Carr Opinion Poll (Hobby Effects)

The purpose of this post is to provide an anonymous poll to sample what collectors think of Carr's fantasy overstrikes. I ask that everyone refrain from revealing their answers or reasoning. I only want to know collector opinion/attitudes. I don't care to read 20 pages+ of cheerleading or bickering.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I am neutral. I won't buy one, but I get where he's coming from. Yes, he is damaging coins to create fantasy pieces. So I get that. They are, at the end of the day, fantasy pieces. No need for "copy" to be placed on them. A simple google search will reveal that. A 1964 Morgan Dollar? A 1910 Indian Head Cent? Google.

 

I would never buy one. And I don't see the point of making or even owning a coin that never existed.

 

I do not think this poll is anonymous. It states that "your vote will be publicly visible." Your other poll doesn't state that phrase in the poll. I haven't posted a poll in a while so not sure of the features. You may want to make sure it is anonymous if you want a greater response.

 

Definitely not anonymous lol. I think it is healthy. Anything that brings people to the hobby is healthy in my opinion. I don't own or collect them because it is not my thing, but for the hobby overall it cannot be bad if it keeps people involved.

 

My vote is healthy. Your poll is definitely not anonymous not that it really matters.

 

I meant anonymous in the sense that you cannot see how any specific poster voted or whether the poster voted at all. You can see percentages of those that have voted.

 

Actually, you can see who voted for what. Just click on the # of votes to see who voted for what.

 

You can't expect a lawyer to know how to construct a simple anonymous poll now do you?

 

Pretty much the usual suspects, anyway.

 

I don't know how I screwed that up. Apparently, it is too late for me to edit the poll to fix it. The other polls I did will not show anything although it does here.

 

I'll just say why I said neutral and then I will move on.

I personally don't see the harm in them. People who truly embrace this hobby know what dates are real which are not. It's an interesting subset of high quality fantasy pieces that I personally think are interesting but I don't own one. I think those that like them will collect them and everyone else won't. I don't mind them being overstrikes because the coins being "destroyed" are culls meant for the smelters pot...plus it adds to the story of the piece and we are always talking about your coin's "stories."

 

I voted detrimental. Unless the coins he uses truly are harshly cleaned, numismatically destroyed coins, I object to destroying a coin on purpose no matter how common today.

Also, I think its bad for the hobby because future heirs will find these, think they are very valuable, and them think the hobby are a bunch of crooks.

I love his mint, his designs, etc. I simply wished he did not do these "overstrikes" for the health of the hobby.

 

It's my understanding that that's exactly what his host coins are -- harshly cleaned or otherwise rendered non-collectable. (Of course, standards for collectability do change over time.)

I just can't lose any sleep over this part. That's nothing different from the heirs finding a complete set of Home Shopping Network individually-mahogany-cased state quarters, or a shiny-as-new (since they were lovingly polished every year) set of 1921 Morgans, and running to the nearest coin shop to cash in...

 

Since this poll is totally random and based on a tiny sample, I fail to see the point of it -- other than to keep stirring this worn-out pot.

 

I wanted to know what a sample of coin collectors thought. While not conducted with the rigor of scientific polling, it is interesting and informative (despite the caveats).

@-jeffB - Can you define "collectable?"

 

I'd say there are others stirring it by starting a handful of new DC threads every week as well.

 

A scientific poll on the subject would be difficult beyond belief, starting with defining the target population, then identifying members of the population, then contacting them. Then there's the usual problem of low response rates. I'm not even sure it's even possible to do such a poll rigorously.

 

The results are also interesting. There is no clear majority, but rather a plurality as we speak. I thought the ratios would be much different. Of course, as acknowledged, sample size and sampling biases are an issue.

 

I didn't know this either until I clicked on the votes, FWIW. But I've never done a poll before...