Mint News Blog

News, Information, and Commentary on US Mint Products

Monday, March 15, 2010

Abigail Fillmore First Spouse Gold Coins

The United States Mint will begin sales of the 2010 Abigail Fillmore First Spouse Gold Coins later this week on March 18, 2010 at 12:00 Noon ET. This will be the first release of the series for the year. Recently revealed product information suggests that this release may present an important shift for the series.

The Abigail Fillmore coin features the First Lady's portrait on the obverse designed by Phebe Hemphill. The reverse, designed by Susan Gamble, features an image of her shelving books at in the White House Library that she established. Abigail Fillmore was the First Lady during the Presidency of her husband Millard Fillmore.

As with the prior releases of the series, proof and uncirculated versions will be available, with both versions struck at the West Point Mint. Each coin will contain one-half ounce of 24 karat gold. If the average price of gold remains within the $1,100 to $1,149.99 range, then the proof version will be priced at $729 and the uncirculated version will be priced at $716.

In an unexpected shift, the US Mint has announced that the maximum authorized mintage will be set at 15,000 across both the proof and uncircualted product options. The split between proof and uncirculated coins will be determined based on demand. There will be no household ordering limits imposed.

In the past, the US Mint has set the maximum authorized mintage at 40,000 coins across both options. Furthermore, they have usually begun sales with an ordering limit of ten coins per option per household in place.

By setting a maximum mintage only slightly above the sales level for the past few issues and removing the initial household limits, the US Mint is providing a much more tantalizing product.

This might be just the boost that the series needs to bring attention to the extremely low mintage of some of the prior issues. The current mintage low among the coins no longer available for sale is the Louisa Adams First Spouse Coin with combined final sales of 11,677 (4,223 uncirculated and 7,454 proof).

An interesting question is also raised by the newly set maximum authorized mintage- will the US Mint use this for all coins of the series going forward? The Mary Todd Lincoln First Spouse Gold Coin slated for release in December was already expected to be popular. If the maximum mintage is set at 15,000, this would contribute to a quick sell out and likely swift secondary market appreciation.

Separately, the US Mint will begin sales of the Abigail Fillmore Bronze Medals on the same date. The medals will be priced at $5.50 each. This is an increase of $2 from the price of last year's individual medals.



At March 15, 2010 at 9:49 AM , Anonymous Anonymous said...

A $2.00 increase for a bronze medal? That's an OUTRAGEOUS 60% increase in these inflationary times! The person responsible for setting these prices should be taken to the nearest pillar on the White House lawn and flogged for 20 minutes.

At March 15, 2010 at 10:02 AM , Anonymous Anonymous said...

Ouch! So much for holding out to see what the spot price of gold does in the coming months!

I'm afraid that this might lead to another rush on the coins, thus making the Mint start imposing a "1 per household" limit again. I'm still having a go at putting together two sets of Uncirculated coins, so I don't really want to have to go the route of enlisting the help of a family member to get my second coin as was the case in the past for the Jefferson's Liberty coin. But, in the case of fast sellouts, I have no choice if I want to avoid having to be gouged on the secondary market.

In a situation like this, the Abigail Fillmore coins could prove to be higher on the secondary market than some of the 2008 and 2009 coins, despite having sold 15,000 units while the others came in at less. The fast sellout would make that the most likely scenario, at least in the short-term.

I was perfectly comfortable with the 40,000 limit that was in no danger of selling out. Why does the Mint always have to stir things up like this?

At March 15, 2010 at 10:13 AM , Anonymous Brad said...

I could be wrong of course, but the Mint might be starting a new strategy of setting limits based on anticipated popularity and sales levels. They probably figure that demand for Abigail Fillmore will be as low or lower as the coins of 2009, hence they are setting the limit lower. The same MAY hold true for Jane Pierce (unless Abigail Fillmore is a first-day sellout, in which case they might raise her limit).

But, chances are good that the Buchanan's Liberty and Mary Lincoln coins will have the old limit of 40,000 coins in place. I think this is especially the case with Mary Lincoln. Buchanan's Liberty is less certain, as sales levels for the Jackson and Van Buren Liberty coins weren't much higher than Elizabeth Monroe or Louisa Adams.

I guess now I'll have to call in sick on Thursday to make sure I don't get shut out! It might be a dumb thing to do, but I can't take any chances!

At March 15, 2010 at 10:23 AM , Anonymous Anonymous said...

This is scary! With no order limit in place, the big players can place orders for 99 of each coin option per order, and a mere 76 orders could eat up the ENTIRE mintage!

I know it would cost a fortune to do so, but the big boys HAVE fortunes!

I have a bad feeling about this...

At March 15, 2010 at 10:24 AM , Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hmmm... The mint is changing its strategy again. I'm shocked! :)

At March 15, 2010 at 10:42 AM , Anonymous Anonymous said...

Jackson's Liberty barely did 12,500 combined, sorry but if that coin can't sell then 15,000 is a stretch with this one.

At March 15, 2010 at 10:47 AM , Anonymous Anonymous said...

I don't know, the Buchanan's Liberty is the only one of the four that is based on an original coin that was made of gold itself. That, plus Buchanan was the only man of the four who truly never had a spouse. Maybe those two factors will weigh in it's favor.

At March 15, 2010 at 11:20 AM , Anonymous Anonymous said...

Fast Sellout for Filmore? You must be kidding. I think it may just have a better chance at being a No Sale on the first day. May as well half the new 'limit'. and I still wouldn't want one for half price.

At March 15, 2010 at 11:20 AM , Anonymous Anonymous said...

Just the fact that a sell-out is being discussed bodes for higher sales.

To the earlier poster's concerns regarding large companies buying all the coins, I don't believe that will happen. Many were burned by loading up on the first three spouse coins, and subsequently, many of these coins were melted down. Gold is also several hundred dollars/Oz higher than it was when the first three spouse coins were up for sale. Fillmore is almost an unknown among presidents. Flippers want a quick profit, and I would personally be content waiting for the secondary market prices to drop before picking one up should a sellout occur.

I think the American Disabled Veteran silver coin has a better chance of selling out than the Fillmore gold coin.

At March 15, 2010 at 11:31 AM , Anonymous Anonymous said...

I don't think lowering the minting will affect interest in the series by a significant amount. The fact is most collectors are interested in collecting the entire series. If you haven't bought all the prior spouse coins, then you're out of luck.
Less interested buyers go for the most interesting one while the majority of bullion buyers would rather put their money into Buffaloes and Gold Eagles.
My vote is for this change not to impact interest in the series by much.


At March 15, 2010 at 11:33 AM , Anonymous Anonymous said...

I always hear these stories of coins being melted down. Yeah right, I don't think so and certainly not for the Wash and Jeff as many would have you believe, in an attempt to create some kind of mystic of ever increasing percieved rarity so they can use it as some kinda weak and false selling point.
Who's like gonna through hundreds of Washs and Jeffs in the smelter and for what and why?
This 'melting Theory' is melting away like a bad lie.

At March 15, 2010 at 12:23 PM , Anonymous Anonymous said...

On the topic of melting, everyone is entitled to their belief. Some believe that the moon is made of cheese and that's their prerogative as well.

It has been widely reported for a few years that Silvertowne bought and melted down thousands of the earlier gold spouse coins when the price of gold went up and they couldn't recover their investment by selling the coins as bullion. Keep in mind that the PF/PR69s and MS69s don't command much over melt anyway. And selling them individually would have resulted in spending more money than just melting them. See the link (one of many) below:

At March 15, 2010 at 1:51 PM , Anonymous Anonymous said...

Does this mean the harrison is no longer going to be for sale or are they going to sell them until 2011. Just curious.

At March 15, 2010 at 2:08 PM , Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Does this mean the Harrison is no longer going to be for sale or are they going to sell them until 2011. Just curious."


Short answer: Anything is possible with the mint. Bear in mind that this is the same "efficiently run" government entity that canceled the 2009 W ASE and 2009 W AGE products. If you plan to get a coin at some point, get it while it's available or risk paying twice it's Mint price on eBay.

At March 15, 2010 at 2:14 PM , Anonymous Anonymous said...

If they want to spur demand for this series, replace the obverse of each coin with a replica of earlier coins.


At March 15, 2010 at 3:10 PM , Blogger Lasloo said...

How long did it take to sell the 2009 platinum eagles last year? I can't recall exactly... but it felt like a good month or more. And that mintage was 8000.
I dont think people were excited about it, and it cost a lot. So, regardless of mintage, it didn't sell as fast as you would think it would.
The same could be said for the Fillmore spouse gold coin.
If you haven't collected them all, I'd stick with just getting the Buchanan liberty and the Lincoln spouse coins this year. Just my opinion.

As the platinums... 2009's might sell well in the future if the other platinums look appealing. They all share the same theme (U.S. Constitution). So, if the next ones hold broader appeal, and people want to get the whole set... than that low mintage might be worth something.

At March 15, 2010 at 3:24 PM , Anonymous Anonymous said...

In econonics their is thing called "opportunity cost" and it basicly says what is the better alternative. I rather have a NGC or PCGs buffalo set any day rather than first spouse set or that matter any of the coins. The only reason any of these are selling is becuase their is NOTHING to buy at the mint. Look at the past blog that Michael put up and the responses from everyone. Sorry first spouse collectors, no offense. I know that it seems that I am only speaking from an investment perspective but their are only a few people that go out and buy a few $1000 coin just because to collect. In the end we all want these prices to increase so we hand something of value to our kids.

At March 15, 2010 at 5:24 PM , Anonymous Anonymous said...

If Silver Town were,as stated by an earlier blogger, were to like
melt down THOUSANDS of the earlier first spouse coins, wouldn't that be like illegal, it kinda defaces the currency a bit to cook it up like that...oh wait a minute I think I just heard the shovel through a few thousand more '06 reverse proofs into the cooker. Better buy em now before they get too Hot!

At March 15, 2010 at 6:12 PM , Anonymous Anonymous said...

Price = Demand-Supply. New mint limit will likely keep a high downside to the Fillmore. Not sure about the upside, but it will assure a reasonable premium over spot.

At March 15, 2010 at 6:40 PM , Anonymous Anonymous said...

I agree the announced restricted mintage may jumpstart the series but I just don't see much happening other than Mrs. Washington, Mrs. Lincoln and the liberty coins. It will take a cataclysmic event to get this series to really matter and that is certainly possible. Imagine Laura Bush, Michele Obama, Madonna, and Lisa Lampanelli were all to announce they were moving into a commune together and started dating Pee Wee Herman and Patton Oswald. That would really jumpstart the series. Having said all this if you really like the coins buy them.

At March 15, 2010 at 7:22 PM , Anonymous Anonymous said...

There goes my hopes of completing my proof collection! I can't believe the Mint is not putting an initial order limit in place. Without a limit, the big dealers are going scoop up every single coin on the first day, and make the true collectors nothing more than victims of the big dealers with their unconscionable price gouging tactics. I was enjoying collecting the First Spouse Coins, but like everything else in America, only the very rich get to play! I'm certain that the Mint is very happy that they just locked out the average, everyday, working stiff from aquiring a nice contemporary collcetion to proud of! Let's face it, it was pobably the only availble opportunity to for the average middleclass person to assemble a COMPLETE SET OF - ANYTHING GOLD! Now, if your not a big player you will be subject to paying a minium of triple the issue price on the secondary market. Thanks for putting it to your customers. Nice job Mint!

At March 15, 2010 at 8:19 PM , Blogger Lasloo said...

I seriously doubt that the big dealers will be scooping this one up in mass quantities.

As people have mentioned, other than the notable spouses, this is not a popular series.

If the Anna Harrison can't even break 10,000 after being on sale for a year, I doubt you will have problems buying this coin.

There may be a higher than normal initial uptick in sales for this one, but nothing reaching 15,000 anytime soon.

At March 15, 2010 at 8:35 PM , Anonymous Anonymous said...

I don't think it really makes difference. They won't sell out, even in a year. People didn't buy the previous issues, why buy this one?

At March 15, 2010 at 8:40 PM , Anonymous Anonymous said...

If the mint doesn't stop jerking us around and taking our wants and pocketbooks into account pretty soon you're liable to see all I own on sale, or up for auction. This is getting ridiculous. Let's just change the rules and jack up prices whenever we want--forget the collectors that are trying so hard to keep up with collections, budget for collections, and keep the collections they have going. The prices on the gold spouse have gone up tremendously, and there's not much we can do about it. But the unjustified greed in pricing the bronze medals is just plain wrong. And now lets start the large silver America the Beautiful coins and make us all buy them on the secondary market. The Parks are "For the People" but the coins sure aren't. Mr. Moy, Teddy Roosevelt would be disappointed in you.

At March 16, 2010 at 2:28 AM , Anonymous Anonymous said...

I would guess that the reason the mint lowered the total mintage is it reduces the amount of spare blanks they need to have on hand in case a lot of buyers show up. By dropping it to 15,000 that is 25,000 less per coin than before plus the additional blanks needed for bad strikes.

Overall this seems to be an acknowledgment by the mint that these coins are very unpopular and they see no reason to plan for large increases in sales.

About the only thing that could help the series would be a large drop in the price of gold, which is unlikely to happen.

The bad part of this change though is it will have the opposite affect of what collectors want, by limiting the mintages like this they also limit the total potential collector base.

In order to see a sizable appreciation in past issues you want to see a rebound in sales, and this effectively prevents that.

15,0000 total would be about 6000 unc coins and 9000 proofs.

The last four spouses finished at about 4500 unc and 6000 proof.

The 15,000 total is a very minor rebound by comparison.

At March 16, 2010 at 3:19 AM , Anonymous Anonymous said...

I remember reading shortly after the first 3 coins sold out that the mint originally only expected to sell between 5K and 10K per coin, per finish. 15K would put the mintage in the middle of that range.

At March 16, 2010 at 5:36 AM , Anonymous Anonymous said...

"If Silver Town were,as stated by an earlier blogger, were to like
melt down THOUSANDS of the earlier first spouse coins, wouldn't that be like illegal, it kinda defaces the currency a bit to cook it up like that...oh wait a minute I think I just heard the shovel through a few thousand more '06 reverse proofs into the cooker. Better buy em now before they get too Hot!"

Silvertowne admits to melting down the coins, and other reputable third parties concur that they did so. As mentioned before, they felt like they had a lot of reasons for melting down these coins: 1) they mint their own gold coins, 2) they couldn't off-load the gold spouses for a profit, 3) it is legal (contrary to your ignorant opinion), 4) there is no demand for these coins, etc. Was it right for them to do so? Absolutely not!

You sound like one of those wack-job conspiracy theorists. Silvertowne has admitted to melting them down...please submit your evidence (not speculation) to the contrary.

By the way, below is a link regarding the legality of melting down US coins. Please quit talking out of your posterior.

At March 16, 2010 at 6:36 AM , Anonymous Anonymous said...

I hope everyone who thinks the lower limit will have no impact on demand is correct, but they seem to be overlooking one very important factor: CORNERING THE MARKET.

When the limit was 40,000 coins, no one had any interest in trying to corner the market buying 15,000 coins because there was the potential for far more coins being available at the Mint to fill collector demand. In this case however, if a group of rich players bought up most of the 15,000 coins available, then the 10,000 or so would-be buyers who truly are trying to collect the series will have two choices. They can quit collecting the series and leave the rich guys holding overpriced gold coins (which would serve them right), or they can pay the rich guys far more than the Mint's price to keep their collections going. The big dealers may figure the potential profit to be had will outweigh the risk of being stuck with slow-moving inventory. It would cost millions to buy up most of these coins, but when the potential exists to make an extra million or two, what's to stop them? Worst-case scenario, they probably figure that they will at least be able to sell the coins for what they paid for them.

I liked it much better when the limit was 40,000 coins and we had at least an entire year to wait it out and try to get our coins for the best price possible. The new limit of 15,000 is extremely low for a gold coin split between two finishes, and the big dealers know that. I'm afraid they will be gambling on this one, and with no order limit to hold them in check, the 15,000 coins could vanish quickly.

At least no more than 198 coins can be placed per order, since the Mint has what they call a "shopping cart limit" of 99 for an identical item. I've found that out when trying to buy much cheaper items. They force you to place a second order if you want 100 or more of an identical item.

At March 16, 2010 at 7:04 AM , Anonymous Anonymous said...

"At least no more than 198 coins can be placed per order, since the Mint has what they call a "shopping cart limit" of 99 for an identical item. I've found that out when trying to buy much cheaper items. They force you to place a second order if you want 100 or more of an identical item."

Dude...a couple comments:

1) Nobody is going to corner the Abigail Fillmore Gold Spouse coin market...ain't gonna happen.

2) Your post sounds a bit hypocritical. You are slamming flippers, but admit to buying 99+ identical items for your collection.

At March 16, 2010 at 7:58 AM , Anonymous Anonymous said...

Sorry if it sounded hypocritical, I guess I should have clarified better. Buying 125 Uncirculated Mint Sets each year is not an effort to corner the market by any means. After all, there have been anywhere from around 745,000 to 1,100,000 of them sold each year recently. Rather, it's the tactic some coin dealers use to make a little money while at the same time saving their customers a little bit too.

For example, buying 99 of the 2009 Mint Sets in one order reduces the per unit cost to an even $28 each. You've gotta love the Mint's s/h charge staying the same regardless of quantity. You can then turn around and sell the sets at flea markets and such for $30 a set to buyers who only want one set for their collection. Presto, you just made $2 and the buyer saved $2.90 over what it would have cost them to buy one set from the Mint directly ($27.95 plus $4.95 shipping). It's not some sort of "get rich quick" scheme or anything like that. Just a way to make a little money and have some fun doing it. There's nothing wrong with that.

Anyway, I hope you and everyone else is right in thinking the big dealers will leave this one alone. It would certainly be better for everyone if they did!

At March 16, 2010 at 8:06 AM , Anonymous Falcon said...

The mint was hard pressed to sell 15,000 of the other gold spouse coins. I can understand why they did not want to make more then they can sell. Why store them when they only make money selling them. It allows them to have more blanks ready for the Lincoln spouse coin which they must know they will sell alot of.
I do not think the mint is smart enough to try to control any market. Look what they did with the Lincoln Chronicles. They could have made alot more of the Lincoln silver dollars into chronicle sets for the collector. They would have made a larger profit doing that. The bronze penny sets should have been sold first or at least put on the production list. Now there are alot of broken proof sets. Though I suppose alot of the penny sets were brought to complete the proof sets. Sometimes the mint makes more then it needs. Sometimes it doesn't make enough to please the collector. Now the lucky people who have the 2009 unc mint set pennies hold a satin set that will be hard to find for alot of collectors in the future.
Our mint isn't organized enough to keep production dates. It sure dosen't care about what the collector wants or needs. I look at what the Canadian mint makes and wonder why our mint can't do better.

At March 16, 2010 at 8:11 AM , Blogger Lasloo said...

One caveat to "5:36 AM:"'s claim about the legality of melting coins... please take note of the link at the bottom of the "Is it Illegal to Melt U.S. Coins?" article that was referenced.

It links to this article:

Apparently, it IS illegal to melt copper coins specifically your pennies and nickels. The government fears a lack of enough circulating coinage if people did start melting copper in mass quantities.

As to silver and gold, the existing laws is somewhat ambiguous, but it does sound like currently THAT is legal. I know in the past there were stretches of time that the government made that illegal. But since neither is used in circulating coinage anymore, it is not necessary to prevent mass quantities of silver or gold to be melted.

At March 16, 2010 at 8:46 AM , Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Anyway, I hope you and everyone else is right in thinking the big dealers will leave this one alone. It would certainly be better for everyone if they did!"

Dude...If the mint was only producing 15K buffaloes or AGEs, that would be one thing. I wouldn't even put this one in the same light as the 2009 Platinum diversity coin of which only 8K were made and it took over a week to sell out. Abigail Fillmore rates much lower than the mint's politically correct diversity coin, so you should be safe.

At March 16, 2010 at 8:56 AM , Anonymous Anonymous said...

Lasloo - I agree with you that pennies and nickels are specifically called out as illegal to melt down. My response was to the poster that claimed it was illegal to melt gold coins (which it isn't). As you know, the magic word in the law is "fraud", and I doubt making a big glob of gold out of first spouse coins would be considered fraudulent by any standards.

A side conversation here would be whether or not the government would/should legalize melting pennies of all varieties IF pennies are eliminated from our currency. It seems then that the reason (having enough for circulation demand) would no longer be a valid reason. If pennies are eliminated from currency (and the law is adjusted accordingly), then say goodbye to a fair chunk of the pre-1982 copper pennies. Those may end up going for the same prices as wheaties in short order.

At March 16, 2010 at 9:19 AM , Blogger Lasloo said...

I'd be curious if they could pass a law just allowing pennies to be melted, but no other copper coins.

There is no way they could allow any copper coin to be melted though... all of our circulating coins have a significant amount of copper in them. Everything but the penny, nickel, and dollar coins is almost 92% copper. The nickel is 75%, and the dollar coins are 88.5%.

The post-1982 penny is only 2.5% copper... so, if they discontinued the penny, I could see it reasonable for the govt to allow pennies, but only pennies to be melted.

But something tells me that all that influx of copper into the economy will drive the price of copper way way down.

At March 16, 2010 at 9:34 AM , Anonymous Anonymous said...

It's probably true that despite the lower limit, the Abigail Fillmore coins won't sell out right away (if at all). But, the comparison to the 2009 Platinum Proof coin is not really applicable to this situation, since it had an order limit in place. Had the order limit not been there, it would have probably sold out all 8,000 coins in the first day or two of sales.

It's all in the perspective of the potential buyers as to how well the coin will do. The lower stated limit could make a difference in a lot of people's minds (including flippers). It will be interesting to see how it plays out. If nothing much changes, the limit might be lowered even more for Jane Pierce.

With no order limit, it's almost like the Mint just wants to be done with this one. Strike 'em and move 'em out! I guess they're throwing their tired old philosophy of "to ensure the broadest and most fair access to United States Mint products" out the window this time. They don't even have faith that there will be much demand for this one! :)

At March 16, 2010 at 10:25 AM , Blogger Lasloo said...

Of course, remember, the Mint is required by law to make these.
So, yes, I think if they had their way, they'd probably not make them anymore.

At March 16, 2010 at 10:25 AM , Anonymous Anonymous said...

buy abigail fillmore, margaret taylor and letitia tyler. that's the one gonna shine in the future.

At March 16, 2010 at 11:04 AM , Anonymous Anonymous said...

Julia Tyler might be the one for 2009 that has the lowest mintage (uncirculated version, anyway.) I noticed that it has slightly lower sales than the Sarah Polk despite being on sale longer. Plus, it should be taken off-sale before the Polk coin, so it could end up the lowest of them all.

At March 16, 2010 at 11:27 AM , Anonymous Anonymous said...

try the upcoming jane pierce. this is the one we are waiting for. the lowest.

At March 16, 2010 at 11:32 AM , Anonymous Anonymous said...

let's us all buy abigail fillmore tomorrow and clear the 15,000 FS 1/2 oz gold unc and proof. make it a sell out immediately. remember it is better than buying the 2009 bullion AGE unc. mintage at 110,000.

At March 16, 2010 at 12:27 PM , Anonymous Anonymous said...

Made my day reading the comment way above about somebody may corner the Abigail Fillmore gold coin market. That may be possible but boy is it hilarious. What a headline "ABIGAIL FILLMORE GOLD COIN MARKET CORNERED! WHAT WILL COLLECTORS DO?"

At March 16, 2010 at 12:58 PM , Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hee hee! That WOULD be an interesting headline! If it happened, I can see a picture of one of the parties responsible holding up the newspaper grinning from ear to ear, like Harry Truman after the 1948 election when the Chicago Tribune printed a big headline "Dewey Defeats Truman."

At March 16, 2010 at 1:21 PM , Anonymous Doubting Thomas said...

Ok,I called silvertown and it is true, they say they Did melt down some of the first spouse coins. Sorry I just couldn't intitially beleive it to be true. It would be nice to know Exactly just how many of each they did melt. The lady on the phone couldn't tell me that. Does anybody know more precisely just how many of each were taken out of the collector pool?

At March 16, 2010 at 1:55 PM , Anonymous Anonymous said...

I read an estimate of around 7,000 coins total over the first three designs and finishes, but supposedly accurate counts of exactly how many of each type were not kept.

At March 16, 2010 at 2:00 PM , Anonymous Anonymous said...

I bet nobody could name all of the spouses that will be on coins. This is why nobody is buying.

At March 16, 2010 at 2:02 PM , Anonymous Anonymous said...

Don't worry, they didn't melt enough to affect the market much or else the prices would already be higher on those coins. Now if they melt some of the Jackson coins that would be a different matter.

At March 16, 2010 at 3:49 PM , Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Ok,I called silvertown and it is true, they say they Did melt down some of the first spouse coins. Sorry I just couldn't intitially beleive it to be true. It would be nice to know Exactly just how many of each they did melt. The lady on the phone couldn't tell me that. Does anybody know more precisely just how many of each were taken out of the collector pool?"


Here is a quote from the earlier link I provided:

"Estimates of how many of these coins they have destroyed to date are:

Martha Washington & Louisa Adams - 5,000 to 7,000

Jefferson & Dolley Madison - Unknown

2006-W San Francisco Old Mint $5 - 2,000 to 3,000

2007-W Jamestown $5 - 5,000 to 7,000

By their own admission this one company has singlehandedly destroyed almost 10% of the entire mintage of the first two First Spouse coins and over 10% of the Jamestown $5 issue. Others are probably also melting these coins and the total number destroyed will never be known."

In short, nobody knows how many are gone.

At March 16, 2010 at 5:33 PM , Anonymous Anonymous said...

Thursday I'm for 1 PF and 1 UNC. I just want to be safe. With Margaret Taylor I will wait for some time. I hope the price of gold stay in same level for long time.

At March 16, 2010 at 10:23 PM , Anonymous Anonymous said...

This issue being raised with Silvertown and their melting would seem to be a rather significnt concern for collectors. It would be nice to know just...I mean we as coin collectors rely on the red book and mint postings for currents mintages and the market pricing reflecting these #'s.
Yet, as collectors I almost feel we have a right to know. I gotta say I don't like being in the dark about this. There should be some basic acounting on this. It's hard to believe that one outfit could put a such a dent in the mintages.
I would think it would be to their advanage too, to tell the us collectors just how many Were in fact melted. Then the value of the ones they haven't been smoked will be considerably higher. How will we ever know? (They could just say they melted 19,000 of each).
Mabey buying Limits do make more practical sense afterall. (I outta buy a Wash since their may just be only one left). Like go figure.
One would be inclined to ask Leo if he would some how account for this and report to redbook just how many have been taken out. And thats just one coin group. Others?
I think I may now need a new hobby.-T

At March 17, 2010 at 5:20 AM , Anonymous Anonymous said...

You can still pickup a Washington, Adams, and/or Jefferson for a reasonable price considering the current cost of gold. So apparently, nobody is too worried about Silvertowne's actions. While their actions were numismatically wrong, I don't think they had too big of an impact on this series (at this point in time). Ten percent of a relatively unpopular series probably won't do much.

At March 17, 2010 at 6:31 AM , Anonymous Anonymous said...

The product details for the Abigail Fillmore coins finally showed up on the Mint website. When it comes to order limits, the page states that there are no order limits for the 2010 First Spouse Series. That makes it sound like even Mary Lincoln won't have one. God help us if the limit on that coin is 15,000 also. 30 minute sellout?

At August 28, 2010 at 2:00 PM , Blogger Veriappelsiini said...

Looks like the coin has cool details. :)


Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home