Sandon

I strongly agree with the original assessment that this circulated (XF-AU) 1864 large motto two cent piece (the most common date) is not worth the substantial cost of submission to a third-party grading service. Many, probably most of them, have one or more date numerals repunched. The "1" on your coin appears slightly repunched and the "6" is weak likely due to a filled die, which is not a variety or significant enough to be classified as a mint error. The "8" appears normal for this issue. Additionally, NGC will not attribute die varieties that are not included in VarietyPlus. See Shield Two Cents (1864-1873) | VarietyPlus® | NGC (ngccoin.com) for a list and photos. Only varieties with very strong repunchings or other significant features are worth a significant premium and then only to a relatively small group of collectors.

In my opinion, it makes no sense to remove modern issues from their protective and attractive mint packaging and submit them to third-party grading services. I bought this set from the mint in 1997 and enjoy it in the mint packaging. I strongly suspect that at some point the original packaging will generate a premium, especially for a lower mintage issue such as this (25,000), where many or most have probably been submitted to grading services.

Welcome to the NGC chat board. Your coin doesn't appear to have been struck off-center but to have been struck from a slightly misaligned reverse die, which is considered a quality control issue rather than a mint error. Even if it were an off-center strike, it would be too minor to warrant much interest. The coin is also well-worn and scratched, so unless it is a rare date or variety that would be worth at least several hundred dollars even in its current condition, it wouldn't be worth the cost of submission. A significant off-center strike that would be designated as a mint error by a third-party grading service such as NGC would look more like this: NGC photos.

I have noticed an apparent error in the scoring for 1936-42 proof Walking Liberty half dollars in type set categories. (The "Request Score Correction" function would be cumbersome to use due to the number of sets affected and the nature of the problem.) This issue came to my attention when a PF65 1939 half dollar I recently acquired received a lower score (1152) in my type sets than coins graded PF 64 or 64+ (1264). The specific set categories I have observed affected are as follows: U.S. Type Set 1792-1964 U.S. Type Set, including Modern Issues Basic U.S. Type Set, With Gold Basic U.S. Type Set, No Gold 20th Century Series Type Set, Proofs Only 20th Century Series Type Set, Proofs and Non-Proofs Half Dollar Type Set For 1936-42 Walking Liberty half dollars in the "PF" category, the pertinent scoring in these sets is as follows: 63 1156 63 + or * 1192 63 +* 1228 64 1264 64 + or * 1264 64 +* 1264 65 1152 65 + or * 1228 65 +* 1304 The scoring of coins graded PF 65, 65+ or 65* lower than those graded PF 64, 64+, or 64+* is presumably in error and should be corrected. The awarding of the same score of 1264 for coins graded PF 64 whether or not they have "+" or "*" qualifiers also appears to be inconsistent with the Registry's usual practice. I appreciate your assistance with this issue.

I've thought about starting a stickering service myself. Like CAC's or CMQ's, my sticker would mean that in my opinion the coin in the stickered holder is correctly graded and attractive for the grade. I would only charge my expenses and perform this service for the benefit of the numismatic community. However, there would be a catch. If I find the coin to be overgraded or unattractive, I would remove the coin from the holder and return it to its owner in a "body bag" (a flip for those who aren't familiar with this term). Based on what I see on bourse floors and lot viewings, I would be making frequent use of a hammer and using many flips. Any takers for this service?

1835 large date, small 5c. half dime, NGC graded XF 40: Photos courtesy of Stacks Bowers Galleries.

@GoldFinger1969--While there is certainly a financial aspect to numismatics, I prefer not to state current retail list prices for coins whose photos I post on the chat board. I want to emphasize the aspects of the coins that make them interesting--and therefore of value--in the first place. In many cases the values vary widely from one guide to another. You should be able to look up list prices of pieces that interest you on the NGC Price Guide or any other guide that you prefer. If you think I'm being unreasonable, I understand that John Jay Pittman would sometimes carry coins with him to show to non-collectors he encountered and would answer any questions they wanted to ask, unless the question was "What is it worth?", in which case he would immediately put the coin back in his pocket and sternly walk away. Another of the better date Morgan dollars that I recently took from storage is this 1899, a nice uncirculated coin whose grade I will estimate at MS 64, which means a range of MS 63 to 65. The 1899 has a reported mintage of 330,000 pieces, about 6% lower than the 1889-CC's mintage of 350,000 pieces. However, unlike the 1889-CC which mostly survives in the form of circulated coins and is considered a "key" issue, the 1899, though not a very common date like the 1899-O, is quite available as an uncirculated coin. Bowers wrote that the Treasury probably released 50,000 to 100,000 pieces in the 1950s and early 1960s and that thousands more appeared from the Treasury and other sources in 1963-64. https://www.pcgs.com/coinfacts/coin/1899-1/7258. Pieces like mine can still be bought for mid-three figure prices. Edit 12/12/23: NGC agreed with my estimated grade and awarded this coin a grade of MS 64.

The lump below the "9" is a die chip, which is quite common on coins of this era, especially cents. They generally have no numismatic value.

1939 Walking Liberty half dollar, NGC graded PF 65, which I just purchased to complete my "put together" 1939 proof set:

They sure do. I have a copy of the October-December 2023 issue of the CPG Coin & Currency Market Review. CPG was distributing them free at the just concluded Whitman Coin Expo and was selling subscriptions to the "Greysheet", which has for some time been in magazine form.

Welcome to the NGC chat board. Respectfully, you are apparently new to coin collecting and do not have the level of knowledge to understand why it is not possible for your 1976-S silver clad uncirculated issue Bicentennial quarter to achieve the highest awarded grade for this issue of MS 69 and be worth thousands of dollars. I'll try to explain. Such a coin would have to be virtually flawless at 5-7x magnification and be extremely attractive for the issue. Even the incomplete and/or blurry photos you have provided so far show a scratch on Washington's jaw, a shiny friction spot on his nose, and spotty, unattractive tarnish-type "toning". Such a coin would not receive a "69" grade from a reputable third-party grading service such as NGC or PCGS and would likely be graded several grades lower. As the advertisement you posted admits, the U.S. mint sold close to five million (4,908,319 to be exact) three-coin uncirculated collectors' sets of silver clad (40% silver) "S" mint Bicentennial coins that included this quarter dollar, as well as the half dollar and dollar. They are abundantly common. These silver clad coins were not intended to circulate but didn't receive separate handling before being packaged, so the vast majority of them have marks from coin to coin contact or other imperfections. The NGC Census indicates that NGC has graded 2,064 pieces of this issue, most of which were presumably submitted by experienced dealers and collectors who reasonably expected them to receive high enough grades to make the cost of submission worthwhile. Washington Quarters (1932-1998) | Coin Census Population Report | NGC (ngccoin.com), see "1776-1976-S SILVER" issue. The vast majority of these coins graded from MS 64 to MS 67, with 65 graded MS 68 and only 3 graded MS 69. PCGS has graded 12,589 pieces of this issue, with a surprising 1,919 graded MS 68 but only 6 graded MS 69. https://www.pcgs.com/pop/detail/category/112?l=washington-quarter-1932-1998&ccid=0&t=3&p=MS&pn=2, see Type 4, PCGS #5898 listing at the bottom of the page. The NGC Price Guide gives this issue a retail price of $7.50 in MS 64 (quite possible for your spotted coin), $12.50 in MS 65 (see photo posted above), $15 in MS 66, $30 in MS 67 (a high grade for this issue but not worth the cost of submission), $85 in MS 68 (around the break-even point, assuming you already have a paid membership with submission privileges and are submitting other coins), and . . . $10,000 in MS 69. Washington Quarters (1932-1998) | Price Guide & Values | NGC (ngccoin.com) The extraordinary prices realized for the few MS 69 graded coins comes from a group of wealthy collectors who insist on having the very highest graded pieces to win registry set competitions on the NGC and PCGS websites. The coins usually sell at auctions held by major numismatic auction houses. Future prices are uncertain. Most collectors don't think that they are worth the money, especially for a common coin like this. Coin collecting can be a rewarding pursuit, but like every other endeavor in life, it requires knowledge and experience. Without such knowledge and experience, sending coins to third-party grading service is the last thing you should be thinking about. Please refer to the resources described in the following forum topics to begin acquiring the necessary knowledge to be a successful collector:

They're called love tokens--I've never before heard of them referred to as "romance medallions"--and, although they were made from coins of all denominations, they were usually made from smaller coins such as Seated dimes (as shown) or gold dollars, not as commonly larger coins such as half dollars. There are avid collectors of love tokens and the pieces with the liberty head transformed into a three-dimensional representation--repousse means "raised in relief"--as shown in the initial post and Idhair's, provided that they are original to the mid-nineteenth to early twentieth centuries when such items were commonly given as gifts or purchased as novelties. The Lincoln cents with all the scrapes are, in my opinion, simply mutilated coins that have been ruined and would be of no interest to any knowledgeable collector. I fail to see anything artistic or aesthetically pleasing about them.

This is simply what a coin looks like when it is worn down to About Good condition. The largely incomplete or missing rims are usually an indicator of that and lower grades. As noted, the presence of edge reeding is also an indicator that the coin is not broadstruck. A broadstruck coin is created by the collar being missing or having slipped below the level where the coin is struck, and edge reeding on coins that are supposed to have it is created by grooves in the collar.

The only article I could find on the NGC website that specifically deals with magnification is NGC: Higher Powers of Magnification | NGC (ngccoin.com), which indicates that 10x or higher should only be used for authentication, not grading or identifying varieties. Also see NGC Coin Grading Scale | About Coin Grades | NGC, which specifically states that to grade "70" a coin need only show "no post-production imperfections at 5x magnification." For an overview of the grading process, see Coin Grading Certification Process | NGC (ngccoin.com). There is no reason you can't view coins at higher magnifications if you prefer. As I stated, I usually use a 10x hand loupe and occasionally go up to 15x. Tiny features like over-mintmarks are sometimes photographed at higher powers, and I'll confess to having looked at them at 40x on an old-fashioned optical microscope. Generally, however, if you use more than 10x to evaluate a coin, you truly "can't see the forest for the trees."

According to whom, other than @dprince1138? Most numismatic authorities classify errors as individual coins that were improperly manufactured and die varieties as multiple coins produced by specific dies showing characteristics specific to those dies. See Variety vs. Mint Error | NGC (ngccoin.com). Actually, VarietyPlus only lists varieties that NGC finds distinctive and/or popular enough to attribute. There are many varieties, including some VAM Morgan and Peace dollar varieties and minor doubled dies and other varieties listed on such sites as doubleddie.com and varietyvista.com that are not included in VarietyPlus and will not be attributed by NGC. See the previously linked article. Some of the lesser varieties may be attributed by other services such as ANACS.

Then why does NGC have this policy? "With few exceptions, NGC will not attribute die varieties that require greater than 5x magnification to be clearly recognizable." What is a Variety? | NGC (ngccoin.com). Similarly, the recently published Volume 2, Sixth Edition of the Cherrypickers Guide to Rare Die Varieties states as a "helpful hint" at p. 27, "If you can't discern a variety with a 7x loupe, it probably isn't significant enough to earn the attention of other collectors." I like to look at coins at 10x myself and occasionally check details at 15x but have never found anything stronger to be necessary. We're looking at coins, after all, not microorganisms!

1834 Capped Bust half dime, PCGS graded MS 62 (old green label holder):

Welcome to the NGC chat board. Please post full, cropped photos of each side of the coin as well as closeups of the areas you think show doubling. Based on the current photos, your coin appears to have strike doubling, also known as machine or mechanical doubling, which is extremely common and not of interest or value to knowledgeable collectors. See Double Dies vs. Machine Doubling | NGC (ngccoin.com) for a full explanation.

1830 Capped Bust dime (attributed by me as JR-8), uncertified. This coin is also toned in vivid colors, which don't show up well in the photos, but is unnaturally bright at the centers. I grade it Ch. AU details, "cleaned" and retoned. It's still nice for the type.

Possibly, the (likely Asian) maker did this deliberately in order to claim that these pieces were some sort of novelties and not intended to be mistaken for or passed as legal tender coins. However, if the maker was serious about this, the word "COPY" should at least have been placed in the blank space where the denomination should have been.

1944-S Lincoln cent, NGC graded MS 66RD:

Regarding @powermad5000's 1891-S Seated quarter, although I can't see much detail from the single photo posted, what I do notice is that the coin appears to be a flat "white" without much frost or "cartwheel", which would suggest that the coin was "dipped", perhaps a little too long or repeatedly. Although the grading services usually don't designate a "dipped" coin "cleaned", obvious "dipping" can lower the numerical grade where the coin appears "washed out", dull, or unnaturally white for a type like this one, whose uncirculated survivors are usually toned. Here is an 1879-O Morgan dollar (not the prooflike one I recently posted on the "Post Some of Your Morgan Dollars" topic) that PCGS graded MS 61 some years ago and is housed in a green label holder. The coin doesn't have the number of abrasions one would associate with a Morgan dollar in that grade and has some "cartwheel" but is unusually light in color.

For NGC's explanation of the difference between die varieties and mint errors, see Variety vs. Mint Error | NGC (ngccoin.com). It is also important to differentiate between die varieties on early (pre-1837) U.S. coins and those on later issues. On the early issues dies were prepared by punching each element (Liberty Head, eagle, dates, letters, stars, into each die), so the coins struck from each die pair can likely be distinguished as a separate die variety. Some of these varieties don't have any particularly distinctive or interesting characteristics and are of interest mainly to specialists in the series in question, such as members of the Bust Half Nut Club, whose goal is to collect as many as possible of the, as I recall, five hundred or so known varieties of Bust half dollars by Overton numbers. Some specialists also collect individual varieties by die state. Only those varieties with sufficiently distinctive characteristics to be listed in major guides such as the "Redbook" tend to attract the attention of the broader community of collectors. However, the less distinctive varieties that are scarce enough to have ratings of Rarity 5 (R5) or higher may command high prices from specialists at well-publicized coin auctions, so those who are willing to closely examine every early U.S. coin they encounter may occasionally profit from their knowledge and scrutiny. Beginning around 1837 most dies were made from "hubs" that usually included all die elements except the date and any mint mark. Dates have been included in the hubs since about 1908 and mint marks since about 1992. Most die varieties are identified either by minor differences in date or mint mark positions or by some anomaly in the die such as repunched dates or mint marks, doubled dies, prominent die scratches, small areas of hand engraving, and the like. Many or most die pairs produced (and still produce) coins with no discernible differences worthy of notice. Although some numismatists, such as Newcomb for 1837-57 large cents, have endeavored to catalog some of the nineteenth century series comprehensively, they are often very difficult to attribute.

No, it is not! Machine doubling, a.k.a. strike doubling or mechanical doubling, is caused by a die that is loose in the press, resulting in shallow, step-like secondary images. A doubled die ("DDO" means doubled die obverse) is caused by doubling on the die itself. See Double Dies vs. Machine Doubling | NGC (ngccoin.com). Coins with machine doubling are not considered to be worth a premium, while coins with die doubling may be.

I don't collect these, but the NGC World Coin Price Guide identifies this as an actual Chinese non-circulating legal tender issue that was issued in both "proof" and "proof like" finishes, with the proof version having a higher list value. China - People'S Republic 10 Yuan KM 1031 Prices & Values | NGC (ngccoin.com). I can't tell which finish this is. The certificate or other documentation that accompanied the coin might say. You may find it difficult to find a buyer who would be willing to pay more than the bullion value of this coin (currently in the $22-23 range), as there usually isn't too much of a market for these items.