Specimens Only: Post your SP coins here. 2 2

[numisport]

PCGS says SMS coins are Specimen strikes. I don't agree as these coins had no special handling after the strike. The nice ones actually look like proofs.

 

[VKurtB]

SMS is NOT SP, and SP is NOT SMS. They are different things. I don’t care WHO at PCGS insists otherwise. PCGS also insists all medals are SP. They’re out of their minds. 

[J P M]

[VKurtB]

On 10/31/2023 at 7:09 PM, J P M said:

Now THAT is an SP coin, according to EVERYONE except Roger, who, like the cheese, stands alone.

[Mike Meenderink]

[robec1347]

On 10/29/2023 at 10:53 AM, numisport said:

PCGS says SMS coins are Specimen strikes. I don't agree as these coins had no special handling after the strike. The nice ones actually look like

That is not true. While PCGS does uses SP on SMS and Specimen coins, they don’t consider SMS coins as Specimen. The SP on SMS coins is for Special, as in Special Mint Set, not Specimen.

In fact they describe Specimen coins as such:  

Specimen

Term used to indicate special coins struck at the Mint from 1792-1816 that display many characteristics of the later Proof coinage. Prior to 1817, the minting equipment and technology was limited, so these coins do not have the “watery” surfaces of later Proofs nor the evenness of strike of the close collar Proofs. PCGS designates these coins SP.

Nowhere in their description do they state SMS coins are Specimen strikes. 

Special Mint Set

A set of special coins-neither business strikes nor Proofs-first struck in limited quantities in 1965 and officially released in 1966-1967- to replace Proof sets, which were discontinued as part of the U.S. Mint’s efforts to stop coin hoarding. The quality of many of the 1965 coins was not much better than that of business strikes-but by 1967, some Special Mint Set (SMS) coins resembled Proofs. In fact, the government admitted as much when it revealed how the 1967 issues were struck. In 1968, Proof coinage resume. There have been similar issues since; the 1994 and 1997 Matte-finish Jefferson nickels, for example, are frosted SMS-type coins. There also are a few known 1964 SMS coins, these likely struck as tests in late 1964 for the new 1965 SMS strikings.

Do you see Specimen Strike on any of the SMS coins?

Edited November 23, 2023 by robec1347

[numisport]

On 11/23/2023 at 5:42 PM, robec1347 said:

That is not true. While PCGS does uses SP on SMS and Specimen coins, they don’t consider SMS coins as Specimen. The SP on SMS coins is for Special, as in Special Mint Set, not Specimen.

In fact they describe Specimen coins as such:  

Specimen

Term used to indicate special coins struck at the Mint from 1792-1816 that display many characteristics of the later Proof coinage. Prior to 1817, the minting equipment and technology was limited, so these coins do not have the “watery” surfaces of later Proofs nor the evenness of strike of the close collar Proofs. PCGS designates these coins SP.

Nowhere in their description do they state SMS coins are Specimen strikes. 

Special Mint Set

A set of special coins-neither business strikes nor Proofs-first struck in limited quantities in 1965 and officially released in 1966-1967- to replace Proof sets, which were discontinued as part of the U.S. Mint’s efforts to stop coin hoarding. The quality of many of the 1965 coins was not much better than that of business strikes-but by 1967, some Special Mint Set (SMS) coins resembled Proofs. In fact, the government admitted as much when it revealed how the 1967 issues were struck. In 1968, Proof coinage resume. There have been similar issues since; the 1994 and 1997 Matte-finish Jefferson nickels, for example, are frosted SMS-type coins. There also are a few known 1964 SMS coins, these likely struck as tests in late 1964 for the new 1965 SMS strikings.

Do you see Specimen Strike on any of the SMS coins?

Thanks for the correction, I was not aware of this.

[Mike Meenderink]

[Henri Charriere]

On 10/31/2023 at 8:09 PM, J P M said:

[Would you be so kind as to state unequivocally, that each of the steps are visually discernable and observable, and whether they are of the 5- or 6-step variety.  Tks!]

[J P M]

Yes, HC this is a 6-step coin. but in the NGC registry all PCGS coins are considered 5 step coins.

[Mike Meenderink]

[Henri Charriere]

On 9/27/2023 at 2:00 PM, The Neophyte Numismatist said:

SP designated coins are an area where I have very limited numismatic knowledge.  In my mind they are "enhanced" business strikes and/or pseudo-proofs, SMS coins, etc....

1878-S Specimen Morgan Dollar, graded NGC SP 64

"Enhanced" business strikes?  I don't know which sounds worse, qualifying a term whose etymology I challenge anyone to trace, or characterizing, of all things, one of the first coins minted of the first year of its series as a "Presentation Piece," despite exhibiting severe PMD on its obverse.

Is the above coin, whether SP or not, something you would feel comfortable presenting to someone, whether a close colleague or official dignitary?  No, never!  However the coin was iredeemably damaged, it no longer is what it once was. It is now a common, circulation strike coin. It is not enhanced.  If anything, it is grossly degraded and certification would be appropriate if it were intended as a gift to the submitter's worst enemy.

[mlovmo]

Here's my S. Korea 2000 50-Won coin in SP-68

https://www.ngccoin.com/certlookup/6611569-017/68/

 

[Henri Charriere]

To my knowledge, and some accelerated finger-scrolling, the coin posted above is the first of foreign origin.

Generally speaking, unless you have an intimate familiarity with overseas coins and the grading scales they use, this coin, having been certified by experienced NGC graders as an SP-68, must be deemed above reproach, unless specific information suggests otherwise. SP is a fine example of a coin which denotes varying standards in different countries.

[mlovmo]

On 2/24/2024 at 5:46 PM, Henri Charriere said:

To my knowledge, and some accelerated finger-scrolling, the coin posted above is the first of foreign origin.

Generally speaking, unless you have an intimate familiarity with overseas coins and the grading scales they use, this coin, having been certified by experienced NGC graders as an SP-68, must be deemed above reproach, unless specific information suggests otherwise. SP is a fine example of a coin which denotes varying standards in different countries.

Well... First, "the grading scales they (S. Korea) use..."  The issue is that the Koreans do NOT have grading scales for their coins. If they ever did, I have not heard about it, and in my interactions with the Korean collector/investor community, I have never heard of such a thing.   They simply use a "sort of" version of U.S. (ANA?) grading standards when grading raw coins and rely HEAVILY on the grading services provided by NGC for high-value coins.  The third-party grading companies have loomed large in the South Korean numismatic market at a level not often seen in countries outside of North America.   The big auction house in Korea, Hwadong, is an NGC submission center.  Other grading services are accepted by dealers/collectors in Korea, but NGC has cornered the market there for sure. 

I believe this coin is an SP grade since it was made for a "special" coin set for the Bank of Korea's 50th Anniversary.  The surfaces appear "matte proof."  Later, similar "special" Bank of Korea coin sets issued from 2001 to 2004 were given PF grades when submitted to NGC.

[Henri Charriere]

There has been a brouhaha brewing on the Forum now for some time as regarding the designation: SP.  At issue were U.S. coins, exclusively.  The intent of my interception was to head things off at the pass and alert the membership that with your coin we were now in uncharted waters where the usual descriptors to not apply.  I am frankly delighted to hear South Korea has chosen NGC to grade their coins for owners, collectors, prospective buyers, sellers, dealers and auction houses.

The term SP has a specific narrow definition in France, Germany and Spain that deviates significantly from the Sheldon scale adopted by the United States.

I thank you for the courtesy of your reply and encourage you in your pursuit of coins in your area of interest.  

[mlovmo]

On 2/25/2024 at 7:54 PM, Henri Charriere said:

There has been a brouhaha brewing on the Forum now for some time as regarding the designation: SP.  At issue were U.S. coins, exclusively.  The intent of my interception was to head things off at the pass and alert the membership that with your coin we were now in uncharted waters where the usual descriptors to not apply.  I am frankly delighted to hear South Korea has chosen NGC to grade their coins for owners, collectors, prospective buyers, sellers, dealers and auction houses.

The term SP has a specific narrow definition in France, Germany and Spain that deviates significantly from the Sheldon scale adopted by the United States.

I thank you for the courtesy of your reply and encourage you in your pursuit of coins in your area of interest.  

Well, I think this summarizes the designation SP, which appears to me to be a description of the SURFACES of a coin: 
Specimen (SP): A coin that falls short of the definition for an actual Proof yet is clearly superior to the normal currency issues. SP applies to a variety of finishes that are distinct from the appearance of circulation issues but do not fit any of the Proof categories.

If it's a World Coin, so be it...  Just my two cents.  

[zadok]

On 2/25/2024 at 9:12 PM, mlovmo said:

Well, I think this summarizes the designation SP, which appears to me to be a description of the SURFACES of a coin: 
Specimen (SP): A coin that falls short of the definition for an actual Proof yet is clearly superior to the normal currency issues. SP applies to a variety of finishes that are distinct from the appearance of circulation issues but do not fit any of the Proof categories.

If it's a World Coin, so be it...  Just my two cents.  

...dont get locked in on comparing SP to Proof, the subject is much broader than just that simple definition which only encompasses a narrow slice of coin production processes n intent...its not like a one size fits all definition....

[mlovmo]

On 2/26/2024 at 8:33 AM, zadok said:

...dont get locked in on comparing SP to Proof, the subject is much broader than just that simple definition which only encompasses a narrow slice of coin production processes n intent...its not like a one size fits all definition....

Okay, I have no doubt that what you say is true.   Actually, I had no idea how the coins from this 2000 Bank of Korea set would come back from NGC.  Somebody told me to put "SP" on the form, so I did and the coin came back in the holder as you see above.   I just got my definition of "SP" from here (https://www.ngccoin.com/news/article/7708/learn-grading-sp-and-pl-prefixes/)

I don't have a dog in this fight...

[Henri Charriere]

On 2/26/2024 at 6:19 PM, mlovmo said:

.... I don't have a dog in this fight...

Neither do I, but SP is an honorable grade.  I see no harm in deferring to NGC on this one.

[Mike Meenderink]

[Henri Charriere]

On 2/26/2024 at 6:19 PM, mlovmo said:

....   I just got my definition of "SP" from here (https://www.ngccoin.com/news/article/7708/learn-grading-sp-and-pl-prefixes/)

I don't have a dog in this fight...

Reconsideration...

Actually, you may have a dog in this fight.  I can think of one plausible explanation for acceptance of an SP term and that is at it relates to World coins. Some countries use SP as an abbreviated form of a word in their language which would correspond to an adjectival grade used by numismatists here.  This is the case of three-letter descriptors used by France (SPLendide) and Italy (SPLendido) to embrace a range of grades, commonly rendered as the abbreviated "SP" on encapsulations. I merely suggest a possible explanation.