Why is there such a high premium on PL 2000-D Sacagawea dollars

[yonico]

While other dates in the series, in same grade and also designated PL, sell for a fraction of these prices?

 

I was looking for one Sac. dollar to buy (specifically with PL designation), and surprisingly i picked up a 2000-P for maybe 1/3 of the price i would have paid for a 2000-D at the same grade (MS68PL).

 

since the 2000-D Sacagawea dollars in the millennium set were produced with a burnished finish, which made most of them get the PL designation at NGC (not just "most", almost 100% of them from the millennium sets were designated PL) - shouldn't that make them very common in PL and not command that high a premium (comparing to other dates in same grade, with or without PL desig.)?

 

 

 

[physics-fan3.14]

You would think so....

 

I'm not entirely sure why the 2000-D has such a high premium. I do know that you can find DMPLs of this date, which are understandably desirable. I have a 67DPL. I also have a 2000P in 68PL that I got for a third of the price. In this case, I was willing to pay the premium for the DPL.

 

PLs in the Sacagawea series are fairly common. However, interestingly, they are less common on the Native American dollars.

[yonico]

You would think so....

 

I'm not entirely sure why the 2000-D has such a high premium. I do know that you can find DMPLs of this date, which are understandably desirable. I have a 67DPL. I also have a 2000P in 68PL that I got for a third of the price. In this case, I was willing to pay the premium for the DPL.

 

PLs in the Sacagawea series are fairly common. However, interestingly, they are less common on the Native American dollars.

 

Yes, absolutely. I fully understand the premium on a DPL. the number of DPL's is seriously lower..

 

on PL though.. Perhaps there's no real reason, or maybe some collectors like the label with the 'millennium set' pedigree.. idk

 

completed listing on ebay from the recent 90 days show 2000-D MS68PL examples sold for

$225, $215, $200, $155, $143, $135, $131 and so on..

 

the 2000-P in the same grade was only $46!

 

this below is from a PM in a discussion i had with a friend on on this subject (she also bought a 2000-P and gave me the idea to go for this date for a nice high grade PL that is also affordable). reading the pop numbers is what made me ask the question here.

 

 

[the coins and dollar bill that were included in the 'millennium set' in 2000 (2000-D Sac. $1, 2000 silver eagle, $1 bill), all had a special aspect, or 'marker'.

the silver eagle did not have a mintmark on it, but was identified in the set by the U.S MINT to have been minted at the West Point mint. silver eagles were produced in both West point and Philadelphia that year, and there was no way to tell which came from which mint otherwise. the $1 bill had a serial number "2000xxxx" to recognize the new millennium.]

the 2000-D Sacagawea dollars came with a special burnished finish (similar finish was used on the 5,000 dollar coins the mint paid Glenna Goodacre with as her coin design fee).

Due to the burnished finish, many of the coins that were submitted to NGC for grading were awarded the “PL” designation, with a much smaller proportion of coins receiving the “DPL” designation.

 

 

according to the NGC coin census, in 2000-D Sacagawea dollars (only those with the 'millennium set' pedigree ),

 

5947 MS coins were graded, of which:

 

63 were graded MS (no designation)

 

5,779 were graded MSPL (inc. 2,110 in 66PL, 2,811 in 67PL, 313 in 68PL & 1 in 69PL)

 

105 were graded MSDPL (inc. 46 each in 66DPL and 67DPL)

 

[=99% of the millennium set 2000-D dollars submitted were designated PL/DPL]

 

it's literally harder to find a 2000-D dollar without a prooflike designation than one with, millennium pedigree or not.

 

 

 

But take another date, 2000-P for example (I use this date cause that's the one I bought, but numbers are kind of similar for other dates).

 

according to the NGC coin census, for 2005-P Sac $1,

 

5947 MS coins were graded (about the same number submitted as 2000-D), of which:

 

5,875 were graded MS (no designation)

71 were graded MSPL (inc. 8 in 66PL, 19 in 67PL, 44 in 68PL)

1 was graded MSDPL (66DPL)

 

[= 1% of the 2000-P dollars submitted were designated PL/DPL]

[World Colonial]

There are a number of coins which sell for inflated prices versus their perceived relative numismatic merits and their apparent relative scarcity. This is also true in the world coin series (South Africa Union and ZAR) which I collect.

[coinman1794]

While other dates in the series, in same grade and also designated PL, sell for a fraction of these prices?

 

I was looking for one Sac. dollar to buy (specifically with PL designation), and surprisingly i picked up a 2000-P for maybe 1/3 of the price i would have paid for a 2000-D at the same grade (MS68PL).

 

since the 2000-D Sacagawea dollars in the millennium set were produced with a burnished finish, which made most of them get the PL designation at NGC (not just "most", almost 100% of them from the millennium sets were designated PL) - shouldn't that make them very common in PL and not command that high a premium (comparing to other dates in same grade, with or without PL desig.)?

 

 

 

The answer has nothing to do with the PL designation, ironically. A 2000-D Sacagawea dollar is a very tough coin, and 2000-P is not.

 

The population for 2000-P in MS68 is 1145 with 76 finer at NGC. The population of 2000-D in MS68 is 34, with 2 finer. I'm sure there are some people who would pay close to $100, or more, to acquire a plain 68 of this date.

 

Add in the PL factor, and a price around $150 is reasonable. In 68PL the 2000-P pop is 44 and the 2000-D pop is 42.

 

 

Also, I don't think the burnished 2000-D coins are considered business strikes, which means they are not the same as an actual PL 2000-D dollar.

 

[yonico]

While other dates in the series, in same grade and also designated PL, sell for a fraction of these prices?

 

I was looking for one Sac. dollar to buy (specifically with PL designation), and surprisingly i picked up a 2000-P for maybe 1/3 of the price i would have paid for a 2000-D at the same grade (MS68PL).

 

since the 2000-D Sacagawea dollars in the millennium set were produced with a burnished finish, which made most of them get the PL designation at NGC (not just "most", almost 100% of them from the millennium sets were designated PL) - shouldn't that make them very common in PL and not command that high a premium (comparing to other dates in same grade, with or without PL desig.)?

 

 

 

The answer has nothing to do with the PL designation, ironically. A 2000-D Sacagawea dollar is a very tough coin, and 2000-P is not.

 

The population for 2000-P in MS68 is 1145 with 76 finer at NGC. The population of 2000-D in MS68 is 34, with 2 finer. I'm sure there are some people who would pay close to $100, or more, to acquire a plain 68 of this date.

 

Add in the PL factor, and a price around $150 is reasonable. In 68PL the 2000-P pop is 44 and the 2000-D pop is 42.

 

 

Also, I don't think the burnished 2000-D coins are considered business strikes, which means they are not the same as an actual PL 2000-D dollar.

 

I understand..

 

But, Since (at least in my opinion) anyone who's looking for a 2000-D in MS68 wouldn't refuse a 68PL just because it also has a PL designation, I think when you quote the low pop of this coin in MS68 level you should include the pop of ones in 68PL. Especially since 68PL is so much more common than a plain 68 (about 7:1). Example, if a coin has a pop of 40 in MS 66, but a pop of 400 in MS66+, do you considered it to be a tough coin in MS66?

 

To say that the total population of 2000-D in 68 is 34/2 is technically right, but in doing so you're only taking into account the 1% of the coins in this date that were not designated PL, and ignoring the 99% that were (These numbers are not exaggerated - seriously, 99% of the 2000-D dollars submitted to NGC were designated PL).

[coinman1794]

While other dates in the series, in same grade and also designated PL, sell for a fraction of these prices?

 

I was looking for one Sac. dollar to buy (specifically with PL designation), and surprisingly i picked up a 2000-P for maybe 1/3 of the price i would have paid for a 2000-D at the same grade (MS68PL).

 

since the 2000-D Sacagawea dollars in the millennium set were produced with a burnished finish, which made most of them get the PL designation at NGC (not just "most", almost 100% of them from the millennium sets were designated PL) - shouldn't that make them very common in PL and not command that high a premium (comparing to other dates in same grade, with or without PL desig.)?

 

 

 

The answer has nothing to do with the PL designation, ironically.

The population for 2000-P in MS68 is 1145 with 76 finer at NGC. The population of 2000-D in MS68 is 34, with 2 finer. I'm sure there are some people who would pay close to $100, or more, to acquire a plain 68 of this date.

 

Add in the PL factor, and a price around $150 is reasonable. In 68PL the 2000-P pop is 44 and the 2000-D pop is 42.

 

 

Also, I don't think the burnished 2000-D coins are considered business strikes, which means they are not the same as an actual PL 2000-D dollar.

 

I understand..

 

But, Since (at least in my opinion) anyone who's looking for a 2000-D in MS68 wouldn't refuse a 68PL just because it also has a PL designation, I think when you quote the low pop of this coin in MS68 level you should include the pop of ones in 68PL. Especially since 68PL is so much more common than a plain 68 (about 7:1). Example, if a coin has a pop of 40 in MS 66, but a pop of 400 in MS66+, do you considered it to be a tough coin in MS66?

 

To say that the total population of 2000-D in 68 is 34/2 is technically right, but in doing so you're only taking into account the 1% of the coins in this date that were not designated PL, and ignoring the 99% that were (These numbers are not exaggerated - seriously, 99% of the 2000-D dollars submitted to NGC were designated PL).

 

 

First, the gist of my argument is that a 2000-D is tough in MS68, whether or not it's PL; and also that 68 is the highest grade for 2000-D, whereas 2000-P is available in 69.

 

Additionally, to be accurate, I quoted both numbers (42 in PL and 34 in non-PL) knowing that people would be able to add them together.

 

Finally, the population of 2000-D business strike Sacs, in all grades, is 1070, with another 296 in PL. The Millennium Set coins are not business strikes because they are burnished, and they are not a part of my analysis and discussion.

 

 

 

 

 

[yonico]

While other dates in the series, in same grade and also designated PL, sell for a fraction of these prices?

 

I was looking for one Sac. dollar to buy (specifically with PL designation), and surprisingly i picked up a 2000-P for maybe 1/3 of the price i would have paid for a 2000-D at the same grade (MS68PL).

 

since the 2000-D Sacagawea dollars in the millennium set were produced with a burnished finish, which made most of them get the PL designation at NGC (not just "most", almost 100% of them from the millennium sets were designated PL) - shouldn't that make them very common in PL and not command that high a premium (comparing to other dates in same grade, with or without PL desig.)?

 

 

 

The answer has nothing to do with the PL designation, ironically.

The population for 2000-P in MS68 is 1145 with 76 finer at NGC. The population of 2000-D in MS68 is 34, with 2 finer. I'm sure there are some people who would pay close to $100, or more, to acquire a plain 68 of this date.

 

Add in the PL factor, and a price around $150 is reasonable. In 68PL the 2000-P pop is 44 and the 2000-D pop is 42.

 

 

Also, I don't think the burnished 2000-D coins are considered business strikes, which means they are not the same as an actual PL 2000-D dollar.

 

I understand..

 

But, Since (at least in my opinion) anyone who's looking for a 2000-D in MS68 wouldn't refuse a 68PL just because it also has a PL designation, I think when you quote the low pop of this coin in MS68 level you should include the pop of ones in 68PL. Especially since 68PL is so much more common than a plain 68 (about 7:1). Example, if a coin has a pop of 40 in MS 66, but a pop of 400 in MS66+, do you considered it to be a tough coin in MS66?

 

To say that the total population of 2000-D in 68 is 34/2 is technically right, but in doing so you're only taking into account the 1% of the coins in this date that were not designated PL, and ignoring the 99% that were (These numbers are not exaggerated - seriously, 99% of the 2000-D dollars submitted to NGC were designated PL).

 

 

First, the gist of my argument is that a 2000-D is tough in MS68, whether or not it's PL; and also that 68 is the highest grade for 2000-D, whereas 2000-P is available in 69.

 

 

Finally, the population of 2000-D business strike Sacs, in all grades, is 1070, with another 296 in PL. The Millennium Set coins are not business strikes because they are burnished, and they are not a part of my analysis and discussion.

 

 

 

 

 

ah.. ok. I didn't get it because the PL and Millennium coins were indeed the subject of my question in my main post, and so i thought naturally they would be the subject of your comments and part of your analysis..

 

i was asking why there was still a high premium on specifically Millenium set coins that are designated PL, if they were so common.

 

 

 

 

[coinman1794]

While other dates in the series, in same grade and also designated PL, sell for a fraction of these prices?

 

I was looking for one Sac. dollar to buy (specifically with PL designation), and surprisingly i picked up a 2000-P for maybe 1/3 of the price i would have paid for a 2000-D at the same grade (MS68PL).

 

since the 2000-D Sacagawea dollars in the millennium set were produced with a burnished finish, which made most of them get the PL designation at NGC (not just "most", almost 100% of them from the millennium sets were designated PL) - shouldn't that make them very common in PL and not command that high a premium (comparing to other dates in same grade, with or without PL desig.)?

 

 

 

The answer has nothing to do with the PL designation, ironically.

The population for 2000-P in MS68 is 1145 with 76 finer at NGC. The population of 2000-D in MS68 is 34, with 2 finer. I'm sure there are some people who would pay close to $100, or more, to acquire a plain 68 of this date.

 

Add in the PL factor, and a price around $150 is reasonable. In 68PL the 2000-P pop is 44 and the 2000-D pop is 42.

 

 

Also, I don't think the burnished 2000-D coins are considered business strikes, which means they are not the same as an actual PL 2000-D dollar.

 

I understand..

 

But, Since (at least in my opinion) anyone who's looking for a 2000-D in MS68 wouldn't refuse a 68PL just because it also has a PL designation, I think when you quote the low pop of this coin in MS68 level you should include the pop of ones in 68PL. Especially since 68PL is so much more common than a plain 68 (about 7:1). Example, if a coin has a pop of 40 in MS 66, but a pop of 400 in MS66+, do you considered it to be a tough coin in MS66?

 

To say that the total population of 2000-D in 68 is 34/2 is technically right, but in doing so you're only taking into account the 1% of the coins in this date that were not designated PL, and ignoring the 99% that were (These numbers are not exaggerated - seriously, 99% of the 2000-D dollars submitted to NGC were designated PL).

 

 

First, the gist of my argument is that a 2000-D is tough in MS68, whether or not it's PL; and also that 68 is the highest grade for 2000-D, whereas 2000-P is available in 69.

 

 

Finally, the population of 2000-D business strike Sacs, in all grades, is 1070, with another 296 in PL. The Millennium Set coins are not business strikes because they are burnished, and they are not a part of my analysis and discussion.

 

 

 

 

 

ah.. ok. I didn't get it because the PL and Millennium coins were indeed the subject of my question in my main post, and so i thought naturally they would be the subject of your comments and part of your analysis..

 

i was asking why there was still a high premium on specifically Millenium set coins that are designated PL, if they were so common.

 

 

 

 

OK, if that is what you mean: The Millennium Set coins are a one year, one of a kind, special finish issue, made in the first year of production, and in a millennium year, so they have a special value to collectors. The comparison of the burnished 2000-D coins to the business strike 2000-Ps was throwing me off. I got it now. I guess I would say it boils down to the idea that their value can't be compared to the prices of the 2000-P.

 

[ngcmember2018]

Also, the 2000d coins have a much lower mintage number.  

[Conder101]

Three year old thread.