<< <i>Wonder how many pages this will invite? Daniel Carr coins are not for everyone. If you don't like them move along. If you like them, enjoy them. >>
To me this encourages counterfeiting, and effects all of us. When something can have an adverse affect upon the hobby, we the the right to speak out against it. >>
Could you show us a pic of a genuine 1933 quarter? If he is making a counterfeit there must be a real one somewhere. Right? Otherwise, this is a fantasy coin rather than a counterfeit. Anyone see the movie "Groundhog Day"? >>
We will agree to disagree on that one. Did you read my post which appears just above your post? YOU know that a genuine 1933 quarter does not exist, but most people don't know that.
If he was marking this things with "COPY" or "FACSIMILE" I would not have a problem, but he isn't. Like I wrote before, this thing is not much different from an 1888-CC Chinese Morgan dollar.
Years ago I lost $100 on a political token because it was a copy that had "BECKER" stamped on it. The dealer from whom I bought it didn't know what that met and neither did I. In those pre Internet days it took me a couple days of research to figure out with this "token" was. This guy Becker was marking exact copies of 19th tokens and medals and marking them with a counterstamp named after a famous 19th century counterfeiter in the early 1960s.
Who is to say that someone else won't be swindled this way in the future with the Carr product? This way the Hobby Protection Act should be amended to put an end the production of this type of unmarked material.
Retired dealer and avid collector of U.S. type coins, 19th century presidential campaign medalets and selected medals. In recent years I have been working on a set of British coins - at least one coin from each king or queen who issued pieces that are collectible. I am also collecting at least one coin for each Roman emperor from Julius Caesar to ... ?
Bill---Did you read what I said about plenty of people being swindled with genuine coins (ATed, added mintmark, whizzed or polished, overgraded, etc)? At least a fantasy coin is easy to research---if it isn't listed in any of the standard references, that should raise a big red flag. Like I said before, you can't protect stupid people from themselves.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
In a way DCarrs coins are a novelty item like the many bills and notes printed with faces other than the presidents. If we were to stop this all novelty numismatic items would have to be stopped including bullion that looks like a coin. My mother sent me a bullion coin of a walking liberty with a current date and she wanted to know when they started making them again. You are correct that people could get confused by these coins but people get confused by more than just coins. I grew up in Tucson AZ. and on my 16th B-day I bought a 1972 Chevelle that was a base model bench seat(remember those) car. When I was done with it aroun age 21 I had a 1972 454 SS clone but unless you truly know about cars you would have thought it real.
<< <i>Years ago I lost $100 on a political token because it was a copy that had "BECKER" stamped on it. The dealer from whom I bought it didn't know what that met and neither did I. In those pre Internet days it took me a couple days of research to figure out with this "token" was. This guy Becker was marking exact copies of 19th tokens and medals and marking them with a counterstamp named after a famous 19th century counterfeiter in the early 1960s. >>
Buying something without full information is something that still happens these days and is a decision each collector makes when making a purchase. There are many cases where a collector doesn't have full information and often happens with doctored (putty, AT, etc.) coins which seems to be under a "Code of Silence" to actively prevent eradication. I actually purchased something without full information and posted it to these forums. The consensus was that I should treat the purchase as tuition which I did.
In the case of the over strikes, a few seconds with Google on a computer or phone will identify these pieces. That's one benefit of living in a post-Internet world so the situation where you need to purchase an item and wait for a few days to identify the item shouldn't happen these days.
This hobby is interesting in that some people seem to be more worried about hypothetical harm and less about actual harm. In the case of over strikes, no one is getting fooled because the pieces are well documented on the net. In the case of doctored coins where collectors, dealers and TPGs are getting fooled to the tune of multiple $10,000s, sellers of doctored coins aren't named due to the Code of Silence in the hobby. It's an interesting state of affairs.
Does'nt do anything for me, BUT........I would like to see some FRESH & CURRENT Hard Time Tokens preferably dealing with the current administrations Fiascos
<< <i>Does'nt do anything for me, BUT........I would like to see some FRESH & CURRENT Hard Time Tokens preferably dealing with the current administrations Fiascos
Steve >>
Agree. I like Dan's political medals. They insure that future generations can see what we've been putting up with.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
<< <i>Does'nt do anything for me, BUT........I would like to see some FRESH & CURRENT Hard Time Tokens preferably dealing with the current administrations Fiascos
Steve >>
Agree. I like Dan's political medals. They insure that future generations can see what we've been putting up with. >>
I'm a big fan of those too, especially the $1 trillion debt evasion HTT. Very relevant and very timely
<< <i>... YOU know that a genuine 1933 quarter does not exist, but most people don't know that. ...
If he was marking this things with "COPY" or "FACSIMILE" I would not have a problem, but he isn't. Like I wrote before, this thing is not much different from an 1888-CC Chinese Morgan dollar.
Years ago I lost $100 on a political token because it was a copy that had "BECKER" stamped on it. The dealer from whom I bought it didn't know what that met and neither did I. In those pre Internet days it took me a couple days of research to figure out with this "token" was. This guy Becker was marking exact copies of 19th tokens and medals and marking them with a counterstamp named after a famous 19th century counterfeiter in the early 1960s.
Who is to say that someone else won't be swindled this way in the future with the Carr product? This way the Hobby Protection Act should be amended to put an end the production of this type of unmarked material. >>
Of these people who don't know about 1933 quarters, would any of them pay a lot of money for such a thing that they know nothing about ? I personally don't know anybody who would pay a lot for something they know nothing of. And if there was such a person determined to part ways with their money, even a "COPY" stamp might not prevent it.
When valuing a coin, it is necessary to determine what type of coin it is, where it was made, what is it made out of, the date, and condition. For coin types that were minted for more than one year, you can not determine the value accurately without considering the date on it. And the date "1933" is hard to miss.
Suppose in the future somebody sells a "1933" over-strike quarter to an unknowledgeable person for $100. If the free market value of it at the time is $100, did anybody get "swindled" ? Who is to say what the future market value of these might be ?
<< <i>Does'nt do anything for me, BUT........I would like to see some FRESH & CURRENT Hard Time Tokens preferably dealing with the current administrations Fiascos
<< <i>Does'nt do anything for me, BUT........I would like to see some FRESH & CURRENT Hard Time Tokens preferably dealing with the current administrations Fiascos
As I continue to see things, I see the 2 sides clearly and it always seem to be:
For the coins: Those that are selfish and want to make profit or "fill a hole". (talking about the US Mint design ripoffs, not the 'original' artwork pieces
Against the coins: The argument consistently seems to be to want to protect the hobby, and anyone not expert enough to know better. If the same exact things were being done from China, these same people would likely be saying the same thing and not changing their tune (unlike some of the ones in the "for" group). Some of these folks have known people that have been ripped off by similar 'coins'/instances, or have been hit themselves, early in their hobbying days before knowing better.
There may well be the variable person to the above, who doesn't fit the mold, so to speak, but, by and large, those are the types of posters I have seen and they seem to easily fall into one camp or the other.
I am not out to mislead people with these coins but I do see where it could be done. Again I state something obvious: over 90% of American flags are made outside of our country and over 40% of those do not match the exact specks for the flag but they are still sold. There are many Fantasy items on the market not just for our hobby. The main reason for this is that we are a country of the free, we can make decisions for our self and we have some of the best resources at the tips of our fingers. I have plastic cups in my house right now that look like real cut crystal until you investigate them and see that they are not. I am learning every day about this hobby and that education will never stop. With out the resources we currently have at our disposal I would be more on the negative side. I deal with vintage horns and without the internet on some I would be at a loss. Most people have access to the same resources that we have by going to the library to use the internet or to read a book. I investigate my coins and when I am not sure about it's authenticity I ask questions, that's what we are supposed to do. Our hobby and for many our lively hood does need protection from people who are making coins that are exact replicas of circulated coins that are even the correct composition and are being sold as legal tender circulated U.S. Mint coins. DCarr does provide a certificate stating that the coin is a work of art/fantasy coin and thus what is done with it after he sells it is not his total responsibility. Should all auto manufactures be responsible for every accident that happens in their cars or for every crime committed using their cars. The emphasis should be on the unscrupulous producers. JMHO Thank you to those who took the time to read this.
A few questions for DCarr, How many each of these fantasy 1933 Washington will be pressed ? Also, You want $10. for shipping ? To me, its a bit high for a single coin. When I can ship one to you for $2.07 USPS. I'm interested in one of these "1933"s so how many are left ? Maybe a coupon code to seal the deal ? Thank you in advance
<< <i> "Retreat? Hell, we just got here!" Captain Williams USMC >>
if a 1932 dated Washington Quarter were made in the manner of the OP coin(overstuck on a genuine Washington Quarter) with the exception being that it had a detail obvious to any collector that was never incorporated on any Washington Quarter would that fantasy piece be a counterfeit or violate the Hobby Protection Act?? it could be something as subtle as longer branches extending into the Eagle's wings.
<< <i>The only ones that are going to be fooled in the future, are the ignorant, just as they are fooled today. I like them, but haters are going to hate. >>
Are you referring to the people who hate the Hobby Protection Act, because it requires that imitation numismatic items be "dafaced" with the word COPY?
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.
Not really my cup of tea.Not sure who these pieces are really for.Hope I don't get one for Christmas.
I am kind of curious how real this "1933" DCarr seems to be to me.Owning just one might be okay.I take that back.I would be filled with joy if I got the fabulously rare 1933 Quarter for Christmas.I'm certainly into it for a good price.Are these made of silver,same weight/size,etc. as authentic Washington Quarters?
Is there anyone who is scared of it for one reason or another?
Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.-Albert Einstein
<< <i>The only ones that are going to be fooled in the future, are the ignorant, just as they are fooled today. I like them, but haters are going to hate. >>
I find that to be an ignorant statement. The ones that will be "fooled" will likely be the UNINFORMED, not necessarily ignorant.
It's more ignorant to just turn a blindeye and blame others for not knowing something they shouldn't necessarily have to know, all because someone wanted to make some extra bucks.
<< <i>I would probably become much more interested in this type of stuff if early US Coins were made. An 1816 bust half dollar, for example. >>
There is a 1816 CBH. I have a number of Daniel's pieces but only one overstrike to date, however, I am considering a 1816 CBH. I'm also interested in more early US coins.
Pardon my ignorance.I read they would be silver since "struck over" is the basic process.Seems to me that the date area would need to be processed before the quarter is struck so that the date is in proper relief.
Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.-Albert Einstein
<< <i>Not really my cup of tea.Not sure who these pieces are really for.Hope I don't get one for Christmas.
I am kind of curious how real this "1933" DCarr seems to be to me.Owning just one might be okay.I take that back.I would be filled with joy if I got the fabulously rare 1933 Quarter for Christmas.I'm certainly into it for a good price.Are these made of silver,same weight/size,etc. as authentic Washington Quarters? >>
<< <i>The only ones that are going to be fooled in the future, are the ignorant, just as they are fooled today. I like them, but haters are going to hate. >>
I find that to be an ignorant statement. The ones that will be "fooled" will likely be the UNINFORMED, not necessarily ignorant.
It's more ignorant to just turn a blindeye and blame others for not knowing something they shouldn't necessarily have to know, all because someone wanted to make some extra bucks. >>
That is one of the meanings of ignorant, uninformed.
<< <i>Bill---Did you read what I said about plenty of people being swindled with genuine coins (ATed, added mintmark, whizzed or polished, overgraded, etc)? At least a fantasy coin is easy to research---if it isn't listed in any of the standard references, that should raise a big red flag. Like I said before, you can't protect stupid people from themselves. >>
So by parity of reasoning (Perry-ty of reasoning?), there's no point in having laws against counterfeiting our paper currency? After all, there are plenty of sources of information regarding the precise features of genuine U.S. notes, yet people still get swindled by passers of counterfeit U.S. notes every day of the year.
I guess if the laws against counterfeiting aren't aren't sufficient to prevent all counterfeiting fraud, there's no point in enacting or enforcing those laws. (Even with those laws, you just can't protect every one of these people from themselves, right?)
So, if we accept Perry's form of argument, let's just let those "stupid" people who aren't able to distinguish an excellent counterfeit note from a genuine note (or who don't take the time to check authenticity each time they are handed a piece of paper money following a commercial transaction) get what they deserve.
Flawed reasoning aside, I find it very troubling--and quite certainly dangerous to the longterm health of numismatics--that any thoughtul numismatist can decry the threat of "Chinese fakes" yet welcome the manufacture in the U.S. of non-genuine "coins" that are not clearly marked as such.
Just my two cents, but at least they're not 1910-S VDBs.
"Coin collecting problem"? What "coin collecting problem"?
<< <i>Bill---Did you read what I said about plenty of people being swindled with genuine coins (ATed, added mintmark, whizzed or polished, overgraded, etc)? At least a fantasy coin is easy to research---if it isn't listed in any of the standard references, that should raise a big red flag. Like I said before, you can't protect stupid people from themselves. >>
So by parity of reasoning (Perry-ty of reasoning?), there's no point in having laws against counterfeiting our paper currency? After all, there are plenty of sources of information regarding the precise features of genuine U.S. notes, yet people still get swindled by passers of counterfeit U.S. notes every day of the year.
I guess if the laws against counterfeiting aren't aren't sufficient to prevent all counterfeiting fraud, there's no point in enacting or enforcing those laws. (Even with those laws, you just can't protect every one of these people from themselves, right?)
So, if we accept Perry's form of argument, let's just let those "stupid" people who aren't able to distinguish an excellent counterfeit note from a genuine note (or who don't take the time to check authenticity each time they are handed a piece of paper money following a commercial transaction) get what they deserve.
Flawed reasoning aside, I find it very troubling--and quite certainly dangerous to the longterm health of numismatics--that any thoughtul numismatist can decry the threat of "Chinese fakes" yet welcome the manufacture in the U.S. of non-genuine "coins" that are not clearly marked as such.
Just my two cents, but at least they're not 1910-S VDBs.
>>
Why are you putting words in my mouth? Where did I say it was okay to pass counterfeit paper money? Since when is it illegal to AT a coin or whizz a coin or even overgrade a coin? Can you cite the laws? Bottom line is a coin collector needs to do his due diligence or he is going to get burned. Also, in a free society, there is no way to protect stupid people from doing stupid things.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
<< <i>Gee, I wonder what would happen if someone tried to spend one. Say a 1975-D Kennedy half? >>
He would lose a lot of money because they are worth far more than face value.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
Of course,ignorant doesn't mean stupid.I do see all of these replica products, call them what you want, as simply for the sake of somebody making a buck.Some of the bucks will come from the ignorant who think they have bought something special and extremely valuable.
I would be curious what the reaction from dealers would be if I were to buy one of these pieces and take it around,offering it for sale,next show.
Strange looks?
Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.-Albert Einstein
Why are you putting words in my mouth? Where did I say it was okay to pass counterfeit paper money? Since when is it illegal to AT a coin or whizz a coin or even overgrade a coin? Can you cite the laws? Bottom line is a coin collector needs to do his due diligence or he is going to get burned. Also, in a free society, there is no way to protect stupid people from doing stupid things. >>
I'm not putting any words into your mouth, Perry, just pointing out that the argument you appeared to be employing is a form of argument that cannot be relied upon to produce true conclusions.
The fact that there is no way (in any type of society, I suspect) to completely protect people (stupid or otherwise) from doing occasional stupid things is quite irrevelevant to the question of whether a particular law (or policy) should be enacted (or instituted) and enforced. For example, we don't--and shouldn't--shrug our shoulders and say there's no point in having speed limits on our streets and roads because we recognize that having speed limits won't completely eliminate speed-related automobile accidents. We enact and enforce those laws because we recognize that such laws will be helpful in reducing the number of speed-related automobile accidents.
By the same token, prohibiting the addition to the numismatic marketplace of non-genuine, coin-like items that are not marked as non-geniune surely helps any effort to create a numismatic marketplace in which fewer collectors will get "burned." That's a powerful consideration that, in my judgment, argues against the production of D. Carr items. Your pointing out that people sometimes do stupid things, or that coin collectors can be defrauded a variety of other ways, or that coin collectors (or all consumers) should be wary of fraud doesn't make it any less a powerful consideration.
Of course, the larger point here is that even though laws and prohibitions are never 100% effective in preventing misery of various kinds, they are often helpful in reducing the amount of misery of those various kinds. That we all do some stupid things in our lifetimes simply doesn't count as an argument against the regulation or prohibition of potentially harmful behaviors.
"Coin collecting problem"? What "coin collecting problem"?
Uh, making a buck a problem? I don't get that one as I don't see a lot of volunteer work being done in the numismatic world when it comes to selling coins/medals/bills, etc. If people don't like Dan's products because of quality, price or other issues, they are as has been said, free to go elsewhere.
Where has there been instances of people being defrauded by DC's work? In the case of Gallery Mint there have been instances of people trying to hide or obscure markings that the coins are copies/reproductions of actual dates that exist. I think a lot of the arguments presented are highly speculative...
Love that Milled British (1830-1960) Well, just Love coins, period.
I think Dcar's coins are fantastic pieces of art.I really like them. For many, it gives an opportunity to own a flawless example of an "old" coin. Many are very creative as well.
Give me the proper equipment and I make some art too.In addition,I can make some money by selling my art.I don't quite get the "creative" part.
"Opportunity to own a flawless example of an "old" coin."
You have the opportunity to own a D. Carr mint product.I recently saw some Jamestown Commemorative Dollars that have been TPG graded MS 70 and PF 70 Ultra Cameo.These "coins" truly are flawless works of art from the United States Mint.Price? $50.
How much money does it take to buy a "1933" Quarter?
Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.-Albert Einstein
I support the hobby and see this two ways. As to manufacturing a product that was not created by the U.S. Mint : Filling A Void As to collecting something that was not created by the U.S. Mint : Feeling ? Avoid !
<< <i>There are few things as predictable as a DC thread. >>
So true. And you can predict what side certain forum members will take. It's like watching the movie "Groundhog Day".
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
Groundhog Day is a movie that I have watched many times.I see something new,that I missed before,on each viewing.Besides,I get to see Andie MacDowell again and again.
I would be a buyer of a well-done Andie MacDowell fantasy piece,with her birthdate of April 21,1958 on it.
Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.-Albert Einstein
<< <i>I'm not putting any words into your mouth, Perry, just pointing out that the argument you appeared to be employing is a form of argument that cannot be relied upon to produce true conclusions.
The fact that there is no way (in any type of society, I suspect) to completely protect people (stupid or otherwise) from doing occasional stupid things is quite irrevelevant to the question of whether a particular law (or policy) should be enacted (or instituted) and enforced. For example, we don't--and shouldn't--shrug our shoulders and say there's no point in having speed limits on our streets and roads because we recognize that having speed limits won't completely eliminate speed-related automobile accidents. We enact and enforce those laws because we recognize that such laws will be helpful in reducing the number of speed-related automobile accidents.
By the same token, prohibiting the addition to the numismatic marketplace of non-genuine, coin-like items that are not marked as non-geniune surely helps any effort to create a numismatic marketplace in which fewer collectors will get "burned." That's a powerful consideration that, in my judgment, argues against the production of D. Carr items. Your pointing out that people sometimes do stupid things, or that coin collectors can be defrauded a variety of other ways, or that coin collectors (or all consumers) should be wary of fraud doesn't make it any less a powerful consideration.
Of course, the larger point here is that even though laws and prohibitions are never 100% effective in preventing misery of various kinds, they are often helpful in reducing the amount of misery of those various kinds. That we all do some stupid things in our lifetimes simply doesn't count as an argument against the regulation or prohibition of potentially harmful behaviors.
<< <i>I'm not putting any words into your mouth, Perry, just pointing out that the argument you appeared to be employing is a form of argument that cannot be relied upon to produce true conclusions.
The fact that there is no way (in any type of society, I suspect) to completely protect people (stupid or otherwise) from doing occasional stupid things is quite irrevelevant to the question of whether a particular law (or policy) should be enacted (or instituted) and enforced. For example, we don't--and shouldn't--shrug our shoulders and say there's no point in having speed limits on our streets and roads because we recognize that having speed limits won't completely eliminate speed-related automobile accidents. We enact and enforce those laws because we recognize that such laws will be helpful in reducing the number of speed-related automobile accidents.
By the same token, prohibiting the addition to the numismatic marketplace of non-genuine, coin-like items that are not marked as non-geniune surely helps any effort to create a numismatic marketplace in which fewer collectors will get "burned." That's a powerful consideration that, in my judgment, argues against the production of D. Carr items. Your pointing out that people sometimes do stupid things, or that coin collectors can be defrauded a variety of other ways, or that coin collectors (or all consumers) should be wary of fraud doesn't make it any less a powerful consideration.
Of course, the larger point here is that even though laws and prohibitions are never 100% effective in preventing misery of various kinds, they are often helpful in reducing the amount of misery of those various kinds. That we all do some stupid things in our lifetimes simply doesn't count as an argument against the regulation or prohibition of potentially harmful behaviors.
<< <i>Uh, making a buck a problem? I don't get that one as I don't see a lot of volunteer work being done in the numismatic world when it comes to selling coins/medals/bills, etc. If people don't like Dan's products because of quality, price or other issues, they are as has been said, free to go elsewhere.
Where has there been instances of people being defrauded by DC's work? In the case of Gallery Mint there have been instances of people trying to hide or obscure markings that the coins are copies/reproductions of actual dates that exist. I think a lot of the arguments presented are highly speculative... >>
Well I guess today is parity of reasoning day: Uh, making a few yen a problem? If people don't like Chinese fakes because of quality, price or other reasons, they are--as has been said--free to go elsewhere.
This is not intended as a criticism of the poster, just the observation that the post quoted above offers no more reason to be in favor of the production by D. Carr of non-genuine, coin-like items than to be in favor of the production by the Chinese of non-genuine, coin-like items.
And, of course, endorsing unrestricted commercial enterprise in no way counts as reasoned support for the claim that Chinese fakes aren't harmful to the U.S. coin marketplace and the hobby of collecting genuine U.S. coins.
Again, to note another important and larger consideration: Making a buck/yen can very definitely be a problem if the buck/yen is made via an activity that harms people or institutions that do not deserve to be harmed. That's the critical consideration at the heart of this discussion: Is D. Carr and are the Chinese pursuing profits via enterprises productive of current or future harm to collectors of genuine U.S. coins and/or the hobby of numismatics?
"Coin collecting problem"? What "coin collecting problem"?
<< <i>That's the critical consideration at the heart of this discussion: Is D. Carr [...] pursuing profits via enterprises productive of current or future harm to collectors of genuine U.S. coins and/or the hobby of numismatics? >>
I personally don't see any harm in Dan's products. The potential harm brought up is often hypothetical and unlikely. I think the negative response to some of Dan's work is more that some collectors are afraid of change in the hobby.
Is the reason the word COPY isn't required to appear on these because there were never actually coins minted for the year in that design? Not sure if this is a good thing for numismatics with many new collectors possibly being targeted for future sales of these coins.
I can see where a new collector could eventually be left with a bad taste in his/her mouth. Might be bad enough to forever lose a few to coin collecting forever. That's why it is important for us collectors and dealers "who have been around the block a year or two" to help educate new collectors.
Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.-Albert Einstein
<< <i>Is the reason the word COPY isn't required to appear on these because there were never actually coins minted for the year in that design? Not sure if this is a good thing for numismatics with many new collectors possibly being targeted for future sales of these coins.
I can see where a new collector could eventually be left with a bad taste in his/her mouth. Might be bad enough to forever lose a few to coin collecting forever. That's why it is important for us collectors and dealers "who have been around the block a year or two" to help educate new collectors. >>
As someone who is relatively new back to collecting, the things that leave a bad taste in my mouth regarding collecting include the rise of counterfeit slabs, dealers that mislead, and dealers that hide behind the "Code of Silence" and PNG to prevent the reduction of doctoring.
Those that tell other people what they should and should not collect also leave a bad taste in my mouth, especially when highlighting theoretical harm while ignoring and actively facilitating actual harm (avoidance of doctoring issue where people are actually misled and lose money).
Additionally, I actually consider Dan's work one of the bright spots in the hobby these days. I also think that new collectors are less likely to be misled buying a Dan Carr piece than buying a fake TPG slab. For a new collector that doesn't have time to study up on fake coins and fake slabs, Dan's pieces come with the peace of mind that they aren't heavily counterfeited.
<< <i>Is the reason the word COPY isn't required to appear on these because there were never actually coins minted for the year in that design? Not sure if this is a good thing for numismatics with many new collectors possibly being targeted for future sales of these coins.
I can see where a new collector could eventually be left with a bad taste in his/her mouth. Might be bad enough to forever lose a few to coin collecting forever. That's why it is important for us collectors and dealers "who have been around the block a year or two" to help educate new collectors. >>
As someone who is relatively new back to collecting, the things that leave a bad taste in my mouth regarding collecting include the rise of counterfeit slabs, dealers that mislead, and dealers that hide behind the "Code of Silence" and PNG to prevent the reduction of doctoring.
Those that tell other people what they should and should not collect also leave a bad taste in my mouth, especially when highlighting theoretical harm while ignoring and actively facilitating actual harm (avoidance of doctoring issue where people are actually misled and lose money).
Additionally, I actually consider Dan's work one of the bright spots in the hobby these days. I also think that new collectors are less likely to be misled buying a Dan Carr piece than buying a fake TPG slab. For a new collector that doesn't have time to study up on fake coins and fake slabs, Dan's pieces come with the peace of mind that they aren't heavily counterfeited. >>
Excellent points.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
Comments
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>Wonder how many pages this will invite? Daniel Carr coins are not for everyone. If you don't like them move along. If you like them, enjoy them. >>
To me this encourages counterfeiting, and effects all of us. When something can have an adverse affect upon the hobby, we the the right to speak out against it. >>
Could you show us a pic of a genuine 1933 quarter? If he is making a counterfeit there must be a real one somewhere. Right? Otherwise, this is a fantasy coin rather than a counterfeit. Anyone see the movie "Groundhog Day"? >>
We will agree to disagree on that one. Did you read my post which appears just above your post? YOU know that a genuine 1933 quarter does not exist, but most people don't know that.
If he was marking this things with "COPY" or "FACSIMILE" I would not have a problem, but he isn't. Like I wrote before, this thing is not much different from an 1888-CC Chinese Morgan dollar.
Years ago I lost $100 on a political token because it was a copy that had "BECKER" stamped on it. The dealer from whom I bought it didn't know what that met and neither did I. In those pre Internet days it took me a couple days of research to figure out with this "token" was. This guy Becker was marking exact copies of 19th tokens and medals and marking them with a counterstamp named after a famous 19th century counterfeiter in the early 1960s.
Who is to say that someone else won't be swindled this way in the future with the Carr product? This way the Hobby Protection Act should be amended to put an end the production of this type of unmarked material.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
<< <i>Years ago I lost $100 on a political token because it was a copy that had "BECKER" stamped on it. The dealer from whom I bought it didn't know what that met and neither did I. In those pre Internet days it took me a couple days of research to figure out with this "token" was. This guy Becker was marking exact copies of 19th tokens and medals and marking them with a counterstamp named after a famous 19th century counterfeiter in the early 1960s. >>
Buying something without full information is something that still happens these days and is a decision each collector makes when making a purchase. There are many cases where a collector doesn't have full information and often happens with doctored (putty, AT, etc.) coins which seems to be under a "Code of Silence" to actively prevent eradication. I actually purchased something without full information and posted it to these forums. The consensus was that I should treat the purchase as tuition which I did.
In the case of the over strikes, a few seconds with Google on a computer or phone will identify these pieces. That's one benefit of living in a post-Internet world so the situation where you need to purchase an item and wait for a few days to identify the item shouldn't happen these days.
This hobby is interesting in that some people seem to be more worried about hypothetical harm and less about actual harm. In the case of over strikes, no one is getting fooled because the pieces are well documented on the net. In the case of doctored coins where collectors, dealers and TPGs are getting fooled to the tune of multiple $10,000s, sellers of doctored coins aren't named due to the Code of Silence in the hobby. It's an interesting state of affairs.
preferably dealing with the current administrations Fiascos
Steve
<< <i>Does'nt do anything for me, BUT........I would like to see some FRESH & CURRENT Hard Time Tokens
preferably dealing with the current administrations Fiascos
Steve >>
Agree. I like Dan's political medals. They insure that future generations can see what we've been putting up with.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
<< <i>
<< <i>Does'nt do anything for me, BUT........I would like to see some FRESH & CURRENT Hard Time Tokens
preferably dealing with the current administrations Fiascos
Steve >>
Agree. I like Dan's political medals. They insure that future generations can see what we've been putting up with. >>
I'm a big fan of those too, especially the $1 trillion debt evasion HTT. Very relevant and very timely
<< <i>... YOU know that a genuine 1933 quarter does not exist, but most people don't know that. ...
If he was marking this things with "COPY" or "FACSIMILE" I would not have a problem, but he isn't. Like I wrote before, this thing is not much different from an 1888-CC Chinese Morgan dollar.
Years ago I lost $100 on a political token because it was a copy that had "BECKER" stamped on it. The dealer from whom I bought it didn't know what that met and neither did I. In those pre Internet days it took me a couple days of research to figure out with this "token" was. This guy Becker was marking exact copies of 19th tokens and medals and marking them with a counterstamp named after a famous 19th century counterfeiter in the early 1960s.
Who is to say that someone else won't be swindled this way in the future with the Carr product? This way the Hobby Protection Act should be amended to put an end the production of this type of unmarked material. >>
Of these people who don't know about 1933 quarters, would any of them pay a lot of money for such a thing that they know nothing about ?
I personally don't know anybody who would pay a lot for something they know nothing of. And if there was such a person determined to part ways with their money, even a "COPY" stamp might not prevent it.
When valuing a coin, it is necessary to determine what type of coin it is, where it was made, what is it made out of, the date, and condition. For coin types that were minted for more than one year, you can not determine the value accurately without considering the date on it. And the date "1933" is hard to miss.
Suppose in the future somebody sells a "1933" over-strike quarter to an unknowledgeable person for $100. If the free market value of it at the time is $100, did anybody get "swindled" ?
Who is to say what the future market value of these might be ?
<< <i>Does'nt do anything for me, BUT........I would like to see some FRESH & CURRENT Hard Time Tokens
preferably dealing with the current administrations Fiascos
Steve >>
<< <i>
<< <i>Does'nt do anything for me, BUT........I would like to see some FRESH & CURRENT Hard Time Tokens
preferably dealing with the current administrations Fiascos
Steve >>
WE WANT MORE!, MORE!
Steve
For the coins: Those that are selfish and want to make profit or "fill a hole". (talking about the US Mint design ripoffs, not the 'original' artwork pieces
Against the coins: The argument consistently seems to be to want to protect the hobby, and anyone not expert enough to know better. If the same exact things were being done from China, these same people would likely be saying the same thing and not changing their tune (unlike some of the ones in the "for" group). Some of these folks have known people that have been ripped off by similar 'coins'/instances, or have been hit themselves, early in their hobbying days before knowing better.
There may well be the variable person to the above, who doesn't fit the mold, so to speak, but, by and large, those are the types of posters I have seen and they seem to easily fall into one camp or the other.
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
Medals... just for fun, spend 20-30 searching for art Medals online. You will be amazed at the artistic merit and history.
This truly seems to be a lost art form.
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
<< <i> "Retreat? Hell, we just got here!" Captain Williams USMC >>
<< <i>The only ones that are going to be fooled in the future, are the ignorant, just as they are fooled today. I like them, but haters are going to hate. >>
Are you referring to the people who hate the Hobby Protection Act, because it requires that imitation numismatic items be "dafaced" with the word COPY?
I am kind of curious how real this "1933" DCarr seems to be to me.Owning just one might be okay.I take that back.I would be filled with joy if I got the fabulously rare 1933 Quarter for Christmas.I'm certainly into it for a good price.Are these made of silver,same weight/size,etc. as authentic Washington Quarters?
Is there anyone who is scared of it for one reason or another?
Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.-Albert Einstein
<< <i>The only ones that are going to be fooled in the future, are the ignorant, just as they are fooled today. I like them, but haters are going to hate. >>
I find that to be an ignorant statement.
The ones that will be "fooled" will likely be the UNINFORMED, not necessarily ignorant.
It's more ignorant to just turn a blindeye and blame others for not knowing something they shouldn't necessarily have to know, all because someone wanted to make some extra bucks.
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>I would probably become much more interested in this type of stuff if early US Coins were made. An 1816 bust half dollar, for example. >>
There is a 1816 CBH. I have a number of Daniel's pieces but only one overstrike to date, however, I am considering a 1816 CBH. I'm also interested in more early US coins.
My philosophy is: collect what you like.
Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.-Albert Einstein
<< <i>Not really my cup of tea.Not sure who these pieces are really for.Hope I don't get one for Christmas.
I am kind of curious how real this "1933" DCarr seems to be to me.Owning just one might be okay.I take that back.I would be filled with joy if I got the fabulously rare 1933 Quarter for Christmas.I'm certainly into it for a good price.Are these made of silver,same weight/size,etc. as authentic Washington Quarters? >>
These are struck over genuine 1932-1964 Washington Quarters so they are made of silver and the same weight/size as an authentic Washington Quarter from 1932-1964.
<< <i>Is there anyone who is scared of it for one reason or another? >>
That's the impression I'm getting. It's a regrettable situation.
How much would the 1816 CBH cost? Is it more than $100?
Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.-Albert Einstein
Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.-Albert Einstein
<< <i> I am considering a 1816 CBH. I'm also interested in more early US coins.
How much would the 1816 CBH cost? Is it more than $100? >>
It was more than $190 when sold last year. When you do find them they are going for far more than that now.
<< <i>
<< <i>The only ones that are going to be fooled in the future, are the ignorant, just as they are fooled today. I like them, but haters are going to hate. >>
I find that to be an ignorant statement.
The ones that will be "fooled" will likely be the UNINFORMED, not necessarily ignorant.
It's more ignorant to just turn a blindeye and blame others for not knowing something they shouldn't necessarily have to know, all because someone wanted to make some extra bucks. >>
That is one of the meanings of ignorant, uninformed.
Joe.
<< <i>Bill---Did you read what I said about plenty of people being swindled with genuine coins (ATed, added mintmark, whizzed or polished, overgraded, etc)? At least a fantasy coin is easy to research---if it isn't listed in any of the standard references, that should raise a big red flag. Like I said before, you can't protect stupid people from themselves. >>
So by parity of reasoning (Perry-ty of reasoning?), there's no point in having laws against counterfeiting our paper currency? After all, there are plenty of sources of information regarding the precise features of genuine U.S. notes, yet people still get swindled by passers of counterfeit U.S. notes every day of the year.
I guess if the laws against counterfeiting aren't aren't sufficient to prevent all counterfeiting fraud, there's no point in enacting or enforcing those laws. (Even with those laws, you just can't protect every one of these people from themselves, right?)
So, if we accept Perry's form of argument, let's just let those "stupid" people who aren't able to distinguish an excellent counterfeit note from a genuine note (or who don't take the time to check authenticity each time they are handed a piece of paper money following a commercial transaction) get what they deserve.
Flawed reasoning aside, I find it very troubling--and quite certainly dangerous to the longterm health of numismatics--that any thoughtul numismatist can decry the threat of "Chinese fakes" yet welcome the manufacture in the U.S. of non-genuine "coins" that are not clearly marked as such.
Just my two cents, but at least they're not 1910-S VDBs.
<< <i>
<< <i>Bill---Did you read what I said about plenty of people being swindled with genuine coins (ATed, added mintmark, whizzed or polished, overgraded, etc)? At least a fantasy coin is easy to research---if it isn't listed in any of the standard references, that should raise a big red flag. Like I said before, you can't protect stupid people from themselves. >>
So by parity of reasoning (Perry-ty of reasoning?), there's no point in having laws against counterfeiting our paper currency? After all, there are plenty of sources of information regarding the precise features of genuine U.S. notes, yet people still get swindled by passers of counterfeit U.S. notes every day of the year.
I guess if the laws against counterfeiting aren't aren't sufficient to prevent all counterfeiting fraud, there's no point in enacting or enforcing those laws. (Even with those laws, you just can't protect every one of these people from themselves, right?)
So, if we accept Perry's form of argument, let's just let those "stupid" people who aren't able to distinguish an excellent counterfeit note from a genuine note (or who don't take the time to check authenticity each time they are handed a piece of paper money following a commercial transaction) get what they deserve.
Flawed reasoning aside, I find it very troubling--and quite certainly dangerous to the longterm health of numismatics--that any thoughtul numismatist can decry the threat of "Chinese fakes" yet welcome the manufacture in the U.S. of non-genuine "coins" that are not clearly marked as such.
Just my two cents, but at least they're not 1910-S VDBs.
Why are you putting words in my mouth? Where did I say it was okay to pass counterfeit paper money? Since when is it illegal to AT a coin or whizz a coin or even overgrade a coin? Can you cite the laws? Bottom line is a coin collector needs to do his due diligence or he is going to get burned. Also, in a free society, there is no way to protect stupid people from doing stupid things.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
<< <i>Gee, I wonder what would happen if someone tried to spend one. Say a 1975-D Kennedy half?
He would lose a lot of money because they are worth far more than face value.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
I would be curious what the reaction from dealers would be if I were to buy one of these pieces and take it around,offering it for sale,next show.
Strange looks?
Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.-Albert Einstein
I'm not putting any words into your mouth, Perry, just pointing out that the argument you appeared to be employing is a form of argument that cannot be relied upon to produce true conclusions.
The fact that there is no way (in any type of society, I suspect) to completely protect people (stupid or otherwise) from doing occasional stupid things is quite irrevelevant to the question of whether a particular law (or policy) should be enacted (or instituted) and enforced. For example, we don't--and shouldn't--shrug our shoulders and say there's no point in having speed limits on our streets and roads because we recognize that having speed limits won't completely eliminate speed-related automobile accidents. We enact and enforce those laws because we recognize that such laws will be helpful in reducing the number of speed-related automobile accidents.
By the same token, prohibiting the addition to the numismatic marketplace of non-genuine, coin-like items that are not marked as non-geniune surely helps any effort to create a numismatic marketplace in which fewer collectors will get "burned." That's a powerful consideration that, in my judgment, argues against the production of D. Carr items. Your pointing out that people sometimes do stupid things, or that coin collectors can be defrauded a variety of other ways, or that coin collectors (or all consumers) should be wary of fraud doesn't make it any less a powerful consideration.
Of course, the larger point here is that even though laws and prohibitions are never 100% effective in preventing misery of various kinds, they are often helpful in reducing the amount of misery of those various kinds. That we all do some stupid things in our lifetimes simply doesn't count as an argument against the regulation or prohibition of potentially harmful behaviors.
Where has there been instances of people being defrauded by DC's work? In the case of Gallery Mint there have been instances of people trying to hide or obscure markings that the coins are copies/reproductions of actual dates that exist. I think a lot of the arguments presented are highly speculative...
Well, just Love coins, period.
Give me the proper equipment and I make some art too.In addition,I can make some money by selling my art.I don't quite get the "creative" part.
"Opportunity to own a flawless example of an "old" coin."
You have the opportunity to own a D. Carr mint product.I recently saw some Jamestown Commemorative Dollars that have been TPG graded MS 70 and PF 70 Ultra Cameo.These "coins" truly are flawless works of art from the United States Mint.Price? $50.
How much money does it take to buy a "1933" Quarter?
Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.-Albert Einstein
As to manufacturing a product that was not created by the U.S. Mint : Filling A Void
As to collecting something that was not created by the U.S. Mint : Feeling ? Avoid !
Let the music play on !
<< <i>There are few things as predictable as a DC thread. >>
So true. And you can predict what side certain forum members will take. It's like watching the movie "Groundhog Day".
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
<< <i>
<< <i>There are few things as predictable as a DC thread. >>
So true. And you can predict what side certain forum members will take. It's like watching the movie "Groundhog Day".
May they rest in peace.
Never expected a few of them to be on the other side so soon.
Groundhog Day is a movie that I have watched many times.I see something new,that I missed before,on each viewing.Besides,I get to see Andie MacDowell again and again.
I would be a buyer of a well-done Andie MacDowell fantasy piece,with her birthdate of April 21,1958 on it.
Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.-Albert Einstein
Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.-Albert Einstein
<< <i>I'm not putting any words into your mouth, Perry, just pointing out that the argument you appeared to be employing is a form of argument that cannot be relied upon to produce true conclusions.
The fact that there is no way (in any type of society, I suspect) to completely protect people (stupid or otherwise) from doing occasional stupid things is quite irrevelevant to the question of whether a particular law (or policy) should be enacted (or instituted) and enforced. For example, we don't--and shouldn't--shrug our shoulders and say there's no point in having speed limits on our streets and roads because we recognize that having speed limits won't completely eliminate speed-related automobile accidents. We enact and enforce those laws because we recognize that such laws will be helpful in reducing the number of speed-related automobile accidents.
By the same token, prohibiting the addition to the numismatic marketplace of non-genuine, coin-like items that are not marked as non-geniune surely helps any effort to create a numismatic marketplace in which fewer collectors will get "burned." That's a powerful consideration that, in my judgment, argues against the production of D. Carr items. Your pointing out that people sometimes do stupid things, or that coin collectors can be defrauded a variety of other ways, or that coin collectors (or all consumers) should be wary of fraud doesn't make it any less a powerful consideration.
Of course, the larger point here is that even though laws and prohibitions are never 100% effective in preventing misery of various kinds, they are often helpful in reducing the amount of misery of those various kinds. That we all do some stupid things in our lifetimes simply doesn't count as an argument against the regulation or prohibition of potentially harmful behaviors.
Excellent. +1
<< <i>
<< <i>I'm not putting any words into your mouth, Perry, just pointing out that the argument you appeared to be employing is a form of argument that cannot be relied upon to produce true conclusions.
The fact that there is no way (in any type of society, I suspect) to completely protect people (stupid or otherwise) from doing occasional stupid things is quite irrevelevant to the question of whether a particular law (or policy) should be enacted (or instituted) and enforced. For example, we don't--and shouldn't--shrug our shoulders and say there's no point in having speed limits on our streets and roads because we recognize that having speed limits won't completely eliminate speed-related automobile accidents. We enact and enforce those laws because we recognize that such laws will be helpful in reducing the number of speed-related automobile accidents.
By the same token, prohibiting the addition to the numismatic marketplace of non-genuine, coin-like items that are not marked as non-geniune surely helps any effort to create a numismatic marketplace in which fewer collectors will get "burned." That's a powerful consideration that, in my judgment, argues against the production of D. Carr items. Your pointing out that people sometimes do stupid things, or that coin collectors can be defrauded a variety of other ways, or that coin collectors (or all consumers) should be wary of fraud doesn't make it any less a powerful consideration.
Of course, the larger point here is that even though laws and prohibitions are never 100% effective in preventing misery of various kinds, they are often helpful in reducing the amount of misery of those various kinds. That we all do some stupid things in our lifetimes simply doesn't count as an argument against the regulation or prohibition of potentially harmful behaviors.
Excellent. +1 >>
+1
<< <i>Uh, making a buck a problem? I don't get that one as I don't see a lot of volunteer work being done in the numismatic world when it comes to selling coins/medals/bills, etc. If people don't like Dan's products because of quality, price or other issues, they are as has been said, free to go elsewhere.
Where has there been instances of people being defrauded by DC's work? In the case of Gallery Mint there have been instances of people trying to hide or obscure markings that the coins are copies/reproductions of actual dates that exist. I think a lot of the arguments presented are highly speculative... >>
Well I guess today is parity of reasoning day: Uh, making a few yen a problem? If people don't like Chinese fakes because of quality, price or other reasons, they are--as has been said--free to go elsewhere.
This is not intended as a criticism of the poster, just the observation that the post quoted above offers no more reason to be in favor of the production by D. Carr of non-genuine, coin-like items than to be in favor of the production by the Chinese of non-genuine, coin-like items.
And, of course, endorsing unrestricted commercial enterprise in no way counts as reasoned support for the claim that Chinese fakes aren't harmful to the U.S. coin marketplace and the hobby of collecting genuine U.S. coins.
Again, to note another important and larger consideration: Making a buck/yen can very definitely be a problem if the buck/yen is made via an activity that harms people or institutions that do not deserve to be harmed. That's the critical consideration at the heart of this discussion: Is D. Carr and are the Chinese pursuing profits via enterprises productive of current or future harm to collectors of genuine U.S. coins and/or the hobby of numismatics?
<< <i>That's the critical consideration at the heart of this discussion: Is D. Carr [...] pursuing profits via enterprises productive of current or future harm to collectors of genuine U.S. coins and/or the hobby of numismatics? >>
I personally don't see any harm in Dan's products. The potential harm brought up is often hypothetical and unlikely. I think the negative response to some of Dan's work is more that some collectors are afraid of change in the hobby.
I can see where a new collector could eventually be left with a bad taste in his/her mouth. Might be bad enough to forever lose a few to coin collecting forever.
That's why it is important for us collectors and dealers "who have been around the block a year or two" to help educate new collectors.
Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.-Albert Einstein
<< <i>Is the reason the word COPY isn't required to appear on these because there were never actually coins minted for the year in that design? Not sure if this is a good thing for numismatics with many new collectors possibly being targeted for future sales of these coins.
I can see where a new collector could eventually be left with a bad taste in his/her mouth. Might be bad enough to forever lose a few to coin collecting forever.
That's why it is important for us collectors and dealers "who have been around the block a year or two" to help educate new collectors. >>
As someone who is relatively new back to collecting, the things that leave a bad taste in my mouth regarding collecting include the rise of counterfeit slabs, dealers that mislead, and dealers that hide behind the "Code of Silence" and PNG to prevent the reduction of doctoring.
Those that tell other people what they should and should not collect also leave a bad taste in my mouth, especially when highlighting theoretical harm while ignoring and actively facilitating actual harm (avoidance of doctoring issue where people are actually misled and lose money).
Additionally, I actually consider Dan's work one of the bright spots in the hobby these days. I also think that new collectors are less likely to be misled buying a Dan Carr piece than buying a fake TPG slab. For a new collector that doesn't have time to study up on fake coins and fake slabs, Dan's pieces come with the peace of mind that they aren't heavily counterfeited.
<< <i>
<< <i>Is the reason the word COPY isn't required to appear on these because there were never actually coins minted for the year in that design? Not sure if this is a good thing for numismatics with many new collectors possibly being targeted for future sales of these coins.
I can see where a new collector could eventually be left with a bad taste in his/her mouth. Might be bad enough to forever lose a few to coin collecting forever.
That's why it is important for us collectors and dealers "who have been around the block a year or two" to help educate new collectors. >>
As someone who is relatively new back to collecting, the things that leave a bad taste in my mouth regarding collecting include the rise of counterfeit slabs, dealers that mislead, and dealers that hide behind the "Code of Silence" and PNG to prevent the reduction of doctoring.
Those that tell other people what they should and should not collect also leave a bad taste in my mouth, especially when highlighting theoretical harm while ignoring and actively facilitating actual harm (avoidance of doctoring issue where people are actually misled and lose money).
Additionally, I actually consider Dan's work one of the bright spots in the hobby these days. I also think that new collectors are less likely to be misled buying a Dan Carr piece than buying a fake TPG slab. For a new collector that doesn't have time to study up on fake coins and fake slabs, Dan's pieces come with the peace of mind that they aren't heavily counterfeited. >>
Excellent points.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire