Conder101

It would depend on the new owner. Some would have insisted they hand it over, but other. did allow their slaves to keep their money if they earned some. That is why some slaves were able to buy their own freedom. Because they were valuable property. The Amish treat their horses well, but they don't just free them. They need them for the work they do. And in this case Butler needed them to pay off his creditors. Dred Scott decision would not have had any bearing in this situation. These were slaves in a slave state that had probably never been in a free state. Dredd Scott basically said that a slave that lived in a free state did not automatically become a free person, that negros were not and could never be citizens of the US, and the Missouri Compromise was unconstitutional. Parking meters? In 1859? You're about 75 years early.

That is probably true. A LOT of people confuse rarity and value. They will consider that if the price goes up it got "rarer" The scale is still pertinent, an SVDB is still an R-1+ coin. There are a LOT of them around But there are also a LOT more collectors of Lincoln cents than of half cents, so that R-1+ coin is expensive. I suppose you could try to come up with a rarity scale that would apply to Lincolns but I have no idea how you would quantify it. You could use the Universal Rarity Scale but there would be no way to come up with reasonable survivor figures for the scale. Price is a function of availability and demand, rare is more of an absolute and is dependent on survivorship. But you are correct, if the demand isn't there even extremely rare pieces aren't worth much. I would assume your putting rare in quote equates to the average person confusion of rarity and value.

And why did you bid on the one you did and not on the one that ended up selling for less? Probably because you liked the one you bid on better. Well guess what you competitors liked it better to. So there was less competition on the other coin and it sold for less.

These are just bullion pieces. They sold them to the distributors all year long and were never on the mint website.

China, that fake has been around a long time, longer than your Denver nemesis has been.

I also like the statement that if the date is outside the 1873 to 1885 that it is probably a fake. Probably? And then they go on to say that one of the most common trade dollars is the 1847 S. And that is in there twice.

Normally the edge doesn't wear that quickly. Sometimes if a coin spends a LOT of time going through vending machines the edge will be abraded badly, but normally they don't suffer that much. Go to the bank and find some 2009 President dollars or the 2009 NA dollar and check the edges. For the most part after 14 years you will find that the edges are still clear. The real problem is in trying to avoid jamming and slippage problems they often didn't adjust the roller closely enough to the edge die and the lettering/date/mint were weakly impressed when the coins were new.

If the rot is damaging the AM but the TAT and FG are still clear it can still be identified as a Close AM. Frankly though many of the others on here are looking down their nose at the coin, an 92 or 92 D Close AM are, in my opinion, rare enough coins that authentication would probably be a good idea even if it is a details coin.

And if would actually make that grade you would have to pay PCGS between $27 and $50 for it to be worth $10.

If it is a capped die it IS a struck through. So obverse struck through capped die, and obv capped die are the same thing.

It was, and just a little larger than the 5 kopeck. About 56.5 grams compared to 51.2 grams. You want something a little larger go for the Siberian 10 Kopeck 65.5 grams

No, that was the design on the Standing Liberty quarters. All the "U's" were made using V's. Just a matter of artistic license, In the latin alphabet the U and V were the same letter and in art or government buildings you will often see the use of the V in replace of the U. It is best known on Peace dollars with IN GOD WE TRVST. Most people notice on the dollar, many fewer notice it on the standing quarter.

While true, in 1986 the coining rate was much slower than it is today. I believe press cycle speed was around 120 per minute (but with 2 or 4 dies per press), where today it is closer to 750 with a single die. I think today they are all struck on single die horizontal Schuler presses.

Probably not as the 1955 DDO cent has one of the largest displacements between the images in the US series. (some of the doubled dies in the shield nickel series are greater, but who pays attention to shield nickels) Most doubled dies have only slight displacement, and the coin with the greatest separation isn't visually impressive because the first hubbing either wasn't that deep or was mostly wiped out by the second hubbing. (a seated dime DDR wish nearly a 180 degree rotation between hubbings. 1872 if I remember correctly.) there was interest in repunching in the early coin series, but mostly for die variety identification.

All I see are typical contact marks.

Doubling from repunching could occur (assuming they were using punches and not hand engraving the dies) but the doubling would be on individual elements and if two items were repunched the doubling would most likely not be the same on both As Physics said a DDO or DDR would require the use of a hub and that didn't come till much later.

As a counterfeit coin is an imposter masquerading as a genuine coin. Except it isn't a "reject" it is exactly what they intended It was at the time the supposed dime on nail would have been struck. Horizontal striking has only been going on for about 20 years.

Usually when I run into someone doing this type of research they are doing it on their own and they either work for a University or lab and have access to the equipment through their work and they have their employers permission to utilize the equipment on their own time. So their cost is minimal, but they don't or wouldn't have the access to the type or number of pieces that would be needed for the type of research Roger is suggesting.

That's because a coin that has been properly clean would be one where you can't tell that it has been cleaned. And if you can't tell, how do you know it has been cleaned.

An error sells for more than a normal strike, especially on a common date such as this one. And yes the Chinese HAVE been making fake error coins, with off-centers being a commonly made "error".

Pictures? From the description and the even spacing it sounds like the holder may have indentations or "prongs" to hold the coin and keep it from rotating.

Bullion coins are uncirculated unless they have received wear from mis-handling, or from actually having been is circulation. (which is rare, but has been know to happen) It was standard terminology in the hobby until the Mint started making the "burnished" coins and threw a monkey wrench into the works by calling them Uncirculated. (After over 30 years of the bullion coins being listed as Uncirculated by dealers and collectors.) Internally they also use it for coins intended for collector sets. Coins struck intended to be released into circulation are referred to internally as Circulated coins The TPG's only indicate a mintmark on bullion pieces when unopened green monster boxes are submitted with banding on them that indicates a mint other than West Point. Normally all the bullion coins are struck at West Point but from time to time they have been struck a Philadelphia or San Francisco as well. When that happens and the unopened monster box is submitted the striking mint is indicated on the holder by a (P) or (S)

How many of the toys you got as a kid and played with/abused/ broke are worth $35 today? And also have the sentimental value of having come from you grandparent.

It isn't illegal to mutilate US coins unless done with the intent to defraud. (You also can't legally melt cents and none silver five cent pieces) The two conterstamps are merely novelty pieces, the first is simply to appeal to someone who likes American football. The second is part of a group of counterstamped cents made (privately) to commemorate the Apollo missions. The one shown marks the landing date of Apollo 12 on the Moon. 11/19/1969

Thanks, that nailed it down nicely. Definitely die deterioration doubling.