Oldhoopster

Always can use an updated reference book, especially to build on one that's over 60 years old.  The amount of new info that's available must be staggering.  

Btw, I'm not a trade dollar collector, but as a young collector in the 70s I would search at coin shows, local shops and the backs of the numismatic publications to find reference books, but usually I was stuck with the redbook.  As the new references started to proliferate in the late 80s and early 90s, I bought lots of books, even if I only had 1 or 2 coins in that series.  Turns out I learned a lot from those books.  

On 1/23/2022 at 11:40 PM, tj96 said:

Maybe, maybe not.

Just trying to put out some factual info to help people make a better decision.  If you're only looking for attribution, such as errors and varieties, especially for those where grade isn't a significant part of the value, then ANACS or ICG may be a cost effective option, but overall you'll likely to receive a lower offer for graded coins in these slabs

Like it or not, that's the way the current market works.  As long as you're aware of it, there's nothing wrong with using them, but to recommend them to a newbie without that caveat isn't much help.

On 1/23/2022 at 10:44 PM, tj96 said:

Not with ANACS it is!

Yes, but when it comes time for you or your heirs to sell, many dealers and collectors will pay less for ANACS.  You may be paying less up front, but may lose more than that later.  Not saying it's fair, but that's the reality of the market.

On 1/23/2022 at 9:52 PM, Chester Wall said:

Thank you all for the info. I guess I have some work to do. I’m trying to gauge which ones to get graded. 

Getting a coin graded is going to cost approx $50-$60, so you want to meet and sure that the coin is worth sending in.  No sense in grading a $5 coin.

On 1/23/2022 at 2:05 PM, GBrad said:

Good info here Hoopster.  Thank you.  Just to set my thought processes straight here, if these proof coins do not contain any iron, and they only pure silver and copper even in the layer forms as you described, how could rust could happen if there's not any iron in the mix?  Especially if an entire coin has rusted.  To me that means it would have to contain a considerable amount of iron???  Thanks.

A pic will make all the difference.  Could be toning that's mistaken for rust, or the coin could have been in contact with iron and the rust stained the surface.  Until we can see the coin, everything is just speculation.

See if you can find an exact match here

Www.doubleddie.com

Www.varietyvista.com

On 1/22/2022 at 1:38 PM, GBrad said:

Hello Chris.  Your 1969-S Proof I don't believe could possibly rust granted it was struck on its intended planchet.  Being comprised of 40% silver and 60% copper, neither one of these elements are predisposed to, or are able to, rust.  I'm not a professional metallurgist but unless your half somehow contains iron, which it shouldn't..... I don't see how it could actually rust.

FYI

Just to clarify.  40% silver coins have a 3 layer clad composition.  The outter layers are 80% Silver and 20% copper while the inner core is 21% silver 79% copper.

Someone using the same username used to post outrageous claims on CT a few years ago.  He was eventually banned (for using multiple accounts I think). 

Hopefully, he will clarify his post here and the group can give him a good answer

They are die chips.  As others have mentioned, they aren't rare and don't add any additional value, but still cool IMO.  Nothing wrong with keeping it if you like it

Agree.  Definitely damaged after it left the mint

I'm not a CBH collector, but the weak/missing dentictles along the rim are common on Chinese counterfeits.  

A bisecting die crack is a cool find does carry a premium.  I haven't purchased errors in a while but a rough guess for yours is in the $15-30 range on ebay.  Maybe more on a good day with the right bidders.  That would put it in the "not worth slabbing" and "not interesting to auction houses" territory, but definitely a keeper

The 69D may have gotten a bump due to the die collapse/subsidence.

Yours is not listed in the RRDC (rim to rim die crack) section of Cuds on coins

http://cuds-on-coins.com/rim-to-rim-die-cracks-on-u-s-coins-2/

Edit to add

JP had his recent find listed on Cuds on coins

Get used to it.  Happens to me about every 4-6 days. You have to use the work around posted above to get back in. 

On 1/16/2022 at 10:56 PM, VKurtB said:

So how many “workers” do you imagine are out there carrying Morgans as pocket pieces to lower their grades? It’s a sick concept. 

No.  Rock tumblers in the back room.  Much faster.  Then carry them around with other dirty coins for the aged look.

Don't forget, beyond the US, there isn't much interest in errors

Your coin isn't an error, it's a variety.  In my very limited knowledge of 19th century British coins, there does appear to be an interest in the numerous die varieties.  I've heard of the predecimal.com being referenced as a resource for British coins.  You might want to post on their forum for more info.  And please post anything back here. I would like to learn more, but don't have the time to do the research (way too many coins of my own that need research)

The forked 6 is known but couldn't find much on it.

http://www.predecimal.com/forum/topic/5286-1862-farthing/

If you can ID the emperor (for Roman imperial), the following is a good site to search for ancient coin identification. You can also use it for Greek and Roman republic issues. Once you have a little experience, it's not much harder than attributing large cents by Sheldon number

I also believe theY have a partial legend search.  

Www.wildwinds.com

I would not recommend performing a scratch test on ancients.  The silver/gold levels can vary depending on the time period, mint, etc.  I don't see the need to add damage, even in a discrete location.   Just my opinion, your mileage may vary.

On 1/15/2022 at 12:31 PM, Quintus Arrius said:

 

I had no idea 1972 Kennedies were worth so much.  All of mine are sitting in a kitchen drawer. In my mind, a clad coin is incapable of attaining any value beyond face.  But, then again, I hadn't realized so much time (50 years) had transpired.

Not sure if you're referring to  all 1972 halves, but just to clarify, 1972 and 1972D halves are worth face value.  A variety that carries a premium is the 1972D that's missing the designers initials on the reverse. 

On 1/15/2022 at 6:32 AM, Quintus Arrius said:

My understanding is  many of the lower denomination notes, which bore the brunt of wear and tear, like Silver Certificates, exhibit this look.  This bill was printed by the BEP in Washington, D.C., c.1934, for distribution to the FRB's district in Philadelphia, PA. [The BEP also printed larger denominations such as $500 - McKinley, $1000 - Cleveland, $10,000 - Chase [and $10,000 - Wilson, for dedicated, inter-FRB use between the twelve districts in the nation.]

Considerations in grading are many but are centered primarily on age, paper quality (exeptionally crisp versus worn out used bills; with little or no folding, holes, staining) and scarcity.  Obviously, the older notes withdrawn from circulation after being forwarded to the FRB, and then, on to Washington, D.C., command the highest premiums.  Their respective availability gets smaller or remains the same with each passing year. Price, as always, is predicated on demand.

Fyi

The note in this revived, 2 year old thread is a series 1934C.  They were printed in approx 1948.

@RWB I always enjoy these snippets of info.  It's always good to learn something new.

Nicely polished   

The LIBERTY and QUARTER DOLLAR are from a weak strike, not damage.  Maybe from a slightly titled die, or even possibly a filled die error.  Notice how the weakness is directly opposite on each side.  Maybe the graders felt the weakness was due to a minor error and did not down grade for it.

I agree with the others and don't like this coin as a 66.  My recommendation is that if the weakness bothers you, sell the coin and buy one you like.  Many times, a coin like this in your collection will always bother you.  Dump it and chalk it up to a learning experience. Might be a good candidate for Great Collections.  Nothing wrong if you want to keep it, that's just my opinion

I believe @DWLange wrote about it in his Lincoln cent book but I don't have access to my copy (buried in box waiting for me to find a place for my library after a recent move)

Agree with @l.cutler  Your coin has what is commonly called zinc rot, and is not an error

Since mid-1982, cents are made from copper plated zinc. the plating is approx 8 microns (0.0003") thick and if it gets breached, the underlying zinc can start to corrode.  It's similar to getting rust on your car from a scratch in the paint