1990 NO S PROOF LINCOLN CENT

Steve

While discussion and auctions continue about the 1909 VDB Matte Proof Lincoln cent, we haven't heard too much lately about its "bookend sister" the 1990 no S proof Lincoln cent. I checked the populations and found that currently, PCGS has slabbed 101, NGC has slabbed 26 and Anacs has slabbed 1 for a total of 128. This is less than the current 169 slabbed for the 1909 VDB MPL but there is no doubt in my mind that the 09 VDB is a RARER coin.

There appears to be a consistent increase in the slabbed populations of the 1990 no S in the past couple of years. I remember when only a couple had been slabbed by NGC and the PCGS pop was in the 70's. This increase is good because it probably means that people who own the proof sets are getting this coin slabbed. There is NO logical reason to let a valuable coin like the 1990 no S sit in a proof set which is not protected from air and moisture.

Another interesting thing I've noticed in the past year is that fewer of the 1990 no S coins appear for sale in auctions or print ads than in prior years. I just checked Heritage auction archives and only two of these coins have been auctioned by them since June, 2007. PCGS continues to list the retail values at $20,000 for PR69, $8,750 for PR68 and $8,000 for PR67. My sense is that the coins can be gotten for less money today. My sense is also that, unlike the 09 VDB, this coin IS available from dealers. Perhaps they are just holding them until collectors are more willing to pay the asking price.

In any case, I continue to believe that less than 200 of these coins are out there and probably over 150 are already in the hands of collectors. Anyone have any comments or more information about this KEY Lincoln cent proof coin?

Steve

RBinTex

Good assessment overall but I feel the rarity of an error as opposed to an intentionally struck coin (all else equal) has a different (and possibly more appealing) allure.

Steve

Roger,
I assume you agree that the 1990 no S is an ERROR coin and not an intentially struck coin.
Steve

DMWJR

I think of the No S as a die variety, rather than an error. The omission was in the creating of that die. I tend to think of errors as things that go wrong in the striking process, and not in the preparation of the dies.

Steve, I think 68's and 67's can be found, but I don't know of any 69's that are readily available.

lasvegasteddy

"I think of the No S as a die variety, rather than an error. The omission was in the creating of that die. I tend to think of errors as things that go wrong in the striking process, and not in the preparation of the dies."

i agree fully with doug on this

many varieties in the lincoln series out shadow the no s 1990 proof

i find more interest in the 1964 sms and it should be interesting to see what the final hammer falls at on heritage's current offering of one

i would think the trial issue to be of more respect(value) then a error/variety/standard issue buisness or proof

just my 2 cents

great post steve and i hope you found no disrespect in my reply

Steve

Doug anf Teddy,
Thanks for your input. I know that terms used in the hobby can sometimes be confusing. What do we REALLY mean by "die variety"? What do we really mean by "error"? When we start getting into the hundreds of Lincoln cent "so called varieties", I must admit that I get lost. Part of the reason is I have limited my collecting interest to Lincolns by date and mint mark and then added the "so called MAJOR varieties" although that too is subjective. What is MAJOR? Anyway, one of MY definitions of "die variety" would be the 1960 and 1970 small dates and large dates. They were a deliberate change of design dating made by the US Mint with the intention to be produced in the different styles. When it comes to so called "error" Lincoln's, I immediately think of the 1955 doubled die, the 1922 plain and the 1944 D/S. These coins were not meant to be produced this way. THAT logic also applies to the 1990 no S proof. I KNOW the hobby doesn't necessarily "think of" varieties and errors in this way. But I DO think that many of us less educated in the minting process use these terms in a way that links into how WE each perceive the coins.

Doug states " I tend to think of errors as things that go wrong in the striking process and not in the preparation of the dies". Well, that definition would eliminate the 1922 plain as an error coin since the preparation of the die included scraping off the "D" on die #2. I guess I think that if the US Mint does something with a die that is NOT intended for production, then it is an error. That, of course, doesn't make me right and Doug wrong. If MOST of us agree that Doug is right, then I will learn that MY current definitions maybe should be changed.

In any event, I appreciate what each of you have to say. Thanks.
Steve

DMWJR

For most specialist in this area, put them in these categories:

Varieties:

Double Dies of all known cl(except mechanical/strick doubling) but all known classes
RPM's OMM's MPDS's.
design changes

Errors:

wrong planchet,
defective planchet
Clipped planchet (curved and straight - end of sheet)
laminations
fold overs
Brockage
retained (whatever)
Off center
muled coins (except for that sweet 1C pattern about to go off at Stacks)
Struck thru (whatever)
Filled dies

It gets a litte gray when you talk about:

cuds, "BIE's",
The 1922 plain Lincolns ( I consider them errors and not varieties) The problem with the 22's is that the "error" occurred with most significant design element - the mint mark, causing people to believe a the time that it was not a variety or error, but that Philly had actually cranked out some 22's.


There are plenty more to discuss that I haven't listed.

segoja

These are available certainly.

I have 2 for sale now in PCGS 68DCAM holders.

A 3rd is back in for grade review as I think it's a 69.

The last 69 that sold at Heritage was mine.

Not sure that they are readily available for numbers significantly below the PCGS price guide prices. Heritage has been pretty steady for 68's in the $8200-8500 range. 67's may go for $7000-7500, and 69's will still bring $20K.

Just my 10c worth.

Steve

James,
Thanks for your input. As a dealer I'm sure you have a good "feel" for the market for this coin. The fact that you have 3 and 2 are currently for sale sorta confirms my assumption that there are coins available for collectors, BUT you're not just giving them away to get rid of them. I believe these ARE scarce coins and over time will increase in value.
Steve