Pierce's Imperfections

Some of you may know that (among other things) I collect the First Spouse series. Early on I would buy from the Mint with great results. Last year, I started to have some poor results if I didn't get my coins on the first day.

Sticking to that approach, I bought two (2) sets of Jane Pierce coins (Unc and Proof) the day they came out. I received the coins on Thursday and was crestfallen at what I found. Both of the Unc coins looked like someone wiped them with a Brillo pad! :crying:

Yesterday, after forcing myself to look at the hideous coins once again, I noticed something interesting...the scratch marks (or whatever they are) appeared to be exactly the same on both coins!

I'm a lousey coin photographer so I'm not sure if the photos show what I see "in hand"...but here they are. I'm thinking that someone wiped the die with something abrasive and all the coins from this die will look like this.

I can see some lack of "attention to detail" with production coins, but these coins come with hundreds of dollars of premiums to assure care is taken in their production and handling. Does anyone inspect these coins before they're shipped? Where's the Quality Assurance? :goof:





What should I do? Send them back? Will the replacements be any better?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

imo that is totally unacceptable for a proof. if it were me, i would send them back!

now i don't have much experience, actually none at all, from ordering from the mint. so i don't know how common this is or if people put up with it. i definitely would not!

proofs should not be like this! no excuse and they should have someone to inspect at least the proof coins before they go out. in the long run it may save them money, from having to refund all the damaged coins that get sent out.

send it back!

 

Are the scratch's raised?
Being that they are so alike it could be scratch's one the dies from polishing but it has to be raised on the coin and not dug into it...

 

I can't tell with my loupe (my eyes aren't as good as they used to be), but they appear raised when I zoom in on the hi-res photos.

 

These are the Unc coins. The proofs have "issues", too...but not like this.

 

i am sorry, i thought you said they were proofs and i didn't look at the pictures enough.

still i was going to include in my first post that they should also include an inspector for all the unc sets of coins being sent out. and still not how these should be.

 

I agree. The charges a $150 premium for these coins...you would think they would have someone look at them before sending them out. :computer:

 

Well if raised then they would be Die Scratch's and that does not hurt the grade usually. It comes from polishing the dies so they are pretty and shiny but leave grooves in the dies so when minting the coin they leave the raised marks on the coin.

 

I have a lot of First Spouse Unc coins and none of them are as hideous looking as these. These marks really detract from the coins' eye appeal (imo).

I don't know how many dies they have, but I guess it's not many. If the problem is with the die itself, will they be able to replace the coins with something better?

EDIT: Does anyone know (or can offer a guess) how many dies the Mint prepares for small coin runs such as the First Spouse series?

 

Yak, that is EXACTLY what I trying to describe to you when I bought my second Tyler last year. Remember!!!! I sent my first one...maybe two...can't remember...back to the USM. I finally had to settle for a not so near perfect coin, but one that was rather close and better than the others. It seems like this "imperfection" started to appear on the unc coins last year. I have no idea what it is. Die polishing came to mind, but these actually look like someone took brillo to the coin itself. I would like to know what this is.

 

I recall you sending your coins back, but did they all have the same damage? In the case of the Jane Pierce, the marks appear exactly the same...and the marks do appear to be raised so I'm thinking the damage in this case is to the die and not the coin directly.

In the first week the Mint sold 855 Uncs. If they were all struck from the same die, it'll be interesting to see how many returns they get. :thumb:

I plan to contact the Mint in the morning to address this. I don't think I should have to pay postage to return coins that were clearly damaged by the Mint.

On the other hand, if they noticed the error and hubbed a replacement die right away, the coins I received may be of some non-zero numismatic interest down the road.

What to do...what to do?

 

Can you put in a totally new order? Then, as a totally mutually exclusive activity from the new order, send these defective ones back and ask for a refund (or exchange)...?

 

Indeed!

###
That is completely bogus YP! The premium on these coins is such that one is ENTITLED to a premium product. I'd expect better from British Petroleum. And I believe that in the ordinary course of business, I'd get it too.
---
'Nuff said.

 

Another mint basher I see...
Yakpoo will you post a picture of the whole coin please.
My intention is to show that we are collectors here and we focus on every little imprefection that we can see. To most of the population those would not be much if anything at all but we do notice and it bothers us.
The mint allows you to return them if you have a problem. RGJohn will BP take their oil back
Look at how much better the proof coins look today then back in the day.
I'm not saying you can't want another or send it in for replacement. I'm just not wanting to see this get into one of those "The Mint stinks and can't make coins worth anything" kind of thread.

 

Well, yeah, there IS that too......

 

Yes, I believe they would like nothing half so much....

Just package it up ever-so-nicely, pre-pay the shipping and send it off. There's a good fellow.

 

I've been avoiding this thread, because I realize people's feeling are affected by this type of thread, and the coin in question. I don't know how many first spouse coins are made, I'm thinking on the order of a few 10s of thousands. I also don't know how many strikes a die is supposed to produce before it is replaced. It might be possible that there is only one die, for the number of coins struck. In that case, your chances of getting something better is minimal. It looks to me like the "scratches" are a case of haste makes waste. I understand you think there should be quality in a product that costs hundreds of dollars and sells for a high premium, but every business is subject to workers that don't take 100% pride in their job. This is just fact of life.

P.S. but I'm starting to see this as other people are.....maybe this is the key first spouse coin that you are looking for......one with real mint damage....scratched die strike. Possibly in the future people will be seeking this one out for the "rare condition" it represents.

P.P.S. Maybe you could send it in to one of the grading companies and get a die error designation for it.

 

Wild. I will keep my eyes open. I still do not access to a loupe, but will soon. It is buried in the shop somewhere.

 

Excellent post! :thumb: I would really like to know the answer to the question of how many dies are prepared for an issue such as this...and how easy it is to hub replacement dies once a problem is identified. It will be interesting to follow the Unc sales figure for this issue.

At first I was thinking of returning both of them within the seven (7) day window...then I considered taking RGJohn777's advice and just returning one of them. But if I did that, I wouldn't have both of them to "prove" this was die damage.

I think I may take your advice and just keep the both of them as a set. I hadn't considered having them certified as a die error, but that's a great suggestion...if they'll do it.

I hope others will post their Unc Jane Pierce's for comparison...I suspect they all have this die defect.

Duke...I agree the Mint does a terrific job most of the time. I've received some beautiful silver proof sets over the years. They used to do a good job on the First Spouse coins, too...but it seems like someone involved in FS production has copped an attitude about these coins and quality has gone noticably down hill...starting in mid-2009. I say this based on personal experience and the reported experiences of fellow FS collectors.

Now, if I were a conspiracy theorist (which I am not), I may be inclined to suspect that (given the decreasing mintages of FS coins) it's not outside the realm of possibility that someone at the Mint could purposefully reduce the population of well struck coins in an effort to secure the few perfect examples for themselves.

That wouldn't work for the large mintages of most issues, but the First Spouse series presents some interesting opportunities for "potential" conflicts of interest. I want to go on the record saying that I don't believe that. I'm just saying...the "possibility" exists...:kewl:.

 

Come on Yak....I have laid the foundation for a perfect return. You have to reorder the replacement coin first and then inspect it when it comes in. You return the coin that you are least happy with. This will ensure that you don't receive your old one back. But before you do that, let me know so I can get my order in first! LOL!