Henri Charriere

I have never seen an armored car guard or transit revenue officer carry more than one box of rolls or box of packets of tokens, on their shoulders, at one time. Impressed.

FYI: There are 40 nickels in a roll, 50 two-dollar rolls in a box, $100/box; Each nickel weighs 5 grams, 200 grams/roll, or roughly .44 lbs/roll. At .44 lbs/roll,1 box (50 rolls) weighs 22 lbs (or 10 kgms). $22 lbs/box, 10 boxes, 220 lbs. I do not have any suggestions, but have only one question: How? How did you manage to move all that weight?

🐓 : Say Q... have you anything of pertinence to add to the conversation? Q.A.: Is humor permissible? Good. Here goes. While I am unalterably opposed to wanton desecration, i.e., "crack-outs," this is illustrative of the inadvertent damage and unintended consequences that can occur when the novice tries something new without consulting more experienced hands. 🤣

Unfortunately, the vast majority of members, I assume, do not collect these coins, are unfamiliar with them and may have never seen them -- or the countries they are from. Be that as it nay, and now I speak from experience, I have been a member here for five years and can count the number of collectors who have contacted me regarding my line of coins, the F20F Gold Rooster -- on two fingers. I have two Set Registries, one here, one "there." No feedback. Ninety-some-odd members collect them, but virtually no one has anything to say about them On a hunch, curious as to why no one has responded to your entreaties, positively or negatively, I checked the numbers on these Baltic States. What I found is confounding. There are 80 set registrants of Lithuanian coins, the same number collecting gold roosters. Another 167 collecting coins from Latvia, and a whopping 392 collecting the coins from Estonia. I don't get it. There are 639 collectors of these coins who have placed them in set registries, and not one has anything to say? Is there no one who can offer a theory as to why the OP, a fellow hobbyist is encountering problems regarding attributions? I see two options: One, PM a set registrants, and/or, Two: Avail yourself of the "Ask NGC" thread which is among a few that may be found preceding the main body of Topic offerings. You have nothing to lose. Considering mail volume, I would limit my query to the aspect of attribution that concerns you most.

[Out of an abundance of respect for RWB's expeditionary pursuits, (and a healthy regard for the long arm of Moderation, I have posted my gratuitous remarks on the "Unsolicited Comments" topic thread.]

Re: Sn (tin) and the copper cent. So as not to sully the fine research conducted by our Grand Master on his "tin in cents" thread posted elsewhere earlier today, I believe allegations from a friend referring to me as a "tinhorn cowboy," are wholly unwarranted. On the plus side as a self-described, [unlicensed] soothsayer from an [unaccredited mail-order correspondence school] I believe there may be a grain of truth that the "copper-coated" cent, as we now know it shall be obsolete before one of the next three presidents are out of office. (For the naysayers out there: Sorry, but I will be long gone before you''ve had your chance to say: "Nothing but poppycock, Quintus, and don't say I didn't sat so.") Man, I love this place! 🤣

Godspeed!

[Redacted by Moderation. Giant classified secret. PM me.]

Based upon the photos submitted, wear appears to be present on a localized area of the obverse of your piece (headband above forelock) but the piece is exquisite and deserves to be encapsulated for posterity. I have never seen one before and it is clear great pains were taken to maintain its lovely state of preservation. Do let us know the outcome.

As much as I enjoy bragging all I really need to know I learned in kindergarten (the title of a book by Robert Fulghum) published years ago which may be familiar to older members, the truth is I learn something new every day. For years I insisted I had no problem with paying taxes.* But when you're dirt poor, why would you? If my wife and I do absolutely nothing at all come April 15th, as certified paupers we lose the $63 each of us would be entitled to. Big deal. Maybe this year I will try doing my "taxes" on-line. What've I got to lose? * I did not have a problem with taxes until eBay jumped into the act. I sent for the forms, got them, read them, and decided I did not like them. One of the reasons I gift numismatic items to members here, which I do irrespective of religious, personal and political beliefs, etc. is due in part to two mutually exclusive things: One, I paid taxes on those items, and Two: if I (already) know I will not be getting anything close to what I paid for them plus tax, insurance, postage, etc., I would rather make someone happy and give it away. Yes, even if it means re-using paper cups. Disturbing Trend # 2: Sellers or dealers who list certified coins -- complete with a glimpse of prongs without a grade, coupled with a No Return Policy. Where does this leave the Set Registrant? Unless, of course, there is something on that paper insert which a potential buyer could use a bargaining point. Disturbing Trend # 3: Several years ago, @Conder101 did me a favor. He wrote in and boldly proclaimed what FedEx had done on CBPs behest -- "forcing" me to fill out four pages of paperwork and demanding a $33 fee within five days or the shipment comprised of three of the finest, certified French 20-franc gold roosters known to civilized man would be returned forthwith -- was highly irregular and contrary to law (the pertinent part of which he provided with chapter and verse.) Due to time constraints, I paid the ransom. I did not appreciate being cross-examined by people I did not know who politely but firmly demanded my FULL LEGAL NAME, RESIDENTIAL ADDRESS, SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER. Whatever the reason, by their intrusive, personal questioning I was left with the impression that they were convinced others were involved and I was an unwitting participant. Interested viewers may wish to refer to a current listing on eBay, entitled: "20 francs gold coin 1908." It represents what I deem to be the perfect lising with good reviews and fine photography which can be magnified to the extent that what appears at first blush to be an unretouched MS-70 coin, is plagued with some truly unfortunate surface strikes. Of interest, however, is not an inflated price or country to be shipped from, Romania, but a virtual dissertation on the international fees a buyer may be expected to pay based on carrier used and any other number of variables. Lately, it seems, some of the big-name purveyors of quality coins have abandoned certification, though coins already encapsulated are still being sold, but it appears to me an inordinate emphasis is being made to get buyers to know that other fees on our end is likelier than it once once. If anyone can confirms my worst suspicions with his own experience, please feel free to do so.

I do not know what is more shocking: the allegations you've made -- or the fact NGC saw fit to publish them. One could argue they were published because they lacked substance but I prefer to give you the benefit of the doubt. It will take only one member intimately familiar with the subject matter, if not the precise details, to speak up. I look forward to hearing informed feedback which I trust will be forthcoming. (Incidentally, what does your notation, "Rooster Mint Mark -- Checkmate" mean?)

Note: while I have been unsuccessful in attempting to secure an English translation to "tuaeiur unita deus," I have been provided various translations in French to: "noni soit qui mal y pense," which appears in the dead center of the reverse example member RWB has provided from H.A. auctions (which appears to depart from the posted O.P.s coin.) As the same quote differs with context used, I have taken the liberty of providing at least three which.members may not be familiar with. The various expressions used symbolizes the Order of the Garter, and ancient order of Knigthood of which the Queen is Sovereign: a). "Shame on him who evil thinks." b)."Shamed be (the person) who thinks evil of it." c). "Evil to him who thinks evil of it, ithe motto of the garters." "honi," an archaic term, used depending on context, is variously defined as "shamed, disgrace and dishonor". To emphasize his point King Charles donned a garter to drive hom his point.

If I may, I should like to suggest decisions involving millions of dollars are not made lightly. True, NGC reversed it's course and accepted PCGS-certified coins, but the wonderful world of world gold languishes in limbo. Tell ya what, you have a number of years here, there, and everywhere, but wherever you may be, you'll be the first to know. I personally guarantee it. 🐓

JAPAN! And if "the pro" you consult says, "No go," then what? What enquiring minds would want to know is how can you proceed with an overseas buy without knowing exactly what you're buying and its Fair Market Value? Was this purchased from an individual or a reputable firm with stellar reviews? Does he (do they) have a Return policy if not completely satisfied? How did you determine if the price was right? (Prices run higher, much higher in Japan.) Submission for Certification, while a personal choice, entails cost. That is a decision that can await informal authentication and depends on a number of factors. I do hope, with pending feedback, you make out swimmingly well.

Corrections and Amplifications An astute member of the United Ancient Order of Druids has discreetly brought to my attention the following misstatement which requires action on my part, as regarding the prior post. it was member @James_OldeTowne who expounded at length on the distinction between "sight-seen" and "sight-unseen," as it relates to buying on the internet. Photos, however clear and detailed, in the absence of in-hand inspection, do not count whether they are provided, or not. It was @Woods020 who, in a column dated 12/15/2020, stated: "... read more, submit less, and question everything." Wise counsel. I suspect the venerable @VKurtB enjoys the large following he has is not because he watches Sanford & Son re-runs to bone up on commodities, but because the very fiber of his being forged during his many years serving the government, with distinction, has encouraged him to be direct with others as encapsulated in the classic retort: "I would rather be right, than nice. Has he ever been wrong? Yes, and he owned up to it immediately and publicly -- not in a PM. Not everyone deserves to be around you. Any member who furthers your knowledge and enhances your experience in the hobby, is a friend.

Welcome to the Forum! The more obvious question is why are the blue lines bleeding -- some apparently on the coin's edge itself? Kodak??? And what powers beyond those of mortal cellphones do they provide? Ideally, this should be posted on the Newbie Forum, but you're here so why not make the most of your quandary. What did you do, take your Kodak moment and then record it for posterity using a cellphone? Your initial photos, measured at their widest, came in at little more than 1/2 inches, or 1-1/2 centimeters. Cropping is something done with cellphone cameras. You may have to repeat the procedure to achieve the widest photo permissible on these threads: 4.88 MB MAXIMUM TOTAL AND FILE SIZE. (see below). I believe you will get an informed answer.

" Better to Remain Silent, and Be Thought a Fool, than to Speak and Remove all Doubt." #16 *** Back on Track: To reiterate, ALL the information I need in order to proceed with an acquisition may be summarized in the following examples: 1900 NGC MS-67. or. 1914 NGC MS-67 To date, no "original" (1899-1906) French 20-franc Gold Rooster has been certified as MS-67 and only a handful have been graded MS-66. The line of completion stops at MS-64 at every reputable TPGS known to man. The exact opposite is true for the "restrike" line where fine examples of the best of the best are available, albeit in small numbers. But what about price? Luster? And all the other myriad attributions plaguing collectors and depriving them of a good night's sleep??? To me, of no moment. I wish to thank member Woods020 (by whatever user name now known) for providing this critical, little-known tidbit, in substance, as follows: if you are buying a coin that advertises a "Return policy," as well as a reasonable time frame within which to return a purchase that does not meet your expectations and full satisfaction, have no fear, your purchase is not "sight-unseen," but falls squarely within the realm of "sight-seen." I should also like to thank member Just Bob for defining, in layman's terms, supply and demand, a relatively simple concept which eluded my own brother who regrettably collected all manner of things, only to die intestate in the worst room, in the worst public shelter, in the the worst neighborhood in the City of New York. It was then I realized much of what he termed rare and priceless which I had no legal access to -- was interesting, but essentially worthless. 🐓

Ordinarily, I would not dignify a response to ill-informed doggerel spouted by a junk dealer whose forte is scap metal, but a cogent retort is all but required. Consider this: an encapsulated coin is removed from its holder, thereby losing its certification, its position on a census of certified coins and a Set Registry -- and the poseur has the unmitigated, colossal gall to insist that, having compromised the integrity of its vaunted status, has NOT been decertified, because, after all, it can always be resubmitted. Really! Balderdash! It reverts to being a raw coin. Period. (The accompanying insert is no more than a souvenir.) Once out of its sarcophagus, all bets are off. "... the potential registry set rating remains unaffected." This erudite assertion coming from someone whom, to my knowledge, has never posted a coin or participated in any Set Registry I am aware of. Nonsense, and the tens of thousands of Set Registrants who occupy the highest rankings in their respective areas of interest know accept this as irrefutable fact.

Based upon the eyewitness account(s) of member VKurtB, as well as information made available to the general public from a variety of sources, I got the impression any coin chosen was not special but merely representative of a mintage run. I do not think they would have it any other way. Then again, I have an inner bias which strongly suggests that mere participation in a ritual is not enough to get me to part with my dollars.

No.

[Fast-forward to the future, circa 2024.... while this may be of interest to one-tenth of one percent of the membership, a little-known fact: .... if you apply for public entitlements in New York State, you will be asked about any "resources" you may have which pointedly includes gold and silver bullion -- and collectibles, such as relics (including coins) with "numismatic" value and character.... No Executive Orders or similar such public notices. Just another line on a simple paper application....]

🐓 : You see what I see, Q? Q..A.: I most certainly do. A change in geographical coordinates minus 35 years and this LHC devotee will land squarely within gold rooster territory. Nice!

To any Newbies, guests or lurkers loitering about... bear in mind a troy pound of silver or gold weighs 12 troy ounces. Copper, a non-precious metal, is weighed in avoirdupois ounces in units of 16 per avdp lb.

Amateur error of first impression and perception. Even "carbon copy," anytime I have ever come across it, was never abbreviated with periods (just one colon) -- and the so-called mint marks of the various branch facilities were, or are, always capitalized.

[Would you be so kind as to state unequivocally, that each of the steps are visually discernable and observable, and whether they are of the 5- or 6-step variety. Tks!]