Mercury Dime - Key/Semi-Key Analysis

keyman64

For some folks, it seems very easy to select which coins are the keys and semi-keys for any given series. For myself though, while studying the Mercury Dime Series, I have learned that it is not so straight forward. I will even begin this by saying that this analysis is incomplete since I did not look at the circulated examples nor did I do my desired Market Availability Analysis. My focus was only on the uncirculated. And since I believe my sample sizes to be large enough for a statistical analysis, I only used the PCGS Population Numbers from June 9, 2012 instead of adding in NGC and ANACS numbers etc. I also included the 1945-P in the study for one reason, the Full Band designation rarity that it represents.

Different factors come into play when doing this analysis: Mintage, Survivability, and Strike Quality from the Mint.
Then there are the other factors that are much more difficult to measure such as demand, perceived demand and hoarding that might affect supply.

When I first started to learn the Mercury Dime series years ago, I understood the following to be the Keys/Semi-Keys: 1916-D, 1921, 1921-D, 1926-S, 1931-D.
Are they the keys? How key are they? How do they rank? Are there others? Should others be considered? How much does grade matter? How much do Full Bands matter?

There are several ways to look at this information. I decided on just a few ways. Below is my data. After the data is my personal analysis.


When you look at the data SORTED by MINTAGE you see the following list...the list I learned as a child:
01. 1916-D
02. 1921-D
03. 1921
04. 1931-D
05. 1926-S
06. 1931-S
07. 1930-S
08. 1931
09. 1928-D
10. 1929-S

When you look at the data SORTED by Total Mint State Full Band Examples at PCGS you see a very different list. This list should be studied a little if you wish to build a Full Band Set of Mercs. This list speaks to the quality of the workmanship at the mint, or the lack thereof actually...to a certain degree. You will notice the 1916-D(#19), 1921-D(#15), 1921(#20) and 1931-D(#30) do not even make the cut for the TOP 10 when it comes to scarcity in FB. This surprised me at first...then I thought about the crack-out game where people are resubmitting coins over and over again, hoping to get a coin in a higher graded holder...Ahhh, the motivation of money. Last year(July 12, 2011) when I did this analysis the 1931-S was in the #10 spot and the 1924-S was #11. So this is an example of how things can change from year to year when we have resubmissions happening.
01. 1919-S
02. 1927-S
03. 1945
04. 1926-S
05. 1927-D
06. 1918-S
07. 1918-D
08. 1919-D
09. 1923-S
10. 1924-S

When sorted by non-FB Mint State Examples at PCGS you again find a different list. This is an interesting list for those that are interested in building a Mint State set of Mercury Dimes but they do not want to spend the extra money on the Full Bands designation. It is very interesting because the non-FB examples are cheaper but this list shows there can be some serious competition for finding a few of them that will be just right for your set. Out of the Top 5 Lowest Mintage, only the 1931-D(#16) did not make this list.
01. 1921
02. 1925-D
03. 1916-D
04. 1925-S
05. 1928-D
06. 1924-D
07. 1920-S
08. 1921-D
09. 1926-S
10. 1926-D

When you combine the strength of the previous two lists to include ALL Mint State Examples the list comes into a little better focus I think. You will notice that the 1916-D just barely cracks the top 10 by 13 pieces...but here again I must stress the importance of the crack out game and the wonderful human quality called GREED.
01. 1926-S
02. 1919-S
03. 1927-S
04. 1927-D
05. 1920-S
06. 1921
07. 1925-D
08. 1923-S
09. 1924-S
10. 1916-D

Another question we can ask ourselves is which coins make all of the lists...or most of the lists and what is their average ranking? Let's take a look just for fun...because if you have really read this far then you are clearly a real coin geek/merc fan/glutton for punishment/data analysis junkie.........or maybe you are wondering where I might be going with all of this. I took this exercise on to see where the data might lead and to see if there were any clear answers. On we go....
Average Ranking From Above Lists:
Date Ave. Rank
01. 1926-S 4.75
02. 1921-P 7.50
02. 1927-S 7.50
03. 1916-D 8.25
04. 1927-D 8.50
05. 1921-D 9.50
06. 1925-D 9.75
07. 1919-S 10.25
08. 1923-S 11.25
09. 1928-D 11.75
10. 1925-S 12.00
11. 1924-S 12.75
11. 1920-S 12.75
12. 1931-S 16.25
13. 1924-D 16.50
14. 1919-D 16.75
15. 1918-S 18.75
15. 1926-D 18.75
16. 1930-S 19.00
17. 1931-D 19.25
18. 1929-S 19.50
19. 1931-P 20.00
20. 1918-D 21.25
21. 1945-P 24.00

So, where do we go from here you might ask...if you are still reading this. The next step would be to do a sampling of market availability. There are certainly different ways to do this. One way I would like to consider would be to find out how many times a PCGS Problem Free Mint State example of each of these dates showed up at Heritage Auctions in the past 10 years...then rank them. That would be interesting. There are other places we could go with this as well but you get the idea. We could even add weights to each ranking figure.

Based on what I have here so far, what might I conclude as the TOP 6?...and why?
01. 1926-S
I might just be trying to ruffle some feathers here but a little Heritage Market Availability Analysis sure would go a loooong way with this one. How many PCGS Mint State 26-S examples have you seen hit the auction block in comparison to the 16-D?
02. 1916-D
There have been way too many of these darn things saved which holds it back and there have been way too many of these things cracked out and resubmitted which lands it in this spot.
03. 1927-S
Here again is where I think a little Market Availability Analysis would help but it is my feeling that this coin would rank higher than the 21-P.
04. 1921-P
05. 1927-D
06. 1921-D

If you are building a MS FB set, things should be fairly clear. It should also be clear if you do not care about spending the extra money on Full Bands. If you are building a mixed set then you certainly have a few things to consider.

Well, as you can probably tell, I had some free time and I like Mercury Dimes. I hope someone finds at least some of this interesting or valuable. I hope a few folks that are either new to collecting or maybe just new to Mercury Dimes can learn something here. I know I lived way too long thinking that the top 5 keys/semi-keys were all based on the mintage numbers. Enjoy!

Greg

oreville

I do not want to burst your bubble but this analysis would be stronger if you did three more analyses.

One for choice mint state and better MS-63 and better doing the exact same process you have used.
The second for gem mint state and better MS-65 and better ....
the last is for super gem mint state MS-66 (or MS-67) and better

This might make your findings more precise as I imagine most mint state examples are of the 60 61 and 62 grades and may make your findings imprecise.

Probably not a big deal to re-plug the numbers as you have already done the hard part.

mkman123

very nicely researched analysis!

fcloud

That took a bunch of work to put together.

MFH

Greg,

What a labor of love.

Thanks for posting this as I am at the infantcy stage
in my Mercury Dime collection .


edit for typos

DIMEMAN

I always told you how tuff the 27-S was. And the 16-D can be found at any show...ANY!!!!

Nice work!!!

DeepCoin

As a former collector of this series, I think you got off to a great start, but I concur with Oreville on many points. One more factor in addition to the issue regarding resubmissions is that many quality coins reside in NGC holders. In my experience, many if not most are about one point over graded. Yes, there WILL be examples of correct and under grading, but on balance for a large population i think you would find a general agreement regarding this issue. Now the question is, how to factor that and resubmissions into the analysis.

My own experience was in building a high grade 66/67/68 no bands set. Someone wanting a 63/64 set would find a completely different landscape in terms of coins available. For example, a 1918-P in 66 was pop one coin (no bands) 10 years ago. When last I looked it was a pop 3/0 coin. My point to all of this is that an MS designation is just too broad. Another factor is that the "key" coins 1916-D and both 1921s are generally available without too much trouble in most grades. Because they have been accepted as key coins for many years, they surfaced and have been graded more often due to value.

IMHO, the hardest coins to locate are the mint marked teens and twenties coins, 1916-d excepted.

As a trained statistician I appreciate your work, keep going!

MidLifeCrisis

I'm a simple guy. If I were building a collection of key date and semi-key date Mercury Dimes, I would use the list sorted by mintage to define my collection; i.e.,
01. 1916-D
02. 1921-D
03. 1921
04. 1931-D
05. 1926-S
06. 1931-S
07. 1930-S
08. 1931
09. 1928-D
10. 1929-S

All other factors pertaining to full bands, non-full bands, grades awarded by PCGS or some other TPG...these factors cannot be treated with the same validity, so I would not consider them relevant to my collecting decisions.

In other words, I don't think a key date should be defined by a TPG and/or a grade, and certainly not by whether or not it has full bands (particularly while other parts of the coin may be weakly struck).

But that's just my opinion...

DIMEMAN

MLC - I understand your thinking to a point. But there is a flaw in your thinking also.

Lowest mintage isn't always lowest survival! Some of the date/mm Mercs with higher mintages than the 16-D are a lot harder to find in certain grades because of survival.

MidLifeCrisis

<< <i>Lowest mintage isn't always lowest survival! Some of the date/mm Mercs with higher mintages than the 16-D are a lot harder to find in certain grades because of survival. >>


True.

However, no one really knows the exact numbers of these coins that have survived either. This is just another subjective factor that I would not let influence my decision.

As keyman64 noted in his OP - For some folks, it seems very easy to select which coins are the keys and semi-keys for any given series.

I am one of those folks.

MidLifeCrisis

<< <i>This data merely points out where folks will have challenges, more often than not, depending upon how they wish to structure their set. That's all. >>


And for that purpose, you've provided an excellent set of data and analysis.

I think it all comes down to deciding what attributes about a particular coin you are willing to pay more for.

Some will pay more for full steps, full bell lines, full bands, full head, etc. Some won't.

Some will pay more for condition rarity. Some won't.

Some will pay more for a top pop. Some won't.

Some will pay more to get that 65. Some will be satisfied with a nice 64.

All of these are valid issues to consider when buying a coin. I'm not saying those who do not collect the way I collect are wrong. (Well, maybe just a little bit! )

But, in the end, I think it's important to remember that, when determining key dates, anything beyond mintage figures is a matter of opinion.

lasvegasteddy

wow...alot of research there

Cocoinut

<< I'm a simple guy. If I were building a collection of key date and semi-key date Mercury Dimes, I would use the list sorted by mintage to define my collection; i.e.,
01. 1916-D
02. 1921-D
03. 1921
04. 1931-D
05. 1926-S
06. 1931-S
07. 1930-S
08. 1931
09. 1928-D
10. 1929-S


Really? I have read that many coins from the late 1920's to early '30's were available from banks at face value until the mid-1930's; there simply was no demand for them in the early years of the Great Depression. My own experience has borne that out, particularly with the 1929-S, 1930-S, and 1931-D. I've found the 1931-P and 1931-S to be a bit tougher, but still not too difficult. The 1916-D can be found easily at major shows, or more commonly, auctions. Both 1921's are harder to locate than the '16-D. I believe Greg's list of the Top 21 is as good as anyone can make (excluding FB's and condition rarities). The '26-S and '27-S are seldom seen in MS64/better, FB or not.

Jim

MidLifeCrisis

<< <i>The 1916-D can be found easily at major shows, or more commonly, auctions. >>


Let's face it...none of these coins is really rare.

The 16-D, like its 09-S VDB Lincoln counterpart or most any other "key" date, can be found easily at major shows and auctions because more people collect them; more of them get slabbed; and dealers want to stock more of them because they are easier to sell.

Serious Mercury Dime collectors have a hard time finding the 27-S, the 25-S, the 19-S, the 26-S, etc, because these coins have not been as popular historically with the broader collecting community. They have been largely ignored by type and key date collectors; therefore, fewer of them survive in higher grades and fewer have been slabbed.

veryfine

<< <i>

<< <i>This data merely points out where folks will have challenges, more often than not, depending upon how they wish to structure their set. That's all. >>


And for that purpose, you've provided an excellent set of data and analysis.

I think it all comes down to deciding what attributes about a particular coin you are willing to pay more for.

Some will pay more for full steps, full bell lines, full bands, full head, etc. Some won't.

Some will pay more for condition rarity. Some won't.

Some will pay more for a top pop. Some won't.

Some will pay more to get that 65. Some will be satisfied with a nice 64.

All of these are valid issues to consider when buying a coin. I'm not saying those who do not collect the way I collect are wrong. (Well, maybe just a little bit! )

But, in the end, I think it's important to remember that, when determining key dates, anything beyond mintage figures is a matter of opinion. >>


MLC,

Very well said and I share your thoughts with regard to key dates.

MidLifeCrisis

<< <i>There are some very rare Mercury Dime Varieties out there. >>


Ah, yes indeed! But varieties are a different thing altogether!

camlov2

Great information. I would give the column MS less worth due to the fact that a portion of those coins are now sitting in the MSFB column. Mintage and MSFB I believe to be the most important. Thanks for the work.

lasvegasteddy

i know it's another story bringing proofs into the discussion
but aren't the rarest mercury dimes sitting in cameo holders
so if a person was truly after rarity in this series
wouldn't proof cameo's top the list???

if i can this is what i'm after...a cameo example

i know ngc has a few
pcgs is even tougher
just how many pcgs cameo exsist?

lasvegasteddy

"Trouble Maker!!! "
lol
ahhh come on
doing a spread on cameo designated proofs should only of been a smoke break in time...

lasvegasteddy

pcgs pop shows proof mercury dimes that made cameo designation or deep cameo (no dcams to report)
1936...0
1937...1
1938...0
1939...9
1940...0
1941...0
1942...1

out of seven year run of proofs...4 still remain dark...2 years hold only 1....one year has 9 (wow)<<<there is hope

lasvegasteddy

just don't poke any more pins in my voodoo doll as it was a humble inclusion...and he's a hurtin unit already...

copperhunter

I do not collect these at all, but when I read your post from Mr. Lange, I wanted to add to that the survival rate vs. mintage argument can best be seen when 1) looking at the circulated versus uncirculated population ratios. Coins with low mintage with disproporationately higher uncirculated examples imply hoarding, and 2) looking to other series for similar grade distributions. As someone who concentrates on Lincolns, I know that the 1931-S is considered a key date from a mintage perspective, but most are uncirculated, since this year was one for hoarding, much in the same way the 1931-D dime was according to Mr. Lange. This is also why the grade/price curve is very flat for the 1931-S Lincoln.

baseballjeff

I am a Mercury Dime collector and I stumbled across this post tonight for the first time. This has been an amazing read! I am curious, where are we at now with all these figures 10 years later?

Great work! Thank you!!!

relicsncoins

Great Info

ricko

This is a thread that Mercury dime collectors should have bookmarked... A deep dive indeed into statistics, and shows opportunities for even further analysis. Cheers, RickO

PTVETTER

I am sure that some of the information is still spot on.
As an example I believe that the hardest Mercury dime to find is the 1926-S with full bands!

jesbroken

I saved this when I first read it and had already completed my Mercury Dime collection. Unfortunately, I didn't understand much of this, as it was unknown to me, so I went after the typical stars. A wildman named kryptonitecomics sold my collection after having it graded and I truly was lucky in I received payment just as his world collapsed. Wish I had read this first and would love to see the followup analysis spoke of.
Jim

mavs2583

The 1916d has increased in price significantly in the past year. They used to be available all day at around $500 in ag3 , now they’re consistently $700+. I want to upgrade mine but don’t want to possibly overpay at current prices if they do come down.

Swampboy

Saw I had 6 notifications just now.
Bookmarked this guy back in the day.
Great thread.
I see Teddy stopped by recently.