Do any of you know about this project?

[Danye West]

I was at the Long Beach show, and Leo Frese was telling me about a new ANACS certification for double mint sets. I didn't get much of a chance to chat with him about it, but do any of you have any info?

[cpm9ball]

Why would anyone want to encapsulate a, potentially, high-grade coin(s) with a bunch of losers?

 

Chris

[Raisethis2]

I talked with Leo Frese at the ANA in Chicago. There he indicated that he was in the process of researching whether it would be viable to verify originality and then encapsulate these older mint sets. My take was that this was his project. No mention of ANACS was discussed at that time.

 

I do agree that these sets have cooked in the cardboard long enough and it would be wise to get them out of the cardboard before beautiful toning turns to environmental damage. Many of the sets I see are not at all attractive.

[BillJones]

I don't know how it could be done, but the big problem with these sets is that any coin can substitutued in them at any time. If you add up the prices for assembled mint sets that contain the same coins as the original mint sets, you will find that there is a huge premium for original sets.

 

A lot of these sets have had the best coins taken from them to be slabbed and have had substitute pieces put in their place. A veteran collector or dealer can often spot this, but less experienced collectors cannot. Therefore it is easy to pay a huge premium for set that has been "salted" with ordinary Mint State coins, that is worth a fraction of the price paid.

 

I don't how a grading service can fix this. One of charms of these sets is that they are time capsule of coin collecting from many years go by. When the coins are taken from the mint holders much of that is lost. The coins that have been removed for grading have had that done because of their high Mint State grade number NOT for their history. Mint set coins in MS-63 and 64 are nothing more than old tarished coins. In other words with mint sets the parts are worth a lot less than the whole.

[Danye West]

I don't know how it could be done, but the big problem with these sets is that any coin can substitutued in them at any time. If you add up the prices for assembled mint sets that contain the same coins as the original mint sets, you will find that there is a huge premium for original sets.

 

A lot of these sets have had the best coins taken from them to be slabbed and have had substitute pieces put in their place. A veteran collector or dealer can often spot this, but less experienced collectors cannot. Therefore it is easy to pay a huge premium for set that has been "salted" with ordinary Mint State coins, that is worth a fraction of the price paid.

 

I don't how a grading service can fix this. One of charms of these sets is that they are time capsule of coin collecting from many years go by. When the coins are taken from the mint holders much of that is lost. The coins that have been removed for grading have had that done because of their high Mint State grade number NOT for their history. Mint set coins in MS-63 and 64 are nothing more than old tarished coins. In other words with mint sets the parts are worth a lot less than the whole.

 

That is why I cracked the set I came to see him about. 2 amazingly toned '55 frankies in MS65-FBL and some nice quarters. If it ever does happen, I might try it.

[RWB]

Some protection can be provided by keeping the coins in their original holders, then putting the whole thing in a plastic container that includes archival storage strips that absorb sulfur. This is routine museum stuff, but not something any of the authentication companies ordinarily do.

[Conder101]

The "originality" of a double mint set can be judged by looking at the BACK of the holder. The cardboard was attached to a FLAT piece of paper. If a coin was removed from the set to examine it (and possibly replace it) the paper is distorted by the pressure needed to push the coin out. Even if the coin is replaced the paper will no longer be flat. I would not consider a double set where the paper is not flat over all the back side to be original. There are dang few original sets still in existence.

[RWB]

I recently examined a small group of double sets from the 1940s/50s and none of them had crinkled paper. (Sets were still in the mailing boxes and envelopes with postmarks.)

[BillJones]

The "originality" of a double mint set can be judged by looking at the BACK of the holder. The cardboard was attached to a FLAT piece of paper. If a coin was removed from the set to examine it (and possibly replace it) the paper is distorted by the pressure needed to push the coin out. Even if the coin is replaced the paper will no longer be flat. I would not consider a double set where the paper is not flat over all the back side to be original. There are dang few original sets still in existence.

 

That is a very tough and unrealistic standard. You can forget about buying any of these sets if that is the way it has to be. Just think of it this way. The last of these sets was issued in 1958. To think that no one wanted to see the reverse of any coin in the set for 57 years or more is not reasonable.

[RWB]

They fall out with a light tap. Easier to look for foxing on the cutout holes. Edges of new coins are sharp.

[Afterword]

I purchased a 1954 double mint set last month. The paper on the back of each cardboard holder was flat and by all appearances unmolested. Neither was there any sign of tampering around the edges of the apertures housing the coins on the other side of the holder.

 

Is there some sort of trick to removing the coins without leaving any indication of doing so? It does not seem likely judging by the materials involved, both of which, the paper and cardboard, being vulnerable to impressions left by any attempt to remove the coins.

 

I know this from my own experience when removing the coins in my mint set from there cardboard and paper homes. They were very snugly embedded in the slots where they had resided for sixty years. They were not extracted without effort and force sufficient enough to damage the cardboard around the edges of the apertures and the paper underneath.

 

But perhaps my experience was an anomaly.

 

Regardless, I was happily surprised I was able to free them without causing any damage to the coins themselves.

 

This coin was particularly difficult to remove. The reverse did not want to let go of the paper without a fight. I believe this contact with the paper created the striped toning pattern it displays.