I was going to do this anyway.... but what a great time to derail a possible downward spiral to locked-dom
These are approximate (*) as Numismatic News(NN) did not give a full month's total in some cases. The figures given in the next to last week were used. (*In fact, checking November 25ths report with year-to-date totals, the numbers were well over 100,000 gold short and well over 2,500,000 silver short.)
1 toz. Gold and Silver Eagles approximate monthly bullion sales
..Month...........................2009.................................2010.................... ================================================ January ............... 92,000 / 1,900,000 ....... 85,000 / 3,592,500 February ........... 113,500 / 2,125,000 ....... 84,000 / 2,050,000 March .................. 67,000 / 1,725,500 ....... 98,000 / 3,321,500 April .................. 147,000 / 2,479,500 ....... 53,500 / 2,170,000 May ..................... 65,000 / 1,904,500 ..... 190,000 / 3,636,500 June .................. 113,000 / 1,945,000 ..... July ...................... 86,000 / 2,810,000 ..... August ................. 82,000 / 2,130,000 ..... September ........ 115,500 / 1,703,000 ..... October ............... 60,500 / 1,600,000 ..... November ......... 124,000 / 2,586,500 ...... December ........... 91,000 / 629,000 .........
NN's 2009 mintages 1,386,500 / 29,134,000 (I know the numbers don't add up... see above)
(I need to go back and add in the Buffs, too. It's late, I'll do that later)
Don't forget to allow for the fact that next-year coins are usually pre-sold in December, and counted in the sales figures for the previous calendar year.
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
<< <i>… attempting to fill that void (like any business person would do - supply a product that the market wants).
…sounds a lot like the excuse of people who whiz coins, or polish them, or laser to change the original surface, or putty, or add a mintmark or tool a coin – all mutilations of an original coin. I sure hope it has not become “Dr. Carr.”
WL halves have a lot of “holes” in the series. Why not mutilate some to fill those spots? ... no shiny “proof” 1935 halves?...no problem, just polish up a bunch and help collectors “fill that void.”
Do you actually believe ANY collector of ASEs, particularly slabbed ones, would put one of those crude abominations in their collection? What happens to the pride of ownership?
Given positive contributions of the past, one can only presume there has been some sort of traumatic event to place Mr. Carr on the path presented in earlier posts.
I have nothing more to say. >>
I completely agree with RWB. If those things are real (i.e., not photographic creations), then they will eventually make it into the marketplace, be misrepresented' at some point by 'enterprising' souls, and beginners will likely be ripped off. Even if Carr doesn't misrepresent those things, surely he has to consider this. To openly talk of deliberately making such altered coins for sale is shameless.
Member: EAC, NBS, C4, CWTS, ANA
RMR: 'Wer, wenn ich schriee, hörte mich denn aus der Engel Ordnungen?'
<< <i>… attempting to fill that void (like any business person would do - supply a product that the market wants).
…sounds a lot like the excuse of people who whiz coins, or polish them, or laser to change the original surface, or putty, or add a mintmark or tool a coin – all mutilations of an original coin. I sure hope it has not become “Dr. Carr.”
WL halves have a lot of “holes” in the series. Why not mutilate some to fill those spots? ... no shiny “proof” 1935 halves?...no problem, just polish up a bunch and help collectors “fill that void.”
Do you actually believe ANY collector of ASEs, particularly slabbed ones, would put one of those crude abominations in their collection? What happens to the pride of ownership?
Given positive contributions of the past, one can only presume there has been some sort of traumatic event to place Mr. Carr on the path presented in earlier posts.
I have nothing more to say. >>
I completely agree with RWB. If those things are real (i.e., not photographic creations), then they will eventually make it into the marketplace, be misrepresented' at some point by 'enterprising' souls, and beginners will likely be ripped off. Even if Carr doesn't misrepresent those things, surely he has to consider this. To openly talk of deliberately making such altered coins for sale is shameless. >>
Bingo...I was thinking the same thing. They will be 'repurposed' at some point, without stating the whole truth, and someone will be sorely disappointed with them. Akin to chinese counterfeits and franklin mint items, imho.
I like DC's work and think maybe some of the posters here are a bit cranky doubt it would fool many in a way to hurt them financially. He makes some great pieces and is creative, I guess people can vote with their feet and walk away or with their wallet and buy one.
Love that Milled British (1830-1960) Well, just Love coins, period.
<< <i>I like DC's work and think maybe some of the posters here are a bit cranky doubt it would fool many in a way to hurt them financially. He makes some great pieces and is creative, I guess people can vote with their feet and walk away or with their wallet and buy one. >>
Exactly, thanks. They've got a big "DC" mintmark on them, so any serious collector who is going to pay a big premium for such a coin is going to notice it. A casual buyer might not notice, but such a buyer is very unlikely to pay any sort of premium.
When and if these coins are ever released, who knows, maybe in the future they might sell for a big premium to buyers who know exactly what they are ? No guarantees, of course.
<< <i>I like DC's work and think maybe some of the posters here are a bit cranky doubt it would fool many in a way to hurt them financially. He makes some great pieces and is creative, I guess people can vote with their feet and walk away or with their wallet and buy one. >>
Exactly, thanks. They've got a big "DC" mintmark on them, so any serious collector who is going to pay a big premium for such a coin is going to notice it. A casual buyer might not notice, but such a buyer is very unlikely to pay any sort of premium.
When and if these coins are ever released, who knows, maybe in the future they might sell for a big premium to buyers who know exactly what they are ? No guarantees, of course. >>
You would be amazed at the number of "casual buyers" I have had to break the bad news to in the past 35 years, and the prices some of them have paid for things they should not have bought.
I remember the gentleman who had paid good money for a cheap cast replica territorial gold piece that was stamped "R" in the field for "Replica." The seller had told him that it stood for "Real."
TD
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
"My boy, the 'DC' stands for 'Deep Cameo!' How many would you like?"
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
<< <i>You would be amazed at the number of "casual buyers" I have had to break the bad news to in the past 35 years, and the prices some of them have paid for things they should not have bought.
I remember the gentleman who had paid good money for a cheap cast replica territorial gold piece that was stamped "R" in the field for "Replica." The seller had told him that it stood for "Real." TD >>
I'm guessing he looked it up in the Red Book, saw a high price listed, and his greed got the better of him.
This thread is starting to sound like those anti gun threads where somebody proclaims "guns kill people and the guys making them know that so they are a bunch of killers!"
If the coin is made and steps are taken to make it a DC coin I don't believe it is fair to call Mr Carr a villian, a thief, or as some of the threads have implied worse. I would like to by a few for myself as I see them as a variety of the Hard Times token. Sort of a thumb in the eye to the Mint for not minting these coins when I believe they certainly could have.
<< <i>The government is not in the business of making money, rather they are in the business of hemorrhaging our money on senseless and wasteful projects like bank bailouts. >>
This is this is one of the biggest bits of misinformation in the public. Most of these "bailouts" were loans that got paid back. And most who are knowledgeable of the finanical industry will acknowedge that the consequences of not helping AIG, as distasteful as it was, would have been far worse (i.e. economic collapse).
<< <i>The real blanks are the fools running the US mint.
When Congress requires silver hockey pucks and provides no resources to do it, does that make the mint responsible?
Shiny versions of silver and gold bullion pieces are not required by Congress, but a great many other things are. The mint is limited by equipment, space, staff and money, so it has to prioritize what it can do with what the Congress provides. >>
Yes, they should cancel the hockey puck progaram before the proof ASEs, but I guess they can't because they are "required" by Congress.
So whats the next best thing if we can't get our hands on the 2009 ASE proof? Wait for the 2010 ASE proofs (if they ever produce one) or the "Hockey Pucks?"
It seems someone from "outside" has picked up on this story.
At the heart of the issue, is whether or not the law requires that the word "COPY" be stamped on the 2009-DC "proofs". If I were to stamp these coins on blank pieces of silver, then absolutely, the word "COPY" would be required. However, since these are over-struck genuine 2009 Silver Eagles, the answer to the question is unknown.
In 2008 and again in 2009 I sent letters to the FTC (who are in charge of enforcing the Hobby Protection Act as it relates to numismatic "COPY" regulations). I presented a similar hypothetical scenario and requested a clarification of the copy regulations when genuine coins are altered to appear to be items that were never released by the US Mint (like, for example, a "1964" Franklin Half Dollar made from a genuine 1948-1963 Franklin Half Dollar). I received no reply from them, even though the second letter was sent "FedEx".
But now that the "cat is out of the bag", so to speak, a "ruling" by the US Mint may be coming very soon.
I am not a lawyer, nor do I play one on television, but I see absolutely no call for marking these with the word "COPY." MOO TD
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
<< <i>This thread is starting to sound like those anti gun threads where somebody proclaims "guns kill people and the guys making them know that so they are a bunch of killers!"
If the coin is made and steps are taken to make it a DC coin I don't believe it is fair to call Mr Carr a villian, a thief, or as some of the threads have implied worse. I would like to by a few for myself as I see them as a variety of the Hard Times token. Sort of a thumb in the eye to the Mint for not minting these coins when I believe they certainly could have. >>
My purpose for initiating this project was NOT to take any jabs at the US Mint. I'm sure they are doing everything they can to fulfill the numerous obligations imposed upon them by Congress, and if some things get left by the wayside, that's the way it has to be.
I mentioned previously that one motivation for making these pieces was that it is a business venture. But ultimately, the main reason was that I just thought it would be cool to have a 2009 "proof" Silver Eagle and I wanted a couple for myself. If I go forward with this project, it might sway the US Mint towards making proof Silver Eagles again.
<< <i>I completely agree with RWB. If those things are real (i.e., not photographic creations), then they will eventually make it into the marketplace, be misrepresented' at some point by 'enterprising' souls, and beginners will likely be ripped off. Even if Carr doesn't misrepresent those things, surely he has to consider this. To openly talk of deliberately making such altered coins for sale is shameless. >>
Doesn't this already happen? Everyday some unsuspecting & uneducated beginner buys a raw "MS65" from a dealer at $4,000 that is actually a $400 AU58. What's the difference?
I talked to Mint Director Moy at the ANA Fort Worth show about this. He insists the law requires him to fill all orders for bullion coins FIRST before any proofs can be made, and it would be ILLEGAL to allocate some blanks for proofs. But since the blanks are ordered under a "just in time" procedure, and orders come in continuously for bullion coins (there is neither a cutoff date nor mintage limit) there will NEVER BE ANY PROOFS MADE under his interpretation of the rules.
His term expires in 2011. You might want to write President Obama and ask that he appoint someone with experience in production of physical products and order fulfillment.
Frank Provasek - PCGS Authorized Dealer, Life Member ANA, Member TNA. www.frankcoins.com
<< <i>So whats the next best thing if we can't get our hands on the 2009 ASE proof? Wait for the 2010 ASE proofs (if they ever produce one) or the "Hockey Pucks?" >>
I talked to Moy in person at the ANA show and suggested that Proof eagles "commemorating" 2009 be issued with a small 2010 date as the year of issue. He said it would be illegal (wrong) and has never been done (wrong)
We lost tons of sales in 2009 from people who had bought these as Christmas, anniversary, birthday and other gifts, as well as those who bought one or two a year for over 20 years to have a complete date run. How many of those people will come back now that they have had to find other gifts, or are fed up with the hole in their date run?
Frank Provasek - PCGS Authorized Dealer, Life Member ANA, Member TNA. www.frankcoins.com
<< <i>Whatever happened to Littleton Coin Company when they were making the 2009 Reverse Proof SAE's by altering Business Strike coins? >>
I do not recall seeing that thread. Does anybody have one of the pieces they can show? The link in the thread no longer works. TD
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
I don't see that this question has been asked before, so I'll ask. Won't the denomination "ONE DOLLAR" get DC in the same trouble as the maker of the Liberty "dollars"? His assets were seized, and even their (former) Web site has recently been disemboweled, with only this left: "Site Removed Due to Court Order."
Good deals with: goldman86 mkman123 Wingsrule wondercoin segoja Tccuga OKCC LindeDad and others.
<< <i>I don't see that this question has been asked before, so I'll ask. Won't the denomination "ONE DOLLAR" get DC in the same trouble as the maker of the Liberty "dollars"? His assets were seized, and even their (former) Web site has recently been disemboweled, with only this left: "Site Removed Due to Court Order." >>
The"Liberty Dollars" were not government-issue legal tender, but they were trying to get them to be used in commerce to replace Federal Reserve currency. I'm taking a legal-tender US Mint 2009 Silver Eagle and modifying it. So I'm not attempting to create what looks like a legal tender instrument out of something that wasn't legal tender to start with (like Liberty Dollar did).
The"Liberty Dollars" were not government-issue legal tender, but they were trying to get them to be used in commerce to replace Federal Reserve currency. I'm taking a legal-tender US Mint 2009 Silver Eagle and modifying it. So I'm not attempting to create what looks like a legal tender instrument out of something that wasn't legal tender to start with (like Liberty Dollar did). >>
The Liberty Dollar things were being forced on people as though they were legal tender, it was not as though the government stepped in because people objected to being paid. In addition the promoter of the things was alleged to have defrauded people. Similarly someone who attempts to pay a large debt in something inconvenient like cents can be arrested for creating a nuisance.
I don't think anybody but a fool would attempt to pass off DC's creations. Frankly anybody who buys them is going to keep them tucked away like I keep my DC coins tucked away. I like the craftsmanship of the pieces and believe they have a good collectible factor.
In memory of my kitty Seryozha 14.2.1996 ~ 13.9.2016 and Shadow 3.4.2015 - 16.4.21
"So I'm not attempting to create what looks like a legal tender instrument out of something that wasn't legal tender to start with (like Liberty Dollar did)."
The situation is different, yes, and I *think* these are a nice creation. But if I were you, I'd get official permission in writing before putting them on sale. The Federal government employs attorneys in bulk, and sues (or doesn't sue) in whimsical fashion, from what I have observed.
Good deals with: goldman86 mkman123 Wingsrule wondercoin segoja Tccuga OKCC LindeDad and others.
<< <i>"So I'm not attempting to create what looks like a legal tender instrument out of something that wasn't legal tender to start with (like Liberty Dollar did)."
The situation is different, yes, and I *think* these are a nice creation. But if I were you, I'd get official permission in writing before putting them on sale. The Federal government employs attorneys in bulk, and sues (or doesn't sue) in whimsical fashion, from what I have observed. >>
Yes, that would be a good idea. However, the US government doesn't like to give "permission" to anyone for anything. In other words, they don't tell you what you can do, they only tell you what you can't do (after the fact much of the time).
Comments
but what a great time to derail a possible downward spiral to locked-dom
These are approximate (*) as Numismatic News(NN) did not give a full month's total in some cases. The figures given in the next to last week were used.
(*In fact, checking November 25ths report with year-to-date totals, the numbers were well over 100,000 gold short and well over 2,500,000 silver short.)
1 toz. Gold and Silver Eagles approximate monthly bullion sales
..Month...........................2009.................................2010....................
================================================
January ............... 92,000 / 1,900,000 ....... 85,000 / 3,592,500
February ........... 113,500 / 2,125,000 ....... 84,000 / 2,050,000
March .................. 67,000 / 1,725,500 ....... 98,000 / 3,321,500
April .................. 147,000 / 2,479,500 ....... 53,500 / 2,170,000
May ..................... 65,000 / 1,904,500 ..... 190,000 / 3,636,500
June .................. 113,000 / 1,945,000 .....
July ...................... 86,000 / 2,810,000 .....
August ................. 82,000 / 2,130,000 .....
September ........ 115,500 / 1,703,000 .....
October ............... 60,500 / 1,600,000 .....
November ......... 124,000 / 2,586,500 ......
December ........... 91,000 / 629,000 .........
NN's 2009 mintages 1,386,500 / 29,134,000
(I know the numbers don't add up... see above)
(I need to go back and add in the Buffs, too. It's late, I'll do that later)
<< <i>
<< <i>How hard is it to acquire blanks?? >>
2008W Silver - 444,558
2008 Silver Proof - 713,353
2008 Silver Bullion - 19,510,000
2008 Total Silver Eagles alone - 20,667,911
2009 Bullion - 29,134,000
~41% increase >>
<< <i>How much do these coins weigh after they are gelded? >>
Not sure exactly, but a bag of them weighs two stones less than before.
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution
<< <i>… attempting to fill that void (like any business person would do - supply a product that the market wants).
…sounds a lot like the excuse of people who whiz coins, or polish them, or laser to change the original surface, or putty, or add a mintmark or tool a coin – all mutilations of an original coin. I sure hope it has not become “Dr. Carr.”
WL halves have a lot of “holes” in the series. Why not mutilate some to fill those spots? ... no shiny “proof” 1935 halves?...no problem, just polish up a bunch and help collectors “fill that void.”
Do you actually believe ANY collector of ASEs, particularly slabbed ones, would put one of those crude abominations in their collection? What happens to the pride of ownership?
Given positive contributions of the past, one can only presume there has been some sort of traumatic event to place Mr. Carr on the path presented in earlier posts.
I have nothing more to say. >>
I completely agree with RWB.
If those things are real (i.e., not photographic creations), then they will eventually make it into the marketplace, be misrepresented' at some point by 'enterprising' souls, and beginners will likely be ripped off.
Even if Carr doesn't misrepresent those things, surely he has to consider this.
To openly talk of deliberately making such altered coins for sale is shameless.
RMR: 'Wer, wenn ich schriee, hörte mich denn aus der Engel Ordnungen?'
CJ: 'No one!' [Ain't no angels in the coin biz]
<< <i>
<< <i>… attempting to fill that void (like any business person would do - supply a product that the market wants).
…sounds a lot like the excuse of people who whiz coins, or polish them, or laser to change the original surface, or putty, or add a mintmark or tool a coin – all mutilations of an original coin. I sure hope it has not become “Dr. Carr.”
WL halves have a lot of “holes” in the series. Why not mutilate some to fill those spots? ... no shiny “proof” 1935 halves?...no problem, just polish up a bunch and help collectors “fill that void.”
Do you actually believe ANY collector of ASEs, particularly slabbed ones, would put one of those crude abominations in their collection? What happens to the pride of ownership?
Given positive contributions of the past, one can only presume there has been some sort of traumatic event to place Mr. Carr on the path presented in earlier posts.
I have nothing more to say. >>
I completely agree with RWB.
If those things are real (i.e., not photographic creations), then they will eventually make it into the marketplace, be misrepresented' at some point by 'enterprising' souls, and beginners will likely be ripped off.
Even if Carr doesn't misrepresent those things, surely he has to consider this.
To openly talk of deliberately making such altered coins for sale is shameless. >>
Bingo...I was thinking the same thing. They will be 'repurposed' at some point, without stating the whole truth, and someone will be sorely disappointed with them. Akin to chinese counterfeits and franklin mint items, imho.
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
He makes some great pieces and is creative, I guess people can vote with their feet and walk away or with their wallet and buy one.
Well, just Love coins, period.
<< <i>Some more pictures (these are only a few hours old):
They look very good keep up the good work maybe you can show the us mint how to do it.
Hoard the keys.
<< <i>I like DC's work and think maybe some of the posters here are a bit cranky doubt it would fool many in a way to hurt them financially.
He makes some great pieces and is creative, I guess people can vote with their feet and walk away or with their wallet and buy one. >>
Exactly, thanks. They've got a big "DC" mintmark on them, so any serious collector who is going to pay a big premium for such a coin is going to notice it. A casual buyer might not notice, but such a buyer is very unlikely to pay any sort of premium.
When and if these coins are ever released, who knows, maybe in the future they might sell for a big premium to buyers who know exactly what they are ? No guarantees, of course.
<< <i>
<< <i>I like DC's work and think maybe some of the posters here are a bit cranky doubt it would fool many in a way to hurt them financially.
He makes some great pieces and is creative, I guess people can vote with their feet and walk away or with their wallet and buy one. >>
Exactly, thanks. They've got a big "DC" mintmark on them, so any serious collector who is going to pay a big premium for such a coin is going to notice it. A casual buyer might not notice, but such a buyer is very unlikely to pay any sort of premium.
When and if these coins are ever released, who knows, maybe in the future they might sell for a big premium to buyers who know exactly what they are ? No guarantees, of course. >>
You would be amazed at the number of "casual buyers" I have had to break the bad news to in the past 35 years, and the prices some of them have paid for things they should not have bought.
I remember the gentleman who had paid good money for a cheap cast replica territorial gold piece that was stamped "R" in the field for "Replica." The seller had told him that it stood for "Real."
TD
"My boy, the 'DC' stands for 'Deep Cameo!' How many would you like?"
<< <i>You would be amazed at the number of "casual buyers" I have had to break the bad news to in the past 35 years, and the prices some of them have paid for things they should not have bought.
I remember the gentleman who had paid good money for a cheap cast replica territorial gold piece that was stamped "R" in the field for "Replica." The seller had told him that it stood for "Real." TD >>
I'm guessing he looked it up in the Red Book, saw a high price listed, and his greed got the better of him.
If the coin is made and steps are taken to make it a DC coin I don't believe it is fair to call Mr Carr a villian, a thief, or as some of the threads have implied worse.
I would like to by a few for myself as I see them as a variety of the Hard Times token. Sort of a thumb in the eye to the Mint for not minting these coins when I believe they certainly could have.
BST Transactions: DonnyJf, MrOrganic, Justanothercoinaddict, Fivecents, Slq, Jdimmick,
Robb, Tee135, Ibzman350, Mercfan, Outhaul, Erickso1, Cugamongacoins, Indiananationals, Wayne Herndon
Negative BST Transactions:
<< <i>The government is not in the business of making money, rather they are in the business of hemorrhaging our money on senseless and wasteful projects like bank bailouts. >>
This is this is one of the biggest bits of misinformation in the public. Most of these "bailouts" were loans that got paid back. And most who are knowledgeable of the finanical industry will acknowedge that the consequences of not helping AIG, as distasteful as it was, would have been far worse (i.e. economic collapse).
<< <i>The real blanks are the fools running the US mint.
When Congress requires silver hockey pucks and provides no resources to do it, does that make the mint responsible?
Shiny versions of silver and gold bullion pieces are not required by Congress, but a great many other things are. The mint is limited by equipment, space, staff and money, so it has to prioritize what it can do with what the Congress provides. >>
Yes, they should cancel the hockey puck progaram before the proof ASEs, but I guess they can't because they are "required" by Congress.
At the heart of the issue, is whether or not the law requires that the word "COPY" be stamped on the 2009-DC "proofs".
If I were to stamp these coins on blank pieces of silver, then absolutely, the word "COPY" would be required. However,
since these are over-struck genuine 2009 Silver Eagles, the answer to the question is unknown.
In 2008 and again in 2009 I sent letters to the FTC (who are in charge of enforcing the Hobby Protection Act as it relates
to numismatic "COPY" regulations). I presented a similar hypothetical scenario and requested a clarification of the copy
regulations when genuine coins are altered to appear to be items that were never released by the US Mint (like, for example,
a "1964" Franklin Half Dollar made from a genuine 1948-1963 Franklin Half Dollar). I received no reply from them, even though
the second letter was sent "FedEx".
But now that the "cat is out of the bag", so to speak, a "ruling" by the US Mint may be coming very soon.
MOO
TD
<< <i>This thread is starting to sound like those anti gun threads where somebody proclaims "guns kill people and the guys making them know that so they are a bunch of killers!"
If the coin is made and steps are taken to make it a DC coin I don't believe it is fair to call Mr Carr a villian, a thief, or as some of the threads have implied worse.
I would like to by a few for myself as I see them as a variety of the Hard Times token. Sort of a thumb in the eye to the Mint for not minting these coins when I believe they certainly could have. >>
My purpose for initiating this project was NOT to take any jabs at the US Mint. I'm sure they are doing everything they can to fulfill the numerous obligations imposed upon them by Congress, and if some things get left by the wayside, that's the way it has to be.
I mentioned previously that one motivation for making these pieces was that it is a business venture. But ultimately, the main reason was that I just thought it would be cool to have a 2009 "proof" Silver Eagle and I wanted a couple for myself. If I go forward with this project, it might sway the US Mint towards making proof Silver Eagles again.
These appear to be fantasy overstrikes on genuine US coins.
I still do not like the reverse on these Silver american eagles.
The original 1936 to 1942 walker proof half dollars were nicer!
<< <i>Interesting.
These appear to be fantasy overstrikes on genuine US coins.
I still do not like the reverse on these Silver american eagles.
The original 1936 to 1942 walker proof half dollars were nicer! >>
Yes, I agree. Maybe I could make a version with that reverse
<< <i>I completely agree with RWB.
If those things are real (i.e., not photographic creations), then they will eventually make it into the marketplace, be misrepresented' at some point by 'enterprising' souls, and beginners will likely be ripped off.
Even if Carr doesn't misrepresent those things, surely he has to consider this.
To openly talk of deliberately making such altered coins for sale is shameless. >>
Doesn't this already happen? Everyday some unsuspecting & uneducated beginner buys a raw "MS65" from a dealer at $4,000 that is actually a $400 AU58. What's the difference?
His term expires in 2011. You might want to write President Obama and ask that he appoint someone with experience in production of physical products and order fulfillment.
<< <i>So whats the next best thing if we can't get our hands on the 2009 ASE proof? Wait for the 2010 ASE proofs (if they ever produce one) or the "Hockey Pucks?"
I talked to Moy in person at the ANA show and suggested that Proof eagles "commemorating" 2009 be issued with a small 2010 date as the year of issue. He said it would be illegal (wrong) and has never been done (wrong)
We lost tons of sales in 2009 from people who had bought these as Christmas, anniversary, birthday and other gifts, as well as those who bought one or two a year for over 20 years to have a complete date run. How many of those people will come back now that they have had to find other gifts, or are fed up with the hole in their date run?
My Adolph A. Weinman signature
The name is LEE!
<< <i>Whatever happened to Littleton Coin Company when they were making the 2009 Reverse Proof SAE's by altering Business Strike coins? >>
I do not recall seeing that thread.
Does anybody have one of the pieces they can show? The link in the thread no longer works.
TD
my early American coins & currency: -- http://yankeedoodlecoins.com/
<< <i>I don't see that this question has been asked before, so I'll ask. Won't the denomination "ONE DOLLAR" get DC in the same trouble as the maker of the Liberty "dollars"? His assets were seized, and even their (former) Web site has recently been disemboweled, with only this left: "Site Removed Due to Court Order." >>
The"Liberty Dollars" were not government-issue legal tender, but they were trying to get them to be used in commerce to replace Federal Reserve currency. I'm taking a legal-tender US Mint 2009 Silver Eagle and modifying it. So I'm not attempting to create what looks like a legal tender instrument out of something that wasn't legal tender to start with (like Liberty Dollar did).
<< <i>
The"Liberty Dollars" were not government-issue legal tender, but they were trying to get them to be used in commerce to replace Federal Reserve currency. I'm taking a legal-tender US Mint 2009 Silver Eagle and modifying it. So I'm not attempting to create what looks like a legal tender instrument out of something that wasn't legal tender to start with (like Liberty Dollar did). >>
The Liberty Dollar things were being forced on people as though they were legal tender, it was not as though the government stepped in because people objected to being paid. In addition the promoter of the things was alleged to have defrauded people. Similarly someone who attempts to pay a large debt in something inconvenient like cents can be arrested for creating a nuisance.
I don't think anybody but a fool would attempt to pass off DC's creations. Frankly anybody who buys them is going to keep them tucked away like I keep my DC coins tucked away. I like the craftsmanship of the pieces and believe they have a good collectible factor.
The situation is different, yes, and I *think* these are a nice creation. But if I were you, I'd get official permission in writing before putting them on sale. The Federal government employs attorneys in bulk, and sues (or doesn't sue) in whimsical fashion, from what I have observed.
my early American coins & currency: -- http://yankeedoodlecoins.com/
<< <i>"So I'm not attempting to create what looks like a legal tender instrument out of something that wasn't legal tender to start with (like Liberty Dollar did)."
The situation is different, yes, and I *think* these are a nice creation. But if I were you, I'd get official permission in writing before putting them on sale. The Federal government employs attorneys in bulk, and sues (or doesn't sue) in whimsical fashion, from what I have observed. >>
Yes, that would be a good idea. However, the US government doesn't like to give "permission" to anyone for anything. In other words, they don't tell you what you can do, they only tell you what you can't do (after the fact much of the time).