Help understanding SMS...

ajbauman

This may be a really stupid question...but here goes!

In PCGS Price Guide 1965 SMS mint sets are listed at a price of about $11, but a 1965 SMS Quarter MS67 is worth $50 and in Cameo would be worth $600.

Why the large discrepancies?

I must be missing something, otherwise I'm going to start buying 1965 sets like crazy splitting them up and submitting them!

ProofRainbowRoosevelt

Because there are few to none 67cams in any set. You could buy hundreds of sets and never find a singe one.

Well not none... but few

adamlaneus

Some folks on this board are experts on this stuff. I have seen about 10 SMS sets, up close and personal, of various years and each set has been so different, it confounds. They are interesting things.

RegistryCoin

Crazily, well, maybe not so crazily, splitting up and submitting '65 sms sets would be a very good experience. I think we all need such an experience.
It reminds me of searching early '70s kennedy bags for ms67 candidates. In all those halves, I think there were two that were were possible ms67s. I can't even remember if they both made the grade or not, but I certainly remember the experience, and subsequently having many half dollars to spend.
The '65s are especially difficult sms coins to find in grades that would make the search profitable, but would be worth the effort if (big "if") the right sets were found.
Good luck with the search and let us know how it goes.

jmski52

It reminds me of searching early '70s kennedy bags for ms67 candidates. In all those halves, I think there were two that were were possible ms67s. I can't even remember if they both made the grade or not, but I certainly remember the experience, and subsequently having many half dollars to spend.
The '65s are especially difficult sms coins to find in grades that would make the search profitable, but would be worth the effort if (big "if") the right sets were found.

Since 2002 (when the Kennedy Halves went collector-only), I've bought 3 of the Mint's (200-coin mixed mintmark) bags to look through each year.

And what I've found has been, well - sort of a "mixed bag". A few times, I've found some pristine coins that have that brilliant "new die" look. Other times, I've found coins that have been struck through die grease and have sort of a halo effect around Kennedy's profile. Much of the time, I just find various grades of Kennedy Halves between MS-62 and MS-65.

Going through numerous examples and comparing them all "on the spot" is a very good way to gain a knowledge of what's got potential and what does not.

Registry Coin's idea regarding multiple SMS sets is very intriguing, and in fact - that's something I'm doing right now. I'm in the accumulation phase of a number of SMS sets (when I can find what look to me like "fresh ones"), so that I can lay them out and look them over someday all at once.

Unfortunately, it looks like the "fresh ones" are very few and far between these days. Most of the sets I obtain have already been looked at by either Russ or MartyK, it seems.

hammered54

<< <i>It reminds me of searching early '70s kennedy bags for ms67 candidates. In all those halves, I think there were two that were were possible ms67s. I can't even remember if they both made the grade or not, but I certainly remember the experience, and subsequently having many half dollars to spend.
The '65s are especially difficult sms coins to find in grades that would make the search profitable, but would be worth the effort if (big "if") the right sets were found.

Since 2002 (when the Kennedy Halves went collector-only), I've bought 3 of the Mint's (200-coin mixed mintmark) bags to look through each year.

And what I've found has been, well - sort of a "mixed bag". A few times, I've found some pristine coins that have that brilliant "new die" look. Other times, I've found coins that have been struck through die grease and have sort of a halo effect around Kennedy's profile. Much of the time, I just find various grades of Kennedy Halves between MS-62 and MS-65.

Going through numerous examples and comparing them all "on the spot" is a very good way to gain a knowledge of what's got potential and what does not.

Registry Coin's idea regarding multiple SMS sets is very intriguing, and in fact - that's something I'm doing right now. I'm in the accumulation phase of a number of SMS sets (when I can find what look to me like "fresh ones"), so that I can lay them out and look them over someday all at once.

Unfortunately, it looks like the "fresh ones" are very few and far between these days. Most of the sets I obtain have already been looked at by either Russ or MartyK, it seems. >>

hammered54

I have several box's of each 65, 66, 67. org. box's with the family name still on them, now it's been a while so I'm not sure how many of each there are. I will check tonite if anybody is interested.
Matt.

CarlWohlforth

<<I have several box's of each 65, 66, 67. org. box's with the family name still on them, now it's been a while so I'm not sure how many of each there are. I will check tonite if anybody is interested.>>

Please do. You owe it to yourself to see if there are any cameo coins there.

There were no proof coins minted between 1965 and 1967. The mint did spiff up mint set production and called them Special Mint Sets. They did spiff up the dies but didn't replace them often. I don't think they struck the coins as many times as they do for proofs. Anyway only the very first few coins struck off fresh dies had that desirable cameo contrast. This quickly wore down and the vast majority of coins were brilliant. The mint improved over the years so 1965 is the toughest of those three years for cameos. The coins were not individually handled so there were way fewer super high grade coins minted.

jmski52

They did spiff up the dies but didn't replace them often. I don't think they struck the coins as many times as they do for proofs. Anyway only the very first few coins struck off fresh dies had that desirable cameo contrast. This quickly wore down and the vast majority of coins were brilliant. The mint improved over the years so 1965 is the toughest of those three years for cameos. The coins were not individually handled so there were way fewer super high grade coins minted.

As I recall, the sets I bought from the Mint in '65 to '67 were brilliant, but I never paid much attention to whether any of them were cameo - probably because they weren't. Most of the sets I've bought on ebay have been opened and most of the coins are grungy (in the case of '66 and '67) or very ordinary (in the case of the '65s).

lope208

I just did this with 1984 proof sets (my birth year). I found a box of 5 original sets unopened on Ebay and they turned out to be beautiful,
at least to my eye. Some light toning around the edges. I am preparing to send a bunch of the coins in and see how they do. I still
consider this a learning experience so I'm ok with it, but I hope they come back high !

SMK

How can you tell whether an individual coin is actually SMS proof or not?

Placid

Pcgs price guide may be $50 for a ms67 1965sms quarter but I doubt you will get that if you sell one today.

One example.1965 25C SMS MS67 PCGS Sold for: $29.00 (includes BP) Bid Source: Internet
Ended: Apr 22, 2008.Auction of this coin.

CarlWohlforth

<<How can you tell whether an individual coin is actually SMS proof or not? >>

SMS coins are not proofs.

One can be pretty sure a coin is SMS if it is in the original mint package or in a slab.

If a mundane SMS were cut out of the package and lightly circulated it could be hard indeed to tell it apart from a biz strike. Some high grade biz strike coins are certified as SMS coins by accident.

SMK

Thanks Carl.