1984 fiji 1c and 2c

These exist in mint sets but apparently circulating examples exist too (they are slightly different).

Has anyone seen circulating examples of the above coins? The mint set coins aren't uncommon but I've never seen any circulating examples.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Welcome New Member , No. Pictures please . That would be nice .

 

I mean, not sure how many members here are from Fiji...

 

I've been doing some research in recent weeks on modern coins. Krause seems to list a lot of coins as circulating that either were only released in sets, or don't exist at all. My goal is to figure out what coins were issued in sets only, and what ones don't exist at all.

From what I was able to find, I believe that both of those coins, and indeed all 'circulation' Fiji coins from both 1983 and 84, were only issued in sets. I would be interested in any evidence to the contrary.

 

On another forum someone told me their 1994 Krause said ~2,000,000 1984 1c and 2c pieces were struck, but all other 1983 and 1984 mintages were equivalent to mint set mintages, so it seems like 1c and 2c pieces were struck in 1984.
More recent editions of Krause have gotten less accurate.

On a side note, 1975 Cook Islands coins are mint set only - the circulating coins struck that year were all dated 1974.

 

Haven't really kept up with Fiji, dabble just a tiny bit with Cook, but a bit more familiar with Br. Caribbean. The FM issues interestingly seemingly WERE struck in some instances for 1984, especially for Jamaica and Trinidad possibly and also Barbados. Based on their infrequent occurrence, I would imagine rather few however.
Keep us posted on your Oceania findings Sir!

 

Curiously the 1983 and 1984 sets were struck at the Singapore Mint - Franklin Mint never did any Fijian coins. I suspect the Royal Australian Mint probably had the contract when the Franklin Mint was at its peak.

 

Ah, OK then. And what would the differences be between the circulation and set pieces?

 

Have only seen them in mint sets

 

I do know that Mister T in his area is as fanatical as I am in mine so am guessing he then has sources (as he seems to indicate in his post) for there being actual circulation strikes...

 

Which makes me wonder: Where are the official mintage figures, either from the issuing authority, or the mint that struck them? Those would be the sources.

 

Except they are not forthcoming in many instances. For the defunct Franklin Mint, these likely will never be available. The Royal Mint does NOT answer inquiry.

 

In this case, I don't think there would be any difference in finish between a set coin and a circulation coin, if one exists.

 

Well, many mints do have a difference between the specimen like (non proof) uncirculated sets and the coins minted for circulation....This is what Mister T seems to have been saying.

 

Whoops, I missed that in the OP, interesting. Looking at examples of the sets, they look like normal circulation-quality strikes to me, so I'm curious as to what the difference may be as well.

 

Get the slow-motion popcorn out as we can all learn....

 

I'm from Australia, but currently live in Japan. The Australian 1 & 2 cent coins, and those of New Zealand and Fiji were similar, and followed a similar path.

For example, all of the 1cent coins are a similar diameter, all had similar dates of issue and withdrawal, all are demonetized:
- Australia: Bronze, Diameter = 17.53mm, thickness = 1.5mm, 1966-1984
- New Zealand: Bronze, Diameter = 17.5mm, thickness = 1.18mm, 1967-1985
- Fiji: Bronze, Diameter = 17.5mm, thickness = 1.05mm, 1969-1985

The same was true of 2 cent coins, same dates, but again just a slight different diameter, and different thickness.

In Australia, it was quite common to see New Zealand 1 & 2 cent coins, and you would occasionally see 1 & 2 cent Fijian coins as well. (these usually passed for Australian 1 & 2 cent coins, if people didn't notice.)

(There seem to have been more than 20 million 1c, and 40 million 2c coins minted for general circulation, not minted on all years however)

 

The hair lines are cut less deeply among other things (though I think the reverses are the same).

I assume the Royal Australian Mint would have struck them but reports are available online only back to 2000.

And possibly none were struck for circulation in 1984 though I believe an old Krause says so. Sometime between the early 1990s and now Krause seems to have inserted a bunch of non-existent coins so I suspect the early editions may have been correct.

 

Yes, I had alerted them to a non-existent coin in their South Korea listing, too. I wonder what's going on with that?

I wonder why mints are not responsive to inquiries? It's probably as simple as a staffing issue.

 

I don't know as the Royal Mint promised to respond to me on their Facebook site and I also sent the requests through their web site.
Not to detract from Mister T's excellent OP, but the RM is very tricky when it comes to actual released number of coins or sets (as opposed to authorised mintage vs. number struck vs. net number actually released). This came up as some readers may recall as I was in a greater than 10 year pursuit to finish collecting the Jamaica proof set series 1985-2002 wherein the 1987-2002 proof sets are all listed as authorised mintage of 500 but some are clearly MUCH scarcer than others. This is also true for such sets as the Bahamas 1998 proof set, the Barbados 1997 proof set, the Cayman Islands 1986-88 proof sets, the Falkland Islands 1999 and especially the 2004 proof sets, the Guernsey 1997 proof set, etc.
There was also a problem where the RM used Franklin Mint dies complete with the FM monogram on coins it evidently struck in 1986 and 1987. As I said, NO response from them...

PS - I realise that his listed coins are NOT RM products.