Home› PCGS Set Registry Forum

The Lincoln Cent Varieties and weights are listed

STEWARTBLAYNUMISSTEWARTBLAYNUMIS Posts: 2,697 ✭✭✭✭
in PCGS Set Registry Forum

Both BJ and Hep Daddy Hall have been working on the varieties that werer promised and are now listed in the Lincoln cent categories.Please post your feedback

Stewart Blay

Comments

  • mdwoodsmdwoods Posts: 5,547 ✭✭✭
    I thought PCGS was recognizing the 36 DDO die 3 Lincoln too.
    National Register Of Big Trees

    We'll use our hands and hearts and if we must we'll use our heads.
  • dldallendldallen Posts: 359 ✭✭
    Can't speak for the Wheats but the Memorial varieties are interesting to put it nicely. Kind of pisses me off when we went through this a long while back, DH wouldn't consider the 1960 Large/Small Date even though it has the highest population of the four new varieties added. Of course I sold the useless coin to upgrade others and now it's required to fulfill his new idea of a variety set.

    Another thing is the weighting is totally hosed. These four new varieties with a total POP (all four together in all colors and grades) of less than 100 carry the same weight (4) as the 1972 DDO with a POP of over 2,000 coins in all grades. Doesn't seem like much of an incentive to rush out and complete the set.

    Seems like a waste to me. Hope you folks are happy with the Wheats - I was never meant for the variety game in those. Dave
  • GerryGerry Posts: 456 ✭
    Mark:

    Re "I thought PCGS was recognizing the 36 DDO die 3 Lincoln too." The pop on that one just went to 4 this week. The cutoff for inclusion in the registry is 5. It will be there before too long. Regards.

    Gerry


  • STEWARTBLAYNUMISSTEWARTBLAYNUMIS Posts: 2,697 ✭✭✭✭

    I was informed by David Hall that he is also recognizing the
    1960 sm/lg date in the Proof Memorial series

    I am also lobbying to get the 1922 weak D and the 1922 no D weak reverse either completely off the variety set or the weighting down to 1 ( one ) each.It would be a shame to see someone pay $39,100 for a 1922 weak D.

    stewart

  • clackamasclackamas Posts: 5,615 ✭
    This listing in my opinion is about as lame as you get with varieties. PCGS just plain sucks with variety designations and listings and this is another feeble attempt to appease people somewhat, I don't buy it.
  • perfectstrikeperfectstrike Posts: 677 ✭✭
    Guess I did the right thing a while back. I took a liking to the 1960 proof varieties and located a bunch. Now I've got a reason to cross these NGC 1960's. Anybody got a real nice FS-023 quad die example? Hoping for PCGS to recognize this one would be too much.

    perfectstrike
  • STEWARTBLAYNUMISSTEWARTBLAYNUMIS Posts: 2,697 ✭✭✭✭

    Perfectstrike - Teletrade just sold one as lot 1068 in the February 10th Auction.It brought $220 as an NGC Proof 67

    Stewart
  • StoogeStooge Posts: 4,668 ✭✭✭✭✭
    It seems to me that everyone is missing the (7) 1982 varieties. I don't understand why these are not recognized.

    Paul.

    Later, Paul.
  • dldallendldallen Posts: 359 ✭✭
    Paul,

    I imagine it's because PCGS would have to "retool" before trying to rectify the 1982 varieties. They already have over 470 of them slabbed and each would require being sent back for proper attribution and reslabbing. At who's cost? I can assure you PCGS is not going to foot that bill! Be careful what you wish for - you might get it!

    Seriously, I understand and agree that they are a peculiar group for that year that qualify as varieties. Will be interesting to see how it plays out at our favorite 3rd Party Grading firm. Dave
  • mrpaseomrpaseo Posts: 4,753 ✭✭✭
    dldallen,
    Please do not hold back, tell us how you really feel...image

    I feel you brother.

    Ray
  • lincolnSencelincolnSence Posts: 407 ✭
    clackamas - I don't fully understand what you are saying. Could you please elaborate on your statement as to what you might have expected.
  • clackamasclackamas Posts: 5,615 ✭
    lincolnSence - If your going to do a variety set, all or many of the major one DDO's should be included not just the lame few that PCGS has listed, which is just a fraction of the well known varieties. Some of these are easy to obtain and others are much harder. By including a much broader selection it gives many a chance to compete and would enhance the collection of varities. PCGS is IMO lame in recognizing varieties and the variety registry should be a hard goal to finish since its the ultimate collection of any series.

    Here are just a few of the coins that are not listed but should be.

    lincolnSence

    1909 VDB DDO
    1927 DDO
    1934 DDO
    1935 DDO
    1938 S/S/S
    1939 DDO
    1942 DDO
    1942 S/S/S DDO
    1943-S DDO (1-O-IV and 2-O-IV)
    1947 DDO
    1951-D DDO
    1955-D DDO


  • STEWARTBLAYNUMISSTEWARTBLAYNUMIS Posts: 2,697 ✭✭✭✭

    Clakamas,

    It appears that you are looking for not only a double die set but you also want an RPM variety set.The 38 s/s/s and the 42 s/s/s are clearly RPM's.Then what about the 38 s/s and the 57 d/d and the 61 d/d etc. etc.It would be endless.
    Certain varieties that you listed I would need a microscope to find and if I use my imagination I may BELIEVE is a double die such as the 1934 double die.
    If you want to collect EVERY variety as listed in the Cherry Pickers guide.......then you can collect them in the holders across the street.
    However I don't think you should describe as LAME what PCGS has done regarding the varieties set.To quote David Hall:
    Rarety is not the only consideration,We look at price in all grades,price at the highest end,rarity in all grades,rarity on the high end and the nebulus concept of "importance".
    I also agree that the 1909 vdb DDO should be recognized!!!!!

    Stewart
  • onlylincolnsonlylincolns Posts: 55
    I agree the 1922 no D weak and the 22 weak D should not be included. I'll vote for the 1909 VDB DDO to be included.
  • clackamasclackamas Posts: 5,615 ✭
    Stewart,

    First point, yes some of the ones I listed are RPM's, but they are varieties the last time I checked and they happen to be the very coolest of the OMM varieties. Second point, the 1934, you do need help in seeing the doubling, so then don't include it, but the vast majority are clearly visible with the naked eye. Much more so than the 41 DDO. With all do respect you are wrong, and PCGS is lame on varieties and has put little effort into this. The new variety set is just a regurgitation of the same old varieties that PCGS has recognized for years and the fact it took so long to come up with this proves my point, severe lameness.
  • STEWARTBLAYNUMISSTEWARTBLAYNUMIS Posts: 2,697 ✭✭✭✭
    Clakamas,

    First I would like to say that you are the coolest dude that I have never met.
    Since I am wrong I would like you to educate me.Can you provide me with any auction sales for the 1927 DDO,1935 DDO,
    1939 DDO,1942 DDO,1951 D and any of the other "varieties" that you listed?
    Since you are so critical of the 1941 DDO,I ask you to look in the Heritage Auction for June Long Beach.The 1941 DDO in ms 66 red is already bid at over $2,000.
    I own many 1938 s/s/s encapsulated by ANACS and have sold many ms 66 reds for about $40 each.Do you need one?
    Lastly I would like to praise you for having one of the best eyes in Numismatics as you are able to see things that virtually all mumismatists I know are unable to detect.

    Stewart
  • wondercoinwondercoin Posts: 16,974 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Paul, I imagine it's because PCGS would have to "retool" before trying to rectify the 1982 varieties. They already have over 470 of them slabbed and each would require being sent back for proper attribution and reslabbing. At who's cost? I can assure you PCGS is not going to foot that bill! Be careful what you wish for - you might get it! Seriously, I understand and agree that they are a peculiar group for that year that qualify as varieties. Will be interesting to see how it plays out at our favorite 3rd Party Grading firm. Dave"

    Dave/Paul: THERE IS NO QUESTION IN MY MIND PCGS SHOULD SEPARATE OUT THE (7) 1982 LINCOLNS AS (7) DIFFERENT COINS IN THE SET. I asked R.M. to do this way back when and he said "no". But, RM never favored this sort of thing. Meanwhile, they now have 470 coins to deal with. What are they waiting for 4700 to deal with? PCGS should recognize their miskake and begin recognizing these ASAP AND BECAUSE IT WAS PCGS' MESS UP - ALL REDESIGNATING OF THESE 7 VARIETIES SHOULD BE AT NO CHARGE TO THE SUBMITTER.

    IMHO -

    There are only a relatively few serious collectors and dealers out there today that begin to understand the scarcity of MINT STATE Memorial Cents. This is going to be a HUGE area of submissions for PCGS down the road, likely surpassing wheat cent submissions. People are going to look back and kick themselves for not pursuing many of these dates when they had a chance (in the same manner the 1936-1958 wheats were ignored for years and now look).

    PCGS can still get this right and change the 1982 into the 7 varieties - or wait for another 2 or 3 years and "piss off" serious Memorial Cent collectors even more. Unfortunately, this honest but brutal writing style is the only thing that PCGS ends up listening to- as RM had his chance to get this right and punted (sorry Rick - you know I love you, but you were dead wrong here).

    Written to make PCGS even a better company than it is.
    Wondercoin

    Please visit my website at www.wondercoins.com and my ebay auctions under my user name www.wondercoin.com.
  • STEWARTBLAYNUMISSTEWARTBLAYNUMIS Posts: 2,697 ✭✭✭✭

    Mitch

    I guess MAYBE I do not understand the SCARCITY of MINT STATE MEMORIALS. Are you referring to the fact that most are non existant as ms 67 between 1959-1973. You know and I know they are available in ms 66 by the box at about $25 or less per coin.

    Stewart

  • wondercoinwondercoin Posts: 16,974 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Stewart: Yes - indeed, I believe MS67 is the turning point for many of the coins in that time period you mentioned. No different than say a 1946(p) or 1951(p) Lincoln in PCGS-MS66RD and its MS67RD counterpart at roughly 75x-100x the price, to name just a few.

    I do not desire to debate the point with you (and I recognize you are tops in the "Wheat Cent" field and tell everyone I know the same thing) - my hope is that PCGS steps in and does what is right as far as 1982 Lincolns is concerned. I have little doubt that the MS Memorial Cent collection will be a very imporant series as this decade unfolds image Wondercoin.

    Please visit my website at www.wondercoins.com and my ebay auctions under my user name www.wondercoin.com.
  • clackamasclackamas Posts: 5,615 ✭
    Stewart.

    Actually there is a 1939 DDO at the Heritage Long beach auction. However it is listed in the "error" coin section. The fact that there are few if any auction sales does not mean a coin is not a collectable variety. When was the last time a 1936 DDO fs 014 came up to auction? I have 2 do you want one? I have about 15 38 S/S/S's as well, common yes, cool yes. Because they are common does this mean they are not a cool variety? How many do you have in MS67RD?

    As for the 41 DDO, I thought one sold at FUN for $4k but I may be wrong. However I do know who found that coin and sold the 2 lesser of the 10 he has on Ebay one went 65RD and the other 66RD. He has more do you want one? I like this variety and believe it should be included but this does not lessen the lameness of the varieties that PCGS recognizes and IMO the shallow depth of what should be the ULTIMATE collection, the variety set.
  • GerryGerry Posts: 456 ✭
    If PCGS started to recognize the 7 1982 varieties, it would be a simple matter to carry 9 items in their pop report – 1982 and 1982D without a variety designation and then another seven with the variety designation - 1982 LDC, 1982 SDC, 1982D LDC, 1982 LDZ, 1982 SDZ, 1982D LDZ and 1982D SDZ.

    Over time if someone wants to resubmit an undesignated 1982 or 1982D for the variety designation, they simply submit it to PCGS for regrade – I would think a reslabbing fee should be sufficient. If someone doesn't care, then they need not resubmit.

    ANACS has done this with many issues – once they recognize a variety they continue the undesignated along with the new designated categories in their pop report.

    The 1982 varieties are relatively easy to ascertain, though sometimes I wonder. I’ve seen NGC coins slabbed and labeled as 1982D SDC – either a mistake or someone tiptoed it out of the mint and it’s worth a fortune! I'll bet you'd be interested then, Stewart! image Here’s a similar example that's on eBay right now:

    Whoa!

    By the way, at one time or another, I understood that the Red Book was THE book to decide whether PCGS recognized a variety or not. See page 102 of the 2002 book - there they are - all 7 1982 varieties.



  • STEWARTBLAYNUMISSTEWARTBLAYNUMIS Posts: 2,697 ✭✭✭✭
    Gerry

    I think that you have answered my question.I can not think that any grader could ascertain each variety in twenty seconds.
    When I wanted to collect the 1982 series I went to Angel Dee's and bought the whole set ascertained by (Joe Blow) for $2.95 and was happy.Perhaps one day PCGS will grade 1982 in all varieties.
    As far as me being interested in a small date zinc 1982 d.....I don't think so..........but



    I am VERYinterested in a 1974 Aluminum cent

    stewart
  • GerryGerry Posts: 456 ✭


    << <i>When I wanted to collect the 1982 series I went to Angel Dee's and bought the whole set ascertained by (Joe Blow) for $2.95 and was happy >>



    Stewart - it slipped out - you HAVE bought some mint state memorials - and I thought that you would only pay one cent a piece for them! Only another 90 or so to go and you'll have a complete set. I'm sure you'll only buy them in top grade. You will then be known as the "King of the Memorials" as well "King of the Wheats." You will then think they have some value.

    image
  • lincolnSencelincolnSence Posts: 407 ✭
    "I am VERYinterested in a 1974 Aluminum cent"

    I am also interested!!!!!!!!!!!!! Please PM me.
  • GerryGerry Posts: 456 ✭


    << <i>"I am VERYinterested in a 1974 Aluminum cent" >>



    So is the Secret Service image
  • STEWARTBLAYNUMISSTEWARTBLAYNUMIS Posts: 2,697 ✭✭✭✭
    I am VERY interested in a 1974 Aluminum cent

    As a collector specializing in Lincoln cents I don't see why I couldn't own a 1974 Aluminum cent as it is basically a pattern.

    If the Secret Service has nothing better to do than go on a witch hunt looking for an experimental cent...........that would be pathetic.I would like to hear an acceptable reason why it is such a big deal.Is there a member of the Secret Service on this message board?

    Stewart

    Gerry - You know I collect memorial cents.I collect 1960 and 1960 d small dates,1969 s DDO,1972 DDO,1983 DDR,1984 double ear,and the 1995 DDO.What do you collect ?

    Lincoln sence - Do you have an Aluminum cent for me?
  • GerryGerry Posts: 456 ✭
    I quote from the Authoritative Reference on Lincoln Cents: “It is illegal to own pattern coins produced after 1916. Guidelines for the disposal of experimental pieces were outlined in 1910, Article 15, Section 11, of Amended Regulations Concerning Medals, Proof cents, Experimental Pieces, Hubs, and Dies. Regarding experimental cents, it says ‘Such experimental pieces shall be receipted for by the Director of the Mint, and if not adopted for regular coinage during the same year, shall be defaced by him and returned to the Superintendent, who shall cause them to be melted in his presence and that of the Assayar.’”

    In 1973 about 1.5 million of these aluminum alloy cents, dated 1974, were struck by the mint. Most were destroyed when the experiment was aborted. However, a number of the 1974 aluminum cents had been given to members of Congress, but NEVER returned to the Mint. So some are out there guys, for you to cherrypick. You need to be careful of those that have the Brooklyn Bridge and not the Lincoln Memorial on the reverse. But even if you find a legitimate example please remember that the Treasury Department, has clearly stated that to own or sell the 1974 aluminum cents is a violation of Federal Law.

    There is a example at the Smithsonian Institue. I doubt that even you, Stewart, could wrangle that out of them. But, if you do, please know that I for one will miss you. image
  • STEWARTBLAYNUMISSTEWARTBLAYNUMIS Posts: 2,697 ✭✭✭✭
    Gerry

    You're a scholar !!! Can you please give me an explanation why it is LEGAL to own a 1964 SMS pattern coin

    stewart
  • GerryGerry Posts: 456 ✭
    Stewart: I have no idea. Maybe they are not. It is reported that they came from the estate of a former employee of the Mint. Sounds suspicious. I guess I better not admit to having one. Or, maybe there is, after all, a special rule for memorials. image Gerry
  • sonofagunksonofagunk Posts: 1,349 ✭✭
    if it were legal, what does one think a 1974 Aluminum cent go for?

    eBay Error Sales
  • lincolnSencelincolnSence Posts: 407 ✭
    A 74 would be worth $25k to me anyday! PM me if you want to dump one. And I don't care if the SS is listening either. They should be working on national security, not old coins.
  • STEWARTBLAYNUMISSTEWARTBLAYNUMIS Posts: 2,697 ✭✭✭✭

    SOG - I up the bid to $27,500.......Done Deal ?

    Stewart
  • KeyrockKeyrock Posts: 961 ✭
    Regarding the varieties listed, should PCGS recognize the type II 44D/S and 36DD type II. They meet the population criteria. BTW, does this mean the 1933 dbouble eagle will be dropped since it's unique

    Rich
  • dpooledpoole Posts: 5,940 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Why weren't the Type 2 1998, 1999 and 2000 included? I thought there was a lot of strong sentiment for this.

    Here's a warning parable for coin collectors...



Sign In or Register to comment.