Coin Community Family of Web Sites Join Thousands of Coin, Bullion, & Money Collectors
Royal Canadian Mint products, Canadian, Polish, American, and world coins and banknotes. Royal Estate Auctions - $1 Coin AuctionsCoin, Banknote and Medal Collectors's Online Mall Join Thousands of Coin, Bullion, & Money Collectors Vancouvers #1 Coin and Paper Money Dealer Specializing in Modern Numismatics 300,000 items to help build your collection!








Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?


This page may contain links that result in small commissions to keep this free site up and running.

Welcome Guest! Registering and/or logging in will remove the anchor (bottom) ads. It's Free!

Isn't It Time To Put "P" Mint Marks On Cents?

To participate in the forum you must log in or register.
Author Previous TopicReplies: 31 / Views: 3,924Next Topic
Page: of 3
Pillar of the Community
CopperCastle's Avatar
United States
1132 Posts
 Posted 05/09/2015  10:40 pm  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add CopperCastle to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply

Quote:
Isn't that kinda like what a privy mark is?

Yes, absolutely! Although I'm sure the US mint would elect to use alternate terminolgy. 'Merica!
Bedrock of the Community
Learn More...
CelticKnot's Avatar
United States
12839 Posts
 Posted 05/10/2015  01:45 am  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add CelticKnot to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply

Quote:
We should have iconic emblems placed in their stead! Perhaps the Liberty Bell & a Mountain Range for the mile-high city?


I think I like it. "P" & "D" are (as has been pointed out) similar enough to cause confusion.... especially on poorer strikes.

However, I'm sure no one cares about it besides us collectors, so it'll never change.
Bedrock of the Community
Conder101's Avatar
United States
17884 Posts
 Posted 05/10/2015  03:15 am  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add Conder101 to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply

Quote:
So has denver, and san francisco.

I know San Francisco deliberately made coins with no mintmark. But the only case of Denver making a coin without the mintmark that I know of was the 1922 "plain" cent and that was unintentional and simply the use of a die that was worn out and should have been retired.
Bedrock of the Community
Learn More...
CelticKnot's Avatar
United States
12839 Posts
 Posted 05/10/2015  03:21 am  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add CelticKnot to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply
So what specifically are all these coins that have no MM from WP, D, and S? Were they within the past 50 years? And were said coins intended for circulation?
Pillar of the Community
Gyrene7483's Avatar
United States
1704 Posts
 Posted 05/10/2015  8:28 pm  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add Gyrene7483 to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply

Quote:
I find "P" mintmarks unnecessary. "The absence of a mintmark is a mintmark in itself", yes, exactly. Everybody knows that, on a US coin



Quote:
"no mark" means Philadelphia, & has since 1792.
The Mint struck coins at Denver,and San Francisco without mint marks during 1965-67 when the San Francisco Assay Office was being prepared to strike proof coins and cents. And more recently West Point did not use a mint mark.
Pillar of the Community
CoinCollector2012's Avatar
United States
8137 Posts
 Posted 05/10/2015  8:39 pm  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add CoinCollector2012 to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply
I find a P mintmark unnecessary because, outside of the collector community, no one seems to care where their coins are made.
Pillar of the Community
publius's Avatar
United States
807 Posts
 Posted 05/10/2015  9:24 pm  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add publius to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply
US coins from mid-1964 to 1967 were made without marks, regardless of mint, in accordance with a special Act of Congress intended to discourage coin collectors from withdrawing them from circulation. In fact all silver coins made after mid-1964 were made without a change in date, & it was initially expected (I have seen contemporary references) that there would be no 1965-dated coins at all.

But that is an exceptional circumstance.
Pillar of the Community
ratio411's Avatar
United States
1208 Posts
 Posted 05/11/2015  07:49 am  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add ratio411 to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply
I liked the Philly coins when they weren't marked. It was
tradition, and since everyone knew what was going on, it
never should have been changed... IMO. So, no...
Pillar of the Community
billymac11's Avatar
United States
613 Posts
 Posted 05/11/2015  10:21 am  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add billymac11 to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply
I think it's always been a "status" thing that Philly is the "main" mint, so there's no need for a mm. The privy mark idea is pretty cool, though, maybe a one-off year of privy marks instead of blank, D, S, and W. What would the symbolic privy mark be? The Liberty Bell for Philly is perfect, the mountains or a prospector pickax for Denver, the helmet-and-sword logo of West Point could be cool. Golden Gate Bridge or a cable car for San Francisco?
Moderator
Learn More...
jbuck's Avatar
United States
188660 Posts
 Posted 05/11/2015  11:05 am  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add jbuck to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply

Quote:
A better idea is to eliminate the cent altogether.
Agreed, at least for circulation.


Quote:
I think the West Point issue is probably part of the reason. West Point fulfills the surplus order for cents when Philly can't make them all. The mint doesn't want collectors snatching up the W cents (or the no-mint mark cents when a P is added to the Phillies).
This is correct, or at least has been in the past.
Pillar of the Community
koinpro's Avatar
United States
1781 Posts
 Posted 05/11/2015  11:08 am  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add koinpro to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply
West Point struck cents from 1973 through 1976 with no Mintmark. They've also struck bullion American Silver Eagles with no Mintmark -- though I'm not sure of all the years so I will defer to the expertise of others on this. The 1922 No D is missing the D due to overzealous die abrasion and is known mainly due to the fact Philadelphia struck no cents that year. It is conceivable that other branch mints struck coins without a Mintmark in error but were not noticed because there was a Philadelphia Mint counterpart. Of course we have the 1982 No P Dime and a small handful of proof coins missing the Mintmark due to omission in error. Then there are the missing edge lettering Presidential dollars ... None of this includes coins Struck Through Grease or whatever -- such as the once well-known 1989 No Mintmark 25c promoted by the late, Harry Forman.
Edited by koinpro
05/11/2015 11:09 am
Bedrock of the Community
Conder101's Avatar
United States
17884 Posts
 Posted 05/11/2015  11:54 am  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add Conder101 to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply
Denver no mintmarks 1965-67, HOW did I forget that!!?

One other case of a mint issuing a coin without a mintmark, the medium letter 1840 half dollar. Struck in New Orleans with no mintmark because they muled the seated Liberty obv with an old reeded edge capped bust reverse. The capped bust halves had the mintmark on the obv
Valued Member
United States
61 Posts
 Posted 05/11/2015  12:57 pm  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add Mintmarks to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply
I would actually prefer to only have a "D" mintmark for circulation coins due to my aging infrastructure.

In my folders I turn the Philadelphia coins to reverse and the Denver coins to the obverse so I am sure I have the mintmarks correct.

Very truly yours,
Mintmarks
Pillar of the Community
ratio411's Avatar
United States
1208 Posts
 Posted 05/11/2015  1:43 pm  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add ratio411 to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply
Well, some of the " no mint mark" situations are special instances...
Business strike ASEs are minted all over the place, depending on year,
and yet have no mint mark. The excuse is that it is NIFC, and bullion.

Then you have the 65-67 period, which was considered a move to avert
an economic crisis as the switch was made to clad coinage.

The only real circulation situation I have seen mentioned, I assume,
is WP minted cents from 73-76. I know nothing about that, and I
assume it wasn't just uncirculated sets? That one seems odd to
me if they were for circulation, and it would have been 'neato'
to have W cents for a few years. Maybe the mint thought that it
would be so sensational, that people would hoard them if marked?
Moderator
Learn More...
jbuck's Avatar
United States
188660 Posts
 Posted 05/11/2015  2:49 pm  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add jbuck to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply
Yes, that is the reason. The cents were minted in West Point because Philadelphia and Denver alone could not meet demand. Supplementing the mintage with cents from West Point would have been pointless if they went right into collector hoards.
  Previous TopicReplies: 31 / Views: 3,924Next Topic
Page: of 3

To participate in the forum you must log in or register.



    




Disclaimer: While a tremendous amount of effort goes into ensuring the accuracy of the information contained in this site, Coin Community assumes no liability for errors. Copyright 2005 - 2026 Coin Community Family- all rights reserved worldwide. Use of any images or content on this website without prior written permission of Coin Community or the original lender is strictly prohibited.
Contact Us  |  Advertise Here  |  Privacy Policy / Terms of Use

Coin Community Forum © 2005 - 2026 Coin Community Forums
It took 0.42 seconds to rattle this change. Forums