Zebo

You are correct - 1889, 1892, 1893. The 1879 & 1890 are also quite expensive, but are fairly easy to obtain.

I like competition and enjoy competing. But if I'm presenting something to a club for education or enjoyment purposes - I would not liked to be judged. If I'm preparing something for a show or competition - then judging would be appropriate and would assist in improving the exhibit.

Good idea - I'd like to read it.

Not sure I'd like that - being judged unless I was preparing to exhibit at a major show. Where are (CCC) they holding their meetings these days - (too lazy to check).

Who wants to go see money after losing all of your money at the gaming tables? just joking

$300-$1,000 for the very common GSA Morgan's, but what about the 1879 and 1890 CC GSAs? Both carry a hefty price tag with the 1879 CC moving into five figures for a decent one.

Even tough I've never been to the museum and maybe never have the chance, I'd hate to see its demise. If absolutely needed, maybe scaling down a bit only.

Please PM me the web-site. I'm wondering if this is the same firm that was unrealistic on the 1965. Also - do you know what reverse the 1986 has and was it proof or BU? Thanks

Even with the differs cert number issue -- if you can negotiate the price - it's a beautiful coin with a low mintage.

I think this should raise a flag or two. Proofs are struck four times, just not sure when that started. Sometimes Pobjoy gives flippant information, sometimes contradictory and once in a blue moon - some good. They often confuse full and half sovereigns. Most of the time the information is the same for both, but on occasion - it's not and if they confuse it or give an off the cuff response - it can really mess up your records. I'd love to g through their holding(records), but have been denied that opportunity. I'll try again one day.

I saw this offering quite a while ago. It is a bit confusing. There was supposedly a four coin set below with a mintage of 10 or less. This would be separate from the individual offerings I believe. The questions I'd have on the offering are: 1) where are the other three coins from the set and why were they separated? 2) why do you included the approved maximum mintage for the BU2 (COA)? I cannot remember if the number of strikes in 1984 for proofs was two or four as it is today. I have that information someplace, but cannot put my fingers on it at the moment. 3) where is the letter stating that it was part of the four piece set? Without the letter - I do not believe that you can distinguish between the sets and the individual offerings. I'd have to examine both in hand. From Pobjoy: Thank you for the message, with the information that we have available the design with the 4 Crown shield in Proof has a mintage of 20. Mike - your suspicion regarding poor sales numbers is logical because of the recession. The early 1980s recession was a severe global economic recessionthat affected much of the developed world in the late 1970s and early 1980s. The United States and Japan exited the recession relatively early, but high unemployment would continue to affect other OECD nations until at least 1985

I don't know -- I think NGC does it right. you pay for the photograph and it should be yours exclusively unless you want to share it. It shouldn't appear on the site for anyone to lift for free. I do do see your point, however.

I really do not think you can pull up those images - I do not know is for certain, however. When I search on mine - all I see are the stock photos. The photo vision photos are probably stored in another database or server since they are so large.

The ANA just held a elearning seminar (2 hour vs 30 hour class). It goes over some of the issues being discussed in this thread and has some good recommendations. It should be posted on their web-site in a week or so.

Copied from another thread (edited slightly for readability, not content - I cannot confirm or dispute the OP's findings: As of the end of 2018. The ANA endowment appears to consist mainly of their collection and stocks/bonds/other investments. They value the collection at $37,865,973. The other investments are $22,811,800. Total Revenue is $5,058,000. The main parts are Revenue from Conventions is $1,800,000, Annual Seminars $315,000, Membership $954,000, Contribution $590,000 Total Expenses are $5,800,000

You can definitely hear the difference in between gold and tungsten when struck (or dropped).

Many (many) conversations with Mint personnel along with some information in the reference bookmark and from the author.

Mike is right - this explains it further: Pobjoy uses the term BU to specify the range of bullion products which are only struck once and have a matt finish. The proof coins are struck four times to produce a brilliant mirror finish quality with frosted relief.

Can't say for sure.

I understand all that, but I'm wondering if anyone has seen a Tungsten counterfeit. I believe they are out there, but have never ran across one or heard anyone discussing it. I'd love to play around with a nice example of one. As for the ringer - I might just pick one up to complete the set.

This brings up an interesting question. How prevalent is using Tungsten as a substitute for gold (has a similar density and weight) in counterfeiting? It is much harder to use (much higher melt point) but it could be done. I have not heard of any counterfeits using Tungsten, but I also haven't been looking for any information on it. The ringer is a substitute for the old drop and listen coin test. It's a neat idea, however. I've had a couple of counterfeits that were extremely well made. They used the same or slightly higher gold content on a very rare date. Both fooled two seasoned dealers. I was fooled by The first one, but was pretty convinced that the second was a counterfeit (98% sure) but wanted it anyhow to use as an excellent example. Others that I have seen had added or removed mint marks, alters dates or the like - not to mention the obvious ones using base metals as a substitute. Has anyone seen a Tungsten counterfeit?

Bumping this thread - interested to see if this is genuine or not (I think not, but one of our members will know better).

Looking forward to attending and meeting some of the people I've only dealt with on-line or telephone. The seminars would be a must.

Hello Pawel from Poland. Welcome to the forum, please post the other side of the coin. Where in Poland are you located? You should have an answer to your question soon.

Rats - I was hoping that it was a JR-7. what book did you pick up. I'm considering the one below: