Sandon

Welcome to the NGC chat board. If you want to offer a coin for sale on this forum, you are supposed to comply with the rules set forth in the posted guidelines, including stating an asking price. See Coin Marketplace Guidelines - Coin Marketplace - NGC Coin Collectors Chat Boards A circulated 1966 half dollar like yours is only worth its silver value, currently about $3.40, and is unlikely to attract a buyer here. A coin or bullion dealer in your area would be a better choice for selling it.

Welcome to the NGC chat board. Traditionally, coins made at the Philadelphia mint, which was the first U.S. mint location and the primary rather than a "branch" mint, bore no mint mark. The "P" mintmark first appeared on wartime composition five cent pieces coined in Philadelphia from 1942-45 to distinguish them from regular composition pieces. In 1979, the "P" appeared on Susan B. Anthony dollar coins minted in Philadelphia and has been used on all denominations except the cent since 1980. (The "P" mintmark appeared on Philadelphia cents dated 2017 to commemorate the mint's 225th anniversary.) Therefore, your 1973 dime (mintage 315,670,000) and 1975 dime (mintage 585,673,900) are normal coins minted in Philadelphia for circulation and in worn grades like yours are only worth face value. The 1975 "no S" proofs about which you have heard were coins minted in San Francisco with a mirror finish and sold to collectors in sealed proof sets. The "S" mintmark was left off the die by mistake, and nearly all of the coins struck by this die were evidently intercepted by mint inspectors before release. Only two proof sets (2,845,450 sets issued) containing a "no S" dime have ever been found.

1995-S silver proof Kennedy half dollar, NGC graded PR 69 DCAM:

My digital microscope can't take a full image of a coin larger than a nickel on its stand, so I place it on a stack of books of necessary height to capture larger coins. The scope has a broad range of focus and was marketed as being able to photograph coins, so I don't know why it was equipped with such a short stand.

Error-ref.com classifies the "ridge ring" as a form of severe or "design devouring" die wear that is commonly seen on copper-plated zinc cents. See https://www.error-ref.com/?s=design+devouring+die+wear. Coins struck from worn dies generally do not command a premium.

Although the obverse by itself could be interpreted as a possible retained "cud", the photos of the reverse and the edge make it clear that this is edge damage. This coin is a good example of why we ask that those with questions about possible mint errors post full photos of both sides of the coin and of the edge if pertinent.

Your coin is a 1945-D wartime composition five cent piece, not a 1943-D. Per the "Redbook", these coins, dated 1942-45 with large mintmarks above the dome of Monticello, were composed of an alloy of 56% copper, 35% silver, and 9% manganese instead of the normal copper nickel (75% copper 25% nickel) alloy. Both the copper nickel and wartime composition coins have a standard weight of 5 grams. These coins are bright when in uncirculated but rapidly stain and darken in circulation or from improper handling. Your coin has a normal appearance for an About Uncirculated or so coin, with stains from people's fingers. Where did you hear about a "war nickel" on a copper planchet? It is possible that a few such pieces were struck on bronze cent planchets (3.11 grams), but such coins would be undersized due to the smaller size of the planchet and would be copper colored ("red" and/or brown). It is also possible that such a coin could have been struck on a copper alloy planchet intended for a foreign coin then being struck by the U.S. Mint, but it would also be copper colored and likely of a different size.

If NCS determined that the coin wouldn't benefit from "conservation", you should have only been charged a $5 evaluation fee instead of the $25 minimum "standard" conservation fee. See NCS Conservation Services and Fees | NGC (ngccoin.com). If they charged you the conservation fee, they presumably did something. I think it is reprehensible that NGC misattributed this Fugio copper as a "Pointed Rays" variety when a glance at the standard "Redbook" would have revealed it to have "Club Rays." I don't think that either "top tier" grading service does a good job attributing or grading early coppers, which are really a specialty of certain traditional numismatists and were fine in their paper coin envelopes with handwritten notes. Most of them have surface issues that preclude numerical grading and/or striking issues that make them very difficult to grade. I wouldn't bother with the expense of shipping it back for correction. (If you attend one of the major shows where NGC accepts submissions, you should be able to submit it for "mechanical error" correction without the shipping cost.) Otherwise, you might consider removing it from its incorrectly labeled holder and placing it in your own holder with a correct attribution.

Be careful about buying these otherwise common date certified coins with high numerical grades and very high list values! Prices realized at auction for these coins may vary widely and may decline as the popularity of certain series or issues wane or as their certified populations in these high grades increase. Both PCGS and NGC have records of sales by major numismatic auction houses on their websites. NGC's listing for 1950-D nickels is at 1950 D 5C MS | Coin Auction Prices | NGC (ngccoin.com). It is difficult to estimate the resale value for a coin like this at any given time, unlike a coin in a more typical mint state grade, unless there have been a number of recent auction sales at around the same price level. Note also that while NGC classifies "full steps" Jefferson nickels as either five full steps (5FS) or six full steps (6FS), PCGS classifies both groups together as "FS". Some of the higher prices seen for PCGS "FS" coins may be for coins that were judged by buyers to have six full steps.

I'm sorry if the previous replies appear harsh to you. The obverse impression on the coin you posted does not resemble that of any other coin and does not appear to have been created during the manufacturing process. Someone may have taken a metal stamp or other hard object and impressed it into the coin by beating it with a hammer or squeezing it in a vise. I see some swelling on the reverse portion of the eagle's right (facing) wing opposite the impression from the pressure, which would not occur if the impression had been created while that side was seated on the reverse die. Although it is possible for a struck coin to be struck multiple times (see https://www.error-ref.com/?s=multiple+strikes) or struck over another struck coin or planchet in the press (see, for, example, https://www.error-ref.com/?s=external+disc+impression), such pieces look nothing like the coin you posted. Apart from the impression, your coin does in fact have numerous nicks, scratches, and abrasions that would result in its being classified as damaged in any case. Please refer to the resources on grading to which I referred you in replying to one of your previous topics.

The coin is clearly damaged, perhaps run over by vehicles on a road where the obverse was lying on gravel that caused the indentations. Some members of this forum collect such mutilated pieces as "parking lot coins", although the attraction of doing so escapes me.

I certainly wouldn't try it, as it is likely to damage the coin. The reference is to a clear plastic cleaner and polish such as Meguiar's PlastX, which is most commonly used to clarify automobile headlights, and which can be used on other clear hard plastics such as grading service holders to reduce dullness and minor scuffs. While a "70" grade awarded by a "basement slabber" such as SGS isn't of any real significance, those given by top tier graders such as NGC are supposed to be. NGC graded this 1998-S silver proof dime PF 70. Two tiny ticks can just be seen on Roosevelt's face under the 5x magnification, at which NGC claims the coin should appear flawless, although they don't show on the photos. I have yet to see any coin that I could describe as flawless.

Yesterday I went to the Mint's website to subscribe for a couple of regular (clad coin) 2024 proof sets, which are scheduled to be released in March. The final step in submitting an online order is an acknowledgement of certain terms of sale, including that the purchaser is over 18 years of age, accepts the Mint's privacy policy, and the like. Yesterday, however, I noticed that an apparently new term had been placed directly above the "accept" button. The version of this term that I copied from the terms and conditions under the "Customer Service" tab of the website reads as follows: "The customer assumes the risk of loss during transit. Issues arising from delivery need to be resolved with the shipping carrier." The terms and conditions also indicate that the Mint ships packages uninsured. Years ago, the Mint used to ship more expensive packages through insured registered mail, but apparently no more. As the Mint chooses the carrier and uses different carriers--I have had orders shipped to me in recent years through the U.S. Postal Service, Fedex Smartpost (shipped primarily through Federal Express but delivered by the Postal Service), and UPS--it seems profoundly unfair that the mint would place this burden upon its customers. This is especially true for more expensive bullion and commemorative products, which I don't buy but whose individual purchase prices may run into thousands of dollars. When added to the currently outrageous prices for some mint products, such as $130 for silver proof sets that sold for $56.25 as recently as 2020 and $50 or more for clad commemorative half dollars, I am finding the proposition of continuing to order anything but the least expensive items (annual base metal proof and uncirculated coin sets) from the Mint quite unpalatable. A number of topics on these forums have noted the marked increase in difficulties with deliveries by various carriers in recent years. Although I doubt that complaints from a few small Mint customers would make any difference, perhaps the threats of or actual cessation of business by numerous customers, including dealers who order in bulk, would lead to a change in policy. In any event, I did want to make it known that if you buy U.S. Mint products, "you pay your money and you take your chances."

1967 SMS Washington quarter, PCGS graded SP 66, purchased for all of $6 some years ago:

Yes, the 1886-O also has an unnatural, appearance and has also been polished or "cleaned", with Very Fine details. It also has a dent in the hair above the eye. You must learn to distinguish between original and "cleaned" or polished coins, which is sometimes difficult even for experienced collectors. This can't be learned entirely from photos, and you should attend coin shows and other venues where you can examine coins in hand. However, I created a custom registry set with an explanation of what to look for and photos and descriptions of "cleaned" coins from my collection, these being mainly rarer pieces or pieces that I bought at an appropriate discount. See Characteristics of "Cleaned" Coins - Custom Set (collectors-society.com).

The 1884 Morgan dollar is a relatively common date that is readily available unimpaired through mid-uncirculated grades. An unimpaired XF currently lists $32 in Coin World and $50 in the NGC Price Guide. This coin has an unnatural, and, therefore, undesirable appearance. This coin was being offered in part for its "VAM" die variety as listed in the guides originally developed by Van Allen & Mallis, with the "Hot 50" perhaps being less sought after than the "Top 100". It is not a coin I would buy for its type or date. I would recommend that you avoid impaired pieces and buy the best pieces that you can afford. That being said, it's hard to buy any silver dollar these days for under $30. Although ANACS, unlike NGC, PCGS, or CAC Grading, gives a numerical grade to "details" graded coins, an impairment always reduces its value and often its salability. There is no precise way to calculate the value of an impaired coin, or any coin for that matter, but I would subtract one to two grades in pricing this one from a price list. A coin with a severe impairment such as a deep scratch or a hole with Extremely Fine details might be valued as a Good or even less.

A coin that has been abrasively treated with metal polish is regarded as impaired and would be "details" graded by a grading service as "polished" or "cleaned". This would obviously reduce the coin's value, but it would be difficult even to guess by how much without at least seeing its photos. Sometimes, cheap can be expensive. As for "cheep", that is strictly for the birds!

This appears to be an ordinary 2013-D Perry's Victory and International Peace Memorial quarter dollar, with a reported mintage of 131,600,000 pieces. It is lightly circulated, with About Uncirculated details, scratched, and has no collector value. Why did you think that it might be worth the substantial cost of submitting it to a third-party grading service (at NGC, $19 grading fee plus processing and shipping fees)?

It appears that genuine pieces of this issue are rare, which would have given counterfeiters an incentive to create fakes of them for many decades. See Korea 5 Chon KM 1122 Prices & Values | NGC (ngccoin.com). It may also be a counterfeit of contemporary origin intended to be passed as money. Your piece bears only a passing resemblance to the photos of genuine examples on either Numista or the NGC World Coin Price Guide. It also appears to be composed of a reddish copper alloy instead of copper nickel. Before you spend and likely waste a substantial amount of money submitting this coin to NGC, you may wish to locate a dealer who is familiar with these coins and could give you at least an informal opinion as to its authenticity. You can check the dealer locator on the NGC website, Find Coin Shops & Dealers | Coin Dealer Locator | NGC (ngccoin.com), as well as on the Professional Numismatists' Guild website, https://www.pngdealers.org/af_memberdirectory.asp. You may also have the coin weighed on a properly calibrated digital scale to determine whether its weight equals or is close to the 4.3 grams of a genuine coin.

The 1851 large cent in the initial post appears to have been overgraded and would be more accurately graded as Very Fine details, "cleaned" and with reverse damage. The descriptions of the coin's design and its historical context are fairly accurate, however.

1934 light motto Washington quarter, NGC graded MS 63 (old holder):

This is called a "tube" and is used by coin dealers and collectors to store coins in roll quantities, with the cap providing easy access. I've never seen them used by banks, which provide rolls of coins in paper wrappers or shrink wrap.

It appears to be "RLL" and a stray mark, probably an abbreviation for "roll" by whoever labeled this tubed roll of cents decades ago.

Notice the displaced metal around the edges of what you called a "double planchet mark". This is an indication that they are scrapes made after the coin was struck, likely from a roll wrapping machine as indicated. The "I" and "N" and the mintmark have also been affected by the scrapes.

Based on its depth and texture, I think that this coin more likely shows a "strikethrough" of foreign matter on the die or planchet than a planchet lamination. See https://www.error-ref.com/?s=struck+through. Conceivably, the matter that this coin was struck through was a lamination that had fallen from another coin, although that would be impossible to determine. Strikethroughs, like planchet laminations, are quite common on both modern and older U.S. coins and generally aren't worth much of a premium unless they create a piece with a spectacular appearance. (As I have stated before, if you enjoy collecting these sorts of anomalies, you are welcome to do so, and it won't cost much if you collect them out of pocket change.) I have a forum topic about a strikethrough found on a number of (but not all) examples of a specific die variety of 1856 large cent. See 1856 Large Cent Mystery - US, World, and Ancient Coins - NGC Coin Collectors Chat Boards. About a year ago, I purchased at auction, an 1874 copper-nickel three cent piece with a noticeable obverse "strikethrough" at the top of Liberty's coronet. The coin is NGC graded MS 64 but has no error attribution, which would have cost $18, and it might or might not have been attributed. I paid a favorable price for the coin based on its date and grade, perhaps because most date or type collectors would prefer such a coin without the strikethrough. Note the resemblance of the strikethroughs on this coin from 1874 as well as the 1856 large cents to the one on your 1960-D Lincoln cent. Photos courtesy of Stacks Bowers Galleries.