Happy ending UPDATE 1962 D FS901 Misplaced D Proof half dollar, CAC PR68DCAM!!!

Aspie_Rocco · January 27, 2019 11:10PM

Another home run top pop Variety, located by a tireless Variety hunter, me )
Notice the slanted D after STOW
It has the CAC green bean!
Now attributed as of 3/11/19

Deep cameo

davewesen · January 28, 2019 2:32AM

very nice

Namvet69 · January 28, 2019 3:30AM

Hey what's that D doing way over there?

keets · January 28, 2019 4:25AM

JMHO, I don't see a "D" which could only be explained as a dropped letter, I see a strike through of some kind which has a curve that a vivid imagination stretches to call a letter "D" of some kind.

bolivarshagnasty · January 28, 2019 4:41AM

Since we know only Philly made proofs that year, my guess is struck through lint of some kind .

CuKevin · January 28, 2019 5:24AM

Don’t know how the D got there, but it’s a well known variety.
Are there any generally accepted (or hotly debated) explanations how it got there? @Aspie_Rocco or anyone else

Hemispherical · January 28, 2019 5:31AM

@Aspie_Rocco

Coin Facts image has the FS 901, there is something in that location:

Edit: Looks like the current Pop is 2/0 and a pre-Congrats if you get the attribution! https://www.pcgs.com/coinfacts/coin/1962-50c-fs-901/510671

georgiacop50 · January 28, 2019 6:57AM

Nice pick! Never examined one in person. Appears to not be incuse so if it is a strike through it would have to be a retained strike through I believe. I think a more likely explanation is some minor die damage.

thevolcanogod · January 28, 2019 7:25AM

Premiums for minor varieties on Franklins are sadly thin. I have a few RPMs and a nice 1948 DDR listed and they’re not getting attention at just slightly over retail for the non-varieties.

davewesen · January 28, 2019 7:25AM

Aspie variety hunter, what do you use for a monitor? I looked when it sold on eBay and I would not have pulled the trigger with those pictures. My imagination has gotten me many coins that were not what I imagined.

ricko · January 28, 2019 7:25AM

This has been discussed before on this forum... long time ago... I do not recall just when. No conclusions were reached at that time.... It appears raised, so that would indicate die damage... certainly not a dropped letter. The shape (D) is a random occurrence, not formed perfectly as a letter would normally be seen. Cheers, RickO

messydesk · January 28, 2019 7:39AM

The die was hubbed through a piece of debris that took the shape of a D, leaving an incuse mark on the die and raised mark on the coins.

CaptHenway · January 28, 2019 7:40AM

I have never seen one of these. That said, that D-shaped feature appears to be a lot smaller than any D mint mark punch ever used at a U.S. Mint.

Perhaps some small fragment of something got between the die and the hub during the hubbing process, and the hub being harder than the die, the fragment got sunk into the die a bit.

RogerB · January 28, 2019 7:42AM

Difficult to know what that is. Does it match the font of a D mintmark for 1962?

All dies were made at Philadelphia by the same group of people. A "proof" die was just like any other until it was polished. We do not know how mintmarked and plain dies were segregated prior to punching, although some sort of separation must have occurred. Same for dies intended for proof coins.

davewesen · January 28, 2019 8:39AM

The 1957-D quarter has a variety called misplaced D, but it also is not mintmark or letter size and similar to this D.

I suspect both are re-engraved initials from someone working at the mint, leaving their initial.

cmerlo1 · January 28, 2019 9:00AM

I don't believe it's a D. I think it's the same hubbing issue (steel lint between the hub and die) that I believe created the Superbird quarter in 1952. The Superbird is a widely-accepted variety. Either way, the '62 phantom D a neat variety. It's listed in the CPG, and after searching for many years I can tell you it's rare.

Aspie_Rocco · January 28, 2019 9:10AM

It is definitely raised, so the die must have had an incuse D.
A strike through would leave an incuse feature on the coin it self.
The D is lightly complete at the bottom, but not raised as much as the rest there, lending the appearance of it being incomplete.

The height of the D almost looks like a punch could have been dropped on it from an angle, digging deeper on the top portion of the D and very weakly at the base.

This most recent brings my total to 6 of these I have found. Interesting to me, I noticed that some examples have an extra “flair” that goes beyond the left side straight back of the D. This example does not have any sort of flourish or extra parts to the D.

The exaggerated top that extends left on some examples makes me think some one intentionally made this Variety and even touched up the die at least one more time.

@davewesen said:
Aspie variety hunter, what do you use for a monitor? I looked when it sold on eBay and I would not have pulled the trigger with those pictures. My imagination has gotten me many coins that were not what I imagined.

I have been a victim of my imagination quite a few times also.
I exclusively hunt with my iPhone, as a monitor. Always have. I examine photos with it of known varieties to be able to detect some varieties from bad pictures.

davewesen · January 28, 2019 9:56AM

@cmerlo1 said:
I don't believe it's a D. I think it's the same hubbing issue (steel lint between the hub and die) that I believe created the Superbird quarter in 1952. The Superbird is a widely-accepted variety. Either way it's a neat variety, it's listed in the CPG, and after searching for one for many years I can tell you it's rare.

15-20% is not really rare

cmerlo1 · January 28, 2019 10:02AM

@davewesen said:

@cmerlo1 said:
I don't believe it's a D. I think it's the same hubbing issue (steel lint between the hub and die) that I believe created the Superbird quarter in 1952. The Superbird is a widely-accepted variety. Either way it's a neat variety, it's listed in the CPG, and after searching for one for many years I can tell you it's rare.

15-20% is not really rare

I was referring to the '62 half, not the Superbird (I've edited my post to clarify). I've found lots of Superbirds, but after looking at over a thousand proof '62 halves over the years, I've never found a phantom 'D'.

Owen1793 · January 28, 2019 11:26AM

That's an awesome cherry pick. I've checked many hundred 1962 proof sets with no luck. I'm jealous!

ChrisH821 · January 28, 2019 12:39PM

Aspie_rocco knows what he is doing and has an excellent eye for detail from what I've seen of his postings here. Everyone should know by now that he isn't going to post a strike-through as a variety...
I would have snatched that up if I had seen it, nice catch!

AngryTurtle · January 28, 2019 1:43PM

Congrats! Had not heard of this variety before, will have to check my '62. Sounds like its most likely not!

Aspie_Rocco · January 28, 2019 2:21PM

If this is an intentional Variety My hypotheses is that it has been re engraved similar to the re engraved proof 1953 half, and 1952-1954 re engraved nickel varieties. Also the 1952 or 53 re engraved Lincoln chest line. All accepted cherry pickers varieties, as of newest edition. There are several more re engraved varieties not included in latest CPG, across a few denominations.

If accidental, I like the thought of a strike through object during hubbing, or a punch dropped on the die, however, the thinness if the letter seems too thin to be a Denver mint Mark punch.

Timbuk3 · January 28, 2019 3:36PM

Interesting, I'd love to know what the final result is !!!

bolivarshagnasty · January 29, 2019 7:43AM

I'm reminded of sitting in a seminar at FUN years ago where JT Stanton was going on about the next big deal, a 59-D Lincoln with a D struck at the edge of the rim. I bought several when I came across them. The attribution community balked at the idea and it was later concluded that it most likely was a die chip in the shape of a D. The prospective new variety was debunked and never made it into the C/P's book. There are numerous examples of this scenario playing out and usually leaves someone holding the bag. Sometimes we see what we want to see.

georgiacop50 · January 29, 2019 12:00PM

With all due respect to the folks poo pooing this pick, you are clearly not understanding the Registry Game! Regardless of how the "error" occurred or how trivial it is, once it gets put in the Reg Variety Set the top players will trip over themselves going for it.

This coin could well put Rocco in the coveted "YOU SUCK" club.

Aspie_Rocco · January 29, 2019 12:04PM

@georgiacop50 said:
With all due respect to the folks poo pooing this pick, you are clearly not understanding the Registry Game! Regardless of how the "error" occurred or how trivial it is, once it gets put in the Reg Variety Set the top players will trip over themselves going for it.

This coin could well put Rocco in the coveted "YOU SUCK" club.

I will just say, I have been hoping for the coveted coin “you suck” award since I learned of it.
I have heard it before but never in reference to coins.

Aspie_Rocco · January 30, 2019 10:57PM

I will be bringing this to Long Beach if anyone wants to see it before it is gone.

RogerB · January 31, 2019 2:35PM

How does the "D" compare to a D-mintmark on the same date coin?

Aspie_Rocco · February 21, 2019 6:19PM

As a follow up,
A buyer was located for this coin, it was sold, and went in for attribution.
Apparently, it did not get the fs901 attribution
I can only assume this is a clerical error or a digital bug, while the system updates. It is not logically possible that this did not make the variety. Does anyone knowledgeable on the misplaced D, believe it is not the variety?

Aspie_Rocco · February 21, 2019 6:22PM

From CPG

DIMEMAN · February 21, 2019 7:58PM

Sure looks like the variety to me. Good eye and pick!

RogerB · February 21, 2019 8:14PM

Lint or other debris on the hub; but nice effect anyway.

Coinscratch · February 21, 2019 8:34PM

@Aspie_Rocco . I knew I had seen that somewhere, and there it is the CPG. Nice score dude, thats a top pop as well. Whaassuup!

davewesen · February 22, 2019 1:03PM

I hope you get it ... the bottom of the D is not complete, so I am guessing must be later die state. Being DCAM, I wonder if it acid etched later in die life. Looking at the CAMs on CoinFacts I can not see it either, but realize with proofs the light nd angle has to be just right to see many things.

Aspie_Rocco · March 11, 2019 5:21PM

Boom!
And a happy ending!

Second pass made it, trueviews coming soon.
This the the 8th top pop Variety I have picked and seen attributed.

Hemispherical · March 11, 2019 5:29PM

Cannot wait for the TV. More anticipation from grading to the pic!

ECHOES · March 11, 2019 6:24PM

@Aspie_Rocco said:

@georgiacop50 said:
With all due respect to the folks poo pooing this pick, you are clearly not understanding the Registry Game! Regardless of how the "error" occurred or how trivial it is, once it gets put in the Reg Variety Set the top players will trip over themselves going for it.

This coin could well put Rocco in the coveted "YOU SUCK" club.

I will just say, I have been hoping for the coveted coin “you suck” award since I learned of it.
I have heard it before but never in reference to coins.

+1

Unknown · March 11, 2019 6:54PM

This content has been removed.

BuffaloIronTail · March 11, 2019 6:57PM

Two Mint Marks from 1962 - one from a Half (top) and one from a Quarter:

I don't really know what to say about this, so I'll just say "Have at it".

Pete

Aspie_Rocco · March 11, 2019 11:20PM

Mint marks Look too blunt to have caused the “D” on the bell, the bell has the appearance of a more thin letter.

georgiacop50 · March 12, 2019 7:55AM

It is acknowledged by most everyone that it is NOT really a mintmark so discussing that point is mostly moot. It is likely a lint mark according to Bill Fivaz who thought the variety was nonetheless interesting and scarce enough to warrant inclusion in the CPG.

I am very glad the coin got the proper designation from PCGS but I am nonetheless dismayed and even angered that the coin had to be re-submitted to get it right, because this is such a no-brainer.

To me it won't truly be a happy ending unless I hear that PCGS is either going to refund all costs associated with their blunder, or, at the very least give the submitter a voucher for a free grading or two.

Happy ending UPDATE 1962 D FS901 Misplaced D Proof half dollar, CAC PR68DCAM!!!

Comments

Leave a Comment