Discussion in 'Coin Chat' started by Connie S Simmons, Feb 26, 2020.
that should have never been in circulation. Any one can help me identify this coin
Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.
It was either culled from a batch of mint sets due to the hazing (light) or far more likely it was merely dumped when the '76 type I Ikes were removed for wholesale.
It is very Gem under the light haze which can probably be removed with an alcohol soak. While it is highly Gem and PL and among the very finest for the date it is probably "out of the money". There is very little demand for this 10 or 20 dollar coin that would cost 20 to 65 dollars to grade.
Mintage of this date of this caliber is very very low. In hand it might look a little different and maybe a little lower or higher grade but it will still be Gem and a little PL. It might also have a little wear which would eliminate its conductibility to most people. The scruffiness on the cheek bone is concerning and you might have found it too late.
edited to add- a blowup looks like you found it too late. It's still an excellent specimen of the minters' art but the it has little market value.
It is my understanding that the only Bicentennial proofs that came from anywhere other than the San Francisco Mint were produced in Philadelphia and bore no mintmark. These coins (dollar, half dollar and quarter) were supposedly presented to the designers of the three Bicentennial reverses and other dignitaries at the ANA Convention in Bal Harbor, Florida in 1974 but were supposed to be returned afterward. The actual production of the proof coins would take place at the San Francisco Mint.
Perhaps @CaptHenway can provide us with more information and/or correct me if I am wrong. ~ Chris
Correct. The no mint mark Proofs were made in Philadelphia in August of 1974. There was a photo op there with the three designers and a representative of President Ford, who had just become President and was too busy to attend. The coins were then displayed at the ANA convention in Florida.
@cladking , it is from a mint set, more than just likely...Spark
Thanks! ~ Chris
Quick question? Do you think that the dies that produced these coins struck enough dies to make some proof sets?
Just a thought?
Huh? ".....dies struck enough dies to make some proof sets?" What am I missing?
Yeah, I meant struck enough coins.
That could have been a possibility. The mint was still hand punching mintmarks.
Why? Do you think that is how the 1975 No S dime may have been created?
The OP also had a thread on a Philly quarter. I got confused, this one has a D MM.
As far as the 75 S no S, It seems that Philly did not prep the dies with a MM before sending them out to SF. And when SF found that the dimes had no MM they removed all the remaining coins near the press. It seems that only a handful escaped.
Here is a good read about the 75S s-less coinage.
A few three-coin sets without mint marks were made and "presented" to the three designers and President Ford's representative, and one or more sets were sent to the ANA convention for display, but the Mint insists that they were all returned to the mint and replaced with regular three-coin Proof sets later. Are they lying? WHo knows.
I thought for sure you were holding out on some No S proof you had. Today was the day for enlightening the world. I was about to fire up eBay and go on the hunt.
Separate names with a comma.