Please post a pic even if it's from a cell phone! TIA. MJ
Walker Proof Digital Album Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
They've been following me home everyday since I bought my Challenger SRT8 It's red like the one in my sig line and has "Target" written all over it to the police!
<< <i>They've been following me home everyday since I bougt my Challenger SRT8 >>
Not sure why that's funny? But what's a "Challenger SRT8"?
"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
I see a sleek auto with slotted front rotors and lotsa dust spinning from the rear wheels. I like it!
Man they need to add the dimples to those slotted rotors, IMO!
"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
I guess I'm simplistic, but with all the griping and concern about doctoring coins and counterfeits I'm amazed so many see something special or legitimate about this. It's a rip off For profit, pure and simple. Let's just over-date nice Liberty Nickels into 1913s while we're at it. Even some counterfeits look nice and are relatively correct in all other ways. Hell, lets make over-dated copies of all extremely rare coins and collect them because they'd be neat to look at. I guess you can collect whatever you want, but if the Franklin Mint were making this you'd be singing a different tune.......I'd much rather have a nice Hobo Nickel. At least on that someone put in some honest work and creativity. I just don't get it!
<< <i>What if DC altered the denomination to read TEN DOLLARS? Would that be similar to raising the value of a $1 bill to a $10 by altering it? Then you are creating a fraudulent situation where you are changing the legal value of the coin/bill.
Since he is changing the date, admittedly still an alteration, then it falls into the altered coin category, just as if you changed the date on any coin. Is it a fraudulent alteration, like removing or adding mintmarks intended to defraud a collector?
What if he struck it on a blank planchet or a base metal blank, like the Chinese 1834-CC Trade Dollar fakes. Then it is an evasion piece. Made to fall outside of counterfeiting laws.
As I posted before, the code to look at is the Hobby Protection Act. Anyone care to post any relevant section? >>
I have used bold to highlight two portions which look as if they are relevant to the discussion/debate at hand. I apologize in advance, if I made in errors in my copying and pasting.
PART 304–RULES AND REGULATIONS UNDER THE HOBBY PROTECTION ACT–Table of Contents
Sec. 304.1 Terms defined. 304.2 General requirement. 304.3 Applicability. 304.4 Application of other law or regulation. 304.5 Marking requirements for imitation political items. 304.6 Marking requirements for imitation numismatic items.
(a) Act means the Hobby Protection Act (approved November 29, 1973; Pub. L. 93-167, 87 Stat. 686, (15 U.S.C. 2101 et seq.)). (b) Commerce has the same meanings as such term has under the Federal Trade Commission Act. (c) Commission means the Federal Trade Commission. 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. (e) Imitation political item means an item which purports to be, but in fact is not, an original political item, or which is a reproduction, copy or counterfeit of an original item. (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. (g) Original political item means any political button, poster, literature, sticker, or any advertisement produced for use in any political cause. (h) Person means any individual, group, association, partnership, or any other business entity. (i) Regulations means any or all regulations prescribed by the Federal Trade Commission pursuant to the Act. (j) United States means the States, the District of Columbia, and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico. (k) Diameter of a reproduction means the length of the longest possible straight line connecting two points on the perimeter of the reproduction. [40 FR 5496, Feb. 6, 1975, as amended at 53 FR 38942, Oct. 4, 1988]
Sec. 304.2 General requirement.
Imitation political or numismatic items subject to the Act shall be marked in conformity with the requirements of the Act and the regulations promulgated thereunder. Any violation of these regulations shall constitute a violation of the Act and of the Federal Trade Commission Act.
Sec. 304.3 Applicability.
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.
Sec. 304.4 Application of other law or regulation.
The provisions of these regulations are in addition to, and not in substitution for or limitation of, the provisions of any other law or regulation of the United States (including the existing statutes and regulations prohibiting the reproduction of genuine currency) or of the law or regulation of any State.
Sec. 304.5 Marking requirements for imitation political items.
(a) An imitation political item which is manufactured in the United States, or imported into the United States for introduction into or distribution in commerce, shall be plainly and permanently marked with the calendar year in which such item was manufactured. (b) The calendar year shall be marked upon the item legibly, conspicuously and nondeceptively, and in accordance with the further requirements of these regulations. (1) The calendar year shall appear in arabic numerals, shall be based upon the Gregorian calendar and shall consist of four digits. (2) The calendar year shall be marked on either the obverse or the reverse surface of the item. It shall not be marked on the edge of the item. (3) An imitation political item of incusable material shall be incused with the calendar year in sans-serif numerals. Each numeral shall have a vertical dimension of not less than two millimeters (2.0 mm) and a minimum depth of three-tenths of one millimeter (0.3 mm) or one-half (1/2) the thickness of the reproduction, whichever is the lesser. The minimum total horizontal dimension for the four numerals composing the calendar year shall be six millimeters (6.0 mm). (4) An imitation political button, poster, literature, sticker, or advertisement composed of nonincusable material shall be imprinted with the calendar year in sans-serif numerals. Each numeral shall have a vertical dimension of not less than two millimeters (2.0 mm). The minimum total horizontal dimension of the four numerals composing the calendar year shall be six millimeters (6.0 mm).
Sec. 304.6 Marking requirements for imitation numismatic items.
(a) An imitation numismatic item which is manufactured in the United States, or imported into the United States for introduction into or distribution in commerce, shall be plainly and permanently marked “COPY”.(b) The word “COPY” shall be marked upon the item legibly, conspicuously, and nondeceptively, and in accordance with the further requirements of these regulations. (1) The word “COPY” shall appear in capital letters, in the English language. (2) The word “COPY” shall be marked on either the obverse or the reverse surface of the item. It shall not be marked on the edge of the item (3) An imitation numismatic item of incusable material shall be incused with the word “COPY” in sans-serif letters having a vertical dimension of not less than two millimeters (2.0 mm) or not less than one-sixth of the diameter of the reproduction, and a minimum depth of three-tenths of one millimeter (0.3 mm) or to one-half (1/2) the thickness of the reproduction, whichever is the lesser. The minimum total horizontal dimension of the word “COPY” shall be six millimeters (6.0 mm) or not less than one-half of the diameter of the reproduction. (4) An imitation numismatic item composed of nonincusable material shall be imprinted with the word “COPY” in sans-serif letters having a vertical dimension of not less than two millimeters (2.0 mm) or not less than one-sixth of the diameter of the reproduction. The minimum total horizontal dimension of the word “COPY” shall be six millimeters (6.0 mm) or not less than one-half of the diameter of the reproduction
Walker Proof Digital Album Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
The Liberty Dollar thing was a different scenario. That guy was passing liberty dollars off as an alternate currency. The Headquarters of that operation was in my home town and I was happy to see it raided and shut down. John >>
The point of the Liberty Dollar connection was the actual raid where everthing was confiscated even though Liberty Dollars had been bought and sold for a couple of years and the fact that if the SS did get involved, it would more than likely be that way.
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.
that coin looks great given its a scan. Daniel`s work is always superb.
daniel, i can appreciate what it would take to put something like this together. just being able to acquire/refurbish/setup/operate a denver mint coin press along with all the other design and prep work is amazing.
i`m surprised that nobody suggested that instead of putting "copy" on the coin that you should of put your initials like your other issues.
<< <i>that coin looks great given its a scan. Daniel`s work is always superb.
daniel, i can appreciate what it would take to put something like this together. just being able to acquire/refurbish/setup/operate a denver mint coin press along with all the other design and prep work is amazing.
i`m surprised that nobody suggested that instead of putting "copy" on the coin that you should of put your initials like your other issues.
BTW, my coins have shipped >>
Like my wife always says: "Stupidity is blossoming!"
<< <i>Will the dies be destroyed after minting is complete? >>
He said they literally would go into a bucket of water to rust like all his other retired dies. MJ
Walker Proof Digital Album Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
<< <i>Can we expect that this work will be worth more after the artist passes? >>
I'm sure Daniel will want to remain uncooperative on this point.
Walker Proof Digital Album Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
I encourage everyone to offer Mr. Carr foods high in cholesterol and discourage him from going to the gym. Encourage him to take up new hobbies like sky diving and such. We must all do our part.
There is no "AT" or "NT". We only have "market acceptable" or "not market acceptable.
So, no one wants to talk about whether these items are required to have "Copy" on them, under the Hobby Protection Act?
From a previous post, in reply to EagleEye:
I have used bold to highlight two portions which look as if they are relevant to the discussion/debate at hand. I apologize in advance, if I made in errors in my copying and pasting.
PART 304–RULES AND REGULATIONS UNDER THE HOBBY PROTECTION ACT–Table of Contents
Sec. 304.1 Terms defined. 304.2 General requirement. 304.3 Applicability. 304.4 Application of other law or regulation. 304.5 Marking requirements for imitation political items. 304.6 Marking requirements for imitation numismatic items.
(a) Act means the Hobby Protection Act (approved November 29, 1973; Pub. L. 93-167, 87 Stat. 686, (15 U.S.C. 2101 et seq.)). (b) Commerce has the same meanings as such term has under the Federal Trade Commission Act. (c) Commission means the Federal Trade Commission. 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. (e) Imitation political item means an item which purports to be, but in fact is not, an original political item, or which is a reproduction, copy or counterfeit of an original item. (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. (g) Original political item means any political button, poster, literature, sticker, or any advertisement produced for use in any political cause. (h) Person means any individual, group, association, partnership, or any other business entity. (i) Regulations means any or all regulations prescribed by the Federal Trade Commission pursuant to the Act. (j) United States means the States, the District of Columbia, and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico. (k) Diameter of a reproduction means the length of the longest possible straight line connecting two points on the perimeter of the reproduction. [40 FR 5496, Feb. 6, 1975, as amended at 53 FR 38942, Oct. 4, 1988]
Sec. 304.2 General requirement.
Imitation political or numismatic items subject to the Act shall be marked in conformity with the requirements of the Act and the regulations promulgated thereunder. Any violation of these regulations shall constitute a violation of the Act and of the Federal Trade Commission Act.
Sec. 304.3 Applicability.
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.
Sec. 304.4 Application of other law or regulation.
The provisions of these regulations are in addition to, and not in substitution for or limitation of, the provisions of any other law or regulation of the United States (including the existing statutes and regulations prohibiting the reproduction of genuine currency) or of the law or regulation of any State.
Sec. 304.5 Marking requirements for imitation political items.
(a) An imitation political item which is manufactured in the United States, or imported into the United States for introduction into or distribution in commerce, shall be plainly and permanently marked with the calendar year in which such item was manufactured. (b) The calendar year shall be marked upon the item legibly, conspicuously and nondeceptively, and in accordance with the further requirements of these regulations. (1) The calendar year shall appear in arabic numerals, shall be based upon the Gregorian calendar and shall consist of four digits. (2) The calendar year shall be marked on either the obverse or the reverse surface of the item. It shall not be marked on the edge of the item. (3) An imitation political item of incusable material shall be incused with the calendar year in sans-serif numerals. Each numeral shall have a vertical dimension of not less than two millimeters (2.0 mm) and a minimum depth of three-tenths of one millimeter (0.3 mm) or one-half (1/2) the thickness of the reproduction, whichever is the lesser. The minimum total horizontal dimension for the four numerals composing the calendar year shall be six millimeters (6.0 mm). (4) An imitation political button, poster, literature, sticker, or advertisement composed of nonincusable material shall be imprinted with the calendar year in sans-serif numerals. Each numeral shall have a vertical dimension of not less than two millimeters (2.0 mm). The minimum total horizontal dimension of the four numerals composing the calendar year shall be six millimeters (6.0 mm).
Sec. 304.6 Marking requirements for imitation numismatic items.
(a) An imitation numismatic item which is manufactured in the United States, or imported into the United States for introduction into or distribution in commerce, shall be plainly and permanently marked “COPY”.(b) The word “COPY” shall be marked upon the item legibly, conspicuously, and nondeceptively, and in accordance with the further requirements of these regulations. (1) The word “COPY” shall appear in capital letters, in the English language. (2) The word “COPY” shall be marked on either the obverse or the reverse surface of the item. It shall not be marked on the edge of the item (3) An imitation numismatic item of incusable material shall be incused with the word “COPY” in sans-serif letters having a vertical dimension of not less than two millimeters (2.0 mm) or not less than one-sixth of the diameter of the reproduction, and a minimum depth of three-tenths of one millimeter (0.3 mm) or to one-half (1/2) the thickness of the reproduction, whichever is the lesser. The minimum total horizontal dimension of the word “COPY” shall be six millimeters (6.0 mm) or not less than one-half of the diameter of the reproduction. (4) An imitation numismatic item composed of nonincusable material shall be imprinted with the word “COPY” in sans-serif letters having a vertical dimension of not less than two millimeters (2.0 mm) or not less than one-sixth of the diameter of the reproduction. The minimum total horizontal dimension of the word “COPY” shall be six millimeters (6.0 mm) or not less than one-half of the diameter of the reproduction
<So, no one wants to talk about whether these items are required to have "Copy" on them, under the Hobby Protection Act?>
Nope. MJ
Walker Proof Digital Album Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
<< <i>So, no one wants to talk about whether these items are required to have "Copy" on them, under the Hobby Protection Act? >>
Mark, what can be said that hasn't? What result would you expect with more debate? I can only expect that demand will continue to rise with additional debate. Is that your goal? If not, I can't imagine why you would continue to post. What can we expect as an outcome of our debates here?
There is no "AT" or "NT". We only have "market acceptable" or "not market acceptable.
<< <i>So, no one wants to talk about whether these items are required to have "Copy" on them, under the Hobby Protection Act? >>
Mark, what can be said that hasn't? What result would you expect with more debate? I can only expect that demand will continue to rise with additional debate. Is that your goal? If not, I can't imagine why you would continue to post. What can we expect as an outcome of our debates here? >>
I have no stake or care in whether the price rises or not. Thus far, the large majority of the debate has centered upon things other than the Hobby Protection Act, itself. I was hoping that a few posters would actually look at the language and provide some opinions based on that. But I don't always get what I hope for.
<< <i>So, no one wants to talk about whether these items are required to have "Copy" on them, under the Hobby Protection Act? >>
Guess not, probably because it requires one to engage in critical thinking...
Thanks for posting the obvious, at least to rational thinking individuals. These objects are both illegal and worthless except for the silver they contain.
Like I said before, what's to prevent Mr. Carr from overstriking 1912 "V" nickels with 1913 dates?
<< <i>I can only expect that demand will continue to rise with additional debate. Is that your goal? If not, I can't imagine why you would continue to post. What can we expect as an outcome of our debates here? >>
I keep commenting because I love seeing fools and their money part company...
One thing's for sure... the economy ain't all that bad if so many individuals are willing to part with $115 so easily.
<< <i>I was hoping that a few posters would actually look at the language and provide some opinions based on that. But I don't always get what I hope for.
>>
OK, who am I to turn down your request. I read the lines you bolded three times. It's my dumb opinion that it depends of the interpretation of the reader whether Mr. Carr violated this act or not. Quite simply, is the coin not a copy because a 1964 peace dollar does not exist (according to the U.S. Mint) or is the date of no importance and therefore it is a copy.
If it is up to a judge to decide and the judge is not a collector of coins, he/she will not take the date into much consideration. That this will get in front of a judge in the first place, well, that remains to be seen.
There is no "AT" or "NT". We only have "market acceptable" or "not market acceptable.
<< <i>I encourage everyone to offer Mr. Carr foods high in cholesterol and discourage him from going to the gym. Encourage him to take up new hobbies like sky diving and such. We must all do our part. >>
Almost 600 posts ain't shabby... but looks like this thread has taken a turn for the worse.
To Err Is Human.... To Collect Err's Is Just Too Much Darn Tootin Fun!
<< <i>So, no one wants to talk about whether these items are required to have "Copy" on them, under the Hobby Protection Act? >>
Guess not, probably because it requires one to engage in critical thinking... Thanks for posting the obvious, at least to rational thinking individuals. These objects are both illegal and worthless except for the silver they contain. Like I said before, what's to prevent Mr. Carr from overstriking 1912 "V" nickels with 1913 dates? >>
Dang. I thought you'd crawled back under the bridge.
<< <i>I was hoping that a few posters would actually look at the language and provide some opinions based on that. But I don't always get what I hope for.
>>
OK, who am I to turn down your request. I read the lines you bolded three times. It's my dumb opinion that it depends of the interpretation of the reader whether Mr. Carr violated this act or not. Quite simply, is the coin not a copy because a 1964 peace dollar does not exist (according to the U.S. Mint) or is the date of no importance and therefore it is a copy.
If it is up to a judge to decide and the judge is not a collector of coins, he/she will not take the date into much consideration. That this will get in front of a judge in the first place, well, that remains to be seen. >>
Still, I shan't cancel my order!!
"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
<< <i>So, no one wants to talk about whether these items are required to have "Copy" on them, under the Hobby Protection Act? >>
Mark, what can be said that hasn't? What result would you expect with more debate? I can only expect that demand will continue to rise with additional debate. Is that your goal? If not, I can't imagine why you would continue to post. What can we expect as an outcome of our debates here? >>
I have no stake or care in whether the price rises or not. Thus far, the large majority of the debate has centered upon things other than the Hobby Protection Act, itself. I was hoping that a few posters would actually look at the language and provide some opinions based on that. But I don't always get what I hope for.
>>
I have made my opinion quite plain that I believe these pieces should be marked "COPY." My belief is based upon the Hobby Protection Act.
BTW, FWIW, I was reminded today of another case where a genuine U.S. coin was overstruck with false dies to change the date.
The coin in question was what appeared to be a 1977/6 cent, which came into the Coin World office in 1977. With the owner's permission, we sent it to the Mint Lab in Washington, D.C. The head of the lab declared it to be a genuine overdate.
We published the story, and then a few days later the Mint called us back to say that the number two man at the Mint Lab had returned from a business trip, examined the coin and called it an alteration. They now said that it had been overstruck with false dies to add a 7 over the 6.
The man who had sent us the coin was arrested, charged and pled guilty in exchange for a suspended sentence. The Secret Service said that they found material used to make a false die in his residence. The coin was never returned.
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>So, no one wants to talk about whether these items are required to have "Copy" on them, under the Hobby Protection Act? >>
Mark, what can be said that hasn't? What result would you expect with more debate? I can only expect that demand will continue to rise with additional debate. Is that your goal? If not, I can't imagine why you would continue to post. What can we expect as an outcome of our debates here? >>
I have no stake or care in whether the price rises or not. Thus far, the large majority of the debate has centered upon things other than the Hobby Protection Act, itself. I was hoping that a few posters would actually look at the language and provide some opinions based on that. But I don't always get what I hope for.
>>
I have made my opinion quite plain that I believe these pieces should be marked "COPY." My belief is based upon the Hobby Protection Act.
BTW, FWIW, I was reminded today of another case where a genuine U.S. coin was overstruck with false dies to change the date.
The coin in question was what appeared to be a 1977/6 cent, which came into the Coin World office in 1977. With the owner's permission, we sent it to the Mint Lab in Washington, D.C. The head of the lab declared it to be a genuine overdate.
We published the story, and then a few days later the Mint called us back to say that the number two man at the Mint Lab had returned from a business trip, examined the coin and called it an alteration. They now said that it had been overstruck with false dies to add a 7 over the 6.
The man who had sent us the coin was arrested, charged and pled guilty in exchange for a suspended sentence. The Secret Service said that they found material used to make a false die in his residence. The coin was never returned.
<< <i>So, no one wants to talk about whether these items are required to have "Copy" on them, under the Hobby Protection Act? >>
Guess not, probably because it requires one to engage in critical thinking...
Thanks for posting the obvious, at least to rational thinking individuals. These objects are both illegal and worthless except for the silver they contain.
Like I said before, what's to prevent Mr. Carr from overstriking 1912 "V" nickels with 1913 dates? >>
My belief is that the Hobby Protection Act would require COPY on an altered date 1913 "V" nickel but not on a 1964-D Peace dollar.
This is because I believe a 1913 "V" nickel qualifies as an "original numismatic item" while there are no 1964-D Peace dollars to represent an "original numismatic item." Because there is not a single 1964-D Peace dollar to qualify as an "original numismatic item," I'm unclear whether the Hobby Protection Act is relevant here. It may very well not be.
I do not feel the hobby needs to be protected with respect to Daniel's 1964-D Peace dollar because our best available information is that there are no real ones to be protected. In the unlikely event that a real one does appear, Daniel's coins have positive diagnostics and are well documented. However, I do not feel we should base our decisions on suppositions and what ifs. We can just make decisions on our best available information today, which is that there are no Mint issued 1964-D Peace dollars.
<< <i>the person "Zoins " has made 43 posts in this thread >>
I think I may need to post more since my previous posts on the Hobby Protection Act were overlooked
<< <i>So, no one wants to talk about whether these items are required to have "Copy" on them, under the Hobby Protection Act? >>
>>
How many am I short?
They aren't 100% faithful copies of the real thing. They're purposefully different.
plus I'm hoping to turn it into a holographic, colorized version with a sticker! >>
Good point! Can't be an intentional copy or counterfeit, if we don't have an "original" to counterfeit, ya know!
"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
I do think it is curious that it seems some people will use the Hobby Protection Act to suggest this coin should not be distributed as is while seemingly defending the practice of violating government orders to turn over any existing coins to be melted.
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.
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.
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.
Comments
<< <i>I just picked mine up at the P.O.
Please post a pic even if it's from a cell phone! TIA. MJ
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
<< <i>They've been following me home everyday since I bougt my Challenger SRT8
Not sure why that's funny?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BONGO HURTLES ALONG THE RAIN SODDEN HIGHWAY OF LIFE ON UNDERINFLATED BALD RETREAD TIRES
Proud recipient of two "You Suck" awards
<< <i>look here for answer >>
I see a sleek auto with slotted front rotors and lotsa dust spinning from the rear wheels. I like it!
Man they need to add the dimples to those slotted rotors, IMO!
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BONGO HURTLES ALONG THE RAIN SODDEN HIGHWAY OF LIFE ON UNDERINFLATED BALD RETREAD TIRES
<< <i>What if DC altered the denomination to read TEN DOLLARS? Would that be similar to raising the value of a $1 bill to a $10 by altering it? Then you are creating a fraudulent situation where you are changing the legal value of the coin/bill.
Since he is changing the date, admittedly still an alteration, then it falls into the altered coin category, just as if you changed the date on any coin. Is it a fraudulent alteration, like removing or adding mintmarks intended to defraud a collector?
What if he struck it on a blank planchet or a base metal blank, like the Chinese 1834-CC Trade Dollar fakes. Then it is an evasion piece. Made to fall outside of counterfeiting laws.
As I posted before, the code to look at is the Hobby Protection Act. Anyone care to post any relevant section? >>
I have used bold to highlight two portions which look as if they are relevant to the discussion/debate at hand. I apologize in advance, if I made in errors in my copying and pasting.
PART 304–RULES AND REGULATIONS UNDER THE HOBBY PROTECTION ACT–Table of Contents
Sec.
304.1 Terms defined.
304.2 General requirement.
304.3 Applicability.
304.4 Application of other law or regulation.
304.5 Marking requirements for imitation political items.
304.6 Marking requirements for imitation numismatic items.
Authority: 15 U.S.C. 2101 et seq.
Source: 40 FR 5496, Feb. 6, 1975, unless otherwise noted.
Sec. 304.1 Terms defined.
(a) Act means the Hobby Protection Act (approved November 29, 1973; Pub. L. 93-167, 87 Stat. 686, (15 U.S.C. 2101 et seq.)).
(b) Commerce has the same meanings as such term has under the Federal Trade Commission Act.
(c) Commission means the Federal Trade Commission.
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.
(e) Imitation political item means an item which purports to be, but in fact is not, an original political item, or which is a reproduction, copy or counterfeit of an original item.
(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.
(g) Original political item means any political button, poster, literature, sticker, or any advertisement produced for use in any political cause.
(h) Person means any individual, group, association, partnership, or any other business entity.
(i) Regulations means any or all regulations prescribed by the Federal Trade Commission pursuant to the Act.
(j) United States means the States, the District of Columbia, and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico.
(k) Diameter of a reproduction means the length of the longest possible straight line connecting two points on the perimeter of the reproduction. [40 FR 5496, Feb. 6, 1975, as amended at 53 FR 38942, Oct. 4, 1988]
Sec. 304.2 General requirement.
Imitation political or numismatic items subject to the Act shall be marked in conformity with the requirements of the Act and the regulations promulgated thereunder. Any violation of these regulations shall constitute a violation of the Act and of the Federal Trade Commission Act.
Sec. 304.3 Applicability.
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.
Sec. 304.4 Application of other law or regulation.
The provisions of these regulations are in addition to, and not in substitution for or limitation of, the provisions of any other law or regulation of the United States (including the existing statutes and regulations prohibiting the reproduction of genuine currency) or of the law or regulation of any State.
Sec. 304.5 Marking requirements for imitation political items.
(a) An imitation political item which is manufactured in the United States, or imported into the United States for introduction into or distribution in commerce, shall be plainly and permanently marked with the calendar year in which such item was manufactured.
(b) The calendar year shall be marked upon the item legibly, conspicuously and nondeceptively, and in accordance with the further requirements of these regulations.
(1) The calendar year shall appear in arabic numerals, shall be based upon the Gregorian calendar and shall consist of four digits.
(2) The calendar year shall be marked on either the obverse or the reverse surface of the item. It shall not be marked on the edge of the item.
(3) An imitation political item of incusable material shall be incused with the calendar year in sans-serif numerals. Each numeral shall have a vertical dimension of not less than two millimeters (2.0 mm) and a minimum depth of three-tenths of one millimeter (0.3 mm) or one-half (1/2) the thickness of the reproduction, whichever is the lesser. The minimum total horizontal dimension for the four numerals composing the calendar year shall be six millimeters (6.0 mm).
(4) An imitation political button, poster, literature, sticker, or advertisement composed of nonincusable material shall be imprinted with the calendar year in sans-serif numerals. Each numeral shall have a vertical dimension of not less than two millimeters (2.0 mm). The minimum total horizontal dimension of the four numerals composing the calendar year shall be six millimeters (6.0 mm).
Sec. 304.6 Marking requirements for imitation numismatic items.
(a) An imitation numismatic item which is manufactured in the United States, or imported into the United States for introduction into or distribution in commerce, shall be plainly and permanently marked “COPY”.(b) The word “COPY” shall be marked upon the item legibly, conspicuously, and nondeceptively, and in accordance with the further requirements of these regulations.
(1) The word “COPY” shall appear in capital letters, in the English language.
(2) The word “COPY” shall be marked on either the obverse or the reverse surface of the item. It shall not be marked on the edge of the item
(3) An imitation numismatic item of incusable material shall be incused with the word “COPY” in sans-serif letters having a vertical dimension of not less than two millimeters (2.0 mm) or not less than one-sixth of the diameter of the reproduction, and a minimum depth of three-tenths of one millimeter (0.3 mm) or to one-half (1/2) the thickness of the reproduction, whichever is the lesser. The minimum total horizontal dimension of the word “COPY” shall be six millimeters (6.0 mm) or not less than one-half of the diameter of the reproduction.
(4) An imitation numismatic item composed of nonincusable material shall be imprinted with the word “COPY” in sans-serif letters having a vertical dimension of not less than two millimeters (2.0 mm) or not less than one-sixth of the diameter of the reproduction. The minimum total horizontal dimension of the word “COPY” shall be six millimeters (6.0 mm) or not less than one-half of the diameter of the reproduction
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
<< <i>Lee,
The Liberty Dollar thing was a different scenario. That guy was passing liberty dollars off as an alternate currency. The Headquarters of that operation was in my home town and I was happy to see it raided and shut down.
John >>
The point of the Liberty Dollar connection was the actual raid where everthing was confiscated even though Liberty Dollars had been bought and sold for a couple of years and the fact that if the SS did get involved, it would more than likely be that way.
The name is LEE!
daniel, i can appreciate what it would take to put something like this together. just being able to acquire/refurbish/setup/operate a denver mint coin press along with all the other design and prep work is amazing.
i`m surprised that nobody suggested that instead of putting "copy" on the coin that you should of put your initials like your other issues.
BTW, my coins have shipped
<< <i>that coin looks great given its a scan. Daniel`s work is always superb.
daniel, i can appreciate what it would take to put something like this together. just being able to acquire/refurbish/setup/operate a denver mint coin press along with all the other design and prep work is amazing.
i`m surprised that nobody suggested that instead of putting "copy" on the coin that you should of put your initials like your other issues.
BTW, my coins have shipped
Like my wife always says: "Stupidity is blossoming!"
<< <i>Will the dies be destroyed after minting is complete? >>
He said they literally would go into a bucket of water to rust like all his other retired dies. MJ
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
<< <i>Guess your skepticism has been proven wrong. >>
Yes it has...
"Keep your malarkey filter in good operating order" -Walter Breen
<< <i>Can we expect that this work will be worth more after the artist passes? >>
I'm sure Daniel will want to remain uncooperative on this point.
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
not if its just gas.......
<rim shot>
Proud recipient of two "You Suck" awards
From a previous post, in reply to EagleEye:
I have used bold to highlight two portions which look as if they are relevant to the discussion/debate at hand. I apologize in advance, if I made in errors in my copying and pasting.
PART 304–RULES AND REGULATIONS UNDER THE HOBBY PROTECTION ACT–Table of Contents
Sec.
304.1 Terms defined.
304.2 General requirement.
304.3 Applicability.
304.4 Application of other law or regulation.
304.5 Marking requirements for imitation political items.
304.6 Marking requirements for imitation numismatic items.
Authority: 15 U.S.C. 2101 et seq.
Source: 40 FR 5496, Feb. 6, 1975, unless otherwise noted.
Sec. 304.1 Terms defined.
(a) Act means the Hobby Protection Act (approved November 29, 1973; Pub. L. 93-167, 87 Stat. 686, (15 U.S.C. 2101 et seq.)).
(b) Commerce has the same meanings as such term has under the Federal Trade Commission Act.
(c) Commission means the Federal Trade Commission.
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.
(e) Imitation political item means an item which purports to be, but in fact is not, an original political item, or which is a reproduction, copy or counterfeit of an original item.
(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.
(g) Original political item means any political button, poster, literature, sticker, or any advertisement produced for use in any political cause.
(h) Person means any individual, group, association, partnership, or any other business entity.
(i) Regulations means any or all regulations prescribed by the Federal Trade Commission pursuant to the Act.
(j) United States means the States, the District of Columbia, and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico.
(k) Diameter of a reproduction means the length of the longest possible straight line connecting two points on the perimeter of the reproduction. [40 FR 5496, Feb. 6, 1975, as amended at 53 FR 38942, Oct. 4, 1988]
Sec. 304.2 General requirement.
Imitation political or numismatic items subject to the Act shall be marked in conformity with the requirements of the Act and the regulations promulgated thereunder. Any violation of these regulations shall constitute a violation of the Act and of the Federal Trade Commission Act.
Sec. 304.3 Applicability.
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.
Sec. 304.4 Application of other law or regulation.
The provisions of these regulations are in addition to, and not in substitution for or limitation of, the provisions of any other law or regulation of the United States (including the existing statutes and regulations prohibiting the reproduction of genuine currency) or of the law or regulation of any State.
Sec. 304.5 Marking requirements for imitation political items.
(a) An imitation political item which is manufactured in the United States, or imported into the United States for introduction into or distribution in commerce, shall be plainly and permanently marked with the calendar year in which such item was manufactured.
(b) The calendar year shall be marked upon the item legibly, conspicuously and nondeceptively, and in accordance with the further requirements of these regulations.
(1) The calendar year shall appear in arabic numerals, shall be based upon the Gregorian calendar and shall consist of four digits.
(2) The calendar year shall be marked on either the obverse or the reverse surface of the item. It shall not be marked on the edge of the item.
(3) An imitation political item of incusable material shall be incused with the calendar year in sans-serif numerals. Each numeral shall have a vertical dimension of not less than two millimeters (2.0 mm) and a minimum depth of three-tenths of one millimeter (0.3 mm) or one-half (1/2) the thickness of the reproduction, whichever is the lesser. The minimum total horizontal dimension for the four numerals composing the calendar year shall be six millimeters (6.0 mm).
(4) An imitation political button, poster, literature, sticker, or advertisement composed of nonincusable material shall be imprinted with the calendar year in sans-serif numerals. Each numeral shall have a vertical dimension of not less than two millimeters (2.0 mm). The minimum total horizontal dimension of the four numerals composing the calendar year shall be six millimeters (6.0 mm).
Sec. 304.6 Marking requirements for imitation numismatic items.
(a) An imitation numismatic item which is manufactured in the United States, or imported into the United States for introduction into or distribution in commerce, shall be plainly and permanently marked “COPY”.(b) The word “COPY” shall be marked upon the item legibly, conspicuously, and nondeceptively, and in accordance with the further requirements of these regulations.
(1) The word “COPY” shall appear in capital letters, in the English language.
(2) The word “COPY” shall be marked on either the obverse or the reverse surface of the item. It shall not be marked on the edge of the item
(3) An imitation numismatic item of incusable material shall be incused with the word “COPY” in sans-serif letters having a vertical dimension of not less than two millimeters (2.0 mm) or not less than one-sixth of the diameter of the reproduction, and a minimum depth of three-tenths of one millimeter (0.3 mm) or to one-half (1/2) the thickness of the reproduction, whichever is the lesser. The minimum total horizontal dimension of the word “COPY” shall be six millimeters (6.0 mm) or not less than one-half of the diameter of the reproduction.
(4) An imitation numismatic item composed of nonincusable material shall be imprinted with the word “COPY” in sans-serif letters having a vertical dimension of not less than two millimeters (2.0 mm) or not less than one-sixth of the diameter of the reproduction. The minimum total horizontal dimension of the word “COPY” shall be six millimeters (6.0 mm) or not less than one-half of the diameter of the reproduction
Nope. MJ
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
<< <i><So, no one wants to talk about whether these items are required to have "Copy" on them, under the Hobby Protection Act?>
Nope. MJ >>
Look, this thread is already long enough - please don't be so verbose next time.
<< <i>So, no one wants to talk about whether these items are required to have "Copy" on them, under the Hobby Protection Act? >>
Mark, what can be said that hasn't? What result would you expect with more debate? I can only expect that demand will continue to rise with additional debate. Is that your goal? If not, I can't imagine why you would continue to post. What can we expect as an outcome of our debates here?
<< <i>
<< <i>So, no one wants to talk about whether these items are required to have "Copy" on them, under the Hobby Protection Act? >>
Mark, what can be said that hasn't? What result would you expect with more debate? I can only expect that demand will continue to rise with additional debate. Is that your goal? If not, I can't imagine why you would continue to post. What can we expect as an outcome of our debates here? >>
I have no stake or care in whether the price rises or not. Thus far, the large majority of the debate has centered upon things other than the Hobby Protection Act, itself. I was hoping that a few posters would actually look at the language and provide some opinions based on that. But I don't always get what I hope for.
<< <i>So, no one wants to talk about whether these items are required to have "Copy" on them, under the Hobby Protection Act? >>
Guess not, probably because it requires one to engage in critical thinking...
Thanks for posting the obvious, at least to rational thinking individuals. These objects are both illegal and worthless except for the silver they contain.
Like I said before, what's to prevent Mr. Carr from overstriking 1912 "V" nickels with 1913 dates?
<< <i>I can only expect that demand will continue to rise with additional debate. Is that your goal? If not, I can't imagine why you would continue to post. What can we expect as an outcome of our debates here? >>
I keep commenting because I love seeing fools and their money part company...
One thing's for sure... the economy ain't all that bad if so many individuals are willing to part with $115 so easily.
<< <i>I was hoping that a few posters would actually look at the language and provide some opinions based on that. But I don't always get what I hope for.
OK, who am I to turn down your request. I read the lines you bolded three times. It's my dumb opinion that it depends of the interpretation of the reader whether Mr. Carr violated this act or not. Quite simply, is the coin not a copy because a 1964 peace dollar does not exist (according to the U.S. Mint) or is the date of no importance and therefore it is a copy.
If it is up to a judge to decide and the judge is not a collector of coins, he/she will not take the date into much consideration. That this will get in front of a judge in the first place, well, that remains to be seen.
<< <i>I encourage everyone to offer Mr. Carr foods high in cholesterol and discourage him from going to the gym. Encourage him to take up new hobbies like sky diving and such. We must all do our part. >>
Almost 600 posts ain't shabby... but looks like this thread has taken a turn for the worse.
<< <i>
<< <i>So, no one wants to talk about whether these items are required to have "Copy" on them, under the Hobby Protection Act? >>
Guess not, probably because it requires one to engage in critical thinking... Thanks for posting the obvious, at least to rational thinking individuals. These objects are both illegal and worthless except for the silver they contain. Like I said before, what's to prevent Mr. Carr from overstriking 1912 "V" nickels with 1913 dates? >>
Dang. I thought you'd crawled back under the bridge.
<< <i>
<< <i>I was hoping that a few posters would actually look at the language and provide some opinions based on that. But I don't always get what I hope for.
OK, who am I to turn down your request. I read the lines you bolded three times. It's my dumb opinion that it depends of the interpretation of the reader whether Mr. Carr violated this act or not. Quite simply, is the coin not a copy because a 1964 peace dollar does not exist (according to the U.S. Mint) or is the date of no importance and therefore it is a copy.
If it is up to a judge to decide and the judge is not a collector of coins, he/she will not take the date into much consideration. That this will get in front of a judge in the first place, well, that remains to be seen. >>
Still, I shan't cancel my order!!
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BONGO HURTLES ALONG THE RAIN SODDEN HIGHWAY OF LIFE ON UNDERINFLATED BALD RETREAD TIRES
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>So, no one wants to talk about whether these items are required to have "Copy" on them, under the Hobby Protection Act? >>
Mark, what can be said that hasn't? What result would you expect with more debate? I can only expect that demand will continue to rise with additional debate. Is that your goal? If not, I can't imagine why you would continue to post. What can we expect as an outcome of our debates here? >>
I have no stake or care in whether the price rises or not. Thus far, the large majority of the debate has centered upon things other than the Hobby Protection Act, itself. I was hoping that a few posters would actually look at the language and provide some opinions based on that. But I don't always get what I hope for.
I have made my opinion quite plain that I believe these pieces should be marked "COPY." My belief is based upon the Hobby Protection Act.
BTW, FWIW, I was reminded today of another case where a genuine U.S. coin was overstruck with false dies to change the date.
The coin in question was what appeared to be a 1977/6 cent, which came into the Coin World office in 1977. With the owner's permission, we sent it to the Mint Lab in Washington, D.C. The head of the lab declared it to be a genuine overdate.
We published the story, and then a few days later the Mint called us back to say that the number two man at the Mint Lab had returned from a business trip, examined the coin and called it an alteration. They now said that it had been overstruck with false dies to add a 7 over the 6.
The man who had sent us the coin was arrested, charged and pled guilty in exchange for a suspended sentence. The Secret Service said that they found material used to make a false die in his residence. The coin was never returned.
TD
<< <i>the person "Zoins " has made 43 posts in this thread >>
I think I may need to post more since my previous posts on the Hobby Protection Act were overlooked
<< <i>So, no one wants to talk about whether these items are required to have "Copy" on them, under the Hobby Protection Act? >>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>So, no one wants to talk about whether these items are required to have "Copy" on them, under the Hobby Protection Act? >>
Mark, what can be said that hasn't? What result would you expect with more debate? I can only expect that demand will continue to rise with additional debate. Is that your goal? If not, I can't imagine why you would continue to post. What can we expect as an outcome of our debates here? >>
I have no stake or care in whether the price rises or not. Thus far, the large majority of the debate has centered upon things other than the Hobby Protection Act, itself. I was hoping that a few posters would actually look at the language and provide some opinions based on that. But I don't always get what I hope for.
I have made my opinion quite plain that I believe these pieces should be marked "COPY." My belief is based upon the Hobby Protection Act.
BTW, FWIW, I was reminded today of another case where a genuine U.S. coin was overstruck with false dies to change the date.
The coin in question was what appeared to be a 1977/6 cent, which came into the Coin World office in 1977. With the owner's permission, we sent it to the Mint Lab in Washington, D.C. The head of the lab declared it to be a genuine overdate.
We published the story, and then a few days later the Mint called us back to say that the number two man at the Mint Lab had returned from a business trip, examined the coin and called it an alteration. They now said that it had been overstruck with false dies to add a 7 over the 6.
The man who had sent us the coin was arrested, charged and pled guilty in exchange for a suspended sentence. The Secret Service said that they found material used to make a false die in his residence. The coin was never returned.
TD >>
And so it should be with these!
<< <i>
<< <i>So, no one wants to talk about whether these items are required to have "Copy" on them, under the Hobby Protection Act? >>
Guess not, probably because it requires one to engage in critical thinking...
Thanks for posting the obvious, at least to rational thinking individuals. These objects are both illegal and worthless except for the silver they contain.
Like I said before, what's to prevent Mr. Carr from overstriking 1912 "V" nickels with 1913 dates? >>
My belief is that the Hobby Protection Act would require COPY on an altered date 1913 "V" nickel but not on a 1964-D Peace dollar.
This is because I believe a 1913 "V" nickel qualifies as an "original numismatic item" while there are no 1964-D Peace dollars to represent an "original numismatic item." Because there is not a single 1964-D Peace dollar to qualify as an "original numismatic item," I'm unclear whether the Hobby Protection Act is relevant here. It may very well not be.
I do not feel the hobby needs to be protected with respect to Daniel's 1964-D Peace dollar because our best available information is that there are no real ones to be protected. In the unlikely event that a real one does appear, Daniel's coins have positive diagnostics and are well documented. However, I do not feel we should base our decisions on suppositions and what ifs. We can just make decisions on our best available information today, which is that there are no Mint issued 1964-D Peace dollars.
<< <i>
<< <i>the person "Zoins " has made 43 posts in this thread >>
I think I may need to post more since my previous posts on the Hobby Protection Act were overlooked
<< <i>So, no one wants to talk about whether these items are required to have "Copy" on them, under the Hobby Protection Act? >>
>>
How many am I short?
They aren't 100% faithful copies of the real thing. They're purposefully different.
plus I'm hoping to turn it into a holographic, colorized version with a sticker!
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>the person "Zoins " has made 43 posts in this thread >>
I think I may need to post more since my previous posts on the Hobby Protection Act were overlooked
<< <i>So, no one wants to talk about whether these items are required to have "Copy" on them, under the Hobby Protection Act? >>
>>
How many am I short?
They aren't 100% faithful copies of the real thing. They're purposefully different.
plus I'm hoping to turn it into a holographic, colorized version with a sticker! >>
Good point! Can't be an intentional copy or counterfeit, if we don't have an "original" to counterfeit, ya know!
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BONGO HURTLES ALONG THE RAIN SODDEN HIGHWAY OF LIFE ON UNDERINFLATED BALD RETREAD TIRES
Does this seem like a double standard?
Double Secret Probation
<< <i>Two words:
Double Secret Probation >>
Aren't you glad you started this thread?