• 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.

Original Mint Set?

Started by Coindude,

19 posts in this topic

MarkFeld

MarkFeld

Posted
Posted

I think the seller might or might not be correct.

 

Does the "original" refer to the type of set (issued by the mint) or the condition of the coins, or both?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
AHFreak

AHFreak

Posted
Posted

This is something I have put some thought into... Just yesterday I was browsing Ebay, and thinking, "I wish I could know for sure it truly was original".

 

That said, this one here doesn't necessarily scream out to me that it isn't original. That cardboard looks clean/crisp and I haven't tried so I wouldn't know, but it seems like removing/replacing coins would leave it looking not quite as good.

 

Maybe you are looking at the cent and the fact that one is "backwards" of how it is supposed to be, I have a mint set that I am extremely confident is "all-original" that has one of the coins facing the wrong way. I could easily chalk that up to mint employees, putting these together as quickly as possible.

 

If it is the toning/or lack there of that is a concern, the coins look like they have been in the cardboard for a long time to me.... just cause they don't have that "mint set" rainbow effect, doesn't mean they aren't original. Toning is not an equal opportunity employer....

 

Anytime I have doubts about an Ebay seller, I simply look at and read that seller's other coin-listings.... (photo's and descriptions are probably the most telling as far as Im concerned).

 

Based on the photo of the mint set you posted here, I would suggest holding back on forming judgements/opinions on the honesty and or integrity of this particular seller. Just my two cents....

Link to comment
Share on other sites
AHFreak

AHFreak

Posted
Posted

Now that I look again.. harder... I see what is cause for concern... IMO, at the very minimum, that half in the bottom left looks to me that it is not original, and was swapped out. (I think better pics would make it easy to know for sure one way or another.).

 

 

 

So, No I don't think its original. I am very confident that it isn't.

 

But that only means that sometime between now and in the last 50+ years, that someone swapped out a coin or two.. doesn't mean the seller did it. I think that the majority of coin-dealers, especially if they own a shop for instance, and/or don't specialize or deal with mint sets, wouldn't even notice one of the coins not being original.. and therefore, buy it assuming they are, and sell it assuming they are..

 

Again, just my two cents.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Coindude

Coindude

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I have seen lots of mint sets with coins that are flipped. That is the least of my thoughts. My main thoughts are, what are the odds that almost every coin is perfectly square in the holder, even the ones with the reverse up. That would have to be one conscientious mint employee... and if they were that conscientious, how did the miss the Cents!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MarkFeld

MarkFeld

Posted
Posted
I have seen lots of mint sets with coins that are flipped. That is the least of my thoughts. My main thoughts are, what are the odds that almost every coin is perfectly square in the holder, even the ones with the reverse up. That would have to be one conscientious mint employee... and if they were that conscientious, how did the miss the Cents!

 

One or more persons could have removed and re-inserted any of the coins, over time. And that wouldn't disqualify the set from being "original".

 

Bottom line - if the set is other than original, it's not obvious to me, based on the images provided.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
coinman_23885

coinman_23885

Posted
Posted
What do you think of a seller who lists items like this as "ORIGINAL"?

 

Either laughable or the seller was intentionally trying to play semantic games to fool the unknowledgeable. Obviously, while the packaging might be original, it is unlikely to be an original set or the coins would be toned. And if the pieces are the same as those in the set, they likely have been dipped, and it would still be inappropriate to describe it as "original" in my opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MarkFeld

MarkFeld

Posted
Posted
What do you think of a seller who lists items like this as "ORIGINAL"?

 

Either laughable or the seller was intentionally trying to play semantic games to fool the unknowledgeable. Obviously, while the packaging might be original, it is unlikely to be an original set or the coins would be toned. And if the pieces are the same as those in the set, they likely have been dipped, and it would still be inappropriate to describe it as "original" in my opinion.

 

The coins look toned to me, though some of them only lightly so. Not all "original" coins in mint sets tone deeply and/or colorfully.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
coinman_23885

coinman_23885

Posted
Posted
What do you think of a seller who lists items like this as "ORIGINAL"?

 

Either laughable or the seller was intentionally trying to play semantic games to fool the unknowledgeable. Obviously, while the packaging might be original, it is unlikely to be an original set or the coins would be toned. And if the pieces are the same as those in the set, they likely have been dipped, and it would still be inappropriate to describe it as "original" in my opinion.

 

The coins look toned to me, though some of them only lightly so. Not all "original" coins in mint sets tone deeply and/or colorfully.

 

Fair enough, but wouldn't all the coins in the board most likely tone to the same or similar degree? For instance, all light toning or all dark toning since the same forces (temperature, environmental gases, moisture, etc.) would be constant for the entire set. If so, why would the bottom dime tone so much more than the other coins?

 

Edited: It isn't like a mint bag where position would seemingly matter more. The coins are face down in the packaging and each coin should have roughly the same level of exposure to sulfur from the paper and surrounding packaging, wouldn't it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MarkFeld

MarkFeld

Posted
Posted
What do you think of a seller who lists items like this as "ORIGINAL"?

 

Either laughable or the seller was intentionally trying to play semantic games to fool the unknowledgeable. Obviously, while the packaging might be original, it is unlikely to be an original set or the coins would be toned. And if the pieces are the same as those in the set, they likely have been dipped, and it would still be inappropriate to describe it as "original" in my opinion.

 

The coins look toned to me, though some of them only lightly so. Not all "original" coins in mint sets tone deeply and/or colorfully.

 

Fair enough, but wouldn't all the coins in the board most likely tone to the same or similar degree? For instance, all light toning or all dark toning since the same forces (temperature, environmental gases, moisture, etc.) would be constant for the entire set. If so, why would the bottom dime tone so much more than the other coins?

 

 

Edited: It isn't like a mint bag where position would seemingly matter more. The coins are face down in the packaging and each coin should have roughly the same level of exposure to sulfur from the paper and surrounding packaging, wouldn't it?

 

I have seen many (original) mint sets containing coins with uneven/unmatched toning. But I'd be suspicious if, for example, three of the half dollars were deeply toned and the other one was blast white.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
$ilverHawk

$ilverHawk

Posted
Posted
What do you think of a seller who lists items like this as "ORIGINAL"?

 

Screenshot_2_zpsfa994f73.jpg

 

Ah excuse me but the first board shows the reverse of both Lincoln cents. Original? I don't think so. Yeah, it could have been a mint packaging error, not.

 

See here. http://www.ebay.com/itm/1957-US-Mint-Uncirculated-Coin-Set-20-coins-Beautifully-Toned-/371073475427?pt=Coins_US_Individual&hash=item5665b3e363

 

Note the "shuffling" of obverse and reverse presentations on the "mint boards". Manufactured mint sets.

 

Carl

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RWB

RWB

Posted
Posted

Sets were likely assembled by several people - one for each denomination and mint. That would have been the only way to ensure that each set contained the correct coins.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MarkFeld

MarkFeld

Posted
Posted
What do you think of a seller who lists items like this as "ORIGINAL"?

 

Screenshot_2_zpsfa994f73.jpg

 

Ah excuse me but the first board shows the reverse of both Lincoln cents. Original? I don't think so. Yeah, it could have been a mint packaging error, not.

 

See here. http://www.ebay.com/itm/1957-US-Mint-Uncirculated-Coin-Set-20-coins-Beautifully-Toned-/371073475427?pt=Coins_US_Individual&hash=item5665b3e363

 

Note the "shuffling" of obverse and reverse presentations on the "mint boards". Manufactured mint sets.

 

Carl

 

The originality of the set (or lack thereof) has nothing to do with how the coins were inserted or whether they were removed and re-inserted with a different side facing up.

 

The set might not be original - I don't think there is a way to know for certain - but I have read more than one post/conclusion in this thread which is based upon poor evidence of such.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Coindude

Coindude

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Mark, I completely understand and respect your point of view. It just seems fishy to me and I hate for people to overpay for something that they think they are getting when they most likely aren't getting what they bargained for.

 

This is my own opinion and even though it differs from your may not be correct as you've pointed out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MarkFeld

MarkFeld

Posted
Posted
Mark, I completely understand and respect your point of view. It just seems fishy to me and I hate for people to overpay for something that they think they are getting when they most likely aren't getting what they bargained for.

 

This is my own opinion and even though it differs from your may not be correct as you've pointed out.

 

No problem at all. It's quite possible that the set isn't original. And even if it is, it doesn't look desirable to me, due to the lack of attractive toning.

 

My two major points in this thread are that 1) we can't know for certain whether the set is original and 2) the lack of more and/or better matched toning and the sides of the coins that are facing up do not necessarily indicate that it's not original. In other words, it isn't about who is "right" or "wrong" in their guesses. It's about forming opinions based on sound, rather than possibly poor evidence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Go to topic listing