However in some sort of bizarro twist of fate I do not own an SVDB currently, and have no real intention to purchase one. They are just far too common and the prices driven by demand are just too high to justify the expense. I think the nicest one I’ve ever owned was a 65RD.
That said, I do own a VDB proof, as well as an 1856 Flyer, and an 1877 Indian Cent, so maybe one day I’ll buy one just to show to all the muggles who ask.
Also, I don’t believe the 22 No D is an error so much as it is a die state. I own a 12 star 1808 cent. The die was made with 13 stars but as the reverse die started to sink in that spot, the star disappeared from the struck coins. Is that an error or a die state?
However in some sort of bizarro twist of fate I do not own an SVDB currently, and have no real intention to purchase one. They are just far too common and the prices driven by demand are just too high to justify the expense. I think the nicest one I’ve ever owned was a 65RD.
That said, I do own a VDB proof, as well as an 1856 Flyer, and an 1877 Indian Cent, so maybe one day I’ll buy one just to show to all the muggles who ask.
Also, I don’t believe the 22 No D is an error so much as it is a die state. I own a 12 star 1808 cent. The die was made with 13 stars but as the reverse die started to sink in that spot, the star disappeared from the struck coins. Is that an error or a die state?
I vote die state for the 22 No D and the 12 star 1808 cents.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
1909 V.D.B. DDO is the very first Lincoln cent doubled die. I'm surprised it doesn't get more respect. My next task is make a not-too-cheesy looking label to replace the SVDB label in my Whitman #9405. I've got some ideas on how to make a really pro label that looks like all the other year and mint labels in my album. I'll take a picture of the first page in my album and publish it here after I've finished making the DDO label.
@jmlanzaf said:
Why didn't the OP also mention the 1909 VDB? I guess it's too cheap to not include.
If he doesn't care about completeness, why not just collect a type set of Lincolns?
In the interest of completeness, 1909 V.D.B. DDO will be occupying the space in my album that was once for 1909-S V.D.B.
Take a lesson from Burger King. They tried replacing their regular burger meat with a vegan patty still referring to it a "Whopper"
The consumer balked.
The same thing happened when they tried to make the harschepuppy sandwiches without any harschepuppies.
But did they start a "Hey! Look at me!" thread to go with it?
They (1909-S V.D.B.) are just far too common and the prices driven by demand are just too high to justify the expense.
I'm a 1909-S and 1914-D and 1931-S fan myself. I'll buy these, raw or slabbed no matter, even if I already have one or more examples in my holdings. I'm currently working on making a roll of 50 1909s and 1909 V.D.Bs with a sprinkling of 1909 dated IHCs.
@MasonG said:
There are a lot of expensive coins in a Dansco type set, I'm going to put this one in and call the set complete.
That's seems like a lot of trouble. Ejy not just cut a picture out of an auction catalog and stick it in the hole. I don't see why a complete set needs to include actual coins.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
@mr1931S said: They (1909-S V.D.B.) are just far too common and the prices driven by demand are just too high to justify the expense.
I'm a 1909-S and 1914-D and 1931-S fan myself. I'll buy these, raw or slabbed no matter, even if I already have one or more examples in my holdings. I'm currently working on making a roll of 50 1909s and 1909 V.D.Bs with a sprinkling of 1909 dated IHCs.
I think this may well be the first time a thread creator has turned and started to troll his own thread.
@mr1931S said:
1909 V.D.B. DDO is the very first Lincoln cent doubled die. I'm surprised it doesn't get more respect. My next task is make a not-too-cheesy looking label to replace the SVDB label in my Whitman #9405. I've got some ideas on how to make a really pro label that looks like all the other year and mint labels in my album. I'll take a picture of the first page in my album and publish it here after I've finished making the DDO label.
You need the S-VDB for a complete set. In regard to your quote, most long-time Lincoln wheat collectors like myself don't respect the VDB DDO because it looks like machine doubling. I have the '17, '41, & '55 DDOs and still looking for a nice '36 DDO but I will never seek the VDB DDO. JMHO.
@mr1931S said: They (1909-S V.D.B.) are just far too common and the prices driven by demand are just too high to justify the expense.
I'm a 1909-S and 1914-D and 1931-S fan myself. I'll buy these, raw or slabbed no matter, even if I already have one or more examples in my holdings. I'm currently working on making a roll of 50 1909s and 1909 V.D.Bs with a sprinkling of 1909 dated IHCs.
I think this may well be the first time a thread creator has turned and started to troll his own thread.
I wasn't talking to you mr. buttinski. You don't like what I write in a thread I created kindly stay out of it with your sophomoric remarks.
most long-time Lincoln wheat collectors like myself don't respect the VDB DDO because it looks like machine doubling.
Not machine doubling. 1909 V.D.B. DDO is legitimate hub doubling of a working die. It's a fairly scarce coin that the collector should seek out in XF or better to fully appreciate the doubling. I scored one in the wild a few years ago that I eventually sold. The piece was sent it in for grading by our host here and it came back to my buyer as RB MS 63, about a $300 coin that I paid $15 for and sold to the buyer for $115 as I recall.
The First Lincoln cent doubled die error is the 1909 V.D.B. DDO.
@mr1931S said: They (1909-S V.D.B.) are just far too common and the prices driven by demand are just too high to justify the expense.
I'm a 1909-S and 1914-D and 1931-S fan myself. I'll buy these, raw or slabbed no matter, even if I already have one or more examples in my holdings. I'm currently working on making a roll of 50 1909s and 1909 V.D.Bs with a sprinkling of 1909 dated IHCs.
I think this may well be the first time a thread creator has turned and started to troll his own thread.
I wasn't talking to you mr. buttinski. You don't like what I write in a thread I created kindly stay out of it with your sophomoric remarks.
@mr1931S said: They (1909-S V.D.B.) are just far too common and the prices driven by demand are just too high to justify the expense.
I'm a 1909-S and 1914-D and 1931-S fan myself. I'll buy these, raw or slabbed no matter, even if I already have one or more examples in my holdings. I'm currently working on making a roll of 50 1909s and 1909 V.D.Bs with a sprinkling of 1909 dated IHCs.
I think this may well be the first time a thread creator has turned and started to troll his own thread.
I wasn't talking to you mr. buttinski. You don't like what I write in a thread I created kindly stay out of it with your sophomoric remarks.
If you don't want people to read a thread and comment, you probably shouldn't create a thread.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
@mr1931S said: They (1909-S V.D.B.) are just far too common and the prices driven by demand are just too high to justify the expense.
I'm a 1909-S and 1914-D and 1931-S fan myself. I'll buy these, raw or slabbed no matter, even if I already have one or more examples in my holdings. I'm currently working on making a roll of 50 1909s and 1909 V.D.Bs with a sprinkling of 1909 dated IHCs.
I think this may well be the first time a thread creator has turned and started to troll his own thread.
I wasn't talking to you mr. buttinski. You don't like what I write in a thread I created kindly stay out of it with your sophomoric remarks.
Another first: defending his own trolling.
Hmmm...it appears he created the thread but doesn't want anyone to read it or comment on it.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
@mr1931S said: most long-time Lincoln wheat collectors like myself don't respect the VDB DDO because it looks like machine doubling.
Not machine doubling. 1909 V.D.B. DDO is legitimate hub doubling of a working die. It's a fairly scarce coin that the collector should seek out in XF or better to fully appreciate the doubling. I scored one in the wild a few years ago that I eventually sold. The piece was sent it in for grading by our host here and it came back to my buyer as RB MS 63, about a $300 coin that I paid $15 for and sold to the buyer for $115 as I recall.
The First Lincoln cent doubled die error is the 1909 V.D.B. DDO.
Shall we discuss the difference between "looks like" and "is"?
It looks like your "light" is still "blocked".
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
Like I was saying IkesT, your brand has gone stale.
A doubled die occurs when the die is re‑hubbed (re‑engraved) with a misaligned master die, causing design elements to appear doubled or shifted. This change is part of the die’s original state and will be present on all coins struck from that die.
"Misaligned" suggests an error was made to me. You want to call doubled die a variety go for it. I'm going with ERROR. 1909 V.D.B. DDO is certainly not a variety in the sense that varying mintmark positions are die varieties for 1909-S V.D.B. pennies. There are four known die varieties for 1909-S V.D.B. Harsche discovered three of them in the course of producing his ground-breaking work, Detecting Altered Coins. The fourth one, the one that Harsche never saw prior to the publication of the 4th edition of his guide, is very, very scarce. I call it the "mess of an 'S'" variety of 1909-S V.D.B. I found one in the PCGS images library and might start a thread here featuring it.
Like I was saying IkesT, your brand has gone stale.
A doubled die occurs when the die is re‑hubbed (re‑engraved) with a misaligned master die, causing design elements to appear doubled or shifted. This change is part of the die’s original state and will be present on all coins struck from that die.
Like I was saying IkesT, your brand has gone stale.
A doubled die occurs when the die is re‑hubbed (re‑engraved) with a misaligned master die, causing design elements to appear doubled or shifted. This change is part of the die’s original state and will be present on all coins struck from that die.
That's what makes it a variety.
Agree. Although he's not the only one who is too literal about what "error" means.
Errors should be taken to occur during the minting process not the hubbing process. Otherwise, most varieties are errors and you lose the differentiation between the two.
Since I'm sure Mr. SVDB doesn't care what i think, in the words of our host:
Is there such a thing as a variety error? Seems like there would be in the case of 1909-S over horizontal 'S' cent. Making the horizontal 's' on the working die was the error.
From the readingroom article:
Varieties
To illustrate this concept, let me use a coin that most hobbyists are familiar with—the 1955 doubled-die Wheat cent. We can all agree that this is an error coin. The U.S. Mint never intended for all 1955 cents to have a doubled legend and date that year. The error occurred during the hubbing process—at least to my knowledge—which meant that the finished die was able to strike several thousand pieces that all share this same error. If you had two or more of these pieces in similar levels of preservation, they would all look exactly the same. This is what error collectors call a variety. Varieties are more widely collectable as more collectors have the opportunity to own one. This is similar for overdates, die clashes, and repunched mintmarks, which are both an error and a variety.
If 1955 DDO is considered an error why would 1909 V.D.B. DDO not be considered an error as well?
Intent is the deal. Ask the question, "Did the Mint intend this coin to be made this way?" If the answer to the question is 'no' then the coin must be an error. We might do well to just eliminate altogether the word, 'variety', from the coin collector's vocabulary.
Like I was saying IkesT, your brand has gone stale.
A doubled die occurs when the die is re‑hubbed (re‑engraved) with a misaligned master die, causing design elements to appear doubled or shifted. This change is part of the die’s original state and will be present on all coins struck from that die.
That's what makes it a variety.
Agree. Although he's not the only one who is too literal about what "error" means.
Errors should be taken to occur during the minting process not the hubbing process. Otherwise, most varieties are errors and you lose the differentiation between the two.
Since I'm sure Mr. SVDB doesn't care what i think, in the words of our host:
Like I was saying IkesT, your brand has gone stale.
A doubled die occurs when the die is re‑hubbed (re‑engraved) with a misaligned master die, causing design elements to appear doubled or shifted. This change is part of the die’s original state and will be present on all coins struck from that die.
That's what makes it a variety.
Agree. Although he's not the only one who is too literal about what "error" means.
Errors should be taken to occur during the minting process not the hubbing process. Otherwise, most varieties are errors and you lose the differentiation between the two.
Since I'm sure Mr. SVDB doesn't care what i think, in the words of our host:
Comments
Metamucil
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
Are you vying to displace IkesT as my #1 follower?
I was just trying to help with the block.
You need to tag @IkesT if you want to get his attention.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
Yes! Of course!
However in some sort of bizarro twist of fate I do not own an SVDB currently, and have no real intention to purchase one. They are just far too common and the prices driven by demand are just too high to justify the expense. I think the nicest one I’ve ever owned was a 65RD.
That said, I do own a VDB proof, as well as an 1856 Flyer, and an 1877 Indian Cent, so maybe one day I’ll buy one just to show to all the muggles who ask.
Also, I don’t believe the 22 No D is an error so much as it is a die state. I own a 12 star 1808 cent. The die was made with 13 stars but as the reverse die started to sink in that spot, the star disappeared from the struck coins. Is that an error or a die state?
Empty Nest Collection
I vote die state for the 22 No D and the 12 star 1808 cents.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Tradition, tradition! Tradition!
1909 V.D.B. DDO is the very first Lincoln cent doubled die. I'm surprised it doesn't get more respect. My next task is make a not-too-cheesy looking label to replace the SVDB label in my Whitman #9405. I've got some ideas on how to make a really pro label that looks like all the other year and mint labels in my album. I'll take a picture of the first page in my album and publish it here after I've finished making the DDO label.
Yes. They also quoted Buddha.
They (1909-S V.D.B.) are just far too common and the prices driven by demand are just too high to justify the expense.
I'm a 1909-S and 1914-D and 1931-S fan myself. I'll buy these, raw or slabbed no matter, even if I already have one or more examples in my holdings. I'm currently working on making a roll of 50 1909s and 1909 V.D.Bs with a sprinkling of 1909 dated IHCs.
By similar standards one should only need forty-five cents for a complete roll.
There are a lot of expensive coins in a Dansco type set, I'm going to put this one in and call the set complete.
That's seems like a lot of trouble. Ejy not just cut a picture out of an auction catalog and stick it in the hole. I don't see why a complete set needs to include actual coins.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
Not at all. I find them all the time when I'm walking the dogs.
That would work, too. But to be fair, that sounds like about as much effort as picking a penny up off the ground to me.
But then I don't need any coins and I can just buy more concert tickets.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
I didn't say I needed it, just that i found it and used it for my "Complete Set".
I think this may well be the first time a thread creator has turned and started to troll his own thread.
You need the S-VDB for a complete set. In regard to your quote, most long-time Lincoln wheat collectors like myself don't respect the VDB DDO because it looks like machine doubling. I have the '17, '41, & '55 DDOs and still looking for a nice '36 DDO but I will never seek the VDB DDO. JMHO.
https://pcgs.com/setregistry/showcase/2819
I wasn't talking to you mr. buttinski. You don't like what I write in a thread I created kindly stay out of it with your sophomoric remarks.
most long-time Lincoln wheat collectors like myself don't respect the VDB DDO because it looks like machine doubling.
Not machine doubling. 1909 V.D.B. DDO is legitimate hub doubling of a working die. It's a fairly scarce coin that the collector should seek out in XF or better to fully appreciate the doubling. I scored one in the wild a few years ago that I eventually sold. The piece was sent it in for grading by our host here and it came back to my buyer as RB MS 63, about a $300 coin that I paid $15 for and sold to the buyer for $115 as I recall.
The First Lincoln cent doubled die error is the 1909 V.D.B. DDO.
Another first: defending his own trolling.
Absolutely.
If you don't want people to read a thread and comment, you probably shouldn't create a thread.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
Hmmm...it appears he created the thread but doesn't want anyone to read it or comment on it.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
Shall we discuss the difference between "looks like" and "is"?
It looks like your "light" is still "blocked".
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
Like I was saying IkesT, your brand has gone stale.
A doubled die occurs when the die is re‑hubbed (re‑engraved) with a misaligned master die, causing design elements to appear doubled or shifted. This change is part of the die’s original state and will be present on all coins struck from that die.
"Misaligned" suggests an error was made to me. You want to call doubled die a variety go for it. I'm going with ERROR. 1909 V.D.B. DDO is certainly not a variety in the sense that varying mintmark positions are die varieties for 1909-S V.D.B. pennies. There are four known die varieties for 1909-S V.D.B. Harsche discovered three of them in the course of producing his ground-breaking work, Detecting Altered Coins. The fourth one, the one that Harsche never saw prior to the publication of the 4th edition of his guide, is very, very scarce. I call it the "mess of an 'S'" variety of 1909-S V.D.B. I found one in the PCGS images library and might start a thread here featuring it.
That's what makes it a variety.
Agree. Although he's not the only one who is too literal about what "error" means.
Errors should be taken to occur during the minting process not the hubbing process. Otherwise, most varieties are errors and you lose the differentiation between the two.
Since I'm sure Mr. SVDB doesn't care what i think, in the words of our host:
https://www.pcgs.com/news/varieties-vs-mint-errors-whats-the-difference
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
https://readingroom.money.org/error-or-variety/
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
https://www.ngccoin.com/news/article/1655/Variety-versus-Mint-Error/
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
Is there such a thing as a variety error? Seems like there would be in the case of 1909-S over horizontal 'S' cent. Making the horizontal 's' on the working die was the error.
From the readingroom article:
Varieties
To illustrate this concept, let me use a coin that most hobbyists are familiar with—the 1955 doubled-die Wheat cent. We can all agree that this is an error coin. The U.S. Mint never intended for all 1955 cents to have a doubled legend and date that year. The error occurred during the hubbing process—at least to my knowledge—which meant that the finished die was able to strike several thousand pieces that all share this same error. If you had two or more of these pieces in similar levels of preservation, they would all look exactly the same. This is what error collectors call a variety. Varieties are more widely collectable as more collectors have the opportunity to own one. This is similar for overdates, die clashes, and repunched mintmarks, which are both an error and a variety.
If 1955 DDO is considered an error why would 1909 V.D.B. DDO not be considered an error as well?
Intent is the deal. Ask the question, "Did the Mint intend this coin to be made this way?" If the answer to the question is 'no' then the coin must be an error. We might do well to just eliminate altogether the word, 'variety', from the coin collector's vocabulary.
You might consider me Mr. SVDB but I don't.
Based on established definitions. A 1955 DDO cent is a variety. The fact that a die or hub was prepared improperly doesn't change that.
An off-center 1955 DDO is both a variety and an error.
That's between you and Buddha. Buddha says you're wrong.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.