Henri Charriere

To be clear about it, I am inclined to give any new member -- and I belive you must sign in to post, but may "lurk" about if you wish -- the benefit of the doubt. Is not the primary purpose of "The Hand" to alert readers that new members are afoot and should be treated accordingly? It is difficult to take the measure of a man based solely on three posts. I am not in college and do not intend to write an essay. Accordingly, the website (and subject matter) are of no interest to me. I receive over 300 spam posts a week, down considerably from what I used to. I believe I saw the suspect post before he edited it out. That indicates he is a cooperative member; in marked contrast, a certified spamster (or scamster) would have elected to move on without comment. This member, commendably, stood his ground, apologized, and quickly took down the "objectionable" citation without argument. In any event, I trust Moderation will look into the matter, and rule accordingly.

But, but... the gentleman just signed on as a newly-minted newbie. Nobody is going to sign up, pay his dues, and intentionally cite a source by website that quite openly states its purpose for all to see. And what about "THE HAND"? ? ? Not a very hospitable reception. Report if you must -- I would have simply pointed out the possible faux pas committed -- but let's all allow the complaint to be reviewed when it is received by Moderation. This is reminiscent of the rush to judgment in "Hand 'em High!" Welcome to the Forum!

Their loss, NGC's gain.

IN THE BEGINNING, according to a casual comment made by John Albanese during an interview, turn-around times went as high as eight months! My understanding and experience with submission turn-around times is, as stated on the submission forms, merely ballpark figures. Guidelines. If Covid-19 comes along, the estimated times change understandably. The irregularity you have experienced very likely could be attributed to just a pro-looonged holiday weekend.

A fleeting thought on stickering... As a "Rising Star" -- NGC's characterization, not mine -- I have the benefit of having been around long enough to know who stands where on the matter of stickering. Recently, I viewed a marvelous compilation of coins painstakingly put together over time by a much-esteemed member on his Set Registry. It was the first time I recall seeing what I call a hybrid, a mix of coins certified by two TPGS's. It was peppered with a healthy dose of stickers. Now here's the hard part: confiding in my first impression heretofore never articulated by any other member, to my knowledge. I could not help but feeling that sticker, which amounts to a pat on the back, unintentionally and inadvertently reduced the value of all the other coins displayed. An unfair perception, perhaps, but one that developed over time. Rankings on set registries differ from one TPGS to the next. I would imagine the intent is to level the playing field for all players. There is another member's thinking that mirrors my own. He, like I, am partial to symmetry. Early on in my "short" set of gold rooster "restrikes" here at NGC, I hewed to a line: MS-66. Elsewhere, my "originals" settled primarily on MS-64 while my "restrikes" settled on MS-67, a high bar. Even if the two examples which graded at MS-68 were to surface, I would not deviate from my set course to accommodate them. I am simply curious as to their whereabouts. Stickers? Now, at my age? No, the fickle market of NO AVAILABILITY forced me into early retirement. With Paris in an uproar, if our globe-trotting member stumbles onto a lead, I will certainly jump on it because I implicitly trust his grading skills. I am told World Gold is now eligible for stickering. If an example he manages to find is so endowed at the lofty grade sought, I would acquire it. In any event that is my thought on stickering, in much the same manner collectors insist on NGC slabs: it's all or none. Nothing I have "said" should in any way detract from the success achieved by the OP. His is an enviable result in the world of submissions.

[Not to complain, but my delusions of grandeur are steadily being challenged and eroded... referee in champion Forum bouts, guest moderator, thread retreader, (being acknowledged -- even Liked by my Ignorers!) and now being a stickler for spelling and grammar, USURPED! I tell you, it ain't easy being me.] 🤣

Afterthought, having viewed the item via the link helpfully provided by a member... Absolutely, positively, the worst reviews submitted by "verified" buyers I have ever seen! And, pray tell, why would any seller provide two identical reviews by the same buyer with the same date? Not encouraging. Etsy, eBay, and the like, offer a wide variety of legitimate goods. Unfortunately, those that are numismatically related have used the platform for an inordinately number of suspect goods and outright frauds. Where coins are concerned, there ought to be a mandatory exam before access is permitted unless accompanied by a pre-approved chaperone.

France, 1870 To Date - an analysis... It may be of interest to members, and itinerant curious lurkers, generally -- and the gentleman who three years ago derisively referred to my specific area of interest [G20F gold roosters] as "your precious niche" -- to learn that of the 77 different coin denominations currently listed in the NGC Census under the above-entitled banner heading, the lion's share of 7788 certified coins reside in the G20F line comprised of, among others, eleven different series of which the Gold Rooster is a part. The next leading contender trails behind with two others which boast less than half the total certifications, to date, of the G20F series, leaving all the rest far behind at the "clubhouse turn." As always, I shamelessly claim credit for the renewed interest in the Gold Rooster series. I wish all a safe, happy and healthy Fourth!

UPDATE - DATELINE: JULY 1, 2023 There are ten times as many set registrants here as opposed to the other major TPGS. [I, of course, take full responsibility for the resurgence in interest in this series though I have not a scintella of objective or subjective evidence to support or substantiate my claim.] No French 20-franc gold rooster has been certifiably graded Mint State-67, or higher, by any TPGS to my knowledge, for the years 1899 to 1906, commonly referred to as the "originals" as opposed to the "restrikes," or "redistributed" coins minted, in part, in 1921 as well as the 1950's and 1960's. The two gold rooster restrikes dated 1908 and 1912 and graded an unprecedented MS-68 by PCGS and quickly cross-graded successfully by NGC, continue to reside in the Twilight Zone. Discreet inquiries regarding same are met with blank stares and shrugged shoulders. Although as a coin collector I detest the term, the "melt value" of this coin series in the time I have been a member, has approached, but never surpassed $400. (Their AGW is just under a fifth of a troy ounce.) The common expression, "Once burnt, twice shy," is apt in describing the quandary faced by the average (non-fanatical) set registrants. In the face of stubborn unavailability, fed by stiff resistance to sell in a generally lackluster gold market, the seasoned collector can elect to wait, possibly interminably, or take a chance and acquire and submit a raw example. What I have learned in the years since I was overcome with the gold bug is all the major bullion dealers have numismatists on staff (many of whom have compiled superlative compilations) making the prospect of finding a gem in an already cherry-picked lot, slim if not impossible. Advice to prospective roostermeisters: do your due diligence before you commit yourself. It's only a 16-coin series but a challenge to assemble. One Top Member had a good chuckle when I declared my intention to complete my set within 90 days. My perception of 100% complete does not jibe with most collectors -- or at least one other TPGS. To me, if higher grades have been certified, and you don't have them, your compilation, at least for Set Registry purposes, is not complete.

I do know the 1903 original resides at the National Air and Space Museum in Washinton, D.C. I would imagine it would not be difficult to establish authenticity. Three reproductions were also built in time for the Wright's centennial flight in 2003. (Having been dubbed a "Rising Star" by NGC, there shall undoubtedly come a time when my word, bolstered by the strength of my deportment and hirsute good looks, shall be accepted as gospel truth in matters regarding authentification.) 🤣

This token reminds me of the counterfeiter who for ten years was a thorn in the side of the U.S.S.S. He misspelled Washington as WAHSINGTON on his one-dollar silver certificates in the 1940's. Here we have a depiction of the U.S. CAPITOL building -- clearly not a reference to money (capital) or the capital of the United States, Washington. Columbia, a "district," dates back to 1791. The error in spelling gives this token a special charm all its own.

[In the same manner I would reject some coins out of hand within a series with a dismissive, "I don't like them," unable to articulate exactly why, I thank two members for taking the time and trouble to do so for me: @cladking for painstakingly illustrating why I did not care for the earliest (post-silver years) clad Washington quarters, he deemed to be worthy innovations, and now both @RWB and @GoldFinger1969 for bringing to my attention something I never suspected, i.e., "weak" strikes adjustible "wedges," and die "chucks" which, being from a big city, I assume to be a type of woodchuck. 🤣 Man, I love this place!

My own question: what did the lady or gentleman who gave you or sold this piece to you, represent it as being? [I will not inquire as to its selling price because that may provide an answer to your question.]

Very interesting piece, riddled with symbolism, and uniquely accented by mini-bullet bollards and what can only be described as "eighticles." Great conversation starter!

No, you wouldn't because you're a straight-shooter. The inclusion of my name with Top Members was an inadvertent travesty. Rather than elevating me, I feel I have sullied their well-earned reputations. And as far as Moderation goes, I had been a thorn in their side for some time. I believe NGC is by far and away the most user-friendly site in the entire nation.

Well! Having put up with me and the likes of my various alter-egos, for 3-1/2 years, I can certainly appreciate at least part of the source of your discontent. Not to get your hopes up, relying solely on instinct, I have a feeling something wonderful will happen for you before the year is out. Oh, and do have a pleasant Fourth!

First and foremost, I appreciate as always, your sharing with the membership the results of your latest excavations wherever conducted. Having said that, and after consulting various sources on the internet, I find myself at odds with Director Snowden's comments. Before the Flying Eagles, there were Large Cents apparently.minted from copper unalloyed with other metals. Oddly, Snowden makes no mention of any of the patterns which, according to one source, were minted as patterns from 1854! to 1856. The Flying Eagle Cents were comprised of 88% Cu and 12% nickel. High relief aside, what was learned and, more importantly, what was tweaked? The Director waits until the 11th hour to inform the Secretary of the Treasurer that the production of a new line of cents is imminent. Contrary to his bold assertions to the contrary, the FE Cent was well-received and very popular. Later still, with the introduction of the IHC, the composition was changed again to 95% Cu, 5% zinc/tin. For collectors unfamiliar with the series, the FE is universally liked as an example of a coin uncluttered with mottos and verbiage such as LIBERTY, IGWT and E. PLURIBUS UNUM. Its timeless beauty resides in its simplicity: USA (spelled out) the DATE and DENOMINATION..In all fairness, this letter is likely one of many pieces of correspondence exchanged between Philadelphia and Washington.

Welcome! You don't need time. All you need is a copy of the "Red Book," the basic tool for every collector. A $5.00 gold piece lying on a track bed is very unusual. If it is not an imposition, I would encourage you to obtain that most basic of coin collecting reference books and see if you can recognize the coin you found. It can't be but a few pages and moments of your time. I have never heard of a story remotely like yours. You're in the right place; everyone has to start somewhere!

Blast from the Past! 🐓 : Have you seen the new format? H.C.: I have. 🐓 : Have you viewed the Top Members? H.C.: I have... most regrettable! 🐓 : You know what that means? H.C.: Precisely. We owe the distinguished assemblage our sincerest apologies and a deep bow. We also owe the Website Coordinator our very lives and sacred fortunes. Our lives are changed forever, from this day on.

I do not know what the current thought is on OGP, and ultimately, the decision is yours to make, but will you continue to store the intact set as is, seek an opinion on conservation, or...

[I trust the reverse side of the IHC look-alike will meet with the approval of all charter members of the resident anti-counterfeit league.] 🤣

Mystery solved! CAG, as defined above, is grouped with NGC amongst the acronyms, NCS, PMG, CGC, ASG, CSG [and CAG]. If there be something popularly known as "guilt by association," then the other side of the coin is "vetting or validation by association." Whether the wood swatch has a story to tell will depend on the price realized with the fall of the gavel. I have no opinion on the matter.

CAG, or Collectibles Authentification Guaranty, by their own telling, are experts in determining provenance. To begin to answer your question, one would have to pore through their website and review some of the references others have made about them. That would take time but I imagine it would be well worth it if these sorts of artifacts are of interest to others. Talk about a niche area of interest! 🤣

First "tripled" UNUM I have ever seen.

+ 1 (I don't know about User Name, but my nick name for you will be "Okefenokee.") 🤣 Welcome back!