2009 Formative Years Lincoln Cent is not a Doubled Die!

[True Money]

I can't believe that Coin World is publishing incorrect information. Apparently, there have been a few varieties surface of the new Formative Years Lincoln Cent that appear to have doubling in the hand. This is a high relief area on the coin and appears to either be intentionally placed there, is simply an incomplete design impressed into the die, or is the result of a minor chip in the die in that specific region. The diagnostics do not match those of true doubled dies. A true doubled die will show the same type of doubling in other areas of the coin as well. These coins show absolutely none of that. Be mindful of this information. These varieties resemble those of the Wisconsin "D" quarter from a few years ago. One or two may become valuable. However, these are not doubled dies and any inherent value is mere speculation. Beware of those trying to gouge in an attempt to make a quick buck!

[Lureuin]

I totally agree with you Money. This is what is known as a "variety"; not a Double Die!! If Coin World called this a DD then I have lost a little respect for them.

I for one laugh at folks who need a microscope to find what they call errors. I find coins with issues that could be seen under microscope every week. I respend them.

[Jim Archibald]

Jim, while I totally agree these minor things are much more hassle than they are worth, and I don't even take the time to look for them myself, you have a terminology mix up going on here. Doubled Dies are varieties and no errors which are totally different than varieties.A variety is something wrong with a die, where every coin struck by that die pair has the same mistake. A error can happen on any given die pair affecting a specific coin or coins, but not all of the coins that specific die pair strikes. There are major and minor coins in each category, and as for me, it's gotta be dramitic to hold my interest. ~ Jim

[Lureuin]

Jim- Yes you are correct.

A Double Die is when the die itself was created with doubling on it, and then every coin struck by that die shows the doubling that was apparent on the die. Classic example 1955 cent. Yes, those were dies of the 1955 cent that were one variety of the many that were used (actually more than 1 die had doubling, thus several varieties).

As for errors or varieties; the extra leaf or extra branch quarters are die varieties (some say error), not Double Dies. The examples shown of the Lincolns are either die varieties, errors, or strike errors. They are not Double Dies, which is all I'm getting at.

Also, the most magnification that should be needed to determine a real Double, or error coin is 10x. Anything beyond that is used to determine the exact die that struck the coin; thus die variety which is what this will end up being. If you need more than 10x to find an error it will never be worth much (except on e-bay which allows nickels worth 6.5 cents to sell for $60). JMHO's

[Jim Archibald]

A 2009 Nickel just sold for $102.50 a few days ago Jim, $60.00 must be a sale price. Anyway, my point was that a doubled die is considered a die variety. There are many we never even hear about and at least from my perspective, most are boring. An old saying I use is "minor errors are worth minor money" Now, I wonder if that 2009 Nickel can be considered a error? anyone paying $102.50 for a new Nickel must have made a error. ~ Jim

[Coinomologist]

I hope someone sues WEXLER AND CRAWFORD AND COIN WORLD for this wrong attribution.The shame of it all is the fact that many people just getting started in collecting errors will get ripped because they relied on a bunch of marketing maniacs who claim to be experts.I think when all the smoke clears.They will lose much respect over this So call DDR.Variety what ever you want to call it.It's not worth the money people are paying.I think it's a simple die break error.The Philly Mint is good for those types of varieties.Maybe a machine double even.But certainly not a DDR.Wexler has always been quick to call everything he sees a ddr or ddo.I can't understand why people give him any respect myself.Of course this is just my opinion.But go look at his sight and then you might see what I'm talking about.The good ole days of collecting substantial errors is over.Now any old idiot cand call it what ever they want.It's no long the love of finding the error.It's the love of making the money off of any error found.Oh well thats just the way things have turned out.I say screw um all.I'll still love searching myself.

Jim Archibald said:

A 2009 Nickel just sold for $102.50 a few days ago Jim, $60.00 must be a sale price. Anyway, my point was that a doubled die is considered a die variety. There are many we never even hear about and at least from my perspective, most are boring. An old saying I use is "minor errors are worth minor money" Now, I wonder if that 2009 Nickel can be considered a error? anyone paying $102.50 for a new Nickel must have made a error. ~ Jim

[Coinomologist]

It doesn't amaze me to see someone use a NGC MS 66 slabbed FV that was not attributed a CDDR OR WDDR go for 100.00.Imagine that.Someone got another unknowing person trying to get what they thought was significant just because WEXLER,CRAWFORD,AND COIN WORLD marketed them.It's no surprise that it was a yellow star that actually won all three close to that price.I can't really call it a fool and his money parting.I call it a shame that WEXLER,CRAWFORD, and COINWORLD has caused another person to get ripped off.

Lureuin said:

Jim- Yes you are correct.

A Double Die is when the die itself was created with doubling on it, and then every coin struck by that die shows the doubling that was apparent on the die. Classic example 1955 cent. Yes, those were dies of the 1955 cent that were one variety of the many that were used (actually more than 1 die had doubling, thus several varieties).

As for errors or varieties; the extra leaf or extra branch quarters are die varieties (some say error), not Double Dies. The examples shown of the Lincolns are either die varieties, errors, or strike errors. They are not Double Dies, which is all I'm getting at.

Also, the most magnification that should be needed to determine a real Double, or error coin is 10x. Anything beyond that is used to determine the exact die that struck the coin; thus die variety which is what this will end up being. If you need more than 10x to find an error it will never be worth much (except on e-bay which allows nickels worth 6.5 cents to sell for $60). JMHO's

[Coinomologist]

looks like the biggest gouge just happened.100.00 for a NGC MS 66 that showed no attribution to the error on the slab.Won by a yellow star.I have still yet to see any of the grading companies attribute these as DDRs.Hmmmm Kinda makes ya wonder who is right.Even if they do attribute them as DDRs .It's my opinion that they will lose a lot of respect from many collectors by doing so.

[Jim Archibald]

Has anyone checked to see what Chuck Daughtrey is saying about these coins? Billy Crawford and John Wexler know what they're talking about when it comes to die varieties. You can bet your bottom Dollar that they don't shoot their mouths off just to hear themselves talk. Minor die varieties don't really interest me,as I've said, but they do interest hundreds of collector's of U.S. Coins. Something is definately happening to the hand area of these new Cents, and if not some form of doubled die what is it? It's certainly not a variety of different die chips. Saying COIN WORLD and the variety experts should be sued is unproductive. JMOHO. ~ Jim

Coinomologist said:

I hope someone sues WEXLER AND CRAWFORD AND COIN WORLD for this wrong attribution.

[Coinomologist]

I'm just tired of seeing people that don't know very much about the true values. Pay more then they should just because a coin gets head line news.I opened a box to see for myself.I literally found 23 of these type of errors from one P roll.And I believe them to be machine doubling.To see someone pay 100.00 for this is just uncalled for.Specially when someone uses wexlers name on an NGC slab that isn't on the NGC slab.Shelf type doubling equals machine doubling.And that's what I have seen.I have also seen many die cracks and strange looking bubbling on these P mint coins.They are literally a mess.To say they should be sued may be an over statement.But to say they shouldn't jump the gun so soon on an attribution is another.And to see Coin World put it on the front page only makes me believe the coins and attributions were made to hike up values and interest because values came out of the gates low.When I see a coin go for 10.00 bucks and it's minor.Then that's one thing.But 40.00 to 100.00 is just plain nuts.The fools and their money have parted on this one for sure.I have a bunch of them.And I just refuse to sell them as a DDR.I guess I'm just not a microscope error hunter.I like to be able to identify the errors I find with a ten times loop or just my eyes.You literally need a scope to see a lot of these.and they look flat.I guess I was just outraged at first.But like other errors I have seen not deserving of the attributions.I'll get over it .Unproductive ? maybe.I'm curious as to why none of these coins have made attributions with any of the graders as well.I guess it's like any error.Time will tell and the fools will part with their money in the process.I just don't like seeing people get burned when they pay so much.No body can save the world.But maybe some opinions can make more people aware.I just believe they got this one wrong.I think I really became mostly disgusted with the attribution when I started seeing 001,002,003,004,005,006,008 and so on.if the 008 is a sure machine double.then what makes the others any different.The extra tree was also uncalled for in my opinion.A die break is very possible too.I have Alaska die breaks that are all very consistent with raised areas in the same area of the coin.They look very impressive to me because the initials are covered on the obverse and the extra claw is on every one of them on the reverse and they never became popular because they never made front page.I'm glad they didn't Because they may have been call DDOs. I've seen die cracks in the same 2009 P rolls I've seen these Hand errors in.That only has lead me to believe they may be either a die break or a machine double.But There is no way I will ever believe they are a DDR.Minor or not.Put all these factors together and ad the fact that they are Philly errors.And I just can't buy the DDR thing.So if I came off a bit strong with Wexler and Crawford and Coin world. It was only because I was disgusted and not in agreement.

Jim Archibald said:

Has anyone checked to see what Chuck Daughtrey is saying about these coins? Billy Crawford and John Wexler know what they're talking about when it comes to die varieties. You can bet your bottom Dollar that they don't shoot their mouths off just to hear themselves talk. Minor die varieties don't really interest me,as I've said, but they do interest hundreds of collector's of U.S. Coins. Something is definately happening to the hand area of these new Cents, and if not some form of doubled die what is it? It's certainly not a variety of different die chips. Saying COIN WORLD and the variety experts should be sued is unproductive. JMOHO. ~ Jim

Coinomologist said:

I hope someone sues WEXLER AND CRAWFORD AND COIN WORLD for this wrong attribution.

[Jim Archibald]

The pictures I've seen are definately not machine doubling, as you mentioned that shows "shelving" or flat doubling, and the coin pictures I've seen as not flat. As to the bubbles, that's just poor plating or the byproduct of the striking of these poorly designed planchets. Now the certification companies probably haven't begun attributing and doubled dies simply because the slabs your seeing were probably submitted before any news reports regarding this minor variation hit the news. Remember people submit coins for grading as soon as they get them in. That's when the variety collector's begin examining coins as well. So you see there's a time when coins are being examined and certified at the same time. It's not like these new varieties are as obvious as the 1955 DDO Lincoln Cent was. ~ Jim
U.S. Coin Collecting

[Coinomologist]

I think it still doesn't dismiss the possibility of these coins being a die break.And many I have show a flat shelf.And I'm not looking at pictures.I'm looking at the actual coins.I don't know.I guess it really doesn't matter what I think to anyone but myself and a few others.I'm going to stay clear of this issue until the verdict is in on the grading companies.But if one of the 001s sold for 100.00 bucks on a NGC that wasn't attributed.Then maybe the grading companies will see no other alternative but to ring in the money on the attributions.I still have to hold my opinion though.I'm just not convinced.

Jim Archibald said:

The pictures I've seen are definately not machine doubling, as you mentioned that shows "shelving" or flat doubling, and the coin pictures I've seen as not flat. As to the bubbles, that's just poor plating or the byproduct of the striking of these poorly designed planchets. Now the certification companies probably haven't begun attributing and doubled dies simply because the slabs your seeing were probably submitted before any news reports regarding this minor variation hit the news. Remember people submit coins for grading as soon as they get them in. That's when the variety collector's begin examining coins as well. So you see there's a time when coins are being examined and certified at the same time. It's not like these new varieties are as obvious as the 1955 DDO Lincoln Cent was. ~ Jim
U.S. Coin Collecting