Wisconsin X-leaf varities and price guide
blastpak
Posts: 567
Do these sell along the lines of what the PCGS price guide lists them for? What is the going rate for a MS66-MS67 high and low?
Earth is the insane asylum for the universe.
0
Comments
No, what they meant initially was that they were just routine die gouges that happened serendipitously, and no amount of spinning will change the fact the "error experts" were just plain wrong. I'll always look at anything else they opine on through the filter of their performance in this situation, thank you very much.
Apropos of the coin posse/aka caca: "The longer he spoke of his honor, the tighter I held to my purse."
<< <i>Nah; corn doesn't lose its leaves like trees do. >>
That's why there are "Huskers".
You can start shooting now -- but the bullets are just blanks.
that they are intentional even if it seems nearly overwhelming to many of us. Certainly the possibility of
pure chance exists. Imagine if there were a third variety from the same press that had a similar "gouge"
elsewhere. At what point do you say that these were mere coincidence?
He states that die gouges occur when scraps of metal are impressed into the surface of a die during striking. This is incorrect most of the time, the exceptions being rare cases such as the 1804 "Spiked Chin" half cent where a threaded screw apparently came between the dies, or another die pair I once saw which had come together on a steel ball bearing.
Under normal circumstances, a scrap of metal between a die and a planchet will be sunken into the softer planchet without leaving any impression upon the hardened die. Hardened dies are very difficult to mark up. I once tried to cancel a medal die with a chisel and a ten pound sledge, and could barely scratch the surface.
I believe that the markings occured, however they occured, in the die shop before the dies were hardened. I believe that the marking are the result of the end of a hollow steel tube contacting the dies at an angle, leaving curved indents in the dies that look, to some people, like leaves. a similar curved indent occurred below the ear on a 2004-D dime die, and much smaller curved indents occurred around the Lincoln figure in the center of the Lincoln Memorial building on two different 2005 cent reverses.
Whether these indentations were deliberate or accidental remains unproven.
Tom DeLorey
<< <i>If you go to the error coins section of US Coins on ebay, on the left you'll see the titles of a couple "guides" about these. Fairly well written, and they pointedly debunk the die gouge opinion that various "experts" still desperately cling to, possibly because they famously came out loudly with that premise soon after Rick Snow began telling the story. Two of those experts are on this forum. Frankly, I'd love to hear them now defend their positions. I guess one has said that Ken Potter's screed makes their die gouge point, in that even if they acknowledge that someone intentionally added the leaves in two separate dies, as obviously is the case, that act is "gouging" the die, so they were thus right all along. Clintonian parsing if I ever saw it.
No, what they meant initially was that they were just routine die gouges that happened serendipitously, and no amount of spinning will change the fact the "error experts" were just plain wrong. I'll always look at anything else they opine on through the filter of their performance in this situation, thank you very much. >>
<< <i>I'm not attacking -- I'm stating my opinion. Just as many of you on this forum have stated yours. Bring on the evidence that shows this is NOT a die dent/gouge. >>
The case is entirely circumstantial. But if this were a murder trial, I'd have to vote guilty on "motive", "means", "opportunity", and "intent" of the mint employees.
Free Trial
<< <i>Does anybody have an e-mail address for the Larry who posted two of these comments? I need to correct a major error in his description of how die gouges occur.
He states that die gouges occur when scraps of metal are impressed into the surface of a die during striking. This is incorrect most of the time, the exceptions being rare cases such as the 1804 "Spiked Chin" half cent where a threaded screw apparently came between the dies, or another die pair I once saw which had come together on a steel ball bearing.
Under normal circumstances, a scrap of metal between a die and a planchet will be sunken into the softer planchet without leaving any impression upon the hardened die. Hardened dies are very difficult to mark up. I once tried to cancel a medal die with a chisel and a ten pound sledge, and could barely scratch the surface.
I believe that the markings occured, however they occured, in the die shop before the dies were hardened. I believe that the marking are the result of the end of a hollow steel tube contacting the dies at an angle, leaving curved indents in the dies that look, to some people, like leaves. a similar curved indent occurred below the ear on a 2004-D dime die, and much smaller curved indents occurred around the Lincoln figure in the center of the Lincoln Memorial building on two different 2005 cent reverses.
Whether these indentations were deliberate or accidental remains unproven.
Tom DeLorey
<< <i>If you go to the error coins section of US Coins on ebay, on the left you'll see the titles of a couple "guides" about these. Fairly well written, and they pointedly debunk the die gouge opinion that various "experts" still desperately cling to, possibly because they famously came out loudly with that premise soon after Rick Snow began telling the story. Two of those experts are on this forum. Frankly, I'd love to hear them now defend their positions. I guess one has said that Ken Potter's screed makes their die gouge point, in that even if they acknowledge that someone intentionally added the leaves in two separate dies, as obviously is the case, that act is "gouging" the die, so they were thus right all along. Clintonian parsing if I ever saw it.
No, what they meant initially was that they were just routine die gouges that happened serendipitously, and no amount of spinning will change the fact the "error experts" were just plain wrong. I'll always look at anything else they opine on through the filter of their performance in this situation, thank you very much. >>
>>
Shucks Tom -- I was going to present my photos on the 2004 cent die dent on the reverse I discovered that also resembles a similar one to John Wexler's. But since you mention it -- yep, I have seen many of these along with other anomalies on various quarters and other denominations that have similar appearances. Also too -- I did an overlay with the two so-called "hi and low" leaves and their curvature match up, especially the extra indentation. As well add the 2004-D dime you mentioned, along with the 2005-S Silver Proof Kansas quarter with the so-called extra "hoof" in the hindquarter. To me, evidence points to the die dent/gouge category.
<< <i>If you go to the error coins section of US Coins on ebay, on the left you'll see the titles of a couple "guides" about these. Fairly well written, and they pointedly debunk the die gouge opinion that various "experts" still desperately cling to, possibly because they famously came out loudly with that premise soon after Rick Snow began telling the story. >>
But those ebay guides are just plain wrong. The die gouges are not extremely deep. The pierced leaf die gouge varity is shallower than the leaf it goes through, and the moldy cheese die gouge variety is shallower than either the cheese or the leaf it meets up with.
Plus, stating that all the real leaves start in the cheese are incorrect; they obviuously meet up or are meeting up with the corn. But the moldy cheese variety the base of the leaf is in fact moving away from the corn, and the pierced leaf variety just doesn't have good perspective to really tell where it's base is coming from.
Further, there are known deep die gouses. The 1804 spiked chin half cent certainly has a deeper die gouge, the 1890-CC tailbar Morgan, and perhaps the 2004 dime which was once classified as a DDO.
Finally, if this was an intentional variety, why just two dies, on one state quarter? Make a Rhode Island quarter with extra waves. Or an extra fiery torch on the Roosevelt dime. The Lincoln memorial reverse has been likened to a trolly car. Whay not put some liuttle wheels on a die or two? That certainly wouldn't be difficult. Instead, all we get, if the "extra leaves" coins are varities, are two modified dies which just look like mere die gouges. Might as well aregue that Bugs Bunny halves are also intentional varities. They even have a fancier name.
Ed. S.
(EJS)
<< <i>Bring on the evidence that shows this is NOT a die dent/gouge. >>
All you have to do is look at one under a loupe. Its TOO damn perfect to be anything other than intentional IMO.
<< <i>
<< <i>I'm not attacking -- I'm stating my opinion. Just as many of you on this forum have stated yours. Bring on the evidence that shows this is NOT a die dent/gouge. >>
The case is entirely circumstantial. But if this were a murder trial, I'd have to vote guilty on "motive", "means", "opportunity", and "intent" of the mint employees. >>
Don't forget to thrown in a healthy dose of common sense. Oh, and a heapin helpin of not having any financial incentive to keep the debate going. There are pundits in our hobby, just as there are in politics, and like the latter, the former need endless debate rather than resolution.
Apropos of the coin posse/aka caca: "The longer he spoke of his honor, the tighter I held to my purse."
<< <i>
Finally, if this was an intentional variety, why just two dies, on one state quarter? Make a Rhode Island quarter with extra waves. Or an extra fiery torch on the Roosevelt dime. The Lincoln memorial reverse has been likened to a trolly car. Whay not put some liuttle wheels on a die or two? That certainly wouldn't be difficult. Instead, all we get, if the "extra leaves" coins are varities, are two modified dies which just look like mere die gouges. Might as well aregue that Bugs Bunny halves are also intentional varities. They even have a fancier name. >>
Even if you accept the idea that these two gouges just happened to land so that they appear to be leaves then you still must explain how the only two dies affected just happened to land in the same press. Call them what you will but they do look like leaves and this is the one irrefutable fact. I can accept that such gouges might occur anywhere on the coin but what are the odds that they'd look like corn?
What if they had landed on the bovine's head and one were left horn and one right horn? I have to believe the odds say these are intentional.
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
Sorry -- for me that's not evidence. It's your opinion and that's fine.
Actually -- the so-called "hi leaf" type extends outward into the left main leaf and then on the other side it continues on outward into the field. But the extension thru the main leaf only hits its high points -- exactly like a die gouge does. The same thing happens with the so-called "low leaf" as it extends into the main design. It is only hitting high points -- again like a die gouge does.
As far as intentional or unintentional -- beats me.
<< <i>
<< <i>Bring on the evidence that shows this is NOT a die dent/gouge. >>
All you have to do is look at one under a loupe. Its TOO damn perfect to be anything other than intentional IMO. >>
Perfect in what way? Round?
Several mid-19th century dies have little round circles in the center that were not understood for many years, until it was figured out that the circle was part of a positioning guide for the hub. The circle it left was supposed to be hand tooled off of the die made from the hub, but sometimes they forgot.
These round die gouges may be the remnant of some perfectly normal modern Mint procedure we do not yet understand. Or they may be part of some Mint worker's dastardly plan to make some money. Or they may be some Mint worker's humorous way of saying "Kilroy was here." We don't yet know.
Tom DeLorey
Apropos of the coin posse/aka caca: "The longer he spoke of his honor, the tighter I held to my purse."
<< <i>What we do know is that no explanation from the Mint will be forthcoming, and the perpetrators of the "let's keep this going by clinging to the flimsiest of notions" theories know this, and thus get endless debate, which is their stock in trade. I'd be embarrassed to be associated with such non-sensical and frivolous arguments. >>
Wishing something does not make it so, and saying that people are wrong only because they do not agree with you does not make it so, either.
You keep your non-sensical and frivolous argument and I'll keep mine, and we'll all be happy.
TD
Jerry
<< <i>What we do know is that no explanation from the Mint will be forthcoming, and the perpetrators of the "let's keep this going by clinging to the flimsiest of notions" theories know this, and thus get endless debate, which is their stock in trade. I'd be embarrassed to be associated with such non-sensical and frivolous arguments. >>
First off -- I didn't initiate this post. Earlier you mentioned, "Frankly, I'd love to hear them now defend their positions." Now maybe I'm not one of the perpetrators you are talking about -- or maybe I am, I don't know, but, it makes no difference, I was only expressing my opinion and the evidence of why I came to that opinion. This is the first time I have ever expressed an opinion about these Wisconsin quarters on this forum. But, and if I have it wrong, correct me, but I get the distinct feeling were not allowed to do that here.
<< <i>
But, and if I have it wrong, correct me, but I get the distinct feeling were not allowed to do that here. >>
Hell, they let me post here, there's no reason they wouldn't let someone who knows what he's talking about.
<< <i>
<< <i>What we do know is that no explanation from the Mint will be forthcoming, and the perpetrators of the "let's keep this going by clinging to the flimsiest of notions" theories know this, and thus get endless debate, which is their stock in trade. I'd be embarrassed to be associated with such non-sensical and frivolous arguments. >>
First off -- I didn't initiate this post. Earlier you mentioned, "Frankly, I'd love to hear them now defend their positions." Now maybe I'm not one of the perpetrators you are talking about -- or maybe I am, I don't know, but, it makes no difference, I was only expressing my opinion and the evidence of why I came to that opinion. This is the first time I have ever expressed an opinion about these Wisconsin quarters on this forum. But, and if I have it wrong, correct me, but I get the distinct feeling were not allowed to do that here. >>
You're quite sensitive aren't you?
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
<< <i>Has anybody ever found one in circulation? Outside of Arizona? I've only heard of new ones being taken into coin shops out there. What's the deal with that?
Jerry >>
Board member HIGHLOWLEAVES found some at banks in Kerrville, TX after they were found in Arizona. You could PM him and ask. He's real nice and has a lot of information about the Texas finds.
BTW, I still think the extra leaves were intentional. It isn't logical or scientific but I just have the "feeling" it was done on purpose.
"Live long and prosper"
My "How I Started" columns
My wife seems to think so. BTW -- I believe the earth is round and man walked on the moon.
So -- I still ask, like in the long ago commercial, "Where's the beef?"
whether it is a matter of this over that,
or, that over this?
Camelot
But in Dec 2004, the internet had provided amateurs an opportunity to chime in and challenge the wise old men, and I'm using that phrase affectionately, believe me.
Thus, again IMO, the preponderance of opinions is on the side of "one leaf, fine, could very well be a die gouge that is shaped precisely like a leaf, and positioned such that it's of a piece with the design. But two meeting those same criteria, and throw in CK's other points. Coincidence can only take you so far." If the accidental die gouge theorists had had their way unchallenged as in the past, it would not be a recognized variety, and thus a boon to collecting. It's all good, including the debate. I just hate to see experts lowered to depending on such flimsy arguments, that's all.
Apropos of the coin posse/aka caca: "The longer he spoke of his honor, the tighter I held to my purse."
Die Varieties: Not only are you incorrect that this is a die gouge, you are incorrect regarding the two varieities. The "hi-leaf" variety's high- leaf DOES NOT extend outward through the main left leaf. It ENDS at the main left leaf.
Anyone who actually believes these are die gouges are only diminishing their own credibility.
BTW, I don't care if these go down in value to a buck each. It is a very cool error, purposely made, and my three sets of these are the LEAST valuable coins in my portfoilio. To me, just another factoid regarding the lax of security at government local's. There will always be someone in the mints trying to either make an extra buck or make a mark that they "existed" as a mint employee at one time. Look at the mule coins that come out of there. Yeah, those are ACCIDENTS. Security at the mints about as great as at the airports.
BTW, "hi-leaf is spelled HIGH LEAF, or was it your own way of saying, ""hi there extra leaf!!!"
<< <i><<Actually -- the so-called "hi leaf" type extends outward into the left main leaf and then on the other side it continues on outward into the field. But the extension thru the main leaf only hits its high points -- exactly like a die gouge does. The same thing happens with the so-called "low leaf" as it extends into the main design. It is only hitting high points -- again like a die gouge does.>>
Die Varieties: Not only are you incorrect that this is a die gouge, you are incorrect regarding the two varieities. The "hi-leaf" variety's high- leaf DOES NOT extend outward through the main left leaf. It ENDS at the main left leaf.
Anyone who actually believes these are die gouges are only diminishing their own credibility.
BTW, I don't care if these go down in value to a buck each. It is a very cool error, purposely made, and my three sets of these are the LEAST valuable coins in my portfoilio. To me, just another factoid regarding the lax of security at government local's. There will always be someone in the mints trying to either make an extra buck or make a mark that they "existed" as a mint employee at one time. Look at the mule coins that come out of there. Yeah, those are ACCIDENTS. Security at the mints about as great as at the airports.
BTW, "hi-leaf is spelled HIGH LEAF, or was it your own way of saying, ""hi there extra leaf!!!"
Die Varieties: Not only are you incorrect that this is a die gouge, you are incorrect regarding the two varieities. The "hi-leaf" variety's high- leaf DOES NOT extend outward through the main left leaf. It ENDS at the main left leaf.
Dead wrong. That I can prove.
Morgan, modern sets, circulated Kennedys, and Wisconsin error leaf quarter Collector
First (and only - so far) Official "You Suck" Award from Russ 2/9/07
"Dead wrong. That I can prove."
Below is a photo I took of a "High Leaf" (did I get that spelled correctly for you now?) that shows the die damage not only extends to the main leaf but does NOT stop there. It continues within the main leaf at it's low point (corresponding high point on the working die) as pointed out with arrow #2. Further, arrow #1 shows the die damage continues thru the main leaf and now extends outward tapering off into the field.
Additionally -- there is a slight indentation curve on the main body of the die damage pointed out with arrow #3. When this is flipped (inverted) and rotated to the same degree as the "Low Leaf" damage and superimposed, the curve and the indentation match. This shows me the two are related die damage.
Sorry -- for me that's not evidence. It's your opinion and that's fine.
*********
Of course that is my opinion and not evidence. By too perfect I mean that they look too much like they belong there; not just one error but two. I'm sure that if mint officials could have passed it off as die gouges or whatever else they would have done so right away. I expect that the perps were planning smoething all along and the Wisconsin quarter gave them that chance because the design made their little prank hard to detect.
Just wondering. Anyway, What "proof" would be acceptable to show that these were intentional and not die damage?
<< <i>Shucks Tom -- I was going to present my photos on the 2004 cent die dent on the reverse I discovered that also resembles a similar one to John Wexler's. But since you mention it -- yep, I have seen many of these along with other anomalies on various quarters and other denominations that have similar appearances. Also too -- I did an overlay with the two so-called "hi and low" leaves and their curvature match up, especially the extra indentation. As well add the 2004-D dime you mentioned, along with the 2005-S Silver Proof Kansas quarter with the so-called extra "hoof" in the hindquarter. To me, evidence points to the die dent/gouge category. >>
All these curved die gouges... these seem to all be close to the center of the die. Is that correct? That has to mean something.
Ed. S.
(EJS)
Well -- here some more evidence to ponder with your speculations, theories, conjectures and intentional intentions.
All photos were taken at the exact same magnification and were of Bill Fivaz's personal coins.
The top photo is the same photo I presented earlier in this thread showing that the so-called "High Leaf" does in fact extend thru the main leaf design and continues on outward tapering off into the field. This is shown with arrows #1 and #2. Arrow #3, as I mentioned in my earlier response, pointed to a slight indentation to the main body of the so-called "High Leaf" die damage.
Now -- the next photo (middle photo) is of the so-called "Low Leaf" die damage. Again, arrow #1 and arrow #2 point to the continuing extension of the curve into the main stalk low points (again, corresponding to the high points on the working die like the "High Leaf" does in the top photo) which is what a die gouge does. Also in this photo I point out with arrow #3 the indentation on the main body of the curve of the die damage.
Lets go another step further. The bottom photo is the middle photo with the top photo superimposed over the die damage. In other words, I have the so-called "High Leaf" photo flip-flopped (like I said in my earlier post) and rotated to the angle of the indentation. We can see the #1 and #2 and #3 lettering flip-flopped (going backwards in the photo). Now we see that the so-called "High Leaf" falls over the so-called "Low Leaf" with the same long overall curvature closely matching. The indentation of the two leafs (which were pointed out with the arrow 3's) compliment each other and more importantly the extension of the "High Leaf" also corresponds to the extension of the "Low Leaf" into the main stalk low areas.
<< <i>
<< <i>The case is entirely circumstantial. But if this were a murder trial, I'd have to vote guilty on "motive", "means", "opportunity", and "intent" of the mint employees. >>
>>
I must note that "evidence" is not in your list.
<< <i>Don't forget to thrown in a healthy dose of common sense. Oh, and a heapin helpin of not having any financial incentive to keep the debate going. There are pundits in our hobby, just as there are in politics, and like the latter, the former need endless debate rather than resolution. >>
I have no financial interest in these coins. I will not buy them at the multi-hundred to thousands dollar range they are at now, and I doubt I'd buy them if they cost, maybe say, 25% more than a non-gouged Wisconson quarter. Perhaps it is those who think these items are intentional who need the debate. Didn't someone admit in this thread that the internet allowed the non-experts to compete with the experts? Isn't this close to admitting that if we had all listened to the experts and their noticing the coins appaer to have die gouges, that similar die gouges on other coins exist which do not look like added design features at any level of imagination, that overlays sugest the same tool made the three quarter markings (i.e. not engravings), that it'd be extremely difficult to mark an already in-use die, and that the coins look nothing like known re-engraved dies (i.e. 1944 re-initialed half)... that'd we'd all be agreeing on at least the cause.
Of course, we must realize that the Wisconson extra leaf quarters being die gouges says as much about their value as realizing that the 1937-D 3-legged buffalo 5c is an abraded die and that the 1955 Bugs Bunny half is a clashed die. Or, knowing that it's not an intentional variety doesn't tell us what it's value will or should be.
Ed. S.
(EJS)
Can you prove that statement? Just asking not trying to pick a fight, this is great stuff!!
mainly affect the high points. This would apply to a chisel or some other improvised carv-
ing tool. The fact that they have similar shapes can be caused by several factors. If they
were identical then this would be evidence of a sort.
All three of these lines appear to have a different radius. While this doesn't mean they
can't have been caused inadvertantly, it certainly doesn't mean they were.
Thank you -- it would seem this is evidence that a lot of so-called experts intentionally ignored.
<< <i>Even if you accept the idea that these two gouges just happened to land so that they appear to be leaves then you still must explain how the only two dies affected just happened to land in the same press. >>
Do we know that? We know that the two varieties had a propensity to be in the same shipments, and so were likely made around the same time, quite possibly the same day. But I don't think we can say they came from the same press, and in any case, weren't they made on Schulyer(sp?) presses, which use only a single die pair?
<< <i>Call them what you will but they do look like leaves and this is the one irrefutable fact. >>
No, that to some people they look like leaves is. They really do just look like generic curved lines to me.
<< <i>I can accept that such gouges might occur anywhere on the coin but what are the odds that they'd look like corn?
What if they had landed on the bovine's head and one were left horn and one right horn? I have to believe the odds say these are intentional. >>
I'd say first that two instances would not be enough to make the claim that they were intentionally caused. There is, after all, a realistic chance that at least two people posting to this thread have the same birthday. No one forced them to be on the same thread.
Second, mere number of dies does not seem to be horribly relevent, unless it were a significantly larger number (and even then it may be deceptive). There is, AFAIK, only one re-engraved initials die on a Walking Liberty half, but we have no problem knowing that was intentional. Alternatively, there are numerous 1970-era Lincoln obverse dies with breaks blocking out portions of the IGWT motto, but I don't think anyone could seriously argue that this shows there was a mint worker at the time who took the establishment clause seriously, nor do the hundred+ RPM 1960-D Lincoln dies shows that the mint's die makers were intentionally producing varieties for collectors.
Ed. S.
(EJS)
No, there's no proof, nor evidence, that they were made on the same press but most bags
are composed of very few die pairs (even jumbo bags since coins are made so fast), so it
seems pretty improbable that these coincidentally were made on separate presses and then
just happened to be only issued together. The odds against this are staggering whether
they are intentional or not.
them to be issued together the hypothetical other press would have had to be stoped and
started at the same time. It's not normal practice to stop presses for lunch breaks. It's much
easier to believe that they were made on the samwe press.
No, that to some people they look like leaves is. They really do just look like generic curved lines to me.
,,,,,,,,,,,,
They look like leaves within the context of the design on the coin and thats what most people are referring to and seeing. If you didn't know anything about the design of the coin and saw one of these "extra leaf errors" for the first time you would most likely think that it belonged there. While the chicanery mite not have been perfectly executed technically or mechanically its damn good and likely fooled many people. The fact that both errors appear to belong in the same way pretty much discounts anything other than intent. One mite be coincidence; two no way.
I have the utmost respect for Mr. Billy Crawford and I look foward to subscribing to his new coin variety publication that is on line.
I do not pretend to be a coin error or variety expert but I wanted to share some of my thoughts concerning the Extra Leaf Quarters.
I have been a serious collector of Statehood Quarters beginning back in June, 2004 when our state's Texas Quarters were released. After buying rolls and boxes of that issue, my various sources for new coins were in place. One of those locations is a small town here in the Hill Country of Texas called Kerrville. Back in late January, 2005, there was a trio set of raw BU Wisconsin State Quarters containing one regular coin, one High Leaf and one Low Leaf coin. The Ebay auction stated that the seller was located in "Kerrville, Texas" !!! Needless to say, I went to Kerrville the next business day and purchased every coin, roll or box of Wisconsin Quarters that I could find !!
I have visited with one quarter collector who said that he had boxes that contained the Extra Leaf Quarters that he had bought them in the San Antonio , Tx area prior to Thanksgiving, 2004. This was before Bob Ford made his discovery in December, 2004 in Tucson, AZ. I contend that these special coins were in Texas before or at the same time that they were in Arizonia. South Texas was a major discovery in itself !!
We were finding about the same number of High Leaf quarters as we were finding Low Leaf quarters. Tucson was finding much fewer High varieties as compared to the Low ones in a roll.
I had both small and large unopened Mint bags of Wisconsin D quarters on Ebay in February, 2005. One particular night, I received a phone call. The gentleman who I had never talked to before asked my what dates were on the Mint boxes of quarters that I had on auction. I told my that the small bag was dated October 18, 2004 and the $250 bag had no date. His reply was.. well, October18 is too early !! I said, What? He explained that all the Extra Leaf Quarters were shipped out of the Denver Mint before Thanksgiving, 2004 and that they were made in November of that year. That the Mint had narrowed it down to three employees that were responsible for creating and coining the two Wisconsin variety quarters. That they were able to produce all the Low leaf quarters that they wanted without getting caught but they were actually discovered minting the High Leaf quarters. The caller explained that the officials had the High Leaf Die in hand.
I cannot vouch for the information that this caller told me one night over a year ago but the Treasury's OIG Report doesn't contradict what this individual told me a year before the government's findings were released. I tend to believe the caller !!
Best I can tell, there were fewer than a total of 20,000 of both varieties minted. The High Leaf being the scarcer of the two.
The mystery as to the cause of the fascinating quarter varieties continues !! I beleive that they have found a well deserved place in the history of numismatics and they are certainly much more than simply a passing fad !! Please read my friend's letter to the editor in May 22, 2006 Coin World. Coin Valves Magazine, June 2006 has a great article that descibes the growing interest and values of these rare coins.
Sincerely, Mark.
Amazing where this thread has gone, from its humble beginnings.
Apropos of the coin posse/aka caca: "The longer he spoke of his honor, the tighter I held to my purse."
can i get an AMEN ?
just one question if anyone can answer it ....
Have any of these leaf errors been discovered in MINT BAGS or US MINT ROLLS ? or were they only discovered through the "CIRCULATION" process via federal reserve to armored car to OBW to bank branches ?
of a single die will always get bunched up into release points and the only known places for these have been in the southwest. There is still a very small chance that more of these will be found in mint storage but this becomes less likely with each passing day.
<< <i>
It must be just me but I don't think the 2 leaves look like each other at all. And just because they curve the same way could mean the same person did it on both. I figure there is just about the same chance of that as the chance of 2 peices of metal falling right next to the ear of corn on different dies with the same dents, details and curves. I guess that's kind of like saying it's easier to believe the world and the universe and stuff all happened by chance rather than being created. When I look at stuff like the sky at night and read about the planets and stuff it makes me think of a Creator and that it all was made on purpose
When I see the extra leaves, where they are, how they look it makes me think that there was a "creator" of them and that they were made on purpose too.
I know I'm just a kid and I don't know all of the stuff everybody else does but that makes sense to me.
"Live long and prosper"
My "How I Started" columns