Henri Charriere

In all fairness, there are tons of raw Roosters out there (117 million were minted; untold numbers melted) but having embarked on an upgrading spree early on I quickly reached the upper limits and remain there -- stranded until I get a notice, likely from abroad, that another one just became available. I will not be satisfied with my #1 ranking across the street until an example of each of the highest grades in existence resides in my set registry.

[The words schmuck and in Yiddish, and pillock in Norwegian -- a corruption, of pilliock over time, are references to a male's primary member and their use to describe an esteemed colleague is not only ill-advised but unwarranted. Why can't we all just accept each other on common ground and all just try to get along? Re lighting, the advice given by the two main camps may very well be sound, but lacking resources (and the initiative to be resourceful) I do what every one else does: the best I can with what I have.

If Ratzie33 is Harvey Stack's User Name, the answer is, Yes!

I am totally unfamiliar with these products because no one I know is a drinker. (I did slip into MsSorley's but only wanted to take a look at an original old-time 1854 saloon.) [One thing I credit the liquor industry with is promoting the liquid measure metric system the sensible way by labeling their merchandise in metrics and relegating their equivalents i.e., pints, quarts, etc. in parentheses. My idea of a liberal in grading is someone whose coins are viewed thru rose-tinted glasses; there are no distractions worth mentioning. A conservative uses details with free abandon and he has no agenda beyond providing all the substantive "facts" a collector would need to make an informed decision. With an experienced grader with a sterling reputation, you would not need a "second opinion."

[I liked the president's response. When asked by a journalist" what tax bracket he was in (presumably to justify a comparatively paltry $750 return) he responded: "It 's none of your business!" Law Enforcenent is creative too with their reliance on, "We will neither confirm nor deny." I am advocating for retaining the Sheldon scale but supplementing the whole numbers assigned with decimiled distinctions, e.g., details, to differentiate between hard hooch, or number and depth of bag marks or similar such commonly encountered damage, from gradeflation which is nothing more than unsubstantiated hooey.

To steal from one person is plagiarism; to steal from many is research. Freedom of the press is guaranteed only to those who own one. We should all try to be more like Just Bob, myself included, who jumps in, has his say, and jumps right back out, unscathed.

I remember two: Uncirculated (UNC) and Brilliant Uncirculated (B.U.). The litany of descriptive adjectives, for which a vaccine has never been developed, came later. Hence: exceptional; dazzling eye appeal; sharp devices with prominent high point details; ultra smooth fields shining with brilliance; extraordinary to behold; pristine surfaces glowing with residual mint luster; "mint-fresh" appearance; perfect for high-end collection/registry set; and sure to sit at the pinnacle of your impressive registry set... all of which heirs to the throne of the Sheldon scale are presumably disinclined to assign a decimal sussex to beyond MS-60.

Just a moment. So the "deena" bsshog40 was referring to several weeks ago was in no way meant to intimidate me with residual but still active members of General Augusto Pinochet's secret police, Direction de Intelligencia National, i.e., the National Intelligence Directorate, popularly known as DINA? Then who expropriated my image from a PCGS Set Registry and placed it on NGC's before God and everyone else to see prior to or during my "disappearance" from the Forum recently?

The U.S. Mint, and its product line today, bears little resemblance to the facility of yesteryear. It makes one wonder to whom exactly are their product lines produced to appeal to? And, it goes without saying, the pricing scheme employed is totally devoid of any sense of supply and demand. The quality, or more properly, lack thereof is a recurring issue and the ordering interval, particularly with products anticipated to be popular with all segments of the public defy common sense.

I will have to give it a serious try. Thanks for the encouragement.

Saddest thread I have ever had the misfortune of reading. I had always wondered why The ANA was not the premier TPGS in the nation. VKurtB dropped a few jewels of wisdom over the past few months but this post was the final nail in the coffin. If VKurtB wants to join the Board of Governors, as presently constituted with one primary Type A calling the shots, I hope he realizes only a top-to-bottom reorganization and a comprehensive audit from an accredited company will be mandatory to put the association back on track.

I do not know that I qualify as a "collector" anymore. I am [for all intents and purposes] dormant. I keep a small 5" x 7" legal pad on my desk listing the populations and holdings of my standard 16-piece, French 20-franc gold rooster compilation as featured on two set registries, that serve to remind me that somewhere out there are coins that have graded higher but remain inaccessible and unavailable, apparently at any price. None but the respective TPGS know who the owners are; none have been offered for sale or at auction and thus I have not made a single addition to my collection in over a year. I envy your tenacity, devotion, obsession and endurance bordering on fierce fanaticism, immensely. Fortunately, you have references you can consult; I have never seen so much as a digital distillation on my topic more often than not presented in a foreign tongue, usually French or German. Your enthusiasm is contagious and refreshing and is an inspiration to me. And to my knowledge, no one has ever criticized arguably one of the finest coins ever produced by the U.S. mint or your choice in collecting them.

Speaking strictly for myself, I do not believe I was able to fully appreciate the Mint State spectrum until I obtained several MS-67 examples (none have been graded higher in my particular series) and examined them at length with a vintage high-power loupe to familiarize myself with near-perfection which enabled me to have some inkling as to the intricate challenges faced by graders in rendering their respective opinions. The only way I can reconcile my own feelings about the opinions rendered is to accept that an obverse can differ, sometimes significantly, from the reverse but in the end the entire matter is one of a degree of scientific objectivity over artistic subjectivity. And if a representative of the Sultan of Brunei is the apparent owner of the merchandise under study, I can only hope a soft-spoken gentleman like Just Bob will be available to present a plausible explanation at a private consultation that will achieve the desired result acceptable to all parties.

I think it fair to say any Canadian one-cent piece minted up to and including the 12-sided ones in 1986 are worth saving. The cent reverted to round form thereafter with the ones minted from 1997 through 1999 made from zinc, with a thin copper coating, and the ones minted from 2000 to 2012, when production of the penny ceased predominantly made from steel, with a thin copper coating. Each coin's ping when dropped on a countertop or other suitable safe hard-top surface should emit a different sound. I am assuming we are talking about comparatively new coinage and not the older types prior to 1938 which would have a numismatic value beyond their metal content.

You would think grading Mint State coins is a fairly straight-forward process but what I have found, with no anecdotal evidence to back up my claim, is if you are a collector of French 20-franc gold roosters, 1899-1914, you can expect to get a more accurate overall certification from the PCGS based in France than the one based in the United States (California) for what I would suggest is an obvious reason: they deal with them on a daily basis whereas most collectors and dealers likely have no experience with them or have encountered them on a very limited basis. It makes sense to me but most would argue this is not the way it should be. [Does any of this mean I owe seasoned veteran MarkFeld an apology for my ill-tempered and unwarranted denunciation of a coin and series I know nothing about? Yes, it does.] The other thirty-six who have relegated me to the ignore chamber pot will just have to wait patiently in line.

Thanks for the clarification. We live in volatile times with a great deal of uncertainty. I forsee a correction for profit-taking, already in progress... with a bull market to follow. But we've both heard talk like that for years.

You're probably right. A few years back the $1,000,000 question (the answer to which the contestant, I believe, did not know) on "Who Wants To Be A Millionaire," then moderated by Regis Philbin was: What was the first U.S. coin that bore the legend IN GOD WE TRUST? Your two-cent pieces are the finest examples I have ever seen up close. Great stuff!

I would love to comment but why dissuade those who have not heard from me for awhile from believing I remain anything but unapologetically unrepentant?

Keep the copper ones; feel free to dispense with the rest.

The watermark on the charts suggest reliance on an authority I am unacquainted with but -- no offense intended -- the information it imparts is nebulous. What those interested in these artifacts want to know is a lot simpler: What was the price of gold in just the past hundred years? And what was the corresponding value of Double Eagles at each interval in MS-63 condition. We all know an number of variables skew the results.

[I believe your 1937 Buffalo nickel comes closest to sides featuring both mesas and plateaus -- and we haven't even seen the third side yet.]

Whatever else anyone may be inclined to say about you, you sure know your French (piedfort) and as far as a departure from acceptable (standard) English spelling, grammar, punctuation, etc., I knew all was lost when a paper of record noted penmanship was no longer being taught in public schools. It goes without saying slang, Twitter and social media hastened its demise. That reality TV series, Growing up Gotti, featuring the incomprehensible conversations of John Gotti's sons was the death knell of spoken English when series consultants suggested English sub-titling would be needed to help viewers understand the gutter English that was bring spoken. There had never been a more embarrassing display of illiteracy before or since.

With Lincoln on the campaign trail and rumors of a Civil War running rife, government men were busy pounding out these gorgeous, well-struck gems. Nice catch, Alex!

[I feel a whole lot better knowing I am being ignored by an insignificant number of people who belong to a hobby that cannot fill a third of the subway trains running during the morning and evening rush on any given weekday.]

Take it easy there, BRG5658. You should do what I do. Heretofore, the secret of my success... First, never give in. Do not stoop so low as to ignore anyone. You are always free to turn the page or risk suffering a cerebral hemorrhage, as one member did, or develop an aortal aneurism -- now complicated by atrial fibrillation requiring "a procedure" my cardiologist has informed me is "inevitable" if left uncorrected. What I, and a few others, apparently, do is sit back quietly and watch. When I am in a good mood, I drop by to see what new offerings Just Bob, possibly the nicest member, has introduced on his Token Tuesday thread, and compliment him appropriately. (I was thrilled when he responded to me personally one, and only one, time.) There are others who dislike me intensely, and I shower effusive praise on them unreservedly. They know who they are. I kill 'em with kindness. VKurtB posed a special problem. He would pay out just enough rope for me to hang myself -- and pounce. I admired his technique so much that I try not to get him all riled up out of concern for his health. There is one member who has blocked me and if I am capable of admitting I was wrong, and undeservedly rude, I would apologize to him publicly, but do not know how -- whether he accepts my sincere apology or not. I will be drafting a note to him shortly at an address my innate nosyness found with the help of Ms. Google's niece. You have been around a long time and have held your ground magnificently. It would be a shame to tamper with the rules of engagement. Is there really anyone on this site "better" than you are? Maybe different, but not better. Stick around. You're doing just fine!