Why are 93 proofs close AM?

[makecents]

D4mmit!! I missed the will sighting!!

[VAB2013]

D4mmit!! I missed the will sighting!!

nahh you didn't miss anything, he's still here

nope... I was wrong, he's gone - but he'll be back!

[GrumpyEd]

It may be a screw up like Will said, once noticed they might continue because that way it's not like a mistake and some won't be hoarded over it.

It brings up another thought.
If it was ok to use the same rev on bus strikes as proofs for 93 then why on earth do they go through the effort of making a different rev for proofs at all on those modern S mint proofs? It must cost a lot of money to make a whole different galvano and masters and all the stuff needed.

I don't see a valid reason. The only thing I can imagine is it's a definitive way to tell proofs from bus strikes (ignoring finish) but even that only matters if they left off the S (which they have done) but still it's solving a problem that does not matter and costs a lot to do it. I think most older proofs before S proofs were the same designs as normal dies and it wasn't an issue.

[VAB2013]

Great points Ed! I wonder if the economy and year end financials had much to do with all of it. Even though it's a government entity, some years it probably made more money than others so they could spend more to make more proof dies (so they could sell them in mint sets) and make more money. It's all about money!

[GrumpyEd]

Viv,

LOL, they could have sold the proof sets with WAM or CAM, nobody notices except us and we wouldn't know until after we got them.

[Petespockets55]

Does the mint have a different master hub for proof and business strike dies?

Could it be as simple as the mint using the master hub reverse for business strikes in '93 to make the proof reverse dies?

[GrumpyEd]

Yes, that's why if you have a 98-99-00 WAM attributed, ANACs will label it "proof reverse hub".

The question is why was it the norm to use the bus strike RDV for 93 but not in the surrounding years.
And why they ever use a different style.

[Petespockets55]

Wouldn't the mint have a different master reverse die for proofs and business strike working hubs. (Wide and Close AM)

Sounds like someone grabbed the wrong master die to create the working hub reverse proofs in '93. Maybe that's why some showed up in 1992.

[GrumpyEd]

Wouldn't the mint have a different master reverse die for proofs and business strike working hubs. (Wide and Close AM)

Sounds like someone grabbed the wrong master die to create the working hub reverse proofs in '93. Maybe that's why some showed up in 1992.

Yes sort of.
If they grabbed one and made the whole bunch of proof dies for the year then there would not be mistakes within a year.
My question is, if it matters enough to them to make them different then why did they not care in 93.
If it was a random mistake why did it get the whole entire proof run in 93 and they never reacted and made any right.
Why do they ever do them different, nobody except for us would notice or care.
It didn't matter in 93 so why did they not make them the same in 94 and make the flow simpler.

[Petespockets55]

Maybe part of the answer is in "Occam's razor" which states that of any given set of explanations for an event occurring, the simplest one is most likely the correct one.

A lot was changing/happening at the mint in the late '80's and early '90's.
From doubleddies.com -
-"By the middle of the 1980’s the Mint started placing the last two digits of the date on the master design (galvano). New master hubs were prepared each year for each denomination. At this time the Mint also started placing the mint mark on the master design for all Commemorative and proof coins."

-"In 1990 and 1991 the Mint began applying the mint mark to the master die for circulation strike coins. After 1994 the mint mark was placed on the master design."

All I'm thinking is that the proof dies for 1993 were produced in late '92 and "Florida Man" was on a working vacation in Philly and grabbed the wrong master hub to produce them.

(The fact that there are two different reverses, CLAM and WAM, would mean that there are two different master dies. Not sure how easy it might be to "grab" the wrong one.)

[Petespockets55]

........ If it was a random mistake why did it get the whole entire proof run in 93 and they never reacted and made any right.........

Maybe they didn't realize their mistake until after they were done producing proof coins?

Maybe part of the answer is in "Occam's razor" which states that of any given set of explanations for an event occurring, the simplest one is most likely the correct one.

A lot was changing/happening at the mint in the late '80's and early '90's.
From doubleddies.com -
-"By the middle of the 1980’s the Mint started placing the last two digits of the date on the master design (galvano). New master hubs were prepared each year for each denomination. At this time the Mint also started placing the mint mark on the master design for all Commemorative and proof coins."

-"In 1990 and 1991 the Mint began applying the mint mark to the master die for circulation strike coins. After 1994 the mint mark was placed on the master design."

All I'm thinking is that the proof dies for 1993 were produced in late '92 and "Florida Man" was on a working vacation in Philly and grabbed the wrong master hub to produce them.

(The fact that there are two different reverses, CLAM and WAM, would mean that there are two different master dies. Not sure how easy it might be to "grab" the wrong one.)

[willbrooks]

I do want to point out the fact that the reason we are all here, the very existence of our hobby is founded on Mint workers' failure to be competent. I mean, Mint workers aren't (for the most part) making varieties and errors on purpose, right? We are here to celebrate this lack of competence and we congratulate each other for finding examples of it! So, I just don't see where you are coming from.

[Petespockets55]

I do like errors and varieties.
I can't say as I can comment on their competency as a group, as I don't personally know any, but that blanket assessment seems a little harsh.

You won't be taking to task people who can't sllep or plunctuate,
properly next; will you?
(I will say I'm as human as they are. Better on some days than others and there is a certain amount of autonomous Matrix type machines involved.)

[jallengomez]

I'm with Will. I think there was no rhyme or reason to it. Government incompetence makes pickles on fries look like the newest dish at a Micheline Star restaurant. And normally there are 18 supervisors standing around watching any given fiasco.

[jfines69]

I have been doing a little research... Maybe there was an error at the beginning but once discovered it may have been to late to restart the minting process... In accordance with Title 31 5112 Section D para 2 of the United States Code changing the design of a coin requires permission from the Secretary after consulting with the Citizens Coinage Advisory Committee and the Commission of Fine Arts... So even with a mistake on someones part it is basically an act of congress to change a design... Since the different parties are required to record what they do in annual reports the info of why the 93 proofs are Close AMs should be obtainable... Hope that helps a bit!!!