| Author |
Replies: 561 / Views: 56,859 |
|
|
|
Moderator
 Canada
10458 Posts |
I think they dropped the ball with this set. Each 1-cent coin should have been struck like the predecessors they are supposed to represent. The large cents should have been large, and why on earth did they put '1' instead of 'ONE' on the Edward and two George V cents? The Edward cent looks ridiculous...
"Discovery follows discovery, each both raising and answering questions, each ending a long search, and each providing the new instruments for a new search." -- J. Robert OppenheimerContent of this post is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 Unported License. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses...0/deed.en_USMy eBay store
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
3690 Posts |
Absolutely. The set is very good but correct sizing and wording would have made it great. RCM the dropped ball for sure. Can only explain the '1' as misguided political correctness or simply lack of attention to detail. I suspect the former. 
Edited by CC-Ottawa 01/07/2013 8:29 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
1007 Posts |
I definetly think political correctness is behind the 1 and I can't explain the size issue.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
1354 Posts |
Received my sets today. They shipped them by air to me :)))
|
|
Valued Member
Canada
370 Posts |
 I'm still waiting for my set 
|
|
Valued Member
Canada
196 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
933 Posts |
agreed on the size issue. I still love the set...but first thing I said when I got it was...WHY ARE THE LARGE CENTS NOT LARGE? oh well
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
2426 Posts |
Big or small I love them all!
|
|
Valued Member
Canada
414 Posts |
Finally recv'd my two sets yesterday, COA # 4501 and 4491 if I remmeber correctly. Staying true to RCM's poor order managemenet, I'm not suprised that I received such a high COA # even though I entered my order within hours of the sets release. I guess the US dealers are more important :( I try not to complain about mint products because I think everyone has a different opinion. But why not include a sixth coin depicting Queen Victoria and double dated 1858-2012? Vicky's are likely the most desireable years for collectors, this would have been a nice piece to finish off the Vicky collection.
|
|
Valued Member
Canada
112 Posts |
I am still waiting for mine.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
1007 Posts |
 fed
|
|
Valued Member
Canada
196 Posts |
i hope I get COA# 4998 - Coa#5000
|
|
Moderator
 Canada
10458 Posts |
Quote: But why not include a sixth coin depicting Queen Victoria and double dated 1858-2012? Because Victorian coins were never struck by the Royal Canadian Mint - this set was supposed to represent 1-cent coins struck by the Royal Canadian Mint 1908-2012.
"Discovery follows discovery, each both raising and answering questions, each ending a long search, and each providing the new instruments for a new search." -- J. Robert OppenheimerContent of this post is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 Unported License. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses...0/deed.en_USMy eBay store
|
|
Valued Member
Canada
200 Posts |
My first 3 sets are in 42xx range and I did order it before MC release. It seems like the Mint starts shipping them out from big COA #? lets see who will get small #...
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
593 Posts |
Still waiting. 
|
| |
Replies: 561 / Views: 56,859 |