Is this the 1972 cent DDO FS-104? 2 2

[Origami Master]

Found this and am wondering if it is the FS-104 and if not then which one/ones it could be.

[Sandon]

   From what I can see on NGC VarietyPlus, your coin does appear to resemble the FS-104.  Does it have the reverse die scratches running from the "N" of "UNITED" as shown in the photo below?

[Origami Master]

No

[Coinbuf]

It appears to be a match, perhaps a late die state which there are no markers available to confirm on VV.    

[Origami Master]

Wow, Thanks for the input!

[Origami Master]

Do you think it is gradable? In any condition its value outweighs grading fees according to the pcgs price guide.

[Origami Master]

In other words, should I get it graded?

[Sandon]

   

On 1/21/2023 at 11:31 AM, Origami Master said:

should I get it graded?

   I wouldn't! The PCGS Price Guide has very high retail prices.  You would probably have to sell it for a much lower price.  Not many collectors seek minor doubled dies, and some of those who do prefer them uncirculated, so I doubt a dealer would pay more than half the list price for it, probably less.  It would be unlikely to realize the retail price at auction before commissions. (I assume that you're including the variety attribution fee ($18 at NGC) in your calculation of the grading cost.) 

   If you don't intend to sell it right away and have attributed it yourself, why pay a grading service to do what you had the numismatic skills to do yourself? If you have a Lincoln cent album, it will nicely fill the 1972 DD opening, as one would generally have the "Redbook" variety (FS-101) certified.  That's what I did with an AU FS-102 that I bought for $15 in 2012.

   

[Coinbuf]

On 1/21/2023 at 9:31 AM, Origami Master said:

In other words, should I get it graded?

I would suggest that before you spend any grading fees on it that you post your photos on the CONECA forum for further feedback.   While the areas that you have shown us do match for FS-104, your coin is missing the rev marker that @Sandon posted.   And FS-104 and FS-105 have very similar obv doubling on the motto, so I suggest that you investigate the photos for FS-105 very closely as there is a big price difference between 104 and 105.

If you just want the coin certified for your collection, and if the folks on the CONECA forum feel you might have an FS-104 then it might be worth the cost to submit if you choose to.   However if your goal is to sell this coin after having it graded, the question you should answer before spending money on submitting is, who is the buyer for this coin.   I have many Lincoln sets in the registry, not one set in the NGC registry has a slot for this coin only the FS-101.   Same for the PCGS registry, and if there are no registry buyers for these somewhat obscure DDO's then finding a buyer for a coin in less than stelar condition may be difficult.

Edited January 21, 2023 by Coinbuf

[Origami Master]

I Researched it more and have come to the conclusion that it is the FS-104 due to the position of the doubling and the lack of die markers that should be present on the FS-105.

[EagleRJO]

On 1/21/2023 at 2:44 PM, Coinbuf said:

While the areas that you have shown us do match for FS-104, your coin is missing the rev marker that @Sandon posted.

That marker may only be present in late die states. Of the numerous certified FS-104 examples at the CoinFacts page for that, all of them except one doesn't have the die scratches at the 'N" on the reverse.

https://www.pcgs.com/coinfacts/coin/1972-1c-ddo-fs-104-bn/38020

[J P M]

On 1/23/2023 at 1:10 AM, EagleRJO said:

That marker may only be present in late die states. Of the numerous certified FS-104 examples at the CoinFacts page for that, all of them except one doesn't have the die scratches at the 'N" on the reverse.

https://www.pcgs.com/coinfacts/coin/1972-1c-ddo-fs-104-bn/38020

It may be a FS-104  but will anyone say it is without the marker ? that is the question. 

[Origami Master]

So the only way to get people to be comfortable buying it would be getting it authenticated... right?

Edited January 23, 2023 by Origami Master

[Coinbuf]

On 1/22/2023 at 11:10 PM, EagleRJO said:

That marker may only be present in late die states. Of the numerous certified FS-104 examples at the CoinFacts page for that, all of them except one doesn't have the die scratches at the 'N" on the reverse.

https://www.pcgs.com/coinfacts/coin/1972-1c-ddo-fs-104-bn/38020

Actually, VV only has photos for an EDS coin, so that rev marker should be on every EDS coin.   The problem is that VV only has the obv and rev markers for an EDS coin there is no information listed for a middle or late die state.   That is why earlier I suggested that possibly because the op's coin does not have that rev marker that it could be a later die state that VV does not show.

 

On 1/23/2023 at 8:38 AM, Origami Master said:

So the only way to get people to be comfortable buying it would be getting it authenticated... right?

Depends, I'm sure that there are buyers that would be fine buying it (perhaps sight seen) raw.   I would grade the coin XF, perhaps AU50, and the value to me is very low raw or graded.   If you plan to sell it for the guide numbers you looked up on the PCGS website that you reference before do remember those values are biased on the coin being graded.   While there is the odd sucker born every minute theory, most people will not pay anywhere near those price guide values for a raw coin.

Edited January 23, 2023 by Coinbuf

[Origami Master]

Ok thanks for the input and info!

[VKurtB]

I want to thank these posters on this thread. Usually, I couldn’t care less about varieties that need to get into the weeds on Fivaz-Stanton numbers, but this thread “force-fed” me to read it. I still don’t care about minor errors, but now I’ve learned more. 

[KarenHolcomb]

Admittedly I did not read all the comments and so may be repeating. If so my apologies. 

With the HUGE difference in value between the 004 and 005 being in the hundred's of dollars, I would like agree with @Coinbuf 's idea of posting to CONECA. They have a great new way of doing things and, like here, you don't have to be a member of their forum to pist your Coin. You post it in the correct room, they tell you where in the instructions, and if it IS special one of their experts will comment and tell you so as well as tell you how to submit it should you decide to. 

ALso, here are a couple of other sites for your comparison. I do so hate to admit that Chuck's site is a valuable resourse, but he's done a lot to it and it is bettter than ever and has many and great photos. His site also shows EDS. But Wiles offers an MDS example shots for your comparison as well. Both sites take attributions for a fee.

 

https://coppercoins.com/diesearch.php

http://www.varietyvista.com/01b LC Doubled Dies Vol 2/DDO 1972.htm

[EagleRJO]

On 1/23/2023 at 12:28 PM, Coinbuf said:

The problem is that VV only has the obv and rev markers for an EDS coin there is no information listed for a middle or late die state.  That is why earlier I suggested that possibly because the op's coin does not have that rev marker that it could be a later die state that VV does not show.

I don't see any indications of polishing or disturbed fields on the op's or CoinFacts coins, which is why I was thinking those were from before the die scratches occured. That, or they did a really good job blending the die scratches.