All wrong stock metal coins are transitionals.
Neca63
Posts: 350
Anybody wanna play along?
Post your thoughts and reasoning.
I will start...
Any coin struck on any planchet not normally intended for that coins production release is a transitional coin error.
...Even the lowly rolled thick and rolled thin planchet coins.
Post your thoughts and reasoning.
I will start...
Any coin struck on any planchet not normally intended for that coins production release is a transitional coin error.
...Even the lowly rolled thick and rolled thin planchet coins.
0
Comments
For example, a nickel struck on a quarter planchet is NOT a transitional because they weren't moving to striking nickels on quarter sized planchets. There is NO transition occurring.
A pattern could be considered a transitional coin because the mint was moving from one design to the next and these were the test strikes along the way.
Certain varieties (i.e. Reverse of XXXX) could be considered transitional because the mint was in the process of changing to a minor new die design. Most recently I would call the 2008 ASE's with the 2007 reverse a transitional coin.
None of the examples you cited are the result of a transition occurring at the mint or anywhere else.
Choice Numismatics www.ChoiceCoin.com
CN eBay
All of my collection is in a safe deposit box!
If you'd like to add more to your statement after "I'll Start",
I'll Read, but with very few exceptions, your statement is
not correct, and you haven't given any reasoning why you
think it is.
You Start - I'll Listen
short lived topic.
I have nothing to add other than Lincoln cents from copper to steel and then back again...those errors on wrong planchets are perhaps classic transitional strikes.
"Keep your malarkey filter in good operating order" -Walter Breen
<< <i>NECA63, your premise is wrong.
If you'd like to add more to your statement after "I'll Start",
I'll Read, but with very few exceptions, your statement is
not correct, and you haven't given any reasoning why you
think it is.
You Start - I'll Listen >>
Enjoy the read. You gonna love this.
the page.......
s
That definition has nothing to do with Off Metal,
Wrong Metals, or anything numismatic, except
for what is traditionally called "Transitional"
error coins. You can't take that definition of the
word, and think it applies to normal Off Metal or
Wrong Stock error coins. It simply does not.
Your dictionary definition does not support your
premise whatsoever.
<< <i>I can't believe I actually pasted that, and went to
the page.......
s
That definition has nothing to do with Off Metal,
Wrong Metals, or anything numismatic, except
for what is traditionally called "Transitional"
error coins. You can't take that definition of the
word, and think it applies to normal Off Metal or
Wrong Stock error coins. It simply does not.
Your dictionary definition does not support your
premise whatsoever. >>
+1
<< <i>I can't believe I actually pasted that, and went to
the page.......
s
That definition has nothing to do with Off Metal,
Wrong Metals, or anything numismatic, except
for what is traditionally called "Transitional"
error coins. You can't take that definition of the
word, and think it applies to normal Off Metal or
Wrong Stock error coins. It simply does not.
Your dictionary definition does not support your
premise whatsoever. >>
Your not suggesting that a Numismatist would create their own definition of a word are you?
Coin Club Benefit auctions ..... View the Lots
I am suggesting that it is just a matter of how we look at things.
Those things that we are looking at may be better understood by a more detailed analysis of how our traditional numismatic nomenclature evolved.
To wit, if there is a composition change in metals such as the 1943 copper cents, by common convention, we consider them to be transitional coins.
But, if during the normal course of production, some event occurs which causes the wrong planchet stock to be used in lieu of the normal production stock, we have a transitional event in occurrence.
It could be the classical end of year composition change transitional , or it could be something else, such as a change in the rolling stock during the given years production.
Some transition has taking place in the normal production process which causes a planchet to deviate from normal.
There was a transition in the normal production process but the reason for it's creation may lie somewhere else within the production process.
Perhaps it seems like a minor point, but if we see wrong stock planchet errors as types of transitional errors, we may then be able to break down those different transitions into their probability of occurrence.
As you see, the answers haven't changed over the last year.
I'm sorry that you don't like, "No, you're wrong" as an answer (even when it comes with piles of supporting data to explain why you're wrong), but the answer isn't going to change a few months later.
<< <i>
<< <i>NECA63, your premise is wrong.
If you'd like to add more to your statement after "I'll Start",
I'll Read, but with very few exceptions, your statement is
not correct, and you haven't given any reasoning why you
think it is.
You Start - I'll Listen >>
Enjoy the read. You gonna love this. >>
Not so much, apparently.
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution
<< <i>
<< <i>I can't believe I actually pasted that, and went to
the page.......
s
That definition has nothing to do with Off Metal,
Wrong Metals, or anything numismatic, except
for what is traditionally called "Transitional"
error coins. You can't take that definition of the
word, and think it applies to normal Off Metal or
Wrong Stock error coins. It simply does not.
Your dictionary definition does not support your
premise whatsoever. >>
Your not suggesting that a Numismatist would create their own definition of a word are you?
or even their own words?
BHNC #203
The Lincoln cent store:
http://www.lincolncent.com
My numismatic art work:
http://www.cdaughtrey.com
USAF veteran, 1986-1996 :: support our troops - the American way.
Here are a few examples of what I am pointing out.
A 1965 dime on a silver planchet is a transitional date composition wrong stock.
A 1970 D quarter struck on dime stock planchet is a transitional denomination composition wrong stock.
A rolled thick or rolled thin stock is a transitional foreign domestic production planchet wrong stock.
and ect.
However, once again, your premise is incorrect.
Having a Wrong Planchet, Wrong Stock Planchet,
or anything similar, get struck as you described
is NOT a 'Transitional Event' (your words)
Your entire last posting is your opinion, which is
fine - just please don't expect the rest of us to
buy into it.
So at least now I know where your Thread Headline
comes from - a totally incorrect assumption/interpretation
of the Minting Process.
I feel a lot better now that I don't have wonder what you meant.
<< <i>No sense in gettin personal fellows, wrong stocks are a growing field in numismatics.
Here are a few examples of what I am pointing out.
A 1965 dime on a silver planchet is a transitional date composition wrong stock.
A 1970 D quarter struck on dime stock planchet is a transitional denomination composition wrong stock.
A rolled thick or rolled thin stock is a transitional foreign domestic production planchet wrong stock.
and ect. >>
Wrong. A 1970-D quarter struck on dime-stock strip is a production error. There was no transition in stock from 1969 to 1970 to 1971.
Breaking down the different types of wrong stock errors into useful classifications will assist in the understanding of their manufacture and relative rarity.
Semantics aside, there is a metal transition taking place somewhere, and at some time, in the mint that is causing the planchets to deviate from normal.
We can label them however we may so choose, so if transitional sounds offensive then call them deviations.
The basic premise is correct, wrong stocks are related by virtue of their manufacture, and proper classifications.
They are worthy of proper classification.
<< <i>
<< <i>No sense in gettin personal fellows, wrong stocks are a growing field in numismatics.
Here are a few examples of what I am pointing out.
A 1965 dime on a silver planchet is a transitional date composition wrong stock.
A 1970 D quarter struck on dime stock planchet is a transitional denomination composition wrong stock.
A rolled thick or rolled thin stock is a transitional foreign domestic production planchet wrong stock.
and ect. >>
Wrong. A 1970-D quarter struck on dime-stock strip is a production error. There was no transition in stock from 1969 to 1970 to 1971. >>
Yo Capt, your getting ahead of me and into the realm of sub classification.
Is it pre production, post production, or no production?
<< <i>I am not suggesting that we should make up our own numismatic definitions.
I am suggesting that it is just a matter of how we look at things.
Those things that we are looking at may be better understood by a more detailed analysis of how our traditional numismatic nomenclature evolved.
To wit, if there is a composition change in metals such as the 1943 copper cents, by common convention, we consider them to be transitional coins.
But, if during the normal course of production, some event occurs which causes the wrong planchet stock to be used in lieu of the normal production stock, we have a transitional event in occurrence.
It could be the classical end of year composition change transitional , or it could be something else, such as a change in the rolling stock during the given years production.
Some transition has taking place in the normal production process which causes a planchet to deviate from normal.
There was a transition in the normal production process but the reason for it's creation may lie somewhere else within the production process.
Perhaps it seems like a minor point, but if we see wrong stock planchet errors as types of transitional errors, we may then be able to break down those different transitions into their probability of occurrence. >>
After reading this, I hope you don't have much influence on anything in the world. Please don't even vote.
You can't even get a definition right after multiple people have told you the correct answer.
My reply may seem harsh, but people have tried being reasonable with you to no avail.
Choice Numismatics www.ChoiceCoin.com
CN eBay
All of my collection is in a safe deposit box!
<< <i>Sure, I'll play along with a question. What happens when a coin collector take a bunch of psychedelic mushrooms and posts online? >>
You.
<< <i>
<< <i>I am not suggesting that we should make up our own numismatic definitions.
I am suggesting that it is just a matter of how we look at things.
Those things that we are looking at may be better understood by a more detailed analysis of how our traditional numismatic nomenclature evolved.
To wit, if there is a composition change in metals such as the 1943 copper cents, by common convention, we consider them to be transitional coins.
But, if during the normal course of production, some event occurs which causes the wrong planchet stock to be used in lieu of the normal production stock, we have a transitional event in occurrence.
It could be the classical end of year composition change transitional , or it could be something else, such as a change in the rolling stock during the given years production.
Some transition has taking place in the normal production process which causes a planchet to deviate from normal.
There was a transition in the normal production process but the reason for it's creation may lie somewhere else within the production process.
Perhaps it seems like a minor point, but if we see wrong stock planchet errors as types of transitional errors, we may then be able to break down those different transitions into their probability of occurrence. >>
After reading this, I hope you don't have much influence on anything in the world. Please don't even vote.
You can't even get a definition right after multiple people have told you the correct answer.
My reply may seem harsh, but people have tried being reasonable with you to no avail. >>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>I am not suggesting that we should make up our own numismatic definitions.
I am suggesting that it is just a matter of how we look at things.
Those things that we are looking at may be better understood by a more detailed analysis of how our traditional numismatic nomenclature evolved.
To wit, if there is a composition change in metals such as the 1943 copper cents, by common convention, we consider them to be transitional coins.
But, if during the normal course of production, some event occurs which causes the wrong planchet stock to be used in lieu of the normal production stock, we have a transitional event in occurrence.
It could be the classical end of year composition change transitional , or it could be something else, such as a change in the rolling stock during the given years production.
Some transition has taking place in the normal production process which causes a planchet to deviate from normal.
There was a transition in the normal production process but the reason for it's creation may lie somewhere else within the production process.
Perhaps it seems like a minor point, but if we see wrong stock planchet errors as types of transitional errors, we may then be able to break down those different transitions into their probability of occurrence. >>
After reading this, I hope you don't have much influence on anything in the world. Please don't even vote.
You can't even get a definition right after multiple people have told you the correct answer.
My reply may seem harsh, but people have tried being reasonable with you to no avail. >>
>>
Not much of interest to some even when written in English.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>I am not suggesting that we should make up our own numismatic definitions.
I am suggesting that it is just a matter of how we look at things.
Those things that we are looking at may be better understood by a more detailed analysis of how our traditional numismatic nomenclature evolved.
To wit, if there is a composition change in metals such as the 1943 copper cents, by common convention, we consider them to be transitional coins.
But, if during the normal course of production, some event occurs which causes the wrong planchet stock to be used in lieu of the normal production stock, we have a transitional event in occurrence.
It could be the classical end of year composition change transitional , or it could be something else, such as a change in the rolling stock during the given years production.
Some transition has taking place in the normal production process which causes a planchet to deviate from normal.
There was a transition in the normal production process but the reason for it's creation may lie somewhere else within the production process.
Perhaps it seems like a minor point, but if we see wrong stock planchet errors as types of transitional errors, we may then be able to break down those different transitions into their probability of occurrence. >>
After reading this, I hope you don't have much influence on anything in the world. Please don't even vote.
You can't even get a definition right after multiple people have told you the correct answer.
My reply may seem harsh, but people have tried being reasonable with you to no avail. >>
>>
Not much of interest to some even when written in English. >>
What???
Choice Numismatics www.ChoiceCoin.com
CN eBay
All of my collection is in a safe deposit box!
<< <i>It should not be too hard to understand that there can be different types of transitional planchet coins.
They are worthy of proper classification. >>
I agree, so why do you insist on using the term incorrectly?
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution
However, the word "transition" has a connotation of change from one long-term state to another long-term state. For example, when a song on the radio ends and another begins, we might speak of a transition between songs. However, if a gun is fired in the middle of a song, we don't speak of the transition from music to gunshot. We use a different word meaning change, such as interruption, glitch, disruption, one-off, etc. What may be confusing is that these short-term, temporary changes are often termed "transitory."
Some wrong stock coins are transitional - from the old state (silver) to the new (clad). Others are transitory - quarter struck on a cent planchet.
It seems that most of the posters here see a fundamental difference between these two categories, and don't want to use the word "transition" to describe both.
<< <i>The OP defines the word "transition" to mean change, in a generic sense. Thus, even an incorrect planchet error is a "transition" from the correct production conditions to the wrong conditions (and presumably immediately back to the right ones).
However, the word "transition" has a connotation of change from one long-term state to another long-term state. For example, when a song on the radio ends and another begins, we might speak of a transition between songs. However, if a gun is fired in the middle of a song, we don't speak of the transition from music to gunshot. We use a different word meaning change, such as interruption, glitch, disruption, one-off, etc. What may be confusing is that these short-term, temporary changes are often termed "transitory."
Some wrong stock coins are transitional - from the old state (silver) to the new (clad). Others are transitory - quarter struck on a cent planchet.
It seems that most of the posters here see a fundamental difference between these two categories, and don't want to use the word "transition" to describe both. >>
Great examples!
Choice Numismatics www.ChoiceCoin.com
CN eBay
All of my collection is in a safe deposit box!
<< <i>The OP defines the word "transition" to mean change, in a generic sense. Thus, even an incorrect planchet error is a "transition" from the correct production conditions to the wrong conditions (and presumably immediately back to the right ones).
However, the word "transition" has a connotation of change from one long-term state to another long-term state. For example, when a song on the radio ends and another begins, we might speak of a transition between songs. However, if a gun is fired in the middle of a song, we don't speak of the transition from music to gunshot. We use a different word meaning change, such as interruption, glitch, disruption, one-off, etc. What may be confusing is that these short-term, temporary changes are often termed "transitory."
Some wrong stock coins are transitional - from the old state (silver) to the new (clad). Others are transitory - quarter struck on a cent planchet.
It seems that most of the posters here see a fundamental difference between these two categories, and don't want to use the word "transition" to describe both. >>
Very good.
Kinda like as all double dies are to all transitional's, but existent.
<< <i>
<< <i>The OP defines the word "transition" to mean change, in a generic sense. Thus, even an incorrect planchet error is a "transition" from the correct production conditions to the wrong conditions (and presumably immediately back to the right ones).
However, the word "transition" has a connotation of change from one long-term state to another long-term state. For example, when a song on the radio ends and another begins, we might speak of a transition between songs. However, if a gun is fired in the middle of a song, we don't speak of the transition from music to gunshot. We use a different word meaning change, such as interruption, glitch, disruption, one-off, etc. What may be confusing is that these short-term, temporary changes are often termed "transitory."
Some wrong stock coins are transitional - from the old state (silver) to the new (clad). Others are transitory - quarter struck on a cent planchet.
It seems that most of the posters here see a fundamental difference between these two categories, and don't want to use the word "transition" to describe both. >>
Very good.
Kinda like as all double dies are to all transitional's, but existent. >>
Choice Numismatics www.ChoiceCoin.com
CN eBay
All of my collection is in a safe deposit box!
Wrong stock metals were not intended to be struck in this manner.
A grey area is the leftover 1942 copper planchets left in the 1943 cent bucket from the PRIOR YEAR and accidentally struck so it could be considered transitional.
But a silver dime planchet put in the wrong same year cent bucket is NOT transitional as the silver dime planchet is not transitional in itself AND cannot be proven to have been leftover from the prior year.
On the other hand, a silver dime planchet from 1964 or 1965 left in the bucket and accidentally ended in the 1965 or 1966 cent bucket COULD be considered a transitional coin.
<< <i>Very good.
Kinda like as all double dies are to all transitional's, but existent. >>
If you are going to use another numismatic term to make your point, please use it correctly. Double dies do not exist ... doubled dies do, however.
No need to reiterate what some of the knowledgable error folks have said here. Simply "redefining" a numismatic term to fit your need doesn't make it correct. There is one author who insists a coin is not a proof unless it was released for sale to the public. Just because he defines a proof that way, does not make it so.
Perhaps your next thread will be lucky number 7 and you will convince us all.
See http://www.doubledimes.com for a free online reference for US twenty-cent pieces
And I agree that those coins are transitionals. however, there are different types of transitional planchet errors.
They can be transitional by virtue of date composition change, metallic compositional change, or by denominational compositional change.
They are all related as the planchet metal being blanked is incorrect for that which was intended for normal release.
As a type of error, all would reasonably fall under the use of of the words transitional planchets.
All are related planchet production errors which occur under similar, but different, circumstance.
They could also just as easily be separated, sub grouped, and referred to, as transitionals, compositionals, or denominationals.
It is just another way of grouping them to help assist in a further understanding, appreciation, and categorization of their creation, and no more.
P.S. If you stop and think about it, the main difference between the wrong date composition transitional coins, and the wrong metal and denomination transitional coins, is that the date transitional will generally result in a normally perfect coin, while the other transitional types result in an imperfect abnormal coin. The one is a perfect transitional, while the others are imperfect transitional s.
<< <i>By common convention and thru years of marketing, the coin business has morphed the use of the term transitional to imply a coin which is struck on a planchet of different composition from that which was intended for the year.
And I agree that those coins are transitionals. however, there are different types of transitional planchet errors.
They can be transitional by virtue of date composition change, metallic compositional change, or by denominational compositional change.
They are all related as the planchet metal being blanked is incorrect for that which was intended for normal release.
As a type of error, all would reasonably fall under the use of of the words transitional planchets.
All are related planchet production errors which occur under similar, but different, circumstance.
They could also just as easily be separated, sub grouped, and referred to, as transitionals, compositionals, or denominationals.
It is just another way of grouping them to help assist in a further understanding, appreciation, and categorization of their creation, and no more.
P.S. If you stop and think about it, the main difference between the wrong date composition transitional coins, and the wrong metal and denomination transitional coins, is that the date transitional will generally result in a normally perfect coin, while the other transitional types result in an imperfect abnormal coin. The one is a perfect transitional, while the others are imperfect transitional s. >>
No, that isn't the common convention. That is the (WRONG) definition you are attempting to convince us of.
If you stop and think about it, you will realize you are attempting to apply a numismatic definition incorrectly.
Choice Numismatics www.ChoiceCoin.com
CN eBay
All of my collection is in a safe deposit box!
<< <i>Text Subscribe to this thread Email this thread to someone User is offline Send user a private message View thread in raw text format By common convention and thru years of marketing, the coin business has morphed the use of the term transitional to imply a coin which is struck on a planchet of different composition from that which was intended for the year. And I agree that those coins are transitionals. however, there are different types of transitional planchet errors. They can be transitional by virtue of date composition change, metallic compositional change, or by denominational compositional change. They are all related as the planchet metal being blanked is incorrect for that which was intended for normal release. As a type of error, all would reasonably fall under the use of of the words transitional planchets. All are related planchet production errors which occur under similar, but different, circumstance. They could also just as easily be separated, sub grouped, and referred to, as transitionals, compositionals, or denominationals. It is just another way of grouping them to help assist in a further understanding, appreciation, and categorization of their creation, and no more. P.S. If you stop and think about it, the main difference between the wrong date composition transitional coins, and the wrong metal and denomination transitional coins, is that the date transitional will generally result in a normally perfect coin, while the other transitional types result in an imperfect abnormal coin. The one is a perfect transitional, while the others are imperfect transitional s. Edited: Friday June 19, 2015 at 8:30 AM by Neca63 >>
I cannot disagree more. Like I and others have stated you are applying a numismatic definition incorrectly. Transitionals, compositionals or denominationals are not merely subgroups of common planchet production errors. You are putting the cart before the horse. Your way of applying your intended definition will only confuse the understanding for well over a century that the numismatic hobby enjoys in defining the difference between transitional coins which is quite rare in that there are only a few years in which an INTENDED transition in composition or design occurs versus much more common wrong metal or denominational which are NOT INTENDED.
Transitional is NOT a subgroup of planchet production errors. It is the other way around. Transitional enjoys its own unique major grouping in our hobby. The hobby only ALLOWED planchet production errors during transitional years to be called a transitional ......such as the 1943 copper cent because it enjoyed a huge marketing benefit which excited the public at large and did fall within the two years of the transitional change.
<< <i>
<< <i>Text Subscribe to this thread Email this thread to someone User is offline Send user a private message View thread in raw text format By common convention and thru years of marketing, the coin business has morphed the use of the term transitional to imply a coin which is struck on a planchet of different composition from that which was intended for the year. And I agree that those coins are transitionals. however, there are different types of transitional planchet errors. They can be transitional by virtue of date composition change, metallic compositional change, or by denominational compositional change. They are all related as the planchet metal being blanked is incorrect for that which was intended for normal release. As a type of error, all would reasonably fall under the use of of the words transitional planchets. All are related planchet production errors which occur under similar, but different, circumstance. They could also just as easily be separated, sub grouped, and referred to, as transitionals, compositionals, or denominationals. It is just another way of grouping them to help assist in a further understanding, appreciation, and categorization of their creation, and no more. P.S. If you stop and think about it, the main difference between the wrong date composition transitional coins, and the wrong metal and denomination transitional coins, is that the date transitional will generally result in a normally perfect coin, while the other transitional types result in an imperfect abnormal coin. The one is a perfect transitional, while the others are imperfect transitional s.
Edited: Friday June 19, 2015 at 8:30 AM by Neca63 >>
If you prefer, substitute the words perfect for intentional, and imperfect for unintentional.
I cannot disagree more. Like I and others have stated you are applying a numismatic definition incorrectly. Transitionals, compositionals or denominationals are not merely subgroups of common planchet production errors. You are putting the cart before the horse. Your way of applying your intended definition will only confuse the understanding for well over a century that the numismatic hobby enjoys in defining the difference between transitional coins which is quite rare in that there are only a few years in which an INTENDED transition in composition or design occurs versus much more common wrong metal or denominational which are NOT INTENDED.
Transitional is NOT a subgroup of planchet production errors. It is the other way around. Transitional enjoys its own unique major grouping in our hobby. The hobby only ALLOWED planchet production errors during transitional years to be called a transitional ......such as the 1943 copper cent because it enjoyed a huge marketing benefit which excited the public at large and did fall within the two years of the transitional change. >>
Coin Club Benefit auctions ..... View the Lots
<< <i>The 1864 With L Indian cents in copper nickel are either patterns (Proof format) or wrong planchet errors (circulation finds). You could argue, and I have, that these are transitional pieces. The real question is whether they should be collected as part of the regular issue series. It is cool to have one in a collection, but the Proofs are transitional patterns and the circ pieces are still wrong planchet errors even though they are struck with dies in use in 1864 on planchets that were used in 1864. If any wrong stock coin has a claim to being collected as a regular issue it is the 1864 With L CN pieces. But they are not. >>
Yet.
<< <i>The 1864 With L Indian cents in copper nickel are either patterns (Proof format) or wrong planchet errors (circulation finds). You could argue, and I have, that these are transitional pieces. The real question is whether they should be collected as part of the regular issue series. It is cool to have one in a collection, but the Proofs are transitional patterns and the circ pieces are still wrong planchet errors even though they are struck with dies in use in 1864 on planchets that were used in 1864. If any wrong stock coin has a claim to being collected as a regular issue it is the 1864 With L CN pieces. But they are not. >>
Rick, Without a doubt, I agree that the business strike is a transitional wrong stock. The only other thing that comes to mind with regards to that business strike transitional, is that it may only also be a specimen strike.
With respect to what I have been referring to as perfect and imperferct transitional wrong stocks, I am going to post, what I hope will be, an easy to understand hypothetical example of what I have been discussing, and the rational for my original post.
The year is 1965 and the mint is simultaneously producing both 1964 dated silver coinage, and 1965 clad coinages. There are two separated but identical assembly lines set up that can take coin production from the point of blanking all the way to final striking of the coins. They are set up so that there can be no cross contamination between them, ie...no planchets can escape from one line to the other line.
Line one is set up to run 1964 silver dated quarters and 1964 silver dimes.
Line two is set up to run 1965 dated copper nickel clad quarters, and 1965 dated cu/ni dimes.
Behind these productions lines is a room that is shared by the two production lines which houses the planchet rolling stocks.
In that room, there are only four rolls and they are all different types of rolling stock.
We have a roll of silver quarter stock, we have a roll of silver dime stock, we have a roll of cu/ni quarter stock, and we have a roll of cu/ni dime stock.
Now assume that in the first production line, we are set up to run 1964 silver dated quarters.
If we put on a blindfold and go into the room where the rolling stock is, and then randomly pick out any one of the four rolls of metal stock, and we then place it into our 1964 silver quarter production run, what occurs?
We can get a perfect normal 1964 silver quarter production coin if we have selected the silver quarter dollar stock.
But, what if we did not pick the silver quarter stock? What are we then producing, and how do we properly classify it?
OK, so we ran the silver quarter stock, and then we are left with the other three rolls. So now we go and grab one of the last three rolls, and run it on our silver quarter production line. What gets produced, and how would you properly classify it?
...
to be continued.