Discussion in 'What's it Worth' started by Rick Gardner, Aug 17, 2019.
Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.
so this is a common phenom? ive never seen one. does it have any collectible value? sorry for the pic quality getting light reflection off casep
This generally happens on coins struck with a late die stage die. and would be considered die deterioration.
It's a bit common on 40s to 50s S mint coins
Now as far as value goes... no. There's no added premium to the coin for it. It's an oddity that shows up on coins struck by worn dies. I'm willing to bet the obverse side is really strong and the reverse is weaker in comparison. Maybe they used an older reverse die and a new obverse die together? It's interesting and it's an oddity, but as far as collector interest is concerned, any one of any year would do for an example so they pretty much have the entire history of Lincoln cents to go through to find an example if the want one, it's not collected by dates or anything and once you have one... meh.. lol
Someone more knowledgeable than me in this area may be able to tell you if there's a premium for a proof coin that exhibits this, since generally proofs are stuck more carefully and less of them, but from what I know it adds no value because to get an example of it, if a person wanted one, you wouldn't need a proof coin for that and as I said they happen frequently enough as part of die wear progression.
Although I suppose if a handful to a dozen of collectors wanted to build sets of PIDT coins and an example of each year for their set a premium would have to occur, and they would fight to get them at that pint and pay more... I'm not aware of this particular situation existing in the market though.
That set doesn't look like it was US Mint packaged. so, it is difficult to know the source of the coins.
I totally agree! Especially the toning issue.
Is this a US Mint OGP set, or was it compiled?
I wouldn't say common but not rare either. It's an excellent example!
Here's one of mine...
It's not a mint issued set in that manner. The mint sets of 1958 would of come in a manilla envelope and packaged in that in sealed cellophane plastic.
Many people at that time would have removed them from the cellophane and put them into something like this rigid plastic screwdown holder... not sure but maybe it's a capital holder?
Anyways the rigid holders keep them from getting banged or moving and offer more protection to hits than the cellophane. It's relatively common to find sets in these types of holders, but it's not mint issued originally like that.
Few years earlier and they would have been shipped from the mint in a small cardboard box with the coins wrapped in tissue paper only. I think that where putting them into these rigid plastic screw down cases became popular and likely someone that was doing it in earlier years would have stuck with it so their collection would be uniform.
But if the set was compiled that diminishes that possibility.
No. Generally speaking it doesn't matter if it's in the OGP set intact or not unless the whole set were errored. just the one coin in the set would be the one that mattered, like a no S proof dime, or a clear S SBA proof. A proof is a proof. There's no confusing it for a circulation strike.
The issue with this coin is that it's not a mint error, it falls into "die deterioration" damage. It's not like a double struck or and off center strike, or double die, or a missing mintmark, or struck through, it's more like a minor die chip or chips or machine doubling category. IDT isn't a special thing it happens to some extent with cents and dimes, the thinner coins, pretty regularly before the die pair needs replacing every year and any date or strike type would do for an example if you wanted one. Nobody collects them by year or strike types that I am aware of so IDT on a proof coin as far as I'm aware carries no premium over IDT on a business strike for instance just as nobody collect split plating lincoln zinc cents so there's no premium for a proof coin or business strike that has that issue heavily around the devices either.
Being in OGP wouldn't make a difference to a buyer or a TPG unless it was mishandled when it was removed from the set. Many of the early proof coins that didn't come in OGP sets besides shipped in the same small box are mixed proof sets pieced together. If that coin were desirable and had a premium it would make no difference to a buyer if they got the whole set or just the one coin. In fact he could take the coin out of this set and send it for grading and buy another proof cent of the same year and replace it in the set without issue as long as it was handled properly.
I said that one in an untampered OGP proof set might be
more special than a set that was put together.
And I replied that no, any way you looked at it, it would not be seen as any more special or valuable.
Separate names with a comma.