Why the price difference between '98, '99 and 2000 Wide AM?

[Robert]

I understand that the "wide AM" variety is due to the use of proof dies, but why the steep price differential? Are '99s that much more rare? And if so, why are they so much rarer than the other two?

[coop]

The three years were made from proof hubs but were never proof dies. Somehow the hub/s were sent to the mint by mistake and used without anyone noticing it. Seems they made more of the 1998 & 2000 dies and less of the 1999 dies, thus less coins were struck in 1999. Thus the price difference. Less made and found by us. I've found one 2000 one, but the other two years has eluded me so far. But I keep looking. Less Philly mint Cents here to check. I got a box from out of town that had hand rolled Cents in them. 90% of them were Philly Cents. Only one variety found from the whole batch. They must have lived back east and traded them in when they moved here. That is the only way I could explain the large number of Philly Cents in Arizona. Only batch I've found was that one. The 99% Denver Cents is the norm here.

[Robert]

You're right, hubs not dies.

But why would arguably the same mistake at the same mint over a series of years yield varying mintages?

Rhetorical question I suppose.

[eagames]

I heard that there are many different die pairs that had wide AM in 1998 and 2000 (maybe up to 50 dies) but only one known die pair for 1999 had the wide AM.

The 2000 was discovered first then later the 1998 was discovered then years later the 1999 was discovered. Since there are less of the 1999 maybe that was why it took longer to be discovered.

In any case you can buy cheap 1998 and 2000 wide AM cents but the 1999 wide AMs cost $200-600 depending on grade and not many show up for sale.

[GarryN]

I have one of the 1998 Wide AM cents, 65 red in a PCGS holder. I wanted to trade it and a few other coins in for somethng else and the dealer didnt know what it was and would not take it. I thought that was funny.

[coop]

They might be thinking about the de-bunked 1980-D/S that now is worth one cent. No one wants to buy a loosing item just because they are out there. You have to have a market for them and the more found only makes prices go down.

[hasfam]

When the wide AM's hit the news I was a bit leary as to how they would go over in the hobby. It seemed as though K.Potter was the only one selling them for awhile. I found several in the early goings in the Kentucky & Tennessee area, probably 2 1998's for every 5 2000's. Unfortunately, I had 3 sealed boxes of Philly 98's at one time that I went thru and got rid of before I knew about the wide AM's. I missed those but did pull 4 really nice capped dies from the batch. I had sold most of my wide AM's a few years ago and they were going for pretty cheap too. When I picked back up in the hobbie earlier this year I was eager to find some more to replace them. They have been tough as all get out to find now. At least for me. I have only found 1 1998 and 1 2000 this year. I also see a bit more of a demand on ebay for them. All of them seem to sell now and the price has double and tripled from what they used to go for couple of years ago. It's just funny how some things will stand the test of time and become more and more popular and valuable while other varieties and errors will just drop off in popularity bringing little to no excitement or value.
Rock

[smed]

[coppercoins]

Few things...

1. The 1999 is far rarer than the 1998 or 2000, thus the wide price difference. And true, only one die pair is known for that year, while there are dozens for the 1998 and 2000.

2. To Coop: Just because a die variety is debunked doesn't pull all the value out of examples of said debunked die variety. People will still pay $10-$20 to get an example of this once-touted over mintmark that turned out not to be. They are still very scarce to rare.

3. Very few people mention the 1992P and D mismatched reverse coins...these are far rarer than even the 1999 wide AM.

[Dick]

In addition to the ones mentioned by Chuck, above, there are others, since the change to the memorial rev. I believe there are 6, or 7 in all, if memory serves me. They are very minor, and if one doesn't know what, or which ones they are, one will not even notice. They are that small. This is posted on Varietyvista, if I'm not wrong. I saw it recently, and at the time wondered if they were of such character as to be listed, but thought not. I don't see mention of them in our site, other than in postings, now and then.
Dick

[eagames]

Dick,

There are only the wide AMs that CD mentioned.
Rare close AMs in: 92, 92-d
Rare wide AMs in:98, 99, 00.

(the 92 and 92-d rare ones are close AM, all 92 are supposed to be wide)

The 92 and 92-d are scarcer than hens teeth!!!!

No other years have proven to be legit.

On wide AMs the reverse dies were made with the hub with the design for proofs (but the dies were not prepped as proofs) with a gap between A-M and different FG location.

The ones you mentioned are something other than wide AM.

[Robert]

Thanks for the background information.

But why are 99s much rarer in the first place? Are they truly that rare or have they not been found as often (i.e. lots of them lying around in mint sewn bags etc)? I don't understand how the number manufactured could vary so much. You go from none (1997) to some (1998) to very few (1999) to some (2000) and then back to none (2001). The minting process didn't change in that period (or did it?)...

Had no idea (as usual) about the 92s. Perhaps other years are out there as well.

[Dick]

Sorry, Ed. I was thinking of the differences on the other devices, rather than the "wide- AM/close AM". It was the third comment by Chuck yhat recalled the other changes, that obviously have ocurred more than just the three, or four years covered in the post. Rather things like the change in the font for the designers initials, etc. In other words, I was looking at the over-all picture, rather that a few specific changes, ie, Proof rev vs business rev. Can't win them all!
hope this clarifies matters.
Dick

[eagames]

Robert,

The number of dies for each is the reason.
For this to happen they had to get by mistake a reverse die that was hubbed with the proof design (intended for the San Francisco mint).

Only 1 die was wrong for 1999 but there were many for 1998 and 2000. They can tell this by the markers, all 99 are from one die but 98 and 00 are from many different dies.

Maybe they had extra dies made for San Francisco and after making the proofs no more were needed in SF and they forgot they were different and sent them to other mints?? Later the mint director acknowledged that they never intentionaly used the proof hubbed dies for bussiness strikes.

Just a wild guess... I've seen photos of dies in wooden boxes from mints (maybe 50 die per box?) and they might have got a full box of the wrong dies in 1998 and 2000 but in 1999 it seems they got only one of the wrong die mixed in with others that were correct.

[coop]