• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Wisconsin high & low leaf quarters in Dansco & whitman folders YES/NO

Started by steve's coins-migration,

33 posts in this topic

okbustchaser

okbustchaser

Posted
Posted

No, they are simply die scratches, not varieties. When Dansco starts putting 450 slots in their bust half dollar book (the number of different die combinations for the series) then they should start including these.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
cpm9ball

cpm9ball

Posted
Posted

I agree with our Sooner-mate. If they did that then they should also make a slot for my 2005-D CA SQ. It has a big die break on the brim of Muir's hat that looks like a big blob of Condor doo-doo. Or, how about my 2005-S Silver Proof KS SQ which looks like a horse kicked the buffalo in the butt.

 

Why don't you just buy a blank page so you can incorporate any of the oddities into your set?

 

Chris

Link to comment
Share on other sites
WoodenJefferson

WoodenJefferson

Posted
Posted

Nein! :eek:

 

Then you need to add the 54 or so double tree'd Minnesota DD's :P

 

But the extra leaf varieties would still be cool to have in the back! :grin:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
cpm9ball

cpm9ball

Posted
Posted

I just realized that I left my manners at the garbage dump.

 

Welcome to the neighborhood. There are a lot of really good people, here, to answer questions for you, and you should try to keep one thing in mind, "There is no such thing as stupid questions, just stupid answers."

 

Chris

Link to comment
Share on other sites
zrlevin

zrlevin

Posted
Posted
I just realized that I left my manners at the garbage dump.

 

Welcome to the neighborhood. There are a lot of really good people, here, to answer questions for you, and you should try to keep one thing in mind, "There is no such thing as stupid questions, just stupid answers."

 

Chris

 

Chris is very good at the latter. ;)

 

:baiting:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
cpm9ball

cpm9ball

Posted
Posted
I just realized that I left my manners at the garbage dump.

 

Welcome to the neighborhood. There are a lot of really good people, here, to answer questions for you, and you should try to keep one thing in mind, "There is no such thing as stupid questions, just stupid answers."

 

Chris

 

Chris is very good at the latter. ;)

 

:baiting:

 

What is that?

 

Chris

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MikeInFL

MikeInFL

Posted
Posted
Should Dansco & Whitman start making slots in their new albums to include Wisconsin high & low leafs.

YES or NO

 

I vote YES

 

Let me guess -- you own one?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
okbustchaser

okbustchaser

Posted
Posted

A day later and re-reading my above post and thinking it may seem over the top.

 

It isn't meant as another "modern " rant and I apologize to anyone who took it that way and resented it. I simply don't think that just because a particular set of dies is cracked, scratched, lapped, whatever in such a manner that the resultant coins struck from them should be considered necessary varieties for a "complete" date/MM collection. They aren't varieties--they are simply die stages of that particular set of dies.

 

I feel this way regardless of the date/series. For example, I don't think that simply because the 1807 "Bearded Goddess" has a cool nickname that it should be considered a necessary part of a capped bust half set. Nor do I consider a "3 leg" Buffalo part of that set. For the same reason I don't think the "High/Low Leaves" are either. ALL of these are collectable. I understand why all of these should carry a premium. I just don't think they belong in a Dansco or Whitman date/MM book.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
shirohniichan

shirohniichan

Posted
Posted
A day later and re-reading my above post and thinking it may seem over the top.

 

It isn't meant as another "modern " rant and I apologize to anyone who took it that way and resented it. I simply don't think that just because a particular set of dies is cracked, scratched, lapped, whatever in such a manner that the resultant coins struck from them should be considered necessary varieties for a "complete" date/MM collection. They aren't varieties--they are simply die stages of that particular set of dies.

 

I feel this way regardless of the date/series. For example, I don't think that simply because the 1807 "Bearded Goddess" has a cool nickname that it should be considered a necessary part of a capped bust half set. Nor do I consider a "3 leg" Buffalo part of that set. For the same reason I don't think the "High/Low Leaves" are either. ALL of these are collectable. I understand why all of these should carry a premium. I just don't think they belong in a Dansco or Whitman date/MM book.

 

Yea, verily.

 

If they are going to include die varieties, they should also include above wreath and below wreath mintmark placements for seated dimes, type II trade dollar obverse and reverses, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
michael

michael

Posted
Posted

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

Link to comment
Share on other sites
cpm9ball

cpm9ball

Posted
Posted
NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

 

Michael, quit beating around the bush. If you have something to say, spit it out.

 

Chris

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TomB

TomB

Posted
Posted

Absolutely not. However, if an album including varieties is produced then I see no reason why they would be excluded. I feel the same way about other popular coins that have already found themselves in these albums such as the 1922 Plain and 1955 DDO Lincoln cents, the 1918/7-D and 1937-D three-legged Buffs, the 1918/7-S SLQ and all similar coinage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
cladking

cladking

Posted
Posted

These are not mere die stages as some of the older "varieties" that have places in the albums. These aren't even mere varieties. Varieties are subtle or dramatic differences in dies that allow them to be differentiated but these differences have to be caused by legitimate mint processes. These processes result in varieties because of design changes, improper operation of equipment, equipment malfunction or any number of reasons.

 

But when coins are produced intentionally with competing designs then they go way beyond mere varieties or mere types. They are unique, dramatic and among the most important coins to ever come out of the US mint.

 

They have more similarities to the 1913 liberty nickels than most things. But even here the difference is extreme. The 1913 is normal in that it's what they'd have likely looked like, the WI different than standard issue. The '13 was believed to be produced by a single "coiner" the WI had at least two and occurred during a busy shift. The '13 was made in tiny numbers and hyped all through the late-'20's and '30's, the WI coins got national press before being slammed by most of the hobby.

 

It is simply ludicrous to make folders with slots for a 1913 with no real possibility of being found and not for the WI which still turn up once in a while. If you really want to talk ludicrous then there are most of the 20th century "varieties" that do have slots.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MikeInFL

MikeInFL

Posted
Posted

I think this coin has more in common with the Superbird quarter than the 1913 nickel, and no, in my opinon, they don't belong in Whitman/Dansco folders.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
cladking

cladking

Posted
Posted
I think this coin has more in common with the Superbird quarter than the 1913 nickel, and no, in my opinon, they don't belong in Whitman/Dansco folders.

 

 

If it's true that the superbird was made intentionally then I agree entirely.

 

But the superbird is not nearly so dramatic and isn't even identifiable in heavily worn condition. While its existence might make the WI coins to be not unique it still doesn't change their status otherwise.

 

Let's not lose sight of the fact that the only difference between a 1912 and '13 nickel is a tiny design change in the last number. Just because most collect them on the basis of that number rather than the ears of corn on the reverse doesn't make this "variety" any more spectacular. The WI coin evidences a great deal more artistic talent than merely changing the date.

 

And it's hardly just a die state considering it went into production and was removed from production shortly later in the exact same condition. All specimens are in essentially the same die state. The biggest difference with the nickel is that the mintage is higher for the latter and that they might actually be found in circulation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
okbustchaser

okbustchaser

Posted
Posted

Yes, and there should be no slot for the counterfeit 1913 Liberty nickel either. As for whether or not it is a die state it is unless no coins were struck by that die prior to the damage. Other than the so-called "It looks too perfect to be a random scratch." theory I am unaware of any reason to believe it isn't simply a scratch. I am not stating that such proof doesn't exist--merely that I am unaware of it.

 

Either way--random scratch or purposely (but illegally) done by an anonymous mint worker to a new die--it doesn't IMO belong in a date/MM folder.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
cladking

cladking

Posted
Posted
Yes, and there should be no slot for the counterfeit 1913 Liberty nickel either. As for whether or not it is a die state it is unless no coins were struck by that die prior to the damage. Other than the so-called "It looks too perfect to be a random scratch." theory I am unaware of any reason to believe it isn't simply a scratch. I am not stating that such proof doesn't exist--merely that I am unaware of it.

 

Either way--random scratch or purposely (but illegally) done by an anonymous mint worker to a new die--it doesn't IMO belong in a date/MM folder.

 

 

They are obviously not scratches to my eye. The odds of getting two random events to occur to two adjacent dies which both look like design details are exceedingly remote.

 

Beyond this it has been shown quite convincingly by others that these could not have been made in the hardened die steel so had to have originated in the die shop.

 

These are added detail. This makes these much more like types than anything else. So should the type 1 buffalo nickels be removed from the set because they just have a higher mound under the buffalo? What's the point of collecting both types of buffalos anyway when there are already a "regular' 1913 P, D, and S?

 

The fact that these are unofficial types makes them more interesting not less.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TomB

TomB

Posted
Posted

The fact that these are unofficial types makes them more interesting not less.

The fact that they may be unofficial types may make them more interesting, but it makes their inclusion in an album no more legitimate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
cladking

cladking

Posted
Posted

I believe it does on the basis of the fact that it's mostly interest that drives what people collect. Obviously everyone with an album won't both desire and be able to afford one of these but then not everyone has the hole for the 3-legged buffalo or the '16-D dime filled either.

 

My thinking is essentially if something this interesting exists then why not use it to build interest in the hobby. Some people will want to include this in their set and they should be able to display it as an integral part of it. Some might think this would create "artificial demand" but I'd counter it would be "real demand" for a very interesting pair of coins.

 

Not every album made need include it but albums should be available.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
okbustchaser

okbustchaser

Posted
Posted
The fact that these are unofficial types makes them more interesting not less.

 

Accepting your arguement that these are "unofficial types" rather than the result of damaged dies doesn't make them more interesting. It makes them counterfeit. These "types" were never authorized either by Congress or by the mint--therefore they are illegal. They don't belong in a state quarter folder.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
cladking

cladking

Posted
Posted
The fact that these are unofficial types makes them more interesting not less.

 

Accepting your arguement that these are "unofficial types" rather than the result of damaged dies doesn't make them more interesting. It makes them counterfeit. These "types" were never authorized either by Congress or by the mint--therefore they are illegal. They don't belong in a state quarter folder.

 

That's a reasonable argument and will be some people's opinion.

 

It's not mine. I collect coins and feel these still qualify as such.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
World Colonial

World Colonial

Posted
Posted

I do not care one way or the other since the coins I collect do not even have albums available. But I would say that inclusion of this coin or some of the others mentioned here such as the 1937-D 3 leg Buffalo and the 1955 DDO cent in albums and the "Red Book" is a big reason why these coins cost as much as they do. There are many coins that are much scarcer that remain much cheaper.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
cladking

cladking

Posted
Posted
I do not care one way or the other since the coins I collect do not even have albums available. But I would say that inclusion of this coin or some of the others mentioned here such as the 1937-D 3 leg Buffalo and the 1955 DDO cent in albums and the "Red Book" is a big reason why these coins cost as much as they do. There are many coins that are much scarcer that remain much cheaper.

 

 

Exactly.

 

So why not use these to bait the hook and catch some newbies?

 

These make nearly ideal bait because their numbers are sufficient to attract a mass market and small enough to be limiting. It just seems like a dream come true and the hobby should capitalize on it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BECOKA

BECOKA

Posted
Posted

I vote no. I have no interest in obtaining the varieties.

 

What I would suggest is a variety specific page to be optional. This could be at the back and maybe more enjoyable with them together.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Go to topic listing