<< <i>What does everyone think about the new "Speared Buffalo" variety? It's kind of on the line, so to speak. The line thru the Buffalo is definitely there, but it is a little weak.
Should we recognize this variety?
Thanks for the input,
David >>
I think PCGS should do whatever they feel like doing, to further this great hobby.
I'm still having a hissy fit over the proper name (shish-ke-buff) not even getting one vote in the poll.
That aside, the major problem with this coin is timing. It has come right on the heels of one of the more important discoveries in some time and appears to have a similar causation. Were it not for the WI variety and the frequent bashing of it then it would be a shoe-in to become popular and adding it immediately shouldn't be a problem. But , promoting this coin at the current time would tend to distract from the importance and popularity of the other coins. For this reason I believe the buffalo should stand or fall on its own (the stick might help keep it up). Rella's right, just wait until it gets popular and then add it.
Regarding the recognition of the speared buffalo, I am always amazed at the excitement generated by microscopic and barely visible varieties on modern coins, while major and blatant varieties of much greater importance are ignored on earlier series.
I don't know where you should draw the line, but I do think a lot of modern varieties are silly. When I see the usual articles in Coin World pointing out possible doubled dies, I am perplexed. These people ought to look at the 1872 and 1873 shield nickels shown in the CHerrypicker's Guide. Now THOSE are DDO's !!!! They make any 20th century DDO seem tame (or even irrelevant) by comparison. In the shield nickel series alone, there are repunched dates with wide displacements, major hub varieties, major date logotype varieties, and more. For example, why doesn't PCGS recognize the 1869 5c narrow date logotype variety (FS-005, also called "tall date"), or the 1868 5c Reverse of 1868 (a hub unique to that year)? Not to mention the wild DDO's, etc.
I do understand that there is some value in getting people interested in coin collecting, and one way is to get people to look at their pocket change in search of "rare" varieties. However, it seems odd to me to consider recognizing something like the speared bison when there are so many other more obvious and numismatically important varieties that are not attributed on PCGS holders.
Best, Doug Kurz/Sunnywood >>
There are also some pretty dramatic modern varieties which have escaped notice.
Moderns are much more likely to be collected by variety especially in lower grades since there aren't regular issue rarities in lower grades. While insignificant varieties do tend to get more attention if they are modern, few have much more than nominal value.
Personally I think recognition by PCGS should solely be dictated by the popularity of this coin and by the number of individuals that request that it be recognized. After all, isn't this what its all about, collecting? The importance of the coin is to the collector first! If we want it recognized and there are enough of them out there to warrant recognition, then why not give it number?
It is the collecting community that recognizes something as being collectible and the grading services should follow suit.
I decided to change calling the bathroom the John and renamed it the Jim. I feel so much better saying I went to the Jim this morning.
<< <i>It's a die gouge and nothing more, so I say it's fine to talk about it, but the PMM is just as worthy and not formally recognized by PCGS and really goes to show the worth of the error. This is basically a worthless attribution, although it can be trivial fun. I'd say do without the formal designation. Let CONECA handle it.
Hoot >>
I agree. This coin is technically not a "variety". I would rather see PCGS start attributing real varieties such as non-redbook'ed Doubled Dies and RPMs. A neat coin but a die gouge is a die gouge.
(By the way Mark, CONECA would not classify this as a variety)
Absolutely not. I won't be surprised if you come to regret acting so hastily on the WI leaf varieties in a year or so, too.
Sean Reynolds
Incomplete planchets wanted, especially Lincoln Cents & type coins.
"Keep in mind that most of what passes as numismatic information is no more than tested opinion at best, and marketing blather at worst. However, I try to choose my words carefully, since I know that you guys are always watching." - Joe O'Connor
I am going to change my opinion slightly. PCGS is is the business of making money by "slabbing" coins. Starting to slab these with the label of "speared bison" or "Rhodesion Bison" or "double your pleasure bison" or whatever will generate more submissions to PCGS. Maybe don't include them in the Registry yet, but go ahead and slab them? People act as if PCGS will do irreparable harm to itself by slabbing these. How so? They make some money over the next 12 months while this fad runs its course. A few years from now, if nobody remembers them, what harm done? And if it turns out to be significant, then PCGS was right on top of the game all along. I see no downside.
"First things first, you still haven't gotten to many cherrypicker's varieties, or many major rpm's, or many major ddo's. With the former ANACS guy on board, and many of us with nice varieties in your slabs but without attribution, seems like that should be the next order of business."
Especially since BOTH NGC & ANACS already have them in THEIR pop reports
David, you should know better than to ask a question like this, here! Anyone collecting moderns, is going to say "Yea" and those who do not will say "Nay". However, even though I am a modern collector, I think you should do what is best for PCGS, and the hobby et al. There is no way to make everyone happy unless you revamp the entire system. I have heard a lot of whining on these boards, but this thread is getting ridiculous.
Do it, or don't, but you will have to make that decision.
why bother recognizing such a modern coin as a variety when there are so many classic's that PCGS don't recognize? must have a lot of them to even be thinking such a thing!
PCGS should recognize all the other varieties and RPM's and then worry about this one !! it pretty much sucks to have to have a single series in three different holder's just so your different varieties are on the holder.
Comments
<< <i>What does everyone think about the new "Speared Buffalo" variety? It's kind of on the line, so to speak. The line thru the Buffalo is definitely there, but it is a little weak.
Should we recognize this variety?
Thanks for the input,
David >>
I think PCGS should do whatever they feel like doing, to further this great hobby.
Smooch...smooch...smooch!................
one vote in the poll.
That aside, the major problem with this coin is timing. It has come right on the heels
of one of the more important discoveries in some time and appears to have a similar
causation. Were it not for the WI variety and the frequent bashing of it then it would
be a shoe-in to become popular and adding it immediately shouldn't be a problem. But ,
promoting this coin at the current time would tend to distract from the importance and
popularity of the other coins. For this reason I believe the buffalo should stand or fall
on its own (the stick might help keep it up). Rella's right, just wait until it gets popular
and then add it.
<< <i>Hi David,
Regarding the recognition of the speared buffalo, I am always amazed at the excitement generated by microscopic and barely visible varieties on modern coins, while major and blatant varieties of much greater importance are ignored on earlier series.
I don't know where you should draw the line, but I do think a lot of modern varieties are silly. When I see the usual articles in Coin World pointing out possible doubled dies, I am perplexed. These people ought to look at the 1872 and 1873 shield nickels shown in the CHerrypicker's Guide. Now THOSE are DDO's !!!! They make any 20th century DDO seem tame (or even irrelevant) by comparison. In the shield nickel series alone, there are repunched dates with wide displacements, major hub varieties, major date logotype varieties, and more. For example, why doesn't PCGS recognize the 1869 5c narrow date logotype variety (FS-005, also called "tall date"), or the 1868 5c Reverse of 1868 (a hub unique to that year)? Not to mention the wild DDO's, etc.
I do understand that there is some value in getting people interested in coin collecting, and one way is to get people to look at their pocket change in search of "rare" varieties. However, it seems odd to me to consider recognizing something like the speared bison when there are so many other more obvious and numismatically important varieties that are not attributed on PCGS holders.
Best,
Doug Kurz/Sunnywood >>
There are also some pretty dramatic modern varieties which have escaped notice.
Moderns are much more likely to be collected by variety especially in lower grades
since there aren't regular issue rarities in lower grades. While insignificant varieties
do tend to get more attention if they are modern, few have much more than nominal
value.
<< <i>(think PCGS should do whatever they feel like doing, to further this great hobby.)
Smooch...smooch...smooch!................
It is the collecting community that recognizes something as being collectible and the grading services should follow suit.
The name is LEE!
<< <i>It's a die gouge and nothing more, so I say it's fine to talk about it, but the PMM is just as worthy and not formally recognized by PCGS and really goes to show the worth of the error. This is basically a worthless attribution, although it can be trivial fun. I'd say do without the formal designation. Let CONECA handle it.
Hoot >>
I agree. This coin is technically not a "variety". I would rather see PCGS start attributing real varieties such as non-redbook'ed Doubled Dies and RPMs. A neat coin but a die gouge is a die gouge.
(By the way Mark, CONECA would not classify this as a variety)
J. Taylor
CONECA Member
FSNC Member
<< <i>Should we recognize this variety? >>
No, in that case you should recognize every variety, including RPM's, Die breaks, and other things.
And I'm sure PCGS won't do that
Dennis
Like VOC Numismatics on facebook
I say grade them and label as such, "Speared Buffalo"
Another spark to the hobby, and it's with this great newly designed Jefferson Nickel
I do agree with others, not to add this coin as well as the WI D High / Low coins to the Registry sets
Sean Reynolds
"Keep in mind that most of what passes as numismatic information is no more than tested opinion at best, and marketing blather at worst. However, I try to choose my words carefully, since I know that you guys are always watching." - Joe O'Connor
<< <i>Should we recognize this variety? >>
I'm searching for the analogous thread that you started regarding the WI 'variety'. I'll let you know after I respond to that one.
Glad to hear it.
Hoot
Especially since BOTH NGC & ANACS already have them in THEIR pop reports
Anyone collecting moderns, is going to say "Yea" and those who do not will say "Nay".
However, even though I am a modern collector, I think you should do what is best for PCGS, and the hobby et al.
There is no way to make everyone happy unless you revamp the entire system.
I have heard a lot of whining on these boards, but this thread is getting ridiculous.
Do it, or don't, but you will have to make that decision.
must have a lot of them to even be thinking such a thing!
PCGS should recognize all the other varieties and RPM's and then worry about this one !!
it pretty much sucks to have to have a single series in three different holder's just so your different varieties are on the holder.