Just got a package back from Sydney. LVA received my coins on 9/24, and it’s postmarked 10/9 so that’s a pretty darn fast turnaround time. I had four issues to present to him:
1) The newly announced 1885-O VAM 35 looked to me a lot like VAM 12, so I sent LVA a couple VAM 12 examples. He agreed that the VAM 35 was a duplicate listing, and made some edits to the VAM 12 description.
2) Us 21P nerds have been discussing how the VAM 93 seems like it is a duplicate to the VAM 57. In presenting three examples to LVA, he agreed; since the description of the newer VAM 93 was more accurate, he killed VAMs 57 and 57A, now VAM 93 and 93A. Much thanks to @ljs123 for loaning me the VAM 93 discovery coin!
3) My first discovery with LVA was the 1921P VAM 3FY, whose main feature is a die gouge in the first U of UNUM. Earlier this year I found an earlier die state without the gouge. I wanted to show this to LVA, just for reference. I’m sort of relieved he didn’t split it into 3FY1 / 3FY2, and simply acknowledged that it was an VAM 3FY EDS.
4) As part of a discussion in my letter about the 83CC series (and since I had space), I wanted to include a VAM 3 LDS example, well after VAM 3A where the obverse had been polished. Similar to the previous case, it was sort of a relief that he simply called it VAM 3 LDS.
TL:DR Version
1885-O VAM 35 is killed, as it is a duplicate of VAM 12
1921-P VAMs 57 and 57A are killed, as they are duplicates of VAM 93 (and now VAM 93A)
There’s an EDS of 1921P VAM 3FY without the gouge
- weth_LVAletter_cropped_100820.jpg (276.46 KiB) Viewed 693 times
