@Jzyskowski1 said:
2019 explore and discover set. Intentionally included in the set. Now we are this far how about the other thread where my first strike pcgs slabbed planchet is, well not struck, so how about that? 🙀
Released intentionally seems to mean it’s not an error. Very interesting.
@braddick said:
I suppose it is an "error" the Mint released the blank planchet into commerce. I agree though- calling it an error on the insert is a bit odd.
If it’s an error because it was released then should the 1933 DE and 1974-D Aluminum Cent that PCGS certified be errors too?<
Those were produced in the correct manner in terms of their "completeness of production"--the release of them would be the only question (legality, etc.)
A 1933 $20 or a 1974-D were created "correctly"." A planchet or blank, are just in a "stage of production" and never were finished. Although they were made correctly for that stage, they are not "correctly made" coins because the proceeding steps were never completed to turn them into a coin.
That's a bit different than the reasoning used by NECA mentioned by Fred above.
Is this approach supported by error experts, like CONECA?<
There are varying views, and really, it's a topic in the same camp as "are cuds errors or varieties", or "are all clashed dies errors or are they varieties." In other words, there's a reasonable case to be made "for or against" calling them errors, but at the end of the day the coin is generally considered to be "not made correctly." I prefer the definition that if it's not "as intended to look when issued" it is an error.
Of course any individual can have an opinion but it’s nice for it to be supported by experts, as people often often say. Do any error groups support your reasoning?
@FredWeinberg said:
Even back in the '60's, we had this discussion about blanks
and planchets being 'errors' or not.
Back then, NECA, and the local error clubs came to agree that
although the planchets themselves were not errors,
they were released, or got out, in error.
Just like clipped planchets aren't clipped, but we call them
that for ease of use, blanks and planchets are grouped
into the category of errors.
That's my two cents worth......
Agreed.
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.
@braddick said:
I suppose it is an "error" the Mint released the blank planchet into commerce. I agree though- calling it an error on the insert is a bit odd.
If it’s an error because it was released then should the 1933 DE and 1974-D Aluminum Cent that PCGS certified should be errors too?
If your choices are standard coin, error, or variety... Then I suppose those would also be considered errors.
The 1913 Liberty Head Nickel as well.
yeah, and the copper war penny...
But I think it is semantics and splitting hairs to quibble about whether they are "errors". Pedantry aside, they aren't what the mint intended to produce. It's funny that we would call a "horribly mangled cracked die with a huge cud" a variety, rather than an error, because there would presumably be many struck that way. Still not what was intended, so poor quality for sure... error or variety... half of one, 6-dozen of the other...
100th pint of blood donated 7/19/2022 . Transactions with WilliamF, Relaxn, LukeMarshal, jclovescoins, braddick, JWP, Weather11am, Fairlaneman, Dscoins, lordmarcovan, Collectorcoins, SurfinxHI, JimW. God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son, that who so believeth in him should not perish but have everlasting life.
@braddick said:
I suppose it is an "error" the Mint released the blank planchet into commerce. I agree though- calling it an error on the insert is a bit odd.
If it’s an error because it was released then should the 1933 DE and 1974-D Aluminum Cent that PCGS certified be errors too?<
Those were produced in the correct manner in terms of their "completeness of production"--the release of them would be the only question (legality, etc.)
A 1933 $20 or a 1974-D were created "correctly"." A planchet or blank, are just in a "stage of production" and never were finished. Although they were made correctly for that stage, they are not "correctly made" coins because the proceeding steps were never completed to turn them into a coin.
That's a bit different than the reasoning used by NECA mentioned by Fred above.
Is this approach supported by error experts, like CONECA?<
There are varying views, and really, it's a topic in the same camp as "are cuds errors or varieties", or "are all clashed dies errors or are they varieties." In other words, there's a reasonable case to be made "for or against" calling them errors, but at the end of the day the coin is generally considered to be "not made correctly." I prefer the definition that if it's not "as intended to look when issued" it is an error.
Of course any individual can have an opinion but it’s nice for it to be supported by experts, as people often often say. Do any error groups support your reasoning?
Yes, there are people on both sides of the debate within coin clubs. They are not improperly made at that stage in their production, but they did miss the later stages of production. Because they are not "normal", they are classified with error coins.
But they were intentionally put in a set. I think they did this 15-20 years ago ( including a blank in a uS Mint product) but for sure in 2019. That’s fairly normal to me. 😉
@Jzyskowski1 said:
But they were intentionally put in a set. I think they did this 15-20 years ago ( including a blank in a uS Mint product) but for sure in 2019. That’s fairly normal to me. 😉
Mint errors (double-strikes, off-metals, etc) are put into mint sets & proof sets as well, but they are not "properly formed" coins anymore than a planchet is. In either the case of the mint error or the planchet, the Mint would quickly remove the "coin" if they knew it was there.
@Jzyskowski1 said:
Don’t you feel it’s a little weird that there’s first strike on an on-struck blank. The heck with the rest 🤨
unstruck? Yes, first strike on something never struck is a little weird!
100th pint of blood donated 7/19/2022 . Transactions with WilliamF, Relaxn, LukeMarshal, jclovescoins, braddick, JWP, Weather11am, Fairlaneman, Dscoins, lordmarcovan, Collectorcoins, SurfinxHI, JimW. God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son, that who so believeth in him should not perish but have everlasting life.
@Jzyskowski1 said:
But they were intentionally put in a set. I think they did this 15-20 years ago ( including a blank in a uS Mint product) but for sure in 2019. That’s fairly normal to me. 😉
Mint errors (double-strikes, off-metals, etc) are put into mint sets & proof sets as well, but they are not "properly formed" coins anymore than a planchet is. In either the case of the mint error or the planchet, the Mint would quickly remove the "coin" if they knew it was there.
It seems you're not aware of the US Mint issue that @Jzyskowski1 is talking about. This is the planchet in the 2019 "Explore and Discover Coin Set" explicitly labeled as "2019 Penny Planchet" and still listed for sale on the US Mint website here:
The Mint would not remove the coin because they purposely released it and labeled it as mentioned:
@Jzyskowski1 said:
But they were intentionally put in a set. I think they did this 15-20 years ago ( including a blank in a uS Mint product) but for sure in 2019. That’s fairly normal to me. 😉
@Jzyskowski1 posted one of his that was slabbed by PCGS earlier. Note the label says "(2019)" and "Explore & Discover Set".
Here's a close up photo of the US Mint set showing the "2019 Penny Planchet" labeled blank planchet.
The grading of blank planchets is problematic in my view as planchets, esp for non-proof or specimen issues were not always treated so well and many of them have significant markings, scrapes, pitting, etc. and actually at times quite unpleasant to behold. So some grading might be attempted at the margins of the upset, etc. but very problematic IMO.
Love that Milled British (1830-1960) Well, just Love coins, period.
I would like one that was graded as an error - “100% off center”
It’s late, love the discussion, I don’t have a real opinion yet, but I’m forming one reading what y’all say.
Type II Planchets & Type I Blanks become Errors when they leave the Mint
Thats pretty neat USA set included a 1c planchet in their 2019 set.
Many years ago a local coin shop had numerous Canadian planchets housed in Canadian Mint issued holders & each set also included a related piece of punched strip.
Good question. We don’t know if the 1964-D dollars were quality inspected after striking or not. The rejects from that operation would have been fascinating!
1960 should be included.
From 1958 through 1962, The White House periodically tasked the Bureau of the Mint to manufacture medals "on-demand". These medals were of different compositions: 18KT gold, .900 silver, and bronze.
These medals required cost savings measures due to their low mintages. The cost savings for the silver dollar size medals (of 1960) required the Bureau of the Mint to use its existing stockpile of silver dollar size planchets and repurposed (reeds were removed) silver dollar size collars.
Original mintage 400 (documented estimate of 267 available to collectors)
There are 9 "on demand" silver dollar sized medals.
There should be one more silver dollar size medal image, but all 30 Paris Summit delegate medals (not to be confused with the Gomez-C2-02 image above) were destroyed due to the failure of the Summit.
Good question. We don’t know if the 1964-D dollars were quality inspected after striking or not. The rejects from that operation would have been fascinating!
1960 should be included.
From 1958 through 1962, The White House periodically tasked the Bureau of the Mint to manufacture medals "on-demand". These medals were of different compositions: 18KT gold, .900 silver, and bronze.
These medals required cost savings measures due to their low mintages. The cost savings for the silver dollar size medals (of 1960) required the Bureau of the Mint to use its existing stockpile of silver dollar size planchets and repurposed (reeds were removed) silver dollar size collars.
As mentioned by @FredWeinberg, he would need to see an off center medal with upset rims to compare. Are there any such pieces for these?
It would be interesting to know if any Type-2 planchets from the 1930s made it into these medals, or if they were all Type-1 planchets which would need to have rims upset in the 50s and 60s, and if so, if they were done differently.
Check out these 2 record-setting blanks that Heritage sold!
mikebyers.com Dealer in Major Mint Errors, Die Trials & Patterns - Author of NLG Best World Coin Book World's Greatest Mint Errors - Publisher & Editor of minterrornews.com.
@ricko said: @Russell12... That is a great set of blank planchets. First full set I have seen. What type of dollar was the blank intended to be? Cheers, RickO
@ricko said: @Russell12... That is a great set of blank planchets. First full set I have seen. What type of dollar was the blank intended to be? Cheers, RickO
Jesse C. Kraft, Ph.D.
Resolute Americana Curator of American Numismatics
American Numismatic Society
New York City
Member of the American Numismatic Association (ANA), British Numismatic Society (BNS), New York Numismatic Club (NYNC), Early American Copper (EAC), the Colonial Coin Collectors Club (C4), U.S. Mexican Numismatic Association (USMNA), Liberty Seated Collectors Club (LSCC), Token and Medal Society (TAMS), and life member of the Atlantic County Numismatic Society (ACNS). Become a member of the American Numismatic Society!
It happens to the best of us, @ricko. I noticed that you hadn't received a response to your query and went back to see if I could tell for myself, only to not see one whatsoever.
All best.
Jesse C. Kraft, Ph.D.
Resolute Americana Curator of American Numismatics
American Numismatic Society
New York City
Member of the American Numismatic Association (ANA), British Numismatic Society (BNS), New York Numismatic Club (NYNC), Early American Copper (EAC), the Colonial Coin Collectors Club (C4), U.S. Mexican Numismatic Association (USMNA), Liberty Seated Collectors Club (LSCC), Token and Medal Society (TAMS), and life member of the Atlantic County Numismatic Society (ACNS). Become a member of the American Numismatic Society!
Comments
Released intentionally seems to mean it’s not an error. Very interesting.
Of course any individual can have an opinion but it’s nice for it to be supported by experts, as people often often say. Do any error groups support your reasoning?
Agreed.
yeah, and the copper war penny...
But I think it is semantics and splitting hairs to quibble about whether they are "errors". Pedantry aside, they aren't what the mint intended to produce. It's funny that we would call a "horribly mangled cracked die with a huge cud" a variety, rather than an error, because there would presumably be many struck that way. Still not what was intended, so poor quality for sure... error or variety... half of one, 6-dozen of the other...
Yes, there are people on both sides of the debate within coin clubs. They are not improperly made at that stage in their production, but they did miss the later stages of production. Because they are not "normal", they are classified with error coins.
But they were intentionally put in a set. I think they did this 15-20 years ago ( including a blank in a uS Mint product) but for sure in 2019. That’s fairly normal to me. 😉
🎶 shout shout, let it all out 🎶
I don't see how it can be confirmed an error. It's just not struck.
Mint errors (double-strikes, off-metals, etc) are put into mint sets & proof sets as well, but they are not "properly formed" coins anymore than a planchet is. In either the case of the mint error or the planchet, the Mint would quickly remove the "coin" if they knew it was there.
They put the dang coin in the set. As is no mistake. What’s up 🤔 no error
🎶 shout shout, let it all out 🎶
Don’t you feel it’s a little weird that there’s first strike on an on-struck blank. The heck with the rest 🤨
🎶 shout shout, let it all out 🎶
unstruck? Yes, first strike on something never struck is a little weird!
It seems you're not aware of the US Mint issue that @Jzyskowski1 is talking about. This is the planchet in the 2019 "Explore and Discover Coin Set" explicitly labeled as "2019 Penny Planchet" and still listed for sale on the US Mint website here:
https://catalog.usmint.gov/explore-and-discover-coin-set-2019-19XGB.html
The Mint would not remove the coin because they purposely released it and labeled it as mentioned:
@Jzyskowski1 posted one of his that was slabbed by PCGS earlier. Note the label says "(2019)" and "Explore & Discover Set".
Here's a close up photo of the US Mint set showing the "2019 Penny Planchet" labeled blank planchet.
The grading of blank planchets is problematic in my view as planchets, esp for non-proof or specimen issues were not always treated so well and many of them have significant markings, scrapes, pitting, etc. and actually at times quite unpleasant to behold. So some grading might be attempted at the margins of the upset, etc. but very problematic IMO.
Well, just Love coins, period.
I would like one that was graded as an error - “100% off center”
It’s late, love the discussion, I don’t have a real opinion yet, but I’m forming one reading what y’all say.
Type II Planchets & Type I Blanks become Errors when they leave the Mint
Thats pretty neat USA set included a 1c planchet in their 2019 set.
Many years ago a local coin shop had numerous Canadian planchets housed in Canadian Mint issued holders & each set also included a related piece of punched strip.
1960 should be included.
From 1958 through 1962, The White House periodically tasked the Bureau of the Mint to manufacture medals "on-demand". These medals were of different compositions: 18KT gold, .900 silver, and bronze.
These medals required cost savings measures due to their low mintages. The cost savings for the silver dollar size medals (of 1960) required the Bureau of the Mint to use its existing stockpile of silver dollar size planchets and repurposed (reeds were removed) silver dollar size collars.
An example of the "on demand" silver dollar size medals (original auction listing https://auctions.stacksbowers.com/lots/view/3-KJY1U/1960-dwight-d-eisenhower-appreciation-medal-silver-381-mm-medcalf-russell-2m-94-ms-63-ngc
Original mintage 400 (documented estimate of 267 available to collectors)
There are 9 "on demand" silver dollar sized medals.
There should be one more silver dollar size medal image, but all 30 Paris Summit delegate medals (not to be confused with the Gomez-C2-02 image above) were destroyed due to the failure of the Summit.
The challenge coins of their era.
As mentioned by @FredWeinberg, he would need to see an off center medal with upset rims to compare. Are there any such pieces for these?
It would be interesting to know if any Type-2 planchets from the 1930s made it into these medals, or if they were all Type-1 planchets which would need to have rims upset in the 50s and 60s, and if so, if they were done differently.
@Zoins
Check out these 2 record-setting blanks that Heritage sold!
@Russell12's set is of 1¢ through 50¢.
Jesse C. Kraft, Ph.D.
Resolute Americana Curator of American Numismatics
American Numismatic Society
New York City
Member of the American Numismatic Association (ANA), British Numismatic Society (BNS), New York Numismatic Club (NYNC), Early American Copper (EAC), the Colonial Coin Collectors Club (C4), U.S. Mexican Numismatic Association (USMNA), Liberty Seated Collectors Club (LSCC), Token and Medal Society (TAMS), and life member of the Atlantic County Numismatic Society (ACNS).
Become a member of the American Numismatic Society!
@JesseKraft... You are correct... My brain slipped a gear there... Thanks... Cheers, RickO
It happens to the best of us, @ricko. I noticed that you hadn't received a response to your query and went back to see if I could tell for myself, only to not see one whatsoever.
All best.
Jesse C. Kraft, Ph.D.
Resolute Americana Curator of American Numismatics
American Numismatic Society
New York City
Member of the American Numismatic Association (ANA), British Numismatic Society (BNS), New York Numismatic Club (NYNC), Early American Copper (EAC), the Colonial Coin Collectors Club (C4), U.S. Mexican Numismatic Association (USMNA), Liberty Seated Collectors Club (LSCC), Token and Medal Society (TAMS), and life member of the Atlantic County Numismatic Society (ACNS).
Become a member of the American Numismatic Society!