Just got the elusive 1916 Barber Half....

Destruction?, really?...FYI, there are plenty of "real" Barber halves out in the market.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

As long as there is a disclaimer that it is no legal tender of the United States, apparently. Not a lawyer here, but that is what the legal opinion is--that it is a token, not genuine currency. Hey, I like it--each to their own.

 

Funny, this reminds me of all those FAKE watches on watch forums. I guess it is OK to produce this fake watch since Patek Philippe never did manufacture this model...

http://www.perfectwatches.cn/patek-...billon-rose-gold-bezel-brown-band-622156.html

 

Moral of the story---DON'T BUY the coins if you don't like them.

 

I am proud to say that I will never support any counterfeit products.

 

save your money for the COTC.

 

COTC? = classic old type coins?

 

RPRD MOD COTC

 

So, what happens when the "disclaimer" is suddenly lost and someone wants to sell it? How does that not contradict the latest version of the counterfeit laws?

Chris

 

If someone would buy a coin that doesn't exist as genuine, they need to find a new hobby ASAP

 

That is just a cop-out, and not a valid reason.

Chris

 

Thanks for posting this. I have a '64 Peace dollar. Love Daniel's fantasy pieces. Happy to add this to my collection.

 

To each their own, but if I'm going to spend my $$$ I'm going to spend it on real coins! Not tokens, or look a likes.
You know there was a time real money could not be photographed not for movies, tv, what so ever. So nothing looking like real U.S. coinage or paper notes could be used on a movie set or TV production.
To me and I do understand and respect what others collect , however that said the same amount spent on a real coin will increase more so then a fantasy coin.
No matter how many produced.
After all even in real coins the value no matter what a TPG, or book sez is only what another person is willing to give you for it.

 

Part of the reason they are legal is that they're overstruck on genuine coins of the same type. That makes the process equivalent to defacing a genuine coin. Or, so I understand it. You'd have to talk to Dan Carr's lawyers to get the real theory on how this is legal, I suppose.

 

Although these are very cool I just can't see how they are legal. I'm sure that the general public would easily mistake these as actual coins without knowing the dates certain coins were minted or that these are simply fantasy dates. Maybe not the collector that's buying them now; but at some point in the future in the chain of custody it's bound to occur. I find the 2009 ASE proof one the most fascinating because although sure it's a proof and has a 'DC' mint mark both that were never U.S. mint issued. I just can't see how someone can be essentially minting almost near identical current U.S. coinage and not be running afoul of the law. I mean the government made a big case over the Norfed liberty 'dollar' stuff (granted it included some other issues) but they let this slide?

 

To me, he's just using a loophole in the law and is no different than the owner of Big Tree Mint in Shanghai.

Chris

 

What about an uninformed buyer? Imagine they don't carry a redbook with them, and don't know that in 1916 there were no more Barber halves produced. In my opinion that "coin" is as bad as a counterfeit.

 

Since there are no 1908 Roman numeral saints made by the U.S. mint maybe Mr. Carr can crank out a few hundred MCMVIII High Relief Saints... It shouldn't be very difficult to squeeze in the extra "I" ..

 

It seems every time a new Carr piece comes out, the same discussion is rehashed. Collect what you like.