1994, 1997, 1965-67 SMS problem

homerunhall

Hello Everyone,

We have had a few problems with 1994 nickels, 1997 nickels, and 1965-1967 coins. The SMS coins for those years come a lot nicer than the non-SMS coins. Very high grade examples of the non-SMS coins are very valuable. When people (dealers) submitt them to us they almost always use the non-SMS PCGS numbers, even though the coins are obviously SMS. We then simply change the PCGS number in the grading room and the computer then theoretically prints the correct insert...and if it didn't, the mistake would theoretically get caught in verification. Ocassionally, a few SMS coins have slipped thru the cracks and gotten into holders mis-attributed. This causes hard feelings and screwed up Pop figures. To correct this problem we have changed the computer input program such that the non-SMS coin numbers will no longer be accepted by the computer for these dates during the receiving process. The only way that a non-SMS example can now get out the door is if a grader physically changes the PCGS number in the grading room, i.e. the SMS number is now the required default number. This should keep this mis-attribution problem from happening in the future.

Thanks to Wayne Herndon and Mitch Spivak for their help on this problem.

David Hall

MadMarty

Does that mean I have to send back those MS69 Kennedys I just got!

Russ

You mean like the MS68 business strike 1964 Kennedy half that was really an SMS, and is still showing in the pop reports, even though it is now in an NGC MS69 specimen holder that...

Is being auctioned on Teletrade the 23rd of this month?

Russ, NCNE

WANNABEDEALER

Now that is a real specimen out of the 10 sets that were discovered some years ago. There is no mistaking these coins for business strikes or proofs.

homerunhall

Russ...correct as usual...David

wondercoin

David: Great idea to address the problem head on in the future.

Wondercoin

wayneherndon

David,

Thanks to you and PCGS for addressing the issue. All Mitch and I did was make sure it made it to your plate.

WH

Russ

DH,

Well, head on over and nuke that puppy! I plan to make an MS68 one of these days, and I don't want that fake one interfering with my joy.

Russ, NCNE

wondercoin

I also spoke to David today concerning the 1964 Kennedy Half in PCGS-MS68, which I believe does not exist. I supplied back up information to support the conclusion that the MS68 coin is really an SMS. I am confident after David's investigation, the 1964 Kennedy in MS67 will once again be "pop top".

Wondercoin

misterR

There is nothing I can do about the 65,66 and 67 dimes and quarters that I bought in original rolls. The rolls that I carefully examined for literally hours to send in only the most sharply struck mark-free examples. Most are coming back with SMS on the insert making them a total waste of time and effort. Thanks.

cladking

MisterR: How confident are you that the rolls were original? Were there large
numbers of near misses or just a few? Were there any coins struck by poorly
aligned and badly worn dies?

I have always suspected that used (and possibly new) SMS dies were used to
strike regular production dies, but all the examples I've seen have been circu-
lated. They are so common they shouldn't be too hard to find, but I haven't yet.

misterR

Cert # 90085203, a 1967 dime PCGS 68 SMS. Coin came from the same original roll as others I have submitted that came back as non-SMS. Worth approximately $10 with SMS on insert, worth $300 to $400 without.

dldallen

I second the thanks to Mitch and also extend my thanks to Gerry, Andy, and finally David for taking care of me and my "Pop Top" Lincoln which was really an SMS in disguise. They also took the time and effort to confirm, correct, and "make right" another Pop Top proof coin disguised in an MS slab.

The Pop reports are now correct, there are some new Pop Tops for the two coins, I'm happy with restitution, so keep on collecting! Thanks again all. Dave

misterR

<< <i>MisterR: How confident are you that the rolls were original? Were there large
numbers of near misses or just a few? Were there any coins struck by poorly
aligned and badly worn dies?

I have always suspected that used (and possibly new) SMS dies were used to
strike regular production dies, but all the examples I've seen have been circu-
lated. They are so common they shouldn't be too hard to find, but I haven't yet. >>

I am completely confident these were not SMS coins. Bought a large lot of dime rolls many different dates all were wrapped by the same collector about the time they were released from the mint. There were different die states mixed in the rolls, just like all rolls of business strike coins that I've seen from the 60s, 70s, 80s, and 90s. The conclusion I've come to is that no one, not even the graders at PCGS, can tell if a really nice 65,66 or 67 coin is a SMS or not and they have chosen to label it SMS if they are the least bit uncertain. I've personally had about a dozen erroneously labeled as SMS in the past year.

hughesm1

You mean like the MS68 business strike 1964 Kennedy half that was really an SMS, and is still showing in the pop reports, even though it is now in an NGC MS69 specimen holder that...

<FONT face=Tahoma color=#000080>Is being auctioned on Teletrade the 23rd of this month?</FONT>

Russ, is there a bit of doubling action going on on the 4? Or are my eyes playing tricks

Steve27

So now the errors will be made in the other direction, I don't see this as being much of a solution. It also doesn't explain the SMS nickels, which were submitted with the proper SMS coin numbers, but came back to the submitter as non-SMS.

Russ

Mark,

I don't think that's doubling, but rather a small imaging artifact, likely created by lighting reflectivity when shooting through the plastic of the slab.

Russ, NCNE