Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;dreamer94, post: 167244, member: 6449&quot;]During the past few months, the fallacy of the &quot;first strike&quot; designation has been made unambiguously clear by the US Mint.&nbsp; (<a href="http://www.usmint.gov/consumer/index.cfm?action=HotItems" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="http://www.usmint.gov/consumer/index.cfm?action=HotItems" rel="nofollow">http://www.usmint.gov/consumer/index.cfm?action=HotItems</a>) They do not keep track of the date that any particular coin is struck or whether it was the first or last to be struck from a particular die.&nbsp; The dates on mint packages are the dates the coins were packed, not the dates they were made.&nbsp; </p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>To be most charitable, grading services and dealers may have been misinformed and believed that a packaging date correponding to the first day of sales was a true first strike.&nbsp; However, it is abundantly clear that this is not the case.&nbsp; A coin in a package with the earliest date could have been the last coin to be minted from a worn die just before it was taken out of production.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>Despite this, NGC continues to use the term &quot;First Strikes&quot; on its certification, most recently with 20th anniversary American Eagles and dealers continue to advertise them as such.&nbsp; </p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>In my opinion, there is no longer any justification for the continued use of the term &quot;First Strike&quot;. Is there another side to this story?[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

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