Options
Scarcity of 1877 cent
stevepk
Posts: 238 ✭✭✭
I could be mistaken, but I believe Rick Snow noticed only two obverse die varieties and one reverse die variety on the 1877 Indian Head Cent. There have been no 1877 Indian Head cents found with excessive die cracks, suggesting these dies were not used until failure. A die yields roughly 200,000 or so coins until failure. This means the true mintage figure of the 1877 Indian Head cent is likely to be significantly lower than the reported 800,000+ and closer to 400,000 or fewer original examples. I could be mistaken on the details as I am going by memory and do not have the book in front of me. The point is that there is reasonable conjecture to conclude the actual mintage was less than stated. The excess quantity in the mint report probably belong to cents dated 1876. Please correct me if I am wrong on any of these details.
This partially explains why the mintage figure seems high for such an expensive coin. The other explanation is a low survival rate.
When browsing Ebay, I see plenty of 1877 Indian Head cents on any given day. However, most of these are in junk condition. Most of them are corroded, damaged, severely worn, or just plain ugly. I've also noticed many that appear to be over-graded, even by PCGS and NGC. Several examples in Fine holders have no visible letters of 'Liberty' and many in Good holders have indistinct rims, especially near 'States' on the obverse. There are a few in AG3 holders that require an imagination to see the date.
The 1877 cent appears not to be a rare coin. Rather, it is one of the scarcest coins in a very popular series, driving the value. Of those that do exist, most are in very poor condition or have major problems.
At what grade level is the 1877 a scarce coin? Are my observations of over-graded coins consistent with the observations of others on this board? Feedback would be appreciated. How common are counterfeit 1877 cents in PCGS holders and how common are other cents altered from other years to reflect 1877? I know the 1879 is often altered to look like an 1877 and can be identified by a nub at the base of the 1 in the date.
This partially explains why the mintage figure seems high for such an expensive coin. The other explanation is a low survival rate.
When browsing Ebay, I see plenty of 1877 Indian Head cents on any given day. However, most of these are in junk condition. Most of them are corroded, damaged, severely worn, or just plain ugly. I've also noticed many that appear to be over-graded, even by PCGS and NGC. Several examples in Fine holders have no visible letters of 'Liberty' and many in Good holders have indistinct rims, especially near 'States' on the obverse. There are a few in AG3 holders that require an imagination to see the date.
The 1877 cent appears not to be a rare coin. Rather, it is one of the scarcest coins in a very popular series, driving the value. Of those that do exist, most are in very poor condition or have major problems.
At what grade level is the 1877 a scarce coin? Are my observations of over-graded coins consistent with the observations of others on this board? Feedback would be appreciated. How common are counterfeit 1877 cents in PCGS holders and how common are other cents altered from other years to reflect 1877? I know the 1879 is often altered to look like an 1877 and can be identified by a nub at the base of the 1 in the date.
0
Comments
For me the toughest part was finding a decent enough coin at a reasonable price for my frugal collector friend's Dansco set, which took several years to do. Due to a fortunate circumstance with a dealer friend, I was able to acquire and then resell this one at Fine 12 Bid.....I think it has a shot at F15,
and have seen some in TPG's with similar detail graded VF20. As you indicate, they 'are around', but the problem free ones that are accurately graded generally command all the money.
While there are many counterfiets, I doubt that PCGS slabbed counterfiets are particularly common. I imagine graders are on a higher alert for spotting fakes of this date than others.
This date may have the fewest # of surviving examples in the series, but it is analogous to the 1916-D Merc and 1909-S VDB Lincoln (to name just a couple).
Counterfeits have been problem for a long time. It is a coin that should be purchased slabbed by a major TPG.
<< <i>You guys need to reread the OP's post. He isn't saying that it's a rare coin. >>
I agree.....I'd also like to know more about the OP's premise and specific question: about if there were actually fewer minted than reported).
......I collect old stuff......
<< <i>I shared this one, along with the story, on the forum a couple weeks ago.
For me the toughest part was finding a decent enough coin at a reasonable price for my frugal collector friend's Dansco set, which took several years to do. Due to a fortunate circumstance with a dealer friend, I was able to acquire and then resell this one at Fine 12 Bid.....I think it has a shot at F15,
and have seen some in TPG's with similar detail graded VF20. As you indicate, they 'are around', but the problem free ones that are accurately graded generally command all the money.
>>
Yours pictured is very similar in condition to one that I have, which was graded by PCGS in F15.
<< <i>
<< <i>You guys need to reread the OP's post. He isn't saying that it's a rare coin. >>
I agree.....I'd also like to know more about the OP's premise and specific question: about if there were actually fewer minted than reported). >>
I've heard that theory, but I have seen so many that it's hard to swallow. I think it's more psychological than real - everybody "knows" that it's scarce so the prices stay high.
It is a scarce coin, the high price brings them out as most collectors trade up constantly. I would say a properly graded AU is a good deal at current prices. Most are way overgraded, even in TPG holders. The overgraded coins tend to not sell well and this makes them appear in the market more often.
I only regret is not loading up on mint state 1877s about 20 years ago, this
has been an outstanding key date investment.
<< <i>The die deterioration that is not found is telling. Since one die was used on the reverse of every known 1877, it begs the question, "how could that die strike 825,000 coins"?
>>
Agreed, but it seems an awful lot of whatever was minted ended up surviving. I've read that the Lincoln caused a surge in collectors. Maybe they pulled a lot of the 77's which would have been well worn by that time. I seem to remember looking in Coinfacts and noticing the All Grades survival estimate was higher than some more common dates? And maybe the number slabbed also? Too lazy to go look right now but I think I'm right?
Edited to add: I'm at Long Beach. They just served the taquitos and beer.
<< <i>You guys need to reread the OP's post. He isn't saying that it's a rare coin. >>
Sorry but when a poster starts presenting information to indicate that the mintage figures are "half" of what has been published by the US Mint and traditionally passed on over the years, I could understand why folks might conclude that a case for "rarity" might be building.
IMO, the 1877 is in the exact same boat as the 09-S, 09-SVDB, 1955/55 in that its is readily available at any grade if you've got the financial backing. I could also understand how some might conclude rarity from that statement as well.
The name is LEE!
Actually, there isn't.
By the middle of the 19th century (at least), the Mint had well established procedures to destroy obverse dies at the end of the year. The re-usage of prior year obverse dies was something that happened in the very early days of the mint, but not later. As far as I know, none of the well-established researchers have suggested any off-year usage of obverse dies for regular production coins after the early years of the Mint. (The activities of the "Midnight Minters was a different case, of course.)
In addition, it should be fairly easy to find the records of the deliveries of cents from 1877 - if they all happened after the new dies were delivered, then none of them were dated 1876.
Check out the Southern Gold Society
Still, 852,000 strikes with one reverse die and no evidence of die erosion does seem rather extreme.
Lance.
I would like to see rhedden's reports of several 1877's per year being found by detectorists -- this point, I have a hard time swallowing but am willing to be proven wrong.
The website 1877indianheadcent.com theorizes (but I can't vouch for their information source) that:
Despite the somewhat high mintage for a key date coin, the number of pieces that have survived to this day is much, much lower than the mintage suggests. In all grades, perhaps no more than 5,000 1877 Indian Head Cents are still known to exist, and perhaps only 10% of these are still in uncirculated condition. Proofs are more relatively available, with approximately two-thirds of the original mintage remaining, but these are highly valued as well, despite having a similar mintage to other proof coins of the series.
There are several possible explanations for the scarcity of the 1877 Indian Head Cent. The first is that all coins circulated extensively and were later melted. This, however, appears unlikely, as this issue has been known to collectors as rare since the late 19th century. Another possibility is that the mintage was incorrectly recorded, which is known to have occurred at the Philadelphia Mint from time to time. But perhaps the most likely reason is that the mintage did occur, but that not all were released into circulation (perhaps as few as 200,000) and that the others were later melted at the Mint and used for the production of other dates. It is also a mystery why only two die pairs are known to exist, when die life in this period was no more than a couple of hundreds of thousands of coins, and no coins are known to exist from excessively worn dies.
I'm sure RWB, from ATS could offer an informed opinion as well. I would consider the idea that the reported mintage was in error, or that some were minted, retained and later melted, to not be an unreasonable guess. Similar story as to the rarity (on a more extreme scale) of an 1876-cc double dime. I don't have my copy handy, but recall the Bowers book going into typically high detail regarding this.
We'll use our hands and hearts and if we must we'll use our heads.
<< <i>FWIW (and I'm sure Rick can knowledgeably comment/add to the discussion) Bowers, in his Flying Eagle-Indian Head cents book, made a case for the reported mintage likely being higher than actuality. As far as relative scarcity goes, one "seems to see them everywhere" because it's been acknowledged for 100+ years as a valuable date, one worth pulling aside and saving. But (again in the Bowers book) if they were all that easy to find, why (in the 1890s) did someone looking through many thousands of Indian Heads find only a relative pittance of 1877's present?
I would like to see rhedden's reports of several 1877's per year being found by detectorists -- this point, I have a hard time swallowing but am willing to be proven wrong.
The website 1877indianheadcent.com theorizes (but I can't vouch for their information source) that:
Despite the somewhat high mintage for a key date coin, the number of pieces that have survived to this day is much, much lower than the mintage suggests. In all grades, perhaps no more than 5,000 1877 Indian Head Cents are still known to exist, and perhaps only 10% of these are still in uncirculated condition. Proofs are more relatively available, with approximately two-thirds of the original mintage remaining, but these are highly valued as well, despite having a similar mintage to other proof coins of the series.
There are several possible explanations for the scarcity of the 1877 Indian Head Cent. The first is that all coins circulated extensively and were later melted. This, however, appears unlikely, as this issue has been known to collectors as rare since the late 19th century. Another possibility is that the mintage was incorrectly recorded, which is known to have occurred at the Philadelphia Mint from time to time. But perhaps the most likely reason is that the mintage did occur, but that not all were released into circulation (perhaps as few as 200,000) and that the others were later melted at the Mint and used for the production of other dates. It is also a mystery why only two die pairs are known to exist, when die life in this period was no more than a couple of hundreds of thousands of coins, and no coins are known to exist from excessively worn dies.
I'm sure RWB, from ATS could offer an informed opinion as well. I would consider the idea that the reported mintage was in error, or that some were minted, retained and later melted, to not be an unreasonable guess. Similar story as to the rarity (on a more extreme scale) of an 1876-cc double dime. I don't have my copy handy, but recall the Bowers book going into typically high detail regarding this. >>
"no more than 5,000 1877 Indian Head Cents are still known to exist". Yet I count over 6,500 slabbed between PCGS and NGC. Sure, some crackouts and crossovers, but something is screwy there.
<< <i>There's nothing rare or scarce about the 1877. eBay is littered with them. Every auction has many many choices, and a lot of dealers own at least one or two.... It's just expensive because people are willing to pay a lot of money for it, it (along with a few other coins) is the ultra liquid expensive widget. There seems to be a never ending market for this coin... Just bizarre. >>
Yeah, it's really weird... a wonder we just don't go spend the 1877's as if they were a 1958 wheatie. I mean really, same diff.
Bottom line is that extremely good die life is not evidence that mintage figures are wrong.
<< <i>There's nothing rare or scarce about the 1877. eBay is littered with them. Every auction has many many choices, and a lot of dealers own at least one or two.... It's just expensive because people are willing to pay a lot of money for it, it (along with a few other coins) is the ultra liquid expensive widget. There seems to be a never ending market for this coin... Just bizarre. >>
As I see it, not bizarre at all.
For a small cent, it is scarce. Availability at shows and online auctions attests to its popularity. What do think would happen if all 1877 Indian cent prices were dramatically reduced? Let's imagine an 1877 cent half-price sale. They would soon be hard to find and dealers would be clamoring to find them. Prices would soon hit the roof again.
<< <i>Yeah, I'm not sure where the 5K figure came from.
What? You doubt an anonymous Internet website without references? Come on! It's on the Internet!
See http://www.doubledimes.com for a free online reference for US twenty-cent pieces
A Scarce Date in Mint State
The 1877 cent is the lowest mintage cent of the era and has been the target of collector competition ever since the 1890’s when the circulation issue was found to be much scarcer than any other year. At that time collectors typically desired a Proof example to cover the date in their collections. The 1877 Proof is of the same rarity as the 1876 Proof, so it was easy to get. As a result, the rarity of the circulation pieces was overlooked.
When dealers could not easily locate the business strike example to meet their customer’s demand, so they offered the Proof version as a substitute. The case was made that Proofs offered as a better choice over the business strike and were offered at premium. This tempered demand for the circulation strikes and caused prices to remain relatively affordable.
In the 1930’s average Proofs, what we would call PR63RB today, were selling for around $15. The average Mint State version was selling for $7. In the 1940’s the Proof was about $35 and the Mint State was $20. In the early 1960’s the Proofs were $1,000 and the Mint State was $1,500. But by the 1990’s the Proof was priced around $2,000 and the Mint State at $3,000.
In the 1980’s collectors began to think of Mint State and Proof as two different issues. Collectors desired Proof if they were collecting the Proofs and the Mint State issue if they were collecting Business strikes. This caused Mint State prices to gain momentum. Today Mint State prices are generally double the prices of Proofs. Spirited competition is seen for Mint State pieces in high grade with full original mint red.
Why the low mintage?
In 1877 and 1878, nickel coinage was halted and only Proof examples of the five cent and three cent coins were made. The cent was struck in very limited numbers in 1877. The reason for this slowdown in minor coin production was due to a glut of coins at the Mint.
When the bronze cent was first issued in 1864 it was deemed necessary to give it a legal tender limit. It was a mere token coin with very little metal value and the Congress deemed it appropriate to say that they will stand behind the new coins. A 10¢ legal tender limit was imposed. This was quickly reduced to only 4¢. Earlier cents never had this quality and along with guaranteeing the Governments backing, it also gave merchants and banks a legal standing to refuse them in large quantities.
During the Civil War and early Reconstruction period there was little reason anyone would refuse to take a small quantity of cents as small change, but as coinage again began to circulate in greater quantity, it began to become a problem.
If banks take in more cents than the public needs, they will soon have bags and bags of them sitting around doing nothing. Help came in the way of the Mint Act of 1871. It authorized the Mint to redeem earlier copper, bronze and nickel coinage and reissue new coins. This relieved the backlog and subsequently millions of older half cents, copper large cents, copper-nickel cents, bronze cents, nickel three cents and five cent coins went back to the Mint for recoinage.
The bronze cents redeemed and melted included the 1864-1870 coins, and as each year’s redemption progressed, the previous years coinage might hve been included as well. It is entirely probable that the 1871 -1873 mintage of cents had short round-trip from the Mint, to the banks and back to the Mint again, where they were melted. This seems like a wasteful way to get coins moving out of the banks and back into commerce.
In 1874 things changed. Rather than melting coins redeemed, they were cleaned and reissued alongside newly minted coins. Banks requesting cents from the Mint would get either new coins or older coinage.
The ongoing depression hit its worst year in 1877. It is likely that when unemployment rises to 20% that any money being held back will be released into circulation. This flood of minor coins found its way back to the Mint in record numbers in 1876 and 1877. Because the amount of coins being reissued was so high, it was not necessary to mint any new cents, three cents and five cent coins in 1877. The entire mintage of 852,500 cents was delivered by January, 1877. Alongside the new coins were delivered nearly 10 million older cents. A typical bank had a 1-in-10 chance of receiving a 1877 cent from the Mint in 1877. The nickel coins were not minted for circulation at all.