VKurtB

Member
  • Content Count

    756
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    23

5 Followers

Personal Information

  • Occupation
    State Government
  • Hobbies
    Coins, Antique Cameras
  • Location
    Harrisburg, PA

Recent Profile Visitors

719 profile views
  1. Get this - Claxton fruitcake doesn't even have any hooch in it, unless you put it in there.
  2. Here's what I'd do with that. I'd hold it, maybe put a little sticker on it to remind you, and then when you get a few with oopsies on them, send them in for a reholder job at a later time.
  3. I've started using the blue nitrile gloves, when gloves are called for, which isn't often. What JKK said upthread cannot possibly be emphasized too much. There is a VAAAAASST territory between "meh, junk" and worthy of being graded. Did I mention it's vast? It's probably bigger than either extreme is. And once you become okay with that fact (and please do), there are even finer classifications, such as "cardboard 2x2 worthy", "Saflip worthy", "Capital Plastics holder worthy", "2x2 slide page worthy", "hard plastic holder worthy", 2x2x9 stock box worthy", "tube filler", "jar filler", and several others. And they ALL are neither junk nor worthy of being third party graded.
  4. Yep, I have three NGC's that are chipped and need reholdering. I usually save things up to submit together to hold down the fixed costs.
  5. Well, Carr did make a 2009 "Proof ASE", which the government did not. Again, by overstriking a different proof ASE. On that one, however, there is an additional DC mark. On the one hand, some claim "future collectors might be confused" by Carr's pieces. Have you READ the Newbie section???!!! Present collectors are WAAAAAAY confused by a good many things!! Confusion can scarcely be a legal point here.
  6. Pretty difficult to be LESS specific, isn't it? Is this really the way people communicate these days? Wow! I REALLY prefer to be a "boomer". One day living with millennial values and habits and style around me and I'd probably shoot myself.
  7. You miss the key point, though. Real 1885-CC's exist, no? Real 1895-O's exist, no? So, do "real" ones of what Carr produces exist? No!!! That's the difference!
  8. I eat fruitcake every year. Genuine Claxton, Georgia fruitcake.
  9. It's hard to imagine any bank teller doing this in this day and age.
  10. Carr's pieces do NOT fall under the definition of "imitation numismatic item" under the definitions listed in the Hobby Protection Act, period. Read the language and parse it carefully, Conder. They plainly and clearly do not fall under the definitions therein. It would be LOGICALLY IMPOSSIBLE for an item to purport to be a thing that never existed as an original item. I love irony as a general rule. I own a Daniel Carr 1964 Morgan dollar. The irony is that mine is perfectly legal to own, but a real one would NOT be. Now THAT'S irony!
  11. Neither couch change nor jackpot. There is a vast middle, and you found it.
  12. This is the biggest mistake "non-legal" people make - they forget to check the law for definitions. The common everyday understanding of terms in statute is almost never the case. Terms mean what they mean in the law, not common everyday usage. We who work in legislation spend MOST of our time on definitions.
  13. Which company slabbed it? The top 2, at least, have an inexpensive reholder service.
  14. This is becoming more common every day as collectors and dealers will break up common year sets and just deposit it in the bank as change. The market for early clad sets really has collapsed that much. There was probably a nice frosty cameo half dollar in that set, and the rest became just change.