powermad5000

Hello and welcome to the forum! When posting a question about a specific coin, please be sure to lead with a photo of the obverse and a photo of the reverse, the entire coin, fully cropped. There may be things we need to see that tie in to your question. While I agree with @RWB regarding the floating leaves, I do think the filled O happened from a die chip. I would like to see the full photos of the coin to be able to say confidently however.

Seeing as there is a break in the actual lower nostril, I think this is a VAM 14.5 Open Nostril. I'll let the others chime in as well.

Before either confirming or denying this question or claim, I would like to see full photos of both sides of the coin.

It lost some weight, but it still needs a tummy tuck. Or Sonobello.

Hello and welcome to the forum! To start, you need to crop your photos much better than this. You images are mostly background and least coin. It makes it hard for us with old eyes to see what you have. I used my phone to take a pic of your top pic and all three are large date. The "unicorn" you are referring to is the 1982 D small date bronze transitional, of which only two have been found. It would weigh between 3.05-3.08g (possibly less if it is worn heavily) which were the given weights of the two found in AU. I do note, your scale is one of the cheaper pocket scales which in my opinion are not accurate, and the calibration of which are consistently questionable. 2.5g are zinc core, and 3.11g are the bronze. As far as your question on worth, any of these circulation cents which were minted in the numbers of billions are going to be worth at or near face value. The only one "worth" any premium is the "unicorn". And there is probably hundreds of thousands of people looking for a third which in my humble opinion is not going to ever be found.

Hello and welcome to the forum! You have an interesting error coin! It looks like the die was cracked and I can only think that disturbance led to the weakness and missing lettering on the reverse. What I am curious about is what is that on the reverse under the O in ONE CENT? There looks like a strange circular shape. As far as the value of this error, and all errors in general, I wish this answer was more helpful to you, but it is worth whatever someone is willing to pay for it. Each error is unique, and some errors are more "common" than others such as struck through errors, which don't gain much premium. I think you would not go wrong to reach out to Sullivan Numismatics as mentioned by member @Sandon. They specialize only in error coins. I would think they wouldn't mind taking a look at your cent here and providing you with an opinion on its condition and worth. One other thing I am curious about it is where did you acquire this cent? Did you buy it from a seller or dealer? Also, I just want to say this one is pretty cool!

Hello and welcome to the forum! If you are seeking a grade on this coin I could provide that here. It is at best XF Details - Damaged. Its value is face value. If you are inquiring about submitting this coin to a third party grading service, continue to read my comments. There seems to be some surface environmental damage to your coin causing it to have a "gritty" or "sandblasted" look. Also, I note on the obverse some circular scratches from a coin roll wrapping machine. These modern coins need to be in gem BU to even consider them to be worth the cost of submitting to a TPG. Especially in a single coin submission, a modern tier coin costs $19 to grade, but you also have to add cost of shipping to and from the grading service which will run you about $30 each way. There is also a $10 handling fee applied to all orders. You would also need to shell out an additional $50 to become a basic member to have the ability to submit. It would run you about $130 for a TPG to grade this one coin which its value is face value. So, your answer to sending this for grading is no. As you are new, I would encourage you to avail yourself of the resources mentioned by member @Sandon.

Prices have come down a little bit but for the most part, yes.

I am at about 83% of making the full set of MS 64 FBL splattered with some MS 65 FBL's. If I get back anything less than MS 64 FBL, I will upgrade it. Some day I will complete this set. Where I am at right now, I built the whole thing from raw coins, but the empty slots are getting really hard to fill in the grade I want so I might just have to bite the bullet and complete the rest of the set with ones already slabbed.

An XF obverse. I didn't take a pic of the reverse as it graded low to me. Just saying why I don't think the OP's is high AU.

Very well then. How about you submit this coin to NGC as a mint error and get back to us on this thread with the results. I want to see a picture of it in the slab with the submission number. By the way, if the label says Damaged, it means it happened after it left the mint. I'll wait...

If it happens at the mint, it is not damage per se. It is an error. Capped coins are not damage. Nor are struck throughs, grease filled dies, off center strikes, rotated dies, broadstrikes, brockages...none of those things are damage. A coin struck with cracked dies is also not damage. It is a coin struck with a die that has cracks, not a damaged coin. I think you are confusing coins with physical damage done to them after they left the mint with coins that have an issue during striking. Do you consider your quarter with a cud in the other thread an error or a damaged coin?

In my humble opinion, I would put this coin at AU 50 being the obverse clasp has no detail and the hair of Liberty is more worn to that level and I would go with the obverse as the overriding factor. What does the ANACS label say as far as grade? As far as cleaning goes, many of these half dollars were cleaned and I really couldn't tell if yours was unless I had it in hand to tilt it to the light at different angles to see if any hairlines appear. Unless it was harshly cleaned, it is very difficult to tell if it is from just a single photo. If you were hellbent on cracking it out and it came back as AU Details, would it be worth it? I might just leave it as is if the current label doesn't say that.

With as much experience I do have, I am still learning. There is so much to know in this hobby I think I will get to the end of my time and still not know everything. I would have made the list in Variety Plus for VAM 14.1, 14.1A, 14.10, 14.11, 14.12, etc. That is why I didn't see it at first. I had to keep scrolling to get to it. I guess I organize differently than others. LOL! While I am not a registry participant, I am glad you are still able to put this coin into yours. I agree. There are just so many VAMS out there and I have very few of the total of them by comparison. I don't think it is a very populous VAM so congrats on having one. Yeah, I mean you could cross it over, but as a $$ thing I don't see why. I think at the point of when this coin might eventually be sold (I speak this way because I will go to the grave and someone else is going to do something with my coins) I don't think the crossover would help it add any value, and I don't see it changing anything except one word on the label. Well, maybe two since NGC calls it something different. And it wouldn't change the points it would get in the registry. So that's why I say to just leave it as is.

Well, it seems you have already identified this coin correctly. Here is a link to it on Numista which has the weight, diameter, and thickness. There is a variety in the series for large lion and small lion but I don't see a designation for a difference in the lion for the year of your coin but if there is yours is the small lion. As for which mint it was made at, I am not sure as I don't see a mintmark or small dot on it. According to Numista, this coin in AU is listed for $8. In my humble opinion, your coin exhibits some very light circulation wear so I would put it at that grade level and approximate value. https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces7178.html It is nearly impossible to tell if a coin is counterfeit from just a photo unless it is a very poor counterfeit with missing or altered details. Outside of that, it takes the coin being in hand to check weights, diameter, thickness, and if necessary tests to confirm its metal composition. I hope what I have provided you with the Numista link helps in your checking of these facts to determine its authenticity. I would guess you have less to worry about as this is not a typical target of counterfeiters although in these days you never know what someone will do next. I hope this helps.

My bad. It is not in order, at least not the way I would put it. And they are calling it Eye Spikes not Wild Eye which is probably why my eye didn't pick it up right away. Either way good sir, I still wouldn't bother with trying to cross this over just so the paper label says DETAILS on it. I just don't think it is worth spending the $$. It is your coin, however, and you can do what you like to do with it.

I could be wrong but if it is not listed on their Variety Plus page it is a variety they don't recognize. It might be in the registry set for those who have PCGS ones, but as far as NGC grading, they don't recognize every VAM just as they don't recognize every different variety on other series of coins. Someone can correct me if I am wrong.

I don't see any point in trying to cross this coin over to an NGC slab. In NGC's Variety Plus, they only list VAM 14.1 and 14.1A. It seems they don't recognize VAM 14.11 or it would be listed. That said, if you crossed this coin over, it would lose its current VAM designation. It has a really big rim ding that any grader would knock this coin down to a details grade without a straight numerical grade. As a collector of these, I have to say that rim ding would have caused me to pass by if it were a raw coin, regardless of the VAM designation. I also agree with @Coinbuf it also appears to have had a harsh cleaning. I think it has too many things going against it for you to spend any more extra money on plastic and a paper label.

The arrow in your photo is pointing at the small set of steps on the right side of Monticello. I also see the die chip between the building and the F of FS. Could you elaborate a little on what I am supposed to be focusing on?

I think what you are seeing are linear plating blisters. If I am wrong, the others will surely correct me. I also see a plating bubble under the Y in LIBERTY. I have seen many of these copper plated zinc cents of this era and especially the 90's with these linear plating blisters that can be in many different directions and found in differing areas on the coin, some short, some spanning across the entire coin from rim to rim.

Why do I see some of the silver look of the zinc showing through, especially on the rim? I have informed you before about posting about paper money in this forum. Great. I will wait until you return to this thread with a pic of the coin in the holder.

The one in this thread. As a matter of fact, all of the 1921 Morgans. Pre pandemic a 1921 (P) used to go for around $25-30 for an MS 62-63. Currently that price has doubled. And get into higher grades and sometimes it goes exponentially up. 1881 S is another one. You used to be able to get an MS 65 for about $175-$200 pre pandemic. I have seen auctions for one of these go as high as $400 in MS 65. It's across a lot of the series. And it is not just lowball Morgans. Even some of the higher dollar specimens have gone up by thousands at the gavel. Here's another. Try this. Go to the NGC Price Guide for Morgans and find 1883 CC. Click on the MS 63 Price. There are two spikes in it happening after the pandemic began. You can click on many others and see the same trends.

I shall maintain after collecting and studying coins for 45+ years, that I will stick to what I know. Like you said, we will agree to disagree. Good luck to you sir!

These "First Strikes" and others with signed labels and early releases and even one label numbered with 239 from the last coin struck, are all just marketing gimmicks that turned me off completely from collecting anything with these kinds of designations. It basically makes it near impossible for anyone to assemble a complete set if there are so many "labels" to collect and then to throw actual numbered examples into the mix just destroys any collecting commonalities. It also inflates prices for these pieces which in the end are merely bullion.

Uh oh! I think we are at the point of waking up @Henri Charriere on the difference in nomenclature between penny and cent!