Hmm, not sure what any of your last post has to do with Kras' routine, as it read like you trying to stamp into me your incoherent points.
Perhaps you aren't aware that resolution...or denouement is the same as "the end". In literary terms, and building plots, these terms are used. Perhaps if you read a book, you would know...oh, but you are too busy listening to unpopular music?!
Well, so I can spell it out for you - the difference between music/film and close up magic is many - the audience is usually not willingly suspending their disbelief...that you are using more than just once sense...to name a few. So although their is overlap, magic overlaps with many things...and I just didn't want to get into that analogy discussion, and just focus on magic.
The full circle concept existed in the effects you named, and I gave you credit, however, it doesn't in the routine we are supposed to be discussing...umm, there is a routine we were discussing here right?
Your last paragraph was you trying to take a stab...you just come across like a big douchebag. Look, I obviously understand conviction, but what does that have to do with how people think about coin magic. They may truly believe a coin is in your hand, but when it is gone, they don't believe it went to the heavens...they believe it is hidden somewhere.
Which leads me to Scott's concept - Ghost is just an unfinished version of deck to pocket. Now, I worked for years doing David Williamson's deck to pocket. When I would pull the cards out of my pocket, they would say, "How did they get into your pocket"? The answer...I jammed them in there. However, with some reconstruction, I realized that it was about timing. Where did the cards go...which is asked in Ghost - some random guy doing it poorly below to prove the point...and the question..."but where did the cards go"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GYpCwioDg0Y
I learnt when I resolved that question in a magical way, it had a more satisfying ending for the audience. If they reappear in a box that was empty, or even out of your pocket at that point if it fits the plot (it doesn't in Stone's effect).
The question...where did it go...will always be asked in their head, or out loud, which is fine. I guess you don't feel the need to answer it, but showing it went somewhere amazing, I feel gives the effect more meaning.
I find it odd that you don't see the value in the reproduction of the coin in an impossible spot - in both a plot growth and building concept.
So to iterate:
Coin vanishes...is reproducted in other hand
Coin is dropped...rewinds to float to other hand
Coin is vanished...and THE END?
I don't see this as a satisfying ending, but that is me, especially because the phases build to that point, but I don't see how half the first phase is more amazing then the previous two? Can you explain that to me?
This is what we are talking about, right?