http://www.ebay.com/itm/Very-Rare-E...1850818?pt=US_World_Coins&hash=item564ac8a4c2 How this could have happened in the mint is beyond me. It has signs of being a post-mint job.
I'm thinking it's not a squeeze job. The strike opposite the impressed coin is strong and outside the impression the strike is weak. I'm thinking there was somehow another coin on top of the planchet when it was struck.
But then the opposite side would be flat as a normal coin, it would not have a convex shape corresponding to the indent from the back-side.
If it were a squeeze job. The large planchet was on the anvil die, not a flat surface, then the smaller coin was on top of the planchet. the hammer die came down on the and pushed the planchet into the anvil die causing the coin to partially strike up.
I'd say it is real. If this had been a squeeze job then the rest of the coin away from the indent would still show a good strike. In this case a 50 centavo planchet entered the press and a struck 10 centavo lay on top of it. When the dies came together it forced the 10 centavo deep into the 50 centavo planchet causing it to start cupping up around the ten centavo. The extra thickness of two coins in the press kept the dies from coming together completely and they made minimal contact with the 50 centavo planchet leaving a very weak impression everywhere except directly below the 10 centavo where it is extremely sharp. On the side where the ten centavo was you have a full SHARP brockage with no traces of a previously struck 50 centavo. If you had tried to do that extreme a squeeze job out side the coining press the area below the ten centavo would be mushy at best or completely flattened while the rest of the coin would look good. It may have had help, but if it did it was in the mint.
I wonder why the helper didn't make sure the 10 centavo was found along with the 50. It sure would have helped the value to have both of the coins.
yes this error coin is definately a real mint error and looks exactly like it should. I don't see how anyone could possibly think this was done post mint. the 10 centavos coin absorbed all of the pressure from the coin die.
Thanks for your insight guys. It looked suspicious to me, also due to the cut marks near the left side of the edge on the first side, figured that was left over from a vice or something. I think we can still all agree that it's overpriced, even for a genuine error like this. =)
If you mean the marks on the side with the head those are simply marks on the original planchet that were not wiped out by the strike. The surface of planchets are typically covered with nicks, scratches, cuts etc Just like bagmarks on coins from the rough handling and contact between pieces. Normally they are eradicated by the force of the strike, but in this case the extra thickness of metal between the dies kep them from coming into strong contact and the planchet marks remain.
that had to be deliberately done.. at the time of mintin. if thats the case and that is just cool then
id buy it if i didnt have to put a down payment on the car i cannot afford in the house i dont live in
just imagine if this was a U.S. 50 cent coin with a U.S. dime imprint in it . I have never seen or heard of one but I bet someone has one. a U.S. coin like this would probably be up in the hundreds of thousands of dollars. EDIT: I hope things will turn around and get better for you. It is hard to survive in our world today with these high prices on everything.
