Wednesday, February 12, 2020
Friday, February 7, 2020
Questions Too Darn Juicy To Let Slip By
Over on facebook a few of us got together to create a group to go along with the Live Coin Q&A program airing on Thursday evenings starting at 830 Eastern on youtube.
The group is aptly named Coin Q&A. Join it.
Early this morning a budding numismatist by the name of Shane posed a poignant question. My response become rather lengthy. Rather than see it lost to the facebook nether regions I thought it prudent to share here.
There are more replies by other folks. To review those, you'll just have to join the group to follow the discussion. My response is here...
I can not answer right now as to tolerances of design hubbed into the die. That will take some investigation.
As to value, most of the minor doubled die varieties do not draw all that extreme a premium. Part is due to collector interest...the variety side of the hobby is still in it's infancy. Those varieties that draw a hefty premium have been glorified in print, particularly in the Red Book and Cherrypicker's guide. Minor varieties are largely unknown, but are gaining attention albeit slowly.
As for weight, there is a correlation between the greater it is from the target planchet weight and premium. Slightly over/under does not draw much interest. As with varieties and other measurable errors (e.g. 5% off center v 75% off center), the more substantial the anomaly, the greater the premium.
Errors vs varieties:
Errors are an event or state during production. They are unique. They can be further classified as a strike, die, planchet, or collar error.
Varieties are a change in the design, either intentional or unintentional.
A die crack would fall under the definition of Variety. Varieties are repeated as often as the die strikes the coin. However, there is some grey area...some of these varieties come into being gradually, such as a crack. Others come into being instantly, as with a clash. There is some crossover of these definitions. Here you are getting into the realm of numismatic theory. Who or what would make the decision regarding standard classification rules? The ANA? It's a club. The Mint? Their interest is in producing coinage to support the economy. Consensus begs to be the determining body but you'd have an easier time herding cats.
As to value of minor errors vs minor varieties, that falls into the scope of collector interest. I've seen people claim machine doubling has value. I vehemently disagree with such a claim. On a similar note I here people claim die chips have no value. To this I offer objective evidence to support the idea that some can, should and do. Again, it is dependent on the numismatic importance of the issue. Documentation of such varieties can also add numismatic importance. As an example: cuds-on-coins has a broad range of listings for BIE varieties. These bring a few bucks, especially in high grades. Should not die chips in prominent locations on other dates bring similar interest? What if there was more documentation of some of these other die chips..."pooping horse" comes to mind.
They like the sneezing horse (die crack), spitting eagle (clash), jailbird lincolns (clash), extra bear claw (chip), among others...is this the result of hype? Documentation? Uniqueness? Findability?
There is a 1975-D Jefferson with a mintmark in an extreme location. They call it the High D. I see no reason such a variety should command a premium, yet people are willing to pay a few bucks.
There is a Canadian Large Cent with a "Wide Date" but several different dies with varying distances of the last digit. Without standards to differentiate between the several dies, it is uncertain which diagnostics to employ to identify the correct die.
Your questions here are right on target, baby. It is your sort of interest that drives numismatists to investigate further. You are on the path to becoming a hard core numismatist. Keep going down that path.
Here's where it gets interesting...
Variety attributors also have Tolerances.
Chuck Daughtrey has mentioned that he considers some die varieties to be too minor to list, and he is SPOT ON in this regard while leaving the door open wide for other attributors to document minor varieites.
This brings up the idea of "Attributability Thresholds".
There are minor RPMs out there that are well documented but no more than a split serif. Is Size of the Anomaly the metric to employ in determining if a variety should be documented? Daughtrey cites Marketability as a critical determining factor. Other attributors will list the ability to identify the variety with a 10x loupe as the threshold. There are die chips the size of dump trucks out there receiving little attention while there are numerous VAMs that would be regarded as minor chips or cracks by other attributors.
Fivaz lists the most extreme, most desired, most rare, most valuable and penultimate varieties in the Cherrypicker's Guide.
Potter offers up some glorious oddities in "Strike It Rich with Pocket Change".
Me, I like em all. BUT there is a limit in many instances. Die cracks on the 1983 cent reverse, chips on 1957 cents, chips on Roosevelt's face, Some of these are more common than jerks on facebook.
It is up to each attributor to determine what is going to be listed in their work, be it based on value, importance, grandeur, or how much time is available to study and list them.
There are entire books dedicated to RPMs.
I think it would be interesting to produce a book on die chips. What would make them interesting? Some combination of size, location, domination of the design, and I would include Findability in there. Plenty of folks can find an identical variety or something similar, and would love to make a contribution to the hobby as having discovered it.
This one is listed in the SAN Database as US-5C-2005P-Bison-SCHP-001.
It's a simple, minor, unremarkable die chip in a letter.
And you can find these.
If you did, would you want to be able to potentially look it up somewhere, identify your specimen accordingly, or submit it for inclusion in a variety database with your name as the discoverer?
Is it marketable? Not particularly. Not yet anyway. Is this because it is not documented? I think partly.
How about US-1C-1910S-SCHP-001.
A die chip in a prominent location-inside the mintmark.
You can find these, but it takes some hunting and here are few surviving specimens in high grade.
Neglect it or use it to add breadth to your collection?
As these varieties are brought to the attention of more people, does the hobby grow as a result of the effort?
Do collectors have more to look for, more to identify, and the tools to do so?
And if they do, is it a positive benefit for the hobby?
The group is aptly named Coin Q&A. Join it.
Early this morning a budding numismatist by the name of Shane posed a poignant question. My response become rather lengthy. Rather than see it lost to the facebook nether regions I thought it prudent to share here.
Shane:I'm a slow typist so it took a while putting out a reply while keeping my coffee at an acceptable level.
Does anyone know if the Mint considers minor doubled dies (such as single squeeze class 8) to be within tolerance? I heard this somewhere and am not sure it's a fact. If workers are aware of a particular sound that happens when a doubled die is created, and these are still getting out in high numbers, they must not care, thus supporting some doubled dies have a tolerance level. If they do have a tolerance level, why are they far more valuable than a coin that isn't exactly the weight put in official writing?
Additionally, concerning errors vs. die varieties, each error coin must be unique, even die errors such as the spiked head (the crack gets progressively larger as the die is used). Die varieties can have 1,000,000 examples that are *exactly* the same. Why are minor die errors/striking errors not valued more than die varieties?
There are more replies by other folks. To review those, you'll just have to join the group to follow the discussion. My response is here...
I can not answer right now as to tolerances of design hubbed into the die. That will take some investigation.
As to value, most of the minor doubled die varieties do not draw all that extreme a premium. Part is due to collector interest...the variety side of the hobby is still in it's infancy. Those varieties that draw a hefty premium have been glorified in print, particularly in the Red Book and Cherrypicker's guide. Minor varieties are largely unknown, but are gaining attention albeit slowly.
As for weight, there is a correlation between the greater it is from the target planchet weight and premium. Slightly over/under does not draw much interest. As with varieties and other measurable errors (e.g. 5% off center v 75% off center), the more substantial the anomaly, the greater the premium.
Errors vs varieties:
Errors are an event or state during production. They are unique. They can be further classified as a strike, die, planchet, or collar error.
Varieties are a change in the design, either intentional or unintentional.
A die crack would fall under the definition of Variety. Varieties are repeated as often as the die strikes the coin. However, there is some grey area...some of these varieties come into being gradually, such as a crack. Others come into being instantly, as with a clash. There is some crossover of these definitions. Here you are getting into the realm of numismatic theory. Who or what would make the decision regarding standard classification rules? The ANA? It's a club. The Mint? Their interest is in producing coinage to support the economy. Consensus begs to be the determining body but you'd have an easier time herding cats.
As to value of minor errors vs minor varieties, that falls into the scope of collector interest. I've seen people claim machine doubling has value. I vehemently disagree with such a claim. On a similar note I here people claim die chips have no value. To this I offer objective evidence to support the idea that some can, should and do. Again, it is dependent on the numismatic importance of the issue. Documentation of such varieties can also add numismatic importance. As an example: cuds-on-coins has a broad range of listings for BIE varieties. These bring a few bucks, especially in high grades. Should not die chips in prominent locations on other dates bring similar interest? What if there was more documentation of some of these other die chips..."pooping horse" comes to mind.
They like the sneezing horse (die crack), spitting eagle (clash), jailbird lincolns (clash), extra bear claw (chip), among others...is this the result of hype? Documentation? Uniqueness? Findability?
There is a 1975-D Jefferson with a mintmark in an extreme location. They call it the High D. I see no reason such a variety should command a premium, yet people are willing to pay a few bucks.
There is a Canadian Large Cent with a "Wide Date" but several different dies with varying distances of the last digit. Without standards to differentiate between the several dies, it is uncertain which diagnostics to employ to identify the correct die.
Your questions here are right on target, baby. It is your sort of interest that drives numismatists to investigate further. You are on the path to becoming a hard core numismatist. Keep going down that path.
 |
| I am of the opinion that more information made available to more collectors is a good thing for the hobby. |
Here's where it gets interesting...
Variety attributors also have Tolerances.
Chuck Daughtrey has mentioned that he considers some die varieties to be too minor to list, and he is SPOT ON in this regard while leaving the door open wide for other attributors to document minor varieites.
This brings up the idea of "Attributability Thresholds".
There are minor RPMs out there that are well documented but no more than a split serif. Is Size of the Anomaly the metric to employ in determining if a variety should be documented? Daughtrey cites Marketability as a critical determining factor. Other attributors will list the ability to identify the variety with a 10x loupe as the threshold. There are die chips the size of dump trucks out there receiving little attention while there are numerous VAMs that would be regarded as minor chips or cracks by other attributors.
Fivaz lists the most extreme, most desired, most rare, most valuable and penultimate varieties in the Cherrypicker's Guide.
Potter offers up some glorious oddities in "Strike It Rich with Pocket Change".
Me, I like em all. BUT there is a limit in many instances. Die cracks on the 1983 cent reverse, chips on 1957 cents, chips on Roosevelt's face, Some of these are more common than jerks on facebook.
It is up to each attributor to determine what is going to be listed in their work, be it based on value, importance, grandeur, or how much time is available to study and list them.
There are entire books dedicated to RPMs.
I think it would be interesting to produce a book on die chips. What would make them interesting? Some combination of size, location, domination of the design, and I would include Findability in there. Plenty of folks can find an identical variety or something similar, and would love to make a contribution to the hobby as having discovered it.
This one is listed in the SAN Database as US-5C-2005P-Bison-SCHP-001.
It's a simple, minor, unremarkable die chip in a letter.
And you can find these.
If you did, would you want to be able to potentially look it up somewhere, identify your specimen accordingly, or submit it for inclusion in a variety database with your name as the discoverer?
Is it marketable? Not particularly. Not yet anyway. Is this because it is not documented? I think partly.
A die chip in a prominent location-inside the mintmark.
You can find these, but it takes some hunting and here are few surviving specimens in high grade.
Neglect it or use it to add breadth to your collection?
As these varieties are brought to the attention of more people, does the hobby grow as a result of the effort?
Do collectors have more to look for, more to identify, and the tools to do so?
And if they do, is it a positive benefit for the hobby?
Thursday, September 19, 2019
Latest Project - Diagnostic Manual
Just in case I didn't have enough to do I've started work on the Diagnostic Manual For Circulating United States Coinage. I've been threatening to produce a book for some time. Better now than later.
The primary objective is a reference volume which offers the exacting detail required to accurately and positively identify commonly found errors, varieties, and collectible coins in circulation.
Any reference volume about coins can easily grow to extreme proportions. The scope of this piece will be those issues that are most often asked about in social networks and personal email. The main focus will be on US coins issued since 1965. It will not include proof, gold, or commemmorative issues, but I'm sure to stray. It's hard to put a hold on a good idea.
I have invited a select handful of competent numismatists to contribute to the project. As the work develops, they'll be credited accordingly.
An electronic version of the book as it develops is available online to Patreon supporters of another project: The SAN Database of Die Varieties, an ongoing project that will take several more weeks to become functional. The previous iteration of the SAN Database is still available in an incomplete form. This work, being developed by myself, Shay Hoffmaster, and CJ Langbecker, was being held up by the limited interface offered by Wordpress. Expect much improved progress and announcements to be forthcoming in the next few weeks.
The Diagnostic Manual will explain a number of common errors and varieties with informative articles, diagrams, and photos of examples to give aspiring numismatists an invaluable learning tool. Never knowing when to leave well enough alone I expect one day to change the name to leave out the word "Circulating".
Excerpt from the Introduction Section:
Special Thanks to my friend Paula Bluhm for the cover image.
The primary objective is a reference volume which offers the exacting detail required to accurately and positively identify commonly found errors, varieties, and collectible coins in circulation.
Any reference volume about coins can easily grow to extreme proportions. The scope of this piece will be those issues that are most often asked about in social networks and personal email. The main focus will be on US coins issued since 1965. It will not include proof, gold, or commemmorative issues, but I'm sure to stray. It's hard to put a hold on a good idea.
I have invited a select handful of competent numismatists to contribute to the project. As the work develops, they'll be credited accordingly.
An electronic version of the book as it develops is available online to Patreon supporters of another project: The SAN Database of Die Varieties, an ongoing project that will take several more weeks to become functional. The previous iteration of the SAN Database is still available in an incomplete form. This work, being developed by myself, Shay Hoffmaster, and CJ Langbecker, was being held up by the limited interface offered by Wordpress. Expect much improved progress and announcements to be forthcoming in the next few weeks.
The Diagnostic Manual will explain a number of common errors and varieties with informative articles, diagrams, and photos of examples to give aspiring numismatists an invaluable learning tool. Never knowing when to leave well enough alone I expect one day to change the name to leave out the word "Circulating".
Excerpt from the Introduction Section:
Rather than an attribution catalog, this work is designed to explain those features which support, verify, or debunk a theory explaining the coin.The community of amateur collectors needs this reference as a vital source of useful information to correctly identify their coins. All too often they are besieged with bad information from questionable sources and leaping to conclusions without using logical reasoning based on empirical evidence in order to reach a sound conclusion. There is a procedure for diagnosing the issue on a coin that does not include Ignorance, Apathy, Stubbornness, or Hope.It’s the scientific method: Hypothesis-Observation-Conclusion.“I heard about it on facebook so it must be true” is not good enough. There are specific, measurable, qualifying markers on a coin that will help to support or to debunk the identification of an error or attribution of a variety. Rather than rely on others to tell you what the error or variety on your coin is, learn the methods, procedures, and criteria to make the call yourself, and develop the confidence that what you have determined is the correct conclusion
Special Thanks to my friend Paula Bluhm for the cover image.
Wednesday, August 21, 2019
Monday, August 19, 2019
Inaccurate, Wrong, Misleading, Dubious and Unsavory Coin Sale Listings
Or
How To Lose Money When Buying Coins
For the August Coin Seminar Weekend I produced this video showing a number of coin sales listing that are suspect for one reason or another. Sooner or later a collector is going to outgrow hunting through pocket change and bank rolls and will have to purchase coins to complete a set and grow
their collection. Let's take a close look at some more to give you an idea of what I'm talking about.
This Mint Set is in it's original box. The only indicator of the date is the number above the bar code: U13. U = Uncirculated Mint Set. 13 = 2013. The date checks out. The Price is a bit high. Numis shows 2013 Mint Sets with a fair market value of $26 on the day I found this listing. $4 heavy on a $26 purchase is 15% over market value. Compound this with the $8.52 shipping charge. I've worked with these sets before. They fit in a 6x9 padded mailer with additional cardboard for protection and still weigh less than a pound. I could ship this anywhere in the US for $5. $31 should get you this set, shipped. This makes the final price $7.52 higher than reasonable. I like the new blister packaging the Mint switched to in 2008 for Mint Sets but paying 24% too much is not a deal no matter how you look at it. The description says 28 Satin Coins. This is inaccurate. If you have done your homework you'll know Satin coins were produced for Mint Sets from 2005-2010 ONLY. These will be normal business strikes. Does the seller not know or is this an attempt at deception?
Prices will fluctuate. Right now, prices on Mint Sets are down. It's a good time to buy, but at the right price. Shipping is an administrative expense. Charging more shipping than necessary is unfair and unnecessary.
Several early wheats have lower mintage and draw considerably better prices than common wheats. I've found 1940s wheats that have had the side of the 4 removed to make the coin appear to be a teen.
This one appears to be a 1919-S that has had the last 9 worked in a manner to close it into a loop.
A genuine 1910-S has a round zero and a different mintmark style.
Close examination shows some blemishes on the shoulder consistent with filing off the metal around the VDB, added in 1918.
Top is a genuine 1910-S. Note the round zero and the square outline of the S.
Bottom shows a 2nd 9 with a flat left side and blemish at 7 oclock that is consistent with 2 discontinuous pieces of metal moved close together.
The mintmark has been flattened, probably intentionally. Flattening of the correct mintmark would not result in one this big.
Here are some more fake S-Mint Wheats
I came across this Stone Mountain Commemmorative Half Dollar while surfing eBay looking for bargains. This one is NOT a bargain. Take a look at the photos, see if you can tell the difference between this one and a genuine specimen.
Compare with known authenticated examples on the PCGS website.
I went live with a video as soon as I found it. Here's the way I see it.
Would you have caught it?
How To Lose Money When Buying Coins
For the August Coin Seminar Weekend I produced this video showing a number of coin sales listing that are suspect for one reason or another. Sooner or later a collector is going to outgrow hunting through pocket change and bank rolls and will have to purchase coins to complete a set and grow their collection. Let's take a close look at some more to give you an idea of what I'm talking about.
2013 Satin Mint Set
First up is a 2013 Mint Set listed on eBay. I cropped and zoomed in on one of the photos.
Prices will fluctuate. Right now, prices on Mint Sets are down. It's a good time to buy, but at the right price. Shipping is an administrative expense. Charging more shipping than necessary is unfair and unnecessary.
Not a 1910-S
I found this Lincoln Cent listed for sale on USACoinBook as a 1910-S. Problem is, it's not a 1910-S. It appears to be a 1919-S that has been altered.
Several early wheats have lower mintage and draw considerably better prices than common wheats. I've found 1940s wheats that have had the side of the 4 removed to make the coin appear to be a teen.
This one appears to be a 1919-S that has had the last 9 worked in a manner to close it into a loop.
A genuine 1910-S has a round zero and a different mintmark style.
Close examination shows some blemishes on the shoulder consistent with filing off the metal around the VDB, added in 1918.
Top is a genuine 1910-S. Note the round zero and the square outline of the S.
Bottom shows a 2nd 9 with a flat left side and blemish at 7 oclock that is consistent with 2 discontinuous pieces of metal moved close together.
The mintmark has been flattened, probably intentionally. Flattening of the correct mintmark would not result in one this big.
Here are some more fake S-Mint Wheats
1925 Stone Mountain Half
Compare with known authenticated examples on the PCGS website.
I went live with a video as soon as I found it. Here's the way I see it.
Would you have caught it?
Saturday, April 27, 2019
Subjective Coin Grading
Grading has always been subjective, always will be to some degree. What you are trying to do with the coin can sway your opinion.
Saturday, April 6, 2019
West Point Quarters
Q: What's better than finding the secret toy surprise in the bottom of a box of Cracker Jack?
A: Finding a quarter with a W on it.
A couple weeks ago I announced the possible release of West Point Quarters into circulation. How fortunate for my reputation that this turned out to be true! The US Mint made the announcement on April 2: They are out there.
They should start showing up in banks within the next couple of weeks. One fellow commented on a video by Blue Ridge Silver Hound that he had found 4 already. It's still a bit early for that and the fellow has yet to verify his claim with photos. Unless those photos show up I call BS. The time it takes for coins fresh from the mint to move through distribution networks to reach local banks suggest the first W-Quarters will be available starting around the third week in April. The coins are being mixed with Philadelphia AND Denver quarters and are available ONLY in circulation. The US Mint will not be offering these quarters for sale.
Let the hunt begin!
That video by Blue Ridge Silver hound mentioned above is where I learned of the bounty offered by PCGS: $5000 for the 1st West Point Lowell Quarter to be submitted for certification.
In addition to the First Discovery, they'll be offering special holders with First week of Discovery and Early Discovery pedigrees. I suppose all the hubbub and excitement of people submitting a pile of coins in the next month will allow PCGS to recoup the bounty.
I'll enhance that offer to allow a choice from several potential items, just in case the winner already has that proof set. I just have to clean up the desk a bit to find some good stuff.
Meanwhile the quarter will be added to the BIG Show Package and some lucky viewer will win it.
Each of these 5 America The Beautiful quarters with the West Point mintmark will be limited to a production run of 2 million units. This will put them tied in 205th place for least produced Washington Quarters. See Mintage Chart below. This makes them hardly a rarity. As business strikes go, they will be a bit less common, with only 1932 D, 1932-S, and 1937-S being produced in fewer numbers.
What we'll see is a burst in value as collectors seek to complete their sets. There will be some speculation as these coins are found, certified, promoted, and hyped. Much of the value will be novelty in the first weeks after discovery.
I remember the discovery of the 1995 Doubled Die DDO-001 (CONECA) and all the fuss. Articles in Numismatic News, lots of talk on the early internet chat groups. It even made the cover of COINS Magazine. These things were HOT! I recall prices reaching into the 4 digits when it was first discovered. Over time, as more specimens were found, prices cooled. Nowadays, Superb certified specimens can be picked up for less than $100.
The Mint has never been all that great at promoting its products and even less great at putting out a decent product. Most of the quarters that find their way into circulation will be overlooked by an apathetic public. It's the collectors in the know who will be furiously hunting these quarters down. Perhaps media exposure will put people on alert for later issues this year but with 2 weeks notice and a media more concerned with celebrities and politicians, this special issue has already seen most of the fanfare its going to get. We can always hope for a 15 second sound bite late at night during a 24 hour news channel looking for a human interest story after a neti pot commercial.
It will be the coin roll hunters and coin dealers who will hunt these coins down. Upon finding one you can take comfort in knowing these folks will run out to purchase every last quarter roll in town they can get their hands on in the hopes of building some inventory. What they don't grab will work their way into circulation to be scraped, smudged, and screwed up forever. It won't take but a couple weeks for the circulated specimens to take on all those nicks and dings that make us cringe and weep. I project 2 classes of resulting coinage: Minty Fresh, straight out of the roll and well protected, and the run of the mill stuff. These will be separated by 2 weeks of circulation.
I made a video last night picking through a brand spanking new roll of 2016 pennies. Fact of the matter is most of the coins in these new rolls won't make MS65. Looking at PCGS and NGC population reports for Mint State modern coins, MS67 and higher are few and far between, and many of those were from Mint Sets, Mint Rolls, and maybe a mint bag here and there. These West Point quarters have already lost most of the high grade examples during their trip from the Mint to their designated targets. Many have yet to be sacrificed to the coin rolling machine demons and every overexcited 12 year old coin roll hunter with no gloves
Coins above MS66 will command a handsome premium. I've heard estimates of hundreds to the low thousands. That would be consistent with what we see in other issues. Perhaps the Novelty Premium will add another 20%. The hunters and dealers will save tens of thousands of coins fresh from the rolls. They'll be good for $5-10 based on the mintage figures. Circulated specimens, of which I expect the lions share of production will end up as will offer little numismatic value. Their greatest value will be in attracting new collectors to the hobby.
In my opinion, that makes them PRICELESS!
That's my 2¢.
Happy Hunting and Good Luck.
Mintage Chart for Washington Quarters through rank 205
The full chart has 642 different Washington Quarters and I have yet to add all the 2019 PDS issues.
More charts
A: Finding a quarter with a W on it.
Let the hunt begin!
That video by Blue Ridge Silver hound mentioned above is where I learned of the bounty offered by PCGS: $5000 for the 1st West Point Lowell Quarter to be submitted for certification.
In addition to the First Discovery, they'll be offering special holders with First week of Discovery and Early Discovery pedigrees. I suppose all the hubbub and excitement of people submitting a pile of coins in the next month will allow PCGS to recoup the bounty.
REWARD!
I have also offered a reward for the 1st West Point Quarter donated to The BIG Show: a 2001 Proof Set!I'll enhance that offer to allow a choice from several potential items, just in case the winner already has that proof set. I just have to clean up the desk a bit to find some good stuff.
Meanwhile the quarter will be added to the BIG Show Package and some lucky viewer will win it.
What Will They Be Worth?
Aside from the first discovery submitted to PCGS that will bring the owner a fat payday, the big question everyone is wondering is what sort of premium these coins will fetch?Each of these 5 America The Beautiful quarters with the West Point mintmark will be limited to a production run of 2 million units. This will put them tied in 205th place for least produced Washington Quarters. See Mintage Chart below. This makes them hardly a rarity. As business strikes go, they will be a bit less common, with only 1932 D, 1932-S, and 1937-S being produced in fewer numbers.
What we'll see is a burst in value as collectors seek to complete their sets. There will be some speculation as these coins are found, certified, promoted, and hyped. Much of the value will be novelty in the first weeks after discovery.
I remember the discovery of the 1995 Doubled Die DDO-001 (CONECA) and all the fuss. Articles in Numismatic News, lots of talk on the early internet chat groups. It even made the cover of COINS Magazine. These things were HOT! I recall prices reaching into the 4 digits when it was first discovered. Over time, as more specimens were found, prices cooled. Nowadays, Superb certified specimens can be picked up for less than $100.
The Mint has never been all that great at promoting its products and even less great at putting out a decent product. Most of the quarters that find their way into circulation will be overlooked by an apathetic public. It's the collectors in the know who will be furiously hunting these quarters down. Perhaps media exposure will put people on alert for later issues this year but with 2 weeks notice and a media more concerned with celebrities and politicians, this special issue has already seen most of the fanfare its going to get. We can always hope for a 15 second sound bite late at night during a 24 hour news channel looking for a human interest story after a neti pot commercial.
It will be the coin roll hunters and coin dealers who will hunt these coins down. Upon finding one you can take comfort in knowing these folks will run out to purchase every last quarter roll in town they can get their hands on in the hopes of building some inventory. What they don't grab will work their way into circulation to be scraped, smudged, and screwed up forever. It won't take but a couple weeks for the circulated specimens to take on all those nicks and dings that make us cringe and weep. I project 2 classes of resulting coinage: Minty Fresh, straight out of the roll and well protected, and the run of the mill stuff. These will be separated by 2 weeks of circulation.
I made a video last night picking through a brand spanking new roll of 2016 pennies. Fact of the matter is most of the coins in these new rolls won't make MS65. Looking at PCGS and NGC population reports for Mint State modern coins, MS67 and higher are few and far between, and many of those were from Mint Sets, Mint Rolls, and maybe a mint bag here and there. These West Point quarters have already lost most of the high grade examples during their trip from the Mint to their designated targets. Many have yet to be sacrificed to the coin rolling machine demons and every overexcited 12 year old coin roll hunter with no gloves
Coins above MS66 will command a handsome premium. I've heard estimates of hundreds to the low thousands. That would be consistent with what we see in other issues. Perhaps the Novelty Premium will add another 20%. The hunters and dealers will save tens of thousands of coins fresh from the rolls. They'll be good for $5-10 based on the mintage figures. Circulated specimens, of which I expect the lions share of production will end up as will offer little numismatic value. Their greatest value will be in attracting new collectors to the hobby.
In my opinion, that makes them PRICELESS!
That's my 2¢.
Happy Hunting and Good Luck.
Mintage Chart for Washington Quarters through rank 205
| Rank | Date/MM | Mintage | ||
| 1 | 1964 | SMS | 50 | |
| 2 | 1936 | Proof | 3837 | |
| 3 | 1937 | Proof | 5542 | |
| 4 | 1938 | Proof | 8045 | |
| 5 | 1939 | Proof | 8795 | |
| 6 | 1940 | Proof | 11246 | |
| 7 | 1941 | Proof | 15287 | |
| 8 | 1942 | Proof | 21123 | |
| 9 | 1950 | Proof | 51386 | |
| 10 | 1951 | Proof | 57500 | |
| 11 | 1952 | Proof | 81980 | |
| 12 | 1953 | Proof | 128800 | |
| 13 | 1954 | Proof | 233300 | |
| 14 | 1955 | Proof | 378200 | |
| 15 | 1932 S | 408000 | ||
| 16 | 1932 D | 436800 | ||
| 17 | 2012 S | ELY Silver Proof | 557891 | |
| 18 | 2012 S | CHA Silver Proof | 557891 | |
| 19 | 2012 S | ACA Silver Proof | 557891 | |
| 20 | 2012 S | VLC Silver Proof | 557891 | |
| 21 | 2012 S | DEN Silver Proof | 557891 | |
| 22 | 2013 S | WHM Silver Proof | 579409 | |
| 23 | 2013 S | PVY Silver Proof | 579409 | |
| 24 | 2013 S | BAS Silver Proof | 579409 | |
| 25 | 2013 S | FMH Silver Proof | 579409 | |
| 26 | 2013 S | RSH Silver Proof | 579409 | |
| 27 | 2010 P | HOT Satin | 583897 | |
| 28 | 2010 D | HOT Satin | 583897 | |
| 29 | 2010 P | YST Satin | 583897 | |
| 30 | 2010 D | YST Satin | 583897 | |
| 31 | 2010 P | YOS Satin | 583897 | |
| 32 | 2010 D | YOS Satin | 583897 | |
| 33 | 2010 P | CAN Satin | 583897 | |
| 34 | 2010 D | CAN Satin | 583897 | |
| 35 | 2010 P | MHD Satin | 583897 | |
| 36 | 2010 D | MHD Satin | 583897 | |
| 37 | 1956 | Proof | 669384 | |
| 38 | 1995 S | Silver Proof | 679985 | |
| 39 | 2011 S | GTB Silver Proof | 722076 | |
| 40 | 2011 S | GLA Silver Proof | 722076 | |
| 41 | 2011 S | OLY Silver Proof | 722076 | |
| 42 | 2011 S | VKB Silver Proof | 722076 | |
| 43 | 2011 S | CHK Silver Proof | 722076 | |
| 44 | 1997 S | Silver Proof | 741678 | |
| 45 | 2008 P | OK Satin | 745464 | |
| 46 | 2008 D | OK Satin | 745464 | |
| 47 | 2008 P | NM Satin | 745464 | |
| 48 | 2008 D | NM Satin | 745464 | |
| 49 | 2008 P | AZ Satin | 745464 | |
| 50 | 2008 D | AZ Satin | 745464 | |
| 51 | 2008 P | AK Satin | 745464 | |
| 52 | 2008 D | AK Satin | 745464 | |
| 53 | 2008 P | HI Satin | 745464 | |
| 54 | 2008 D | HI Satin | 745464 | |
| 55 | 1993 S | Silver Proof | 761353 | |
| 56 | 1996 S | Silver Proof | 775021 | |
| 57 | 2009 P | DC Satin | 784614 | |
| 58 | 2009 D | DC Satin | 784614 | |
| 59 | 2009 P | PR Satin | 784614 | |
| 60 | 2009 D | PR Satin | 784614 | |
| 61 | 2009 P | GU Satin | 784614 | |
| 62 | 2009 D | GU Satin | 784614 | |
| 63 | 2009 P | AS Satin | 784614 | |
| 64 | 2009 D | AS Satin | 784614 | |
| 65 | 2009 P | VI Satin | 784614 | |
| 66 | 2009 D | VI Satin | 784614 | |
| 67 | 2009 P | MP Satin | 784614 | |
| 68 | 2009 D | MP Satin | 784614 | |
| 69 | 1994 S | Silver Proof | 785329 | |
| 70 | 1999 S | DE Silver Proof | 804565 | |
| 71 | 1999 S | PA Silver Proof | 804565 | |
| 72 | 1999 S | NJ Silver Proof | 804565 | |
| 73 | 1999 S | GA Silver Proof | 804565 | |
| 74 | 1999 S | CT Silver Proof | 804565 | |
| 75 | 2006 P | NV Satin | 847361 | |
| 76 | 2006 D | NV Satin | 847361 | |
| 77 | 2006 P | NE Satin | 847361 | |
| 78 | 2006 D | NE Satin | 847361 | |
| 79 | 2006 P | CO Satin | 847361 | |
| 80 | 2006 D | CO Satin | 847361 | |
| 81 | 2006 P | ND Satin | 847361 | |
| 82 | 2006 D | ND Satin | 847361 | |
| 83 | 2006 P | SD Satin | 847361 | |
| 84 | 2006 D | SD Satin | 847361 | |
| 85 | 2010 S | HOT Silver Proof | 859435 | |
| 86 | 2010 S | YST Silver Proof | 859435 | |
| 87 | 2010 S | YOS Silver Proof | 859435 | |
| 88 | 2010 S | CAN Silver Proof | 859435 | |
| 89 | 2010 S | MHD Silver Proof | 859435 | |
| 90 | 1958 | Proof | 875652 | |
| 91 | 1998 S | Silver Proof | 878792 | |
| 92 | 2001 S | NY Silver Proof | 889697 | |
| 93 | 2001 S | NC Silver Proof | 889697 | |
| 94 | 2001 S | RI Silver Proof | 889697 | |
| 95 | 2001 S | VT Silver Proof | 889697 | |
| 96 | 2001 S | KY Silver Proof | 889697 | |
| 97 | 2002 S | TN Silver Proof | 892229 | |
| 98 | 2002 S | OH Silver Proof | 892229 | |
| 99 | 2002 S | LA Silver Proof | 892229 | |
| 100 | 2002 S | IN Silver Proof | 892229 | |
| 101 | 2002 S | MS Silver Proof | 892229 | |
| 102 | 2007 P | MT Satin | 895628 | |
| 103 | 2007 D | MT Satin | 895628 | |
| 104 | 2007 P | WA Satin | 895628 | |
| 105 | 2007 D | WA Satin | 895628 | |
| 106 | 2007 P | ID Satin | 895628 | |
| 107 | 2007 D | ID Satin | 895628 | |
| 108 | 2007 P | WY Satin | 895628 | |
| 109 | 2007 D | WY Satin | 895628 | |
| 110 | 2007 P | UT Satin | 895628 | |
| 111 | 2007 D | UT Satin | 895628 | |
| 112 | 2013 S | FMH Proof | 911451 | |
| 113 | 2013 S | BAS Proof | 911525 | |
| 114 | 2013 S | PVY Proof | 913563 | |
| 115 | 2013 S | RSH Proof | 920695 | |
| 116 | 2013 S | WHM Proof | 950080 | |
| 117 | 2012 S | DEN Proof | 957856 | |
| 118 | 2012 S | CHA Proof | 960049 | |
| 119 | 2012 S | ACA Proof | 960409 | |
| 120 | 2012 S | VLC Proof | 961272 | |
| 121 | 2000 S | MA Silver Proof | 965421 | |
| 122 | 2000 S | MY Silver Proof | 965421 | |
| 123 | 2000 S | SC Silver Proof | 965421 | |
| 124 | 2000 S | NH Silver Proof | 965421 | |
| 125 | 2000 S | VA Silver Proof | 965421 | |
| 126 | 2009 S | DC Silver Proof | 996548 | |
| 127 | 2009 S | PR Silver Proof | 996548 | |
| 128 | 2009 S | GU Silver Proof | 996548 | |
| 129 | 2009 S | AS Silver Proof | 996548 | |
| 130 | 2009 S | VI Silver Proof | 996548 | |
| 131 | 2009 S | MP Silver Proof | 996548 | |
| 132 | 2012 S | ELY Proof | 1010361 | |
| 133 | 2008 S | HI Silver Proof | 1020768 | |
| 134 | 2003 S | IL Silver Proof | 1125755 | |
| 135 | 2003 S | AL Silver Proof | 1125755 | |
| 136 | 2003 S | ME Silver Proof | 1125755 | |
| 137 | 2003 S | MO Silver Proof | 1125755 | |
| 138 | 2003 S | AR Silver Proof | 1125755 | |
| 139 | 2014 S | EVG Uncirculated | 1139140 | |
| 140 | 2014 S | DUN Uncirculated | 1146000 | |
| 141 | 1959 | Proof | 1149291 | |
| 142 | 2005 P | CA Satin | 1160000 | |
| 143 | 2005 D | CA Satin | 1160000 | |
| 144 | 2005 P | MN Satin | 1160000 | |
| 145 | 2005 D | MN Satin | 1160000 | |
| 146 | 2005 P | OR Satin | 1160000 | |
| 147 | 2005 D | OR Satin | 1160000 | |
| 148 | 2005 P | KS Satin | 1160000 | |
| 149 | 2005 D | KS Satin | 1160000 | |
| 150 | 2005 P | WV Satin | 1160000 | |
| 151 | 2005 D | WV Satin | 1160000 | |
| 152 | 2008 S | OK Silver Proof | 1192908 | |
| 153 | 2008 S | NM Silver Proof | 1192908 | |
| 154 | 2008 S | AZ Silver Proof | 1192908 | |
| 155 | 2008 S | AK Silver Proof | 1192908 | |
| 156 | 2014 S | ARC Uncirculated | 1203100 | |
| 157 | 2014 S | SHN Uncirculated | 1239320 | |
| 158 | 1957 | Proof | 1247952 | |
| 159 | 2011 S | CHK Proof | 1266010 | |
| 160 | 2011 S | OLY Proof | 1267361 | |
| 161 | 2011 S | VKB Proof | 1267691 | |
| 162 | 2011 S | GLA Proof | 1268452 | |
| 163 | 2011 S | GTB Proof | 1271553 | |
| 164 | 2007 S | MT Silver Proof | 1313481 | |
| 165 | 2007 S | WA Silver Proof | 1313481 | |
| 166 | 2007 S | ID Silver Proof | 1313481 | |
| 167 | 2007 S | WY Silver Proof | 1313481 | |
| 168 | 2007 S | UT Silver Proof | 1313481 | |
| 169 | 2013 S | FMH Uncirculated | 1314740 | |
| 170 | 2013 S | BAS Uncirculated | 1316580 | |
| 171 | 1992 S | Silver Proof | 1317579 | |
| 172 | 2014 S | GSM Uncirculated | 1360780 | |
| 173 | 2013 S | RSH Uncirculated | 1373260 | |
| 174 | 2012 S | CHA Uncirculated | 1389020 | |
| 175 | 2010 S | MHD Proof | 1397101 | |
| 176 | 2010 S | CAN Proof | 1399970 | |
| 177 | 2010 S | YOS Proof | 1400215 | |
| 178 | 2010 S | HOT Proof | 1401903 | |
| 179 | 2012 S | DEN Uncirculated | 1401920 | |
| 180 | 2010 S | YST Proof | 1402756 | |
| 181 | 2012 S | VLC Uncirculated | 1407520 | |
| 182 | 2012 S | ACA Uncirculated | 1409120 | |
| 183 | 2013 S | PVY Uncirculated | 1425860 | |
| 184 | 2006 S | NV Silver Proof | 1585008 | |
| 185 | 2006 S | NE Silver Proof | 1585008 | |
| 186 | 2006 S | CO Silver Proof | 1585008 | |
| 187 | 2006 S | ND Silver Proof | 1585008 | |
| 188 | 2006 S | SD Silver Proof | 1585008 | |
| 189 | 2013 S | WHM Uncirculated | 1606900 | |
| 190 | 1937 S | 1652000 | ||
| 191 | 2005 S | CA Silver Proof | 1678649 | |
| 192 | 2005 S | MN Silver Proof | 1678649 | |
| 193 | 2005 S | OR Silver Proof | 1678649 | |
| 194 | 2005 S | KS Silver Proof | 1678649 | |
| 195 | 2005 S | WV Silver Proof | 1678949 | |
| 196 | 2012 S | ELY Uncirculated | 1679240 | |
| 197 | 1960 | Proof | 1691602 | |
| 198 | 1996 S | Proof | 1750244 | |
| 199 | 2004 S | MI Silver Proof | 1769786 | |
| 200 | 2004 S | FL Silver Proof | 1769786 | |
| 201 | 2004 S | TX Silver Proof | 1769786 | |
| 202 | 2004 S | IA Silver Proof | 1769786 | |
| 203 | 2004 S | WI Silver Proof | 1769786 | |
| 204 | 1967 | SMS | 1800000 | |
| 205 | 2019-W | Lowell | 2000000 | |
| 205 | 2019-W | AMP | 2000000 | |
| 205 | 2019-W | Pacific | 2000000 | |
| 205 | 2019-W | San Antonio | 2000000 | |
| 205 | 2019-W | Frank Church | 2000000 |
The full chart has 642 different Washington Quarters and I have yet to add all the 2019 PDS issues.
More charts
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)