HOWS ABOUT SOME EYE CANDY?

[namingdiecracks]

James,
Based on what you've said below, it appears that you have not been keeping up with what others in the hobby consider a variety. In another post you site Fivas and Staton as redefining a "variety" as something that was on the die from the start like an RPM, DD, etc., however, in the Cherrypickers' Guide To Rare Die Varieties they include in their listings: die gouges (see the dollar section for starters), the Wisc 25c die gouges/dents?, the so-called Wounded Eagle die gouge Sac $, etc., rusted dies (pitted dies on page 354), at least one "Cud" (see page 346), die breaks (see page 336 for starters), clashes (many entries), die scrapes (see page 219), many abraded dies (missing this and that) and die cracks (more than I care to count in the dollar section). That's just in the latest CPG and there are more to come in the next edition. So your see you are incorrect on this count, which can be confirmed just by opening up the pages of CPG. You are also incorrect in stating that a variation needs to be on the die before it is placed in service to be a variety. The fact is, this has absolutely nothing to do with it being a variety or not. I can take one of my dies and redate it by softening the steel and repunching it with a new date after using it for an entire year and it then becomes an OMM variety not an OMM error. A die can clash or crack or break after being in service for lengthy periods and these variations are still varieties and not errors by any stretch of the imagination. They may be minor but they are minting varieites not errors. My insistence in calling these varieties has nothing to do with "desperation," it has to do with educating collectors with accurate information rather than inaccurate conveniences. It has to do with continuing my listings for the foreign varieties "as is,:" which have always included some significant die cracks, cuds, clashes, etc., when they stood out. I’ve been doing these for CONECA since the mid 1980s and I have no intention of changing what I call a variety just because some folks insist on mis-categorizing some varieties as errors. It seems that at some point when RPMs and DDs became popular that a few leaders, who should have known better, decided to brainwash the rest of the club (which spilled over to some extent to others outside of the club that are mostly stuck on the moderns) into believing that the rest of the die varieties are not so anymore just so that they could call the more minor variations errors instead of markers. There seems to have been no logical reason for this crusade of misinformation since weather a die crack, die chip, or clash or cud, etc., is referred to as a variety or error makes no difference in its collectability or value.
Additionally, many books written in the past decade or so (and many before that that still see heavy use) include die breaks, die cracks, clashes, etc., in them as varieties. This includes books such as Michael S. Fey and Jeff Oxman's The Top 100 Morgan Dollar Varieties: The VAM Keys, the VAM Book, of course, The Cherrypickers’ Guide, etc. So you see there is no "desperation" on my part -- I'm in good company in this respect and it is just a matter of my insistence in educating the collector correctly weather they decide to listen or not.
There has never been any agreement over exactly what an error or variety is, and at some point we just need to agree to disagree. I just hope that I don’t have to start searching the error section of this forum to read about varieties like Pat’s Spiked Heads!
Sincerely yours,
Ken Potter
CONECA Webmaster

So if merge variety/error into one catagory what do we get now a Varerror or a Errorietie??? LOL

Anyways, I think the two should have never been seperated to begin with also.

[wavysteps]

There does seem to be a blurring of definitions concerning what is and what is not an error or variety. How these conception or mis-conception arose or exactly who started them is a mote, however, the important point is that it be corrected before it forms a schism in the error and variety community.

We have many great minds in the field of errors and varieties and with the ease of communications afford by the use of the PC now-a-days, I am almost sure that satisfactory definitions which identify what is an error coin and what is a variety coin can be reached. Yes, there will be a difference of opinions, there will always be that, however, we must remember that these definitions not only serve the experts in the field but also guide the novice and all those in between as to what he or she is collecting. That is the important part, education and furthering the goals of CONECA and the error and variety community.

I am not advocating immediate action on establishing these definitions, however, in the near future, it should be done. We have had round-robin discussions before, via E-mails and I feel that it would not be so hard to establish this format once again.

This is something that we can not afford to do for the good of the hobby.


BJ Neff

[diamond]

Again, I don't see standardizing the definition of "error" and "variety" to be a pressing issue. As long as the underlying cause is understood, it doesn't much matter what overarching category it is filed away under. I doubt you'll ever acheive a meeting of the minds on this issue.

However, if you are determined to corral the leading lights of the hobby together to hammer out an agreement, I'll be happy to participate.

[wavysteps]

Mike - I also do not see a pressing issue here either. There is no added value or premium to be gained by calling it one or the other, nor does prestige enter into the equation in naming an anomaly an error or variety. Both value and prestige are arrived at by the scarcity and degree of that anomaly.

However, a clearly defined set of definitions, determining which is which, would not hurt the hobby. It would instead aid both the novice and the expert alike, giving clear guidance which is which.

At this time, there are three error variety forums (to my knowledge) who use similar formats, which divides errors and varieties; CONECA, Coppercoins and Coin People. All three are known to group RPMs, doubled dies ...etc or anomalies that happen in the making of that die as varieties. Anomalies such as die cracks, gouges, clashes, strike thrus.....etc or any anomaly that happens after the making of that die, are classified as errors. If these categories are not correct, then they should be changed and open discussion seems the best way to resolve this issue.

Ten years ago, we did not have the communications that are available today and to have accomplished a task such as this in that time period would have been impossible. Now it is not.

BJ Neff