What percentage of active coin collectors read hobby books.... 0

[DWLange]

Quote

I find the NNP to be really difficult to navigate. 

Yes, probably the worst search engine outside of a government website. The administrators are aware of the deficiency.

[VKurtB]

On 8/8/2022 at 1:38 PM, DWLange said:

Yes, probably the worst search engine outside of a government website. The administrators are aware of the deficiency.

On the other hand, I know EXACTLY where every book, brochure (Tyrant Collection), and yes, even court opinion in my library is. Yes, I have every paper from the Langbord case printed and bound in leather. 

[Oldhoopster]

On 8/8/2022 at 2:47 PM, VKurtB said:

On the other hand, I know EXACTLY where every book, brochure (Tyrant Collection), and yes, even court opinion in my library is. Yes, I have every paper from the Langbord case printed and bound in leather. 

You should write a book on the Longobard Trial 

[GoldFinger1969]

On 8/8/2022 at 4:12 PM, Oldhoopster said:

You should write a book on the Longobard Trial 

No, he shouldn't. 

[Zebo]

Here’s a couple of books I’m considering - even though I don’t collect the stuff. If not - maybe I’ll go see these guys.

 

[VKurtB]

On 8/9/2022 at 12:16 AM, GoldFinger1969 said:

No, he shouldn't. 

Says the impartial guy who has no particular interest in a specific outcome. At the 2016 Anaheim ANA show, Scott Travers tried to bring up the Langbord case as a topic at his Money Talk. He asked for a show of hands as to whether the 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals got the Langbord case wrong. About 3/4 raised their hands (amateurs). Keep in mind I was a staffer for the Pennsylvania House Judiciary Committee Chairman at the time. Scott asked for a explanation why we felt as we do. I gave an impromptu 3 minute explanation why the court got it exactly right. Nobody else then wanted to oppose my view. Not one of the 150+ in the room, not even Travers. 
 

The key points:

1) It never was a “beyond a reasonable doubt” case, but merely “preponderance of the evidence”.

2) The Government had no “burden of proof”; that burden was with the Langbords.

3) The Government has no obligation to seek forfeiture when the finder of fact (the jury) has found that the property never ceased to be owned by the Government. 

Edited August 9, 2022 by VKurtB

[GoldFinger1969]

On 8/9/2022 at 1:36 PM, VKurtB said:

Says the impartial guy who has no particular interest in a specific outcome. At the 2016 Anaheim ANA show, Scott Travers tried to bring up the Langbord case as a topic at his Money Talk. He asked for a show of hands as to whether the 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals got the Langbord case wrong. About 3/4 raised their hands (amateurs). Keep in mind I was a staffer for the Pennsylvania House Judiciary Committee Chairman at the time. Scott asked for a explanation why we felt as we do. I gave an impromptu 3 minute explanation why the court got it exactly right. Nobody else then wanted to oppose my view. Not one of the 150+ in the room, not even Travers. 

But you HATE gold, all other things aside. 

And no, I have no particular interest in the outcome.  I own no 1933 Double Eagles -- at least I don't think so... let me check my loose chain jar. 

As for the show of hands.....I am not surprised.  Most coin collectors never accepted the government's arguments, and my reading of threads on multiple sites showed that this was without regard to political party affiliation or ideology.  I would say at LEAST 80% of posters opposed the government's actions, and it may have been as high as 90 or 95%. 

As for why nobody opposed you, they probably weren't comfortable on the minutae of the case, the legal arguments, past cases, etc.  I'm not a lawyer like you but I am (or was, at one time ) pretty up-to-date on the rationale and arguments for a settlement or continued possession of the coins. 

I'd certainly have debated you at that show.  I might not have WON the argument on the merits, but I think I would have held my own. 

Edited August 9, 2022 by GoldFinger1969

[VKurtB]

On 8/9/2022 at 1:00 PM, GoldFinger1969 said:

But you HATE gold, all other things aside. 

And no, I have no particular interest in the outcome.  I own no 1933 Double Eagles -- at least I don't think so... let me check my loose chain jar. 

As for the show of hands.....I am not surprised.  Most coin collectors never accepted the government's arguments, and my reading of threads on multiple sites showed that this was without regard to political party affiliation or ideology.  I would say at LEAST 80% of posters opposed the government's actions, and it may have been as high as 90 or 95%. 

As for why nobody opposed you, they probably weren't comfortable on the minutae of the case, the legal arguments, past cases, etc.  I'm not a lawyer like you but I am (or was, at one time ) pretty up-to-date on the rationale and arguments for a settlement or continued possession of the coins. 

I'd certainly have debated you at that show.  I might not have WON the argument on the merits, but I think I would have held my own. 

That’s what probably annoys me most - people, even coin people, take advocacy positions on a lawsuit without having ANY knowledge of the applicable law. That grinds my gears more than you can ever imagine. It makes me fear for our judicial system generally. 

[VKurtB]

On 8/9/2022 at 1:00 PM, GoldFinger1969 said:

Most coin collectors never accepted the government's arguments,

Why in the heck would that EVER be seen as important or even relevant? Courts of law are NOT democracies, nor should they ever be. Now if a case has a juror or two who understands jury nullification, then the fun begins. If Alabama ever calls me for jury duty, the fun could become non-stop. I’ve seen enough of the Alabama courts to know it’s run by tall Australian marsupials. Or perhaps more accurately, it is a Volksgerichtshof. 

Edited August 9, 2022 by VKurtB

[Oldhoopster]

On 8/9/2022 at 2:05 PM, VKurtB said:

That’s what probably annoys me most - people, even coin people, take advocacy positions on a lawsuit without having ANY knowledge of the applicable law. That grinds my gears more than you can ever imagine. It makes me fear for our judicial system generally. 

All the more reason to write a book to document it.  How many of those 150 people that heard your impromptu 3 minute explanation remember some, if any of it.  If you don't document it, then its lost to history. Unless you're waiting for people to seek you out and personally ask for your story 

Edit to add

Or give a presentation at the ANA or FUN.  The worst that can happen is that you've provided a baseline of facts and data that can be used for any future debates

Edited August 9, 2022 by Oldhoopster

[Henri Charriere]

[That does it. I'm going to have to revive my ritual of keeping a scorecard. This way I know where every member stands at any given moment. It might also help if I put down the newspaper and picked up a book. Of course I remember what they are!] 

Edited August 10, 2022 by Quintus Arrius
Upward departure from guidelines for cause.

[GoldFinger1969]

On 8/9/2022 at 2:05 PM, VKurtB said:

That’s what probably annoys me most - people, even coin people, take advocacy positions on a lawsuit without having ANY knowledge of the applicable law. That grinds my gears more than you can ever imagine. It makes me fear for our judicial system generally. 

Don't forget that there are other coins with similar pedigrees and dubious release histories similar to the 1933 Double Eagle.  While nothing has happened with them....and while multiple transactions have taken place...the FDR EO and actual statements by Treasury/Mint officials that they should or could be seized probably resonates with hardcore goldbugs and collectors.

Myself, I see the differences in the 2 cases but you can also draw a not-so-straight line between the various possessions.

Edited August 10, 2022 by GoldFinger1969

[GoldFinger1969]

On 8/9/2022 at 2:08 PM, VKurtB said:

Why in the heck would that EVER be seen as important or even relevant? 

Ummm....they think the government is WRONG ?  

Has nothing to do with democracy, has to do with whether you think the stronger arguments were with one side or the other.  Even if you believe BOTH SIDES cases had merit and their arguments were both true (or partially true), you might feel a settlement/split was fair or that one side had stronger arguments.

 

Edited August 10, 2022 by GoldFinger1969

[GoldFinger1969]

On 8/9/2022 at 3:04 PM, Oldhoopster said:

All the more reason to write a book to document it.  How many of those 150 people that heard your impromptu 3 minute explanation remember some, if any of it.  If you don't document it, then its lost to history. Unless you're waiting for people to seek you out and personally ask for your story 

Nah, it's not lost...that's what these message forums are for !!!  At least if you back-them-up as I have urged in case a key thread or the site ever goes down or information is accidentally/purposely deleted.

The Omega Counterfeit Mafia Thread over ATS is a lesson nobody should forget. 

On 8/9/2022 at 3:04 PM, Oldhoopster said:

Or give a presentation at the ANA or FUN.  The worst that can happen is that you've provided a baseline of facts and data that can be used for any future debates

I love this idea.  Should make for a GREAT debate and would probably be of interest to the ANA or FUN crowd.  

Edited August 10, 2022 by GoldFinger1969

[VKurtB]

On 8/10/2022 at 9:19 AM, GoldFinger1969 said:

Ummm....they think the government is WRONG ?  

Has nothing to do with democracy, has to do with whether you think the stronger arguments were with one side or the other.  Even if you believe BOTH SIDES cases had merit and their arguments were both true (or partially true), you might feel a settlement/split was fair or that one side had stronger arguments.

 

Except that a “settlement” on other coins was PRECLUDED by the settlement on the Farouk/Fenton one. The one outcome that was NEVER going to happen was a settlement/split solution. 

Edited August 10, 2022 by VKurtB

[GoldFinger1969]

On 8/10/2022 at 10:55 AM, VKurtB said:

Except that a “settlement” on other coins was PRECLUDED by the settlement on the Farouk/Fenton one. The one outcome that was NEVER going to happen was a settlement/split solution. 

Which the government also said was illegal, and they threw coin collectors in jail, until someone informed the clowns that their own Treasury had approved the transaction decades ago.

Because aside from that, the government NEVER makes mistakes. 

[VKurtB]

On 8/10/2022 at 11:49 AM, GoldFinger1969 said:

Which the government also said was illegal, and they threw coin collectors in jail, until someone informed the clowns that their own Treasury had approved the transaction decades ago.

Because aside from that, the government NEVER makes mistakes. 

Have you missed the part where the conditions of sale of the Farouk/Fenton specimen included that it would always be the only one legal to own? That is what created the price both of the last two times it sold. 

[GoldFinger1969]

On 8/10/2022 at 1:11 PM, VKurtB said:

Have you missed the part where the conditions of sale of the Farouk/Fenton specimen included that it would always be the only one legal to own? That is what created the price both of the last two times it sold. 

Right, I'm saying that the Farouk/Fenton piece (part of the Elite Collection whose owner(s) post here ) itself was subject to seizure, civil penalties, and criminal charges.  The government changed their mind once evidence was found that showed they weren't 100% entitled to ownership.

Edited August 10, 2022 by GoldFinger1969

[VKurtB]

On 8/10/2022 at 12:57 PM, GoldFinger1969 said:

Right, I'm saying that the Farouk/Fenton piece (part of the Elite Collection whose owner(s) post here ) itself was subject to seizure, civil penalties, and criminal charges.  The government changed their mind once evidence was found that showed they weren't 100% entitled to ownership.

No, that’s not correct at all. Not even close. They had to relent because some bureaucratic I-d-I-o-t had incorrectly issued an export certificate. Keep in mind that many thousands of gold coins only exist today because they “fled the country”. Otherwise, they’d be part of Ft. Knox bars today. 

Edited August 10, 2022 by VKurtB

[Oldhoopster]

On 8/10/2022 at 2:08 PM, VKurtB said:

No, that’s not correct at all. Not even close. They had to relent because some bureaucratic I-d-I-o-t had incorrectly issued an export certificate. Keep in mind that many thousands of gold coins only exist today because they “fled the country”. Otherwise, they’d be part of Ft. Knox bars today. 

Maybe a presentation, ANA, or ANS article will help set the record  straight from your perspective.  It's obvious that many people disagree with you.  All I'm seeing is you telling us your opinion.  Documenting your information in a clear, concise manner will go a long way to replacing your opinions with facts.  No data or facts = Opinion

And Threads like this may be a substitute for formal documentation, but they are choppy, sometimes hard to follow, and in this case not even the original topic of the thread.  

You may be right, but expect to be challenged by many who disagree.  

[VKurtB]

On 8/10/2022 at 1:39 PM, Oldhoopster said:

Maybe a presentation, ANA, or ANS article will help set the record  straight from your perspective.  It's obvious that many people disagree with you.  All I'm seeing is you telling us your opinion.  Documenting your information in a clear, concise manner will go a long way to replacing your opinions with facts.  No data or facts = Opinion

And Threads like this may be a substitute for formal documentation, but they are choppy, sometimes hard to follow, and in this case not even the original topic of the thread.  

You may be right, but expect to be challenged by many who disagree.  

Don’t take this as aimed at you, ‘Hoop, (it’s not), but I couldn’t possibly give less of a darn who disagrees. Convincing the ignorant ain’t my jam. That’s why I have done a case before my state’s Supreme Court, and did trials before judges as triers of fact, but never a single jury trial. Too much ignorance to overcome. 

Edited August 10, 2022 by VKurtB

[Oldhoopster]

On 8/10/2022 at 2:41 PM, VKurtB said:

Don’t take this as aimed at you, ‘Hoop, (it’s not), but I couldn’t possibly give less of a darn who disagrees. Convincing the ignorant ain’t my jam. 

I recall you posting info back in the CT days and thought you had some good info but not enough to convince me that your opinion was correct.  That's why I'm pushing back.  If you've got good stuff, help set the record straight.  Until then, don't be surprised when people don't  listen to your opinion.  They have their own

[VKurtB]

On 8/10/2022 at 1:49 PM, Oldhoopster said:

I recall you posting info back in the CT days and thought you had some good info but not enough to convince me that your opinion was correct.  That's why I'm pushing back.  If you've got good stuff, help set the record straight.  Until then, don't be surprised when people don't  listen to your opinion.  They have their own

Most coin people are unconvincable. It’s a matter of “I wish…” for almost everybody in this field. They want more legal coins to be out there, and nothing else matters. More coins = pure good. People like that cannot be reasoned with. It’s like negotiating with terrorists. For goldbugs, gold is a religion. 

Edited August 10, 2022 by VKurtB

[VKurtB]

Here’s the basic problem, Hoop. Coin people IGNORE THE LAW!!!

Goldfinger and his past posts are illustrative. “There was no proof beyond a reasonable doubt that the coins were stolen.” True, but irrelevant. 

“The Government should have had the burden of proof.” Well, too bad, they didn’t as a matter of law. 
 

These are the things that matter, to the law but not to coin people. 
 

There is almost no dispute on the facts in the Langbord case. The coins COULD CONCEIVABLY HAVE BEEN EXCHANGED COIN FOR COIN IN ACCORDANCE WITH PAST PRACTICES. The problem is that is irrelevant and coin people don’t accept its irrelevance. 
 

There was only one finding that matters, and the only question the jury needed to answer: “Is it more likely than not that the coins left the Mint by surreptitious means, by ANYONE, not necessarily the Langbord’s ancestors?” Once you understand the ONLY question before the trial court, the ballgame is over. 

Edited August 10, 2022 by VKurtB

[RWB]

But....do collectors and others in the hobby read new books? Do they learn from new research and new approaches?

[DWLange]

Perhaps they might if you publish it in the form of a graphic novel. But handle the book carefully, because you'll want to get certified by CGC afterward.🤔

[Henri Charriere]

[I cannot believe @GoldFinger1969 uttered the word "pedigree."

@VKurtB: Once again you've proven my assertion that you enjoy "unconditional immunity," whether other members believe you deserve to, or not.

@DWLange: Nice to hear your voice again.]  🐓 

[VKurtB]

On 8/10/2022 at 2:25 PM, RWB said:

But....do collectors and others in the hobby read new books? Do they learn from new research and new approaches?

I can only answer that with my hope, my wish. I hope they do, if the subject touches on an area of their interest. For me, there was NO WAY I could NOT buy your book on the 1936-42 proofs. I love those coins so much. But Saints? Not really my bag. Greek Ancients? Way my bag. The topic matters. 

[VKurtB]

On 8/10/2022 at 2:39 PM, DWLange said:

Perhaps they might if you publish it in the form of a graphic novel. But handle the book carefully, because you'll want to get certified by CGC afterward.🤔

The next time I give a darn about a comic book will be the first time. 

[VKurtB]

I want to make it clear that “just” NARA letters would not make a compelling read for me. There has to be more, something ORIGINAL, some analysis, not just “lookyhere” what I found. Data without analysis and context is pretty unimpressive.

Example: the Membership and Outreach Committee of the ANA met over Zoom today. I am a member of that committee. The ANA’s membership is between 26,000 and 27,000 right now. So what? Now, if I tell you that’s a HIGHER NUMBER than during the silver boom of the mid-1960’s, that’s context. 
 

When was the zenith of ANA membership? When the ANA owned and ran the ANACS certification service. 

Edited August 10, 2022 by VKurtB