Numista notes that the 1994 coins have the K initial, without star, in both circulation and proof strikes. It also notes that it exists with a star after the K, but only on some proof coins. You should be aware that ALL 1994 coins carry the K with a star. There are none without the star.
I am responding to Sjoeland’s comments despite his being quite rude (false??????).
It is always difficult to prove a negative. When in Oslo recently I enquired about this at a couple of major dealers as, in the light of Numista, I wanted to find a coin with K without a star. I was told they did not exist. It seemed (seems) quite improbable that the proof coinage could come both with and without the star and Sjoeland makes no mention in his response about the proof. On the circulation coinage, it is quite possible there are both, despite what I was told; and it is also possible that a filled-die could be the reason. However, I note what Sjoeland has said and will continue to look for a circulation strike without a star.
Numista notes that the 1994 coins have the K initial, without star, in both circulation and proof strikes. It also notes that it exists with a star after the K, but only on some proof coins. You should be aware that ALL 1994 coins carry the K with a star. There are none without the star.
Stephen Eccles
(703) 508-8997
I have the 1994K and the 1994K* from the circulation, so don't say “There are none without the star”, since it's a false statement. It's not rude to say that, I think?
Now I'll take a look at, what Numista has understood.
Edit after verifying Numista:
The first year line is the K without star (circulation), the second year line is the 1994 without a star, but in Proof. The third year line is the circulation 1994 K* coin. Nothing wrong in that, as far as I see it?