I love when the descriptions for the 1909VDB MPL use the 420 quantity to represent the mintage as it does in this case. That is the number that the hobby had recognized universally until 1998. Nobody really knows the exact mintage although 1,503 coins were struck on July 30, 1909 at the US Mint in Philadelphia. Of course, lots of those coins were ruled "no good" and many others never made it out as an official sale to customers. The number currently reported by Whitman's Red Book as 1.194 is now suplimented with a note that only 400 to 600 actually were issued. Most other annual price guides like Coin World's Value Trends and Scott Travers Insider's Guide to Coin Values continue to report the 420 mintage number. The problem with using a new number without specific confirmation that the new number is really accurate causes confusion in the hobby in my opinion. To most collectors it really doesn't matter because they don't care about this particular issue, but to some of us it does bother us. Anyway, regarding this auction, we have 2 bidders and the current high bid on Sunday is $26k. The PCGS price guide has the coin at $47.5k. My guess is that we might see some lowering of values in the PCGS guide for the VDB MPL after THIS auction. What do YOU think? Steve
<< <i>Steve, I agree, the MPLs have been dropping a tad bit. But exceptional pieces, will always go up. BTW, that 1916 MPL is pretty nice looking IMHO.
<< <i>The PCGS price guide has the coin at $47.5k. My guess is that we might see some lowering of values in the PCGS guide for the VDB MPL after THIS auction. What do YOU think? Steve >>
I feel a winning lottery ticket Wednesday coming on, everyone lay off! that coin is mine!
<< <i>I love when the descriptions for the 1909VDB MPL use the 420 quantity to represent the mintage as it does in this case. That is the number that the hobby had recognized universally until 1998. Nobody really knows the exact mintage although 1,503 coins were struck on July 30, 1909 at the US Mint in Philadelphia. Of course, lots of those coins were ruled "no good" and many others never made it out as an official sale to customers. The number currently reported by Whitman's Red Book as 1.194 is now suplimented with a note that only 400 to 600 actually were issued. Most other annual price guides like Coin World's Value Trends and Scott Travers Insider's Guide to Coin Values continue to report the 420 mintage number. The problem with using a new number without specific confirmation that the new number is really accurate causes confusion in the hobby in my opinion. To most collectors it really doesn't matter because they don't care about this particular issue, but to some of us it does bother us. Anyway, regarding this auction, we have 2 bidders and the current high bid on Sunday is $26k. The PCGS price guide has the coin at $47.5k. My guess is that we might see some lowering of values in the PCGS guide for the VDB MPL after THIS auction. What do YOU think? Steve >>
I think the Red Book should be consistent. In order to be consistent, the total amount of coins struck should be reported for all coins, regardless of whether or not those coins made it out of the Mint to actual collectors. For example, the Red Book reports a mintage of 445,500 for the 1933 Double Eagle even though we all know none of those were supposed to make it out of the Mint and nearly all of those were melted. Similar issues arise when looking at the mintages of Morgan Dollars of which many were melted before ever entering general circulation. Accordingly, if Mint records reflect that 1503 of these 1909 VDB proofs were coined and existed at one time, that figure should be used as the official mintage of the coin.
Is that a perfect answer?? Not really... I read that last year the Mint made tens of thousands of 2009 Ultra High Reliefs that went unsold and were ultimately melted... should those be part of the official mintage??? Similarly, with the First Spouse Gold series presumably many coins of each issue were minted but never sold, should those be part of the official mintage??? Not sure on these, but whatever the answer is, shouldn't it be universally applied throughout the Red Book?
I think the Red Book should be consistent. In order to be consistent, the total amount of coins struck should be reported for all coins, regardless of whether or not those coins made it out of the Mint to actual collectors. For example, the Red Book reports a mintage of 445,500 for the 1933 Double Eagle even though we all know none of those were supposed to make it out of the Mint and nearly all of those were melted. Similar issues arise when looking at the mintages of Morgan Dollars of which many were melted before ever entering general circulation. Accordingly, if Mint records reflect that 1503 of these 1909 VDB proofs were coined and existed at one time, that figure should be used as the official mintage of the coin.
Is that a perfect answer?? Not really... I read that last year the Mint made tens of thousands of 2009 Ultra High Reliefs that went unsold and were ultimately melted... should those be part of the official mintage??? Similarly, with the First Spouse Gold series presumably many coins of each issue were minted but never sold, should those be part of the official mintage??? Not sure on these, but whatever the answer is, shouldn't it be universally applied throughout the Red Book? >>
Michael, I don't want to get into the Red Book consistency issues here now. There are certainly plenty of them. But they have singled out very specifically the 1909 thru 1916 Matte Proof Lincoln cents to change mintage quantities. No changes on the proof nickels, dimes, quarters or halfs of those years. Only the cents. And the real irony is that both Kevin Flynn and Roger Burdette who have done excellent research into this have different conclusions as to what the mintages of some of the Red Book reported MPL's should be! Very unfortunate and confusing for the hobby. Steve
With the plethora of examples coming to market over the past two years, it's a very nice time to be a buyer for this coin Of course, it would be nice if a few examples were high-end and price-driving, but that's the name of the game, isn't it?
At $30k with a day to go. It's probably a combination of the coin, the venue (Stacks Gallery in New York), and the current market that causes only 2 bidders for a PCGS PR65RB 1909VDB MPL. Long term potential for this coin would seem pretty good IMHO. Steve
Seems low, but I still like mine better. Regardless, I know I overpaid for mine, so I guess I'd better get used to holding it, 'cause it ain't goin' nowhere anytime soon.
so no one knows who got it? 30k seems right ? yes / no?? it's right in line with other similar?
Interesting enough.. check out how similar the MPL reverse is to this VDB 65RB Business Strike - If my lighting was bit different I might be able to nearly match it in this resolution.
<< <i>so no one knows who got it? 30k seems right ? yes / no?? it's right in line with other similar?
Interesting enough.. check out how similar the MPL reverse is to this VDB 65RB Business Strike - If my lighting was bit different I might be able to nearly match it in this resolution.
The price realized was rather low for this grade. In the peak of the MPL market a PCGS PR64RB brought over 40K! That's an attractive MS example but not of the detail of the VDB MPL reverse. Notice, you can hardly read the V.D.B. initials on the MS coin.
VDB MS65RB
PR65RB - MPL
>>
Brian Wagner Rare Coins, Specializing in PCGS graded, Shield, Liberty and Buffalo Nickels varieties.
renomedphys
Posts: 3,501 ✭✭✭✭✭
Comments
I like the gold hues. Reverse looks great.
I would just personally spend some more to get a better example.
But I am broke so it is easy to pass up on this one
Steve
My Complete PROOF Lincoln Cent with Major Varieties(1909-2015)Set Registry
WS
<< <i>Steve, I agree, the MPLs have been dropping a tad bit. But exceptional pieces, will always go up. BTW, that 1916 MPL is pretty nice looking IMHO.
WS >>
Another image of the 1916. Not my coin or image.
- Bob -
"Central Valley" Roosevelts
MPL's - Lincolns of Color
<< <i>The PCGS price guide has the coin at $47.5k. My guess is that we might see some lowering of values in the PCGS guide for the VDB MPL after THIS auction. What do YOU think? Steve
I feel a winning lottery ticket Wednesday coming on, everyone lay off! that coin is mine!
<< <i>I love when the descriptions for the 1909VDB MPL use the 420 quantity to represent the mintage as it does in this case. That is the number that the hobby had recognized universally until 1998. Nobody really knows the exact mintage although 1,503 coins were struck on July 30, 1909 at the US Mint in Philadelphia. Of course, lots of those coins were ruled "no good" and many others never made it out as an official sale to customers. The number currently reported by Whitman's Red Book as 1.194 is now suplimented with a note that only 400 to 600 actually were issued. Most other annual price guides like Coin World's Value Trends and Scott Travers Insider's Guide to Coin Values continue to report the 420 mintage number. The problem with using a new number without specific confirmation that the new number is really accurate causes confusion in the hobby in my opinion. To most collectors it really doesn't matter because they don't care about this particular issue, but to some of us it does bother us. Anyway, regarding this auction, we have 2 bidders and the current high bid on Sunday is $26k. The PCGS price guide has the coin at $47.5k. My guess is that we might see some lowering of values in the PCGS guide for the VDB MPL after THIS auction. What do YOU think?
Steve
I think the Red Book should be consistent. In order to be consistent, the total amount of coins struck should be reported for all coins, regardless of whether or not those coins made it out of the Mint to actual collectors. For example, the Red Book reports a mintage of 445,500 for the 1933 Double Eagle even though we all know none of those were supposed to make it out of the Mint and nearly all of those were melted. Similar issues arise when looking at the mintages of Morgan Dollars of which many were melted before ever entering general circulation. Accordingly, if Mint records reflect that 1503 of these 1909 VDB proofs were coined and existed at one time, that figure should be used as the official mintage of the coin.
Is that a perfect answer?? Not really... I read that last year the Mint made tens of thousands of 2009 Ultra High Reliefs that went unsold and were ultimately melted... should those be part of the official mintage??? Similarly, with the First Spouse Gold series presumably many coins of each issue were minted but never sold, should those be part of the official mintage??? Not sure on these, but whatever the answer is, shouldn't it be universally applied throughout the Red Book?
Michael Kittle Rare Coins --- 1908-S Indian Head Cent Grading Set --- No. 1 1909 Mint Set --- Kittlecoins on Facebook --- Long Beach Table 448
<< <i>
I think the Red Book should be consistent. In order to be consistent, the total amount of coins struck should be reported for all coins, regardless of whether or not those coins made it out of the Mint to actual collectors. For example, the Red Book reports a mintage of 445,500 for the 1933 Double Eagle even though we all know none of those were supposed to make it out of the Mint and nearly all of those were melted. Similar issues arise when looking at the mintages of Morgan Dollars of which many were melted before ever entering general circulation. Accordingly, if Mint records reflect that 1503 of these 1909 VDB proofs were coined and existed at one time, that figure should be used as the official mintage of the coin.
Is that a perfect answer?? Not really... I read that last year the Mint made tens of thousands of 2009 Ultra High Reliefs that went unsold and were ultimately melted... should those be part of the official mintage??? Similarly, with the First Spouse Gold series presumably many coins of each issue were minted but never sold, should those be part of the official mintage??? Not sure on these, but whatever the answer is, shouldn't it be universally applied throughout the Red Book? >>
Michael,
I don't want to get into the Red Book consistency issues here now. There are certainly plenty of them. But they have singled out very specifically the 1909 thru 1916 Matte Proof Lincoln cents to change mintage quantities. No changes on the proof nickels, dimes, quarters or halfs of those years. Only the cents. And the real irony is that both Kevin Flynn and Roger Burdette who have done excellent research into this have different conclusions as to what the mintages of some of the Red Book reported MPL's should be! Very unfortunate and confusing for the hobby.
Steve
My Complete PROOF Lincoln Cent with Major Varieties(1909-2015)Set Registry
Empty Nest Collection
Matt’s Mattes
My Complete PROOF Lincoln Cent with Major Varieties(1909-2015)Set Registry
Seems low, but I still like mine better. Regardless, I know I overpaid for mine, so I guess I'd better get used to holding it, 'cause it ain't goin' nowhere anytime soon.
Empty Nest Collection
Matt’s Mattes
Interesting enough.. check out how similar the MPL reverse is to this VDB 65RB Business Strike - If my lighting was bit different I might be able to nearly match it in this resolution.
VDB MS65RB
PR64RB - MPL
<< <i>so no one knows who got it? 30k seems right ? yes / no?? it's right in line with other similar?
Interesting enough.. check out how similar the MPL reverse is to this VDB 65RB Business Strike - If my lighting was bit different I might be able to nearly match it in this resolution.
The price realized was rather low for this grade. In the peak of the MPL market a PCGS PR64RB brought over 40K!
That's an attractive MS example but not of the detail of the VDB MPL reverse. Notice, you can hardly read the V.D.B. initials on the MS coin.
VDB MS65RB
PR65RB - MPL
<< <i>
<< <i>
Notice, you can hardly read the V.D.B. initials on the MS coin.
Yeah - I see that! So I checked back through and found this one raw that might match better. Whatcha think!
VDB MS65RB
PR65RB - MPL
>>
Weak lettering "E Pluribus" weak "O" in one cent
Rims rounded on the outer edges, VDB is alot bolder
<< <i>Weak lettering "E Pluribus" weak "O" in one cent
Rims rounded on the outer edges, VDB is alot bolder >>
picky picky picky...