Huge Staple on Proof Ike Error! How???

Zoins

How does a Proof Ike get released from the Mint like this? Was this found in a Proof Set?

Given that regular sized slabs can. hold $50 gold slugs, I'm not really sure why this is in what looks to be a Rarities holder without a Rarities label.

Regardless of how it got out, it's really cool looking!

• Cert: https://www.pcgs.com/cert/39031260
• Sale: https://coins.ha.com/itm/errors/1977-s-1-eisenhower-dollar-struck-through-and-retained-copper-staple-pr67-deep-cameo-pcgs-an-unusual-error-struck-th/a/60197-91191.s

Tom147

WOW !!! How did this get out of the mint ? In a proof no less. Amazing !!!

Crypto

Errors like that do nothing for me. No more than a coffee mug made with a hole in the bottom would. I get with mint controls where they are anything visual will find a buyer but still

The_Dinosaur_Man

You should always check your proof sets! Who knows what else is out there.

BillJones

Errors like this on large or valuable coins, like a gold piece, have been very unusual. The inspection process gets almost all of them. One could see where a cent, nickel or dime could get away, but on a large dollar coin like this, it has be a unique event. Although it's not my thing, something like this has to be quite rare.

keets

it's perfectly placed in the middle of the coin, anywhere else and it wouldn't have been an entire staple. being the obverse, whoever assembled this coin in a set would 100% notice it and reject the coin.

for those reasons I assume it was intentionally made and smuggled out.

Zoins

@BillJones said:
Errors like this on large or valuable coins, like a gold piece, have been very unusual. The inspection process gets almost all of them. One could see where a cent, nickel or dime could get away, but on a large dollar coin like this, it has be a unique event. Although it's not my thing, something like this has to be quite rare.

Proof Ike errors can be both very rare and visually impressive.

Now that I see this, I imagine a Proof Ike Error collection with coins like this and the following could be quite stunning.

ricko

I agree with @keets... An error this glaringly obvious, and in a proof set, could not have escaped attention. I suspect some subterfuge occurred here....Cheers, RickO

Zoins

@keets said:
it's perfectly placed in the middle of the coin, anywhere else and it wouldn't have been an entire staple. being the obverse, whoever assembled this coin in a set would 100% notice it and reject the coin.

for those reasons I assume it was intentionally made and smuggled out.

Should the Mint attempt to reclaim coins that got out this way?

Kliao

Wow. That is quite a strike through.

BillJones

@keets said:
it's perfectly placed in the middle of the coin, anywhere else and it wouldn't have been an entire staple. being the obverse, whoever assembled this coin in a set would 100% notice it and reject the coin.

for those reasons I assume it was intentionally made and smuggled out.

Sometimes you really have to watch your step with items like that dollar struck on a quarter planchet piece. Back in the 1970s I was at a club meeting where a member showed slides of Eisenhower Dollars that had been struck on cent planchets and other similar items. A few months later I read on story in Coin World where the government had seized those items because they had been made illegally. The dates on the Ike Dollars were something like 1971 or '72 before those coins were included in Proof sets. Therefore one had to wonder how a cent planchet got in the mix.

keets

I have ALWAYS been suspicious of the more radical errors, wrong planchet, struck through, multiple strike, mules, etc. because of the incentive to make them and the Mint QA process.

Oldhoopster

There were a number of spectacular errors on proof coins that came from the San Francisco mint in the 70’s. 1970-S quarters struck on a Canadian silver quarter and Barber quarter comes to mind. Some (many?) of these were in an abandoned safety deposit box sold by the state of California and purchased by Fred Weinberg. I wonder if this part of that hoard or if it entered through other channels? Every time I see a major error on a 70’s proof, the first thing I think is “shenanigans”

Edit to add some links for background info

https://www.minterrornews.com/news-6-12-16-unique-pair-of-proof-quarters.html

https://coinweek.com/coins/error-coins/mike-byers-mint-error-news-proof-bicentennial-quarter-2x-struck-on-roosevelt-dime/

https://www.coinworld.com/news/precious-metals/impressive-proof-errors-head-to-auction-at-heritage

https://www.minterrornews.com/discoveries-4-17-20-unique-dual-mint-mark-discovery-proof-bicentennial-quarter-on-cent-double-denomination.html

https://coinweek.com/coins/error-coins/mike-byers-mint-error-news-1970-s-proof-washington-quarter-struck-on-silver-barber-quarter/

Zoins

@Oldhoopster said:
There were a number of spectacular errors on proof coins that came from the San Francisco mint in the 70’s. 1970-S quarters struck on a Canadian silver quarter and Barber quarter comes to mind. Some (many?) of these were in an abandoned safety deposit box sold by the state of California and purchased by Fred Weinberg. I wonder if this part of that hoard or if it entered through other channels? Every time I see a major error on a 70’s proof, the first thing I think is “shenanigans”

If they are shenanigans, they are some pretty good ones.

jmlanzaf

@Zoins said:

@Oldhoopster said:
There were a number of spectacular errors on proof coins that came from the San Francisco mint in the 70’s. 1970-S quarters struck on a Canadian silver quarter and Barber quarter comes to mind. Some (many?) of these were in an abandoned safety deposit box sold by the state of California and purchased by Fred Weinberg. I wonder if this part of that hoard or if it entered through other channels? Every time I see a major error on a 70’s proof, the first thing I think is “shenanigans”

If they are shenanigans, they are some pretty good ones.

Give me access to a Mint facility for a day and I'll show you some amazing "errors".

silverpop

i call such errors man made errors and avoid them at all cost,i do find errors but they are done cause of some issue with the die or the blank itself nothing man made like the error above is

Struntz

.

MasonG

@Zoins said:
How does a Proof Ike get released from the Mint like this?

Unofficially.

There's money in it, so it will keep happening.

Jimnight

I see it ... but am suspicious.

yspsales

Off center and planchet flaws have grown on me.

As neat as these are, this strike thru seems manufactured.

That double strike is amazing. How does that ghosting happen.

ChrisH821

Meh. I'll hold off till they find a proof Ike struck over a Morgan.

seanq

@Oldhoopster said:
There were a number of spectacular errors on proof coins that came from the San Francisco mint in the 70’s. 1970-S quarters struck on a Canadian silver quarter and Barber quarter comes to mind. Some (many?) of these were in an abandoned safety deposit box sold by the state of California and purchased by Fred Weinberg. I wonder if this part of that hoard or if it entered through other channels? Every time I see a major error on a 70’s proof, the first thing I think is “shenanigans”

I think the OP's coin is too old to have been part of that hoard, IIRC most of them were dated 1970 and earlier, with the majority in the 1960s.

Sean Reynolds

Treashunt

well, I like it!

astrorat

It was the 70's, man.

ctf_error_coins

Zions, is that coin for sale somewhere? Awesome coin.

ctf_error_coins

CaptHenway

@ErrorsOnCoins said:

This one I am OK with.

jabba

Sometimes I wonder if the mint guys get board and fool around

keets

with regard to these errors which seem to clearly have been made with help, how is profiting off of them any different than the whole AT game??

ctf_error_coins

@keets said:
with regard to these errors which seem to clearly have been made with help, how is profiting off of them any different than the whole AT game??

How can you know what you state? You just make up this stuff or what. Show me your facts.

Anyone can AT. No one is allowed to make Mint Errors. That is a huge difference.

keets

I suppose I can know just as clearly as you know what you state. it is fact that Mint employees have fabricated errors in the past, as recently as 1999-2000 with the Sac Dollar/SHQ mules. also, going back to the mid-19th Century it is pretty clear that Mint employees were "helping" themselves. re-read MasonG's reply up the page and try to recall the adage: Love of money is the root of all evil.

please excuse me for criticizing an area you profit from and collect(not).

MasonG

If they were made with help, they're not really "errors", are they? More like "intentionals".

ctf_error_coins

@keets said:
I suppose I can know just as clearly as you know what you state. it is fact that Mint employees have fabricated errors in the past, as recently as 1999-2000 with the Sac Dollar/SHQ mules. also, going back to the mid-19th Century it is pretty clear that Mint employees were "helping" themselves. re-read MasonG's reply up the page and try to recall the adage: Love of money is the root of all evil.

please excuse me for criticizing an area you profit from and collect(not).

Neither one of us was there so we can not know for sure either way.

Have mint employees made mint errors for profit? Absolutely.

Have mint employees made mint errors for fun? Most likely.

Has every major mint error been produced on purpose? Absolutely not.

Nice dig on me about NOT being a collector, which is untrue, and shows your character.

keets

Nice dig on me about NOT being a collector

please re-read my post, but no apology is necessary.

FredWeinberg

"neither one of us was there so we can not know for sure either way"

"Have Mint employees made US coins for profit? Absolutely"

"Have Mint employees made US coins for fun? Most Likely"

"Has every major US rarity been produced on purpose? Absolutely not"

.....we're talking about 1913 Liberty Nickels, correct?

(and yes, I do believe that Proof Ike Staple error was made on purpose;
my customers don't care, but they sure wouldn't want to knowingly buy a Morgan
dollar that was artificially toned)

I thought we've talked about this numerous times before : collect what you like
and don't collect what you don't like

MedalCollector

As an error coin collector, I’ve never cared about whether the error was intentional or not. The fact is that US Mint security and manufacturing processes prevent most errors, whether assisted or not, from escaping. Whether assisted or not, this piece is rare. Whether assisted or not, it is eye appealing.

The value originates from what the piece is, not how it was made.

I like it!

trueblood

Pretty amazing example, what is there not to like, how many have you seen, answer not many

ctf_error_coins

@GoldenEgg said:
As an error coin collector, I’ve never cared about whether the error was intentional or not. The fact is that US Mint security and manufacturing processes prevent most errors, whether assisted or not, from escaping. Whether assisted or not, this piece is rare. Whether assisted or not, it is eye appealing.

The value originates from what the piece is, not how it was made.

I like it!

Well said.

I will add, what I find fascinating are the stories ( forklift oil pans), the speculation, and the mystery surrounding major mint error coins. I also like that the policing authority for my field is the United States Secret Service.

MasonG

If the mint was smart, they'd start making and selling these sorts of things themselves. They could even make stuff to order.

ctf_error_coins

@MasonG said:
If the mint was smart, they'd start making and selling these sorts of things themselves. They could even make stuff to order.

The value in error coins is the fact they mint does not do that nor will they ever do that.

MasonG

@ErrorsOnCoins said:

@MasonG said:
If the mint was smart, they'd start making and selling these sorts of things themselves. They could even make stuff to order.

The value in error coins is the fact they mint does not do that nor will they ever do that.

Somebody made the staple dollar "error" and profited from it and as is evident from a number of the responses here, it's not important to some how it came to be made. The equipment and materials belong to the mint- why shouldn't they keep the profit for themselves?

JBK

There is a mint in Asia (Malaysia? Don't recall) where tons of intentional errors were made. They are very cheap to buy simply because they were openly made in quantity. If the US Mint did that the value would drop and there would be no "profit" to be made.

jmlanzaf

@FredWeinberg said:
"neither one of us was there so we can not know for sure either way"

"Have Mint employees made US coins for profit? Absolutely"

"Have Mint employees made US coins for fun? Most Likely"

"Has every major US rarity been produced on purpose? Absolutely not"

.....we're talking about 1913 Liberty Nickels, correct?

(and yes, I do believe that Proof Ike Staple error was made on purpose;
my customers don't care, but they sure wouldn't want to knowingly buy a Morgan
dollar that was artificially toned)

I thought we've talked about this numerous times before : collect what you like
and don't collect what you don't like

I think that is ALWAYS the bottom line. [And the 1913 Liberty nickels are always my favorite example of "shenanigans"]

There is a whole market for "colored" coins. Some of them are simply breathtaking.

But God forbid someone put a little rose on a Peace dollar. LOL.

MasonG

So it's best if things keep on going as they have been, with these intentional "errors" just getting out now and then?

I see.

jmlanzaf

@MasonG said:

@ErrorsOnCoins said:

@MasonG said:
If the mint was smart, they'd start making and selling these sorts of things themselves. They could even make stuff to order.

The value in error coins is the fact they mint does not do that nor will they ever do that.

Somebody made the staple dollar "error" and profited from it and as is evident from a number of the responses here, it's not important to some how it came to be made. The equipment and materials belong to the mint- why shouldn't they keep the profit for themselves?

I could imagine a limited edition of 500 stapled Silver Eagles as being a big seller.

jmlanzaf

@JBK said:
There is a mint in Asia (Malaysia? Don't recall) where tons of intentional errors were made. They are very cheap to buy simply because they were openly made in quantity. If the US Mint did that the value would drop and there would be no "profit" to be made.

There's actually a whole series of obviously intentionally made Mexican error patterns that sell quite well.

stman

Great thread.

gonzer

@FredWeinberg , who was the fella who had the exquisite collection of Ike errors back in the early 70's? Dr. something??

JRocco

I put this coin in the same sphere as a hobo nickel. Someone made it and it is unique. Everyone will put its “worth” at a different level depending on if they like it enough to want to buy it. All this IMHO of course.

Snaps

I think the Roosevelt dime struck on a nail was a little over the top for mint errors. It graded MS65. No FB/FT.

FredWeinberg

Dr. A.K. Berry-he donated his fantastic collection of Ike dollar errors to be ANA just a few years before he passed away