Penny Rarity - Why is the 1882 London Mint Issue not more celebrated?

[E Dawson 0]

This is a subject I have pondered for some time: how is it that so much attention is paid to all the sub-varietals of pennies (ie by Freeman and Peck types), complete with excitement over die control letters or nose shape or even in the case of the earliest bunheads the "LC WYON", with big monies being paid out for even worn specimens when the 1882 London mint issue is neglected in terms of value. The London minted coin is extraordiarily rare, and I have never seen one in mint or even GEF; I would think this coin would absolutely smash the varietals in terms of price at auction.

In the US, an equivalent to such a coin would likely bring 10k USD or even much more for a VF specimen, and I noticed that the Bamford specimen which was only F or so brought barely 1k pounds. This seems to truly be an odd anomaly for a coin in a series that is so avidly collected.

Can anybody explain this phenomenon or hazard a guess to whether it may be undervalued?

PS Does anybody have the SNC's which were referred to in the DNW Bamford sale so that I might at least third hand see pictures of better preserved specimens?

[Rob 3,224]

  E Dawson said:

PS Does anybody have the SNC's which were referred to in the DNW Bamford sale so that I might at least third hand see pictures of better preserved specimens?

Coming your way shortly.

[Red Riley 2]

  E Dawson said:

This is a subject I have pondered for some time: how is it that so much attention is paid to all the sub-varietals of pennies (ie by Freeman and Peck types), complete with excitement over die control letters or nose shape or even in the case of the earliest bunheads the "LC WYON", with big monies being paid out for even worn specimens when the 1882 London mint issue is neglected in terms of value. The London minted coin is extraordiarily rare, and I have never seen one in mint or even GEF; I would think this coin would absolutely smash the varietals in terms of price at auction.

In the US, an equivalent to such a coin would likely bring 10k USD or even much more for a VF specimen, and I noticed that the Bamford specimen which was only F or so brought barely 1k pounds. This seems to truly be an odd anomaly for a coin in a series that is so avidly collected.

Can anybody explain this phenomenon or hazard a guess to whether it may be undervalued?

PS Does anybody have the SNC's which were referred to in the DNW Bamford sale so that I might at least third hand see pictures of better preserved specimens?

A specimen in poor condition reached over £1k on eBay recently. Illogical I know, but I guess the royal mint variety, or leastways the coin without the H, does not reach the stratosphere in terms of price simply because 1882 pennies overall are extremely common. I guess collectors generally just regard it as a variety of 1882H, but if the more common coin did not exist then yes, it would be up there with the 1933 penny...

[E Dawson 0]

No doubt about the availability of the '82 H and varieties, but still I would think of this as not being just a rare variety but a distinct issue from the mother mint - just check to see (and the comparison is NOT fair) what a red uncirculated full lustre 1909 S VDB cent would go for in comparison to an ordinary 1909 cent! Also, the 1918 and 1919 KN, and to a lesser extent the "H" issues command very high premiums in the better grades when compared to their Royal mint issues of those years.

I guess it just seems illogical.

[Bronze & Copper Collector 417]

  E Dawson said:

No doubt about the availability of the '82 H and varieties, but still I would think of this as not being just a rare variety but a distinct issue from the mother mint - just check to see (and the comparison is NOT fair) what a red uncirculated full lustre 1909 S VDB cent would go for in comparison to an ordinary 1909 cent! Also, the 1918 and 1919 KN, and to a lesser extent the "H" issues command very high premiums in the better grades when compared to their Royal mint issues of those years.

I guess it just seems illogical.

Possibly also because any purported 1882 NO H (F-112) pennies are NOT.... I believe 2 were sold recently.... I have EXTREME doubts about the one, and am not convinced on the other........ Mine is well worn (and acquired from an unimpeachable source), yet identifiable using the diagnostics listed on Tony Clayton's website.... (an explanation of what to look for from Freeman & Gouby, which can easily eliminate the "pretenders" and help confirm genuine specimens.....) a few years back, a major auction firm sold a purported 1882 no H that even the consignor did not believe to be that variety and when I requested and examined images, it was obvious it was NOT an F-112.....

Potential buyers may be VERY hesitant to purchase a coin in low grade for a large amount of money, regardless of how rare it is, because they are not sure that it is that variety.......

Despite the results of the Bamford sale, I'm sure that if a SUPERB QUALITY specimen became available, it would command the premium that it deserves (relative to the series, not in comparison to the same rarity in US coins.... an issue that enables to to own many of the classic rarities in the Bronze series, and is slowly resolving itself)

[josie 8]

Any chance that their is an identifier besides the no H 1882 on the coin to look for so that others may know that it is a no H variety?

Any test or probe use in coin that it is really a no H variety to scan or something like what they do in 1860 penny is copper or bronze?

[E Dawson 0]

No, there is no "easy" way to tell. I have Freeman and think I understand the difference but could not swear to it as per RBC above.

[Bronze & Copper Collector 417]

  E Dawson said:

No, there is no "easy" way to tell. I have Freeman and think I understand the difference but could not swear to it as per RBC above.

With the following information, you can easily prove that a specimen is NOT a true NO H, or, with a bit more research, prove that one is an F-112.......

Quoted from Tony Clayton's very informative website...... http://www.tclayton.demon.co.uk/penny.html

(My comment: it would help to have both obverses to compare as you relate to the information below........ Both reverses too, if you're not familiar with those either)

"The 1882 penny without mintmark is particularly rare (and not in Peck), but watch for worn coins where the mintmark has been worn away. A variety with the bar missing from the H is known. The following is a description of how to tell a genuine 1882 no H from an 1882H penny, as kindly related by the Penny specialist Bernie:

The identifiable features of the genuine non "H" 1882 penny are a flat shield on the reverse, NOT convex. Victoria has an apparent hooked nose, caused by a weak die strike in the area of the eyeball. The "R" and the "I" in "BRITT" should not be joined; a very small space should be visible with a magnifier. There is a tuft of hair protruding from the back of the neck, left of the ribbon knot. This tuft of hair is always visible on very worn specimens. The "H" variety can be clarified by examining the space encapsulated by the inner ribbon, as if the uppermost section forms a point in this triangulated section, then it is the common variety. The rare non "H" does not terminate in a point because of the tuft of hair mentioned above.

I should add that there are two types of obverse and reverse for 1882H pennies, and that the 1882 No H penny has the less common types - having these characteristics does not ensure that it is a No H, but having the characteristics of the other types confirms that there was an H even if worn away. "

[josie 8]

THANK YOU BAC (Bronzed And Copper).

That is very good information.