Are they really "keys"?
morgansforever
Posts: 8,465 ✭✭✭✭✭
I went on a key binge for a while, buying 94 & 97 SMS nickels, and 98S SMS halves, all 69 slabbed by PCGS.
But are they really key, none will circulate, which equates to thousands of
mint state examples for future generations.
A 93S Morgan is a key, so is a 14D cent, they circulated, had low mintages, and only a handful survived in high mint state.
I guess the only factor is collector demand, regarding the SMS nickels and halves.
Your thoughts......
But are they really key, none will circulate, which equates to thousands of
mint state examples for future generations.
A 93S Morgan is a key, so is a 14D cent, they circulated, had low mintages, and only a handful survived in high mint state.
I guess the only factor is collector demand, regarding the SMS nickels and halves.
Your thoughts......
World coins FSHO Hundreds of successful BST transactions U.S. coins FSHO
0
Comments
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
<< <i>Your thoughts...... >>
I guess it depends on what issues you feel are necessary to complete your set. My nickel and half collections are date/mint sets of circulation strikes, even if the mint didn't release a particular piece for circulation (1970-D half, for example). I don't include SMS/proofs in my set, so they are not keys *to me*. Of course, YMMV...
<< <i>"Keys" are a term of relative scarcity AND popularity and cannot easily be considered out of the context of their own series. For example, the 16-D is the "key" of the merc dime series but is far more common than many dates in the seated dime series. I tend not to use the term because it is often more misleading than helpful. >>
So many of the so-called "keys" aren't rare...the 1909-S VDB is an example...any coin that you can easily go online or to a show and find can't be that rare. For many of them, it is a popularity contest...
Yes, I guess that sums it up. Will those examples be sought after in the future?
exactly. every series has a key or key dates, the lowest mintage or rarest coins of the type. But a "rare date" key Lincoln or other popular series is a distressingly common coin to a collector of pre-1807 coinage. Luckily, there are far, far more collectors of Lincoln cents than there are collectors of, say, draped bust cents
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
<< <i>"Keys" are a term of relative scarcity AND popularity and cannot easily be considered out of the context of their own series. For example, the 16-D is the "key" of the merc dime series but is far more common than many dates in the seated dime series. I tend not to use the term because it is often more misleading than helpful. >>
Actually I think you explained it very well. Based on your definition, there is nothing misleading about the term. I wish others had the same understanding that you do.
<< <i>"Keys" are a term of relative scarcity AND popularity and cannot easily be considered out of the context of their own series. For example, the 16-D is the "key" of the merc dime series but is far more common than many dates in the seated dime series. I tend not to use the term because it is often more misleading than helpful. >>
I agree with RYK.
Is a coin considered a "key" because of popularity of the series? Because of market hype? Because of condition rarity which makes it scarce or even rare in high grades? Because it is a legitimate rarity of which very few were originally minted or exist now?
In your case, if your 94 & 97 SMS nickels, and 98S SMS halves cost you more than other coins in those series, then you have to decide if you think those prices will be sustained or actually increase in the future...will they continue to be popular? Does supply equal or exceed demand in reality?
<< <i>A rare coin has a pop of less then 75, past that it's just tough keys... >>
Are coins with less than 75 in existence also keys? Tougher keys?
"I am sorry you are unhappy with the care you recieved, is their anything I can do for you right now, how about some high speed lead therapy?" - A qoute from my wife's nursing forum
"I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them." – Thomas Jefferson
cannot really compare them.
i have a hard time thinking of any coin newer then 1964 as a key.
<< <i>
<< <i>"Keys" are a term of relative scarcity AND popularity and cannot easily be considered out of the context of their own series. For example, the 16-D is the "key" of the merc dime series but is far more common than many dates in the seated dime series. I tend not to use the term because it is often more misleading than helpful. >>
So many of the so-called "keys" aren't rare...the 1909-S VDB is an example...any coin that you can easily go online or to a show and find can't be that rare. For many of them, it is a popularity contest... >>
I know several collectors of advertising memorabilia. Some items in their collections are extremely rare and in some cases, unique. Are these items popular enough to translate into high value?
The answer is sometimes yes and often, NO!
One cannot compare mintages and availability of twentieth century coins with nineteenth and late eighteenth century coins. The 16D, for example, is an incredibly low mintage dime within the context of this period. It is a first year issue date and a much more appealing design than anything prior to it. The result? An exceptionally popular key date with a high price tag. And it truly deserves all the attention it gets.
Totally here where your coming from. I had a chance to pick up a real key today,
a 16D dime, in F12 graded by ANACS, for $2500. Should I have pulled the trigger?
It would have wiped out my checking, but I would of scored a serious key.
Maybe it will be there next week?
<< <i><<i have a hard time thinking of any coin newer then 1964 as a key.>>
Totally here where your coming from. I had a chance to pick up a real key today,
a 16D dime, in F12 graded by ANACS, for $2500. Should I have pulled the trigger?
It would have wiped out my checking, but I would of scored a serious key.
Maybe it will be there next week? >>
Everyone has his/her own collecting priorities. If you are putting together a set of merc dimes, this may be a good buy. In isolation, I do not find it to be interesting enough for $2500 or good value.
"I am sorry you are unhappy with the care you recieved, is their anything I can do for you right now, how about some high speed lead therapy?" - A qoute from my wife's nursing forum
"I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them." – Thomas Jefferson
<< <i>Another factor in the popularity of the 09 SVDB and the 16D is the simple fact that 9 out of 10 of us, at least those of us a certian age started on those sets as childern. One doesn't forget their first love or that first stopper they run into. The aura of the 16D and the 09SVDB are as much a product of the red book and the whitman albums as the mintages. Those are sets many of us cut our teeth on, and like the '57 chevy or the 63 spilt window vette.. they hold a special place in our heart where logic slips into the shadows as childhood dreams dance upon our wallets. >>
Hey, that was pretty good.
<< <i>
<< <i><<i have a hard time thinking of any coin newer then 1964 as a key.>>
Totally here where your coming from. I had a chance to pick up a real key today,
a 16D dime, in F12 graded by ANACS, for $2500. Should I have pulled the trigger?
It would have wiped out my checking, but I would of scored a serious key.
Maybe it will be there next week? >>
Everyone has his/her own collecting priorities. If you are putting together a set of merc dimes, this may be a good buy. In isolation, I do not find it to be interesting enough for $2500 or good value. >>
personally since I was 10.. three coins I have wanted..
Are the 16D, 09SVDB, and the Bar Cent.
There is a reason the Coin Rarities Online ran an add for the Bar Cent that read..
"How old were you the first time you saw a picture of this coin in the Red book and decided you wanted one?"
Owning just those 3 coins would be dream come true, if others found my collection uninteresting.. so be it.. but the 10 year old in me would be dancing a jig.
"I am sorry you are unhappy with the care you recieved, is their anything I can do for you right now, how about some high speed lead therapy?" - A qoute from my wife's nursing forum
"I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them." – Thomas Jefferson
<< <i>the '57 chevy or the 63 spilt window vette.. they hold a special place in our heart where logic slips into the shadows as childhood dreams dance upon our wallets. >>
I believe muscle cars are where it's at now. Imagine trying to build a type set and getting the keys?
<< <i>The aura of the 16D and the 09SVDB are as much a product of the red book and the whitman albums as the mintages. Those are sets many of us cut our teeth on, and like the '57 chevy or the 63 spilt window vette.. they hold a special place in our heart where logic slips into the shadows as childhood dreams dance upon our wallets. >>
I agree with much of what you say. However, the "logic slips into the shadows" line implies that a more sophisticated collector would focus on more challenging dates that are legitimately scarce or rare. keep in mind that ALL COIN COLLECTING is motivated by emotion. The ultra "rare" Seated coin will have some fighting to acquire one, yet the next collector says, "BIG DEAL!"
In addition, the 16D and 09SVDB are not only popular for nostalgic influences, but the designs are universally appealing as well. They are at a much higher artistic level than any series prior to them. Just one Mercury dime is a sight to behold, but a full set? What can be more attractive than that? Young collectors of modern series undoubtedly go further back in time, only to discover these little gems. A low mintage key date from a beautiful series will always attract attention, regardless of logic and population reports.
One more point:
Series like these can be completed by many people. Once you get the 16D, you can relax. The rest of the series is within easy reach of many collectors. The same is true for the 1909s VDB, 1877 Indian, 1928 Peace, etc. This adds to the appeal of these sets and their respective keys.
not sure i'd wipe out my checking account for ANY coin
<< <i>
<< <i>The aura of the 16D and the 09SVDB are as much a product of the red book and the whitman albums as the mintages. Those are sets many of us cut our teeth on, and like the '57 chevy or the 63 spilt window vette.. they hold a special place in our heart where logic slips into the shadows as childhood dreams dance upon our wallets. >>
I agree with much of what you say. However, the "logic slips into the shadows" line implies that a more sophisticated collector would focus on more challenging dates that are legitimately scarce or rare. keep in mind that ALL COIN COLLECTING is motivated by emotion. The ultra "rare" Seated coin will have some fighting to acquire one, yet the next collector says, "BIG DEAL!"
In addition, the 16D and 09SVDB are not only popular for nostalgic influences, but the designs are universally appealing as well. They are at a much higher artistic level than any series prior to them. Just one Mercury dime is a sight to behold, but a full set? What can be more attractive than that? Young collectors of modern series undoubtedly go further back in time, only to discover these little gems. A low mintage key date from a beautiful series will always attract attention, regardless of logic and population reports.
One more point:
Series like these can be completed by many people. Once you get the 16D, you can relax. The rest of the series is within easy reach of many collectors. The same is true for the 1909s VDB, 1877 Indian, 1928 Peace, etc. This adds to the appeal of these sets and their respective keys. >>
I agree with everything you said, It was not my intention to degrade these coins.. for me they are special coins and always will be.
"I am sorry you are unhappy with the care you recieved, is their anything I can do for you right now, how about some high speed lead therapy?" - A qoute from my wife's nursing forum
"I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them." – Thomas Jefferson
<< <i><<i have a hard time thinking of any coin newer then 1964 as a key.>>
Totally here where your coming from. I had a chance to pick up a real key today,
a 16D dime, in F12 graded by ANACS, for $2500. Should I have pulled the trigger?
It would have wiped out my checking, but I would of scored a serious key.
Maybe it will be there next week? >>
These are a lot like the 93-s Morgan in that they are scarce but not rare. There is a lot of demand for them and its pretty likely that everyone who wants one doesn't have one so at least the potential demand is robust.
I knew it would happen.
i have a hard time thinking of any coin newer than 1933 as a key.
Whoever is careless with the truth in small matters cannot be trusted with important matters.
i have a hard time thinking of any coin newer than 1933 as a key.
Ergo, you have a hard time thinking of any modern coin as a coin. Not my problem. To look down upon a series just because they are "beneath you" says volumes about the type of "collector" that you happen to be.
If these coins become the most-sought-after coins in the series, they are keys, regardless of whether you are just starting out collecting Jeffs or Kennedys - or even if you are the consumate expert and top dog in Saint Gaudens'.
In both of these cases, I think that the jury is still out as to how much the relative demand will be for say, a 1950-D vs. a Botanical nickel, or say, a high grade cameo SMS Kennedy vs. the 1998-S Matte Proof. And it does depend on your collecting objectives within the series, too.
I knew it would happen.
<< <i>i have a hard time thinking of any coin newer then 1964 as a key."
i have a hard time thinking of any coin newer than 1933 as a key.
Ergo, you have a hard time thinking of any modern coin as a coin. Not my problem.
If these coins become the most-sought-after coins in the series, they are keys, regardless of whether you are just starting out collecting Jeffs or Kennedys - or even if you are the consumate expert and top dog in Saint Gaudens'. To look down upon a series just because they are "beneath you" says volumes about the type of "collector" that you happen to be. >>
cough. ;-) no need to get nasty. ;-)
the point i made with the 1964 date is that the series that contain these newer dates
really have not had enough time to develop a "key" in the range 1964-2008.
i am not denying the fact that every series has a key.
but using the term for every new series that pops up in the last decade is abusing the term.
do you base it on the lowest mintage? the most popular date? the most expensive date/MM?
a lot of older series have had time to mature and through time developed well known keys
to the series. newer series people just pick out the one that seems most likely even though
50 years from now it could easily change. I doubt mercury dime "keys" will change much
even if another 100 years goes by. but ASEs, sure. i can see a date called common now becoming
a key 100 years from now.
it takes TIME to develop a key. not just a pool of collectors picking their favorite.
<< <i> If these coins become the most-sought-after coins in the series, they are keys, regardless of whether you are just starting out collecting Jeffs or Kennedys - or even if you are the consumate expert and top dog in Saint Gaudens'. >>
Well said jmski52
Your thoughts........
Oh, there's a demand for coins like that alright! Just as long as you can continue to believe that there are others out there that think just like you!
Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
My Jefferson Nickel Collection
<< <i>
<< <i> If these coins become the most-sought-after coins in the series, they are keys, regardless of whether you are just starting out collecting Jeffs or Kennedys - or even if you are the consumate expert and top dog in Saint Gaudens'. >>
Well said jmski52 >>
i think this is changing the definition of the term key. i always thought the term key meant
the hardest to purchase coin in the series. the one that has the lowest survival population.
not the most expensive. not the most desired or sought-after.
but that is just me. in the lib half eagle series the 1854S is the key. the coin that stops you
cold. next is the 1875P, yet it is not even close to the most expensive grade for grade compared
to some southern gold. (well i checked a price guide, it is costly, the 1875P but other coins
more common come pretty darn close to it)......
near impossible to find to even consider purchasing at any price. the rest are just, well, lesser keys or plain common.
one can easily say that other lib half eagles are more popular and sought after yet common
relative to the two coins above. 1861D, 1864S, etc..
and to this day the lesser keys are still shaking out on a series that is older then moderns.
one date thought to have only 35 survivors turns out to have 70 for example.
The coins you mention are only "key" coins for a "complete" collection of their specific series. In other words, if your collection were a date set, then none of them would be a key coin as the Kennedy is a branch mint coin and the nickels have business strike counterparts which are easily obtainable. Expensive coins yes, but key coins, no.
Other than that, they are just low mintage, reasonably valuable, high quality coins.
The name is LEE!
Thanks for the non sequitur.
Whoever is careless with the truth in small matters cannot be trusted with important matters.
Thanks for the non sequitur.
Let's take this nice n'slow. Please explain, then - If I left out too many of the connections, why not elucidate my thinking? Case in point - what's the key for the Jefferson Nickel Series, if it isn't a coin made after 1933?
it takes TIME to develop a key. not just a pool of collectors picking their favorite.
Well, I'd say that this is partly right. I do think that keys evolve, but I don't know how much time you would require, since various factors such as a large meltdown of the existing specimens might change things, especially over time. And I also think that a pool of collectors picking their favorite will influence demand, which is part of the equation in establishing a "key."
a lot of older series have had time to mature and through time developed well known keys to the series. newer series people just pick out the one that seems most likely even though 50 years from now it could easily change.
We agree. Just because the series hasn't matured does not mean that there aren't a key or two lurking in the mix.
As a collector, I was always under the assumption that a "key" coin, to a collection that is, was one that was not readily available or easily obtainable and would be a coin that was required to "complete" the set.
That's always been my understanding, in a nutshell. Now, we are re-defining keys based on a cutoff date?
I knew it would happen.
<< <i>
a lot of older series have had time to mature and through time developed well known keys
to the series. newer series people just pick out the one that seems most likely even though
50 years from now it could easily change. I doubt mercury dime "keys" will change much
even if another 100 years goes by. but ASEs, sure. i can see a date called common now becoming
a key 100 years from now.
it takes TIME to develop a key. not just a pool of collectors picking their favorite. >>
Tempus fugit, indeed. Sometimes it even seems to go backward.
In 1957 when I started collecting the '50-D nickel was the bluest of the chips
and the most important coin made in decades. By 1964 a bag went for a quart-
er million in today's money. It was very highly sought for a seven year old coin
and sure to be a classic. Something like a '31-S Lincoln was ancient and a '14-D,
prehistoric.
Now, more than half a century later, many consider all these coins modern. The
real moderns were even invented yet in those days and we still used good silver
and bronze (along with the occasional cu/ni) for purchases.
Two generations is plenty of time to identify key dates and there are many here
who can.
Time has a way of changing everything. Even today we might be very close to the
time that the government recalls and melts the pennies and nickels. How many 1986
cents do you think would exist in twenty years if they did? The attrition on moderns
throughout the world is staggering. They are not only degraded rapidly but every
day millions more go into furnaces to make new products. It's probable that destruc-
tion has exceeded new mintage continually since about 1992. There are many many
moderns that are scarce in unc because they weren't saved and then the balance of
the mintage was melted before any more were saved. This sort of thing is happening
here as well though it is in slow motion.
There are lotsa of key moderns because they weren't saved. If you're looking for a
mass production coin that is scarce in any condition then, no, there are no keys. But
why limit this to mass produced coins? Why limit it to "any condition". Modern collect-
ors usually want uncs so this is where the "key dates" lie.
Everything is perspective.
Despite the resentment many in here have with regard to the special status of these and other dates, the keys from most classic U.S. coin series are well established. You may not agree with the pricing structure, but it makes little sense to redefine the word.
The modern series also have well established keys, such as the 1970D half dollar. It is always available, but within the context of the series, it clearly stands out as a scarcer, low mintage date. Despite the "opinions" stated, this is a key date Kennedy half dollar.
<< <i>With few exceptions, the coin with the lowest mintage in the series is, without question, A KEY COIN within its series. ...
...
The modern series also have well established keys, such as the 1970D half dollar. It is always available, but within the context of the series, it clearly stands out as a scarcer, low mintage date. Despite the "opinions" stated, this is a key date Kennedy half dollar. >>
I strongly disagree. In modern coins (and even dating back to 1934) the mint made
enough of each coin every year that everyone could set aside as many coins as they
desired. In the old days you might want to set aside something like 1886 nickels or
1916 quarters but you just couldn't find them to save. This made the low mintages
key date.
But now days the question is merely how many were set aside. The '68-D quarter had
the lowest mintage of all the clads with fewer than a hundred million made for circulation
but dozens (if not hundreds) of people set aside a roll or two (or a bag). Mint set sales
were strong and quality was excellent in rolls and sets. It's a "key date" only in the sense
that it's hard to find in circulation. But the '69 mintage was higher and quality was awful.
Everyone figured it would be a common date and almost no one set it aside. To compound
the problem mint set quality is also very poor and mint set sales were weak.
Low mintages tend to hurt the potential for moderns to become key dates. This is true in
other countries as well. There are cases where due to poor demand a coin with a mintage
of 1,000 will sell for less than another date with a mintage in the millions. This will become
more common in time.
<< <i>
<< <i>With few exceptions, the coin with the lowest mintage in the series is, without question, A KEY COIN within its series. ...
...
The modern series also have well established keys, such as the 1970D half dollar. It is always available, but within the context of the series, it clearly stands out as a scarcer, low mintage date. Despite the "opinions" stated, this is a key date Kennedy half dollar. >>
I strongly disagree. In modern coins (and even dating back to 1934) the mint made
enough of each coin every year that everyone could set aside as many coins as they
desired. In the old days you might want to set aside something like 1886 nickels or
1916 quarters but you just couldn't find them to save. This made the low mintages
key date.
But now days the question is merely how many were set aside. The '68-D quarter had
the lowest mintage of all the clads with fewer than a hundred million made for circulation
but dozens (if not hundreds) of people set aside a roll or two (or a bag). Mint set sales
were strong and quality was excellent in rolls and sets. It's a "key date" only in the sense
that it's hard to find in circulation. But the '69 mintage was higher and quality was awful.
Everyone figured it would be a common date and almost no one set it aside. To compound
the problem mint set quality is also very poor and mint set sales were weak.
Low mintages tend to hurt the potential for moderns to become key dates. This is true in
other countries as well. There are cases where due to poor demand a coin with a mintage
of 1,000 will sell for less than another date with a mintage in the millions. This will become
more common in time. >>
I think I stepped into unknowledgeable territory by lumping all moderns together. My mistake.
I only brought up the 70D half because it was quickly recognized as a standout key among other mint state Kennedy halves.
Okay,both of these issues are keys to completing a date/mint set of Jefferson nickels.Exception noted to my "after 1933 no keys" comment.
I do think the word "key" as it is ordinarily applied to certain coins is much abused,however. In recent years the word has taken on new meanings for some that to me seem kind of goofy.
Whoever is careless with the truth in small matters cannot be trusted with important matters.
1) Part of a set, and a key in the set.
2) Part of a set, but not a key in the set.
3) Not a part of the set.
Now... take a 1909-S VDB Lincoln- is it a key? Well, "yes", "no", and "it doesn't matter".
If the set in question is a complete date/mint set of Lincoln cents, the answer is "Yes". If the set is a complete date/mint set of every US coin ever struck for circulation, the answer is "No". And if the set is a type set of US gold, the answer is "It doesn't matter".
The fact that there are no Jefferson nickels which even come close in scarcity to some (many? most?) 19th century branch mint half eagles is irrelevant to the Jefferson nickel collector- no matter what, there are going to be some dates which are more difficult to find than others. I think it's a mistake to try to compare keys across sets unless your goal is to prove that your key is bigger than someone else's.
<< <i>You can't determine the keys until you define the set. A coin can be one of three things:
1) Part of a set, and a key in the set.
2) Part of a set, but not a key in the set.
3) Not a part of the set.
Now... take a 1909-S VDB Lincoln- is it a key? Well, "yes", "no", and "it doesn't matter".
If the set in question is a complete date/mint set of Lincoln cents, the answer is "Yes". If the set is a complete date/mint set of every US coin ever struck for circulation, the answer is "No". And if the set is a type set of US gold, the answer is "It doesn't matter".
The fact that there are no Jefferson nickels which even come close in scarcity to some (many? most?) 19th century branch mint half eagles is irrelevant to the Jefferson nickel collector- no matter what, there are going to be some dates which are more difficult to find than others. I think it's a mistake to try to compare keys across sets unless your goal is to prove that your key is bigger than someone else's. >>
I would label the 1909-S VDB as a key coin, regardless of its context. In the examples you give, I see it as a key date performing different fucntions. The key date status is fused to the coin, wherever it travels.
Let's examine that. Moving on to the post-1964 era, is it goofy to include the 1994 and 1997 Special Finish Jeffersons in the definition of a "key"? That really does depend on what collectors of Jefferson Nickels think. I no longer collect them, but can think of no reason why those 2 coins wouldn't be considered as "keys" in consideration of their limited mintage and distribution. Can you? Both of them were produced after 1964.
Is a 1/2 oz. 2004 Proof Platinum Eagle a "key"? Most Plat collectors would agree that it is a key, even though the jury is still out about how the 2006-W Burnished Uncs will stack up compared to the 2004 Proof. All of the Plats were produced after 1964. The "key" in this case simply refers to the likelihood that you will be able to obtain one, and the current market pricing reflects that. As the series evolves, there may be changes in the status of some "keys" due to melting during price run-ups. Today, the 2004 Proofs are hardest to find. Some day, the 2006-W Burnished 1/2 ozer might be considered a tougher key than the 2004 Proof simply because of its lower mintage.
Finally, let's consider the Kennedy Half Series. The definition of a "key" continues to evolve here, especially in the light of the 1964 SMS discoveries, the ultra-grade SMS coins, special Matte Proof finishes or the cameo and star designations for Proofs. None of these developments really strike me as "silly" even though I might not agree with Mint policies or industry trends in grading. Does a .1 mm mark on the obverse of an MS-68 SMS Kennedy mean anything to me? Not really, because it doesn't affect my collecting habits. Is it silly that such a mark might mean the difference of a few thousand dollars in the market? I don't know why it would be considered silly, since a single grade difference has an even larger impact in many "classic" coin series. Does it qualify the coin as being a "key"? I am guessing that the overwhelming majority of Kennedy collectors would say, "yes."
Sorry if I sounded brusque, but I just don't understand why calling a key Jefferson or a key Kennedy would be considered "silly" simply because they were produced after some arbitrary date. I feel the same way about the inane term "widget" when applied to coins and coin collecting. Imagine how disheartening a YN must feel to hear adults downplaying the importance of his or her crowning achievements in coin collecting when such discouraging remarks are directed towards their favorite coin series. Implying that anything produced after say, 1933 or 1964 cannot be a "key" coin - does just that, in my opinion - and what's more, it's not entirely true. Hey, I'm just trying to help.
I knew it would happen.
<< <i>I would label the 1909-S VDB as a key coin, regardless of its context. >>
You can send a pitcher to the mound for a single A league team and watch him mow the batters down, while that very pitcher in the big leagues gets lit up like a pinball machine. Same pitcher- different results.
I'm not sure how you can make a proper evaluation without considering context, but I guess that's just me...
<< <i>
<< <i>I would label the 1909-S VDB as a key coin, regardless of its context. >>
You can send a pitcher to the mound for a single A league team and watch him mow the batters down, while that very pitcher in the big leagues gets lit up like a pinball machine. Same pitcher- different results.
I'm not sure how you can make a proper evaluation without considering context, but I guess that's just me...
So let me get this straight; a full date set of Lincoln cents "just happens" to include a 1909-S VDB. As a date set, it is not necessary to have a branch mint or odd variety to achieve completion. The 1909-s VDB has a new context, thereby negating its status as an extremely valuable key date? Its importance is now diluted among all the other common date cents?
<< <i>So let me get this straight; a full date set of Lincoln cents "just happens" to include a 1909-S VDB. As a date set, it is not necessary to have a branch mint or odd variety to achieve completion. The 1909-s VDB has a new context, thereby negating its status as an extremely valuable key date? Its importance is now diluted among all the other common date cents? >>
A 1909-S VDB is certainly still valuable, but in this context (a date set of Lincolns), I don't really think it's a key, since you don't *need* it to complete the set.
edited to add... When I said "I don't really think it's a key", I meant "I don't really think it's a key for this set". I think the number one feature of a key date is that it is necessary for the completion of the set in question.