Lots of "new" Fantasy Over Struck D. Carr stuff available
oih82w8
Posts: 12,775 ✭✭✭✭✭
oih82w8 = Oh I Hate To Wait _defectus patientia_aka...Dr. Defecto - Curator of RMO's
BST transactions: dbldie55, jayPem, 78saen, UltraHighRelief, nibanny, liefgold, FallGuy, lkeigwin, mbogoman, Sandman70gt, keets, joeykoins, ianrussell (@GC), EagleEye, ThePennyLady, GRANDAM, Ilikecolor, Gluggo, okiedude, Voyageur, LJenkins11, fastfreddie, ms70, pursuitofliberty, ZoidMeister,Coin Finder, GotTheBug, edwardjulio, Coinnmore, Nickpatton, Namvet69,...
BST transactions: dbldie55, jayPem, 78saen, UltraHighRelief, nibanny, liefgold, FallGuy, lkeigwin, mbogoman, Sandman70gt, keets, joeykoins, ianrussell (@GC), EagleEye, ThePennyLady, GRANDAM, Ilikecolor, Gluggo, okiedude, Voyageur, LJenkins11, fastfreddie, ms70, pursuitofliberty, ZoidMeister,Coin Finder, GotTheBug, edwardjulio, Coinnmore, Nickpatton, Namvet69,...
0
Comments
I have D. Carrs page link on my desk top and try to check it in the AM and PM.
Stinks when you forget to check it and view something that is "Sold Out."
If we were all the same, the world would be an incredibly boring place.
Tommy
Seems there are never enough to go around. Enterprising men impress upon us, a beautiful example of stewardship with the equipment that's now obsolete, in essence. (oh wait, I'm an old man, now) How old are you Mr Carr ? Always a creative numismatist behind that artist. Kudos to you, always.
``https://ebay.us/m/KxolR5
graded coin sale at link below
https://photos.google.com/album/AF1QipNItjHsIF_1nPvk5MqennKhv-5_TZcOr7ac9jB0
If the Redbook lists the mounting amount of schlock from the US Mint, they could without much sweat asterisk and then put in the
Private Issues sections listings of his overstrikes.
Well, just Love coins, period.
A bonus is that if they are included, PCGS may start slabbing them.
``https://ebay.us/m/KxolR5
Since Mr. Carr quite rightly states that he does not wish to accidentally deceive current and/or future collectors with these legal tender design overstrikes, but does not wish to mark them with the word "COPY" as required by the Hobby Protection Act, should the Redbook list a footnote warning about them in the appropriate design sections for the benefit of future collectors?
The original work items are one thing, but I remain surprised at the loophole that allows the fantasy dated copies/restrikes/novelties ( or whatever other nouns are preferred ) to be overstruck on original coins and sold without the COPY requirement of the Hobby Protection Act
Would they (the legal tender designs with fake dates) be legal if struck on virgin blanks?
How can one prove they weren't?
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
As I have a passion for SLQ's - I ordered the pair - 15-D & 22-P -
which will go nicely with my 31-S I bought a few years ago.
~~~~~~~~~~~~
Coin collecting is not a hobby, it's an obsession !
New Barber Purchases
A long shot: getting PCGS to grade and then accept these in each of the Registries. Probably won't happen, yet fingers crossed for what the future may bring!
Since Mr. Carr quite rightly states that he does not wish to accidentally deceive current and/or future collectors with these legal tender design overstrikes, but does not wish to mark them with the word "COPY" as required by the Hobby Protection Act, should the Redbook list a footnote warning about them in the appropriate design sections for the benefit of future collectors?
The original work items are one thing, but I remain surprised at the loophole that allows the fantasy dated copies/restrikes/novelties ( or whatever other nouns are preferred ) to be overstruck on original coins and sold without the COPY requirement of the Hobby Protection Act
Would they (the legal tender designs with fake dates) be legal if struck on virgin blanks?
How can one prove they weren't?
I think it comes down to how do you copy a coin that was never made? Can't copy something that does not exist.
bob
Yes, they do sell out quickly.
I have D. Carrs page link on my desk top and try to check it in the AM and PM.
Stinks when you forget to check it and view something that is "Sold Out."
Same here.
Successful BST transactions with forum members thebigeng, SPalladino, Zoidmeister, coin22lover, coinsarefun, jwitten, CommemKing.
Since Mr. Carr quite rightly states that he does not wish to accidentally deceive current and/or future collectors with these legal tender design overstrikes, but does not wish to mark them with the word "COPY" as required by the Hobby Protection Act, should the Redbook list a footnote warning about them in the appropriate design sections for the benefit of future collectors?
The original work items are one thing, but I remain surprised at the loophole that allows the fantasy dated copies/restrikes/novelties ( or whatever other nouns are preferred ) to be overstruck on original coins and sold without the COPY requirement of the Hobby Protection Act
Would they (the legal tender designs with fake dates) be legal if struck on virgin blanks?
How can one prove they weren't?
I think it comes down to how do you copy a coin that was never made? Can't copy something that does not exist.
bob
I would personally love to see the Carrs in a PCGS Slab, I have several Carr Peace Dollars.
ANACS will slab 'em -- with a special Dan Carr-designed label: http://www.moonlightmint.com/anacs.htm
Successful BST transactions with forum members thebigeng, SPalladino, Zoidmeister, coin22lover, coinsarefun, jwitten, CommemKing.
I don't have sufficient interest in the overdates to buy them, probably because I'm not collecting the full run of any series, but I love the new octagonal issue. Many thank-yous to the OP for making me aware of them; I ordered one almost on impulse, and was surprised to see them sold out later in the day. I guess I shoulda bought two.
I think it comes down to how do you copy a coin that was never made? Can't copy something that does not exist.
bob
It is understood that there is a large percentage of the members here who do not find these vaguely "wrong", significantly, "silly", and who tolerate a level of sales spamming, that would be heavily lambasted, criticized, and otherwise mocked. Flipping to others for a profit, on top of the original profit, is most likely the motive. ...
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
I like the works of D. Carr.
As I have posted, I never sell or 'flip' anything.
I would personally love to see the Carrs in a PCGS Slab, I have several Carr Peace Dollars.
The PCGS Tokens and Medals guide lists the exonumia items that PCGS will certify. Valid items for certification are those listed in the catalogs approved by PCGS. One catalog in particular is described as:
•Krause Unusuals listed in the US Section, from the reference "Unusual World Coins, 6th Edition" by Krause Publications.
That catalog has, within the United States section, a subsection titled "Daniel Carr Prototype Dollars". And in that section, on page 696, is the "1964-D" Peace Dollar over-strikes.
Also in the same subsection is the "1975" Eisenhower dollar over-strikes, as well as Astronaut, Bessie Coleman, Sacagawea, and President concept dollars.
Other items listed in the United States section include the Carr concept and parody state quarters. NORFED "Liberty Dollars" are also listed.
The Union of North America concept coins are also listed in that catalog, but not in the United States section.
I do not know, however, what would happen if one of the Carr "1964-D" over-strikes was actually submitted.
Not everyone can make coins that stay suitable for collectors long after they're minted, nor hold their value with a nostalgia all their own like DCarr can.
Seems there are never enough to go around. Enterprising men impress upon us, a beautiful example of stewardship with the equipment that's now obsolete, in essence. (oh wait, I'm an old man, now) How old are you Mr Carr ? Always a creative numismatist behind that artist. Kudos to you, always.
Thanks.
I'm currently 57.
Thanks. I always seemed to make it to the "Out of Stock" dance, but not this time. Not here yet, but looking forward to its arrival. Some of the 62's look like they are sold out ...
It is probable that some of the "bulk handled" options will become available again as I generate some more during ongoing production of high-grade pieces.
PS:
It is possible that I might later produce "circulated" finish pieces. These would equate to VF-XF grade, most likely. But in any case, the total mintage for a particular fantasy date will not exceed 500 pieces for all finish types combined:
((high-grade + bulk-handled + circulated) <= 500) />
Highly attractive and I wouldn't carry the guilt of using it as a pocket piece.
Since Mr. Carr quite rightly states that he does not wish to accidentally deceive current and/or future collectors with these legal tender design overstrikes, but does not wish to mark them with the word "COPY" as required by the Hobby Protection Act, should the Redbook list a footnote warning about them in the appropriate design sections for the benefit of future collectors?
The original work items are one thing, but I remain surprised at the loophole that allows the fantasy dated copies/restrikes/novelties ( or whatever other nouns are preferred ) to be overstruck on original coins and sold without the COPY requirement of the Hobby Protection Act
Would they (the legal tender designs with fake dates) be legal if struck on virgin blanks?
How can one prove they weren't?
I think it comes down to how do you copy a coin that was never made? Can't copy something that does not exist.
bob
A definition of the terms found in the Hobby Protection Act can be found here:
http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?c=e....1.3.28&idno=16
It includes this definition of "imitation numismatic item":
(d) Imitation numismatic item means an item which purports to be, but in fact is not, an original numismatic item or which is a reproduction, copy, or counterfeit of an original numismatic item. Such term includes an original numismatic item which has been altered or modified in such a manner that it could reasonably purport to be an original numismatic item other than the one which was altered or modified. The term shall not include any re-issue or re-strike of any original numismatic item by the United States or any foreign government.
I am not a lawyer, nor do I play one on television, but by my interpretation of this paragraph, Mr. Carr's legal tender design overstrikes do not need to be considered to be counterfeits to be required by the Hobby Protection Act to be marked with the word "COPY." In my opinion Mr. Carr is in violation of the Hobby Protection Act.
TD
Since Mr. Carr quite rightly states that he does not wish to accidentally deceive current and/or future collectors with these legal tender design overstrikes, but does not wish to mark them with the word "COPY" as required by the Hobby Protection Act, should the Redbook list a footnote warning about them in the appropriate design sections for the benefit of future collectors?
The original work items are one thing, but I remain surprised at the loophole that allows the fantasy dated copies/restrikes/novelties ( or whatever other nouns are preferred ) to be overstruck on original coins and sold without the COPY requirement of the Hobby Protection Act
Would they (the legal tender designs with fake dates) be legal if struck on virgin blanks?
How can one prove they weren't?
I think it comes down to how do you copy a coin that was never made? Can't copy something that does not exist.
bob
A definition of the terms found in the Hobby Protection Act can be found here:
http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?c=e....1.3.28&idno=16
It includes this definition of "imitation numismatic item":
(d) Imitation numismatic item means an item which purports to be, but in fact is not, an original numismatic item or which is a reproduction, copy, or counterfeit of an original numismatic item. Such term includes an original numismatic item which has been altered or modified in such a manner that it could reasonably purport to be an original numismatic item other than the one which was altered or modified. The term shall not include any re-issue or re-strike of any original numismatic item by the United States or any foreign government.
I am not a lawyer, nor do I play one on television, but by my interpretation of this paragraph, Mr. Carr's legal tender design overstrikes do not need to be considered to be counterfeits to be required by the Hobby Protection Act to be marked with the word "COPY." In my opinion Mr. Carr is in violation of the Hobby Protection Act.
TD
Apparently there is an opinion that COPY does not need to appear as long as each future buyer is informed the coin is not a genuine US Mint issue, otherwise criminal and/or civil fraud charges could result.
But the first sale is OK?
By purchasing one or more of these coins, the buyer agrees to provide full disclosure of their origin when reselling them. Failure to provide potential buyers with complete and accurate information when offering these coins could result in criminal and/or civil fraud charges. In other words, don't even think about trying to sell these to unaware buyers as original 1932 Walking Liberty Halfs !
Since Mr. Carr quite rightly states that he does not wish to accidentally deceive current and/or future collectors with these legal tender design overstrikes, but does not wish to mark them with the word "COPY" as required by the Hobby Protection Act, should the Redbook list a footnote warning about them in the appropriate design sections for the benefit of future collectors?
The original work items are one thing, but I remain surprised at the loophole that allows the fantasy dated copies/restrikes/novelties ( or whatever other nouns are preferred ) to be overstruck on original coins and sold without the COPY requirement of the Hobby Protection Act
Would they (the legal tender designs with fake dates) be legal if struck on virgin blanks?
How can one prove they weren't?
I think it comes down to how do you copy a coin that was never made? Can't copy something that does not exist.
bob
A definition of the terms found in the Hobby Protection Act can be found here:
http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?c=e....1.3.28&idno=16
It includes this definition of "imitation numismatic item":
(d) Imitation numismatic item means an item which purports to be, but in fact is not, an original numismatic item or which is a reproduction, copy, or counterfeit of an original numismatic item. Such term includes an original numismatic item which has been altered or modified in such a manner that it could reasonably purport to be an original numismatic item other than the one which was altered or modified. The term shall not include any re-issue or re-strike of any original numismatic item by the United States or any foreign government.
I am not a lawyer, nor do I play one on television, but by my interpretation of this paragraph, Mr. Carr's legal tender design overstrikes do not need to be considered to be counterfeits to be required by the Hobby Protection Act to be marked with the word "COPY." In my opinion Mr. Carr is in violation of the Hobby Protection Act.
TD
I am also not a lawyer, but I don't believe Dan Carr is in violation of the Hobby Protection Act from that clause because that clause requires the existence of an "original numismatic item". Since Dan is making fantasy date coins, there is no "original numismatic item" to speak of so the clause does not apply from my understanding.
It does seem plausible that the Hobby Protection Act would require coins such as the Scovill Mfg New Haven Fugios to be marked COPY if they were ever moved out of the US and imported again, but I'm not sure that's ever happened. It would be sad if that happened because such imitation numismatic items are now collectible in their own right.
Well, just Love coins, period.
"Imitation numismatic item means an item which purports to be, but in fact is not, an original numismatic item..."
There does not need to be a genuine item such as what the imitation item purports to be. A 1931-S quarter overstrike purports to be a 1931-S quarter, whether or not the government ever made a 1931-S quarter.
pass
+1
I just don't need made up coins.
He is not therefore making copies or facsimiles or play on coins that already exist; to belabor this yet again the original numismatic item is that struck by the mint, his in imitation or homage to this item.
Well, just Love coins, period.
Now I know all the white knights will be here to slam me as they like all the advertizing as well.
Especially if the things they made (books, hobo nickels, overstrikes) are very well done.
I be leave this thread says Lots of "new" Fantasy Over Struck D. Carr stuff available if you dont like them why do you open this tread ? those of us who love them dont really care to hear your opinions ABOUT them !
If you're talking to me...... Care to or not you're gonna hear my opinions if I choose to use that option. Typical these days trying to shut out opinions. And I said nothing about the title of the thread. Next!
And Cap, that is not how I read it at all! "...to be an ORIGINAL NUMISMATIC ITEM". He can strike anything he likes but the numismatic item would be a facsimile of such a coin as already struck by the us mint; ergo the term.
He is not therefore making copies or facsimiles or play on coins that already exist; to belabor this yet again the original numismatic item is that struck by the mint, his in imitation or homage to this item.
Read the second definition of purport, as in purport to be:
http://www.learnersdictionary.com/definition/purport
The 1931-S quarter overstrikes purport to be 1931-S quarters. The fact that there are no genuine 1931-S quarters does not change the fact that the 1931-S quarter overstrikes purport to be 1931-S quarters.
And Cap, that is not how I read it at all! "...to be an ORIGINAL NUMISMATIC ITEM". He can strike anything he likes but the numismatic item would be a facsimile of such a coin as already struck by the us mint; ergo the term.
He is not therefore making copies or facsimiles or play on coins that already exist; to belabor this yet again the original numismatic item is that struck by the mint, his in imitation or homage to this item.
Read the second definition of purport, as in purport to be:
http://www.learnersdictionary.com/definition/purport
The 1931-S quarter overstrikes purport to be 1931-S quarters. The fact that there are no genuine 1931-S quarters does not change the fact that the 1931-S quarter overstrikes purport to be 1931-S quarters.
I think the grammar object of the verb purport needs to be considered. If "original numismatic item" doesn't matter in the text "purports to be, but in fact is not, an original numismatic item", then what if a metal token purports to be something else, like a cardboard disc? Would that violate the Hobby Protection Act as well if the object doesn't matter? It doesn't seem to make sense when interpreted this way.
For the Hobby Protection Act to cover Dan Carr's overstrikes, I think it would need to be amended with a new law. This would be similar to when private, territorial coinage was outlawed with an updated Coinage Act.
That being said, a number of collectors enjoy the pieces and I have not heard of a single person fooled by the pieces yet, so it's hard to see the harm given they are well documented and have a collector following.
mark
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'm sure lots of sellers would like to have a thread it seems every week or two. And come in and spam their sales and what they will have in the future. Of course members here don't mind as many are looking for a profit (surprise.) But most of the real dealers that have integrity don't seem to spam the forum......... too much!
Now I know all the white knights will be here to slam me as they like all the advertizing as well.
What? I think if someone says something like, man I really liked that coin and missed one the maker should feel free to say they will have more.
I have purchased a large number of Dans coins and don't think I have sold one yet for "profit". Perhaps one or two to someone that missed out on an issue I got multiples of.
In any event, I'm not sure why so many people get all up in arms.
BST transactions: dbldie55, jayPem, 78saen, UltraHighRelief, nibanny, liefgold, FallGuy, lkeigwin, mbogoman, Sandman70gt, keets, joeykoins, ianrussell (@GC), EagleEye, ThePennyLady, GRANDAM, Ilikecolor, Gluggo, okiedude, Voyageur, LJenkins11, fastfreddie, ms70, pursuitofliberty, ZoidMeister,Coin Finder, GotTheBug, edwardjulio, Coinnmore, Nickpatton, Namvet69,...
Since Mr. Carr quite rightly states that he does not wish to accidentally deceive current and/or future collectors with these legal tender design overstrikes, but does not wish to mark them with the word "COPY" as required by the Hobby Protection Act, should the Redbook list a footnote warning about them in the appropriate design sections for the benefit of future collectors?
The original work items are one thing, but I remain surprised at the loophole that allows the fantasy dated copies/restrikes/novelties ( or whatever other nouns are preferred ) to be overstruck on original coins and sold without the COPY requirement of the Hobby Protection Act
Would they (the legal tender designs with fake dates) be legal if struck on virgin blanks?
How can one prove they weren't?
I think it comes down to how do you copy a coin that was never made? Can't copy something that does not exist.
bob
If he's not copying coins and he's not marking them "copy" as required, then is striking what appears to be "coins," which is illegal. Only the federal government can make money.
Also, and regardless of what how these objects are ultimately defined, they are NOT coins and therefore do not belong in the red book or any other similar publication.
Personally, I would never touch them for a host of reasons; aesthetically-lacking objects that whet the imaginations of the collector are not appealing to me in any way.
I started this thread with the courtesy of letting fellow collectors know that Dan Carr had some new material on his website. Dan did not spam this forum thread, I did. I am asking the forum moderator(s) to close this thread as well since it was not my intention to defame Dan or his products, which apparently those who wish to do so...did.
You did fine. Had it not been for this thread I'd have missed out on adding some neat material to my collection, so I thank you for posting it.
Don't worry about those who wish to, "defame Dan or his products" ad nauseam. As much as that attempt is made- it is feeble at best.
I simply choose to allow the United States Government to determine what is a counterfeit and what is not. They've determined these fantasy creations are most assuredly are not.
Let the naysayer coin jockeys gnash their teeth while other collectors simply and happily go about enjoying this hobby as they (and Law Enforcement condoning) see fit.
my early American coins & currency: -- http://yankeedoodlecoins.com/
He is a proven and respected artist.
Many collect his items.
Too much criticism on the world today.
Dan....thanks for all that you do...many here and elsewhere really enjoy and collect what you do!
Since Mr. Carr quite rightly states that he does not wish to accidentally deceive current and/or future collectors with these legal tender design overstrikes, but does not wish to mark them with the word "COPY" as required by the Hobby Protection Act, should the Redbook list a footnote warning about them in the appropriate design sections for the benefit of future collectors?
The original work items are one thing, but I remain surprised at the loophole that allows the fantasy dated copies/restrikes/novelties ( or whatever other nouns are preferred ) to be overstruck on original coins and sold without the COPY requirement of the Hobby Protection Act
Would they (the legal tender designs with fake dates) be legal if struck on virgin blanks?
How can one prove they weren't?
I think it comes down to how do you copy a coin that was never made? Can't copy something that does not exist.
bob
If he's not copying coins and he's not marking them "copy" as required, then is striking what appears to be "coins," which is illegal. Only the federal government can make money.
Also, and regardless of what how these objects are ultimately defined, they are NOT coins and therefore do not belong in the red book or any other similar publication.
Personally, I would never touch them for a host of reasons; aesthetically-lacking objects that whet the imaginations of the collector are not appealing to me in any way.
Of course this is only your opinion and not based in fact. Thank goodness.
mark
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......
Out of curiosity, I hope this isn't proprietary info, if it is, no problem, but what is the usual grade of the coins used as planchets? Are they dipped prior to striking?
Most are worn. Some were cleaned or polished before I bought them.
Prior to over-striking all are cleaned to remove gunk and tarnish.
The cleaning process does not involve "dipping".