40,000 fakes intercepted 0

[VKurtB]

The more I think about this story of 40,000 fakes, the more one aspect disturbs me. The Secret Service had no in-house expertise to tell these coins were fake. THAT WAS THEIR ORIGINAL MISSION, not “setting picks” for assassins’ bullets. They used to be in the Treasury Department. Then Tom Ridge drafted them into Homeland Security. Just imagine the silliness of the fact that NO ONE at Secret Service knows (or cares) squat about counterfeit coins. Wow.

[Alex in PA.]

On 6/4/2021 at 3:46 PM, Coinbuf said:

make some rainbow toners. 

I loved those Shake and Bake toned Morgans that were all the rave on SleezeBay.  I was just sorry you could never get the scm bgs who did the cooking and ruined those coins.  Some did make it into slabs though!  

[Alex in PA.]

On 6/4/2021 at 3:46 PM, Coinbuf said:

And if all else fails just dig around in your loose change, your sure to come across several very valuable doubled die coins.

Now where have I been seeing a lot of this lately?  

[gmarguli]

49 minutes ago, VKurtB said:

The more I think about this story of 40,000 fakes, the more one aspect disturbs me. The Secret Service had no in-house expertise to tell these coins were fake. THAT WAS THEIR ORIGINAL MISSION, not “setting picks” for assassins’ bullets. They used to be in the Treasury Department. Then Tom Ridge drafted them into Homeland Security. Just imagine the silliness of the fact that NO ONE at Secret Service knows (or cares) squat about counterfeit coins. Wow.

Maybe we now know why the Colorado counterfeiter, D.C., hasn't been arrested. The Secret Service doesn't have the ability to tell that the coins are counterfeit.

And given the quality of the counterfeits pictured in the article, no expert would be needed. They were bad fakes. Anyone with a tiny bit of knowledge about coins would have spotted them as fakes instantly. 

[VKurtB]

6 hours ago, gmarguli said:

Maybe we now know why the Colorado counterfeiter, D.C., hasn't been arrested. The Secret Service doesn't have the ability to tell that the coins are counterfeit.

And given the quality of the counterfeits pictured in the article, no expert would be needed. They were bad fakes. Anyone with a tiny bit of knowledge about coins would have spotted them as fakes instantly. 

Have you read the ANA’s dismissal of the complaint about D.C. filed by RWB? They deny in writing that D.C. is counterfeiting. A formal action of the Board. 

[GoldFinger1969]

On 6/4/2021 at 4:02 PM, VKurtB said:

Or "double dead"? The May 25 (cover date) Numismatic News has a story of a 8-year-old kid who found a bronze 1983 cent, so it can happen. 

How did a bronze penny get created ?

[Woods020]

1 hour ago, GoldFinger1969 said:

How did a bronze penny get created ?

Bronze is a combination of copper and tin or other metals. The pre-zinc cents were 95% copper and 5% zinc. Then they transitioned to 97.5% zinc and 2.5% copper. The bronze cent mentioned is a transition error where a 1983 was struck on a pre-transition planchet. Some refer to them as bronze and some just say copper. 

Edited June 7, 2021 by Woods020

[RWB]

The original "bronze" standard was 95% copper and 5% tin and zinc - the proportions were not specified but it was often about 2% tin and 3% zinc. (True "French bronze" sometimes called "bell metal" is approx. 93% copper 5% tin and 2% zinc.)

The original alloy was used until the Spring of 1941 when the mints eliminated "all but a trace" of tin. That alloy - which was really brass - continued (except 1943) until the change to zinc in 1983. The so-called "transition error" is nothing more than the Mints using leftover planchets of the old alloy. It doesn't "transition" anything, except possibly cleaning out the "attic."

[VKurtB]

25 minutes ago, RWB said:

The original "bronze" standard was 95% copper and 5% tin and zinc - the proportions were not specified but it was often about 2% tin and 3% zinc. (True "French bronze" sometimes called "bell metal" is approx. 93% copper 5% tin and 2% zinc.)

The original alloy was used until the Spring of 1941 when the mints eliminated "all but a trace" of tin. That alloy - which was really brass - continued (except 1943) until the change to zinc in 1983. The so-called "transition error" is nothing more than the Mints using leftover planchets of the old alloy. It doesn't "transition" anything, except possibly cleaning out the "attic."

If you’ve ever taken the Philadelphia mint self-guided tour, you’ll wonder why more random stuff doesn’t get struck as cents. Too easy. 

[brg5658]

20 minutes ago, RWB said:

The original "bronze" standard was 95% copper and 5% tin and zinc - the proportions were not specified but it was often about 2% tin and 3% zinc. (True "French bronze" sometimes called "bell metal" is approx. 93% copper 5% tin and 2% zinc.)

The original alloy was used until the Spring of 1941 when the mints eliminated "all but a trace" of tin. That alloy - which was really brass - continued (except 1943) until the change to zinc in 1983. The so-called "transition error" is nothing more than the Mints using leftover planchets of the old alloy. It doesn't "transition" anything, except possibly cleaning out the "attic."

Couldn't the same be said for the copper 1943 cents that should have been struck on zinc coated steel planchets?  If the 1943 "transition" pieces are errors (previous copper alloy planchet struck with 1943), why wouldn't the 1983 pieces be considered "transition" errors (previous copper alloy planchet struck with 1983)?  Just because the alloy from 1982 looks like the new 1983 copper plated zinc cents (i.e., they both look like copper), why would it not quality as this magical "transitional error" type?

NGC groups errors they will attribute into 3 main categories:

• Errors related to the die (Part 1)
• Errors related to the strike (Part 2 and Part 3)
• Errors related to the planchet (Part 4)  ← This one

I'm not sure why NGC differentiates "transitional errors" versus just calling them what they are - wrong planchet errors.  All "transitional errors" are a subset of wrong planchet errors.  The "sex-appeal" factor of them being left over and part of an "attic cleaning" seems to make them sell for insane money.  

I have no horse in this race - error coins bore me to tears as collectibles, though I find them interesting from a minting process standpoint.

[VKurtB]

2 hours ago, brg5658 said:

I have no horse in this race - error coins bore me to tears as collectibles

I feel the same way, but I’m constantly on the lookout for ngccoin.com newbies who might want to burn me as a heretic.

[World Colonial]

23 minutes ago, VKurtB said:

I feel the same way, but I’m constantly on the lookout for ngccoin.com newbies who might want to burn me as a heretic.

I see most of the motivation as financial, to inflate the price level as much as possible and exaggerate the significance for the rarity even though it's the norm.

[gmarguli]

15 hours ago, VKurtB said:

Have you read the ANA’s dismissal of the complaint about D.C. filed by RWB? They deny in writing that D.C. is counterfeiting. A formal action of the Board. 

I did not know that. Every Board member that voted that way should lose their seat and be permanently banned from the ANA. 

[VKurtB]

38 minutes ago, gmarguli said:

I did not know that. Every Board member that voted that way should lose their seat and be permanently banned from the ANA. 

It was years ago, and as I hear it, it was unanimous: 9-0. On edit: RWB filed the complaint on June 1, 2014 and the Board held a hearing on October 30, 2014 and found the complaint to be without merit. Carr remains an ANA member in good standing, and his pieces, of ALL types that he produces, remain eligible for competitive exhibition at ANA conventions, and have been for sale on an ANA bourse floor as recently as 2017.

Edited June 7, 2021 by VKurtB

[Conder101]

On 6/7/2021 at 11:11 AM, RWB said:

That alloy - which was really brass - continued (except 1943) until the change to zinc in 1983.

1963, they eliminated the requirement for tin then and went to 95% copper 5% zinc.

 

On 6/6/2021 at 11:22 PM, VKurtB said:

Have you read the ANA’s dismissal of the complaint about D.C. filed by RWB? They deny in writing that D.C. is counterfeiting.

That's nice.  When did the ANA Board start writing the laws on counterfeiting?

[VKurtB]

11 minutes ago, Conder101 said:

1963, they eliminated the requirement for tin then and went to 95% copper 5% zinc.

 

That's nice.  When did the ANA Board start writing the laws on counterfeiting?

They don’t. But RWB went after DC formally with a complaint against DC’s membership. The ANA dismissed the complaint and explained why. One reason was they found NO EVIDENCE that DC has committed any crime. And the ANA is THE ONLY BODY enforcing any ethical standards in this field. The ANA rules do not allow exhibits violating any law, and they DO now allow DC’s fantasy date overstrikes. Now, can you draw the obvious conclusion? Yes, some people disagree. Big deal. Some people think the earth is flat, too.

 

The letter regarding the decision was signed by Hollie Wieland, the ANA’s Chief Legal Counsel. What does your LEGAL EDUCATION tell you?

Edited June 9, 2021 by VKurtB

[RWB]

14 minutes ago, Conder101 said:

1963, they eliminated the requirement for tin then and went to 95% copper 5% zinc.

Yep. forgot about that.

[Conder101]

42 minutes ago, VKurtB said:

What does your LEGAL EDUCATION tell you?

It tells me their decision only applies to their own little fiefdom.

[VKurtB]

15 minutes ago, Conder101 said:

It tells me their decision only applies to their own little fiefdom.

Name anyone “learned in the law” (the definition of a lawyer) who believes DC is counterfeiting. Any amateur can (mis)read statutes, as we repeatedly see here.

[comicdonna]

It's sad to see DC is still allowed to make counterfeit coins.  Sure he discloses but, what about the buyers who sell them at a later date?  How many newcomers to the hobby will get taken from these counterfeit coins?  A crime is being allowed to happen in this hobby.  

[coinman_23885]

 

On 6/7/2021 at 3:14 PM, gmarguli said:

I did not know that. Every Board member that voted that way should lose their seat and be permanently banned from the ANA. 

Notably RWB only referenced one of Carr's productions, and it was seemingly one of the most benign ones. The ANA's letter response did not claim his pieces were not counterfeit; it took the easy route and said he hadn't been convicted of counterfeiting or criminal behavior as of that time.  That dodges the issue completely. The letter does nothing to purport to legitimate his pieces as is often suggested by various posters of various message boards.  I agree that the those members should lose their seats. Moreover, since the ANA doesn't even care whether the statute it helped promoted (i.e. the HPA) is enforced, it should lose its charter.

Edited June 27, 2021 by coinman_23885