Seeking opinion. Is a 1909-s Lincoln NGC Au 50 with mint error rev. Lamination worth more or less than a regular NGC AU50? Thanks for your help. I have an opportunity to buy one.
I think that kind of stuff is pretty neat but, in my experience, the market for it is thinner, so I'd offer less than without the lamination.
Error collectors generally want the best example they can find/afford of an error, and don't care so much about date rarity in general. They won't pay much extra for a key date. Normal collectors want the best example they can find/afford of a rare date, and don't want distracting features, even if they occurred at the Mint. They'll likely pay less for a coin with a lamination. So, yeah, the two characteristics (date rarity and error prominence) don't usually combine to increase value.
For that particular coin, I'd say a lamination would bring the price down. At least it would for me. Like @-jeffB said, most collectors want as perfect an example of a rare dated coin as they can get. Someone collecting just lamination errors, I doubt would be willing to pay high premium for it. IMHO
I think that most folks don't find laminations that particularly interesting. There are a few of us, but even then, on something key/semi-key, I don't think that I'd be interested in that piece. When I'm interested in the lamination, I don't think it even really occurs to me what the date is. But on something like this, I'd be buying a problem free specimen. Or possibly a woody...but then again, it would have to hit me just right. I've passed on some coins that had the woody appearance, quite common for VDBs and S VDBs. And some are truly striking in that state. But I opted for something clean. It's a preference thing, but unless you are in a bidding war and have to have it...I don't see a need to pay any sort of premium.
