Conder101

It's called marketing.

If it's not a proof, and it has a W mintmark, it's "burnished".

PCI has had half a dozen owners and it would probably depend on which owner/slab generation you have.

They're probably correct, I never even NOTICED the background sketch.

Yep the "Number" is just a name just as the letter grade is a name. Eventually it probably will be.

Stick with the CD's. The people with the toys can upload the CD to their own cloud account using a real computer and then either access it with their toy or download it from their cloud account to their toy.

When I started collecting Unc was any uncirculated coin, Gem was a high end Uncirculated coin (what would later be called 65 or above) and BU meant an untoned uncirculated coin. There were no numbers back then.

I wouldn't call the 2008/rev of 2007 a die error, it's a mule, a pairing of dies that were not intended to be used together. As to an answer to the original question, they changed the design and they changed the font when they did so. The font used didn't have a U with a "leg"

At PCGS? Probably not. Although they are adding some more images, most PCGS slabbed coins don't have images associated with them.

For numismatic values or based on melt values?

NGC slabbed a fake/fantasy California fractional?

"Sight unseen" basically died before the first year the TPG's were in operation. The whole concept of TPG grading allowing you to buy sight unseen was a complete failure. No one buys sight unseen anymore. The blue book, and the blue book prices predates TPGs by about 45 years. Maybe you mean bluesheet prices. Well originally those prices were for sight SEEN slabbed coins. For awhile there was a sheet for sight unseen slabbed coins, it was the pinksheet and it's prices were about 25% of the bluesheet. That was because with sight unseen buying it didn't matter what kind a dog you got, if the label grade matched what was ordered the coin was not returnable. Hence the reason why the pinksheet prices were so low.

It appears to have some kind of crud on the surface.and that is what the "design" is in.

Correct but to me it looks like a 9 that has suffered a hit pushing metal to make it look like the tail of a 6.

They might not have had the physical license (or they might have had it) but it was known to have been issued. I knew about it long before the Fenton seizure and trial. Yes he died maybe 10 years ago or more. They still recycle his articles from time to time.

Yep, spend $30 apiece (grading fees, invoice fees and shipping both ways) to get them graded MS65-66 and they will be worth $10 each. The examples you posted are proofs , not MS coins.

Struck through a mid to late stage capped die.

If it was just created by a denver employee/officer, the planchet didn't have to come from Philadelphia, it could have been brought in from outside. Could the Superintendenthave gotten a Nepal 2 Pice planchet from someone at the San Francisco mint? They were striking pure aluminum 2 Pice coins that were just about the right size, 18.5 mm .9 grams But why strike a D mint aluminum cent when you are already striking 1.5 million plain ones What would the D coin tell you that the plain ones didn't? And if you wanted to send Denver an aluminum cent to show them what it looked like, one of the plain ones would have sufficed. No need to strike a D just to send them one.

And while they are busy shaking him down someone else on a different flight carries it out of the country for him. Then when they can't find it they have to let him go and he flies out.

I agree with Kurt, looks like a carbon spot.

Really? It got past the TPG's

There are at least four Eliasberg catalogs, one for his US gold collection, two for his other US coins and one that had his foreign gold coins.

That was a 1974 D aluminum cent, a coin that never should have existed in the first place. They do experiments like that aluminum cent in Philadelphia, and the 1974 plain aluminum cents were most likely part of the test run of something like 1.5 million pieces they did to make sure they would scale up to regular production. There would never have been any good reason to have a few (or one) struck at Denver. I would find it difficult to believe there was ever any official order to have that coin struck. I think it was something the Denver Mint official did on his own. And the six figure sum was what they expected it to bring at auction, the proceeds of which were to be donated to charity. When it was publicly announced the government claimed if was their property and the auction company withdrew it and returned it tot he consignor. The government kept claiming it was theirs and that it should be surrendered, but in that case they also never actually made any attempt to physically recover it. The owner finally turned it over to them to make them go away and leave him alone. I believe he had to get it to them as well, they didn't come to get it.

You may have to blow up the image but do you see the die cracks trough the top of MERIC and through the much finer one through the bottom of 200 through the top of UNI on this 1806 half cent? Well this is a struck counterfeit using a rev die that was copied from an 1804 C-6 half cent. The 1804 C-6 does have those cracks, and this same fake rev die has been used to create counterfeit draped bust half cents for every year from 1800 to 1808. Die cracks do NOT establish authenticity. In fact in this case they prove it's a fake.

Those images are good enough to tell what has happened. This is a cent that has bee soaked in acid. The acid eats away the metal relatively evenly on all the surfaces making the coin smaller, and thinner, but since the action is even the details remain clear. But eventually the reduction in the diameter causes the loss of the rim, So this is just Post Strike Damage.