Is it an Ultimate Lincoln or Not?

[Ed J]

Just received in the mail my 1992-P Lincoln Cent NGC MS 69 RD. The coin to the necked eye looks like a 70 but I need a better glass to view it, one coming in the mail soon. I am new to collecting, any of you seasoned coin veteran’s thoughts on this coin and purchase. Thanks in advance for your views. Paid $180.00

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[noow]

There may be some soil on the rims.

[dimefreak]

Last time they graded a penny MS70RD it sold on teletrade and there was quite a bit of problems that followed. After that debacle I would never expect to see another one.

[Ed J]

Dime...You peek my curiosity what happen?

[robec1347]

That is nice, but I think the ultimate is the MS69 Red that belongs to Stuart Blay. No comparison.

 

[dimefreak]

It is a lincoln cent therefore very susceptible to flecks and spots. It was a 2003 if I recall correctly and it sold for somewhere between 14000-20000 dollars. It ended up getting the spots after being graded and PCGS bought it back and regraded it as a MS69RD. They took a big loss and I dont think anybody will think about grading another Lincoln MS69RD considering they dont stay very stable.

[WoodenJefferson]

I know very little about modern Lincoln cents in that lofty grade, it looks nice but being perfect (MS-70) is impossible right now, but this one must have had a good life in order to get a 69.

[cpm9ball]

Trying to determine if a coin is a 69 or 70 from photos is practically impossible, but you really don't need high-power magnification to tell the difference in-hand. You should be able to use a 10x loupe.

 

Chris

[ldhair]

$180 sounds like a great deal for an MS69.

[MarkFeld]

In the larger of the obverse images, there appear to be some flaws and/or discoloration, most notably in the right obverse field.

[BillJones]

In the larger of the obverse images, there appear to be some flaws and/or discoloration, most notably in the right obverse field.

 

I don't see this coin getting an upgrade because of the marks noted above. It also probably would not cross over because PCGS is tougher on these coins.

 

Good luck with this, but it's not my thing. One toning spot, and you've got a cent in plastic.

[Buffalo Head]

It is a lincoln cent therefore very susceptible to flecks and spots. It was a 2003 if I recall correctly and it sold for somewhere between 14000-20000 dollars. It ended up getting the spots after being graded and PCGS bought it back and regraded it as a MS69RD. They took a big loss and I don't think anybody will think about grading another Lincoln MS69RD considering they dont stay very stable.

 

I didn't see this cent you speak of, but I did hear about it. It was tizzy, now pcgs will not guarantee red copper anymore and I think it's because of that coin.

 

As far as the coin your showing it does look VERY nice but I'm not good at all with copper. I feel copper is toughest alloy to grade. Good luck with your new purchase, to me it looks superb.....Joe

[MarkFeld]

It is a lincoln cent therefore very susceptible to flecks and spots. It was a 2003 if I recall correctly and it sold for somewhere between 14000-20000 dollars. It ended up getting the spots after being graded and PCGS bought it back and regraded it as a MS69RD. They took a big loss and I don't think anybody will think about grading another Lincoln MS69RD considering they dont stay very stable.

 

I didn't see this cent you speak of, but I did hear about it. It was tizzy, now pcgs will not guarantee red copper anymore and I think it's because of that coin.

 

As far as the coin your showing it does look VERY nice but I'm not good at all with copper. I feel copper is toughest alloy to grade. Good luck with your new purchase, to me it looks superb.....Joe

 

The decision by PCGS not to guarantee copper any more was based on a great deal more than that one coin. It was based on widespread doctoring of and the highly reactive nature of copper/bronze coins.

[WoodenJefferson]

It is a lincoln cent therefore very susceptible to flecks and spots. It was a 2003 if I recall correctly and it sold for somewhere between 14000-20000 dollars. It ended up getting the spots after being graded and PCGS bought it back and regraded it as a MS69RD. They took a big loss and I don't think anybody will think about grading another Lincoln MS69RD considering they dont stay very stable.

 

I didn't see this cent you speak of, but I did hear about it. It was tizzy, now pcgs will not guarantee red copper anymore and I think it's because of that coin.

 

As far as the coin your showing it does look VERY nice but I'm not good at all with copper. I feel copper is toughest alloy to grade. Good luck with your new purchase, to me it looks superb.....Joe

 

The decision by PCGS not to guarantee copper any more was based on a great deal more than that one coin. It was based on widespread doctoring of and the highly reactive nature of copper/bronze coins.

 

But, it did play a part, the annual stock holders meeting/report reflected a large sum of money due to buy-backs that year and as all profitable companies are run, the stock holders in essence were told this would be addressed, and it was, much to the collectors chagrin. We the collectors seem to be at the end of this food chain, always have and always will be. The premier grading services have done a wonderful job protecting the integrity of this hobby, hopefully they will continue to strive to do so.

[Buffalo Head]

It is a lincoln cent therefore very susceptible to flecks and spots. It was a 2003 if I recall correctly and it sold for somewhere between 14000-20000 dollars. It ended up getting the spots after being graded and PCGS bought it back and regraded it as a MS69RD. They took a big loss and I don't think anybody will think about grading another Lincoln MS69RD considering they dont stay very stable.

 

I didn't see this cent you speak of, but I did hear about it. It was tizzy, now pcgs will not guarantee red copper anymore and I think it's because of that coin.

 

As far as the coin your showing it does look VERY nice but I'm not good at all with copper. I feel copper is toughest alloy to grade. Good luck with your new purchase, to me it looks superb.....Joe

 

The decision by PCGS not to guarantee copper any more was based on a great deal more than that one coin. It was based on widespread doctoring of and the highly reactive nature of copper/bronze coins.

 

But, it did play a part, the annual stock holders meeting/report reflected a large sum of money due to buy-backs that year and as all profitable companies are run, the stock holders in essence were told this would be addressed, and it was, much to the collectors chagrin. We the collectors seem to be at the end of this food chain, always have and always will be. The premier grading services have done a wonderful job protecting the integrity of this hobby, hopefully they will continue to strive to do so.

 

It did create a wake so to speak. It was a HUGE buyback...along with others at the time....

 

I just want to add the coin your showing , in my mind, is as good as it's gonna get I think. This is a VERY highly graded coin and the folks grading this piece, in hand, must have thought so for the grade assigned. Be happy.....Joe

[MarkFeld]

It is a lincoln cent therefore very susceptible to flecks and spots. It was a 2003 if I recall correctly and it sold for somewhere between 14000-20000 dollars. It ended up getting the spots after being graded and PCGS bought it back and regraded it as a MS69RD. They took a big loss and I don't think anybody will think about grading another Lincoln MS69RD considering they dont stay very stable.

 

I didn't see this cent you speak of, but I did hear about it. It was tizzy, now pcgs will not guarantee red copper anymore and I think it's because of that coin.

 

As far as the coin your showing it does look VERY nice but I'm not good at all with copper. I feel copper is toughest alloy to grade. Good luck with your new purchase, to me it looks superb.....Joe

 

The decision by PCGS not to guarantee copper any more was based on a great deal more than that one coin. It was based on widespread doctoring of and the highly reactive nature of copper/bronze coins.

 

But, it did play a part, the annual stock holders meeting/report reflected a large sum of money due to buy-backs that year and as all profitable companies are run, the stock holders in essence were told this would be addressed, and it was, much to the collectors chagrin. We the collectors seem to be at the end of this food chain, always have and always will be. The premier grading services have done a wonderful job protecting the integrity of this hobby, hopefully they will continue to strive to do so.

 

I never said it didn't play a part. I was commenting that the decision was based on a lot more than just "because of that coin".

 

Also, how soon (or long) after the buyback of that coin did PCGS change their copper guarantee?

[WoodenJefferson]

Wasn't it within the their same fiscal year, implemented in the next? I remember HRH commenting there was on average a 1% buy back on total sales and ever increasing, indicating that the guarantee needed to be modified to reduce that amount. There is no doubt the bottom line drove these decisions.

[MarkFeld]

Wasn't it within the their same fiscal year, implemented in the next? I remember HRH commenting there was on average a 1% buy back on total sales and ever increasing, indicating that the guarantee needed to be modified to reduce that amount. There is no doubt the bottom line drove these decisions.

 

The change in the PCGS copper guarantee took place at the beginning of 2010.

 

And prior to that, according to PCGS, listed below are the 10 most costly buy-backs. So I don't see a correlation between the buyback of a single copper coin and the change in their guarantee.

 

 

"1794 Silver dollar AU55 $575,000, January, 2008. This was a beautiful looking coin, but on close examination, the hair had been reworked and the toning was actually not original. It was obviously a very skillful doctoring job and it fooled a lot of people.

 

1849 Mass & Cal $5 AU55 $150,000, June, 2006. This is a very rare territorial gold coin that turned out to be counterfeit.

 

1792 Half Disme XF45 $150,000, January, 2008. This coin had actual been flattened, probably around 1800, and did not look right at all. We shouldn't have missed this one.

 

1969-S double die Lincoln cent MS65RD $80,000, November, 2003. This coin had been doctored. We missed the doctoring and the coin "turned" in the holder.

 

1861/57-S Clark Gruber $20 MS63 $75,000, November, 2007. This coin had been known to the coin community for decades. In fact David Hall had it at coin shows for sale in the mid-1970s. But research eventually showed that this coin, and several other Clark Gruber rarities, were actually counterfeits that were probably made in the 1950s or 1960s.

 

1861 Clark Gruber $20 (three) MS62s $55,000 each, January, 2008. Same type of circa 1950s counterfeits as coin above.

 

1899 Indian cent PR69 $50,000, February, 1988. This gorgeous proof Indian cent later developed a huge copper spot covering the face of the Indian. We bought the coin back and hung it on the grading room wall with a sign that said "The $50,000 Spot" and we told the graders to be really careful when handling copper coins.

 

1908 $20 St. Gaudens PR63 $45,000, July, 2008. This matte proof Saint had been improperly cleaned or conserved or doctored or whatever you want to call it. We missed the subtle surfaces problems which later became not so subtle as the chemicals used by the "doctor" reacted on the coin.

 

1963 Lincoln cent PR70DCAM $40,768, April, 2004. This perfect Lincoln proof later developed a few minor spots. Not really our fault, but it was covered by our grading guarantee.

 

1849-D gold dollar MS64 $40,000, July, 2008. This was a beautiful, very high grade Dahlonega Mint that unfortunately had a planchet lamination on the rim the broke loose and negatively effected the coin. This was not really a grading mistake, but an unforeseen problem covered by our grading guarantee nonetheless."

 

 

 

[WoodenJefferson]

I never implied that ~sheesh~

 

I think I need a break from this place.

 

Forgive me, El Guapo.

 

I know that I, Jefe, do not have

your superior intellect and education.

 

But could it be that, once again...

 

you are angry at something else...

 

and are looking

to take it out on me?

 

[MarkFeld]

I never implied that ~sheesh~

 

I think I need a break from this place.

 

Forgive me, El Guapo.

 

I know that I, Jefe, do not have

your superior intellect and education.

 

But could it be that, once again...

 

you are angry at something else...

 

and are looking

to take it out on me?

 

I'm not angry about anything or at anyone. Where did you detect any anger in my post, or my taking anything out on you?

 

I had asked "Also, how soon (or long) after the buyback of that coin did PCGS change their copper guarantee?"

 

To which you replied "Wasn't it within the their same fiscal year, implemented in the next"

 

To which I replied "So I don't see a correlation between the buyback of a single copper coin and the change in their guarantee."

 

If you weren't implying that there was a correlation, than I misunderstood you.

 

I agree, I think you need to take a break and/or figure out what it is that you're angry about, such that you took it out on me.

 

 

 

[WoodenJefferson]

Please Mr. Feld, do not spin this to make me look like the pawn.

[MarkFeld]

Please Mr. Feld, do not spin this to make me look like the pawn.

 

I really don't understand what your problem is.

 

We each posted, and apparently I misunderstood one of your posts. If you look at my previous post (in which I included exchanges from our earlier posts), you should at least be able to understand how that occurred.

 

Yet, for reasons unknown to me, you took my reply as my possibly being angry about something and taking it out on you, which wasn't the case. And you were sarcastic, as well.

 

I'll ask again, "where did you detect any anger in my post, or my taking anything out on you?"

 

I'm truly baffled by your comments.

[jom]

Mark...often you have a "terse" way of responding in your posts...which is NOTHING like what you present in person. Therefore, I always take your posts with humor. If someone does not know you or hasn't met you the language of the posts can be taken differently. This is just MY impression not necessarily others.

 

Such is the world of internet message boards and the lack of "inflection of voice" when posting.

 

jom

[noow]

Mark...often you have a "terse" way of responding in your posts...which is NOTHING like what you present in person. Therefore, I always take your posts with humor. If someone does not know you or hasn't met you the language of the posts can be taken differently. This is just MY impression not necessarily others.

 

Such is the world of internet message boards and the lack of "inflection of voice" when posting.

 

jom

^^ ^^

[MarkFeld]

Mark...often you have a "terse" way of responding in your posts...which is NOTHING like what you present in person. Therefore, I always take your posts with humor. If someone does not know you or hasn't met you the language of the posts can be taken differently. This is just MY impression not necessarily others.

 

Such is the world of internet message boards and the lack of "inflection of voice" when posting.

 

jom

 

John, I am aware of the limitations of "talking" on line, and I invite you to re-read my post, which led to the ensuing exchange. And let me know how it could be taken as angry in any way, even by someone who hasn't met me in person?

 

I thought it was informational and polite. And I don't understand the reaction it caused, even if I misunderstood what the post prior to mine was trying to imply.

 

So as not to sidetrack this thread further...

 

The coin in the original post looks to have some flaws that (to me, at least) would/should knock it out of the MS69 category. Hopefully, what I think I'm seeing, isn't actually on the coin.

 

But, from what I can see, no, it doesn't strike me as "an ultimate Lincoln". I'd like to feel differently.

[e1cnr]

that MS69 looks mighty fine to me

 

 

with the plastic and its imperfections causing photography difficulties, it is really hard to tell how good it is

 

with the billions of cents minted over the years, that coin is probably one of the top million

 

if you keep on looking, you may find one that you like even more - but that is what collecting is all about, don't be discouraged if others imply that coin is no good - they just put their $180 into items that they like better

 

 

you could go through hundreds of mint rolls and possibly find one you like better, but maybe not

[jom]

John, I am aware of the limitations of "talking" on line, and I invite you to re-read my post, which led to the ensuing exchange. And let me know how it could be taken as angry in any way, even by someone who hasn't met me in person?

 

I don't know how it could be taken as angry from WJ's POV. I know that it would NOT have interpreted that way if directed at me. However, like I said, you do have a terse way of responding at times and I can see how it might be interpreted incorrectly by others.

 

Keep in mind I don't think you have EVER had any intent on being negative in ANY post you've ever made (that I know of). That's because I kind of know you a bit. But I cannot speak for WJ as he could (obviously) take things differently than I. Or maybe he was just having a bad day. I dunno...

 

jom

[Coinbuf]

The coin you bought looks great but trying to split hairs on MS70 vs MS69 from pics is next to impossible. Just from what I see I think you did well and I would not crack it out and retry; just my .02

[brg5658]

Well, to get back on topic, I will add just a little information here. The single business strike Lincoln Memorial Cent graded as MS70RD by either PCGS or NGC sold in September 2006 for $13,500. You can see the Teletrade auction here .

 

Subsequently, the cent was downgraded to MS69RD by PCGS. The PCGS photo file of the cent is attached below or you can view the PCGS super-large photo here. It's a stunning cent.

 

---------------------

 

On an aside, there are a few (52 total) MS70RD cents graded by NGC and PCGS from the Satin Finish years of 2005-2010. Of these, 40 are graded by PCGS and 12 by NGC and they all come from 2005 and 2006.

 

2005 Philadelphia, (28 coins in MS70 -- 18 PCGS / 10 NGC)

2005 Denver, (2 coins in MS70 -- both from PCGS)

2006 Philadelphia, (22 coins in MS70 -- 20 PCGS / 2 NGC)

[Keigwin]

The MS70 cent that developed a spot and involved a big buy back is irrelevant to PCGS's decision not to guarantee copper color for coins bought or graded after 2009.

 

It wasn't a matter of color. It was about condition. The same problem today would be covered.

Lance.