Are pre 1999 quarters having to stay in circulation longer or shorter?

The US Mint estimates the lifespan of a coin in circulation to be aproximately 30 years. Because new coins are constantly being minted, there’s a steady stream of replacements.

Since the introduction of the 50 State Quarters program though, the number of quarters that vanish from circulation relatively imediately, to disapear in some coin collection somewhere has gone up.

Is this having any effect on how long the old quarters are having to be kept in circulation? Come 2009, when the mint finishes with Alsaska and Hawaii, is there going to be a signifigantly larger number of quarters from the early 70s, 6-8 years past what today is considered the average age for a quarter by today’s standards, still in circulation, and all the much worse for wear due to people prefering to spend a worn “eagle” quarter over a shiny new state quarter?

Or is the Mint just going to keep upping the numbers of the new state quarters each year to make up for the accelerated wear on the pre '99 coins due to the public’s preferential spending on the old quarters? Since it only costs the government 4.29 cents to mint each quarter, this would seem to be the more likely course of action.

However, if they do keep upping the production of new quarters, and accelerate the phase out of the pre '99 coins, I imagine there may end up being a backlash. Casual collectors could very well dump their collections back into circulation if increasing production of state quarters ruins the sense of their rarity.

Should such a glut of quarters come flooding back onto the market, the US Mint may find demand for what is arguably its most profitable coin to mint sharply drop. Or is the Mint counting on a resurgance of coin-op video game arcades as the children of the 80s move firmly into the “mass-marketed nostalgia” age bracket to insulate them from such a catastrophe?

In reality, the amount of money being printed (especially in quaters) is trivial compared to the virtual money that is flowing through the country so I think that the reserver bank would be more interested in making sure there is no shortage of loose change rather than trying to use it to control monetary policy. If there turns out to be a shortage of quarters on the market, the reserve bank will simply stamp more.

Actually, the US MInt has cut back on the number of state quarters produced. They found that the production levels in 2000-2001 were causing an oversupply of quarters. So the mintage figures for 2002 are smaller. And there’s still an oversupply.

That’s interesting, samclem, because I remember heaing that they’d increased the number of quarters stamped for the year 2000 because there was so much hording of the 99 state quaters. I guess the collector backlash and subsequent glut is already upon us, if the Mint’s having to cut back.