Henri Charriere

I certainly hope JKK doesn't feel that way. I hear that sort of trash talk in my neighborhood all day long. It's nothing more than posturing. It was wrong but the medium used affords one anonymity. Real gangstas don't collect coins!

Just curious... An alloy comprised of copper and tin is called bronze. We refer to them as coppers. An alloy of copper and zinc is called brass. We refer to them as coppers I guess because Cu predominates. Oh, now I know why the Lincolns are called Zincolns. Only .08 copper. And I just checked the steel cents. Low-carbon steel, only .005" layer of zinc. Which is the rarer of the two: a 1943 "copper," or a 1944 steel cent?

Our Just Bob did a terrific piece of detective work! I never would have guessed it was fabricated outside the U.S. I never knew it existed.

Do we? Copper is a non-precious metal. As such, unlike its gold and silver counterparts, it is measured in avoirdupois ounces, 16 ounces per pound. The "medallion," ahem, weighs all of three ounces. Today's copper spot is 24 cents an ounce. Someone won alright, but it wasn't the Moolah Man.

"If no, why not?" You're not going to hear this from anyone else, so you might as well hear it from me. What you are about to read is what I really wrote. You don't have to do a double-take. Ready? I do not regard any U.S. cent minted after 1959, irrespective of Mint mark, to be real. That means the vast majority of cents. If we are talking 1909 to 1959, you're on. If you were to knock on my door and offer that '74-D bag to me FREE, I would smile and say, Thank you, but no thank you! I would not expect you or anyone else half my age (72) or younger to understand this. Not surprisingly, many of the views expressed by members above, comport with mine. (Only exception: mint bags of dimes, quarters and halves dated 1964, and earlier.)

[To my fellow members and members too new to fully appreciate this heiroglyph, allow me to offer an explanation: up until this past month, I assiduously avoided this topic. Even with off-on-off contact with the hobby, I never felt the confidence that comes when coins and collecting have been front-and-center in your life, continually and continuously, for a half-century, and more. Here, we have a member who has seen it all and heard it all. He once conceded, "I would rather be right, than nice." Another seasoned veteran bolstered his excellent reply upthread with, ".... I will do this only once,...." It took me only a few weeks to realize many of us were repeating ourselves, ad infinitum ad nauseum. You have to have the right temperament for this. Some do, some decidedly not. It was like watching "Groundhog Day," repeatedly, and inspired me to recently propose an inherently unfair moratorium on all queries regarding ERRORS by suggesting any coin older than 25 years from date of minting would be time-barred and exempt from analysis simply because entirely too much time was being spent explaining the same concept, over and over again. I floated the idea of dedicating a topic solely to this issue, as a collaborative effort, and posting it at the head of this Forum. A suitable title might be, "Is my coin an ERROR?" The sad, sorry truth is searching for ERRORS a is not unlike looking for a needle in a haystack. It's possible, but highly unlikely. Recognizing true errors comes with repeated exposures and experience. Stick around and see for yourself.] Posted at the discretion of Moderation.

In all fairness, I transcribed the figure for weight correctly, but read it incorrectly. A genuine gold rooster weighs 6.45 grams. This one weighed in at 6.33 grams, or a difference of not 12 tenths, but 12 hundredths of a gram. (I attribute the weight loss to damage inflicted on the coin by a succession of potential buyers in a series of clumsy efforts to determine its authencity, hence the garish mark on Marianne's cheek on the obverse as well as lesser abrasions on the reverse. That it found a buyer at that inflated price, $540. (Gold Rooster melt is about $380.) is nothing less than remarkable.

POSTSCRIPT: To those of you who have endured many a sleepness night wondering about the Final Disposition of the 1904 "Counterfeit Forgery," your worries are over. The coin has since been sold by NumisCorner in France for €500 or the equivalent of roughly USD 540.

An MS-69 would prompt close inspection. An MS-70, likely wouldn't. Now I understand your declaration, elsewhere, that you have never seen flawless perfection. I guess it's a good thing they are virtually imperceptible. Perhaps the graders did not feel they warranted a demerit.

Welcome! Are there any photos, or additional information, accompanying your post?

Interestingly, only six years later (1913) the Federal Reserve Bank comprising 12 districts was set up and though they presumably have served the country well in the 100+ years they have been around, three were established in cities with Mints -- Philadelphia, New York and San Francisco (Denver was skipped) it appears Seattle was either not considered, or considered but not chosen. (There are also 24 branches, which I was unaware of, but know not where they are situated.) Nice find, Roger! I am not a psycholinguist but the Director's intimate familiarity and grasp of Mint operations is evident in the confidence he exudes in addressing a member of the President's cabinet in writing. P.S. Numismatics embraces a wide range of endeavors from the guys in business suits sitting in climate-controlled boardrooms dictating policy, men doing grunt work deep in the bowels of institutions amid dusty stacks -- and even humble coin collectors sharing their fondness of proof die cracks with fellow members. It takes all types to make a hobby run like a well-oiled machine. I appreciate the fruits of Roger's labor and NGC for permitting him to showcase his wares.

I was not aware of that. Thanks for making me a a better, more responsible and erudite citizen.

An "error?" Just to be clear, before you run off to Etsy, your non-copper steel coin is damaged: it is painted. The bronze copper cent is the one that is rare and valuable.

🐓: Technically, while a violation, any sanction would be superfluous at this point. Q.A.: I agree. There is no come-back from the humiliation of being exposed as a perpetrator of a fraud. He overplayed his hand. Why would anyone who owns a 3-oz gold coin regale us with a "mystery" roll of presumably unseatched coins. Yo Moolah Man: Your game ain't strong enough. You did it to yourself! Regards to Snoop Dogg.

Great detective work! I do not know any private "mint" that produces 3-oz. tributes.

The field is the surface of a coin minus devices such a dates, mottos, legends, stars, rays, etc. Though I never heard it described as such, every planchet starts life out as a blank field and though the rims be raised, they are not considered formal devices.

If there is an imperfection or flaw present on this coin, would you be kind enough to point it out?

[I am frankly quite pleased you made no mention of the deformation of E in LIBERTY.]

This being the First of the Month, I usually undertake a review of the various compilations on the respective Set Registries, here and "there." It appears there are six times as many collectors here, than "there." Only 2 points and change, separate my Best Current and All-Time Set rating, 65.906, "there" with the current Finest Possible Set Rating: 67.313. I continue to urge all serious collectors of this 16-coin series to look to France and Germany for sought-after examples. The only glitch I sensed, confirmed recently by our globe-trotting ambassador, is an apparent disinclination on the part of dealers to submit coins for formal certification. In a real sense, this has put a kibosh on collecting this series. If you wish to assemble a type set within a preferred range of grades, it can be done. The availability is there. The serious collector must be prepared to GTG with photos and big bucks. All know I am not risk-averse, but am I willing to put, say, $1,250 + on the line, gambling an FDC (U.S. equivalent from MS-65 to MS-70) is specifically an MS-67 for Set Registry purposes? No. What are you going to do when the FDC you waited up to a month for comes back from a TPGS designated MS-64+? Food for thought. As for me, it was one helluva learning experience. I had a good run, had a lot of fun, and now I'm done. All I have to do is defend my title, tooth and nail, for the rest of my life.

And to think when the Reviewers' copies came into the Strand Book Store way back then, they were routinely bought at 1/4 the cover price, sold at half price and later "Remaindered" at a dollar a copy + tax! Years later, as a "Used Book," the price rose and if now "Out of Print," the price, depending on demand (and inflation) could very well exceed, double or even triple the original cover price. You did very well! (Madonna's book, ---, never made it to the selling floor. Copies were sold at $100. each upstairs in the Rare Book Room.)

If the House of Morgan deems it to be a variety, it is exempt from my Statute of Limitatations which, at least presently, applies only to ERRORS. I may have to carve out a special variance for you as it appears, while your predilection is unusual, you appear to know what you are talking about.

This coin illustrates a point I would like to emphasize for collectors of all (in this instance) Jefferson nickels, wartime or not. Since it comes so close to being near-Perfect, it can be instructive to collectors in that it exhibits precisely what your nickel should look like. This is a fine example against which all other such nickels can be compared. If you are a collector of Mint State Jeff's, you understand. Very valuable topic, Mike!

[Truth be told, I disabled all cookies (except the Oatmeal ones) and I was left with a periscope. I didn't break the internet. They broke me. And if you want to do the most basic tasks, you are directed to settings which informs you in SECOND COMING type that your COOKIES ARE DISABLED! Big deal. I cleared the cache, too. So I get lightning quick responses but every site I visit slams its door in my face. They are all anxious "to improve your viewing experience." No thanks. I couldn't care less but I have to admit that wonderful CoinWeek article was delivered piecemeal eye-dropper style.]

But, but one learned member elsewhere disputed that this thing happened the way you say it did and now you are taking the liberty of embellishing your discovery with whipped cream!

[Let's see now... Italian lira and British Petroleum. Hmm. I know someone withdrew the latest €500 notes from circulation, but where? What's a Lira worth today? What was it worth back in '67? Has it since been devalued? You got me good, F' Mike. That and that guy waving that finger at me! How about USD 737.37 + the usual, let's make that 20%. I know someone is having a hearty guffaw at my expense!]