Souvenir Sets supposedly were sold beginning 1972. So WTH is this 1963 set?? ANYBODY??
georgiacop50
Posts: 2,909 ✭✭✭✭
This seems like just a typical one half of a 1963 mint set at first glance.
However there are 3 things wrong with that initial classification:
1) I have seen over 1000 1963 mint sets. In every single one of them the Philadelphia packaging sleeve is of the LIGHT blue color borders like this one:
The darker blue bordered sleeves were used for Mint Sets 1959-1962. There are SOME1962 Mint Sets that have the LIGHT blue borders, but most are of the dark variety
2) Of the 1000+ 1963 sets I have handled, never have I seen a single Type B (proof dies) Washington in one. And yes I do carefully check each one. This odd set DOES contain a Type B.
3) The plastic disk in 1963 Mint Sets say "Distributed by US MINT". This odd set says "Distributed by US Treasurer's Office". Very very odd.
Comments
I do not know near enough to have an opinion but that's interesting, I'll be watching the thread to see the answer .
Very interesting and I cant wait to hear an explanation.
And a Type B too!
Twighlight zone stuff.
"If I say something in the woods and my wife isn't there to hear it.....am I still wrong?"
My Washington Quarter Registry set...in progress
Here's a dark border on ebay.
https://ebay.com/itm/1963-U-S-P-D-Uncirculated-Silver-Mint-Set-in-Original-Mint-Issued-Envelope/202654386161?hash=item2f2f2487f1:g:1FYAAOSwZwlcCAuJ
My Original Song Written to my late wife-"Plus other original music by me"
https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PL8A11CC8CC6093D80
https://n1m.com/bobbysmith1
If you could find a 1972 Franklin in those sets I'd be particularly interested.
U.S. Type Set
Token is a different color @bsshog40 too.
Pretty sure that is a light border just underexposed.
Interesting, keep us posted !!!
Logical explanation is that the packaging department ordered new plastic stock in 1962, without specifying the shade of blue to be used because who cared, and the old stock and new stock got used interchangeably in late 1962 and early 1963.
Perhaps this is similar to what occurred during 1982 and 1983 and third parties made sets. Why? No idea. At least we know why the 82/83’s were made.
Comments on the tokens are at the bottom.
Observable Differences:
-thicker letters, bolder
-enclosed letters are filled, example: A, B, R
-Mint’s token thicker?
Gives the appearance of a photocopy of a copy. When re-copying a copy of a document and on and on... the copied copies never looks the same as the original.
Lastly, the paint/ink on the cellophane:
-paint/ink chipping
Yes but that only explains 1 of the 3 anomalies.
Agree, curious of the type b.
Just got home to a real computer instead of my cell phone and now see the difference between the "Distributed by..." tokens. I was totally unaware that they came that way. Great catch.
Presumably they were all packaged at the Philly and Denver Mints with the different tokens. Whether or not the different colors were a deliberate way to keep them separate or not I have no idea.
There was a thread on here about a month ago (?) about a 1962 or 1963 Mint Set with an enclosed note from the Treasury Department saying that as of a certain time the Treasury would no longer be selling the uncirculated sets. Could somebody please find that thread? This token discovery suddenly makes it much more relevant.
TD
Old thread bumped here:
https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/1004438/unusual-note-from-superintendant-of-the-mint-found-in-mint-set-update-with-something-even-cooler#latest
Now THATS the Capn !
The chipping paint phenom is very common on mint sets of this era, especially the 1962's which for some reason degraded more rapidly than surrounding years Hemispherical.
The difference in the mint tokens is really interesting....the one on ebay is the U.S. Mint variety...so likely the color is due to photography.... Hope to hear more on this anomaly... Cheers, RickO
There is a lot of normal variability on the inking of the plastic tokens, so I don't think the "thicker, bolder" font holds much water. The plastic disk itself (irregardless of differences of the inking) leads me to believe with 99.9% certainty that the mystery set is of "Government" origin.
Here's a pic showing how variable the ink can be (all from 1963 P-sets):
BTW the inking can be found slightly to EXTREMELY off-center on the tokens, despite the claims by one ebay seller that his is a RARE LOOK!! ERROR
Any with the “U. S. Treasury’s Office”?
There must be more than the one in the OP.
Still looking.
Went archive hunting for information on the uncirculated 1963 souvenir sets.
The uncirculated coins do not appear to be counted as sets but as individual coinage. Might need to find the records from the Philly Mint.
Then got sidetracked...
Partial extract from, “ANNUAL REPORT of the DIRECTOR OF THE MINT FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 1963” about foreign coinage.
—————-
“Record of foreign coinage production by United States Mints for other countries from 1876 through 1962
INTRODUCTION
*
The United States Mints were first permitted to manufacture coins for foreign governments in 1874. The authorizing act of Congress reads as follows:
"It shall be lawful for coinage to be executed at the mints of the United States for any foreign country applying for the same, ac- cording to the legally prescribed standards and devices of such country, under such regulations as the Secretary of the Treasury may prescribe; and the charge for the same shall be equal to the expenses thereof, including labor, materials, and use of ma- chinery, to be fixed by the Director of the Mint, with the approval of the Secretary of the Treasury: Provided, That the manufacture of such coin shall not interfere with the required coinage of the United States." (Jan. 29, 1874, Ch. 19, 18 Stat. 6.)
The first foreign coinage order was executed for the Government of Venezuela during the U.S. Government fiscal year 1876. To date. United States Mints at Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; San Francisco, California; New Orleans, Louisiana; and Denver, Colorado have produced more than 6.7 billion coins for 37 foreign countries. The greatest number of foreign coins produced in a single year was in 1945 when more than 1.8 billion coins in 27 different denominations were struck for nine countries. Summaries by country and year precede individual country tables which give the following informa- tion: Year of coinage, mint, denomination, number of coins pro- duced, metallic composition, and the gross weight and diameter of each denomination. Coins are manufactured to conform to the standards and specifications that are required by the decrees or laws of the various foreign countries . Certain foreign coinage details are prerogatives of the governments concerned rather than the United States Mints which function only in a manufacturing capacity. The .San Francisco and New Orleans Mints are no longer in operation.” p. 63-
Some of the countries:
Argentina
Auatralla
Belgian
Congo
Belgium
Bolivia
China
Colombia
Costa Rica
Cuba
Curacao
Dominican Republic
Ecuador
Netherlands
Neth. E. Indies
Nicaragua
Panama (Republic)
Peru
El Salvador
Ethiopia
FIJI
Greenland
Haiti
Hawaii
Honduras
Indo-Chlna
Korea
Liberia
Mexico
Philippines
Poland
Saudi Arabia
Slam (Thailand)
Surinam (Neth. Guiana)
Syria
Venezuela
More tables and info in the link:
https://ia801307.us.archive.org/32/items/annualreportofdi1963unit/annualreportofdi1963unit.pdf
I’m too far sidetracked.