PCGS VARIETY NUMBERS FOR THE SAME COIN
Steve
Posts: 3,312 ✭✭✭
I am concerned to see that PCGS has assigned separate 6 digit coin numbers for at least two of their 2012 Lincoln cent DCAM proof coins. One number is for their so called "First Strike" version (511886) and the other number (511252) supposedly for their basic blue labeled Lincoln cents. We also see these other labels for "Flag" and "Autograph" and who knows what else showing up as marketing promotions especially on the Shield reverse Lincoln cents. I assumed they were trying to use (get rid of) the old holders with these so called "special labels". Most of the traditional blue labels seem to appear on the NEW "prong" holders only.
All that is minor to noteing that in the Lincoln cent proof set registries, the two different coin numbers appear in various sets for the 2012 coins and they show different total coins holdered by PCGS. For instance in grade PR70DCAM there are currently 63 of the "First Strike" version holdered and 26 of the regular blue labeled coins holdered. Of course, the 2012 coins don't count until 2013 but I can see this new trend by PCGS where the same coin is assigned different coin populations based on the label used to be confusing and not appropriate for the fair designation of the coin. What do you think?
Steve
P.S. For those of you who may not know that so called "First Strike" labels have no REAL relationship to WHEN the coins were actually struck by the US Mint it is clear to me that the coins holdered in FIRST STRIKE or in regular blue holders are exactly the same coin and should NOT have different numbers assigned by PCGS.
All that is minor to noteing that in the Lincoln cent proof set registries, the two different coin numbers appear in various sets for the 2012 coins and they show different total coins holdered by PCGS. For instance in grade PR70DCAM there are currently 63 of the "First Strike" version holdered and 26 of the regular blue labeled coins holdered. Of course, the 2012 coins don't count until 2013 but I can see this new trend by PCGS where the same coin is assigned different coin populations based on the label used to be confusing and not appropriate for the fair designation of the coin. What do you think?
Steve
P.S. For those of you who may not know that so called "First Strike" labels have no REAL relationship to WHEN the coins were actually struck by the US Mint it is clear to me that the coins holdered in FIRST STRIKE or in regular blue holders are exactly the same coin and should NOT have different numbers assigned by PCGS.
0
Comments
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution
http://www.coinshop.com
<< <i>Bubbling Zinc? What is that? >>
Zinc bubbling is often seen on Lincoln cents post-1982 due to airbubbles trapped in the metal during some part of the process. Someone else can elaborate. I'm assuming LindeDad is talking about when they start corroding in the holders.
<< <i>Bubbling Zinc? What is that? >>
Look at some of the early zinc cents, they often had bubbles under the copper plating.
It's less of a problem on the newer ones.
The newer ones are more likely to have spotting/stains from the rinse used at the mint.
A few years back they had a PCGS 1995 DDO in 66 RED at one of the big auction houses.
They're common in that grade and higher. I was surprised reading the auction description.
It was described as almost a top pop and the total pop stated was really low (like a dozen).
The reason was that the coin was submitted as an error so it had the E prefix number.
Few of those 1995 DDOs were submitted that way because they will attribute them free with the normal service.
The pop in the normal holder at that time was about 10,000 and many of coins in the high grades above 66.
I guess the moral of the story is to know about what you're bidding on and understand how to check the total pop numbers.