Source: AgAuNEWS.com I know these seem to be popular and images are all over the place in quality so I thought a guide may be of interest. It doesn't include the Burning series as they're by a different company and our CSP's don't work like that. Contains some mock-ups of other possibilities as well. Forgot link. http://agaunews.com/?p=20395 Edited to remove a word
Its funny how you only "push" certain coins..... "Awful Burning Series" ? Really? Cant be that awful as they are very popular unlike some other over priced coins that get hyped up by certain advertising "blogs" with links to their site etc. The golden Enigma coins are no better then the Burning coins, all are third party enhanced , actually they are worst since they have 5000 mintage vers 500 .
It's a personal view as I made quite clear in the article, and one I stand by. I take great pains to cover a wide range of stuff, a lot of which I personally don't like but understand that looks are subjective. My Coin Series Profiles are exactly that, a profile of a coin series and the Burning coins are not part of the Golden Enigma range, hence not included. As for the GE coins not being better, you've done what I have and expressed an opinion. As to the Burning being better because the mintage is lower. Really, is that the criteria you use for deciding a coins merit? BTW. I don't 'push' anything. Allcollect are one of the very few producers I have absolutely no dealings with and there's hardly a mint in the world not represented on the site. The only 'ads' I have are the usual affiliates from the RCM, Perth and Royal Mints, none of which bring in much money, and one for a small site run by my mrs which I'm using to test layouts for future dealer advertising and which brings in nothing. I don't appreciate the insinuation that AgAUNEWS is anything but strictly independant and nobody else has ever seen fit to question the sites integrity. Just sounds pretty petulant that somebody doesn't like what you do.
I sell both series, and both are done very well. The only thing I don't like between the 2 of them is that the COA numbers on the GE coins are hand written instead of printed, doesn't seem to have any effect on their desirability though. I do like AgAUNEWS' write ups, always well written, nice graphics and fairly impartial as he said. This is why we asked them to help us announce the release of a series we issuing very soon.
It doesn't include the awful Burning series as they're by a different company and our CSP's don't work like that. Its funny how you only "push" certain coins..... "Awful Burning Series" ? Really? Cant be that awful as they are very popular unlike some other over priced coins that get hyped up by certain advertising "blogs" with links to their site etc. The golden Enigma coins are no better then the Burning coins, all are third party enhanced , actually they are worst since they have 5000 mintage vers 500 . This collector can not handle any critic about a coin he has purchased and even goes so far to point the finger at our beloved AgAuNEWS iam always looking forward to AgAuNEWS updates and dont find him pushing any coin never limited mintage seems to be the only criterium for buying in case of northerncoins specialy hugely overpriced low mintage usa medals
I like both series, and I am collecting them both as well, buying multiple pieces of same coin to flip the duplicates at the right time. So far I sold with great profit a few Golden Enigma Walking Liberty 2014, Golden Enigma Panda 2014 and Burning Maple Leaf. I wish I had bought more when price was much lower than today's insane prices for these beauties. The Burning series is more original (talking about design) but packaging is very poor. If they improve this, I prefer the burning series. The burning panda is the next one in series and seems already very popular. Source: www.powercoin.it About AgAuNews, it is definitely one of my favourite numismatic blogs and is in my opinion a good source to find out about modern coins news. Alex.
Look, I will hold my hands up and say I'm being a little hypocritical calling the coins awful as I do generally try to leave it up to people to decide for theirselves. I will remove the awful comment, as it doesn't sit right with being impartial. It was a genuine opinion but perhaps I should temper my expression of them a little. As you may have guessed from my gushing over the 2014 proof Britannia and the Taj Mahal coin, I'm more of a classic style kind of bloke. Perhaps I need to take a look at the whole aftermarket paint-job market but they seem to come out quicker than I can type, admittedly with two fingers.. Mik
I don't agree. It's unrealistic and unfair to feel you must censor yourself on this forum. Actually - especially on this forum which is not known for being shy on its opinions. You are a collector as well and have opinions. Why shouldn't you? Especially for a third party series you never covered on your site. On the one hand, you have an ethos for your site and people respect that. That's fine. On here, though, it's useful for everyone to gauge the current 'mood' for new series/issues, as well. I think people can understand the separation of the two. Regardless, we'll all go ahead collecting/stacking what we personally like. Obviously.... just don't go all Samuel L Jackson on stuff Flaming-Awful is fine
I have been a follower on AgAuNews facebook page, it is always nice to have a reliable source for new coin releases. To be honest, covering 3rd party modifications is not something I expect from a reputable website. Coins are a form of money, money is approved by the country's monetary authority. Modifying a coin is just like drawing sunglasses on Franklin's face on your $100 bill and then market it as a collector piece. Most of the time this is illegal.. most countries have their own laws against modifying/mutilating money. In Singapore, under our Currency Act: Mutilating, destroying or defacing currency notes and coins Any person who (a) mutilates or destroys any currency note or coin; (b) causes any change in a coin so as to destroy or diminish its value or utility; (c) prints or stamps, or by any like means writes, or impresses, on any currency note any mark, word, letter or figure; or (d) defaces any coin by stamping thereon any name or word, whether the coin is or is not thereby impaired, diminished or lightened, shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable on conviction to a fine not exceeding $2,000. Similar laws in the States as well: 18 U.S. Code 331 - Mutilation, diminution, and falsification of coins Whoever fraudulently alters, defaces, mutilates, impairs, diminishes, falsifies, scales, or lightens any of the coins coined at the mints of the United States, or any foreign coins which are by law made current or are in actual use or circulation as money within the United States; Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both. As a reputable site it is surprising to see aftermarket modified coins being featured and showcased...
There's nothing illegal about painting on a bullion coin. You are misreading the law. It is only a crime if you have fraudulent intent. Here's the statement on it from the US Treasury: And 3rd party coloured coins are popular amongst certain collectors so there's absolutely nothing wrong with a "reputable" site covering them. There WOULD be something wrong if a reputable site felt the need to self-censor a completely legal aspect of coin collecting.
Thing is, anyone and everyone can buy bullion coins and paint them, stick a crystal on them, do a laser cutout etc... but this is more of personal interest and not an official release from the Mint. I just find it odd (and disappointed) to see AgAuNews showcasing and featuring these aftermarket coins on their website; if these were featured on Etsy probably I am fine with it.
The after market treatments on coins still renders them as coins. Look, I don't particularly like any of the Ruthenium coated / plated coins (and I have no intention of buying any) but apparently enough people seem to and therefore AgAuNews decided to run an article on them....I don't think that's a foul ball....they are still coins after all. The argument that "covering 3rd party modifications is not something I expect from a reputable website." reminds me of the coin collectors who eschew and condemn all modern collector coins because they are not real circulating numismatic coins. We are all entitled to our opinions but in my view, legitimate coin collecting isn't just collecting old circulated coins or eschewing coins that happen to have an after market treatment. Coin collecting today is very mature and very broad and there's all sorts of preferences and I for one like the free market to determine what is the definition of a collector coin. The free market is apparently telling us that some of the after market treatments on coins are indeed legitimate forms of coin collecting. .
Seems to be a hotbed of discussion. I didn't expect the subject to be so contentious but I will confess to thinking longer and harder about covering these and made the jump for two main reasons. Firstly, it's primarily a collectors site and whatever my views on this type of coin, the Golden Enigma series has risen above the mass of aftermarket conversions to gain widespread acceptance. They're sold at a lot of the big dealers worldwide, something quite rare in itself. I think it's because they've picked a good, clean style and applied it to different coins. Most apply a haphazard range of finishes to the same coin; witness the ranges of Maples and Eagles with different images in the background. Golden Enigma is something new and Allcollect are being sensible both with coin rollouts and with maintaining the core integrity of the range. Secondly, I believe that Allcollect are responsible for the commemorative issues of the Gabon Springbok, so at least that one GE coin may well be state approved. It's certainly something that you couldn't say about the other ranges. This kind of coin won't generally be covered, but I do stand by the GE decision. As for what mmissinglink said, it's spot-on. Lots of coin discussions would be more genial if people occasionally put the words "in my opinion.." at the beginning of a sentence. It's easy to forget that much of what is offered today is the result of a coin producer experimenting. It would be an appalling world if everybody liked the same thing. Mik
I dont have a problem with AgAunews, some nice write ups, but calling a coin awful be it 3rd party or 1st party is a bit much. Thats that point I was making, I actually enjoy reading some of your write ups, but I think we can all do without the "awful" references.
No doubt there is a continuum between awesome and awful, and that it is a highly subjective judgement. And then there is this:
^ Not that I would buy that Rodman coin but there are far more pathetic or uglier coins than that. Somewhere in this forum there's a thread dedicated to the worst or ugliest coins ever. Some of them in that thread are really hideous. .
