Jeff Makkos of Ohio reports finding a Double Struck 2007-P James Madison dollar in a government issued Mint Set.  The type of double strike involved is what errorists refer to as an "In-Collar Double Strike with Rotation Between Strikes." The cause may be due to two different scenarios.  The first possibility is that the coin was struck normally and then reentered the coining area falling back over the collar where it was forced back into the collar by a second strike in a position  rotated just a few degrees away from the original strike.  Another possibility suggested by CONECA president Mike Diamond, is that coin remained in the collar while the inner sleeve of the collar broke loose and rotated within resulting in the same effect.  Because a coin normally expands in diameter ever so slightly upon ejection it is difficult for it to completely reenter the collar unless forced.  The forcing of the coin into the collar often results in it only being forced part way and an edge that looks to have two levels or what is known as a "Partial Collar."  Makkos' coin does not show a partial collar indicating that it was either forced all the way back into the collar during the second strike or could have been in a rotating collar.
    What is most interesting about the second possible cause is that a double strike caused by a rotating sleeve inside of a collar could have repeated itself for a number of coins before the condition was spotted and the collar replaced if the Mint was routinely striking these special Mint Set issues twice to bring up the detail much in the same way as they double or triple strike proof coins.  For this reason, I suggest that collectors check their sets to see if they also got a double strike.
    Makkos found it in a newly introduced version of Mint Set that the Mint refers to as the "United States Mint Annual Uncirculated Dollar Coin Set." It contains the four 2007 Presidential dollars issued by Philadelphia, one 2007 Sacagawea dollar from Denver and a West Point minted 2007 Silver Eagle.  All are of the special matte or satin finish that are only issued to collectors in Mint Sets.  An image of what the set looks like is shown.
    Makkos' find appears to be quite valuable as a panel of mostly error coin dealer consultants that I use for pricing figured the coin to fall into the $2000 to $8000 price range.  Diamond guessed it at about $2000 saying that he may be off some since he is not an error coin dealer.  Rich Schemmer of Franklin Square, NY, said that he'd retail the coin at around $2,500.  Mike Byers of San Clemente, CA, said: "Although in-collar double strikes are rarer than those with the second strike off-center, sometimes there is very little detail showing from the original strike if the rotation is slight. In this case, this double struck Mint State Madison Dollar shows considerable rotation which increases the value and desirability. I would estimate a wholesale value in the $2500. to $3000. range.  Neil Osina of Best Variety/ Sportscards & Coins, Glendora, CA said:  "Regardless of how it came to be, it should carry a huge bonus dollar value due to it both being of a satin finish and being sealed inside the special set. Since the error might have happened on few other coins might actually add to its popularity if some others were found. Since this would be a significant error even out of the case, I would say in auction this coin might bring $5000-$8000. If it were not the satin finish and not in the set, it would still conjure a $2500. price tag.  Fred Weinberg of Encino, CA weighed in with:  "It's a nice double strike in collar, and I agree with the two scenarios that you and Mike put forth.  It is a bit unusual to find it in a mint set, but a nice find, that's for sure. As for value, I'd have to agree with Rich, etc., that it's a $2000. to $2,500. retail item, if you can find
the right buyer for it."
    Not a bad find for a fellow who spent just $31.95 to get it from the Mint!     
    

Image courtesy of US Mint
Here is a look the type of Mint Set that the error was found in.

Opinions expressed in articles or other features posted on the CONECA web site do not necessarily represent official CONECA policy or those of it's officers.  The act of submitting material shall constitute an expressed warranty by the contributor that the material is original; if not, the source and permission must be provided.