Mint mark over Mint mark

Several aspects of all of this ..I will post my coins good or bad. I believe 100% I have this penny...I also sent to PCGS 1969s one cent ..I fully understand as I believe the 1969s sold for 145.K .and will mine who knows...Its ok that I make errors with a small or large date I'm new about 5 mts.in..but I have every coin I said that quarter is a 1990 and to me it forsure has a D over P mint Mark and If it doesn't there forsure something under the D as the belly of the D is in the middle of a ? ..and like I said good or bad the outcome I will post and take the negativity as in I told you so. I give my word I have very thick skin but to worry about grammar or thinking I'm talk bad about a small date or large date , I didn't even have a clue there have only been two found , well I'm sticking by my word now there are three until they prove I'm wrong...I also stand by my quarter and the 1969s ..and the others until I get them back....you get more out of a prospect by teaching him the ins and outs of the other side and to beat him down, as they may be a day you need that man by your side and don't want him to take his time showing up..Ragu

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Yes, but the problem here is you already refuse to except the teachings that have been given you. It was well explained that a dual mint mark on the quarter is impossible. Over mint marks and rpms were only possible when said mint marks were punched into the die face by hand. After 1989 all mint marks were engraved into the master. No punching!
You sent the 1982 D out without actually knowing the difference between small and large date.
The 1969 could be a doubled die, but not the big one. Chances are it will be md.

 

Errors are caused ether by human or Machine ,ether way that is what makes them one of a kind 1955 one cent I believe,as well as some of the know translational years. Just maybe someone made a mistake and I have that one of a kind. I give you 100% That D is over something. I understand this error should not happen but something did. This quarter looks like nobody has even touched it. I thought it was a 2021. There is no reason for me to keep banging heads, I should have keeped all the pictures. Thanks for the help.Ragu

 

Doubled Dies are a variety not an error,and I 100% guarantee you what happened to your quarter is not what you think(still 25 cents).

 

You keep saying you know almost nothing about coins, yet you're positive about what you have, even though it's not possible. The 1955 doubled die is NOT just one coin. There again, not having knowledge about the minting process. I'm not trying to argue, just don't understand why you won't listen to seasoned experts. I will bet that what you think is a second mint mark is probably just a die chip.
I'll make a prediction right now. We will never see pictures of the finished graded coins.

 

Hopefully attribution was included and paid for on the submission or we will never know

 

Could use some help on a 2013 One Cent. I was calling it Tri-Color, its called Matte finish as I have a 2013 same as the 1909. The texture is not smooth and the best way to describe it is like sandpaper. Is this coin worth getting graded. Thanks Ragu

 

Technically an overmintmark on a 1990 quarter could be possible, but it would exist on every coin from the die and none have ever been seen after almost 30 years so it is VERY highly unlikely. The only way it could happen would be as a doubled die with the die being hubbed from a hub for one mint and then hubbed from a hub used for the other mint. After 1997 it would be impossible because after that date the P hubs were in Pennsylvania, and the D hubs were in Colorado and then around the same time they went to the single squeeze hubbing.

 

Picture please.

 

Pretty hard to determine without a picture.

 

Hi Ragu,

your question really would need a picture of the coin in order to determine what happened. there were no "matte finish" cents struck in 2013 and "satin finish" cents ended in 2010. in all likelihood the reason will be one of a few causes for the appearance.
1. toning, copper is really reactive.
2. zinc particles under the copper plating, this will give a bumpy appearance.
3. roller lines, when the zinc is rolled out to proper thickness, the rolles can get grit or jam and gouge the zinc before it's plated, and then the strike doesn't remove the lines either.
4. possible a struck through slight overgreasing, sometimes this will make the coin look hazy or "fogged" like a matte or satin finish and all details are present.

it could be a lot of things, but no way to tell unless a picture is provided. one thing though, the mint didn't make any cents that were matte or satin finish in 2013.

like this, it's from an old thread, but it's the same coins, same date and MM, but they look different. both found at the end of 2013, judging by in front of the ear and top of lincolns hair, and bottom of the bust, it's MAYBE even the same obverse die at different points of the dies life, my opinion the coins visual difference is due to the die deterioration at different points in the die life, they reflect light differently due to die wear, and possibly toning playing a factor here also.


picture would be useful for me to go any further on your cent and what might have caused what you are seeing, we'd need to see what you're looking at.

I pull this picture of roller lines out whenever I can, This is one of my favorite worthless (valueless) coins in my collection. this is actually a date where the mint was making satin finish coins for mint sets, but this is not from a mint set, just a business strike. looks very different from other 2005s.

 

Wow, Thank you for the great response. I will send a picture right away. Ragu

 

The Picture of this coin does not do it any justice. Ragu

 

I'm sorry, but no picture will do that coin justice. I see the same picture posted 3 times and not rotated correctly. I'm afraid it's just a damaged coin. You'll need to post better pics for us to make an accurate decision on this coin.

 

I gave my word. Good or bad I will post. I talked to customer service yesterday. The woman I spoke to said about 20 days from getting my grading complete.

 

I can't believe that a penny could cause all this animosity. I was only saying what I sent out to PCGS. Let me rephrase this what I thought I sent out. I believe I have what I have and this is why I put the coins out for feed back. I would have thought the 1969s would have gotten more attention. Ragu

 

I can't believe that a penny could cause all this animosity. I was only saying what I sent out to PCGS. Let me rephrase this what I thought I sent out. I believe I have what I have and this is why I put the coins out for feed back. I would have thought the 1969s would have gotten more attention. Ragu

 

Huh? Animosity?

Just tell us the results when you get them.

Oh and Happy Thanksgiving

 

As said before, there are many knowledgeable people on the forum. People have told you that it's not what you think it is. As for the 1969, I see no doubling whatsoever. I think you have gotten caught up in the multiple online videos telling how you can get rich quick off of searching coins. The majority of those are just click bait and the posters know nothing about coins.

 

pcgs online free grading site, also i use numismedia for prices, they are way more realisatic than pcgs or ngc prices, usually 20-25% less than those two, so i think it is fairer to customers to get the lower price, hope this helps, good luck with your submissions, i am thinking of sending 10 in to anacs, they will slab 10 for 140.00 plus 24.00 return shipping, so might do this if i have some sales at the next show i go to in devens, ma