Options
An ambro requested DCarr poll.
keets
Posts: 25,351 ✭✭✭✭✭
Will PCGS encapsulate the 1964-D Token submitted by cardinal??
0
Comments
they should though as the Carr pieces are clearly tokens significant to the numismatic community.
I trust them.
"Keep your malarkey filter in good operating order" -Walter Breen
I think there maybe still the 'legality' issue here, it would behoove a company not to get caught up in some legal mess. Just saying.
I will abstain from voting in the poll, but will inform the Forum of the final results, when known.
In terms of legal issues, I understand that defacing U.S. coinage and then trying to use the defaced coins as legal tender is prohibited.
I also understand that all of the defaced coins that were turned into love tokens, hobo nickels and other artistic creations, are clearly legal to own, buy, and sell.
There exist many coins that have been defaced in one manner or another, and used as a planchet for private advertising tokens -- such the countermarks coins used as merchant tokens. These too are legal to own, buy, and sell.
The DCarr 1964-D pieces are said to be made from defaced coins. Aside from that admission, I have not seen a single example that exhibited enough details of the undertype to be self-sufficient to legally prove the undertype was an actual coin. That being said, the result of the process produced artistic tokens, which have been duly recorded in a reference book that PCGS has adopted for guidance in accepting submissions for grading.
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......
Sam, the point that most avoid, which is really what the whole thing is about, is simple: if PCGS follows their own guidelines then they will encapsulate it. that means it's really a "trust" issue --- do you Trust PCGS to do what they say they will do??
I trust them.
well the issue here is what side will PCGS lean on.
The tokens are struck on a US legal tender under type. Very few other Tokens are struck in that manner at least in recent times that have been certified by PCGS. Does this matter?
I tend to think PCGS will stay on the cautious side of the fence.
The Carr art pieces are a grey area.
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution
the only reason this is known, or believed, is because Dan said so. on the pieces that exhibit underlying traces of "something" how does anyone know without a doubt what it is?? what if it was marketing hype??
The tokens are struck on a US legal tender under type
the only reason this is known, or believed, is because Dan said so. on the pieces that exhibit underlying traces of "something" how does anyone know without a doubt what it is?? what if it was marketing hype??
it is a valid point completely.
the fact it was disclosed as being an under type is enough for PCGS to be cautious though it is overly so in my opinion. I would also say I don't really think the tokens are illegal as they more then simply deface a legal tender coin they destroy the coin and produce the token.
it will be interesting to see the result from PCGS
I voted no, as there are many really nice tokens out there that PCGS doesn't touch. Why should the dcarr piece be any different?
“In matters of style, swim with the current; in matters of principle, stand like a rock." - Thomas Jefferson
My digital cameo album 1950-64 Cameos - take a look!
DCarr is loving this.
I am almost certain those were listed, just going from memory. I think they are the first listings in the U.S. section.
Why should the dcarr piece be any different?
because they are listed in an approved publication.
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
so i'm clear, is this referencing the 1964-d peace dollar imitation "token?"
.
``https://ebay.us/m/KxolR5
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......
Lafayette Grading Set
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution
When the undertype can't be determined, neither can the authenticity, so it would seem our hosts would have to give it an 86.
I do believe the undertype can be definitively identified as being silver!
they probably wont certify the ones that fall under this umbrella.
16 CFR Part 304
Rule Summary:
The Hobby Protection Act, passed by Congress in 1973, covers imitation political items (e.g., buttons, posters, stickers, etc.), as well as imitation numismatic items (e.g., various coins, tokens, paper money, commemorative medals) that are required to be marked with certain identifying information in an effort to flag them as imitations. The FTC’s Rule establishes the size of the required disclosures, their location, and the manner in which items may be marked.
the others which are obvious token/political items will be much safer.
there are several that are in multiple violations per the hpa.
i say this having read a lot of these dcarr related threads.
ive read much more supporting info but ive no dog in this fight; just saying why i think they wont/shouldn't certify with or without grades, certain pieces of his creation.
.
It will be interesting to see how this turns out since their policy seems to indicate these would be slabbed.
i would certainly slab all my gruber half eagles created by dcarr. they are awesome. i hope pcgs does this.
yep.
That being said, submissions for medals and tokens generally take longer, especially those that PCGS has not graded previously. (For example, an earlier token submission under the "regular" tier will be on business day 29 tomorrow, versus the current estimate of 19 days, and appears to have not made any progress whatsoever so far, aside from being checked in.)