@Jimnight said:
If the coins are illegal ... they should be destroyed.
Why?
Not sure they need to be destroyed but those alleged illegal coins have a chilling effect on the legal one. You see in these boards how people try to diminish the value of the Farouk coin by pointing to the other coins. That's a reason. Rather than destroying them they could be put in the Smithsonian with some guarantee that they can not be removed. This would mitigate the problem of the so called illegal coins hampering a legal coin but also keep these historic coins from being destroyed.
@HashTag said:
Everything changes with time; decisions, court rulings and sadly us.
Some of us truly embrace change. I don't ever want to be too old for that!
I moved to Colorado long before it was "cool". Doesn't mean I toke...but we did a lot of things right out here. An enormous amount of money has gone to our schools thanks to that little plant! We also helped change the country's economy with it, and now the global economy too.
If you've ever been a manager in retail you know just how important it is to embrace change lol!
"Be the change you want to see in the world."
"Reality is a crutch for people who can't cope with drugs."
"Positivity is a superpower."
Coins are Neato!
"If it's a penny for your thoughts and you put in your two cents worth, then someone...somewhere...is making a penny." - Steven Wright
The coins are not 'illegal'... they have not been 'monetized', therefore have not been awarded official government status. A fine distinction indeed, but our legal system functions on many, many 'fine distinctions' in language. Cheers, RickO
Isn't our government "emotionally attached" to these coins because they are linked in history to FDR's gold confiscation order? If the government has a claim on these, shouldn't they also have a claim on various pattern pieces or perhaps 1913 nickels or even 1964 SMS coins?
We are a culture with a short memory. 1933 is ages ago. Free these things.
@CoinHoarder said:
The federal court made their decision during the Langbord trial. Whoever posessed these coins all those years, must certainly have known they were illegal to possess. Case closed!
@JBK said:
Maybe they slipped out the same way the Sac/quarter mules did, or Martha Washington test pieces, etc.
The problem is that the feds took such a hard position for so long that it would be impossible to change the rules now.
It would be possible. Look at the laws regarding weed.... What happened with the sac/quarter mules and martha washington test pieces. And no one can prove that they were obtained illegally, its basically the government saying "oh these records that only we have access to say bla bla bla". Also the government can effectively pass a law saying that all the coins are legal, and return any coins that exist either fully or partially to their owners, and either tell the families of the destroyed coins "tough luck" or compensate them.
The families can't prove they even legally possessed the coins. Even a change in law doesn't prove they were legally acquired. You might go to law school before you keep throwing out legal opinions.
True story: I have a bunch of probably stolen coins here that I legally possess. Why? Because when the thief was arrested, even though the thief was charged with stealing coins LIKE this, the original owner could only legally take possession of the coins that he could prove legal title to.
Unless the Langbord's have receipts (they don't), even if 1933 DEs were made "legal", they and all the other owners other than Farouk can't prove legal right to possess.
As for why the Langbord's went to the Mint, it is not because they were unaware of the status of the coins. The only way they could legally sell them was to get the Mint to authenticate them. I imagine (supposition) they were hoping for a deal similar to the Farouk coin where they got to split the proceeds with the Mint. Why do you think their Dad (?) never took them out of the safety deposit box and the family didn't pull them out until after the Farouk coin was made legal to sell?
And so, unless your name is Langbord, I don't know why you are trying to waste the time of the government to enrich them by turning a blind eye to a 90 year old crime.
I haven’t seen any proof that a “crime” was committed.
I think it is a "technical" crime: releasing coins from the back door of the Mint prior to authorization. If, as it is usually phrased, "the coins illegally left the Mint", doesn't it have to be a crime?
No proof they went out the back. They could have come from the cashier.
That is how the "back door" worked at the Mint. Do some research. There was a buddy, buddy system with local dealers in Philadelphia. No one actually picked stuff up and walked off with it. They did favors for the insiders, including the premature trading of the 1933 DEs WHICH WERE NEVER AUTHORIZED FOR RELEASE. Which is why the government has won every legal case for 90 years.
@jmlanzaf said: "the government has won every legal case for 90 years."
I don't doubt this, but am asking out of curiosity -- what are the other significant cases in pursuit of apparently illegally held coins? I know there has been activity regarding the aluminum cents, but would be interested to know about others.
@Higashiyama said: @jmlanzaf said: "the government has won every legal case for 90 years."
I don't doubt this, but am asking out of curiosity -- what are the other significant cases in pursuit of apparently illegally held coins? I know there has been activity regarding the aluminum cents, but would be interested to know about others.
I'm only showing of the DEs. There aren't a lot of coins the government went after like that. Most patterns were left in the private sector. They simply denied the 1913 nickels.
The DEs were special, probably because of the coincidental gold ban.
@Jimnight said:
If the coins are illegal ... they should be destroyed.
Why?
I figure if it's illegal for the public to own ... why would I want the mint/gov to profit off it.
They don't exactly profit off it if it goes in a museum. In fact, the entire public benefit rather than just a few people.
There should be a split, some go to the government/museum's, and some go to collectors. The government can auction it off and have the funds benefit some charity.
@Jimnight said:
If the coins are illegal ... they should be destroyed.
Why?
I figure if it's illegal for the public to own ... why would I want the mint/gov to profit off it.
They don't exactly profit off it if it goes in a museum. In fact, the entire public benefit rather than just a few people.
There should be a split, some go to the government/museum's, and some go to collectors. The government can auction it off and have the funds benefit some charity.
NONE should go to collectors. That defeats the whole purpose of their 90 year effort to reacquire the illegal coins. Further, you would be robbing the owner of the Farouk coin who bought it as the only legal example available to collectors.
@Jimnight said:
If the coins are illegal ... they should be destroyed.
Why?
I figure if it's illegal for the public to own ... why would I want the mint/gov to profit off it.
They don't exactly profit off it if it goes in a museum. In fact, the entire public benefit rather than just a few people.
There should be a split, some go to the government/museum's, and some go to collectors. The government can auction it off and have the funds benefit some charity.
NONE should go to collectors. That defeats the whole purpose of their 90 year effort to reacquire the illegal coins. Further, you would be robbing the owner of the Farouk coin who bought it as the only legal example available to collectors.
This is an unworthy quest on so many levels.
The unworthy quest was the 90 year battle to take it away from people. It has been to long to be able to honestly prove that they were stolen. You could not find one reliable witness, there is no hard evidence. The only thing you would be able to get, is some kid who was like 7 taking a tour of the mint, who may or may not have seen someone steal a coin...
@Jimnight said:
If the coins are illegal ... they should be destroyed.
Why?
I figure if it's illegal for the public to own ... why would I want the mint/gov to profit off it.
They don't exactly profit off it if it goes in a museum. In fact, the entire public benefit rather than just a few people.
There should be a split, some go to the government/museum's, and some go to collectors. The government can auction it off and have the funds benefit some charity.
NONE should go to collectors. That defeats the whole purpose of their 90 year effort to reacquire the illegal coins. Further, you would be robbing the owner of the Farouk coin who bought it as the only legal example available to collectors.
This is an unworthy quest on so many levels.
The unworthy quest was the 90 year battle to take it away from people. It has been to long to be able to honestly prove that they were stolen. You could not find one reliable witness, there is no hard evidence. The only thing you would be able to get, is some kid who was like 7 taking a tour of the mint, who may or may not have seen someone steal a coin...
@291fifth said:
I'm sure such a petition will go right to the top of the President's pile of actions needing to be taken.
Most definatly! Should shoot straight to the top! But in all seriousness, we might be able to garner some attention and this might work..
I don't want it to work. I never supported the Langbord's position.
I never even supported the Farouk coin position. It made no sense to me that erroneously issuing an export license somehow monetized a coin that had never been monetized. That's like saying that if the State of NY accidentally issued me a marriage license rather than an adoption certificate that I would have a 3 year old wife!
Substantive points may be meritorious, but in fact the Fenton coin was not monetized until after the settlement when $20 was paid for it - so technically the allegedly erroneous issuance of an export license did not monetize the coin.
@amwldcoin said:
At the very least...since it is known nothing was missing from the mint, the government ripped them off for the face value in 1933 dollars!
@Jimnight said:
If the coins are illegal ... they should be destroyed.
Why?
I figure if it's illegal for the public to own ... why would I want the mint/gov to profit off it.
They don't exactly profit off it if it goes in a museum. In fact, the entire public benefit rather than just a few people.
There should be a split, some go to the government/museum's, and some go to collectors. The government can auction it off and have the funds benefit some charity.
NONE should go to collectors. That defeats the whole purpose of their 90 year effort to reacquire the illegal coins. Further, you would be robbing the owner of the Farouk coin who bought it as the only legal example available to collectors.
This is an unworthy quest on so many levels.
The unworthy quest was the 90 year battle to take it away from people. It has been to long to be able to honestly prove that they were stolen. You could not find one reliable witness, there is no hard evidence. The only thing you would be able to get, is some kid who was like 7 taking a tour of the mint, who may or may not have seen someone steal a coin...
@291fifth said:
I'm sure such a petition will go right to the top of the President's pile of actions needing to be taken.
Most definatly! Should shoot straight to the top! But in all seriousness, we might be able to garner some attention and this might work..
I don't want it to work. I never supported the Langbord's position.
I never even supported the Farouk coin position. It made no sense to me that erroneously issuing an export license somehow monetized a coin that had never been monetized. That's like saying that if the State of NY accidentally issued me a marriage license rather than an adoption certificate that I would have a 3 year old wife!
Substantive points may be meritorious, but in fact the Fenton coin was not monetized until after the settlement when $20 was paid for it - so technically the allegedly erroneous issuance of an export license did not monetize the coin.
Is there any evidence that the actual "farouk" specimen is the Farouk Specimen? Can't someone just say "oh this one is the actual one"
@291fifth said:
I'm sure such a petition will go right to the top of the President's pile of actions needing to be taken.
Most definatly! Should shoot straight to the top! But in all seriousness, we might be able to garner some attention and this might work..
I don't want it to work. I never supported the Langbord's position.
I never even supported the Farouk coin position. It made no sense to me that erroneously issuing an export license somehow monetized a coin that had never been monetized. That's like saying that if the State of NY accidentally issued me a marriage license rather than an adoption certificate that I would have a 3 year old wife!
Substantive points may be meritorious, but in fact the Fenton coin was not monetized until after the settlement when $20 was paid for it - so technically the allegedly erroneous issuance of an export license did not monetize the coin.
Is there any evidence that the actual "farouk" specimen is the Farouk Specimen? Can't someone just say "oh this one is the actual one"
@Jimnight said:
If the coins are illegal ... they should be destroyed.
Why?
I figure if it's illegal for the public to own ... why would I want the mint/gov to profit off it.
They don't exactly profit off it if it goes in a museum. In fact, the entire public benefit rather than just a few people.
There should be a split, some go to the government/museum's, and some go to collectors. The government can auction it off and have the funds benefit some charity.
NONE should go to collectors. That defeats the whole purpose of their 90 year effort to reacquire the illegal coins. Further, you would be robbing the owner of the Farouk coin who bought it as the only legal example available to collectors.
This is an unworthy quest on so many levels.
The unworthy quest was the 90 year battle to take it away from people. It has been to long to be able to honestly prove that they were stolen. You could not find one reliable witness, there is no hard evidence. The only thing you would be able to get, is some kid who was like 7 taking a tour of the mint, who may or may not have seen someone steal a coin...
You really don't understand the nature of the case. It has been adjudicated numerous times. BO ONE thinks someone pocketed a coin. The coins were released without authorization. Period.
@291fifth said:
I'm sure such a petition will go right to the top of the President's pile of actions needing to be taken.
Most definatly! Should shoot straight to the top! But in all seriousness, we might be able to garner some attention and this might work..
I don't want it to work. I never supported the Langbord's position.
I never even supported the Farouk coin position. It made no sense to me that erroneously issuing an export license somehow monetized a coin that had never been monetized. That's like saying that if the State of NY accidentally issued me a marriage license rather than an adoption certificate that I would have a 3 year old wife!
Substantive points may be meritorious, but in fact the Fenton coin was not monetized until after the settlement when $20 was paid for it - so technically the allegedly erroneous issuance of an export license did not monetize the coin.
That was the compromise in the settlement. The only difference between that coin and all other 33 DEs was the export license that was viewed as government authorization of the release of the coin.
The coins were never released by the Mint. So they remain government property to this day. The Langbord position runs totally contrary to the law. And the government has a vested interest in discouraging pilfering from the Mint.
@291fifth said:
I'm sure such a petition will go right to the top of the President's pile of actions needing to be taken.
Most definatly! Should shoot straight to the top! But in all seriousness, we might be able to garner some attention and this might work..
I don't want it to work. I never supported the Langbord's position.
I never even supported the Farouk coin position. It made no sense to me that erroneously issuing an export license somehow monetized a coin that had never been monetized. That's like saying that if the State of NY accidentally issued me a marriage license rather than an adoption certificate that I would have a 3 year old wife!
Substantive points may be meritorious, but in fact the Fenton coin was not monetized until after the settlement when $20 was paid for it - so technically the allegedly erroneous issuance of an export license did not monetize the coin.
Is there any evidence that the actual "farouk" specimen is the Farouk Specimen? Can't someone just say "oh this one is the actual one"
@291fifth said:
I'm sure such a petition will go right to the top of the President's pile of actions needing to be taken.
Most definatly! Should shoot straight to the top! But in all seriousness, we might be able to garner some attention and this might work..
I don't want it to work. I never supported the Langbord's position.
I never even supported the Farouk coin position. It made no sense to me that erroneously issuing an export license somehow monetized a coin that had never been monetized. That's like saying that if the State of NY accidentally issued me a marriage license rather than an adoption certificate that I would have a 3 year old wife!
Substantive points may be meritorious, but in fact the Fenton coin was not monetized until after the settlement when $20 was paid for it - so technically the allegedly erroneous issuance of an export license did not monetize the coin.
Is there any evidence that the actual "farouk" specimen is the Farouk Specimen? Can't someone just say "oh this one is the actual one"
So what I hear is, no one can definitively prove if the Farouk Specimen is the actual Farouk Specimen,
You only hear what you want to hear.
Fenten was buying formerly Farouk coins and was offered the Double Eagle by an Egyptian dealer who had ties to the Egyptian military. Since the U.S. Mint authenticated it as genuine, there is little doubt that it is the same coin.
Since the court case was settled and the Mint and Fenten reached an agreement, the coin is legally recognized as the Farouk coin unless you have evidence to the contrary.
Maybe you'd like to change your petition and seek to seize and melt the Fenten coin as it is NOT the Farouk coin? Because I'm sure there were a lot of other 1933 DEs floating around in Egypt.
@tradedollarnut said:
If the Mint’s 11 coins were legalized, the price for an average specimen would be in the $3-4M range, not a “few hundred thousand “.
There are the 11 mint coins + the 12 estimated ones in hiding. That should bring the number to around the same price range of the 1933 eagle, which I belive trades in the 80-100k range.
@tradedollarnut said:
If the Mint’s 11 coins were legalized, the price for an average specimen would be in the $3-4M range, not a “few hundred thousand “.
There are the 11 mint coins + the 12 estimated ones in hiding. That should bring the number to around the same price range of the 1933 eagle, which I belive trades in the 80-100k range.
I haven’t heard of an estimated number in hiding that was anywhere close to 12. Without checking again, at this point, my guess would be approximately 3. And the 1933 Saints have far more history than the 1933 Eagles. So equal populations would not equate to equal values.
Edited to add: The PCGS price guide for 1933 Eagles is $250,000 in MS63 and $400,000 in MS64 and the combined PCGS/ NGC census is 36.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
@291fifth said:
I'm sure such a petition will go right to the top of the President's pile of actions needing to be taken.
Most definatly! Should shoot straight to the top! But in all seriousness, we might be able to garner some attention and this might work..
I don't want it to work. I never supported the Langbord's position.
I never even supported the Farouk coin position. It made no sense to me that erroneously issuing an export license somehow monetized a coin that had never been monetized. That's like saying that if the State of NY accidentally issued me a marriage license rather than an adoption certificate that I would have a 3 year old wife!
It makes about as much sense as the “One China” policy. The only reason the nonsensical Farouk coin deal was made was to settle a case that the government thought they might lose and open the floodgates for other coins.
@Jimnight said:
If the coins are illegal ... they should be destroyed.
Why?
Not sure they need to be destroyed but those alleged illegal coins have a chilling effect on the legal one. You see in these boards how people try to diminish the value of the Farouk coin by pointing to the other coins. That's a reason. Rather than destroying them they could be put in the Smithsonian with some guarantee that they can not be removed. This would mitigate the problem of the so called illegal coins hampering a legal coin but also keep these historic coins from being destroyed.
As much as people talk on the forums, I’m not sure how chilling of an effect it had as it just sold for over $18 million.
There are all kinds of people that talk down coins, even certain coins that still go up in value.
@Connecticoin said:
The only reason the nonsensical Farouk coin deal was made was to settle a case that the government thought they might lose and open the floodgates for other coins.
Losing the case is a legitimate concern. For example, NASA just lost a moon dust bag when the case went to court.
NONE should go to collectors. That defeats the whole purpose of their 90 year effort to reacquire the illegal coins. Further, you would be robbing the owner of the Farouk coin who bought it as the only legal example available to collectors.
This is an unworthy quest on so many levels.
As far as I'm concerned, the buyer took a huge risk on the Farouk coin knowing that other examples exist and that it is entirely possible that, in the future, he may NOT own the only monetized example.
USAF (Ret) 1974 - 1994 - The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; the inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries. Remembering RickO, a brother in arms.
NONE should go to collectors. That defeats the whole purpose of their 90 year effort to reacquire the illegal coins. Further, you would be robbing the owner of the Farouk coin who bought it as the only legal example available to collectors.
This is an unworthy quest on so many levels.
As far as I'm concerned, the buyer took a huge risk on the Farouk coin knowing that other examples exist and that it is entirely possible that, in the future, he may NOT own the only monetized example.
Considering what’s transpired during the past several decades and (edited) the Supreme Court refusing to hear the Langbord appeal, realistically, under what circumstances could you see any additional examples being monetized?
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
NONE should go to collectors. That defeats the whole purpose of their 90 year effort to reacquire the illegal coins. Further, you would be robbing the owner of the Farouk coin who bought it as the only legal example available to collectors.
This is an unworthy quest on so many levels.
As far as I'm concerned, the buyer took a huge risk on the Farouk coin knowing that other examples exist and that it is entirely possible that, in the future, he may NOT own the only monetized example.
From a financial exposure perspective, $20 million isn't a huge amount to many people. Do you know the net worth of the buyer?
There's also the probability of others becoming available which seems minuscule to me. Perhaps you have another thought on this?
The only way I can see this happening is:
authenticated cashier receipt shows up like for the 1933 Eagle
government accidentally releases one like the NASA moon dust bag
The probability of these or anything else happening (given the 70+ year history on government action), is so minimal, my approach would be to enjoy life. Stuart Weitzman did and it turned out ok.
Are saying this because the Supreme Court declined to hear the case? Catching you at your own game because your statement makes it sound like they ruled on the case.
NONE should go to collectors. That defeats the whole purpose of their 90 year effort to reacquire the illegal coins. Further, you would be robbing the owner of the Farouk coin who bought it as the only legal example available to collectors.
This is an unworthy quest on so many levels.
As far as I'm concerned, the buyer took a huge risk on the Farouk coin knowing that other examples exist and that it is entirely possible that, in the future, he may NOT own the only monetized example.
Considering what’s transpired during the past several decades and the Supreme Court ruling pertaining to the Langbord coins, realistically, under what circumstances could you see any additional examples being monetized?
@amwldcoin said:
Are saying this because the Supreme Court declined to hear the case? Catching you at your own game because your statement makes it sound like they ruled on the case.
NONE should go to collectors. That defeats the whole purpose of their 90 year effort to reacquire the illegal coins. Further, you would be robbing the owner of the Farouk coin who bought it as the only legal example available to collectors.
This is an unworthy quest on so many levels.
As far as I'm concerned, the buyer took a huge risk on the Farouk coin knowing that other examples exist and that it is entirely possible that, in the future, he may NOT own the only monetized example.
Considering what’s transpired during the past several decades and the Supreme Court ruling pertaining to the Langbord coins, realistically, under what circumstances could you see any additional examples being monetized?
No game here, as when the Supreme Court declined to hear the case, that ended the appeal process. That said, I should have stated that they declined to rule, rather than making reference to a ruling. So thank you.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
NONE should go to collectors. That defeats the whole purpose of their 90 year effort to reacquire the illegal coins. Further, you would be robbing the owner of the Farouk coin who bought it as the only legal example available to collectors.
This is an unworthy quest on so many levels.
As far as I'm concerned, the buyer took a huge risk on the Farouk coin knowing that other examples exist and that it is entirely possible that, in the future, he may NOT own the only monetized example.
Quite easily. All it takes is for someone to sneak a provision in on the next spending bill (that happens all the time) and then it becomes law.
@amwldcoin said:
Are saying this because the Supreme Court declined to hear the case? Catching you at your own game because your statement makes it sound like they ruled on the case.
NONE should go to collectors. That defeats the whole purpose of their 90 year effort to reacquire the illegal coins. Further, you would be robbing the owner of the Farouk coin who bought it as the only legal example available to collectors.
This is an unworthy quest on so many levels.
As far as I'm concerned, the buyer took a huge risk on the Farouk coin knowing that other examples exist and that it is entirely possible that, in the future, he may NOT own the only monetized example.
Considering what’s transpired during the past several decades and the Supreme Court ruling pertaining to the Langbord coins, realistically, under what circumstances could you see any additional examples being monetized?
No game here, as when the Supreme Court declined to hear the case, that ended the appeal process. That said, I should have stated that they declined to rule, rather than making reference to a ruling. So thank you.
Through the legal system, there is little chance of them becoming legal. Through congress, potentially. But I think it is quite likely that the remaining ones stay in hiding. Personally I would love to own one, even if it was less than legal.
@amwldcoin said:
Are saying this because the Supreme Court declined to hear the case? Catching you at your own game because your statement makes it sound like they ruled on the case.
NONE should go to collectors. That defeats the whole purpose of their 90 year effort to reacquire the illegal coins. Further, you would be robbing the owner of the Farouk coin who bought it as the only legal example available to collectors.
This is an unworthy quest on so many levels.
As far as I'm concerned, the buyer took a huge risk on the Farouk coin knowing that other examples exist and that it is entirely possible that, in the future, he may NOT own the only monetized example.
Considering what’s transpired during the past several decades and the Supreme Court ruling pertaining to the Langbord coins, realistically, under what circumstances could you see any additional examples being monetized?
@amwldcoin said:
Are saying this because the Supreme Court declined to hear the case? Catching you at your own game because your statement makes it sound like they ruled on the case.
NONE should go to collectors. That defeats the whole purpose of their 90 year effort to reacquire the illegal coins. Further, you would be robbing the owner of the Farouk coin who bought it as the only legal example available to collectors.
This is an unworthy quest on so many levels.
As far as I'm concerned, the buyer took a huge risk on the Farouk coin knowing that other examples exist and that it is entirely possible that, in the future, he may NOT own the only monetized example.
Considering what’s transpired during the past several decades and the Supreme Court ruling pertaining to the Langbord coins, realistically, under what circumstances could you see any additional examples being monetized?
No game here, as when the Supreme Court declined to hear the case, that ended the appeal process. That said, I should have stated that they declined to rule, rather than making reference to a ruling. So thank you.
Potentially if there is another case that gets heard, the appeal process may go differently.
NONE should go to collectors. That defeats the whole purpose of their 90 year effort to reacquire the illegal coins. Further, you would be robbing the owner of the Farouk coin who bought it as the only legal example available to collectors.
This is an unworthy quest on so many levels.
As far as I'm concerned, the buyer took a huge risk on the Farouk coin knowing that other examples exist and that it is entirely possible that, in the future, he may NOT own the only monetized example.
Quite easily. All it takes is for someone to sneak a provision in on the next spending bill (that happens all the time) and then it becomes law.
Sure, one way or another, additional examples could be made legal to own. But the chances of that seem even (much) more remote than that 1933 Eagles trade in the $80,000-$100,000 range.😉
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
NONE should go to collectors. That defeats the whole purpose of their 90 year effort to reacquire the illegal coins. Further, you would be robbing the owner of the Farouk coin who bought it as the only legal example available to collectors.
This is an unworthy quest on so many levels.
As far as I'm concerned, the buyer took a huge risk on the Farouk coin knowing that other examples exist and that it is entirely possible that, in the future, he may NOT own the only monetized example.
Quite easily. All it takes is for someone to sneak a provision in on the next spending bill (that happens all the time) and then it becomes law.
Sure, one way or another, additional examples could be made legal to own. But the chances of that seem even (much) more remote than that 1933 Eagles trade in the $80,000-$100,000 range.😉
You can put your tin foil hat on and assume many things. Why would Congress care to do it?
Congress could also demonetize any coin or order them melted. [May or may not survive appeal. ]
Congress could institute an annual wealth tax on all coin collections. Our, they could institute a national VAT on bullion or coins.
Hard to live your life trying to protect yourself from events of life likelihood.
NONE should go to collectors. That defeats the whole purpose of their 90 year effort to reacquire the illegal coins. Further, you would be robbing the owner of the Farouk coin who bought it as the only legal example available to collectors.
This is an unworthy quest on so many levels.
As far as I'm concerned, the buyer took a huge risk on the Farouk coin knowing that other examples exist and that it is entirely possible that, in the future, he may NOT own the only monetized example.
Quite easily. All it takes is for someone to sneak a provision in on the next spending bill (that happens all the time) and then it becomes law.
Sure, one way or another, additional examples could be made legal to own. But the chances of that seem even (much) more remote than that 1933 Eagles trade in the $80,000-$100,000 range.😉
You can put your tin foil hat on and assume many things. Why would Congress care to do it?
Congress could also demonetize any coin or order them melted. [May or may not survive appeal. ]
Congress could institute an annual wealth tax on all coin collections. Our, they could institute a national VAT on bullion or coins.
Hard to live your life trying to protect yourself from events of life likelihood.
Why didn’t you post that reply to CaloforniaKing? He’s the one who posted about Congress.
Comments
Not sure they need to be destroyed but those alleged illegal coins have a chilling effect on the legal one. You see in these boards how people try to diminish the value of the Farouk coin by pointing to the other coins. That's a reason. Rather than destroying them they could be put in the Smithsonian with some guarantee that they can not be removed. This would mitigate the problem of the so called illegal coins hampering a legal coin but also keep these historic coins from being destroyed.
Why destroy anything? Laws and interpretations can change.
Anything can be legalized if snuck into a piece of legislation. The trick is finding a politician who cares enough to try.
Some of us truly embrace change. I don't ever want to be too old for that!
I moved to Colorado long before it was "cool". Doesn't mean I toke...but we did a lot of things right out here. An enormous amount of money has gone to our schools thanks to that little plant! We also helped change the country's economy with it, and now the global economy too.
If you've ever been a manager in retail you know just how important it is to embrace change lol!
"Be the change you want to see in the world."
"Reality is a crutch for people who can't cope with drugs."
"Positivity is a superpower."
Coins are Neato!
"If it's a penny for your thoughts and you put in your two cents worth, then someone...somewhere...is making a penny." - Steven Wright
The coins are not 'illegal'... they have not been 'monetized', therefore have not been awarded official government status. A fine distinction indeed, but our legal system functions on many, many 'fine distinctions' in language. Cheers, RickO
Isn't our government "emotionally attached" to these coins because they are linked in history to FDR's gold confiscation order? If the government has a claim on these, shouldn't they also have a claim on various pattern pieces or perhaps 1913 nickels or even 1964 SMS coins?
We are a culture with a short memory. 1933 is ages ago. Free these things.
That is how the "back door" worked at the Mint. Do some research. There was a buddy, buddy system with local dealers in Philadelphia. No one actually picked stuff up and walked off with it. They did favors for the insiders, including the premature trading of the 1933 DEs WHICH WERE NEVER AUTHORIZED FOR RELEASE. Which is why the government has won every legal case for 90 years.
They aren't illegal for the Mint to possess. They can go into the Mint holdings or the NNC.
@jmlanzaf said: "the government has won every legal case for 90 years."
I don't doubt this, but am asking out of curiosity -- what are the other significant cases in pursuit of apparently illegally held coins? I know there has been activity regarding the aluminum cents, but would be interested to know about others.
I'm only showing of the DEs. There aren't a lot of coins the government went after like that. Most patterns were left in the private sector. They simply denied the 1913 nickels.
The DEs were special, probably because of the coincidental gold ban.
I figure if it's illegal for the public to own ... why would I want the mint/gov to profit off it.
They don't exactly profit off it if it goes in a museum. In fact, the entire public benefit rather than just a few people.
There should be a split, some go to the government/museum's, and some go to collectors. The government can auction it off and have the funds benefit some charity.
NONE should go to collectors. That defeats the whole purpose of their 90 year effort to reacquire the illegal coins. Further, you would be robbing the owner of the Farouk coin who bought it as the only legal example available to collectors.
This is an unworthy quest on so many levels.
The unworthy quest was the 90 year battle to take it away from people. It has been to long to be able to honestly prove that they were stolen. You could not find one reliable witness, there is no hard evidence. The only thing you would be able to get, is some kid who was like 7 taking a tour of the mint, who may or may not have seen someone steal a coin...
At the very least...since it is known nothing was missing from the mint, the government ripped them off for the face value in 1933 dollars!
Substantive points may be meritorious, but in fact the Fenton coin was not monetized until after the settlement when $20 was paid for it - so technically the allegedly erroneous issuance of an export license did not monetize the coin.
yea. Doubt anyone would care tho.
Is there any evidence that the actual "farouk" specimen is the Farouk Specimen? Can't someone just say "oh this one is the actual one"
Lol...looks like you have 2 signatures!
The sale was in 1954, so it’s not nearly that easy.
See here: https://www.coinworld.com/news/precious-metals/last-u-s-numismatist-at-1954-farouk-auction-dies-at-97
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
You really don't understand the nature of the case. It has been adjudicated numerous times. BO ONE thinks someone pocketed a coin. The coins were released without authorization. Period.
That was the compromise in the settlement. The only difference between that coin and all other 33 DEs was the export license that was viewed as government authorization of the release of the coin.
The coins were never released by the Mint. So they remain government property to this day. The Langbord position runs totally contrary to the law. And the government has a vested interest in discouraging pilfering from the Mint.
So what I hear is, no one can definitively prove if the Farouk Specimen is the actual Farouk Specimen,
You only hear what you want to hear.
Fenten was buying formerly Farouk coins and was offered the Double Eagle by an Egyptian dealer who had ties to the Egyptian military. Since the U.S. Mint authenticated it as genuine, there is little doubt that it is the same coin.
Since the court case was settled and the Mint and Fenten reached an agreement, the coin is legally recognized as the Farouk coin unless you have evidence to the contrary.
Maybe you'd like to change your petition and seek to seize and melt the Fenten coin as it is NOT the Farouk coin? Because I'm sure there were a lot of other 1933 DEs floating around in Egypt.
If the Mint’s 11 coins were legalized, the price for an average specimen would be in the $3-4M range, not a “few hundred thousand “.
There are the 11 mint coins + the 12 estimated ones in hiding. That should bring the number to around the same price range of the 1933 eagle, which I belive trades in the 80-100k range.
Late much?
I haven’t heard of an estimated number in hiding that was anywhere close to 12. Without checking again, at this point, my guess would be approximately 3. And the 1933 Saints have far more history than the 1933 Eagles. So equal populations would not equate to equal values.
Edited to add: The PCGS price guide for 1933 Eagles is $250,000 in MS63 and $400,000 in MS64 and the combined PCGS/ NGC census is 36.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
I always thought they should be legal, until I read the book "Illegal Tender".
It makes about as much sense as the “One China” policy. The only reason the nonsensical Farouk coin deal was made was to settle a case that the government thought they might lose and open the floodgates for other coins.
As much as people talk on the forums, I’m not sure how chilling of an effect it had as it just sold for over $18 million.
There are all kinds of people that talk down coins, even certain coins that still go up in value.
Losing the case is a legitimate concern. For example, NASA just lost a moon dust bag when the case went to court.
As far as I'm concerned, the buyer took a huge risk on the Farouk coin knowing that other examples exist and that it is entirely possible that, in the future, he may NOT own the only monetized example.
USAF (Ret) 1974 - 1994 - The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; the inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries. Remembering RickO, a brother in arms.
Considering what’s transpired during the past several decades and (edited) the Supreme Court refusing to hear the Langbord appeal, realistically, under what circumstances could you see any additional examples being monetized?
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
From a financial exposure perspective, $20 million isn't a huge amount to many people. Do you know the net worth of the buyer?
There's also the probability of others becoming available which seems minuscule to me. Perhaps you have another thought on this?
The only way I can see this happening is:
The probability of these or anything else happening (given the 70+ year history on government action), is so minimal, my approach would be to enjoy life. Stuart Weitzman did and it turned out ok.
Are saying this because the Supreme Court declined to hear the case? Catching you at your own game because your statement makes it sound like they ruled on the case.
No game here, as when the Supreme Court declined to hear the case, that ended the appeal process. That said, I should have stated that they declined to rule, rather than making reference to a ruling. So thank you.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Quite easily. All it takes is for someone to sneak a provision in on the next spending bill (that happens all the time) and then it becomes law.
Through the legal system, there is little chance of them becoming legal. Through congress, potentially. But I think it is quite likely that the remaining ones stay in hiding. Personally I would love to own one, even if it was less than legal.
Potentially if there is another case that gets heard, the appeal process may go differently.
Sure, one way or another, additional examples could be made legal to own. But the chances of that seem even (much) more remote than that 1933 Eagles trade in the $80,000-$100,000 range.😉
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
You can put your tin foil hat on and assume many things. Why would Congress care to do it?
Congress could also demonetize any coin or order them melted. [May or may not survive appeal. ]
Congress could institute an annual wealth tax on all coin collections. Our, they could institute a national VAT on bullion or coins.
Hard to live your life trying to protect yourself from events of life likelihood.
Should go to him also.