Home U.S. Coin Forum
Options

Designated error vs. error not designated

If you collect Flying Eagle cents and you
bought an 1857 mS 65 overstruck on a
50 cent on the obverse, Rick Snow could tell you about the midnight minter etc. However PCGS
Does not recognize this coin as an error
In reality Rick Snow will sell this coin for a premium above me 65 price.
But if you buy a gem 1877 ms 65 red Indian cent
that had grease in the die and some of the date
Is not crisply struck , PCGS will designate
this coin an Error. In reality your coin will bring
Considerably less, perhaps even 25% of the valu
Of an ms 65 red 1877 Indian.
It seems to me having called your coin. an error can be a curse.

  What do you think ?

Comments

  • Options
    STEWARTBLAYNUMISSTEWARTBLAYNUMIS Posts: 2,697 ✭✭✭✭

    In PCGS lingo grease in the die is called
    Struck thru and designated an error.

  • Options
    BigMooseBigMoose Posts: 1,466 ✭✭✭

    Stewart, have you ever seen or heard of a Broadstruck Proof Indian Cent?? I have seen only one in many years of chasing Proof Indian Cents, an 1885 in Gem. Seems to me that a broadstruck 1885 Proof Indian Cent error would be worth many times more than it's generic cousin 1885 Proof Indian Cent.

    TomT-1794

    Check out some of my 1794 Large Cents on www.coingallery.org
  • Options
    STEWARTBLAYNUMISSTEWARTBLAYNUMIS Posts: 2,697 ✭✭✭✭

    Big Moose - completely agree with you

    However grease in the die should not be designated an error. It kills the value
    I believe it is putting liability over numismatics. I am a fan of numismatics

  • Options
    ctf_error_coinsctf_error_coins Posts: 15,433 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Error is a term

    There are major errors and there are minor errors.

    Chase the big ones.

  • Options
    ZoinsZoins Posts: 33,910 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited September 23, 2017 8:26AM

    Some types of errors are with much more than others. In the OP example the distinction is more about overstruck vs. grease filled die than non-designated vs designated.

    Some errors are more desirable than non-error coins and others less desirable. Does every error have to be worth more? They are "errors" after all.

  • Options
    ctf_error_coinsctf_error_coins Posts: 15,433 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited September 23, 2017 8:35AM

    And yes, some minor errors can make an older key type coin worth less. These are called white elephants because they add no value or lose value

  • Options
    GoldenEggGoldenEgg Posts: 1,924 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited September 23, 2017 9:00AM

    @STEWARTBLAYNUMIS said:
    bought an 1857 mS 65 overstruck on a
    50 cent on the obverse, Rick Snow could tell you about the midnight minter etc. However PCGS
    Does not recognize this coin as an error
    In reality Rick Snow will sell this coin for a premium above me 65 price.

    This coin is not an overstrike, correct? You are talking about the die clashes, I believe. In this case, I think these types have more so been collected as varieties, due to their inclusion in the Snow reference. While these coins are errors, they are not recognized or collected in the same manner.

    @STEWARTBLAYNUMIS
    But if you buy a gem 1877 ms 65 red Indian cent
    that had grease in the die and some of the date
    Is not crisply struck , PCGS will designate
    this coin an Error. In reality your coin will bring
    Considerably less, perhaps even 25% of the valu
    Of an ms 65 red 1877 Indian.

    This is a poor example. An 1877 MS65 Indian is an expensive coin. Error collectors would not want it, because the date adds too much to the premium. Indian Cent date collectors wouldn't necessarily want it because they see it more so as a defect that detracts from the grade/eye-appeal etc. "White Elephant", is correct.

    Now, say that it was an MS63 1907 Indian cent with filled dies. I have little doubt that an example with strong filled dies would bring more than a 'normal' M63 1907 Indian cent.

    Edit: In the case of a "White Elephant", I would agree with you @STEWARTBLAYNUMIS

  • Options
    Insider2Insider2 Posts: 14,452 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited September 23, 2017 9:48AM

    @STEWARTBLAYNUMIS said: "However grease in the die should not be designated an error. It kills the value.
    I believe it is putting liability over numismatics. I am a fan of numismatics."

    I'm a fan and student of numismatics also. I make a living at it. After reading your opinion above, I pray that you have little to do with anything other than collecting coins, forming registry sets, and posting on CU.

    Since you are an important numismatist and can be considered an educator (at least here), I'll add this: While, the characteristics we see on coins such as strike thru's, and clashes can affect the value of a coin up or down, their effect on the coin's value does not change what they are. One man's "liability" is another's treasure!

    IMHO, since the Mint tries to produce normal coins, such things as clips, strike thru's, and clashes are unacceptable and can be considered as "errors." Otherwise, the Mint would not bother to polish dies to remove clash marks and now riddlers would be on the production floor. ***

    Hopefully, my o:) rant here may change your opinion about what constitutes a mint error to the majority of folks I've interacted with. :wink:

    *** Note, I have not been on the actual floor of a mint in fifteen years. A few years ago, from the gallery, it looked like the riddlers were still being used although they were now covered. Perhaps @FredWeinberg can update us.

  • Options
    STEWARTBLAYNUMISSTEWARTBLAYNUMIS Posts: 2,697 ✭✭✭✭

    Insider 2 - The problem is the consistency factor. For example the Eliasberg Chain cent. I
    Was at the Eliasberg sale and wanted the coin. However I was not convinced it would
    grade due to a very noticeable clip on the planchette. However PCGS did grade it eventually
    and it sold for $ 1,300,000 at a FUN sale a few years ago. I could have bought the coin for
    in the $100,000 range at the Eliasberg sale.

      I own an 1865 Indian cent with a double die reverse. IMO it is the finest specimen
    

    I have ever seen.It is choice uncirculated and fully red. However there was grease in the dies and the date and some lettering were not crisply struck. PCGS graded the coin a strike thru
    as an error without even designating it a double die reverse. This is an important coin to Indian cent collectors as it has doubling visible to the naked eye. So my point is it seems if a coin is important in the eyes of a PCGS grader it can eventually get graded.. I will keep on persuing
    to get this coin graded as an 1865 ddr Indian cent.

    Golden Egg - yes die clashes

  • Options
    mannie graymannie gray Posts: 7,259 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @STEWARTBLAYNUMIS said:
    If you collect Flying Eagle cents and you
    bought an 1857 mS 65 overstruck on a
    50 cent on the obverse, Rick Snow could tell you about the midnight minter etc. However PCGS
    Does not recognize this coin as an error
    In reality Rick Snow will sell this coin for a premium above me 65 price.
    But if you buy a gem 1877 ms 65 red Indian cent
    that had grease in the die and some of the date
    Is not crisply struck , PCGS will designate
    this coin an Error. In reality your coin will bring
    Considerably less, perhaps even 25% of the valu
    Of an ms 65 red 1877 Indian.
    It seems to me having called your coin. an error can be a curse.

    What do you think ?

    I agree an "error" is a curse on a rare date coin.
    A blessing on a "common" date.

  • Options
    Insider2Insider2 Posts: 14,452 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited September 23, 2017 2:00PM

    @STEWARTBLAYNUMIS said:
    Insider 2 - The problem is the consistency factor. For example the Eliasberg Chain cent. I
    Was at the Eliasberg sale and wanted the coin. However I was not convinced it would
    grade due to a very noticeable clip on the planchette. However PCGS did grade it eventually
    and it sold for $ 1,300,000 at a FUN sale a few years ago. I could have bought the coin for
    in the $100,000 range at the Eliasberg sale.

      I own an 1865 Indian cent with a double die reverse. IMO it is the finest specimen
    

    I have ever seen.It is choice uncirculated and fully red. However there was grease in the dies and the date and some lettering were not crisply struck. PCGS graded the coin a strike thru
    as an error without even designating it a double die reverse. This is an important coin to Indian cent collectors as it has doubling visible to the naked eye. So my point is it seems if a coin is important in the eyes of a PCGS grader it can eventually get graded.. I will keep on persuing
    to get this coin graded as an 1865 ddr Indian cent.

    Golden Egg - yes die clashes

    I can understand how you feel; however, I should expect that you of all people would know that the word consistency does not apply to grading. That goes for all of us and the TPGS's. Nevertheless, our personal opinion on a grade is more consistent than theirs.

    I don't give a flying-you-know-what about the value of a coin. As soon as the powers-that-be connected a coin's value with its ACTUAL condition of preservation, extremely rare, XF coins became Uncirculated after a time! A coin is what it is. The clip on the Large cent should be on the label. The fact that you would of/could of/didn't is just that...nothing but an exercise in your preferences and that of PCGS.

    As for your Indian cent, I'll guarantee you know more about them than I do, without my files and Rick's books, or anyone working at a TPGS. The simple fact is - they missed the doubled die. So what. Rather than tell the world about it, next time, send it in for attribution with a big notation as to what it is and what you would prefer on the label. From what I hear you still might not get it LOL!

  • Options
    DMWJRDMWJR Posts: 5,975 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Instead of being an error, a struck thru should be just reflected in the grade. How do you feel about scratches? They get detail graded.

    Doug
  • Options
    Insider2Insider2 Posts: 14,452 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited September 23, 2017 2:50PM

    Hopefully, an error expert can correct me on this but I grade error coins pretty closely to the way I grade a normal coin. Guess that is a holdover from the way I learned. A fully struck, red, Large cent with no defects except for a clip or strike thru would still be a "Gem Unc" - clipped or "Gem Unc" -strike thru.

    That's because strike thru's, clips, etc. happen at the mint. So do scratches and bag marks; however, the former cannot be produced authentically outside the mint.

  • Options
    Insider2Insider2 Posts: 14,452 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited September 23, 2017 3:14PM

    @DMWJR said:
    Instead of being an error, a struck thru should be just reflected in the grade. How do you feel about scratches? They get detail graded.

    Grading is complicated enough. Just for fun, read the way Large cent collectors grade coins. With all the nuances (one you suggest) and net grading, a coin that looks like an XF/AU may be graded only VF-35.

    BTW, I highly recommend Grading Guide for Early American Copper Coins.

  • Options
    DMWJRDMWJR Posts: 5,975 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I'm familiar with EAC grading. The OP doesn't like that a clashed die mark on a coin is ignored, while a struck thru grease is an error. I think the difference is the die is damaged in the first instance and every coin produced with it has the same marks. With grease, it is temporary and will not replicated the same on every coin. That is why a struck thru is treated as an error and the clashed dies are not. That is the difference and it is accurate. He just doesn't like it in this instance :wink:

    Doug
  • Options
    BLUEJAYWAYBLUEJAYWAY Posts: 8,046 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @mannie gray said:

    @STEWARTBLAYNUMIS said:
    If you collect Flying Eagle cents and you
    bought an 1857 mS 65 overstruck on a
    50 cent on the obverse, Rick Snow could tell you about the midnight minter etc. However PCGS
    Does not recognize this coin as an error
    In reality Rick Snow will sell this coin for a premium above me 65 price.
    But if you buy a gem 1877 ms 65 red Indian cent
    that had grease in the die and some of the date
    Is not crisply struck , PCGS will designate
    this coin an Error. In reality your coin will bring
    Considerably less, perhaps even 25% of the valu
    Of an ms 65 red 1877 Indian.
    It seems to me having called your coin. an error can be a curse.

    What do you think ?

    I agree an "error" is a curse on a rare date coin.
    A blessing on a "common" date.

    I am a collector and big fan of "lamination errors". For years I worked on a Lincoln Cent Whitman folder of laminations. To cover each date/mint. In the past year I saw a 1909-S VDB laminated cent on EBay. It was priced more than a normal key 09-S VDB. In this case at least, the seller valued (?)/ listed it at a higher price than a non error key specimen. Don't know if he got his price.

    Successful transactions:Tookybandit. "Everyone is equal, some are more equal than others".
  • Options
    ZoinsZoins Posts: 33,910 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @BLUEJAYWAY said:

    @mannie gray said:

    @STEWARTBLAYNUMIS said:
    If you collect Flying Eagle cents and you
    bought an 1857 mS 65 overstruck on a
    50 cent on the obverse, Rick Snow could tell you about the midnight minter etc. However PCGS
    Does not recognize this coin as an error
    In reality Rick Snow will sell this coin for a premium above me 65 price.
    But if you buy a gem 1877 ms 65 red Indian cent
    that had grease in the die and some of the date
    Is not crisply struck , PCGS will designate
    this coin an Error. In reality your coin will bring
    Considerably less, perhaps even 25% of the valu
    Of an ms 65 red 1877 Indian.
    It seems to me having called your coin. an error can be a curse.

    What do you think ?

    I agree an "error" is a curse on a rare date coin.
    A blessing on a "common" date.

    I am a collector and big fan of "lamination errors". For years I worked on a Lincoln Cent Whitman folder of laminations. To cover each date/mint. In the past year I saw a 1909-S VDB laminated cent on EBay. It was priced more than a normal key 09-S VDB. In this case at least, the seller valued (?)/ listed it at a higher price than a non error key specimen. Don't know if he got his price.

    I have a few laminations and think that would be a great collection to see!

  • Options
    Batman23Batman23 Posts: 4,999 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Have you looked at the price of those labeled 1922 Lincoln mint errors? They cost WAY MORE than any non-error 1922-D Lincoln cents which were created at the same mint using the same presses and the same dies in that same year...

  • Options
    STEWARTBLAYNUMISSTEWARTBLAYNUMIS Posts: 2,697 ✭✭✭✭

    DMWJR - You say you THINK you know
    the die is damaged in clashed dies on 1857 Flying Eagle cents. You are
    totally wrong. They were intentionally
    Made by the " Midnight Minter " I believe
    you can read about it in one or more of Rick Snow's books. If not the next time I see you I will sit you down and explain it.
    Grease in the dies and struck through was was very common 150 years ago when they minted coins.
    Someone said struck thru was a blessing on a common coin and a curse on a
    rare date coin. This is very accurate. Since grading in many instances is
    Speculative And inconsistent, what I am saying is my coin should be called
    What it is and not something arbitrary and negative.
    I will prevail ! I have no doubts ! You are correct that I don't like it in this instance.
    BTW - 1955 /55 double die Lincoln Cents are errors

  • Options
    BillJonesBillJones Posts: 33,486 ✭✭✭✭✭

    With modern coins, an error can make the piece more valuable. With early pieces, an error, that effects the design in a negative way, probably will lower the price.

    I had this situation with a high grade 1795 half cent that I purchased some years ago. The piece was raw, and it a tiny (2% or less) planchet clip. If the piece came back in a holder that was marked with a note about the clip, the price would have been lower. For that reason, it was a make or break part of the deal. The coin came back as a normal coin, and it is now in my collection.

    Retired dealer and avid collector of U.S. type coins, 19th century presidential campaign medalets and selected medals. In recent years I have been working on a set of British coins - at least one coin from each king or queen who issued pieces that are collectible. I am also collecting at least one coin for each Roman emperor from Julius Caesar to ... ?
  • Options
    astroratastrorat Posts: 9,221 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @Insider2 said:
    Hopefully, an error expert can correct me on this but I grade error coins pretty closely to the way I grade a normal coin. Guess that is a holdover from the way I learned. A fully struck, red, Large cent with no defects except for a clip or strike thru would still be a "Gem Unc" - clipped or "Gem Unc" -strike thru.

    That's because strike thru's, clips, etc. happen at the mint. So do scratches and bag marks; however, the former cannot be produced authentically outside the mint.

    I was taught by error experts that the appropriate way to grade an error is to grade the "normal" part of the coin and then add the designated error ... just as you mentioned. The challenge becomes when the "normal" part is minimal.

    Numismatist Ordinaire
    See http://www.doubledimes.com for a free online reference for US twenty-cent pieces
  • Options
    TwoSides2aCoinTwoSides2aCoin Posts: 43,850 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I'll go with afford on this. LOL. It's Eagle Eye's fault.

  • Options
    EagleEyeEagleEye Posts: 7,676 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I'll take it.

    Rick Snow, Eagle Eye Rare Coins, Inc.Check out my new web site:
  • Options
    CascadeChrisCascadeChris Posts: 2,519 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @STEWARTBLAYNUMIS said:
    Insider 2 - The problem is the consistency factor. For example the Eliasberg Chain cent. I
    Was at the Eliasberg sale and wanted the coin. However I was not convinced it would
    grade due to a very noticeable clip on the planchette. However PCGS did grade it eventually
    and it sold for $ 1,300,000 at a FUN sale a few years ago. I could have bought the coin for
    in the $100,000 range at the Eliasberg sale.

      I own an 1865 Indian cent with a double die reverse. IMO it is the finest specimen
    

    I have ever seen.It is choice uncirculated and fully red. However there was grease in the dies and the date and some lettering were not crisply struck. PCGS graded the coin a strike thru
    as an error without even designating it a double die reverse. This is an important coin to Indian cent collectors as it has doubling visible to the naked eye. So my point is it seems if a coin is important in the eyes of a PCGS grader it can eventually get graded.. I will keep on persuing
    to get this coin graded as an 1865 ddr Indian cent.

    Golden Egg - yes die clashes

    You can send it to @messydesk to have his VSS variety identification sticker on the back of the slab thereby having both the coins error and variety noted.

    Was it a space issue on the label or does PC not attribute a variety and error at the same time even if label space allows?

    The more you VAM..
  • Options
    DMWJRDMWJR Posts: 5,975 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited September 24, 2017 8:44AM

    Stewart, we are in 100% agreement, and I do know of the legend of the midnight minters who were making more copies of rarities to sell on the side. But I don't think they meant to strike the machine without a blank in there. I also don't think they were making mules either. Multi-denomintional clashes are very rare because there would have to be two mistakes: forgetting to replace a die, and forgetting to insert a blank.

    Error is a "term of art" and I don't mean art as in your art. I want to post more but I'll have to wait a little. I have a similar problem with the recognition of 1858/7 stage C as a separate variety known as weak.

    Doug
  • Options
    Insider2Insider2 Posts: 14,452 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @STEWARTBLAYNUMIS said: "DMWJR - You say you THINK you know the die is damaged in clashed dies on 1857 Flying Eagle cents. You are totally wrong. They were intentionally made by the " Midnight Minter...."

    LOL, nonsense...In MHO it is you who are totally wrong. As I will not have a chance to sit down and explain why,
    try this: It does not matter if coin dies clash (DAMAGE) while making coins or if they become clashed (DAMAGED) intentionally. Damage is damage. :wink:

  • Options
    DMWJRDMWJR Posts: 5,975 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I've seen where the 1877 cent die clashed 3-4 times, so it's not about the referenced clash marks on the Snow varieties. I could say more, but I think I will just say netting it would be useful in this instance, where the damage was done during the minting process. With a filled die, it should matter the location and extent. If the whole date was filled could you overlook it? How about just one letter? How about the three 1922-d, no d? Market perception and acceptability.

    Doug
  • Options
    EagleEyeEagleEye Posts: 7,676 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I don't know why Stewart can't get a variety designation on a strike-through error. Seems like something that can be done.

    Die errors might be errors on the die but they are die varieties on the coin.

    The clashed dies, both multi-denominational and same denomination are caused when the dies are not spaced properly and smack one another, not when a planchet fails to feed into the space between the dies. Properly spaced dies do not come together at any time, planchet or not.

    I think a strike-though error should lower the grade of an otherwise gem (MS65) or superb gem (MS66) to no more than a MS64.

    Rick Snow, Eagle Eye Rare Coins, Inc.Check out my new web site:
  • Options
    Insider2Insider2 Posts: 14,452 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Perhaps the grade should depend on the size and location of the strike thru also. :wink:

  • Options
    EagleEyeEagleEye Posts: 7,676 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited September 25, 2017 8:24AM

    @STEWARTBLAYNUMIS said:

      I own an 1865 Indian cent with a double die reverse. IMO it is the finest specimen
    

    I have ever seen.It is choice uncirculated and fully red. However there was grease in the dies and the date and some lettering were not crisply struck. PCGS graded the coin a strike thru
    as an error without even designating it a double die reverse. This is an important coin to Indian cent collectors as it has doubling visible to the naked eye. So my point is it seems if a coin is important in the eyes of a PCGS grader it can eventually get graded.. I will keep on persuing
    to get this coin graded as an 1865 ddr Indian cent.

    This is the the only full red 1865 Fancy 5 S2 known. There is a MS64RB known which does not have the strike-though issues, but for a full red piece, this is it.

    Rick Snow, Eagle Eye Rare Coins, Inc.Check out my new web site:
  • Options
    DMWJRDMWJR Posts: 5,975 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Rick, are you saying the clashes occur when they improperly space the dies while setting up and don't space them correctly at that time?

    Doug
  • Options
    DMWJRDMWJR Posts: 5,975 ✭✭✭✭✭

    This would be one of the times I would grade something MS60RB to MS62RB depending on the look in hand. It has a problem and is missing important detail so you can't grade it 63. But nevertheless I would never consider it an error or not gradable as it is clearly uncirculated and not altered or damaged outside the mint. not an error.

    Doug
  • Options
    EagleEyeEagleEye Posts: 7,676 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @DMWJR said:
    Rick, are you saying the clashes occur when they improperly space the dies while setting up and don't space them correctly at that time?

    Yes, dies need to be set a specific distance apart.

    If the dies are too wide apart, the strikes will be weak.

    When the dies are properly spaced and no planchet is there, nothing will happen. There will be no sound of anything striking anything.

    If the dies are too close the dies will break early from too high a pressure on each strike. Still, if no planchet is there, it just cycles though.

    If the dies are way too close they will come together and cause a clash mark on each other. If there is a planchet when dies are spaced too close, you may get a pile-up of mis-struck coins. Obviously, the die spacing is very important.

    This applies to coins struck with steam press coinage or later.

    Rick Snow, Eagle Eye Rare Coins, Inc.Check out my new web site:
  • Options
    DMWJRDMWJR Posts: 5,975 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Gotcha, so improper spacing + no planchet = clashed dies

    Doug
  • Options
    STEWARTBLAYNUMISSTEWARTBLAYNUMIS Posts: 2,697 ✭✭✭✭

    Thank you for posting an image of my coin Rick !
    You can also see how the coin fits nicely into my set.
    I also own a 63 R/B that was not struck thru
    I also think PCGS should incorporate this variety in the Set Registry
    It is visible to the naked eye without o loop and the only DDR Indian cent

    DMWJR - How can you say the coin should grade 60 R/B or 62 R/B ???
    The coin is clearly RED
    IMO the coin is a high end 64 Red
    NGC probably graded it 63 Red because of the strike thru

  • Options
    DMWJRDMWJR Posts: 5,975 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Sorry the RB was a typo. I was typing and thinking about something else :blush: , but on the grade, it is a problem coin. The date is very obscured ... the second most important place I look for grading. Otherwise, it certainly has the look of a solid 64. Interesting that there would be additional matter on the obverse die, yet the shield isn't fully struck up. I would think it would be the opposite, but as you say -- I don't know Jack Schit about the minting process.

    BTW, congrats on having two of these! One of the rarest and coolest varieties in the series, and a traditional doubled die! There are only two other reverse varieties that come close and they are very different - a very strange clash, and a dot fit to catch a thief !

    Doug

Leave a Comment

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