Original Bag of 1964 Kennedy Halves, Opened & Graded by NGC

Allow me to amend your statement: "These coins are marketed." That, plain and simple, is why they are included in the Red Book. That is why they are included in albums. They are marketed, they are publicized, they sell for premiums - and so, people are taught that they should pay premiums for them, and that they are popular.

They are not varieties, despite what any marketing might tell you.

They are different, sure. But marketing has always played fast and loose with terminology, especially in a highly technical field, and certainly when a buck could be made. Hey, Mr. TV Personality - use these really fancy words to convince those stupid people to pay lots of money to buy these silly things! I'll give you a dollar every time you sell one!

Well yes, Mr. Cable Man, I'll do exactly that.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

So you don't consider the 1922 "weak D" and "no D" varieties, either?

 

The original die contained a D, correct?

Over time, the die wore down to the point where the D was no longer visible.

That, by definition, is a die state.

Is it collectable? Well, judging by the premiums for no-D coins, absolutely yes.

But would I consider it a variety? Absolutely not. This is the same die, which over the course of striking coins and the treatment of the die, the die changed.

Remember, I consider a "variety" to be anything involved in the creation of the die.

Once that die has struck a coin, anything after that is a die state (stage). The die has been created. It is what it is. The life of the die now plays out. Some dies live famous lives from the beginning (1955/55 Lincoln), some dies don't reach greatness until they are near death (1922 D Lincoln). Either way, a variety is created while manufacturing a die.

The problem lies in the fact that some people don't adhere to the technical definition. They know that varieties are popular and will sell for more. They will market coins and who cares what the right term is? Many marketers don't know what the right term is, and frankly don't care - they'll call it whatever the heck they think will get the most money. What matters is what will get the most people interested and get people to spend money on their thing! Sure, you'll see hundreds of offers for rare "varieties." You'll see ads in influential magazines for "varieties." It's been ingrained in many people's heads based on decades of marketing that these are varieties.

They aren't. They're wrong. And that's just numismatic fact.

 

A PCGS MS-67+ sold for right around that mark this January(pop 11/1) its outrageously over priced

 

No it;s not they consistently sell for that price for the 64-D in 67+. The P are even more expensive

 

Correct, and since production of these coins STARTED Feb 11th. there were thousands of these bags produced before this one.

 

Eh, never try to stand between a hucksters and his mark, it can get ugly.

Same thing happens with ancients. People selling common coins, hyping them as "coin of socrates", "30 pieces of silver" (though most sold were struck a century or more BC), etc. Even today some sellers are simply known for charging 4 times or more than everyone else for coins. I buy them all of the time, paying pennies on the dollar versus price on flip, (and I am just a collector, not a dealer). Coin collecting, like many collectible fields, is simply a field where prices can be all over the place. It simply pays to get educated, and those who refuse simply overpay over and over.

 

So the 1922 Plain Lincoln is an error and not a variety, the same as the 1937-D 3leg as mentioned? As by most analyses of both is that a die then in use was judged lacking, necessary for "quality" reasons, and then removed and "refurbished" to acceptable ,and these 2 coin ( "error/variety") were created from that point Since the reworked dies were produced within the mint, they should be considered as separate die varieties and not errors. If the above definition was so, almost all of the VAM listings and other similar would be incorrect as well. IMO, Jim

 

I wouldn't call them errors. They are die states.

 

But the die was modified within the mint, not from wear to produce the "characteristic" like the general definition of die states where changes on a single (unmodified by mint employee) die. Well I will still call them varieties as seems to be the common and commercial interpretation Jim

 

I hear you Jim, but I am still in the camp of a variety is on the die, not deterioration of a die changing details. Now, if the mint took off a die and INTENTIONALLY did something like over strike a MM, remove a leg on purpose, or reinforced details somewhere, I could be swayed that is a variety, but I do not think those things happened. In my view, once a die left the die office and was issued to production they never intentionally altered it. It was only production using the die and polishing it that changed the die state.

I agree people may call things like 3 legged buffalo varieties, but they are a little like First Day Kennedy's, made up for people to promote and make a fast buck on. If you enjoy them fine, and I believe you can find other examples than the 37D, but it's not technically a die variety.

 

"....Mint Director Eva Adams authorized work to develop the Kennedy Half Dollar within days of the president’s assassination on November 23, 1963."

Am I the only one who is a bit queasy and uncomfortable that they felt the need to rush out a new coin design to honor a president assasinated less than 72 hours earlier ??

 

Probably. Emotions were high and they wanted to do something and it was an extraordinary event for more modern times in this country. I don't really see anything uncomfortable about it

Had that not happened we probably still have Franklin halfs today