Home› U.S. Coin Forum

Do you consider the insert on this one (accidently) deceptive?

Comments

  • braddickbraddick Posts: 25,000 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Another example:

    https://www.ebay.com/itm/1879-2004-IGC-PR67-Morgan-Barber-Pattern-Dollar-Private-Mint-Golden-Aly-Ltd-Ed/333867189432?hash=item4dbc0904b8:g:uJoAAOSwN2pgDKnR

    peacockcoins

  • truebloodtrueblood Posts: 609 ✭✭✭✭

    wow

  • CaptHenwayCaptHenway Posts: 33,033 ✭✭✭✭✭

    The first one especially so, because it calls the piece a "coin."

    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.
  • CaptHenwayCaptHenway Posts: 33,033 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Another imitation numismatic item subject to the Hobby Protection Act, but nobody cares.

    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.
  • KSorboKSorbo Posts: 164 ✭✭✭

    A term like “modern fantasy strike” would go a long ways.

  • SmudgeSmudge Posts: 9,855 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I don’t know, it says private mint.

  • keetskeets Posts: 25,351 ✭✭✭✭✭

    to the OP's question, no.

  • U1chicagoU1chicago Posts: 6,688 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I don't think so as the "Private Mint" notation is enough for me. However, I can see where confusion might arise and can support @KSorbo 's idea of using something like "Modern Private Mint Fantasy" (would be better if we knew a date so it could be "2004 Private Mint Fantasy" since "modern" can be a bit vague).

  • messydeskmessydesk Posts: 20,439 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Perplexing until you look at the piece and say, "Blech," then it doesn't matter.

    It probably would be best had the label said it was a reproduction, even if not a very good one, rather than "Private Mint," and maybe also put the date in quotes or included the actual date of manufacture. At least it has a COPY stamp. There were "Morgan-Barber" designs, and this one seems to approximate J-1615.

    John
    Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution
  • astroratastrorat Posts: 9,221 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @CaptHenway said:
    Another imitation numismatic item subject to the Hobby Protection Act, but nobody cares.

    Is labeling of a holder by a third part subject to the HPA? The item is stamped with COPY, which seems to meet the HPA requirement.

    Numismatist Ordinaire
    See http://www.doubledimes.com for a free online reference for US twenty-cent pieces
  • rickoricko Posts: 98,724 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Does not look deceptive to me...... Cheers, RickO

  • astroratastrorat Posts: 9,221 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @CaptHenway said:
    The first one especially so, because it calls the piece a "coin."

    I don't think the label states it's a coin. The seller calls it a coin, but not the TPG label.

    Numismatist Ordinaire
    See http://www.doubledimes.com for a free online reference for US twenty-cent pieces
  • MasonGMasonG Posts: 6,287 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @astrorat said:

    @CaptHenway said:
    The first one especially so, because it calls the piece a "coin."

    I don't think the label states it's a coin. The seller calls it a coin, but not the TPG label.

    All his descriptions are basically the same, regardless of whether they're coins or medals. Besides, it's listed in the "Exonumia>Medals" category.

    I vote "Nothing to see here."

  • mannie graymannie gray Posts: 7,259 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Not deceptive but clarity would be better if the TPG put the date in parentheses and/or added some additional information.

  • CaptHenwayCaptHenway Posts: 33,033 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @astrorat said:

    @CaptHenway said:
    Another imitation numismatic item subject to the Hobby Protection Act, but nobody cares.

    Is labeling of a holder by a third part subject to the HPA? The item is stamped with COPY, which seems to meet the HPA requirement.

    Sorry, I missed that. That makes it fully compliant.

    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.

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Format
SpoilerCodeQuote
Heading 2Heading 1
Emoji
:):D:(;):/:o:s:p:'(:|B):#:*<3o:)>:)
Url
Image
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file
Home • U.S. Coin ForumComment As ...