Henri Charriere

2 hours ago, MarkFeld said:

I don't know whether you're trying to be funny or if you're being serious. Regardless, first, AU58 is a grade, not a designation. And second, my guess is that you're not expert at grading colonials and have no business mocking the coin or its graders. But even if I'm wrong and you are expert, there are more civil ways to make your point. I think perhaps, you just covet attention, and I'm done responding to any of your posts.

If I were really smart I would take my cue from the OP -- who, being the consummate gentleman he undoubtedly is, once thundered one viewer's contribution was "the most ignorant opinion I've read this year." -- and start a thread entitled:  I JUST FIGURED OUT WHY SOME MEMBERS POST SO  LITTLE!  

But I get ahead of myself. Let's dissect this delicious stew, sha'n't we?

Forget the part at the end where MF picks up his marbles, runs and vows to refrain from ever responding to my posts again.  Where have we heard such idle boasts before?  Why, from none other than the King of the Paper Tigers himself lately of the Great Commonwealth of PA. (My ability to endear himself to me, once again, was nothing short of a stroke of masterful genius.)

Even more stunning, we have an acknowledged expert reduced here to unabashedly questioning the integrity of a self-described Troll!  Now how pathetic is that?  Am I, a confirmed rank amateur, seriously expected to dignify such pitifully uninformed indecisiveness with a cogent response?

Moving along, MF takes issue with my use of the word "designation" to refer to a "grade" thereby effectively, and likely unwittingly, engaging an  anachronism known as to "hoist with one's own petard."  Is there a collector anywhere who truly believes the grade assigned to an item coming up for auction from a renowned collection with an impeccable provenance is subject to debate?  MF elsewhere has hewed to the line that a grade is merely an opinion.  It follows that opinions can be mulled over, formulated , expressed, and even revised, right?

Nope! Not if that opinion fails to coincide with that of MF (and a supporting cast comprised of what another viewer once referred to opaquely as a "nefarious cabal.") And therein lies the rub. You are allowed to express your opinion, as long as it is in line with the party line.  This is reminiscent of a quote attributed to Henry Ford:  You can have any color [Ford Model T car] you want, as long as it's black.

Judging by MF's grossly disproportionate highly personal response to a simple recyclable observation, I am convinced, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that his uncanny ability of zeroing in on the precise excuse for a coin I was alluding to -- buried within 70-plus pages of listings! -- suggests even a rookie examiner would have no problem finding his latents all over that slab.  I can only hope far better specimens don't show up to save him the embarrassment of a mandatory recall for reconsideration and the sight of me, a rank amateur (so designated by VKurtB) standing there saying, I told you so.

As Billy Batts told Tommy in Goodfellas, "...go home and get your shinebox."  You'll be back.  They all come back.  And the ones you think haven't, are on the sidelines watching. No one in their right mind wades in shark-infested waters.

Happy collecting, everybody!

3 hours ago, VKurtB said:

‘Baffling’ is about as generous and diplomatic a term as can be employed here.

I wish I had the time and inclination to wade through the 70-some-odd pages of NGC's enhanced images of the Partrick Collection to zero in on the poor excuse of a Pine Tree Shilling or whatever that severely defaced slug of a coin from the 1600's some grading finalizer chose to honor with an AU-58 designation.  Now that's not just baffling but downright laughable.  Even our own Ratzie, an authentic character in his own right, would not have the audacity to pull off a stunt like that!

12 minutes ago, VKurtB said:

Weakly struck? Seriously? Have you even read the descriptions? I think the back story on this 1794 dollar is about as good as any ever get.

To paraphrase that T-shirt slogan, I am not a gynecologist, but I will take another look.

5 hours ago, Just Bob said:

Some things involving internet chat and messaging are generally accepted by the community at large. LOL is understood to mean "Laugh Out Loud," not "Lots of Love,"  "Larry or Louise," or any other term with three words which begin with those letters. Bold, italics, highlighting, colors, and different fonts are used to draw attention or emphasize. All caps is understood to be the internet equivalent of shouting, regardless of whomever says they are using it in another way.

As a most welcome voice of moderation on the Forum, I wholeheartedly accept your premise and observations.  I have found through experience it is near impossible to argue with a voice of reason -- and your enviable track record proves it.  No one should take offense.  I certainly don't.  [Besides, having hitchhiked through 62 of the 82 counties in the Magnolia State, I get a big kick out of viewing your collection of seldom if ever seen tokens as posted elsewhere.  Thanks for sharing them!  You are an indispensable asset to true collectors everywhere.]

4 hours ago, VKurtB said:

$8.25 million. Why? Because everybody expects a discount, right?

Auctions are difficult to call.  And it only takes.one fanatic whose been waiting for this once-in-a-generation, or lifetime opportunity to skew the final result beyond all reason.  On direct sales, European purveyors of coins are amenable to your best offer, or standard 5% discount; U.S. dealers, are not citing the all sacred Fair Market Value. The only seller I really felt sorry for was the one whose name I failed to record who sold me a physically unimpressive raw coin at a price then barely above melt which I eventually sent in for routine grading only to discover there was only one other graded like it -- and none higher, a record that persists to this day.  (Other than the digit "4," there is nothing about the weakly struck, scarred for life, 1794 dollar that leaps out at the viewer and says, Hey, look at this!  At least, with the occasional discovery of hoards and shipwrecks, you get an interesting back story coupled with an objective grade.)

This is sure to humor or offend someone...

My nomination for the most (you can fill in the blank) is:

Apollo 11 50 Anniversary,  2019-S  50C,  First Day of Issue,  PF-70. Ultra Cameo

What are the odds a Weinman or Gobrecht or Barber or MacNeil or St. Gauden or Longacre or Roberts would stoop so low as to produce an inartistic atrocity like a bootprint to commemorate an historic event?

12 minutes ago, Alex in PA. said:

+1

Request GRANTED.  

I do not doubt color is important for authentication purposes but I would feel a whole lot better if the gentleman who posted that photo of the lime-green Peace dollar allowed that he fished that coin out of the Gowanus Canal in Brooklyn sometime in the late 1950's when it was deemed to be the most polluted body of water in the nation putting it at the head of the list of toxic waste sites eligible for federal disaster aid. (I also secretly believe all that talk of spectral isotopes and super-heated neon vs. naked incandescent lightbulbs is nothing more than superfluous window dressing, IMNSHO.)

Foiled again.  About my only saving grace is unlike the heavyweights on this Forum, yourself included, I have no good name, credibility,  credentials, reputation, or even plausibility left to lose. My rank amateur status remains intact.  (I was originally going to call those lacerations cat scratches but even tiger claws are not that strong. And, no, I would not bid on anything deserving of a better fate than a safe deposit box somewhere.) I appreciate the time and effort you put into formulating your response for me!

8 minutes ago, Alex in PA. said:

I have a friend who is a psychologist and he could make a career out of analyzing these pages of syntax suffering coupled with adverb overload.

Adieu mes amis

There was a viewer some time ago who took exception to RichieRich2020's use of Capital letters likening them to shouting.  And yet, in the past week alone we've seen bold, out-sized fonts, some in living technicolor, which no one takes exception to because they are a creative sight to behold and/or intimidated by the temperamental personalities who wield them.  Great stuff!

That is the one good thing about being both a rank amateur and troll.  Whether you pass or fail a colorblindness test -- or promote the efficacy of 100-watt bulbs to the heavens, no one cares... and life, and this thread, go on.

37 minutes ago, VKurtB said:

I really don’t think you would. This one is widely considered the finest known. 

Sorry to have to disappoint you but even trolls have values.  I am not going to purchase an original Rolls Royce Silver Ghost classic car from a recognized reputable authorized dealer or auction house with no mention made of the glaring key marks that had been gouged into its body by the previous owner's irate wife. NO SALE!!!

1 hour ago, jtryka said:

Wow @bsshog40 I can't believe you have that many posts!

Me neither, but the gentleman has been around awhile and apparently drops in from time to time to see how the Forum is coming along.  The truth is the Forum is only as good as its participating members at any given time.  I am sorry I cannot contribute to any discussion of his gorgeous barber half, but believe I am the only member with the guts to come right out and say that that 1794 coming up for auction shortly sports a series of unsightly (but curiously unmentioned) parallel lacerations on its obverse which ought to detract from any grade assigned to it as well as its unwarranted

1 hour ago, jtryka said:

Wow @bsshog40 I can't believe you have that many posts!

comparison to a similar piece widely reported to have been sold for $10 million.  If I had the means, I would sooner acquire a true unblemished gem that speaks for itself without qualification.

It is probably a bit late to make mention of this now, what with the thread moving along nicely at Mach One speed, but if one were to Google (or Duckduckgo) "sms coin," one will stumble across one question among many entitled:  "How can I identify SMS coins?"  A YouTube video will pop up which may either answer members' questions -- or, in the alternative, re-ignite the fury besetting this thread.  Either way, it's worth a look-see.

(And in case anyone watching may have missed it, no less an authority than MarkFelt -- an expert a viewer once suggested I ought to have on my side -- characterized a casual comment I had made earlier on this thread, as "Excellent!"  Is this Forum the Greatest Of All Time, or what?)

5 hours ago, MarkFeld said:

I have a hard time believing that there wasn't a more formal way of distinguishing Proof coins from business strikes/circulation strikes, than using the term "change".

Goaded by your gentle prodding, I dove into the web and discovered the term used was quite simply referred to as a "circulation" strike.

56 minutes ago, VKurtB said:

Okay, smarta$$, what we have here is another dishonest “gotcha” attempt by a dishonest person trying to play games. Exhibit A, the magenta one, WOULD be a 6, IF it were an honest Ichihara plate, which it is not. It is a representation of what a colorblind person would see in not seeing the 6. Similarly, Exhibit B is a similar “colorblind version” of Ichihara Plate #2, I believe, one of the most severe color blindness ones, in which nearly everyone easily sees the 8 that is present on the honest Ichihara Plate #2, but is missing on this representation of what a profoundly colorblind person would see on Plate #2, except for what can be seen just from dot placement. 
 

Now, just who in the hell do you think you’re messing with here, sir?

[Just got off the wire with my old friend Moishe Ichihara who categorically denies tampering with any of the tectonic plates bedeviling Chiba Prefecture in Japan, either by clandestine fracking, or otherwise. He has, however, implored me to stop pushing VKurtB's buttons -- and pointedly reminded me it's not even Labor Day yet!]

28 minutes ago, VKurtB said:

Now, just who in the hell do you think you’re messing with here, sir?

DEFENSE:  Your Honor, I submit my client has answered all questions asked of him satisfactorily.

AUSA:  No further questions, your Honor.

THE COURT:  You may step down, sir.   Adjournment in contemplation of dismissal.  Bailiff, call the next case...

Docket 20-Civ-13735 (VKB)  UNITED STATES OF AMERICA versus BRIAN SILLIMAN. . .

27 minutes ago, VKurtB said:

... photos on this thread are among the worst I have ever seen anywhere in terms of calibrated color. 

Alright then, let's pretend you're back in court. You've been sworn in and reminded you're still under oath...

Now, sir!  You've been shown two pieces of evidence.  Would you now tell the court the numbers, if any, as displayed in Exhibits A and B, respectively.

2 minutes ago, VKurtB said:

That explains way more than I even realized. Do you even know the science of color, sir? I do. It was my life for over 30 years. 

Is this your quaint way of saying even with your massive infusion of knowledge and experience, you are still unable to see the plain-as-day number eight???!  I mean, I see it, and I've got cataracts.  What's your excuse, phosphorescence?  Who's zoomin' who here?

Remember that book, All I really need to

15 minutes ago, Alex in PA. said:

Maybe, Alex, maybe. I hope I do not offend anyone but I am in a wonderful mood!  And the really sad part is there is nothing anyone can say or do to dampen my enthusiasm.  My love and respect for everyone on this Forum is unconditional.

15 minutes ago, Alex in PA. said:

 know I learned in kindergarten? As I am fond of saying I graduated in the top 90% of the Class of 1963, Magnum crumb laudanum, the William Sydney Mount school (P.S. 174) in the Crescents of Rego Park, Queens, City of New York. 

2 minutes ago, VKurtB said:

Come on now. I have now viewed these color blindness circles on a cheap phone, a really new high end phone, and a somewhat cheap computer monitor. They look radically different on each. What you see depends on the phosphors on your device every bit as much as your eyesight. These color blindness patches are designed to be used on a printed page with non-standard inks that are spot colors, not process CMYK color. Their use here is pointless. 

I was kind of hoping you would be like the guy in the Geico commercial who, when shown his likeness by the lady painting his portrait with the outsized bill, simply responded: "I don't see it." Phosphors?  Please!

14 minutes ago, Insider said:

Thank you.  Read the post from Physics-fan.  He covered much of it.   BTW, do you see a number in the circle of dots I posted?  I've been told that this particular circle of color is one of the most commonly missed in the usual test.

Apparently, more women are colorblind than men.  This one also gives lots of folks trouble. 

 

  

Anyone, numismatist or not, who fails to discern the number eight -- clear as day here --

17 minutes ago, Insider said:

 

 

  

deserves to have his driver license revoked.

6 hours ago, MarkFeld said:

With respect to the lack of the term “business strike” in 1964, what were non-proof coins/non-mint set coins that were made for commerce, called at that time?

The millions, then billions of coins?  Ordinary change.  Graded with names, not numbers.  When the common copper cent was predominantly copper; the "silver," so-called, referred to their precious metal content.  When the centennial gold coins were announced with great fanfare in 2016, I was an enthusiastic buyer expecting to receive what had always been my now deceased mother's favorite coin, the "Mercury" dime, exquisitely rendered in excruciating detail. Instead, I got a Ratzie-like replica, poorly executed, in a presentation box not at all worthy of the price exacted. That was the first time I was rudely awakened by the clever construct termed a "business strike." My first and only thought was, and still is, I WUZ ROBBED!  And I don't care if gold skyrockets to $50,000 an ounce, I will sell this atrocity to a Young Numismatist for less than what I paid for it, at the recorded for all posterity, Mint-issued price, and throw in free postage, to boot.  This will constitute my final statement on this most detestable term.

9 minutes ago, Insider said:

 

 

I'm providing this image for our visually impaired members.  What number do you see?

I see a six, but I cheated. I viewed it cross-eyed.

I am in an unaccountably mischievous mood so I am going to hew toward First Impressions Count which in this case suggests without a date, or any other meaningful clews (which, to me, are purposeful omissions) this may very well be nothing more than a coprolitic deposit of unknown origin.  And to my many detractors who reject such a diagnosis and demand a more conventional explanation, I defer to our resident expert, Ratzie33, who is well-versed on such Frankensteinian matters. But wouldn't that be like finding a Ford Model T in King Tut's tomb?  There is no accounting for personal taste. 😀😉 Do have a great day, coin lovers!