TOPIC: ORDER them TOKENS...helps trading in the off season

Bro may shoot me for saying this.<br /><br />But a easier/cost effective compromise on the proofs.<br />You drill the chippies before applying the stickers. So on the coin side would be the drilled hole but the sticker side would be whole.<br />This would easily let you see the difference between the proofs and regulars.<br />And it would difficult to forge because they would have to try and peel the stickers off, drill them, and put the stickers back on. And if someone attempted to tamper like that the sticker would most definitely show that it.<br /><br />I had thought about certs of auth. but you'd have to do one for each, and that would be too much work, and simple ones could be faked. Pre-drilled, sticker over top of hole would be more difficult.

Not going to shoot you - unless it is with a gummi bear sling...<br /><br />So I dunno - the holes sound kinda iffy - would the sticker sink into the hole, perhaps dimple oddly or even get torn?<br /><br />It is really sad we have to worry about fakers...I don't have any other easy solutions other than a mold change or no special PROOF distinction.<br /><br />G

Then drill and epoxy fill(obvious color diff), and sticker.<br />Visibly different, not easy to fake, and won't muss the sticker. Better?

oooo - I like the filled in hole idea...then put a holographic thingy in it...WOW J/K<br /><br />Good idea Sis.<br /><br />

Why not have a symbol etched into the coin side of the token you could have a machine do it so its really hard to reproduce at least cost effectively. That way you don't have to drill through the token.

The thing I keep going back to is time and effort...<br /><br />Are Proof tokens all that important?? - They are not worth too much hassle in my opinion, but I might be in the small minority.<br /><br />I'd be OK if they were exactly the same as the ones coming out later this year...

<br />Are Proof tokens all that important?? - They are not worth too much hassle in my opinion, but I might be in the small minority.<br />

<br /><br />I don't think they're worth the hassle, myself.<br />I think it's neat that we get the proof tokens early. They don't have to be different to be special.

i go along with making them the same as well.<br />

Personally, I'm of the opinion of its fine if they are the same.<br />I mean the fact that you get these at all, and early! is the real bonus. Those who are getting them have something to play with and anticipate when the tokens will finally be shipped out in a couple months. Its having your own personal sneak peek before anyone else who didn't preorder. <br />And was said, Jeff didn't have to share the proofs. The fact that he is, is pretty cool.

I'll jump on the bandwagon saying that I'm OK if the first print PURPs are exactly the same as the ones in May.  Proof tokens would be kind of neat, but it's certainly not worth a lot of effort or expense in my opinion.  I also agree that it's great of Jeff to make them available to us as perks for ordering tokens!<br /><br />I would like to see some change in the coin or sticker to differentiate each year's printing, but this year's tokens could be left exactly as is, and future years can show some sort of change to differentiate the printings.  <br /><br />Mike

oh, so there isnt a difference...  huh, not that it changes my want of them (i am getting them to use them), but the whole 'first-run' thing made me think there was something special/different about them (more than just when we get them), so i asked for the non-weapon to be my first-run token. ::shrug:: whatever.  though, i suppose this means i won't be able to trade my first run for a regular plus some other stuff? 

Again let me clarify (which Jeff seems to have confirmed).  Jeff got the proofs back and he wants to make a change to the embossment (reverse side) for aesthetic reasons, provided the manufacturer does not want to charge too much.  The molds are very expensive and I am pretty sure once Jeff is happy with the design, the reverse side will not change, at least not yearly.  <br /><br />If that change is made it will make the “proof” tokens unique as no more of that embossment can be made (can’t put the mold back, so to speak).  That is a side effect that is not the major driver of why the change may happen, but will make the proofs unique.  <br /><br />For year identification, any symbol, mark, or date will be on the “obverse” or image side of the token, my guess (based on the images I have seen) is this year is effectively the “blank” year for the new design.  Jeff had proposed calling it the “thorns” year based on the little projections attached to the dividing ring around the inside of the token, however I am not sure they were used consistently, or how creative we might be with border designs in the future.  A simple symbol is easier to manipulate in the various art programs (e.g. Photoshop) and would make more sense.  Unfortunately, for the collectors, we will probably cross that bridge when we get there, next year….<br /><br />Dave<br />