Henri Charriere

I wish I knew. The now primitive one I have that I got from a box of Crackerjacks in the late 1950's simply is not up to the job.

The problem, as I see it, more so on selling platforms where it appears anything goes, is the willy-nilly use of well-defined numismatic terms used carelessly, at will. What is Uncirculated? When, exactly, does a Proof coin cease being one? How has "wear" become so fragmented as to include "cabinet friction" as well as a routine, generational hand-off from steward to steward? What qualifies as an "heirloom' piece. Why are graders with varying degrees of "apprenticeship," not formally licensed as professionals? If they were, perhaps all the crack-out artists would stop seeking "second opinions." Is it ethically correct to accept a counterfeit coin that had been sold and accepted as a return to be passed on to another collector? How can it be acceptable for a coin that failed to cross-grade be returned to stock, or to a web site? If a buyer who unknowingly acquires a 1964 SMS, wishes to return the item, for cause, why is his only option appealing to the fox guarding the hen house?

Absolute poppycock! I am no better than anyone else here. Would my correction have been more properly made via PM? YES. And for that, I apologize.

You are a good sport and well-liked on the Forum. Everyone makes mistakes and, truth be told, I make my fair share of them. Hence, the tongue-in-cheek reason I give for editing; "Routine die polishing."

I reported the seller of fine, quality SMS sets, but as one who was not a buyer and, hence, suffered no harm, what can I reasonably expect to happen? Not being a complainant, my role is relegated to raising the hue and cry, and little else. Recently, in following an unrelated thread to its conclusion, I discovered two excellent responses were volunteered, which did not elicit a comment from the OP because he evidently did not see them having departed the premises a few month's earlier. I personally had no stake in the matter, but was curious as to its resolution, whether favorable or unfavorable. I found his writing to be lucid and exemplary in every aspect and was curious, above all, about the fact the dealer was "reputable" and the buyer knew him having enjoyed a prior relationship with him. Upshot: the seller accepted the return of the presumed counterfeit months after the transaction had been concluded. I was gratified, and the OP responded to the two helpful members who endeavors to help him. In the instant matter, suppose everything the buyer said was not only true but the seller accepted the return of the questioned goods. The question now becomes what does he do with it? He's effectively out $600 +. Human nature being what it is I would expect that if one were to fail, he would try, try again. So the buyer's dillema is solved, any problem which had been apparent becomes moot. But is the problem first brought to our attention by @The Penny Lady solved? I believe this to be the crux of the problem. I see the same problem with counterfeits. No one is inclined to do the right thing; seller or buyer, and they make their problem, everyone else's. When my interests in coins was wide and I did not specialize in a specific type or key coin, I was vulnerable to the itinerant peddling patent medicines on the street. Now that I had confined my interest to a single comparatively small series, my exposure to collectible hazards is greatly reduced. But being a fellow hobbyist, I am still receptive to the tricks of the trade hoisted upon my colleagues -- and that includes the 1847 Crown apparently lost to the mails whilst in transit months ago. I believe enough has been written about the entire SMS mess as to warrant all collectors steer clear of them. I look forward to reading what @FlyingAl has uncovered in the course of his research.

The Honorable Danny Downer, presiding. The People: An allegation of a dead die, er, broken die, sorry, a die break... The Court; What do I think? What am I supposed to think? 🐓 : The coin is 80 years old, your Honor! The Court; Tell me about it... Whose claiming jurisdiction here? Who is the aggrieved party here? What damages were purportedly suffered? (No response.) The Court; Time-barred by the Statute of Limitations. Case closed. Bailif! Next Case. (Privately... die marriages, mules, proof dies cracks, laminations, speared animals (why isn't this ASPCA's reslonsibility?) Spitting protected species 3-legged bison. I tell you these numystical folks are driving me nuts!. It's gotten so bad, you can't even enjoy a porcelain counterfeit in the privacy of your own home.)

Maybe it's just me, but would you buy coins from anyone who would uses "Evicter's Coins" as their handle? For all the good it would do, everyone reading this should report this to eBay. I plan on doing so right now.

You can start by spelling "dumd," DUMB.

Q.A.: Thanks for the heads up, Zebo. 🐓 : (You know, I still can't believe he knew you'd be back within a week!) Q.A.: "Fairy tales can come true, they can happen to you. If you're young at heart... " (Courtesy Frank Sinatra.)

There are several promising leads provided: 1. The medal is "unlisted," and does not bear a date (ND) 2. A reference to the "Syd Martin's Collection" in Manhattan on New York's City's Upper East Side suggests this piece was but one of many which may have been sold or auctioned off, and 3. The Meropoitan Museum of Art which is likely a reference to the institution on Fifth Avenue on Manattan's Upper East Side. Collecting and classifying and exhibiting materials for display are what they do. Lacking the mobility I once had, I would begin mining the internet and, if all else fails, contact the curator or archivist sending color photos of the medal requesting whatever information may be available. I would not submit the medal to NGC or it's partners but may be inclined to cheat and contact a Heritage Auction site indicating you would be interested in selling the item "but am afraid I have no further information" beyond what you have provided in this Forum. They have convenient offices nationwide. Nothing is produced and distributed in a vacuum. The information is out there. Seek and ye shall find.

Congratulations @Sandon on your 35th hundredth post and Leaderboard status. No one's "voice" reflects your non-judgmental, even, temperament when engaged with unreceptive members some of whom have been quite contentious. I believe the army of lurkers who remain steadfastly unengaged will be encouraged to participate when the right cord in a post you deem quite ordinary, is struck. Your grasp of the subject matter at hand -- a never-ending cast of characters -- is nothing less than outstanding. Youlr Custom Sets are a labor of love and incomparable.Your regular contributions to the various Forums are most wecome, indispensable, memorable and most illuminating. (Posted at the discretion of Moderstion.)

By unwritten Law, I must agree with the substance of the remarks made above, some by members who were here when trilobites and pterodactyls roamed the earth at will -- or so legend has it. While there is no member who has taken a harder stance against the sudden proliferation of ERRORS, the irrefutible truth is you have a better chance of coming across a 1943 "copper" penny in change than you will an alleged ERROR. In your favor, however, I am constrained to admit I have never seen another like it and we're talking about a common cent that has apparently gone unnoticed in circulation for over 40 years. The damage, when inflicted, does not appear to be recent. (I will have to check with our resident Mad Scientists to confirm none have been tampering with this type coin of this vintage. My advice to you is hold on to it. Place it in an ordinary cardboard flip as it is unusual. Its so-called Fair Market Value would depend on how desirable collectors who specialize in "ERRORS" find it to be. To me, it appears unique as the copper alloy used appears to have been displaced by unknown means leaving a distinct "shadow" behind indicating its proper position. You may wish to explore this with collectors who are enamored of such interesting displaced strikes whether made intentionally or not.

Correct me if I am wrong, readers, but I do not recall a single voice raised in objection or sharp criticism for the late David W. Lange's penchant for collecting old coin albums. I recall he was missing a particularly scarce one which understandably would not appeal to 1960's era collectors but it did not stop me from secretly hoping he would snag one, complete the collection, and perhaps be eligible for a performance of Just Bob's dancing emoji As regarding Coinbuf's interest in the various generations of holders, members may not fully understand his interest but I do and suspect those members who have had questions about their own old holders appreciated his input. Lastly, if "James" is @James_OldeTowne I owe him a debt of gratitude for addressing a subject totally unknown to me but should be of paramount importance to all coin collectors and that is the consequential difference between buying sight-seen vs. sight-unseen. It turns out despite the fact I never met or soke to any seller or physically examined their wares, it was their policy, or lack thereof, that determined whether I had a great deal more consumer protection than I had been aware of. Thanks. (Posted at the discretion of Moderation.)

As regular viewers of this column are aware, while I have completed this 5-year long undertaking, it is by no means the end of the story. There are many things about this short series that are unknowable. I have all 16 coins on the West coast Set Registry, half of which are Top Pops, which as our Grand Master here correctly pointed out, is subject to change in an eye blink. I embrace that as one would immutable fact. The powers that be have recognized it as being the "Best French Set." There is a big difference between the "best" and the "best possible set." The 1.313 gulf represents thousands of dollars. It cannot be achieved with the addition of a single coin. About two months ago, with no notice to Fr20FrGR Set Registrants, high-order explosives were placed under the series which consisted of 13 members and detonated. As I observed weeks later, I did not find out about it until Ricky 🐓 had been pecking about and noticed my Number One rating, four years in a row, had dropped to Four. Ricky is congenitally incapable of lying, so I took it upon myself to investigate his "outrageous" claim and, much to my surprise found it to be TRUE! On or about the First of September, when I usually conduct my review of respective certified populations, I will report my findings. Imagine, if you will, spending a thousand dollars on something solely on the strength of its description only to find out, rather rudely, that what you thought you had, wasn't anything of the kind. I will discuss the controversy I regard as an avoidable debacle. An assertion had been made by one particular member suggesting that the two parts of the series should never have been made a part of a single set and those who did so were unfairly "padding" their sets. If that were true all those shell-shocked owners would have jumped off the fence and celebrated their "victory" noisily in the streets. I will present you, gentle, faithful reader, with the unvarnished facts and let you decide for yourselves. incidentally, where does NGC, which boasts the most collectors of this series (83) stand on this controversy? Thus far, their stance is unequivocal and is expressed in a single line, stating in substance: All 20-francs gold roosters minted from 1907 to 1914 are regarded as Restrikes. See yooou, in Sep-tem-ber... 🎶

To what end, considering bars/ingots/ bullion coins are readily available with an undisputed .9999 fineness? Melt this thing down and, besides destroying a possible unique historical relic, you may discover this humongous "door block" was not all it was cracked up to be. The owner sought this artifact for all its "attributes," as is, for reasons likely only z knows. 🤣

How would you like to be remembered by your colleagues at NGC? Some people, reflecting on their life, seize the opportunity to pen their own "authorized" autobiography. They have the luxury of picking and choosing what gets included, what gets excluded -- and what's glossed over. Others write their obituaries. The NY Times does that routinely. After a person is gone is too late. In fact, they now present the obituaries of people who had been overlooked or whose contributions were not timely recognized. [My favorite is Henry "Box" Brown who literally "shipped" himself in a small crate to a Free state from a Slave one.] He remained free for the rest of his life. So, if you care, how would you like to be remembered? For those things members (and an army of lurkers) are most familiar with, or the things of great general interest viewers know nothing about and would never expect. I suspect there are a great many interesting stories out there. Fell free to think about it, and share yours.

Probably heretical to even suggest it, but seeing as how I never cared for cast bars to begin with, this one's a bit too crude and primitive for my taste. (Obviously, I do not have the money to acquire it.) My only objection is the mention of avoirdupois weights in relation to precious metals. I don't trust fineness determined in a country during primitive times with a primitive calendar. [Would you believe the USG INS certificate issued to my mother when she became a citizen sometime in the 1990's reads: FEBRUARY 31, 1921!] Pounds and ounces have no business being used with gold. How reliable is that fineness? And how was it determined. They couldn't even produce steel strong and reliable enough to use on the Trans-Siberian railway -- and to make matters worse, decided a single track was sufficient. But I digress. Re that 44 oz.figure bandied about... again, was that Troy or Avoirdupois ounces? We are talking 12 versus 16 ozs. so it is a significant figure. If it were mine, unless irrefutable information is produced and integrated into a modern-day equivalent of a Certificate of Authenticity which I would expect would be the case here, I would pass on this. As my mentor emeritus knows well, I do not relish the obligation of being put in a position of explaining, justifying or defending my acquisitions. With accompanying documentation, I would prefer the acquistion speak for itself.

The coin is practically 50 years old. Here, do what I do and dispense with all the endless scrutiny of a product of modern machinery churning out stuff expeditiously under tons of pressure involving moving parts;. "Time-barred inquiry which has exceeded the 25-year Statute of Limitations." Case closed. Next!

Thank you! You are most kind.

I am painfully aware of the passage of three month's' time. Color and apparent misspellings are noted but do not necessarily militate against authenticity. The coin may have been cleaned and, obvious wear aside, I should still like to see "hundrrd" when the coin's edge is ready for its close-up. We may very well have the work of an amateur illiterate counterfeiter or something as simple as a mishap, i.e. a coin the was damaged in some way which affected the spelling. Many coin collectors may not be familiar with "scrawny eagles" and expect a well-made coin which justifies the high price tags they command. We should not overlook the fact that these coins represent U.S. coinage in its infancy. One touchy symubject I have noticed other hobbyists avoid asking seems forward, but can be instructive though intrusive and that is, How did you acquire this coin? Did you inherit it? Had it been passed down generation-to- generation? Was it gotten from someone in a flea market who had it unloaded on a weekend seller with little or no knowledge of its provenance, or, perhaps unlikely, purchased it from a prominent firm with a rock-solid reputation going back decades with some name recognition. The answer elicited very often suggests which way the balance tips. IMHO.

I love happy endings. When I saw the OP's characterization of the dealer as "reputable" I felt he stood a chance and was encouraged to intervene. No such concern wants a complaint or "Bad review." I am delighted things worked out.

There is nothing wrong with experimentation in the pursuit of knowledge as long as participating Mad Scientists test-drive their guinea Pigs on coins which all agrees are basically shot. Nothing tried, nothing gained. Just make sure to conduct your tests on appropriate coins.

Ha! Ha! Ha! To @J P M : Reassembling my Fr20FrGR collection after it was vandalized two months ago and attempting to complete it (the first and final ADD in 4 years) was why I was "cranky." After I read anything @VKurtB writes now, I am elated. 🤣 The late @Oldhoopster and I had divergent views on grading and submission. Regrettably, his view encouraged futile submissions as a peculiar sport, topped with humor. My view is best expressed by members with a more heightened sense of responsibility, like @Woods020 which bears repeating: "read more, submit less, and question everything." I sense @Sandon feels the same way. Submission should be the court of last resort. And we should remind Newbies that formal paid memberships must also be routinely included in the costs of submission. It may have been a cruel joke once, but now it's an expensive and, at times, a prohibitively costly proposition. I do not revel in other peoples' adversities.

To be honest, I do not feel you were being malicious. You were only musing out loud. However, as a courtesy to my fellow brethren, I shall not extend my fangs anymore. That way I will no longer have to retract them anymore :-) P.S. The coin NEVER left the Mint like that. Trust me. My reputation here is pristine and my credentials are impeccable.

Perhaps I can speed things up. There is a quote attributed to Hermann Goering that roughly translates into: "When I hear the word "culture," I reach for my gun." Likewise when I hear the word "error," I reach for my ... " It appears you have a "Wheatie" and a post "59 "Zincoln." The chance they, and any others you may have are ERRORS is remote. But if you can supply photos with sufficient resolution, I will graciously step aside and have our more knowledgeable members exercise the privilege of conveying the bad news to you.