EagleRJO

I see a plating bubble also to the right of the "7" in the date. The only known doubled die cent for that year is a 1997 (P) DDO FS-101 with a clear doubled ear from various sites like NGC VarietyPlus, The Lincoln Cent Resource site, and Variety Vista. And that's a typical "1" in the date.

If you compare it to a clean certified coin there is very little that is off except for the hit to the MM, stains, and scratches on the op's coin.

I have been encountering the same issues with prices for other coins where I am working on sets, including filling some holes in a complete Morgan circulation set (all years and marks), a one-per-year trade dollars set, and a one-per-year pre-1930's half dollars collection recently started. Prices really spiked towards the end of the pandemic, near the end of 2022, as I think there were a lot of people with extra money that was being given out spending that cash on coins. I figured that as the slush funds dried up, and we headed into a possible recession, that prices would start dropping. They actually did drop for a while, and I was able to scoop a bunch of missing coins. Then, much to my chagrin, the prices for the coins mentioned started to go up again. And in some cases being sold with bids exceeding the valuations for the coins, which is really frustrating. So I am back to sitting on the sidelines mostly waiting for prices to drop again, and also doing onesie-twosie pick ups while hoping to see people finally run out of slush fund money so that the prices drop again as expected.

A good place to learn more is by going through the following topic on this board ... ---> https://boards.ngccoin.com/topic/430263-basic-resources-glossary-for-those-posting-questions/ As you go through the topic look for the links related to "Resources for Newer Collectors", as well as those related to errors and varieties as those may be something of interest given your posts. And of course as you find interesting coins, or have questions related to coin collecting, post about them on this board as there are many experienced collectors more than willing to help out less experienced collectors willing to learn like yourself.

It doesn't look like you will be able to get the "First Day of Issue" designation on the label if submitted. But as mentioned, I would post the question in the "Ask NGC/NCS" section anyway. What's the worst that can happen, someone from NGC verifies that it's too late to submit for that label. Is your coin a 2023 ASE Uncirculated as you stated was an example? If so the difference between the two labels is minimal unless it would grade out MS70, in which case the difference in value would only be like $20 or so.

There is also no 1916 D/S OMM listed on varietyvista.com/, coppercoins.com, or lincolncentresource.com/ which likely would have been discovered in over 100+ years since the coins were struck if it existed.

You may want to post this in the "Ask NGC/NCS" section, but it looks like that ship has sailed. And how would NGC know the coin submitted is the one identified in the invoice? https://www.ngccoin.com/coin-grading/designations/

I'm positive it is NOT a doubled die obverse. There would be no need to authenticate worthless common machine doubling. See the attached to help you identify MD in the future, as well as looking for more than just localized doubling. There are 64 DDO's recorded at Wexler's, just not for that coin with MD ... http://doubleddie.com/300201.html

Stick with vids from ANA. You Tube vids, except the ANA ones, are hit or miss with mostly click-bait misses. https://www.money.org/video-library https://www.youtube.com/@MoneyOrg You might like this topic ...

Hype usually relates to something not very common or valuable, like the 1992 (P) and 1992-D Close AM Cent, except for YT channels when it becomes about views and getting ppl to smash that like button regardless of whether it is accurate or not. Some info about the Close AM cents and values can be found here ... http://www.lincolncentcollection.com/closeamwideam.php https://www.pcgs.com/coinfacts/category/half-cents/lincoln-cent-modern/type-4-memorial-reverse-zinc/922

Either out of spec, or the more likely scenario is that your scale is off. See the attached mint specs for half dollars with tolerances (the 1967 50C s/b 11.10g to 11.90g), but your scale likely needs to be recalibrated or replaced. Agree about the really cheap pocket scales. You can buy two of them and throw them both out, or for about the same money as two of the cheap ones get a decent scale accurate to 0.001g that comes with multiple calibration weights, like the attached Smart Weight digital precision scale.

Yea, acid damage with additional info found here ... https://www.error-ref.com/acid-shrunk-coins/

Looks like MD to me. See the infographic about this to check that with the coin in-hand as pics can be misleading sometimes ...

I also don't see any reason not to just open the roll, as there is no added value from keeping the coins untouched in the paper wrapper regardless of what may be advertised on some sites by scammers, and it appears to have been previously opened. You can just carefully open one end and slide the coins onto a rubber mat or hand towel, and handle the coins by the edges as noted. Look for any pre-1965 halves Sandon mentioned, as those are likely 90% silver and worth a little more, or halves that are bright color without many marks or discoloration as they may be worth a little more if in excellent uncirculated condition. If you find anything good you can always posts some pics of the coins here to get some feedback. I would keep the paper wrapper just because I think it would be neat to have a 50+ year old wrapper, and try to handle it as little as possible as it may be a little brittle. The additional markings sometimes on paper wrappers like that posted are typically either the bank where it was rolled (like the attached) or info on the manufacturer. For that wrapper I think it's the latter.

I'm not sure what you are asking, but eBay is full of scam artists that get old style roll papers and fill them with common coins to sell at a premium. Even if it's a legit older roll paper, the old tape mark on the right which is interrupted by a later folded over end would suggest this is not an unopened or unsearched roll. How and when was this roll acquired, and what do you hope to find within the roll?

I'm not sure what you mean by "passed", and if you mean specific gravity test what were the dry and wet weights you came up with?

Weight really isn't the issue as with the tolerances either a CuNi coin or 40% silver coin could weigh the same. But you are right about the dirt cheap scales as I had the same issue with one or two of them before I spent a little more for a better quality scale a while ago, I haven't had an issue with it or even needed to re-calibrate it since I purchased it. Definitely worth the little extra amount of money.

I have also seen something similar but smaller marks. But this one seems larger and just doesn't seem to fit. When I overplayed the reeded edge of a Morgan onto the mark on the op's coin at a similar scale it definitely was not a match. But if I had full sized pics of the op's coin I could better compare them. Could you post some examples of other coins with that mark to compare the relative size. @txboaz55 That's what I am seeing too. Can you post full size cropped pics of both sides of your coin so I can better scale the comparison. Also, can you clarify if the marks are incluse, which is cut into the coin, or raised which would be higher than the surrounding area on the coin. It does look a little like they are incuse marks. But I'm not completely sure as pics can be misleading sometimes.

Well they are smaller quarters, and if larger dollars and you completely filled and closed up that bag cinched tight I doubt it would remain in that position. But more importantly and to the point, even if a coin in a stuffed bag could end up in that position it would not produce the marks seen on the op"s coin.

That's not strange at all since there were over 1 Million 1882-CC coins struck in multiple batches, which were put in thousands of mint bags and then handled and circulated in different ways. So all of these million coins can have distinctly different marks, or virtually none at all. Coins in a bag can definitely end up somewhat sideways or at an angle to other coins while being handled, and then have contact marks from other coins in the bag particularly when the bags are tossed around, with the coins moving around slightly and then dropping to the ground. I think RWB was trying to say that when the bags are handled or are at rest on the floor that there likely are not any coins in a complete perpendicular edge-to-face position. I would tend to agree with that. But the 1882-CC Morgan coin the OP has with larger tooth like marks definitely does not look like a contact mark from another Morgan, either from being dropped into a bin or being put in bags and tossed around. I have never seen a contact mark on a Morgan that looked like the one on the OP's coin, which has a mark with more rounded and spaced apart fairly large peaks and valleys.

At the beginning of 1971 the half dollars were to be switched to a CuNi planchet. But there was a mix up at the mint with a handful of the 1971 coins at the beginning of that year having an off-metal error from being struck on left over 40% silver clad planchets or coils from the previous year. There is virtually no shot that a 1973 half dollar, which was to be struck on CuNi clad planchets since early 1971, was struck on a 40% silver planchet. And there would have to be a batch of them, since there is no way for it to be just a one-off error. But none have been identified over the last 50 years. Just weighing the coin would not help in identifying if it's on a 40% silver planchet. A CuNi clad half dollar was to be 11.34g with a weight tolerance of 0.45g, which could weigh between 10.89g to 11.79g. The half dollar on a 40% silver planchet would be 11.50g with a weight tolerance of 0.40g, which could weigh between 11.10g to 11.90g. So either one, as well as a silver plated CuNi coin, could weigh around 11.34g or 11.50g. So if you insist you have a 1973-D half dollar with an off-metal error from being struck on a 40% silver planchet you could likely waste your time and have it checked out by a coin dealer or jewelry store that has an XRF tester, which will give you the metal composition. You could also likely waste your time and do a specific gravity (SG) test, as a CuNi and 40% silver coin would have distinctly different values. Finally, you could likely waste your time and money to have a TPG do the XRF test to tell you the likely case, which is that the 1973-D half dollar was struck is on a normal CuNi planchet.

The mark on right of the attached enlarged view with a red arrow looks like a contact scrape. But the tooth like marks on the left circled in red does not look like a contact mark from another Morgan to me, which have reeded edges in a much tighter pattern. I agree with the op that tooth like marks seem too large and rounded to be from the edges of another Morgan. What coin are you guys thinking made that mark with the fairly large rounded peaks and valleys?

Is the tooth like mark incuse, or cut into the surface of the coin as it appears to be? If not PMD then maybe a struck through with a piece of wire or machine part? [...]

The coins GF and I are discussing were already toned, but I don't know if that toning continued to possibly hide some issues. I think it has more to do with the rainbow toned coins becoming more appealing visually to collectors, which then resulted in some grade increases and huge price jumps, It likely was not necessarily just a direct valuation increase which then affected grade, but probably more of a recognition of increased valuation being an indicator of what collectors were starting to find more desirable having an effect on the "eye appeal" portion of the grade. Bottom line is I don't think that a particular type of toning having a profound affect on the desirability and eye appeal for a specific coin is really an indicator that there has been an industry wide systemic grade inflation, which may have had an impact on this 1893 (P) Morgan apparently being over graded at XF40. I think it's more an indication of assembly line TPG grading, where maybe only seconds are spent looking at a coin, occasionally cranking out an improper grade.

There are always going to be instances of over-graded individual coins, and that may be one of them, but that situation wasn't the case for almost all of the toned coins being discussed in that thread. Keep in mind that while toned coins had already become popular around that 2015 time frame, the prices and grade jumps had just started going through the roof. Also not considered was that collectors were beginning to hoard the rainbow toned coins they could get their hands on. The rainbow toned coins in particular being discussed were just starting to go crazy as the supply dried up, with collectors holding on to them with death grips. An example from around the time of that thread was a rainbow toned MS-68 1880-S Morgan, valued at $5,000 from a recent sale, then sold at auction not long after for $23,000 through Sacks Bowers with no grade change. And a similar rainbow toned MS-67 Morgan then received a MS-68 grade reportedly to consider the increased valuation [or appeal to collectors] following current market grading, which indirectly factors in the value of a coin in the grade. That is one of the criticisms, which has some merit imo, of current market grading. If there are other examples of this elusive "gradeflation" with other than rainbow toned coins with prices going crazy I'm all ears.