It is still an utter counterfeit, despite the fact that the U,S, did not strike any half dollars dated 1787.
The FTC has clearly stated that minor changes from an original numismatic design, up to and including a non-existing DATE, do not exempt an imitation numismatic item from the provisions of the Hobby Protection Act. Of course, that has not stopped various people who think that the rules should not apply to them because the rules might impair their enjoyment of their imitation numismatic items from claiming otherwise.
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
The FTC has clearly stated that minor changes from an original numismatic design, up to and including a non-existing DATE, do not exempt an imitation numismatic item from the provisions of the Hobby Protection Act.
Can you provide a link to where the FTC said this?
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
It is still an utter counterfeit, despite the fact that the U,S, did not strike any half dollars dated 1787.
The FTC has clearly stated that minor changes from an original numismatic design, up to and including a non-existing DATE, do not exempt an imitation numismatic item from the provisions of the Hobby Protection Act. Of course, that has not stopped various people who think that the rules should not apply to them because the rules might impair their enjoyment of their imitation numismatic items from claiming otherwise.
Seems like what you're saying may not apply since organizations like the Smithsonian have been using their approach for some time, and if any organization wants to follow the law, I imagine it would be them.
And how did a thread on a 1851 piece selling for over $25k become a Hobby Protection Act thread
In my mind, just because someone mentions restrikes, that shouldn't be an invitation to derail the thread to Hobby Protection Act posts that have already been discussed for 1000s of posts elsewhere. Please start another thread if it's that important to discuss this again. Let's just ignore the copy posts and focus on the piece in the OP.
Back in the roughly 1820’s to 1850’s, it was not unusual for private European mints to strike speculative patterns for non-European nations, using the pieces as samples in the hopes of landing a contract with a fledgling foreign nation. The San Francisco patterns may fall into that category. In fact, that would be my best guess. And if that’s what the pieces are, they’re well worth collecting, even in the five-figure range. IMHO, of course.
Also, FWIW, I have one Central American piece in my collection with a similar (uncertain) story. I don’t especially consider it trash or treasure, but I do enjoy owning it.
Andy Lustig
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
@CaptainBlunt said:
Bangs Merwin & Co. NY
Year 1863
No 2204
No 2205
Under patterns
pg. 95
They have the twenty dollar and half eagle pieces both in copper
Described as proof
It's nice that these are known as early as 1863 to be patterns.
I can definitely see the attraction of these pieces given the early history and their rarity.
Lower grade Humbert slugs were mentioned as alternatives in the same price range, but I have looked at them would tend to wait till nicer condition pieces came into budget, or pass.
@MrEureka said:
Back in the roughly 1820’s to 1850’s, it was not unusual for private European mints to strike speculative patterns for non-European nations, using the pieces as samples in the hopes of landing a contract with a fledgling foreign nation. The San Francisco patterns may fall into that category. In fact, that would be my best guess. And if that’s what the pieces are, they’re well worth collecting, even in the five-figure range. IMHO, of course.
Also, FWIW, I have one Central American piece in my collection with a similar (uncertain) story. I don’t especially consider it trash or treasure, but I do enjoy owning it.
Thanks Andy, that’s the kind of rationale I was looking for. I get it, although I personally would want to know More specifics before dropping 25 Gs on a “maybe”.
Another thought...much of the pioneer stuff is so rare in nice condition that it’s tough to scratch the itch on a regular basis. Maybe the well heeled gold rush enthusiast was doing just that.
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
@4BR said:
1851 San Francisco Territorial Double Eagle, that coin is incredible, thanks for posting the images. Hopefully Moonlight Mint / Carr, or some other private mint would make a high quality re-strike in silver, I love that design!
That is a neat coin. But I wouldn't do anything exactly like it. I prefer Colorado (Clark Gruber) pieces since they are more local to me. But I have come close to that one if you combine two different pieces that I've done.
My own version of Longacre's Double Eagle Liberty obverse:
California state seal on a Glendale Coin Club medal:
The FTC has clearly stated that minor changes from an original numismatic design, up to and including a non-existing DATE, do not exempt an imitation numismatic item from the provisions of the Hobby Protection Act.
Can you provide a link to where the FTC said this?
Let us move the HPA discussion over to this thread, and leave this charming one alone.
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
@dcarr said:
California state seal on a Glendale Coin Club medal
I wonder if @illini420 and the Glendale Coin Club will go for a version with the original Seal as designed by Albrecht Küner with Medusa on the shield? I think that would be a great twist for their club medal! They could do one with Washington too
Looks like it it may have been sold for a song to a dealer. It went for $19,800, or 25% lower than 2 years ago, and is now offered for $28,325, or 43% more than it sold for.
Comments
See the 1787 counterfeit half dollar here:
https://www.sheridanscoins.com/cccbhd.html
It is still an utter counterfeit, despite the fact that the U,S, did not strike any half dollars dated 1787.
The FTC has clearly stated that minor changes from an original numismatic design, up to and including a non-existing DATE, do not exempt an imitation numismatic item from the provisions of the Hobby Protection Act. Of course, that has not stopped various people who think that the rules should not apply to them because the rules might impair their enjoyment of their imitation numismatic items from claiming otherwise.
Can you provide a link to where the FTC said this?
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
Seems like what you're saying may not apply since organizations like the Smithsonian have been using their approach for some time, and if any organization wants to follow the law, I imagine it would be them.
And how did a thread on a 1851 piece selling for over $25k become a Hobby Protection Act thread
In my mind, just because someone mentions restrikes, that shouldn't be an invitation to derail the thread to Hobby Protection Act posts that have already been discussed for 1000s of posts elsewhere. Please start another thread if it's that important to discuss this again. Let's just ignore the copy posts and focus on the piece in the OP.
Does anyone else see George Washington's face above the bear's head?
Yes, that's why I posted it originally. It's an awesome variety of the California State Seal!
Back in the roughly 1820’s to 1850’s, it was not unusual for private European mints to strike speculative patterns for non-European nations, using the pieces as samples in the hopes of landing a contract with a fledgling foreign nation. The San Francisco patterns may fall into that category. In fact, that would be my best guess. And if that’s what the pieces are, they’re well worth collecting, even in the five-figure range. IMHO, of course.
Also, FWIW, I have one Central American piece in my collection with a similar (uncertain) story. I don’t especially consider it trash or treasure, but I do enjoy owning it.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
What about "COPY" on the edge where it does not interfere with the design...
Well, just Love coins, period.
It's nice that these are known as early as 1863 to be patterns.
I can definitely see the attraction of these pieces given the early history and their rarity.
Lower grade Humbert slugs were mentioned as alternatives in the same price range, but I have looked at them would tend to wait till nicer condition pieces came into budget, or pass.
Thanks Andy, that’s the kind of rationale I was looking for. I get it, although I personally would want to know More specifics before dropping 25 Gs on a “maybe”.
Another thought...much of the pioneer stuff is so rare in nice condition that it’s tough to scratch the itch on a regular basis. Maybe the well heeled gold rush enthusiast was doing just that.
That does look like Washington!
That is a neat coin. But I wouldn't do anything exactly like it. I prefer Colorado (Clark Gruber) pieces since they are more local to me. But I have come close to that one if you combine two different pieces that I've done.
My own version of Longacre's Double Eagle Liberty obverse:
California state seal on a Glendale Coin Club medal:
Let us move the HPA discussion over to this thread, and leave this charming one alone.
https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/comment/12525361#Comment_12525361
I wonder if @illini420 and the Glendale Coin Club will go for a version with the original Seal as designed by Albrecht Küner with Medusa on the shield? I think that would be a great twist for their club medal! They could do one with Washington too
Looks like it it may have been sold for a song to a dealer. It went for $19,800, or 25% lower than 2 years ago, and is now offered for $28,325, or 43% more than it sold for.