powermad5000

I had another thought this morning on this topic. To add twist to attempting to achieve the goal of figuring out this number, I started thinking about some lower mintages of older issues. I'll just use the 1916 D Mercury Dime as an example. With only 264,000 minted, if there were more than 264,000 collectors of older coinage and especially these dimes, none of these would be available for sale as they would all be residing and filling that slot in each collection, yet, there are still many examples available for sale and these come up in AG and G in auctions frequently. That means either collectors don't want it in these grades or that there are not that many collectors to deplete the number for them to be available.

Which led me to think then we have collectors all scattered about all the different issues and some who only collect by specialty such as error collectors. We have collectors who collect only ASE's and nothing else. We have collectors that only collect Lincoln Wheats and nothing else. We have collectors that only collect anything from the Barber series (dimes, quarters, halves) and nothing else. We have collectors that only collect Capped Bust halves and nothing else. This then also adds to the impossibility of trying to pin down the total number of collectors overall.

The pics are a little too blurry to tell for sure if there even is any kind of doubling on it. From what I can tell, if there is any doubling it would be some sort of strike/mechanical doubling or one of the nicknamed Poor Mans 1955 DDO which isn't a true hub doubled coin but rather from an overpolished die I believe. Many of these are for sale on sites like eBay but there are some unscrupulous sellers on sites like Etsy and Temu that will try to pass these off as the real deal.

Either way, this is not a coin I would submit to a TPG for grading.

On 4/21/2024 at 2:00 PM, JKK said:

I never used those because I was the A/P and cash manager, but I did work for a gasket cutting and die making shop. It's possible there are punches that tiny, but that would mean very small bolt holes--as in smaller than on flatpack furniture kits. Most of ours were more like 1/2" to 1" wide. If we had punches that small, we never mounted them inside a die that I knew of. I'm not sure how you'd even bend the steel rule to make such a probably tiny die.

Everything we had at that shop was ancient as far as tooling went. We had them from 1" all the way down to 3/16". There may have been a 1/8" one originally but if there was I am sure it got so trashed someone probably threw it out. It was a cool set, but most of them were well worn out and when management was asked to get us new ones because most of them only cut half the rubber out of the hole, we got the standard answer of "Well, just try to sharpen them somehow and get them to work".

Hello and welcome to the forum!

It only took me a few seconds with a look at the date numerals to know these are all counterfeits. The 7 is missing the uptick, the 9 is missing the knob, and the 4 is missing the uptick and is incorrectly shaped. As well as all the numerals look lower and smaller than on an original. I did not really need to examine the reverse.

The fact that these do not stick to a magnet is because they are probably mostly nickel with some other cheaper metals like tin and copper mixed in.

Some of the Chinese counterfeits have been close to the weights of the originals so you can't always go off the weight. These however have obvious differences in detail from a genuine specimen.

On 4/21/2024 at 9:40 AM, ldhair said:

I'll guess a gasket punch was used.

I used those at my old job. I would think striking metal with it that it wouldn't last very long without totally trashing the end on it. We set the gaskets on a wood block to try to keep the punches from getting dulled out too quickly. I think those are a pretty much really old way of doing it as I think today they cut gaskets with a laser. Much faster and a much better cut.

On 4/21/2024 at 4:18 AM, Ceegan Clingan said:

It is a newer type yes, it is where foreign materials get pressed on a coin and either the obverse or reverse retained the material. Exp as in string,fibers, grease, or even other metals.

The only error I have heard of where something gets pressed into the coin is a retained die break where a small piece of the die breaks off right before the coin is struck and that piece of the die becomes embedded into the coin while it is being struck. A strike through is called that because the coin was struck through a foreign object which left the imprint of the object in the coin. Being @VKurtB is active in ANA, perhaps he would like to inform me on this "new" error as I have never seen an error coin with that label.

Looks like someone who lives in your area or in a nearby area is counterstamping coins with this 8.

Hello and welcome!

The instructions for posting are clear and easily understandable. Please provide clear, fully cropped photos of both sides of the coin along with a question.

I cannot give an opinion based upon the photos provided.

Usually don't find a wheatie in the teens. Sweet!

On 4/20/2024 at 3:00 PM, Coinbuf said:

It is possible that his car may have had a tracking device attached to it, thus it is wrong to assume he was not situationally aware and checking to see if he was being followed.

You are correct. I forgot about those darn AirTags. Good additional point! Something we all should also need to start checking when parking at these shows. Do as best you can a check for AirTags on your car. 

On 4/15/2024 at 8:47 PM, Slancman said:

There is a slight point that your missing. I'm among myself and more than likely the folks above, there's probably thousands of people coming into coin collecting,/buying at any given timeand tp them ykur body bay spory means nothing. With that said as a new person coming into a VERY detailed sector of collecting, it is vary off putting not knowing what to expect and then receive this grading. I sent in 4 and 2 of them were "cleaned" according to one or several people depending on who you ask. So without early intervention or education there is a certain feeling on betrayal. When they came in the body bag, I'm sure you didn't pay as much as we're paying for these stabbed  coins.

Not to mention, you long-term guys keep every thing so close to your heart that we have to learn from experience.  Honestly the way yall do things has me seriously second guessing spending any more time on this as a whole. So in actuality all you and NGC are doing is potentially killing off the niche , all too detailed corner of a huge collecting day and age.

 

Instead of making people feel like they got tricked for a fee. I would suggest easier learning , more accessible information on the process. Instead of a form that looks like a president's application for office, just ask about the count , explain the real process and potential negatives.

Even back in the day when coins came back in the "body bags", we still paid the money to NGC to have them looked at. None of us got special treatment or anything for free or discounted from NGC.

None of us long term collectors are "keeping secrets close to the heart" or however you referred to that. It is difficult sometimes depending on how a coin was cleaned to be able to actually tell. Not all cleanings have evidence of hairlines. Coins that were "overdipped" will not have these hairlines but will still be considered as cleaned. I don't know how to tell you that it takes years of experience and looking at thousands and tens of thousands of coins that "weall" have done over many years to be able to learn visually something you are asking us to give you a step by step so you can be an instant expert on. And even those of us with a lot of experience still get some of our coins back in slabs with details grades on them even if we know a lot. I find that comment there by you a little insulting to say the least as we are all just volunteers here and do try to help the people coming to these forums. We however cannot take the place of years and years of hands on coin visual experience that cannot be instantly gratified through a step by step list or education course.

It is also worthy of note that many decades ago, the practice of cleaning coins was considered an acceptable practice and many people did do this to their coins. In the last couple decades however it has changed that that practice is now viewed as damage to the coin's surface and collectors tastes have changed to see that as damage and are now demanding and seeking out coins of exceptional surface.

Your comment here as well as others screams of someone who feels they have been treated unfairly, but the reality is everyone in this forum has experienced the exact same thing you have.

Your Lincoln Wheat cent is environmentally damaged from loss and find, poor storage practices, or circulation abuse, or possibly a combination of all three. It is cull. As noted by @Sandon, any copper coins not properly handled or stored will develop corrosion like this over time. Copper is not as forgiving a metal as is silver or gold and is much more susceptible to corrosion than the two latter. I have a lot of early 1800s copper half and large cents which sadly have environmental damage and corrosion issues. It is difficult to find these cents from this era without these types of issues.

I submitted a 1972 S Ike that was in OGP with the Blue Chip because I noticed after all the years I have owned it (I bought it as a kid) somehow the OGP plastic had gotten a hole in it. I figured it had been exposed to the environment for years not knowing how the hole got in the plastic or how long ago that happened. I was disappointed to find it because I take extremely good care of my coins since I was a kid and this was also kept in the envelope it was in when I bought it. I am only guessing but maybe it got there intentionally by one of my exes. I digress. After submitting this for grading, about a year later when I was rearranging my SDB, I noticed it had developed a white spot around something tiny on the surface. I pulled it out and resubmitted it for NCS Conservation, and the spot has been removed and the coin stable since.

So as an answer to your question, I did experience an issue with mine.

On 4/19/2024 at 12:33 PM, RWB said:

It's a casual emotional observation of little value. To test this theory, a broad selection of identical coins (meaning the SAME coins) would have to be submitted by several "anonymous" collectors and several "well known" dealers. Once the coin-by-coin results were compared, a more rigorous experimental design could be prepared.

SCIENCE!!!!!! YES!!!!! This must be proven through science and actual real world experiments!

As anyone can post any comment on social media, it must be taken with a grain of salt. I agree with @Fenntucky Mike and @Sandon when it comes to this. We in this forum will even argue over the proposed self grade of a coin posted by an OP. And sometimes people do crossover grading or even cut the coin out of the slab and resubmit to a different TPG after they get their submission back to try to get a better grade. Being grading itself is subjective, it is based upon the subject. Whoever made that statement in my opinion is mixing apples and oranges. Every coin has different surface issues (or not), and minor nicks and scratches in different places. It is not accurate for the person who posted that to make that comment unless the EXACT same coin was submitted through him or herself and then resubmitted by a dealer and even in that case it would be graded by two completely different graders who might have a different subjective view of the coin in hand and still assigning it two different grades in the end.

I would assume the dealer simply had better quality coins to submit in the first place.

On 4/13/2024 at 4:28 PM, cladking said:

Nobody is going to spend $20 to grade a 30c coin no matter how tough the coin is to find.

This is listed as $1.00 in the price guide but in reality is worth about 30c. I had my reasons which I don't need to explain.

I don't think the term "hot" will be applicable in the timeframe you suggested. I say that based upon sheer mintage numbers. I think there will be a market for the highest end and Top Pop moderns (as there is now), but being I am still finding Lincoln Wheat cents in cash register change more than 75 years since they were struck, I don't think people will be scrambling for a 1986 Lincoln Memorial cent that there were more than 100x made as compared to the Lincoln Wheats I get in change dated 1945 or 1947.

Most certainly either environmental damage or an attempt at artificial toning gone horribly wrong.

On 4/20/2024 at 3:51 AM, Haydeen said:

They say to use scales that weigh to at least a tenth (0.1) so I would say that my scale is pretty good….

You need scales that weigh to 0.01g. Scales that weigh to 0.1g will either round up or down depending on the weight of the item which isn't helpful for weighing coins.

Also keep in mind a scale that has lost accuracy will weigh the calibration weight and say PASS but still gives incorrect weights.

The scale I use is so accurate and sensitive that you need to turn off the fans in the room and also the heat or AC as well. It can read the air movement of your hand passing by or your breathing. I use the wind shield it came with to get 100% accurate weights.

We can argue about impaired proofs all night, and you have a case on that end, but I still don't see your coin being a proof. I don't think the strike is commensurate with the strike of a proof Morgan. 

I do think the coin was struck from worn dies and the OP thinks incorrectly that effect is a broadstrike.

What I do see that nobody has mentioned, I think there is quite a set of depressions on Abe's cheek, next to his eye, and a large one on his head and hair. That looks to be struck through to me as the design in the hair is still present.

I doubt this was struck from rotated dies. I have not really seen any of these cents with a rotated die error and I think the modern presses have dies with a pin or keyway to keep the dies from rotating if I am not mistaken.

I am not even seeing a strike through. I see some damage and staining and I think the area the OP is referring to is the plating starting to bubble up near the rim and will eventually chip off. I see this cent developing severe zinc rot in the near future.

It also could just be the photo, but I think the obverse around the date and mintmark has split plate doubling.

Hello and welcome to the forum!

I think this is a vise job. Another coin was pressed into this one which explains why it is also bent.

Same. I see a pretty deep gouge with displaced metal around the edges. Post mint damage.

Most certainly not a proof. The details would be crisp, especially in the hair and the eagle on the reverse. It would also have more contrast and frost. There were only 930 proofs struck for this year.

Your coin shows signs of a normal strike although probably struck from a recently changed set of dies. There were limited proofs struck and back when they were struck, unlike today, I seriously doubt a collector would have put their Morgan proof into circulation.

I have a hard time with the answer to this question being what do we define as a collector? Is not someone who bought a Whitman album when the statehood quarters were released and filled such said album as they were released, now having a full statehood quarter album not a collector even if they have collected no other coins? I think they would be considered a "casual" collector. It would be difficult to pin down a number on these people as they will never submit a single coin to a TPG, nor will they ever attend a coin show, but by technical definition are still a collector.

You also have amateur collectors, experienced collectors, and advanced collectors. These would comprise a number that could possibly be pinned down through submissions (but not all collectors submit and I am sure there are still many collectors with extensive collections that are raw).

I would say there is a high percentage of casual collectors which outnumber greatly the amateur, experienced, and advanced combined. To me, it would be impossible to accurately assign a specific number to the posted question.