Cheerios dollar: pattern or variety?

[Zoins]

NGC calls the Cheerios dollar a pattern but PCGS calls it a variety. Which do you think fits better (or neither) and why?

[MunkyMan95]

Pattern. A variety is more like an error, while a pattern is made intentionally.

[bigmanSAM88]

Pattern

[gedis3]

I'm gonna go with pattern as well.

 

I think of patterns as intentional, varieties just sorta happen...

[cladking]

Neither.

 

You can make an argument for either but I think "prototype" comes closest.

[RWB]

An observation is that the Cheerios dollars fit in the same relative position as many of the major 1878 silver dollar design variants, for example 7 TF vs 8 TF.

 

A pattern is usually a piece made prior to final acceptance of the designs. It may or may not be identical to the version released for circulation. In 1877 the silver dollar approved by President Hayes was not identical to that used for first production in March 1878. The initial production coins had 8 TF, but this was changed to 7 TF (along with several other changes such as the eagle's breast and head, etc.

 

We don't know what the "pattern" Sacagawea dollars looked like - all the mint released were drawings. But it is likely the first trial pieces differed from the design finally approved by the Sec of the Treasury. The Cheerios dollars were clearly intended for circulation and are certainly made from early dies, much like the 1878 8TF coins. The later versions are analogous to the 7 TF and other variants of the Morgan dollar.

 

If one looks carefully, there are often differences in design between each years' production. Should each of these be called "patterns" too? A lot of “Abe Lincolns” have been on the cent during the last century, but none are called “patterns” except the aluminum pieces.

[cpm9ball]

Some say tomayto.............some say tomahto. So, what's the big deal? It's still a big feather in Pat's cap for this Discovery Coin.

 

Chris

[Zoins]

Some say tomayto.............some say tomahto. So, what's the big deal? It's still a big feather in Pat's cap for this Discovery Coin.

I agree it's a great find and think it is a big feather either way. However, I don't think that automatically makes proper classification unimportant, especially when the top TPGs have classified it differently. The "big deal" is that proper classification may be important to some collectors while being unimportant to others. I don't think proper classification or discussion of it reduces the greatness of the find if that's what you're getting at.

 

I think RWB's comparison with the 7 TF vs 8 TF situation is a good one

[Conder101]

The problem was that although the "cheerios" design was originally approved, it was then modified BEFORE they actually started circulation production runs making it a design different than the one actually produced for use. (Unless you decide to call the 5,500 pieces struck for the Cheerios promotion a circulation production run.)

[Zoins]

The problem was that although the "cheerios" design was originally approved, it was then modified BEFORE they actually started circulation production runs making it a design different than the one actually produced for use. (Unless you decide to call the 5,500 pieces struck for the Cheerios promotion a circulation production run.)

If the Cheerios promotion pieces were not officially produced and released for circulation, then how would one describe their production and distribution? To me, it seems the Cheerios dollars were intended for distribution/circulation at face value, just officially released through General Mills instead of banks.

[RWB]

One should examine the mint documents surrounding the Cheerios coins and initial test and production dies before calling them anything more than interesting varieties. The 1878 dollar analogy remains apt.

 

The coins might, with some stretching of definition, be called "trial pieces" analogous to the 1922 low relief Peace dollars made before the design was accepted. These were struck and after examination by Director Baker and James Fraser, approved for use. Release of the trial strikes (about 300,000) was specifically approved and the first production pieces were also from the same hubs. There is no way to separate the trial strikes from the first production coins (about 3 million). After about 2 weeks, the hubs were changed and new dies used for the balance of the year.

 

Note, another analogous situation involves changes to the Barber quarter in 1892. See the separate posting "Something for Barber quarter collectors."