1967 1 Cent Doubled Die Obverse

Catching up on my 2019 coin show acquisitions and photographing the cooler ones. This is one from the fall Montreal Nuphilex. Paid a handsome sum of $15 for this one. Possibly too much for a normal MS red-brown 1967 clip, that is, until you look closer. I didn't find a single 1967 DDO at that show, except for this one!

So I managed to acquire some more bank rolls yesterday and while searching I found a second 1967 Doubled Die Obverse, but this one is in a lot better condition then the original one I made this post about.

I think it is safe to say the crown can be used as a good marker, as you can see in this one it is completely doubled.

This coin is actually a lot shinier than the pics look, I just had my light filtered enough to get rid of the glare/shine.

This is awesome news SPP! I cant wait to see the TrueView, do you think they will have some sort of determination on the population for this one? I have searched high and low and I've estimated the population to be roughly around the 20's. I know you have had a few in your possession in the past along with the two I have, and a couple other collectors I have stumbled upon obviously taking into consideration the amount still in hiding from collectors that have yet to share theirs, but I have yet to see one in MS-64 so that is pretty amazing.

Im glad to see this one getting the proper attention none the less.

Hi john. Yes, you have the 1967 DD coin. I have a nice brilliant uncirculated 67 dd too, and sent it to ICCS for certification. They declared that they would rather not handle the "minor types". Hard to believe.

Now that I have a better camera I can finally take decent photos of my Doubled Dies I have found.






I am still messing around with getting my lighting a bit better but over all I am pleased with the photo quality.

I would have to say that PCGS has made itself look ridiculous here. It has added this new, minor and obscure variety to small cents before it has added 1948 ATSD, 1947 ML BL or PT, or 1955 SD or LD. It just makes the registry set game for PCGS in Canada look stupid and rigged. That being said, I play to win! And I may have this one beat anyway.

Smallcentguy, the majority of the varieties you mentioned may not be in the PCGS registry set but they are widely known enough for almost all major TPG's, dealers and collectors to recognize them without an issue. However, the small and large denticle varieties are kinda minor and common, probably why PCGS didn't add them.

The 1967 DDO on the other hand, how many can you say you have found personally? Have you mentioned the 1967 DDO to any dealers or other collectors that may not be on the site? if so what was their input? Most of the collectors and dealers I have spoken to didn't even know it existed until I showed them one of the examples I have found.

My point being, the large and small denticle varieties are far too common to be comparable to a genuine doubled die.

The likelihood of PCGS adding the small and large denticle small cents is just as likely as them starting to attribute minor die clashes, which to my understanding won't happen as they are too common and happen far too often for PCGS liking.

Notice how PCGS recognizes 1955 No Shoulder Fold and 1955 With Shoulder Fold variety but does not show the 1955 Large and Small denticles? The 1955 SF and NSF are far more superior than a denticle being the wrong size which can happen for any reason during production or even circulation. I have all of the "large & small" denticle varieties that I'm aware of and to me they just seem like overused dies.

Not a seller I am familiar with, however what bothers me the most is the fact PCGS called it a "Double Die Obverse" instead of the proper term "Doubled Die Obverse" as the meaning "Double" and "Doubled" mean two different things.

Yet in the article here https://www.PCGS.com/news/now-recog...obverse-cent they properly refer to it as a Doubled Die Obverse.

You would think for a major TPG they would have corrected it in the registry and the slabs.

As for the grade I know how picky PCGS can get when it comes to details, thats why I dont bother sending in any of my examples. I was extremely happy to see they finally recognize this variety, just wish they would label it correctly.