1962-D RPM "Elongated D" Variety

That is a RPM. A south:
1962D-1MM-003
http://www.coppercoins.com/lincoln/...ie_state=mds
Here are the CONECA Markers for this die.
1962-D RPM-003
Stage A: Obverse and Reverse are EDS
Stage B: Light North-South die crack on forehead â€" EMDS
Reverse is EMDS
Stage C: Obverse is MDS
Depression at Right eave tip â€" MDS
Stage D: Obverse is MDS
Die break on column #12 â€" MDS
Stage E: Obverse is LMDS
Die break at Right eave tip â€" LMDS
Stage F: Obverse is LDS
Larger die break at Right eave tip â€" LDS

Nice find! Hope you find lots of them.

I buy only BU rolls. Hang on, I have an Obverse/ Reverse.





This doesn't look like the Coppercoins example. Again, their pictures are small and blurry, and markers could be a lot better .The markers aren't there. I'll look on Variety Vista later.

One would figure, the Affected area of the coin should be highlighted in the examples. This is not a single occurrence of a generic shot. There are many others. All pictures should have a light box. Simply click on the photo and an enhanced version pops up. Every "attribution service" is a person's opinion about the item. This applies to coins, sports cards, estate appraisals, sports memorabilia, vintage automobiles and more.

Some people are in it to list as many duds as potential RPM's and DDO / DDR's to make a site popular. When coin cross references to several other key websites is when I start believing the validity of a finding. This doesn't help the collector - it only confuses them. Varieties that are so minor that people require a 40-60X magnification are uncertifiable and become no more than a plaque for some ones wall. When it comes to this, it doesn't become a hobby, it evolves into a big business for some, who see the bottom dollar over the purpose why they started the organization in the first place.

I've done this for well over 30 years, and I have seen my fair share of the same thing. Nothing new, as long as it trends, it stays alive.

I don't sugar coat anything, its blunt and cards ( or coins in this matter) are laid on the table.

The only reference I used in my above statement about them was the first paragraph.

The generic second paragraph applies to businesses and individuals who no longer see the hobby for what it is meant to be.

Most TPG companies will not certify anything over 7x power. If it is over that, its considered minor. If they do certify it at 10x, they still consider it minor, but that's not a well known fact. Then the uneducated collectors get taken when some business or individual tries to sell them something that is way over priced.

CONECA is as close to the real deal as it gets. They have better examples, mainly write up of what should be seen on a coin.

Larger Magnified versions of coins allows a hobbyist to see the true potential of the variety. Not everyone will carry a Loupe of the same power around with them if that is their tool of the trade. Eventually the hobbyist will educate themselves, and it should be with the classic versions of the coins they collect so they get to see what the coins they are collecting truly look like. Adding all these less significant coins on these websites muddies the water and confuses the new hobbyist.

A single listing does not make the issue at hand correct. There are many years and coins that will not cross reference between 2-3 individual attributors. People can make excuses or assume their opinions about these issues, but the bottom line is, they are excuses why coins don't cross reference and it stinks.

All coins that are submitted should be verified by at least 2-3 separate attribution companies before becoming valid. Otherwise its a simple opinion about a coin. The Hammering process for a coin in many earlier years that are called RPM's are simply shifts in the die, ejection process or single abnormal punching that people want to call RPM's. Unless the coin specifically has a Split Serif, an easily identifiable additional vertical ( or horizontal) bar, or clear and distinct separation of the RPM, then the muddying of the water has begun.

I personally don't accept the validity of any single site, attributor or collector. No matter the cost coins should be verified and attributed by 2-3 individual attributors. Then the values of the valid and significant coins would rise in value for the attributed coins. As a whole, there is no guarantee that what you have in your hand is what it is. These people make their best educated guess at what it is. If the coin is made of copper, then they may guarantee that as genuine, but as for guarantees, they are not willing to do so since they personally have not analytically attributed the coin. All they do is look at other so-called examples and nod their head. Once one is withdrawn and debunked is when you see the true colors.