mlovmo

I suggest that you do searches using Russian Cyrillic alphabet to find the Russian-language sources in this field of numismatics.  The best sources of any coins are (usually) to be found in that country's source language.  You'll have to translate the books, unfortunately, if you aren't literate in Russian.  Some facility, but not necessarily complete fluency, in the Russian language will be helpful, too.   I am a researcher of Korean coins, and without some Korean, in addition to knowing how to use online translation machines, I wouldn't have gotten far with my research (and yes, you DO have to learn HOW to use them if you are going to use them!).   First, break up all paragraphs into sentences, then sentences into phrases.  That seems to work better with translations.  The problem is knowing the language enough to know where the phrase breaks are in the first place.  Also, make friends with native speakers of Russian who are also collectors.  Find a native speaker near you who can help you also confirm your translations.  The arcane language of numismatics or the coining industry are another barrier in the First Language.  Many native speakers don't know the terminology.

I suggested First Language searching to a collector of Croatian coins at another forum, and a whole WORLD of information suddenly appeared where there was previously NOTHING.  The "Krause Catalog" is SOOOOO lacking in information, if it doesn't contain outright errors that are decades old.

I did.  ANA 2022.

On 3/26/2024 at 7:45 PM, RWB said:

But ----- There will be a tractor pull and a beauty contest among dealers....

I'll stay for the tractor pull but that "beauty contest" is gonna be brutal...

Just wondering if NGC will be taking submissions at the May 2024 Central States Show.

If this inquiry is in the wrong place, I apologize...

I don't know about 7, but I have one that seems to have produced various shades of opinion in the past:

What is "wear" on a coin? 

Really, it seems to boil down to: When does "wear" begin for a coin:  Immediately after it freed from between the coining dies?  After the struck coin slides off the chute and into a hopper or bag?  After it is released by the Mint's Coiner (since it's not "officially a coin" until then)?  Or after it is freed from a mint roll or mint bag?  Perhaps it's only after it leaves its source financial institution (a bank) and gets used as money for the first time?

Related issue:  Is "cabinet friction" or "roll friction" a more allowable form of wear that is essentially tantamount to being given a higher coin grade than if it hasn't been blessed with such names?

On 2/26/2024 at 8:33 AM, zadok said:

...dont get locked in on comparing SP to Proof, the subject is much broader than just that simple definition which only encompasses a narrow slice of coin production processes n intent...its not like a one size fits all definition....

Okay, I have no doubt that what you say is true.   Actually, I had no idea how the coins from this 2000 Bank of Korea set would come back from NGC.  Somebody told me to put "SP" on the form, so I did and the coin came back in the holder as you see above.   I just got my definition of "SP" from here (https://www.ngccoin.com/news/article/7708/learn-grading-sp-and-pl-prefixes/)

I don't have a dog in this fight...

On 2/25/2024 at 7:54 PM, Henri Charriere said:

There has been a brouhaha brewing on the Forum now for some time as regarding the designation: SP.  At issue were U.S. coins, exclusively.  The intent of my interception was to head things off at the pass and alert the membership that with your coin we were now in uncharted waters where the usual descriptors to not apply.  I am frankly delighted to hear South Korea has chosen NGC to grade their coins for owners, collectors, prospective buyers, sellers, dealers and auction houses.

The term SP has a specific narrow definition in France, Germany and Spain that deviates significantly from the Sheldon scale adopted by the United States.

I thank you for the courtesy of your reply and encourage you in your pursuit of coins in your area of interest.  

Well, I think this summarizes the designation SP, which appears to me to be a description of the SURFACES of a coin: 
Specimen (SP): A coin that falls short of the definition for an actual Proof yet is clearly superior to the normal currency issues. SP applies to a variety of finishes that are distinct from the appearance of circulation issues but do not fit any of the Proof categories.

If it's a World Coin, so be it...  Just my two cents.  

On 2/24/2024 at 5:46 PM, Henri Charriere said:

To my knowledge, and some accelerated finger-scrolling, the coin posted above is the first of foreign origin.

Generally speaking, unless you have an intimate familiarity with overseas coins and the grading scales they use, this coin, having been certified by experienced NGC graders as an SP-68, must be deemed above reproach, unless specific information suggests otherwise. SP is a fine example of a coin which denotes varying standards in different countries.

Well... First, "the grading scales they (S. Korea) use..."  The issue is that the Koreans do NOT have grading scales for their coins. If they ever did, I have not heard about it, and in my interactions with the Korean collector/investor community, I have never heard of such a thing.   They simply use a "sort of" version of U.S. (ANA?) grading standards when grading raw coins and rely HEAVILY on the grading services provided by NGC for high-value coins.  The third-party grading companies have loomed large in the South Korean numismatic market at a level not often seen in countries outside of North America.   The big auction house in Korea, Hwadong, is an NGC submission center.  Other grading services are accepted by dealers/collectors in Korea, but NGC has cornered the market there for sure. 

I believe this coin is an SP grade since it was made for a "special" coin set for the Bank of Korea's 50th Anniversary.  The surfaces appear "matte proof."  Later, similar "special" Bank of Korea coin sets issued from 2001 to 2004 were given PF grades when submitted to NGC.

Looking for the following South Korean Denominations in these dates, in UNC:

100 Hwan
50 Hwan 4292
10 Hwan 4292

1 Won 1966

5 Won 1966
5 Won 1967
5 won 1970 BRONZE
5 Won 1970 BRASS

10 Won 1966
10 Won 1967
10 Won 1968
10 Won 1969
10 Won 1970 BRONZE
10 Won 1970 BRASS
10 Won 1973
10 Won 1975

50 Won 1972

100 Won 1970
100 Won 1971
100 Won 1972
100 Won 1974
100 Won 1981
100 Won 1998

500 Won 1982
500 Won 1987

On 12/27/2023 at 3:20 PM, GoldFinger1969 said:

I suspected as much...

Yes, it is an advertising platform when sellers do this, IMO.

WHY is that though?  Tell me of any other ONE place ANYWHERE where coin buyers around the world go to look at coins.  Heritage?  Maybe.  Those European auction venues/auction houses?  Maybe.

But you simply will not get as many EYES ON YOUR COIN than you will on eBay.  Keep your listing open to "Worldwide" and you'll get the world's eyes on your coin!

EBay is easily the BEST advertising platform for those with online stores that have the same name as the seller's eBay handle.  Are there risks?  Sure. But if you operate an online store, YOU control how the buyer pays and the return policy.  There's no eBay worker telling you to give a 60% refund when your buyer initiates a refund and sends back to you something (lower-grade piece of junk) that isn't what you sold him (as had happened to me once)!

This also happens with "higher value, LEGIT coins," too. 

For example, a seller will list at eBay a coin that normally sells for, say, $2,500~$3,000 in the North American market/eBay for $7,000 BIN.

The seller does NOT expect anyone to buy it via eBay, of course.  EBay in this sense is only an ADVERTISING PLATFORM for this coin.

How?  Well, many dealers' eBay handles are exactly the same as the name of their coin business or online name they use elsewhere.

If buyers see this coin, they simply do a google search of that name and find the online store or email, or Facebook or IG page and THAT is where the real negotiations take place.

The seller and buyer agree to a price closer to that $2,500~$3,000 and terms (money now or coin first, or 50% now and 50% when coin arrives) and negotiate it all via PM or email.

The seller then pulls the listing and sells the coin according to the agreed terms.

The beauty of this method is that some **insufficiently_thoughtful_person** may just come along first and pay the $7,000 for the BIN price(!)

On 11/19/2023 at 9:42 PM, VKurtB said:

Yeah but aren’t they vinyl? I won’t do vinyl. 

Not sure.  I held one of them in my hands once.  The pages appeared to be a paper-type material, similar to those Korean coin folders in the OP.   Perhaps contact Wizard Coin Supply.  They should be able to tell you the material, if they're interested in making a sale.

On 11/14/2023 at 6:05 PM, VKurtB said:

I'd really like to see these for more countries.

Yep.  I know that some middle east countries have some folder products:
https://www.wizardcoinsupply.com/iraq-kingdom-coin-album-1931-1955?atrkid=V3ADW4095EC2F_____x_c_pla__&gclid=CjwKCAiAgeeqBhBAEiwAoDDhnw_BatFcnVRpmkCvh-JcJAX5x6enKZ8Uaqv7iFNLYzip1oJzPSjRuBoCKlYQAvD_BwE

On 11/13/2023 at 4:53 PM, RWB said:

Nice presentation and good flow. Thanks for the link.

Thanks for the feedback!   It's hard to know what people think of video content on YouTube nowadays, since GONE are the days where nobodies like me could get 8,000+ views on an arcane coin-related video over a year's time and lots of comments from those viewers.   YouTube likes to pick its winners and losers nowadays and no longer leave a video's chances of being seen up to chance through a random algorithm.  

I reviewed some Whitman-style folders made by a Korean coin retailer for Korean coins:

https://youtu.be/9BetTA-d4bs?si=ZsYJTyzunvsExUNS

On 9/5/2023 at 8:59 AM, zadok said:

...not suggesting there r mistakes or errors in ur bullet points, just that im not sure the procedures r so cut n dried...im suggesting that procedures most likely varied from the pre ww-1 production n post ww-2 production of coins for foreign gov'ts...u mite also want to consider that in some instances the dies used were the property of the foreign country n subsequently used by that country's mint e.g. mexico 1905-7 issues...one other consideration, although minor, US struck coins at our various mints r indistinguishable unless designated by our mint marks, some r some r not...i am impressed with the degree of ur research in ur subject area....

These Philadelphia-made Korean dies were only used by the US Mint and the coins only struck in Philly.  The dies were boxed and sealed by Bank of Korea employees who visited Philly from their office on Wall St in NYC.  They were indeed the property of the Bank of Korea, as you mentioned. The masters were all sent to Korea after the end of the coining contract and were never used again to make coins.  I was stoked when I found photos of some of these masters in a Bank of Korea pamphlet printed for the Bank's 20th anniversary in 1970.  I found that in the ANA Library.   I know I'm "nerding out" about it, but it is very hard to find photographic or other kinds of image evidence related to ANYTHING from South Korea's coin production from that far back in time.  Photos and other evidence DOES exist, but the Bank of Korea has placed an absolute embargo on releasing it to anyone.

Oh, and thanks for your kind words!  You can see what I've been up to here:

https://dokdo-research.com/SouthKoreanCoinBook.html

https://dokdo-research.com/Price Guide.html

On 9/4/2023 at 8:30 PM, RWB said:

A lot depended on the context of the work and prior discussions -- things that might have taken place a year or more before, or were part of a treaty, etc. But, yep, things were sometimes very fluid-- at least until money was required.

The Saudi gold discs was an example of State going around Treasury's objections - a little unusual. (Look in my book "Saudi Gold.")

Yes.  Hints of "things being in place beforehand" appear in the records, from what I can gather.  The first Koreans to visit the Mint were on an International Cooperation Administration (precursor organization to USAID) sponsored trip, and Korea had been the recipient of over $1.3 billion in U.S. aid in the late 1950s.

On 9/4/2023 at 2:41 PM, RWB said:

That's a good summary, just in reverse order. Everything starts with diplomatic contact, then to Treasury, etc.

One pervasive question was usually the source of metal. This was especially important during WW-II when much foreign coinage was struck using Lend-Lease metal contracts.

Thanks, RWB!  

You got me to go back and look again... I noticed that the State Department's formal approval letter was NOT received at the beginning the process in the case of the Korean contract. 

It was received right after the the Mint completed sketches and showed them to the Bank of Korea representative on June 24, 1959 for two of the three Korean coins.  Later, the Bank of Korea representative approved finished plasters for the remaining 100-Hwan coin before the State Department even sent its formal "approval letter" for that coin(!).  These things all happened within days of each other, but there was not exactly State Dept approval first, then work commencing next.  It seems that PRIOR State Dept approval before ANY work is done was more of a suggestion than a rule... as long as it was a forgone conclusion that the approval was coming, I guess.

Or is it the case that the Mint could do ARTWORK, up to and including reductions, without State Dept. approval?  They aren't making COINS yet, just artwork.

After some review of Mint documents that I have, I believe that the U.S. Mint’s approval process for the production of foreign coins, as it existed in the past, is as follows.  I'm not sure that all of this is correct, but I have found examples in the documents I have on Korea's 1950s contract with the U.S. Mint where each of these points was discussed.

 1)     If needing coin designs, the foreign government can request the U.S. Mint to sketch designs based on the government’s provided parameters, themes or images.  Payment must be made before artwork can be started.  Countries can pay for the sketches alone or may pay for any or all of the following steps including engravings, reductions, and the hubbing of master and coining dies.  Any final sketches that the U.S. Mint produces must have approval of the foreign government before continuing with the subsequent steps.  

2)     The U.S. Mint will request approval from the foreign government upon completion of the sculptures and again upon completion of the master dies.  The foreign government can review sample lead strikes made from the dies to approve them.

3)     If a foreign government wishes the U.S. Mint to produce coins in any of the steps involving melting, rolling, blanking, upsetting and stamping coins, the foreign government must formally appeal through diplomatic channels directly to the U.S. State Department for approval.  Receipt of State Department approval will allow the Mint to place the foreign coin order on the U.S. Mint’s production schedule as long as it does not interfere with coinage production required for the United States.

4)   To be placed on the U.S. Mint’s production schedule, the foreign government must first pay the Mint for the total cost of the coinage project, including actual overhead costs (labor, materials, use of machinery), any costs incurred in the purchase of the coining metals, plus profit for the Mint.

If anyone here thinks that there are mistakes with my understanding of the  process, please let me know!

On 8/20/2023 at 5:35 PM, Henri Charriere said:

Talk about contributing to the "body of knowledge," this letter, some 65 years old, is a fascinating find.

I believe it safe to say, anyone inclined to read it in its entirety will be amply rewarded learning something he never knew -- or gave much thought to -- before.

Thanks for sharing this bit of vintage, Mint-related correspondence with the membership.

Yes, it seems that Mr. Leland Howard here had "been around the block" a few times hearing the problems that other central banks/mint had with their coin problems (like coins becoming more valuable as recyclable metal than as currency).   The Koreans themselves would soon face this problem in the late 1960s.  They got on top of it, though.

I especially like his "truck vs. Cadillac" analogy when it comes to nations choosing the metal (base or precious) for their coins.  That was nice.  His advice was that silver was not a good coining metal because it was akin to a "Cadillac."   Of course, it's easy to detect the irony in this, since Mr. Howard was an official of a mint that was merrily striking millions of 90% silver coins as he gave out this sage advice(!)

The ancient Chinese understood this concept all too well.  They never made their round coins with the square holes in the middles out of precious metals.  Only base metals (well, up until they began trading with Westerners, that is).  The Chinese understood coins to be "money objects" whose real value was in the wealth that they created through their velocity in transaction.   Coins, as medium of exchange, created wealth.  Coins were not seen as a store of value.  If they made their coins out of precious metals, hoarding would have immobilized their money objects in circulation.  And then there would be NO CURRENCY! The ancient Chinese understood gold and silver as commodities susceptible to hoarding, so they didn't use them to make coins (since money was to "move," not hide under a mattress).  The role of "store of wealth" was left to gold, jade, bronze vessels, paintings and land.

I've been to coin shows where guys wave a silver coin in my face and say, "this here is REAL money!"   Well... I think it's only is money because humans assign value to it (much like a banknote).  You can't eat silver for food, you can't drink it as water, and you can't dig a furrow in it and grow plants or build shelter with it.  Just my opinion...

On 8/20/2023 at 11:22 AM, RWB said:

Thanks for a very interesting letter. Where was it located at NARA?

It was where YOU told me it was located, RWB!  Ha...

NARA-CP, RG104, Entry 328-F, Box 10, Korea Mint- Establishment of New Coinage System and Coinage

Letter dated February 21, 1958 to Lee Chan-sup, Assist. Representative of the Bank of Korea, New York from Leland Howard Assistant Director of the Mint