| Author |
Replies: 88 / Views: 6,706 |
|
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
12437 Posts |
Of course, PCGS also calls a particular grade XF when it is supposed to be Extremely Fine by ANA standards 
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
7629 Posts |
And neither PCGS nor NGC claim to follow " ANA" standard. If they did, they would also be able to agree upon the abbreviation for 'proof'. One correctly uses "PR" and the other improperly uses "PF".
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
7629 Posts |
scubu - Both of those definitions are wrong. It's a very well known fact that PCGS certifies everything out of the norm as a 'mint error', and thousands of people agree that this practice is wrong.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1807 Posts |
Holy Cow, I go away for a few weeks and look what I almost missed. Great discussion. Now what about 'cent' vs. 'penny' ?
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
7629 Posts |
There's one that's been around for a LONG time, and has gone unchecked for so long that it is perfectly acceptable to call a 'cent' a 'penny'. Even our coin wrappers have said 'pennies' for over 50 years. I think it's one that should just go forgotten. Biggest difference here is that we don't have 'cents' and 'pennies' which are different. These two terms are interchangeable because they describe the exact same thing in this country, even though the old technical definition of 'penny' is 1/12 of a shilling. We don't have those pennies, we don't use shillings, so when someone says 'penny' in this country, only an idiot would blindly assume the person is talking about 1/12 of a shilling and be confused by the term.
Insisting on calling them 'cents' because they are 1/100 of a dollar is just being confrontational for no good reason.
Edited by coppercoins 04/10/2009 11:48 am
|
|
Valued Member
United States
198 Posts |
Quote: As for my die reference...it has been on hold for over a year. I have gone through some tough personal times, and had to shelf it to make money at other things. The guide was being produced at a personal financial loss just to get it into the hands of collectors who wanted it. I never imagined I would be producing over 200 copies. I figured no more than a dozen people would care to have one. I was wrong, and lose around $100 every time I create a new packet of pages. I am still working my way out of debt so I can go back to finishing that reference.
I'm sorry to hear that, but I know that your doing this out of your love for the hobby, and I respect that. Even though my interests are different, I'm really glad that your there for me to send people to for advice or just to cross check a new find. Your efforts are http://coppercoin.com are to be commended. To my knowledge, there are no other websites that offer as much useful information to collector's today, at least without subscribing. I really commend you on your dedication to Lincoln Cent varieties. Maybe when this project gets complete it can be published in some form, but I imagine there still won't be a big profit involved, at least not compared with the countless hours you've spent putting this work together. Anyway Chuck, keep up the good work, and thanks for being there. ~ Jim
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
5619 Posts |
Well, I see that some people have the same knowledge base and some people follow this and other's teach against it. I do know that being a 45-year "newbie collector" has been difficult to obtain knowledge and information to clearly work with to feel somewhat comfortable and express the knowledge to other's to advance this hobby.
Chuck you seem to be very frustrated that while other's who did teach, and no longer do, leaves the "remaining" teacher's in a place that is clearly unsettling to say the least. I always have seen things from many sides and chose which side I would be a believer in( sometimes in the middle). I have an opinion and it does seem that even well known coin graders have this opinion, whether fact from the books or fact from the industry, I see your side being from the teacher's desk, can you see the side from the student's, very difficult as I am sure your view is also....PS: Chuck I hope you have at least 201 copies made, I also would enjoy the educational reading from the Teacher's View, Be Well, Mike
Edited by Morgans Dad 04/10/2009 12:30 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3507 Posts |
Hi,
I want to go on record as saying that those definitions on PCGS are horrible and were apparently written by someone who was clueless. They even spelled "doubled die" as doubled die where it is incorrectly listed under errors.
The first basic premise that a large amount of cluelessness was involved is based upon the fact that any die variety person knows that "double die" is incorrect and shows an extreme lack of knowledge on the subject.
They are just dead wrong and those definitions simply irk numismatists that are trying to teach things correctly. I take those goofy definitions with a grain of salt as they set this part of our hobby back fifty years or more.
Thanks, Bill
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
7629 Posts |
I find it amazing that some of the most respected references and companies out there do the very worst job at dealing with numismatic terms. I haven't seen a copy of late, but the Red Book used to be VERY bad at interchanging terms that cannot be interchanged. And I go on the record with Bill on the PCGS definitions...they should just be tossed they are so bad.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3507 Posts |
I am still relatively "anal" I suppose where the terms cent and penny are used. While I accept the common usage of the word penny, Chuck points out the difference between the two. Our cents say ONE CENT and not ONE PENNY , which for example would be found on older British coins.
Being a person who collects anything that can be found in a roll. I have an interest in Cents as well as British and Irish Pennies which do turn up in half dollar rolls on occasion.
If someone tells me they found a 1945 Penny, it could be a non-U.S. coin , unless a further bit of information is added. If someone says they found a 1945 cent, I can guess they mean a U.S. cent although the cent is a denomination used in other countries.
I still want to have a clue if a coin is a penny or a cent and even though that is really an upstream swim, I try to use those terms as non-interchangeable.
I am not 100% at my effort and occasionally I call a cent a penny:-) but there is a little bit of education in understanding the difference.
Have Fun, Bill
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3507 Posts |
One of the scariest things I've seen where numismatic terminology is involved pertains to coin definition websites where members can create their own definitions of a term and have it posted. If you do a search for a definition of a term you come up with , I would guess, at least an 80/20 ratio where 80 out of 100 definitions are questionable at best and 20 out of 100 might have some merit.
You can find almost anything on the internet as definitions of all things "numismatic" and a majority of them , even on important websites, like PCGS are just out in the ozone.
There are still definitions pertaining to "clipped" planchets (incomplete planchets) that indicate that the clip happens when a coin is struck.
Of course we know that the incomplete planchet is created when blanks are cut from the strip.
There is a lot of "junk" out there.
Edited by foundinrolls 04/10/2009 3:11 pm
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
10045 Posts |
Well...I see there is an apparent discrepancy between how PCGS defines errors and that of many other experienced numismatists who specialize in these areas of study? So, which is more accurate--a broad definition for an "error", or one that makes a specific distinction between errors that occur during striking and die varieties that originate with unique features on one die? Isn't this really comparing "apples to oranges"? It strikes me that the intended goal for strict definitions is not to impose on individual collector's opinions, but create more clarity so everyone can share a common understanding and learn about die making and coining processes--or am I simply off-base here? 
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2669 Posts |
Quote:It strikes me that the intended goal for strict definitions is not to impose on individual collector's opinions, but create more clarity so everyone can share a common understanding and learn about die making and coining processes--or am I simply off-base here?   Indeed, when something has no name, it's bound to be called all matter of odd things that will require an explanation. Once something has a name, everyone knows what one is talking about. Naming something isn't done to squish everyone else into a certain mold or "impose on .. opinions" but simply so everyone has a base of understanding of what something is. Like Chuck's dog and cat. One is a "dog" and one is a "cat". Calling them by those names will let everyone know what animal you are talking about. woof! 
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
62064 Posts |
Something interesting. Try to find a wrapper for Cents that says Cents on it. Most of all I've seen say Pennies. Try to buy a collectors book to put your Cents in that says Pennies. You will be hard pressed to find one for U.S. Cents. But another thing interesting, you can buy books for Nickels, Dimes, Quarters, Halves, Dollars, but none that says Pennies on it. You never hear of a U.S.two Penny piece or Three Penny Silver or three penny piece or a half penny on U.S. Coins. They all say Half Cent, Cent, Two Cent, Three Cent (Silver or Nickel) Twenty Cent Piece Not 20 Penny piece. So it seems that pennies refer more to non collectors, but collectors prefer to say Cent.
Edited by coop 04/10/2009 6:26 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1882 Posts |
Quote: But another thing interesting, you can buy books for Nickels And yet the 5 cent piece doesn't say nickel on it, but it calling it a nickel for some reason doesn't cause any controversy. :)
|
| |
Replies: 88 / Views: 6,706 |