EARLY LINCOLN PROOF CENT POPULATIONS

Steve

I thought the attached population information might be of interest to some Lincoln cent registry members who are interested in or collect the early proof cents. Key points here are these early Lincolns are rare in comparison to current issues and that a rather large percentage of the Matte proof cents of 1909 thru 1916 and the 1936 are currently slabbed by PCGS, NGC or ANACS. My population numbers come from the online PCGS & NGC pop reports today and my copy of the August,2003 ANACS report. Steve

TimListon

Interesting. Two points.

I know I personally have cracked out and resubmitted at least 10 matte proofs. Some of my very earliest were in ANACS holders that I crossed to PCGS (quite successfully) and within the last year I resubmitted a couple PCGS 64RB's that I thought deserved better (and both came back PCGS 65RB) before I sold them. My10 or so is not a big dent in the 4,000 plus that are slabbed though.

More interestingly, isn't there some dispute as to the number of VDB's that were minted? 420 is the generally accepted figure, but some think maybe around 1200 actually were minted, if I remember right. But given the percentages slabbed, the 420 figure would seem to be much more likely. If 1200 were actually minted, the percentage slabbed would be more like a glaringly low, and very unlikely, 12% or so. Maybe those of you more knowledgeable than I can comment.

Tim

Steve

Tim,
Doug and I and others including Stewart have kicked around the 1909VDB proof mintage before. Seems that Kevin Flynn did some "research" for the book he and John Wexler wrote in 1996, "The Authoritative Reference on Lincoln Cents". In it, on pages 346 thru 356 he describes his theories about how the mintages reported were wrong. In the case of the 1909VDB he found a note in the national archives that said 1,194 of these coins were delivered from the metal room to the coiner on August 2,1909. From this he concludes that 1,194 were subsequently sold by the US Mint. He does similiar reporting on the other matte proof lincolns, but suggests only that the 1909VDB thru 1911 needed to be changed. Ken Bressert then changed the Red Book numbers. My feeling has been that Flynn's documentation has been flimsy at best, while the traditionally used numbers are supported by a number of US Mint sales documents. Coin World, among others, has gone back to the traditional numbers. Nobody can know for sure, but in the case of the 1909VDB Matte Proof, it seems very logical, based on the slab numbers, that the 420 total is closer to the truth than the 1,194. In the same book, Flynn also says there were two obverse and three reverse dies used in the production of the 1909VDB, but he shows no pictures of the diagnostics to support his conclusion. Leonard Albrecht, in 1983 published pictures and text on the Matte Proofs. Albrecht says there was one obverse and one reverse die and I believe the third party grading services are using his diagnostics to verify the legitimacy of this rare coin. Hope this helps. Good to see you on the boards again Tim. Steve

jacktheknife

Tim,
From your first comment it appears that you did not turn in your labels. If that's the case, why not?
As far as the 09-VDB Proofs, I believe the number 420 is accurate. If 1200 were minted, I would think there would be many more appearances of this very scarce proof Lincoln.

Jack

Cocoinut

Interesting stats. Matte Lincolns have never shared the popularity of their brilliant cousins. In the days before slabbing, many people (myself included) were reluctant to buy them because there were so many sharply struck unc.'s being offered as proofs. They have more of a tendency to turn brown than the brilliant proofs, so I suspect that many have been cleaned or some discarded (spent?) because they had lost their original color. I'd be surprised if even half of the 15,314 matte Lincolns are certifiable today. Compared to the 1936 proofs, they are a bargain.

The 1941 proof seems to be a fluke. The mintage is about a third higher than than 1940, yet fewer coins have been certified. It could be because for years the values of the 1941 and 1942 were so low ($60-$80 in PR65RD) that they weren't considered worth the cost of slabbing, but now PR64RD's are bringing more than that, so maybe more of them will be slabbed. I think the 1937-1942 dates are currently fairly priced; the 1936 may be a bit high.

Looking at the percentages of the original 1950-1952 mintages that have been slabbed makes me believe that there are a lot of sets that are still sitting around in Capital Plastics holders (plus a very few in original packaging). There must be a lot of gems extant and waiting to be certified, but apparently the demand just doesn't exist at this time, or people are reluctant to break up their sets. If only 1,686 of the 1950 proofs have been slabbed, that leaves 49,700 others. What would happen to the price of certified coins if just 10% of the total were slabbed? I've got to believe that these dates are overpriced.

All of the pre-1955 dates would be expected to have higher attrition rates than later dates, due to the packaging used by the Mint, and subsequent improper storage. (Were there any chemically inert holders available commercially before 1950? I believe Kointoins first appeared in that year.) And because copper is more reactive to its environment than nickel or silver, a larger percentage have become spotted or discolored to the point where they’re undesirable.

Thanks for providing some food for thought.

Jim

mozeppa

<< <i>
As far as the 09-VDB Proofs, I believe the number 420 is accurate. If 1200 were minted, I would think there would be many more appearances of this very scarce proof Lincoln.

Jack >>




seems that i heard that many coin collectors were disenchanted with matte finish on the proofs and many collectors couldn't
tell the difference between the business strikes and the proofs...so they spent them. many were worn out naturally in circulation.

might be wrong ....just thought i'd throw that in the fray.

michael

excellent thread and pop research steve


michael

merz2

As usual Steve your research is worth millions.If I were half as good,or the collector as you I'd know this stuff too.Thanks for sharing your research with us.

Merc

How many 1917 matte proofs were made? I've read 2 1917 proof sets were produced.

Steve

Nobody REALLY knows how many 1917 Matte Proof coins were made. Since it has been reported over the years, I tend to accept the fact that some were made, but certainly none were intended to be sold to collectors. No grading service has yet slabbed one, and that to me, is the defining point. If and when a 1917 proof is certified by PCGS, NGC or ANACS, I'll believe it for sure. Steve

cohodk

Here's a 1917 proof1917 matte proof on Ebay....cheap

Steve

<< <i>Here's a 1917 proof1917 matte proof on Ebay....cheap >>



And another "power seller" lets a unique coin go for $100. The buyer is just "bottom fishing" and the seller has already tried to get it slabbed by PCGS, NGC or ANACS imho. Believe me, if it was slabbed it would go in auction to one of our fine friends on these boards for..............$25,000??? What do YOU think? Steve

DMWJR

Steve, excellent post!!! Thanks for taking the time to do it.

I have to believe that there were only 420 vdb's minted. Circulation vdb's were hoarded at the time. Why wouldn't the proofs be coveted at the same time? Anyway, I think Steve's earlier spreadsheet regarding mintage figures is dead on . . . to the penny!

cohodk

DMWJR

The 1917 would be north of $100k.