Log in or Sign up
Coin Talk
Home
Forums
>
Coin Forums
>
Error Coins
>
1972-D five cent misprint major error
>
Reply to Thread
Message:
<p>[QUOTE="Fred Weinberg, post: 2840823, member: 86437"]Earl42, I'd be willing to bet that if your reply 4 posts above,</p><p>was the very first reply to the OP's post, he would have not</p><p>understood, agreed with, wanted, or appreciated your reply.</p><p><br /></p><p>Look at the other posts - others here tried to tell him (in less words)</p><p>that it was damaged, and how - and NO ONE was rude with him.</p><p>He simply chose not to believe or listen to the people here who offered</p><p>him honest, straight, opinions and (shorter)explanations of the coin.</p><p><br /></p><p>I've spent decades 'mentoring' or explaining error coins to lots of</p><p>new, existing, young and old, collectors, but to be honest, I don't</p><p>feel I need to, nor have the time, to explain how EVERY damaged or</p><p>altered coin was made, and exactly why it couldn't be an error coin.</p><p>If you have that time and inclination, I applaud you, but when six or</p><p>so folks here say it's not an error, and some offer possible explanations,</p><p>I'm sorry if that isn't sufficient for the OP. It certainly doesn't warrant</p><p>his last reply - which says volumes about his attitude, and what he </p><p>really expected (hoped for) when he found the coin.</p><p><br /></p><p>There's nothing wrong with telling someone they're coin isn't a genuine</p><p>mint error, give a short explanation,and then let that person learn about</p><p>the minting process themselves. Isn't that the main reason they came here?</p><p><br /></p><p>Most of the new posters on this site (not all, but most) look at their</p><p>coins with a high magnification that 97% of collectors wouldn't use, </p><p>find something that is (most times) either damage or (most times)</p><p>minor anomalies, because they are not familiar with what coins actually</p><p>look like after dies wear out from excessive striking pressure, etc.</p><p><br /></p><p>As Bill Fivaz says, when someone asks him how a damaged coin was </p><p>made, 'I wasn't there when they did it, so I can't tell you exactly how',</p><p>but he knows it was not a genuine mint error coin.</p><p><br /></p><p>Many times the simple explaination works: it was plated, it was pressed,</p><p>it was environmentally damaged, etc. - but none of us know what</p><p>machine shop the coin was pressed against another coin, what type of </p><p>shop the plating was done with, or if a 'sandwich coin' was pressed</p><p>between two pieces of leather, or two pieces of balsa wood. We also</p><p>don't know exactly, most of the time, the actual cause of 'enviornmental</p><p>damage'. </p><p><br /></p><p>I guess my rant is done, at least for now.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>
[QUOTE="Fred Weinberg, post: 2840823, member: 86437"]Earl42, I'd be willing to bet that if your reply 4 posts above, was the very first reply to the OP's post, he would have not understood, agreed with, wanted, or appreciated your reply. Look at the other posts - others here tried to tell him (in less words) that it was damaged, and how - and NO ONE was rude with him. He simply chose not to believe or listen to the people here who offered him honest, straight, opinions and (shorter)explanations of the coin. I've spent decades 'mentoring' or explaining error coins to lots of new, existing, young and old, collectors, but to be honest, I don't feel I need to, nor have the time, to explain how EVERY damaged or altered coin was made, and exactly why it couldn't be an error coin. If you have that time and inclination, I applaud you, but when six or so folks here say it's not an error, and some offer possible explanations, I'm sorry if that isn't sufficient for the OP. It certainly doesn't warrant his last reply - which says volumes about his attitude, and what he really expected (hoped for) when he found the coin. There's nothing wrong with telling someone they're coin isn't a genuine mint error, give a short explanation,and then let that person learn about the minting process themselves. Isn't that the main reason they came here? Most of the new posters on this site (not all, but most) look at their coins with a high magnification that 97% of collectors wouldn't use, find something that is (most times) either damage or (most times) minor anomalies, because they are not familiar with what coins actually look like after dies wear out from excessive striking pressure, etc. As Bill Fivaz says, when someone asks him how a damaged coin was made, 'I wasn't there when they did it, so I can't tell you exactly how', but he knows it was not a genuine mint error coin. Many times the simple explaination works: it was plated, it was pressed, it was environmentally damaged, etc. - but none of us know what machine shop the coin was pressed against another coin, what type of shop the plating was done with, or if a 'sandwich coin' was pressed between two pieces of leather, or two pieces of balsa wood. We also don't know exactly, most of the time, the actual cause of 'enviornmental damage'. I guess my rant is done, at least for now.[/QUOTE]
Your name or email address:
Do you already have an account?
No, create an account now.
Yes, my password is:
Forgot your password?
Stay logged in
Coin Talk
Home
Forums
>
Coin Forums
>
Error Coins
>
1972-D five cent misprint major error
>
Home
Home
Quick Links
Search Forums
Recent Activity
Recent Posts
Forums
Forums
Quick Links
Search Forums
Recent Posts
Competitions
Competitions
Quick Links
Competition Index
Rules, Terms & Conditions
Gallery
Gallery
Quick Links
Search Media
New Media
Showcase
Showcase
Quick Links
Search Items
Most Active Members
New Items
Directory
Directory
Quick Links
Directory Home
New Listings
Members
Members
Quick Links
Notable Members
Current Visitors
Recent Activity
New Profile Posts
Sponsors
Menu
Search
Search titles only
Posted by Member:
Separate names with a comma.
Newer Than:
Search this thread only
Search this forum only
Display results as threads
Useful Searches
Recent Posts
More...