What's wrong with this PCGS insert?

seanq

No prize, just bragging rights... and if we're lucky a multi-page thread debating whether PCGS is really "wrong" on this one or not.




Sean Reynolds

pharmer

It's a variety, not an error.

DennisH

Shouldn't it say "Doubled Die Obv" instead of "Double Die Obv"?

By the way... great photo!!

seanq

<< <i>Shouldn't it say "Doubled Die Obv" instead of "Double Die Obv"? >>



Bingo! I got three coins back on a Mint Error submission with the same text. It's a nitpick but also a major pet peeve of mine.



<< <i>By the way... great photo!! >>



Would you believe it's a scan? Ihave a six-year-old Epson scanner at work, with the cover open it can capture slabs like nobody's business.


Sean Reynolds

morgannut2

At least they didn't leave a fingerprint!

DMWJR

with the cover open it can capture slabs like nobody's business

I hadn't thought of that . . . I know what I'll be doing at the office tomorrow . . .


Two answers, both right:

1. not an error, but a variety
2. Doubled is the correct wording

I didn't know they would put the FS# on the mint error submission like that. I have some I need to send in then.

oreville

Personally I think if PCGS used the term doubled die obverse for the major doubled die variety (usually #001) and distinquish it from the other more minor doubled die obverse with the use of the term: FS# 034 DDO Variety, then it would be much easier for collectors and PCGS alike to distinquish the major doubled die obverse (or reverse) from the minor DDO's or DDR's. Of course, the line mint error should be removed.

In summary: "doubled die obverse" (reverse) for the major variety.
The use of the acronym "DDO (DDR) Variety" for the minor die varieties including the FS#xxx.

This might solve the interpretation concerns!