EagleRJO

The clashes from the eye seem to be pretty common, including the post from NeverEnoughCoins.

No. If a coin has a diameter greater than the space between the inner and outer drums it could never get in a vertical position, no matter where it is. It's physically impossible since it just wont fit in the smaller space. That's why it's just not possible for a "dryer coin" to have edges mashed in like a "spooned" coin. Only if it could be gradually jammed into a smaller space, which it cant with a commercial dryer that has a fixed space between the drums. In the upsetting machine the space starts out greater than the diameter and is reduced to press in the edges and create a rim. The following is from the mint's webpage on "Coin Production":

It is a strange looking date on that dime, particularly the "8" even uncirculated. Like they tried to squeeze it between the neckline and rim, but failed. Try this topic ... https://boards.ngccoin.com/topic/430263-basic-resources-glossary/

Per the error-ref.com link I posted it says that's a 1964 nickel, and it does look like a match to me.

I would think that the damage caused by commercial dryers with an inner and outer drum heated to much higher temperatures would be different. And the ones I have seen reported to be from those commercial dryers, including coins from repair persons asking if they were worth anything and also referenced on reputable sites like error-ref.com, do look different. The coins reported to be from commercial dryers appear to have less individual or deep scratches and have a more "mushy" appearance, like the attached example from error-ref.com. I am wondering if maybe the coins posted above may have already been scratched, but still something different and interesting. Where those from a "Parking Lot" collection that you left in your pocket? https://www.error-ref.com/dryer-coins/ However, the part I don't buy is when coins that have edges pushed in like "spooned" coins are suggested to have come from being jammed and squeezed between the inner and outer drums of a commercial dryer. While it's possible for a coin to occasionally roll around edgewise on these drums, it would be impossible to go from a flatwise position to edge up in a vertical position jammed between the drums pushing in on the edges. It just wouldn't fit to begin with.

Attached is the 2006-Present 5C clash overlay from MadDieClashes.com which shows the eye clash on the reverse and the mansion clash on the obverse. The second obverse of a 2021-P 5C JPM posted above may also have a little clash on the nose from mansion steps if that is raised.

Nice additions to your collection! I also think it's interesting that you found a bunch together like that overseas, and hopefully you were able to scoop them as a lot for a good price.

If you look closely there are two entries for the bronze medals, wilth a total likely considerably more than 50. Also, from Mikes post with a catalog page the very similar 40F Gold Princess Ermesinde Essai medal that is also a trial strike had a mintage of 5,000, instead of the more typical 25,000, which seems more realistic a number. About the curious figures it's possible they did a full 5,000 run and then started to run out of gold available as they struck more of the large medal, so they reduced the size to continue additional runs of smaller gold medals for that commemorative year. If the first struck as others suggested it would make no sense they did a partrial run. Also I don't think there is any direct correlation between census and mintage numbers, particularly for what is essentially a commemorative bullion medal. And I just don't see it going for much over melt. Good luck to the op and keep us posted.

Not sure where that number came from, but even so it seems very unrealistic for the op's gold medal. All the other 1963 Luxembourg gold medals, including similar Princess Ermesinde gold medals, had a mintage of like 5,000 to 25,000 which seems more likely in the ballpark. I have not seen any issued as currency with a value, and the page Mike posted lists them as "Medallic Coinage" with curious figures, like the smallest 5 Franc amount for the largest medal which maybe someone could explain. Silly French. I think there is some risk as it is just a commemorative medal, and the only number I have found is the $2,000 NGC guide price with no auction house or eBay records. Also other 1963 Luxembourg gold medals have recently sold for just a little over melt value. It's not a popular piece, and unless the stars align and two people who really want this medal happen to find it and bid, which doesn't seem very likely, it may just go for around melt (total bid), as the dealers have offered the op. Then you could end up with less than what dealers have offered when the buyers fee (likely ~15%) and sellers fee are subtracted. I have been watching and buying a good amount of gold pieces and bullion coins over the years, and I think it would go for between melt and the NGC price from what I have seen. I hope I'm wrong and it would go for the range indicated, but just wanted to offer the other side of the coin so to speak. And it would be interesting to see what the op does end up with if they go the consignment route.

What have they sold for, and at what premium over melt, as that may give you a rough idea of a premium over melt for the commemorative gold medal to go with the NGC guide price. Also keep in mind that circulation or business strike coins generally go for more than similar commemorative medals.

I went to the NGC World Coin Price Guide page at the following link and typed in "1963 Luxembourg 5 Francs" from the info Mike posted. It lists 3 coins/medals in various compositions, including the subject 42g [41.9g] Gold medal. https://www.ngccoin.com/price-guide/world/ And it may just be an average MS grade listed for value as all 3 compositions are valued only at MS63, and it looks like your MS65 is the only one listed in the census for that gold medal.

From the info Mike posted it would be X# MA1b, as it's "Prev[iously] KM# M14b". From Mike's info I found the following at the NGC World Coin Price Guide for an X# MA1b Luxembourg 41.9g Gold 5 Francs Medal. It's valued at $2,000 for MS grade, which would be around melt with the seller/buyer fees to auction the piece subtracted. https://www.ngccoin.com/price-guide/world/luxembourg-5-francs-x-ma1b-1963-cuid-1131340-duid-1442830 P.S. It does look like the NGC label info is correct, even if it is missing a X# or KM#. And it's not a circulated coin so they may not add the 5 Francs anyway, which is not necessarily a bad thing.

It looks like in 1963 Luxembourg went completely nuts and struck additional coins of various compositions (gold, silver, bronze and copper-nickel) in 5F, 20F, 40F, 100F and 250F denominations, as well as commemorative medals in various sizes and compositions, to celebrate the anniversaries of Luxembourg City. These included strikes such as a 40F Gold coin (12.9g 21mm X# M3c), a 250F Gold coin (42.4g 37mm X# E71 like the attached), and the 42g Gold medal originally posted with a similar size and weight as the 250F gold coin. The 42g medal may be X# or KM# MA1b, and Mike may be right that it's assigned an arbitrary value in Francs, even though it's not a circulated coin with a specific value for use in commerce. This would be similar to the more recent 1-Ounce American Gold Eagle bullion coins which are assigned an apparently meaningless and arbitrary $50 value, which is not how that coin is typically described or listed, in contrast to an earlier date $20 Gold Double Eagle circulation strike with a similar weight and size. I agree not having a KM# on the label is minor as I really can't see people looking for a label with that, and it can always be included in a listing description if verified. And I think having some arbitrary value less than 250F may detract from the piece. Would you rather have a 1963 5 Francs Gold medal or 1963 250 Francs Gold coin, even though they may be about the same size and weight?

More like $75 to $80 for just that coin including shipping to NGC at around $15 to $20. Not worth it. Also to me it looks like a combination of a grease filled die and a post-mint hit on the obverse at 7 o'clock. The rim looks like it's hit in this area, which does not appear to be an off-center strike or broadstruck. This would not occur at the coin press since the rim is added with a separate upsetting machine. Therefore that part would not be a mint error.

The Lux 40F Gold coin is 12.9g and 21mm in diameter. As noted the op posted a commerative gold medal that is not a circulated coin designating a specific currency amount, and it seems the NGC label is correct and complete. Yes, silly French. 😜

It may be that they used the circulation coin as the design for a gold medal but it's not a 5F coin. You don't really need extra info on a label when you can just describe it in a listing.

You linked a 5 Franc (5F) currency coin, while you have a medal that does not designate or represent a specific currency amount. NGC just includes enough info on labels to uniquely identify a coin or medal, which doesn't usually include the KM number or other info you may want to add to any for sale listing.

Sure

What was the premium above melt for say the silver ones? There may be a curiosity factor for unusual items if not that much, but that may help answer your question.

Why are you thinking it's worth more than melt? Particularly for a commemorative gold medal from another country, which doesn't even show any sold on typical auction sites or ebay.

Some good advice, particularly the option of bringing the coins to one or two local shops if the intent is simply to sell the coins. Keep in mind dealers will likely want to cherry pick better coins or ones with silver content, so if you want to sell the entire collection that needs to be clear. Also keep in mind it's typical to be offered below market value by a shop so there is room for them to make a bit on the coins. There is no reason to try and reinvent the wheel, and there is considerable misinformation about coins and thier handling and storage on the web which can result in damaging what may otherwise be somewhat valuable coins. Stick with information available on either the NGC or PCGS websites, and available from well known coin supply outlets such as wizardcoinsupply.com as suggested.

Agreed it's pretty worn to tell for sure. But there are examples of certified G and VG graded 1917 1C DDO FS-101 coins from CoinFacts. However, as noted they still have distinct differences between horizontal and vertical elements only at the date and lettering where doubling would be expected, and it would be very unlikely that a coin was only subjected to hits exactly where it would be doubled. There may also have been other diagnostics visible with the coin in-hand not visible from pics. I don't see any of these indicators on the op's coin. I don't think the op's coin is a DDO, but I agree the op really needs to compare the coin in hand to the diagnostics referenced as Coinbuf noted, or perhaps bring it to a local coin shop, to decide if it may be worth holding onto as I also think it's worn to the point of not being worth submitting.

No, as mentioned above I do see some indications of a "horizontal demarcation line" at the top, more so on the right side fading off to the left or just at the intersection, and was really using the circled area to show a lack of difference in the widths between what was circled and the rest of the "7". I'm not sure if it's just a stain or hit on the right giving that appearance. But I still do not see any consistent difference in vertical vs horizontal elements of the date and lettering noted I would expect to see from a doubled die that was worn, like for example the "7" compared above. See the CoinFacts link I posted for examples of worn DDO 1917 cents, some of them very worn like the op's coin, for an indication of what I am referring to if it's not clear.

For the coins you can put them in tubes as suggested, with a piece of foam packing at the top to keep them from jostling around in transit, or for ones that appear to be in decent condition use archival quality Mylar coin flips, like a 2.5" x 2.5" Saflip, to separate and protect them. Just handle the coins by the edges or with gloves, and carefully put them in tubes or place them in the flips without bumping coins together or sliding the coins on the flips which can cause something called "flip rub". Once in the flips leave them there as excessive handling can cause cracks in the flips or rub marks.

You can see various grades of a DDO 1917 (P) Cent at CoinFacts, including a VG10 which is probably close to the wear on the op's coin. https://www.pcgs.com/coinfacts/coin/1917-1c-ddo-fs-101-bn/images/37673 The top of the "7" in the date on the op's coin is thicker as you circled, but so in the vertical part. If it was a DDO just the top would be thicker as shown in the links I posted above. And I'm not sure if there is a horizontal demarcation line at the top of the "7" or it's just discolored with blurry pics and I expect one to be there. See the attached comparison to a 1917 DDO, with the op's coin on the left, which to me indicates it's not a DDO as it just appears that the date, as well as other elements, have taken hits while in circulation mashing them down somewhat. However, I agree the op should look closely at the coin in-hand and compare that to the example DDO indicators.