EagleRJO

It does look like MD. See the attached which can help with the coin in-hand, and the following with known DDR"s for the 1972-D cent ... https://doubleddie.com/671734.html

Geeze, took you long enough!

It is there with the search I gave you. This should also help ... https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woke

Do a search for "woke" [with my user name as the author] on the forum and the explanation should become clear.

I can't see his comments as he is blocked since his rant, but that sounds like he is on the right tract to correct making those nasty comments. I can accept that, but it is really @Coinbuf that his past rant was directed at, and I think he offended, which I took issue with. If Coinbuf is good I am good. Maybe, and maybe not. There was a past member here, David Lange, who passed away not that long ago. He was known as the "Coin Whisperer", and was teaching me to listen to coins. https://www.ngccoin.com/news/article/8146/

Welcome to the Forum! As @Greenstang indicated a simple comparison (see attached coin-over-coin pic) with a legit coin from the PCGS CoinFacts site will reveal the differences. One of the first things I look at is the date and mint mark (if any), which has the wrong font right off the bat. [https://www.pcgs.com/coinfacts/coin/1804-1-original-class/6907] Also consider that with only 15 genuine 1804 silver dollars known to exist worth 7 figures, including one very rare Class-1 kept at the Smithsonian Institute, sometimes referred to as the "King of American Coins", what do you think the odds are that you have a legit coin? A little knowledge will go a long way, particularly with coins like this. If you are interested in coin collecting, I would take up @Sandon on his offer to provide more info on this most interesting hobby.

I wouldn't say it was a "nasty interaction" with Coinbuf. I would categorize that exchange as a nasty reply by the op to a legit opinion or observation by Coinbuf. The op was way out of line, and didn't apologize when they should have realized that. It's why I stopped replying to the op's questions. Others may not be aware of the op's nasty reply, or maybe just don't care.

Yea, nice grade for that coin!

Welcome to coin collecting! First, there are no recognized "bleeding ear" or "cauliflower", or anything similar, varieties or errors for the 1983 cent ... [www.coppercoins.com/lincoln/date.php, lincolncentresource.com/Errors/Lincoln_Cent_Errors.html, www.ngccoin.com/variety-plus/, and www.error-ref.com/]. What is around and below Lincoln's ear on that 1983 cent is not anything like the 1984 double ear (attached), and appears to be either plating bubbles or die chips. Die chips would not likely line up the way it kind of does, and there were significant problems with the copper plated zinc planchets starting in 1983 as noted by Sandon, including frequent bubbles, so it's very likely plating bubbles. Regardless of which one caused the raised areas, it's not an error. Plating bubbles are a defect, or damage, and die chips are considered a result of normal wear on working dies. Even though the raised areas would not be a variety or error, I still think it looks cool, and would put it in a flip with an appropriate label to throw in the save box. It's not clear to me who, other than the op and maybe a click-bait you-tuber that had a 1980's cent with similar plating bubbles, is seeking these types of one-off plating defects, or how this has made "a big difference". Perhaps you could clarify and elaborate on that. Do you really need to ask?

Yea, you may have noticed a distinct lack of interest in the topic. I figured it was the age thing kicking in. [duck]

@J P Mafter the way this yahoo riped into Coinbuf for no reason I am suprised you even bothered to reply.

Both a scanned coin or a die transfer will lose some detail, particularly with die markers like the crack. But the die crack at "America" on both coins is an exact match. So either they are both legit or both counterfeits from the same die. It looks like they are both legit as my overlay to check the coin was rotated slightly on the reverse. It's sometimes hard to get a solid reference point on those T$ reverses to create the overlay. Also, attached is an MS63 certified by PCG$ as authentic with exactly the same die crack.

You could take the $2k, or ....

I have been collecting trade dollars for a while, and finding uncirculated ones is not common. When you do find them they are pricey, and higher grade ones are very expensive, due to the limited numbers. They are readily available in pretty worn condition, but I have been sticking to looking for XF grades, with an occasional AU available. Most of the trade dollars like the 1875-S were circulated amd have chop marks from being sent directly to the Orient. The ones I am missing have been a problem finding even in XF grade at a reasonable price, are counterfeits, or are impaired like this one which I really don't want in my collection. So I might also start looking at some in a VF grade.

Nice! Did you talk to a jeweler to see if they might be able to get the coin out without damaging it? Or maybe just accept the $2k and let the coin dealer assume that risk.

The larger Good Luck tokens may push the sides of the edges inwards from being press fit, but wouldn't press downward on the rims creating the impression at the rims on both faces like on the op's coin. That's why I think it was in some type of clasp like holder as I pictured above, which would cause the downward impression around both rims over time.

Mutilation as in chop marks? There are a number of coins which were marked, but I think Trade Dollars shipped directly from the mint to the Orient are the only ones which should get a pass.

I already passed on this one, but it just looked off like the eagle's head. I may just be seeing things that aren't there, like the slope of the beak and the mouth looks different. It might be I just got the rotation of the overlay wrong giving it a different appearance. Thanks for the feedback

I have been looking for a few missing trade dollars, including the 1875-S T$. Seems like they are either way overpriced, over-graded, cleaned, damaged or a counterfeit. I saw anther one on eBay (yea, I know) that seemed to check a couple of those boxes. First the grade isn't AU as listed, it looks like VF+ or XF. The color is a little off with a bunch of hairlines, so likely cleaned, and there is some damage on the reverse including some scratches and a hit to the eagle's left. Even if I could live with that something is rubbing me the wrong way with this coin. Like on the reverse the eagles head seems different comparing it to a PCGS AU55, on the right of attached comparison pic. Seems to have different details and at a different angle. Am I seeing things having looked at so many of these, or is the eagles head different?

From the price guide images it does look like the coin may be a 1997 5 Yuan Platinum Panda, which is the key date for the series, consistent with what the op indicated is labeled on the box. I can't imagine why someone would take a very valuable key date coin and have it mounted in a stone to make a pendant. That leads me to believe the coin may be a cheap counterfeit. The coin was likely set in the stone with an adhesive, and would need to be removed in order for NGC to authenticate and grade it. Since stone is more porous than platinum it's possible the coin may come out fairly clean, as long as significant force isn't needed to pry it out, which could cause irreparable damage. If the coin does come out of the stone pretty easily maybe some focused and cropped pics of both sides could be posted for people to possibly give an opinion on authenticity.

I think it a good move to not mess with it further since the coin may be press fit or glued into the stone, and to see if a jeweler can get the coin free without damaging it. From doing a little more digging the 1997 Panda is the key date in the series, with a limited number struck, and could be worth thousands if in good shape. It would be a bummer if someone glued the coin to the stone, and it can't be removed without damaging the coin, as then the damaged coin is pretty much scrap metal.

I have been bidding on slabbed ones due to the cost of some of them (yea me, a confirmed raw coin collector bidding on paper labeled coin coffins ), but I may have to also start searching/bidding on raw 1890's CC Morgans. I will wait and see what happens over the summer to see if prices are continuing the downward trend.

I see that now. Good to know for the future as I don't collect platinum coins. Yea, it does look like NGC added an extra zero as the 1/20 ounce Pt. coins have been selling in the $200 to $400 range, not in the thousands! But those prices are just for the panda in general, and not for any specific year. I did see that 1997 is considered a key date for the series, so just maybe the numbers in the thousands are not far off.

This coin can easily be removed from the bezel by loosening the screw at the top. The coin may or may not have been damaged by the bezel, but it looks like a separate holder for the coin. It could be valuable depending on the year and composition. Also why do you think its platinum and not silver? https://www.pcgs.com/prices/detail/platinum/3729/most-active https://www.pcgs.com/prices/detail/5-yuan/3798/most-active https://www.ngccoin.com/price-guide/chinese-modern-coin-prices.aspx?lang=en-US&ChineseCategoryID=1&subcat=silver-panda-coin-prices https://www.ngccoin.com/price-guide/chinese-modern-coin-prices.aspx?lang=en-US&ChineseCategoryID=3&subcat=platinum-panda-coin-prices It would also be helpful to post focused and cropped pics of both sides of the coin.

You a confirmed MS guy looking at raw coins? OMG!