"Discovery Piece"???

[jcuve]

First Reported with a date would make even more sense.

True.

Don't forget, the TPGs make extra money from special designation labels.

[Maineman750]

Don't forget, the TPGs make extra money from special designation labels.

LOL..that was my answer to Roller early on in this thread..."money"

[Roller]

Was not my intent to look for feathers in the cap. I just could not get my mind around how anyone can lable a coin of many to be the discovery coin. Except for the intellectual debate, I have no horse in this race. Money being the best answer IMHO. Question still is; how do you get ANACS to go along?

[liveandievarieties]

Question still is; how do you get ANACS to go along?

It's actually pretty simple- I just included the 2x2 insert from Bob stating that the coin was "reported 8/26". I included a note in the submission requesting the "first reported" designation and explained that the insert was from Bob Piazza of Coppercoins. They didn't charge me any extra either. But perhaps it was so seamless because Chuck did the attribution work for that group of coins. That was my only experience requesting the designation.

[Coppertop]

...crazyness, I can only think whats next ,somebody will lay claim to some sorts of proprietary and sue the pants out of somebody

[Maineman750]

George, I thought Bob had answered your question already...maybe you mean something different ?

[Roller]

George, I thought Bob had answered your question already...maybe you mean something different ?

He did, in part. The 2011 pictured on CC being the first on CC, then, using Bob's criteria, would qualify as the "discovery piece'' using the CC#? This is despite the fact that when it was entered on CC we all knew that there was at least one other out there (the one sent to Crawford)? I guess the point is that the designation is worthless and often meaningless and I wonder why the grading companies would give in to this practice. Would ANACS, if now sent the CC specimen, lable it, also, as the discovery piece?

[Maineman750]

Would ANACS, if now sent the CC specimen, lable it, also, as the discovery piece?

I believe if you sent it in,(with documentation from CC) and requested CC's attribution number..(and it was the first request for CC's) the answer would be yes. Very tricky game,isn't it ?

[pman860507]

I believe if you sent it in,(with documentation from CC) and requested CC's attribution number..(and it was the first request for CC's) the answer would be yes. Very tricky game,isn't it ?

True it's tricky but it makes since. This problem really only occurs the first few years or mintage. When most of the varieties are discovered.

The key to getting a true discovery piece is to send it to everyone as fast as possible.

I have always wondered how this works. Thanks everyone.

[hasfam]

I used to care about this, but now I don't. Ironically, my name has shown up on CONECA for new varieties but, I've never sent them a coin to look at. On the other hand, I've had new listings on CC, sold the coins (unfortunately) and the new owners then had sent them to Wexler then to a TPG and got the annodated discovery piece put on the on the slab. It doesn't matter to me anymore, especially when it could cost up to $30-$40 to have all the attributors look at it and then have it slabbed all the while its on a circulated $5.00 coin. Not worth the 1 minute fame.

[Fido_Finder]

Not worth the 1 minute fame.

I hear that.

[Roller]

I hear that.

Yep. I definitely agree.

[coppercoins]

Being the owner of coppercoins, I can answer for my site and my listing system:

I do not use 'discovery coin' for anything. I use 'plate coin' for those coins we used to make photographs for the site. Obviously some of those will be the 'discovery coin' as well, but I do not use that term because of exactly the confusion that has come about in this thread. Unless someone is willing and able to PROVE that a particular coin is the first of its type to be discovered, using the term 'discovery coin' is arbitrary and pointless.

So...if you send in a coin to one of us and it is the first coin of a given die, we will call your coin a 'plate coin' - but we will not call it a 'discovery coin'.

[JamesWiles]

I agree with Bob and Chuck. I use the terms "First Reported" and "Reported by" in the CONECA files. There was a signficant discussion of these terms in the late 90s and every attributer at the time committed to using these terms instead of "discovery" for the very reasons cited above. It is impossible to be sure. New attributers have entered the picture and some may have gotten lax in the intervening years. Futhermore I don't use the term "plate coin" because I am always updating photos with a coin in a better grade or different die state or just one not in a holder. Thus it becomes impossible to say for sure just which coin will end up being a "plate coin."

After a few years, having my name on the reported by line got to be old, so when I purchase a coin and it ends up being a new listing for the CONECA files, I will give credit to the person I purchased the coin from, if I know who that was.

[eaxtellcoin]

Very interesting thread. I can go either way with "First Reported or Discovery" just so credit is given = Why? I personally have collected/Sold cents for better than 20 years. My goal, albe it minor to many; is to find a newly listed cent RPM variety for the decades, I.E. CONECA = I.E. Teens,20,30,40,50,60,70,and 80's This is a monumental task in itself if anyone has tried it, and YES to all the skeptics who think its impossible. That is my goal and yes it can be achieved - I need one more coin!

Another reason = I like to see my name in print!