mintage, especially if the mint intends to keep minting these as a series.

    Premiums currently are as follows for one ounce bullion numismatic products:
    AGE Proof – $377.50
    AGE Unc – $340
    Buffalo Proof – $410
    APtE Proof – $420
    Liberty Gold – $440

    With a proposed palladium proof eagle mintage limit higher than the platinum proof eagle, the mint is likely attempting to recoup the startup costs by having a higher sales limit. If the entire mintage is not sold they might not recoup the production costs if the production costs are higher than other products. It is unlikely to sell out on day one with the hhl of one.

    In any case, it is likely purchasers of this coin are not likely to recoup their purchase cost long term until the bullion price exceeds the purchase cost. Short term, if this is a sellout prices could jump and remain steady until the time later in the series when mintages are lower. This has happened with every eagle series since the start in 1986. The higher mintage coins in each eagle series have mostly gone up in price due to rises in bullion prices, with the key dates in the series having higher premiums in current sales prices. Collectors should at least be able to get one if they want one.

    The price range or chart for the palladium proof should come out by Tuesday since the mint has recently posted proposed prices three weeks prior to the release (just a guess at this point).

  78. cagcrisp says

    • cagcrisp says
    August 2, 2018 at 9:41 am

    “I’m on record that I would Like to see a $600+ premium to Spot and a Low Mintage of 10,000”

    • cagcrisp says
    August 11, 2018 at 6:11 pm

    “However 15,000 is pushing Long Term Appreciation…”

    NOW…

    …With a Mintage of 15,000 my Guesstimate is $1,350 with the Grid Spot price of Palladium $900…

  79. Mintman says

    15,000 bullion pieces flew out of dealers inventories last year
    15,000 proofs will do the same this year out of mint coffers

  80. CaliSkier says

    Sharks2th I pretty much concur with your above comments. The part where you say that: “With a proposed palladium proof eagle mintage limit higher than the platinum proof eagle, the mint is likely attempting to recoup the startup costs by having a higher sales limit. If the entire mintage is not sold they might not recoup the production costs if the production costs are higher than other products. “. Brings a few things to mind.

    Wouldn’t or shouldn’t the Mint have recouped their startup costs for this new issue last year? Most bugs, flaws should be worked out, as least I’d hope so? With this issue, only needing a change of the year and the specially prepared dies and or blanks? Also IMO, the overhead head with their artists on this one, in theory, shouldn’t be higher than the Buffalo Proof since there is no salary for James Earle Fraser or Adolph A. Weinman!

    The Pt PF has had only the 1997-2000 & 2014 have mintages above 10,000. I do think they can sell 15,000, 2018 PF Pd coins, depending on the price.

    If the series of Pd coins continues next year, expect the mintage limit to also be at 10,000 -15,000 coins, unless spot is cheaper, then that amount should cover demand for this issue? Unless of course this image is changed into some PC theme, then expect sales to be Dismal regardless of price!

    The mintage of 20,000 for Pt PF seems a bit ambitious, based on sales trends? Knowing that, it’s hard to see Pd mintage going above 15,000 EVER? Lastly, this 2018 Pd, IMO should indeed sell out as its design is far superior to what’s on the Pt coin!

  81. CaliSkier says

    @ Mintman: “15,000 bullion pieces flew out of dealers inventories last year”

    My guess is that those buyers got in, thinking of a good chance we’d seen the bottom of Pd spot prices? Hoping that we’ll see a rise and max spot pricing like 2007-20014? Lastly as I mentioned, IMO this is an attractive and historical design, which I’m thinking possibly has contributed to its aftermarket success??? Not sure though…..

  82. Mintman says

    Keep in mind that the USM did not say the Pd eagle is a recurring issue
    No BU Pd this year at all
    Only the proof.

  83. earthling says

    I’m still writhing in agony over the collapse in Platinum in 2008. At one point I was feeling like a rich man – now I’m still in a bit of a funk because of it all. Seeing your stash drop by about 70% sure isn’t much fun. Watching $100 drop to $30 isn’t a big deal. Watching a much bigger stash drop by 70% is getting to depression land. Playing the Rhodium or Palladium Game has no appeal to me at all. Since moving to the 3rd World -like Detroit Metro area my world view has really been affected. Thank God I haven’t become an Alcoholic or Drug Addict. My Lotto habit is becoming under control. My OT Work habit is becoming well controlled. I fell down a couple weeks ago and lost $200 at the MGM Grand Slots. It was a much needed wake up call to the ways of this $ worshiping culture of ours. Well, I’m not missing any meals lately, guess I’m living the good life? For sure ! Getting a Jets Square Pizza w Pepperoni, Sausage, Mushrooms, and Black Olives , is my low cost entry to heaven on Earth !

  84. Mintman says

    @earthling-you agony is shared by many, but it seems we have become smarter because of it
    The collector base is declining severely, flippers have destroyed many of the issues that could have had a fighting chance at long term appreciation, so the game now is buy what you like—and if it appreciates multi-fold in a short period of time—let it go.
    I’m sure you’ll be able to buy it back later at a fraction of the high.

  85. Larry says

    I don’t understand why the mint can’t take better pictures of their coins when they go up for sale. Surely the palladium proof will look better in real life than in the mint’s picture. I want to pull the trigger on this coin badly. I have a feeling it is going to be a fabulous coin. A cameo proof of the winged liberty head design in this size should be something. The eagle on the reverse also. I have a strong feeling at least 15,000 others will feel the same. Does anyone know if the mint has said this is going to be a one time only coin?

  86. sharks2th says

    @CaliSkier – Theoretically the production costs shouldn’t be any higher for the Pd than for the Pt proofs. Since this is the first year for the proofs they may have to fiddle with the press settings. Pd is a hard metal to strike, like Pt. The cost will be higher than for the bullion version due to the additional die prep and multiple strikes required, as you point out.

    Whether or not the production costs are a lot higher, the mint has gotten out of hand with the premiums on the high dollar coins. I can’t see paying a 50% premium at this time even though I do like this design. Two years ago I had planned to get one of these when they started moving forward. Since then, Pd has gone up 50% and the mint premiums have gone up.

    I tend to agree with cag’s latest assessment the premium will probably be about $450. I don’t see the premium being less than the $420 the mint has on the Pt proof.

  87. Erik H says

    Last year’s Pd coin was sold directly to AP’s with a small premium over spot. Supply & demand caused prices to rise.

    This year’s Pd will have the premium built-in. So how will the Proof finish & higher premium affect the supply & demand? I think 15,000k is about right but long term mintages will fall. And if alternatives to the combustion engine accelerate Pd price will drop too.

  88. Michael Dean says

    The Alamo is not under the care of the National Park Service which is why it is not represented on the ATB quarter.
    The Alamo Mission San Antonio de Valero is commonly called the Alamo. Founded in 1718, it was the first mission on the San Antonio River. After 106 years as the sole caretaker of the Alamo, the Daughters of the Republic of Texas now manages this state historic site under the Texas General Land Office.

  89. CaliSkier says

    Well, my curiosity got the best of me so I looked up and found out that, the answe to my ? “I wonder where the US Mint gets their seemingly, arbitrary face values for their PM’s numismatic offerings?”, lies in Public Law 99-185!

    From the Government Publishing Office website:

    https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/STATUTE-99/pdf/STATUTE-99-Pg1177.pdf

    I still feell, however that “Face values @ $25, $50 & even $100 dollars for Au, Pt, & Pd coins, are ridiculous IMHO.”

    This law should be updated and amended to reflect the times we currently live! Much like the desire to rid the USA of the penny and nickel!!! Especially since they each cost more to make than their face values!

  90. CaliSkier says

    Caution So Krates, LOL if you decide to read the link! LOL about your comments earlier in this thread! Now I see what you meant, LOL, sorry as I’m sure your not amused in the least, as far as I can tell by your post! “20th Century Variety – Thanks for posting the article. I don’t know why that author’s (Dave Harper) refusal to compose a paragraph bothers me so much. ”LOL😂

    Not sure if this has been posted or not? Article from Dave Harper are 2018 Pd PF, from the Numismatic News website dated November 30, 2017.

    http://www.numismaticnews.net/buzz/get-money-ready-2018-palladium-proof

  91. gatortreke says

    @CaliSkier: to complete your Pd comments, APMEX’s buyback price on the bullion coin was $1231.90 in the 11/30/2017 article. Today, the buyback price is $1216.20, not very different from last fall. Spot was $1014.30 then, $921.30 today. So, does this make the Pd bullion coin really a collector coin as Harper suggests in the article?

  92. CaliSkier says

    @ gatortreke: “Today, the buyback price is $1216.20, not very different from last fall. Spot was $1014.30 then, $921.30 today. So, does this make the Pd bullion coin really a collector coin as Harper suggests in the article?”

    Ponder…. Perhaps if you’re trying to buy one? Apmex price if one is looking to purchase 1 is $1600.90, up $.20 over last night BTW. The $.20, however is probably, solely related to $12.00 increase we’re seeing with the spot price you mentioned?

    Additionally, so far the only indications there Might be a Bullion version offered this year can only(what I found/Google) be found, via a search for such a 2018 American Palladium Eagle. Apmex comes up and as some has said it shows Out of Stock. When I go to Apmex directly to search I can’t find this 2018 at all? The other site mentioning this coin was Austin Coins. There site says coming soon, then down the page they offer a “2018 1 oz. Proof Palladium American Eagles Pre-Sale Signup”. At this point there is nothing stating there will be a Bullion version released? $1600.90. Vs spot? Since Bullion is typically sold much closer to spot, I don’t think IMO that investors or speculators are buying, the 2017 APdE, only collectors?

  93. Mintman says

    Confirmed by a very well known national dealer
    There will be no bullion Pd eagle this year, period

  94. John Q. Coinage says

    IMHO last years Pd bullion coin suffered from a combo of collusion between the authorized buyers to hace a real winner AND supply & demand, the dmand let them, supply it @ a super high mark up…..kind of like a bogus “gas” war…..to be fair the mint has gone proof I see, well the premium has to be the ? now, CAG has it @ about $1,350 which is a viable #, I fell that a $600 mark up is CRAZY!!! Regardless I may get one, I have the $, I have the time….but …. EARTHLING the set for the mint to make is a 1920 Morgan Z-proof combine with a 1921 PEACE HR… what a set in silver, not gold, lead, pd or other stuff, no AU peace $ PLEASE….

  95. cagcrisp says

    John Q. Coinage, ” CAG has it @ about $1,350 which is a viable #, I fell that a $600 mark up is CRAZY!!!”

    For some reason people tend to forget that I Wanted 10,000 and did Not want a HHL of 1

    From my point of view Investors would be Much better off with a Mintage of 10,000, a $600+ premium and a Reasonable HHL vs. 15,000 with a HHL of 1 vs. a $450 premium…

  96. cagcrisp says

    In a multiplication problem with 3 variables, each variable has Equal weight

    HHL vs. Mintage vs. Price

    To have Long Term Potential you have to get All 3 variables correct and you Only have Launch Day to get them correct.

    Raising the HHL after 24 hours is part of the problem, Not part of the solution…

  97. John Q. Coinage says

    Cag I agree w/you completely, I think 10k & HH Limit of 3 = success & a ‘return’ of flippers maybe [the evil doers, but indication f a market with afterlife..leg$…??] …..15k in the market with PMetals kind of skitterish makes it interesting to say the least….. Price I feel IF it was $600 over spot w/10k it would take a little more time to sell out, but would, 15k likely there until they life the limit it will take 2-3 days…..

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *