Signed Bay Bridge is it a gimmick?

Walkerlover

I saw this coin on EBay and was wondering if these items are a gimmick or true signed sealed coins by the designer packaged in 1936. I like the coin in the photo but have no idea if it was in original packaging since 1936 or not a gem worthy of submitting to a TPG service. Any suggestions if I should consider buying?

CaptHenway

Obviously that was not sealed in 1936.

jayPem

From 1986.

bsshog40

Seen another on ebay that was dated 1992 from ANICS.

TomB

As long as they aren't tampered with then they are legitimate, random Bay Bridge half dollars that were inserted into cardboard holders that were signed by Jacques Schnier. However, these were not done in 1936 and were instead done decades later in an agreement with a private company to market and be sold to collectors.

Walkerlover

@TomB said:
As long as they aren't tampered with then they are legitimate, random Bay Bridge half dollars that were inserted into cardboard holders that were signed by Jacques Schnier. However, these were not done in 1936 and were instead done decades later in an agreement with a private company to market and be sold to collectors.

So are you saying they were signed in 1936 but reholdered in plastic and sold to collectors in 1986, or Mr. Schiner signed some in later years for promotional purposes as well?

Any opinions on the coin itself?

Walkerlover

So far no one is commenting on the quality of the coin which is more important than the signed piece

TomB

These were signed decades later, which is what I thought I wrote.

JBK

@Walkerlover said:
So far no one is commenting on the quality of the coin which is more important than the signed piece

Well, not really.

The extra value of this collectable is in the signature/packaging. They obviously would not have used premium coins for this item.

And it is disappointing to think that there would be any confusion over whether or not this was put together in 1936.

Plastics like that did not exist then, and the whole "numbered limited edition" format is a far more recent phenomenon. Not to mention that the pen used didn't exist almost 90 years ago.

PerryHall

Definitely not a gimmick. A classical commemorative coin collector would find this coin and holder to be a very desirable and historical acquisition. Hopefully the next owner won't crack it out just to submit the coin to one of the grading services. The historical value of this coin is mostly in the holder and autograph. Jacques Schnier died in 1988 so this holder is at least 35 years old. Apparently 1000 were made and I imagine many no longer exist.

FredWeinberg

That was a deal I did about 25 years ago – I had a local friend who knew the coins designer, and had him sign all of the cards -then we sonically sealed Unc – BU coins.
as I recall, we couldn’t find 1000 coins and my recollection is that there were less than 750–800 pieces produced

PerryHall

@FredWeinberg said:
That was a deal I did about 25 years ago – I had a local friend who knew the coins designer, and had him sign all of the cards -then we sonically sealed Unc – BU coins.
as I recall, we couldn’t find 1000 coins and my recollection is that there were less than 750–800 pieces produced

The designer died in 1988 so it had to have been more than 35 years ago.

FredWeinberg

Doesn’t surprise me that I was 10 years off

ricko

Nice collectible for those who like signature pieces. Certainly a limited amount available. Nice to see it was a @FredWeinberg project. Cheers, RickO

Catbert

@Walkerlover said:
So far no one is commenting on the quality of the coin which is more important than the signed piece

Difficult to give feedback when only half of the coin is visible!

MFeld

@Catbert said:

@Walkerlover said:
So far no one is commenting on the quality of the coin which is more important than the signed piece

Difficult to give feedback when only half of the coin is visible!

In this case, not really. It's a common coin of low value, that looks to be unexceptional. As has already been pointed out, the holder/signature are much more significant than the coin.

Catbert

@MFeld said:

@Catbert said:

@Walkerlover said:
So far no one is commenting on the quality of the coin which is more important than the signed piece

Difficult to give feedback when only half of the coin is visible!

In this case, not really. It's a common coin of low value, that looks to be unexceptional. As has already been pointed out, the holder/signature are much more significant than the coin.

I know all of this, but was attempting to be responsive to his complaint.

habaraca

so YES it is/was a gimmick by our own Fred Weinberg

Commemoratives themselves were/are a gimmick by the mint to sell coins. This practice
continues today.

CaptHenway

@Walkerlover said:

@TomB said:
As long as they aren't tampered with then they are legitimate, random Bay Bridge half dollars that were inserted into cardboard holders that were signed by Jacques Schnier. However, these were not done in 1936 and were instead done decades later in an agreement with a private company to market and be sold to collectors.

So are you saying they were signed in 1936 but reholdered in plastic and sold to collectors in 1986, or Mr. Schiner signed some in later years for promotional purposes as well?

Any opinions on the coin itself?

The type of pen used for the signature did not exist in 1936.

See Fred Weinberg's comments above. The coins were random coins purchased on the open market in 1986.

SlipKid

@CaptHenway said:

@Walkerlover said:

@TomB said:
As long as they aren't tampered with then they are legitimate, random Bay Bridge half dollars that were inserted into cardboard holders that were signed by Jacques Schnier. However, these were not done in 1936 and were instead done decades later in an agreement with a private company to market and be sold to collectors.

So are you saying they were signed in 1936 but reholdered in plastic and sold to collectors in 1986, or Mr. Schiner signed some in later years for promotional purposes as well?

Any opinions on the coin itself?

The type of pen used for the signature did not exist in 1936.

See Fred Weinberg's comments above. The coins were random coins purchased on the open market in 1986.

Mr Schnier probably didn't look like that in 1936 either.

braddick

All I know is my Bay Bridge is nowhere close to being as large as that depicted in the photograph.

braddick

@FredWeinberg said:
That was a deal I did about 25 years ago – I had a local friend who knew the coins designer, and had him sign all of the cards -then we sonically sealed Unc – BU coins.
as I recall, we couldn’t find 1000 coins and my recollection is that there were less than 750–800 pieces produced

And thus my forty-year quest in searching relentlessly for the 1000/1000 coin has now reached a conclusion.

messydesk

@FredWeinberg said:
That was a deal I did about 25 years ago – I had a local friend who knew the coins designer, and had him sign all of the cards -then we sonically sealed Unc – BU coins.
as I recall, we couldn’t find 1000 coins and my recollection is that there were less than 750–800 pieces produced

It's always nice when The Answer is posted.