Hello everyone, I recently read Mike Diamond's article on the 2014 Nickel "design Creep" error. I have searched and searched but cannot find any more information. I am curious to know if anyone knows approximately how many errors were minted? Or what the coin collecting community thinks about the value or potential value of these coins. Are the coins being acknowledged formally ( other than having design creep on the slab)? I personally think they are awesome. Thanks, Mike
First I've heard of that one. Cool as heck, and so eminently plausible that you have to wonder why it hasn't happened before. For the record, Chris "tagged" Mike Diamond with that post. Next time he's here - which seems almost every day - he'll have a Notification leading him to cpm9ball's post, so he will see yours. It's a pretty neat forum feature.
Never heard of it until now, I have a roll of 2014 nickels I put away. I wonder if rolls of that date will go up in the future due to people searching for the error.
I sure do Chris, I read one of his debates from a while ago with another senior member. They were both extremely knowledgeable.
I didn't know that you could tag someone on this forum, thanks for doing that Chris hopefully Mike will have some information on the status of this error.
A small hoard was extracted from a large number of rolls searched by a single individual. He offers these coins on eBay from time to time. I haven't heard of anyone else finding them. So I suspect the total number is quite modest. They've sold for as much as $60, although most have sold for much less. I agree that they're immensely interesting, but that doesn't necessarily translate into widespread appeal.
Than you Mike, I actually bought 2 from Rob because they are so interesting, here's the next question... The coins I purchased from Rob are from the original set that he had sent out to be graded by various services the first time. The coins came back (at that point) as "defective reverse die". It wasn't until you did your footwork that the grading companies started using the designated term "design Creep"... Would it be beneficial or wise, to send these coins back for grading to achieve the "design Creep" designated name?
Actually, I wrote the article before Rob submitted his nickels. It simply took time and a lot of arm-twisting by Rob before the grading services would adopt the term I introduced. I don't know if re-submission would be worth the cost in order to get the design creep label. I don't know if that label would enhance their retail value. If you're going to do it, then simply do it in the interest of getting a precise and accurate description.
Hello, Rob here ). The coin was not submitted until AFTER the article was written by Mike Diamond First I submitted 5 coins to NGC and included the Article. after getting the coins back as 'defective reverse die', I called and asked about what research they do...... They basically said, if it's not in the Whitman Books, they will do nothing more. I then submitted coins to ICG with all the same as my first submission. Coins came back as 'defective reverse die'...... I then gave a call to ICG to as about what research they do. I spoke with 'Skip' and we discussed something that could be done! (ICG has been extremely helpful in all ways). I handed over another set of coins right before a FUN convention. 'Skip' then started with major footwork sharing and discussing with other specialist/expert/enthusiasts. -----During this time I sent another set of 5 to ANACS. Article. These coins came back as "Distorted Reverse Die 'Design Creep'". Done and done; I wonder about ANACS quality?----- Soooo...... After months I get a call back from 'Skip'. A bump was reached when contacting mint on more information; still unknown. . ...? Anyway, 'Skip' had said they would put the 'appropriate' label o f 'Design Creep' on these from now on. ... There you have the short version. Sorry for poor writing, that's how it is. ;P
