CPG Pricing

[ddorpm]

Received my new CPG recently. Was curious about some of the pricing.

It list the 1982 1c big DDR on page 153 with a value of MS65 (full red) as $95.

It list the 1992-D 1c Close AM variety on page 158 with a value of MS65 (full red) as $75.

It list the 1968-D 1c big DDR on page 136 with a value of MS65 (full red) as $25.

Plus they're other listings that have me scratching my head as well.

If those are correct values -- I will buy them all day long for those prices.

Billy

[eagames]

I hadn't got the new one yet.

Those prices are ridiculus and baseless.

[CoinboyJay]

I have been having this discussion with my local coin dealer recently about ALL coins, not just varieties.
An 1865 3 cent silver proof with 500 proofs and only 8000 business strikes minted. July 2000 PCGS had graded only 143 proof coins TOTAL for this year. With re-submissions is there really 100 of these even available??!!?!? And then you see RED BOOK PF-63 $640.....!?!??!?.

A P.O.S. 1909svbd brings as much!!

The difference??

NOBODY COLLECTS 3 CENT SILVERS. And like we all know, Lincoln cents are the most collected coin in the world.

How about varieties.........

As proved by this forum, and several more like it, not to mention the numerous clubs and publications now available, a LOT of people look for and collect varieties. Espically Lincoln cents.
BUT, how many of us BUY Lincoln varieties?!???
Lets face reality here, MOST OF US SEARCH FOR THE THRILL OF FINDING!!!! How many of us have $50+ coins we would never sell because WE found it. I have SEVERAL.

I HAVE NEVER BOUGHT A VARIETY COIN, although I have cherrypicked my share.

The point is:

There are no "key" coins we need to fill the last two holes in our book to complete the quest.

It is, and always shall be, about the thrill of the hunt, the knowledge gained, and (because of forums like this) the sanity of knowing YOU ARE NOT THE ONLY ONE!!!

Verieties are not about money, they are the cream at the top for the true collectors.

Just my cent worth.

Cheers,
JAY

[Bob P]

Billy,
The new CPG has caused a big uproar on other boards as well. The cents listings stop at 2000 even though they have assigned numbers to varieties up to 2006. They have not mentioned Wide AMs or RDV's.
I have not received my copy yet, but from what everyone else who has theirs has told me, there are many complaints being lodged to Whitman and the authors, and books returned. They say it appears to be thrown together, and for the very reasons you list, the data is terribly inaccurate. It seems since the last one was published in 2000, there should be more updated data for your 30 something bucks.

[ddorpm]

Bob,

Thanks for the update. I must admit, after now comparing more extensively, very little new info was added. Actually, about the only new significant addition was the inclusion of the 1982 Major DDR (but, unfortunately, and in my opinion, was assigned with an extremely low-ball value for that great discovery).

It does cover some of the Wide AMs, but no RDVs, and yes it stops at 2000.

Overall, in comparison, it does come across as old, outdated material that was thrown together.

Bob, I hope you find your copy more useful -- as for me, this CPG edition will gather a lot of dust in my reference library.

Regards,
Billy

[Dick]

Billy, Bob, Ed, and Jay, after reading the mail, I have decided not to get the CPG. I have the third Edition, and the fourth,plus the Vol. 2. I won't be getting this one that has caused so much controversy. I don't worry about "how muich it is worth", so much as it is not something I would sell. All of my coins are "valuable", to me, and for that reason I keep them, even if it is onlty a big die break with no premium value, it is vakluable to me, because I found it! It is that way with all my collection. That is the way it was when I spent a lot of time prospecting for gold. All that I found, is still in my possession, bwcause, like coin collecting, the thril of the hunt, and the actual find, is what it is all about. Gold has gone up, and down, but mine is still just the evidence of the success of the thrill of the hunt! Make sense? Probably not, but I don't either, most of the time! LOL I hope everyone got for Christmas, at least one thing you really wanted, or NEED!
Dick

[eagames]

I respect the authors (the first CPG motivated me) but I think they needed to add a new author to the team but didn't pass the torch. There are some very respected folks (some in this thread) that could have added something to it.

It creates a problem since some TPGs only want to attribute (or make it difficult to use other listings) based on their listings but not being complete and ending at 2000 (old CPG went to 1997) added little. It only added 1998-2000 and those were dull years for DDOs. I was hoping it would be better and more accurate and inclusive.

Why don't a group of experts get together and come out with a more inclusive book that can be used as a main guide for cent attribution? I'd gladly buy that book for more than $30.

[Dick]

I know there is a "rhyme, and, or reason " but why can't we come yo with a single, standard "label, title, version, or whatever", for each die? The fact that there are rorm three, to five different identifications for most of the varieties known, and it is most confusing to try to compare "this one, with that one", and everyone will know exactly what one is looking at, or talking about. This has been brought up on more than one ocassion, and forum, but no one seems to care enough to try and standardize the indexing of thes dies. In my case, I can understand the Wexler, Crawford, but I don't make sense out of either the FS, or CONECA sysrtems. "Our" system is as clear as it gets, and it is worth mentioning, the BJ Neff system makse sense, and is understandable. While I doubt I will ever see a "single system" come to be, in my life time, it would be nice to see it come to pass, eventually. IMHO
Dick

[CoinboyJay]

Dick,
The reason there are so many "systems" with variey coins is the same reason there is more than one church in town. Not everyone agrees and or believes what the next person does.
In the original RPM book from 1983 by Wexler & Miller they acknowledged the the fact that several experts in the field had to "put aside personal and professional differences in the pursuit of knowledge".
These files were sold several times until CONECA bought them with the idea to publish updated versions of the RPM Book.
Some where along the way Wexler & friends started NCADD. Rumor is they didn't agree with everything CONECA and Wiles believed, did, and or published.
I believe Mr. Crawford, who started this post, has at one time or another been involved in both camps and he has since started his own numbering system. Why? Only he can say. Please correct me if I'm wrong ddorpm.

I have just recently come upon coppercoins.com and this forum and really enjoy all the info and folks who contribute. I don't know C.D. His system is "new" to me and I would assume ( I know dangerous to do) he came up with his system after the others were in place. Why did he make his own system? Only he can answer that.

I know CONECA says you must be able to see an RPM with only a 10x loupe and NCADD says if it can be photographed at 30x its an RPM. HUGE difference in philosophy. Throw in the personalities and human nature and I personally don't think there will ever be a single system.
Hopefully I'm wrong.
I welcome any historical corrections in my post, and would love to here from Mr. Crawford and CD as to why they would take on such a HUGE undertaking of cataloging and creating their own systems. Glad you both did, I've learned alot.

Just my cent worth....
Cheers,
JAY

[coppercoins]

The reason behind me having my own system was simple. I didn't have access to any of the systems in their complete form, and I wanted to organize my collection. Given I didn't know what 3/4 of the "listed" die varieties looked like and had no way of finding out short of sending a thousand coins in for $5 each, I devised the system used here to organize what I had.

Because I knew other collectors had the same issue I had, I published the system in its entirety on this website so everyone would have access to the work I was doing on my own collection. I have since lost interest in trying to complete a collection of my own, I am much more interested in completing a catalog of information for every US die variety issued before I die.

Why there are different systems? Access. People don't freely give access to other people by publishing what they have in its entirety and people lose interest.

Another reason? Completeness. Some people think just so much is complete, there doesn't need to be more. Other people list what's reasonable to them and don't list every flyspeck. Yet other people think every single flyspeck needs to be listed. Different opinions yield different results.

I stand by my decision to do what I have over the years and also stand by my statement that I have (or Bob has) published everything we know WHEN we know it. No other source has accomplished this.

[coppercoins]

By the way, when 'my system' became a published system, I removed the 'my' off of it and made it 'ours'. Anyone can use it anywhere any time. It was only 'my' system when I was the only one using it.

Although the photography and information published is copyrighted material, anyone can use the system at their free will as long as credit is given to the source.

[coppercoins]

Durr...and I forgot to post a reply to the subject of the thread:

I have not seen the new CPG and do not intend on having one. I believe the information I have already gleaned from posts such as Billy's gives me reason enough to not bother.

I am embarassed enough that the pricing information on this website is for the better part out of date - I would be highly embarassed if I published a book with such bad information.

By the way, I am working on a way to be able to value the die varieties listed on this site and keep them updated regularly. I have been testing various methods for quite a while, and have not yet found the exact correct formula for the regular coin to die variety pricing curve for differing values of die varieties. It's rather complicated math.

[Dick]

Jay, I appreciate your clarifying the waters a bit, and accept the idea that " each has his own" method. I could not begin to understand all that is known about the different "systems", but I have to admit, that being as this forum is the one where I feel "at home", with the system, is mostlikely because here I found that varieties are a whole new world, and decided to learn as much about them as I can. TYhe other "systsms" are easily understood by those who use them cionstantly. I, too would be comfrotable under thiose circumstances. I starteed with "Coin Talk, and became dis-enchanted, right away, and left. then it was CONECA. I am still a member, Then I was turned onto Coooercoins.com, and found a home! I have become a variety collector, and not just a world coins, or mexican coin collector, a natural thing, haviong spent 18 years in the border, and interior areas. But when I became a member of this forum, things made a turn,and I am very happy they did. TYhabnks to Chuck, Bob, Coop, ED and so many more that I can't name, I have learned a huge amout about something I had niot an inkling aboout! I will be forever grateful to all members. About the different systems, some I don't understand, others, yes, but it took time. I check the cross-referencing info on each die variety I look at, just to see if it is "common to all. Most are not. Some check, others don't. I use the info for my "education, and benefit, and hopefully, will learn enough to be able to share it with those who are lacking. There is one other forum I must name, because so many members there are members here as well. It is more extensive in coverage, but no other forum , of whichi have knowledge, is as complete as this one. I speak of the Coin Community Forum. (Than is where I "pick the brain" of the different members, who can't be on thr board 24/7) Thanks for your patience,and may your next fine be "that Big One".
Dick

[eagames]

Dick,

You mentioned the cross-referencing.
That's what I like best, CDs system has a space for anything plus they used the cross-referencing so I can cross it.

When I first used the site I didn't understand how difficult the cross-referencing is but now I do. If the others did not have good pics and markers it's not easy to know crosses. If they jumped the gun and assumed stuff without markers then it would be full of mistakes. The way CD did it makes a lot of sense

[ddorpm]

"I believe Mr. Crawford, who started this post, has at one time or another been involved in both camps and he has since started his own numbering system. Why? Only he can say. Please correct me if I'm wrong ddorpm."

Yes, I started my system years ago. No one system is complete. And, Coppercoins.com has many listings that I do not have to illustrate. As well, I'm sure I have many listings Coppercoins do not have in their system. This goes for CONECA as well as Wexler Files.

As we all know, documenting and cataloging die varieties is always dynamic and never static. The moment any reference is published, it is not complete. Of course, that's a good thing for collectors and variety enthusiast. It keeps us on the hunt! It keeps OUR hobby exciting!

Many of you know I published (online for free), Die Variety News magazine. I have temporarily suspended (I emphasize temporarily) because I am working hard on Volume II of "A Detailed Analysis of Lincoln Cent Varieties." Since Volume I was published in 2003, many have asked when is a Volume II coming out? The reference is coming along nicely and I have calculated it will be in the range of 1500 pages give or take. It covers die varieties for the Lincoln cent series from 1909 to present which includes doubled dies, RPMs, OMMs, RDVs, Wide AMs, and so forth.

Each listing will include die markers for attribution (if known for that particular variety), cross-references with Coppercoins File numbers, CONECA File number, Wexler File number and CPG FS number (if applicable), rarity, interest factor, updated values with annotations if any known actual sales, reported by or submitted by and any special comments or notes about the particular variety.

I do wish to include the 1982P-1DR-001 major DDR. Chuck, you gave me permission to use your photos in one of my past DVN issues of that great variety. Can I use your photos in Volume II with your permission and giving credit?

Anyway, I am about 3/4 complete with Volume II (I'm on page 1086 right now). I plan to set-up a web site with more information along with sample pages from the reference in the very near future.

Again, once Volume II is completed and published, I will resume working on and publishing DVN magazine back online for collectors.

Regards,
Billy G. Crawford