If you collected patterns (or if you do)...

RKKay

Would you be more likely to pay more for an original than a restrike all other factors being equal?

What if your choice were between two patterns (same Judd number) struck at the same time. One was struck with the intent to be evaluated for potential use as a regular issue, and the other was struck purely to be sold to collectors. Some no-cost test were available to determine which was struck for which reason. What then?

pruebas

I collect patterns, but not specifically US patterns.

My answers are 1) yes and 2) I don’t care.

Very few patterns went into “official” hands for their intended use, and those that did aren’t usually high-grade. Many more were struck for archives, or simply extras that weren’t needed for their official purpose. I don’t mind having one of those, though I prefer one struck contemporaneously.

MFeld

Rick, those would be easy choices for me. I’ll take the original over the restrike and the one to be evaluated for its regular issue potential over the one made for sale to collectors.

TurtleCat

Patterns are likely out of reach for me but...

1) Yes
2) It wouldn't matter, especially if you can't prove which one was done for evaluation.

291fifth

My experience with patterns back in the 1990's was so negative my only advice would be to avoid them. Thin market ... especially when it comes time to sell anything except the most popular types.

Zoins

@291fifth said:
My experience with patterns back in the 1990's was so negative my only advice would be to avoid them. Thin market ... especially when it comes time to sell anything except the most popular types.

I’m in the popular camp for US patterns due to the high prices. Some patterns are highly in demand and some are not, regardless for original or restrike.

That being said, the popular ones are currently out of my price range and I avoid the less expensive, less popular ones because they are still expensive and it’s a very thin market.

Many of the ones on eBay have been there a long time. The ones I get excited by show up on Heritage occasionally.

Zoins

@RKKay said:
Would you be more likely to pay more for an original than a restrike all other factors being equal?

What if your choice were between two patterns (same Judd number) struck at the same time. One was struck with the intent to be evaluated for potential use as a regular issue, and the other was struck purely to be sold to collectors. Some no-cost test were available to determine which was struck for which reason. What then?

I’m not certain there are many situations where everything else is equal, but I’d it was, the original would be a no brainer.

Cameonut

I have a couple of patterns that are both original.
Restrikes seem more like a gimmick to me so I doubt I would buy one.

WCC

I wouldn't be interested in any restrike that I can think of. I don't buy any US patterns, don't intend to but if I did, I'd have no interest in a restrike.

Zoins

@WCC said:
I wouldn't be interested in any restrike that I can think of.

Sign me up for a eye appealing Gobrecht dollar restrike any time

WCC

@Zoins said:

@WCC said:
I wouldn't be interested in any restrike that I can think of.

Sign me up for a eye appealing Gobrecht dollar restrike any time

I wouldn't at anywhere near it current market price, whatever that may be.

Zoins

@WCC said:

@Zoins said:

@WCC said:
I wouldn't be interested in any restrike that I can think of.

Sign me up for a eye appealing Gobrecht dollar restrike any time

I wouldn't at anywhere near it current market price, whatever that may be.

Well, interest and price are different. Do you enjoy the restrike coins irrespective of price?

WCC

@Zoins said:

@WCC said:

@Zoins said:

@WCC said:
I wouldn't be interested in any restrike that I can think of.

Sign me up for a eye appealing Gobrecht dollar restrike any time

I wouldn't at anywhere near it current market price, whatever that may be.

Well, interest and price are different. Do you enjoy the coins irrespective of price?

I don't collect for financial reasons. If I did, I wouldn't be a collector. Budget and price are always a consideration. Do you have an unlimited budget?

There are literally thousands of coins I would rather own than the example you gave. If I could find the coins and they even exist, I could probably complete all four denominations of Peru pillar minors (from my primary interest) in AU to better MS for less than the cost of one of these. That's 80+ coins where each one is quite difficult to almost impossible to buy.

I have the same opinion with probably in the vicinity of 80% to 90% of the 2000+ listed in Judd or Pollock. I don't consider this restrike US pattern (or most others) to have the distinction US collecting assigns it.

Zoins

@WCC said:

@Zoins said:

@WCC said:

@Zoins said:

@WCC said:
I wouldn't be interested in any restrike that I can think of.

Sign me up for a eye appealing Gobrecht dollar restrike any time

I wouldn't at anywhere near it current market price, whatever that may be.

Well, interest and price are different. Do you enjoy the coins irrespective of price?

I don't collect for financial reasons. If I did, I wouldn't be a collector. Budget and price are always a consideration. Do you have an unlimited budget?

There are literally thousands of coins I would rather own than the example you gave. If I could find the coins and they even exist, I could probably complete all four denominations of Peru pillar minors (from my primary interest) in AU to better MS for less than the cost of one of these. That's 80+ coins where each one is quite difficult to almost impossible to buy.

I have the same opinion with probably in the vicinity of 80% to 90% of the 2000+ listed in Judd or Pollock. I don't consider this restrike US pattern (or most others) to have the distinction US collecting assigns it.

Put another way, I'm trying to understand if your disinterest in restrikes is because you categorically don't like restrikes, or just that none happen to be of interest and you could be interested in a restrike if the right one appeared.

Zoins

@RKKay said:
If you collected patterns (or if you do)...
Would you be more likely to pay more for an original than a restrike all other factors being equal?

Do you have any in mind?

pruebas

Boy, this thread has taken a turn for the worse....

WCC

@Zoins said:

@WCC said:

@Zoins said:

@WCC said:

@Zoins said:

@WCC said:
I wouldn't be interested in any restrike that I can think of.

Sign me up for a eye appealing Gobrecht dollar restrike any time

I wouldn't at anywhere near it current market price, whatever that may be.

Well, interest and price are different. Do you enjoy the coins irrespective of price?

I don't collect for financial reasons. If I did, I wouldn't be a collector. Budget and price are always a consideration. Do you have an unlimited budget?

There are literally thousands of coins I would rather own than the example you gave. If I could find the coins and they even exist, I could probably complete all four denominations of Peru pillar minors (from my primary interest) in AU to better MS for less than the cost of one of these. That's 80+ coins where each one is quite difficult to almost impossible to buy.

I have the same opinion with probably in the vicinity of 80% to 90% of the 2000+ listed in Judd or Pollock. I don't consider this restrike US pattern (or most others) to have the distinction US collecting assigns it.

Put another way, I'm trying to understand if your disinterest in restrikes is because they are restrikes categorically, or just that none happen to be of interest and you could be interested in a restrike if the right one appeared.

I like the design of the example you gave, a lot. This is no different than practically any US collector. The problem I have with restrikes is that I don't consider any of them to be legitimate coins, and this is irrespective of definitions related to legal tender status. From what I know, many US patterns weren't even "properly" authorized and were made as part of a profit making scheme by US Mint employees. If this isn't true, it would change my opinion of many, but still not of restrikes because it was still issued later for collectors and had nothing to do with a proto type for circulating coinage.

If the "pattern" wasn't intended as some kind of prototype for circulating coinage, it isn't a "real" pattern to me. This opinion doesn't seem to be any different than the one by many collectors today have for the restrike 1804 dollar, another coin that doesn't interest me either.

To answer your question now, if I could buy a restrike Gorbrecht for something like $500 I'd certainly buy it to keep it. However, unlike the overwhelming percentage of US collectors, I wouldn't buy it even for 90% back of what I believe to be current value (at least mid six figures) for the reasons I just gave you. I don't find it interesting as a collectible.

The only restrike I can think of which I would like to own is the CSA half dollar, but still only at a noticeably lower price. I'd make an exception for it because the original is my #1 US coin.

Raybo

Loaded question IMHO RKKay, and what I'm referring to is the term "restrike".
Restrikes are all over the place in everyday U.S. coin collecting and the restrikes were always intended for collectors.

Before I go off here is an example that I would like to own....and it just might be next on my list.

Zoins

@WCC said:

@Zoins said:

@WCC said:

@Zoins said:

@WCC said:

@Zoins said:

@WCC said:
I wouldn't be interested in any restrike that I can think of.

Sign me up for a eye appealing Gobrecht dollar restrike any time

I wouldn't at anywhere near it current market price, whatever that may be.

Well, interest and price are different. Do you enjoy the coins irrespective of price?

I don't collect for financial reasons. If I did, I wouldn't be a collector. Budget and price are always a consideration. Do you have an unlimited budget?

There are literally thousands of coins I would rather own than the example you gave. If I could find the coins and they even exist, I could probably complete all four denominations of Peru pillar minors (from my primary interest) in AU to better MS for less than the cost of one of these. That's 80+ coins where each one is quite difficult to almost impossible to buy.

I have the same opinion with probably in the vicinity of 80% to 90% of the 2000+ listed in Judd or Pollock. I don't consider this restrike US pattern (or most others) to have the distinction US collecting assigns it.

Put another way, I'm trying to understand if your disinterest in restrikes is because they are restrikes categorically, or just that none happen to be of interest and you could be interested in a restrike if the right one appeared.

I like the design of the example you gave, a lot. This is no different than practically any US collector. The problem I have with restrikes is that I don't consider any of them to be legitimate coins, and this is irrespective of definitions related to legal tender status. From what I know, many US patterns weren't even "properly" authorized and were made as part of a profit making scheme by US Mint employees. If this isn't true, it would change my opinion of many, but still not of restrikes because it was still issued later for collectors and had nothing to do with a proto type for circulating coinage.

Fantasy pieces made for collectors are the largest category of patterns. I've been been interested to see if there's a way to classify these separately to better distinguish fantasy collector-made pieces and ones designed for testing coinage, however, so far, there doesn't appear to be an easy way to categorize.

If the "pattern" wasn't intended as some kind of prototype for circulating coinage, it isn't a "real" pattern to me. This opinion doesn't seem to be any different than the one by many collectors today have for the restrike 1804 dollar, another coin that doesn't interest me either.

The thing about the 1804 dollar is that even originals aren't considered "real" coins by many as they were minted in the 1830s.

To answer your question now, if I could buy a restrike Gorbrecht for something like $500 I'd certainly buy it to keep it. However, unlike the overwhelming percentage of US collectors, I wouldn't buy it even for 90% back of what I believe to be current value (at least mid six figures) for the reasons I just gave you. I don't find it interesting as a collectible.

The only restrike I can think of which I would like to own is the CSA half dollar, but still only at a noticeably lower price. I'd make an exception for it because the original is my #1 US coin.

Good to know. Thanks for the your answer.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

Zoins

@Realone said:
I don't believe in this particular case the later manufacture should be identified as restrikes. First they were struck too close together o be defined as a restrict, second they should all be called the same due to the fact they were not minted/intended for circulation but only for approval and being struck so close in time to each other negates the definition of a restrict. Normally minted coins are struck over the same period of time.

Aren't normal coins struck only in the year they are dated?

jmlanzaf

@Zoins said:

@Realone said:
I don't believe in this particular case the later manufacture should be identified as restrikes. First they were struck too close together o be defined as a restrict, second they should all be called the same due to the fact they were not minted/intended for circulation but only for approval and being struck so close in time to each other negates the definition of a restrict. Normally minted coins are struck over the same period of time.

Aren't normal coins struck only in the year they are dated?

UGH. Define "normal"?

Circulation strikes? Presentation pieces?

In the early period, because of die costs, it wasn't unheard of to roll over into the next year even on circuation strikes.

Zoins

@jmlanzaf said:

@Zoins said:

@Realone said:
I don't believe in this particular case the later manufacture should be identified as restrikes. First they were struck too close together o be defined as a restrict, second they should all be called the same due to the fact they were not minted/intended for circulation but only for approval and being struck so close in time to each other negates the definition of a restrict. Normally minted coins are struck over the same period of time.

Aren't normal coins struck only in the year they are dated?

UGH. Define "normal"?

Circulation strikes? Presentation pieces?

Regarding normal, I was responding to @Realone who wrote "Normally minted coins are struck over the same period of time."

In the early period, because of die costs, it wasn't unheard of to roll over into the next year even on circuation strikes.

Agreed, but then wouldn't they change the year on the die as well.

RKKay

@Zoins said:

@RKKay said:
If you collected patterns (or if you do)...
Would you be more likely to pay more for an original than a restrike all other factors being equal?

Do you have any in mind?

All I can say at this point is that it is related to my research.

RKKay

@Raybo said:
Loaded question IMHO RKKay, and what I'm referring to is the term "restrike".
Restrikes are all over the place in everyday U.S. coin collecting and the restrikes were always intended for collectors.

Before I go off here is an example that I would like to own....and it just might be next on my list.

You are 100% correct. I am currently trying to figure out an issue directly on point, and was hoping to spark a discussion (check!).

RKKay

@Zoins said:

@Realone said:
I don't believe in this particular case the later manufacture should be identified as restrikes. First they were struck too close together o be defined as a restrict, second they should all be called the same due to the fact they were not minted/intended for circulation but only for approval and being struck so close in time to each other negates the definition of a restrict. Normally minted coins are struck over the same period of time.

Aren't normal coins struck only in the year they are dated?

I believe Realone has a little insight to the issue I am researching; as such, his response is a bit cryptic.