Reply to Thread

Message:: [QUOTE="Oldhoopster, post: 4392950, member: 84179"]The "lint mark that resembles a 5" is die damage as explained by Mr. Weinberg.  And since the damage left a permanent mark, all coins minted from that die can technically be called a variety since they all display this mark. Now the question becomes "is this a significant variety"? It wasn't something that was done by mint workers like the extra leaf Wisconsin Quarter.  It wasn't caused by a the mint making changes to the design like the 1964 accented hair proof halves.  It wasn't due to the someone at the mint forgetting to add a mm to a die. It was just a die that suffered minor damage by having some lint/string get stuck to it while being hubbed. Not a lot of difference between that and die gouges, polishing lines, and die cracks.  All examples of minor die damage IMO.  By random chance, the damage resembles a 5 and happens to be in a prominent location.  It could have occurred anywhere in any configuration.  Personally, I think it's an interesting coin.  But I do not think it's a significant variety.  Being listed in the CPG should help hype it, but in the end, it's just a die with some minor damage You can try to hype it all you want.  Worked for the 1955 poor man's doubled die.  But it will always be the "damage that resembles a 5 on the cheek" variety.  IMO, knowledgeable error collectors will understand this and that will be reflected in the significance of this variety.[/QUOTE]