I don't know about you guys, but I steer clear of coins with any of these. They are hard to sell and won't EVER stop bothering you when you look at them. Did I leave any others out? Does damage not bother you? Let's talk... 1. The end coin fro a Coin Crimping machine that rolls/wraps coins 2. PVC Damage 3. Zinc Rot/Corrosion 4. Wheel mark from a counting machine 5. Staple scratch 6. Many don't consider this "damage." I do, however: Fingerprints.
I'm wondering if anyone else has difficulty seeing the OP's photos. Never mind, it's just taking a lot longer for them to emerge.
@JCro57 Joe, this damage doesn't bother me as much as the people who find coins like this and think they are Mint errors. Chris
I think you nailed it with those 6! I have a certain fondness/affinity for "holed" coins, as well as "love tokens", so I certainly would not include those. But as @CoinCorgi noted, dryer coins & bezel/jewelry damaged coins drive me nuts. Now I must find something nice to look at to wash those images out of my mind!
Ahh. Yes, @CoinCorgi: bezels. Just in the past two weeks I've seen two 1914 Norwegian 2 kroner coins with "Mother Norway" on them, both mounted in brooches. I wouldn't take a chance on buying either one because not only is there unknown damage from mounting, but one has to make sure the brooch shines, right?! So I'm sure there are hairlines galore on both. What a shame. Steve
Voted up, not because the images aren't painful to look at, but because they're EXCEPTIONAL high-quality illustrations of each type of damage. If we ever put together a pinned "Think you've got an error? Check here first" thread, these images should appear prominently in it. (Not that most "is this an error" posters are likely to look before they post, unfortunately...)
Sometimes you can't avoid fingerprint coins if the coin is a real rarity. In that case it's not a dealbreaker for me. As with my pattern set, these coins were passed around to members of parliament and/or other officials and were not always kept pristine. You either accept that they are there or you don't have an example of the coin. With common coins, however, it's easy to pass on them.
What good would that do? Even if someone read it, we'd probably get a lot of, "Well, the damage you illustrated is on the obverse, but the anomaly on the coin I found is on the reverse. So is that an error?" Chris
What exactly is "PVC" damage? Also that 1776-1976 quarter would have fooled me. From the looks of it, I would have thought for sure that happened at the mint.
PVC (Polyvinyl chloride) damage is the green gunk on coins, a contamination from the plasticizer which softens flips or holders. That might not be the 100% correct scientific explanation, but once you've seen it you'll recognize it. Over the past few days I have repeatedly soaked an expensive Norwegian coin in acetone to clean up PVC damage. I was just getting ready to put it into a Saflip (which has NO PVC) to send in to NGC and noticed minute green spots all over the coin. Made me sick. I'm glad I found them before sending the coin in. Steve
Polyvinyl chloride itself is not the damaging substance, it is the plasticizers that they add to make a holder very flexible and transparent , some made with a minimum of additives are safe for coins Some put the word "SAFE" in the name. Rigid PVC pipe is mostly just pvc, but it is opaque and safe for coin storage. Many bullion/end of world/ people bury all sorts of stuff sealed like plumbing. In my hot (summer) desert environment, Plasticizers gas out within a year or so and the holder will crack if bent. The green/blue gunk is the acidic plasticizer corroding the coin metal. Jim
