Is this a Cheerios dollar and cent?

Zoins

With all the pairs of 2000 dollars and cents out there, how cool is this one? Just ran across this while searching for Sacagawea dollars.

• PCGS 28791037
• HA 12223249

CommemKing

How on planet earth could that have happened? Child's play at the Mint?

AUandAG

Can't get my head around this.

bob

oih82w8

I don't believe the markers (tail feathers and a polishing area at the bust) are exposed to make the determination for the dollar.

Zoins

@oih82w8 said:
I don't believe the markers (tail feathers and a polishing area at the bust) are exposed to make the determination for the dollar.

That's my thought as well, but I was wondering if anyone could figure it out, especially the obverse.

thevolcanogod

I believe the markers are covered on both sides.

FredWeinberg

It's not a Cheerios Dollar – these were struck after those pieces were struck

Insider2

@FredWeinberg said:
It's not a Cheerios Dollar – these were struck after those pieces were struck

How many of the OP's item have you seen?

Rich49

Sold for:$35,250.00
includes Buyer's Premium (BP)

JULY, 2015
9th-12th
Thursday-Sunday

FredWeinberg

There are about eight known of the Cent struck on to a Sac Dollar, and a proxy the same number of cents struck onto struck New Hampshire quarters. There are also a few other single pieces of a similar nature.

coinsarefun

Looks very cool, awesome actually but, impossible to believe this is a mint error.

FredWeinberg

They were obviously struck on purpose.

crazyhounddog

To me it looks like the cent is just laying on top of the dollar. Must just be the image.

Insider2

IMO, the image is really good. Look for the different shadowed areas where the rims of the cent appear to "drop into" the dollar.

Zoins

@FredWeinberg said:
There are about eight known of the Cent struck on to a Sac Dollar, and a proxy the same number of cents struck onto struck New Hampshire quarters. There are also a few other single pieces of a similar nature.

Do you know how these were discovered?

davewesen

@Zoins said:

@FredWeinberg said:
There are about eight known of the Cent struck on to a Sac Dollar, and a proxy the same number of cents struck onto struck New Hampshire quarters. There are also a few other single pieces of a similar nature.

Do you know how these were discovered?

I suspect by the mint employee who made them...

CaptHenway

@Zoins said:

@FredWeinberg said:
There are about eight known of the Cent struck on to a Sac Dollar, and a proxy the same number of cents struck onto struck New Hampshire quarters. There are also a few other single pieces of a similar nature.

Do you know how these were discovered?

They were found under a cabbage in Mrs. Wiggs' Cabbage Patch!

TurboSnail

This is the coin collector version of Disney's 101 dalmatian, 101 denomination.

Justacommeman

My head hurts

mark

DIMEMAN

Neat, but not worth very much to me.

BLUEJAYWAY

@FredWeinberg said:
They were obviously struck on purpose.

When "errors" such as these are, in your words "obviously struck on purpose" can't they be considered up for confiscation by the gov't?

MWallace

@BLUEJAYWAY said:
When "errors" such as these are, in your words "obviously struck on purpose" can't they be considered up for confiscation by the gov't?

Yes.

Zoins

@MWallace said:

@BLUEJAYWAY said:
When "errors" such as these are, in your words "obviously struck on purpose" can't they be considered up for confiscation by the gov't?

Yes.

Has the government confiscated, or indicated they will confiscate, any of these errors by how they are made?

Or do they go by how they are distributed, e.g. by a Mint employee or found in circulation? This is a reason for my asking how they were discovered.

This was sold in 2015 and if there are a few on Sac dollars and statehood quarters, have any of these been confiscated?

ricko

Would be a genuine thrill to find one of these in circulation.... I have no idea where they were found or how they were 'discovered'.... First I have even heard of these. @FredWeinberg.. do you have any details on the backstory? Cheers, RickO

MWallace

@Zoins said:

@MWallace said:

@BLUEJAYWAY said:
When "errors" such as these are, in your words "obviously struck on purpose" can't they be considered up for confiscation by the gov't?

Yes.

Has the government confiscated, or indicated they will confiscate, any of these errors by how they are made?

Or do they go by how they are distributed, e.g. by a Mint employee or found in circulation? This is a reason for my asking how they were discovered.

This was sold in 2015 and if there are a few on Sac dollars and statehood quarters, have any of these been confiscated?

As Fred said, "they were obviously struck on purpose". My understanding is that this alone makes them technically illegal to own. Am I wrong?

Zoins

@MWallace said:

@Zoins said:

@MWallace said:

@BLUEJAYWAY said:
When "errors" such as these are, in your words "obviously struck on purpose" can't they be considered up for confiscation by the gov't?

Yes.

Has the government confiscated, or indicated they will confiscate, any of these errors by how they are made?

Or do they go by how they are distributed, e.g. by a Mint employee or found in circulation? This is a reason for my asking how they were discovered.

This was sold in 2015 and if there are a few on Sac dollars and statehood quarters, have any of these been confiscated?

As Fred said, "they were obviously struck on purpose". My understanding is that this alone makes them technically illegal to own. Am I wrong?

You have a valued, educated opinion but, from my understanding, are not representing the US Government in this instance. We've seen cases where educated opinions and US Goverment opinions/actions don't match. This is why I'm interested in government opinions and actions.

For example, many collectors have the opinion that the 1913 Libery nickels should be illegal to own, but the US Government has not confiscated them. Are the collectors with this opinion wrong?

MWallace

@Zoins said:

@MWallace said:

@Zoins said:

@MWallace said:

@BLUEJAYWAY said:
When "errors" such as these are, in your words "obviously struck on purpose" can't they be considered up for confiscation by the gov't?

Yes.

Has the government confiscated, or indicated they will confiscate, any of these errors by how they are made?

Or do they go by how they are distributed, e.g. by a Mint employee or found in circulation? This is a reason for my asking how they were discovered.

This was sold in 2015 and if there are a few on Sac dollars and statehood quarters, have any of these been confiscated?

As Fred said, "they were obviously struck on purpose". My understanding is that this alone makes them technically illegal to own. Am I wrong?

You have a valued, educated opinion but, from my understanding, are not representing the US Government in this instance . We've seen cases where educated opinions and US Goverment opinions/actions don't match. This is why I'm interested in government opinions and actions.

My memory is not what it used to be, but I seem to remember that the Government checked into confiscating the Sac$/State Quarter mules because they thought they were intentionally struck. Not being able to determine that for sure, they dropped it.

MWallace

@Zoins said:

@MWallace said:

@Zoins said:

@MWallace said:

@BLUEJAYWAY said:
When "errors" such as these are, in your words "obviously struck on purpose" can't they be considered up for confiscation by the gov't?

Yes.

Has the government confiscated, or indicated they will confiscate, any of these errors by how they are made?

Or do they go by how they are distributed, e.g. by a Mint employee or found in circulation? This is a reason for my asking how they were discovered.

This was sold in 2015 and if there are a few on Sac dollars and statehood quarters, have any of these been confiscated?

As Fred said, "they were obviously struck on purpose". My understanding is that this alone makes them technically illegal to own. Am I wrong?

You have a valued, educated opinion but, from my understanding, are not representing the US Government in this instance. We've seen cases where educated opinions and US Goverment opinions/actions don't match. This is why I'm interested in government opinions and actions.

For example, many collectors have the opinion that the 1913 Libery nickels should be illegal to own, but the US Government has not confiscated them. Are the collectors with this opinion wrong?

To answer your edit, are they right?

Zoins

@MWallace said:

@Zoins said:

@MWallace said:

@Zoins said:

@MWallace said:

@BLUEJAYWAY said:
When "errors" such as these are, in your words "obviously struck on purpose" can't they be considered up for confiscation by the gov't?

Yes.

Has the government confiscated, or indicated they will confiscate, any of these errors by how they are made?

Or do they go by how they are distributed, e.g. by a Mint employee or found in circulation? This is a reason for my asking how they were discovered.

This was sold in 2015 and if there are a few on Sac dollars and statehood quarters, have any of these been confiscated?

As Fred said, "they were obviously struck on purpose". My understanding is that this alone makes them technically illegal to own. Am I wrong?

You have a valued, educated opinion but, from my understanding, are not representing the US Government in this instance. We've seen cases where educated opinions and US Goverment opinions/actions don't match. This is why I'm interested in government opinions and actions.

For example, many collectors have the opinion that the 1913 Libery nickels should be illegal to own, but the US Government has not confiscated them. Are the collectors with this opinion wrong?

To answer your edit, are they right?

I don't know. I took one law school class but don't have a law degree. The class was also on product liability, not on ownership of government produced items.

Another similar item is the dime on a nail that was certified by PCGS and sold. To me, the 1913 Liberty nickel, the dime on a nail and this piece all seem legal to own by the US Government allowing the well-publicized sales to go through. On the other hand the 1974-D aluminum cent and 1933 double eagle (other than the Farouk specimen) seem illegal to own, at least in the opinion of government attorneys.

MWallace

@Zoins said:

@MWallace said:

@Zoins said:

@MWallace said:

@Zoins said:

@MWallace said:

@BLUEJAYWAY said:
When "errors" such as these are, in your words "obviously struck on purpose" can't they be considered up for confiscation by the gov't?

Yes.

Has the government confiscated, or indicated they will confiscate, any of these errors by how they are made?

Or do they go by how they are distributed, e.g. by a Mint employee or found in circulation? This is a reason for my asking how they were discovered.

This was sold in 2015 and if there are a few on Sac dollars and statehood quarters, have any of these been confiscated?

As Fred said, "they were obviously struck on purpose". My understanding is that this alone makes them technically illegal to own. Am I wrong?

You have a valued, educated opinion but, from my understanding, are not representing the US Government in this instance. We've seen cases where educated opinions and US Goverment opinions/actions don't match. This is why I'm interested in government opinions and actions.

For example, many collectors have the opinion that the 1913 Libery nickels should be illegal to own, but the US Government has not confiscated them. Are the collectors with this opinion wrong?

To answer your edit, are they right?

I don't know. I took one law school class but don't have a law degree. The class was also on product liability, not on ownership of government produced items.

Another similar item is the dime on a nail that was certified by PCGS and sold. To me, the 1913 Liberty nickel, the dime on a nail and this piece all seem legal to own by the US Government allowing the well-publicized sales to go through. On the other hand the 1974-D aluminum cent and 1933 double eagle (other than the Farouk specimen) seem illegal to own, at least in the opinion of government attorneys.

I don't know either. I wasn't giving a definitive answer or MY opinion. I was just stating what I understand it to be. The government is very unclear on their stance. Probably more trouble to them then it's worth. Disclosure: I'm not a lawyer and I don't play one on TV.

Insider2

In an ANA Authentication Seminar around 1974, the instructor told the class that any error that appeared to be or had to be made on purpose was not certified as genuine. In several cases, these "made-by-hand-errors" were taken in the back door of the Treasury Department for Mint technicians to examine before an opinion was given.

Since at least the 1980's, all sorts of things are now considered "genuine" that would not have been decades ago.

Zoins

@Insider2 said:
In an ANA Authentication Seminar around 1974, the instructor told the class that any error that appeared to be or had to be made on purpose was not certified as genuine. In several cases, these "made-by-hand-errors" were taken in the back door of the Treasury Department for Mint technicians to examine before an opinion was given.

Since at least the 1980's, all sorts of things are now considered "genuine" that would not have been decades ago.

Interesting that these have become Market Acceptable. Wonder what caused the change.

oih82w8

@MWallace said:

I don't know either. I wasn't giving a definitive answer or MY opinion. I was just stating what I understand it to be. The government is very unclear on their stance. Probably more trouble to them then it's worth. Disclosure: I'm not a lawyer and I don't play one on TV.

...but...have you stayed at a Holiday Inn Express?

seanq

I suspect those came our of the Mint in the crankcase of the same forklift used to smuggle out the mules.

Sean Reynolds

Coin Finder

@seanq I suspect those came our of the Mint in the crankcase of the same forklift used to smuggle out the mules.

Do tell that story!!!!

WoodenJefferson

Would this not have to be struck with no collar during or after setting up the dies?

Zoins

Bump

Here's another one of the 8. This one is nice because the last 0 is showing on the dollar. This one also has clear tail feathers and better alignment of the "ONE CENT" and "ONE DOLLAR" denominations.

• https://www.pcgs.com/cert/32761783

ms70

I find it odd that PCGS classifies it as a cent instead of a dollar. I would think the metal would dictate what it is.

JBK

BTW, I don't consider these errors. Does anyone else?

Zoins

@JBK said:
BTW, I don't consider these errors. Does anyone else?

I think if you dive in two levels deep, many don't consider these errors, but if you are doing broad categorization, they often end up as errors because they don't warrant a top level category of their own.

This is similar to how many US Mint struck fantasy coins end up being classified as patterns.

Of course fantasy errors and fantasy patterns could be group together under fantasy coins, if that warranted a top level classification category.

braddick

It was a cent die struck on a struck dollar. As such, I agree with PCGS and it is considered a cent.

JBK

@braddick said:
It was a cent die struck on a struck dollar. As such, I agree with PCGS and it is considered a cent.

Wrong planchet, broadstruck?

ricko

It would be a thrill to find one though... I did some purchases at the Post Office to get Sacs in change for a while back then.... no luck, just a pile of Sacs... Cheers, RickO

fivecents

I ate so many cheerios trying to get the dollar. I still have all the Cheerio cents. Depressing to count them and realize just how many boxes of cheerios I ate.

ms70

@fivecents said:
I ate so many cheerios trying to get the dollar. I still have all the Cheerio cents. Depressing to count them and realize just how many boxes of cheerios I ate.

I went to a few grocery stores late at night with a hand held metal detector and scanned the boxes. Didn't find any.

Jimnight

I wouldn't want that.

fivecents

@FredWeinberg said:
They were obviously struck on purpose.

Makes them that much cooler to own.

JBK

@fivecents said:
I ate so many cheerios trying to get the dollar. I still have all the Cheerio cents. Depressing to count them and realize just how many boxes of cheerios I ate.

I think (not sure) a sealed Cheerios cent with packaging in excellent condition is worth about what a box of cereal costs or a little more.

NumisOxide

@ms70 said:

@fivecents said:
I ate so many cheerios trying to get the dollar. I still have all the Cheerio cents. Depressing to count them and realize just how many boxes of cheerios I ate.

I went to a few grocery stores late at night with a hand held metal detector and scanned the boxes. Didn't find any.

That is awesome!

fivecents

@JBK said:

@fivecents said:
I ate so many cheerios trying to get the dollar. I still have all the Cheerio cents. Depressing to count them and realize just how many boxes of cheerios I ate.

I think (not sure) a sealed Cheerios cent with packaging in excellent condition is worth about what a box of cereal costs or a little more.

Each Cheeros cent is worth a box of cereal? Man did these go way up in price. yes!! Major score!!

fivecents

@coinJP said:

@ms70 said:

@fivecents said:
I ate so many cheerios trying to get the dollar. I still have all the Cheerio cents. Depressing to count them and realize just how many boxes of cheerios I ate.

I went to a few grocery stores late at night with a hand held metal detector and scanned the boxes. Didn't find any.

That is awesome!

Pretty lady friend nurse in Xray at hospital, she knows which cereal box contains what.