I can not understand the reason for putting 2005 SMS coins in general circulation sets.

WaterSport

Regardless of their popularity the use of 2005 SMS coins for registry circulation strike sets makes no sense to me. These coins were only put in mint sets and were not intended for general circulation. Under the rules of the PCGS registry SMS coinage has always been placed under sets with varieties. While you can post either SMS coins or business strikes for 2005 in circulation sets, it is inconsistent with the previous requirements that SMS coins can only be posted in variety sets. I for one would like PCGS to restrict SMS coins to variety sets. What’s your opinion?

WS

halfnut

I have the same concerns I cannot put a 65-67 SMS coin in my Circ Kennedy set so why can I put a 05 SMS coin in now were is the differents between the two. A circ set should be just that.

wondercoin

WS: I do not think the issue is as "cut and dried" as you suggest.

IMHO, First, the coins are not "SMS" coins exactly along the lines of 1965-1967 coinage or 1997 nickels- they are "Satin Finish" coins. Second, these "Satin Finish" coins have been reported as being distributed by the Mint in their regular sales of bags and/or rolls of coins for general circulation. Third, it has been suggested by a few advanced collectors of the various MS modern series that even some of the 2004 dated coins from the Mint Sets (especially "d" mint coins) appear to have had a somewhat different texture surface than 1999-2003 coinage (just look at the scores of MS69 state quarters graded in 2004 as compared with -0- for all of 2003 for example). Did the Mint(s) experiment a bit with the concept of a new surface texture in 2004 with what became known as "Satin Finish" in 2005? Fourth, since the inception of the state quarter program in 1999, the Mint Set produced coins have had a very different surface texture than the roll coins in near all cases - seasoned veterans like Donn Murphy and Doug Rall (tied for #1 in the series) as well as myself can easily identify in most cases a 1999 high grade Mint Set produced coin as compared to a high grade roll coin for example. Indeed, I can show anyone a 1999(p) CT in PCGS-MS68 "roll coin"with a frosty textured surface and, at the same time, I can show you a 1999(p) CT "mint set" coin in either PCGS-MS67 or PCGS-MS68 with the typical either semi-PL or glossy surface. They look "night and day". For these and other reasons (including the reality that some coins will naturally be mislabeled along the way potentially greatly impacting price and frustrating collectors of the series) I am personally less troubled by PCGS' current treatment of the coins in the registry circulation strike set. Although, I have an open mind to the issue of whether both SF and non-SF coins should be included in the registry set(s).

Wondercoin

WaterSport

WonderCoin that is excellent information that educated me a lot. If they are made for general circulation than the question I would have is should we list both types? Of course what the plans are for satin finishes at the mint the coming years would also be good to know.

WS

LincolnsRule

This just stinks all around. I wish the mint left the mint sets alone and put in coins like you would spend. I thought that was the whole point of a mint set.

rb7557

Thanks Mitch. I think a lot of the confusion comes from the labeling from different grading services. NGC is using the term SMS on their slabs. What frustrates me the most, is pcgs will not let us enter both types of strikes into the registry, and if you ask them about it in
the Q & A forum, you just get ignored (at least I did). That just may be their way of not dealing with the issue due to the fact that they haven't decided what to do yet, but IMO not answering that particular question raises more questions when a simple "its in the works but not decided yet" would have made me feel better. Maybe its time for them to take the sets to the next level and maybe give us the
choice of continuing a set with whichever style of strike we want, or a set that includes both "business and satin finish" strikes. Not sure
what kind of problem this would raise for the weighting and points of the set. But I for one would like to list both styles. I also understand that if they do this for 1 series of coins, they have to do it for the rest of the circulating sets. And it would be a + if they could get their data
base straightened out on the pops of the different strikes.

RB

ellewood

Wondercoin is always packed with knowledge isn't he? WOW. Thanks for sharing. I never knew that about the 2004 coins.

The bottom line here is that many people will always have different opinions...and it's impossible for PCGS to please everyone. I, on the other hand, sort of agree that they have it right FOR THE TIME BEING. The way it is set up now gives us to option to put either version in our sets and does not force us to put four different types of lincolns in our set every year after this. It really does not give one person an advantage over the other and that's whats important. One thing that I have wanted to do (but haven't gotten around to it) is to pursue some of the 2005 P & D in regular finish...those in high grades might be worth something down the road because they are MUCH harder to find. Watersport, have you found any?

I heard someone say the other day that they needed to get 20+ MS quarters for 2005...because they need to get the reg. circ AND the satin finish. And that does not even include the proofs! Now THAT is ridiculous!!!

WaterSport

Ellwood, there have been 17 2005 P&D cents graded by PCGS so far..I own 7 of the 17. Unfortuntely 5 2005 P are MS 64! I have one 66 and 67 2005 D.

WS

Dan50

I also wish the mint would leave the mint sets alone. But every so often they seem to come up with what they think is a brain storm. To me it's more like a brain far*. Matte finish, Special Mint sets, Satin Finish, varieties each and every one. If it's not a business strike coin, forcing them into "Circulation Strike" sets is a bad decision. "Forcing" as in how many set owners will opt for lower grades in true business strikes, when they can get more points with SF graded coins?

Coinhog

I was hoping they wouldn't all the satin finish in the circ strike sets. It would have made my official state quarter mint rolls more valuable as they would have then become a primary source for high grade circulation strike specimens.

clackamas

An argument could be made that the SMS coins from the 60's rcvd a similar treatment as the circ strike dies, hence the confusion. To illustrate my point, 1968 a year that had no SMS coins has coins that are unmistakably SMS like. My MS67RD 1968-P, had it been dated 1967 would never get in a circ holder, it would be SMS'd every time, same with my high end quarters that would go SMS CAM. I think that the satin finish is the same deal. True circ coins are getting disregarded and will be very rare in the super grades.