Creating A New Canadian Variety Reference?

Very well said okiecoiner. The audience for a Canadian variety reference is very small and could not cost justify a comprehensive publication. The copyrights held by the existing publishers would necessitate that a new cataloguing methodology be developed.

If Charltons decides to compile a reference that combines all the Variety sections from their past and any future catalogues (that feature a Variety section), this would
be the closest thing to an all encompassing reference that I can foresee.

Unless as okiecoiner states, a group of young enthusiasts decides to step up to the challenge with all the above factors in mind.

okiecorner has once again explained the "ever expanding" varieties dilemma to near perfection.

I would love to see an "all inclusive" varieties publication happen but there are really not enough serious varieties collectors around to make it a viable venture at the present time..IMHO.

There are just not enough of us out there,..and of the general varieties enthusiasts out there,..it might turn them away knowing that there might be 100's or 1000's of lesser varieties coming out as time passes.

Some of the experts have stated.."almost ever 59 cent could be considered somewhat of a variety"..

okiecoiner...

The 2011 Charlton Standard Catalogue Large Cent variety section disproves almost all of your arguments.

I would say it's the closest to an "ideal" variety guide.

The Charlton variety sections for the 5c, 10c and 25c denominations, went in a different direction and were, in my opinion, disasters.

Please define: "advancement of Canadian Numismatics". What does that really mean?

When talking about "reference guides" I think it's crucial to define your goals.

Are you talking about writing a Haxby 1859 catalogue for every date and denomination? Yes, that would probably be impossible.

IMO, anyone trying to "advance" Canadian variety collecting, likely wants to see an increase in the number of variety collectors.

The only way to attract more collectors to Canadian varieties is to create a reference that covers the "major" varieties in a simple, accessible, and dare I say it "FUN" manner.

But if Charlton Catalogues and ICCS both dropped the ball on Canadian varieties, who can decide what "major" varieties are in order to "gain wide acceptance"?

Someone simply has to take the plunge, and deliver a high quality product that will lay a solid groundwork for the field of "Canadian Variety collecting". Then let the collectors decide.

I would agree it will be very hard, it will likely be financially negative and there will be battles that will need to be fought with an establishment that has done so much damage to the field thus far.

Take what the 2011 Charlton Large cent group did for large cent collecting. I think this guide has not been surpassed by any Canadian variety publication before or since.

Now take that approach and expand it across denominations and larger time periods, and you really start to get somewhere.

The 2011 Charlton variety section was done by a small group of dedicated collectors who were also well attuned to the varieties there-in. Although there were many more coins that could have been put in there, the group was limited to 80 pages/varieties TOPS. The goal of the group was to have at least one entry for every date and Obverse that there was to show the readers the TYPES of varieties that were possible and types to look for. It was never intended to be all-inclusive. I do not know the person or persons who did the 5, 10 & 25 or what they decided to put out, but I am familiar and friends with all involved in the Vicky Large Cent section.

For the 2011, at least 5 sets of eyes saw each of the final choices and each person took a private and individual estimate on what kind of premium, if any, that the variety was worth. The multiplier for the premium was based on a given, long-known large cent and they were to compare the scarcity or availability based on a comparison to an 1858 large cent in each of the given grades. The 5-6 estimates were then averaged or taken as general concensus as to the pricing in Charlton. If a single individual dreams up or estimates populations or scarcities, then there are going to be inaccuracies right from the get-go, based upon that person's goals. I know of a few auctioneers, dealers and ebay vendors that would put prices way out of whack just to increase their own personal profit based upon what they said something was worth. The intial prices in the 2011 Charlton have now stabilized and sought their own price levels based upon actual sales, especially those that were picked up by the Charlton front section and Trends. It's a good guide, but was never intended to be an all-inclusive price/ID guide.

To answer C-V's question, I define "the advancement of Canadian Numinsmatics" as doing something good for the hobby and newbies from the heart, not for the advancement of someone's wallet. It means putting your knowledge and research down on paper or computer so everyone can see it, essentially for free. That means putting out ACCURATE information, not dreamed-up ebay auctions for multi-thousand dollar coins that are worth $100 or less. There are too many people entering the varieties game that don't have a solid background in study and research. If they see a dealer/vendor advertising xxx variety coins for insane prices, then they feel that's what the going rate is and they get hosed. Everything that I have ever put out is for the betterment of the hobby, and newbies/beginners to be specific. I email ebay and vendors themselves when I see something put out that is wrong; the same that I do when I walk down the bourse aisle. The only way to get new collectors into the variety field is to make the "getting started" part as cheaply as possible so that they are not burned early on and see it as a hobby, not sugarplum dollars materializing. You don't get them going by putting $100 price tags on ebay auctions or dealer shelves for coins that have the added word "variety" to try to justify a $10 coin with a pumped-up price. I also have not mixed up the difference between reference book and guide. If C-V thinks that a "Major Variety" guide wouldn't be used as a reference, then I guess that I am mixed up. I consider Rob Turner's book to be part of a personal Library, not a reference and it is used to study and understand, not thumb-through. I use Griffin and Zoell as guides/catalogues and they accompnay me to every coin show and ebay session. What C-V proposed was a guide/ID/catalogue but it most certainly would be a reference book in my mind as well. And anyone who doesn't think that the large cent variety section of the 2100 65th edition as a reference needs to consult Webster's.

If someone is going to be authoring a variety guide, he had better be honest, have credetials and be accepted by the experienced collecting community. He should also have a pretty good rapport with Bill Cross & Charlton (until it is sold) because lots of copyright OK's need to be gotten from them and any author will need to guatantee to him that it will not be in direct competition with a Charlton pub. Just the uasge of DP1's 1 through 5 names/numbers will need their permission, since they own them, let along any Obverse or Reverse ID that starts with "OC" since they own that as well, as well as using any Griffin or Zoell numbers. Then you have Dr Haxby's numbers, B. Gravestone and Turner numbers to name just a few. All of those guys did what they did for the good of the hobby, not for any profit in mind, and they made up the numbering and ID systems. So when I say that an all inclusive guide that only touches the "Major" varieties would be an extremely daunting task, I'm not just whistling Dixie and I'm not talking die-tracking each and every die, I'm just talking about relatively well-known varieties. An all-around pub would be great, but I think out of reach at this time. You maybe 25 hardliner collectors, another 25 or so dabblers, maybe 25 dealers and maybe 10-15 libraries. That's a target audience of less than 100 for any kind of book.

ICCS and Charlton are non-profit organizations? I dont think so :).

Also...I agree, too many dealers are posting non-sensical varieties at astronomical prices. Most of them are in ICCS flips.
I agree, ICCS has done more damage to Canadian variety collecting than any other entity.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/1859-Double...em2c8ea9765b

Even the copyrights for the variety section we did in the 2011 Charlton were a little tricky. I worked with Bill Cross to get something we all could live with. We gave Charlton permission to use our photos, numbering, and descriptions (this includes re-publishing them again). We each kept our copyright to them and our ability to publish them in the future.

Excellent posts. I'll certainly have more to say on this topic in coming days, but here are a few of my thoughts at this point. Venue: I've become convinced that the way of the future is in the electronic, not printed format. If such a work were on line, the actual monetary cost to produce it would be much less. Can you imagine how big and how expensive a paper version of my 1859 catalog would have to be?

An online general variety catalog could be done as a free publication (as my 1859 catalog is) or could be password-protected with a nominal annual subscription charge. The other great advantage of an online publication is its ease of updating. No need to buy "updated" volumes just to get a modest number of changes.

Committee Size: Although it would be a lot of work to produce this catalog, my impression is the more people on a given committee, the less well it functions. So, work groups should be trimmed as much as possible.

I'm next