Unique Bullion Coin in 25th Anniversary Set?

I don't think it's the die so much as it is the preparation of the planchet.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Sometimes (or should I say often?) single statements are wrong but Mr. Jurkowsky did say it twice, once unprompted and again when asked to confirm his initial claim so, that coupled with the fact that the sets were assembled in SF, which was sitting on an inventory of bullion SAEs (which would make it quite odd for the mint to ship in WP coins) is enough for me, every bit as good as the seal on the monster boxes. Since the bullion coins lack a mint mark, at least the reverse die has to be a bullion die and it is unlikely that die pair would get separated and mixed up. Even the 2008 reverse of 2007 wasn't made through the use of a 2007 reverse die, it was made because a 2007 reverse die was produced as part of a 2008 die pair (maybe saying that some early 2008 reverse die were produced using the 2007 reverse pattern is a better way to say that). It is not difficult to tell a bullion die from an uncirculated die under magnification, the uncirculated die have been "sand blasted" and the bullion die do not receive the same treatment. I must admit though that I thought we were only talking about possible differences between SF and WP bullion coins, not the differences between bullion and uncirculated coins. Bullion coins minted from fresh die resemble uncirculated coins with the naked eye but under magnification the surface differences are apparent. Of course the results of differing strike forces tend to show as well. The burnished planchets used for thee uncirculated coins actually have little effect on the finished coin surface. Their main effect is that of allowing for a more consistent finish. The die itself is primarily responsible for the uncirculated coin's surface.

 

Could be. Then we'd have a variation for the 25th bullion. Seems like most claim their 25th bullion ain't the same other bullion.

 

Or it makes him wrong twice. lol These days government officials tend to double down, rather than admitt errors, until pushed. Seems like the collector community feels something is different about their 25th bullions.

I doubt the 25th bullions were taken from existing stock, as if they were, we'd see a variety of die states, including some worn dies, producing "shiny" coins. As of now, all are reporting higher, "matte" quality 25th bullions. Which could point to the 25th bullions were produced specifically for the set and possibly given special planchet or die preparation. Or, maybe the dies were simply changed more often. It will be interesting to see what NGC has to say, we should hear soon from YoYoSpin.

 

I have seen enough from Mr. Jurkowsky to make me think he is a pretty straight up guy, a GO for sure, but one of the good ones. I am not sure that we have seen enough of the bullion coins to be sure that there is not some fair variation but I also think that, again because of the way that Jurkowsky spoke initially on the subject, that they may have fired up a short production run (just a couple days would do) to strike the bullion coins for this set. Part of my reasoning there is that even thought he sample is still small, it does look like they got better than normal handling, like maybe they never made it into tubes or boxes. That reinforces the notion of solely SF production as well. I don't think that there is any possibility that anything other than normal bullion die were used but since they have plenty of uncirculated planchets in SF they might have used those. Using burnished planchets for bullion strikes may have some effect on the final surface, beyond just providing for increased consistency because of the lower relief (at the microscopic level) of the fields on the die and because of the lower strike forces.

 

Just look at the 3 non proofs in your sets and pick the one bullion if no mint mark its bullion. The 3 coins in your set are worth a thousand pictures.

 

Ya know what? I think I may have been a little hasty in my commentary last evening. I think that perhaps you guys may be on to something. My first two pics are of the bullion and collector bullion from my Dansco......









These next three from the anniversary set. It sure does appear that these coins were specially struck for this set.....

 

Great. I've been looking at my sealed box for 2 days now debating if shoould send it in for grading or just open it. Now it appears there's a chance that a new variety has been discovered. I'm aware the at the TPG's haven't acknowledged this and the mint hasn't said anything but I wonder if I should wait to see what happens. Shouldn't these get the 25th anniversary set designation even if from an open box like the S and the reverse are now?

 

More evidence of a variety...the marker is at the bottom of the middle tail feather:

 

Great pics. When you flip through the images using different tabs on your browser, the difference is pretty apparent.

 

Is it correct to say we are looking at 2 variations on the (S) Anniversary bullion coin?

A) Statequarterguy who first posted a different finish.

B) SilverHaired who first discovered a different tail on both the (S) and S Anniversary coins

Conclusion: A third unique coin in the 25th Anniversary set (S) that can be quantified and verified as coming from San Fran ?

 

That's where we're hoping this is headed......but it's not up to us

 

The 25th bullion is still very different than the two uncirculated coins, the strike force difference is easy to see. As to a die variety, if the bullion coins came from stock they could have been struck by any number of die pair and if they did a short run just for the set, they probably still used several die sets for 100,000 coins. We are going to need a fairly large sample size (100s or 1000s of coins) to conclude that a variety exists and then we have to not have any like it show up from outside the sets. The bullion coin in the set comes from the SF mint but so do several million other SAE bullion strikes and maybe more before year's end.

 

I'm betting CV is right. As of now SilverHaired has found a link between the Anniversary (S) and S. And Statequarterguy has noticed a different finish on the (S) from that of common bullion. The next question, where does it go from here?

 

That's why we need the TPG'ers to weigh in - they're examining a lot of coins. Based on what they determine, we may get further details from The Mint.

Your eye is better than mine or your coins are different. Comparing my coins, I see no difference in strike detail: skirt lines, head, eagle feathers, appear strong and identical on all three coins compared in the set.

 

It would be nice if the TPG'ers recognize a difference, but the market may have it's own mind - I'm already finding sellers asking more for this coin, claiming it's premium quality.

 

Not that anyone is claiming credit here (because this may be nothing, lol), but I think YoYoSpin noticed the tail feathers. And, thanks to all who are adding to this thread with great pics and opinions, both pro & con.

 

Very interesting marker, appears to be part of the design used for SF for the 25th set. My 25th bullions have this marker, as do my S Mint Uncs (It’s strongest on the bullions). My W Mint Uncs and Proofs do not have this marker. I also checked a 2011 W Mint bullion I purchased early in 2011, it does not have the marker.

How many find this marker/design variation on their 25th set coins?

How many find this marker/design variation on coins not from the 25th set?

 

Unfortunately, the TPGs don't look at the coins long enough to spot any varieties, especially since almost all grading is done with the unaided eye and they are not being paid to look for variety markers. They normally only look at each face for a few seconds to assign a grade. If enough of these coins are being imaged and those images become available to the collecting public maybe we can start an effort to give them a systematic look.

 

I saw YoYoSpin's great pics on the other site. If he did discover this marker, I sincerely apologize to him. I'm guilty because I first saw this posted by SilveredHaired on this site and never looked to confirm who posted the first by time/date stamp. If he was the first, I find YoYoSpin as most humble because he "Liked" SilveredHaired thread. I hope the two gentlemen weigh in. It is an important discovery and credit is due to someone. In the meantime I will asterisk my kudos.

Update: Thank-you YoYoSpin for validating SilverHaired discovery (see post #88)