<< <i>I think for 35k, id want a return policy. >>
I would imagine that if you could afford to drop 35K on a set of coins as such, then a return policy would not be needed. In all reality if you really want something that bad- you make your deal and live with it, but alas in todays market, it seems to be like a SEARS store- go look, touch and throw it to the floor and walk away, never to make a purchase.
and George - it is not my set yet.....are you interested?
<< <i>Stacks never mentioned Adams. 15-20 cents, nickels, and dimes. 12 quarters, and 8 halves. I have seen a few SMS certified quarters from both services which were misattributed. >>
When you say the quarters were mis-attriubted, do you mean they were bus. strikes certified as SMS's or vice-versa?
Also, are the Kennedy's 90% or 40%? >>
The Kennedys are 90% since they used the blanks that were on hand before the 1965 SMS sets began. That much seems clear. The quarters and dimes are also 90%.
<< <i>I think for 35k, id want a return policy. >>
I would imagine that if you could afford to drop 35K on a set of coins as such, then a return policy would not be needed. In all reality if you really want something that bad- you make your deal and live with it, but alas in todays market, it seems to be like a SEARS store- go look, touch and throw it to the floor and walk away, never to make a purchase.
and George - it is not my set yet.....are you interested? >>
<< <i>What coins, exactly, did these sets consist of? >>
They came out through Stack's beginning in 1993, apparently. There were maybe 20 sets, although the dealer who bought most of them (08822 on these boards) said not all of them (some half dollars, the rarest denomination for that reason) were true SMS coins. They were cent through half dollar, five coins. All the true ones are really sharply struck, usually even more than proofs, with heavy die polishing and a mostly satiny, nonreflective finish. I think each denomination was struck from a single die, because they all have unique die markers. The dime, quarter, and half were each 90% silver.
They were apparently made as prototypes for the 1965-67 SMS sets, as Stack's wrote when they first offered them. But there is no known official documentation. Apparently NYC coin dealer Lester Merkin had them in his estate, which went to Stack's. The conjecture is that they came from a Mint employee. Eva Adams who was Mint director back then is most frequently named, although I can find no public/published source. That is not surprising, as they were apparently issued under mysterious/clandestine circumstances. If there were any records, they are unknown today; Adams and Stella Hackel Sims both destroyed large numbers of Mint records. I consider them legitimate varieties, in that they are an experimental finish or surface treatment.
I think that is a fair summary. Talk amongst yourselves ...
i have the 67 set and a newbie if i go to pcgs price guide and it shows kennedy half 1967 what and who decides if its just an SP or a Cam or a dcam? they also show this other variety 1967 SMS QDO FS-101 if these all came out of sets like i owned what are the differences? thks for any info
<< <i>i have the 67 set and a newbie if i go to pcgs price guide and it shows kennedy half 1967 what and who decides if its just an SP or a Cam or a dcam? they also show this other variety 1967 SMS QDO FS-101 if these all came out of sets like i owned what are the differences? thks for any info >>
You need to buy yourself copies of the Cherrypickers' Guides, by Fivaz and Stanton (FS). It comes in two volumes: Vol I is half cents thru Jefferson nickels, and the current edition is fifth edition. Vol II is dimes through double eagles (Kennedy halves are in Vol II), and the latest is the fourth edition although I think maybe the fifth edition is coming before long.
They show the differences between the regular 1965-67 SMS coins and the Cherrypickers (rare) die varieties, mostly doubled die, tripled, or quadrupled die obverses/reverses, missing designer's initials, or doubled/repunched mintmarks. As far as the Cameo, Deep Cameo designations for 1965-67 Kennedys, the grading services certify those coins based on varying levels of contrast--mirrorlike field reflectivity and mint frost on the devices.
Now, this thread is about the 1964 SMS Kennedy half and the other SMS coins, which are immeasurably rarer. I hope this helps ... good luck!
<< <i>Thanks. I saw where you said earlier it was in your RS, but I can't find it there. Can you post it here? I'd really like to see it. >>
I lack the skill to post photos on this site. It is the coin listed in CoinFacts (I think you may be able to see it free if you go to the Kennedy Pop Report and click on PCGS #6844 [1964 SMS]), it is on my website, and it is posted in the Complete Kennedy Variety Set, Business Strikes and Proofs. Here's the URL for that, look for VDB Coins
Got it, George, the link worked. I see the attribution on the slab, but I was hoping to see some differentiating-detail on the coin. If this coin is indeed all it's cracked up to be, your photos really don't do it justice, I have to tell you. Still, I read what you and the others have said on it, here, and I have to give you a big thumbs up on the acquisition!
was there,or could there have been any legal action taken by someone against adams and sims for destroying mint records?
that aside, i have this roll of `64 halves and one coin i remember seems,not like the others like the fields are much more satiny than the rest. i need to dig it out i guess and check for those die markers. then again, if only 20 sets are known, i somewhat doubt i would have one mixed in a roll of halves i`ve had for years.
<< <i>Got it, George, the link worked. I see the attribution on the slab, but I was hoping to see some differentiating-detail on the coin. If this coin is indeed all it's cracked up to be, your photos really don't do it justice, I have to tell you. Still, I read what you and the others have said on it, here, and I have to give you a big thumbs up on the acquisition!
>>
Thanks kurtdog. I have a lot of photos that fit into that same category
<< <i>was there,or could there have been any legal action taken by someone against adams and sims for destroying mint records?
that aside, i have this roll of `64 halves and one coin i remember seems,not like the others like the fields are much more satiny than the rest. i need to dig it out i guess and check for those die markers. then again, if only 20 sets are known, i somewhat doubt i would have one mixed in a roll of halves i`ve had for years. >>
In Million Dollar Nickels where Bob Julian and the authors write about the destruction of Mint records, they point out that there is/was an official procedure to be followed when a federal official contemplates such destruction. That apparently wasn't followed ...
<< <i>Thanks kurtdog. I have a lot of photos that fit into that same category >>
Join the club, friend, I'm no photographer, myself. In fact, though, as far as yours go, the few pictures of your coins you do have up in your registry set are far better than a lot I've seen in other registry sets.
Since I have had so many comments from various collectors regarding the number of existing 1964 SMS coins, I'm going to attempt to put together a Census of the known coins of each denomination, cent through half dollar.
If you (or a friend) own any such coins, raw or certified (PCGS or NGC or other), or have sold such coins, I would appreciate a PM giving me:
the source/provenance,certification number (if any), price paid/sold it for (if you're willing to reveal that), and whether you still own the coin(s).
I will not reveal any personally identifiable information, as they say; I just want to get as accurate a picture as possible of the numbers existing. I will certainly trust any confidences. Thanks in advance for your cooperation. George
keets, there's nothing that intriguing about it, I got a neat coin, now I am researching it and trying to figure out how many really exist and what I think its true value is, along with its siblings. Have a good day.
I have re-read this thread and see that I never really answered this properly. Fortunately, CoinFacts makes it easier! The "differentiating detail" is at the 10x loupe level, unless you rotate an actual 1964 SMS coin in hand. That let's you see the heavy die polishing lines that all the examples I have seen display (all denominations). But those of you who are members of PCGS CoinFacts can enter PCGS number 6844 in the Search box, and it will take you right to my coin. (The photo on my site is not that great, I know.) Then click on the obverse and a large-format version will slowly download (I wouldn't try this on slow systems!).
This large picture gives you a "magnifier" option to zoom in even closer. (Marvelous technology and photographs, PCGS, thank you!)
Zoom in on the obverse:
--The 4 in the date. You can clearly see a small tine of metal hanging down from the underside of the horizontal, near its right end. This is a diagnostic on all the 1964 SMS halves I have seen (three).
--The 1 in the date, just under the flag. You can see a tiny die line that begins about one-third of the way down from the top of the digit, under the flag on the left side of the 1. It extends northwest towards the (I)N. This is also an obverse diagnostic.
--Look at all the heavy die polishing lines that do show up at this high resolution, sometimes traveling in multiple directions.
Zoom in on the reverse:
--Prominent NW-SE die polish lines between A, L in HALF.
--Especially heavy die line runs from the bottom right tip of small middle serif in (O)F to A(MERICA).
I believe these die lines/die polishing marks should be diagnostic on all specimens out there, since so few were apparently struck in the first place.
This should help anyone trying to authenticate at the micro level a 1964 SMS half. But at the macro level, as a knowledgeable dealer and owner of the finest-certified 1964 SMS "set" in existence pointed out, the strike with sharpness of a proof and unusual surface finish are quite obvious as well. Hope this helps!
I'm resurrecting this thread as I'm still trying to compile an accurate census of how many 1964 SMS coins exist of each denomination. Please PM me if you possess (or know the whereabouts of) any 1964 SMS coins. I'd particularly like to know the grade/service, certification number and source (optional). Thanks for any info. Best Regards, George
Just wondering, looking at the large pictures, it looks like there is a double die. The serifs have a small split. As well, it looks like the designers initials are doubled. Anyone have any info on that?
Comments
Dead Cat Waltz Exonumia
"Coin collecting for outcasts..."
<< <i>I think for 35k, id want a return policy. >>
I would imagine that if you could afford to drop 35K on a set of coins as such, then a return policy would not be needed. In all reality if you really want something that bad- you make your deal and live with it, but alas in todays market, it seems to be like a SEARS store- go look, touch and throw it to the floor and walk away, never to make a purchase.
and George - it is not my set yet.....are you interested?
<< <i>
<< <i>Stacks never mentioned Adams. 15-20 cents, nickels, and dimes. 12 quarters, and 8 halves. I have seen a few SMS certified quarters from both services which were misattributed. >>
When you say the quarters were mis-attriubted, do you mean they were bus. strikes certified as SMS's or vice-versa?
Also, are the Kennedy's 90% or 40%? >>
The Kennedys are 90% since they used the blanks that were on hand before the 1965 SMS sets began. That much seems clear. The quarters and dimes are also 90%.
<< <i>
<< <i>I think for 35k, id want a return policy. >>
I would imagine that if you could afford to drop 35K on a set of coins as such, then a return policy would not be needed. In all reality if you really want something that bad- you make your deal and live with it, but alas in todays market, it seems to be like a SEARS store- go look, touch and throw it to the floor and walk away, never to make a purchase.
and George - it is not my set yet.....are you interested? >>
Not really interested in buying, thanks.
<< <i>What coins, exactly, did these sets consist of? >>
They came out through Stack's beginning in 1993, apparently. There were maybe 20 sets, although the dealer who bought most of them (08822 on these boards) said not all of them (some half dollars, the rarest denomination for that reason) were true SMS coins. They were cent through half dollar, five coins. All the true ones are really sharply struck, usually even more than proofs, with heavy die polishing and a mostly satiny, nonreflective finish. I think each denomination was struck from a single die, because they all have unique die markers. The dime, quarter, and half were each 90% silver.
They were apparently made as prototypes for the 1965-67 SMS sets, as Stack's wrote when they first offered them. But there is no known official documentation. Apparently NYC coin dealer Lester Merkin had them in his estate, which went to Stack's. The conjecture is that they came from a Mint employee. Eva Adams who was Mint director back then is most frequently named, although I can find no public/published source. That is not surprising, as they were apparently issued under mysterious/clandestine circumstances. If there were any records, they are unknown today; Adams and Stella Hackel Sims both destroyed large numbers of Mint records. I consider them legitimate varieties, in that they are an experimental finish or surface treatment.
I think that is a fair summary. Talk amongst yourselves ...
I used to be famous now I just collect coins.
Link to My Registry Set.
https://pcgs.com/setregistry/quarters/washington-quarters-specialty-sets/washington-quarters-complete-variety-set-circulation-strikes-1932-1964/publishedset/78469
Varieties Are The Spice Of LIFE and Thanks to Those who teach us what to search For.
<< <i>i have the 67 set and a newbie if i go to pcgs price guide and it shows kennedy half 1967 what and who decides if its just an SP or a Cam or a dcam? they also show this other variety 1967 SMS QDO FS-101 if these all came out of sets like i owned what are the differences? thks for any info >>
You need to buy yourself copies of the Cherrypickers' Guides, by Fivaz and Stanton (FS). It comes in two volumes: Vol I is half cents thru Jefferson nickels, and the current edition is fifth edition. Vol II is dimes through double eagles (Kennedy halves are in Vol II), and the latest is the fourth edition although I think maybe the fifth edition is coming before long.
They show the differences between the regular 1965-67 SMS coins and the Cherrypickers (rare) die varieties, mostly doubled die, tripled, or quadrupled die obverses/reverses, missing designer's initials, or doubled/repunched mintmarks. As far as the Cameo, Deep Cameo designations for 1965-67 Kennedys, the grading services certify those coins based on varying levels of contrast--mirrorlike field reflectivity and mint frost on the devices.
Now, this thread is about the 1964 SMS Kennedy half and the other SMS coins, which are immeasurably rarer. I hope this helps ... good luck!
Specifically, then, all of these were Special [Philadelphia] Mint Sets? There's no way the 1964-D was in the set you bought out of, I'm saying...
<< <i>Georgio11:
Specifically, then, all of these were Special [Philadelphia] Mint Sets? There's no way the 1964-D was in the set you bought out of, I'm saying... >>
Right, all coins with no mintmark. Presumably made at Philadelphia.
<< <i>Thanks. I saw where you said earlier it was in your RS, but I can't find it there. Can you post it here? I'd really like to see it. >>
I lack the skill to post photos on this site. It is the coin listed in CoinFacts (I think you may be able to see it free if you go to the Kennedy Pop Report and click on PCGS #6844 [1964 SMS]), it is on my website, and it is posted in the Complete Kennedy Variety Set, Business Strikes and Proofs. Here's the URL for that, look for VDB Coins
http://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/Composite.aspx?c=2038
against adams and sims for destroying mint records?
that aside, i have this roll of `64 halves and one coin i remember seems,not like the others
like the fields are much more satiny than the rest. i need to dig it out i guess
and check for those die markers. then again, if only 20 sets are known, i somewhat
doubt i would have one mixed in a roll of halves i`ve had for years.
<< <i>Got it, George, the link worked. I see the attribution on the slab, but I was hoping to see some differentiating-detail on the coin. If this coin is indeed all it's cracked up to be, your photos really don't do it justice, I have to tell you. Still, I read what you and the others have said on it, here, and I have to give you a big thumbs up on the acquisition!
Thanks kurtdog. I have a lot of photos that fit into that same category
<< <i>was there,or could there have been any legal action taken by someone
against adams and sims for destroying mint records?
that aside, i have this roll of `64 halves and one coin i remember seems,not like the others
like the fields are much more satiny than the rest. i need to dig it out i guess
and check for those die markers. then again, if only 20 sets are known, i somewhat
doubt i would have one mixed in a roll of halves i`ve had for years. >>
In Million Dollar Nickels where Bob Julian and the authors write about the destruction of Mint records, they point out that there is/was an official procedure to be followed when a federal official contemplates such destruction. That apparently wasn't followed ...
Check that coin! One never knows.
<< <i>Thanks kurtdog. I have a lot of photos that fit into that same category
Join the club, friend, I'm no photographer, myself. In fact, though, as far as yours go, the few pictures of your coins you do have up in your registry set are far better than a lot I've seen in other registry sets.
Since I have had so many comments from various collectors regarding the number of existing 1964 SMS coins, I'm going to attempt to put together a Census of the known coins of each denomination, cent through half dollar.
If you (or a friend) own any such coins, raw or certified (PCGS or NGC or other), or have sold such coins, I would appreciate a PM giving me:
the source/provenance,certification number (if any), price paid/sold it for (if you're willing to reveal that), and whether you still own the coin(s).
I will not reveal any personally identifiable information, as they say; I just want to get as accurate a picture as possible of the numbers existing. I will certainly trust any confidences. Thanks in advance for your cooperation. George
strange that you would even solicit that when you have been unwilling to divulge the same.
<< <i>price paid/sold it for (if you're willing to reveal that)
strange that you would even solicit that when you have been unwilling to divulge the same. >>
No, actually the difference is that I asked for a PM, not a public disclosure.
This large picture gives you a "magnifier" option to zoom in even closer. (Marvelous technology and photographs, PCGS, thank you!)
Zoom in on the obverse:
--The 4 in the date. You can clearly see a small tine of metal hanging down from the underside of the horizontal, near its right end. This is a diagnostic on all the 1964 SMS halves I have seen (three).
--The 1 in the date, just under the flag. You can see a tiny die line that begins about one-third of the way down from the top of the digit, under the flag on the left side of the 1. It extends northwest towards the (I)N. This is also an obverse diagnostic.
--Look at all the heavy die polishing lines that do show up at this high resolution, sometimes traveling in multiple directions.
Zoom in on the reverse:
--Prominent NW-SE die polish lines between A, L in HALF.
--Especially heavy die line runs from the bottom right tip of small middle serif in (O)F to A(MERICA).
I believe these die lines/die polishing marks should be diagnostic on all specimens out there, since so few were apparently struck in the first place.
This should help anyone trying to authenticate at the micro level a 1964 SMS half. But at the macro level, as a knowledgeable dealer and owner of the finest-certified 1964 SMS "set" in existence pointed out, the strike with sharpness of a proof and unusual surface finish are quite obvious as well. Hope this helps!