olympicsos

Nielsen sends people cash in the mail as a thank you for participating regularly. 

On 5/8/2024 at 4:57 PM, VKurtB said:

Hardly a surprising outcome. This is frankly the way this hobby rolls. Too many people assume everyone wants to help others and share information when nothing could be further from the truth. 

Some series more than others. I find that 20th century gold collectors tend to be out here and share stuff, same with Barber collectors, on the other hand Bust Half collectors seem to be more insular. 

When did this practice of the mint selling bars stop? When the NYC assay office closed? It would have been nice to still have an assay office in NYC! 

On 4/22/2024 at 9:57 PM, GoldFinger1969 said:

I love the Eagle-in-Flight pose better.  It's very majestic. 

As I recall (I'm sure it's in Roger's RoAC books)...Teddy Roosevelt said that the eagle on the Liberty Head DE looked like a grilled squab. 

I think any of the renaissance eagle portrayals are more majestic than what preceded them. But even James Longacre did not do a bad job. If anything, the worst designs in classic coinage must be the classic head gold and copper coins. 

On 3/10/2024 at 6:57 PM, RWB said:

Quite likely responses. 

If someone had read the 1905-1908 book, they would have a shot at identifying it. Corroboration would have to come from the US Mint since there are no photos known.

I’ve also heard in some places that there were patterns that had the striding Liberty obverse but the standing eagle reverse. 
 

On a side note regarding the coinage renaissance, would you consider coins which series started after 1921 including various classic commemoratives such as  the Oregon Trail, Texas or Connecticut half dollars also designed by outside artists to be part of the coinage renaissance? Or the Washington quarter which was designed by John Flanagan who was one of Saint Gaudens assistants as an extension of the coinage renaissance? This is of course a broad definition, but there was a whole tradition of outside artists started that the renaissance books don’t necessarily cover and outside artists that did work that isn’t covered. 

The definition of moderns will likely change over time. Before 1934 was the dividing line, then it became 1964. I bet when new compositions for circulating coins are issued, that will be yet another dividing line.

On 3/19/2024 at 1:16 AM, GoldFinger1969 said:

Their output is miniscule compared to those countries (and South Africa).

 

Here's an article showing that Turkish mint production outpaces the US Mint 

https://thegoldobserver.substack.com/p/turkish-mint-outpaces-u-s-mint

Also certain gold dealers can deliver bars to the Turkish mint and request gold coins in specific sizes much like how the US operated a long time ago. 

On 3/18/2024 at 7:25 PM, Henri Charriere said:

The Turkish Mint?  In Ankara? Who knew?  How come GoldFinger1969 did not include that fact in his fancy colored graphs? I have millions in old Turkish lira (currency) which dissolved/deteriorated/disintegrated/depreciated into nothingness via devaluation -- and now this? Gold bullion? You know, if it weren't for bad luck I wouldn't have any luck at all. Oh, I forgot. It's Turkiye now. Sheesh!

The Turkish mint is in Istanbul.

The Turkish mint is the world's largest producer of gold bullion coins (even outpacing the US and Canadian mints) and for the sentimental value that gold has in Turkish culture (much more than American culture as gold coins are given as wedding gifts, births etc.) the handling of the coins at the mint is horrible. Many of them would end up in a details holder or body bag even. I've never seen a Turkish gold coin grade higher than MS63 or MS64. West Point does a pretty good job! 

Go to 4:03 

On 3/14/2024 at 6:33 PM, Henri Charriere said:

 

Whatever the composition of sets for each of the respective denominations to 1964 is what I propose. Why would that be preposterous, as some likely think, when that's the way it was always done?  If you are charging collectors an arm and a leg, why not give them what they want?  I don't have any objection to the silver sets.  I imagine they would cost more, but why bother minting proof coins that aren't "real" to begin with?

We had 90% silver but the mint preferred .999 silver because of quality and cost efficiency reasons. To be honest if we are going to deviate from the historical circulating composition and decide to basically do bullion rounds with an uneven amount of silver, might as well discontinue the silver proof set. My suggestion would be to make the Morgan and Peace Dollars 1 ounce silver coins, any silver half 1/2 ounce, any silver quarter 1/4 ounce and so on so forth. No need for a 1 oz silver eagle + .858 oz silver dollar that's .999 fine. Make them all even ounces. 

It's not like customers are happy campers 

https://www.businessinsider.com/costco-silver-coins-scratched-damaged-bullion-royal-canadian-mint-reviews-2024-3

On 2/9/2024 at 9:54 AM, Henri Charriere said:

This should have been a no-brainer.  But I don't feel a cent should be spent lobbying Congress. You would need a broad constituency backing you.  Right now Congress can't even agree on what to have for lunch.  I wouldn't waste my time on high ticket items.  The future of the hobby depends on the young and they don't have the money.  If anything, I would have re-introduced classic coins for the common people... Flying Eagle or Indian Head cents, etc.  But that high-falutin bliu-ribbon committee they appointed to study the issue, didn't see it that way. One more thing which definitely won't go over well on this Forum is something other countries routinely do on anniversaries:  right-sizing the prison populations by freeing select categories of people by declaring a general amnesty. In the absence of parole and an antiquated Executive clemency system, it's well past time to get rid of the dead wood. Maybe give each deserving releasee a classic coin for good luck. Anybody want to hear my views on the border?  I didn't think so.  To re-cap: forget the pricey stuff.  Introduce the young boy and girl to the classic coin designs we all enjoyed in our youth. 

Most coin legislation that passes congress these days passes congress on unanimous consent. Yes congress frequently disagrees on big stuff that gets them attention, but stuff like coinage is on the bottom of their priority lists. All it takes is a couple people with money to fundamentally reshape coinage, especially coinage that doesn't circulate. 

On 2/8/2024 at 11:44 PM, GoldFinger1969 said:

Silver or gold ?  Silver is more affordable; the 2009 UHR Saint-Gaudens didn't sell out as I recall.  Much steeper price for a 1-ounce gold coin means y ou can't have one every year.

Both. The 2009 UHR was minted to demand, there was no mintage limit. You can also have congress push through a program which would allow for a modern day large cent program. Large cents capture collector imagination just like silver dollars do and we have modern silver dollars. 

I was reading this article by our very own @RWBand I can't help but think when looking at the Classic Head gold that Christian Gobrecht never designed a coin completely on his own. The Coronet Head looks like a fixed up version of the Classic Head. Even the reverse of all Gobrecht coins looked like he just modified existing designs. 

https://coinweek.com/practical-coin-grading-concepts-average-collector/

On 1/22/2024 at 7:14 PM, gmarguli said:

Not a single coin, but a complete set of classic silver commems in gem. I've started and stopped the set many times over many years. 

The biggest stopping block for me has been the fact that they have performed so unbelievably poorly over the years. I can't bring myself to park $150K into a set of coins that very well will sell for the same in 10-20 years.

With the way things are going with modern remakes, if I had $150K, I might as well spend it on lobbyists to introduce legislation to have the US Mint reissue modern versions of the most beautiful designs. 

On 1/18/2024 at 12:38 PM, RWB said:

I am not aware of any sculptors or medallic artists who favored mirror-like polish on medals or coins. All felt it was cheap and suitable only for tawdry tokens and baubles. From a manufacturing position, it was difficult to give a uniform polish to irregularly curved surfaces, as were normal on medals. Engravers at the Philadelphia Mint were fully aware of this, but also did what they were told and followed tradition. Coin collectors favored polished fields on master and proof coins; this gave the pieces a distinctive appearance that was not available with satin, matte or sandblast surfaces.

Thanks for the insight! I would assume that this objection might also apply to the modern era sculptors or engravers like Gasparro, Jones, Mercanti, Menna etc. Sandblast surfaces are really an acquired taste, but once I realized that a non polished surface would be the artists original intent, it's really hard to look at mirror proof coins the same. Especially considering there are coin salespeople who hype proof coins as coins that are intended to match the artists original intent. 

On 12/8/2022 at 7:09 PM, RWB said:

The artists objected to shiny, polished baubles. The approved other types of medallic finishes and treatments, including sandblasting and antiquing (as seen on some 1921 Peace dollars).

I wonder if any other artists of coins other than the Renaissance artists objected to polished surfaces? Or whether any mint engravers objected to polished surfaces? Which designers preferred polished surfaces? Reading about the Renaissance artists objection made me wonder. 

On 12/7/2023 at 6:13 PM, Henri Charriere said:

Interesting idea.  Doubtful it would ever happen, but if it were entertained I would hope they would consider calling it a HALF-DISME. I see there is one available for sale on eBay for a half-million dollars + shipping... $1000.  🤣   Yeah, right.

Think about it, a half dime with the clad composition would be smaller than a dime and the dime costs less than five cents to make. 

On 12/5/2023 at 11:09 PM, VKurtB said:

Scrap Jefferson. Put Ronald Reagan on a coin.

More than any president I think the nickel should be replaced with a half dime for circulation. That would really cut down on production costs and make five cent pieces profitable for the government. 

On 11/28/2023 at 11:33 AM, RWB said:

The primary international gold coin was the sovereign and other pieces of the same size and gold content. US coins were never major international bullion pieces. Eagles were in greater demand than Double Eagles as were Half Eagles until the awful "Indian Head" version. All U.S. military and diplomatic actions during and after WW-2 used sovereigns, Napoleons, and occasionally Canadian, Italian lira, Swiss francs, etc. In negotiations with French and Libyans in North Africa, U.S. gold coins were rejected for their unfamiliarity to locals.

The three pages below, from the book Saudi Gold and other tales from the Mint describes the situation more fully. (Start midway on page 164 and read through page 166.)

But what about all those double eagles that were exported? What about the double eagle being seen as an international trade coin? Other than backing for gold certificates, if it wasn't the big international trade coin, there might be no point to that coin. 

The best time artistically for US coinage was also the time where the US mint slipped in quality. I have a gut feeling that the departure of Charles Barber was when mint operations became worse. 

I think Charles Barber did a better job than most of the artists we have today. 

I think this is a wonderful idea. However I think some of the coins on the list leave much to be desired (such as the Kennedy Half). While other coins are great additions that I feel no one talks about as great coins (1986 and 1987 gold $5 commems). While other coins should've made the cut but didn't such as the Type 2 SLQ instead of the Type 1 or the Barber coins which I feel are underrated. 

On 8/3/2023 at 12:42 PM, RWB said:

Three cent CuNi coins proved to be more popular than 3-cent silver, and the public used them as replacements, not temporary substitutes. A 5-cent CuNi received the same reception. This led to elimination of half dimes and 3-cent silver in the Act of 1873.

Although with the nickel costing 10 cents to produce and the dime costing 4 cents to produce, an argument can be made to reinstate the half dime as a copper nickel clad coin today as it would reduce the loss in making nickels and actually generate seigniorage.