@MikeHunt I didn’t see this post until now. I thought @KaiserW had a profile picture with a helmet. I could be mistaken and saw your picture maybe.

Vinnie — I just saw your posting re Kaiser. I think I posted this picture of one I took in Nuremburg once on this site. Is it the one you are referring to? One way or another, my “helmet” is off for him. Kaiser, if you are still lingering in the shadows on this site … my best is always with you. And CaliSkier, my bet is that Kaiser and I were on total opposite sides of many issues. But we shared common ground on many others … our love for coins being one. Thanks Vinnie — Mike

Hi CaliSkier,
Thanks for sharing more info to try to figure out why some could not log in successfully that day. I can’t say it helped us figure out what went wrong, but every bit of data helps at least narrow down the possibilities. I would like to say I feel better having to put the username I created in the first field as I think a bad actor would find it harder to figure out the username I chose in 2008 than my email address, which may be more publicly accessible. Meaning I for one am glad putting in my email address the first time was invalid. My account feels just a little bit more secure to me than anyone who uses their email. I am also really glad my username worked for my second attempt at logging in.
I was thinking more about the effects of Mint to Demand and how I thought it wouldn’t necessarily increase mintages overall. I am less sure of that after thinking more about it. It probably would increase mintages because some % of people would order more for gifts. But then the flippers should be ordering less under Mint to Demand because right now their profitability is a near sure thing, and gets better the more they can score of them at our expense but there will be a lot less surety of that with Mint to Demand. Soon as the flippers/dealers get burned by too high a mintage by underestimating subscription demand of the public (remember, I want the dealers to go first in ordering) they will be ordering a lot less new releases going forward. Could those opposing forces end up going as far as cancelling each other out? I am unsure what the end result would be but I still think it would be net positive over time, whether it increased mintages or not.
Demand for all our older issues should remain as strong as today and only get stronger over time as more collectors join the hobby. Whatever the effects of Mint to Demand are, increasing the amount of collectors should be a certain result (unless we have already fallen too far to do more than slow the decline?). Both less frustration in getting a coin directly from the Mint and lower secondary market pricing would open coin collecting to people that are shut out now. I cannot see how it could not. I also still stand by my statement that there would still be low mintage coins produced and I really do believe we should see some coin or set everyone ignored end up with a lower mintage and higher value than we have ever seen before (not necessarily in the same coin, it is all relative), as I noted previously in example with the 2017 1 Ounce Gold American Liberty coin that I said would have ended up with a final mintage under 20000 if had been under Mint to Demand at the time (probably way, way, less. That figure I got was from a month in. I have no idea what it sold in the first day or week), the only difference from today is that nobody would know which item was low mintage before the first one even went on sale. I would prefer it that way myself. It is very satisfying when you noticed a gem nobody else did, right? As I mentioned to REB when he said he might be worried if it affects the value of his current collection: If the number of people ordering coins increases then demand will increase for older ones too because of any people like me who want to work on “completing” a collection they start (and there will be at least some of those), and those mintages will be locked in for the “older and lower” mintages pre-Mint to Demand, which should mean an increase to their value regardless of how many more are minted going forward. Even if the number of people ordering does not increase (just the amount each individual ordered), if they ordered more for profiting on the secondary market and they get burned, they won’t do that again. If they don’t get burned, I guess the sky didn’t fall after all. If some of those people ordered more to give as gifts though, then a certain percentage of those gifts will result in adding a new collector someday. The question being whether it will be more then we are losing year over year currently. If Mint to Demand increases the amount of collectors that has to be a good thing for the health of the hobby and eventually the amount of new collectors should mean whatever loss of value occurs would only be temporary (possibly for many years or even decades, but still not permanent. I do tend to take the long view, I have to admit.) or much less than the anti-Mint to Demand people are claiming now, and still only for the new issues. I do feel quite confident that even if Mint to Demand badly hurts values going forward (I am still just as skeptical as I was about that previously) all who collected pre-Mint to demand coins (that is all of us here at this time) should show a corresponding increase in value of every one of those because more people would be collecting overall. In fact, it seems to me the more it hurts the value of new releases initially (because oh-so-many-more are being sold, oh the horror!)) the greater the rise in value for pre-Mint to Demand items, perhaps cancelling all the bad effects out for us current collectors and quickly, while at the same time lowering our costs of collecting going forward as well as the price point for entry to the hobby. Maybe that would be a buy signal for new releases instead of reason to panic. That should allow more people to start collecting, which should over time increase demand again and will further increase the value of pre-Mint to Demand ones.
I think I am more convinced now Mint to Demand is a good idea than I was before we all started discussing it here. I did notice the comment from someone about how the Mint has used Mint to Demand before in the past, but nobody gave hard data about how well it worked out those times. I guess the fact that the “nays” didn’t know of those times already and were not able to claim what a “disaster” they were is another point in Mint to Demand’s favor. Did those items end up holding any more or less value than the average Mint item of their non-Mint to Demand type? Anything there to validate the fears of the nays?
One last thing. I mentioned “less frustration in getting a coin directly from the Mint” in passing above. That should not be discounted. I was thinking about “frustration while collecting coins” the past few days. How I have felt that repeatedly (once in 2009 and many times since 2017) while dealing with the Mint. I have collected various things over my life (casually collecting coins for a short time in the early 70s before losing interest and moving to beer can collecting ((starting in 1976 for me)). None of the things I ever collected before have ever caused me as much frustration as coin collecting has. Or any frustration at all, honestly. The first artificial rarities I can ever recall were from Magic the Gathering (card game, if you are unfamiliar. Early-mid 1990s for me. 4th edition I recall, whatever year that was) and I lost interest quickly in creating a “complete collection” as I rapidly saw they were going to just keep producing more and more “different” sets to keep people buying forever. I just wanted a new game to play, and it was a fun one. The problem as time went on was that if you played, (not just collected) the cards, you needed the new ones because many old cards could not defend against the new ones that had abilities that weren’t even thought of when the old ones came out. I see it is still going on and I stopped paying more than a passing attention to them a long time ago now. As a long time gamer who loves non electronic as well as electronic games, before Magic I do not recall not being able to buy every component of a game I desired at will, or being forced to overpay in the secondary market because I got “shut out” of a new release. Magic might have even started this crappy trend of artificial rarity. The only time I ever needed to go to the secondary market was when a game was not being produced anymore due to the company going out of business for some reason before I heard about it or because the game itself did not sell well initially and I hadn’t heard about it until after they decided to pull the plug. You certainly did not have to fight to collect those particular games at release, so no frustration involved with getting one of those if you so desired. No artificial rarities. Don’t know if it was really true but it seems everything everywhere was “mint to demand” in those days unless your product was catered to the wealthy exclusively, who have always demanded rare things to set them apart from the masses.
Aside from government doing nothing to encourage the use of physical money, which can’t be good for helping the future of collecting, it is no wonder the Mint is not gaining collectors year over year. Most people do not collect anything to be frustrated regularly, they do it for pleasure or relaxation. I am still collecting my ASEs but I am taking little pleasure in doing so anymore and am just biding my time until the price of Silver is high enough to allow me a small profit upon selling my collection or I realize I am dying and pass it on to some lucky, possibly random, young individual I think may keep it and hopefully not sell it off as soon as I croak. Whichever comes first. Things like that can change a young persons life. Sometimes even the smallest things. I still remember a guy ((somewhere in his 20s at the time, named Tim)) that collected swords and daggers ((he probably had 20-30 hanging on his wall)) when I was around 10 years old ((which would place it around 1973)) that worked on a second farm my father owned for a short while ((for 5 years or so while he was in his 30s. He eventually figured out owning one is a more than a full time occupation already so where do you get the extra time to run 2 of them with only 1 young son to help reliably)). Tim gave me a fancy looking dagger made in Toledo, Spain that I eventually realized was an extra, inexpensive, or inferior ((or all 3)) item but meant the world to that 10 year old farm boy. The tang was thin and broke while playing with it lightly when I was 15 or 16. I still have the parts. Seriously, by 13 at the latest I was taking good care of stuff, mine and/or others. Before age 10, not so much; so maybe I did the damage from 10-13, but I doubt it. I valued that dagger from the very start. The tang was thin. It might well have been the very item that made me start to take care of things as opposed to abusing them. So some small gesture Tim did had a lifetime effect on young me. He probably forgot about me, the farm, and the sword in short order. Hired help came and went. I cringe remembering me throwing around Colored Disney story records of my mom’s that were from the 40s or 50s (whose sleeves were also books) like frisbees when I was like 6. I avoid looking up values of those to this day. I hope they are less valuable than I fear. I have a fair number of edged weapons of my own now, bought my first at 14.
Well CaliSkier, I am glad you pump out a few long posts here too so I don’t feel as bad making you read this one as I did when I replied to cagcrisp but at least this is an old thread at this point so few others should even notice and these should be my final thoughts on this subject until we all talk about it again here the next time, probably a few years from now. Other than a few minor missing points of data, I think I got enough to say I am for Mint to Demand and won’t be changing my mind about that anytime soon. Unless some upcoming article really excites me I expect I will be fading back into the shadows again. Until then, take care. In my defense, this one would have been quite short if I didn’t revisit Mint to Demand. This was like the final draft of all my earlier points in favor of Mint to Demand drawn from my comments nearer the top of the article and what I had been pondering since. Plus I have a secondary reason for revisiting this. Thanks for your ongoing efforts to keep things peaceful here, too.
Interestingly, I got a marketing email a few days ago from Naxion, doing an in person survey locally for the Mint. If they choose me, I will print Mine, cagcrisps, yours, and any other comments from this thread about Mint to Demand I think are germane and bring it to that survey. And tell them if they are not already, they should be monitoring comments from as many coin forums as they know of, including or especially this one. And whatever else I think of while I am there. They may not pick me though. They said they want “diverse views” for the survey and while that is me to a “T”, the basic questions they asked just make me look like another typical old white man who collects coins. I guess it will depend upon how many are interested. There may be a fair amount who bite, as they offered to pay a small amount for our time, which is a first for me related to the Mint surveys.

Hey Jeff, no problems here logging in, and yes I’ve had an account since 2008 as well. Interesting what you mention about “user name” vs email address. My account has always had my email as my username. I’m now wondering if at some point, back then, if when creating a new account, the system could have possibly allowed for one to create an account, using either your e-mail or a unique password? Ponder? Again, my account has always had my e-mail as the login identifier for my account. When I look at what I have written down, there isn’t anything crossed out or updated to what I wrote down 17 years ago. I can only assume, I never had a unique “ username” other than my e-mail.

PS Not sure if it’s the power of suggestion, however I vaguely(?) recall that the field did use to ask for a “username” vs “Email Address”? As best I can recall though and what I’ve got written down is my email address.

A top 5 favorite from them ✔️

Lee,
Did you create your account a long time ago? When I created mine around 2008, I was asked for a “username” and “password” to log in, not “email” and “password”. I had not had to play the “noon” game for quite a while because I subscribe whenever possible. When I tried to log in for the Army privy purchase, I put in “email” and “password” as it asked and got the invalid password message too. I knew my password was correct (same since account creation and written down) so the problem was the “email” field (which may have changed since 2008, but it didn’t seem logical to try an old email address. I obviously created my account with my current email or updated my email address with the Mint successfully sometime in the past, as I have no problem getting emails from the Mint). I tried my “username” instead there and got in immediately. I am sure I had always signed in before using “username”, not “email”, unless possibly it asked for my “email” before and took it immediately. I don’t think it did though, because I always double check my account log in information before I prepare for the noon rush so I am sure I would have remembered the discrepancy between what they asked for and what worked if it happened more than once and I do not remember that happening before. I am pretty sure I have always logged in with “username”. I could imagine sometime after I created my account they started asking for “email” instead of “username” to create new accounts but I never got a message asking me to change. Of course, they do have my email anyway, so if they automatically switch me over to using “email” instead I could easily. More likely they changed the log in screen somewhere along the line and the person who did it was not a long time employee so did not know older accounts use “username” to log in instead of “email” so they changed the instructions to “email” there, even though older accounts like mine still use “username” and the underlying programming had not been changed to transition to accepting only “email”. The message probably should read “email” or “username” there. Just a guess. If it had asked for “email” ever before there and I got a log in rejection message, I am 99% sure I would have remembered that, and I do not remember that happening to me before.
CaliSkier—You said you write down your passwords too. Assuming you have had an account a long time too, do you also have a “username” written down for your Mint account as I do? I would be surprised if your account is relatively new. Or possibly you are so familiar with your username you never needed to write it down? If I hadn’t written mine down, I might not have been able to figure out what the discrepancy was and exactly why I got the log in error message from the Mint in the first place. I don’t feel like scrolling through all the comments to check, but you did not have a problem logging in this time, did you?

i only have 1 email address but have not had a chance to do another reset yet. But will try again soon to get it cleared up

Lee, have you managed to access your old account or not yet? Any chance, like many, you might have multiple email addressees(gmail, hotmail?) set up on your computer and you’re using the wrong one? In theory you should be able to enter your email address that you used to originally set up your account at the Mints main sign on page and use the “Forgot Password” feature below the Password box at sign in. Sounds like you may have done this already?

Providing you’ve entered the correct e-mail address that you originally used to set up your account, you will receive an e-mail from the Mint with instructions on how to reset your password. Typically on most websites, this will require you to set up a new password that is different from the one you used originally.

Make sure “caps lock” is off on your computer key board and make sure to write down, “exactly” the characters used to set up your new one. I’m old school, so I’ve got all of my passwords written down vs storing on a computer or my phone. Most of my passwords, are variations of the same one used across many different platforms. Capital and lower case letters, numbers and symbols. When I have had trouble in the past, I have had to make sure to “peck” each character methodically in order to get my password entered correctly. As long as you are using the same original email associated with your account, the “Forgot Password” feature should do the trick in being able to access your old account and then set up a new password. You can try to use the same original password you’d had in the past as your “new” password, however many times, modern technology will prompt you to use or set up a different one. This typically means you just have to alter/adjust only “one character” from the old password you were familiar with. If there is, let’s say a zero in your old password and you want your new password to be similar, when resetting your password, simply use all the same ordered format of characters and change that zero to a 1.

Good luck, write it down, and don’t wait until later to resolve. The sooner you get your account squared away the less hassle down the road. Plus, like many here I’m sure you’d like to access your old account, just to simply access your purchase history.

PS Take a deep breath in through the nose, out through your mouth, you got this! Patience and persistence will pay off. “May the force be with you…” PSS I’ve had password issues before on a release day and found I was too wound up, anxious or in a hurry and wasn’t holding down the shift key far enough in order to get my capital letters or symbols entered properly while typing. Once I slowed down and methodically pecked them in, one character at a time, I managed to get it entered properly. Lastly, most all systems are designed to lock your account for 24hrs if the wrong password is entered 5 times. So, use the “Forgot Password” feature and set up a new one. Once you’ve reset your password,’ log in and log out multiple times to familiarize and verify, you’re not getting experiencing “user error” on your part. Breathe… Hope this helps resolve your log on problem.