I too bought from him on one or two occasions. I picked up a stellar VDB DDO in 65RD, which he said was the nicest he had seen. I would have to agree. I don't get the impression that he over-hypes undeserving coins. Just a great guy and a great collector.
oh my...yeah-yeah-yeah...you all is right on such notes
even though these sneak under a variety guise in the lincoln series i swear this lincoln would be invited to the round table of them
great coin...price...might be out of range but i imagine oneday it to be a laughable one as how low it could of been had for
yup...it would take the selling of all i got minus my dime...but dayum to have 2 of the 5 denominations could only bring a smile
lol...darn the bad luck too as...at least my kids know i tried but if my dime don't fetch $3.5k ...i guess i'm stuck with it (yayy)
my kids laffed at me showing my thread of selling my coins and the mod had replied with...sell tha kids not the coins but i don't think i'll show them this one as i'd really hate not selling my dime
sweet lincoln here matt that i swear is off to moon any ol time
everything in life is but merely on loan to us by our appreciation....lose your appreciation and see
So, this notion of "the best struck MS Lincoln" combined with the overall rarity, and the desire to complete a true set of SMS issues... those are the driving factors for ownership of this coin? Rarity alone seems insufficient for the assigned value.
Reverse strike detail on that coin is incredible! And the picture is a scan. I'd like to see it in hand. When I collected proofs, I had a 65 SMS in 68RD, and the 66 SMS & 67 SMS in 67CA, and known of the three compared to the reverse of this 1964, at least comparing with the photos.
<< <i>Isn't it correct that the 1964 SMS is not included in any of the Lincoln registry sets? Wonder why?
>>
These coins are at best "Specimens" or "Test" strikes. The U.S. Mint didn't start the "Special Mint Set" (SMS) program until 1965. All anyone has to do, is look into a 1965 SMS set and read the card that the Director of the Mint had enclosed. "These coins, which consitute our first issue of United States Special Mint Sets, were struck at the U.S. Assay Office at San Fancisco, California. In addition to the 1965 dated nickel and cent pieces, the set contains three new clad coins authorized by the Coinage Act of 1965."
So if the 1965 SMS coins consituted the first issue of United States Special Mint Sets, I think this demonstrates that PCGS overreacted, jumped to conclusions, acted without thinking and erroneously labeled these slabs as 1964 SMS
The erroneously labeled 1964 SMS coins are not basic coins or die varieties of any series and should not be a requirement in any set. Heck, PCGS doesn’t even have in the Mint Set side of the Registry a 1964 SMS Mint Set which is the only logical place to put them.
PCGS has compounded their original erroneous decision of calling these coins SMS by trying to justify the inclusion into some of the modern complete variety sets
JMHO, Tim
EDIT TO ADD: I would love to see if David Hall, Don Willis or BJ had the intestinal fortitude to address this post and explain first why these are labeled SMS coins and not “Specimens” or “Test” pieces and then explain why they are not included in all series sets.
What is next, with the Kennedy half dollars, there are several years when the coins were struck on quarter planchets, or have rotated dies, are these going to be required in the complete variety sets as well? What is the difference, the 1964 SMS labeled slabs to not have die varieties in them.
i agree with tim in alot of his address here...they per se are...specimen strikes
<<<What is next, with the Kennedy half dollars, there are several years when the coins were struck on quarter planchets, or have rotated dies, are these going to be required in the complete variety sets as well? >>>
the above stated though does not apply...those are errors...pure plain and simple
these do however fall under "a die variation" by all means and do fall in complete sets with all major varieties...these dies were specially finished and used to produce coins from those specially finished dies
i know anacs labelled these or did as "stain finish"...if you ever see a 1964 anacs labeled 1964 satin finish...that's what you're looking at...a 1964 sms
reguardless of all opinions...these are and forever will be surrounded in mystery-intrique
and with less then 50 known sets these will forever be crowned in truest form "rare"
everything in life is but merely on loan to us by our appreciation....lose your appreciation and see
<< <i> <<<What is next, with the Kennedy half dollars, there are several years when the coins were struck on quarter planchets, or have rotated dies, are these going to be required in the complete variety sets as well? >>>
the above stated though does not apply...those are errors...pure plain and simple >>
I’m not sure it is so plain and simple. Maybe not the best examples but I‘ve seen to many centered or near centered Kennedy strikes on quarter planchets to make me wonder if they were not done on purpose. If the coin was struck on purpose and not accidental, then to me it is more of a “Fantasy” coin then a true error or variety. Now what is the difference if a coin is struck on the wrong planchet and leaves the Mint in an employees lunch pal or if all “Test” strikes leave with the Mint Director and do not see the light of day until her estate is sold off? In either case, would you call them a legitimate variety?
Getting back to how PCGS is classifying these coins in the Registry, they are putting them in some of the Complete Variety sets as a variety to the basic business strike of Philadelphia. Do they also list the early proof or legitimate SMS coins as a variety to the basic business strike coins from Philadelphia for different years?
I mean is the 1964 proof Kennedy or the 1965 SMS Kennedy required as a variety coin in the circulations strike complete set? No, these coins are part of the proof sets. The difference between the business strike coins or the proof and SMS coins is the finish. What finish do these so called 1964 SMS coin have, most experts say they have a satin or matte finish to them. Should the matte Lincolns be required in the complete variety set of circulated business strike set?
We have a saying in Maine which PCGS may not understand. "If your cat has kittens in the oven do you call them biscuits?” Just because PCGS calls these mysterious coins dated 1964 SMS doesn’t make them so.
I have writing several notes to PCGS over the past two years about this issue, most have gone unanswered. One answer I did receive was that the 1964 SMS is much like the modern Satin Finish Uncirculated Mint sets from 2005 – Present. I laughed my a$$ off when I read that.
Just My Humble Opinion, I would love to read PCGS’ reasoning, hopefully more then just “we needed some place to put these slabs that we erroneously labeled SMS”.
yeah myself i see a clear case of error in name of those kennedies..."wrong" or "other then intended" planchets...those fall in error category
these 1964 coins...it was in the way the die was finished without design change...leaving them out of pattern status...per se a variation in final die finishing...making them a varietity
i've read too where it was a standard practise to supply lawmakers a inhand example of coinage to approve or not...this surely lays a path under which guise these left the us mint..."in the superintendants custody for approval"
did they make it into lawmakers hands? was the mint told they made it into lawmakers hands and refused return?
i'm more so in the 1st chain of thought crowd...intended for in hand approval by lawmakers...then the mint super never handed them off and played her cards in "having a blonde moument" with them
yes tim...truly pcgs has picking a coin category these fall under----wrong...will they chime in??? probably not
everything in life is but merely on loan to us by our appreciation....lose your appreciation and see
@Traviscrush86 said:
I have a 1964 SMS test coin check out on eBay tell me what you think type in 1964 SMS Kennedy half dollar test coin
As far as I'm aware, no 64 SMS coins have ever been found in circulation (members, please correct this if I'm wrong). All of the 64 SMS coins were from the estate of a former mint director and sold to a prominent dealer in the late 80s. The were then authenticated and slabbed by ANACS. Over time many ended up in other slabs like PCGS.
Why do you believe it's an SMS? Does it have a link to Mint Director Adams, other mint employees, or dealer Lester Merkin? Did you take the time to see if it matches any of the die markers on authenticated halves? This info shouldn't be hard to find with a little research. Or did you see a you "get rich from pocket change" YouTube video, where they are just looking for clicks and never tell you the real story?
Comments
My Ebay
1934-1958 RB Lincoln Short Set
WS
My Ebay
1934-1958 RB Lincoln Short Set
<< <i>You have to wonder why that kind of a coin would be put up for auction on Ebay.
WS >>
this guy was a strong buyer for quite a while...butted bids with him many times.
he has/had many high end lincolns and always sells at a stiff price.
I think he's a dentist by trade ....but don't hold me to that...I could be mistaken.
he has/had many high end lincolns and always sells at a stiff price.
I think he's a dentist by trade ....but don't hold me to that...I could be mistaken. >>
I've only seen him sell, his buying musta been before my time.
I do believe he is a dentist tho, a friend of mine has bought from him, and mentioned it to me.
My Ebay
1934-1958 RB Lincoln Short Set
Empty Nest Collection
Matt’s Mattes
<< <i>I saw that and thought of lasvegasteddy >>
CRAP! Don't tell Teddy about this one!!!
http://coins.ha.com/common/view_item.php?Sale_No=318&Lot_No=5550&src=pr
-Paul
even though these sneak under a variety guise in the lincoln series i swear this lincoln would be invited to the round table of them
great coin...price...might be out of range but i imagine oneday it to be a laughable one as how low it could of been had for
yup...it would take the selling of all i got minus my dime...but dayum to have 2 of the 5 denominations could only bring a smile
lol...darn the bad luck too as...at least my kids know i tried but if my dime don't fetch $3.5k ...i guess i'm stuck with it (yayy)
my kids laffed at me showing my thread of selling my coins and the mod had replied with...sell tha kids not the coins but i don't think i'll show them this one as i'd really hate not selling my dime
sweet lincoln here matt that i swear is off to moon any ol time
Empty Nest Collection
Matt’s Mattes
sorry.
And I suppose for only 10K, with a total 'mintage' of fifty or so (?) others feel the same
I'll bet it there were fifty 1910 D's......they would sell for far more than 10K each
i agree with stewart that these are a "never officially released" us coin variety.
interesting enough i find that they aren't "seized at public offering" like most all other us coins falling in this category
current price levels on trading truly can be regretful hindsight in the making as these are in a league of their own...an elitest type of coin
Or is it a sort of 1933 Saint "bad boy" coin without the insane following?
1910-D... heh heh... good analogy Ambro!
Empty Nest Collection
Matt’s Mattes
Dan
<< <i>Isn't it correct that the 1964 SMS is not included in any of the Lincoln registry sets? Wonder why?
>>
These coins are at best "Specimens" or "Test" strikes. The U.S. Mint didn't start the "Special Mint Set" (SMS) program until 1965. All anyone has to do, is look into a 1965 SMS set and read the card that the Director of the Mint had enclosed. "These coins, which consitute our first issue of United States Special Mint Sets, were struck at the U.S. Assay Office at San Fancisco, California. In addition to the 1965 dated nickel and cent pieces, the set contains three new clad coins authorized by the Coinage Act of 1965."
So if the 1965 SMS coins consituted the first issue of United States Special Mint Sets, I think this demonstrates that PCGS overreacted, jumped to conclusions, acted without thinking and erroneously labeled these slabs as 1964 SMS
The erroneously labeled 1964 SMS coins are not basic coins or die varieties of any series and should not be a requirement in any set. Heck, PCGS doesn’t even have in the Mint Set side of the Registry a 1964 SMS Mint Set which is the only logical place to put them.
PCGS has compounded their original erroneous decision of calling these coins SMS by trying to justify the inclusion into some of the modern complete variety sets
JMHO,
Tim
EDIT TO ADD: I would love to see if David Hall, Don Willis or BJ had the intestinal fortitude to address this post and explain first why these are labeled SMS coins and not “Specimens” or “Test” pieces and then explain why they are not included in all series sets.
What is next, with the Kennedy half dollars, there are several years when the coins were struck on quarter planchets, or have rotated dies, are these going to be required in the complete variety sets as well? What is the difference, the 1964 SMS labeled slabs to not have die varieties in them.
Empty Nest Collection
Matt’s Mattes
<<<What is next, with the Kennedy half dollars, there are several years when the coins were struck on quarter planchets, or have rotated dies, are these going to be required in the complete variety sets as well? >>>
the above stated though does not apply...those are errors...pure plain and simple
these do however fall under "a die variation" by all means and do fall in complete sets with all major varieties...these dies were specially finished and used to produce coins from those specially finished dies
i know anacs labelled these or did as "stain finish"...if you ever see a 1964 anacs labeled 1964 satin finish...that's what you're looking at...a 1964 sms
reguardless of all opinions...these are and forever will be surrounded in mystery-intrique
and with less then 50 known sets these will forever be crowned in truest form "rare"
<< <i> <<<What is next, with the Kennedy half dollars, there are several years when the coins were struck on quarter planchets, or have rotated dies, are these going to be required in the complete variety sets as well? >>>
the above stated though does not apply...those are errors...pure plain and simple >>
I’m not sure it is so plain and simple. Maybe not the best examples but I‘ve seen to many centered or near centered Kennedy strikes on quarter planchets to make me wonder if they were not done on purpose. If the coin was struck on purpose and not accidental, then to me it is more of a “Fantasy” coin then a true error or variety. Now what is the difference if a coin is struck on the wrong planchet and leaves the Mint in an employees lunch pal or if all “Test” strikes leave with the Mint Director and do not see the light of day until her estate is sold off? In either case, would you call them a legitimate variety?
Getting back to how PCGS is classifying these coins in the Registry, they are putting them in some of the Complete Variety sets as a variety to the basic business strike of Philadelphia. Do they also list the early proof or legitimate SMS coins as a variety to the basic business strike coins from Philadelphia for different years?
I mean is the 1964 proof Kennedy or the 1965 SMS Kennedy required as a variety coin in the circulations strike complete set? No, these coins are part of the proof sets. The difference between the business strike coins or the proof and SMS coins is the finish. What finish do these so called 1964 SMS coin have, most experts say they have a satin or matte finish to them. Should the matte Lincolns be required in the complete variety set of circulated business strike set?
We have a saying in Maine which PCGS may not understand. "If your cat has kittens in the oven do you call them biscuits?” Just because PCGS calls these mysterious coins dated 1964 SMS doesn’t make them so.
I have writing several notes to PCGS over the past two years about this issue, most have gone unanswered. One answer I did receive was that the 1964 SMS is much like the modern Satin Finish Uncirculated Mint sets from 2005 – Present. I laughed my a$$ off when I read that.
Just My Humble Opinion, I would love to read PCGS’ reasoning, hopefully more then just “we needed some place to put these slabs that we erroneously labeled SMS”.
Edited for grammar.
these 1964 coins...it was in the way the die was finished without design change...leaving them out of pattern status...per se a variation in final die finishing...making them a varietity
i've read too where it was a standard practise to supply lawmakers a inhand example of coinage to approve or not...this surely lays a path under which guise these left the us mint..."in the superintendants custody for approval"
did they make it into lawmakers hands?
was the mint told they made it into lawmakers hands and refused return?
i'm more so in the 1st chain of thought crowd...intended for in hand approval by lawmakers...then the mint super never handed them off and played her cards in "having a blonde moument" with them
yes tim...truly pcgs has picking a coin category these fall under----wrong...will they chime in???
probably not
Russ, NCNE
Big Tuna Material
Anyone gonna snipe it?
Of course it wouldn't be so funny if it were included in the complete variety set, would it?
Big Tuna Material>>>
why i changed my thoughts on selling my dawg of a dime...just way too much potential in these
funny how that cent is still available as it is a big tuna coin
-Paul
I have a 1964 SMS test coin check out on eBay tell me what you think type in 1964 SMS Kennedy half dollar test coin
https://www.ebay.com/itm/194879618847?hash=item2d5fbaff1f:g:xDwAAOSw905iHKDJ
peacockcoins
Can I get it graded
As far as I'm aware, no 64 SMS coins have ever been found in circulation (members, please correct this if I'm wrong). All of the 64 SMS coins were from the estate of a former mint director and sold to a prominent dealer in the late 80s. The were then authenticated and slabbed by ANACS. Over time many ended up in other slabs like PCGS.
Why do you believe it's an SMS? Does it have a link to Mint Director Adams, other mint employees, or dealer Lester Merkin? Did you take the time to see if it matches any of the die markers on authenticated halves? This info shouldn't be hard to find with a little research. Or did you see a you "get rich from pocket change" YouTube video, where they are just looking for clicks and never tell you the real story?