Do errors always increase the value of a coin?

[e1cnr]

Just because a coin has an error, does it make it worth more?

 

 

I was an underbidder on the following coin. It is double struck (or squeezed) with about a 20 degree rotation. The error really has negative eye appeal to me.

 

What are your thoughts -

 

 

[MarkFeld]

No. Many errors are very minor and/or collectors don't care about them.

[noow]

Sometimes, not always.

[physics-fan3.14]

If it has negative eye appeal, why did you bid on it? Not to mention that coin has been cleaned, has environmental damage, is corroded, and ugly to boot.

 

Many minor errors detract from the value of the coin, while major errors can often increase the value exponentially.

[noow]

If it has negative eye appeal, why did you bid on it? Not to mention that coin has been cleaned, has environmental damage, is corroded, and ugly to boot.

 

Many minor errors detract from the value of the coin, while major errors can often increase the value exponentially.

 

Corroded? CLEANED? I can't see where you are coming from based on those photos.

[physics-fan3.14]

If it has negative eye appeal, why did you bid on it? Not to mention that coin has been cleaned, has environmental damage, is corroded, and ugly to boot.

 

Many minor errors detract from the value of the coin, while major errors can often increase the value exponentially.

 

Corroded? CLEANED? I can't see where you are coming from based on those photos.

 

Look at the color. Its green. That's not healthy. Notice the pink spots on the highlights. Again, not healthy. Furthermore, look at the pitting on the obverse behind her head and on the reverse to the left. Even more, look at the large spot of verdigris (aka corrosion) under and behind her bust.

 

I can't see how you don't see these based on those photos.

[noow]

If it has negative eye appeal, why did you bid on it? Not to mention that coin has been cleaned, has environmental damage, is corroded, and ugly to boot.

 

Many minor errors detract from the value of the coin, while major errors can often increase the value exponentially.

 

Corroded? CLEANED? I can't see where you are coming from based on those photos.

 

Look at the color. Its green. That's not healthy. Notice the pink spots on the highlights. Again, not healthy. Furthermore, look at the pitting on the obverse behind her head and on the reverse to the left. Even more, look at the large spot of verdigris (aka corrosion) under and behind her bust.

 

I can't see how you don't see these based on those photos.

 

Don't you mean the red?

And if you see verdigris, how do you know it was from corrosion?

I don't see how you not see how I see my opinion of the coin.

 

So much for "ignoring" me huh?

 

 

 

[physics-fan3.14]

Red and pink are not the same - stop trying to correct me when you have no idea what you are talking about. Red and pink copper mean something very different - red is a natural patina color on uncirculated copper, and is highly desirable. Pink means stripped, and the metal under any patina is revealed. This is pink.

 

And verdigris is by definition corrosion. If you see verdigris, you see corrosion.

 

I'm ignoring you, but I still have to combat your inaccurate information.

[noow]

Red and pink are not the same - stop trying to correct me when you have no idea what you are talking about. Red and pink copper mean something very different - red is a natural patina color on uncirculated copper, and is highly desirable. Pink means stripped, and the metal under any patina is revealed. This is pink.

 

And verdigris is by definition corrosion. If you see verdigris, you see corrosion.

 

I'm ignoring you, but I still have to combat your inaccurate information.

 

Verdigris is also caused by foreign debris, not always corrosion. And how do you know that the "pink" on the coin means it is "stripped"?

 

Paradox: ignoring me and correcting me.

 

It looks like I'm the one who has to correct you.

[e1cnr]

I usually try not to bid on 'problem' coins, seeing the cleaning and corrosion

 

cleaning -> pumpkin pink on high locations

corrosion -> pitting near UNITED and Cap

 

 

but will at a discount, especially on 200+ year old coins

with interesting errors and decent grade details

 

[physics-fan3.14]

I usually try not to bid on 'problem' coins, seeing the cleaning and corrosion

 

cleaning -> pumpkin pink on high locations

corrosion -> pitting near UNITED and Cap

 

 

but will at a discount, especially on 200+ year old coins

with interesting errors and decent grade details

 

I agree, the details are pretty strong on this coin. Copper scares me though, because it is such an unstable metal.

 

Are you an error collector? I'd love to see some of your pieces. I'm not really big into errors, but they are interesting sometimes.

[noow]

I usually try not to bid on 'problem' coins, seeing the cleaning and corrosion

 

cleaning -> pumpkin pink on high locations

corrosion -> pitting near UNITED and Cap

 

 

but will at a discount, especially on 200+ year old coins

with interesting errors and decent grade details

 

FINALLY!

An opinion other than Jason's

 

I can see why there might be cleaning, but pitting does not nessicarily mean corrosion.

 

[Walkerfan]

I think that this is a very cool error that appears to be more dramatic but the coin DOES look pitted and damaged, so it would not be for me, unfortunately.

[noow]

I think that this is a very cool error that appears to be more dramatic but the coin DOES look pitted and damaged, so it would not be for me, unfortunately.

 

Yeah... but still a nice coin

[brg5658]

I usually try not to bid on 'problem' coins, seeing the cleaning and corrosion

 

cleaning -> pumpkin pink on high locations

corrosion -> pitting near UNITED and Cap

 

 

but will at a discount, especially on 200+ year old coins

with interesting errors and decent grade details

 

FINALLY!

An opinion other than Jason's

 

I can see why there might be cleaning, but pitting does not nessicarily mean corrosion.

 

Noow, you would be wise to listen to some of the knowledgeable and senior members on this board. You are NOT making very many friends or allies here, and you are annoying a helluva lot of people.

 

Everyone is entitled to his/her opinion if they have evidence to support it. However, in your case it is usually either drivel emoticon vomit or purposeful confrontational polemic. Jason is one of the most knowledgeable people here, and he wouldn't comment on something if he doesn't have reasons for doing so. Yes, he has strong opinions, and I have lightly butted heads with him a couple times....but he is a rational and extremely clever guy.

 

Pumping up your post numbers by replying to every thread here doesn't suddenly make you knowledgeable or more respected. Again, to each his/her own. I welcome your comments, opinions, and knowledge when you are able to contribute...but I am not alone when I say the emoticons are out of control!!!

[noow]

I usually try not to bid on 'problem' coins, seeing the cleaning and corrosion

 

cleaning -> pumpkin pink on high locations

corrosion -> pitting near UNITED and Cap

 

 

but will at a discount, especially on 200+ year old coins

with interesting errors and decent grade details

 

FINALLY!

An opinion other than Jason's

 

I can see why there might be cleaning, but pitting does not nessicarily mean corrosion.

 

 

Noow, you would be wise to listen to some of the knowledgeable and senior members on this board. You are NOT making very many friends or allies here, and you are annoying a helluva lot of people.

 

Everyone is entitled to his/her opinion if they have evidence to support it. However, in your case it is usually either drivel emoticon vomit or purposeful confrontational polemic. Jason is one of the most knowledgeable people here, and he wouldn't comment on something if he doesn't have reasons for doing so. Yes, he has strong opinions, and I have lightly butted heads with him a couple times....but he is a rational and extremely clever guy.

 

Pumping up your post numbers by replying to every thread here doesn't suddenly make you knowledgeable or more respected. Again, to each his/her own. I welcome your comments, opinions, and knowledge when you are able to contribute...but I am not alone when I say the emoticons are out of control!!!

 

1. I don't care about my posts count

2. What you say here is overrated by my opinion

3. Solve all your problems by ignoring me

4. I'm looking forward to completing my dictionary of emoticons

 

[BillJones]

In most cases mint errors have a negative affect on the value of early U.S. coins HOWEVER one of the excecptions is early coins that have been double struck, provided that the coin is not in a "wonder grade" like MS-65 or even higher. A very high grade early coin that is double struck might or might not catch fire at a major auction.

 

Without knowing the price paid, I have no way of deciding if the piece went for too much money. I will say that the condition of this piece to a certain price level is off set by the fact that it is double struck. These who collect early copper don't get nearly as upset by corrosion, cleaning and re-coloring as those who collect later date copper coins and the small cents.

 

If this were a "normal" coin with the problems noted by others, it is probably worth $1,200 to $1,400. The double strike would double the price to the right collector. If they can determine the planchet stock (sheet copper, spoiled large cent or Talbot, Allum & Lee token), it could bring even more.

 

No, this is not my kind of coin, but I have sold early coper coins (when I sold my die variety set of half cents) with problems worse than this for more dollars than you might believe. For example I sold a rare variety of an 1805 half cent in Fair to AG, ground salvage for $1,200, in the mid 1990s, to a well known copper dealer. Yes, there is a collecting world outside of slabbed coins.

[James_OldeTowne]

Just because a coin has an error, does it make it worth more?

 

 

I was an underbidder on the following coin. It is double struck (or squeezed) with about a 20 degree rotation. The error really has negative eye appeal to me.

 

What are your thoughts -

My thoughts on this particular error is that it's pretty darned awesome. One doesn't collect such early double-struck errors for aesthetics! The error tells something and gives something tangible about the early minting process.

 

Many errors have negative eye-appeal and bring down the commercial value of a coin. But again, the particular one you reference has superb mind-appeal and is worthy of premium value.

[Walkerfan]

I think that this is a very cool error that appears to be more dramatic but the coin DOES look pitted and damaged, so it would not be for me, unfortunately.

 

Yeah... but still a nice coin

 

Without a doubt; a nice coin.

[bsshog40]

Besides what looks like corrosion to me, and a cleaning, I still like the coin. I also know that most any coin that is pre-1800 demand some pretty good dollars in any condition.

[michael]

If it has negative eye appeal, why did you bid on it? Not to mention that coin has been cleaned, has environmental damage, is corroded, and ugly to boot.

 

Many minor errors detract from the value of the coin, while major errors can often increase the value exponentially.

 

agreed 100% also it has a terrible botched recolor job

 

yuk

[Conder101]

Verdigris is also caused by foreign debris, not always corrosion.

True verdigris is always corrosion. A lot of people call any kind of green gunk verdigris. Verdigris is a corrosion end product of copper acetate, copper chloride, and/or copper carbonate. If verdigris is caused by foreign debris it is because the debris is facilitating the corrosion of the copper (it contains acids or salts).

 

 

[noow]

Verdigris is also caused by foreign debris, not always corrosion.

True verdigris is always corrosion. A lot of people call any kind of green gunk verdigris. Verdigris is a corrosion end product of copper acetate, copper chloride, and/or copper carbonate. If verdigris is caused by foreign debris it is because the debris is facilitating the corrosion of the copper (it contains acids or salts).

 

 

Which is what I meant

[e1cnr]

here is a link to auction

 

the winner will get it for just under $900

 

my analysis was VF30 details with some issues

cut my bid some because of shipping/authenticity risk

no edge view, so if something on there, worth much more

seller did not mention/know about double struck?

so buyer probably did fine - depending if they are going to hold or sell

 

eBay UK auction

[BillJones]

Given the fact that it is double struck and a slightly better 1797 half cent variety (C-2), a little less than $900 was cheap for that coin. And yes, an expert could make that coin more presentable, not gradable in the slab, but more presentable.

[Conder101]

There was a very similar coin in the first Davy collection of half cent errors sold 9/19/10

 

It sold for $1,850 ($2,128 with the juice) The back of the eBay coin is stronger. I think the eBay buyer did pretty good. (One thing that might have caused the Davy coin to go higher was that it was a plate coin in the Breen half cent book.)