5 Cents 1932 ( Varieties : Far 2 And Near 2 )

za - please forgive me - I have been fighting off an oncoming migraine all afternoon and it shows.

My second one is the common NEAR and NOT the rare FAR

I cannot believe I made that mistake in my last post

- again - sorry

I started reading this thread just the other day, and it intrigued me. I think za75 has raised several good points.

In my opinion, this variety parallels the 26 far 6. It is a virtually identical variety, the only question is rarity. I suspect that the far 6 has become so popular because of the publicity it has received over time. Had this variety been discovered at the same time, I suspect it would be just as popular. Why is it that this coin has been brought to the attention of some of the "authorities" on Canadian coins (ICCS, Charlton, etc) and they refuse to acknowledge it as a variety? It takes two seconds to learn the difference, and I'm sure either of them could quickly pull some data and see that the far 2 is quite scarce, in a relative way at least.

Ultimately, it is the opinions of people like those aforementioned who will determine whether or not this variety ever becomes popular (I'm sure someone will refute this, but it is true). This isn't something ridiculous to propose to the authorities either. The 26 far is one of the most sought after varieties in Canadian coinage, and the 32 far presents the exact same thing. There is no reason to acknowledge one and disregard the other.

When ICCS begins grading far/near 2s, or Charlton/Trends start pricing them separately, everyone will go look through their 32s to see if they have the rare one. That will create a market for the variety, and it will give us a better idea of the population of these coins. za75 - I hope your efforts get this variety recognized one day/

Well written jg86...

Not sure I would go as far as to call ICCS, Charlton and Trends, "authorities" on Canadian coins ... but your point being made is not missed...

All three mentions are "at-this-time" {and times are changing} the more popular to reference ... but make no-mistake, they are all three just there to extract "expendable income" from the pockets of the hobbyist...

dts...

Persistence. It took several years for a group of us to get some of the Victorian cent varieties to the front of the Charlton catalog.

Here is a similar analogy:

The 1-cent 1929 High 9 was discovered in 2003 (by Jerry Himelfarb), but it was not in the Charlton Catalogue until the 64th Edition (2010). A raw example sold at an RCNA auction in Saint John in 2010. I then lobbied and convinced Michael Findlay (then, the editor of CCN Trends) at the fall 2010 Torex to put it in Trends and provided a price list for him. ICCS only started attributing the variety (upon request) in the last year or so. Even now, some dealers don't bother to attribute this variety, and you can still find them in junk bins. These coins are still super scarce in grades above EF.

So, if you are lucky, the 1932 Far 2 might get formal recognition within a decade or so of discovery. As bosox states, you have to be persistent.

Earle,

You say : " The big boys like to call the shots and somtimes their logic appears to be based on nothing......".

I agree with this comment and I was happy, in 2012, to be able to use some sites for create a form of " movement " ( evolution ).

The numismatic's world seem to me like an elephant for his mean of moving around ! Maybe the motivations for this stagnation are very numerous, but I think that money ($) and power take a great place.

But any way, the interest of collectors is a good motivation, and " Yes we can ", despite of contraints.

Earle & za75,

I think you give the people you call "big boys" too much credit and blame.

Charlton's variety segments over the past few years were based upon collector input, usually groups of collectors for each denomination. I worked with a handful of others on the one cent section. Did we include all of the varieties? - no. Did we include the most popular varieties? - mostly yes based upon our subjective judgment. Did we include only rare varieties? - no. Was it perfect? - no. Did Charlton do it sell books? - yes, but so what, selling books is what they do. Although Charlton took this step into varieties, if you ask them, I believe they will tell you they are not a variety catalog and do not want to be one. Other than moving a few of the most popular varieties to the front of the catalog, I doubt they will continue the more exhaustive variety listings.

Regarding dealers, most dealers I talk with couldn't care less about varieties. There is no money in it for them and, let's be honest, buying and selling coins is how they make their living. Most will not take the time to go through their inventories and sort out varieties, unless the varieties sell for a significant premium. Rarity of a variety has little to do with any premium. Face it, many very scarce or rare varieties have no premium. Most variety collectors I know want to cherry pick them for no premium and won't pay a premium if it is asked. This will continue until you cannot find them to cherry pick any more.

These things may change going forward, if varieties become harder to find, if demand increases, if more variety information is published. I submit to you, like most changes to the hobby, the popularity of varieties will be driven by the collectors, not the "big boys." Time will tell.