Hey everyone, I have been trying to get information on my Presidential Prestige set Lincoln and have received conflicting answers from Heritage, PCGS and NCG. This is what I received from Heritage and PCGS indicated a rotation strike and instructed me to take it out of the case and send it in while NCG stated it was MD and is worth the same as any normal struck proof. My head is spinning from the conflicting answers of the experts? I really don't like the idea of taking it out of the original set fearing it would not be considered a proof. Any thoughts as to why even the experts can't agree? Hello Frank, We think there’s a chance the coin could be double struck in the collar, which would probably make it worth around $1,000. There’s also a chance the doubling is simply machine doubling, which is an error that doesn’t command any premium above the coin’s graded value (approximately, 68DCAM = $1, 69DCAM=$5, 70DCAM=$350). We recommend you get it graded at PCGS, NGC, or ANACS, making sure to check the box for “mint error” or “variety attribution” so that it gets properly evaluated. Upon its return, please let me know the results; we can evaluate from there. Best regards, Mark Stephenson Consignment Director Heritage Auctions From: edited Sent: Friday, August 2, 2019 7:21 AM To: edited Subject: External Email Good morning, Was just wanting to inquire if there has been any progress as to pics of the 1983s Presidential Prestige set Lincoln coin? Frank Baylor
I had posted them before I thought you had commented on. I'm sorry will put them up. Point I was trying to make that if you look up wikipedia's definition of error and variety an error is almost a one time thing from the mint and given that the mintage of 1983S Lincoln's were only for proof sets that year and the process that a proof goes through from minting to inspecting the possibility of this getting by is diminished greatly.
I don't see any evidence of a double strike. I do see some copper plating 'pull away' from the motto (IGWT) - that's considered as struck, and not an error. Don't waste any submission/postage fees on it, imo.
I believe Heritage was implying that the MD was on the reverse. That's what I was informed by PCGS and a couple other numismatist. My question is it's been 37 years since released and what if this is the only set that contains this type of anomaly. Would not being the only one make it desirable considering how number knowing to exist is a major factor as well as number given a certain grade? Not trying to argue but with all the conflicting opinions and assessments by even the experts I feel waiting is the best path to take and maybe things will change in a few years or in my kids lifetime. Thank you for answering.
Left it there so no one would say I made it up and I'm ok if people email me. I would enjoy the correspondence..lol
Whatever the results, that is one cool set! I'd love to have something like that. Very cool. I wouldnt sell it anyway.
Thank you Matrix. I'm really trying to understand how the grading process works or if there is a criteria as to mintage number and number of varieties and/or anomalies such as this that get past any proof minting safe guards. From what I have read online everything the mint implements to produce proof sets or coins is pretty stringent. And just as coins that were minted with proof dies escaped into general circulation have a premium why shouldn't proof coins even with anomalies be given the same? What if a proof was sent out and found to have be minted with circulation die? Thank you once again.
ANAC or ANACS? Makes a big difference. If you actually mean ANAC they are a basement slabber and should be treated as a raw coin.
