RCC Tokens
nohope587
old names, but I guess things change.
Anyway I found a bunch of RCC tokens in my desk draw the other day.
From 2002 through 2004
I can find very little info on the net about their popularity. Are
these still collected by RCC members? if so what are the going rates
for them.
Thank you for your time.
nohope587
Eric Babula
news:af76c995-d7d1-485d-a800-
a6c1be...@d12g2000vbr.googlegroups.com:
They are not popular and are not worth anything. Send them all to
me, and I'll "dispose" of them for you.
Eric Babula
nohope587
I am patient they have been sitting in a draw for a fair few years
another decade will not harm them. Though if this group will even be
around then who knows.
Richard
gogu
news:3p3vc6....@news.alt.net...
> On 5/21/2010 7:37 PM, Eric Babula wrote:
>> Anyway I found a bunch of RCC tokens in my desk draw the other
>>> day. From 2002 through 2004
>>> I can find very little info on the net about their popularity. Are
> I don't think these have much market value, and you don't see them for
> sale at all on eBay, or hardly at all. I followed only the first such
> token.
I'd buy one if offerd at a decent price (that's no more than $25.00)...
--
E' mai possibile, oh porco di un cane, che le avventure
in codesto reame debban risolversi tutte con grandi
puttane! F.d.A
Coins, travels and more:
http://s208.photobucket.com/albums/bb120/golanule/
http://gogu.enosi.org/index.html
>The process of choosing it was fairly schizoid. I have one of these as a
>curiosity, and here's what I have at my site about it (long):
>
> RCC 2002 bronze token (32.1g, 40mm).
>
> This odd-looking token, consisting of bronze with an antique brass finish,
> was made for rec.collecting.coins (RCC), a Usenet discussion group about
> coins, with this being the group's first such token. It was made by
> Quality Challenge Coins, which produced 121 pieces of this type, and the
> project was spearheaded by George V. Huse Jr., a participant in the
> discussion group. The circumstances behind the minting of this token,
> which I witnessed firsthand, present an interesting example of the issue
> of Internet misinformation.
>
> Unlike the vast majority of other medals and tokens inspired by ancient
> Athenian Owl coins, this piece isn't based on the famous Classical Owls of
> the fifth century BC but the less important New Style Owls of the second
> and first centuries BC. However, as opposed to the actual ancient coins,
> Athena is facing left on this token rather than right because Huse was led
> to believe that if this copy had been made with a right-facing Athena it
> might be regarded as a forgery or might be modified and sold as an
> authentic ancient coin. This is despite the fact that this token is
> considerably larger and heavier than ancient coins of this type, that it's
> made of a copper alloy whereas the ancient tetradrachms were made of
> silver (ancient bronzes of this type exist but they're even smaller and
> are seen far less), that it was manufactured with a modern press and has a
> perfectly round shape, flat fields, and uniform rims and other design
> elements as opposed to the irregularity of ancient hand-struck coins, and
> that it features modern Latin lettering and Arabic numbering, which no
> ancient Greek coins had because such lettering and numbering hadn't yet
> come into existence.
>
> What's more, the model used for this token wasn't a genuine New Style Owl
> because some RCC participants convinced Huse that using a photo from a
> coin book for design guidance could result in a copyright violation. For
> some reason no genuine specimens of this common coin type were available
> for a scan or photo and no attempt was made to ask for the use of anyone's
> existing photo. So instead a Slavey replica of a New Style Owl tetradrachm
> was purchased and a scan of it was made and sent to the minter even though
> Slavey replicas have a reputation at least among those who know ancient
> coins for their flamboyant exaggeration.
>
> Unlike with genuine New Style Owls, which feature Athena with a pleasant
> smile or neutral expression, Athena on this piece has an unpleasant scowl.
> Another anomaly is the obverse legend "Pallas Athene," which never
> appeared on ancient coins of this type and which misdescribes the Athena
> that's illustrated. Pallas is one of the many epithets sometimes used as
> part of Athena's name, in this case signifying an opponent she killed in
> battle whose name she took. But the epithet used with Athena on New Style
> Owls in coin books and coin catalogs is Parthenos, not Pallas, as in
> Athena Parthenos, since the image used on these coins is thought to have
> been based on the sculpture of Athena by Phidias that stood in the
> Parthenon. What's more, Athena is much more commonly spelled with an "a"
> at the end, "Athena" instead of "Athene," in books on numismatics as well
> as mythology, not to mention being better known this way in the popular
> culture. Two further anomalies are an owl that's smaller than on authentic
> New Style Owls and a wreath around the coin's edge that's larger, with the
> wreath taking up far more space even though the owl by far is the more
> important design element.
>
> --
>
> Consumer: http://rg.ancients.info/guide
> Connoisseur: http://rg.ancients.info/glom
> Counterfeit: http://rg.ancients.info/bogos
Bruce Remick
"Reid Goldsborough" <reidgol...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> On 5/21/2010 7:37 PM, Eric Babula wrote:
>>> day. From 2002 through 2004
>>> I can find very little info on the net about their popularity. Are
>
> sale at all on eBay, or hardly at all. I followed only the first such
Er....... he simply asked if these were still collected by rcc members and
what their value might be. Gogu gave him a pretty good idea in a single
sentence.
nohope587
I recognize that they do not have much if any intrinsic value.
I have five each of
2002 5 Embers
2003 10 Embers
2004? Half Flame
I have a couple of the original tokens and a spark. But unlike Mr.
Goldsborough I like those and intend to keep them around a bit longer.
I will construct a sale thread i guess and see if there are any takers
$25 would also seem to me to be more than reasonable.
Richard (nohope587)
Reid Goldsborough wrote:
> On 5/21/2010 11:30 PM, Reid Goldsborough wrote:
>> Eric can get indications of what the entire group of these have sold for
>> in the past...
>
> Actually not Eric but Richard, the OP.
>
Bruce Remick
> On 5/21/2010 10:47 PM, Bruce Remick wrote:
>> Er
>
> You should do something about this problem.
>
>> he simply asked if these were still collected by rcc members and
>> what their value might be. Gogu gave him a pretty good idea in a single
>> sentence.
>
> existence. And you feel you have to offer your sage commentary on my doing
> this. Got to stick your two cents in no matter what. Not even two cents,
> more like a farthing. No, not even a farthing, more like a chocolate coin
> that fell behind a sofa cushion a couple of years ago and is now chalky
> white and worthless.
You really do see yourself as the master of prose, don't you. The OP wasn't
asking for "background" and you implied that you didn't know much about
their popularity or value. I see it as YOU sticking your two cents in.
You continue to post here on this open forum and you will continue to get
comments that you may or may not agree with. If it bothers you, go find an
owl site to play on where everyone thinks you're a hoot.
>
> Gogu's offer is one indication of the value of the first of these, but
> only one person's, which is not a "pretty good idea" of its value, and
> this was just for the first token whereas the OP indicated he had a bunch
> of these, suggesting different ones. Along with asking here, Eric can get
> indications of what the entire group of these have sold for in the past by
> doing a Google search, or I can:
I would say that one person's direct offer to buy does indeed provide a
"pretty good idea" of value. Bettter even than your own "I don't think
these have much value" comment. You obviously had little to contribute to
the OP's questions about popularity and value, but instead you chose to use
the post as another opportunity to ramble on with unasked-for owl-related
minutia where a simple link to your site would have sufficed.
Bruce Remick
> On 5/22/2010 9:10 AM, Bruce Remick wrote:
>> I would say that one person's direct offer to buy does indeed provide a
>> "pretty good idea" of value. Bettter even than your own "I don't think
>> these have much value" comment. You obviously had little to contribute
>> to
>> the OP's questions about popularity and value, but instead you chose to
>> use
>> the post as another opportunity to ramble on with unasked-for owl-related
>> minutia where a simple link to your site would have sufficed.
>
> determination about market value. Didn't stop you though. It's fine for
> the OP to say, OK, I'll sell any for $25. But a far better way to
> determine market value is to see what they've sold for in the past, and a
> better way than this is to take open offers here or put them up on eBay.
>
> For you of all people to criticize me for offering on-topic commentary
> about a numismatic subject, clearly labeled as (long), is preposterous
> when you jump in and offer off-topic commentary on about anything and
> everything here. But you've done this before. You seem to object when
> somebody leaves comments longer than some internal limit you have in your
> head, as if you were stuck in 1985 when we were limited by bandwidth in
> the length of the text that could be efficiently routed within Usenet.
No one else here criticized you. Just me. Bandwidth has nothing to do
with it. Just my personal observation. If you think so little of me, it
shouldn't have bothered you at all and you should have ignored my post. But
of course you can't resist any opportunity to offer your profound
psychoanalytical analysis of anyone who criticizes you. At least it's free.
>
> It's stupid to criticize posts for being too long today. Not talking about
> book-long posts, but posts the length of a short newspaper or magazine
> article. My post here was five paragraphs long! If this is too taxing for
> you, if you feel that five paragraphs is "rambling," that's fine, but why
> criticize it. That just adds to the verbiage that seems to bother you so
> much. But it's not really verbiage that bothers you. That's just your
> pretext. It's the opportunity to comment that you enjoy so much, any and
> every opportunity, about anything, doesn't matter, you'll have your say,
> even if it's to criticize others for having their say.
My comment was not meant so much about your post's length per se. You said
it was a verbatum quote from your web site, to which you easily could have
provided a link for anyone wanting to delve into the minutia of the rcc
token(s), especially since you had nothing significant to offer about what
the OP asked about. You simply delight in seeing yourself in print. Yes,
sometimes I do enjoy pointing this out. You do what you enjoy. So do I.
You're not the only critic here.
Jud
collection by adding those that I don't have. BTW, is there a website
showing all of the RCC tokens?
Jud -Another interested collector-
nohope587
Here are the types I am thinking of parting with
http://www.mycoins.us/Tokens/RCC5emberh.jpg
http://www.mycoins.us/Tokens/RCC5embert.jpg
http://www.mycoins.us/Tokens/2003%20RCC%2010%20Embers%20Obv.JPG
http://www.mycoins.us/Tokens/2003%20RCC%2010%20Embers%20Rev.JPG
http://www.mycoins.us/Tokens/2004%20RCC%20Half%20Flame%20Obv.JPG
http://www.mycoins.us/Tokens/2004%20RCC%20Half%20Flame%20Rev.JPG
Jeff R.
<snipped>
TL;DR
:-)
--
Jeff R.
Bruce Remick
> On 5/22/2010 12:28 PM, Bruce Remick wrote:
>> of course you can't resist any opportunity to offer your profound
>> psychoanalytical analysis of anyone who criticizes you. At least it's
>> free.
>
> pointing out your hypocrisy, stupidity, and unselfconscious buffoonery.
> Yes, I could have done what you're repeatedly saying I should have done,
> just written a link. I could have said, "Go to this link. Then read about
> the 13th medal down." Instead, I copied and pasted the text. Big whoop.
> Some might have found that a convenience, saving them the time of clicking
> on the link and finding the text. You, in your buffoonery, criticize it,
> illogically, stupidly, without any sound basis for the criticism, just
> mindless criticism, which is my psychoanalytical opinion is evidence of
> profound Dissociative Identity Disorder.
I am a hypocrite? Stupid? A selfconscious buffoon? This seems to be
your typical defensive reaction when wounded. Call the one who wounded you
as many names as you can think of. Just like you did in school.
cnntp
> Gogu's offer is one indication of the value of the first of these, but
> only one person's, which is not a "pretty good idea" of its value, and
> this was just for the first token whereas the OP indicated he had a bunch
> of these, suggesting different ones.
Reid!
I didn't give that price without considering a few things:
1) the average price for the Athena medal was around $50.00-$60.00 back in
the good times (eBay auctions)
2) there is no more a big deal of an interest in rcc coins
3) we are in a financial crisis
Considering all the above I concluded that the price such a medal can comand
today is somewhere around half the price it was sold a few years ago.
Of course I may be wrong but this is how I see things and just my personal
opinion!
rgrds
Reid Goldsborough
> 1) the average price for the Athena medal was around $50.00-$60.00 back
Do you know/remember what this Athena RCC one ember medal sold for when
it was released in 2002? It was $10, according to one poster back in
2004, though he indicated uncertainty about this.
Interesting that it reached as high as $60 at one point. Didn't know
that. Another poster indicated in 2005 that they were then selling for
about $35.
cnntp
> On 5/22/2010 7:40 PM, cnntp wrote:
>
>> 1) the average price for the Athena medal was around $50.00-$60.00 back
> Do you know/remember what this Athena RCC one ember medal sold for when it
> was released in 2002? It was $10, according to one poster back in 2004,
> though he indicated uncertainty about this.
I couldn't say as I was not reading rcc that time:-(
But....I doubt the issue price was just $10.00...
Maybe someone who acquired one token directly from the source could offer
his/her insight.
> Interesting that it reached as high as $60 at one point. Didn't know that.
> Another poster indicated in 2005 that they were then selling for about
> $35.
IIRC one auction ended there around.
I was watching it but when it went over $40.00 I stopped bidding.
rgrds
Reid Goldsborough
> IIRC one auction ended there around.
> I was watching it but when it went over $40.00 I stopped bidding.
Poking around a little bit ... Here's a thread from 2003 indicating that
the first RCC medal, the one ember, did sell for $10 when introduced.
It's not clear if they were all sold in this way. But they soon wound up
on eBay, with some hammer prices exceeding $100.
or
Other threads indicated this bidding frenzy died down, and at least in
the mid-2000s the typical eBay hammer price was $30 to $40.
I acquired mine in a trade with Ian Milne, another former regular here,
someone who I used to tussle with a bit here but who I later became
friendly with. We did several trades.
Among the areas I specialize in are ancient Athenian Owls and their
copies. I also like quirky stuff, and this piece squarely falls into
this realm.
Jud
wrote:
> I acquired mine in a trade with Ian Milne, another former regular here,
> someone who I used to tussle with a bit here but who I later became
> friendly with. We did several trades.
Ian is still with us, but not as often as usual. He has been quite
busy in the non-numismatic world, you know, work, fixing up the house
etc.
Jud -Reports of my demise are premature-
PS...Did you end your penultimate sentence with a preposition? Tsk tsk
tsk.
Reid Goldsborough
> PS...Did you end your penultimate sentence with a preposition? Tsk tsk
> tsk.
That was last considered bad grammar about a half century ago. At least
on this side of the pond. Among many cites online about this:
http://grammar.about.com/od/grammarfaq/f/terminalprepositionmyth.htm
som...@some.domain
>On 5/23/2010 1:36 AM, Jud wrote:
>
>> PS...Did you end your penultimate sentence with a preposition? Tsk tsk
>> tsk.
>
>That was last considered bad grammar about a half century ago. At least
>on this side of the pond. Among many cites online about this:
>
>http://grammar.about.com/od/grammarfaq/f/terminalprepositionmyth.htm
>
beats the lame crap chmberlain spewed.
Jeff R.
"Jud" <numis...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:a81522aa-16b0-417d...@40g2000vbr.googlegroups.com...
<snipped - TB;DR>
> PS...Did you end your penultimate sentence with a preposition? Tsk tsk
> tsk.
But he'd never start a sentence with a conjunction.
--
Jeff R.
Jerry Dennis
>
> - Show quoted text -
Say, "Hello," Richard. (Borrowed from the Rocky Horror Show).
I'll toss my own trime's worth of info here. For the most part, the
RCC tokens don't seem to be anything more than a novelty anymore.
Sad, too, because they're pretty good works of art with a lot of
thought and input by a close bunch of people.
Doing a google search from the old days, Eric Tillery sold a complete
set of six different tokens for the RCC Legal Defense Fund and brought
in $255.00. Granted the high price realized was in part due to the
reason for the auction. I seem to remember another set being sold a
couple of years later for $135.00.
Jerry
Jerry Dennis
> ? "Reid Goldsborough" <reidgolduse...@yahoo.com> ?????? ??? ??????news:3p6ih3....@news.alt.net...
I was the one who wrote the original issue prices post back in 2004.
Read my earlier post about Eric's LDF auction. I wrote the issue
price of the 1 Ember being $10, and the remaining tokens issue priced
at $15. I have two complete sets, including the Spark tokens.
Jerry
Jerry Dennis
wrote:
> On 5/22/2010 10:43 PM, Reid Goldsborough wrote:
>
> > Poking around a little bit ... Here's a thread from 2003 indicating that
> > the first RCC medal, the one ember, did sell for $10 when introduced.
> > It's not clear if they were all sold in this way. But they soon wound up
> > on eBay, with some hammer prices exceeding $100.
>
> for $10? In Google Grouping around, I noticed a lot of discussion of
> them before they were sold and discussion of them selling on eBay
> afterward. But I couldn't find any announcement that they were finished
> and now for sale. This was eight years ago, but I don't remember this
> either.
>
> --
>
> Consumer:http://rg.ancients.info/guide
> Connoisseur:http://rg.ancients.info/glom
> Counterfeit:http://rg.ancients.info/bogos
Jerry
sgt23
wrote:
> On 5/21/2010 10:47 PM, Bruce Remick wrote:
>
> > Er
>
> You should do something about this problem.
>
> > what their value might be. Gogu gave him a pretty good idea in a single
> > sentence.
>
> existence. And you feel you have to offer your sage commentary on my
> doing this. Got to stick your two cents in no matter what. Not even two
> cents, more like a farthing. No, not even a farthing, more like a
> chocolate coin that fell behind a sofa cushion a couple of years ago and
> is now chalky white and worthless.
>
> only one person's, which is not a "pretty good idea" of its value, and
> this was just for the first token whereas the OP indicated he had a
> can get indications of what the entire group of these have sold for in
>
> andhttp://www.cointalk.com/t57/
>
> --
>
> Consumer:http://rg.ancients.info/guide
> Connoisseur:http://rg.ancients.info/glom
> Counterfeit:http://rg.ancients.info/bogos
I wouldn't give more than $20 for it and shipping would need too be
free.
George
Than you probably won't get one will you.
George, Proud owner of 2 complete sets including the sparks from Canada
--
Government is a voracious monster that must have your labor to control
YOU! Your money is your liberty. The taxes you pay gently enslave you,
and eventually destroy any human liberty you have. Fear government, pray
for the country.
sgt23
I don't see why anyone would give more than what I said or the guy who
offered $25 for them, there is no demand for them. I wonder how many
collectors out there even know about the RCC tokens? You would need
show me there is demand for them before I would go any farther than I
quoted before.