MarkFeld

It sounds like a “filled die” error. Either way, I doubt it would add a lot of value.

Yes, coins of that type can tone to that extent. I’d suggest looking at lots of on-line images of NGC and PCGS BN and RB mint state Indian cents. And for that matter, look at images of “uncirculated details, cleaned” examples, too. You’ll hopefully start to get a feel for what such coins are supposed to look like.

Based on comments I read about the holder/label being off and the PCGS cert number not checking out in the CAC database, the two most likely scenarios are that the coin is counterfeit or that a genuine one was inserted into that holder. The coin looks genuine to me, but does not match the MS68:example that was auctioned.

Unfortunately, the coin exhibits a highly unnatural, cleaned appearance. That is not natural color for an Indian cent.

Your 1971-S proof set is worth about $5.

Even if the weight had been light, if the coin had been an error of the type you thought, the size and color would be different.

Thank you and I reported the third seller, as well.

I and others have reported them, but the more, the better.

Last time I looked, all dollars currently listed (and already sold) by those sellers were counterfeit. And it’s highly unlikely that they’re made of silver.

Many dealers who buy such coins work on much tighter buy-sell spread than that. I’d expect approximately a $4 spread on the coin, rather than $9.

The first and third coin each look MS62 to me and the second one, MS63. Even if they were to sticker (at whatever grades they are,) I don’t think it would make much difference for those coins.

If it’s an error - and it doesn’t look like it to me - it’s meaningless, as are many errors.

As you can see, that’s very different looking than “textile toning”.

That’s definitely a large date.

Many counterfeits are of the correct weight and are even made out of gold. A decent dealer will be able to look at and authenticate the coins in hand in a matter of seconds.

While I can’t guarantee it, the $20’s look genuine. But they are probably only worth their melt value or slightly more. And I agree with RWB about the 1921 Morgan looking suspicious. It has the coloring (resulting from artificial aging) seen on many counterfeits.

I don’t necessarily agree that the $20’s are worth getting graded. There are plenty of buyers who can easily determine whether they’re genuine and who are willing to buy them, as is. If they were in better condition and more valuable relative to their gold content, I might feel differently.

Welcome to the forum. Yes, the pattern you’re asking about is referred to as “textile toning”, the result of the coin being in contact with the bag in which it resided for a long period of time. That’s an especially prominent example.

Welcome to the forum. I can' tell what it is, but regardless, I can't imagine it adding value or that it would be worth it to submit the coin for grading.

I haven’t worked as a grader since 1998 and won’t try to speak for others. As for myself, however...often, I didn’t use magnification, other times I used 5x and on rare occasions, stronger. My decisions weren’t typically based on any particular contemplated grades. But rather, they were based on factors such as the size of the coin, whether the surfaces were noticeably toned, when I was having difficulty determining whether a flaw was man-made vs. mint-made and potential value of the coin. Again, nothing approaching a formula.

As Coinbuf stated, there is no formula. Among the considerations, however, would be the size, location and number of spots. Then add to that, a bit of subjectivity and inconsistency. Based just on the pictures you posted, the coin looks 67RD to me. But in addition to flaws already mentioned, there look to be quite a few rim ticks/hits on each side.

It’s a bit light, but unless it also looks noticeably undersized, I doubt that it’s anything out of the ordinary.

In answer to the question as to whether the coins would bring more as a set - I think that in most cases, they would bring less. That’s because, while some buyers might want to buy an entire set at once, many more would not. Many buyers would want to acquire one or more coins and might pay good money for them, but would have no interest in an entire set. So they would be eliminated as potential buyers of a set. Said differently, if you offer the coins as a set, you’re eliminating many potential buyers of individual coins.

That’s not an SMS quarter.

😄