It looks fine to me. I don't think there is such a thing as an inherently "bad" or "good" mintmark position, only that some might be rarer and more interesting than others.
Young Numismatist • My Toned Coins
Life is roadblocks. Don't let nothing stop you, 'cause we ain't stopping. - DJ Khaled
In 1989 the Engraving Dept. was still adding mint marks to individual working dies by hand, which resulted in many mint mark positions from die to die. They started adding mint marks to circulation coin hubs the following year. Proof coin hubs started having mint marks back in 1985.
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
@CaptHenway said:
In 1989 the Engraving Dept. was still adding mint marks to individual working dies by hand, which resulted in many mint mark positions from die to die. They started adding mint marks to circulation coin hubs the following year. Proof coin hubs started having mint marks back in 1985.
Ah, so that explains it, thanks for providing the explanation. In 1989 when I used cash for nearly every purchase I noticed that the 1989 D cents had mintmarks in several different positions. I held on to them briefly because I found them very interesting, but ultimately spent them all knowing there was no numismatic premium.
Comments
It looks fine to me. I don't think there is such a thing as an inherently "bad" or "good" mintmark position, only that some might be rarer and more interesting than others.
Young Numismatist • My Toned Coins
Life is roadblocks. Don't let nothing stop you, 'cause we ain't stopping. - DJ Khaled
So, tell us what you think you've got there
BST: endeavor1967, synchr, kliao, Outhaul, Donttellthewife, U1Chicago, ajaan, mCarney1173, SurfinHi, MWallace, Sandman70gt, mustanggt, Pittstate03, Lazybones, Walkerguy21D, coinandcurrency242 , thebigeng, Collectorcoins, JimTyler, USMarine6, Elkevvo, Coll3ctor, Yorkshireman, CUKevin, ranshdow, CoinHunter4, bennybravo, Centsearcher, braddick, Windycity, ZoidMeister, mirabela, JJM, RichURich, Bullsitter, jmski52, LukeMarshall, coinsarefun, MichaelDixon, NickPatton, ProfLiz, Twobitcollector,Jesbroken oih82w8, DCW
I've always wanted to see a Lincoln cent with the mintmark erroneously stamped above the date. Still waiting.
Things were much more fun in the early 19th century when the drunken office boy was allowed to modify the dies on a whim.
That's where Denver wanted it.data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/0228a/0228a503c440c4ee8c250c854ecdc96f290f4839" alt=";) ;)"
The mm looks OK to me.... The cent looks like it has been messed with though... Cheers, RickO
If you look at the 1989-D’s in CoinFacts they all have the same look. It is larger than the D mintmark used to be.
- Bob -
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/4ea30/4ea30f479d7a94fd1ba2a2da02f9f073c1751b03" alt="image"
MPL's - Lincolns of Color
Central Valley Roosevelts
In 1989 the Engraving Dept. was still adding mint marks to individual working dies by hand, which resulted in many mint mark positions from die to die. They started adding mint marks to circulation coin hubs the following year. Proof coin hubs started having mint marks back in 1985.
See this forum:
https://www.ikegroup.info/forum2/viewtopic.php?t=184&sid=75044059b8c0c956181750c093a9ae4d&start=10
That bad mint make sure could use a time-out!
Ah, so that explains it, thanks for providing the explanation. In 1989 when I used cash for nearly every purchase I noticed that the 1989 D cents had mintmarks in several different positions. I held on to them briefly because I found them very interesting, but ultimately spent them all knowing there was no numismatic premium.