MAJOR 2014 DDO discovered!

I think it because of the sheer volume minted. We are talking billions not millions. There are more dies and more strikes involved so the probability of a DD increases as well. Because it's affordable, more collectors save penny's and are looking for them. Discovery therefor increases.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

The thing people are missing in this thread is that the major variety EXPERTS agree this is a very strong major doubled die. I say again EXPERTS.

 

when I buy coins, heres how I think, A few is less the 10, A couple is less then 100, And so on ! ! !

 

That doesn't mean, they'll all agree ! ! !

 

Jay, no need to apologize...HEALTHY disagreements are what it's all about and it's how we learn, especially when proven wrong.

As for what you say, Rich S., whether the experts agree or not, it's all about how the COLLECTORS of these will receive them. Those who say this '14 Lincoln isn't major (I being one of them), could very well be proven wrong, not by the 'experts', per se, but, ultimately, by how much Joe Q. Collector is prepared to pay up for them. I didn't think the '09 Lincolns were 'all that', as there are what, a bajillion different ones (same thing went for the Minnesota SHQ 'extra tree'...just sooo many of them)?. But, there ARE a few of the '09 Lincolns that have DEFINITELY proven me wrong, and those big prices are for ANACS graded/attributed coins (as they, obviously, are the only ones attributing them, presently), and we all know where ANACS coins (speaking specifically about the NEW ANACS 'yellow slabs') sit in the 'pecking order' of TPG's and realized prices. If those coins can bring big $$'s in ANACS slabs, well, if/WHEN PCGS and NGC attribute them, all bets are off.

 

Guess the discovery and labeling it "major" created quite the hubbub. I guess a lot of people reading these threads (both here and at the PCGS forums) are not as involved with variety searching as others. That is fine, and if they don't find it major, they are entitled to that opinion.

But what I read on the other forum about this just being a "pump up"? Seriously? Some people are just excited for possibly the largest doubled die of the single-squeeze hubbing era, not trying to push an agenda to inflate the prices! People saying it is way too minor and will barely be worth a couple bucks need to look at even more MINOR varieties, like the 1988-D RDV-006. Pretty much the only way to tell that one is a few die markers and looking at the initials on the back under magnification, and those go for $200+ in AU. And of course, the whole "electron microscope" thing is a bit of an exaggeration, some people just may not have the patience or would not consider something best seen with 10x to be "major".

Anyways, I'm glad that some people share the same enthusiasm that I do with this discovery, and hopefully people that may not be as psyched can gain a little bit of a better understanding of this small niche of collectors.

 

More than likely there around a 1,000,000 of them. Just as it is with most varieties cents - general thinking is the average production life of a working die is around 1,000,000 coins.

 

Agreed

 

I agree with you totally simon.

 

Another thing is that I do believe that the word "major" should be redefined based on the die making process. What if the mint initially started making dies using the single-squeeze hubbing method and produced coins like this, then switched to the multi-squeeze method and produced the 1955 doubled die a few decades later? Would the 1955 be considered "major"? It would not have distortion and appearance of the devices that were shown on the first doubled dies the mint made. The fact is, that the two methods are completely different, and it is very difficult to compare the doubled dies of the multi-squeeze era with the current single-squeeze method.

 

That's not major...


Sent from my iPod touch using Tapatalk

 

These replies are great news for us (non cents, gunnovice, other fans). More $34+ die varieties for us!

 

Who is Simon?

 

Yo.

 

In that case, if Simon says... MAJOR, I"ll say MAJOR. After all, these planchets are a bit different when it comes to detail, compared to the older, crisper, more detailed cents. At a glance, it does look like a different font. I can see a major difference...

 

For a multiple squeeze hubbed die it would agree it isn't. but for a single squeeze die, it's major. Normally the doubling on a single squeeze double die is confined to just the central portions of the die. To get that much shifting out close to the edges is surprising.

 

Thanks for chiming in, Conder. This is kind of the point I was hoping to get across. Compared to the extreme doubled dies of the multi-squeeze era, of course this wouldn't even rank in the top 10. But for a coin like this to be produced using single-squeeze hubbing, where many doubled dies only exhibit the most minor of notching on LIBERTY, it is major.

 

Ok, seeing it side by side I retract my earlier uneducated opinion. I would strongly advise anyone trying to sell one of these to use a similar picture.

You need a catchy name though: muddy 2014, fat fourteen, warped date, bent zero - something like that

 

WDDO-002 "THE BIG ONE" is working right now. It's at $45 with over 15 hours left.

 

Nothing terms me off faster than a "cutesy catchy name" used to try and stir up interest in a coin.