Another Daniel Carr token for me

I agree--when tokens and medallions are minted in the 150-500 range, there will never be saturation. All of his issue sell out, to people like me, and other collectors. When they do resell on eBay, it is invariably at a much higher rate than at issue, especially if they are slabbed by ANACS. I recently got a shipment back from them with Carr tokens slabbed, and shall post them soon--they range in the 67-69 grade, and tend to resell particularly well when certified. I would say the resale rate is generally double to triple that of issue price. That is not why I buy them, as not a single one has been resold by me.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Traditionally, fantasy-date over-strikes comprise about 25% of my minting. The other 75% is either completely original work, or a partial derivation of some pre-existing design (such as a coin club medal which has a known coin icon as a part of the overall design). When I do utilize an existing coin design, it is always one that is public domain and not copyrighted.

But the fantasy-date over-strikes are definitely popular. The fact is, people really want them. I get emails all the time from people suggesting which ones I should do, and when the next one will be available. At least once a week I have someone ask me if I have any "1964-D" Peace Dollar over-strikes available (those were minted in, and sold out in, 2010).

And as a coin collector myself, I have a lot of fun making the fantasy-date over-strikes.

PS:
I'm currently preparing to exhibit at a major sculpture show, and I'm working on several original designs for that.

 

There are some 1882 Liberty Head "V" nickel patterns that exist. And I believe there are even some 1881-dated ones as well. So I would have to go with "1880" if I did any (probably not).

A "1913" Liberty Head V nickel with a no "CENTS" reverse is an interesting idea. I had previously thought about one with a Buffalo reverse, but not very seriously. I like the "no "CENTS" idea better. I might consider that. The original 1913 Liberty Head nickels were a clandestine (unofficial) issue. Like the 1964 Peace Dollars, the 1913 Liberty Head nickels were never officially issued.

The "marker" on my "1914" over-strike Liberty Head nickels is the date itself. There is no other specific marker, other than the overall characteristics.

PS:
I just had another interesting idea. A 1913 no "CENTS" over-strike Liberty Head "racketeer" nickel (gold plated with reeded edge). Or maybe even an 1883 no "CENTS" racketeer-style piece, but actually made out of solid gold.

 

A 1913 no cents issue would be AWESOME in my honest and humble opinion ...

BTW, you really do fine work even though I've yet to own one of your pieces. A small aside: I'm a "somewhat dedicated" Ike collector but missed out on your bicentennial and 1970 issues as I wasn't collecting them that seriously back then. But I hope to snag at least one of them in the future if prices come down a bit

Can't wait to see what you do next DC!!

 

Sorry for the duplicate reply ... But I forgot to ask, what would the host coin be for a hypothetical racketeer nickel? Could you use a Liberty Head Quarter Eagle (~18mm) for an ~21mm nickel? Or would you just use custom blanks, probably pretty expensive...

Anyways sounds interesting and I'll have to reach far back into my geometry/calculus memory to figure out if that could host and still be the normal thickness of a Liberty V Nickel at 1.95mm.

Edit - ok after about 30 mins of math using my simple computer calculator (not easy btw) ... If you hosted on a half eagle, the resulting coin (not taking into account reeding or wear) would be ~33% thinner than a liberty nickel (1.29mm vs 1.95mm) ... If you hosted using a $10 eagle (not chump change), it'd be ~33% thicker at 2.59mm instead of 1.95mm ... my invoice is incoming (jk, probably wrong with my maths too )

 

That would be a J-1684.

 

An "1883" no "CENTS" V nickel could technically be over-struck on a US liberty Head $5 gold half eagle. But that could be a plausible original mint error type. So now that I've thought about it some, I probably wouldn't do that. But the "1913" over-strike without "CENTS" on a Liberty Head gold $5 half eagle is a possibility.

 

Edit,

 

I'd buy it. Interesting fantasy piece. Have you considered a CC Morgan fantasy dollar? Perhaps an 1895CC proof like Morgan. I would definitely buy a couple of those.

 

What about an 1895 Business Strike Morgan Dollar???? That be about as awesome as it gets. I wonder if they'd be copacetic since some say they were made (I think 10/12K) but were melted down and some say it was a ledger error and never existed. Another logical option would be the bookend dates (disregarding 21s) of either 1877 Morgan or a 1905 Morgan. I bet the 1877 has pattern pieces that would rule that out. So if I had a vote, lol, I'd go with an 1895 Business Strike then a 1905 Morgan.

This is all aside from the possible 1913 No Cents V Nickel, which is a winner in my book. Thanks for the time responding earlier @dcarr !! You're cool too @Morgandude11

edit - whoops why did I have an 1894CC in my head? I think I had bookends in my head before I posted. You obviously had the same idea I had, just even more layers added. It might help the "copacetic-ness" of it, being CC and PL? Either way, I think if it were 1895, just like the 2009 proof ASEs, it have to have some strong markers and even a mintmark if I'm not mistaken since it's within the series duration. So an 1895-DC Morgan in BS and PL how bout that Morgandude? You would get one C at least...

 

I could go for an 1895 business strike. They never existed--they were a statistical error as you suggested, so it is a non-existent coin. 1894CC or 1896CC would do it for me as well.

 

Hey, stop distracting him with such good ideas. I am still waiting for him to ship my order. lol

 

I'm in for multiples of ALL of the above ideas including the gold racketeer

Hopefully he will show us some pics of the sculpture pieces he's doing for the upcoming show ..
One of them as described to me sounded quite amazing

 

Nice to see you folks behavin' and not pickin' on Dan.........

 

I just find what P.T. Barnum said rings so true,every time this subject matter surfaces .

 

Remind me what P T Barnum said, so that I can understand the meaning behind your statement..
I could probably Google the answer, but I prefer to hear it from your keyboard lips

 

How about: "Money is in some respects life's fire: it is a very excellent servant, but a terrible master."

-- P.T. Barnum

 

Is that an invitation?

 

Many people have asked me to do an "1895" Morgan dollar business strike. The problem with that would be if some one wore it down until it looked like a circulated 1895 proof. An "1895-CC" would be less of a problem, but someone could scrape off the "CC" and then artificially circulate it. An "1895" over-strike doesn't qualify as a "fantasy-date" because 1895 Morgans already exist. And they are considered a key date, regardless of what mint they are from.

But just about ANY coin (genuine or not) could be altered and/or represented in some way so as to perpetrate a fraud with.

I've already done the "1909-o" micro-o Morgan dollar over-strike. If I do another Morgan, it would more likely be a "1920" or a "1905".

 

I'd love to see a 1905.