Well, you'll get a chance to see it at lot viewing at the Stack's/Bowers sale in Rosemont in August! TD
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
This coin made the front page of Coin World along with the quote "Notes the auction firm, "It is far and away the rarest United States coin since 1874 (the 1873-CC Dime is unique and thus rarer)."
PAH
"Publically Accepted Hype" since I can think of 3 modern coins which are "rarer" than the 1975 No S Roosevelt Proof which has at least 2 examples if not more.
I decided to change calling the bathroom the John and renamed it the Jim. I feel so much better saying I went to the Jim this morning.
The 1976 "No S" 40% Silver Bicentennial Dollar in Proof with the Variety Two reverse is unique. TD
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
Breen has this to say regarding the no S 1975 dime;
3793 1975 [S] No Mintmark. Proof. Ex. Rare, 2 Known. Discovered in a proof set in the Mint's sealed container. CW 2/22/78 p.1 ; NNW 3/11/78, p.3. The second example was described in CW 7/5/78
He says the 1968 and 1975 S less proofs are arguably the rarest of all 20th century dimes. Partly to avoid similar omissions, beginning in 1985 each years master die for proofs contains the S mintmark.
<< <i>The 1976 "No S" 40% Silver Bicentennial Dollar in Proof with the Variety Two reverse is unique. TD >>
Thats the one I was thinking of.
The two different prototype Ike's probably don;t count since they wouldn't be considered "error" coins or is this conversation strickly limited to "errors"?
I decided to change calling the bathroom the John and renamed it the Jim. I feel so much better saying I went to the Jim this morning.
I'd love to own it as A. It would be sweet to have a "rare" coin B. It's needed for my 65-present no s set C. It's my birth year for an extra added coolness bonus
However, I have a better chance of pulling a 1955 DD penny from a roll of dimes before I'll ever own it.
Positive dealing with oilstates2003, rkfish, Scrapman1077, Weather11am, Guitarwes, Twosides2acoin, Hendrixkat, Sevensteps, CarlWohlforth, DLBack, zug, wildjag, tetradrachm, tydye, NotSure, AgBlox, Seemyauction, Stopmotion, Zubie, Fivecents, Musky1011, Bstat1020, Gsa1fan several times, and Mkman123 LOTS of times
I say $50-55,000. The coin has never sold before. Some people cannot buy a coin without an auction record to reassure them. TD
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
If we are describing it as a die variety, then it's importance with the 1958 DDO Lincoln Cent. (I'd rather have the 1958)
If it is described as a wrong format (Philadelphia issue in Proof) then it looses some luster (pun!) This is the wrong description, 1- because it's not a Philadelphia issue, 2- It is not a wrong format (it's just a S-mint coin missing the mintmark).
I don't know if it can be described as a regular issue, like the 1873-CC no arrows dime. Is it part of a complete set?
<< <i>If we are describing it as a die variety, then it's importance with the 1958 DDO Lincoln Cent. (I'd rather have the 1958)
If it is described as a wrong format (Philadelphia issue in Proof) then it looses some luster (pun!) This is the wrong description, 1- because it's not a Philadelphia issue, 2- It is not a wrong format (it's just a S-mint coin missing the mintmark).
I don't know if it can be described as a regular issue, like the 1873-CC no arrows dime. Is it part of a complete set?
Can't wait to see it. >>
Just to pick nits, is the 1873-CC No Arrows dime a "regular issue?" They were never issued. The lone survivor is thought to have been rescued from the assay commission coins.
TD
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
I'm thinking above $100K, but less than $300K. I'd need more time to figure out a more precise figure, though I'd lean towards the lower half of that range.
I still think it will be around $60,000-80,000. It may be rare but the economy is sluggish and the series isn't as popular as a lot of others. However, all it takes is too bidders that want it to send it sky high.
Positive dealing with oilstates2003, rkfish, Scrapman1077, Weather11am, Guitarwes, Twosides2acoin, Hendrixkat, Sevensteps, CarlWohlforth, DLBack, zug, wildjag, tetradrachm, tydye, NotSure, AgBlox, Seemyauction, Stopmotion, Zubie, Fivecents, Musky1011, Bstat1020, Gsa1fan several times, and Mkman123 LOTS of times
<< <i>< Partly to avoid similar omissions, beginning in 1985 each years master die for proofs contains the S mintmark. >> Interesting. How did the 1990 no "S" cents slip through? >>
<< <i><< Partly to avoid similar omissions, beginning in 1985 each years master die for proofs contains the S mintmark. >>
Interesting. How did the 1990 no "S" cents slip through? >>
A Philadelphia cent die got sent.
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
<< <i>TD - Is it the nicer of the 2 in your opinion? Are they both roughly the same quality?
Wondercoin >>
It's been almost a third of a century since I saw the discovery coin, and my wayback machine is broken. Sorry. TD
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
There was a dealer in central IL who's now long retired who claimed to have owned one of the sets.
I can't help but think that there are more than just two of these. Someone somewhere has a set that's unaware of the missing MM or perhaps has a still-unopened box that contains more of them.
<< <i>There was a dealer in central IL who's now long retired who claimed to have owned one of the sets.
I can't help but think that there are more than just two of these. Someone somewhere has a set that's unaware of the missing MM or perhaps has a still-unopened box that contains more of them. >>
Quite possible, but not a fact. Add "possibly" to your statement after "somewhere" and you would then be correct. TD
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
<< <i>There was a dealer in central IL who's now long retired who claimed to have owned one of the sets.
I can't help but think that there are more than just two of these. Someone somewhere has a set that's unaware of the missing MM or perhaps has a still-unopened box that contains more of them. >>
Frank Volmer (sp) in Central IL was the feller that bought both the sets as far as I know ;
as for more of them out there ??
........you find me one and I will cough up 30 thousand dollars for it
<< <i>There was a dealer in central IL who's now long retired who claimed to have owned one of the sets.
I can't help but think that there are more than just two of these. Someone somewhere has a set that's unaware of the missing MM or perhaps has a still-unopened box that contains more of them. >>
Quite possible, but not a fact. Add "possibly" to your statement after "somewhere" and you would then be correct. TD >>
I'm thinking "probably" rather than "possibly"...
And yes, it was Fred Vollmer in Bloomington who I was referring to.
<< <i> I can't help but think that there are more than just two of these. Someone somewhere has a set that's unaware of the missing MM or perhaps has a still-unopened box that contains more of them. >>
The odds aren't as high as you think.
Everyone knows where most of these turn up and these get selectively searched. If a roll of '69 cents from Michigan comes to light people will jump on it and it's the same way with most other varieties. How many WI quarters in Tucson haven't been checked? How many '82-P dimes in Sandusky Ohio?
Rare coins are rare because there aren't many around. The odds of an unchecked box even from central IL having one of these is exceedingly low.
And keep in mind that even if there were some of these out there the odds are that the at- trition which they suffer will prevent most from ever coming to light.
In the old days coins got set aside all the time and they are still being found hundreds of years later. This just doesn't happen any longer because coins are just change now rather than significant amounts of money. No one will ever raise a wreck off Florida with hundreds of nice clad quarters or dimes on it. Even if it happened the coins would be a wreck too.
We get offered unopened boxes of 70s/80s proof sets fairly regularly throughout the course of a year. Many buyers who purchased multiples often would just open one box to peruse the sets and then stash it with the rest. Also, many buyers who aren't numismatists got them to give as gifts- and neither they nor the recipient necessarily looked at the set in more than a passing fashion. Plus, a missing mintmark on a dime doesn't exactly stick out like a sore thumb unless you're really looking for it with the eye of a collector. My point is that it is quite possible that more of these exist. I highly doubt that only two examples escaped the Mint.
<< <i>We get offered unopened boxes of 70s/80s proof sets fairly regularly throughout the course of a year. Many buyers who purchased multiples often would just open one box to peruse the sets and then stash it with the rest. Also, many buyers who aren't numismatists got them to give as gifts- and neither they nor the recipient necessarily looked at the set in more than a passing fashion. Plus, a missing mintmark on a dime doesn't exactly stick out like a sore thumb unless you're really looking for it with the eye of a collector. My point is that it is quite possible that more of these exist. I highly doubt that only two examples escaped the Mint. >>
Yes, that is my point. It is possible, but you cannot state as fact that there is another one out there.
TD
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
<< <i>We get offered unopened boxes of 70s/80s proof sets fairly regularly throughout the course of a year. Many buyers who purchased multiples often would just open one box to peruse the sets and then stash it with the rest. Also, many buyers who aren't numismatists got them to give as gifts- and neither they nor the recipient necessarily looked at the set in more than a passing fashion. Plus, a missing mintmark on a dime doesn't exactly stick out like a sore thumb unless you're really looking for it with the eye of a collector. My point is that it is quite possible that more of these exist. I highly doubt that only two examples escaped the Mint. >>
Yes, that is my point. It is possible, but you cannot state as fact that there is another one out there.
<< <i>We get offered unopened boxes of 70s/80s proof sets fairly regularly throughout the course of a year. Many buyers who purchased multiples often would just open one box to peruse the sets and then stash it with the rest. Also, many buyers who aren't numismatists got them to give as gifts- and neither they nor the recipient necessarily looked at the set in more than a passing fashion. Plus, a missing mintmark on a dime doesn't exactly stick out like a sore thumb unless you're really looking for it with the eye of a collector. My point is that it is quite possible that more of these exist. I highly doubt that only two examples escaped the Mint. >>
Yes, that is my point. It is possible, but you cannot state as fact that there is another one out there.
TD >>
Semantics. I'm sure most people understood the implied "probably" (or "possibly" if you wish) in my statement. Quite obviously I wasn't "stat(ing) it as fact" because to do so I would have to conclusively know of the existence of another set...and obviously I don't. At least not yet. I am sitting smack in the middle of cental IL however so hope springs eternal.
<< <i>We get offered unopened boxes of 70s/80s proof sets fairly regularly throughout the course of a year. Many buyers who purchased multiples often would just open one box to peruse the sets and then stash it with the rest. Also, many buyers who aren't numismatists got them to give as gifts- and neither they nor the recipient necessarily looked at the set in more than a passing fashion. Plus, a missing mintmark on a dime doesn't exactly stick out like a sore thumb unless you're really looking for it with the eye of a collector. My point is that it is quite possible that more of these exist. I highly doubt that only two examples escaped the Mint. >>
Yes, that is my point. It is possible, but you cannot state as fact that there is another one out there.
TD >>
Semantics. I'm sure most people understood the implied "probably" (or "possibly" if you wish) in my statement. Quite obviously I wasn't "stat(ing) it as fact" because to do so I would have to conclusively know of the existence of another set...and obviously I don't. At least not yet. I am sitting smack in the middle of cental IL however so hope springs eternal. >>
I'd guess there's less than a 20% chance more will be found but if more are found it will probably be 3 or 4.
There's another possibility when it comes to rare moderns and almost any coin made after the 1850's which are very scarce; there are more in private collections. Simply stated a significant percentage of some coins are just "missing". Fewer than 20,000 '16-D dimes are accounted for but the mintage and implied attrition suggest there should be many more out there and many in the mid-grades. Collectors have no read need to slab their coins so many don't.
A '75- No-s dime is not the kind of thing the average proof set buyer would want to hold onto for his collection but a wealthy proof set buyer might be in no particular hurry to sell it. It wouldn't be too surprising if another couple like this existed.
I'd guess about a 50: 50 chance of about two more existing.
<< <i>We get offered unopened boxes of 70s/80s proof sets fairly regularly throughout the course of a year. Many buyers who purchased multiples often would just open one box to peruse the sets and then stash it with the rest. Also, many buyers who aren't numismatists got them to give as gifts- and neither they nor the recipient necessarily looked at the set in more than a passing fashion. Plus, a missing mintmark on a dime doesn't exactly stick out like a sore thumb unless you're really looking for it with the eye of a collector. My point is that it is quite possible that more of these exist. I highly doubt that only two examples escaped the Mint. >>
Yes, that is my point. It is possible, but you cannot state as fact that there is another one out there.
TD >>
Semantics. I'm sure most people understood the implied "probably" (or "possibly" if you wish) in my statement. Quite obviously I wasn't "stat(ing) it as fact" because to do so I would have to conclusively know of the existence of another set...and obviously I don't. At least not yet. I am sitting smack in the middle of cental IL however so hope springs eternal. >>
An old friend of mine used to say that if you have to use the word "semantics" to defend your argument, you've "probably" already lost the argument!
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
Comments
TD
<< <i>Well, you'll get a chance to see it at lot viewing at the Stack's/Bowers sale in Rosemont in August!
TD >>
So, who's going to buy it? Anyone on the boards want to stake claim to it?
Looking for Top Pop Mercury Dime Varieties & High Grade Mercury Dime Toners.
PAH
"Publically Accepted Hype" since I can think of 3 modern coins which are "rarer" than the 1975 No S Roosevelt Proof which has at least 2 examples if not more.
The name is LEE!
TD
3793 1975 [S] No Mintmark. Proof. Ex. Rare, 2 Known.
Discovered in a proof set in the Mint's sealed container. CW
2/22/78 p.1 ; NNW 3/11/78, p.3. The second example was described in CW 7/5/78
He says the 1968 and 1975 S less proofs are arguably the rarest of all 20th century dimes. Partly to avoid similar omissions, beginning in 1985 each years master die for proofs contains the S mintmark.
<< <i>The 1976 "No S" 40% Silver Bicentennial Dollar in Proof with the Variety Two reverse is unique.
TD >>
Thats the one I was thinking of.
The two different prototype Ike's probably don;t count since they wouldn't be considered "error" coins or is this conversation strickly limited to "errors"?
The name is LEE!
any graded ? what grades ?
who own's one ?
Who wants to sell one ?
<< <i>so - whats known about these dimes ..............
any graded ? what grades ?
who own's one ?
Who wants to sell one ?
According to the Coin World article, the piece being offered in August was being evaluated and graded at PCGS at the time the magazinr went to print.
The name is LEE!
<< <i>........and where is the one coming up for sale ? >>
One of the Stacks-Bowers August Auctions at the ANA Illinois Show.
The name is LEE!
A. It would be sweet to have a "rare" coin
B. It's needed for my 65-present no s set
C. It's my birth year for an extra added coolness bonus
However, I have a better chance of pulling a 1955 DD penny from a roll of dimes before I'll ever own it.
....what level would we be talking ?
more then 100 thousand dollars ?
No, I haven't.
Would this one fit the term "scarce"?
The coin has never sold before. Some people cannot buy a coin without an auction record to reassure them.
TD
<< <i>I say $50-55,000.
The coin has never sold before. Some people cannot buy a coin without an auction record to reassure them. >>
I'm thinking along the same lines. A "common" 1894-S dime will go for one and a half million
but a much scarcer modern will be lucky to break $80,000.
There may be hundreds of them just waiting to be discovered in unopened boxes.
<< <i>I say $50-55,000.
The coin has never sold before. Some people cannot buy a coin without an auction record to reassure them.
TD >>
I'm thinking more like $75,000. I collect Roosevelt varieties, and if I had the money, that's what I'd be willing to pay.
Steve
If it is described as a wrong format (Philadelphia issue in Proof) then it looses some luster (pun!) This is the wrong description, 1- because it's not a Philadelphia issue, 2- It is not a wrong format (it's just a S-mint coin missing the mintmark).
I don't know if it can be described as a regular issue, like the 1873-CC no arrows dime. Is it part of a complete set?
Can't wait to see it.
<< <i>If we are describing it as a die variety, then it's importance with the 1958 DDO Lincoln Cent. (I'd rather have the 1958)
If it is described as a wrong format (Philadelphia issue in Proof) then it looses some luster (pun!) This is the wrong description, 1- because it's not a Philadelphia issue, 2- It is not a wrong format (it's just a S-mint coin missing the mintmark).
I don't know if it can be described as a regular issue, like the 1873-CC no arrows dime. Is it part of a complete set?
Can't wait to see it. >>
Just to pick nits, is the 1873-CC No Arrows dime a "regular issue?" They were never issued. The lone survivor is thought to have been rescued from the assay commission coins.
TD
Ed. S.
(EJS)
my 150 k level is looking good !
<< <i>now were getting some where ;
my 150 k level is looking good ! >>
That's the figure that comes to mind for me as well.
Stewart Huckaby
mailto:stewarth@HA.com
------------------------------------------
Heritage Auctions
Heritage Auctions
2801 W. Airport Freeway
Dallas, Texas 75261
Phone: 1-800-US-COINS, x1355
Heritage Auctions
Interesting. How did the 1990 no "S" cents slip through?
My Adolph A. Weinman signature
<< <i>< Partly to avoid similar omissions, beginning in 1985 each years master die for proofs contains the S mintmark. >> Interesting. How did the 1990 no "S" cents slip through? >>
Breen was speaking about Dimes here.....
<< <i><< Partly to avoid similar omissions, beginning in 1985 each years master die for proofs contains the S mintmark. >>
Interesting. How did the 1990 no "S" cents slip through? >>
A Philadelphia cent die got sent.
Franklin-Lover's Forum
Wondercoin
<< <i>TD - Is it the nicer of the 2 in your opinion? Are they both roughly the same quality?
Wondercoin >>
It's been almost a third of a century since I saw the discovery coin, and my wayback machine is broken.
Sorry.
TD
<< <i>i can not find anything about this coin @ Heritage ...............what am I missing ? >>
The coin is in the ANA auction being held by Stacks-Bowers.
There are auction houses other than Heritage.
An authorized PCGS dealer, and a contributor to the Red Book.
I can't help but think that there are more than just two of these. Someone somewhere has a set that's unaware of the missing MM or perhaps has a still-unopened box that contains more of them.
RIP Mom- 1932-2012
<< <i>There was a dealer in central IL who's now long retired who claimed to have owned one of the sets.
I can't help but think that there are more than just two of these. Someone somewhere has a set that's unaware of the missing MM or perhaps has a still-unopened box that contains more of them. >>
Quite possible, but not a fact. Add "possibly" to your statement after "somewhere" and you would then be correct.
TD
<< <i>There was a dealer in central IL who's now long retired who claimed to have owned one of the sets.
I can't help but think that there are more than just two of these. Someone somewhere has a set that's unaware of the missing MM or perhaps has a still-unopened box that contains more of them. >>
Frank Volmer (sp) in Central IL was the feller that bought both the sets as far as I know ;
as for more of them out there ??
........you find me one and I will cough up 30 thousand dollars for it
<< <i>
<< <i>There was a dealer in central IL who's now long retired who claimed to have owned one of the sets.
I can't help but think that there are more than just two of these. Someone somewhere has a set that's unaware of the missing MM or perhaps has a still-unopened box that contains more of them. >>
Quite possible, but not a fact. Add "possibly" to your statement after "somewhere" and you would then be correct.
TD >>
I'm thinking "probably" rather than "possibly"...
And yes, it was Fred Vollmer in Bloomington who I was referring to.
RIP Mom- 1932-2012
<< <i>
I can't help but think that there are more than just two of these. Someone somewhere has a set that's unaware of the missing MM or perhaps has a still-unopened box that contains more of them. >>
The odds aren't as high as you think.
Everyone knows where most of these turn up and these get selectively searched. If a roll
of '69 cents from Michigan comes to light people will jump on it and it's the same way with
most other varieties. How many WI quarters in Tucson haven't been checked? How many
'82-P dimes in Sandusky Ohio?
Rare coins are rare because there aren't many around. The odds of an unchecked box even
from central IL having one of these is exceedingly low.
And keep in mind that even if there were some of these out there the odds are that the at-
trition which they suffer will prevent most from ever coming to light.
In the old days coins got set aside all the time and they are still being found hundreds of
years later. This just doesn't happen any longer because coins are just change now rather
than significant amounts of money. No one will ever raise a wreck off Florida with hundreds
of nice clad quarters or dimes on it. Even if it happened the coins would be a wreck too.
This 75 dime has got me seriously interested .
I went to the Stacks/Bowers site and found nothing ...........
RIP Mom- 1932-2012
<< <i>We get offered unopened boxes of 70s/80s proof sets fairly regularly throughout the course of a year. Many buyers who purchased multiples often would just open one box to peruse the sets and then stash it with the rest. Also, many buyers who aren't numismatists got them to give as gifts- and neither they nor the recipient necessarily looked at the set in more than a passing fashion. Plus, a missing mintmark on a dime doesn't exactly stick out like a sore thumb unless you're really looking for it with the eye of a collector. My point is that it is quite possible that more of these exist. I highly doubt that only two examples escaped the Mint. >>
Yes, that is my point. It is possible, but you cannot state as fact that there is another one out there.
TD
Lets see a link ASAP.
<< <i>
<< <i>We get offered unopened boxes of 70s/80s proof sets fairly regularly throughout the course of a year. Many buyers who purchased multiples often would just open one box to peruse the sets and then stash it with the rest. Also, many buyers who aren't numismatists got them to give as gifts- and neither they nor the recipient necessarily looked at the set in more than a passing fashion. Plus, a missing mintmark on a dime doesn't exactly stick out like a sore thumb unless you're really looking for it with the eye of a collector. My point is that it is quite possible that more of these exist. I highly doubt that only two examples escaped the Mint. >>
Yes, that is my point. It is possible, but you cannot state as fact that there is another one out there.
TD >>
You are both correct.
<< <i>
<< <i>We get offered unopened boxes of 70s/80s proof sets fairly regularly throughout the course of a year. Many buyers who purchased multiples often would just open one box to peruse the sets and then stash it with the rest. Also, many buyers who aren't numismatists got them to give as gifts- and neither they nor the recipient necessarily looked at the set in more than a passing fashion. Plus, a missing mintmark on a dime doesn't exactly stick out like a sore thumb unless you're really looking for it with the eye of a collector. My point is that it is quite possible that more of these exist. I highly doubt that only two examples escaped the Mint. >>
Yes, that is my point. It is possible, but you cannot state as fact that there is another one out there.
TD >>
Semantics. I'm sure most people understood the implied "probably" (or "possibly" if you wish) in my statement. Quite obviously I wasn't "stat(ing) it as fact" because to do so I would have to conclusively know of the existence of another set...and obviously I don't. At least not yet. I am sitting smack in the middle of cental IL however so hope springs eternal.
RIP Mom- 1932-2012
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>We get offered unopened boxes of 70s/80s proof sets fairly regularly throughout the course of a year. Many buyers who purchased multiples often would just open one box to peruse the sets and then stash it with the rest. Also, many buyers who aren't numismatists got them to give as gifts- and neither they nor the recipient necessarily looked at the set in more than a passing fashion. Plus, a missing mintmark on a dime doesn't exactly stick out like a sore thumb unless you're really looking for it with the eye of a collector. My point is that it is quite possible that more of these exist. I highly doubt that only two examples escaped the Mint. >>
Yes, that is my point. It is possible, but you cannot state as fact that there is another one out there.
TD >>
Semantics. I'm sure most people understood the implied "probably" (or "possibly" if you wish) in my statement. Quite obviously I wasn't "stat(ing) it as fact" because to do so I would have to conclusively know of the existence of another set...and obviously I don't. At least not yet. I am sitting smack in the middle of cental IL however so hope springs eternal.
I'd guess there's less than a 20% chance more will be found but if more are found it will
probably be 3 or 4.
There's another possibility when it comes to rare moderns and almost any coin made after
the 1850's which are very scarce; there are more in private collections. Simply stated a
significant percentage of some coins are just "missing". Fewer than 20,000 '16-D dimes
are accounted for but the mintage and implied attrition suggest there should be many more
out there and many in the mid-grades. Collectors have no read need to slab their coins so
many don't.
A '75- No-s dime is not the kind of thing the average proof set buyer would want to hold
onto for his collection but a wealthy proof set buyer might be in no particular hurry to sell
it. It wouldn't be too surprising if another couple like this existed.
I'd guess about a 50: 50 chance of about two more existing.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>We get offered unopened boxes of 70s/80s proof sets fairly regularly throughout the course of a year. Many buyers who purchased multiples often would just open one box to peruse the sets and then stash it with the rest. Also, many buyers who aren't numismatists got them to give as gifts- and neither they nor the recipient necessarily looked at the set in more than a passing fashion. Plus, a missing mintmark on a dime doesn't exactly stick out like a sore thumb unless you're really looking for it with the eye of a collector. My point is that it is quite possible that more of these exist. I highly doubt that only two examples escaped the Mint. >>
Yes, that is my point. It is possible, but you cannot state as fact that there is another one out there.
TD >>
Semantics. I'm sure most people understood the implied "probably" (or "possibly" if you wish) in my statement. Quite obviously I wasn't "stat(ing) it as fact" because to do so I would have to conclusively know of the existence of another set...and obviously I don't. At least not yet. I am sitting smack in the middle of cental IL however so hope springs eternal.
An old friend of mine used to say that if you have to use the word "semantics" to defend your argument, you've "probably" already lost the argument!
Those w/o CoinFacts memberships can see the coin under the cert verification here:
LINK
Michael Kittle Rare Coins --- 1908-S Indian Head Cent Grading Set --- No. 1 1909 Mint Set --- Kittlecoins on Facebook --- Long Beach Table 448
<< <i>A PCGS PR68 graded example just got listed in CoinFacts along with an image. Pretty neat.
Those w/o CoinFacts memberships can see the coin under the cert verification here:
LINK
That is correct,and the current owner is a dear friend of mine who is auctioning off the set.My guess is it will bring close to 6 figures.JMHO