"USPS Licensed" (Overpriced) Stamp Ingots

For anyone who has not yet seen the latest "hard copy" issue of USA Philatelic, they are including in the centerfold a subscription offer for a collection of "stamp ingots" at what seems to me to be an overpriced $148 apiece for collections of ingots featuring various US Stamps that will be sent once a month for the next 12 or 25 months. They even have a ".999 Pure Swiss Gold" ingot of the US Semipostal Stamp "Heroes" for a whopping $2,995.00.



Here's the link advertised with the USPS logo prominently shown:

http://uspscollections.com/

Am I the only one that feels this is cheapening the reputation of the US Postal Service by not only "licensing" these "collectibles" to the Hallmark Group as an independent maker of such items, but to promote them within USA Philatelic?

As most collectors will know, similar items have been marketed in the past but have been shown to have dubious "value" as unsuspecting consumers purchase subscriptions to these things at significant cost, thinking they have put away a valuable commodity for the future, only to find out later on that they are worth only a fraction of what they paid for them.

Is this just free enterprise and another means for the USPS to collect some advertising revenue? Maybe the reputation of the USPS is so low right now that any number of such things prominently featuring their logo is fair game.

Anyone care to comment?

Talk about your rising postal rates!

how much does each "ingot" weigh?

For the $2995.00 "Heroes Pure Stamp Ingot, it's "Expertly crafted in .999 Pure Swiss Gold and a full 1.70 mm thick." Doesn't mention weight in any other terms other than the "solid gold stamp ingot is the exact size of the original stamp". I don't have a stamp handy to provide an exact measurement, but it can't be all that big.

The other offers for the American Presidents, Lunar New Year and United We Stand Collections at $148.00 each (issued once a month for 12 or 25 months) are for "24-karat gold-layered pure silver" ingots. Each ingot is "exactly the same size as the original stamp" and is "2.2" thick".

At least shipping charges are "included" in the above prices, along with a "wooden lacquered storage case, horn spatula, jeweler's cloth and cotton handling gloves."

they are nowhere near and ounce then...

I probably would not buy, instead prefer by Pure Gold Ingot.

Very First once I bought that was Canada Issued Gold,Silver and
Brass I believe was Olympic. That ws the first and last time
I bought.
JMO

tikithindi.

Moral is in a decline,
US government is a bad example
How could be blame USPS ?

These kinds of sales pitches go back thousands of years, and have nothing to do with morals, declining or otherwise.

Some organizations are very good at making a lot of money on one end and losing a lot of money on the other end.

These are all ripoffs. Remember the Franklin Mint that inundated the airwaves with programs like this in the 1980s?

When it comes time to sell these, the only thing that will matter is the melt value. Gold plated silver is only as valuable as the actual silver content. The few microns of gold plating have zero value. Silver is at a recent low of about $16 an ounce, so these "ingots" that are being sold for $148 likely have about $8 of precious metal value.

Nice markup.

I regard the failure to disclose the net weight of the precious metal content as per se deceptive. A new low for USPS as the licensing and marketing executives continue their ascendancy. Shameful.

One would come out much farther ahead by buying a copy of the actual stamp along with a Silver Eagle. You'd save $120+ and would retain more or less the full value of the item, which would of course be about twice what these things are worth. They look like a neat keepsake, just overpriced by about a factor of 10.

What a horrible scam!

Silver is US$16.50 per oz.

They are backing that stamp collector's have not got a clue.

Biggest rip off I have seen for a very long time.:(

It has to be more the slick ads that get some to buy these types of things rather than any common sense.

More proof that P T Barnum was right on!