How many 16-D dimes are there?
cladking
Posts: 28,702 ✭✭✭✭✭
This is the most desirable coin in a very popular set. High percentages of these
will be slabbed when they come on the market to improve their salability. It would
seem after all these years that many would have been slabbed yet the numbers
are low.
In the late 50's is was possible to find the coins in circulation though highly improbable
because of the large numbers of people seeking the few remaining examples. 264,000
were made and in those days attrition in circulation was quite a bit lower than today
because a dime was a lot more money. It was probably the 40's befor most of these
started getting set aside by collectors and they were still in circulation in the mid 50's
as evidenced by the advanced wear that many display. There were some 1916 dimes
with extensive wear on the reverse in the mid-60's and some of these were likely to be
16-D's with the mintmark worn off. I always figured it was relatively few since so many
had been removed before the wear was so advanced.
I don't believe any of my arguments are dependent on this point, but am curious how my
views can differ so greatly from a knowledgeable collector's opinion.
Rather than hijack a different thread, I'll ask here. How many 16-D dimes do you believe
exist? Any insights would be appreciated even if they involve a different coin from the same
era.
Third paragraph added.
will be slabbed when they come on the market to improve their salability. It would
seem after all these years that many would have been slabbed yet the numbers
are low.
In the late 50's is was possible to find the coins in circulation though highly improbable
because of the large numbers of people seeking the few remaining examples. 264,000
were made and in those days attrition in circulation was quite a bit lower than today
because a dime was a lot more money. It was probably the 40's befor most of these
started getting set aside by collectors and they were still in circulation in the mid 50's
as evidenced by the advanced wear that many display. There were some 1916 dimes
with extensive wear on the reverse in the mid-60's and some of these were likely to be
16-D's with the mintmark worn off. I always figured it was relatively few since so many
had been removed before the wear was so advanced.
I don't believe any of my arguments are dependent on this point, but am curious how my
views can differ so greatly from a knowledgeable collector's opinion.
Rather than hijack a different thread, I'll ask here. How many 16-D dimes do you believe
exist? Any insights would be appreciated even if they involve a different coin from the same
era.
Third paragraph added.
Tempus fugit.
0
Comments
W.C. Fields
Using the standard 1 to 3 percent survival rates, a mintage of 264,000 would easily work down to 10,000 or fewer survivors. Coins from the teens and twenties got killed because of the Great Depression. People needed to eat and put a roof over their head, and they could not afford to set aside a lot of old coins, especially coins that carried the current designs.
Tom
had very low standards for the amount of wear permissable. This should
not have been a significant factor in drawdown.
The individual coins which represent attrition in a population are destroyed
by natural factors such as physical loss, burning, floods, or being sunk on a
ship. Many coins which are lost end up in the garbage stream or might get
recycled in an old car.
FrederickCoinClub
PCGS & NGC have slabbed about 2,400 and figure about 20% of them are resubmissions or maybe even fakes. Why 20%? I went back to 9/02 pop report and found most of the growth [8%] between then and now [9%] occurred in the AU-MS grades. I cannot believe these are "new" coins but resubmissions and maybe x-overs.
This is an exceeding rare coin more than most realize.
Fill in these blanks and you will have the surviving population, Sounds absurd, but this formula works for early U.S. coins.
I don't collect these, but I speculate the surviving population of 1916D dimes is quite high given the frequency of auction appearences.
NGC has ceritified 600+ so if you multiply that number by three to include the coins certified by PCGS and ANACS you're only at 1800 coins in all conditions. Multiply that by five if you like (generous in my opinion) and you get to BillJone's 10,000 surviving coins.
O.K., I did a lot of guessing but I think they are educated guesses. That said I seriously doubt that the number would be much higher (or even that high).
hey paul
i think the above is your biggest guess and one most likely to be wrong. the overwhelming majority of collectors don't use grading companies. you would probably be surprised how many have no interest in a professional grading company opinion, especially collectors who are 60+ and have been collecting for many years. JMHO from my neck-o-the-woods.
al h.
On the other hand, the G-4 grade is the predominent grade of surviving coins (my hypothesis) and while there is some incentive to slab these, they also get sold raw. Also, I think the surviving collections are far more likely to have Good coins what may or may not ever get slabbed. Just MHO.
I agree with the statement above. There are more 1909-S-VDB cents now than there were in 1909 and there may even be more 1916-D Mercs around than there were during the Great Depression.
And, yes, a lot of coins have gone down the tubes through the years. The mint's estimates for the average usefull life of a circulating coin used to be 20 years. It might be higher since the introduction of the clad coins. Of course with the current cent and half dollars it's about a week to two weeks because the darn things don't circulate. The just end up in jars around the house.
Among early large cents, a Sheldon variety in which there are say 3 thousand survivors is considered to be a VERY COMMON coin. Since most people don't collect Sheldon varieties, that keeps the price down.
Still, it does not take that many coins flood market once you think something is worth a few hundred dollars. Those of us who spend hundreds or thousands for a single coin are rare birds when you compare our numbers to the general population. That's why Proof sets from the 60s, 70s and 80s that have mintages in the low millions and survivial rates in excess of 90% are so darn cheap.
The 1794 dollar had a mintage of 1758 with 125 DOCUMENTED survivors (Collins study). Last year 2 new ones appeared that were not in the study. Thats a 7% survival rate.
The 1815 half dollar is the capped series key date, as a common R.1, most bust half experts have put the survivors at 1500. This is after years of tracking auctions and census data from the BHNC. This is a 3% survival rate, higher than other dates because it is the key date. The 1796/97 key date small eagle half dollars have a survival rate of 5%
How could US coins minted 100 years prior to 1916 have a higher survival rate than a 1916D dime? Consider these early coins were melted in great numbers due to weight standards changing for halves and dollars. How many coin collectors were there in 1850? How many in 1950?
I believe the survival rate for the 1916D dime is much higher than 3%, key dates have always had higher survival rates.
The 1916-D dime probably does have a little more 10 thousand survivors in collectable condition. The number of pieces that are available at shows would support that. But the numbers are not far from 10 thousand.
Yes, there were collectors in 1916, but how many of them really cared if the dime had a D mint mark? Mint mark rarity only started to be recognized in the 1890s, and coin collecting only became popular for masses at the end of the 1930s with the introduction of the penny board.
BillJones offered some insight but another factory is circulation. My guess is that dimes in the early 20th century circulated far more readily during the 30 ~ 40 years after the 1916-D was released then 1794 dollars and 1815 half dollars during the 30 ~ 40 years after there release. Coupled with the desire to hoard precious metal during that period as a store of wealth and I'm not surprised by the survival rates of these coins and don't beleive you can interpret the survival rates of 16-D's based on those survival rates.
They are more out there than you think, just tucked away and probably not a thought of being in the house till relatives find them after they pass away.
NEVER LET HIPPO MOUTH OVERLOAD HUMMINGBIRD BUTT!!!
WORK HARDER!!!!
Millions on WELFARE depend on you!
Lets try another angle:
Current ebay listing for 1916-D dime is 15.
Completed items listing for 1916-D dime is 34.
Current ebay listing for 1815 half dollar is 1.
Completed items listing for 1815 half dollar is 2.
The 1815 half dollar survivors is 1500. (even with error probably +-300). Using the ebay relationship to the 1916D shoud be about 15x, or 22,500 survivors.
So there are counterfeit 1916-D's on ebay? There were at least two bogus 1815 halves last year on ebay. It would all wash out.
This is hardly a scientific study, but I wanted to show the importance of auction appearance frequency to determining rarity. Using more information from the big auction houses over a period of time, and considering the average turn time for 16d's is probably low compared to the common dates, an in-depth study could probably get fairly close in determining survivors of 1916-D's. Forget the NGC/PCGS pops to determine total survivors.
About 15 1916-D's were sold on ebay in the past 15 days, assuming this is fairly constant that would be 360/year sold on ebay.
What percent of all 1916-D's all sold on ebay? Consider big 5 auctions, coins shops, shows, private deals. I would think even 10% would be high.
What is the average turnover rate for a 1916-D Merc? 10 years?
Using 10% and 10 years: 1/.1=10x360/year=3600total per year sales x 10 years average turn = 36000 total population.
If the 10% number is too high for ebay sales, any reduction would increase the total population. If the turn rate is more than 10 years it will increase the total population.
Just my opinion, I like to play with numbers.
WAY too large of an estimate. If the the coin were that common, the price of $400 + for a Good would never hold up. No, I'll stick buy the 10,000 neighborhood. That might be high too, but there's no way that there are 36,000 of them.
As you keep breaking down the subsets from collectors who would spend several hundred to few thousand for a coin, to the collectors who are that interested in Mercury dimes, you'll find the number gets much smaller than you might think.
determined they had a thirty year life expectancy. Which if my math isn't failing
me means that a date's population should be cut in half every thirty years In
practical terms though, when a coin gets too much wear then it's effectively gone
by numismatic standards. Clad coins are far more durable than the silver were
but have a far lower velocity (turn-over)(rate of circulation)also. Attrition rates
have been soaring due to the decreased buying power of a dime. Someone who
lost a dime would move heaven and Earth to retrieve an errant dime in 1933 but
may not even bend over for it today.
The 16-D did circulate without much interference from collectors until the 1940's
and then were pulled out for their premium. Virtually none of these dimes would
have been melted privately or in the government melt in 1968-9. Attrition rates
for 16-D dimes today is probably under .5%.
.5% range. Some dates are as low as .2% while others as high as say 1-2%. I would guess that the time in history and what was going on plays a big part in the ultimate survival rate. I'd doubt if less than 10,000 16D dimes still exist. That works out to be 200 pieces for each state in the union.
roadrunner
"Which if my math isn't failing me means that a date's population should be cut in half every thirty years In
practical terms though, when a coin gets too much wear then it's effectively gone by numismatic standards. "
I don't think you can relate life expectency and half-life! The second half of your sentence makes sense.
By comparison, consider the prices of 1881-cc and 1885-cc dollars from the GSA hoard. Nearly the entire mintage of those dates (296,000 for the 1881 and 228,000 for the 1885) were found in MS condition. In MS65 condition, the 1881-cc is a $500+ coin and the 1885-cc is a $600 to $700 coin. And Morgan dollars are perhaps the second most popular series to collect, with many collectors assembling subsets of CC coins.
In reality, mercury dimes were not saved or hoarded until 1965 when our coins were debased. By then most 1916 coins left in circulation were worn down to G or less grade and the D mintmark would have been obliterated as the lettering merged with the rim. Others had been removed from circulation by the Treasury years before when they became worn out.
Many millions of people save silver coins from circulation beginning in during the late 1960s. Most of those people were not collectors and did not have the patience or knowledge to search for rare dates. When the price got high enough, especially during the Hunt brothers bubble in 1980, large quantities of coins were sent to the smelter unsearched. Of course, there may be a bund of 1916-D dimes still sitting in private silver coin hoards held by non-collectosr who do not have clue what they are holding.
CG
were long gone by then though. There were not large numbers of coins of which one
couldn't tell if there were a mint mark or not and virtually none lacked a date. Usually the
difficulty was in trying to tell a D from an S. But again there were not large numbers of these,
and they were definitely preponderently S's and likely the D's were very underrepresented
since the D's had been removed from circulation BEFORE the late 50's.
The .5% attrition rate I suggested might apply to these coins today is an annual rate. By this
time next year, I would expect another .5% to have been destroyed.
Note that I don't say that they are in the numismatic pipeline- I would be surprised if much more than half the original mintage was (if that).
Those of us who are avid detectorists know where many of the desirable coins ended up, and they're still there, for the most part, sleeping in the ground, waiting for some lucky soul to swing a searchcoil over them...
'16-D dimes in the dirt? I reckon at least 5% of the original mintage ended up there, quite possibly more than that. And many of them are there still. That's more than ten thousand coins. It sounds mind-boggling, but if you consider the land area that they're spread over, it still makes 'em a rare find.
mike
W.C. Fields
The reason you and your buddies did not find and 16-Ds in your change is the same reason you did not find any of a number of other rare coins jingling in your pockets--they are RARE! If you and everyon else could just reach into his pocket and pick one out they would be common.
I too collected merc from my change, and I know that almost all of the coins from the teens were quite worn, mostly G or lower and on many the mint marks were mostly worn off.
Edited to add: There were many millions of dimes in circulation at any given time during the 1950s and 1960s, and the likelihood of finding a 35+ year old coin of which only about 260,000 were originally minted was remote.
CG
-7800 total surviving genuine examples.
-5200 FR1- VG
-1700 VG-XF
-900 XF+
about 800 total counterfeits.
Brian
from surveys, pops and auctions or did you employ other methods in addition?
800 total counterfits is way to low. Breen states that 10's of thousands were produced in the 1950's-1970's by various folks in LA and Milwaukee?. I guarantee that I have seen more fakes than reals.
peacockcoins
al h.
Dimes). Here it goes.
:Great Depression attrition: 175,000 (extreme minimum due to heavy circulation and melting).
:subtotal: 89,000
:second round of attrition from
the collecting boom of the 1950's
and examples re-entering circulation
during the recession of the 1970's 50,000 (extreme minimum)
: subtotal 39,000
: silver speculation by the non-
numismatic public 1980's 30,000
subtotal: 9,000
variance +/- 2000
poor storage/handling /whizzing/
circulation.
80% are less than XF:
surving examples in XF 1000-2500 +/- 800
Also, the same 800-1200 counterfeits keep changing hands and being rejected by the grading services,
about 1% probably bypass the grading services and make it into holders. I hope this helps.
Brian.
That was quite helpful indeed -
MorganBarber
...... There are many, many , nice, soon to be "fresh" coins in decades-old collections held by relatively well-to-do older folks. Why should a 65 year old man who has had his 16-D for 40 years suddenly have his slabbed. In the next 40 years, population reports for many better date and key coins will skyrocket as these coins enter the current market.
This stmnt makes little sense as an astute collector of so many years even would know better and have their coins slabbed, or rather would have had done that already. very few RAW collections are sold although it seems Stacks excells in doing just that! Population records to skyrocket - I don't believe so - not in this life - JMHO!
Marc
but a couple things bother me. Silver prices were very low during the depression so there
would be no reason to melt dimes for their silver. These coins hadn't been in circulation
long enough at that time to be extremely worn. (Remember, even the Barbers which were
still circulating rarely have so much wear today that the date is unreadable). So the only
losses to this point should have been normal attrition with a little extra drawdown due to
collector demand (This drawdown caused by collectors would be far more likely to still exist
since collectors treat coins far better than circulation). It wasn't until the mid-40's that the
coins started their mass exodus from circulation. -and again to the tender mercies of collectors.
The other problem I have with this whole line of thinking is this: If only 4% of some of the most
desirable and important coins of the era were saved. - If collectors carefully searched the circu-
lating coins of the day. - If they then saved these coins in the best possible condition. Then what
about the other coins of the era. The 17-D would have had EXACTLY THE SAME FACTORS working
on it except for the influence of collectors. 17-D dimes shouldn't be much more common than 16-D's
yet I've owned dozens of these. Why would high mintage coins survive in higher percentages?
Brian.
Totally false IMO.
Joe.
"These coins hadn't been in circulation long enough at that time to be extremely worn."
I'm not sure I'd go along with that statement. We're talking about a period in which nickels and dimes were probably the major circulating coins. You mentioned here or in another thread that coins typically survive in circulation for 30 years but I'd suggest given the lack of durability of silver and the time period that a higher attrition rate occurred with these coins and by the mid-1940's (approximately 30 years) the vast majority of the mintage would not be desirable as coins to save and placed in collections.
I still go back to the point about the numbers certified. Coins that were originally saved in collections have probably been turned over at least once and probably more. I believe the majority of the coins with numismatic value have been seen (again, probably 1500 ~ 2000 graded by one of the major grading services) and that most of what is raw (MAYBE another 6,000 - 8,000 coins) is not very desirable (with some exceptions) along with many counterfeits.
show far too small of numbers to account for so many missing 16-D's. The few
dimes which were being melted should have been largely of the Barber design.
I remember seeing 17-D's in circulation. They were fairly common and they were
usually very heavily worn. All of the pre 1920 issues were typically in AG or Fair,
with an occasional G or maybe VG. One was far more likely to see the commoner
dates in better grades and all the better grades were more likely to be damaged.
This was obviously a result of collector selectivity.
So we come back to the question of why a treasured coin (valued at $15 by '46)
would have a lower survival rate than common coins made at the same time?
I meant most of us would not go near 16-d raw at auction or whatever - not with a 10 foot pole - so if they were NOT slabbed over the course of last many years , along time collector etc. would not know if their coins were ever tampered with, counterfeit or fakes or whatever - and ulitametly a loss for the seller etc.
Marc
Whether or not the government can account for the 1916-D's that were removed from circulation and melted doesn't sway me as far as believing the attrition rate for this coins was extremely low. What happened to the coins may continue to be a matter of speculation BUT based on the relatively hard information we have regarding coins certified by the major grading services (with duplicates included), what is seen in the marketplace by some very knowledgable collectors and dealers, the authoritative work by David Lange of NGC and what I've studied regard surviving populations and pricing I'd be very, very surprised to find that the number of surviving 16-D's is much over ten thousand coins. That said the 100,000 you referenced is total out of the question (IMHO).
jom
What really happened is that there were many fewer coin collectors back then, the general public was far less attuned to the fact that rare coins could actually be found in circulation, and during the Great Depression most people sadly had to answer "No" when they were asked "Brother can you spare a dime."
A typical 30 to 35 year old silver coin such as a dime or quarter was quite worn down to lower grades--as is shown by the fact that a VF coin was valued at $15. Any that remained in circulation into the late 1950s and early 1960s would have been worn down to a ghostly shadow and in most cases the mint mark would have been worn away with the rim and legends.
As the coins wore out and were melted by the Treasury along with millions of other worn out coins. Funny that CladKing thinks the Treasury melted Barbers but not Mercs. The last Barber pre-dated the 16-D by only one year. No one at Treasury would have screened the coins by type, only by wear. As far as old Barbers still having their dates, I believe that is a factor of the design. The rims protected the date of Barber dimes pretty well. Merc rims did a poorer job of protecting the legends on the coin, more so in area of the mint mark on the reverse than in the area of the date.
CG
Lots of speculation on this post. The only known quantitive data we have is the high frequency of auction appearances, which indicates a higher population than 10,000.
Use facts and data, not speculation, to get the total population.
<< <i>Keets' research of the Redbook price of the 16-D in 1946 clearly shows that the coin was rare back then. The prices indicated ($15 in VF and $60 UNC) were high prices at the time. Had a very large number of coins been removed from circulation by that date or soon after, the price would have plummeted as coins would have been brought to dealers for sale from collectors and members of the public who had pulled them from their pocket change.
What really happened is that there were many fewer coin collectors back then, the general public was far less attuned to the fact that rare coins could actually be found in circulation, and during the Great Depression most people sadly had to answer "No" when they were asked "Brother can you spare a dime."
A typical 30 to 35 year old silver coin such as a dime or quarter was quite worn down to lower grades--as is shown by the fact that a VF coin was valued at $15. Any that remained in circulation into the late 1950s and early 1960s would have been worn down to a ghostly shadow and in most cases the mint mark would have been worn away with the rim and legends.
As the coins wore out and were melted by the Treasury along with millions of other worn out coins. Funny that CladKing thinks the Treasury melted Barbers but not Mercs. The last Barber pre-dated the 16-D by only one year. No one at Treasury would have screened the coins by type, only by wear. As far as old Barbers still having their dates, I believe that is a factor of the design. The rims protected the date of Barber dimes pretty well. Merc rims did a poorer job of protecting the legends on the coin, more so in area of the mint mark on the reverse than in the area of the date.
CG >>
Coin collecting was very popular during the depression. I believe one of Mr. Bowers articles
in CW pertains to this very fact. While dimes would have been beyond most people's finances
to collect, they'd have certainly been inclined to save a 16-D dime especially if it were a nice
example.
The tresury does not like to melt current coin and never did. They don't want to melt a dime in-
to a three cent lump of metal any more than private industry. There is absolutely no evidence
that the fed ever separated coins by wear to remove bad coin. Even the most highly worn coins
retain nearly 97% of their constituent metal, so why destroy them? All the coin which is redeemed
today and for at least the last 84 years has come back from banks, individuals, and the coin which
won't go through the counting machines at the member federal reserve banks due to damage.
Again I ask. Why would a rare coin disappear in higher percentages than a common coin when all
the factors which differentiate them lead to a higher survival rate?
Marc
New collectors, please educate yourself before spending money on coins; there are people who believe that using numismatic knowledge to rip the naïve is what this hobby is all about.