| Author |
Replies: 51 / Views: 8,397 |
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
2845 Posts |
Quote:
Just ask yourself .......how could a gold 1970 Dollar , or a Prussian 20 mark 1969 twenty five cents just happen ?
Impossible. My theory is coins such as this were knowingly minted as a novelty item, perhaps given to mint employees, politicians or dignitaries. At the time, RCM had just completed their run of 1967 gold sets selling for $40, a pittance compared to the value of gold today. In 1967 gold was a new and exciting metal, 1914 gold coins were but a long ago page in history, Over the years the existence began to become known through estate sales, beneficiaries, etc and the value skyrocketed. I don't for a moment believe most dealers or collectors become involved with high value "one of a kind" coins without knowledge of the original source of ownership. And I think the reason RCM has not taken an active position is because, well much like any government dept, focusing on a past era of entitlement really serves no worthwhile purpose, most of the players in the game are now certainly seniors or no longer alive. The likelihood of successful prosecution without key witnesses would be very low. The other possibly is that the statute of limitations time-clock has already gonged. Just my opinion...
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
5255 Posts |
@WildflowerAB said: Quote:For such a well established TPG as PCGS to slab ANY high value "one of a kind" coin without seeking proof of legitimacy would seem very unusual, given their guarantee of authenticity. Yes, I would agree, but where is the proof? Do they keep the proof themselves? Can the person who paid for the certification get a copy? I have proof that I own my car. If I sold it to you, would you be satisfied if I told you that I had the proof, but would not let you see it? Would you be satisfied to assume that I had it (fair assumption?) because otherwise why would I try to sell the car? I am just wondering what the facts are.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
2845 Posts |
Quote:I agree to a certain point, the Manitoba gold has a court order against it, all the RCM has to do is exert their power on this type of coin, p John, while I'm not a legal expert, in a court of law, timeliness is always very critical. For example once a fraudulent act becomes known, one is then obliged to immediately follow through as opposed to waiting and watching until a "preferred" victim has bought the goods at fair market value. Failure to take action is equivalent to condoning it. Court orders are definitely not open-ended for unlimited periods of time. Especially that several of these coins are freely advertised in the marketplace, they're clearly not back-alley dealings. That an innocent buyer would suddenly be jumped upon by an RCM ordered seizure, while neglecting to serve forfeiture notice upon the dealers...that'd be a greater scandalous bungle than even the story of their creation!
Edited by wildflowerAB 05/02/2016 12:44 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
2845 Posts |
Quote:
Do they keep the proof themselves? Can the person who paid for the certification get a copy?
That's a good question. I'd assume PCGS has their back covered in some manner as they undoubtedly employ a team of legal experts, as do RCM. Wealthy buyers of high value coinage most likely seek legal advice when the selling contract is signed, whereby purchase agreements are scrutinized to ensure their client bears no risk. In the comparison to cars, the govt vehicle registry has been deemed to be public records, whereby business documents are not. Some types of government records can be obtained through Freedom of Information requests, but certainly not all. What type of guarantee buyers of these gold coins might hold, I can't say, but it may involve a chain of confidential assurances.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
5324 Posts |
The court order has no time limit, due to the results of the two rogue RCM employees trial and their guilty pleas these coins are subject to seizure, the unit taken was at a US auction, cooperation between two government police forces, t Now if the RCM choose to enforce the order when one of these coins shows up for sale is a risk you take on owning this unit. There is no doubt with this coin and the 69 gold 25 cents it shouldn't have been created, but it's a shame on the RCM of how it left the mint that is more important. Some collectors does not know the risk in owning this coin, as example the 67 double struck coins, the RCM took on the wrong dealer lost the court ruling and had to return the seized coins and they became legal to own. The Manitoba gold piece offered at 2013 Torex under the table was eventually sold, so someone was willing to accept the risk
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4233 Posts |
I got a laugh out of the ha.com link of the 1969 25 cent posted by SPP. The description calls it "mint sport". This whole discussion reminds me of the saga of the US 1933 double eagle. Similar, but different.
|
|
Moderator
 Canada
10463 Posts |
Quote: Actually it was a 1906 Prussian 20 mark the 1969 25 cents was struck over. Look at the Heritage auction link I posted. You can see the younger effigy of Queen Elizabeth II and the hooves of the horse on the reverse - that is an English sovereign under that 1969 25c strike.
"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
2845 Posts |
Quote:Now if the RCM choose to enforce the order when one of these coins shows up for sale is a risk you take on owning this unit. A Court Order specifies the name of the person the goods are to be seized from. You're describing a scenario whereby two employees were charged and convicted and the actual evidence of their one misdeed was confiscated. One coin, one incident, one fraud count. But it can't be assumed that two guys fraudulently minted all or any of the others. Maybe they just wanted to make one that looked like those that their bosses were given as retirement gifts? RCM had every opportunity to pursue legal recourse by subpoenaing PCGS through the US courts in order to determine the name of the owner/s and yet they chose to look the other way. There's got to be a good reason for that. Considering the amount of time that's passed their failure to do so has already legitimizes these coins (in my opinion). It would be interesting to hear what the dealers presently selling any have to say but I suspect the answer is in the PCGS holder. Wasn't it PCGS who was contracted by RCM to grade the 1912-1914 gold coins as well? If so, that's an indication of a pretty solid business relationship between the two.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
2845 Posts |
Quote:
I got a laugh out of the ha.com link of the 1969 25 cent posted by SPP. The description calls it "mint sport". This whole discussion reminds me of the saga of the US 1933 double eagle. Similar, but different.
Well since you mention it.....I recall it mentioned that RCM had production issues after silver coinage was discontinued in 1967. For example it's known a portion of 1968 dime were minted at the Philadelphia mint because the reeding on the edge is different. The general timing may mean nothing but it just happens to be in somewhat the same era. What's not known is how often this type of outsourcing occurred or what other mints might have engaged in "mint sport" knowing the risk was less if their home currency wasn't involved.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 Canada
5404 Posts |
I referred to the auction reference I had. It clearly states A Prussian 1906 20 mark, sale price £700 . As SPP shows ,obviously there are a few Sovereigns as well. The point is , there is clear evidence of skulduggery at the mint in the past. Especially the post silver coin era from 1969 - 1971. Reference Coinhistory.info Chronology of Canadian Coins July 11 1984 [ 708.7 ] . It will save precious time rather than going through old English Coin Catalogues .
Edited by Pacificoin 05/02/2016 4:08 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
2428 Posts |
As stated earlier, the Mint has no desire to chase down any of these coins from the past. Court orders or not. Only would a recent or current scandal cause the Mint to step up to the plate. The RCM is about making money and not wasting it on the retrieval of a coin or two. Just too much time and resources wasted for the return. Someone mentioned earlier about the Mint chasing down those who make and sell fraudulent/counterfeit coins... I hope this story puts things in perspective. The gentlemen who invented the illusion of sawing a lady in half had a million dollar idea so many years ago. People were paying plenty of money to watch as he performed his illusion night after night. He was on his way to easy street. Eventually he decided to patent his illusion. Once he obtained his Patent, he spent the rest of his life in courts trying to sue thousands of individuals for Patent infringements rather then do what he did best, saw women in half. Instead of enjoying profits from his illusion act he wound up penny less and miserable and over a million dollars in debt.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
5324 Posts |
One of the most respected dealers Mr. Moore offered a ms 64 version of this coin to me at 2013 Torex under the table he cautioned and warned me about legality of this unit. When a judge gives a judgement at the end of a trial, they give their reasons and in this case the RCM asked for a court order to make these coins the property of the RCM for obvious reasons, if you want to take a chance on a 15000 to 20000 coin be my guest, some people are willing to take the risk, if you dangle this coin at a show with an RCM rep or even a failed marriage. Court orders are what the RCMP will readily act upon, that's the difference when the RCMP seized the 67 dollars, ect. from JM and eventually succeeding trial and having the coins returned and becoming a reconized error because the RCM failed to prove their point. By the way, the two convicted RCM employees admitted to producing the 6 to 8 units and smuggling them out.
Edited by john100 05/03/2016 10:26 am
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
2845 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
2428 Posts |
Try to ask the seller a question about the coin. I asked a question and rather then an answer, I received questions on my question.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
5324 Posts |
The dealer is smart, being on consignment, with it's history still a cool coin to have in hand.
Edited by john100 08/20/2016 1:56 pm
|
| |
Replies: 51 / Views: 8,397 |