That’s a scary thought!

I might agree that the investors have little interest in the series.

Consider that a collector is interested in the series and he pays an estimated $37 for 25 coins. He has paid $13 for the privilege of collecting one coin, which is really all he wants. He may consider keeping six, one for each grandchild for $3 per coin, after spending the other nineteen. If he becomes an investor he can try to sell the nineteen on Ebay for $2 each. The point being that a collector wanting only a few coins will either become an investor hoping to recoup his investment or purchase from an investor to keep his costs down. With low mintages investors will probably take the risk and buy coins. Any normal circulating coin with a 3 million piece production would disappear from circulation quickly.

The Treasury Department should encourage collecting by minting coins that are readily available to collectors in quantities that are appropriate for needs and be happy with the seigniorage rather than saddle collectors with exorbitant costs. The new series of dollars is greed for the Treasury Department and an opportunity for investors. The design could have been used on quarters which adds insult to injury for the casual collector.

I assume that the Mint can sell all they produce. From the comments made here, collectors don’t want to buy, it would be the investors who will.

Robert F Davenport Jr-

Really good thoughts and points taken. I understand/and agree with most all of what you said, except this,” Making more $1 coins is useless under current conditions. They are being made for investors not collectors”.
I agree those $1 coins are useless under current conditions, but I don’t think they are being made for investors. With no limits on mintage or high mintage, a coin that will not be circulated, little to no desire from the public, and also no real “Metal value”, be it gold or silver, I don’t think investors have any interest in this series. There would have to be some “variety” or “error” crop up to catch the eyes of investors.
I consider myself a collector /investor, if there is such a thing.

There needs to be a distinction between collectors and investors. Children are basically collectors and adults are often investors I’ll call them COLLECTORS. Collectors are pleased to have items that are valuable but are happy to have items that are different are reasonably priced. The emphasis on value and investing has led to the reduction in collectors. Value is not necessarily a bad thing for collectors, they look for rarities but are happy with variety. Your point, “Silver” provides variety and value but only if you pay a premium to start with, that is not what collectors want. It would appeal to collectors if every X “normal” coins had a single “Variety” coin of the same design but different composition, distributed randomly. The “variety” coin could be worth less in bullion value that the “normal” coin but would be more collectible.
The “variety” could be due to a particular mark such as a star.

Silver coins are useless as coins because nobody uses them. “Variety” coins would be ignored by most because they would not command a premium and searched for only by collectors.

Making more $1 coins is useless under current conditions. They are being made for investors not collectors. Why pay $32 plus shipping for $25 worth of coins if you can get $1 for $1 at any bank if not picky about the design.

.

If the US stubbornly continues to issue low denomination paper money, use the invention design on paper money not unneeded dollar coins. Edge printing is useless to most collectors. What use is the mint mark and date except to make a coin more collectable? Also the US should follow Canada’s lead and stop making cents. From a collectors point of view that would not make me happy but maybe the mint would do something good for collectors as opposed to investors.

The other proposed designs were worse.