Home U.S. Coin Forum

Is Proof Brown (PR BN) copper unusually cheap?

WingedLiberty1957WingedLiberty1957 Posts: 2,960 ✭✭✭✭✭
I have seen almost every 1961 Proof Brown (BN) Lincoln Cent, and every one that I've seen has really beautiful and vivid color. Also the total population of ALL BN Proof Lincolns in the year 1961 (a total of 62) is significantly lower than every other color class, including the rarer Deep Cameo (DC) class (a total of 162).

I have a hard time wrapping my head around the fact that the PCGS Price Guide lists a PR69DC 1961 Proof Lincoln at $3,650. While a rare and gorgeous PR67BN 1961 Proof Lincoln is listed at a paltry $14 (which doesn't even cover the slabbing costs).

Honestly I will buy all you can find at that price!!! Send them my way for instant cash.

You can pick out any other year of Proof Copper and see this same price dynamic.

Here is the Slab Population Census of Proof Lincolns for the year 1961 ... and at the bottom the PCGS Guide Prices (note that PCGS does not list prices for RBs).

image

Here is a bevy of "$14" PR66BN and PR67BNs:
image
image
image
image

Send any and all PR66BN and PR67BNs you have my way for your $14 payout!!!
Actually I would offer 3x that amount for any you might have.

And are there really collectors out there that would pay over $3,000 for a 1961 PR69DC Lincoln?

Comments

  • WingedLiberty1957WingedLiberty1957 Posts: 2,960 ✭✭✭✭✭
    1961 is actually a bit of an anomaly, having more "colorful" Brown (BN) Proofs than other years. I call this spike the "1961 Anomaly". BN Proofs for other years post 1936 are extremely rare.

    Note that the statistics shown in the chart below were compiled in April 2013. I see from the above screen capture that the total number of 1961 PRBNs (as of today) is 62 (an increase of 12 in the past year).

    image

    I have heard some theories on why this "1961 Anomaly" happened -- one is that the mint was experimenting with a "rinse" for Proofs in the early 1960's (and especially 1961), which may have reacted with the copper coins to turn the copper colors under very specific storage conditions. In these sets the copper would turn colors inside the original (unopened) U.S.Mint Cello Packs. Below is an original 1961 Proof Set that I cherry picked from my local Bricks and Mortar for $25 -- underneath that is how the Lincoln looked when tipped into the light.

    image
    image
  • WingedLiberty1957WingedLiberty1957 Posts: 2,960 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Here is an original 1962 Proof Set that I bought on eBay for $25 ...

    image

    I submitted this coin to PCGS and got the 2nd known PR68 BN Lincoln Cent in the entire series
    image

    There are no known PR69 BN Lincolns (at least not as of today)
  • crypto79crypto79 Posts: 8,623
    The logic is backwards. 1961 proof cents are cheap in general as they should be being very common. The multi thousand dollar example you listed was that price because it was red, it made those because of its plastic. In a bucket at a B&M the reds would only bring a dollar or so more than the toned. Silver Proof sets for 25$ seams like a steal and if there are any attractive coins in them even better!
  • WildIdeaWildIdea Posts: 1,872 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Winged, I dig how much time you put into the thread. I appreciate the fact that you collect these and bring attention to BN Lincoln's of all types, Lord knows I'm sitting on a good plenty, so carry on.

    My thinking is that if PCGS listed for higher money many many more would get sent in for sure. You'll prob have to keep making these yourself. You may be onto something though, so unless you have as many as you want, shhhhhhh.

    And as you bring attention to this niche, I still can't muster the interest myself to even open a mint set box to peek and fold back up.
  • pennyanniepennyannie Posts: 3,929 ✭✭✭
    Winged- While the browns cover the neon colors most do not feel the need to sell them for 14 bucks. I agree I would take all I can get for that price and have a few neon pinks that are slabbed brown. lol
    Mark
    NGC registry V-Nickel proof #6!!!!
    working on proof shield nickels # 8 with a bullet!!!!

    RIP "BEAR"
  • WingedLiberty1957WingedLiberty1957 Posts: 2,960 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Good responses. I enjoyed reading them.



  • Are there different grades(higher quality,purity) of copper being used?
    Mark Anderson
  • airplanenutairplanenut Posts: 21,875 ✭✭✭✭✭
    I think the problem here is the usage of the term brown, not the pricing per se. For better or for worse, the brown designation has become a catch-all for copper that isn't red. This means that when the price guides are made, they have to account for a brown coin that is legitimately brown, not colorfully toned. But just the same, no price guide accounts for toned or otherwise particularly appealing coins. There's only one price for an MS65 Morgan dollar for any given year, but the white one and the one with a bright, neon rainbow have nowhere near the same value. With your logic, all that seems to matter in setting the price is the look-up of actual grade in a price guide table, not factoring in the eye appeal.
    JK Coin Photography - eBay Consignments | High Quality Photos | LOW Prices | 20% of Consignment Proceeds Go to Pancreatic Cancer Research
  • SmEagle1795SmEagle1795 Posts: 2,135 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Side question: what application did you use to make that histogram? It looks very clean and well represented, with the slight 3D.
    Learn about our world's shared history told through the first millennium of coinage: Colosseo Collection
  • WingedLiberty1957WingedLiberty1957 Posts: 2,960 ✭✭✭✭✭


    << <i>Are there different grades(higher quality,purity) of copper being used? >>


    This was initially my thought about the spike in colorfully toned proof Lincolns in the early 1960's (with the color spike peaking in 1961). I thought that perhaps the 95% copper / 5% zinc blanks used in 1961 had some impurity in it -- that lead to the wild color. However I dropped that theory when I noticed there was practically ZERO color in Brown Mint State 1961 Lincolns. (I assumed the blanks used probably came from the same supplier.) That's when someone posted on this board (a few years back as I recall) about the experimental rinse used by the U.S.Mint on Proofs in the early 1960's. I have to note that I have never seen a corroboration of that fact from another source though -- so I would still consider this a working theory only.





    << <i>I think the problem here is the usage of the term brown, not the pricing per se. For better or for worse, the brown designation has become a catch-all for copper that isn't red. This means that when the price guides are made, they have to account for a brown coin that is legitimately brown, not colorfully toned. But just the same, no price guide accounts for toned or otherwise particularly appealing coins. There's only one price for an MS65 Morgan dollar for any given year, but the white one and the one with a bright, neon rainbow have nowhere near the same value. With your logic, all that seems to matter in setting the price is the look-up of actual grade in a price guide table, not factoring in the eye appeal. >>


    I totally agree. "BROWN" (BN) is such a huge misnomer for many non-red copper coins. I always felt like PCGS should have instituted four color classes for Copper: Red (RD), Red-Brown (RB), Brown (BN), and Color (CL).

    It's interesting that if you have a toned silver coin, there is no alternate color designation -- yet copper is cut into all those color classes with the Brown color class "catching" all (or at least most of) the wild toners.

    It's interesting but I have seen some/many MS copper where the coin's color is a true brown -- while Proof Brown's often display wild colors when tipped into the light. That being said, I have seen a few wildly toned MS BN copper pieces -- they are definitely out there.





    << <i>Side question: what application did you use to make that histogram? It looks very clean and well represented, with the slight 3D. >>


    I started by punching into the raw numbers into this web-based tool ...
    Bar Chart Tool
    I had to play around with the settings a bit (specifying 3D and black background)
    Then did some fine tuning in Adobe Photoshop to make it look the way I wanted.
    There might be some easier way, but that's what I did.
  • OldIndianNutKaseOldIndianNutKase Posts: 2,700 ✭✭✭✭✭
    WL,

    I have been very impressed not only by your fabulous collection of toned coins, but the excellent manner in which you display them. So, let me take a moment to share some ideas with you as to:

    <<I have a hard time wrapping my head around the fact that the PCGS Price Guide lists a PR69DC 1961 Proof Lincoln at $3,650. While a rare and gorgeous PR67BN 1961 Proof Lincoln is listed at a paltry $14 (which doesn't even cover the slabbing costs). >>

    I too have had an interest in the 1961 anomoly as well. But I think the PCGS Price Guide is not reflective of the "toned" 1961 Linclon proofs. Just searching eBay for 1961 Lincoln proofs I find a number of beautifully toned specimens ranging in grade from PF66BN to PF67RB with prices ranging from $385 to $725 each. The PCGS Guide lists a 1961 PF67Red DCAM at $165 (22% of the toned PF67RB) and a 1961 PF 66 Red DCAM at $60 (16% of the toned PF66 RB). Of course a PF69 Red DCAM will fetch very significant $$ because it will rate the highest of any 1961 Lincoln proof in a registry set. And I would not be suprised if a toned PF69 would sell for more than the PF69 DCAM.

    It would seem to me that there is a common denominator of some type playing in with the toned 1961 Lincoln proofs. Interesting that one of the ones that you posted was still in mint wrapper. But also take note of the consecutive PCGS regristration numbers of the following Lincoln 1961 PF's:

    image
    image
    image
    image

    Not only do these coins have consecutive serial numbers, their look is almost identical as to their toning. One can reasonable conclude that they were part of the same submittal to PCGS. And PCGS seems to agree that the toning is natural. Can one assumve from this that the mint must have had a "bad air" day when these coins were packaged? But they are certainly NOT the 1961 Lincoln PFxxBN's that are listed in the Price Guide.

    Most of the toned specimens on eBay were listed by a member of this forum as part of the "Over the Rainbow" Collection. That isn't your collection, is it??

    OINK

  • robecrobec Posts: 6,573 ✭✭✭✭✭
    I had the chance to buy the 4 sequentially PCGS certified last June on eBay. I initially won the auction for one of them. I noticed a week later that another auction was going with the same certification as the one I won. I still hadn't received my coin so I contacted the seller. It was then he told me that the photo was a mistake and that he had three others from the same group. I made him a deal to acquire the other three.

    More Lincoln Proof toners.
  • WingedLiberty1957WingedLiberty1957 Posts: 2,960 ✭✭✭✭✭


    << <i>I have been very impressed not only by your fabulous collection of toned coins, but the excellent manner in which you display them. So, let me take a moment to share some ideas with you. I too have had an interest in the 1961 anomaly. But I think the PCGS Price Guide is not reflective of the "toned" 1961 Linclon proofs. Just searching eBay for 1961 Lincoln proofs I find a number of beautifully toned specimens ranging in grade from PF66BN to PF67RB with prices ranging from $385 to $725 each. The PCGS Guide lists a 1961 PF67Red DCAM at $165 (22% of the toned PF67RB) and a 1961 PF 66 Red DCAM at $60 (16% of the toned PF66 RB). Of course a PF69 Red DCAM will fetch very significant $$ because it will rate the highest of any 1961 Lincoln proof in a registry set. And I would not be surprised if a toned PF69 would sell for more than the PF69 DCAM. It would seem to me that there is a common denominator of some type playing in with the toned 1961 Lincoln proofs. Interesting that one of the ones that you posted was still in mint wrapper. But also take note of the consecutive PCGS registration numbers of the following Lincoln 1961 PF's. Not only do these coins have consecutive serial numbers, their look is almost identical as to their toning. One can reasonable conclude that they were part of the same submittable to PCGS. And PCGS seems to agree that the toning is natural. Can one assume from this that the mint must have had a "bad air" day when these coins were packaged? But they are certainly NOT the 1961 Lincoln PFxxBN's that are listed in the Price Guide. Most of the toned specimens on eBay were listed by a member of this forum as part of the "Over the Rainbow" Collection. That isn't your collection, is it?? >>



    Thanks for the nice feedback on the display. The photography accolades belong to Phil Arnold of PCGS TrueView fame, who does an excellent job capturing toners.

    I do agree that the PCGS Price Guide seems "off" -- However I bet it's difficult to have a guide reflect a general and average price. Does anyone know how PCGS determines the Guide Price? Is it done by averaging auction results? If a PR67BN sells for $200 on eBay, does their price guide bump the "average" price to reflect that higher sale?

    The prices of the very high grade DC's just seem crazy to me!! (but that's me) I would much rather buy a 1795 Half Dollar in VG or F condition than than a pristine 1961 DC Lincoln Cent. I have a hard time believing that those $3000+ prices will hold up over the long haul.

    No, that "Over the Rainbow" collection is not mine. It belonged (or belongs) to C.U.Forum member Ibndalight (not sure if he still posts here or not).

    In terms of those consecutive Cert Numbers, that was because of seller of these -- collected a few toned 1961's -- then submitted the entire batch to PCGS at one time. That blue/purple color is actually fairly common for the year 1961 and is sort of a "default" toning color -- though 1961's can also have other looks and colors. I think that entire slew of 1961's that you posted were bought by CUForum member Robec. Robec and I have most of the toned 1961's that are known/certified (well over half of the total known population, I believe) -- I guess that makes the two of us 1961 toned proof addicts. Robec actually has more 1961's than I do, so he wins the "prize". If you are looking for beautiful color on a copper proof coin, focus on the year 1961, and you can't go wrong. (Sort of like a fine wine year.)
  • dbemikedbemike Posts: 1,018 ✭✭✭
    WL, I, too, am impressed with your collection of toned proofs. The statistics are really interesting also, since I recently acquired a few of the 1937-1942 BNs, I see how tough it'll be to find the others in BN.

    My pictures aren't fancy and aren't Truviewed, but the 1937 has a picture in Coin Facts

    image

    image

    image
  • OldIndianNutKaseOldIndianNutKase Posts: 2,700 ✭✭✭✭✭
    From my viewpoint I think that you have acquired spectacular coins that have yet to be recognized in the same light as a PF70DCAM. A "perfect coin" right out of the mint, that has been perfectly struck, and without any noticeable spots of any kind is special. But out of thousands of coins that will now meet that description, there happen to be a very few that attain remarkable toning. But the toning is NOT BROWN. Brown is a mostly a naturally oxidized copper surface. All copper will attain this state, unless they are enslabbed with an inert gas, which is not the case with a TPG holder. And in reality, many "Red" copper coins have likely been enhanced by dipping at some point in time.

    So, getting back to your OP, there is an argument to be made that a perfectly toned coins is more special than is a "Red" coin or a "cameo" coin which is the most speculative of designations. I recently acquired an 1885 Indian cent PCGS PF67BN from Rick Snow for $6,000. The Coinfacts price for a PF67BN is $3250 and the Coinfacts price for a 67 Red is $8,700. No picture of the PF67Red on Coinfacts, but my PF67BN:
    image

    I would LOVE to see a PF67 Red that looks better than this coin (out of 3 graded PF67 Red). Like in your OP, perfectly toned coins may not only be more beautiful than Red coins, but they may also be more believable.

    OINK
  • WingedLiberty1957WingedLiberty1957 Posts: 2,960 ✭✭✭✭✭
    OldIndian, now THAT is one SPECTACULAR Proof Indian Cent!!!
    I find these toners so much more interesting and beautiful than Reds.
    But I realize there are lots of collectors out there that prefer mint-fresh looking reds.
    I guess I am just weird!! To each their own.

    I paid $800 for this PR65BN. To me it was worth every penny of the $250 I paid over top of the Guide price.
    In any case, your PR67BN beats mine easily for the depth and richness of color.
    I could stare at coins like yours all day.

    image

  • OldIndianNutKaseOldIndianNutKase Posts: 2,700 ✭✭✭✭✭
    We share a viewpoint that is not necessarily the TPG's viewpoint. The assumption that Red is superior (or market preferable) to BN or RB is their attempt to overly simplify their market acceptable concept. The do not even show a 1885 PF in CoinFacts higher than PF64. There are 29 >PF64 but they do not even publish a picture of one. The more visual specimens are BR or RB obviously. There is no reason that a spectacular 67BN can not sell for more than a 67Red.

    But I think that you are doing very well on your 1961 Lincoln PF's. If you only had a nicely toned PF69BR........could just be 2x the Red. But CoinFacts will still call it BR. Whatever.

    OINK

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Emoji
Image
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file