Let's get our facts straight. With very little disclosure on the Mint's part, The Inspector General's Report that was released back in the Spring of 2006 clearly stated that a coin press operator detected the minting of a"Blemished" WI D state quarter. The mint employee turned the press off, placed an example of the coin which was verifed by the US Govt. as the WI D High Leaf Variety on the press controls. Then this operator proceeded to take his evening lunch break. The Mint knew that they had minted the High for sure and because the lows were being minted at the same time as the Highs and were mixed together in at least two balistic mint bags, the officials in Denver knew they had these blemished WI quarters ready to be shipped. Rumor has it that the Denver Mint personnel may have removed many of the so called 50,000 examples before they left the Denver Mint. Call Director Moy and get his take !! Good Luck. I wrote him a letter direct over a month ago and have still not received a reply. Go Figure !!
I'm sorry, but it is unclear from your "facts" if the coin was or was not intentionally released, despite knowledge by certain mint employees.
In addition, Director Foy's silence on the topic, as well as the rumored actions of the Denver employees removing some of these coins, both seem contrary to the suggestion that these were indeed released intentionally.
Lastly, I'm not sure how you arrived at the conclusion: "The Mint knew that they had minted the High for sure and because the lows were being minted at the same time as the Highs and were mixed together in at least two balistic mint bags, the officials in Denver knew they had these blemished WI quarters ready to be shipped." I don't recall any reports from the mint that said anything about mint officials knowing about these coins prior to release. Couldn't it be that word hadn't reached mint officials before the coins were released?
It seems to me that all we really know is one mint employee noticed, and that they were put in the same bags -- and the rest is conjecture. But again, I'm not nearly as well-versed in the history of these coins as some around here, so please correct me if I'm wrong....
Curiously yours...Mike
Collector of Large Cents, US Type, and modern pocket change.
Yes, I do think the mint's intention matters. Those two examples you site were intentional and officially released by the mint. I doubt that this coin would have been released had it been caught. That said, I'm not as familiar as some with the events surrounding these coins, so please correct me if I'm wrong...
Personally, the closest parallel I can think of is the proof "superbird" Washington quarters. Like these coins, apparently they were issued without noticing the clandestine addition of a feature to the coin by mint employees. It is interesting to note that you don't see those as part of the Redbook or the CDN. >>
It was not an official mint issue.
I'm not familiar with the circumstances surrounding the issuance of the "superbird" but you're probably right that it's more similar than the examples I cited.
The superbird wasn't released right along with another similar issue that essentially proved it was intentional. It didn't get the kind of controversy the WI quarters did and it didn't get national attention.
<< <i>Does this mean that these are now recognized by dealers as a Error or a variety or????? what does this mean? >>
Some dealers care. Others, such as myself, do not. You may decide for yourself if you care. They are not required for a complete collection of statehood quarters. TD >>
As I said, you may decide for yourself if you care. Don't let the people selling them make that decision for you. TD
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. 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. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
Yes, I do think the mint's intention matters. Those two examples you site were intentional and officially released by the mint. I doubt that this coin would have been released had it been caught. That said, I'm not as familiar as some with the events surrounding these coins, so please correct me if I'm wrong...
Personally, the closest parallel I can think of is the proof "superbird" Washington quarters. Like these coins, apparently they were issued without noticing the clandestine addition of a feature to the coin by mint employees. It is interesting to note that you don't see those as part of the Redbook or the CDN. >>
It was not an official mint issue.
I'm not familiar with the circumstances surrounding the issuance of the "superbird" but you're probably right that it's more similar than the examples I cited.
The superbird wasn't released right along with another similar issue that essentially proved it was intentional. It didn't get the kind of controversy the WI quarters did and it didn't get national attention. >>
Clad,
Just when I thought I was getting this, you've thrown me for another loop!
Have the high-leaf and low-leaf coins been deemed an "official mint issue"??? Does the fact that one employee noticed them and that it was subsequently mentioned in the mint report make it official???
That asked, I agree the level of hype associated with the high-leaves and low-leaves far eclipses that which was associated with the Suberbirds.
However, setting the hype aside, the parallel seems very good otherwise, as it is my understanding that both coins were made by mint employees adding non-approved features to a coin, and the coin being released without the mint officially intending them to.
But again, I'm open minded to other possibilities....Mike
Collector of Large Cents, US Type, and modern pocket change.
Yes, I do think the mint's intention matters. Those two examples you site were intentional and officially released by the mint. I doubt that this coin would have been released had it been caught. That said, I'm not as familiar as some with the events surrounding these coins, so please correct me if I'm wrong...
Personally, the closest parallel I can think of is the proof "superbird" Washington quarters. Like these coins, apparently they were issued without noticing the clandestine addition of a feature to the coin by mint employees. It is interesting to note that you don't see those as part of the Redbook or the CDN. >>
It was not an official mint issue.
I'm not familiar with the circumstances surrounding the issuance of the "superbird" but you're probably right that it's more similar than the examples I cited.
The superbird wasn't released right along with another similar issue that essentially proved it was intentional. It didn't get the kind of controversy the WI quarters did and it didn't get national attention. >>
How does the fact that two different dies were involved "essentially prove it was intentional?"
There are multiple Lincoln cents from the same general time period with curved line die damage in the centers of the reverses. Does this prove that they are deliberate also? If so, should they be in the Redbook also? Should they be in the Greysheet? Should they be required to complete a collection of Lincoln cents?
I vote no.
TD
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. 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. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
I'm not familiar with the circumstances surrounding the issuance of the "superbird" but you're probably right that it's more similar than the examples I cited.
The superbird wasn't released right along with another similar issue that essentially proved it was intentional. It didn't get the kind of controversy the WI quarters did and it didn't get national attention. >>
Just when I thought I was getting this, you've thrown me for another loop!
Have the high-leaf and low-leaf coins been deemed an "official mint issue"??? Does the fact that one employee noticed them and that it was subsequently mentioned in the mint report make it official???
That asked, I agree the level of hype associated with the high-leaves and low-leaves far eclipses that which was associated with the Suberbirds.
However, setting the hype aside, the parallel seems very good otherwise, as it is my understanding that both coins were made by mint employees adding non-approved features to a coin, and the coin being released without the mint officially intending them to.
But again, I'm open minded to other possibilities....Mike >>
I don't understand why people say this is hype and promotion. No one can control what the national media is going to pick up. What were they supposed to do sit on the news?
All the hype I see is still for the old coins rather than any of the new ones.
I set out to do my own research on these coins several years ago. I have not edited the original writing, haven't looked at it in over a year, but here it is, and it didn't make Mr. Potter happy... Best
I'm not familiar with the circumstances surrounding the issuance of the "superbird" but you're probably right that it's more similar than the examples I cited.
The superbird wasn't released right along with another similar issue that essentially proved it was intentional. It didn't get the kind of controversy the WI quarters did and it didn't get national attention. >>
Just when I thought I was getting this, you've thrown me for another loop!
Have the high-leaf and low-leaf coins been deemed an "official mint issue"??? Does the fact that one employee noticed them and that it was subsequently mentioned in the mint report make it official???
That asked, I agree the level of hype associated with the high-leaves and low-leaves far eclipses that which was associated with the Suberbirds.
However, setting the hype aside, the parallel seems very good otherwise, as it is my understanding that both coins were made by mint employees adding non-approved features to a coin, and the coin being released without the mint officially intending them to.
But again, I'm open minded to other possibilities....Mike >>
I don't understand why people say this is hype and promotion. No one can control what the national media is going to pick up. What were they supposed to do sit on the news?
All the hype I see is still for the old coins rather than any of the new ones. >>
You're right, that term was perjorative. Sorry.
Please substitue "hype" with "attention" -- and the questions remain:
Have the high-leaf and low-leaf coins been deemed an "official mint issue"??? Does the fact that one employee noticed them and that it was subsequently mentioned in the mint report make it official???
Just trying to get a better understanding here....Mike
Collector of Large Cents, US Type, and modern pocket change.
<< <i>I'm sorry, but it is unclear from your "facts" if the coin was or was not intentionally released, despite knowledge by certain mint employees.
In addition, Director Foy's silence on the topic, as well as the rumored actions of the Denver employees removing some of these coins, both seem contrary to the suggestion that these were indeed released intentionally.
Lastly, I'm not sure how you arrived at the conclusion: "The Mint knew that they had minted the High for sure and because the lows were being minted at the same time as the Highs and were mixed together in at least two balistic mint bags, the officials in Denver knew they had these blemished WI quarters ready to be shipped." I don't recall any reports from the mint that said anything about mint officials knowing about these coins prior to release. Couldn't it be that word hadn't reached mint officials before the coins were released?
It seems to me that all we really know is one mint employee noticed, and that they were put in the same bags -- and the rest is conjecture. But again, I'm not nearly as well-versed in the history of these coins as some around here, so please correct me if I'm wrong....
Curiously yours...Mike >>
The mint,in this case, was just hoping the coins were never going to be found and just ignored the problem thinking it would go away. It would have cost them lots of money to either destroy the bags of these coins or to inspect them. So now they refuse to admit to much of anything on the problem which is really stupid to cover up all the facts. Just ask some of the politicians who cover up problems what happens when they get caught.
Have the high-leaf and low-leaf coins been deemed an "official mint issue"??? Does the fact that one employee noticed them and that it was subsequently mentioned in the mint report make it official??? >>
I think the answer to both questions is, no.
It was not official mint policy to issue three different designs for the WI quarter and the fact that an employee was aware of at least one of these before the fact doesn't really change that. Ev- en the fact that at least two employees worked together to make these doesn't change the fact.
But they are still the products of the US Mint as surely as double eagles or a 1794 half dime. They are collectible in the eyes of many US coin collectors on that basis.
<< <i>I'm sorry, but it is unclear from your "facts" if the coin was or was not intentionally released, despite knowledge by certain mint employees.
In addition, Director Foy's silence on the topic, as well as the rumored actions of the Denver employees removing some of these coins, both seem contrary to the suggestion that these were indeed released intentionally.
Lastly, I'm not sure how you arrived at the conclusion: "The Mint knew that they had minted the High for sure and because the lows were being minted at the same time as the Highs and were mixed together in at least two balistic mint bags, the officials in Denver knew they had these blemished WI quarters ready to be shipped." I don't recall any reports from the mint that said anything about mint officials knowing about these coins prior to release. Couldn't it be that word hadn't reached mint officials before the coins were released?
It seems to me that all we really know is one mint employee noticed, and that they were put in the same bags -- and the rest is conjecture. But again, I'm not nearly as well-versed in the history of these coins as some around here, so please correct me if I'm wrong....
Curiously yours...Mike >>
The mint,in this case, was just hoping the coins were never going to be found and just ignored the problem thinking it would go away. It would have cost them lots of money to either destroy the bags of these coins or to inspect them. So now they refuse to admit to much of anything on the problem which is really stupid to cover up all the facts. Just ask some of the politicians who cover up problems what happens when they get caught. >>
Hi Pitboss! Thanks for your response...but with all due resepct, that sounds like a lot of conjecture, and it seems to me at least that it is equally possible that the Mint (i.e. mint management) had no idea whatsoever what happened until after the fact. Respectfully...Mike
Collector of Large Cents, US Type, and modern pocket change.
Have the high-leaf and low-leaf coins been deemed an "official mint issue"??? Does the fact that one employee noticed them and that it was subsequently mentioned in the mint report make it official??? >>
I think the answer to both questions is, no.
It was not official mint policy to issue three different designs for the WI quarter and the fact that an employee was aware of at least one of these before the fact doesn't really change that. Ev- en the fact that at least two employees worked together to make these doesn't change the fact.
But they are still the products of the US Mint as surely as double eagles or a 1794 half dime. They are collectible in the eyes of many US coin collectors on that basis. >>
Hi Clad! Thanks again for your response. I think your response is more than reasonable. The crux of the issue I was getting at is if these were clandestine or intentional from the Mint's perspective, and you have helped answer that question -- so thank you! And I agree, they are undoubtedly US mint products, and each collector needs to decide for themselves to collect them or not...Mike
Collector of Large Cents, US Type, and modern pocket change.
I am amazed there is still such silly debating going on regarding these coins. It was proven that the marks on the die were made with the same round tool on both dies. The High leaf was struck twice and the low leaf was struck once with the tool and a hammer blow while the dies were soft. We went round and round and proved it.
Using the electron microscope, Chris Pilliod showed repeating damage on the tool that showed up on the inside of the "leafs" on all three ridges! The arc was also measured and found to be the same.
He also found ridges on the low leaf that had metal flow that could only be accounted for on a softened die.
As far as the Mint cover-up and six-month old story, it only adds to the flavor of these coins. It does not make them anything other than what they are.
Having them in the grey sheet, Coin values, Coin Prices and PCGS price guide only says they are collected by many and are here to stay. No more speculation. That is a good thing.
Here is what I would like to add to this. If a Mint employee had confessed and there was a front page article in the USA Today or any other publication that a Mint employee had created his own wisconsin quarter then I bet this coin would be selling for $500 raw and $700 to $1000 for 65's right now. This would be a true variety and with a mintage of about 20,000 high leafs and 30,000 low leafs you could easily justify prices close to $1000.
That depends on what you call promotion. I ran ads in Coin World selling them. Did you see it? As far as hyping them, I don't think setting the record straight from disinformation is hype. My main position is, with pricing in the grey sheet, perhaps the "market" will move away from ebay and get "real"! Perhaps with a wider dealer participation too. That's what I want to happen. I'm sure anyone who owns them wants that too.
That depends on what you call promotion. I ran ads in Coin World selling them. Did you see it? As far as hyping them, I don't think setting the record straight from disinformation is hype. My main position is, with pricing in the grey sheet, perhaps the "market" will move away from ebay and get "real"! Perhaps with a wider dealer participation too. That's what I want to happen. I'm sure anyone who owns them wants that too. >>
If your running ads in Coin World, I can understand why you want that to happen.
I am just not sure its "real".
I manage money. I earn money. I save money . I give away money. I collect money. I don’t love money . I do love the Lord God.
<< <i>I am amazed there is still such silly debating going on regarding these coins. It was proven that the marks on the die were made with the same round tool on both dies. The High leaf was struck twice and the low leaf was struck once with the tool and a hammer blow while the dies were soft. We went round and round and proved it.
Using the electron microscope, Chris Pilliod showed repeating damage on the tool that showed up on the inside of the "leafs" on all three ridges! The arc was also measured and found to be the same.
He also found ridges on the low leaf that had metal flow that could only be accounted for on a softened die.
As far as the Mint cover-up and six-month old story, it only adds to the flavor of these coins. It does not make them anything other than what they are.
Having them in the grey sheet, Coin values, Coin Prices and PCGS price guide only says they are collected by many and are here to stay. No more speculation. That is a good thing. >>
I was not speculating. I said that people have a right to decide whether to care about these or not. I still say that is true.
Consider another case of die damage, the 1890-CC "Tail Bar" dollar. Back in the 1960s and 70s one dealer heavily promoted these as an "Extra tail feather," even though the mark was not a tail feather. It was die damage. Though some people bought them, it was never considered necessary to complete a collection of Morgan dollars.
Now the dealer is gone, or at least no longer promoting them, and only the VAM collectors care.
TD
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. 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. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
Coin collectors collect a wide range of coins... be it what denomination, what series, what grade and what key coins or varieties to enjoy. I would not be a numismatist if I didn't enjoy building my statehood quarter set. To many, any WI quarter is simply that.. a quarter to be used in a soda pop machine !! To many others, the mystery origin of the High/Low coins now revealed in no better platform than the 2007 August ANA Numismatist Magazine and Rick's and Chris' one hour ANA educational seminar last August, provides essential proof that someone or group produced these rare coins while the dies were in a softened state. This totally disspells Ken Potter's die gouge theory. There will always be coin collectors, dealers and want-to-be's who like Arnie in NY have no interest in these altered die examples made at the Denver Mint and will go to great lenghts to play down or discredit their rightful existence. Best, each person decide for themselves if they want one of the few coins for their statehood quarter set and let others who cannot stand the varieties get own with their lives. Life is too short to bicker about this topic. Unless you were one of the employees at the Denver Mint back in October, 2004 that was responsible for minting a handful of the Extra Leaf quarters and came public with your story, then there will always be contrarians and disbelievers. Sometime in the future, just when and by whom, I can not say; a detailed book to delight many collectors will be written and made available. Just like the coins, you will decide for yourself if you choose to buy the book. In the meantime, the Dealer's Grey Sheet will greatly improve the acceptance of these rare coins. Prices can go either way. For now, WI Extra High/Low Leaf quarter activity is firming up on Ebay. No major up trend but coins are selling at a much greater pace. Ebay served it purpose early on but the coins deserve their place in the Grey Sheet. Rick, thanks again. You have demonstrated a patient but determined approach to inform coin collectors about the uniqueness and rarity of the WI variety quarters. Many of us collectors thank you. Mark.
<< <i> Best, each person decide for themselves if they want one of the few coins for their statehood quarter set .... Mark. >>
That is what I keep saying. Why the hello does it keep offending you? TD
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. 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. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
To each their own. I'd prefer an extra leaf coin over a 1955 DD anyday, just because I don't care for DD coins. Price is not an object, it's just my preference. If both coins were priced the same, I'd get the Wisconsin.
All of the commentary about this coin, the redbook, the greysheet, the 'hype', the whole thing means nada to me.
Once the coin gains some 'age' it may become less controversial. Many of us don't collect new coins, including state quarters. I don't collect state quarters or new mint stuff, I prefer old coinage. But I still enjoy the up/down leafs. I also like the look of off center struck coinage.
1909 S vdb........that's a coin that I would not pay the additional $3500 premium over a no mintmark 1909. Same reason, I just don't enjoy the little s. Could care less about rarity.
I don't find any coin worth an argument, if you like it, own it. Make up your mind, and own what you like
With the inclusion of the Wisconsin Extra leaf High and Low Quarters into the Grey Sheet recently, dealers and collectors are submitting some higher quality raw coins to PCGS. Crossovers and upgrades may explain some of the higher grades (MS 65 and MS 66).
It is pretty much final. There is now no major pricing guide that does not include these coins. A "complete" series of State quarters will need to include them (along with the clad proofs, silver proofs, and satin finish).
Unless you define a complete Lincoln set when it is missing the 1922 No D. Unless you define a complete Buffalo nickel set when it is missing the 1937-D 3-leg. Unless you define the Roosevelt dime set as complete when it is missing the 1982 no MM. These are all unintentional mint products. Although the WI Extra Leafs were officially unintentional, they have the additional honor of being an "inside job" and thus an even greater "story" coin. Etc.
Of course in lower "album grades" if the space for the coin is in the album or missing it does have an effect on collectibility. I think the age of slabs has pretty much made them irrelevant. If its in the PCGS registry it part of the set!
<< <i>A "complete" series of State quarters will need to include them (along with the clad proofs, silver proofs, and satin finish). q] . That is an opinion, not a fact. What about the Statehood quarter die/ Sacagawea dollar die mule? TD
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. 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. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
Of course! Anyone can define their collection any way they want! Just like the examples I listed. How may collectors choose not to include the 3-legged buffalo? Just as many as will omit the WI Extra Leafs, I suspect.
<< <i>Great Thread and a Big "Thanks" to Rick and Chris and Mark for not Giving up on This Variety. I've Posted this Picture Here Before,But maybe there are Some New Members That Might Enjoy Seeing it. Ray in Florida..
There are only 2 high leafs listed on ebay right now for auction, but plenty of buy it nows. It seems buyers are not willing to give them away anymore. I can't say I blame them for going this way with the cost of only 35 cents to list them. If they do happen to sell some they are willing to absorb the high final value fees.
<< <i>Great Thread and a Big "Thanks" to Rick and Chris and Mark for not Giving up on This Variety. I've Posted this Picture Here Before,But maybe there are Some New Members That Might Enjoy Seeing it. Ray in Florida..
>>
Very nice >>
Hey Harvey...any chance you'll scan that article on Biker Chicks And post it here?
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.
Comments
In addition, Director Foy's silence on the topic, as well as the rumored actions of the Denver employees removing some of these coins, both seem contrary to the suggestion that these were indeed released intentionally.
Lastly, I'm not sure how you arrived at the conclusion: "The Mint knew that they had minted the High for sure and because the lows were being minted at the same time as the Highs and were mixed together in at least two balistic mint bags, the officials in Denver knew they had these blemished WI quarters ready to be shipped." I don't recall any reports from the mint that said anything about mint officials knowing about these coins prior to release. Couldn't it be that word hadn't reached mint officials before the coins were released?
It seems to me that all we really know is one mint employee noticed, and that they were put in the same bags -- and the rest is conjecture. But again, I'm not nearly as well-versed in the history of these coins as some around here, so please correct me if I'm wrong....
Curiously yours...Mike
<< <i>
Yes, I do think the mint's intention matters. Those two examples you site were intentional and officially released by the mint. I doubt that this coin would have been released had it been caught. That said, I'm not as familiar as some with the events surrounding these coins, so please correct me if I'm wrong...
Personally, the closest parallel I can think of is the proof "superbird" Washington quarters. Like these coins, apparently they were issued without noticing the clandestine addition of a feature to the coin by mint employees. It is interesting to note that you don't see those as part of the Redbook or the CDN. >>
It was not an official mint issue.
I'm not familiar with the circumstances surrounding the
issuance of the "superbird" but you're probably right that
it's more similar than the examples I cited.
The superbird wasn't released right along with another
similar issue that essentially proved it was intentional. It
didn't get the kind of controversy the WI quarters did and
it didn't get national attention.
<< <i>
<< <i>Does this mean that these are now recognized by dealers as a Error or a variety or????? what does this mean? >>
Some dealers care.
Others, such as myself, do not.
You may decide for yourself if you care. They are not required for a complete collection of statehood quarters.
TD >>
As I said, you may decide for yourself if you care.
Don't let the people selling them make that decision for you.
TD
<< <i>
<< <i>
Yes, I do think the mint's intention matters. Those two examples you site were intentional and officially released by the mint. I doubt that this coin would have been released had it been caught. That said, I'm not as familiar as some with the events surrounding these coins, so please correct me if I'm wrong...
Personally, the closest parallel I can think of is the proof "superbird" Washington quarters. Like these coins, apparently they were issued without noticing the clandestine addition of a feature to the coin by mint employees. It is interesting to note that you don't see those as part of the Redbook or the CDN. >>
It was not an official mint issue.
I'm not familiar with the circumstances surrounding the
issuance of the "superbird" but you're probably right that
it's more similar than the examples I cited.
The superbird wasn't released right along with another
similar issue that essentially proved it was intentional. It
didn't get the kind of controversy the WI quarters did and
it didn't get national attention. >>
Clad,
Just when I thought I was getting this, you've thrown me for another loop!
Have the high-leaf and low-leaf coins been deemed an "official mint issue"??? Does the fact that one employee noticed them and that it was subsequently mentioned in the mint report make it official???
That asked, I agree the level of hype associated with the high-leaves and low-leaves far eclipses that which was associated with the Suberbirds.
However, setting the hype aside, the parallel seems very good otherwise, as it is my understanding that both coins were made by mint employees adding non-approved features to a coin, and the coin being released without the mint officially intending them to.
But again, I'm open minded to other possibilities....Mike
<< <i><snip>
In addition, Director Foy's silence on the topic,
<snip> >>
Director Foy and the Seven Little Foys?
<< <i>
<< <i>
Yes, I do think the mint's intention matters. Those two examples you site were intentional and officially released by the mint. I doubt that this coin would have been released had it been caught. That said, I'm not as familiar as some with the events surrounding these coins, so please correct me if I'm wrong...
Personally, the closest parallel I can think of is the proof "superbird" Washington quarters. Like these coins, apparently they were issued without noticing the clandestine addition of a feature to the coin by mint employees. It is interesting to note that you don't see those as part of the Redbook or the CDN. >>
It was not an official mint issue.
I'm not familiar with the circumstances surrounding the
issuance of the "superbird" but you're probably right that
it's more similar than the examples I cited.
The superbird wasn't released right along with another
similar issue that essentially proved it was intentional. It
didn't get the kind of controversy the WI quarters did and
it didn't get national attention. >>
How does the fact that two different dies were involved "essentially prove it was intentional?"
There are multiple Lincoln cents from the same general time period with curved line die damage in the centers of the reverses. Does this prove that they are deliberate also? If so, should they be in the Redbook also? Should they be in the Greysheet? Should they be required to complete a collection of Lincoln cents?
I vote no.
TD
<< <i>
It was not an official mint issue.
I'm not familiar with the circumstances surrounding the
issuance of the "superbird" but you're probably right that
it's more similar than the examples I cited.
The superbird wasn't released right along with another
similar issue that essentially proved it was intentional. It
didn't get the kind of controversy the WI quarters did and
it didn't get national attention. >>
Just when I thought I was getting this, you've thrown me for another loop!
Have the high-leaf and low-leaf coins been deemed an "official mint issue"??? Does the fact that one employee noticed them and that it was subsequently mentioned in the mint report make it official???
That asked, I agree the level of hype associated with the high-leaves and low-leaves far eclipses that which was associated with the Suberbirds.
However, setting the hype aside, the parallel seems very good otherwise, as it is my understanding that both coins were made by mint employees adding non-approved features to a coin, and the coin being released without the mint officially intending them to.
But again, I'm open minded to other possibilities....Mike >>
I don't understand why people say this is hype and promotion. No
one can control what the national media is going to pick up. What
were they supposed to do sit on the news?
All the hype I see is still for the old coins rather than any of the new
ones.
Best
Wisconsin Quarter Review
<< <i>
<< <i>
It was not an official mint issue.
I'm not familiar with the circumstances surrounding the
issuance of the "superbird" but you're probably right that
it's more similar than the examples I cited.
The superbird wasn't released right along with another
similar issue that essentially proved it was intentional. It
didn't get the kind of controversy the WI quarters did and
it didn't get national attention. >>
Just when I thought I was getting this, you've thrown me for another loop!
Have the high-leaf and low-leaf coins been deemed an "official mint issue"??? Does the fact that one employee noticed them and that it was subsequently mentioned in the mint report make it official???
That asked, I agree the level of hype associated with the high-leaves and low-leaves far eclipses that which was associated with the Suberbirds.
However, setting the hype aside, the parallel seems very good otherwise, as it is my understanding that both coins were made by mint employees adding non-approved features to a coin, and the coin being released without the mint officially intending them to.
But again, I'm open minded to other possibilities....Mike >>
I don't understand why people say this is hype and promotion. No
one can control what the national media is going to pick up. What
were they supposed to do sit on the news?
All the hype I see is still for the old coins rather than any of the new
ones. >>
You're right, that term was perjorative. Sorry.
Please substitue "hype" with "attention" -- and the questions remain:
Have the high-leaf and low-leaf coins been deemed an "official mint issue"??? Does the fact that one employee noticed them and that it was subsequently mentioned in the mint report make it official???
Just trying to get a better understanding here....Mike
<< <i>I'm sorry, but it is unclear from your "facts" if the coin was or was not intentionally released, despite knowledge by certain mint employees.
In addition, Director Foy's silence on the topic, as well as the rumored actions of the Denver employees removing some of these coins, both seem contrary to the suggestion that these were indeed released intentionally.
Lastly, I'm not sure how you arrived at the conclusion: "The Mint knew that they had minted the High for sure and because the lows were being minted at the same time as the Highs and were mixed together in at least two balistic mint bags, the officials in Denver knew they had these blemished WI quarters ready to be shipped." I don't recall any reports from the mint that said anything about mint officials knowing about these coins prior to release. Couldn't it be that word hadn't reached mint officials before the coins were released?
It seems to me that all we really know is one mint employee noticed, and that they were put in the same bags -- and the rest is conjecture. But again, I'm not nearly as well-versed in the history of these coins as some around here, so please correct me if I'm wrong....
Curiously yours...Mike >>
The mint,in this case, was just hoping the coins were never going to be found and just ignored the problem thinking it would go away. It would have cost them lots of money to either destroy the bags of these coins or to inspect them. So now they refuse to admit to much of anything on the problem which is really stupid to cover up all the facts. Just ask some of the politicians who cover up problems what happens when they get caught.
<< <i>
Have the high-leaf and low-leaf coins been deemed an "official mint issue"??? Does the fact that one employee noticed them and that it was subsequently mentioned in the mint report make it official???
>>
I think the answer to both questions is, no.
It was not official mint policy to issue three different designs for
the WI quarter and the fact that an employee was aware of at
least one of these before the fact doesn't really change that. Ev-
en the fact that at least two employees worked together to make
these doesn't change the fact.
But they are still the products of the US Mint as surely as double
eagles or a 1794 half dime. They are collectible in the eyes of many
US coin collectors on that basis.
<< <i>
<< <i>I'm sorry, but it is unclear from your "facts" if the coin was or was not intentionally released, despite knowledge by certain mint employees.
In addition, Director Foy's silence on the topic, as well as the rumored actions of the Denver employees removing some of these coins, both seem contrary to the suggestion that these were indeed released intentionally.
Lastly, I'm not sure how you arrived at the conclusion: "The Mint knew that they had minted the High for sure and because the lows were being minted at the same time as the Highs and were mixed together in at least two balistic mint bags, the officials in Denver knew they had these blemished WI quarters ready to be shipped." I don't recall any reports from the mint that said anything about mint officials knowing about these coins prior to release. Couldn't it be that word hadn't reached mint officials before the coins were released?
It seems to me that all we really know is one mint employee noticed, and that they were put in the same bags -- and the rest is conjecture. But again, I'm not nearly as well-versed in the history of these coins as some around here, so please correct me if I'm wrong....
Curiously yours...Mike >>
The mint,in this case, was just hoping the coins were never going to be found and just ignored the problem thinking it would go away. It would have cost them lots of money to either destroy the bags of these coins or to inspect them. So now they refuse to admit to much of anything on the problem which is really stupid to cover up all the facts. Just ask some of the politicians who cover up problems what happens when they get caught. >>
Hi Pitboss! Thanks for your response...but with all due resepct, that sounds like a lot of conjecture, and it seems to me at least that it is equally possible that the Mint (i.e. mint management) had no idea whatsoever what happened until after the fact. Respectfully...Mike
<< <i>
<< <i>
Have the high-leaf and low-leaf coins been deemed an "official mint issue"??? Does the fact that one employee noticed them and that it was subsequently mentioned in the mint report make it official???
>>
I think the answer to both questions is, no.
It was not official mint policy to issue three different designs for
the WI quarter and the fact that an employee was aware of at
least one of these before the fact doesn't really change that. Ev-
en the fact that at least two employees worked together to make
these doesn't change the fact.
But they are still the products of the US Mint as surely as double
eagles or a 1794 half dime. They are collectible in the eyes of many
US coin collectors on that basis. >>
Hi Clad! Thanks again for your response. I think your response is more than reasonable. The crux of the issue I was getting at is if these were clandestine or intentional from the Mint's perspective, and you have helped answer that question -- so thank you! And I agree, they are undoubtedly US mint products, and each collector needs to decide for themselves to collect them or not...Mike
(that's an inside joke)
``https://ebay.us/m/KxolR5
Using the electron microscope, Chris Pilliod showed repeating damage on the tool that showed up on the inside of the "leafs" on all three ridges! The arc was also measured and found to be the same.
He also found ridges on the low leaf that had metal flow that could only be accounted for on a softened die.
As far as the Mint cover-up and six-month old story, it only adds to the flavor of these coins. It does not make them anything other than what they are.
Having them in the grey sheet, Coin values, Coin Prices and PCGS price guide only says they are collected by many and are here to stay. No more speculation. That is a good thing.
The mintage is closer to 10,000 of each, maybe a few K more of the Low Leaf.
I give away money. I collect money.
I don’t love money . I do love the Lord God.
That depends on what you call promotion. I ran ads in Coin World selling them. Did you see it? As far as hyping them, I don't think setting the record straight from disinformation is hype. My main position is, with pricing in the grey sheet, perhaps the "market" will move away from ebay and get "real"! Perhaps with a wider dealer participation too. That's what I want to happen. I'm sure anyone who owns them wants that too.
<< <i>Are these being promoted?
That depends on what you call promotion. I ran ads in Coin World selling them. Did you see it? As far as hyping them, I don't think setting the record straight from disinformation is hype. My main position is, with pricing in the grey sheet, perhaps the "market" will move away from ebay and get "real"! Perhaps with a wider dealer participation too. That's what I want to happen. I'm sure anyone who owns them wants that too. >>
If your running ads in Coin World, I can understand why you want that to happen.
I am just not sure its "real".
I give away money. I collect money.
I don’t love money . I do love the Lord God.
<< <i>I am amazed there is still such silly debating going on regarding these coins. It was proven that the marks on the die were made with the same round tool on both dies. The High leaf was struck twice and the low leaf was struck once with the tool and a hammer blow while the dies were soft. We went round and round and proved it.
Using the electron microscope, Chris Pilliod showed repeating damage on the tool that showed up on the inside of the "leafs" on all three ridges! The arc was also measured and found to be the same.
He also found ridges on the low leaf that had metal flow that could only be accounted for on a softened die.
As far as the Mint cover-up and six-month old story, it only adds to the flavor of these coins. It does not make them anything other than what they are.
Having them in the grey sheet, Coin values, Coin Prices and PCGS price guide only says they are collected by many and are here to stay. No more speculation. That is a good thing. >>
I was not speculating. I said that people have a right to decide whether to care about these or not. I still say that is true.
Consider another case of die damage, the 1890-CC "Tail Bar" dollar. Back in the 1960s and 70s one dealer heavily promoted these as an "Extra tail feather," even though the mark was not a tail feather. It was die damage. Though some people bought them, it was never considered necessary to complete a collection of Morgan dollars.
Now the dealer is gone, or at least no longer promoting them, and only the VAM collectors care.
TD
<< <i>Are these being promoted? >>
IMO, clearly -- not that there's necessarily anything wrong with that.
<< <i> Best, each person decide for themselves if they want one of the few coins for their statehood quarter set .... Mark. >>
That is what I keep saying.
Why the hello does it keep offending you?
TD
<< <i>
<< <i>Are these being promoted? >>
IMO, clearly -- not that there's necessarily anything wrong with that. >>
Pricewise promotions like these do not usually work out very well ( as in overpay) but collectors sure have the right to collect ...
I give away money. I collect money.
I don’t love money . I do love the Lord God.
If both coins were priced the same, I'd get the Wisconsin.
All of the commentary about this coin, the redbook, the greysheet, the 'hype', the whole thing means nada to me.
Once the coin gains some 'age' it may become less controversial. Many of us don't collect new coins, including state quarters. I don't collect state quarters or new mint stuff,
I prefer old coinage. But I still enjoy the up/down leafs. I also like the look of off center struck coinage.
1909 S vdb........that's a coin that I would not pay the additional $3500 premium over a no mintmark 1909. Same reason, I just don't enjoy the little s. Could care less about rarity.
I don't find any coin worth an argument, if you like it, own it. Make up your mind, and own what you like
Unless you define a complete Lincoln set when it is missing the 1922 No D.
Unless you define a complete Buffalo nickel set when it is missing the 1937-D 3-leg.
Unless you define the Roosevelt dime set as complete when it is missing the 1982 no MM.
These are all unintentional mint products. Although the WI Extra Leafs were officially unintentional, they have the additional honor of being an "inside job" and thus an even greater "story" coin.
Etc.
Of course in lower "album grades" if the space for the coin is in the album or missing it does have an effect on collectibility. I think the age of slabs has pretty much made them irrelevant. If its in the PCGS registry it part of the set!
<< <i>A "complete" series of State quarters will need to include them (along with the clad proofs, silver proofs, and satin finish). q]
.
That is an opinion, not a fact.
What about the Statehood quarter die/ Sacagawea dollar die mule?
TD
<< <i>Great Thread and a Big "Thanks" to Rick and Chris and Mark for not Giving up on This Variety. I've Posted this Picture Here Before,But maybe there are Some New Members That Might Enjoy Seeing it. Ray in Florida..
Very nice
I give away money. I collect money.
I don’t love money . I do love the Lord God.
It's still going to be a" have to have" for a complete collection.
<< <i>It's still going to be a" have to have" for a complete collection. >>
I agree. Even if only half the collectors agree there still aren't enough for millions upon millions of states quarter collectors.
That's right and I may not live to see it but my grand kids are going to get mine someday. I will hold them for them rather than give them away.
I will not be a buyer of these. One less person to drive the price up.
NGC registry V-Nickel proof #6!!!!
working on proof shield nickels # 8 with a bullet!!!!
RIP "BEAR"
<< <i>
<< <i>Great Thread and a Big "Thanks" to Rick and Chris and Mark for not Giving up on This Variety. I've Posted this Picture Here Before,But maybe there are Some New Members That Might Enjoy Seeing it. Ray in Florida..
Very nice
Hey Harvey...any chance you'll scan that article on Biker Chicks And post it here?
The name is LEE!