RWB

Combination of minor mechanical doubling (very common) and damage.

Differences in strike detail should have little effect on grading a coin. The key element is the observed change from the coin's original condition to its present state.

The coin is EF and has been harshly cleaned. Consider offering him a conditional sale: you'll buy the coin if it comes back from NGC straight grade of EF-45 or better. Even then, it's worth about 2/3rds of his asking price. (This is the 3rd most common New Orleans mint quarter.) Just because "They are both very old and don't really use the internet," doesn't mean they won't try to gouge you for every cent.

The ammunition in his cartridge belt, will not fit the pistol in his holster. Also, the background "trees" resemble a "tree farm" planting and not a natural forest.

The difference are critical and can be captured in good photos, but it requires skills the ANA photographer lacked.

"It came upon the Google search, that valuable pile of gold; Hysteria looming far over head, from just another lie told."

To me, the photos do little to differentiate a true AU ("AU-58") from all the UNC versions and thus don't show the details that separate one grade from the other. In this mashup, a "MS62" and a "MS67" hardly differ. The photos are nice illustrations for EF and lower, but hardly usable as grading examples. Thanks for posting the link.

That's from incomplete detail. Look at other letters near the rim. Top of T is almost invisible.

Numismatically? Nothing. Anyway, I already won a Mega-MIllions Lottery. My ticket paid $4.

RE: "Is this a die crack?" Nope. It's a tiny lobster with a damaged right claw. (Red arrow points to crustacean.) The photo Mr.Bill347 posted is of a numismatic crack-out artist at work. You'll occasionally see these at larger coin shows, etc.

Damage. Hope the rest of the collection is better.

Yep. Fake. Open your Dad's copy of the Guide Book of U.S. coins and compare those photos with your fake.

A very simple way to squeeze money out of damaged and badly worn Trade dollars is to add fake "chops." Foolish people will then pay more than junk-box $$ for these imitations. Kind of like what the Colorado counterfeiter does to produce fakes.

I was reviewing the origins of the young portraits and combinations made with language and font styles. Back then I could not find photos of sufficient quality and resolution to allow me to examine hand engraving details. Sooo...I saved by pennies ,,,errrr "cents" and eventually found a beautiful proof with just a little nice toning. That allowed me to complete what I was working on. The coin was so attractive that I decided to keep it. It always gets an admiring look whenever I visit the bank box. (I have a medal from sculptor Heidi Wastweet that's in the same category -- except it was bought solely for its magnificence.)

I now have digital offprints of this article and will send one to any individual for their personal use. Send me a PM with your email if you want a copy.

Rykel: Your cent is damaged/mutilated. It is not an "error" of any kind. Now, please step away from your "smart phone" and "U-Tube" hysterical coin videos. You've been given honest, reasonable suggestions above. As a new collector you have zero knowledge or experience and should listen to the members here and learn. Thank you.

This little table is a draft result of searching multiple documents for proof coins struck in 1879. Something similar is being done for as many years as possible so we have the most accurate information for collectors to use. Sometimes source documents disagree and we have to add secondary sources such as proportions in auction records. Those curious about the monthly Trade dollar quantities should remember that from 1879 forward Trade dollars were not coins - they were struck as medals and as such do not appear in most coinage records.

It's been my observation that gold plated medals seem to always have defects. What have you noticed?

The scratch overlays part of the rim at left, then continues at uniform width across but not touching the right rim. Notice the plowed up metal just above the wing. Die cracks are not this uniform and regular -- they follow invisible crystal boundaries. Might have been done with a knife -- seems too deep for a staple -- and the coin was used long after it was scratched. Compare details to the 1921 dollar.

Trying to analyze the date/mint/denomination distribution of a hoard is pointless unless provenance to this hoard can be established for all pieces under consideration.

Do they mention "Bi-valve" cracks, too....

Notice that the winner's name was punched into an inset which fit in a space on the Bison side die. This was a good way to avoid the occasionally sloppy manually engraved names found on many award medals. The same "inset recipient die" approach was used on the Columbian Exposition medals made by Scovill for the Commission.

Hmmm....If West Point Mint ships the coins to the distributor in FIFO order, and the distribution center maintains this identical order, then the coin might be among those struck during the first 30 days of production. However, distribution order to the wholesale buyers has no relationship to striking date or order of manufacture - the two are separate actions. BTW -- very nice looking ASE !

Minor semantic issue. "Shattered" means a die has broken into pieces and those pieces are no longer connected. This coin was struck from a "broken" or "cracked" die with retained cud.

Minor die chip of no special value. Please stay away from the U-Tube videos. You'll learn much more by asking questions here.