Why So Against Some Attributes

Understanding what is behind all of this will help you understand how your questions is a bit like asking why people don't value cubic zirconiums as much as a true diamond.

A doubled die is a true error in the sense the image is doubled in the die striking the coins. It is a very rarre thing (for a decent DDO or DDR like the 1972 DDO penny) to occur.

However, die are polished by workers all the time to extend the life of the die. Often the worker gets a bit zealous and polishes off a design element. Since the polishing is not something actually engraved into the die, and polishing can remove any details on the coin randomly, it is generally not collectable.

Before the internet giving us anything we wanted to know at our fingertips, the distinction between true errors and a polished off details was not well known. So when the, for example, three-legged Buffalo nickel was found, the hobby and collectors went nuts over them.

Now many people know this 3-legger is just a polished off error, but its history in the hobby has kept it a highly sought after collectable.

As to No FG Kennedy halves (you can read about them in the essay in my signature). It is my opinion there is one legitimate No FG: the1982 No FG. Why?

1. All legit No FG 1982s also have a different OBV die where the 1 in the date is missing the base. 1982s with an FG have a base on their 1.
2. The surrounding details on a legitimate 1982 No FG will not necessarily be weak (polished off).

So how did the 1972-D no FG polished off initials become popular?

Former president of PCGS, Ron Guth, once saw a 1972-D half with polished off initials and decided to slab them (remember companies, legitimately, are about making profit to survive). I find it hard to believe a president of PCGS would no have known this was a non-error, but this is just speculation on my part.

On these 1972-D (and 1966) "No FG" halves, the rest of the design in the initials area is worn from that area being polished. But since PCGS slabbed the 1972-Ds as No FG, the Red Book picked them up, and today we have people literally paying hundreds of dollars to get a non-error.

In the essay you will even find PCGS website pictures showing PCGS regularly breaks their own rule that no trace of the letters can be showing if a half is to be labeled as a No FG. Registry Set competition drives the price higher and higher, and the companies get more and more money by people hoping to get a money-level slab.

Back to the 1982 P No FG: Nowhere on the PCGS NGC, or ANACS website is their currently the information about all legit No FG 1982s having a different front die. You would think "THE experts" would know this bit of info.

Or do the companies know that bit of info, but know it would be a bad business move to get people looking closer at the No FG slabs? The result would likely be some people becoming a bit angry finding they spent hundreds of dollars but they can see the FG! BTW...some of those slab have some pretty obvious initials.

That actually had a ton if really good info.. I don't know how other ppl see it. But I like hearing that stuff. But way to often.im real life and on forums you don't get an answer like that. Or a to each their own. You learned the history. There's a reason you like it and you have standards for what you like. But there's a ton of ppl that have to add in just snotty comments. Or just be jerks in general. No helpful info. Just a opinionated snarky comment that could have been left unsaid

@ker, I can assure you as a moderator here, that I spend a good amount of my time ensuring that this remains a family-friendly environment for numismatic discussion. Please click on the "report this to the staff " link if you find someone going over the line.

Generally speaking: an error is one of a kind and a variety is many with the same issue.
John1

Never never never ever clean your coins, period.

IMHO, I'm glad you mentioned this to discuss it. I had the same feeling at times when getting back into collecting. But as time has gone on I realized a big part of the sensitivity on my part was simply the "quickness" of the internet [which is why some (most?) of my replies are long-winded]. My thirst for knowledge made me ask more detailed questions when the answers fell short of my level of understanding.

And remember that online posts are hard to add nuance to sometimes. Nothing negative may have been intended, but sometimes in our haste to reply it may come off as cold.

In regards to the CZ, they simply aren't as valuable as natural diamonds. His comment addressed the $ value of CZ compared to natural stones and I didn't see it as a dig toward anyone who owns a CZ.

Human curiosity really is a wonderful thing. People collect what they like, especially if they find it personally. Most of us here have probably set aside an extreme example of MD we've come across, even if we wouldn't pay money for it.

Carrs... Yesss exactly. And I don't have anything for or against cz.. it was just an awesome example. Ppl like what they like. However john1. Lab Grown. Omg now thats a step too far. &