New... Dan Carr 1964 Morgan Dollars!

Boy have you got that flipped upside down trout. Its the minoriry (of those that know of their existance) that view them as trinkits. The vast majority see them as solid numismatic items ranging from classifying them as exonumia at the very least up to the finest numismatic art of our generation. Only on these forums do I hear any negativity about them and that only comes from a small minority and it's always the same old people

You quoted a part of my post which I did not mean to make the main focus of what I was/am requesting of you. My request was if you would please explain to me how you perceive someone being impacted negatively by these overstrikes?

Please be assured my request is not one for making an argument either. I am sincerely interested how these could be a threat since I cannot think of a scenario myself. I am very aware I don't know everything (very far from it) and enjoy learning. I hope this is made clear at all times by my signature's first quotation.

Oh - as to whether or not the hobby accepts Daniel's work, admittedly, I do hold that opinion in general.

Since the businessmen behind one of the big three money-making TPGs in the hobby saw enough profit potential in recognizing Daniel's items, I just took it as evidence there must be a major acceptance of these overstrikes within the hobby. The TPGs know how to fill their own coffers effectively. They saw a potential and are making money from it.

I also ran into factual reference about the existence of these overstrikes on websites such as the Ike Group and (cannot remember its name) a (the?) main Franklin half website.

Without thinking about the subject consciously, I made a universal statement. Reflecting, I guess in light of the above mentioned circumstances that I subconsciously deem the acceptance status of DC items to no longer need a quantitative statement of non-univeral acceptance.

edited for typos and grammar

IMHO, Carr's work is art, being an imitation of an ideal.

@Trout .... Ideally, coin collectors strive to own rare pieces, limited editions, coins, tokens and the like that few other collectors will own or have perhaps even seen. Carr's work, imitations of coins that bear impossible dates, does appear to fit Plato's definition of art.

IMHO, Carr's pieces are far superior to "rare" sequentially-numbered prints in the art world. The quality, depth of production and imagination that Mr. Carr puts into his creations constitutes a numismatic art form, methinks.

Yes, there is some comparison to art prints, and that's why I made the comparison. Yet, there are differences, too. There are classes of prints that are specially made by the original artist and numbered in limited editions. Many such prints sell into the thousands of dollars, being far more than Mr. Carr's creations as yet fetch.

In a large sense, I view Carr's work as highly imaginative. His work is unparalleled. He's created a genre of collectibles that did not before exist. His attention to detail and the beauty of his products is undoubtedly appealing to a great many collectors ... readily born out by Carr's successful sales.

This is from a previous one of my posts on this subject




To put it simply.
If at some later date or even right now for that matter some unscrupulous person decides to sell these offerings as genuine Mint rarities then there IS the potential that someone is going to get severely Burned.
It is all well and good saying that a buyer should be better informed, This may work in a perfect world But in reality the world is far from perfect and the innocent or ill informed could easily be duped with these.

When a collector gets duped on an over-graded or altered coin/token/medal, it's surely not the fault of the U.S. Mint or die sinker that made the piece. Likewise, if someone gets fooled on a Carr piece, it's not the fault of the maker. Put the blame where it belongs ... either on an unscrupulous or careless third party and/or a lack of due diligence of the buyer. That's my take, for what it's worth.