Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;Bmmartin, post: 3915451, member: 98956&quot;]Sorry about reopening the discussion.</p><p><br /></p><p>Is this what the big fuss is about?</p><p><br /></p><p>[ATTACH=full]1031982[/ATTACH] </p><p><br /></p><p>or maybe this?</p><p><br /></p><p>[ATTACH=full]1031985[/ATTACH] </p><p><br /></p><p>When does an error become a variety?&nbsp; 2 coins?&nbsp; 5 coins? 10 coins? Is it an arbitrary number?</p><p><br /></p><p>Do we use NGC’s definition? Here’s what the experts there have to say on varieties.</p><p><b><br /></b></p><p><b>“A variety is a coin that has characteristics specific to the die pair that struck it . . . </b>In United States numismatics, a variety may be defined as a die or die pairing that offers some distinctive feature not a normal part of the design.” <i> What is a Variety. </i><a href="https://www.ngccoin.com/variety-plus/what-is-a-variety/" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="https://www.ngccoin.com/variety-plus/what-is-a-variety/" rel="nofollow">https://www.ngccoin.com/variety-plus/what-is-a-variety/</a>.</p><p><br /></p><p>There appears to be a few die markers that aren’t a normal part of the design.&nbsp; Regardless of whether this is or isn’t numismatic pareidolia, we can all agree that the “5” is not normal.&nbsp; </p><p><br /></p><p>To educate, as is the goal here, pareidolia refers to an <u>incorrect</u> perception, not the <u>actual</u> perception itself. </p><p><br /></p><p>Whatever we call it (a “5”, “lint mark”, etc.), the feature exists, and it’s existence appears to be the central <u>issue</u>, not whether this is a case of people suffering from pareidolia.</p><p><br /></p><p>If we agree to this, and everyone concedes that it is simply a lint mark, is a lint mark normal to a die? Isn’t the term normally used with coins and not dies? And if so, wouldn’t the use of the term with dies be abnormal (not impossible, just unusual).&nbsp; </p><p><br /></p><p>To continue with NGC’s definition:</p><p><br /></p><p>”A variety is a coin that differs from its basic design type in some distinctive way and is thus differentiated by collectors.” <i>Variety vs. Mint Error. </i> <a href="https://www.ngccoin.com/news/article/1655/Variety-versus-Mint-Error/" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="https://www.ngccoin.com/news/article/1655/Variety-versus-Mint-Error/" rel="nofollow">https://www.ngccoin.com/news/article/1655/Variety-versus-Mint-Error/</a></p><p><br /></p><p>Surely the lint mark is distinctive. It’s easy to differentiate.&nbsp; In fact, my fifth grade son spotted the one on the coin in the second picture.</p><p><br /></p><p>For comparison, does the Superbird quarter actually have an “S” on it?&nbsp; Personally, I think not, but the “S” IS a distinctive feature, it differs from the basic design, and it is specific to a die pair that struck it.</p><p><br /></p><p>I’ve seen a Superbird in person, and the “S” can take some effort to see (it’s also not in plain sight).&nbsp; In contrast, the “5” on this dime is much more pronounced and on an open portion of the design. To deny the mark exists is to be blind, either physically or willfully.</p><p><br /></p><p>I am fully convinced that the “misplaced 5” (or as we like to refer to it, “a nickel on the dime”) exists because I have two in my possession.&nbsp; I believe it’s a lint mark on a die that produced several specimens with the characteristics specific to that die and its corresponding pair.&nbsp; In other words, I believe it is a variety.</p><p><br /></p><p>I apologize for the length of this reply/mini-treatise, but I intended to convert a few doubters.&nbsp; I doubt I have convinced all.&nbsp; Either way, the two coins in the photos are for everyone to have fun debating.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in