1964 sms Kennedy? 2 2

[Melior Invenidiste]

?

[Fenntucky Mike]

Nope.

[RWB]

No such thing. There were and are no 1964 "Special Mint Set" coins.

[Oldhoopster]

All coins authenticated as1964 SMS came from the estate of a former mint director.  If you didn't buy yours in the late 80s from that auction or one that had been subsequently slabbed, you don't have one.  None were released through public channels

Quit looking looking at the "get rich from pocket change" sites.  They could have easily written the truth about this coin, but are going for clicks, not educating collectors.  Bunch of junk

[VKurtB]

On 10/10/2022 at 9:00 AM, Oldhoopster said:

All coins authenticated as1964 SMS came from the estate of a former mint director.  If you didn't buy yours in the late 80s from that auction or one that had been subsequently slabbed, you don't have one.  None were released through public channels

Quit looking looking at the "get rich from pocket change" sites.  They could have easily written the truth about this coin, but are going for clicks, not educating collectors.  Bunch of junk

Exceptionally well said. 

[Henri Charriere]

But, but, gentlemen!  One of you says there were no such things, while another confirms their existence and provides provenancial itinerary. So which is it, irrespective of who's got it, how he got it and whether it can be obtained or not?

[VKurtB]

On 10/10/2022 at 11:36 AM, Quintus Arrius said:

But, but, gentlemen!  One of you says there were no such things, while another confirms their existence and provides provenancial itinerary. So which is it, irrespective of who's got it, how he got it and whether it can be obtained or not?

Both can be, and probably are, true. There is a small handful of 1964 Kennedy halves that have been certified as SMS coins. HOWEVER, and this is a good one for folks like you who enjoy judicial language, it is quite likely that those certifications were “improvidently granted”. There will be no further such certifications. 

[VKurtB]

And at any rate, the OP’s pictured coin “ain’t one”.

[Henri Charriere]

On 10/10/2022 at 1:52 PM, VKurtB said:

And at any rate, the OP’s pictured coin “ain’t one”.

I will take judicial note of that.

[MarkFeld]

On 10/10/2022 at 9:00 AM, Oldhoopster said:

All coins authenticated as1964 SMS came from the estate of a former mint director.  If you didn't buy yours in the late 80s from that auction or one that had been subsequently slabbed, you don't have one.  None were released through public channels

Quit looking looking at the "get rich from pocket change" sites.  They could have easily written the truth about this coin, but are going for clicks, not educating collectors.  Bunch of junk

 

It's a very minor difference, but I believe that the sales in which the coins surfaced were in the early 90's, not the late 80's. I was a a grader at NGC from 1991-1998 and as far as I know, none of the coins were submitted until after I had started grading there. I suppose that the submitter(s) could have purchased the coins before that time and initially held them for a few years, but I doubt it.

Edited October 10, 2022 by MarkFeld

[DWLange]

1991 is correct. I viewed one of these coins about three years later, when NGC was certifying them as SP. The fact is they were well made currency strikes from fresh dies that were produced for inclusion in the Smithsonian's National Numismatic Collection. A few went stray and ended up in the estate of a former Mint Director, from which source they were auctioned by Stack's.

[Coinbuf]

@Melior InvenidisteSince you arrived here you have asked several questions all about unicorn type coins, in fact your very first post back on July 8th of this year Your first post was another post about another supposed 1964 SMS half.   You were provided the correct information about this coin then but here you are with another unicorn post.   While I see you wasting your time chasing rainbows and unicorns it is your time and your choice, but if you continue to keep wasting everyone else's time with these types of posts eventually you will get a rep as a troll and the members will ignore your posts.   

Edited October 10, 2022 by Coinbuf

[RWB]

On 10/10/2022 at 4:45 PM, DWLange said:

were produced for inclusion in the Smithsonian's National Numismatic Collection

They were not specifically produced for the SI collection or anyone else. They are normal very early strikes from new dies that were pulled from standard toggle presses at the beginning of a new die run. They are not "specimens" of anything ("specimen" is undefined bologna, except at your Dr.'s office).

The identical situation occurs with EVERY change of obv/rev die pair, only the coins are not saved. Realistically, there are thousands of these for every production year and every US Mint. (An analogous situation occurred with 1936-42 proof coins where the only fully frosted coins came from new die pairs.)

[zadok]

On 10/10/2022 at 4:50 PM, RWB said:

They were not specifically produced for the SI collection or anyone else. They are normal very early strikes from new dies that were pulled from standard toggle presses at the beginning of a new die run. They are not "specimens" of anything ("specimen" is undefined bologna, except at your Dr.'s office).

The identical situation occurs with EVERY change of obv/rev die pair, only the coins are not saved. Realistically, there are thousands of these for every production year and every US Mint. (An analogous situation occurred with 1936-42 proof coins where the only fully frosted coins came from new die pairs.)

...be advised this is just one person's opinion, nothing more n nothing less....

[Henri Charriere]

🐓:  Is there anything you can say to brighten things up a little, Q?

Q.A.: Yes, of course. Why don't we abandon the paternity test approach, and just celebrate the fact that this is a lovely example of a 90% silver half dollar, and leave it at that.   

Edited October 10, 2022 by Quintus Arrius
Add one word.

[Oldhoopster]

On 10/10/2022 at 7:30 PM, Quintus Arrius said:

🐓:  Is there anything you can say to brighten things up a little, Q?

Q.A.: Yes, of course. Why don't we abandon the paternity test approach, and just celebrate the fact that this is a lovely example of a 90% silver half dollar, and leave it at that.   

So what it sounds like you're saying is that we should stop answering questions and just tell people that they have pretty coins.  I'm not sure how well that will work.

[RWB]

Dealers and TPOGs should stop promoting BS, and save their pronouncements for fully researched and understood items. A few people of getting rich while the ordinary schmo is trying to find something that is just another Cheshire Cat of coinage.

I had a guest editorial on this kind of naming falsehood in Coin World a couple of months ago, but not one seemed to care. I care about truth and accuracy. Might be the last Indian standing at Wounded Knee.... ;(

[Henri Charriere]

On 10/10/2022 at 7:43 PM, Oldhoopster said:

So what it sounds like you're saying is that we should stop answering questions and just tell people that they have pretty coins....

No, sir, I would not think of depriving you of the pleasure of answering questions about----what was that word Coinbuf used, Ricky? 

🐓:  U N I C O R N.

----right, unicorns.  

P.S.  You opened the door, counselor!

[zadok]

On 10/10/2022 at 7:53 PM, RWB said:

Dealers and TPOGs should stop promoting BS, and save their pronouncements for fully researched and understood items. A few people of getting rich while the ordinary schmo is trying to find something that is just another Cheshire Cat of coinage.

I had a guest editorial on this kind of naming falsehood in Coin World a couple of months ago, but not one seemed to care. I care about truth and accuracy. Might be the last Indian standing at Wounded Knee.... ;(

...u r correct no one cared...u shouldnt consider urself worthy to be mentioned in the same sentence as the Native Americans that were massacred at Wounded Knee...once again uninformed n insensitive....

[Oldhoopster]

On 10/10/2022 at 9:55 PM, Quintus Arrius said:

No, sir, I would not think of depriving you of the pleasure of answering questions about----what was that word Coinbuf used, Ricky? 

🐓:  U N I C O R N.

----right, unicorns.  

P.S.  You opened the door, counselor!

Would you please clarify this? 

You wrote    P.S.  You opened the door, counselor!

Please don't start any nonsense

You made a statement that basically said we should stop a providing people with information   Why don't we abandon the paternity test approach, and just celebrate the fact that this is a lovely example of a 90% silver half dollar, and leave it at that.    I just wanted to find out if that's what you really thought or if you just got lost in the moment

 

[zadok]

On 10/10/2022 at 11:16 PM, Oldhoopster said:

Would you please clarify this? 

You wrote    P.S.  You opened the door, counselor!

Please don't start any nonsense

You made a statement that basically said we should stop a providing people with information   Why don't we abandon the paternity test approach, and just celebrate the fact that this is a lovely example of a 90% silver half dollar, and leave it at that.    I just wanted to find out if that's what you really thought or if you just got lost in the moment

 

...ur first clue should have been when people start talking to themselves...the second is when both sides of the conversation is indiscernible.... 

[VKurtB]

On 10/10/2022 at 6:53 PM, RWB said:

Dealers and TPOGs should stop promoting BS, and save their pronouncements for fully researched and understood items.

Yes, I agree, but umm, “good luck with that”. These firms are highly competitive with each other and they believe, rightly or wrongly, that pronouncing something as special in some way enhances their reputations. Well it clearly does not for you, I’m betting they regard you as “not their intended audience”. Aside from that, they claim to “know it when they see it” - a standard of proof endorsed by Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart. 

Edited October 11, 2022 by VKurtB

[Henri Charriere]

@Oldhoopster:

[No disrespect intended. The phrase, You opened the door, counselor!, as used here means, IMHO, you committed a grievous error when you, not only responded to a mischievous member's reply, featuring a talking rooster (for heaven's sake) but asked him a question!  Seriously, who does that?  [No, no, this is a rhetorical question.]  🤔