This particular Doubled Die is OFTEN confused (by the TPGs) with DDO-022 (1971-S Proof FS-106) which is ignorantly oblivious of the fact that DDO-022 is an ODV-006 Obverse Design (PegLeg R) and this one, possibly DDO-029 (but I doubt it due to that HUGE serif Split on the R), is an ODV-004 Obverse Design (Serifed R). None the less, the separation on this particular die variety is quite impressive! Some (i.e. Brian Allen and previously Tom K) point to uplink Master Die similarities which I suppose is possible BUT it does not address the doubling which would have occurred on a "Working Die" during the working die creation process. The "serif" on the ODV-004 looks like it was added with a dremel type grinder tool to THE Master Die for 1971. Of course, this doesn't address the fact that the doubling is "similar" but "not the same" meaning, the ODV-004 version has "rounding" in the "I" whereas the ODV-006 is quite square. ODV-004 (DDO-029*) on the left and ODV-006 (DDO-022*) on the Right Certainly "similar" but definitely not the same. I can't think of any particular die wear that would change the "I" or the spread so dramatically. As such, each die, being "different" cannot possibly be a "single" die variety. (i.e. FS-106) Dofferent dies, different FS numbers yet PCGS and NGC continually get it wrong costing some buyers, quite a chunk of change! At any rate, A bad buy: http://www.ebay.com/itm/1971-S-DDO-FS-106-Silver-Eisenhower-FS-106-PCGS-PR-69-DC-Price-Guide-2-500-/391825776569?_trksid=p2047675.l2557&ssPageName=STRK:MEBIDX:IT&nma=true&si=%2FN034X%2B1tUs%2BRY8C543w7HScS2A%3D&orig_cvip=true&rt=nc Simply because the coin is NOT an FS-106 as indicated by the Serfied R! KNOW your varieties before shelling out big bux!
Pcgs, had the chance to work with tom, but choose not too . Thanks for the post Lee, but this is a issue ( Pcgs ) that would never fool me . There's to much info on the internet to get ripped off by Pcgs ..
I created another email for PCGS and decided to add Ken Potter and Bill Fivaz to the CC List. Bill responded almost immediately and forwarded my email to the man in charges of CPG 6/2. I specifically requested that the "T" in Liberty be included for FS-103 since that one have as many imposters as does the FS-106. (i.e. ARED DDO-009, DDO-010, and DDO-011 in addition to some unknown and as of yet discovered pieces. Since the Obverse Dies had a striking life of 2,500 coins and 4,265,234 proofs were produced, it is possible that as many as 1,706 individual dies were used. Of course, this figure does not address the fact that "some" of the dies were reworked to add frosting which would probably bring the figure down to around 1,500 Obverse dies.) I also requested that the "R" in LIBERTY be specifically included with the FS-106 since the doubling on that coin looks similar, as pointed out, to a different die variety that has a "serifed" R. At the very minimum, include a not indicating the FS-106 ONLY comes with a PegLeg R thereby pointing the attributer in that direction. My feeling, is that whomever was creating the Dies for the Proof coins, made some "consistent" errors while placing the working die in the press which would explain the similarities in the two dies.
Give them ( Pcgs ) hell, Lee ... Wouldn't they ( Pcgs ) have to refund the money, For the coins that have sold, that weren't correct ?
Only if buyers submitted them for the Attribution Guarantee which I myself have done in the past. Bought an ANACS Labeled FS-103. PCGS Crossed it over When I found out it was incorrect, I sent it to James Wiles for validation then attached the letter to the Attribution Guarantee submission to PCGS. They made me whole.
I just started getting back into them . I'm bidding ( Ike ) on a fs number, on a pcgs coin, as we speak . I'd better keep my eyes open ...
That is one point at which PCGS is better than NGC. After many years PCGS finally started guaranteeing their attributions. NGC still does not.
