| Author |
 Replies: 95 / Views: 9,005 |
|
|
|
Moderator
 United States
23522 Posts |
I wonder if it's time for a Top 100 Revision?
|
|
Pillar of the Community
3660 Posts |
So there is a clear delineation (abrupt change) in amount of pitting rather than a progressive addition of pitting between the 22A EDS and LDS? If so, then what is not to understand? If you need to know if it was caused by a hurricane or mechanical breakdown, what is the difference? .....the rust initially occurred on the EDS and by the time the LDS was first struck, the pitting had progressed....It is pretty obvious that both EDS and LDS were not struck on the same day if there is no actual progression as shown in the coins themselves (if ALL LDS show the same degree of pitting, then the die had to have been out of action for whatever reason for a certain length of time).
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
709 Posts |
With PCGS putting 'minor variety' on the label, it effectively kept it out of the PCGS registry and from being listed as a top 100 coin. I was unhappy with this development but was happy at the grade of MS 62 and being correctly listed as VAM 22A EDS pitted reverse. VAM 22A is considered rare. I wondered if the coin was 'in fact' an ultra rarity? I e-mailed Dr. Michael Fey about it. The answer was 'very likely'. He suggested I write an article and announce the find. |
|
Moderator
United States
23522 Posts |
Quote:
He suggested I write an article and announce the find. That's a facet I hadn't realized, that the EDS is apparently unique. Backstory is everything in journalism.  Even if it isn't unique (likely), it's nice to get to shake up the establishment a bit, isn't it, Ozland? |
|
Valued Member
United States
133 Posts |
Well gosh Super Dave, The 7/8TF VAM-85 is more recent and the buzz is that a few more of those have already been found and they called that major from the first one. So if what you say is true, and if Brian sent that 85 to PCGS, then it should have MINOR VARIETY on it. And I have yet to hear that a Morgan dollar caused a fire at the White House!! |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
709 Posts |
The good news here Dave, is Coin Community Forum is the venue I chose to announce the find. Alan Scott wrote the narrative and did the comparative of the two coins. John Roberts was consulted on the work in progress. John Baumgart originally saw the coin when it was raw and attributed it. Leroy Van Allen also attributed the coin.
The comparative was also shared with Dr Michael Fey, PhD. and Jeff Oxman. Dr. Fey was kind enough to share his thoughts on this coin about it's possible rarity.
Edited by Ozland
12/19/2010 12:21 pm
|
|
Moderator
United States
23522 Posts |
Wish I'd known. We'd have done something much more self-aggrandizing about it. A find of this sort almost interests me more than Bryan's new B1. I guess you've already figured that I'm just as interested in the process as the product - a greater understanding of the process will provide knowledge applicable to all of the products - and New Orleans coins benefit particularly from greater insight regarding how those inscrutable people did things. 1887-O was produced to the tune of 11.5 million examples. At full speed, that's roughly 90 press-days of production. Understanding the real-world duty cycle of a press, how many were in use, and rough production dates are facts which can lend insight into why things happened the way they did; why the coins looked like they did. As near as I can tell, only one hurricane actually hit New Orleans that year, a Cat 1 on 18-19 October. A fact which is only relevant as a piece of a larger puzzle. Were they still in production then? |
|
Pillar of the Community
3660 Posts |
Quote:And I have yet to hear that a Morgan dollar caused a fire at the White House! I think he was referring to Don Willis' office....By the way, what is the difference between a major and a minor variety? This is the first that I have heard of the terms. |
|
Moderator
United States
23522 Posts |
Yeah, it was an allusion to what I believe is PCGS' attitude that they, not the coins, are the driving force in numismatics. Pay me no attention - I'm a wild-eyed Socialist. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
709 Posts |
Category 1 and category 2 hurricanes are usually big rain makers. Add temperatures in the nineties and ninety plus percent humidity, things get damp pretty quick.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
3660 Posts |
Edited by zeewool
12/19/2010 3:59 pm
|
|
Moderator
United States
23522 Posts |
I never intended to discount the possibility of severe weather playing a factor, although I will contend that New Orleans doesn't need a hurricane to make humidity relevant. There's a bigger picture, though. It's in our nature to try and drill down, to focus on specific facts, and we must remain aware that there are always other possibilities. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
709 Posts |
What intrigued me was this: I was not aware of any pitted reverse coin that has an early die state (EDS) involved with it. My first thought was how did it get that way? If we accept that the most likely cause of the pitting we see is from rust and accept that as the first premise of our logical proof, then what is the second premise? We have a perfectly good 1887-O VAM 22 without pitting. Then we now have a 1887-O VAM 22A pitted reverse with slight pitting and then we have a 1887-O VAM 22A pitted reverse top 100 coin with extensive pitting. Three coins, three different stages. You wouldn't take from production and store a perfectly good VAM 22 die without good reason. Maintenance perhaps? something on the press broke? Any extended interruption of the press that would account for the EDS coin being somewhere exposed to moisture that would allow for the moisture to cause oxidation (rusting) of the reverse die. This is the second premise. For the 1887-O top 100 coin with extensive pitting, the same circumstances would have to occur again only this time for a longer period of time as there is more extensive pitting. This would be the logical conclusion. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
709 Posts |
When Dr. Fey suggested I write an article and announce the find, I had to think about that for a while. At the time I was upset that PCGS listed the coin as 'minor variety'. Much like the 1882 O/S varieties with their rarer early die states, I thought the coin deserved to be listed as a top 100 coin. PCGS felt it did not meet their criteria even though the criteria for being VAM 22A is the reverse must be pitted. They obviously thought it needed more pitting. I considered contesting this with a presidential review and after I thought about it for a while, decided to leave it as it is. In a way, this is mute testament to the absurdity that goes on with in the hobby. Let's see if time will tell whether this is minor or not? Is it an ultra rarity? Perhaps if someone else had it, or if more VAM collectors were looking for it. My belief is this is a relative ultra rarity. Relative to if others are found. |
|
Pillar of the Community
3660 Posts |
Edited by zeewool
12/19/2010 3:59 pm
|
| |
Replies: 95 / Views: 9,005 |
First Page
Previous Page
Posted 12/19/2010 12:00 pm
