<< <i>If this were a copy of a small sized $100 bill with a date of 1927 I can pretty much guaranty the secret service would not consider it a "fantasy piece". >>
They would if you used a real $100 bill to create it, its not a counterfeit, it is a real, in your example, altered $100 bill. It has been monetized. If you took that same real $100 bill and wrote by hand on it 1927 with the date, it would be the same thing, just better art. Its an altered real $100 bill. Its the same as altering a penny, nickel, etc. >>
A) You are making an inaccurate comparison. The value of a real 1964 Peace dollar would be far higher than the monetary value of the Peace dollar from which this counterfeit is made. Additionally the market value of the "fantasy" piece is being set a far higher value than the original Peace dollar used. You seem to believe that if I used $100 bills instead of $1 bills to make counterfeit $100 bills the Secret Service wouldn't care. I am confident you are dead wrong.
The monetary value is meaningless. It is an intentional copy of a non-demonetized coinage regardless of whether it was ever released into circulation. The dies themselves run afoul of the law.
Whoever falsely makes, forges, or counterfeits any coin or bar in resemblance or similitude of any coin of a denomination higher than 5 cents or any gold or silver bar coined or stamped at any mint or assay office of the United States, or in resemblance or similitude of any foreign gold or silver coin current in the United States or in actual use and circulation as money within the United States; or Whoever passes, utters, publishes, sells, possesses, or brings into the United States any false, forged, or counterfeit coin or bar, knowing the same to be false, forged, or counterfeit, with intent to defraud any body politic or corporate, or any person, or attempts the commission of any offense described in this paragraph -
Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than fifteen years, or both.
Any argument that these can't raise the ire of the Treasury/Secret Service is laughable.
None of this is to say that I wouldn't order one, however, I don't think I'd admit to it on an open forum if I did.
I couldn't help thinking about the guy who mistakengly pays 10 grand and finds himself pleading ignorance suing the manufacturer of this coin. The poor guy wouldn't have a case, would he?......to prove that he was, in fact, ignorant!
Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
<< <i>"Restrike" Kellogg & Co. slugs sell on eBay all the time. They do not have COPY on them and are even slabbed by PCGS. I think these were even made by Americans. In addition to the Fugios, this seems to be another example where a similar collector piece is accepted in the marketplace.
With Fugios and Kellogg slugs, there are real ones and the non-COPY ones are accepted. In this case, there are no real ones. >>
To argue it against older "fantasy" pieces is apples and oranges. Those pieces existed before the Hobby Protection Act come into being. I don't believe they are bound by it, but I do believe any NEW piece is. Not a lawyer, just thinking they might, and I wouldn't want to be the person who has to pay a lawyer to defend myself in a case like this if it went to trial.
Most against it aren't arguing and calling it a counterfeit. I'm not saying it is "counterfeit", just saying it is poorly conceived and ill-defended w/o "COPY" on it. You all can like it, and try to justify it till you are blue in the face but I'll remain unconvinced because I truly believe it isn't good for the hobby and someone will try to fool others at some point in time.
Also note the bolded in the text of the Hobby Protection Act: (d) Imitation numismatic item means an item which purports to be, but in fact is not, an original numismatic item or which is a reproduction, copy, or counterfeit of an original numismatic item. Such term includes an original numismatic item which has been altered or modified in such a manner that it could reasonably purport to be an original numismatic item other than the one which was altered or modified. The term shall not include any re-issue or re-strike of any original numismatic item by the United States or any foreign government.
Altering the date itself may satisfy the parts in bold to be considered "imitation". I am not a lawyer so I won't state that it does/doesn't, but just that it may.
When you consider that the government is as uninterested as any organization could ever be about a coin that is just about universally understood to have been made in a "non-traditional" fashion (1913 Liberty nickel) while at the very same time, wetting themselves like excited puppies whenever they hear the words "1933 double eagle" even though there have been plausible scenarios presented for how those coins could have legally been obtained, I'd think it's foolish for anyone to even try to guess what they might do about this token.
<< <i>Don't like the color, sand blast look or price. If it looked like the real thing, were 90% or 100% silver and were being sold for a little more than the going ounce of silver.....then maybe...maybe...but still probably not. A person buying that has some serious cash to burn(or flush down the toilet)....IMO. >>
I think the price is quite reasonable. A lot of work goes into something like this. Maybe if Daniel were striking 10,000 the price should be lowered.
I am pretty confident the coin will look quite genuine in terms of color. It is, after all, a real Peace dollar. And therefore it is 90% silver. I wonder how close it will look to the real thing. Roger B., our local expert, isn't impressed, I seems. Lance. >>
It looks sand blasted and brownish/gray. I would not want to own any REAL Peace Doller with those characteristics.
Let's put it this way, it looks nothing like the 12 1964-D Peace Dollars I may or may not have....
"If it's not fun, it's not worth it." - KeyMan64 Looking for Top Pop Mercury Dime Varieties & High Grade Mercury Dime Toners.
<< <i>"Restrike" Kellogg & Co. slugs sell on eBay all the time. They do not have COPY on them and are even slabbed by PCGS. I think these were even made by Americans. In addition to the Fugios, this seems to be another example where a similar collector piece is accepted in the marketplace.
With Fugios and Kellogg slugs, there are real ones and the non-COPY ones are accepted. In this case, there are no real ones. >>
To argue it against older "fantasy" pieces is apples and oranges. Those pieces existed before the Hobby Protection Act come into being. I don't believe they are bound by it, but I do believe any NEW piece is. Not a lawyer, just thinking they might, and I wouldn't want to be the person who has to pay a lawyer to defend myself in a case like this if it went to trial. >>
The PCGS slabbed Kellogg slugs were made in the 2001 time frame after the 1973 Hobby Protect Act so it would be an apples to apples comparison in that respect.
Regarding the the Fugios, the Hobby Protection Act says in Sec. 304.3 Applicability.
<< <i>Any person engaged in the manufacturing, or importation into the United States for introduction into or distribution in commerce, of imitation political or imitation numismatic items shall be subject to the requirements of the Act and the regulations promulgated thereunder. >>
According to this, presumably a dealer or collector who brings a fantasy Fugio into the US after 1973 would need to have that Fugio stamped COPY.
So I think the Fugios and Kellogg slugs would be treated similarly to this piece under the Hobby Protection Act. Apples and apples comparison all the way, so it would seem.
<< <i>It is an intentional copy of a non-demonetized coinage regardless of whether it was ever released into circulation. >>
Is that kinda like unthawing?
<< <i>None of this is to say that I wouldn't order one, however, I don't think I'd admit to it on an open forum if I did. >>
I would think that his system would be confiscated should the Secret Service get involved since it would record actual sales and shipping addresses vs some announcement on an open forum.
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.
The original Fugio and Kellogg pieces were not struck by the US Mint, contrary to the Peace dollar, which might make the laws pertaining to these pieces slightly different. Additionally, the Kellogg pieces all have the date that they were struck placed in the middle of the reverse along with "CHS" for "California Historical Society" and the date is written in the form "Struck September 5 2001 CHS". Also, the reverse ribbon on the Kellogg pieces of 2001 states "SS Central America Gold, CHS". This would appear to indicate that the Kellogg pieces of 2001 might be considered clearly marked.
<< <i>As already mentioned, please ship quickly and destroy your records......quickly Just kidding, of course. You know it all's can argue till you're blue in the face....It's a cool conversation piece, I like it, I bought one without regret or guilt. I don't need the freakin Moral Majority controlling my buying decisions nor questioning my ethics. >>
Me too and now I wonder if our host would be willing to put it in a Genuine holder labeled as a D. Carr fantasy dollar. >>
That would be cool, a PCGS slabbed 1964-D restrike. I would send it in. >>
I'd prefer a PCGS holder, if not...since ANACS grades just about anything
"Bongo drive 1984 Lincoln that looks like old coin dug from ground."
<< <i>As already mentioned, please ship quickly and destroy your records......quickly Just kidding, of course. You know it all's can argue till you're blue in the face....It's a cool conversation piece, I like it, I bought one without regret or guilt. I don't need the freakin Moral Majority controlling my buying decisions nor questioning my ethics. >>
Me too and now I wonder if our host would be willing to put it in a Genuine holder labeled as a D. Carr fantasy dollar. >>
That would be cool, a PCGS slabbed 1964-D restrike. I would send it in. >>
I'd prefer a PCGS holder, if not...since ANACS grades just about anything >>
From what I understand, ANACS will certify and slab Daniel's Amero coins (which BTW, are being counterfeited due to popularity. )
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>I love Daniel's original artwork medals, but violently object to this. . Over the years I have had to break the bad news to hundreds of people that their coin was a fake. It is not a pleasant duty. . Sooner or later one of these coins, worn down and antiqued, will be sold for a large sum of money to somebody who doesn't know better. By the time the hidden diagnostics are pointed out to him or her, the seller and the money will be long gone. . I guarantee that this will happen. . Tom DeLorey >>
Aww...$110!? I remember asking a while ago if he was going to release these, because I really wanted one...But I'm acollege student. i don't have $100+ to burn on a "fantasy" piece. If he priced these at $50 he'd sell more than enough to make back the difference... Oh well...
As for the legality, I don't see a problem with it. The coin it's supposed to replicate hasn't been proven to exist, so who cares?
<< <i>If this were a copy of a small sized $100 bill with a date of 1927 I can pretty much guaranty the secret service would not consider it a "fantasy piece". >>
They would if you used a real $100 bill to create it, its not a counterfeit, it is a real, in your example, altered $100 bill. It has been monetized. If you took that same real $100 bill and wrote by hand on it 1927 with the date, it would be the same thing, just better art. Its an altered real $100 bill. Its the same as altering a penny, nickel, etc. >>
A) You are making an inaccurate comparison. The value of a real 1964 Peace dollar would be far higher than the monetary value of the Peace dollar from which this counterfeit is made. Additionally the market value of the "fantasy" piece is being set a far higher value than the original Peace dollar used. You seem to believe that if I used $100 bills instead of $1 bills to make counterfeit $100 bills the Secret Service wouldn't care. I am confident you are dead wrong.
The monetary value is meaningless. It is an intentional copy of a non-demonetized coinage regardless of whether it was ever released into circulation. The dies themselves run afoul of the law.
Whoever falsely makes, forges, or counterfeits any coin or bar in resemblance or similitude of any coin of a denomination higher than 5 cents or any gold or silver bar coined or stamped at any mint or assay office of the United States, or in resemblance or similitude of any foreign gold or silver coin current in the United States or in actual use and circulation as money within the United States; or Whoever passes, utters, publishes, sells, possesses, or brings into the United States any false, forged, or counterfeit coin or bar, knowing the same to be false, forged, or counterfeit, with intent to defraud any body politic or corporate, or any person, or attempts the commission of any offense described in this paragraph -
Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than fifteen years, or both.
Any argument that these can't raise the ire of the Treasury/Secret Service is laughable.
None of this is to say that I wouldn't order one, however, I don't think I'd admit to it on an open forum if I did. >>
My comparison is accurate, the value of the altered coin has no bearing. There are no real 64-D peace dollars so there is no value (non exist to establish) and none to copy, what would be the value of of a 1975 Peace dollar, or a 1934 St., it all pure conjecture. Besides value has nothing to do with this, the argument is it this legal. It not a counterfeit, he used a real monetized dollar, so its still legal tender. Its still a dollar and you could spend it, legally and even take it to a bank. It's not a copy because none exist, so where is this illegal? Had he done this with an blank that had not been monetized it would be a counterfeit, but its not, its not a copy because there are none.
<< <i>My comparison is accurate, the value of the altered coin has no bearing. There are no real 64-D peace dollars so there is no value (non exist to establish) and none to copy, what would be the value of of a 1975 Peace dollar, or a 1934 St., it all pure conjecture. Besides value has nothing to do with this, the argument is it this legal. It not a counterfeit, he used a real monetized dollar, so its still legal tender. Its still a dollar and you could spend it, legally and even take it to a bank. It's not a copy because none exist, so where is this illegal? Had he done this with an blank that had not been monetized it would be a counterfeit, but its not, its not a copy because there are none. >>
Just like a few years ago, there were NO 1933 Saints monetized?
<< <i>The original Fugio and Kellogg pieces were not struck by the US Mint, contrary to the Peace dollar, which might make the laws pertaining to these pieces slightly different. Additionally, the Kellogg pieces all have the date that they were struck placed in the middle of the reverse along with "CHS" for "California Historical Society" and the date is written in the form "Struck September 5 2001 CHS". Also, the reverse ribbon on the Kellogg pieces of 2001 states "SS Central America Gold, CHS". This would appear to indicate that the Kellogg pieces of 2001 might be considered clearly marked. >>
Thanks for bringing this up. I didn't see any text in the Hobby Protection Act which restricts it to US Mint issued pieces. Some definitions from the HPA:
<< <i>(d) Imitation numismatic item means an item which purports to be, but in fact is not, an original numismatic item or which is a reproduction, copy, or counterfeit of an original numismatic item. Such term includes an original numismatic item which has been altered or modified in such a manner that it could reasonably purport to be an original numismatic item other than the one which was altered or modified. The term shall not include any re-issue or re-strike of any original numismatic item by the United States or any foreign government. (f) Original numismatic item means anything which has been a part of a coinage or issue which has been used in exchange or has been used to commemorate a person, object, place, or event. Such term includes coins, tokens, paper money, and commemorative medals. >>
Regarding the diagnostics on the Kellogg slug, the Carr piece also has diagnostics and people here generally acknowledge that the diagnostics on the Carr piece would need to be worn down so as not to be recognizable (before being passed off as a non-existent coin). Presumably the diagnostics on a gold slug would be easer to wear down and manipulate until it was unrecognizable. Given that the Kellogg and Carr pieces (and Fugios) have diagnostics, I'm not sure it matters too much what the diagnostics are if the argument is that they can eventually be worn down or manipulated. Since the Carr piece is overstruck and silver, it might even be harder to cover up than the Kellogg piece.
Fugios and Kelloggs aside, I'm not sure the Hobby Protection Act applies to this piece because the 1964-D Peace Dollar does not qualify as an Original numismatic item under the definition:Original numismatic item means anything which has been a part of a coinage or issue which has been used in exchange or has been used to commemorate a person, object, place, or event. Such term includes coins, tokens, paper money, and commemorative medals.. The original issue was never part of a coinage or issue as they were all destroyed. Because of this, it seems that this may be outside of the scope of the Hobby Protection Act.
The bottom line is the object in question is NOT a coin... a phony, a replica , a fantasy coin, perhaps, but not a coin and therefore, it is certainly not worth the asking price.
This whole thing is nothing but greed, plain and simple.
<< <i>The bottom line is the object in question is NOT a coin... a phony, a replica , a fantasy coin, perhaps, but not a coin and therefore, it is certainly not worth the asking price.
This whole thing is nothing but greed, plain and simple. >>
People say the same things about the Fugio and Kellogg pieces.
I bet this thread has helped sales today. Is that Liberty dollar guy still in the pokey with his silver and gold on storage at an undisclosed location? He would probably like a roomy with a back ground in coins.
Mark NGC registry V-Nickel proof #6!!!! working on proof shield nickels # 8 with a bullet!!!!
<< <i>The bottom line is the object in question is NOT a coin... a phony, a replica , a fantasy coin, perhaps, but not a coin and therefore, it is certainly not worth the asking price.
This whole thing is nothing but greed, plain and simple. >>
People say the same things about the Fugio and Kellogg pieces. >>
Perhaps, but first, I would like to retract my first statement. Actually, this a coin... an ALTERED coin. So someone has the technical prowess and the equipment to overstrike a genuine coin to make it an object that, if it were genuine, would be illegal to own. And some of you want to buy this thing for what... $110?
<< <i>The bottom line is the object in question is NOT a coin... a phony, a replica , a fantasy coin, perhaps, but not a coin and therefore, it is certainly not worth the asking price.
This whole thing is nothing but greed, plain and simple. >>
People say the same things about the Fugio and Kellogg pieces. >>
Perhaps, but first, I would like to retract my first statement. Actually, this a coin... an ALTERED coin. So someone has the technical prowess and the equipment to overstrike a genuine coin to make it an object that, if it were genuine, would be illegal to own. And some of you want to buy this thing for what... $110?
<< <i>Those that buy the D Carr items, do you buy this hoping they increase in value or just like to collect the items he makes? >>
I would say those who buy are speculating, not collecting.
The object has no more value (other than its bullion content) than those silly colorized coins the shopping networks try to pawn off onto the unsuspecting public. They're real coins, but altered.
<< <i>Those that buy the D Carr items, do you buy this hoping they increase in value or just like to collect the items he makes? >>
I would say those who buy are speculating, not collecting.
The object has no more value (other than its bullion content) than those silly colorized coins the shopping networks try to pawn off onto the unsuspecting public. They're real coins, but altered. >>
The more we talk about it the more valuable it becomes!
The funny part of all of this is.... I picture someone spending one of these things at McDonalds within the next 20 years. I've also started a pool for how long it will be before I see the first one brought in the store for sale.
My order is going in for at least two.
Steve
U.S. Air Force Security Forces Retired
In memory of the USAF Security Forces lost: A1C Elizabeth N. Jacobson, 9/28/05; SSgt Brian McElroy, 1/22/06; TSgt Jason Norton, 1/22/06; A1C Lee Chavis, 10/14/06; SSgt John Self, 5/14/07; A1C Jason Nathan, 6/23/07; SSgt Travis Griffin, 4/3/08; 1Lt Joseph Helton, 9/8/09; SrA Nicholas J. Alden, 3/3/2011. God Bless them and all those who have lost loved ones in this war. I will never forget their loss.
3) Defacing of US coins is legal so long as the defacement isn't for fraudulent purposes.
I am a big fan of DC. But I have some serious issue with the above statement. Let's see now, we will take a Peace Dollar and overstrike it and charge $110 for it. That's really close to fraudulent, Dan.
<< <i>Aww...$110!? I remember asking a while ago if he was going to release these, because I really wanted one...But I'm acollege student. i don't have $100+ to burn on a "fantasy" piece. If he priced these at $50 he'd sell more than enough to make back the difference... Oh well...
As for the legality, I don't see a problem with it. The coin it's supposed to replicate hasn't been proven to exist, so who cares?
-Paul >>
Try sending $110 in Fantasy Dollars.
Ya never know!
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>Let's see now, we will take a Peace Dollar and overstrike it and charge $110 for it. That's really close to fraudulent, Dan. >>
He's not exactly hiding how he's making the things. And the price? He's free to ask whatever he likes for his creations, and you (and everybody else) is free to buy or not. Where's the fraud?
<< <i>3) Defacing of US coins is legal so long as the defacement isn't for fraudulent purposes.
I am a big fan of DC. But I have some serious issue with the above statement. Let's see now, we will take a Peace Dollar and overstrike it and charge $110 for it. That's really close to fraudulent, Dan. >>
constructive fraud n. when the circumstances show that someone's actions give him/her an unfair advantage over another by unfair means (lying or not telling a buyer about defects in a product, for example), the court may decide from the methods used and the result that it should treat the situation as if there was actual fraud even if all the technical elements of fraud have not been proven.
fraud n. the intentional use of deceit, a trick or some dishonest means to deprive another of his/her/its money, property or a legal right. ... continued on link (click for the rest)
intrinsic fraudn. an intentionally false representation (lie) which is part of the fraud and can be considered in determining general and punitive damages. This is distinguished from extrinsic fraud (collateral fraud) which was a deceptive means to keeping one from enforcing his/her legal rights.
It's a fake. At this point, people know what is for sale.
The worries from some will be that future buyers will be defrauded when not told that it is a fake.
<< <i>The bottom line is the object in question is NOT a coin... a phony, a replica , a fantasy coin, perhaps, but not a coin and therefore, it is certainly not worth the asking price.
This whole thing is nothing but greed, plain and simple. >>
People say the same things about the Fugio and Kellogg pieces. >>
I fail to see greed in the picture. What I do see is a business venture.
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>The worries from some will be that future buyers will be defrauded when not told that it is a fake. >>
I don't think this is a big issue because (a) collectors should educate themselves which should be easy as there is / will be information on this piece and (b) presumably the only people that will want to buy a non-fake are the ones that want to buy stolen property.
<< <i>The bottom line is the object in question is NOT a coin... a phony, a replica , a fantasy coin, perhaps, but not a coin and therefore, it is certainly not worth the asking price.
This whole thing is nothing but greed, plain and simple. >>
People say the same things about the Fugio and Kellogg pieces. >>
I fail to see greed in the picture. What I do see is a business venture. >>
They were / are all business ventures catering to collectors from my understanding.
The object obviously is made with the intention of it strongly resembling a silver dollar. Just because the coin community is fully aware of its origins, does not necessarily mean that the general public won't be easily duped.
If one carefully reads the page on his website, Carr adds a disclaimer that puts the onus on the buyer of these objects.In other words, whoever buys one, HE has to be careful what he does with it.
How convenient... while Carr pockets $110 to boot.
<< <i>Those that buy the D Carr items, do you buy this hoping they increase in value or just like to collect the items he makes? >>
I like what he makes. I surely could go the other way because I have most all of his sub 100 mintage pieces, and any one who follows the series know some pieces are 10x issue. But in the end it's the quality of the work that has inspired me from the time I found out he does his own cnc work and even wrote the program to code it. I keep a piece in the shop by my machine just for that little push to get it correct the first time by double checking everything before I hit 'GO'..
As far as this coin, knowing some of what it took to get it right, plus the stones to not defile it with 'COPY', made this purchase for me was a no brainer.
As for me, I don't know what all the "todo" is about. I simply fell in love with this DCarr strike from the start. And I paid the asking price. No problem from where I stand. If, and if, the SS is determined to pursue a case against Dan, I will support him.
The rest of the responses to this post are mere speculation and innuendo.
"Please help us keep these boards professional and informative…. And fun." - DW --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- BONGO HURTLES ALONG THE RAIN SODDEN HIGHWAY OF LIFE ON UNDERINFLATED BALD RETREAD TIRES
Comments
<< <i>
<< <i>If this were a copy of a small sized $100 bill with a date of 1927 I can pretty much guaranty the secret service would not consider it a "fantasy piece". >>
They would if you used a real $100 bill to create it, its not a counterfeit, it is a real, in your example, altered $100 bill. It has been monetized. If you took that same real $100 bill and wrote by hand on it 1927 with the date, it would be the same thing, just better art. Its an altered real $100 bill. Its the same as altering a penny, nickel, etc. >>
A) You are making an inaccurate comparison. The value of a real 1964 Peace dollar would be far higher than the monetary value of the Peace dollar from which this counterfeit is made. Additionally the market value of the "fantasy" piece is being set a far higher value than the original Peace dollar used. You seem to believe that if I used $100 bills instead of $1 bills to make counterfeit $100 bills the Secret Service wouldn't care. I am confident you are dead wrong.
Whoever falsely makes, forges, or counterfeits any coin or bar in
resemblance or similitude of any coin of a denomination higher than
5 cents or any gold or silver bar coined or stamped at any mint or
assay office of the United States, or in resemblance or similitude
of any foreign gold or silver coin current in the United States or
in actual use and circulation as money within the United States; or
Whoever passes, utters, publishes, sells, possesses, or brings
into the United States any false, forged, or counterfeit coin or
bar, knowing the same to be false, forged, or counterfeit, with
intent to defraud any body politic or corporate, or any person, or
attempts the commission of any offense described in this paragraph -
Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than
fifteen years, or both.
Any argument that these can't raise the ire of the Treasury/Secret Service is laughable.
None of this is to say that I wouldn't order one, however, I don't think I'd admit to it on an open forum if I did.
Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
My Jefferson Nickel Collection
<< <i>"Restrike" Kellogg & Co. slugs sell on eBay all the time. They do not have COPY on them and are even slabbed by PCGS. I think these were even made by Americans. In addition to the Fugios, this seems to be another example where a similar collector piece is accepted in the marketplace.
With Fugios and Kellogg slugs, there are real ones and the non-COPY ones are accepted. In this case, there are no real ones. >>
To argue it against older "fantasy" pieces is apples and oranges.
Those pieces existed before the Hobby Protection Act come into being. I don't believe they are bound by it, but I do believe any NEW piece is. Not a lawyer, just thinking they might, and I wouldn't want to be the person who has to pay a lawyer to defend myself in a case like this if it went to trial.
Most against it aren't arguing and calling it a counterfeit. I'm not saying it is "counterfeit", just saying it is poorly conceived and ill-defended w/o "COPY" on it.
You all can like it, and try to justify it till you are blue in the face but I'll remain unconvinced because I truly believe it isn't good for the hobby and someone will try to fool others at some point in time.
Also note the bolded in the text of the Hobby Protection Act:
(d) Imitation numismatic item means an item which purports to be, but in fact is not, an original numismatic item or which is a reproduction, copy, or counterfeit of an original numismatic item. Such term includes an original numismatic item which has been altered or modified in such a manner that it could reasonably purport to be an original numismatic item other than the one which was altered or modified. The term shall not include any re-issue or re-strike of any original numismatic item by the United States or any foreign government.
Altering the date itself may satisfy the parts in bold to be considered "imitation". I am not a lawyer so I won't state that it does/doesn't, but just that it may.
I've been told I tolerate fools poorly...that may explain things if I have a problem with you. Current ebay items - Nothing at the moment
So I won't.
<< <i>
<< <i>Don't like the color, sand blast look or price. If it looked like the real thing, were 90% or 100% silver and were being sold for a little more than the going ounce of silver.....then maybe...maybe...but still probably not. A person buying that has some serious cash to burn(or flush down the toilet)....IMO. >>
I think the price is quite reasonable. A lot of work goes into something like this. Maybe if Daniel were striking 10,000 the price should be lowered.
I am pretty confident the coin will look quite genuine in terms of color. It is, after all, a real Peace dollar. And therefore it is 90% silver. I wonder how close it will look to the real thing. Roger B., our local expert, isn't impressed, I seems.
Lance. >>
It looks sand blasted and brownish/gray. I would not want to own any REAL Peace Doller with those characteristics.
Let's put it this way, it looks nothing like the 12 1964-D Peace Dollars I may or may not have....
Looking for Top Pop Mercury Dime Varieties & High Grade Mercury Dime Toners.
<< <i>
<< <i>"Restrike" Kellogg & Co. slugs sell on eBay all the time. They do not have COPY on them and are even slabbed by PCGS. I think these were even made by Americans. In addition to the Fugios, this seems to be another example where a similar collector piece is accepted in the marketplace.
With Fugios and Kellogg slugs, there are real ones and the non-COPY ones are accepted. In this case, there are no real ones. >>
To argue it against older "fantasy" pieces is apples and oranges.
Those pieces existed before the Hobby Protection Act come into being. I don't believe they are bound by it, but I do believe any NEW piece is. Not a lawyer, just thinking they might, and I wouldn't want to be the person who has to pay a lawyer to defend myself in a case like this if it went to trial. >>
The PCGS slabbed Kellogg slugs were made in the 2001 time frame after the 1973 Hobby Protect Act so it would be an apples to apples comparison in that respect.
Regarding the the Fugios, the Hobby Protection Act says in Sec. 304.3 Applicability.
<< <i>Any person engaged in the manufacturing, or importation into the United States for introduction into or distribution in commerce, of imitation political or imitation numismatic items shall be subject to the requirements of the Act and the regulations promulgated thereunder. >>
According to this, presumably a dealer or collector who brings a fantasy Fugio into the US after 1973 would need to have that Fugio stamped COPY.
So I think the Fugios and Kellogg slugs would be treated similarly to this piece under the Hobby Protection Act. Apples and apples comparison all the way, so it would seem.
<< <i>It is an intentional copy of a non-demonetized coinage regardless of whether it was ever released into circulation. >>
Is that kinda like unthawing?
<< <i>None of this is to say that I wouldn't order one, however, I don't think I'd admit to it on an open forum if I did. >>
I would think that his system would be confiscated should the Secret Service get involved since it would record actual sales and shipping addresses vs some announcement on an open forum.
The name is LEE!
In honor of the memory of Cpl. Michael E. Thompson
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>As already mentioned, please ship quickly and destroy your records......quickly
Me too and now I wonder if our host would be willing to put it in a Genuine holder labeled as a D. Carr fantasy dollar. >>
That would be cool, a PCGS slabbed 1964-D restrike. I would send it in. >>
I'd prefer a PCGS holder, if not...since ANACS grades just about anything
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>As already mentioned, please ship quickly and destroy your records......quickly
Me too and now I wonder if our host would be willing to put it in a Genuine holder labeled as a D. Carr fantasy dollar. >>
That would be cool, a PCGS slabbed 1964-D restrike. I would send it in. >>
I'd prefer a PCGS holder, if not...since ANACS grades just about anything
From what I understand, ANACS will certify and slab Daniel's Amero coins (which BTW, are being counterfeited due to popularity.
The name is LEE!
would that soothe those that cry counterfeit ?
<< <i>I love Daniel's original artwork medals, but violently object to this.
.
Over the years I have had to break the bad news to hundreds of people that their coin was a fake. It is not a pleasant duty.
.
Sooner or later one of these coins, worn down and antiqued, will be sold for a large sum of money to somebody who doesn't know better. By the time the hidden diagnostics are pointed out to him or her, the seller and the money will be long gone.
.
I guarantee that this will happen.
.
Tom DeLorey >>
So, how long will it take you to wear it down?
<< <i>From what I understand, ANACS will certify and slab Daniel's Amero coins (which BTW, are being counterfeited due to popularity.
ANACS will certify all Carr's designs.
As for the legality, I don't see a problem with it. The coin it's supposed to replicate hasn't been proven to exist, so who cares?
-Paul
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>If this were a copy of a small sized $100 bill with a date of 1927 I can pretty much guaranty the secret service would not consider it a "fantasy piece". >>
They would if you used a real $100 bill to create it, its not a counterfeit, it is a real, in your example, altered $100 bill. It has been monetized. If you took that same real $100 bill and wrote by hand on it 1927 with the date, it would be the same thing, just better art. Its an altered real $100 bill. Its the same as altering a penny, nickel, etc. >>
A) You are making an inaccurate comparison. The value of a real 1964 Peace dollar would be far higher than the monetary value of the Peace dollar from which this counterfeit is made. Additionally the market value of the "fantasy" piece is being set a far higher value than the original Peace dollar used. You seem to believe that if I used $100 bills instead of $1 bills to make counterfeit $100 bills the Secret Service wouldn't care. I am confident you are dead wrong.
Whoever falsely makes, forges, or counterfeits any coin or bar in
resemblance or similitude of any coin of a denomination higher than
5 cents or any gold or silver bar coined or stamped at any mint or
assay office of the United States, or in resemblance or similitude
of any foreign gold or silver coin current in the United States or
in actual use and circulation as money within the United States; or
Whoever passes, utters, publishes, sells, possesses, or brings
into the United States any false, forged, or counterfeit coin or
bar, knowing the same to be false, forged, or counterfeit, with
intent to defraud any body politic or corporate, or any person, or
attempts the commission of any offense described in this paragraph -
Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than
fifteen years, or both.
Any argument that these can't raise the ire of the Treasury/Secret Service is laughable.
None of this is to say that I wouldn't order one, however, I don't think I'd admit to it on an open forum if I did.
My comparison is accurate, the value of the altered coin has no bearing. There are no real 64-D peace dollars so there is no value (non exist to establish) and none to copy, what would be the value of of a 1975 Peace dollar, or a 1934 St., it all pure conjecture. Besides value has nothing to do with this, the argument is it this legal. It not a counterfeit, he used a real monetized dollar, so its still legal tender. Its still a dollar and you could spend it, legally and even take it to a bank. It's not a copy because none exist, so where is this illegal? Had he done this with an blank that had not been monetized it would be a counterfeit, but its not, its not a copy because there are none.
<< <i>
<< <i>From what I understand, ANACS will certify and slab Daniel's Amero coins (which BTW, are being counterfeited due to popularity.
ANACS will certify all Carr's designs. >>
I know ICG does these. ANACS too?
peacockcoins
<< <i>My comparison is accurate, the value of the altered coin has no bearing. There are no real 64-D peace dollars so there is no value (non exist to establish) and none to copy, what would be the value of of a 1975 Peace dollar, or a 1934 St., it all pure conjecture. Besides value has nothing to do with this, the argument is it this legal. It not a counterfeit, he used a real monetized dollar, so its still legal tender. Its still a dollar and you could spend it, legally and even take it to a bank. It's not a copy because none exist, so where is this illegal? Had he done this with an blank that had not been monetized it would be a counterfeit, but its not, its not a copy because there are none. >>
Just like a few years ago, there were NO 1933 Saints monetized?
Your argument holds no water.
<< <i>The original Fugio and Kellogg pieces were not struck by the US Mint, contrary to the Peace dollar, which might make the laws pertaining to these pieces slightly different. Additionally, the Kellogg pieces all have the date that they were struck placed in the middle of the reverse along with "CHS" for "California Historical Society" and the date is written in the form "Struck September 5 2001 CHS". Also, the reverse ribbon on the Kellogg pieces of 2001 states "SS Central America Gold, CHS". This would appear to indicate that the Kellogg pieces of 2001 might be considered clearly marked. >>
Thanks for bringing this up. I didn't see any text in the Hobby Protection Act which restricts it to US Mint issued pieces. Some definitions from the HPA:
<< <i>(d) Imitation numismatic item means an item which purports to be, but in fact is not, an original numismatic item or which is a reproduction, copy, or counterfeit of an original numismatic item. Such term includes an original numismatic item which has been altered or modified in such a manner that it could reasonably purport to be an original numismatic item other than the one which was altered or modified. The term shall not include any re-issue or re-strike of any original numismatic item by the United States or any foreign government.
(f) Original numismatic item means anything which has been a part of a coinage or issue which has been used in exchange or has been used to commemorate a person, object, place, or event. Such term includes coins, tokens, paper money, and commemorative medals. >>
Regarding the diagnostics on the Kellogg slug, the Carr piece also has diagnostics and people here generally acknowledge that the diagnostics on the Carr piece would need to be worn down so as not to be recognizable (before being passed off as a non-existent coin). Presumably the diagnostics on a gold slug would be easer to wear down and manipulate until it was unrecognizable. Given that the Kellogg and Carr pieces (and Fugios) have diagnostics, I'm not sure it matters too much what the diagnostics are if the argument is that they can eventually be worn down or manipulated. Since the Carr piece is overstruck and silver, it might even be harder to cover up than the Kellogg piece.
Fugios and Kelloggs aside, I'm not sure the Hobby Protection Act applies to this piece because the 1964-D Peace Dollar does not qualify as an Original numismatic item under the definition:Original numismatic item means anything which has been a part of a coinage or issue which has been used in exchange or has been used to commemorate a person, object, place, or event. Such term includes coins, tokens, paper money, and commemorative medals.. The original issue was never part of a coinage or issue as they were all destroyed. Because of this, it seems that this may be outside of the scope of the Hobby Protection Act.
This whole thing is nothing but greed, plain and simple.
There isn't a "profitability test" on counterfeiting.
The more money illegally printed or minted decreases the value of all the other money outstanding
<< <i>The bottom line is the object in question is NOT a coin... a phony, a replica , a fantasy coin, perhaps, but not a coin and therefore, it is certainly not worth the asking price.
This whole thing is nothing but greed, plain and simple. >>
People say the same things about the Fugio and Kellogg pieces.
NGC registry V-Nickel proof #6!!!!
working on proof shield nickels # 8 with a bullet!!!!
RIP "BEAR"
<< <i>
<< <i>The bottom line is the object in question is NOT a coin... a phony, a replica , a fantasy coin, perhaps, but not a coin and therefore, it is certainly not worth the asking price.
This whole thing is nothing but greed, plain and simple. >>
People say the same things about the Fugio and Kellogg pieces. >>
Perhaps, but first, I would like to retract my first statement. Actually, this a coin... an ALTERED coin. So someone has the technical prowess and the equipment to overstrike a genuine coin to make it an object that, if it were genuine, would be illegal to own. And some of you want to buy this thing for what... $110?
Amazing...
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>The bottom line is the object in question is NOT a coin... a phony, a replica , a fantasy coin, perhaps, but not a coin and therefore, it is certainly not worth the asking price.
This whole thing is nothing but greed, plain and simple. >>
People say the same things about the Fugio and Kellogg pieces. >>
Perhaps, but first, I would like to retract my first statement. Actually, this a coin... an ALTERED coin. So someone has the technical prowess and the equipment to overstrike a genuine coin to make it an object that, if it were genuine, would be illegal to own. And some of you want to buy this thing for what... $110?
Amazing... >>
If I had the $110.00 available, I would buy one.
<< <i>I know ICG does these. ANACS too? >>
The old ICG is the new ANACS.
Eric
NGC registry V-Nickel proof #6!!!!
working on proof shield nickels # 8 with a bullet!!!!
RIP "BEAR"
<< <i>Those that buy the D Carr items, do you buy this hoping they increase in value or just like to collect the items he makes? >>
He's the shiznit!
Successful Trades: Swampboy,
<< <i>Those that buy the D Carr items, do you buy this hoping they increase in value or just like to collect the items he makes? >>
I would say those who buy are speculating, not collecting.
The object has no more value (other than its bullion content) than those silly colorized coins the shopping networks try to pawn off onto the unsuspecting public. They're real coins, but altered.
<< <i>
<< <i>Those that buy the D Carr items, do you buy this hoping they increase in value or just like to collect the items he makes? >>
I would say those who buy are speculating, not collecting.
The object has no more value (other than its bullion content) than those silly colorized coins the shopping networks try to pawn off onto the unsuspecting public. They're real coins, but altered. >>
The more we talk about it the more valuable it becomes!
My order is going in for at least two.
Steve
In memory of the USAF Security Forces lost: A1C Elizabeth N. Jacobson, 9/28/05; SSgt Brian McElroy, 1/22/06; TSgt Jason Norton, 1/22/06; A1C Lee Chavis, 10/14/06; SSgt John Self, 5/14/07; A1C Jason Nathan, 6/23/07; SSgt Travis Griffin, 4/3/08; 1Lt Joseph Helton, 9/8/09; SrA Nicholas J. Alden, 3/3/2011. God Bless them and all those who have lost loved ones in this war. I will never forget their loss.
I am a big fan of DC. But I have some serious issue with the above statement. Let's see now, we will take a Peace Dollar and overstrike it and charge $110 for it. That's really close to fraudulent, Dan.
Proud recipient of two "You Suck" awards
<< <i>But...but...it was all in Fun..fun..ya' know ..Fun...!!!!!.....
Agreed... the jury's still out whether these are legal to buy sell, trade, or own.
Just because the "manufacturer" says they're okay does not make them so.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>From what I understand, ANACS will certify and slab Daniel's Amero coins (which BTW, are being counterfeited due to popularity.
ANACS will certify all Carr's designs. >>
I know ICG does these. ANACS too? >>
Did I misspeak? I thought sure it was ANACS but I guess it coulda been ICG. I keep getting the two crossed up!
The name is LEE!
<< <i>Aww...$110!? I remember asking a while ago if he was going to release these, because I really wanted one...But I'm acollege student. i don't have $100+ to burn on a "fantasy" piece. If he priced these at $50 he'd sell more than enough to make back the difference... Oh well...
As for the legality, I don't see a problem with it. The coin it's supposed to replicate hasn't been proven to exist, so who cares?
-Paul >>
Try sending $110 in Fantasy Dollars.
Ya never know!
The name is LEE!
<< <i>Let's see now, we will take a Peace Dollar and overstrike it and charge $110 for it. That's really close to fraudulent, Dan. >>
He's not exactly hiding how he's making the things. And the price? He's free to ask whatever he likes for his creations, and you (and everybody else) is free to buy or not. Where's the fraud?
<< <i>3) Defacing of US coins is legal so long as the defacement isn't for fraudulent purposes.
I am a big fan of DC. But I have some serious issue with the above statement. Let's see now, we will take a Peace Dollar and overstrike it and charge $110 for it. That's really close to fraudulent, Dan. >>
fraud?
constructive fraud
n. when the circumstances show that someone's actions give him/her an unfair advantage over another by unfair means (lying or not telling a buyer about defects in a product, for example), the court may decide from the methods used and the result that it should treat the situation as if there was actual fraud even if all the technical elements of fraud have not been proven.
fraud
n. the intentional use of deceit, a trick or some dishonest means to deprive another of his/her/its money, property or a legal right. ... continued on link
(click for the rest)
intrinsic fraudn. an intentionally false representation (lie) which is part of the fraud and can be considered in determining general and punitive damages. This is distinguished from extrinsic fraud (collateral fraud) which was a deceptive means to keeping one from enforcing his/her legal rights.
It's a fake. At this point, people know what is for sale.
The worries from some will be that future buyers will be defrauded when not told that it is a fake.
<< <i>
<< <i>The bottom line is the object in question is NOT a coin... a phony, a replica , a fantasy coin, perhaps, but not a coin and therefore, it is certainly not worth the asking price.
This whole thing is nothing but greed, plain and simple. >>
People say the same things about the Fugio and Kellogg pieces. >>
I fail to see greed in the picture. What I do see is a business venture.
The name is LEE!
<< <i>The worries from some will be that future buyers will be defrauded when not told that it is a fake. >>
I don't think this is a big issue because (a) collectors should educate themselves which should be easy as there is / will be information on this piece and (b) presumably the only people that will want to buy a non-fake are the ones that want to buy stolen property.
<< <i>I would have REALLY liked this coin had it been an obviously overstruck 1964/24-D Peace dollar. >>
Unlikely to happen because 1924-D Peace dollars are so rare.
My Adolph A. Weinman signature
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>The bottom line is the object in question is NOT a coin... a phony, a replica , a fantasy coin, perhaps, but not a coin and therefore, it is certainly not worth the asking price.
This whole thing is nothing but greed, plain and simple. >>
People say the same things about the Fugio and Kellogg pieces. >>
I fail to see greed in the picture. What I do see is a business venture. >>
They were / are all business ventures catering to collectors from my understanding.
If one carefully reads the page on his website, Carr adds a disclaimer that puts the onus on the buyer of these objects.In other words, whoever buys one, HE has to be careful what he does with it.
How convenient... while Carr pockets $110 to boot.
<< <i>Those that buy the D Carr items, do you buy this hoping they increase in value or just like to collect the items he makes? >>
I like what he makes. I surely could go the other way because I have most all of his sub 100 mintage pieces, and any one who follows the series know some pieces are 10x issue. But in the end it's the quality of the work that has inspired me from the time I found out he does his own cnc work and even wrote the program to code it. I keep a piece in the shop by my machine just for that little push to get it correct the first time by double checking everything before I hit 'GO'..
As far as this coin, knowing some of what it took to get it right, plus the stones to not defile it with 'COPY', made this purchase for me was a no brainer.
<< <i>The object obviously is made with the intention of it strongly resembling a non-existent silver dollar. >>
You're welcome for the correction.
The rest of the responses to this post are mere speculation and innuendo.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BONGO HURTLES ALONG THE RAIN SODDEN HIGHWAY OF LIFE ON UNDERINFLATED BALD RETREAD TIRES