Kirt

6 hours ago, xyargx said:

Anyone else having an opinion 

The reason there's been no other comment is that Greenstang is correct; the Royal Mint has said it's a 50/50 shot on the incuse lettering.

That came out really well! I would stop right there; really nice coin.

11 hours ago, Rogerreed said:

Its indented slightly where the feather looking area is and at the bottom of the coin it looks like it has a layer or something folded over and pressed to me ill take  better pictures

If you take pictures again please include the obverse - helps a lot to see both sides of the coin. From your pictures, there does appear to be an indentation between the two wheat stalks (those are the feather looking things) but as Greenstang said it's also possibly a stain or toning, and most lamination errors I've seen have those straight edges and clear separation he describes. Can't tell 3D from pictures! I can't see the layer folded over at the bottom of the coin.

To help manage expectations on this; the cent is heavily circulated and not worth much. It's much easier to conclude on errors when there's light or no circulation, and even if you can determine it's a lamination error the value won't go up due to the condition. Sometimes it's easier to just shrug your shoulders, mutter "huh, neat" and move on.

I've seen quite a few pointy-chinned Lincolns post-82; always chalked it up to strong strikes. I guess I better take a second look.

Looks like a woody. Lots of different opinions on why that happened but the one I see most commonly is incomplete alloy mixing. It's not unusual in wheaties - some folks seem to love it, some folks hate it.

I'm iffy on the XF for the reverse; the wheat kernels - I would like them to be more distinct but they're not and there's that issue with the tip of the left wheat stalk.

Nice pics and yes, nice coin - except for the M in America, strong strike for the year/mint!

It would; they switched to clad in 1965 with silver proofs re-introduced in 1992. If you think you have a silver dime, check the weight - it should be 2.5g. Clad coins are lighter. I don't offhand know if the post 92 proofs are the same weight as the pre-64 strikes but those should be readily identifiable.

To help further, try to get clear pictures of both sides of the coin and crop them so the coin is the majority of the image.

I'm seeing a very little machine doubling or plating bubbles in the 3rd pic; 4th looks more like machine doubling but could be plating as well. This is not the DDO you're looking for, sadly.

You had it right - it's a scratch.

22 hours ago, Just Bob said:

I don't think that identifying the year will add anything to the value. That one is only worth a cent,  if you can get someone to accept it.

It is copper, though, so as Karen Holcomb suggested in another thread, it might be worth saving in case you need to melt it down to make ammo for the Zombie Apocalypse. 

Wait, what? I was keeping my Morgans to melt for ammo for vampires and werewolves...are you saying I need to keep copper too for zombies?

18 hours ago, Melissa6456 said:

Thank u.I read everywhere that vinegar and water cannot hurt a copper penny.apparently they are full of .that makes me sad that I ruined my oldest penny but I do still have my steel 1943 penny lol.I'm really interested in pennies.I thought that it was way too much for me to remember every type of coin and every error but I stuck to pennies for some reason.they're more interesting

There's (unfortunately) a lot of bad advice out there. I've heard the same said of toothpaste, Drano, borax, ketchup, baking soda, aluminum foil, green rose thorns, dish soap, and any number of concoctions marketed directly at coin collectors. But look at it this way - you're in the company of a good number of historical collectors, as well as a lot of us here who tried some things before realizing it's a bad idea to clean coins. Besides, it's not like you did it to an extremely valuable coin - I know it's your oldest but it's also no big deal. I hope you rinsed it thoroughly - if not, do that right away - and keep it. 

Agreed - the coin in the photo you posted and the coin the barcode resolves to are different coins; the one in your image is actually a better coin.

How much experience does this seller have with past coin sales? If they appear to be new, maybe (benefit of the doubt) they just don't know any better and the level of suspicion this sort of thing would raise. For other items it's completely acceptable to obscure serial numbers...although the photoshopped coin image is truly sketchy.

The bar code: https://www.ngccoin.com/certlookup/4429002-007/45/

Thanks for the reverse - sadly, didn't help. I'm either wrong on Guangxu (光绪), my search ability is insufficient, or it too is a tourist token. There appears to be damage on the xu ideogram so I'd guess I'm interpreting that wrong.

Another option, the "guang" ideogram (光) is more like Vietnamese than Chinese examples; I took a quick look but nada.

Good luck on this one - I'd definitely be interested in what it turns out to be.

Great pics - I think the first one may be a modern replica/tourist token; looks like someone's idea of Taiping but the coinage is modern.

The second looks real. Need a solid picture of the back of the coin even if blank to help further but I think I can make out enough on the obverse to guess at Guangxu (Qing dynasty). I'd start there.

9 hours ago, JKK said:

Are the adult images any good? Don't care about the coin, but...

Sadly, the only ones I saw were some really awful counterfeits of bone snuff boxes. Adult, yes - quality...I'd give them an AG.

Back to OP's bullion: while the seller on AliExpress is sketchy as heck on an even sketchier site, the Shanghai Mint itself has at least some issues that have been certified by NGC. That doesn't mean boo about the item pictured, just that the purported mint actually exists and has some credibility. I would see if you can find a reputable bullion dealer with a lot of Shanghai Mint inventory, and see what s/he thinks about the coin.

@kbbpll & @Just Bob,

Gentlemen, please...the cent in question has had a hard life, it's true, but if it can find some other cent to love it there's nothing we can see about its genotype that would indicate a proliferation of gouged, dinged, and otherwise deformed progeny! At the very least, it's still a purebred rather than one of those horrid Zincoln mutts. 

Yup, you got it. Top small date, bottom large date.

Looks like private bullion from a Chinese coin company.

23 hours ago, Greenland said:

 I could say my eyes are getting old.. I'm only trying to do my best. thank you.

Errors are not my focus, but the handful of true DDs I have seen (all of which are not valuable) are immediately visible to the naked eye. The devices look weird and it immediately causes eye strain. You don't need a microscope or loupe to find them.

If you're going to have DD be a focus of your collecting, Variety Plus will help - here's the one for Memorial cents: https://www.ngccoin.com/variety-plus/united-states/cents/lincoln-cents-memorial-reverse-1959-2008/819470/?page=1. Take a look at the DD entries; for example look at the '68 and '69 S DDOs. While the '68 is just barely visible to the naked eye, the 69 S is very apparent. If you look at the price guide and do a quick auction search, that will tell you all you need to know: there's not much on the '68 but very specific info on the '69 S. The latter is valuable; the former -- well, it's worth what someone will pay. Yes, it's an error - but it's not an error that is highly collectible. After specializing, you'll be able to tell when a coin doesn't "look right" and is worth a second look; becoming familiar with what to look for to detect really valuable errors will give confidence a gem won't slip by.

Sorry, not a DDO. Looks like maybe just a hint of MD from the 9 and the 6.

I think you're about right on grade; I do see what looks like wear so AU.

As to your thinking on sending in, it totally depends on what you are trying to achieve, and if you're playing with disposable income versus treating it like an investment. The reason most folks don't send in coins like this is that the value of the coin would be eaten up by the cost of grading and encapsulating it. Let's be generous and say the coin straight grades AU 58, so according to NGC price guides is valued at $47.50. Let's also be really generous and say that you were given the coin so your investment in it is $0. Sending it in via economy tier is $22 plus shipping both ways - call it another $20 in total, or $42 to get it graded.

Now let's be incredibly generous and say you've got a buyer at the NGC price guide price. The coin in its current airtite cost you nothing, so you made $47.50. Enjoy that burger & beer! But if you had it graded & slabbed, you have to take out the $42 - so you've made $3.50. Enjoy your Starbucks espresso.

Of course the real world doesn't work like the one I just described; you've got money sunk in the coin already, buyers always pay under price guides, and I went best case on grading. You can see how a coin that is worth a little bit now would very quickly turn into something you'd end up selling at a loss. Would it be easier to sell a graded coin? Yes, of course...if it straight grades. It's your thinking and your money so therefore your choice - some folks like the assurance that they can sell it quickly, some folks like all their coins in the same little boxes - it's up to you what that's all worth!

Mint mark looks fine to me; are you worried it's fake? I'd call it VG-8.

Well, for the mint mark it's just damage, sorry to say. I also don't see any DD on the rest of the coin but we'll see what the error experts say.

Are those green specks just camera artifacts or is the coin surface that way?

At first I was thinking belt buckle for the 1937 but it's mounted wrong. It strikes me as too big to be a decorative stud for a belt...maybe for a boot, leather vest, or saddlebags? Leave it in the mounting; removing it will likely impair it further and it's a decent looking coin!