Sandon

These all appear to be post-1982 copper plated zinc cents and are all likely worth only their face value of one cent each. The ones that are entirely mint "red' without stains, fingerprints or spots might be worth saving in hard plastic coin tubes or other inert holders or containers, but the others may as well be spent. There's a very slight chance that you have a marketable variety such as a 1984 or 1995 "Redbook" variety doubled die, but we can't tell without cropped, clear photos of the individual coins. This is another reason why, if you want to collect coins, you need to obtain and study the "Redbook", a grading guide, and other necessary resources so that you can evaluate them yourself.

@The Neophyte Numismatist--I was referring to the old, small size (2 inch wide) ANACS holders with a white insert that haven't been used for, I think, about 25 years now. They would say something like "uncirculated details, cleaned, net AU50", like your description of what EAC does. (I have at least one in a safe deposit box but none available to photograph now.) Currently, ANACS, NGC, PCGS and, I think, ICG just give an adjectival "details" grade for an impaired coin, followed by a brief (usually one or two word) description of the impairment and no numerical grade. EAC grading is different in that it takes impairments, as well as the color of the coin, into consideration in coming up with a numerical grade. As we're supposed to post photos of a copper coin on this topic, here's one that is illustrative and that I expect you'll like. It is a 1795 lettered edge with pole half cent (C1) that I bought at a 1997 auction. As I recall, the auctioneer described it as an Extremely Fine with "slight surface roughness". I showed it to Tom Reynolds, a well-known coppers dealer, who said that by EAC standards it would grade "somewhere in the Very Fine [numerical] range" after discounts for the roughness and the small cut on the reverse rim. Last year NGC graded it "AU Details, Corroded", which in my opinion overgraded it in terms of wear but overstated its impairment. (NGC #6455140-001)

To the best of my knowledge, no reputable third-party grading service has ever graded a coin made and distributed for circulation MS 70. Only coins that are specially struck, handled and packaged, such as bullion and commemorative coins and other special issues, have been graded "70". The grades of "68" and "69" are rather unusual for regular circulation coins as well and clearly don't apply to this off-center 1999-D nickel, which shows obvious marks and abrasions on both the struck and unstruck portions of the planchet. It's more likely to grade in the 64 to 65 range. It is my impression that the numerical grade of a striking error like this one isn't as important in determining its value as the extent and rarity of the error. This is a nice (80-90%) off-center strike with the date and mint mark showing, but it's my understanding that they aren't all that rare. It likely only has a mid to high "two figure" value as has been stated. The only good reason to have it certified is to authenticate it, and it is questionable whether it is worth it.

I'd say that this is a decent circulated common date Capped Bust half dollar with Choice Very Fine (30) or so detail and struck from worn dies, as many were. The light color and peripheral toning suggest that the coin may have been dipped or "cleaned" and then toned in an album. Whether you got a good deal on it would depend on what you paid for it.

Welcome to the NGC chat board. In the future, please crop your photos and show both sides of the coin. Until the early 1990s mint marks were hand punched separately into each coinage die while the dies were being made at the Philadelphia mint, resulting in mint marks being punched in varying positions and angles. A mint mark that leans slightly to one side isn't unusual, isn't considered a mint error, and commands no premium. As an Extremely Fine or so 1958-D Lincoln cent, your coin is worth only a few cents. You might benefit from reviewing these topics:

The coin may have Extremely Fine detail but has two punch marks and graffiti in addition to oriental chop marks. I wouldn't buy it.

Welcome to the NGC chat board. I've never included the security code on any submission I've made, so the answer is "no". If your question was intended for the NGC staff, it should have been posted on the "Ask NGC/NCS" forum or submitted more privately by e-mail at service@ngccoin.com.

Shortly after @Lem E started this topic, I posted photos of a worn, battered and buffed 1801 Draped Bust, Heraldic Eagle half dime, the only one I owned. This 1803 that I just acquired (large 8 variety, though not noted on the holder) is NGC graded "Fine details, cleaned". The effects of the "cleaning" are limited to a slightly light color and some barely noticeable hairlining. Coins of this type are quite elusive. Photos courtesy of Stacks Bowers Galleries.

Grading services don't assign numerical grades to coins that they determine to be "cleaned" or otherwise impaired, except that ANACS in its small holder days assigned net numerical grades after describing the impairment.

I think that @powermad5000 was referring to the sixth edition (not Volume 6) of the ANA Grading Guide, which is only one volume. The current edition is the seventh, published in 2013. This and other essential print and online resources for new collectors and where to obtain them are described in the following topics:

This 1875 proof Trade dollar is the largest acquisition I've made since about two years ago. It is PCGS graded PR63CAM with a green CAC sticker on the holder:

1837 Head of 1836 (plain hair cord), medium letters large cent (N7/8). I bought this one in November 1997. NGC just graded it "Uncirculated details, cleaned", but I still like it:

1880-CC Morgan dollar, 0 over high 7 (VAM 5), purchased in December 1993 and just graded MS 64 by NGC:

This doubled profile appears to me to be the result of strike doubling, a.k.a. machine doubling from the obverse die being loose in the press. The images are "shelf-like" or on different levels, not crisp and about on the same level as in a doubled die. Compare the "Redbook" variety 1984 "doubled ear", which resulted from a doubled die:

@damiencotton23--Welcome to the NGC chat board. It's very easy to start a new topic. Just go to the right-side top of this topic's page or the home page for this forum and click the icon that reads "Start New Topic." In your topic. please post clear, cropped photos of each side of whatever coin with die deterioration to which you are referring. Otherwise, we can only speculate about what you are asking. (Coins are struck from dies. Dye is used to color cloth.)

Welcome to the NGC chat board. The NGC World Coin Price Guide is a handy tool for identifying and valuing foreign coins, although the retail prices shown are often unrealistically high. Go to the "Resources" tab on the NGC home page and look under "Price Guides. I looked up your 1922 Guatemala 50 centavo piece. Here is the link to its listing: World Coin Price Guide and Values | NGC (ngccoin.com). There are two varieties that are based on the thickness of the numerals "50", but both are priced the same. In this worn and corroded condition, it is only worth a few dollars, assuming that you could find a collector or dealer who would want to buy it. As others have stated, the die cracks add little or no value. While there are exceptions, nineteenth and twentieth century base metal coins from obscure countries tend to have little market value.

Here is the photo and description of this variety from the Fourth Edition Cherrypickers' Guide (2006): As you can see, this photo shows a much greater portion of something that looks a lot more like a portion of a "D" mintmark than either the VarietyPlus photo or @cobymordet's coin. This could well be a later die state of the same variety, but I am not convinced that it is. I'm somewhat skeptical that any of these coins represents a true repunched mintmark. It's a question that can never be definitively answered.

Assuming that Breen was correct in his mintage guesstimate, 40 million wouldn't be low mintage in most contexts or result in the coin being considered "rare".

This appears to be the common blunt 9. On earlier die states of the pointed 9 the tip of the 9 is rounded, and on later states it comes to a sharp point. On this one the tip is flat.

Decades ago there was interest in collecting the "Pointed 9" 1964 dime varieties, but nowadays they are largely unknown. This appears to be one. Breen's Encyclopedia (1988) estimated the mintage of the 1964-D with this characteristic to be below 40 million (out of the approximately 1.358 billion mintage) and about 2 million for the 1964 out of its mintage of over 929 million.

I'm not sure about this one. Your coin doesn't match either the VarietyPlus or Cherrypickers' Guide (4th edition) photos, which don't seem to match each other. (The VarietyPlus photo doesn't look much like a repunched mintmark either.) What you see may just be a tiny die chip or clash mark. Any other opinions?

No. This style of "S" with bold serifs is called the "large S" (Cherrypickers' Guide) or "serif S" (VarietyPlus). Per both of those resources, the "trumpet tailed S" looks like this (VarietyPlus photo of 1943-S):

This is pretty clearly a repunched mintmark and is similar to the VP-003, but I'm not sure it is that exact variety. Based on the NGC VarietyPlus photo of the 1940-D VP-003 below, the initial (lighter) image on your coin looks a little farther from the bottom leaf. On the VP-001 the lighter image touches the leaf, and on the VP-002 the lighter image is punched below (south of) the heavier one. Perhaps your coin is a new variety.

Your 1964-D Roosevelt dime features a reverse die crack. Die cracks are a natural result of die wear, are very common and unless the crack has gotten to the point where a piece has broken out of the die, resulting in a blob on the coin's surface referred to as a "cud", generally add no collector value to the coin. Neither NGC nor, I think, any other reputable grading service, would attribute this coin as an error or variety. You are welcome to collect coins with die cracks if they interest you.

In all likelihood the slot in which you want to place this coin inadvertently hasn't been programmed to recognize this coin. Your posting of this topic should ultimately result in the correction of this problem once the administrator sees it next week. However, an easier and more private way to deal with this problem is to use the "Add to Sets" function in your coin list ("My Competitive Coins") instead of trying to add the unrecognized coin to the set itself. This function will list the sets for which the coin is presently available and likely won't include the one you want but will have a blue link saying "I'm looking for something else" at the bottom of the dialog box. Click that link, and it will ask you to pick the category, set and ultimately the slot in which you want to place the coin. It will then indicate that your request will be reviewed by an administrator. I've used this technique on several occasions, and on each one the coin has been added to the appropriate slot within two business days.