Error and Variety organizations

wavysteps2003 · Expert Member

Recently, an effort was made concerning the Minnesota quarter, the Oregan quarter and the OIV nickel doubled dies to have matching numerical listings for each die found. What that meant was if you had the Minnesota quarter WDDR-001, you knew that it was also CDDR-001, MM DDR-001 and VCR#1/DDR#1. However, even though intention were the best, the end did not finish like the begining started.

Is it realistic to have a one number system for each variety die? The answer is plain and simple, no. The variety community has progressed to far with its various listing systems to be corrected at this point without long and tedious work, which in the long run would never catch up to the end. Bill Fivaz, a much respected expert in our field, once lamented that the ideal would be a one numbered system per die, but he, like myself, realized that such would never be the case. The attempt with the doubled dies of 2005 all but proved that point. As far as one organization to control the happenings of the error and variety community, that would be disaterous. We would be building a mini me ANA and I for one would not enjoy the politics and squabbling that the ANA is presently experiencing.

However, having said all that, I can invision better cooperation between variety and error organizations, without having "the best man win" situation. I would think that if you asked Chuck Daughtrey, Mike Diamond or John Bordner, the three leaders of the most recognized variety / error organization, what their goals were concerning the numismatic community, it would not be "to be better than the other organizations". I am sure that all three would answer that the goals were "to better inform the people, who are interested in errors and varities, of the information available".

Education is the key word here and in this ever fast changing world, where there are scam artists out for every buck that they can make, it is essentail to make people aware of what is happening. That is why I am trying to institute a program, through CONECA, to be at various coin shows, to help people realize what they have. There is a definite need for this free service. I'll be at the CFCC coin show, all three days, this coming September 7 - 9 and also the winter FUN show, representing CONECA, doing just that.

In closing, it may be that one organization suites your needs better than the other and it is prefectly sound to have pride in belong to that one particular club. However, is it correct to put the efforts of the other organizations in a detrimental light?

Thank you all for listening.

BJ Neff

Gabe · Senior Member

BJ Neff... it would be ideal if all organizations could come together and list all varieties under the same numbering system, and as you already pointed out.. this is very unlikely.

CONECA, Wexler, Crawford and Coppercoins are all in reality competing with each other. Eventhough all of these organizations have the collector's in mind, many people have too much invested in them to just let them go.

They all provide a specific service to collectors, and collectors should choose for themselves which they feel is the best for them. I personally believe coppercoins to be the best, but maybe a variety collector that collects varieties from all denominations will find CONECA better sutted for his needs.

I don't want to get into a discussion about each organization's practices or issues. I have dealt in one point or another with all of the organizations, and recognize that they all have a place in our field of study.

Dick · Expert Member

I have had trouble trying to "decipher" the different ways of identifying the different varieties, and for a while thought it would be nice in everyone used the same system, ( Our forum, for example), and then came the light. That would mean everyone would have to learn "OUR" system! WHY? I came to the conclusion that it behooves one to learn the others, basically, because there are much less of us, using our system, than there are of the others using the "other" systems. Our systen is basically, for the "lowly cent", and therefor needs only a few designations to cover all bases.
We live, we study, and we LEARN! IMHO.
Dick

coppercoins · Site Admin

Gabe - What BJ said is true. We are not really in competition with one another - there is no real money in any of this for any of the experts/attributors. A book here and there that makes someone a few hundred dollars a year or attribution fees that pay far below minimum wage is hardly worth competing over. I made about $30K last year. Only $1.2K was from Coppercoins fees or book revenue. All the rest was web development, photography services, artwork sales, and coin sales...the things that do actually make money.

The different systems exist because there has been notoriously little communication between them. Each system is proprietary in its own way, and no two people agree 100% on what should be listed. This has nothing to do with money, really. If it did, nobody would bother.

Gabe · Senior Member

Well.. when I said that the different organizations are in competition with one another, I didn't mean in a financial sense. I ment that they all want collectors (in some sense) to prefer their listings over others, since so many people have invested time and money in developing the listings.

But I also have to agree that the lack of communication is in part responsible for different types of listing systems. And since not everyone will agree when it comes to listing certain dies, it is up to the collector to choose which system he feels like better represents what he collects.

Dick · Expert Member

Which boils down to: "If you can't beat them, join them". All it takes is a bit of effort to learn their system, and you will be comfortable, there as well. Remember, a day that goes by without learning something new is a day WASTED! IMHO
Dick

hasfam · Veteran Member

Even in my short 10-11 years of variety collecting I have seen a lot of changes occur. At one point I had wondered why there were more than one number system for a coin but decided it was more confirmation based than competitive. I also figured some people wanted to be recognized for their expertise in the field, which was fine by me. I'm not an expert. I don't manage big web sites. I don't publish books or articles. I don't have my own number system. I do like to search and collect varieties and when I find one, I want to see if it's legit so I go to the others to see if they have it. If only one person has it identified and numbered then that's the name I give it. So I have coins that start with C, W, CC, V etc. There was a time when there weren't that many people interested in varieties. It wasn't in the news very much and hundreds of new varieties seemed to go undiscovered for the most part. Then the quarters came out and hit ebay with all kinds of minor errors and varieties and a boom began. More and more people starting looking, learning and it got competitive. prices starting going up. Lots more questions were being asked. Some people responded to their own needs or to the needs of others by coming thru with new web sites, books, articles etc. Lo and Behold, here we are. Being just an average guy, I search, I find then I look around thru one of my 15 books I have on the shelf on errors and varieties, the web sites such as this one and CONECA or I might ask someone who's been around like BJ, Chuck, Ken, Billy and others. It is what it is for now but the road does seem to be getting much wider and perhaps longer with plenty of room for everyone. At least thats how I see it.
Rock

Dick · Expert Member

Rock, you have put it much better than I could, or did! I agree with the idea, and my collection indeed, has more than just the coppercoins, designations. Some of the coins I have been sent have more that the one designation, and it gives me a feeling for what is being said in some of the other forums. My very short time, working with varieties, (less than 2 years), is not enough to have any familiarity with the other sites, therefor I say one must dedicate a little time to learning the other nomenclature. IMHO.
Dick

coppercoins · Site Admin

Gabe: Again, the idea (for me anyway) isn't in competition. I'm not competing for your attention or money. I'm providing what I think is the best form of information in the field for what I do. I do not believe the information provided by any other source is as comprehensive, easy to use, or reliable as my own. That's why I provide it -- it's not competition, it's my addition to the community, and what I think is the best way to provide that information.

If someone else wants to use CONECA as their source of information, for whatever reason, it's no sweat off my back. I'm not competing to get them to see that this system is better. I'm merely providing what I think is a better system, and if they see it like I do, they'll use it and support it. If not, there are others to choose from.

It's really not like a McDonald's versus Burger King thing here. They try to out-do each other so they can get your money. We know there's no real money in this, so we provide the best information we can without having to give in to someone else's opinion regarding what they think we are doing wrong. CONECA lists things (and doesn't list things) that I don't agree with. It's no big deal until I try telling them what to do, and vice versa. To keep it from developing into a problem, we have our own opinions and our own systems. We each have the power to publish our findings and our opinions without having to consult the other for their opinion. Done...end of story.

Doug · Advanced Member

Believe me, IMHO, I sincerely respect all those unselfish people in our aspect of the hobby who have shed blood, sweat and tears developing their particular system. Thanks to one and all is an understatement!

Fact is we presently need all these systems publishing recent inspections/attributions as a matter of "sharing" info on new listings. Fortunately, Mr. Daughtry has been steadfast in his long term vision to FREELY share info AND pictures on his site! Coppercoins has no equal !!

Unfortunately, the criteria for "worthy" listings has been a head shaker for old timers like me for years when the rpm "tilts" appear to be all thats left to scrutinize unless a microscopes power must be cranked up to get a clue. Sure their are more N-S-E-W discoveries out there but one of these days some criteria must be agreed upon in regards to defining "minor/microscopic".

My apologies all around if I inadvertently offended anyones collecting interests and or philosophies.