Discussion on a 1959 DDO FS-101......

I can totally agree with that point of view, however that isn't how the hobby defines Mint State. Mint State in the hobby is "a coin minted for regular distribution that was never actually put into circulation, i.e., it was never used for daily commerce; it is uncirculated and in the state it was after being struck at the mint."

detraction's of course for contact marks, luster impairments aside,
The Sheldon Scale defines MS70 as "The perfect coin, as minted. Has no trace of wear, handling, scratches or contact with other coins from a (5x) magnification."
The top of the scale definition has the qualifier "as minted". I'm not saying this is a MS70 by any means, but grading is a subjective opinion.

Plenty of reasons why this can't be a 67 or higher, it could have been given a MS65 technically too, I am sure it was discussed at NGC when they settled at MS66. So this has to be nicer than the MS65s they've seen you'd have to think than warranted the MS66?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Compare the pictures of this coin to the pictures on Variety Vista: http://varietyvista.com/01b LC Doubled Dies Vol 2/1959PDDO001.htm

This coin is actually not a late die stage - it is Stage B. I don't see the die crack on the lapel, but I do see the die polish shown under Liberty.

In theory, grading will account for various die stages. Die stages primarily affect two things: the amount of detail on a coin, and the luster of the coin. Theoretically, a brand new die will have more detail, and a later die state will have some of the detail worn off from having struck numerous coins. In reality, most issues are not well studied in terms of die state, and thus it is not accounted for. Early US issues (such as bust halves, etc), and notable varieties (such as the 1922D Lincoln cent) may be studied in more detail, and will have the die state included as part of the grading criteria.

Over the course of a die's life, the character of the luster is going to be a very noticeable change. Luster is one of the important factors in grading, and so will change how the coin is perceived.

I'm not entirely sure where you're quoting from, but that simply is not true.

If I look at a coin, I can not objectively state where the coin has been or what its history is. And frankly, it doesn't matter.

The only thing that's important is the current state of the coin.

A "Mint State" or "Uncirculated" coin is defined as a coin which shows no evidence of wear.

It may have been used in circulation. It may have traded hands a dozen times. It may even have fingerprints! (as much as I hate those). However, as long as the coin shows no evidence of wear, then it is mint state (or uncirculated - the two terms are interchangeable). This use of terminology is one of the most unfortunate choices in our grading scale, because it leads to confusion such as this.

Theoretically, if you were to line every coin up that was ever graded, there would be a difference between the 65/66/67 coins. You'd be able to tell that the 66s are objectively nicer than the 65s. That would be in a perfect, ideal world.

However, grading is subjective, it evolves, and it varies from grader to grader. The key with NGC and PCGS is that they try to maintain internal consistency as much as possible.

The coin in question here appears to have a couple of major marks on the obverse, and a few spots that I find unattractive. I personally would like it better at the 65 grade. However, if you look at a bunch of 65 Lincolns, there could be an argument that this coin is nicer than them. That reverse is especially strong.

 

Good questions. I am fairly familiar with this particular variety. I came to the conclusion that it’s a stage D (possibly later) by looking at the die markers from the following sites:
http://varietyvista.com/01b LC Doubled Dies Vol 2/1959PDDO001.htm
http://www.coppercoins.com/lincoln/diestate.php?date=1959&die_id=1959p1do001&die_state=lds
http://doubleddie.com/344622.html
The best description came from Wexlers. There appears to be a die gouge south of the I in Liberty and another die gouge on the reverse between the memorial and the last A in America. There also appears to be a die crack that is more pronounced than the VV stage C picture. The lack of separation detail in the 5 and 9 also makes me think it’s a later die stage. Of course this is based solely on the pictures.


As far as the MS 66 designation, it just appears to have too many marks, of course grading is subjective. Maybe the rarity (CPG URS-9, I-3, L-3) may have influenced it? I’m not trying to denigrate this coin in any way, I just don’t think (my opinion) that is a MS-66 and would be worth $400. If it was an early die stage with less marks... maybe.

 

I agree with you it's no doubt a stage C, and very likely further along than that. I came to the same conclusion for the same reasons.
I've also researched the variety as far as sales go and the $400 is about what a Stage A or Stage B MS65 sells for at top end. A earlier die stage MS66 sells for $600-$850.

I think at $400 it's a reasonable price for the grade and stage based on that information however the eye appeal isn't there.

Had anyone noticed the "gouge" appearing mark on the back of Lincoln head? At first I thought it was a scratch of some sort but the more I looked at this variety and the stages and examples, the more I noticed it was also to some degree visible on other examples that were stage C. The event was smaller but it exists on other examples which lead me to believe it must be a strike though (maybe wire) or die gouge.

As far as the silvery grey spots on the coin these aren't in the same places or as many but I do also see them on other stage Cs or later which leads me to believe they must be inclusions or slag or possibly strike ins, although you'd really need to see it in hand to determine these things and make a call. If it happened during the minting process on the strike, and not post mint, perhaps this detracts from the grade and eye appeal, even market value to a buyer but it may not affect the grade as much if the coin is still lustrous and it's not causing significant impairment of luster.

 

Can you show me the link for the sales? Thanks!!!

 

Sooooo... have you guys actually looked at the links you posted?

First, the "Stage D" listed describes a late die state and a series of die gouges on the reverse. I don't see a single one of those in the pictures.

Next, carefully match the die scratches through Liberty with the pictures linked. Every one of those links describes a series of heavy die polish lines through Liberty. The stronger they are, the earlier the die state. As the die aged, the die polish wore away.

THE FACT THAT WE CAN SEE THE HEAVY DIE POLISH AND NO GOUGES MEANS THIS IS AN EARLY DIE STATE (STAGE A OR B) - NOT A LATER DIE STATE (C OR D).

 

No, look at the facts. I truly respect your opinion but I must disagree here. Die crack:


Die gouge:
http://www.coppercoins.com/lincoln/diestate.php?date=1959&die_id=1959p1do001&die_state=lds
There are not heavy die scratches. Why is the 5 and 9 not have definite separation? You said no die crack, did you look at what I posted? I’m not trying to be negative, I’m just asking for a good debate. Please correct me if I’m wrong.

 

I’m apologize, I missed your comments on the reverse.

 

I don't have links and on my cell on weekends. What I did though was check NGC an PCGS, then checked Heritage, since like all sales have been through Heritage as far as the high grade examples.

 

Show me a picture of Any stage listed of that reverse with the die crack running off the base of the left of the Lincoln Memorial. The crack on the top right under the R is there, the dot towards the rim across from the FG is there. Now I could be mistaken but I don't think cracks disappear as a die wears. If cracks aren't in stage A, B, C ect but they are on an example it should indicate it's a later struck example, later die stage not a newer one, polishing lines or not.

Could also indicate it's a different die pair matching, but that's not what's happened.

The die crack on the obverse in Lincoln's lapel near the rim says it's at least a stage C and can't be earlier because the crack wasn't there. It wasn't on stage B or earlier.

 

One of the first things I saw was the deterioration of the 9 towards the rim. This is at least a C. And the deterioration shows it further along.
@Danomite posted the gouge between the 12th column and the I.
If the photos were a bit clearer I believe we would see the gouge at the bottom left of the 12th.
It is a fun coin, may be the low end of a 66, I do believe it is accurately graded except for the Red designation.

 

I know it would be silly, but I'd love to see this coin cracked out and resubmitted just to see what it would come back as.

 

Well David Lawrence has it listed as "asking price" so I mean maybe offer them $50 and see if they bite. Lol

 

There’s an ICG MS-65Rd on the bay for 150. Appears, photos aren’t great, to be an earlier die stage.

 

Thank you for your post and to ya'll that responded. Most interesting and I enjoyed all posts...

 

If you have the link it would be cool to see them, maybe one of us can get him to post better photos.
I was wondering if ICG has a photo service, or any plans to do so.
@Insider

 

https://www.ebay.com/itm/1959-Linco...491176?hash=item593b826728:g:xJEAAOSwFQVdwLoB

 

I’m sorry. Our friend @Kentucky beat me to it. Tell me what y’all think.

 

Thank you! I don't see anything wrong with the grade or designation. It is a nice looking gem.