1909-S VDB Question

[JIM F.]

I have seen ANACS and PCI slabs with 1909-S VDB cents noted "weak VDB".  Never seen this on a PCGS or NGC slab.  So, assuming these TPGs do not use the notation, if such a coin were sent to PCGS or NGC would they grade it as a 1909-S or a 1909-S VDB?  For simplification, let's assume the coin was uncirculated without any problems.

 

 

[World Colonial]

Are you interested in buying one and crossing it over?  Or buying and making sure the next buyer will consider it as an 09-S VDB?

I don't have a Lincoln Cent reference but one might address this question.  I did find a post on the PCGS forum from 2007 through a Google search.  I can't post the link now.  The replies indicate a filled die, something I don't know much about.

 

[Mohawk]

As I understand it, a weak but discernable VDB is still a VDB coin, so I would imagine that it would be slabbed as a 1909-S VDB because that's what it is, weak VDB or strong VDB.  To be a 1909-S, it would have to have no VDB whatsoever. I'd imagine it's like the 1922 Weak D Lincoln.  A Weak D is not a No D.  That said, I'm mostly a collector and seller of modern coins.....I've never sent a Lincoln Wheat Cent in for grading nor have I ever collected them in slabs. 

[DWLange]

As long as the letters are discernible NGC will label it as simply V.D.B. without any qualifiers. It's different for coins known to come with very weak mintmarks, such as 1909-O half eagles and 1911-D quarter eagles. Those NGC will label as Weak O, etc.

[robec1347]

On 8/8/2018 at 7:40 PM, Mohawk said:

As I understand it, a weak but discernable VDB is still a VDB coin, so I would imagine that it would be slabbed as a 1909-S VDB because that's what it is, weak VDB or strong VDB.  To be a 1909-S, it would have to have no VDB whatsoever. I'd imagine it's like the 1922 Weak D Lincoln.  A Weak D is not a No D.  That said, I'm mostly a collector and seller of modern coins.....I've never sent a Lincoln Wheat Cent in for grading nor have I ever collected them in slabs. 

What about 1922 No D Strong Reverse and 1922 No D Weak Reverse designations?

[Mohawk]

4 hours ago, robec1347 said:

What about 1922 No D Strong Reverse and 1922 No D Weak Reverse designations?

I'm not sure what you're asking and how it pertains to the discussion..........either designation results in the same coin, which is the 1922 no D cent.  Unless I'm missing something, this one is an apples and oranges comparison to this topic. 

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

I sort of understand the point.I assume it is a reference to the Red Book, and notes concerning the 1922. The 09S-VDB does not have a comparable Red Book comment concerning weak vs strong, etc. The OP is simply asking if ANACS has the notation "weak VDB" why doesn't PCGS or NGC? The one distinction I note is that there is no Red Book comment. But, (there is always a "but") the 22 is listed in the Red Book with the corresponding note, and was the only Lincoln so listed and notes added. It would make sense if the 09S-VDB was listed as "weak", with a corresponding note that it was from extremely worn dies. I have read one numismatic author that claims the "weak"  09S-VDB was from extremely worn dies. Maybe so. So, it leave a question of inconsistency, to a person when a TPG (ANACS/PCI) notes a difference and another TPG doesn't.

I can understand the "similarity" of the comment, and to some degree is not quite at an apples/oranges level.

Sometimes, we should be more consistent in things, until it reaches a level of the ridiculous.

Personally, I don't think the 1922 should be given any elevated status, but that is my opinion. It is not a mint error, it is just extremely worn dies.Market hype, so to speak.

[Mohawk]

15 minutes ago, Mr.Mcknowitall said:

I sort of understand the point.I assume it is a reference to the Red Book, and notes concerning the 1922. The 09S-VDB does not have a comparable Red Book comment concerning weak vs strong, etc. The OP is simply asking if ANACS has the notation "weak VDB" why doesn't PCGS or NGC? The one distinction I note is that there is no Red Book comment. But, (there is always a "but") the 22 is listed in the Red Book with the corresponding note, and was the only Lincoln so listed and notes added. It would make sense if the 09S-VDB was listed as "weak", with a corresponding note that it was from extremely worn dies. I have read one numismatic author that claims the "weak"  09S-VDB was from extremely worn dies. Maybe so. So, it leave a question of inconsistency, to a person when a TPG (ANACS/PCI) notes a difference and another TPG doesn't.

I can understand the "similarity" of the comment, and to some degree is not quite at an apples/oranges level.

Sometimes, we should be more consistent in things, until it reaches a level of the ridiculous.

Personally, I don't think the 1922 should be given any elevated status, but that is my opinion. It is not a mint error, it is just extremely worn dies.Market hype, so to speak.

Ahhh....that makes sense Mr.Mcknowitall and I think I see what Robec was driving at.  I'm with you on the 1922 no D thing as well.....but, then again, I'm not hot on U.S. Classic coins to begin with.  That said though, I've always found the 1922 no D to be something less than special. 

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

6 minutes ago, Mohawk said:

Ahhh....that makes sense Mr.Mcknowitall and I think I see what Robec was driving at.  I'm with you on the 1922 no D thing as well.....but, then again, I'm not hot on U.S. Classic coins to begin with.  That said though, I've always found the 1922 no D to be something less than special. 

I think in the numismatic economic community, we are in the minority concerning the 22 no D. I think the reasons are a combination of individuals that may not understand the reason for the no D, and that it is not a Mint error, coupled with it is more wampum for it and that keeps the "myth" going (which is good and bad for collectors/dealers alike depending on the $in a pocket), and collectors that simply want an example in their collection and do understand it is nothing special.

Now, as long as Mr. Robec does not post that I am a dingbat and my post was not at all what he meant, I am safe.

[LINCOLNMAN]

I've never been a 22 no D fan, nor a 3-legged buffalo fan. Worn or over-polished dies.My oh my how very interesting, certainly worth as much as a car or a trip around the world, yes?  As for the 22 no D, imagine the values if Philadelphia had been active. I try not to knock what others collect, glass house and all, but sometimes the silly factor is just too much.

[Mohawk]

4 hours ago, LINCOLNMAN said:

I've never been a 22 no D fan, nor a 3-legged buffalo fan. Worn or over-polished dies.My oh my how very interesting, certainly worth as much as a car or a trip around the world, yes?  As for the 22 no D, imagine the values if Philadelphia had been active. I try not to knock what others collect, glass house and all, but sometimes the silly factor is just too much.

Agreed 100%.  These coins have never been my thing, even less so than most other classic U.S. coins.  I, too, am not trying to knock them but they are overrated in my opinion.  If I were to collect either of those series, I would view those coins as optional and I wouldn't include them.  There are enough legitimate die varieties and errors, things that were the result of the actual die making process, that I would feel would be worth pursuing before pursuing those.  This is especially true of the Lincoln series.  Things like the 1970-S and 1960 and 1960-D Large and Small Dates, the 1981 and 1979 Type 1 and 2 coins.......the list goes on and on.  As always, just my thoughts on the issue and everyone should collect what they like and how they like to do it.

~Tom

[robec1347]

23 hours ago, Mr.Mcknowitall said:

 

Now, as long as Mr. Robec does not post that I am a dingbat and my post was not at all what he meant, I am safe.

You were right on the button.............and I would never call you a dingbat. You are one of my favorite posters.

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

16 hours ago, robec1347 said:

You were right on the button.............and I would never call you a dingbat. You are one of my favorite posters.

Thank you. That is very kind.