Why do you collect? Around here we collect coins, currency, exonumia, and other forms of numismatics. In addition to coins, I collect post cards with subjects that are meaningful to me—such as the little village on Long Island where I first grew up. I also collect lapel pins that I have either picked up over the years or have some other meaning to me. For me, my collection has a meaning to me, including the set to New York City Subway tokens.
Those of us who are collectors knows that along with the thrill of the chase, there are times when we can take it too far. When does it become too much?
The New York Times opinion section, Room for Debate, asked seven experts in various areas of collecting to try to answer these questions. One of the experts that were invited to write a short item for the December 30th discussion, “Why We Collect Stuff” is your favorite blog host.
Besides, if you are curious as to what I look like, there is a current picture (a head shot taken last Sunday) associated with the article.
All of the articles are well written and add value to the discussion about collecting and hoarding. I invite my readers to read the discussion. You can either comment on The New York Times website or you can return here—or both!
Friday, December 30, 2011
Friday, December 23, 2011
Steeling Coins
Let’s start with a trivia question:
What is the only coin (not pattern) struck by the U.S. Mint that contained no copper?
(cue “Jeopardy!” music)
Give up?
If you said the 1943 Lincoln Steel Cents, you are correct. Every other coin struck by the U.S. Mint has contained some amount of copper in the alloy. Even the 1942-1945 war-time alloy used for the Jefferson Nickel was changed from a copper-nickel alloy to one made of copper-silver-manganese.
After the bombing of Pearl Harbor by the Japanese on December 7, 1941, the next day congress passed a formal Declaration of War on Japan. Three days later, a Declaration of War was passed against Germany. Mobilization took a while and the United States did not formally enter the European theater until landing on Normandy Beach on June 6, 1944, better known as D-Day. Between those declaration and full-scale fighting in both Europe and the Pacific, copper was a critical element necessary to manufacture bullets for training.
Rather than using the copper for coins, the government had bullets manufactured. In order to ensure there was a supply of circulating currency, the U.S. Mint changed the composition of the cent to zinc coated steel. Similarly, to save the nickel needed to make other armaments, the Jefferson 5-Cent coin was changed to 56-percent copper, 35-percent silver, and 9-percent manganese.
To say that 1943 Steel Cent was a disaster would be an understatement. Because of its silver color, it was not accepted by the public. Also, since the steel was not treated, it oxidized quickly and became a dark, dirty color. After a while, the coins would begin to rust. In 1944, Lincoln cents were made using the spent shell casing picked up from the training fields. This continued through 1946, the end of World War II giving the coins the nickname of “Shotgun Cents.”
One other coin that was not made using copper was a 1974 Lincoln Cent pattern that was made of aluminum. The U.S. Mint struck over 1.5 million examples in 1973 in order to convince congress to allow them to circulate them. A few was given out to members of congress as part of the U.S. Mint’s lobbying effort. After the measure was defeated, the members of congress was supposed to return the coins. However, one coin was allegedly “dropped” by a senator and retrieved by U.S. Capitol Police Officer Albert Toven. The Toven Specimen was graded MS62 by PCGS in 2005. It is estimated that 18-44 more still exist but have yet to be discovered.
Today there is another issue. Since 2006, the cost of the metals to manufacture the current Lincoln Cent (99.2-percent zinc covered with .8-percent copper) and Jefferson Nickel (75-percent copper and 25-percent nickel) has raised its base cost to at least 150-percent of face value before considering manufacturing costs. The cost has caused several “discussions” about the fate of these coins—there are some who want to eliminate the cents; others want to change its composition; and there is a small group who understands the concept of the loss-leader and is willing to let it go as long as seignorage for other coins cover the costs.
First term Rep. Steve Stivers (R-OH) wants to settle the discussion by introducing two bills that if passed will change the composition of the one-cent and five-cent coins. Stivers introduced H.R. 3693, Cents and Sensibility Act, and H.R. 3694, Saving Taxpayer Expenditures by Employing Less (STEEL) Imported Nickel Act on December 15, 2011. Both bills are being co-sponsored by Reps. Tim Ryan (D-OH) and Pat Tiberi (R-OH).
H.R. 3693 is very straight forward. It says that the “1-cent coin shall be produced primarily of steel” and “shall be treated to impart a copper color to the appearance of the coins.” If the law is enacted, the coins will use only steel produced in the United States. If it is not possible to use U.S. manufactured steel, the reason has to be published in the Federal Register. The size of the coin will not change but the weight is allowed to be altered as necessary.
H.R. 3694 is similar to H.R. 3693 in that it strives to keep the 5-cent coin to look the same using U.S. manufactured steel. Where the bill differs is how the coins are to be designed for use in circulation. The three provisions required for the conversion is that whatever composition is used, the new alloy is not supposed “require more than 1 change to coin-accepting and coin-handling equipment to accommodate coins,” use the same alloy or specifications that is used by another country, and “require changes to coin-accepting or coin-handling equipment whatsoever to accommodate both coins produced with the new specifications.”
Every time there is a proposed change in the composition of U.S. coins, the one group that has the biggest say is the vending machine industry. When silver was removed from U.S. coins in the 1960s, the decision was made to use the current copper-nickel clad coins so that it produces the same electro-mechanical signature its silver counterparts. The electro-mechanical signature is the combination of the coin’s size, weight, and how electricity is conducted by the coin. If the coin can match the specifications, it is determined to be real (as opposed to a slug) and is accepted by the machine. Considering that steel has a different density from the copper-nickel alloy, the coin will have a different weight and be a stronger conductor of electricity. Steel coins may require two changes to vending machines making it nearly impossible to comply with the law. The vending machine lobby will not like the results of this bill and will lobby for its defeat.
Before considering other options, by saying that the coins cannot use the same alloy or specifications that is used by another country, the U.S. Mint could not consider using aluminum, especially since it is being used in Canada.
The professional organizations that cover the vending machine industry has not comment on these bills.
The bill was referred to the House Committee on Financial Services. Coin bills are referred to the Domestic Monetary Policy and Technology subcommittee, chaired by Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX). Aside from Rep. Paul’s current status as a candidate for the Republican nomination for president, he is known for not being a fan of using base-metals for coins and “wasting time” on coinage changes. Remember, it took a the members of this subcommittee to bring the measure to the Financial Services Committee as a whole to have the Baseball Hall of Fame Commemorative referred to the floor for a vote.
While H.R. 3693 and H.R. 3694 may make for an interesting discussion, politics suggests that these bills may never make it out of committee.
What is the only coin (not pattern) struck by the U.S. Mint that contained no copper?
(cue “Jeopardy!” music)
Give up?
If you said the 1943 Lincoln Steel Cents, you are correct. Every other coin struck by the U.S. Mint has contained some amount of copper in the alloy. Even the 1942-1945 war-time alloy used for the Jefferson Nickel was changed from a copper-nickel alloy to one made of copper-silver-manganese.
After the bombing of Pearl Harbor by the Japanese on December 7, 1941, the next day congress passed a formal Declaration of War on Japan. Three days later, a Declaration of War was passed against Germany. Mobilization took a while and the United States did not formally enter the European theater until landing on Normandy Beach on June 6, 1944, better known as D-Day. Between those declaration and full-scale fighting in both Europe and the Pacific, copper was a critical element necessary to manufacture bullets for training.
Rather than using the copper for coins, the government had bullets manufactured. In order to ensure there was a supply of circulating currency, the U.S. Mint changed the composition of the cent to zinc coated steel. Similarly, to save the nickel needed to make other armaments, the Jefferson 5-Cent coin was changed to 56-percent copper, 35-percent silver, and 9-percent manganese.
To say that 1943 Steel Cent was a disaster would be an understatement. Because of its silver color, it was not accepted by the public. Also, since the steel was not treated, it oxidized quickly and became a dark, dirty color. After a while, the coins would begin to rust. In 1944, Lincoln cents were made using the spent shell casing picked up from the training fields. This continued through 1946, the end of World War II giving the coins the nickname of “Shotgun Cents.”
One other coin that was not made using copper was a 1974 Lincoln Cent pattern that was made of aluminum. The U.S. Mint struck over 1.5 million examples in 1973 in order to convince congress to allow them to circulate them. A few was given out to members of congress as part of the U.S. Mint’s lobbying effort. After the measure was defeated, the members of congress was supposed to return the coins. However, one coin was allegedly “dropped” by a senator and retrieved by U.S. Capitol Police Officer Albert Toven. The Toven Specimen was graded MS62 by PCGS in 2005. It is estimated that 18-44 more still exist but have yet to be discovered.
Today there is another issue. Since 2006, the cost of the metals to manufacture the current Lincoln Cent (99.2-percent zinc covered with .8-percent copper) and Jefferson Nickel (75-percent copper and 25-percent nickel) has raised its base cost to at least 150-percent of face value before considering manufacturing costs. The cost has caused several “discussions” about the fate of these coins—there are some who want to eliminate the cents; others want to change its composition; and there is a small group who understands the concept of the loss-leader and is willing to let it go as long as seignorage for other coins cover the costs.
First term Rep. Steve Stivers (R-OH) wants to settle the discussion by introducing two bills that if passed will change the composition of the one-cent and five-cent coins. Stivers introduced H.R. 3693, Cents and Sensibility Act, and H.R. 3694, Saving Taxpayer Expenditures by Employing Less (STEEL) Imported Nickel Act on December 15, 2011. Both bills are being co-sponsored by Reps. Tim Ryan (D-OH) and Pat Tiberi (R-OH).
H.R. 3693 is very straight forward. It says that the “1-cent coin shall be produced primarily of steel” and “shall be treated to impart a copper color to the appearance of the coins.” If the law is enacted, the coins will use only steel produced in the United States. If it is not possible to use U.S. manufactured steel, the reason has to be published in the Federal Register. The size of the coin will not change but the weight is allowed to be altered as necessary.
H.R. 3694 is similar to H.R. 3693 in that it strives to keep the 5-cent coin to look the same using U.S. manufactured steel. Where the bill differs is how the coins are to be designed for use in circulation. The three provisions required for the conversion is that whatever composition is used, the new alloy is not supposed “require more than 1 change to coin-accepting and coin-handling equipment to accommodate coins,” use the same alloy or specifications that is used by another country, and “require changes to coin-accepting or coin-handling equipment whatsoever to accommodate both coins produced with the new specifications.”
Every time there is a proposed change in the composition of U.S. coins, the one group that has the biggest say is the vending machine industry. When silver was removed from U.S. coins in the 1960s, the decision was made to use the current copper-nickel clad coins so that it produces the same electro-mechanical signature its silver counterparts. The electro-mechanical signature is the combination of the coin’s size, weight, and how electricity is conducted by the coin. If the coin can match the specifications, it is determined to be real (as opposed to a slug) and is accepted by the machine. Considering that steel has a different density from the copper-nickel alloy, the coin will have a different weight and be a stronger conductor of electricity. Steel coins may require two changes to vending machines making it nearly impossible to comply with the law. The vending machine lobby will not like the results of this bill and will lobby for its defeat.
Before considering other options, by saying that the coins cannot use the same alloy or specifications that is used by another country, the U.S. Mint could not consider using aluminum, especially since it is being used in Canada.
The professional organizations that cover the vending machine industry has not comment on these bills.
The bill was referred to the House Committee on Financial Services. Coin bills are referred to the Domestic Monetary Policy and Technology subcommittee, chaired by Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX). Aside from Rep. Paul’s current status as a candidate for the Republican nomination for president, he is known for not being a fan of using base-metals for coins and “wasting time” on coinage changes. Remember, it took a the members of this subcommittee to bring the measure to the Financial Services Committee as a whole to have the Baseball Hall of Fame Commemorative referred to the floor for a vote.
While H.R. 3693 and H.R. 3694 may make for an interesting discussion, politics suggests that these bills may never make it out of committee.
Thursday, December 22, 2011
Being Charitable By Overpaying for Collectibles
Every year, usually in December, my coin club holds its annual Donated Auction. It is an auction that lasts the entire meeting of various numismatic items where the proceeds go to the local chapter of the Boys and Girls Club. It is a tradition that has existed for the 52 years of the club’s existence and I am happy that it continues.
As opposed to our regular monthly auction, there are more lots and a lot of different type of items. And since the proceeds go to charity, we are encourage to bid early and bid often. I have to admit that on items I really want, I have been known to overbid on items.
One of my overbids was for a lot with two rolls of Lincoln Cents; one roll contained 40 steel cents and the other had 50 miscellaneous wheat back cents. However, as a bonus, this lot included a U.S. House of Representatives token. Made of aluminum, about 40mm in diameter, the front of the token is the seal of the U.S. House of Representatives. The reverse depicts the east entrance of the capitol building with the south wing closer to the foreground. The south wing is where the chamber for the House of Representatives is located. The member that donated the token was a former staffer for one of the House committees who told me that the tokens were provided to staffers to give to visitors. Although the token is made of aluminum and not that rare, I have not seen one. Since I thought it had that “oh neat” factor, I overbid in order to win the lot and this token.
My other “oh neat” purchase was a Cheerios Penny. The Cheerios Penny is a 2000 Lincoln Cent that placed onto plastic-sealed cards and placed in boxes of Cheerios as a special Y2K promotion. Cheerios was provided the first 10 million Lincoln Cents off the presses in 2000 by the U.S. Mint. These cents are really unremarkable except for being in the Cheerios package. The remarkable cents also included one of the first 5,500 new Sacagawea Dollars to raise awareness of the new “Golden Dollars.” The Cheerios Dollar is notable as being struck from different dies than the regular business strike Sacagawea Dollars.
According to the auction lot listing, there was supposed to be one Cheerios Cent and three wooden nickels. However, when I arrived at home and opened the package, there were two Cheerios Cents. If you would like your own Cheerios Cent, you can buy it on eBay!
Buying “oh neat” with the proceeds going to charity is a lot of fun.
As opposed to our regular monthly auction, there are more lots and a lot of different type of items. And since the proceeds go to charity, we are encourage to bid early and bid often. I have to admit that on items I really want, I have been known to overbid on items.
One of my overbids was for a lot with two rolls of Lincoln Cents; one roll contained 40 steel cents and the other had 50 miscellaneous wheat back cents. However, as a bonus, this lot included a U.S. House of Representatives token. Made of aluminum, about 40mm in diameter, the front of the token is the seal of the U.S. House of Representatives. The reverse depicts the east entrance of the capitol building with the south wing closer to the foreground. The south wing is where the chamber for the House of Representatives is located. The member that donated the token was a former staffer for one of the House committees who told me that the tokens were provided to staffers to give to visitors. Although the token is made of aluminum and not that rare, I have not seen one. Since I thought it had that “oh neat” factor, I overbid in order to win the lot and this token.
My other “oh neat” purchase was a Cheerios Penny. The Cheerios Penny is a 2000 Lincoln Cent that placed onto plastic-sealed cards and placed in boxes of Cheerios as a special Y2K promotion. Cheerios was provided the first 10 million Lincoln Cents off the presses in 2000 by the U.S. Mint. These cents are really unremarkable except for being in the Cheerios package. The remarkable cents also included one of the first 5,500 new Sacagawea Dollars to raise awareness of the new “Golden Dollars.” The Cheerios Dollar is notable as being struck from different dies than the regular business strike Sacagawea Dollars.According to the auction lot listing, there was supposed to be one Cheerios Cent and three wooden nickels. However, when I arrived at home and opened the package, there were two Cheerios Cents. If you would like your own Cheerios Cent, you can buy it on eBay!
Buying “oh neat” with the proceeds going to charity is a lot of fun.
Wednesday, December 21, 2011
2012 Coin of the Year Category Winners
On Monday, Krause Publications announce the winners of the 2012 Coin of the Year Awards. From these winners, judges will select an overall Coin of the Year winner which will be announced February 4, 2012, at the World Money Fair in Berlin, Germany. Voting for the People’s Choice Award will begin in early January with the winner also announced at the World Money Fair.
Krause reports that 95 coins issued in 2010 were nominated early in 2011 for consideration. The category winners are:
Krause reports that 95 coins issued in 2010 were nominated early in 2011 for consideration. The category winners are:
- Best Silver: Austrian Mint, 10 Euro Erzberg in Styria
- Most Popular Coin Design: Austrian Mint, Silver Philharmonic bullion coin
- Best Contemporary Event Coin: The German Federal Ministry of Finance, Silver 10 Euro celebrating German Unity
- Most Historically Significant Coin: Royal Canadian Mint, $100 gold coin commemorating the 400th Anniversary of the Hudson Bay Company
- Best Gold Coin: Royal Mint, £100k London Olymics Gold Coin
- Best Crown: Andorra Mint, 5 Dinar Brown Bear Pyrenees Silver Coin
- Most Artistic Coin: Israel Coins and Medals Corporation, Jonah in the Whale 2 NIS Silver Proof Coin
- Best Trade Coin:, San Marino, 2 Euro circulating coin
- Most Innovative Coin: Coin Invest Trust of Liechtenstein, 1500 Francs CFA Silver Proof featuring The Mecca Qibla Compass with magnetic spoon that points north.
- Most Inspirational Coin, Mont of Finland, Children and Creativity 20 Euro Coin; this coin is notable because it was the first theme for a Finnish coin selected by public vote. The coin was designed by Roope Määttä, an art student at the Kajaani Upper Secondary School, who describes his design as a reminder to always remember one’s roots.
Saturday, December 17, 2011
First They Came For The Ancient Coins...
I am sharing the following from Wayne G. Sayles, Executive Director of the Ancient Coin Collectors Guild (ACCG). Please read my comment following Wayne’s letter.
The following is an extremely important message from Peter K. Tompa, ACCG Board Member and Chairman of the Legislative Affairs Committee:
Fresh on the heels of its deliberation over import restrictions on coins from Bulgaria, the US State Department has now announced a hearing on extension of the MOU (Memoranda of Understanding) with Cyprus that is now up for its 5-year renewal. The Cultural Property Advisory Committee is seeking public comment on the renewal request To submit comments electronically to the State Department’s Cultural Property Advisory Committee (CPAC), see below:
Those present restrictions bar entry into the United States of the following coin types unless they are accompanied with documentation establishing that they were out of Cyprus as of the date of the restrictions, July 16, 2007:
Simply, silence just allows the State Department bureaucrats and their allies in the archaeological establishment to claim that collectors have acquiesced to broad restrictions on their ability to import common ancient coins that are widely available worldwide. And, of course, acquiescence is all that may be needed to justify going back and imposing import restrictions on the Roman Imperial coins that are still exempt from these regulations.
Under the circumstances, please take 5 minutes and tell CPAC, the State Department bureaucrats and the archaeologists what you think.
How do I comment? To submit comments three pages in length or less electronically, go here: http://www.regulations.gov/#!submitComment;D=DOS-2011-0135-0002.
If you are having trouble, go to the Federal eRulemaking Portal (http://www.regulations.gov), enter the Docket No. DOS-2011-0135 for Cyprus, and follow the prompts to submit a comment. To send comments via US Mail or FEDEX see the directions contained in the Federal Register Notice above. For further information, also see http://exchanges.state.gov/heritage/whatsnew.html.
What should I say? The State Department bureaucracy has dictated that any public comments should relate solely to the following statutory criteria:
Be forceful, but polite. We can and should disagree with what the State Department bureaucrats and their allies in the archaeological establishment are doing to our hobby, but we should endeavor to do so in an upstanding manner.
For more information about these issues, see: http://culturalpropertyobserver.blogspot.com/
Please submit comments just once, before the deadline on Jan. 3, 2012.
With best wishes and thanks for your support,
Wayne G. Sayles
Executive Director
From Scott: I am not a collector of ancient coins, but as a member of the numismatic community, it bothers me that the State Department has been capitulating to nearly every foreign government regarding artifacts that have been in worldwide circulation for hundreds or thousands of years with no issue. Suddenly, when countries appear to have an issue with the United States, they appear to be using peripheral means to try to take action against the U.S. and its citizens. Allowing the State Department to entertain these types of actions should be abhorrent to any collector because if it begins with the ancient coins, then where does it stop?
To borrow the concept from Pastor Martin Niemöller’s “First they came...”:
Speak now before they come for your coins!
The letter was sent via email by Wayne Sales on December 15, 2011. It was reformatted to fit in this space and some information links were added.
The following is an extremely important message from Peter K. Tompa, ACCG Board Member and Chairman of the Legislative Affairs Committee:
Fresh on the heels of its deliberation over import restrictions on coins from Bulgaria, the US State Department has now announced a hearing on extension of the MOU (Memoranda of Understanding) with Cyprus that is now up for its 5-year renewal. The Cultural Property Advisory Committee is seeking public comment on the renewal request To submit comments electronically to the State Department’s Cultural Property Advisory Committee (CPAC), see below:
Those present restrictions bar entry into the United States of the following coin types unless they are accompanied with documentation establishing that they were out of Cyprus as of the date of the restrictions, July 16, 2007:
- Issues of the ancient kingdoms of Amathus, Kition, Kourion, Idalion, Lapethos, Marion, Paphos, Soli, and Salamis dating from the end of the 6th century B.C. to 332 B.C.
- Issues of the Hellenistic period, such as those of Paphos, Salamis, and Kition from 332 B.C. to c. 30 B.C. (including coins of Alexander the Great, Ptolemy, and his Dynasty)
- Provincial and local issues of the Roman period from c. 30 B.C. to 235 A.D.
Simply, silence just allows the State Department bureaucrats and their allies in the archaeological establishment to claim that collectors have acquiesced to broad restrictions on their ability to import common ancient coins that are widely available worldwide. And, of course, acquiescence is all that may be needed to justify going back and imposing import restrictions on the Roman Imperial coins that are still exempt from these regulations.
Under the circumstances, please take 5 minutes and tell CPAC, the State Department bureaucrats and the archaeologists what you think.
How do I comment? To submit comments three pages in length or less electronically, go here: http://www.regulations.gov/#!submitComment;D=DOS-2011-0135-0002.
If you are having trouble, go to the Federal eRulemaking Portal (http://www.regulations.gov), enter the Docket No. DOS-2011-0135 for Cyprus, and follow the prompts to submit a comment. To send comments via US Mail or FEDEX see the directions contained in the Federal Register Notice above. For further information, also see http://exchanges.state.gov/heritage/whatsnew.html.
What should I say? The State Department bureaucracy has dictated that any public comments should relate solely to the following statutory criteria:
- Whether the cultural patrimony of Cyprus is in jeopardy from looting of its archaeological materials;
- Whether Cyprus has taken measures consistent with the 1970 UNESCO Convention to protect its cultural patrimony;
- Whether application of U.S. import restrictions, if applied in concert with similar restrictions by other art importing countries, would be of substantial benefit in deterring a serious situation of pillage and that less drastic remedies are not available; and,
- Whether the application of import restrictions is consistent with the general interest of the international community in the interchange of cultural property among nations for scientific, cultural, and educational purposes.
Be forceful, but polite. We can and should disagree with what the State Department bureaucrats and their allies in the archaeological establishment are doing to our hobby, but we should endeavor to do so in an upstanding manner.
For more information about these issues, see: http://culturalpropertyobserver.blogspot.com/
Please submit comments just once, before the deadline on Jan. 3, 2012.
With best wishes and thanks for your support,
Wayne G. Sayles
Executive Director
From Scott: I am not a collector of ancient coins, but as a member of the numismatic community, it bothers me that the State Department has been capitulating to nearly every foreign government regarding artifacts that have been in worldwide circulation for hundreds or thousands of years with no issue. Suddenly, when countries appear to have an issue with the United States, they appear to be using peripheral means to try to take action against the U.S. and its citizens. Allowing the State Department to entertain these types of actions should be abhorrent to any collector because if it begins with the ancient coins, then where does it stop?
To borrow the concept from Pastor Martin Niemöller’s “First they came...”:
First they came for the ancient coins,
and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a ancient coin collector.
Then they came for all foreign coins,
and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a foreign coin collector.
Then they came for the obsolete currency,
and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a obsolete currency collector.
Then they came for the pattern coins,
and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a pattern coin collector.
Then they came for my silver and gold United State coins,
and there was no one left to speak out for me.
and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a ancient coin collector.
Then they came for all foreign coins,
and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a foreign coin collector.
Then they came for the obsolete currency,
and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a obsolete currency collector.
Then they came for the pattern coins,
and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a pattern coin collector.
Then they came for my silver and gold United State coins,
and there was no one left to speak out for me.
Speak now before they come for your coins!
The letter was sent via email by Wayne Sales on December 15, 2011. It was reformatted to fit in this space and some information links were added.
Friday, December 16, 2011
Last Call for 2011 Commemoratives
If you have not purchased your 2011 commemorative coins, you have until 5:00 P.M. Eastern Time to place your order before the U.S. Mint takes the coins off sale. For 2011, the two commemorative programs are for the Medal of Honor and the U.S. Army. Both programs feature a proof and uncirculated $5 gold coins, silver dollars, and clad half-dollars.
Surcharges for both programs are $35 for each gold coin, $10 for each silver coin, and $5 for each clad coin. For the Medal of Honor Commemorative, the surcharge will be paid to the Congressional Medal of Honor Foundation. Surcharges collected for sales of the U.S. Army Commemorative will support the construction of the National Museum of the United States Army at Fort Belvoir, Virginia.
The U.S. Mint reports that there are plenty of coins available. To purchase the coins, visit the U.S. Mint online catalog at catalog.usmint.gov.
Surcharges for both programs are $35 for each gold coin, $10 for each silver coin, and $5 for each clad coin. For the Medal of Honor Commemorative, the surcharge will be paid to the Congressional Medal of Honor Foundation. Surcharges collected for sales of the U.S. Army Commemorative will support the construction of the National Museum of the United States Army at Fort Belvoir, Virginia.
The U.S. Mint reports that there are plenty of coins available. To purchase the coins, visit the U.S. Mint online catalog at catalog.usmint.gov.
Wednesday, December 14, 2011
Treasury Orders Reduction of Dollar Coins
With the furor over the large number of dollar coins sitting in the Federal Reserve vaults, estimated to be over $1.4 million by a Federal Reserve report, Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner exercised his his authority to “mint and issue such number of $1 coins of each design selected under this subsection in uncirculated and proof qualities as the Secretary determines to be appropriate,” (31 U.S.C. § 5112(n)) and will cease to strike dollar coins for circulation. Dollar coins necessary to meet circulation demand will be drawn from existing inventory. The U.S. Mint will strike dollar coins to meet numismatic demands.
Announced as part of a blog post on the Treasury website by Deputy Secretary of the Treasury Neal S. Wolin, those wishing to purchase future Presidential $1 Coins will be able to purchase them directly from the U.S. Mint starting with the Chester A. Arthur dollar in Spring 2012. Prices and shipping costs will be announced in the near future.
Although this may be seen as a significant move, there is precedent for reducing striking of coins to primarily meet numismatic demand. Using a current example, the last time the U.S. Mint struck the Kennedy Half-Dollar for circulation was in 2001. In 2001, only Denver struck coins were delivered to the Federal Reserve.
Touted as part of President Obama’s executive order that established the executive branch’s Campaign to Cut Government Waste, Treasury estimates that this measure will save at least $50 million annually. Wollin wrote that this is, “the right decision for taxpayers. And going forward, we'll continue our work to identify additional opportunities to support President Obama's critical objective to cut waste and improve efficiency across government.”
I wonder if this move will keep any of those bills to eliminate the Presidential $1 Coin Act from even being heard in committee?
Announced as part of a blog post on the Treasury website by Deputy Secretary of the Treasury Neal S. Wolin, those wishing to purchase future Presidential $1 Coins will be able to purchase them directly from the U.S. Mint starting with the Chester A. Arthur dollar in Spring 2012. Prices and shipping costs will be announced in the near future.
Although this may be seen as a significant move, there is precedent for reducing striking of coins to primarily meet numismatic demand. Using a current example, the last time the U.S. Mint struck the Kennedy Half-Dollar for circulation was in 2001. In 2001, only Denver struck coins were delivered to the Federal Reserve.
Touted as part of President Obama’s executive order that established the executive branch’s Campaign to Cut Government Waste, Treasury estimates that this measure will save at least $50 million annually. Wollin wrote that this is, “the right decision for taxpayers. And going forward, we'll continue our work to identify additional opportunities to support President Obama's critical objective to cut waste and improve efficiency across government.”
I wonder if this move will keep any of those bills to eliminate the Presidential $1 Coin Act from even being heard in committee?
Monday, December 12, 2011
Learning More about Vicky Cents of Canada
“Every 1859 cent has something to offer if you look hard enough,” is the quote on the front page of a new website by noted numismatic researcher Dr. James A. Haxby. The website, www.vickycents.com, attempts to document every die variety and die combination used in minting the 1859 Canadian Large Cent.
If you haven’t figured it out, “Vicky Cents” are the cents produced under the reign of Queen Victoria.
The site is not complete and looks like it came online on December 10, 2011, but has some very interesting information on the coin whose handmade dies offers a variety hunter a lifetime treasure trove of searching. However, it looks like Haxby will help collectors of these coins figure out which of the many varieties they have of what seems to be a fascinating coin.
While searching for information about Canadian Victorian Cents, I found a few other interesting sites:
If you haven’t figured it out, “Vicky Cents” are the cents produced under the reign of Queen Victoria.
The site is not complete and looks like it came online on December 10, 2011, but has some very interesting information on the coin whose handmade dies offers a variety hunter a lifetime treasure trove of searching. However, it looks like Haxby will help collectors of these coins figure out which of the many varieties they have of what seems to be a fascinating coin.
While searching for information about Canadian Victorian Cents, I found a few other interesting sites:
- Some Varieties of the 1859 Canadian Large Cent—This site nicely shows re-punched dates on the dies.
- Victorian Cents of Canada by Rob Turner who produced the two volume catalog, The 1858 Cents of Provincial Canada.
- Canadian Large Cents - A Look at Varieties by Daniel Flynn. I just subscribed to Dan’s blog, Victoria Large Cents of Canada after reading the last few posts.
- A Tribute to the Canadian Large Cent Collection of Norm Pullen. Before Pullen’s 30 year collection of Canadian Large Cent collection was liquidated, Howard Spindel photographed 24 of Pullen’s finest coins to preserve for everyone to enjoy.
- CoinsAndCanada.com is a complete reference of Canadian coin and currency, including price guides.
Sunday, December 11, 2011
ANA Announces Executive Director Search
On Pearl Harbor Day, the American Numismatic Association dropped its announcement that the Board of Governors have begun their search for the organization’s next executive director. According to the press release, “the executive director must have extensive knowledge of nonprofit management skills with the ability to initiate, implement and successfully complete programs and objectives.”
When reading the full job description, I found the “Personal characteristics” section very interesting. It is the first time I have seen that as a section title, but these characteristics specifically spelled out. The first two (Adaptability and Behave Ethically) appear to be direct responses to the circumstances that lead to Larry Shepherd’s “dismissal.” Anyone who has attended a masters program and was required to take a course in organizational management can think back to the in class discussion of what it means to “behave ethically.” I remember that it was a lively discussion with no clear conclusion.
Regardless of what happened in the past, I hope this section does not put off potential, talented candidates.
If you are qualified and would like to be the executive director of the world’s largest numismatic organization, I encourage you to apply. Remember, the ANA is located in Colorado Springs, location of the Air Force Academy and about 90 miles south of Denver and east of Pikes Peak. I have not visited Colorado Springs (yet), but I hear it is a really nice area.
When reading the full job description, I found the “Personal characteristics” section very interesting. It is the first time I have seen that as a section title, but these characteristics specifically spelled out. The first two (Adaptability and Behave Ethically) appear to be direct responses to the circumstances that lead to Larry Shepherd’s “dismissal.” Anyone who has attended a masters program and was required to take a course in organizational management can think back to the in class discussion of what it means to “behave ethically.” I remember that it was a lively discussion with no clear conclusion.
Regardless of what happened in the past, I hope this section does not put off potential, talented candidates.
If you are qualified and would like to be the executive director of the world’s largest numismatic organization, I encourage you to apply. Remember, the ANA is located in Colorado Springs, location of the Air Force Academy and about 90 miles south of Denver and east of Pikes Peak. I have not visited Colorado Springs (yet), but I hear it is a really nice area.
Saturday, December 10, 2011
How to Detect Counterfeit Coins Basics
With the proliferation of fake Chinese coins a problem in numismatics industry, it is a good idea to understand how to tell these fakes from the real coin. The following video from silveragecoins.com shows some of the basics that anyone can use to examine coins to determine if they are real or not:
I like the computer-generated voiceover!
If you are uncomfortable trying to detect whether a coin is counterfeit or not, you might consider the following:
For sellers, caveat venditor (let the seller beware): unless you expressly disclaim any responsibility, you will be held liable if the item is not true to its specification.
Now let’s go and have fun collecting!
I like the computer-generated voiceover!
If you are uncomfortable trying to detect whether a coin is counterfeit or not, you might consider the following:
- Buy from a reputable dealer who has return and/or buy back policies.
- If you buy raw coins and have questions, ask that the coin be examined by a third-party grading service (e.g., NGC or PCGS). You may be asked to pay the grading fees. Some dealers may charge a service fee for submitting coins on your behalf.
- If you own coins that you may have questions about, either bring it to a dealer for an opinion or submit the coin to the third-party grading service yourself. NGC and PCGS have membership services to allow you to directly submit coins for authentication and grading. Members of the American Numismatic Association can register to directly submit coins to NGC.
- If you are buying through an online auction and you have any question about the coin, you are better off not trying to purchase it than trying to deal with returns. While there are quite a few reputable dealers who sell on these sites, it may take more than a month for the process from purchase to refund to occur. During that time, you will not have access to this money.
For sellers, caveat venditor (let the seller beware): unless you expressly disclaim any responsibility, you will be held liable if the item is not true to its specification.
Now let’s go and have fun collecting!
Friday, December 09, 2011
Treasurer Rios to Autograph FRN
Treasurer of the United States, Rosie Rios, will sign currency notes/sheets at the Bureau of Engraving and Printing Washington printing facility between 10:00 A.M. and 12 Noon on Friday, December 16, 2011. This event is free and open to the public. Reservations are not required. Visitors participating in this even may exchange older $1 Federal Reserve Notes for $1 Series 2009 notes with the signatures of Treasure Rosie Rios and Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, or purchase uncut sheets/individual notes in the BEP’s Visitor Center. Please note that there is a limit of two items per person for Treasurer Rio’s signature. The BEP is located at 14th & C Streets, SW, Washington, DC 20228.
Add to
.
Adapted from the BEP Press Release
Add to
.Adapted from the BEP Press Release
Thursday, December 01, 2011
Are We Selling Cars or Coins?
A few weeks ago I started to receive email advertisements from several coin companies offering to sell 2012 coins. One note was found in my Junk folder from the end of October. I began to wonder if we are selling coins are cars?
Those of us living in the United States cannot engage in any media without seeing one advertisement for next year’s newly redesigned, sleeker, faster, shiny, new four-wheeled wonder from Detroit, Japan, Korea, or Germany with better handling, more fuel efficient, and technology that will do everything but brew your coffee but will tell you where you can find a cup. Anyone old enough can remember when the next model year would come out in the fall of the previous year—and in those days, you could order a car to your specification for delivery in November or December.
Although it started a few years ago, it seems that many of the world’s mints are not only beginning to advertise their next year’s offerings, but are striking them, too. I have seen advertisements from the Royal Australian Mint, Perth Mint, Royal Mint, the Royal Canadian Mint, the People’s Bank of China, and Tuvalu. These 2012 coins, mostly commemorative issues, are gilded, enameled, and painted on designs with crystals, diamonds, and even rub-and-sniff coins—new, shiny, and better than last year’s versions.
“Order now! Operators are standing by!”
Has the numismatic market become too gimmicky that these mints and central banks are resorting to car selling techniques?
I have bought my share of gimmicky collectibles, but that was at a time when these were novel. Now, it seems that many of these world mints have come up with various gimmicks in order to sell more non-circulated legal tender coins. It seems as if the metal and design are not enough any more.
Fortunately, or unfortunately depending on your view, this could not happen in the United States. The U.S. Mint is the most regulated of all the world mints. Every coin and medal manufactured by the U.S. Mint must be allowed by a law passed by congress. Unless congress authorizes the use of color, crystals, gilded, or other non-engraved design elements, they will not appear on a U.S. coin. Even though the U.S. Mint is allowed to strike coins early, the law prevents them from issuing the coins dated in the future.
I am not going to ask if the gimmicks are good for the hobby because these new issues have the potential to introduce coins to new collectors. But how far will it go? Does the hobby really need to create contrived collectibles to generate interest?
Those of us living in the United States cannot engage in any media without seeing one advertisement for next year’s newly redesigned, sleeker, faster, shiny, new four-wheeled wonder from Detroit, Japan, Korea, or Germany with better handling, more fuel efficient, and technology that will do everything but brew your coffee but will tell you where you can find a cup. Anyone old enough can remember when the next model year would come out in the fall of the previous year—and in those days, you could order a car to your specification for delivery in November or December.
Although it started a few years ago, it seems that many of the world’s mints are not only beginning to advertise their next year’s offerings, but are striking them, too. I have seen advertisements from the Royal Australian Mint, Perth Mint, Royal Mint, the Royal Canadian Mint, the People’s Bank of China, and Tuvalu. These 2012 coins, mostly commemorative issues, are gilded, enameled, and painted on designs with crystals, diamonds, and even rub-and-sniff coins—new, shiny, and better than last year’s versions.
“Order now! Operators are standing by!”
Has the numismatic market become too gimmicky that these mints and central banks are resorting to car selling techniques?
I have bought my share of gimmicky collectibles, but that was at a time when these were novel. Now, it seems that many of these world mints have come up with various gimmicks in order to sell more non-circulated legal tender coins. It seems as if the metal and design are not enough any more.
Fortunately, or unfortunately depending on your view, this could not happen in the United States. The U.S. Mint is the most regulated of all the world mints. Every coin and medal manufactured by the U.S. Mint must be allowed by a law passed by congress. Unless congress authorizes the use of color, crystals, gilded, or other non-engraved design elements, they will not appear on a U.S. coin. Even though the U.S. Mint is allowed to strike coins early, the law prevents them from issuing the coins dated in the future.
I am not going to ask if the gimmicks are good for the hobby because these new issues have the potential to introduce coins to new collectors. But how far will it go? Does the hobby really need to create contrived collectibles to generate interest?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)