I have been looking at cents, ebay and other reference material all dingin day. I'm trying to learn on my own before coming here with questions, but I have to tell you there are a couple of things I am really confused about.

I was recently told that I should go to EBAY to validate the value of coins. First I checked the Red Book and notated that price in my spreadsheet. Then to EBAY and add that price to the spreadsheet. There are 158 coins all in the MS range that range from 1934 to 1988.

My first question: A 1936 MS63 is valued in Red Book for $200. A coin with same grade sold on EBAY for $10. Did this guy just get a lucky break?

Second question: A huge number of cents are advertised on EBAY as RED. Now I can tell when a cent has a red color if it is blatant. However when I look at the pics on EBAY, a lot of them are the same color as mine. So is this coin RED?



Thank you for your patience.

Linda

From the picture the coin looks red to me (and high grade as well).

PCGS lists the 1937 in MS64 at $10.

As for the 1936 for $200, I believe there was a double die obverse error that year.

The double die for 1936 is listed at $1,000 for an MS60 in the Red Book.

Was the coin on eBay graded? And if it was what company graded it?? If it was one of the make your own slab companies it wasn't probably worth the $10 someone paid.

Unless Lincolns have just gone through the roof and I don't know about it, a 1936 Lincoln in MS63 is nowhere near a $200 coin even Red. I'd be sshocked if it was a $20 coin. It must be a misprint in the Red Book.

That coin you posted does look red to me also.

I took a look in the 2004 Red book, 1936 cent MS 63......$2.50
MS 65......$5.00

The 2005 Red Book shows the 1937 @ $75 for an MS63.



Am I reading something incorrectly?

I have no idea what is up with those numbers but I don't think they have any basis in reality unless they represent something I am not understanding.

I wonder if those are Proof prices and they forgot to label the column right? Even the MS60 prices seem way out of whack. I am confused too. But I am not going to buy that a MS63 1936 is a 200 dollar coin or that a 1937 is a 75 dollar coin no matter what the Redbook says! It has to be some kind of error in the printing.

i agree....that must be an error.....unc 36's are very common..

Linda, I believe you quoted the wrong column. The quotes $200 for the 1936 and $75 for the 1937 are for PF-63. These are Proof strikes of the coin. Take the second column from the right and that shows MS-63. $8 and $7 repectively for MS-63.

Not an expert with Lincolns, but from the photo I would say that your coin is red and a very clean sample at that (no distracting bag marks).

I took a quick look in my 2005 Red Book (looks same as in above pic), and it seems that the problem is that the columns were "shifted" (G and VG should be there)

It looks like it should had been

F .10
VF .15
EF .25
AU .50
MS60 1.50
MS63 3.00
MS65 8.00
PF 200.

No, a column shift in the redbook denotes a drastic drop in values past a certain year, where the values for the lower grades are negligible. Where the grade range starts at F, for instance, the coin is a common one and the G and VG grades would be valued at face or bullion value.

For my purposes, I am going to assume there is a "clerical" error in the "shifting" (cut & paste from previous sections) and that the columns should read as ccq indicated instead for what is in the book (G4 in the beginning left and MS63 in the ending column). The prices I am seeing on EBAY make much more sense now.

I think there is also another mistake on page 116. That one indicates that a 1938 cent is worth more in F12 condition than it is in EF40 and that an VF20 coin is worth more than an AU50 coin.

Thank you help.

Linda

Oops, that should be "shouldn't"