I have spent many hours in court testifing over the past twenty-five years, I know how the game is played. Please do not try and mis-represent what I have written. What I said about NGC was perfectly clear:
<< <i>The more I think about it, NGC made the right designation for the 2005 Uncirculated set when they call the coins "Special Mint Sets" or SMS because they have more in common with the SMS coinage of 1965-67 then of a circulation strike. If PCGS wants to be consistant with it's either / or policy then they would allow the 1994 and 1997 Matte Jefferson to be used in place of the regular MS version (I imagine that would go over like a fart in church). >>
I never implied, eluded to or gave an inference that NGC did the right thing by allowing the 2005 (SMS) satin finish quarter into the circulation strike sets, only that they give the coins the right designation (SMS). I believe that if PCGS had used the same designation (SMS), they would have treated 2005 satin finish coins the same way that they treated the mint sets of 1965-67, and we wouldn't be in the mess we are in now.
<< <i>Tim: I am puzzled by your position? If NGC did the "right" thing calling them "SMS" and I believe you also think the coins may have been produced with proof dies on top of that, then why did NGC also place the coins in the circulation strike state quarter registry set just as PCGS did, which I believe they did? >>
I'm not sure what is puzzling? I thought that I had stated my case clear, precise and consistently through out this thread. As far as the dies used to strike the 2005 satin finish coins, I have not stated that they were indeed "proof dies", although I am leaning that way based on the definitions and the merit of the dies in question (but I have asked others for their opinions / arguments so I can take them into consideration before I make up my mind on the subject).
<< <i>Tim - I also have an unanswered question - anyone also notice the(2) different versions of MS Buffalo Dollars struck by the Mint in 2001 - satiny and non-satin? It looks like they had that "technology" back in 2001 to be sure and may aid in understanding the subtle differences in appearance of even coins like the TX(d) and MI(d) quarters from 2004 Mint sets vs. rolls (including the possible understanding of why roughly 45 TX(d) and MI(d) quarters slabbed MS69 from mint sets alone while 1999-2003 yielded but (1) MS69 for all (25) Denver mint issues combined. >>
The answer to this question is 'no' I have not noticed a difference. In 2001, I bought three two coin sets of the Buffalo Dollars (one set for myself, one for my then five year old son and one set for future trading material). The three uncirculated examples that I have, are the dull satin type finish. If some one received an uncirculated Buffalo near the end of a dies life, would it have a non-SF look? I don't know. Pior to 2005, did /was the mint experimenting with new die types, including the satin finish? Again, I don't know. But as of 2005, the Mint wanted it's numismatics production to all have the same quality, hence United States Mint uncirculated sets, Uncirculated American Eagles, Uncirculated Commemorative coins and medals will all have the satin finish from 2005 on so as to differentiate between them and coins meant for commerce. As far as varieties are concerned, I was under the impression that all modern proofs of the US Mint would be of the DCAM type? I have three West Point Silver Commemoratives and they are graded by PCGS PR69, PR69CA and PR69DCAM (so much for all proofs being DCAM).
I apologize if this post sounds course, but I do not put words in other peoples mouths, and a take offense when someone does it to me weather intentionally or accidentally. I am not trying to stifle discussion for I honestly believe that debate is a healthy means of learning.
Sincerely, Tim
P.S. Maybe the problem is that we need to tell the US Treasury that we want our old uncirculation coin sets back, remind them that the original purpose of the yearly uncirculation coin sets was to allow a person to buy a complete example of the coins meant for commerce in a convenient manor. The Mint says that it wants customer satisfaction.
Tim: Sounds good. I really like the SF coins, but, it would be nice to get the mint set coins back as well. Anyway, that is probably not going to happen. If we get together at a show one day, I would enjoy showing you the different looks of some of the 1999-2004 circulation strike state quarters from the rolls and mint sets.
Wondercoin
Please visit my website at www.wondercoins.com and my ebay auctions under my user name www.wondercoin.com.
<< <i>Mas: This is the second time you asked this --- I think this time your direct ("secret") target is actually #1 setholder Donn (who supports PCGS' decision)- isn't it? More personal attacks against anyone not seeing it your way. You lose whatever scintilla of credibility you have left with me when you engage in these continued personal attacks. >>
wondercoin, Just to refresh your memory - on 01/26/06 you posted on this thread “This is now your 58th post on these Message boards. It is almost embarrassing to see this is my 8,104th. Wondercoin”, are you trying to tell us that this was not a personal attack by you? I never mentioned any names, just wanted to know if set ranking would change if the Right thing is done. It should make no difference who is in what place to base your decision on. PCGS set up criteria for a set and named it, Washington Statehood Quarters, Circulation Strikes (1999-Present). If we look at that title, I do not believe it takes a “rocket scientist” to realize that a proof mercury dime is not part of the set. The above mentioned set consist of Washington quarters with a statehood design issued from 1999 – 2008, no proof coins are allowed, the only coins that are allowed are “Circulation Strikes” (definition taken form PCGS Lingo, Circulation Strikes = An alternate term for Business Strike or Regular Strike. A coin meant for commerce). Where the Satin Finish coins of the 2005 mint set’s meant for commerce? Business Strikes? Regular Strikes? Weather the Satin Finish coins should or should not be allowed in a set of circulation strikes, the answer should be self evident if it meets the definition of a circulation strike and the criteria of the set. The criteria of the set should not be changed halfway through the series just for “convenience or economics”. If PCGS didn’t want the coin to be treated differently, they wouldn’t have given them a different number, so why treat them the same?
As far as having a “scintilla of credibility”, I will let the other members on this thread decide ‘who is credible or not.’
There have been several great comments and viewpoints why SF should not be treated the same as non-SF, and I notice that you avoid those comments or just go around.
Wow, over 450 posts to this entertaining thread. So we can have a bit more fun (and probably take the thread to a 500 count, or more, let us know about your batch of "fresh 2,000 KS(p) non-SF coins" Mitch. Thanks. This should be very interesting.
As far as having a “scintilla of credibility”, I will let the other members on this thread decide ‘who is credible or not.’
There have been several great comments and viewpoints why SF should not be treated the same as non-SF, and I notice that you avoid those comments or just go around.
Here mas have on me, you laid it out in black and white! Thought the would be on but its been real quiet.
<< <i>Thought the (arguement?) would be on but its been real quiet >>
There are so many "facts" found in this thread, that an arguement could be made for any number of facets of this discussion from quoting parts of the threads contained herein. I still think that a "wait and see" approach as to what PCGS will do is best to take, under these circumstances. Hopefully a response from PCGS concerning this matter will come sooner, rather than later, although no concrete time frame has, or probably will be given. I don't think that the decision that will be made by PCGS will make everyone completely happy, however, at least their decision will provide a solid basis for further discussion at that time. How's the hunt going, Mitch?
Mitch "Now, back to the "hunting" - I just got in a fresh 2,000 KS(p) non-SF coins and want to enjoy studying them." I applaud Mitch for taking this step and encourage everyone interested that has not already to get a $500 box of something (2,000) coins to search. This is where the greatest appreciation of MS coins comes from with the actual knowledge of the difficulty of the search, then enyoy getting them deposited back at the bank. My wife is known as the "quarter lady" at the local bank and hundreds of customers anxiously await each new quarter release and the banks are slow to get them so my wife is exhuberantly greeted each time she lugs in a bag of fresh quarters. My dad sends me a few $500 boxes of D mints from Nevada for each new release and for the first time in several years his bank has limited him to a few rolls for this one release due to the huge Nevada demand for their state quarter. These circulation released coins are collected by millions of people and there are millions and millions of them saved around the country and they are all MS coins for the average collector most have never even heard of mint sets. When you look broadly at the field of collectibles in my opinion when people get older and have more financial resources they seek to get mint examples of whatever they collect as a reminder of their youth (I have a friend with an antique restored car of his birth date, another friend collects mint state baseball cards circa his youth and we can all think of similar non-coin examples. Imagine when these millions of young collectors get a bit older and start to covet the best examples to update their scrubby state quarter (or other modern) collections. I have and continue to update my youthful youthful coin collections already. Even if just 1/10 of 1% of two million collectors get the bug that will be 2,000 serious collectors in the future and the lower pop coins if they hold up that long will in fact escalate in price in my opinion for the long term hold. KS-P has been my biggest challenge for a long time. Having said that Mitch or anyone else could get lucky and get a gemmy box the first time or just a box full of throw downs, you never know and that is what makes it fun. Looking forward to Mitch's comments on his box.... did you get lucky? Happy hunting! dr.
<< <i>Mitch "Now, back to the "hunting" - I just got in a fresh 2,000 KS(p) non-SF coins and want to enjoy studying them." I applaud Mitch for taking this step and encourage everyone interested that has not already to get a $500 box of something (2,000) coins to search. >>
Well I'll be a bit more civil than he was a few pages back. You remember when this was said?
<< <i>But now, all of a sudden, primarily the "producers" of non-SF coins want them only in the regular state quarter set so collectors have to buy "$5,000" MS68 sets of last years' coins instead of $200 MS68 sets of last years' coins. Forget the freedom of choice - let's cram the "$5,000" MS68 sets of last year's coins down the throats of the collectors instead of the $200 sets >>
I still think that comment deserved an apology, as others have rightly apologized for "uncalled for" comments they made. Besides, like I said before. I never learned the art of shoving a coin down a fellow collectors throat.
Not to change the subject matter, but this is the end of another week. Does anybody have an update for the progress of correcting the population reports? Is there an update on the mislabeled circulation strike Kennedy MS67CA? I noticed the Kennedy is still listed in the Registry set in question.
There is still a mn-p in ms69 listed in an 05 set also. I have had contact with the set owner, and it is a sf coin. So obviously pcgs hasn't done anything with the data entry problem as of yet. Hell, we took the mountain to mohammad so to speak, you would think that they would have taken advantage of all the help that was given. I guess we will have to do as Registry Coin stated ealier and take the "wait and see" approach as to what PCGS will do, and when.
Tim: I just have a minute, but, I received in the mail this afternoon the MS67CA Kennedy Half Dollar. The coin is a no question SMS Cameo coin, which I will personally present to DH next week when I stop over at PCGS with it.
I did not hear anything from Laura R. this week regarding completing the pop report corrections. When I see DH next week, I will ask him for a status report on that as well as when he anticipates the release of the complete state quarter (variety) set.
Wondercoin
Please visit my website at www.wondercoins.com and my ebay auctions under my user name www.wondercoin.com.
Thanks for the update. When you see DH next week, please tell him that I have a set of 2005 Kennedy's (P&D) PCGS MS66 circulation strikes and I need a slot in my Complete Set of Kennedy's for them. I don't want to chose between the satin finsih and circulation strikes, it is a complete set so I want then both!!!! Tell him (DH) not to be so stubborn.
This is where the greatest appreciation of MS coins comes from with the actual knowledge of the difficulty of the search, then enyoy getting them deposited back at the bank.
Boy you said a mouthful there! I went through I don't know how many of Ks-d and WV-d rolls. The Ks quarters I looked at had a lot of flattening to the letters. Now to be honest, I never paid too much attention to the lettering, always focused on the foreground and then the fields of the coin. But somebody around here brought that aspect to my attention (I appreciate the schooling by the way ). Its frustrating to find nice letters but contact marks in the high areas, or nice nice details, but flat letters, or lets not forget that buffalo's butt, nice with high relief (relative to the fields) standing out there just waiting to get nicked up! And smooth clean fields? Yep, its quite a chore. I'll tell ya tho, after awhile, you start getting the hang of it, and you can go through a roll real quick. So, I applaud those of you that do this on a regular basis. It is a hard, frustrating job. Not that "kickback anybody can do this" kind of thing, like you would think. Sore back, and eyes crossed, not to mention aching hands after a couple of hours of looking.
I applaud Mitch for taking this step and encourage everyone interested that has not already to get a $500 box of something (2,000) coins to search.
A lot of the battle around here is just finding a bank that will order you a box. Seems they want you to have an account, bla bla bla with them before they will do this for you, if then. The premium they ask you to pay is not too bad, but some of the banks act like they're really doing you a favor taking your money for their services. Or you get the line, we can get you a box of whatever, but they will be mixed, not just 1 year or issue of the coin you want.
SO, I am known at god knows how many convenience stores, not to mention the bigger retailers in the area. I try to get out a couple of times a month, go to these places, and buy rolls of quarters, then lug them all home. The shopkeepers are pretty patient with me, and this should be noted, since I can be a pest around new release dates. I was able to go through a box of Fl-d this way about a month ago (that was a waste of time). The only problem with getting rolls this way is that you don't hit those pockets of really outstanding coins like you do with a box, where the dies just got changed out, and there is a run of extremely nice stuff.
Thus, my love affair with extremely beautiful "circulation stike" quarters (and coins in general) has come about. It's a good thing I wasn't around for the walking liberty half. I have a feeling that lady would have worn me down to within an inch of my death. But man, what lovely lady she is!!!! Not a bad way to go!!!!
Yeah man, my wife brought home some Nevada rolls last night. She only gets P rolls at the bank she works for, so that leaves me out in the cold as far as Denver coins go.
<< <i>Thanks for the update. When you see DH next week, please tell him that I have a set of 2005 Kennedy's (P&D) PCGS MS66 circulation strikes and I need a slot in my Complete Set of Kennedy's for them. I don't want to chose between the satin finsih and circulation strikes, it is a complete set so I want then both!!!! Tell him (DH) not to be so stubborn >>
Add me to the list on wanting both in the complete set, and put them in the Varitiey set too!!! And off subject a little but, why is the 1982-P Kennedy No FG not in the varitiey set or attritubed by PCGS.
I emailed Ron Guth today to get an update on the pop report clean up. I forwarded him enough information to be sure he is up to speed with everything I know so I will wait and see what kind of response I may update the readers with.
Lindad I do have a 1982 PCGS MS66with no FG noted on the label by PCGS but it does not show seperately in the pop report even though the coin I have has already been designated on the holder. I also have a 1982 no FG in PCGS MS66 that is not designated on the holder. I have talked to two people that have PCGS MS67 1982 halves that are no FG and not designated on the holder and it appears to me that must be where a lot of the high grade 1982 P come from the no FG die. I can email a scan of the no FG 1982 designated by PCGS on the holder if you like. You may remember you bought a few halves from me off e-bay. Best regards WCQX. dr
WCQX I have a 1982-P No FG in MS64. And am interested in any 1982-P in MS67. Have a MS66 with the FG on it in my set now. Would of sent this in a PM but your PM is not on. LindeDad
I am aware of just (2) NO FG Kennedys in PCGS-MS67. I have one in my Kennedy variety set and another coin sold on TT not too long ago I believe. They are very cool coins and belong in the variety set I believe. But, keep in mind that if the coins get accepted in the variety set, the pop on the top pop "regular" MS67 coin will drop from 6 to no more than 4 (once the coins get separate listings in the Registry) making it one of the scarcest dates in the entire regular issue series to locate in MS67. But, that is exactly what the coin is IMHO.
Wondercoin
Please visit my website at www.wondercoins.com and my ebay auctions under my user name www.wondercoin.com.
Non-SF Kansas "p" hunt coming to an end tonight. Found a few coins that appear to be decent MS67's, but, moving on to NV(d) coins. Need a chance of scenery
I located a KS(p) with an MS68+++ Buffalo side. Turned it over praying for the best - just an MS65 Washington side. Heartbreak!!
Should be getting in another 2,000 KS(p) coins later this week - I have orders for (4) MS68's and I won't stop "hunting" until I can slab (4) MS68 coins to fill the orders or someone beats me to it. Good fun at the end of each day!
Wondercoin
Please visit my website at www.wondercoins.com and my ebay auctions under my user name www.wondercoin.com.
Only two of the five KS-P from my gemmy ninth box made 67 (this was a super batch, will have to take a closer look when I get them back)and none higher so my offer to buy a KS-P in MS68 still stands for any-one that finds the first one. Looks like I will need to keep hunting for these. The KS-P is the only 2005 state quarter I still need to complete my MS68 set and has been a real show stopper for me so far. Expecting NV-P and D results soon enough since I sent some in for modern grading within a week of issuance. I find the NV-P are tougher so share opinions if you have them on the NV search. dr
Mitch " I am aware of just (2) NO FG Kennedys in PCGS-MS67. I have one in my Kennedy variety set and another coin sold on TT not too long ago I believe". The two I am speaking of are Mitch's coin he told me about and one on e-bay offered by others that did not sell after a few weeks with a multi-thousand opening bid. This e-bay coin may be the same one that sold on TT but I did not see the TT sale. dr
"Only two of the five KS-P from my gemmy ninth box made 67 (this was a super batch, will have to take a closer look when I get them back)and none higher so my offer to buy a KS-P in MS68 still stands for any-one that finds the first one. Looks like I will need to keep hunting for these. The KS-P is the only 2005 state quarter I still need to complete my MS68 set and has been a real show stopper for me so far. Expecting NV-P and D results soon enough since I sent some in for modern grading within a week of issuance. I find the NV-P are tougher so share opinions if you have them on the NV search. dr"
Doug: I surely will share those results. I am surprised just (2) coins slabbed MS67 for you from that box, but, I suspect they are MS67+ coins though.
Wondercoin
Please visit my website at www.wondercoins.com and my ebay auctions under my user name www.wondercoin.com.
There are OREGON SF coins that closely resemble super high end non-SF coins I believe. I have little doubt these coins may get "mixed around" in the years ahead.
Doug, Seth, Mark /anyone else- have you seen what I am referring to with Oregon?
Wondercoin.
Please visit my website at www.wondercoins.com and my ebay auctions under my user name www.wondercoin.com.
Seth: I agree. I shipped out some SF MS68 OR(d) coins today that, if cracked out of the holder, would look very, very, very similar to what a very high end non-SF OR(d) coin would resemble. The coins also looked remarkably different than some other "satiny" OR(d) coins that were from the same SF mint set batch and shipped together with the coins I am speaking of. Other states did not show this propensity for a % of the SF coins to resemble non-SF.
Wondercoin
Please visit my website at www.wondercoins.com and my ebay auctions under my user name www.wondercoin.com.
I looked over my MS67-68 OR-D and compared carefully to the OR-D SF coins I have and the weaker strike on the legends of the MS coins are a dead give away for me to see the difference. The well struck MS coins have full bases to the lettering and dates and legends but the tops are uneven and not fully struck. Not as bad as the MS KS-P rb spoke of where flat lettereing is common but still visibly different on MS coins. A further look at the surface texture shows the smooth even light texture on the SF coin shile the MS coins have coarser granulation and even the hard smooth surfaced ones look diffferent than a textured SF coin. It is easier to see marks on a coin than it is to look at the granulation of the surface sheen. I have noticed that people that grade coins wearing glasses see surface marks and strikes more clearly than me but often have a harder time seeing the sheen "surface texture" of a coin so hopefully there is something in here for everyone. My OR-D in MS68 also has a tiny die crack that protrudes out slightly from the point of the bust and I have never seen a die crack on a SF coin that protrudes from the bust or eyebrow although I have seen some SF coins with a die crack on the lower edge of the bust but it did not protrude beyond the point of the bust. Here are a few things I have found to differentiate SF from MS: 1) Business strike coins often have pebbly or alligator skin surfaces while the SF coins are without any surface texture except the fine frost granulation when it is present as it usually is. It is rare to find SF coins with no frost at all and yes some of the D mint SF coins have no frost so are the hardest to differentiate. Business strike coins have nice frosty die flow in some of the issues but it is more of a sheeting luster that flows from the center of the coin and not the frost type luster that beams directly from the surface of a SF coin like the halo efect on the SF WV coins. 2) The strike on the lettering and date and legends of the business strike coin especially on E Pluribus Unum is rarely fully brought up on a business strike coin and there are other strike areas to look at after that area is checked first. The top of the lettering on a business strike coin is often wavy and uneven while the SF coin is usually more fully squared off. 3) Business strike coins often have some tiny die erosion marks near the design elements while the SF coins do not. 4) SF coins are almost always much more bright due to the mint using specially burnished planchets for them. 5) SF coins rarely have stains on them because the SF coins are struck from brightened burnished planchets and stored in tarnish proof bags prior to being hand loaded in the mint set injection canisters while stains on MS coins are common. 5) The MS coins often have tiny die cracks in predictable areas such as the point of the bust and the eyebrow on the obverse and of course it varies by state on the design side while a die crack on a satin finish coin is an exception. 6) Lint marks are often present on the surfaces of the SF coin while they are found less often and usually only on very early die state business strike coins.
Not each of these six points will be true 100% of the time but when you look at all these characteristics on a single coin I have yet to see a MS coin from 2005 that held up to all these tests. If you have one I would like to see it. Please provide any more characteristics to differentiate that you may wish to enlighten us readers with as the more points of differentiation the better since we all see coins a bit differently and some readers will be able to spot some characteristics easier than others. dr
Doug, I seem to remember that your list of characteristics applies very well to the P-Oregon situation. I haven't had a moment to go back and look, but that is the reason I really liked your post. Very Accurate and Helpful for everyone --> Thanks!
I spoke with DH today concerning the pop report related issues, but only briefly. He was out of town the better part of this week (I stopped over to PCGS a couple times this week, but missed him). I plan on seeing him next week.
Wondercoin
Please visit my website at www.wondercoins.com and my ebay auctions under my user name www.wondercoin.com.
First batch of NV reuslts in for me and made some NV-P and D in 67 and nothing in 68 so far but more batches out there and more boxes of NV to go thru. I did not get a response from Ron for my email I sent out last Friday and I suspect others are involved in this policy decision and hope to hear something soon. If no clean up seen on Monday pop report I will email again.
Seth the OR-P in MS69 actually has a lint mark on it like a SF coin but there is pebbly surface granulation, a dead give away this is not a SF coin, very bright and well struck though. dr
Comments
I have spent many hours in court testifing over the past twenty-five years, I know how the game is played. Please do not try and mis-represent what I have written. What I said about NGC was perfectly clear:
<< <i>The more I think about it, NGC made the right designation for the 2005 Uncirculated set when they call the coins "Special Mint Sets" or SMS because they have more in common with the SMS coinage of 1965-67 then of a circulation strike. If PCGS wants to be consistant with it's either / or policy then they would allow the 1994 and 1997 Matte Jefferson to be used in place of the regular MS version (I imagine that would go over like a fart in church). >>
I never implied, eluded to or gave an inference that NGC did the right thing by allowing the 2005 (SMS) satin finish quarter into the circulation strike sets, only that they give the coins the right designation (SMS). I believe that if PCGS had used the same designation (SMS), they would have treated 2005 satin finish coins the same way that they treated the mint sets of 1965-67, and we wouldn't be in the mess we are in now.
<< <i>Tim: I am puzzled by your position? If NGC did the "right" thing calling them "SMS" and I believe you also think the coins may have been produced with proof dies on top of that, then why did NGC also place the coins in the circulation strike state quarter registry set just as PCGS did, which I believe they did? >>
I'm not sure what is puzzling? I thought that I had stated my case clear, precise and consistently through out this thread. As far as the dies used to strike the 2005 satin finish coins, I have not stated that they were indeed "proof dies", although I am leaning that way based on the definitions and the merit of the dies in question (but I have asked others for their opinions / arguments so I can take them into consideration before I make up my mind on the subject).
<< <i>Tim - I also have an unanswered question - anyone also notice the(2) different versions of MS Buffalo Dollars struck by the Mint in 2001 - satiny and non-satin? It looks like they had that "technology" back in 2001 to be sure and may aid in understanding the subtle differences in appearance of even coins like the TX(d) and MI(d) quarters from 2004 Mint sets vs. rolls (including the possible understanding of why roughly 45 TX(d) and MI(d) quarters slabbed MS69 from mint sets alone while 1999-2003 yielded but (1) MS69 for all (25) Denver mint issues combined. >>
The answer to this question is 'no' I have not noticed a difference. In 2001, I bought three two coin sets of the Buffalo Dollars (one set for myself, one for my then five year old son and one set for future trading material). The three uncirculated examples that I have, are the dull satin type finish. If some one received an uncirculated Buffalo near the end of a dies life, would it have a non-SF look? I don't know. Pior to 2005, did /was the mint experimenting with new die types, including the satin finish? Again, I don't know. But as of 2005, the Mint wanted it's numismatics production to all have the same quality, hence United States Mint uncirculated sets, Uncirculated American Eagles, Uncirculated Commemorative coins and medals will all have the satin finish from 2005 on so as to differentiate between them and coins meant for commerce. As far as varieties are concerned, I was under the impression that all modern proofs of the US Mint would be of the DCAM type? I have three West Point Silver Commemoratives and they are graded by PCGS PR69, PR69CA and PR69DCAM (so much for all proofs being DCAM).
I apologize if this post sounds course, but I do not put words in other peoples mouths, and a take offense when someone does it to me weather intentionally or accidentally. I am not trying to stifle discussion for I honestly believe that debate is a healthy means of learning.
Sincerely,
Tim
P.S. Maybe the problem is that we need to tell the US Treasury that we want our old uncirculation coin sets back, remind them that the original purpose of the yearly uncirculation coin sets was to allow a person to buy a complete example of the coins meant for commerce in a convenient manor. The Mint says that it wants customer satisfaction.
Wondercoin
<< <i>Mas: This is the second time you asked this --- I think this time your direct ("secret") target is actually #1 setholder Donn (who supports PCGS' decision)- isn't it? More personal attacks against anyone not seeing it your way. You lose whatever scintilla of credibility you have left with me when you engage in these continued personal attacks. >>
wondercoin, Just to refresh your memory - on 01/26/06 you posted on this thread “This is now your 58th post on these Message boards. It is almost embarrassing to see this is my 8,104th. Wondercoin”, are you trying to tell us that this was not a personal attack by you? I never mentioned any names, just wanted to know if set ranking would change if the Right thing is done. It should make no difference who is in what place to base your decision on. PCGS set up criteria for a set and named it, Washington Statehood Quarters, Circulation Strikes (1999-Present). If we look at that title, I do not believe it takes a “rocket scientist” to realize that a proof mercury dime is not part of the set. The above mentioned set consist of Washington quarters with a statehood design issued from 1999 – 2008, no proof coins are allowed, the only coins that are allowed are “Circulation Strikes” (definition taken form PCGS Lingo, Circulation Strikes = An alternate term for Business Strike or Regular Strike. A coin meant for commerce). Where the Satin Finish coins of the 2005 mint set’s meant for commerce? Business Strikes? Regular Strikes? Weather the Satin Finish coins should or should not be allowed in a set of circulation strikes, the answer should be self evident if it meets the definition of a circulation strike and the criteria of the set. The criteria of the set should not be changed halfway through the series just for “convenience or economics”. If PCGS didn’t want the coin to be treated differently, they wouldn’t have given them a different number, so why treat them the same?
As far as having a “scintilla of credibility”, I will let the other members on this thread decide ‘who is credible or not.’
There have been several great comments and viewpoints why SF should not be treated the same as non-SF, and I notice that you avoid those comments or just go around.
Now, back to the "hunting" - I just got in a fresh 2,000 KS(p) non-SF coins and want to enjoy studying them.
Wondercoin
There have been several great comments and viewpoints why SF should not be treated the same as non-SF, and I notice that you avoid those comments or just go around.
Here mas have
<< <i>Thought the (arguement?) would be on but its been real quiet >>
There are so many "facts" found in this thread, that an arguement could be made for any number of facets of this discussion from quoting parts of the threads contained herein. I still think that a "wait and see" approach as to what PCGS will do is best to take, under these circumstances. Hopefully a response from PCGS concerning this matter will come sooner, rather than later, although no concrete time frame has, or probably will be given. I don't think that the decision that will be made by PCGS will make everyone completely happy, however, at least their decision will provide a solid basis for further discussion at that time.
How's the hunt going, Mitch?
<< <i>Mitch "Now, back to the "hunting" - I just got in a fresh 2,000 KS(p) non-SF coins and want to enjoy studying them." I applaud Mitch for taking this step and encourage everyone interested that has not already to get a $500 box of something (2,000) coins to search. >>
Well I'll be a bit more civil than he was a few pages back. You remember when this was said?
<< <i>But now, all of a sudden, primarily the "producers" of non-SF coins want them only in the regular state quarter set so collectors have to buy "$5,000" MS68 sets of last years' coins instead of $200 MS68 sets of last years' coins. Forget the freedom of choice - let's cram the "$5,000" MS68 sets of last year's coins down the throats of the collectors instead of the $200 sets >>
I still think that comment deserved an apology, as others have rightly apologized for "uncalled for" comments they made.
Besides, like I said before. I never learned the art of shoving a coin down a fellow collectors throat.
So good luck with your search Mitch.
Thanks,
Tim
I did not hear anything from Laura R. this week regarding completing the pop report corrections. When I see DH next week, I will ask him for a status report on that as well as when he anticipates the release of the complete state quarter (variety) set.
Wondercoin
Thanks for the update. When you see DH next week, please tell him that I have a set of 2005 Kennedy's (P&D) PCGS MS66 circulation strikes and I need a slot in my Complete Set of Kennedy's for them. I don't want to chose between the satin finsih and circulation strikes, it is a complete set so I want then both!!!! Tell him (DH) not to be so stubborn.
Thanks,
Tim
Boy you said a mouthful there! I went through I don't know how many of Ks-d and WV-d rolls. The Ks quarters I looked at had a lot of flattening to the letters. Now to be honest, I never paid too much attention to the lettering, always focused on the foreground and then the fields of the coin. But somebody around here brought that aspect to my attention (I appreciate the schooling by the way
I applaud Mitch for taking this step and encourage everyone interested that has not already to get a $500 box of something (2,000) coins to search.
A lot of the battle around here is just finding a bank that will order you a box. Seems they want you to have an account, bla bla bla with them before they will do this for you, if then. The premium they ask you to pay is not too bad, but some of the banks act like they're really doing you a favor taking your money for their services. Or you get the line, we can get you a box of whatever, but they will be mixed, not just 1 year or issue of the coin you want.
SO, I am known at god knows how many convenience stores, not to mention the bigger retailers in the area. I try to get out a couple of times a month, go to these places, and buy rolls of quarters, then lug them all home. The shopkeepers are pretty patient with me, and this should be noted, since I can be a pest around new release dates. I was able to go through a box of Fl-d this way about a month ago (that was a waste of time). The only problem with getting rolls this way is that you don't hit those pockets of really outstanding coins like you do with a box, where the dies just got changed out, and there is a run of extremely nice stuff.
Thus, my love affair with extremely beautiful "circulation stike" quarters (and coins in general) has come about. It's a good thing I wasn't around for the walking liberty half. I have a feeling that lady would have worn me down to within an inch of my death. But man, what lovely lady she is!!!! Not a bad way to go!!!!
Edited cause I hit enter before proofreading!!
<< <i>Edited cause I hit enter before proofreading!! >>
I was beginning to wonder if I was the only one to do that???
Tim
<< <i>Thanks for the update. When you see DH next week, please tell him that I have a set of 2005 Kennedy's (P&D) PCGS MS66 circulation strikes and I need a slot in my Complete Set of Kennedy's for them. I don't want to chose between the satin finsih and circulation strikes, it is a complete set so I want then both!!!! Tell him (DH) not to be so stubborn >>
Add me to the list on wanting both in the complete set, and put them in the Varitiey set too!!!
And off subject a little but, why is the 1982-P Kennedy No FG not in the varitiey set or attritubed by PCGS.
Lindad I do have a 1982 PCGS MS66with no FG noted on the label by PCGS but it does not show seperately in the pop report even though the coin I have has already been designated on the holder. I also have a 1982 no FG in PCGS MS66 that is not designated on the holder. I have talked to two people that have PCGS MS67 1982 halves that are no FG and not designated on the holder and it appears to me that must be where a lot of the high grade 1982 P come from the no FG die. I can email a scan of the no FG 1982 designated by PCGS on the holder if you like. You may remember you bought a few halves from me off e-bay. Best regards WCQX. dr
I have a 1982-P No FG in MS64.
And am interested in any 1982-P in MS67.
Have a MS66 with the FG on it in my set now.
Would of sent this in a PM but your PM is not on.
LindeDad
LindeDad I found your email address from previous sales and sent you an email response to your above inquiryabout the Kennedy halves.
My direct email is douglasrall@msn.com in case anyone else wants to communicate off the thread. Best regards, Doug Rall
Wondercoin
I located a KS(p) with an MS68+++ Buffalo side. Turned it over praying for the best - just an MS65 Washington side. Heartbreak!!
Should be getting in another 2,000 KS(p) coins later this week - I have orders for (4) MS68's and I won't stop "hunting" until I can slab (4) MS68 coins to fill the orders or someone beats me to it. Good fun at the end of each day!
Wondercoin
Just curious.........
I've been told I tolerate fools poorly...that may explain things if I have a problem with you. Current ebay items - Nothing at the moment
Don't want to spend too much time with them, as we know with Either / OR you can find a Satin Finish KS P MS68 for about $16.95 + grading Fees.
<< <i>You going to get some quarters to SHOVE down collectors throats?
Good Morning Dan50. The throat cramming won't start till us diehard "business strike" collectors get our ultra high grade exapmles first!
Doug: I surely will share those results. I am surprised just (2) coins slabbed MS67 for you from that box, but, I suspect they are MS67+ coins though.
Wondercoin
Is it possible, or has anyone seen a SF coin that has "some" luster on the Portrait?
Thanks Mike
Doug, Seth, Mark /anyone else- have you seen what I am referring to with Oregon?
Wondercoin.
Wondercoin
Not each of these six points will be true 100% of the time but when you look at all these characteristics on a single coin I have yet to see a MS coin from 2005 that held up to all these tests. If you have one I would like to see it. Please provide any more characteristics to differentiate that you may wish to enlighten us readers with as the more points of differentiation the better since we all see coins a bit differently and some readers will be able to spot some characteristics easier than others. dr
Because it fell off the first page,
Wondercoin
Thank you, I noticed that the mislabeled circulation strike Kennedy MS67CA has been removed from the Registry set(s) in question.
Tim
ps. Darn, I was going to join the PCGS club, and enter the WS contest with $1,000,000 worth of MS cams.
Tim: I asked the collector to do that, suggesting that I believe he would receive "fair consideration" from PCGS.
Wondercoin
Seth the OR-P in MS69 actually has a lint mark on it like a SF coin but there is pebbly surface granulation, a dead give away this is not a SF coin, very bright and well struck though. dr
Wondercoin