Options
Coin World Exposes the Fraud that is "First Strike"
Codder
Posts: 72
OK...here are the rules...and you know them already...
If you want to say what we do is "nonesense," that's OK. But if you call what we do fraud, you're outta here.
Goodbye Codder.
By the way, we think mdwoods comment,
"Coin World has a lot of gall saying anything about a marketing ploy given the reputation of some of their advertisers."
is the most appropriate of all.
Ron Guth and David Hall
If you want to say what we do is "nonesense," that's OK. But if you call what we do fraud, you're outta here.
Goodbye Codder.
By the way, we think mdwoods comment,
"Coin World has a lot of gall saying anything about a marketing ploy given the reputation of some of their advertisers."
is the most appropriate of all.
Ron Guth and David Hall
0
Comments
If I only had a dollar for every VAM I have...err...nevermind...I do!!
My "Fun With 21D" Die State Collection - QX5 Pics Attached
-----
Proud Owner of
2 –DAMMIT BOY!!! ® Awards
Wondercoin
<< <i>I've always thought that first strike designations are complete nonsense >>
Russ, NCNE
Don't follow - my point was simply that non-FS coins will start hitting the market around now / later this month - at which point collectors and dealers will see what, if any, premium exists for FS Buffalos.
Wondercoin
Collectors that want that label should already be aware that it means only that.
Delusional people might think the are buying the first coins off the presses
The Government should cash in on the craze and offer a first strike of the die coins or first 100 coins coin or number the coins by the batch.Then they could jack up the premium and offer the chance to buy them by lottery drawing. Now that would be a gas
Nuff said.
<< <i>I just did---"an act of deceiving or misrepresenting." There are others, and they all fit the First Strike program. You look it up. >>
Precisely how has PCGS deceived or misrepresented? The criteria for this designation is very clearly stated for all to see. The fact that some collectors are willing to pay a premium for the label does not in any way constitute fraud.
Russ, NCNE
<< <i>Before you leap all over me, read the editorial. Don't kill the messenger. >>
Did the author of the editorial call it fraud?
Russ, NCNE
Russ, NCNE
Jerry
Russ, NCNE
if there weren't people out there willing to pay for these silly designations, they wouldn't make them.
if these people want to spend their money on such things, let them. To each his own.
<< <i>Don't kill the messenger. >>
You ceased being just the messenger when you chose to interject your own erroneous opinion that the first strike designation constitutes fraud.
Russ, NCNE
Me personally, I do not think it fraud. It would be fraud if I bought for example an advertised "Mint Sealed" proof set from the 50,s with "all original coins intact" etc.. and when I opened it, it was a bunch of washers.
My opinion.
<< <i>How about the title: "SHIPPING DATES DON"T EQUAL 'FIRST' " Read the editorial. If you don't think what they're doing constitutes fraud, and that is exactly what Coin World means by their editorial, then I can't help you. And OJ wasn't guilty, and Oswald didn't do it, and Clinton didn't have sex with Lewinsky. Whatever. >>
I can't help but think that they didn't come right out and use the word "fraud" because their lawyers told them not to.
<< <i>but I doubt that coinworld called it Fraud. >>
Of course they didn't. The OP added that all by himself.
Russ, NCNE
buy a nice 1872 cc dime is vg as see which is worth more in 20 years.
The only reason I bought a proof buffalo is to give my unborn son a present.
Buying top quality Seated Dimes in Gem BU and Proof.
Buying great coins - monster eye appeal only.
<< <i>The bottom line: by any traditional definition of first strikes, these coins are not. I've given you the deifintion of fraud. >>
The "bottom line" is that the author did not call it fraud, you did. Any thinking person knows that it isn't fraud by any stretch of the imagination. It's a silly marketing gimmick, but not fraud.
<< <i>You've lost the debate and want to hide behind a word. >>
Uh yeah, okay.
Russ, NCNE
your Wrong. Period.
<< <i>Just got my Coin World and the lead editorial is a killer. In plain language that even a novice like me can understand they expose the fraud that is the "first strike" baloney slung by PCGS and the other TPGs. How much of a premium should be placed on a Gold Buffalo (or any other coin) designated as "First Strike?" NOTHING. And this is what we get from the entity that is supposed to "protect" the coin collector from fraud. Good for Coin World--they've struck another blow into the
Robert Chambers obviously has more experience than anyone at PCGS, plus, he buys silver roosies for 2.50 each!
-Daniel
-Aristotle
Dum loquimur fugerit invida aetas. Carpe diem quam minimum credula postero.
-Horace
<< <i>they've lost the ability to see fraud when it's right in front of them. >>
If you show us a REAL example of fraud I'm sure we'll quite readily see it.
Russ, NCNE
I am more peeved at the terminology of "First Strike" rather than the term "First Struck."
Last struck sounds better than last strike too?
I am not kidding, first struck coins of the die is more proof-like and I prefer the creamy luster in which the surfaces are more white frosty (in silver coins).
<< <i>Pick up the paper and PM me your apology. >>
No need to PM. I'm sorry - that you don't know the definition of fraud.
Russ, NCNE
<< <i>If you can't agree that this thing is, there's not much more to say. Pick up the paper and PM me your apology. >>
Here is how I see it:
The U.S. Mint prepares dies for the whole year and makes whatever it needs regarding the Silver, Gold, and Platinum coins. These dies are used starting late in the year for the following year. These are not the only new dies that are used all year long, so if a new die is used in June, then the first 100 or so coins off of that die should be considered "First Strike".
So actually First Strike coins happen all year long, not just before february 1st.
They should be called first Release coins!
Later, Paul.
Later, Paul.
<< <i>I'll give you one more chance to dig yourself out of your very deep hole. >>
It appears you suffer from transference issues.
Russ, NCNE
you should just walk away from this one while you still think you are ahead.
<< <i>you should just walk away from this one while you still think you are ahead. >>
Well, Goose, he already said "goodnight fellows" so it looks like he suddenly developed the good sense to realize the inanity of his assertion and move on.
Russ, NCNE
established. Only high grade coins will be certified in most cases.There's
really little importance to the term nor is there much meaning to the term.
It remains to be seen if these develope a premium in excess to others
but don't be surprised if they don't.
The word "gimmick" springs to mind and it wouldn't be too tough to think
"hype", but fraud would be a major leap in spirit or in fact. There is a def-
inition for these coins and it is related to their striking order even if there
is little or no correlation to quality.
Wrong.
They should be called first Release coins!
That would be better, however, why not just call them "bulk submission" coins? That's what they are.
Jerry
<< <i>if there weren't people out there willing to pay for these silly designations, they wouldn't make them.
if these people want to spend their money on such things, let them. To each his own. >>
Just like WTC death slabs [the ones which were never at ground zero but gave the impression they were].
Coin's for sale/trade.
Tom Pilitowski
US Rare Coin Investments
800-624-1870
It was only $2.00 over the premium for a nice protective case. So i grabbed a few of them.
"The silver is mine and the gold is mine,' declares the LORD GOD Almighty."
movies, cars, food, etc. Stick it out there with a fancy logo and advertising and people will scarf it up......for at least a while.
Coin dealers came up with the idea of special labeling for CAM, DCAM, and probably FSB and many other "to die for" labels of today. And now the collector cannot live without them. Amazing.
No, the people never "request" this crap. The advertising and marketing geniuses come up with it and dump it in front of you.
roadrunner
I have to agree with you.... that the term is deceptive from what is the most common use of the term First Strike. BUT--- I know of no legal, all encompassing, cut and dried official definition of the term.... so anyone can use the term however they see fit. Kind of like grading standards...... there are whatever one makes them out to be. One man's AU58 is anothers MS63.
Also, from what I gathered from this thread, PCGS DEFINED what they meant by the term. So, how can you consider this to be fraud when they disclosed this?? Granted... many purchasers probably did not contact PCGS to find out.... but just assumed the term meant what they themselves thought it meant. (and I have to admit.... I have always used the term for the coins first off of a new die also).
Bottom line.... perhaps creative, deceptive marketing ploy..... but not legal fraud. There is a big difference between the two.
A coin offered for sale with the pitch "MONSTER RAINBOW", without even suggesting it was NT, sells for huge money...
<< <i> if there weren't people out there willing to pay for these silly designations, they wouldn't make them. if these people want to spend their money on such things, let them. To each his own. >>
Change "designations" to "colors". We must then assume the quote above applies equally as well to toned coins sold for huge premiums. Heck, we don't even have to redefine "toned" to support the scam. No problem there, right fellas?
<< <i>from what I gathered from this thread, PCGS DEFINED what they meant by the term. So, how can you consider this to be fraud when they disclosed this?? >>
Sorry ladies, "first strike", by definition, means the first coins struck from new dies. Spin it anyway you want in your little koolaid world, the bottom line is that by labeling coins based on date instead of die life is wrong. It's a "gimmick" intended to extract additional money from the naive. Whether it's $2 or $2,000, the intent is the same. Period.
But then again, maybe I'm wrong.
I wonder if I can get PCGS to reholder all of my 1878 Morgan dollars to say "first strike". I mean after all, my definition of first strike is, well you know, the first year they were struck.
PCGS, ANACS, & NGC Certified Coins on My Website.
Very well put and reenforces how the hobby has become a bit of a mania when coins are surrounded by plastic.
Oh, and we can't forget: FBL, FB, FS and the rest of the alphabet soup.
Nonsense!
Just a worthless marketing gimmick in my opinion.
“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!
<< <i> Instead of bowing to the number of posts a forum member has (and who must therefore qualify as the thread expert), open your eyes and read the editorial. I appreciate the posts of those who understand the point I'm trying to get across. >>
And herein lies much of the problem. We haven't read it. Even if the article is as you say highly
critical of the practice or the companies it is not overly unusual for them to be extremely cruitical
of recent issue coins and they have printed articles detrimental to TPG's in the past. They are not
the final authority either. Customers of the papers, graders, and mint are the final authority.