zadok Posted June 19 Share Posted June 19 ...oh the real question is...which is worse? the babbling or the whining.... Henri Charriere 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henri Charriere Posted June 19 Author Share Posted June 19 Q.A.: I am going to do the unthinkable. 🐓 : What's that? Q.A.: Write the "ASK NGC/NCS" Forum and briefly state, "THIS is what they did over THERE. May I know where the Set Registry stands on this issue?" 🐓 : Good Luck. I hope they don't disappear us. Q.A.: Once again, this is a risk I will have to take. There are exponentially more collectors of the F20F GRs here, than there are over there. They (I guess that includes me) deserve the courtesy of a notice of intent. My identity was stolen over THERE. I never cared much for assasination by deletion under cover of night. It's downright ungentlemanly. zadok 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoldFinger1969 Posted June 20 Share Posted June 20 Were these restrikes re-issued ? They're not like the SSCA "restrike" I bought right ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henri Charriere Posted June 20 Author Share Posted June 20 On 6/20/2024 at 2:44 PM, GoldFinger1969 said: Were these restrikes re-issued ? They're not like the SSCA "restrike" I bought right ? This is a question that has gone unanswered for the five years I have been collecting the series. I have never come across a single reference directly stating "NO COINS BEARING THE DATES 1907 TO 1914 WERE MINTED IN THOSE YEARS." Apparently, PCGS just learned something no other numismatic entity -- including NGC -- was privy to. What is particularly galling to me is the way they went about notifying me and others: deleting a single "restrike," thereby redistributing set ratings and rankings and waiting to see what happens. If I had been notified in a more gentlemanly fashion, my set could have avoided complete disarray and I could have either simply deleted my inventory from one set and added it to another, but no preparations including advance notice, had been made to accommodate those who can live with the decision. Aggravating matters is the fact that any attempt I make to effect the necessary changes is defeated by the age-old warning: fails to match composite. I believe the use of the term Restrike, or Refrappe in French, was most unfortunate. Nothing, apparently, was restruck. If anything, the series was continued after a pause and new dies and planchets with an indiscernible change in metal composition was effected. The issue is not even acknowledged in the French "Red Book" and I appear to be the only collector vocal on the matter though there are scores more collecting the series. If the matter remains unresolved, I will simply pick up my marbles, and go home. It was my intention to retire the sets, here and there, later this year anyway, but I did not anticipate my legacy would be desecrated in such an uncivilized way. [Cross-grading entails it's own risks and I am not sure the prohibitive seemingly unnecessary expense justifies it.] (Posted at the discretion of Moderation.) GoldFinger1969 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henri Charriere Posted June 21 Author Share Posted June 21 @GoldFinger1969 : I am unfamiliar with the SSCA restrikes. . . but I AM familiar with something Kurt once mentioned: the 1780 Austrian Taler restrikes. To me, a restrike would be a coin originally dated, say 1780, that was restruck with the SAME date at a later time. There are NO restrike Originals. However, I cannot state unequivocally whether there were any roosters dated 1907 to 1914 which were struck in those years. If there were, then the question is how would you distinguish between the two? I would like to know what prompted the action PCGS took, now, 110 years after the last dated rooster was minted (1914) and some 60 years after the last restrikes were struck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henri Charriere Posted June 21 Author Share Posted June 21 (edited) On 6/18/2024 at 10:09 PM, zadok said: ...anyone that invests in bullion restrikes should realize the folly of their adventure.... For the Record... The Franklin halves were 90% silver and were minted over l7 years. The F20FR GR were 90% gold and were minted over 16 years. I do not recall anyone ever referring to Franklin halves as "bullion" coins to be "invested" in and believe any collector of the series couldn't care less if the first half of the set were called Originals and the second half, Restrikes. Collectors of type sets collect on the basis of years coins were minted and, where applicable, mintmarks. I collected roosters, first and foremost, on design appeal. Their gold bullion or numismatic value was never a consideration. Compiling the best possible set, limited solely by availability, was my driving force. You view F20FR GRs from a completely different perspective than I do. Let me splain that for you: if gold tanks, you lose. I do not lose anything. Why? Because I still have my roosters. It's nothing more complicated than that. Edited June 21 by Henri Charriere Add word. zadok 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoldFinger1969 Posted June 21 Share Posted June 21 This whole restrike issue and scarcity of all these coins goes back to the French hoarding culture, unique among Europeans as you can all see from the NYT articles I posted. Henri Charriere 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henri Charriere Posted Saturday at 01:41 PM Author Share Posted Saturday at 01:41 PM (edited) V I N D I C A T I O N ! It appears the Ministry's order in the matter of "z's decree" has been OVERRULED. I am pleased to report that my recommendation for "restrike" reconsideration (PCGS refers to them using the French word "refrappes") has been granted AND a new set created -- contrary to z's view -- melding both the Original AND Refrappe Roosters in one set as a series. I found this out late last nite and, though my set lies in disarray in Set Registry cyberspace, I managed to put enough of it back together again to regain my # 1 ranking. The entire issue of "restrikes" is shrouded in ambiguity. But the fact remains there are 16 coins in the series however which way you cut the pie and label the parts. All this conspiratorial talk of padding one's set rating proved in the end to be nothing but hogwash. No one would be foolish enough to suggest the "war time nickels" in the Jefferson nickels be segregated due to their religious persuasion, "silver" sect," because there simply are no Jeffs minted in the war years, that were of the usual composition. If you have a nickel from 1943, it stands to reason there is no need to perform a mass spectrometer test to insure its authenticity as being a member of the Silver Sect. The same goes for gold roosters. No need to wonder whether one dated 1903 is a restrike, or whether one dated 1911 is a restrike. It's black and white. My position on this has always been firm and I had the weight of the "body of knowledge" on my side. Ah, the joy of VINDICATION! (To mark this momentous occasion, I have taken the liberty of re-naming my West coast set, "The Francois Villon Collection," in a barb to "z's decree.") 🤣 Edited Saturday at 01:43 PM by Henri Charriere Add a closing parenthesis. GoldFinger1969 and rrantique 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henri Charriere Posted Saturday at 08:09 PM Author Share Posted Saturday at 08:09 PM (edited) On 6/18/2024 at 10:09 PM, zadok said: ...restrikes dont belong in registry sets as simple as that, just a means to pad points n outscore the collectors who collect the originals... in other words circumventing the integrity intent of the registry as it is supposed to be. the originals n the restrikes belong in two separate sets, simple a no-brainer... anyone that invests in bullion restrikes should realize the folly of their adventure... n not intrude into the collector base of the originals... u should whine elsewhere, no sympathy here.... 🐓: Looks like one TPGS and their panel of World Coin experts, sitting en banc, have reconsidered their position, and beg to differ. What was that saying about revenge?... Q.A.: It is a dish best served cold. As I was fond of advising his crony: "You opened the door, counselor!" That was the real reason for any enmity. As a formidable opponent, he had met his match and lost the jut in his strut. No sympathy? That's okay. I consulted a higher authority, presented my case -- and won. Total Vindication! I am, once again, the reining current and all-time finest. It doesn't get any better than that. Edited Saturday at 08:11 PM by Henri Charriere Die polishing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post J P M Posted Saturday at 09:05 PM Popular Post Share Posted Saturday at 09:05 PM Good to see you back on top you have been very cranky lately rrantique, GoldFinger1969 and Henri Charriere 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henri Charriere Posted Sunday at 09:41 PM Author Share Posted Sunday at 09:41 PM (edited) Warmest 🤣 greetings, all, My set on the West coast, torn asunder in the wake of a policy change, since reversed, has been reconstituted on a newly-created set, of which, as of 1403 hours today, I am the sole registrant. While none of the details such as photos and comments have yet to be reassigned, I officially clawed my way back to the No. 1 rank. I chose to assume the responsibility for reassembling my set because I am not a member, have been unable to add to my set in years due to unavailability, and do not participate on their quirky chat board. I did not check, but I have reason to believe most members were unaffected by the unanticipated policy change and the one I had long believed was a constant, credible threat -- a veritable albatross around my neck -- was a phantom who simply did not "retire" his set. Now I know how Seattle Slew felt when, ahead by 17 lengths, he finished first at Belmont and claimed the trophy at the last leg of the Triple Crown in 1977. For the benefit of those who continue to cling to the mistaken belief z's decree had merit, herewith the incontrovertible proof: "French 20-Francs Original or Refrappe Gold Rooster, Circulation Strikes (1899-1914)." It took me an entire week to recover from the unannounced policy change, and negotiating the debris field spread over three sets was a challenge, but I am whole again having recovered my identity. This episode effectively concludes what will indubitably go down in numismatic history as The Great Gold Rooster Ambush of 2024. 🐓 Edited Sunday at 09:45 PM by Henri Charriere Routine die polishing: add word. GoldFinger1969 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
