• 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.

2000 Liberty Head Sacagawea Concept coin

Started by Schatzy,

17 posts in this topic

World Colonial

World Colonial

Posted
Posted

Right after I resumed collecting in 1998, I bought a few items from them but subsequently considered it a waste of money and sold them. I bought some of the 1796 replicas in proof plus some of the 1792 federal patterns. The quality was very good in my opinion but the marketability is weak which is why I considered it a poor use of my money. I ended up selling them all at a loss, about 60 cents on the dollar.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
physics-fan3.14

physics-fan3.14

Posted
Posted
I have one, but mine isn't a piefort.

 

???? What is piefort?

 

Piefort is also spelled piedfort in many places. The UHR is considered to be a piedfort I believe. I have a 1986 French 100 francs Statue of Liberty silver piedfort. Often, and mainly at European mints, they would make double thick pieforts as presentation pieces, or special issues for collectors. They would also make essais, which are similar to what we call patterns. Both of these generally have very low mintages, for example, my French piedfort has a mintage of 5000 - of which I know for a fact that many have been melted. I also discovered that these coins have a minor DDR as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Conder101

Conder101

Posted
Posted

I considered whether or not the new UHR would be considered a Piedfort and I decided it would not. Yes it is twice as thick, but it is also smaller in diameter so the amount of material in the coin remains the same. Other piedforts are the normal size but double thickness making them twice the weight of the normal coin as well. So the UHR is just a thick coin. (Like the British pound coin which is twice as thick as the other coins but isn't a piedfort, just another thick coin.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
physics-fan3.14

physics-fan3.14

Posted
Posted
I considered whether or not the new UHR would be considered a Piedfort and I decided it would not. Yes it is twice as thick, but it is also smaller in diameter so the amount of material in the coin remains the same. Other piedforts are the normal size but double thickness making them twice the weight of the normal coin as well. So the UHR is just a thick coin. (Like the British pound coin which is twice as thick as the other coins but isn't a piedfort, just another thick coin.)

 

Good point Mike. I hadn't thought of that, I was just focusing on the double thick part.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
WoodenJefferson

WoodenJefferson

Posted
Posted

In the description, it states:

 

This group was discovered after Gallery Mint changed ownership and is undoubtedly the largest original intact hoard. No more will be struck and once we sell out we will not be able to get any additional pieces.

 

How can the seller claim this, "No more will be struck" ?

 

This might be possible if the dies were cancelled or destroyed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Conder101

Conder101

Posted
Posted
How can the seller claim this, "No more will be struck" ?

Well the firm that struck them is no more, and I believe the firm that bought them out has also gone out of business. If the dies do still exist, and they probably do, even if they were used again legally the product would have to be marked to indicate that it is not one of the originals. Even though the concept piece is not a coin, it would be covered under the Hobby Protection Act as a numismatic item. So a restrike or copy would have to be marked..

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Go to topic listing