New definitions needed

Started by <k>, July 21, 2023, 12:32:19 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

<k>


Controversy swirls around the Pitcairn 50 pence issues of 2021, 2022 and 2023. Pitcairn is a British overseas territory but is largely looked after by New Zealand. Pitcairn accordingly uses the New Zealand dollar and does not issue its own circulation coins or banknotes. "Pence" and "pounds" are therefore misnomers on Pitcairn coins. Pitcairn issues collector coins only.

See:  Pitcairn Islands release collectors coins denominated in pounds.





Eurocoin has pointed out the legality of the situation and is accordingly disgusted.

My own view is that these are just collector coins. They are just a gimmick and not even worth taking seriously. The Pitcairn islanders are few and isolated and need to find ways to earn a little money.





I have pointed out that various ECU collector coins were issued in the 1990s.

What was their status? Were they strictly speaking legal?


Now to definitions. Eurocoin has described these Pitcairn issues as "fake". That term has a specific definition in numismatics, so it is misleading to use it in this situation. We need to find another term, perhaps suitably disparaging. Maybe the forum members and any viewers, and especially any Numista members, could put their heads together and invent a new term.

Furthermore, Pitcairn has knowing gone against its own legal requirements as regards these issues.
Visit the website of The Royal Mint Museum.

See: The Royal Mint Museum.

<k>

#1


UK 50 pence, 1973.  EEC commemorative.


See:  The "Illegal" 50p and the Death of "NEW PENCE".

The UK EEC 50 pence of 1973 was minted through to April 1975 with a frozen date. At the time, the only legal name for the the UK subunits was "new pence", not "pence". However, hardly anybody noticed the illegality of the denomination, because the public were by then used to the new decimal coinage and no longer used the term "new pence".

So here you had an unknowingly "illegal" issue. Can we invent a crisp new term for such an issue?

We also need a succinct for knowingly "illegal" issues, such as those by Pitcairn. Perhaps we should also distinguish between "illegal" collector issues and "illegal" circulation issues.
Visit the website of The Royal Mint Museum.

See: The Royal Mint Museum.

<k>

For now, I shall just refer to these as "naughty" issues.  ;)
Visit the website of The Royal Mint Museum.

See: The Royal Mint Museum.

quaziright

Fake is obviously not a suitable word because it implies there is something real it is trying to pass off as and dupe unsuspecting people. However since there is no real Pitcairn pound/pence, so there is nothing to be a fake of.
I would call them "spurious" issues which tells the buyer to beware and question the authenticity. Fake issues are part of spurious issues, but the definition of a fake is more narrow

<k>

Spurious. Yes, I like that. A spurious issue.

Has Canada issued any spurious pieces?
Visit the website of The Royal Mint Museum.

See: The Royal Mint Museum.

Figleaf

Spurious means something looking like what it isn't. Some people believe that the UK 50p has a legal issue (side note: are there cases where an issued coin had to be recalled because of a legal verdict?), but was it even challenged in court?

How about inadvertent problem issue/coin/piece/whatever for the UK 50p and advertent problem issue/coin/piece/whatever for the "Pitcairn" 50p?

Peter
An unidentified coin is a piece of metal. An identified coin is a piece of history.

<k>

Quote from: Figleaf on July 21, 2023, 03:13:21 PMHow about inadvertent problem issue/coin/piece/whatever for the UK 50p and advertent problem issue/coin/piece/whatever for the "Pitcairn" 50p?

Hmm. Inadvertent doesn't resonate with me somehow. Comes across as a bit vague.

Strangely, advertent is almost an orphaned word in English. I never hear anybody say it. Inadvertent is common enough, though. Deliberate would be more likely.
Visit the website of The Royal Mint Museum.

See: The Royal Mint Museum.

quaziright

Quote from: <k> on July 21, 2023, 02:24:31 PMSpurious. Yes, I like that. A spurious issue.

Has Canada issued any spurious pieces?

Questionable, terrible, garish, shameless money grab - yes, but spurious, no

chrisild

Quote from: <k> on July 21, 2023, 12:32:19 PMI have pointed out that various ECU collector coins were issued in the 1990s.

What was their status? Were they strictly speaking legal?[/center]

Depends on the issuing country. The Belgian ecu coins – of course made for collectors only – were in fact legal tender, and you could get them redeemed at the central bank. Most others issued by the later euro countries were just medals, or even pieces issued by third parties. (This does not include "dual denomination" pieces; of course a French franc/ecu coin was legal tender.)

In the Pitcairn topic, offa wrote: "I have a scouse word for it. Tat"  ;D

<k>

Quote from: chrisild on July 22, 2023, 10:26:00 AMThe Belgian ecu coins – of course made for collectors only – were in fact legal tender, and you could get them redeemed at the central bank. Most others issued by the later euro countries were just medals, or even pieces issued by third parties. (This does not include "dual denomination" pieces; of course a French franc/ecu coin was legal tender.)

Thank you, grizzled chrisild.  ;) 

Medals, eh? Reminds me of the many arguments about the term "medal coins" in the early years of this forum.  :-\
Visit the website of The Royal Mint Museum.

See: The Royal Mint Museum.

chrisild

Oh dear, I remember ... Come to think of it, for experienced collectors the term is not even bad. But for others (particularly newbies, or people who have just come cross something round and metallic) it is misleading rather than helpful.

In the euro area we have the legal differentiation of circulation coins vs commemorative (€2) coins vs collector coins. The latter term covers pretty much every oddball issue. :D Then there is the more technical term NCLT (non-circulating legal tender). The Pitcairn pieces, be they in $/c or in £/p, will all be in that category.

Big_M

Quote from: chrisild on July 22, 2023, 01:52:37 PMThen there is the more technical term NCLT (non-circulating legal tender). The Pitcairn pieces, be they in $/c or in £/p, will all be in that category.

I do not agree, Pitcairn's £/p cannot be NCLT as they are not legal tender (LT) in the first place.

chrisild

Quote from: Big_M on August 04, 2023, 06:40:04 PMI do not agree, Pitcairn's £/p cannot be NCLT as they are not legal tender (LT) in the first place.

Admittedly I do not know what kind of money the 35 people living there actually use. :) Yes, I know that the NZD is legal tender there. But if the local government (mayor, council) endorses the pound issues ...

Offa

The Pitcairn coins?? Are minted at the behest of the Kon club as a disgraceful attempt to screw more money out of collectors for their blatant tat. hence they are denominated in pounds and pence.
All coins are equal but some are more equal than others