82P and 83P No FG Kennedy Halves

[Earle42]

Thanks for posting the video Daniel. I had lost the URL to it.

[AverageStacker]

So basically what I'm hearing is that the 82P is the only true No FG possible as the die was not engraved with the initials. All others are solely due to the result of over-polishing the dies and thereby none of them SHOULD be recognized as a No FG. That makes a whole lot more sense than some being recognized (72D Kennedy, 69D Lincoln Cent) and not others.

[Earle42]

At present, I would say correct.

The 72-D, 66 SMS, and 83 are the most known for what appears to be missing an FG. But I have seen other dates as well.

Since the grading companies offer (for a fee of course) to put "No FG" on the label, its a money maker for them and they include them as if they were legit die errors.

Now if a "No FG" 72-D or 66 shows up with no evidence of die polishing (worn features) around the area where the initials should be, then it would likely be from a legitimate die b/c there would be no reason for a polisher to go in and polish of just the tiny initials.

I can say as of the date on the essay, none of the No FGs of 72-D and 66 SMS slabbed coins did not evidence polishing. In other words, none of them, despite people spending thousands on some, b/c PCGS will slab them, were likely from a die with No FG engraved in it.

Money talks.

As to whether or not the others SHOULD be called No FG varieties, my opinion (note that word) is they could label them as Polished Off FG (or something more eloquent) to be completely honest ...if PCGS is even aware of all of this information, which I am hoping b/c otherwise it seems, at least to me, a bit like PCGS is taking advantage of legitimate collector ignorance.

After all, the first person to note the 72-D "No FG" was a president of PCGS - Ron Guth. You would think with the reputation people give this company for being THE experts, their own "experts" would have known and told him it was only a polishing problem.

I have a 1988 with no trace of FG. It s also very late dies state and so most likely is polished off (I have seen these) and the bad condition of the die took care of the rest of the initials showing up.

But this is not the only case of a polishing problem being slabbed as a legit error with half dollars. The 1945 no AW half is also from polishing off the initials. Yet b/c the registry sets recognize these, PCGA can make money slabbing them...and it keeps a lot of people in the dark.

BTW - I went through many boxes over a 2 year period. I saved each 72-D, 83, and 88 I could find that appeared not to have the initials. These were the main circulated dates used after the initial were partially polished off. The best ones are in my collection labeled as "Polished Off FG," simply for fun and the fact I cannot see it there. But again, its obvious they were polished from the surrounding weak features.

[AverageStacker]

Glad I sold my 72D MS64 when I did and got my $2k!

[Earle42]

Wow!
The companies are in the business of making profit - like any company legitimately is.

The sad part is that the non-legit ones go for a lot more than the legit 82s! But the marketing/profit-generating idea of registry sets, thus driving up demand and prices, is more fun to those who enjoy the registry sets when there are more varieties (challenge) recognized by the companies.

i think it would be hard for the hobby to reject these as a whole, especially after a lot of people have a lot of money into them (another sad story of buy the slab and not the coin).