Are these error coins worth the cost of grading? 1 1

[Mike Strand]

My brother in law asked me to submit the following error coins to NGC to be graded.  First off, I have only submitted once and messed up on the form only to learn that once they are shipped, the grading request cannot be changed.  So if anyone thinks these are worth sending in, please share HOW I should fill out the form as well if you happen to know.  It appears that grading of an error coin is going to be close to $40 each, so we probably wont do any that are worth much less than that.

Here are the coins still in their ancient holders (sorry about the photos - I used my Pixel 7 Pro phone at a slight angle out on the deck so the sunshine would light them without shadows).  It seems to add lots of artifacts when really zoomed in.  If you need better photos, let me know and I will try again.  Sine I am limited to 4.88mb of photos, I have cropped and reduced the quality of the photos and will post 1-5 here and 6 and 7 as a reply (hopefully).  Ask and I'll upload untouched full photos on request (if I am able).  Thanks so much for any insights!!!

1. 1979 D Penny with No FG on the reverse.

2. 1985 D Penny with No FG on the reverse, extra 1981 D date impression on obverse and craziness on the reverse (several photos of this)

5 1969 D Penny No FG on the reverse

3. 1986 D Penny Dropping D on obverse in GOD (I think)

4. 1929 Error date with partial 1 or 2 in obverse

6. 1936 Canada dot between N and A in Canada on reverse.  I have attached several photos of this.  I know that the expensive one is below the date, but this absolutely has extra material placed at the top. 

7. 2000 New Hampshire quarter with filled die obverse (and maybe some on reverse)

[Mike Strand]

Here are the photos of the 1936 Canada dot and filled die

[Greenstang]

From what I can see there are not any errors on any of those coins.   
All I see is damage and broken posts. It would be a complete waste    
of money to send any of them in for grading. Unless a coin is worth
at least $150.00, it is not worth grading and most of your coins are.  
not worth much more than face value.

Damage to a coin is not an error.

Addition
Looking closer at your 1936 Canadian cent, it is a counterfeit so it has no value.

Edited August 8 by Greenstang
Addition

[Mike Strand]

Thanks so much for your thoughts on this Greenstang.  I was thinking that it was not worth sending them in also which is why I thought I would get all of your opinions.  The biggest question is whether the 1936 Canada with that extra material between the N and A in Canada might be worth something.  I also did not know if missing the FG next to the monument on the back was actually worth more than a couple dollars.  I looked on ebay and things are all over the place for ungraded missing FG coins making me think that is not a reliable pricing guide.  If anyone has specific thoughts on the 1936 Canada, I would love to hear that.  I wonder if I should I start a post just for it?

Edited August 8 by Mike Strand
added the previous poster's name

[Greenstang]

Look at the end of my first post, I stated that the 1936 cent was a counterfeit, it has no value.

[Mike Strand]

I took bad photos then.  that one truly looks legit in real life... and my brother in law has held it for dozens of years after collecting for over 40 years. 

Edited August 8 by Mike Strand
added info about how long it was held

[Greenstang]

Does your brother in law know the markers for a counterfeit 1936 dot cent?   
He doesn’t seem to know damage from an error.
I have seen quite a few of these. They are made in China.

Edited August 8 by Greenstang

[Mike Strand]

That is interesting...  I doubt he knows counterfeit indicators.  It makes me wonder if he bought it or found it in the thousands of rolls he has gone through over the years.  I suppose they add copper to a normal 1936.  well that definitely helps answer that then.  bummer.  Thanks again for all your insights Greenstang and hope you have a wonderful rest of your week and weekend!

[Coinbuf]

Welcome to the forum, I will echo what greenstang has written that most of the coins you posted do not appear to be errors of any significant value.   There are people that like to collect minor issues like the missing initials and coins with missing letters due to grease filled dies.   But most are looking for coins in better condition than the coins you have.  Also, I do not think that NGC will recognize most of those types of issues which might be why you had problems with your first submission.   If you really want them in a TPG holder you might check with ANACS, I think they will notate some of these minor conditions on the slab label and are a less expensive option for slabbing coins like this.   Mind you I'm not suggesting that you should only that it could be an option.

I will add that your 1985-D cent is what we call a vise job, two cents were pressed together with this coin to create this effect.   The common tool for this is a standard bench vise thus the name.   It may have been done intentionally to deceive or it may have just happened somewhere along the coin's journey after it left the mint, but either way it is just damage.

[Mike Strand]

Thanks Coinbuf.  I am so amazed at the fast, honest and wonderful feedback the members of this forum share.  It definitely instills confidence and I will definitely add this to my reference library.  And now I am learning terminology too.  I never thought about using a vice to create that - and it would be super easy.  I will be talking with my brother in law on Sunday and will share how he got the 1936 Canada coin and how long ago it was.  Maybe it will help someone else in the future.  Thanks again and happy weekend to you all!

[Henri Charriere]

Any chance your brother-in-law would post a picture of the vintage Indian bike he got from you for all those error coins you traded him for it?  🤣

If some guy shows up wearing a PM5000 T-shirt inquiring about the 1936 Dot, tell him you sold it to Quintus from East Harlem.  No way he'd put his life on the line with all these psychos to destroy a cent.  

 

[Sandon]

    Welcome to the NGC chat board.

    It is preferable that you post only one coin and your questions about it per topic. It can be quite difficult to deal with multiple coins with different issues in a single thread.  Try to post better quality photos.

    Unless you have the knowledge and experience to grade and otherwise evaluate coins yourself, you should not consider submitting them to a third-party grading service!  It is also important to understand the policies of the grading service before you submit. This is not for novice or casual collectors. If you had submitted these coins, you would have spent hundreds of dollars in grading, error attribution, and processing fees and shipping and insurance costs on coins that collectively appear to be worth less than $10.

   Coins struck from grease filled dies (such as your 1969-D and 1979-D cents and the 2000 New Hampshire quarter) and those with similar minor anomalies are quite common and are regarded by knowledgeable collectors as quality control issues, not mint errors, and are worth at most a few dollars apiece as novelties. Grading services do not attribute coins with minor anomalies; only the quarter might possibly qualify for error attribution. "NGC does not recognize as mint error coins those with minor die chips, breaks and rotations, etc., that fall within our interpretation of mint tolerance. The determination of what constitutes a mint error is at the discretion of NGC." Variety vs. Mint Error | NGC (ngccoin.com).  None of these coins is worth the $19 per coin minimum "Modern Tier" grading fee, much less the $18 error attribution fee (charged whether the coin is attributed or not) and the other costs of submission.

   The 1985-D cent was altered by someone who squeezed it against a 1981-D cent in a vise or with a hammer. It is worthless. A coin overstruck by dies intended to create another coin would show a positive, not negative image. Moreover, how could it be that in 1985 the mint would have a die from 1981 in a press that could overstrike a coin dated 1985? Logic and common sense apply to coin collecting, just as they do to all other endeavors in life.

   I see nothing unusual about the well-worn 1919 (not 1929) cent. It is in approximately Very Good condition, with a retail value of about 25 cents. I also see nothing unusual about the 1986-D cent, which may have a nick or plating blister on the "G" in "GOD" and would not have any collector value in either case.

   The 1936 Canada "dot" cent, of which only three genuine pieces are known to exist, is not a mint error. It was a variety intentionally created in 1937 to fulfill a possible need for coinage before the new design depicting King George VI would be available. The three genuine pieces were obtained by the late John Jay Pittman (1913-1996) from former Royal Canadian Mint employees, and it is believed that the entire balance of the mintage was melted when found to have been unneeded. See https://www.pcgs.com/news/rare-canadian-1936-dot-cent; Akers, David, Catalog of The John Jay Pittman Collection: Selected Numismatic Rarities Part One at 14-16 (1997). Numerous counterfeits such as your coin have been created, as well as pieces with purported dots added to regular, common 1936 Canada cents. Someone posted one of the altered pieces on the chat board yesterday.

   You should read (and should ask your brother to read) the following recent article by a well-known coin dealer: Jeff Garrett: Fake News and Misinformation in Numismatics | NGC (ngccoin.com).

   Please refer to the following forum topics for reliable print and online resources from which you may learn about U.S. coins and collecting them.

    

 

   

   

[Henri Charriere]

 

On 8/8/2024 at 4:25 PM, Mike Strand said:

Here are the photos of the 1936 Canada dot and filled die

As regarding this 1936 Cent, you may wish to check out a related Topic unspooling presently on the "1936 Canadian Dot Cent Die-Capped Mint thread," that features an allegeded counterfeit example.

Edited August 9 by Henri Charriere
Duplicate.

[Mike Strand]

Again, great information shared - especially insightful Sandon.  Thanks so much to each of you for taking the time for such comprehensive information sharing.  I kindof feel bad that I wasted everyone's time here, but on the other hand, I am so thankful I did before spending hundreds of my family's cash submitting the coins for grading.  My previous submissions were for 5 complete sets of the 2021 Peace/Morgan coins which of course have much higher value.  I messed up not specifying the centennial label but at least they did have the peace/morgan label as the standard.  I will continue to research the topics shared and I and my brother in law thank you again for your insights.  These are fun to have in the collection in any case.  Thanks again for your time helping us out.

[powermad5000]

On 8/8/2024 at 3:24 PM, Mike Strand said:

I used my Pixel 7 Pro phone

Hello and welcome to the forum!

Is this how much more awful the camera is on the Pixel 7??? I have a Pixel 6 and have plenty of difficulty taking coin photos with it and trying to work around the settings that make all my coins look "juiced". This is not a comfort to me when it comes time to upgrade. I think I will have to lodge a formal complaint to Google about their current camera. I had a Pixel 3 for years before it melted down and forced me into a 6 and the 3 took wonderful photos of coins. Just shoot and crop and the coin photos looked nearly what the coin did in hand.

I see you got your results but I'll add my opines anyway.

79 D - Initially weak FG got worn off with circulation wear

85 D - vise job

86 D - Opposite side of Lincoln's bust which takes most of the metal from the strike causes normal weakness of some lettering on the reverse in any or all letters in ATES of A. Does not happen on all strikes but happens very frequently in differing levels and amounts of affected letters.

29 error date - Looks like a 1919 that took a hit across the date numerals

69 D - same as your 79 D

36 Canada Dot - Extremely weak obverse strike details in bust and poorly formed rim on obverse as well as other incorrect details. Counterfeit. (We try not to give out too much info for the counterfeiters to make better fakes in the future).

2000 NH quarter - Partial grease filled obverse die. Technically an error but grading would not bring this premium up to make grading worth the costs involved. Actually more common amongst the statehood quarters so premium is small as with too many specimens in the marketplace, collectors almost see this as poor quality control on behalf of the Mint.

[Mike Strand]

Thanks Powermad5000.  Great info again.  Yes, the pixel 7 pro touted such a great camera - including amazing close up distance when you zoom in.  the better ones were zoomed to 2 (I think these are all optical but not sure).  The ones that have all the artifacts were at the next step (4 or 5).  Obviously this is not a great phone and my daughter just upgraded to the 8 pro and it does not appear to be much better.  My son and his wife just got the Samsung S21 Ultra and they sold theirs in months because of camera quality. I have a Canon DSLR that has not been used in years, but I suspect I need to dust it off for coin photos.  I sure wish I knew more about the best ways to light them.  Outside in the sun gives good brightness I guess.  I suppose a quality ring light might be helpful, but then its another hundred bucks into the hobby.  I guess all hobbies are expensive.  Thanks again and I wish you all a wonderful, restful weekend!

[Halbrook Family]

On 8/8/2024 at 5:21 PM, Henri Charriere said:

 

As regarding this 1936 Cent, you may wish to check out a related Topic unspooling presently on the "1936 Canadian Dot Cent Die-Capped Mint thread," that features an allegeded counterfeit example.

There was alot of that 1936 coin made. A over half a million. How many 16D merc dimes have you seen? Wasn't that only 200,000?  

[powermad5000]

On 8/9/2024 at 7:43 AM, Halbrook Family said:

How many 16D merc dimes have you seen? Wasn't that only 200,000?

The mintage number of the 1916 D Mercury Dime was only 264,000. I have seen a few fakes of them over the years. Pretty much all of them using a cheap 1916 and adding a D mintmark to it.

[Mike Strand]

I spoke to my brother in law this afternoon and he said he found the 1936 Canada with that dot in the 70's from pocket change.  Since I cannot believe that China was making counterfeit coins and putting them into circulation for no profit in the 70's, I am less convinced it is counterfeit.  That said, I am not convinced it is valuable either since the dot is in the wrong place.  I have ordered a ring light which arrives monday and am charging up my Canon DSLR, so I will start a new thread with (hopefully) good quality photos of both sides and close up of the dot.  It will be interesting to see a) whether I can take good quality photos and b) what everyone here says on the coin once I post it.  Thanks again everyone and have a wonderful weekend.

[powermad5000]

On 8/10/2024 at 10:08 PM, Mike Strand said:

Since I cannot believe that China was making counterfeit coins and putting them into circulation for no profit in the 70's, I am less convinced it is counterfeit.

China has been counterfeiting US currency since it was made. Particularly for my collecting, Trade Dollars (late 1800's) have to be checked thoroughly for fakes. Besides, the Hobby Protection Act was enacted by Congress in 1973. IMHO, counterfeiting goes all the way back to when currency started being made.

[GoldFinger1969]

Mike, where did you get the idea or suggestion that these were Error Coins and/or worth big $$$ ?

[Mike Strand]

Hi GoldFinger1969.  My brother in law wanted me to submit all of these for grading thinking it would be worthwhile and I believed that they were not worth more than a few dollars each, thus a waste of his hard to come by money to spend $40+ each.  He has been into searching pocket change for over 50 years since he was a kid.  I have virtually no authority since I've only dabbled for the past couple years.  I have sold some on ebay so have some idea how to look for rough values on ebay (although I've seen $2 pennies go for $500 which I have not figured out). 

I was hoping that by submitting photos to this forum I could get some zero dollar insights and valuable lessons from collectors who have more experience than both of us.  As you can see by the comments, the recommendations are clear and he has already taken back his coins to put back into his archives.  As for the 1936 Canada, the history of the coin still has me wondering, so I just wanted to post better quality photos (hopefully) to have this amazing group double confirm it is counterfeit.

[Greenstang]

Even if the 1936 cent was genuine, (which it’s not), in that condition it would be worth less than $2.00 so still not worth getting graded.

[powermad5000]

On 8/12/2024 at 9:34 AM, Mike Strand said:

(although I've seen $2 pennies go for $500 which I have not figured out).

The thing on eBay is there isn't any real oversight when it comes to pricing coins on there. A cent that sells for $500 could be a premium superb gem BU RD (typically graded) and that is why it sells for so much. But there isn't anything limiting someone from putting a damaged parking lot cent on there for $500 either. There are plenty of scammers on there posting circulation coins with ridiculous asking prices even in the thousands of dollars claiming things like a filled mintmark are some kind of super rare error which they are not an error and in fact they are common, or they list a circulated Washington quarter with weakness in the motto IN GOD WE TRUST of the I and W nearest the rim as some kind of super rare error (once again, very common) for thousands of dollars.

Sellers posting ridiculous asking prices for common circulation change are nothing but scammers looking to take advantage of people just entering the hobby who don't know any better themselves. Another of the more recent ones I have seen on there is them advertising their Sacagawea dollar as gold and charging $2,000 for one. Its golden in color but it isn't gold. Someone coming into the hobby who doesn't know any better might buy that thinking it is actually gold and they are making an investment. It isn't until they try to go to sell it that they find out they were scammed and the scammer is long gone by then.

[Greenstang]

EBay policy says that you can charge up to $2500.00 for a raw coin.   
It only takes one bidiet to make a scammers day. Would you buy a     
Rolex of off some guy on a street corner?
It is up to the buyer to do their homework before purchasing. 

[VKurtB]

On 8/10/2024 at 10:08 PM, Mike Strand said:

I am not convinced it is valuable either since the dot is in the wrong place.

Atta boy! Good thinking!

[powermad5000]

On 8/12/2024 at 3:06 PM, Greenstang said:

It is up to the buyer to do their homework before purchasing.

That is where we have a problem currently existing in this hobby. When the buyer has done their "homework" by watching a You Tube video by Joe Blow about gold Sacagawea's, and finding a $10,000 quarter in his pocket change because the mintmark is filled in and it is some fantastic error coin, and the buyer is so new and hasn't looked up any real, solid information from a reliable source, well, I think you can see where I am going with this and where the problem is.

[Mike Strand]

On 8/13/2024 at 1:25 AM, powermad5000 said:

When the buyer has done their "homework" by watching a You Tube video by Joe Blow

Well that pretty well sums it up for me!  And thankfully I fell into this forum with all of you amazing people sharing tons of super helpful information. Fortunately most of my coin purchases were from the mint. Of course most will not be worth much beyond what I paid for it, but at least they should be real.  I did get lucky to buy a 2020 gold uncirculated American Eagle for $2500 and sold it ungraded on ebay for $3500 shortly after receiving it. The sucky part was having to pay all the ebay fees and special shipping procedures. The stress definitely made me wonder if it was worth the couple hundred gained. I also managed to get lucky with 3 NGC MS70 2021 Denver Morgans which helped my portfolio value, although I have only sold one, so the crazy prices on those could drop at any moment. If anyone has insights (or even better - a perfectly functioning crystal ball) as whether to unload or continue to hold them, I would be interested to hear them.  Thanks again for all your insights, and I will be sure not to pay thousands for a Sacagawea.

[powermad5000]

On 8/13/2024 at 3:39 PM, Mike Strand said:

The sucky part was having to pay all the ebay fees and special shipping procedures.

Anytime you are not selling directly and privately on a collector to collector personal transaction basis, there are going to be fees. Even the major auction houses will take a cut once the gavel drops.

Apologies that my crystal ball is broken and my Magic 8 Ball says Cannot Predict Now.  

[Mike Strand]

I finally got my new purchases here.  So these are also not the greatest photos, but better with my Canon D5 with 19" ring light and 10x macro lens with two tripods.  This is a bugger getting the camera perfectly in the same plane as the coin.  The front must be totally worn out because I can't get much contrast.  The second reverse photo, I put my hand on the left side to block some of the ring light.  Fortunately these are mostly full size images with 97% compression, so you should be able to zoom in better than my previous photos.  Do you have any tips for me to make this easier and if they are close to what they should be?