Options
1970-S PROOF WASHINGTON QUARTER ON SILVER BARBER QUARTER - SHENANIGANS?
jmlanzaf
Posts: 32,029 ✭✭✭✭✭
For Sale: 1970-S Proof Washington Quarter Struck on a Silver Barber Quarter NGC PF 65 1 of 2 Known
Is this coin a legitimate error or a manufactured error? NOTE: I'm not suggesting it isn't what it says it is. I'm asking whether a bored Mint worker made it on purpose or it happened by accident.
1970-S PROOF WASHINGTON QUARTER ON SILVER BARBER QUARTER - SHENANIGANS?
This is a public poll: others will see what you voted for.
.jpg)
0
Comments
Is the base Barber Quarter UNC, like it was hung up in the machinery for 54 years?
75,000 for a coin that was probably manufactured, no thanks. the seller doesn't sell much either, not a good sign. I wouldn't pay 750 for it
I don't believe it happened even once by accident.
The seller is a MAJOR error coin seller.
Who is the seller?
I> @CaptHenway said:
Mike Byers has one of them listed on EBay.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
1 of 2 known? That's 1 of 2 too many. If my livelihood depended on sales of error coins, I'd be seriously unhappy seeing this sort of stuff show up.
edited to add... SHENANIGANS? You have to ask?
Did this come from that safety deposit box group of proof errors that was "authenticated" by the government ( secret service??)
Idk. But if this is shenanigans, hhow many others are?
As many as were possible to get away with?
edited to add... As long as there's a demand there will be an attempt to supply it.
There were a bunch of "impossible" errors that came from the San Francisco mint in that era. One of the more dramatic IMS, is a 1970-S PR die cap jammed into a 1970 proof set. There was a two tailed '65 quarter and several other coins that were just outrageous.
Of course it's still a '70 PR quarter struck on a barber quarter.
How would that be possible without physical and purposely executed "interference"?,
I haven't had a difficult or "hard" life, and the few expensive lessons were ones that were possible to work around.
But $75,000 isn't so worthless that you could just spend it on that thingie.
for lack of knowledge here, what makes them so sure its a barber quarter?
Here is a description of one of the coins that was up for sale, previously:
“1970-S 25C Washington Quarter -- Struck on a Barber Quarter -- PR65 NGC. Here is one overstruck error that required some help to occur, presumably from a prankster numismatist on a tour of the San Francisco Mint. When the coin is tilted just right, the reverse of the Barber undertype is apparent on the obverse field and portrait. DOLLAR is fully legible near the Washington quarter mintmark. No trace of the undertype is apparent on the Washington quarter reverse.”
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
got it and understood, thank you
How could anyone on this board KNOW exactly what happened on this or any error coin?
Were you there?
Tough to say. All that remains of the Barber design is an outline of the design. But I suspect the Barber was something less than a gem. Same as the $5 Lib and Canadian Quarter that were overstruck, probably on the same day. 😉
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
didn't some actual proof dies get accidentally released from those years?
The 1913 Liberty Nickels are the result of "shenanigans" but still accepted as legitimate rarities. If they are mint products, It's all about acceptance, and not as much about intent during manufacture, at least as far as value goes.
But it was plausible that 1913 liberty nickel could have been struck. Also consider the hype and marketing from Samuel Brown and Mehl during a time period when accurate information was scarce to non-existent and it's easy to understand why it's accepted by the numismatic community.
There is no reasonable explanation why coins like this and the and the proof overstruck on the 1941 Canadian quarter could have occurred without help. In my opinion, I do not consider these to be worthy of being regarded as an amazing rarity.
Technically, you are correct, both coins were produced by questionable means. But a 1913 liberty or 1804 class 2/3 dollar is always going to make headlines, while coins like this will always have a stigma attached to them
Don't we always say to the parking lot coin people: ask yourself how this could have happened in the minting process?
I would ask you that question here.
Need to get @FredWeinberg into this discussion. He should be able
to settle this discussion once and for all.
What do you think there is to settle?
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
No doubt, given the contrasting years, it was not a standard Mint error...had to be shenanigans... Cheers, RickO
I don't know if this applies to these particular coins but I remember years ago reading that some coins during this era were being smuggled out of the mint in the crankcases of forklifts.
I don't think it really matters if they are "intentional" or not nor on what level they were "intentional". 1913 V-nickels and most of the `1804 dollars were intentional and are highly sought after. The WI-D leaf quarters were obviously intentional and might have had the tacit approval of the higher ups but this detracts nothing from their desirability and might even add to it.
The intentional manufacture of errors just adds to their numbers and diversity but doesn't detract from their collectability.
I don’t consider 1913 Nickels and 1804 Dollars to be errors.
With respect to errors, if they are intentionally made, are they still errors?
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
In the 1970's this would have been taken to the U.S. Mint Lab (through the back door so they could say they never saw the thing) rejected as needing the "help of man" to make, and then rejected by the ANA Certification Service. Ditto, coins on nails!
Fortunately or unfortunately, times have changed. Now these wonderful concoctions are very unusual, often unique, valuable collectibles. I like them myself. If only I had the chance...
Susie B. Anthony struck on a gold Tiffany lighter. How about a 1976 dime, on a struck cent, on a struck, nickel, on a 40% silver quarter on a 40% silver Ike? A little concave cup of 5 coins. When Mr. Carr wants to make some Real $$$$ he can "jazz up" his production adding "made-to-order" novelties at any time.
This is part of the issue, for me. A bored Mint employee could (and maybe does) put random things into the press all day long. Do we really want to consider those things to be errors or even collectible?
Ultimately, the Market makes the decision. But, for me, a bored Mint employee stamping out "collectible errors" makes them strictly uncollectible.
I would also ask the board members whether such intentionally made "collectible errors" shouldn't better be thought of as COUNTERFEIT ERRORS. Does not the presence of such things potentially undermine the collectibility of legitimate errors?
In the philatelic world, the BEP made an infamous error on the single sheet of Inverted Jennys. There was always suspicion that it was not an accident. Nonetheless the stamp became famous and quite collectible. I liken this to the 1913 Liberty nickels whose origin remains, as far as I know, somewhat unknown. In 1962, the BEP did make an inversion error on the Dag Hammerskoldj stamp. When they discovered that they had released some, they quickly INTENTIONALLY printed millions of sheets of "errors" to prevent the collectibility of the error. It worked. While a collectible variety, the Hammerskoldj error remains a 50 cent stamp not a $500,000 stamp like the Jenny.
It is also worth considering whether paying large amounts for manufactured errors encourages future shenanigans. It's no different than counterfeit coins which, these days, tend to be created for the collector market not for actual commercial use. To that end, it SHOULD make a difference to us whether the error is "real" or "shenanigans".
I think it's unfortunate that these sort of things can get authenticated and slabbed as "Mint Errors".
Well, to be fair, I'm not sure we KNOW the source. [Though one is improbable, two...????] And it is what it says it is: a 1970-S proof quarter on a Barber planchet. But I agree that it might be better to turn up our collective noses at manufactured errors.
Of course, the whole error market suffers from a similar "manipulation". Errors, when discovered, are supposed to be destroyed. Yet, the value attached to them makes it profitable to sneak them out of the Mint even if they are discovered. I mean, how does a giant cluster get out of the Mint intact?
On the flip side, the very act of destroying Mint errors makes any that ACCIDENTALLY get out more valuable. It is, in the modern era, a very manipulated supply...even when someone isn't putting their cafeteria spoon into the press for fun.
There's a difference between an error created in the minting process and one that was deliberately fabricated, not that there's necessarily a good way to definitively tell them apart. IMO, how they get out of the mint is a secondary consideration to this.
All coins (except true errors) were intentionally fabricated. The only variable is whose intention.
LIBERTY SEATED DIMES WITH MAJOR VARIETIES CIRCULATION STRIKES (1837-1891) digital album
I agree with this. The point I was trying to make is that this whole segment of the market is open to manipulation
If this came from the safety deposit find, Fred is one of the people who bought it from the State of California.
Mike Byers is one of the top error coin dealers.
These sorts of things ARE WHAT THEY ARE. The genuine examples were made at the Mint, using genuine dies. Therefore, man-made on purpose or not, today they are considered to be error coins.
As I wrote before. IMO the Mint should have a "make to order" Dept. similar to the "custom" services offered by several upscale auto manufacturers. If you wish to pay 10K extra and wait several months to get a "one-off" car color that matches your parakeet's tail feathers that's up to you and the maker of the vehicle.
Thanks for the insight, Captain Obvious.
But that's not what I was writing about. I posted an opinion (that's the "I think" part of my comment). I'm sure you're familiar with those, right?
Regarding intentionally made oddities being considered errors...
In discussing [a different] question, Abraham Lincoln used to liken the case to that of the boy who, when asked how many legs his calf would have if he called its tail a leg, replied, ” Five,” to which the prompt response was made that calling the tail a leg would not make it a leg.
.> @MasonG said:
Agree. Outside the scope of this thread but I have heard the same thing about 19th century "patterns". If true, I have the same opinion of these.
Well, Private Obvious everyone has one - an opinion of course. I've learned to value an opinion by the significance of the person making it. Thus, Lincoln made a good point.
Appeal to authority? Yeah, I've heard of it. It's among the various recognized logical fallacies.
Hi Guys - That Quarter was not in the Calif. Safe Deposit Box deal I bought.
However, the coin in question was overstruck at the San Francisco Mint.
(inside the Mint - there are no missing 'full design' dies from the SF Mint from the '60's)
It (they) were made on purpose, usually by 'bored' or 'intrigued' employees.
(I've talked to enough of them, from different US Mints, over the decades)
for PCGS. A 49+-Year PNG Member...A full numismatist since 1972, retired in 2022
Good for them! While I don't condone doing any thing illegal, "they" risked their job to provide us with some modern "Moonlight Mint" concoctions. Anyone who thinks this kind of thing at the mint is rarely done is a dreamer.
I saw stuff in the desk drawer of just one engraver that would blow some minds. At one time, an office at the Secret Service had a display of what I assumed were confiscated coins. I apologize for forgetting most of the stuff - so don't believe me but I do remember a commemorative half dollar in gold. Try as I might I cannot remember which one. Look, when you are in your 30's and your eyes are overwhelmed by a group of unusual objects - each as neat or better than the next, your brain shorts out. Anything remaining is lost over the passing decades.
Besides, everything is relative. You could show a press operator one of the mule 25c/$1 and it would mean nothing as he would explain how it could happen in a deadpan tone. Folks who see stuff every day get jaded.
Might the commemorative have been a Texas? I heard a rumor of one, many years ago.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
I was going to mention you as one of the members who might be a little "jaded" by now... LOL, Oh, another 1894-S dime.
Not a Texas for sure. I've had partial designs from several different coins popping into my head anytime I try to bring up the memory like just now when I read your question.
The sad and crazy thing is we probably don't realize the "importance/value/future interest" of everyday things around us. Look at a Picture postcard of the U. S. Mint interior. Today everything is an antique. I'll bet the engraving dept at the mint is now modern and clean - nothing neat laying around, no wood desks with small drawers full of stuff. Heck, everything may be done on a computer today so the only engraving tools might be in a display case for the visitors to see.
TooTellTheTruth will come on and weave us a tale about the mafia's inside guy in the mint making error coins.
Update: That '70-S Proof Quarter error was in the SF Safe Deposit box
deal - I was thinking of an earlier coin......
for PCGS. A 49+-Year PNG Member...A full numismatist since 1972, retired in 2022
None of us know,
But many if us do possess critical thinking skills and have awareness of probabilities and the concepts of deductive reasoning.
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry