Reply to Thread

Message:: [QUOTE="JCro57, post: 4651075, member: 92083"]This is rightly and formally known as a "Mint-assisted" Error. Though these are genuine "error" coins in the sense that Eisenhower dies were not supposed to strike either of these planchets, neither coin in this mated pair meets the true spirit of what it means to be "Mint errors." If it was intentionally staged to produce this 2-coin set, there was no "error" that occurred. The planchets are not defective in any way, there was no striking malfunction, the dies themselves appear to be normal (no clashes, rotation, die breaks/cuds, etc.). The coins were produced exactly as someone intended. In some ways, they are similar to "illegal" or "unauthorized" strikes like the 1913 Liberty Nickel. What confuses myself, and likely many of you, is the sheer inconsistency of U.S. Mint policy when it comes to seizing coins that they consider "solely the property of the U.S. Mint" and are thus illegal to own. Clearly, this coin was not authorized. So, like 1974 aluminum cents and 1964-D Peace Dollars, they are deemed illegal to own and will be seized by the Treasury. Yet five known 1913 Liberty nickels were illegally struck, but they remain in private hands and are worth millions; those were not seized. With Mint errors that were unintentionally created, if they get out into circulation in bags or rolls without being assisted by Mint workers, that is tough luck for the Mint. But then why does the Mint not seize coins like the ones which make up this Eisenhower dollar? I just can't seem to find a clear answer as to when a coin is deemed illegal to own and considered U.S. Mint property if it was unauthorized and when it is not. However, many error collectors don't care if it was intentional or not. They will pay good money for them. I have to admit, if I could afford it, I would be among those buying them.[/QUOTE]

Create my FREE Account!

Log in or Sign up

Reply to Thread

Useful Searches