<< <i>DC creations = prices that have appreciated = greater fool theory in evidence. >>
I don't agree with this. Dan has some popular pieces which don't get offered for sale for long periods of time. If there weren't collectors for these, they would be for sale much more often.
DC's pieces are also much better buys than the common coin that's purchased at retail and sold at wholesale. >>
So long as you sell it to a greater fool, which seems to be the case for a certain amount of DC torch-bearers, then I agree with you, it's a "better buy" than some numismatic items -- so long as it generates you a profit. Doesn't count, if your profit is unrealized. I personally wouldn't want to hold any DC pieces for 20+ years from now, and expect to see a financial return on them. For those that do, more power to you (and good luck!)
<< <i>DC creations = prices that have appreciated = greater fool theory in evidence. >>
I don't agree with this. Dan has some popular pieces which don't get offered for sale for long periods of time. If there weren't collectors for these, they would be for sale much more often.
DC's pieces are also much better buys than the common coin that's purchased at retail and sold at wholesale. >>
So long as you sell it to a greater fool, which seems to be the case for a certain amount of DC torch-bearers, then I agree with you, it's a "better buy" than some numismatic items -- so long as it generates you a profit. Doesn't count, if your profit is unrealized. I personally wouldn't want to hold any DC pieces for 20+ years from now, and expect to see a financial return on them. For those that do, more power to you (and good luck!) >>
Going against the tide on this and I'm gladly taking the other side of this bet Chips are in.
MJ
Walker Proof Digital Album Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
So long as you sell it to a greater fool, which seems to be the case for a certain amount of DC torch-bearers, then I agree with you, it's a "better buy" than some numismatic items -- so long as it generates you a profit. Doesn't count, if your profit is unrealized. I personally wouldn't want to hold any DC pieces for 20+ years from now, and expect to see a financial return on them. For those that do, more power to you (and good luck!) >>
You bring up an interesting point/challenge. In your opinion, what do you believe the 1964 DC Peace dollar will be worth in ten years? (Say we can agree the going rate/value/worth right now is $350., for argument's sakes.)
Second question: What would you wish this Peace dollar to be worth is ten years?
So long as you sell it to a greater fool, which seems to be the case for a certain amount of DC torch-bearers, then I agree with you, it's a "better buy" than some numismatic items -- so long as it generates you a profit. Doesn't count, if your profit is unrealized. I personally wouldn't want to hold any DC pieces for 20+ years from now, and expect to see a financial return on them. For those that do, more power to you (and good luck!) >>
You bring up an interesting point/challenge. In your opinion, what do you believe the 1964 DC Peace dollar will be worth in ten years? (Say we can agree the going rate/value/worth right now is $350., for argument's sakes.)
Second question: What would you wish this Peace dollar to be worth is ten years? >>
I don't really have a "wish" per se, as I don't own one, don't care to own one. So if I had my druthers, I'd hope it's still worth $350 or more in 10 years or so, for the sake of those buying at that level, but I don't think it will be, more a curiosity at best. Worth whatever a buyer thinks its worth to them, worth whatever a seller is willing to give it up for. Those who bought at "issue price" (whatever that was) may be OK now, 10 years from now, etc. if they wish to sell, but I don't think a buyer at $350 will be, i.e., I don't see the price climbing to $600, $1000, beyond. Won't affect my bottom line either way, as I don't care to own one. And for those that do, to repeat myself, good luck to them.
Thanks for offering your take. I owned one at issue price but when they took off on eBay got wrapped up in the buying/selling frenzy and sold it.
I've been casually looking to replace it (there is always hope that a collector will offer a BIN at a very reasonable price), but so far that's a non-starter.
Well I wouldn't worry too much about the price in 10 or 20 years, I heard a Lear Capital commercial not too long ago that said silver will be in the $1000s by then.
<< <i>My crystal ball says DC overstrikes will become collectibles like the Scovill Fugios, Bolen Bar Cents, Machin's Mills Half Pennies, etc. >>
Perhaps, but those pieces were made before the Hobby Protection Act was passed.
Numismatist. 54 year member ANA. Former ANA Senior Authenticator. 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. Author "The Enigmatic Lincoln Cents of 1922," due out late 2025.
<< <i>My crystal ball says DC overstrikes will become collectibles like the Scovill Fugios, Bolen Bar Cents, Machin's Mills Half Pennies, etc. >>
Perhaps, but those pieces were made before the Hobby Protection Act was passed. >>
You make an excellent point. Perhaps the Hobby Protection Act should be modified to require that ALL counterfeits be stamped with "COPY" without regard to their age. We wouldn't want someone to unknowingly buy one of these counterfeits. Right?
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>My crystal ball says DC overstrikes will become collectibles like the Scovill Fugios, Bolen Bar Cents, Machin's Mills Half Pennies, etc. >>
Perhaps, but those pieces were made before the Hobby Protection Act was passed. >>
You make an excellent point. Perhaps the Hobby Protection Act should be modified to require that ALL counterfeits be stamped with "COPY" without regard to their age. We wouldn't want someone to unknowingly buy one of these counterfeits. Right? >>
Why not just the new ones? If we don't go ridiculously retroactive we can't enforce it on modern fakes and replicas? that doesn't make any sense. All I know if it was Danial Lee out of Hong Kong, I doubt the salt of the earth Americans would be so prolific with their support.
I really think it is as simple as: If anybody makes dies that look like established production dies and makes widgets with them those products are fakes or reproductions at best and need to be marked as such unless that person is the US mint. Everything else is semantics
He could even put it on the edge if he wanted to but I believe that he doesn't because he knows deep down it affects the prices he can charge.
blah blah blah blah....another DC-hate thread. get over it...move on. DC makes great coins...anyone who can read should be able to tell the difference. the slab is clearly marked and explains everything. i just don't get all the DC-hate. i have a couple of his coins and they are fantastic. the overstrikes do not bother me.
so that means they are not allowed to bother others? To simply blindly support them and not be able to at least understand the objections of of people who consider coins made or "modified" by people other than the US mint to be replicas shows an intellectual ignorance that is hard to understand. If it was a Louis V purse with a slightly different color brown or different font they would still be illegal and deemed counterfeit. Even someone took a lesser model and changed it to look like a more expensive version even if not exactly like a production model it would still be a fake. Why that doesn't apply to coins I will never know.
<< <i>This is one of those arguments where both sides make excellent points and neither side is likely to convince the other. >>
Although one is an emotional argument and one logical but I digress.
I would say though I would not take the bet of them being worthless in the future, clearly collectable with multiple ave of interest. Even if they were to be declared illegal going forward it would only drive up interest of the older ones.
<< <i>The coins need to have "copy" stamped into them in letters of the proper size and depth in order to conform to the hobby protection act. >>
.......which precludes stamping COPY on the edge of most coins.
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>blah blah blah blah....another DC-hate thread. get over it...move on. DC makes great coins...anyone who can read should be able to tell the difference. the slab is clearly marked and explains everything. i just don't get all the DC-hate. i have a couple of his coins and they are fantastic. the overstrikes do not bother me. >>
Blah blah blah blah -- they aren't "coins", they're fantasy pieces, medalets, whatever else you want to call them, but they are not proper coins of the realm. Aesthetically, I find 100% of DC's works to be lacking. Technically, they're quite competent, but that's about as far as it goes.
I'd like to see one example of anyone selling a D.Carr overstrike by misrepresenting it as a real US coin and causing damage to an injured party who paid big money in order to obtain it, thinking that he is getting a bonafide rarity at a "steal" of a price.
The problem with such a scenario is that the so-called "injured party" wouldn't be paying big money for a D.Carr piece without researching it thoroughly in the first place in order to ascertain a likely value. The whole issue of D.Carr's overstrikes is a made-up problem with bogus remedy.
Q: Are You Printing Money? Bernanke: Not Literally
so that means they are not allowed to bother others? To simply blindly support them and not be able to at least understand the objections of of people who consider coins made or "modified" by people other than the US mint to be replicas shows an intellectual ignorance that is hard to understand. If it was a Louis V purse with a slightly different color brown or different font they would still be illegal and deemed counterfeit. Even someone took a lesser model and changed it to look like a more expensive version even if not exactly like a production model it would still be a fake. Why that doesn't apply to coins I will never know. >>
mine is an opinion, like yours...no better or worse.
i bought some nikes for my son online...when they arrived, they were clearly counterfeit. the difference is that the site told us they were authentic and their intent was to fool us. i don't believe dc's intent is to fool anyone. that's where i see the difference between a fake louis vitton (sp?) purse and a dc overstrike.
btw, i respect your opinion and value you as a knowledgeable numismatist. i don't expect you to blindly accept my opinions. but, i think it would be wise to consider the intent behind the creation.
so that means they are not allowed to bother others? To simply blindly support them and not be able to at least understand the objections of of people who consider coins made or "modified" by people other than the US mint to be replicas shows an intellectual ignorance that is hard to understand. If it was a Louis V purse with a slightly different color brown or different font they would still be illegal and deemed counterfeit. Even someone took a lesser model and changed it to look like a more expensive version even if not exactly like a production model it would still be a fake. Why that doesn't apply to coins I will never know. >>
mine is an opinion, like yours...no better or worse.
i bought some nikes for my son online...when they arrived, they were clearly counterfeit. the difference is that the site told us they were authentic and their intent was to fool us. i don't believe dc's intent is to fool anyone. that's where i see the difference between a fake louis vitton (sp?) purse and a dc overstrike.
btw, i respect your opinion and value you as a knowledgeable numismatist. i don't expect you to blindly accept my opinions. but, i think it would be wise to consider the intent behind the creation. >>
you have a good point about intent but if we were to walk that dog a few degrees further back the DC coins and the fake purse were both created with the intent to invoke the original and make disproportionate profits (opposed to the raw martial) by using the intellectual efforts of others without compensating them. While the fraud element might be the difference between criminal implications for the manufacturer, I am not sure if it has a bearing on the actual item being produced and its legality for marketing. As always just my opinion vocally stated to imply being fact based
I just have a hard time divining the difference between a "gold covered" states quarter, or colorized eagles, or silver round recreations of US coins, and these fantasy pieces. They both exist, in my mind, on the fringe of numismatics. They have a certain beauty to them in their own right, but they aren't what _I_ came to the hobby for.
Of course, "value" is assigned by the market. If people receive enjoyment from them, I don't see a reason to force my opinion on them....nor change my opinion because some don't agree with me.
I think these are and will be collectible. Things in my case, I had to get a 98S Matte, so I did. I also wanted a 63 'what if' one. I will probably get a 75 at some point but they are too expensive.
I think they will be worth more in the Kennedy buzz that is soon to come. If not, oh well I like it.
"A gun is like a parachute. If you need one, and don't have one, you'll probably never need one again.
“I want you to remember that no * ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making the other poor dumb * die for his country”
<< <i>you have a good point about intent but if we were to walk that dog a few degrees further back the DC coins and the fake purse were both created with the intent to invoke the original and make disproportionate profits (opposed to the raw martial) by using the intellectual efforts of others without compensating them. While the fraud element might be the difference between criminal implications for the manufacturer, I am not sure if it has a bearing on the actual item being produced and its legality for marketing. As always just my opinion vocally stated to imply being fact based >>
All of the US Coin designs in play here are, by law, public domain because they were paid for with tax dollars. So there is no "compensation" due. The design work for a pair of shoes is privately-funded, and so there are intellectual property rights to consider in that case.
That said, if you bought some genuine designer-brand shoes and blinged them up to make and sell your own special edition, there is nothing wrong with that so long as you disclose the nature of the modifications.
Going back to the Mustang example - There are several aftermarket outfitters, such as Saleen, which make and sell special-edition Mustangs. They start with a basic Ford Mustang and modify it, sometimes even putting "Saleen" (or whatever) insignia on the car. I have never heard anyone complain about that. And those cars generally sell for higher prices than regular Mustangs.
<< <i>you have a good point about intent but if we were to walk that dog a few degrees further back the DC coins and the fake purse were both created with the intent to invoke the original and make disproportionate profits (opposed to the raw martial) by using the intellectual efforts of others without compensating them. While the fraud element might be the difference between criminal implications for the manufacturer, I am not sure if it has a bearing on the actual item being produced and its legality for marketing. As always just my opinion vocally stated to imply being fact based >>
All of the US Coin designs in play here are, by law, public domain because they were paid for with tax dollars. So there is no "compensation" due. The design work for a pair of shoes is privately-funded, and so there are intellectual property rights to consider in that case.
That said, if you bought some genuine designer-brand shoes and blinged them up to make and sell your own special edition, there is nothing wrong with that so long as you disclose the nature of the modifications.
Going back to the Mustang example - There are several aftermarket outfitters, such as Saleen, which make and sell special-edition Mustangs. They start with a basic Ford Mustang and modify it, sometimes even putting "Saleen" (or whatever) insignia on the car. I have never heard anyone complain about that. And those cars generally sell for higher prices than regular Mustangs. >>
I actually do design original high fashion woman shoes for a living. The intellectual argument is lost on me. Don't care. I simply look at any of my versions that are used it as a form of flattery. Most of us do. It's easier for me to do an original design rather then a "copy" so to speak when a client requires it. The latter is harder think one would think.
I own a ton of D Carr's work and I admire him.
MJ
Walker Proof Digital Album Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
<< <i>I actually do design original high fashion woman shoes for a living. The intellectual argument is lost on me. Don't care. I simply look at any of my versions that are used it as a form of flattery. Most of us do. It's easier for me to do an original design rather then a "copy" so to speak when a client requires it. The latter is harder think one would think.
I own a ton of D Carr's work and I admire him.
MJ >>
Hello
You have seen Warhol's Shoes book I am sure. Great fun. I design as well
I really can't understand the excitement, much of a negative bend when DC's products are brought up. To repeat what has been said: don't like it, leave it. Like many others I have reasonable means and can afford US Mint renditions, but must say that some of Dan's pieces are really amongst my favorite coins.
Just look at one of his matte Oregon Trail pieces - these are tremendous aesthetically & I rather like his Confederate $20 gold pieces as well....
Love that Milled British (1830-1960) Well, just Love coins, period.
<< <i>I've gotta tell you -- I'm guessing that 80-90% or more of legit, honest coin shops would pay a little back of melt for this if they bought it over the counter, and not figure that they got a "rip", but rather they got something that was worth about melt value at best.
I say this with great respect to Mr. Carr, who I think is a very talented artist.
The market for these could possibly be researched on the Internet or on eBay, but considering there are hundreds (or perhaps thousands?) of privately made silver rounds out there, I do not think it is reasonable to expect that retail coin shop owners would be knowledgeable about the very few that sell for a premium over melt in the secondary marketplace. >>
Dave hit the nail on the head, imho. I have been buying OTC for many years, and have seen the craziest of items offered for sale. I have a large screen monitor at my buying station and when something is offered that I do not know about, i research it for the customer using various sites. I continue to build my knowledge of odds and ends, including a vast array of telemarketer crap that eventually gets resold.
However, this one would have stumped me. If I had not researched it, I would have offered $18 on spot of $20, assuming I was comfortable that it was an ounce of pure silver. I have, however, had Daniel Carr products come in and we paid 20% under the low retail price on Ebay/other sites.
<< <i>I've gotta tell you -- I'm guessing that 80-90% or more of legit, honest coin shops would pay a little back of melt for this if they bought it over the counter, and not figure that they got a "rip", but rather they got something that was worth about melt value at best.
I say this with great respect to Mr. Carr, who I think is a very talented artist.
The market for these could possibly be researched on the Internet or on eBay, but considering there are hundreds (or perhaps thousands?) of privately made silver rounds out there, I do not think it is reasonable to expect that retail coin shop owners would be knowledgeable about the very few that sell for a premium over melt in the secondary marketplace. >>
Dave hit the nail on the head, imho. I have been buying OTC for many years, and have seen the craziest of items offered for sale. I have a large screen monitor at my buying station and when something is offered that I do not know about, i research it for the customer using various sites. I continue to build my knowledge of odds and ends, including a vast array of telemarketer crap that eventually gets resold.
However, this one would have stumped me. If I had not researched it, I would have offered $18 on spot of $20, assuming I was comfortable that it was an ounce of pure silver. I have, however, had Daniel Carr products come in and we paid 20% under the low retail price on Ebay/other sites. >>
Well, in the case, the coin shop immediately recognized it as a DC product and, no doubt, made a fair offer relative to retail price for it, right?
<< <i>We had an elderly collector come into the shop this morning. Among the odds-and-ends that made up his collection was a 2009 "Proofed Overstrike" ASE in a nice, plush black velvet case, complete in a holder which mimics the PCGS holder and even has a hologram. All in all I think it's enough to fool an unsophisticated collector/investor and it sort of pisses me off. Oh well, let the games continue.
Al H. >>
This is really disheartening.
Having said that, isn't it up to the buyer on whether or not s/he will swallow the malarkey tale handed out by the unscrupulous sellers? By that, I mean, DC 2009 "Proofed" SAE is still one ounce of fine silver that anybody could purchase on the open market. Having it in a phoney PCGS slab does not change that fact provided its an "original" DC coin.
If a seller decides to play up the "no proofs" minted in 2009 and touts the coin as a 1 in a million opportunity for only $15,000, then shouldn't the buyer have the responsibility of some due diligence?
All the while remembering that it is STILL (if an original DC coin), 1 ounce of .9999 fine silver.
I decided to change calling the bathroom the John and renamed it the Jim. I feel so much better saying I went to the Jim this morning.
Comments
<< <i>100!
I always wanted to do that. >>
Uh.......Excuse me sir.
That spot is normally reserved for a certain member who goes by the name of TDN.
"If I say something in the woods and my wife isn't there to hear it.....am I still wrong?"
My Washington Quarter Registry set...in progress
<< <i>
<< <i>DC creations = prices that have appreciated = greater fool theory in evidence. >>
I don't agree with this. Dan has some popular pieces which don't get offered for sale for long periods of time. If there weren't collectors for these, they would be for sale much more often.
DC's pieces are also much better buys than the common coin that's purchased at retail and sold at wholesale. >>
So long as you sell it to a greater fool, which seems to be the case for a certain amount of DC torch-bearers, then I agree with you, it's a "better buy" than some numismatic items -- so long as it generates you a profit. Doesn't count, if your profit is unrealized. I personally wouldn't want to hold any DC pieces for 20+ years from now, and expect to see a financial return on them. For those that do, more power to you (and good luck!)
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>DC creations = prices that have appreciated = greater fool theory in evidence. >>
I don't agree with this. Dan has some popular pieces which don't get offered for sale for long periods of time. If there weren't collectors for these, they would be for sale much more often.
DC's pieces are also much better buys than the common coin that's purchased at retail and sold at wholesale. >>
So long as you sell it to a greater fool, which seems to be the case for a certain amount of DC torch-bearers, then I agree with you, it's a "better buy" than some numismatic items -- so long as it generates you a profit. Doesn't count, if your profit is unrealized. I personally wouldn't want to hold any DC pieces for 20+ years from now, and expect to see a financial return on them. For those that do, more power to you (and good luck!)
Going against the tide on this and I'm gladly taking the other side of this bet Chips are in.
MJ
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
<< <i>
So long as you sell it to a greater fool, which seems to be the case for a certain amount of DC torch-bearers, then I agree with you, it's a "better buy" than some numismatic items -- so long as it generates you a profit. Doesn't count, if your profit is unrealized. I personally wouldn't want to hold any DC pieces for 20+ years from now, and expect to see a financial return on them. For those that do, more power to you (and good luck!)
You bring up an interesting point/challenge. In your opinion, what do you believe the 1964 DC Peace dollar will be worth in ten years?
(Say we can agree the going rate/value/worth right now is $350., for argument's sakes.)
Second question: What would you wish this Peace dollar to be worth is ten years?
peacockcoins
<< <i>
<< <i>
So long as you sell it to a greater fool, which seems to be the case for a certain amount of DC torch-bearers, then I agree with you, it's a "better buy" than some numismatic items -- so long as it generates you a profit. Doesn't count, if your profit is unrealized. I personally wouldn't want to hold any DC pieces for 20+ years from now, and expect to see a financial return on them. For those that do, more power to you (and good luck!)
You bring up an interesting point/challenge. In your opinion, what do you believe the 1964 DC Peace dollar will be worth in ten years?
(Say we can agree the going rate/value/worth right now is $350., for argument's sakes.)
Second question: What would you wish this Peace dollar to be worth is ten years? >>
I don't really have a "wish" per se, as I don't own one, don't care to own one. So if I had my druthers, I'd hope it's still worth $350 or more in 10 years or so, for the sake of those buying at that level, but I don't think it will be, more a curiosity at best. Worth whatever a buyer thinks its worth to them, worth whatever a seller is willing to give it up for. Those who bought at "issue price" (whatever that was) may be OK now, 10 years from now, etc. if they wish to sell, but I don't think a buyer at $350 will be, i.e., I don't see the price climbing to $600, $1000, beyond. Won't affect my bottom line either way, as I don't care to own one. And for those that do, to repeat myself, good luck to them.
I owned one at issue price but when they took off on eBay got wrapped up in the buying/selling frenzy and sold it.
I've been casually looking to replace it (there is always hope that a collector will offer a BIN at a very reasonable price), but so far that's a non-starter.
peacockcoins
My Ebay Store
<< <i>Sure, yes, it still is a 1955-S cent. >>
oh my god!
<< <i>My crystal ball says DC overstrikes will become collectibles like the Scovill Fugios, Bolen Bar Cents, Machin's Mills Half Pennies, etc. >>
Perhaps, but those pieces were made before the Hobby Protection Act was passed.
I knew it would happen.
<< <i>
<< <i>My crystal ball says DC overstrikes will become collectibles like the Scovill Fugios, Bolen Bar Cents, Machin's Mills Half Pennies, etc. >>
Perhaps, but those pieces were made before the Hobby Protection Act was passed. >>
You make an excellent point. Perhaps the Hobby Protection Act should be modified to require that ALL counterfeits be stamped with "COPY" without regard to their age. We wouldn't want someone to unknowingly buy one of these counterfeits. Right?
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
Less filling!
Great taste!
Less filling!
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>My crystal ball says DC overstrikes will become collectibles like the Scovill Fugios, Bolen Bar Cents, Machin's Mills Half Pennies, etc. >>
Perhaps, but those pieces were made before the Hobby Protection Act was passed. >>
You make an excellent point. Perhaps the Hobby Protection Act should be modified to require that ALL counterfeits be stamped with "COPY" without regard to their age. We wouldn't want someone to unknowingly buy one of these counterfeits. Right?
Why not just the new ones? If we don't go ridiculously retroactive we can't enforce it on modern fakes and replicas? that doesn't make any sense. All I know if it was Danial Lee out of Hong Kong, I doubt the salt of the earth Americans would be so prolific with their support.
I really think it is as simple as: If anybody makes dies that look like established production dies and makes widgets with them those products are fakes or reproductions at best and need to be marked as such unless that person is the US mint. Everything else is semantics
He could even put it on the edge if he wanted to but I believe that he doesn't because he knows deep down it affects the prices he can charge.
<< <i> he overstrikes do not bother me. >>
so that means they are not allowed to bother others? To simply blindly support them and not be able to at least understand the objections of of people who consider coins made or "modified" by people other than the US mint to be replicas shows an intellectual ignorance that is hard to understand. If it was a Louis V purse with a slightly different color brown or different font they would still be illegal and deemed counterfeit. Even someone took a lesser model and changed it to look like a more expensive version even if not exactly like a production model it would still be a fake. Why that doesn't apply to coins I will never know.
peacockcoins
<< <i>This is one of those arguments where both sides make excellent points and neither side is likely to convince the other. >>
Although one is an emotional argument and one logical but I digress.
I would say though I would not take the bet of them being worthless in the future, clearly collectable with multiple ave of interest. Even if they were to be declared illegal going forward it would only drive up interest of the older ones.
<< <i>This is one of those arguments where both sides make excellent points and neither side is likely to convince the other. >>
Great taste!
Less filling!
Great taste!
Less filling!
<< <i>
<< <i>This is one of those arguments where both sides make excellent points and neither side is likely to convince the other. >>
Although one is an emotional argument and one logical but I digress.
>>
Are we talking coins or religion?
peacockcoins
has it been sold?
<< <i>
<< <i>This is one of those arguments where both sides make excellent points and neither side is likely to convince the other. >>
Although one is an emotional argument and one logical but I digress.
>>
I tried to figure out which side had which argument.....But I'm not sure either side has a monopoly on EITHER emotional or logical grounds.
My opposition, (or at least lack of personal interest), is grounded in both arenas...
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
<< <i>The coins need to have "copy" stamped into them in letters of the proper size and depth in order to conform to the hobby protection act. >>
.......which precludes stamping COPY on the edge of most coins.
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>blah blah blah blah....another DC-hate thread. get over it...move on. DC makes great coins...anyone who can read should be able to tell the difference. the slab is clearly marked and explains everything. i just don't get all the DC-hate. i have a couple of his coins and they are fantastic. the overstrikes do not bother me. >>
Blah blah blah blah -- they aren't "coins", they're fantasy pieces, medalets, whatever else you want to call them, but they are not proper coins of the realm. Aesthetically, I find 100% of DC's works to be lacking. Technically, they're quite competent, but that's about as far as it goes.
The problem with such a scenario is that the so-called "injured party" wouldn't be paying big money for a D.Carr piece without researching it thoroughly in the first place in order to ascertain a likely value. The whole issue of D.Carr's overstrikes is a made-up problem with bogus remedy.
I knew it would happen.
<< <i>
<< <i> he overstrikes do not bother me. >>
so that means they are not allowed to bother others? To simply blindly support them and not be able to at least understand the objections of of people who consider coins made or "modified" by people other than the US mint to be replicas shows an intellectual ignorance that is hard to understand. If it was a Louis V purse with a slightly different color brown or different font they would still be illegal and deemed counterfeit. Even someone took a lesser model and changed it to look like a more expensive version even if not exactly like a production model it would still be a fake. Why that doesn't apply to coins I will never know. >>
mine is an opinion, like yours...no better or worse.
i bought some nikes for my son online...when they arrived, they were clearly counterfeit. the difference is that the site told us they were authentic and their intent was to fool us. i don't believe dc's intent is to fool anyone. that's where i see the difference between a fake louis vitton (sp?) purse and a dc overstrike.
btw, i respect your opinion and value you as a knowledgeable numismatist. i don't expect you to blindly accept my opinions. but, i think it would be wise to consider the intent behind the creation.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i> he overstrikes do not bother me. >>
so that means they are not allowed to bother others? To simply blindly support them and not be able to at least understand the objections of of people who consider coins made or "modified" by people other than the US mint to be replicas shows an intellectual ignorance that is hard to understand. If it was a Louis V purse with a slightly different color brown or different font they would still be illegal and deemed counterfeit. Even someone took a lesser model and changed it to look like a more expensive version even if not exactly like a production model it would still be a fake. Why that doesn't apply to coins I will never know. >>
mine is an opinion, like yours...no better or worse.
i bought some nikes for my son online...when they arrived, they were clearly counterfeit. the difference is that the site told us they were authentic and their intent was to fool us. i don't believe dc's intent is to fool anyone. that's where i see the difference between a fake louis vitton (sp?) purse and a dc overstrike.
btw, i respect your opinion and value you as a knowledgeable numismatist. i don't expect you to blindly accept my opinions. but, i think it would be wise to consider the intent behind the creation. >>
you have a good point about intent but if we were to walk that dog a few degrees further back the DC coins and the fake purse were both created with the intent to invoke the original and make disproportionate profits (opposed to the raw martial) by using the intellectual efforts of others without compensating them. While the fraud element might be the difference between criminal implications for the manufacturer, I am not sure if it has a bearing on the actual item being produced and its legality for marketing. As always just my opinion vocally stated to imply being fact based
Of course, "value" is assigned by the market. If people receive enjoyment from them, I don't see a reason to force my opinion on them....nor change my opinion because some don't agree with me.
I recently got a 63D Overstrike.
I like it and I understand why I bought it.
I like DC's work.
I think these are and will be collectible. Things in my case, I had to get a 98S Matte, so I did. I also wanted a 63 'what if' one. I will probably get a 75 at some point but they are too expensive.
I think they will be worth more in the Kennedy buzz that is soon to come. If not, oh well I like it.
“I want you to remember that no * ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making the other poor dumb * die for his country”
<< <i>you have a good point about intent but if we were to walk that dog a few degrees further back the DC coins and the fake purse were both created with the intent to invoke the original and make disproportionate profits (opposed to the raw martial) by using the intellectual efforts of others without compensating them. While the fraud element might be the difference between criminal implications for the manufacturer, I am not sure if it has a bearing on the actual item being produced and its legality for marketing. As always just my opinion vocally stated to imply being fact based
All of the US Coin designs in play here are, by law, public domain because they were paid for with tax dollars. So there is no "compensation" due.
The design work for a pair of shoes is privately-funded, and so there are intellectual property rights to consider in that case.
That said, if you bought some genuine designer-brand shoes and blinged them up to make and sell your own special edition, there is nothing wrong with that so long as you disclose the nature of the modifications.
Going back to the Mustang example -
There are several aftermarket outfitters, such as Saleen, which make and sell special-edition Mustangs. They start with a basic Ford Mustang and modify it, sometimes even putting "Saleen" (or whatever) insignia on the car. I have never heard anyone complain about that. And those cars generally sell for higher prices than regular Mustangs.
<< <i>
<< <i>you have a good point about intent but if we were to walk that dog a few degrees further back the DC coins and the fake purse were both created with the intent to invoke the original and make disproportionate profits (opposed to the raw martial) by using the intellectual efforts of others without compensating them. While the fraud element might be the difference between criminal implications for the manufacturer, I am not sure if it has a bearing on the actual item being produced and its legality for marketing. As always just my opinion vocally stated to imply being fact based
All of the US Coin designs in play here are, by law, public domain because they were paid for with tax dollars. So there is no "compensation" due.
The design work for a pair of shoes is privately-funded, and so there are intellectual property rights to consider in that case.
That said, if you bought some genuine designer-brand shoes and blinged them up to make and sell your own special edition, there is nothing wrong with that so long as you disclose the nature of the modifications.
Going back to the Mustang example -
There are several aftermarket outfitters, such as Saleen, which make and sell special-edition Mustangs. They start with a basic Ford Mustang and modify it, sometimes even putting "Saleen" (or whatever) insignia on the car. I have never heard anyone complain about that. And those cars generally sell for higher prices than regular Mustangs. >>
I actually do design original high fashion woman shoes for a living. The intellectual argument is lost on me. Don't care. I simply look at any of my versions that are used it as a form of flattery. Most of us do. It's easier for me to do an original design rather then a "copy" so to speak when a client requires it. The latter is harder think one would think.
I own a ton of D Carr's work and I admire him.
MJ
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
<< <i>I actually do design original high fashion woman shoes for a living. The intellectual argument is lost on me. Don't care. I simply look at any of my versions that are used it as a form of flattery. Most of us do. It's easier for me to do an original design rather then a "copy" so to speak when a client requires it. The latter is harder think one would think.
I own a ton of D Carr's work and I admire him.
MJ >>
Hello
You have seen Warhol's Shoes book I am sure. Great fun. I design as well
Eric
Like many others I have reasonable means and can afford US Mint renditions, but must say that some of Dan's pieces are really amongst my favorite coins.
Just look at one of his matte Oregon Trail pieces - these are tremendous aesthetically & I rather like his Confederate $20 gold pieces as well....
Well, just Love coins, period.
<< <i>I've gotta tell you -- I'm guessing that 80-90% or more of legit, honest coin shops would pay a little back of melt for this if they bought it over the counter, and not figure that they got a "rip", but rather they got something that was worth about melt value at best.
I say this with great respect to Mr. Carr, who I think is a very talented artist.
The market for these could possibly be researched on the Internet or on eBay, but considering there are hundreds (or perhaps thousands?) of privately made silver rounds out there, I do not think it is reasonable to expect that retail coin shop owners would be knowledgeable about the very few that sell for a premium over melt in the secondary marketplace. >>
Dave hit the nail on the head, imho. I have been buying OTC for many years, and have seen the craziest of items offered for sale. I have a large screen monitor at my buying station and when something is offered that I do not know about, i research it for the customer using various sites. I continue to build my knowledge of odds and ends, including a vast array of telemarketer crap that eventually gets resold.
However, this one would have stumped me. If I had not researched it, I would have offered $18 on spot of $20, assuming I was comfortable that it was an ounce of pure silver. I have, however, had Daniel Carr products come in and we paid 20% under the low retail price on Ebay/other sites.
<< <i>
<< <i>I've gotta tell you -- I'm guessing that 80-90% or more of legit, honest coin shops would pay a little back of melt for this if they bought it over the counter, and not figure that they got a "rip", but rather they got something that was worth about melt value at best.
I say this with great respect to Mr. Carr, who I think is a very talented artist.
The market for these could possibly be researched on the Internet or on eBay, but considering there are hundreds (or perhaps thousands?) of privately made silver rounds out there, I do not think it is reasonable to expect that retail coin shop owners would be knowledgeable about the very few that sell for a premium over melt in the secondary marketplace. >>
Dave hit the nail on the head, imho. I have been buying OTC for many years, and have seen the craziest of items offered for sale. I have a large screen monitor at my buying station and when something is offered that I do not know about, i research it for the customer using various sites. I continue to build my knowledge of odds and ends, including a vast array of telemarketer crap that eventually gets resold.
However, this one would have stumped me. If I had not researched it, I would have offered $18 on spot of $20, assuming I was comfortable that it was an ounce of pure silver. I have, however, had Daniel Carr products come in and we paid 20% under the low retail price on Ebay/other sites. >>
Well, in the case, the coin shop immediately recognized it as a DC product and, no doubt, made a fair offer relative to retail price for it, right?
<< <i>We had an elderly collector come into the shop this morning. Among the odds-and-ends that made up his collection was a 2009 "Proofed Overstrike" ASE in a nice, plush black velvet case, complete in a holder which mimics the PCGS holder and even has a hologram. All in all I think it's enough to fool an unsophisticated collector/investor and it sort of pisses me off. Oh well, let the games continue.
Al H. >>
This is really disheartening.
Having said that, isn't it up to the buyer on whether or not s/he will swallow the malarkey tale handed out by the unscrupulous sellers?
By that, I mean, DC 2009 "Proofed" SAE is still one ounce of fine silver that anybody could purchase on the open market. Having it in a phoney PCGS slab does not change that fact provided its an "original" DC coin.
If a seller decides to play up the "no proofs" minted in 2009 and touts the coin as a 1 in a million opportunity for only $15,000, then shouldn't the buyer have the responsibility of some due diligence?
All the while remembering that it is STILL (if an original DC coin), 1 ounce of .9999 fine silver.
The name is LEE!