Just Bob

It is important to remember that all 5,000 of the coins were encapsulated. The first 3,000 were sold for $200 apiece to collectors who, we assume, bought them solely because of the Goodacre providence. The remaining 2000 were bought by a dealer, crossed to PCGS for grading and encapsulation, and then sold, probably for at least that amount and possibly more. It is highly likely that every collector who bought one was aware that the value lay solely in the fact that their coin once belonged to Ms. Goodacre, and that removing it from the slab would destroy the value. Human nature being what it is, it is possible that a few coins were removed from their holders by collectors who hate having their coins entombed in plastic. But I would guess that 99.9% of the coins are still in a holder from one of the three major grading services. Any coin claiming to be a Goodacre piece and being sold raw has to be assumed to be either a coin struck from new or freshly polished dies, or one that has been buffed to imitate a presentation piece. Either way, I would run from those as fast as I could. On a related note: if anyone sees Skip Fazzari at FUN, or on another coin forum, would you ask him if he was involved in authenticating these coins? Someone at ICG discovered that there were two different types of finish, and I was wondering if it was he who discovered it

That is sad. Someone ruined a proof set.

We need a "drool" emojie. Wow! Amazing pieces!

All 5000 pieces that the mint paid to MS. Goodacre were sent to ICG for encapsulation to preserve their heritage. So, the short answer to your question is that the coin must be in the original ICG holder or have been crossed over to a PCGS or NGC holder which has the Goodacre designation on the label to be worth a premium. Any coin not in a holder cannot be proven to be a presentation piece, regardless of how it looks.

The coin is obviously a fake, and the government should definitely take action, but the holder doesn't actually say "NGC," and the insert is a different style, so I doubt there is anything that can be done about the holder being fake.

What a great idea!

I believe the impression was made by a Roosevelt dime. Obviously not an error. Just glue, as the others have stated.

Judging by the Anthony Dollars that I have seen, anytime you can get a 67 on a business strike from '79 to '81, you've made a major coup. Even the ones I've seen in mint sets were baggy. Nice job.

Only that part which has gone past glossy black to dull black. On an album tone coined for example, that color is usually near the rim, since toning starts there and progresses toward the center of the coin. Do you have a picture of Sunnywood's toning progression scale? It explains color progression very well. To the OP: sorry about getting your thread off topic. It just seemed like a good place to post some information that might be helpful to newbies who read this thread down the road.

Congrats!

Here is the thread It is hard to follow with all of the off topic posts, but there is a link in the thread to a similar thread on CT that might be easier to keep up with.

"Means this is not real and not American Dollar" You are correct. It is not an American dollar coin. It is a fake coin. There were no American coins minted in 1865 that looked like this.

Terminal toning etches the surface of the coin. So, while not necessarily destroyed, the coin is definitely damaged. Skip Fazzari, who used to post as "Insider," showed pictures of a coin several years ago that had been dipped to remove terminal toning. The etching was very noticable. Edit: I should clarify. It isn't actually the toning itself that causes damage to the coin. The contaminants on the surface caused the damage, and toning is just the evidence of the contamination.

Is it blank on the reverse like the 5 cent token?

If you found it in your car, it probably crawled in there to keep from getting beat up again.

If you will post a link to the auction I will report it, too. I'm sure others will, also. It may not help, but at least we can say we tried.

You should weigh it on a scale that reads to the nearest hundredth gram, and if/when it proves to be a brass plated zinc example, you can put it in a coin album or holder as one of the 7 regular types of cents coined that year by the mint, or spend it, whichever you see fit. It would not grade high enough to make it worth sending it in to be certified.

That's the kind of parking lot coin you want to find!

Good point

I don't think your coin is genuine.

Let's keep it accurate here. A chip off the punch would likely show up as a raised area on the die, which would show up as an incuse area on the coin. A chip off the die would show up as a raised area on the coin.

Actually, the random number theory is more far-fetched. Do some studying about how coins and dies were and are made, and you will understand why. Start with this article: How dies are made

"human is far from perfect" Not me. I'm like Mary Poppins: Practically Perfect in Every Way. In fact, I should probably change my username. I could be Mary Bobbins.

I sent the seller this short-but-to-the-point message < This coin is not rare. There were over 1.5 billion minted in 1967, none of which had a mint mark. They are still often found in circulation.> Ebay link click here

I was able to find another C.K Nixon token in Steve's auction to go with the one posted above. It is a 25 cent piece, also brass. (Photo compliments of ebay seller Steve Hayden - used with permission:)