• seperator

Community Voice Responses (04/10/2012)

 

From the March 17th Numismatic News E-Newsletter: Do you consider a Hawaii quarter with extra islands to be a desireable collectible? Here are some answers sent from our e-newsletter readers to Editor, Dave Harper.

I do consider it to be a desirable collectible, However I would not pay too much for one.
I think it is a cool coin, and I enjoy different varieties and errors like that. I am the manager of an online store, and we do mainly error and variety coins. I find any coins that are abnormal to be desirable.

Alex Helzel -  Greensburg, Pa.

Add me to the “never heard of it” category. I have no idea whether this is anything to get excited about.

Walter Fortner – Milwaukie, Ore.

Extra islands?
Sure, if it is a recognized variant or error. If it’s just a grease die problem, then perhaps not. I still think “In God We Rust” (Kansas) should have been recognized. But I am dubious about the Nevada “pooping horse.”

Sam Donovan – Address withheld

Hawaii with extra islands is great.

L.R. Rowe – Avoca, Iowa

The Hawaii state quarter (with islands) is a desired collectible only in the set. Of course, it is a desired single to others.
Another set for it to be in would be “island nations” collectibles as well! This, in my opinion, is still one of the more desireable coins of the set. The Wyoming quarter was just too plain.

Gary Kess – Escalon, Calif.

The fact that a Hawaii quarter turned up with extra islands just doesn’t do anything for me on my end. It may be because of my own stupidity of not knowing how many islands are supposed to be on the Hawaii quarter.
The fact that someone has found an extra dot on a Hawaii quarter to me is like finding out that we have only eight planets in our solar system instead of the old textbook nine. Pluto is no longer a considered a planet, which is unfortunate since it was one of the few that I could actually name.
I think what it all boils down to is that I was expecting to see only one island on the Hawaii quarter. I have no idea why they put those other islands there in the fist place.

Mercury R. Williams – Seattle, Wash.

Not anymore than the previous one produced in the first state quarter series.

Bryan New – Columbia, Ky.

Sure, why not? Seems very similar to the 2004D Wisconsin high/low extra leaf coins. That said, I have yet to see a good photograph of an extra-islands coin.

Greg Duncan – Address withheld

I was not even aware that the 2008 Hawaiian quarter had an extra island, but there are a lot of things that I’m not aware. So if they say it’s worth 1 cent more than face value, then yes, it’s a desirable collectible.
There are way too many coins out there with little problems to keep track of them all. I spend most of my time roll searching lincoln cents and reading numismatic news to worry about much else.

Michael P. Schmeyer – Halsey Valley, N.Y

This entry was posted in Community Voice. Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to Community Voice Responses (04/10/2012)

  1. steelbuffalo says:

    http://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.3383082575378.164806.1218878074&type=3&l=9d32877285

    Link above will take you to a nice photo of the extra islands quarter. Friend me!

  2. The idea is of an extra island is pretty exciting, especially if it is a design error. Culturally speaking, it is a great way to begin discussing American’s alleged lack of familiarity with their far-flung lands. If history would have been different, we might have seen the Hawaiian quarter as part of the 2009 US Territories set, along with Guam and Mariana Islands. I would buy this error quarter just to have this conversation in person.

Leave a Reply