| Author |
 Replies: 35 / Views: 4,196 |
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
14454 Posts |
Every time I see this stuff I ask myself how much more the Govt. will allow before they wrap the loophole around his neck and hang him from it. This photo is from a listing on an auction site for close to $200.00 because of its "rarity". I really try to stay away from any discussions about this type of thing because I have actually had conversations with the man behind all of this before he started doing this and I have no problem with the man, He actually started out making custom dies and even designing a couple State Quarters for the US mint, but I can't say I am on board with the business plan he has been following the past couple of years creating these false "scarce" coins that to me looks like the only reason they are made is to fool the unsuspecting new collector    |
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1903 Posts |
Where are you offended at this? These are obviously "fantasy coins"
|
|
Pillar of the Community
614 Posts |
Personally, I like the new design more...
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
13014 Posts |
Ive never met or talked to who makes these, and he may be a great guy in real life. That said though if his other designs havent crossed the line this one certainly has too. I mean to put a mint mark on it if thats not deceptive I dont know what is. If he wants to make coins the size of a quarter with different obverses thats fine, but he needs to or should have to change the obverse as well. There are far to many things in common with the a real obverse design to not say people wont be fooled or its not intentionally trying to fool people. I would bet money you could spend that coin a lot of places which to mean crosses the line from cool piece to making your own money Quote:
These are obviously "fantasy coins" People on this site know that, however most of the general public would not Edited by basebal21
10/02/2012 10:53 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1903 Posts |
So....if it traded hands at 25¢ face value so what? He is charging $200 as an art piece....if you want to use it at face after paying $200 for it...that is your own business! He has at least 25¢ in it as he used a real quarter as the "blank" so he wouldn't be profiting if he made these with the intent to circulate them like Henning did.Ya ya ya....he defaced a real quarter to make an art piece. He obviously isn't trying to pass this off as a mint error, experimental, or anything from the mint at all.....go tell this to the news paper sellers who put stickers and enamel on coins and bills and calls them special....they are the real offenders.
To me this is no different than a "hobo" nickel
Edited by unholyroller
10/02/2012 11:21 pm
|
|
Valued Member
United States
492 Posts |
He's probably ok because it doesn't have a denomination on it. It has a 25, but it doesn't say cents, or quarter dollar. Also, the card in the flip says it's a pattern.
Edited by TJB17
10/02/2012 11:10 pm
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
13014 Posts |
Quote:
So....if it traded hands at 25¢ face value so what? He is charging $200 as an art piece....if you want to use it at face after paying $200 for it The issue isn't that he defaced a real quarter or how much someone would pay for it relative to how much you could use it for. The issue is that if it will fool most of the general public hes making his own money which is illegal for anyone but the federal government to do. Quote:
He obviously isn't trying to pass this off as a mint error, experimental, or anything from the mint at all. I disagree. That could has all the same markings of legal tender. The only difference is a different reverse and a slight change to the obverse. Theres even a mint mark on it. That coin wasnt minted at the Denver mint it was minted where ever he restamped it which is not a US mint and should bear no mint mark. So theres a flip saying he made it, that can easily be removed. Its far to close to what legal tender looks like to say its not being passed off as a mint item. Whether he intended to or not that coin implies its legal tender and the design is far to similar. People WILL think thats real money which is the problem. From the pictures I've seen of his work it seems to push the line a little more every time, and this one crossed that line from fun weird collectors piece to making a coin that could pass as circulating legal tender |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1903 Posts |
Maybe if he sells enough they might use this obverse for the real deal. Frankly I like it better than what we have now! :-)
I respect your views baseball21 and a fear we will have to agree to disagree on this one. I always do like a good discussion! And will ALWAYS respect the views of others even if opposed to mine as long as they are well thought out and well considered!
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
13014 Posts |
Quote:
Frankly I like it better than what we have now! :-)
I respect your views baseball21 and a fear we will have to agree to disagree on this one. I always do like a good discussion! And will ALWAYS respect the views of others even if opposed to mine as long as they are well thought out and well considered!  |
|
Bedrock of the Community
 United States
14454 Posts |
well it bothers me on quite a few levels really. Not only this coin but just about each and every one that has been coming from this establishment has really got under my skin in one way or another. This one changed the design of the Washington Portrait to that of the Dollar coin and the design of the State Quarters reverse but still used a State Quarter that does exist. The way they are marketed would make a new collector it was over struck at the mint with the wrong design and if they didn't know of Daniel Carr's practices could get taken. It is also the 1964 Peace dollar and others that were actually minted by the US at one time but supposedly all destroyed that really started the distaste in my mouth for this practice. Then you have him minting a design that is still in production with a date that the US Mint decided not to mint because of the demand for other silver bullion coins. I guess its just the fact that he is using loopholes to get around using designs that do exist that bothers me the most. Yeah I know most people on this site will know these are fantasy pieces and may not think any harm done but what about the new collectors that do not know about them, do you think its alright for them to spend their money on something they think is unique just because they are not in the "know" about whats going on? Then you add to all this the "double strikes" that you see everywhere where they took an actual real Morgan/IKE,or any other coin and just struck the coin once and then a second time off center like this one  and I think there has to be some time that the Govt steps in to close the loophole around the ones that are doing this stuff's neck |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1903 Posts |
So, just to revisit one earlier remark I made...where do hobo nickels fit into this in your view? Let's do a thought experiment for a moment.... A new collector...wet behind the ears all big eyed and a fist full of ( real ) dollars is poking around the internet desperately trying to separate himself from his money. He runs upon one of these ( obvious to us ) fake "fantasy" coins. Price tag is about $200 and he bites and puts it in the shopping cart and has it shipped to his home. Should we have to shepherd all the would be foolish spenders out there that don't do their research before spending mucho dinero? Information has never been easier to get in the history of the world as it is now. If someone is willing to part ways with a bunch of money without doing their homework, that is their fault and not our responsibility. I could make an equal argument saying that APMEX is evil because they will charge you $30 shipping + surcharge for a sub-minimum order + spot premium for an order of one ASE which ends up being nearly $100 out of pocket for one ASE, yet if you did your homework you could get it for $3 over spot + $5.95 shipping from another source. We cannot nor should not feel we are obligated to protect the stupid...as those who are just ignorant are smart enough to research before they buy. Remember....ignorance is curable....stupidity is terminal |
|
Bedrock of the Community
13014 Posts |
Quote:
So, just to revisit one earlier remark I made...where do hobo nickels fit into this in your view? The difference I see between the two is that hobos nickels would be much harder to spend. But the biggest thing is hobo nickels almost always change the design completely on one side if not both. Anything left in tact was done by the mint so theres no real problem if they only change it enough to look cool. If someone still sees its a nickel and wants to use or accept it its still really a nickel. Once you completely re-press the entire coin though its no longer a quarter and has been made into a fantasy currency of your own. For example if a hobo nickel left the In god we trust or United States of America it was put there by the mint. These you have someone making a completely new coin with the USA on it and mint markings. Whether its made from scratch or completely re-punched the end result is still the same of an after market coin baring USA coinage markers. Quote:
We cannot nor should not feel we are obligated to protect the stupid I agree that you cant protect everyone from overpaying, but to me its not about that. Thats an unfortunate side affect but the real issue is protecting the integrity of US coinage. Just my Two Cents |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1796 Posts |
And to Carr's merit, his website makes absolutely no ambiguity about his art being genuine coins (other than the coins he used to overstrike them with). He makes things specifically as pieces for numismatists to enjoy. Here's another metaphor: Say someone sells kits to build replicas of classic cars as (at least here in NJ) there is a rather large number of classic car enthusiasts who can't afford the real thing, but appreciate the aesthetic and the history. Is the seller of these kits responsible if someone buys one, builds the car, and then tries to hawk it on ebay Motors as an original? Yet another metaphor: Is the manufacturer of a replica of a vintage Colt .45 revolver to be held responsible if someone holds up a bank with their product? Both of these metaphors are an attempt to illustrate a point: When someone makes something for one purpose in a very established niche, can they be held responsible if someone outside of that niche tries to defraud or wrong another person with their product? With Carr, your average numismatist (his target audience) could catch these as his work from 10 paces. Edited by SteveCaruso
10/03/2012 12:27 am
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1903 Posts |
Protect US coinage or prevent it from looking bad? Lol I still say the "fantasy" version makes current quarters look bad! Lol I have said my peace on the subject! Thanks to all for a lively discussion! |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1903 Posts |
OK OK OK...I just couldn't resist.....if you really want to get your knickers in a twist...Google "boggs notes" this guy takes his art currency creations to the next level! He actually spends his creations at face value!
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1704 Posts |
I have to agree with Bryan1315 this time Carr has gone way over the line with his overstamped quarters. I have never believed that his so called works of numismatic art were things that the government should continue to allow him to produce. I would never buy any of his overpriced creations and would highly recommend that his products be boycotted by all. Ed ANA LM-3175 |
| |
Replies: 35 / Views: 4,196 |
Posted 10/02/2012 10:42 pm
