I'm obviously wrong.

FullStepJeffs · October 3, 2012 2:00PM

So, a couple years ago... a post from someone within PCGS stated they wouldn't designate minor RPM's and DDO's because they just were not worth it. It was shown at the time that a number of older slabs had already been designated, but from what I understood, they might be some of the very few ever designated.

Then, I see THIS ONE and THIS ONE both in secure holders, which seems to me like the Gods may have changed their minds since both of these are in secure holders.

Can someone please explain this?

And for the .05 cent question... what needs to be done on the submission form to get them to designate these "minor" varities... in their own words.

I got a few hundred that need new coffins if this is true.

Thanks!

Steve

LanceNewmanOCC · October 3, 2012 2:07PM

.
1. it is nice to see progress.
2. it still really isn't worth it imo because it just says rpm, unless no extra need be paid.
3. you may submit any coin and select attribution for it without even having the slightest idea about if it is a variety or not, but you will possibly find out when it comes back. I still find it beneficial to have the ability to verify the attributed item to my satisfaction after the TPG do their thing, although if one has not previous knowledge, one still needs another party to verify the accuracy of the item in the TPG holder.
4. would be nice to see some expansion in the set registry for another 200-400 varieties across all USA coin series.
5. check the cert # to get the pcgs # to find out perhaps from the price guide if an extra fee need be paid, or of course just call during business hours.
6. thanks for showing this and "I got a few hundred that need new coffins if this is true." ditto!
.

FullStepJeffs · October 3, 2012 2:36PM

Like I'd love to get this one...

and this one...

among others...

<< .
2. it still really isn't worth it imo because it just says rpm, unless no extra need be paid.

4. would be nice to see some expansion in the set registry for another 200-400 varieties across all USA coin series.
. >>

The next question is... how long will it take for PCGS to actually take charge of this area and designate numbers because I tend to agree with you... depending on price, it will decide how many get re-coffined. But, this is the beginning of actual progress. I applaud their potential change of policy.

coindeuce · October 3, 2012 2:50PM

It took probably the better part of a decade for PCGS to accept the task of acquiring staff with competence to attribute the Morgan and Peace Dollar varieties that are cataloged by various authors as of exceptional interest for set collectors, and which formed a permanent segment of the market. That is not a criticism, just an observation. It may take as long or longer for wider interest in the Jefferson nickel series to win over PCGS. IMHO, your 1939 DDO with the strong shift in the date is anything but minor !

morgandollar1878 · October 3, 2012 3:00PM

From what I know, PCGS has been labeling minor RPM's, DDO/DDR's and other varieties since the time they started the CPG's varieties a couple years ago(they also do this for minor VAM's). If someone sends a coin in for a specific DDR for example, and it really is not that DDR then PCGS will place a minor variety on the label and what kind of variety it is. At least I thought they did this from the start. Maybe I don't know what I am talking about, and am remembering something that they actually did not do when they started labeling the CPG varieties.

As far as them actually going further and actually listing the actual attribution number and designating a coin number on the minor stuff, I doubt that they will ever do this because it would be too time consuming to do so since the popularity of most of the minor stuff is not very high, and there are so many of them out there.

Onedollarnohollar · October 3, 2012 3:23PM

Does this mean that the ddr's on the 2009p formative Lincoln cents (the "best of" pieces) may too have the designations placed on PCGS holders? The CPG has already identified 8-10 significant errors that will

be included in their next publication. That shouldn't be too difficult for the graders to decipher or take too much time to designate. I've got a "few" I could send in...just say the word PCGS!

morgandollar1878 · October 3, 2012 3:28PM

<< Does this mean that the ddr's on the 2009p formative Lincoln cents (the "best of" pieces) may too have the designations placed on PCGS holders? The CPG has already identified 8-10 significant errors that will

be included in their next publication. That shouldn't be too difficult for the graders to decipher or take too much time to designate. I've got a "few" I could send in...just say the word PCGS! >>

If it is in the CPG then PCGS will make a coin number for it and designate the variety and attribution number on the holder.

FullStepJeffs · October 3, 2012 3:39PM

<< IMHO, your 1939 DDO with the strong shift in the date is anything but minor ! >>

I've been saying that for years... the last CPG made a serious mistake not listing that one along with a couple of others, which is why I never bought the book.

By the way, that one is currently in MS67 plastic from PCGS. I know where a second MS67 coin lives because I sold it to the current owner. The BigDog has an MS66FS example he's shown before... I've got three or four MS66's and 65's in other holders. There are enough of these coins out there that it might make a significant appearance if they were actually designated and added to the registry.

<< As far as them actually going further and actually listing the actual attribution number and designating a coin number on the minor stuff, I doubt that they will ever do this because it would be too time consuming to do so since the popularity of most of the minor stuff is not very high, and there are so many of them out there. >>

It's funny... other TPGs have been doing it for decades. On the popularity issue... please go look at what some of these designated coins sold for on Teletrade in the last few months. Some have sold for a higher number than I thought... like THIS ONE or THIS ONE.

IMHO, when PCGS starts running out of coins to grade, they'll make a business decision to add the designator. It may not be in my lifetime, but heck... it seems like they changed their position on even designating these... now all we need is the next level.

To the PCGS Gods... go with the CONECA numbers... maybe it'll help them add pictures to their numbers so it would be easier to designate.

Ok... night all.

Steve

19Lyds · October 3, 2012 4:58PM

<< Does this mean that the ddr's on the 2009p formative Lincoln cents (the "best of" pieces) may too have the designations placed on PCGS holders? The CPG has already identified 8-10 significant errors that will

be included in their next publication. That shouldn't be too difficult for the graders to decipher or take too much time to designate. I've got a "few" I could send in...just say the word PCGS! >>

Once the publication with the DDR's actually gets printed (and released), PCGS will designate the DDR's in the CPG for $24 plus the $14 modern grading fee.

As for the coins in the OP, these were obviously submitted for Variety Attribution with the $24 fee but I have no idea why they were attributed since my copy of the CPG doesn't have a 1942-P RPM nor does it have a 1943-S DDO.

LindeDad · October 4, 2012 1:03AM

Are these by chance coins sent in under last quarters Collectors Club special and are just carry overs from prior grading?

TwoSides2aCoin · October 4, 2012 1:18AM

I guess time changes and now they're worth it ? Just list the variety on the form (and get the right coin number), and pay the extra costs. It might be best to contact customer service and they will walk your order through the process. That's why it costs so much. And I think PCGS probably took the stance (back in the good days), that they didn't want to "gouge" customers with "ADDED EXPENSE" with minor varieties plus the additional costs in changing their forms, which so frequently change due to collector's/dealer's desires and our trivial pursuit of happiness.

This is purely conjecture on my part, but in no way do I find anything wrong you, just things wrong with coins.

CoinCrazyPA · October 8, 2012 3:24AM

Does anyone know what the 1943 S DDO on the is? I looked over the pic's and don't recognize it. Thanks

FullStepJeffs · October 8, 2012 3:31AM

<< Does anyone know what the 1943 S DDO on the is? I looked over the pic's and don't recognize it. Thanks >>

It's a minor DDO, probably listed HERE as one of the 13 varieties of DDO's.

Hope this helps!

Steve

CoinCrazyPA · October 8, 2012 3:34AM

<< 

<< Does anyone know what the 1943 S DDO on the is? I looked over the pic's and don't recognize it. Thanks >>

It's a minor DDO, probably listed HERE as one of the 13 varieties of DDO's.

Hope this helps!

Steve >>

Thanks, I know about Coneca, I was wondering if anyone actually knew which one it is.

FullStepJeffs · October 8, 2012 3:43AM

<< 

<< 

<< Does anyone know what the 1943 S DDO on the is? I looked over the pic's and don't recognize it. Thanks >>

It's a minor DDO, probably listed HERE as one of the 13 varieties of DDO's.

Hope this helps!

Steve >>

Thanks, I know about Coneca, I was wondering if anyone actually knew which one it is. >>

And that's the next problem with all of this... Coneca doesn't have pictures for the most part of these different varieties and multiple very similar varieties exist. I once sent a number of coins for designation (to the TPG that designates minor varieties) with numbers I thought were correct, including a number of coins bought directly from those individuals with their names on books about varieties and their assigned designated variety numbers, only to get the coins back with completely different numbers assigned... so your guess is as good as anybody else on this... that's what needs to be fixed IMHO... a standardized numbering system with easily verified, pictured PUP's.

Take Care!

Steve

DIMEMAN · October 8, 2012 3:50AM

Steve, I am not sure what you are asking. But unless your coin is in the CPG and is blessed by PCGS and they have it in their sets it is a waste of money to send it in and pay the variety fee of $24.

What I do is get the coin graded (no attribution) and put the coin in my Showcase of varieties not in PCGS Registry yet. I have lots of dime varieties waiting like this.

And further I am in the process of trying to get more varieties into the next version of the CPG.

FullStepJeffs · October 8, 2012 5:22AM

<< Steve, I am not sure what you are asking. But unless your coin is in the CPG and is blessed by PCGS and they have it in their sets it is a waste of money to send it in and pay the variety fee of $24. >>

Sorry... sometimes my scatter-ness hurts the comment. Basically, a while back, a push was made before the last CPG was issued, to ask PCGS to annotate minor varieties and designate these coins with a standard numerical numbering system so the varieites would all be the same. There tends to be different numerical numbers for varieites depending on who's giving the answer... the Jefferson RPM Book has one set of numbers, Coneca another, and the un-named TPG that annotates, another. For example, I purchased a number of varieites from a known "expert" only to send the coins off and get the numbers back as completely different numbers, or in some cases, even the TPG couldn't sucessfully ascertain the correct example due to multiple coins with similar characteristics. Coneca has a plethoria of information, but no actual pictures of the varities with PUPS tends to just confuse me even more. Anyway, someone within PCGS stated that PCGS would not annotate minor varities unless they were designated by the CPG... however a number of coins were showen at the time to have already been annotated and a number of folks discussed this fact. The finality at teh time was... if it wasn't in the CPG or they couldn't see the variety with the naked eye, they wouldn't annotate it. Therefore, it was my understanding these minor DDO,s, DDR's, and RPM's were not going to be annotated... or designated... EVER. Then, along came two coins, both obviously graded after this statement was made... with both coins not in the CPG and both coins annotated as minor DDO's/RPM's, etc. So, obviously, either quietly the decision was made to annotate or some how therse two coins got out. The real question is... what's the final answer from PCGS? Do they annotate? Will they annotate a 1939D DDO1, as a minor DDO, which by the way is very worth getting designated in MS65FS or higher grades. (Note: I once sold a PCGS graded MS67 coin, undesignated/unanotated for 3X money for a normal MS67.)

<< What I do is get the coin graded (no attribution) and put the coin in my Showcase of varieties not in PCGS Registry yet. I have lots of dime varieties waiting like this. >>

Me too... But I tend to send some of the best down the street for designation since some of these "minor varieties" tend to sell for premiums. The goal is to get our hosts to get the ball rolling and do it all.

<< And further I am in the process of trying to get more varieties into the next version of the CPG. >>

Thanks! Please let me know when the vote will happen. By the way... who votes on this?

Steve

DIMEMAN · October 8, 2012 6:31AM

>>>Thanks! Please let me know when the vote will happen. By the way... who votes on this?<<<

Steve, I really don't decide anything. The group that makes these decisions, that is headed by Ken Potter, ask several collectors for their input. I simply submit dimes that I would like to see added and they do the adding. Many of my choices were added to the last version of the CPG and many weren't.

FullStepJeffs · October 8, 2012 7:19AM

<< >>>Thanks! Please let me know when the vote will happen. By the way... who votes on this?<<<

Steve, I really don't decide anything. The group that makes these decisions, that is headed by Ken Potter, ask several collectors for their input. I simply submit dimes that I would like to see added and they do the adding. Many of my choices were added to the last version of the CPG and many weren't. >>

Cool... keep trying to add more please!

renomedphys · October 8, 2012 8:14AM

<< I'm obviously wrong. >>

We are not your wife, and talk like that won't get you anywhere around here.

telephoto1 · October 8, 2012 9:16AM

"Slabbable" or not, it would have to be a fairly significant and valuable "minor variety" before I'd want to submit it (or bust it out & resub) and have to pay base cost plus variety fees.

leothelyon · October 8, 2012 10:06AM

Why don't you take this up with the Variety Coin Club (that we all belong to) that oversees all denominations that members here interact and have access to everyday? The CPG people must have a list of varieties earmarked for the next publication of the CPG. There's no mystery to how varieties get notice. Check with the CPG people, I'm certain thay have a ton of info for you.

CoinCrazyPA · October 8, 2012 10:28PM

That 43 S Jefferson sold for very good money with just a minor variety listed on it. So the $24 fee seems to be worth it in this case. Seeing that no one hrre seems to know what variety it is.

DIMEMAN · October 9, 2012 12:21AM

The problem with the "Minor variety" that PCGS gives when not in their sets....is that it is too general and really doesn't say much. Like Minor variety RPM. It doesn't say which RPM or anything. To me this is not worth the $24 fee. If you were trying to sell this coin the buyer would have to know the variety anyway. And if you are keeping the coin just get it graded and put a note on it stating the variety and wait for it to get in the CPG and then send it for variety attribution.

Edited to add that these "minor varieties" are not really minor. It just means that the variety is not acknowledged by PCGS. Those varieties in the OP are anything BUT minor.

TwoSides2aCoin · October 9, 2012 1:37AM

There are many niches in numismatics. Keep up the good work.

Caleb · October 9, 2012 3:12AM

<< Steve, I am not sure what you are asking. But unless your coin is in the CPG and is blessed by PCGS and they have it in their sets it is a waste of money to send it in and pay the variety fee of $24.

What I do is get the coin graded (no attribution) and put the coin in my Showcase of varieties not in PCGS Registry yet. I have lots of dime varieties waiting like this.

And further I am in the process of trying to get more varieties into the next version of the CPG. >>

Even if the variety is listed in the Cherrypickers' Guide, sometimes it comes back labeled "Minor Variety"

And on the other side of the coin, sometimes varieties not listed in the Cherrypickers Guide comes backed labeled as one's that are

For examples, look in the showcase set below

FullStepJeffs · October 9, 2012 4:01AM

BTW... I'd say the $24 dollar cost was well worth it for these two coins in the OP. What would either one of these go for without the minor variety designation... about $20 - 30 each, if that. That was one of the reasons why I brought up the original point. Also, I still think PCGS should go the route of the TPG down the street and annotate/designate every variety, even those not in the CPG. Get the census updated for these things and allow those of us in the weeds of a particular series to go crazy trying to get one of each. The only issue I see is they would have to standardize the numerical numbers for these things... pick one numbering system and go for it. Post pictures of the PUPs somewhere and lets see how many actually exist.

Okay, I've kicked this horse enough. Peace!

Steve

DIMEMAN · October 9, 2012 4:24AM

Steve, I don't think you are beating a horse. You like myself and other collectors want more varieties recognized and put in the PCGS Registry sets. What you have to do is keep asking Mike Faraone, who is the variety chief at PCGS, to do more varieties. I finally got them talked into doing the Seated Dimes by Greer. I have been petitioning this for several years. It's not done yet, but is on the schedule.

If there is a good book on Jefferson's that you would like to see PCGS do I suggest to keep after Mike.

I'm obviously wrong.

Comments

The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!

My Jefferson Nickel Collection

Leave a Comment