HM 90th Birthday

[trout]

"This set will be offered as a made to order product, meaning the customers decide the mintage!"

To Me that clearly states that the mintage for the 3 coins in the set will be capped to the amount of pre orders that are received.
I cannot read anywhere in that statement that there will be other coins minted for another promotion after the pre orders.
I am pretty certain that the 9108 figure was correct until RAM decided that these were a pretty popular coin set and the feedback was favourable so they decided to make some more of them.
Maybe if they had made a slightly different coin by adding a mintmark/counterstamp or some other design change it would be mildly acceptable.
what they have done by producing these "Extra" coins is deceitful and underhanded without any regard for ethics.

With this issue, the delays in shipping and the other shenagans  that have been going on this year RAM is loosing its credibility for myself personally

[interest]

Maybe they should start saying instead of mintage
"PRINTED & PACKAGED"
That way it could be then said, " A limited number of, 9,108 will be "PRINTED & PACKAGED" in this manner."
"With another 9,108, "PRINTED & PACKAGED" in a different manner."

LOL

[purplepennyhunter]

Has anyone mentioned the PNC's and that they have been recalled due to a packaging error? As I mentioned in this article the images on the envelopes didn't match the coins. Not that that has anything to do with mintages, just packyboxitis.

[Nevol]

Makes you wonder how any of them manage to keep their jobs.  It appears as though a trained monkey has a better chance of doing it right first time.

But I suppose, as the old saying goes, there's never time to do it right, but there's always time to do it over.

Looks like AP staff have caught the 'bug' from the RAM staff.

[trout]

If RAM is allowed to get away with this sort of behaviour with the HM Birthday coins without any negative feedback or condemnation from the collecting community, What is there to stop them from screwing around with mintages of any further limited mintage issues ?? :dash1:
If the collecting community is quite happy to bend over and grab their ankles, Then RAM will most certainly take advantage of that in the future :angel:

I for one do NOT condone or accept for one second RAM's lying and cheating actions by producing these extra coins in conjunction with Aust post.
At $25 for a three coin carded set collectors paid a "Premium" for these coins because they were told that the pre order was the ONLY way to get these before the cut off date.
I find that RAM's actions in producing more of the same limited mintage coins for a different sales pitch to be deceitful dishonest and in very poor form.

[trout]

There is a Poll on CCF about this :ok:

http://www.coincommunity.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=271111

[LooseChange]

For me buying these coins was a bit of fun not knowing what the "final" mintage would be. They have made a short term profit by minting more of these coins and repackaging them. This is a big mistake on the mints part... now there is no reason to believe any of their low mintage offerings wont be offered in more numbers in a different packet and when anything the Mint advertises in the future as limited mintage we can just remind the potential buyers the mint has a history of minting more coins and changing the packaging.

I think ill stick to noodling from here on.

[trout]

For me buying these coins was a bit of fun not knowing what the "final" mintage would be. They have made a short term profit by minting more of these coins and repackaging them. This is a big mistake on the mints part... now there is no reason to believe any of their low mintage offerings wont be offered in more numbers in a different packet and when anything the Mint advertises in the future as limited mintage we can just remind the potential buyers the mint has a history of minting more coins and changing the packaging.

I think ill stick to noodling from here on.

Yes this has left a nasty taste in my mouth as well.
I know RAM is inefficient and full of it but I didn't think that they would stoop this low just to make a few extra quid :dodgy::dash1:

[LooseChange]

What i dont understand is why not make the Auspost version a bit different.. different finish even... hell i probably would of bought those as well.

[trout]

What i dont understand is why not make the Auspost version a bit different.. different finish even... hell i probably would of bought those as well.

Arrogance, Lazy

[LooseChange]

Im not sure.. i mean their prime objective is making money, that is fine of course, but they are going about this all wrong.
They have undermined arguably the most valuable selling point of a collectable coin, mintage.
To answer your question.. i think maybe its just a disconnect between the sales/marketing and the thoughts of collectors.

Looking past the Perth Mints excessive amount of grannybait... at least they have a transparent policy regarding mintage that explicitly states this wont happen.

[interest]

There is a Poll on CCF about this :ok:

http://www.coincommunity.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=271111

If I cut that from the CCF & paste it on the SYC forum, do you think it will be deleted, or I will be suspended?

[trout]

There is a Poll on CCF about this :ok:

http://www.coincommunity.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=271111

If I cut that from the CCF & paste it on the SYC forum, do you think it will be deleted, or I will be suspended?

I would say Both Mate :laugh2:
I would say by now that someone from SYC would have seen it anyway :angel:

[trout]

Has anyone asked about this on SYC or is everyone too frightened to ask ??:angel:

[robbiegal]

Has anyone mentioned the PNC's and that they have been recalled due to a packaging error? As I mentioned in this article the images on the envelopes didn't match the coins. Not that that has anything to do with mintages, just packyboxitis.

thanks for a great article PP