by Len Ratzman – California Numismatist – Vol. 6 No.2 (Summer 2009)

When a mint error is first discovered, a predictably lengthy process is begun involving multiple recognized experts in the field to examine and scrutinize the coin’s authenticity under high magnification to separate a bona fide error from a manufactured counterfeit.

Ideally, after sufficient time and examinations have been made, the coin is either accepted or rejected by the numismatic community. But, in reality, there is a third possibility – unending disagreement among the experts. This outcome, of course, leaves many of us who are looking for definitive answers in relative limbo.

If decades go by and recognized, numismatic authorities still are conflicted as to the authenticity of the coin, what then? If, for instance, someone tried to buy or sell a specimen with this error to a dealer, another collector or at auction, how could they vouch for the legitimacy of the error and, in turn, ask a realistic price? This article is devoted to one such enigma that the author discovered by accident.

In a relatively recent attempt to determine if the Smithsonian Institute’s buffalo nickel collection was missing any specimens after all these years, an email inquiry was sent in early January to Mr. Richard Doty, the senior curator of numismatics for the Behring Center.

Sent from the American Museum of Natural History Behring Center where the coins are stored, Mr. Doty’s e-mail responded, “Your inquiry was passed to me. We do have a set of buffalo nickels, only lacking the 1934 two-legged and 1916 doubled die and 1918/7 varieties.”

Nineteen thirty-four, two-legged? When anyone specializes in one coin and finds (after decades devoted to researching that coin) that a variety exists unknown to that collector, it’s a very humbling experience.

A search of the Red Book, several Internet population reports, and reference books containing buffalo mint errors revealed many mint errors were listed but no mention of any two-legged varieties. (more…)

Photos used with permission and courtesy of Heritage Auction Galleries

You know you have too much time on your hands when you find yourself creating an Excel spreadsheet just to calculate the total number of Buffalo nickels minted from 1913 to 1938. But you can always defend yourself by telling the world you have a good excuse.

In this day and age of so much emphasis placed on perfection, what serious collector would turn down an opportunity to own an MS or PF-70 specimen if his or her checkbook would allow it? So, if you’re a Buffalo nickel fan and haven’t been exposed to the harsh reality, you incorrectly assume that out of over 1,200,000,000 nickels (yes, that’s Billion) minted in those 25 years, mathematical probability alone would predict at least a few MS-69 or 70 specimens, wouldn’t you conclude?

But as population report after population report of the major grading services are scanned in desperation, the Buffalo fanatic is sadly resigned to the fact that in countless decades of searching, not one MS-70 has yet been recorded. Does this mean that no such specimen exists? Probably an accurate assumption. But, if one were ever found some time in the future in an obscure safe deposit box and later assigned to a major auction, can you begin to imagine how spirited the bidding would be for that coin regardless of its date and mint mark? Seven figures has such a nice ring to it (okay, maybe six.)

On further examination of these population reports and coin publications, it’s made statistically obvious that there are many year/mint mark combinations of the Buffalo nickel where the highest grade recorded goes all the way “down” to MS-65 level. Having to sadly accept these realistic maximums is the source of the article’s title.

The only solace we can get is from at least knowing why our favorite coins were evidently “doomed” to less than a “perfect” strike even as the blank planchets were about to be hit by a die with tons of pressure behind it “back in the day”. (more…)