Options
So, I just received the new CHERRYPICKER'S GUIDE today...
bronze6827
Posts: 527 ✭✭✭
Anyone else?
I like the brief look I've had so far. It looks a lot cleaner and a little more organized. There are definitely some new entries I'm anxious to look for.
Edit Note (for those interested only): looks like they fouled up the 72 Type 2 Ike between the August and March releases - they have one of the March characteristics list for the August release. Both should be applied to the March release.
I like the brief look I've had so far. It looks a lot cleaner and a little more organized. There are definitely some new entries I'm anxious to look for.
Edit Note (for those interested only): looks like they fouled up the 72 Type 2 Ike between the August and March releases - they have one of the March characteristics list for the August release. Both should be applied to the March release.
0
Comments
Glad to now have it, but somewhat let down thus far having been delayed for three months.
...i think i'll wait for the movie.
<< <i>Anyone else?
I like the brief look I've had so far. It looks a lot cleaner and a little more organized. There are definitely some new entries I'm anxious to look for.
Edit Note (for those interested only): looks like they fouled up the 72 Type 2 Ike between the August and March releases - they have one of the March characteristics list for the August release. Both should be applied to the March release. >>
As I stated on the IKE Group forum site, I'm shocked that they did not present the IKE Group with the final galley's on the Eisenhower Dollar additions before going to print. Especially since you guy's presented them with the March/August definitions!
Of course, this makes me wonder what else got goofed up?
The name is LEE!
Lack of interest? I could more readily believe for lack of specimens. Those are very very scarce!
Make no mistake, I do really think it's a good book and I really like the new format, and truely like the new additions, but, the preciseness could be better in some cases. At some point the guys at Whitman need to accept the fact that their circle of experts need to act more like facilitators and let the the numerous groups out there guide them to the coins that have the most popularity, findability, etc. Now, the Whitman group certainly needs to have the final say on what goes in; they have to market it and make money on it after all. That's the bottom line for any business.
If it were my project, I would have appraoched it a little differently. I'll enjoy the book for what it is either way.
<< <i>Well, you'll be disappointed, Lee, to learn that the Proof DDO 72-S and 73-S IKEs will likely be mothballed in the sixth edition. Not decomissioned, just mothballed for lack of interest.
Lack of interest? I could more readily believe for lack of specimens. Those are very very scarce! >>
What the heck are you referring too?
The name is LEE!
Also the 63P FS101 25c will be removed.
They will all retain their FS #'s , but will not be featured in the next edition. (except perhaps in an appendix).
<< <i>1972-S FS101 & 73-S FS101
Also the 63P FS101 25c will be removed.
They will all retain their FS #'s , but will not be featured in the next edition. (except perhaps in an appendix). >>
It was your comment about "Lack of Interest?" which puzzles me the most since "interest" is difficult to judge. It's my opinion that the interest in these two DDO's happens to be extremely high.
The name is LEE!
<< <i>
<< <i>1972-S FS101 & 73-S FS101
Also the 63P FS101 25c will be removed.
They will all retain their FS #'s , but will not be featured in the next edition. (except perhaps in an appendix). >>
It was your comment about "Lack of Interest?" which puzzles me the most since "interest" is difficult to judge. It's my opinion that the interest in these two DDO's happens to be extremely high. >>
"lack of interest" is according to the CPG editor... I too felt there was a great interest in these varieties...sorry for any confusion...
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>1972-S FS101 & 73-S FS101
Also the 63P FS101 25c will be removed.
They will all retain their FS #'s , but will not be featured in the next edition. (except perhaps in an appendix). >>
It was your comment about "Lack of Interest?" which puzzles me the most since "interest" is difficult to judge. It's my opinion that the interest in these two DDO's happens to be extremely high. >>
"lack of interest" is according to the CPG editor... I too felt there was a great interest in these varieties...sorry for any confusion... >>
If thats the case, then perhaps less interest should be paid toward the CPG?
I mean, exactly what defines "Lack of Interest"? WHO makes that determination based upon WHAT information?
The name is LEE!
Page 394 states that Breen called it a type-1. Walter Breen's Complete Enclopedia of U. S. and Colonialk Coins is quite consistant in calling it a "type" II.
When I first discoverd this coin I called it a type B. Purist jumped all over me for calling it a type. They said it was a variety. So I reformed and called it a variety B.
Breen's use of the quotes might mean that he didn't really consider it a type as versus a variety.
NO!
Like in the Red Book, they are described but not listed.
Pages 160 - 163 has a rather complete listing of "Reverse Hub Comparisions" for the period 1932 - 1972 . 1973 was yet another new hub.
We have 8 varieties used in just the space of 1964 - 1968. The clad B is now known as a type H because of the minor modifications to the type B parent. 1969 D type H is described as rare, while the similiar 1970 D - 1972 D type H's are very rare. I am very glad to see this much included, but I am disappointed they did not receive FS numbers.
1968 S type E is described as extremely rare while 1968 S type F is rare. These two hubs were used otherwise for circulation strikes.
1964 D type C and 1967 type C are listed as scarce to rare.
"SEE THE CHARTS ON PAGES 203 and 204 FOR INDIVIDUAL VALUATIONS OF THE SCARCE TO RARE VARIETIES." I haven't found those yet.
Silver type B's are all listed together in a table under the year 1956.
Did PCGS ever accept Breen numbers for documentation?
<< <i><<Are the washington quarter clad b reverses listed? >>
NO!
Like in the Red Book, they are described but not listed.
Pages 160 - 163 has a rather complete listing of "Reverse Hub Comparisions" for the period 1932 - 1972 . 1973 was yet another new hub.
We have 8 varieties used in just the space of 1964 - 1968. The clad B is now known as a type H because of the minor modifications to the type B parent. 1969 D type H is described as rare, while the similiar 1970 D - 1972 D type H's are very rare. I am very glad to see this much included, but I am disappointed they did not receive FS numbers.
1968 S type E is described as extremely rare while 1968 S type F is rare. These two hubs were used otherwise for circulation strikes.
1964 D type C and 1967 type C are listed as scarce to rare.
"SEE THE CHARTS ON PAGES 203 and 204 FOR INDIVIDUAL VALUATIONS OF THE SCARCE TO RARE VARIETIES." I haven't found those yet.
Silver type B's are all listed together in a table under the year 1956. >>
I also was disappointed that the Type C, E, F and H varieties were not assigned FS numbers, and, like ProofArtworkonCircs, I couldn't find the values on pages 203 and 204.
Unfortunately, they probably condensed some of this valuable information on the Type C, E, F and H varieties so they had room for 8 Minnesota "extra trees", a Kansas dent in the vison's butt, 2 Oregon "extra trees" and 3 Wyoming doubled saddle horns. Those varieties now have FS numbers.
An authorized PCGS dealer, and a contributor to the Red Book.
(Every decision that was made in this volume's production had a lot of thought and discussion
behind it, and many of the comments that are being shared online are ones that the authors
and editor weighed during the editorial process, but the Cherrypickers' Guide is a living,
breathing document, so it doesn't hurt to continue to make your voice heard after publication,
as well as before publication. As is the case with the Red Book, a new CPG is always in the works.)