The Blake "Highlights" Collection (i.e. having fun with colorful collecting)
Duane
Posts: 645
Hello All-
Take a look at the coolest set I was able to literally stumble across - being a Matte Head at heart, I always snubbed the 1936-1942 proof series. Not any more! Look at the fabulous die striations on the first coin in the collection - a 1936 proof satin finish. The 1936 brilliant is even more pronounced, and the colors in this set are without exception, on every coin, from another world! The set is really at number 17 in the series ratings (which has almost 70 collections - more then the MPLs!). The set was a bargain at today's Lincoln prices, and 1909 around the corner. Especially considering how pretty to coins are - a few are rare, as well. And needless to say, my wife and mother, the honorees, are happy, as they like "pretty" coins. The MPLs were a little too knoked back for them (obviously, the MPLs are an acquired taste, and the Matte Heads like myself are hooked, but not everyone feels that way, much to MY surprise!). I see this collection as a natural progression from the MPLs.
Needless to say, the '36 is one of the less colorful in the collection, but the diagnostics are like a MPL on steroids : ) I threw in a Tru-view of the 1942, as well, which has monster colors, with a pop 1-0, to boot!
Enjoy! I'll try to get the other Tru-views in the set ASAP.
Duane
P.S. The set can be found at http://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/publishedset.aspx?s=50055&ac=1
1936 (Satin):
1942:
Take a look at the coolest set I was able to literally stumble across - being a Matte Head at heart, I always snubbed the 1936-1942 proof series. Not any more! Look at the fabulous die striations on the first coin in the collection - a 1936 proof satin finish. The 1936 brilliant is even more pronounced, and the colors in this set are without exception, on every coin, from another world! The set is really at number 17 in the series ratings (which has almost 70 collections - more then the MPLs!). The set was a bargain at today's Lincoln prices, and 1909 around the corner. Especially considering how pretty to coins are - a few are rare, as well. And needless to say, my wife and mother, the honorees, are happy, as they like "pretty" coins. The MPLs were a little too knoked back for them (obviously, the MPLs are an acquired taste, and the Matte Heads like myself are hooked, but not everyone feels that way, much to MY surprise!). I see this collection as a natural progression from the MPLs.
Needless to say, the '36 is one of the less colorful in the collection, but the diagnostics are like a MPL on steroids : ) I threw in a Tru-view of the 1942, as well, which has monster colors, with a pop 1-0, to boot!
Enjoy! I'll try to get the other Tru-views in the set ASAP.
Duane
P.S. The set can be found at http://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/publishedset.aspx?s=50055&ac=1
1936 (Satin):
1942:
0
Comments
Link
- Bob -
MPL's - Lincolns of Color
Central Valley Roosevelts
cohodk
Thank you.
Here is the wildest part, in my opinion - the PCGS Price Guide has this coin listed at $45.00. Yup - that is not a typo. Am I the only person who has noticed that this Lincoln series is EXTREMELY under-appreciated in real value? Mind you, $45.00 can buy a dinner for 2-3 people of hamburgers and a couple of beers with a tip : )
And think about what we usually look at in a coin:
1) It is beautiful;
2) It is a pop 1-0;
3) Unfortunetely, it is an extremely high mintage, and has the highest in the 36-42 series at 32,600! Mind you, that makes this coin roughly ten times more rare than the 1909-S VDB!
Makes one wonder how the 36-42 series was forgotten. The mintage of the 1936 proof Lincoln cent is 5,569, compared to the 'rare' 1950 proof Lincoln at 51,386 minted. And the 1950-1960 series is valued more highly, even with much higher populations (hundreds of thousands minted, in some cases).
Maybe with 2009 at hand, people will take a second look at the 36-42 series, while the coins are still affordable.
Duane
Yes, it is. I think that Dave Kelly's set and my new one may be the only "highly-toned" sets on the registry. Correct me if I'm mistaken. And mine my be the only complete set.
Apparently, these are not as common as would appear. Dave's 1936 satin is also a pop 1-0!
Dave-aside from the obvious wild colors, do you find the striation line diagnostics on your 36-42 coins as well?
As far as I can see, no one has ever done a detailed analysis of this particular series of proofs. I guess it's easier to pick out a brilliant proof then a matte, so the confusion PR/MS argumment is not as worrisome.
But the die striations are still fascinating from my perspective - just the collector in me, I suppose.
- Bob -
MPL's - Lincolns of Color
Central Valley Roosevelts
Thanks a good question. It would seem like there should be more dies and die states then the early years, as more coins were minted. But where did the colors come from?!!
This series seems so undervalued, I'm honestly stunned. It looks like MPLs 5 years ago, or more. I never really looked at the series until this offer (but obviously, at least 69 other collectors DID!!) The coins are beautiful, and from a color and diagnostic perspective, they possess all the positives of the MPLs (color, die analysis potential), yet are attainable for a typical collector in high level reds and wonderful toning for a reasonable cost - there is real value there.
Because of the brilliant surface characteristics, they have more "pop" (i.e. luster) then the average matte proof, as the Mattes were intended to NOT be brilliant (but obviously, the MPLs are far more rare, except for the 1936, perhaps).
But my point is that these coins should not be priced LESS then the 1950-1958s, and not the other way around!! They are older and rarer.
So the market is ripe for correcting, IMO, and value and ticket in is there now (how many copper series can we say that about?)
I think the series needs a champion. Brian Wagner knows MPLs inside and out, and Rick Tomaska is the 1950 to date proof Lincoln expert. Who handles the '36-'42 Lincoln proof series?
Maybe we see many collections in this series for a good reason. Personally, if I still had my full MPL set, I'd like to compliment it with a 36-42 set. They do coordinate well, and watching how the mint developed regarding proof sets is very interesting.
Duane
WS
Enjoy the bits and and pieces that I'm shooting across. I only wish all the coins were Tru-viewed.
this brings a lil sadness as i had 2 of those 36 satins and both went for matty's and darn do i miss that last one dbemike sold me as it was extremely even in shade in pr64rd
those hairlines aren't a desired thing and decrease a coins grade/value
the market "is flat and will be" due to almost all survive but...cameos (truly rare in these years) and the very high graded are strongly suited.
haven't you seen stewarts 1938 yet?
eye catching toners have a following of their own...some like um some don't
all i know is i want a 1965 sms cameo like doug and a 1964 sms lincoln incase santa is reading...please-please-please
"Hairlines" are not the same as "die lines". Hairlines are NOT desired, while die lines do not negitively affect the value of a proof coin - in fact, they may add to the value.
Duane
i'm not aware of them enhancing value at all
matte proof lincolns have them as fruitful in diagnostics
given a choice...a brilliant proof with no die polish or one with them...i'm in the clean crowd as it affects eye appeal
1) As you point out, without die lines, many matte proofs could not be 'diagnosed' as such, and therefore the value of those coins is dependent on the die lines (which were created by the mint in the coin manufacturing process) and because the value of the coin hinges on its 'authenticity', the die lines can establish the coin's authenticity, and increase the value of the coin.
2) From an 'brilliant' proof eye appeal standpoint, maybe many people share your view. They prefer perfect, brilliant coins, without hairlines or die polish lines. I don't know. I personally do not like "hairlines", as they are considered to be damage to the surface of the coin created after the coin left the mint. But I do very much enjoy the die polish lines and striations found on the older proof coins, as I think it adds to the beauty and charm of the coin. That is one of the reasons why I collect MPLs and find them fascinating.
I always thought that most MPL collectors appreciate die lines, and have always made that assumption, and thought the lines added to the eye appeal of the coin. You collect MPLs as well, die lines and all. Do you like the new cameo and brilliant proofs better? Do you collect them?
I'm totally curious - what do other collectors really think??
on the 36 to 42 if i return to them...i'm after cameos as i like my coins on the rare side...cameo brilliants take presidence over toners to me
but when i replace my 09 matty (it that had a hideous surface contamination) i'm after one displaying strong diagnostics
it's not a thing of which do i like better as i like my matty's and cam/dcam coinage (especially in sms one strike baby's) but it's more to each series...die lines on matty's and not on the rest...
stewarts 38' cam is a moose as i'm sure dougs cam's are too shoot he even has all 3 sms in high grade cam's
toners...true eye candy simply put but prices can keep me away with ease...teddy's not a well to do in stature
as to my matty's though...the 16' really has me depressed as it's leaving common workingmans range of affordiability so as much as i was to do a date set...it now looks like one minus the 16' as market is to manipulate it so but i'm very happy with my 10-12-15
goodthing mpb's shouldn't suffer the same plaque as it's in calm waters
put a fork in me i'm done
WS
I suppose a collector can seek 'perfection', but that term itself can have many meanings, depending to the coin series and age. For me, part of the delight in discovering the 36-42 Lincolns were the imperfections (which I have been showing off in this very string!)
And Ted - that colorful proof Lincoln 1942 in this string is a true 'conditional rarity', with a known population of "1" and none finer. How do you get more rarity than that? I can appreciate you liking cameos, but depending on the year, a cameo may or may not be rare, conditionally or otherwise. The 2008-S proof Lincoln Cents are ALL cameos, for example. A non-cameo would be the rarity!
And what about that 1912 MPL in your collection – do you like it any less because it is nicely toned, and has great die striations?
Empty Nest Collection
Matt’s Mattes
rainbowroosie April 1, 2003
Matt-I agree. I absolutely love MPLs, and on the other end, appreciate cameo contrast in the newer Lincoln proofs, but for sheer brilliance of color palette, these toned 36-42s really are fabulous. I can finally understand what the collectors of the era were looking for (although they could never have anticipated such beautiful color combinations). I am going to have my entire set Tru-viewed so all can appreciate.
And Roosie, one amazing thing about the 1942 is that it is an actual Pop 1-0. The first one I've ever owned! But a second truly amazing thing is that the PCGS book value is (get this) ....$45! It appears to me that a series has now finally been exposed that has been a pretty well-kept secret. It is affordable and beautiful. And in just a nick of time with 2009 around the corner...... How can a Pop 1-0 book at $45? Every date in the 1950 forward proof series costs more then that. This is a series that has gotten lost, with no dealer willing to champion it, in my opinion. But the potential for this series is huge.
Of the 69 '36-'42 proof Lincoln sets in the PCGS registry, only 16 are completed [For MPLs, only 13 complete sets out of 40-ish sets]. And in the middle series, only two sets, as far as I can tell (mine and Dave Kelly’s, at #30, are toned sets). The toned sets are very rare and hard to find. Dave Kelly, a very experienced matte proof Lincoln collector, has himself said that completing a toned '36-'42 series is as difficult to do, if not more difficult, then a full set of MPLs - THAT says a mouthful!
Look at the series, and be your own judges.
Duane
Thanks again for the compliment, but in fairness, I got lucky - another collector, now turning full-time dealer, compiled this set over a period of almost 5 years! I am the beneficiary of that hard work and great eye. Frankly, I’m not sure that I have that much patience myself, but I’m sure glad that he did. He was kind enough to sell me the set for some very valid reasons that need no elaboration. Suffice it to say it was an act of friendship, at the core.
But as I was lucky enough to “Gump” across a remarkable collection, I have now, after doing some basic research, become intrigued with this series. I had never felt any draw to this series before, until I actually had the opportunity to see the coins in-hand. I realize that you have, as well. This is a lovely series (or at least, is a series, like others, that has some wonderful coins in it, to be more precise). What I had not noticed before was that Stewart Blay, Tom Mershon, Doug Wright, Bill Corum, Larry Eakins, Mr. Takade and many, many other serious Matte Proof and MS Lincoln collectors hold sets in the ’36-’42 series. That gave me an idea that there may be something about the series that draws not only me, but many of the heavy-hitters in the Lincoln Cent world.
But on a basic level, I forgot to ask you earlier - in your opinion as an experienced Lincoln Cent specialist (having collected an entire Matte Proof Lincoln set - and beginning a second, in fact), and having assembled a beautiful full Mint State Lincoln Cent collection, I would say you are qualified … what is it about the 1936-1942 Brilliant Proof collections that you find to be the most intriguing aspects of the series?
That is an honest question, as basic as it seems. I hope some of the other collectors of the series will also take the opportunity to discuss this series, as it is the one Lincoln Cent series that honestly has stayed under the radar, even with 2009 around the corner.
Duane
http://numiscent.com
email me
Several things come to mind. First, it marks the return of the proof coin after an abyss of nearly twenty years. Second, it brings for the cent the first real effort to provide the collector with a brilliant, mirrored finish coveted by early proof collectors as the indication of the highest quality in proof coinage. Planchet preparation is also interesting. I have read and heard a few accounts of pre-treating planchets with cream of tartar. In fact, an old collector/dealer friend of mine recounted that he used to try to "make" proof coins by puting tartar sauce on cents and polishing them out. Finally, the notion of collecting pre-WWII proof coins has always held some interest for me, as I find that period in history quite intriguing. All of these facts could easily benefit from study and research. Add to that the intricacies of your die line studies, and surely there is enough information to fill a book.
Empty Nest Collection
Matt’s Mattes
One interesting point I noticed: The collectors which own both a full complete set of MPLs and a completed set of middle date ('36-'42) proofs can be counted on one hand. Based on the registry, there are less then 5 collectors who own both full sets!
On top of that, there is not one (1) collector who owns a full set of BN/RB MPLs AND and a full set of BN/RB '36-'42s, that I can see. Not one. How's that for unique?
I wish I knew that fact when I owned my original RB/BN MPL set!
Thank you - Good catch! Those "swirl marks across Lincoln's face" ARE in fact a caused by polishing the die. The dies are a negative, as you point out, so any marks INTO the dies themselves, during cleaning, would show itself as a raised polish line "up" in relation to the fields and devices on the coin (as opposed to recessed, or dug INTO the coin). That is exactly the case with your "facial scrub" - the dies themselves were cleaned (maybe scrubbed).
Cool, huh? (sorry, Teddy...)
Duane
Thank you - Can you actually tell which coin is a PCGS 65BN and which is the PCGS 65RB??
<< <i>I just want to say that as a fledgling proof-only Lincoln collector, I look forward to the day when I can make the natural extension into the 36-42 series, and later into the 1950-present coins. It would give me great pleasure to assemble a high quality and eye appealing collection of these coins, and if there is one thing I will be avoiding, it's run-of-the-mill looks. Congrats Duane on scoring an amazing set of proofs there. I can only hope to be so fortunate in what may be the greatest challenge of all: finding color in a sea of brilliant red proofs. >>
Matt,
As a"fledgling proof-only Lincoln collector" you and Duane and other MPLers may want to look at Doug Wright's COMPLETE Lincoln cent Proof set here if you already haven't done so. While Doug's collection is all red & cameo, it is also all complete, and I admire what he has achieved over the years. As I understand he will make all the pictures available to us when he gets the time. As far as proof Lincoln cents go, even Stewart Blay has not achieved this level of completeness on the PCGS Set Registry.
Steve
My Complete PROOF Lincoln Cent with Major Varieties(1909-2015)Set Registry
Normally I'd go PM on this, but you really laid us both out. I think you are slapping Matt around a bit, and I'm not sure it's deserved, with all the due respect I have for you. And I'm not even sure why?
I may be wrong, but what I think Matt Chapman was doing was being kind and congratulatory to me, as a fellow collector (and he was the only one who did say 'congratulations' on my totally 'lucky' set, by the way..... I am not Doug Wright (or Stewart Blay), and do not pretend to be! Those collectors are on another level, and I give them more respect then you know. And I know Matt - I can tell you that Matt Chapman has no illusions that he is Doug or Stewart. He was just being a decent fellow-collector, and showing his unbounded enthusiasm.
The remarkable thing about the collection that I happenned ("lucked") into, and the one that I built in the MPL series, is that they are not Red, they are RB and BN (except one coin) - that was my point, and that is the accomplishment. I do not beleive that anyone has yet completed a RB/BN proof set of MPLs and middle proofs '36-'42s combined. Please point one out if you can find it - I could not. They are extremely hard to find - just look at the collections. Brian Wagner told me that '36-'42 RB and BNs are hard to find in good shape a long time ago; Dave Kelly said the same thing recently. And for the record, the man who did build the set I just bought spent 4 1/2 years assembling it! It did not just happen for him over night. For me, it did; but NOT for him. I would bet Doug and Stewart would respect that man's efforts. I do.
And while Matt Chapman is a flegling collector, you have to say one thing about him: but has the guts to put his money were his mouth is - he did not buy his MPLs when they could be had at chump change. neither did I. I give Doug Wright a heck of a lot of credit - it takes some chutzpah to buy a coin for over 100K. Or over 50K for that matter. Try writing THAT check!!
So when I find a beautiful set of '36-'42 proofs, at $9K, like the old days of collecting (as I've been told), we are rightfully celebrating. Even at $9,000, that is not exactly pocket change.....
That's all it is. Not everyone has the benefit of your historical knowledge, Steve......
But I would say "be kind".
Duane
What makes MPLs so cool, and I've said this before, is that not only are there BNs and RBs whose beauty are either on par with, or superior to their red bretheren, but that the market seems to appreciate this. THAT is what I find to be so cool. There is a cult following (LeeG comes to mind) of those who seek out and build sets of toned MS cents, but put those coins in a mass auction, and my money's on a disappointing result for the set builder. Those guys build those sets for prestige, and for themselves, and when it's time for them to sell, they have to go "grassroots" and find other specialty buyers, lest they lose their shirts. With MPLs, I don't really see this problem.
The later proofs and the appreciation of their few and far between color toned siblings have not caught up to this in a way that even comes close to the way it has in the MPL series. For that to happen, we need innovation and popularization. Collectors are always going to be on the lookout for the coins that treat their eyes to the kind of visuals THEY want. And honestly, where are all the color toned brilliant proofs? There is not a census of 67BN brilliants because they simply don't exist. It is quite possible that these color tones BPLs are the true rarity, much rarer than CAMs, and that their lack of appreciation stems more from simply not being available than from lack of beauty and desirability. If there were more of them, I believe that we would see more trades, they would get more publicity, and prices would rise.
The color toned BPL club is a very small club indeed. Much like the Mattes, the coins in that subset are all really unique, but the population is so small that it's having trouble building any sort of momentum of it's own. I know it's hard to believe, but without the outright promotion of the MPL series by players like Brian Wagner, Andy Skrabalack, Stewart Blay, Doug Wright, Duane Blake and Kevin Flynn, those coins would not have nearly the kind of following they have now. There just aren't enough of them to go around. But therin lies some of the appeal. I would not be surprised if one day, the color toned BPLs share some portion of the same enthusiasm that MPLs are now enjoying, and in that light, I must commend Duane for jumping in and getting his feet wet. He's trying to be an innovator and a promoter all in one, and that is more than I can say for 99 percent of the collecting populace, myself included.
Empty Nest Collection
Matt’s Mattes
Thank you. I guess this has become an official 'stroke fest' but I do appreciate the recognition. I don't think Steve was talking about being an innovator or promoter. He is talking about a collector. Doug Wright is a pure collector; I think it's fair to say. Doug, I absolutely respect you for being a determined hunter and collector of wonderful coins. But when I think of innovators or promoters, Eliasberg, Blay or Liston come to mind first. That is not an insult. What's wrong with buying genuinely rare coins, like you do, and letting the promoters, innovators, and the market do their natural work? It does not have to be innovative, but if one has patience, the strategy can be profitable.
Obviously, you can see through my actions that I appreciate collectors that set the pace (like Stewart Blay has in the Red copper and Tim Liston did in the Non-Red copper). These guys got in early - almost first, at *mostly* low costs and then either stayed in and loved their collections, or cashed out with a nice profit. They collect and promote attractive and rare coins not yet recognized as even being collectable or rare. In the end, what's wrong with either of these methods?
The fact that I pull the curtain away to show a new way of looking at the 36-42 series (new to me, anyway) should not be pounded, but pro-pounded, by Steve - we need that.
Would “cameos” be selling for premiums (or even recognized by the grading services), if it were not for dealer/promoter Rick Tomaska?
So I think we do need people who will support the innovators who take the chances, and make it better for everyone to collect and profit. Maybe in 5 years my 9K investment on the RB/BN 36-42 collection will be 90K, if I strategically play my cards correctly, and the market assists - what's wrong with that? When I started collecting high end RB and BN Mattes 8 months ago, I heard the same thing. Now a high-quality 191166BN is selling for over 17K!! The only reason Red is "better" (and for the record, I like Red coins), is because it is a theory that has gone un-questioned. I think that is fair to say a coin with a pop of 1-0, even if its 'brown', is rare (and possible beautiful). What is so hard to understand about that? I just got a brown 1-0 1942 beautiful proof for about $1,000. Good for me! Go take a look at the coin again. Pop 1-0. Beautiful. Why is that coin priced at $42 in the PCGS price guide. Do I suck, or what??
It's not red, but it's as rare (or more so) as any red in that series! (and maybe a few others
Being honest I can say that I don't generally collect toned Lincolns. I already mentioned my exception with my 1937 proof. Duane's pictures of the 1941 and 1942 coins are very colorful. PCGS has slabbed them and so, as far as the hobby is concerned, they are NT. I accept that, but I personally prefer the brilliant red coins in my collection. That is what makes this hobby so great! We each can chose what we prefer to collect. That is also what makes this board so great! We can each express our thoughts and comments. I think Duane has become a great addition here thru his comments and his participation and I thank him very much.
One last thought. As most of you know, I am a collector. I am not a dealer. I am not an investor. Almost all the coins I have now I have had for many years. I may upgrade occassionly, but my basic motivation is on completeness of what I collect, not on how much profit I can make from my coins. The fact is that the supposed value of my collection has tripled over what I have in total paid for my coins. That is fine IF when I chose to sell there is someone who wants to buy. But in the meantime I just enjoy the coins for what they are, an enjoyable hobby. JMHO
Steve
My Complete PROOF Lincoln Cent with Major Varieties(1909-2015)Set Registry
No problem at all! Honestly. We are way too close for that.
You just spoke your mind. I get too touchy sometimes about perceived critiques; that’s my problem, not yours. I was truthful too. I respect you, think Doug is an awesome collector, and believe that Stewart and Tim are true collector/innovators.
Coin collecting is all about finding what makes one happy. But as far as value, I think the system needs an overhaul. Why should a beautifully toned BN 1942 proof, with a total population of 8, and a Pop 1-0, be worth less then the same date in cameo, were there are 36 total specimens known, or a red, with over 2,000 total coins known!
What is wrong with that picture??
See the “Serious food for thought for Lincoln Proof collectors” link that I just started, and please throw your opinion in there! : )
Respectfully,
Duane
<< <i>Why should a beautifully toned BN 1942 proof, with a total population of 8, and a Pop 1-0, be worth less then the same date in cameo, were there are 36 total specimens known, or a red, with over 2,000 total coins known! >>
Duane, most people would not send a 36-42 proof coin in to be certified unless they felt it would be worth it. Most people would feel it needs to be full 'RD', or 'CAM' to be 'worth it'.
Doesn't necessarily make a 'BN' coin rare, just that it's rare for a BN coin to be submitted.
Anyway, very nice set you were able to pick up! I could swear I've seen that 1942 before
Lincoln set Colorless Set
Thanks for the note. That sounds sly. Did you own the coin?? : )
Duane
Lincoln set Colorless Set
You might want to consider proofs - they can be pretty catchy!
Your note is pretty testy, as well, and arrogant, which is what you accuse me. You just posted a very public message about me, and not in private. Why would you do that? Coming to me not in private, but publically from a guy I consider a friend. Shun you? Am I not the man who just gave you (in private) a personal loan of $3,000 so you could buy your SMS dime? Sounds like an arrogant "King" who does not appreciate other people, huh? And what about the (private) "1912 deal" 'we' made? Any other person in this registry ever treat you that kindly? Why not speak your mind before you 'use' the arrogant idiot Duane to further your own collection just days ago?
I have opinions, and tell them. Some are wrong, some are right. ..... I'm human. Sorry you are offended.
By the way, I very smart coin collector that you know bought the 1936 - 1942 collection, in total last week. He may choose to post it soon. Nice guy, and he got a fair deal from this arrogant man. So thank you for your hollow 'good luck'. Looks like it was about a week late.
If you don't like my style, Ted, then don't be a fake and take my money. You can PM me and tell me you think I'm a arrogant SOB. But don't be a phony. I liked YOU better when you pretended to be humble, too.
Sincerely,
Duane
I won't even dignify how I treated you on the other deal - If you are so backwards you think that was not a favor, then you should re-consider the way you handle people who genuinely help you.
And you are correct - we are done. You ought not poke people in the eye when they have done you no wrong. I have a 'respect meter' too, buddy.
You paid me back! I know that. But I went out and paid for the coin first! And on the 1912, I honestly do not understand what you are saying. You offered me the coin, I accepted, and then you backed out. That is what I saw.
Listen, this is stupid. Let's let this thread die, and chalk it up to a bad communication. We are friends.
I apoligize for slamming you so hard. I went back and saw what incited this. I was not intending to insult you on the "die stiations" point. Truly. I learn something new every day I collect, just like you. I learned that point, just like you did. I can understand why you thought 'arrogant'. It was not intended to be that at all.
Ted-I an smart enough to know how much I don't know. I say and do things every day that are wrong. We all do. Can we please bury this issue?
We both enjoy collecting beautiful coins. Let's leave it at that. If we have an issue, let's just use the PM or telephone? This is a forum for learning and sharing, not fighting.
Sincerely,
Duane
Duane