New Reverse for the ASE program.

#40 looks like a custom paint job on a pickup truck deeeeep in the trailer park.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

They were all designs that had been previously proposed for various $5 gold commemoratives.

 

So, if they were rejected for higher denominations, why would they be considered for a $1 denomination? Junk is junk, IMO.

 

I like the current design a lot better than any of the proposed designs. However if it was changed I doubt the "general public" would even notice. Among my family & friends I only know 2 that are coin collectors. None of my other family/friends have really ever expressed any interest in collecting.

 

I was more referring to people who are just getting into coins or maybe just have a few. They might be confused as to which one is "genuine" if you have 2 different designs.

 

Well hopefully they'll sign up as members here so we can educate them

 

My suggestion to issue missing dates went nowhere (other thread). So I have another idea. How about if they issue a series of ASE reverses depicting the ugliest governor for each state. They could issue 5 designs each year until all states had been covered.

 

Eh, well...I suppose your comment is tongue-in-cheek. I wouldn't want an ugly governors collection, lol.

 

Yeah, swap out the Stars & Stripes for a Confederate flag and you've got a redneck tattoo.

Nearly all of these designs are really bad in my opinion - half of them look like Pokemon, and the other half look like they were designed by a first-year art school student. A lot of the artists don't even seem to know the difference between an eagle and a vulture.

 

The 25 year 'law' is directed towards circulating coinage. Does a NCLT coin fall under this same 'law'?? Though, I agree, it would be a change in mid-stream if they change the ASE reverse design, no matter how much I like . When the Plats had a reverse change, that was a series of different reverses, much like the NA dollars, now. Regardless of whether it is mid stream change or not, the Mint should leave the ASE as is, as I agree with rickmp...it would just be screwing up what is already liked/appreciated. I think any design change at all is a mistake. Though, if pressed to pick for a definite change, I'd prefer #41.

 

Yes, the ASE definitely falls under the same law. 25 years has passed and it is eligible for a new design. It only makes sense to at least explore the issue. It's funny - I spent years hearing people bash the ASE for an unoriginal obverse (lifted from the walking lib half) and a stodgy reverse. All of a sudden, when word gets out that new designs are being considered, collectors come out of the woodwork to defend her. Collectors sure are a fickle bunch. I welcome a change in design, not because I don't like the current design - I love it, in fact - but because 28 years with no design changes is plenty long enough. Let's see what they can come up with next.

 

I do like the current design but would not object to a new one. My hope would be that the proposed designs would be as good or better than the current one. From the ones shown so far I don't feel that way.

 

I don't like the eagle carrying the olive branch design (#41). Is it supposed to represent the new, gentler America or something like that?

Most of the designs should have never even been considered for the Silver Eagle. The fact that the panel did consider them for this specific coin is problematic.

Those people are liable to ruin the Silver Eagle program.

 

The fact that the committee considered - and rejected - approximate 40 designs that you don't particularly like either is problematic...why?

 

I would not be opposed to a design change after all this time, but I really don't like most of the designs the mint comes up with nowadays... hoping they come up with something better.

 

They put the eagles they liked into a binder to be considered for the reverse of the silver eagle. Why would they put images of cute little baby bald eagles in a nest with eggs into consideration? That design actually made the short list. The cuteness is patently inappropriate for the silver eagle unless they are attempting to change it to suit their political positions.

 

I don't know if they put eagles "they liked" into the list of choices, or rather they put eagle designs rejected for other coin programs into the list of choices... That's what my understanding was....

 

Haha what the heck does any of this have to do with politics? I know people like to link everything to politics, but this is just a matter of artistic taste.

 

Maybe politics is the wrong term. But I believe they are changing the meaning of the reverse rather than simply choosing based on artistic design.

There has been a distinction between the Silver Eagle and the Gold and Platinum Eagles designs. That being that the latter two have nice eagles on their reverses, but they don't have the same symbolism as the Silver. The Gold and Platinum coins reverses are very light on symbolism.

The current Silver Eagle's heraldic eagle is clutching an olive branch and arrows. The symbolism has to do with America's role in the world and it's relationships with others (world politics).

For the new design (#41), they have dropped the arrows. The eagle is flying (somewhere) with an olive branch. I don't think it's just artistic taste. When you pick and choose symbolic elements that have meaning, you are making a statement.

 

If there is a thought to change the design, I would recommend the flying eagle on the reverse of the Gobrecht dollar of the 1830s.