Just got the elusive 1916 Barber Half....

I'm very familiar with Warhol's art. But, let me ask you this, "Would you pay millions of dollars for an ordinary Campbell's Soup can?" It isn't the soup can that is valuable. It is Warhol's rendering. So, if anybody copied Warhol's painting, it would be called a fake.

I hope you realize that I never said you didn't have talent. I just think you are using that talent in a way that is detrimental to the hobby we call numismatics.

Thanks for responding, Daniel.

Chris

The problem with collecting these is that eventually the collector dies, and more often than not, these coins will find their way back into the marketplace. Just like no one can guarantee that every seller on eBay is legitimate, there is no way that anyone can guarantee that these coins won't end up in the hands of a con artist.

So, let me ask you this. "If someone wants to collect these pieces knowing that they are fake, what is wrong with having the word "COPY" incorporated into the design?

Chris

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

To be fair I don't think that is a valid comparison. Warhol took something mundane that our attention spans took for granted and basically not see as anything other than utilitarian - and forced it into our perception as something completely devoid of the utilitarian sense it once had. The same can be said of works like Marcel Duchamp's "Fountain".
What you are doing is art in its own right, but nowhere near the same concept as mentioned in your quote.

 

That's the tough part about CC's. On the one hand they are copies, yes. On the other hand stamping them essentially is damaging a historically significant antique. I agree such a stamp is beneficial if it could be done on the edge rather than obverse/reverse.

But I ask because CC's present a far higher risk of someone knowledgeable in them turning around and ripping off someone who is not. CC's require more advanced knowledge to identify and often require expensive specialized reference material, while fantasy pieces generally require rudimentary knowledge or looking up in a free or cheap and widely available reference.

Of course both can and undeniably will be used in nefarious ways at times, they also enrich and expand the hobby by catering to a wider dynamic of collectors and potential collectors

 

I have produced quite a few different types of over-strikes since 2010. They have a collector following. I receive inquiries all the time asking when I am going to issue the next one and what will it be.

If I saw an auction that was misleading and attempting to "take advantage" of bidders, I would report that auction to the administration. When my "1964-D" Peace Dollars began to sell for fairly high prices, some internet auction listings for Chinese-made "1964-D" copies were described as "Daniel Carr" pieces. I reported those auctions and they were cancelled.

Regardless, a simple search on eBay would generally reveal what "Daniel Carr" over-strikes are, and what they usually sell for. For example, try searching for "1933 Buffalo" in the Coins and Paper Money category. All of those that are listed state "Daniel Carr" in the title. And the prices realized for them is generally higher than most other 1930s UNC Buffalo nickels.

A far bigger pitfall that can engulf a new collector is the whole issue of cleaned coins. How many cleaned coins are listed for sale right now (uncertified) where the seller knows that the coin is cleaned but hasn't mentioned that ? If a person refuses to do a minimum of research on what they are buying then they will have a lot of trouble in life, especially outside of numismatics. If a person buys stock in a company without knowing what that company is or does, and then the company goes bankrupt, who is to blame (if anyone) ?

 

Having the word "COPY" incorporated into the design is different from stamping the finished product with the word "COPY". Placing the word on the edge can easily be overlooked. How many people do you know, other than some collectors, that look at the edge?

Chris

 

I know a lot of people who paid $20 for a Chinese fake Morgan Dollar. At best, they might be able to get a dollar or two for it.

I originally sold the "1964-D" over-strike Peace silver dollars for about $85 at first, and then about $150 later on. I stopped offering them in 2010. Recent internet auctions for them, advertised as "Daniel Carr" and/or "Moonlight Mint" over-strikes, have realized prices from $260 to $535.

I have no access to that article at present. But the picture I remember seeing was not a US Mint coin press. So I have doubts that they actually use a surplus US Mint press.

 

Just about everyone I know of at least inspects the edge for damage. But it also would take away incentive for someone to try and sell it as genuine, knowing that there is a good chance the copy stamp will be seen and then the seller will have a problem.

 

There are two things that have been documented:

In 1923 the Shanghai mint received equipment from the Philadelphia mint that was no longer in use.

Also, in the late 1890's China purchased presses from the same manufacturer that provided presses for the Philadelphia mint.

 

Aw shucks! You just made me think of something that made me chuckle during a serious discussion.

I thought back to my time spent in basic training and the obstacle course which included the "low crawl" under barbed wire while live rounds from a 50 cal whizzed over our heads. I didn't see one trainee raise his head to see if it was really live ammunition!

The problem as I see it, Daniel, is when the time comes that you aren't around, who is going to make sure that your fantasy pieces don't make their way into the hands of collectors of real coins? We have already noted that eBay is not enforcing the counterfeit guidelines like they used to. We even had a former employee who handled the "Report" complaints tell us that eBay was eliminating that function.

Your comment about cleaned coins merely reinforces my contention. When your fantasy pieces eventually leave the hands of collectors who admire them, the rest of the numismatic community must face the strong possibility that less-than-honest sellers will have a field day hawking them as authentic.......I'm not a professional so you be the judge.

Does the previous sentence sound familiar to anyone?

Chris

 

I will add this:

If a person is intent on committing numismatic fraud, they will find some coin to do it with.

Actual example that did occur:

The US Mint produced a special 1995 Eagle proof set with Gold Eagles and a 1995-W proof Silver Eagle. The 1995-W Silver Eagle was ONLY available in this high-priced set. The US Mint also produced a 1995-P proof Silver Eagle that could be bought individually for much less than the W set. Within a few years the 1995-W Silver Eagle was selling by itself for more than $3,000 each (and over $4,000 for the whole W set). At the same time, the 1995-P Silver Eagle could be bought for less than $100.

So what some unscrupulous persons did was this:
They bought the $4,000 sets. They removed the W Silver Eagles and had them certified and sold them for $3,000+ each. They bought 1995-P Silver Eagles for less than $100 each. They put the 1995-P Silver Eagles into the W sets and sold those sets for $4,000. They counted on the fact that some buyers wouldn't notice the wrong mint mark on the Silver Eagles in the sets.

So who is to blame for this ? The persons perpetrating the fraud ? Or the US Mint for negligently issuing the coins in a format that allowed this to happen ?

 

Find the 2008 issues of Coin World with the interview with Jingjuashei. You'll learn more about that old Philly Mint equipment once it left the Shanghai Mint.

Chris

 

Some US Mint equipment was sent to China a long time ago. But I still question that any of this equipment was actually used by Big Tree Mint.

 

How many collectors inspect the smooth edge of 1c & 5c coins? Do you really think that the majority of collectors rotate reeded-edge coins to make sure the third edge is undamaged? I think the percentage would be very, very low.

Chris

 

Tom DeLorey would probably remember the article.

Chris

 

It takes a lot of skill and experience to determine if a coin has been cleaned or not. Cleaned coins have burned more novice collectors than anything else. Unscrupulous dealers would polish coins and sell them as "BU" (Brilliant Uncirculated). Coin encapsulation/certification has alleviated that problem to a great extent. But only if the novice buyers take the advice and stick to certified coins.

But it only requires a basic ability to read to be able to determine that the date on a coin doesn't fit the norm.

My web site documents everything I've done. Information about them has been widely publicized on the internet, in Coin World, in Numismatic News, and on web forums like this one. I made sure of that. My over-strikes are collectibles in their own right and have a following. That will all continue.

If a person won't do even a minimal information search concerning something that they are thinking of buying, there is no helping them. Would you buy a car without researching some aspects of that car ?

My "1964-D" Peace dollar over-strikes were produced and last sold in 2010. About 1,900 total were released. Find one instance where someone paid more than the current market value for one ($250 to $550).

 

You're only strengthening my contention about disreputable sellers. Even as big as the US Mint is, they cannot prevent frauds like this from happening. You're just one person, and what you're saying in effect is, "It's not my problem!" To me, this is just one more cop-out.

Chris

 

Coin Talk is one of the most, if not the most, active numismatic forums on the internet. You, yourself, even commented that many internet searches have the most "hits" here. Yet, if you read the threads on a daily basis, you will find that we are constantly responding to novices who know absolutely nothing about numismatics. Your comments about learning how to detect cleaned coins is nothing more than "beating around the bush" and still boils down to "It's not my problem?"

Chris

 

There are NUMEROUS cases where frauds were committed using US Mint coins in recent years. I've been producing over-strikes since 2010. Find one case where a "disreputable" seller took advantage of someone using one of my coins.

Earlier this year, one of my "1964-D" over-strike Peace Dollars was featured on the TV show "Pawn Stars". My name was mentioned several times and they clearly talked about it as a "Daniel Carr fantasy over-strike". So that is just one more example of information about them that has been in the media.

But, like I said, the only way to stop coin (or other) fraud is to punish the person who is actually perpetrating the fraud. I don't know if you are familiar with Gallery Mint Museum (GMM). Several years ago they produced replicas of early US coins. They were clearly stamped "COPY" because they were copes of coins that were actually issued and not fantasy-date over-strikes. But that didn't stop someone from perpetrating a fraud by filling in the "COPY" stamp and artificially circulating the coin to make it appear genuine. By your logic, it seems Gallery Mint would be to blame for this. See the pink section here:

 

e

Your example bolsters my argument much more than yours. Those "novices" that you are responding to - they are searching for information about numismatics prior to investing any significant sums in coins. Show one example of one of these novices who spent way too much money on a coin that they knew nothing about.

It is one thing to think an item you found or inherited is worth a lot of money. It is entirely a different situation to actually SPEND a lot of money for such an item.

Again I challenge: find one instance of a fraud committed with one of my coins.

Would you spend $75 for your avatar coin (1998-S Matte Kennedy) ?
Probably. Why ? Because you know what it is. But what if you were a complete novice and knew nothing about such coins. Would you spend $75 for a half dollar that you know nothing about ?

 

Yep, I read that article when it came out