Just Bob

Came across my flip tokens the other day.  Here's one from your parts @Hoghead515.
Minted by Whitehead & Hoag which would place this token pre 1960, I think, as W&H had been sold to Bastian Bros. in May of ’59. While the W&H name was used up until ’64-’65, I'm not sure if it was used on any products. Got to do a little more digging on that. 

Kentucky Central Insurance Company (KCL) announced plans to move from Louisville to Lexington in ’63, where they occupied the former Lafayette Hotel which had closed earlier that year.  KCL called the old Lafayette home until ’79 when the Kincaid Towers was completed. Garvice Kncaid, after which the towers are named, purchased controlling interest in KCL twenty years earlier and died (1975) prior to the building's completion.

Portions of the movie Steel, starring Lee Majors, Jennifer O’Neill and George Kennedy, were filmed in the summer of ’78 at the partially completed towers. During filming stuntman A.J. Bakunas died from injuries sustained when the safety air bag split upon impact during a 315ft free fall stunt from the 22nd floor of the construction site.



 
Called “The Kentucky Enron” by some, although KCL's demise was prior Enron's, Kentucky Central (Life) Insurance went belly up in the early 90’s, being placed in Rehabilitation on 2//12/1993 and subsequently Liquidation in August of ’94. All assets were liquidated and the estate closed on December 10, 2007.
(Token Catalog) TC-377793 

Civil War Era.

Another Coin Dealer from days gone by.

Not sharing a token per se, at this point; just a bit of token related news. At January’s F.U.N. show in Orlando, I became an ANA certified exhibit judge in Tokens, plus the related category of Medals, Orders, and Decorations. I also renewed my certification in U.S. Coins there, previously earned at the 2017 F.U.N. show in Ft. Lauderdale. 

Heres the obverse. Sorry made 2 post out of it. Wouldnt let me put both in the same post. Ill share the rest on Tue. Give me something to post on Token Tuesday

I just got the tokens in. Both dollar tokens do have the same misspelling as the one shown in the token catalog.  They were probably all stamped from the same dies. There probably wasnt a real big order for these. I wouldnt think anyways. Grahn is a very small place with a very small population. Im very thrilled to add some of its history to my collection. 

I am behind the times, I guess. I prefer my index in the back of the book.

What research would they need to do, in your opinion? Where would they need to look? 
I checked the Annual Reports of the Director of the Mint for 1973 and 1974. There is no record of any coins minted in the US for foreign countries that would be ferromagnetic, so the idea that your coin might have been struck on a foreign planchet is most unlikely. The weight is not right for a steel cent, which rules out a planchet left over from 1943. We know it isn't aluminum, either. The experts at NGC probably already know all of the above information, so I am not sure what more  they could hope to discover.
If you sent your coin to NGC, they very likely would test the weight, analyze the metal content, and check to see if it was attracted to a magnet. PCGS probably did the same. Weighing it would show it to match the weight of a normal cent. Shooting it with an XRF gun would show the presence of a ferromagnetic metal, probably nickel. The magnet test would confirm this. All of this would lead to the most obvious conclusion. 
If you can come up with an explanation other than plating, I would love to hear it.

I believe that is called a job.
 
At least, according to the IRS.

I am behind the times, I guess. I prefer my index in the back of the book.

I am behind the times, I guess. I prefer my index in the back of the book.

I believe that is called a job.
 
At least, according to the IRS.

It looks to have been re-plated after it left the mint. I would guess that the lines are an anomaly caused by the plating process. That would fall under the post-mint damage category.

Unfortunately,.this is not always the case. There are many instances of market grading  - high end AU coins given MS grades due to eye appeal and perceived value. That is exactly what  the OP is concerned about, and it is a real possibility. 

Even though you didn't say this was a "guess the grade," I'm going to toss my opinion out there. I think the nickel will come back as a 66, maybe a 67, no cameo.

Even though you didn't say this was a "guess the grade," I'm going to toss my opinion out there. I think the nickel will come back as a 66, maybe a 67, no cameo.

Even though you didn't say this was a "guess the grade," I'm going to toss my opinion out there. I think the nickel will come back as a 66, maybe a 67, no cameo.

I am harder on my own coins than I am on those that belong to others.

I am a 3 cent fan, too. Nice collector piece.

A lot of evaluation is looking for the high points. Sometimes it's strike weakness, for example, where the full detail was never present; that can look like wear, but is not. You have seen that when you compare your coin to the real deal, it has lost so much detail that it's in the lower grading tier. If it were rare, it'd be worth something, but it's not. Another important thing is to look for the cleaning, which this coin very clearly appears whizzed (abrasively cleaned). Some cleaned coins are whizzed, and some are chemically cleaned. A few are both, which is a special grade of hideous.
To help yourself away from misunderstanding, burn this into your knowledge base: shiny does not automatically equal good. While you might have figured that out by now, notice that the brightness of your coin is unnatural; that is, for its level of wear, it's not the right color. Cleaning tends to cause that. So when you see a coin that looks shiny, look for the detail. Likewise, when you see a coin that looks dull or dark, look for the detail. It might shock you to learn that a very tarnished example of your coin, with full detail, could well be mint state (as in uncirculated). Happens with copper all the time, since Cu is very reactive (including, of course, the Cu that is alloyed with Ag to make your coin).
Detail, detail, detail. For example, a nice Morgan would have details on the cotton leaves and bolls (in her hair), and you'd be able to see some breast feathers on the bird. A lightly struck Morgan could be missing some of that. We look at the detail. If you glance at Roger's example, you'll see weakness on the hair above her ear, some on the cotton, and very much on the eagle's breast. How does one know that those are not wear? The fields are part of the detail. If the coin were circulated, there'd be all sorts of microscratches in the fields. As it stands, Roger's example has attractive fields free of wear (what you are seeing on her cheek and the field by it are bag marks).
When you know what ought to be there, you can see what is not, and then assess whether that absence represents wear or weakness. That will take you very far in coin collecting.

Here is a link to one of the grading sites on the web that uses pictures to which you can compare your coin. The pictures on this site don't enlarge, but you should be able to compare yours and come up with a very close grade. Hint: it will not be MS64. 
https://coinauctionshelp.com/coincollectingapps/coin-types-identification-cart-lite/us-large-dollar-morgan-photograde-lite/

Your responses - the above statement in particular - lead me to believe that a study into how dies are made would benefit you greatly. And that was what Woods was saying, also. He did not mean that if you did not know the reason something happened that you should ignore it. He meant that if, after learning how the process actually worked, you determined that it could not have happened during the minting process, it could be (most of the time) dismissed as post-minting damage.
 
Mr Burdette responded as I was typing this post, and, as usual, he explained things well. Let me just add a link to a long but detailed article that I think will be of help to you. I suggest spending some time reading this and other articles on this subject.
Click Me 
 
Edited to add: Also, if you could post a link to the Washington quarter with the circle that resembles an earring, I would like to take a look at it.

Your responses - the above statement in particular - lead me to believe that a study into how dies are made would benefit you greatly. And that was what Woods was saying, also. He did not mean that if you did not know the reason something happened that you should ignore it. He meant that if, after learning how the process actually worked, you determined that it could not have happened during the minting process, it could be (most of the time) dismissed as post-minting damage.
 
Mr Burdette responded as I was typing this post, and, as usual, he explained things well. Let me just add a link to a long but detailed article that I think will be of help to you. I suggest spending some time reading this and other articles on this subject.
Click Me 
 
Edited to add: Also, if you could post a link to the Washington quarter with the circle that resembles an earring, I would like to take a look at it.

Large date. Easiest way is to look at the 9.

I just moved from that area and pretty sure an alien invasion happened long ago……