Hard to capture, but there is definite luster when I change the angle under lighting. Great point, and I agree. :thumb:
Your description of how machine doubling occurs is incorrect. What you are referring to would be known as a double struck coin. Machine doubling...
I agree with my Pi enthusiast friend here. It is your opinion that they are worth over face. Are they? Perhaps. Are they worth the trouble of...
I thought of it as an AU-55, so I guess I wasn't too far off. In-hand I don't see much wear. And I like the toning as well...it gives it a nice...
Anyone?
Don't look right to me.
Hi folks. :smile I've got this 1893 Columbian Exposition Half off ebay. I went for this one because all the others seemed to either be quite worn...
It's his opinion that they are spenders. I see nothing wrong with his statement. In fact, I agree with him (then again, I don't collect nickels).
It is post-strike damage. Worth 1 cent. Keep up the hunt!
They are worth at least melt. I am not very aware of the numismatic premiums of morgans. 1880-CC should be worth a good amount.
Not that I can imagine.
Neither, appears to be die deterioration doubling. Keep up the hunt!
He is 12, I wouldn't expect impeccable spelling. But if he wants his auctions to be taken seriously, it doesn't hurt to run a spell check. Still,...
Ask him if he can find my TV remote in there, too.
Yes, that is mechanical doubling. The title of "S/S" in the auction is misleading, as it is not a repunched mintmark.
No known S/D for that year. Pictures would help determine the cause.
Looks like some odd die deterioration doubling to be honest. I don't think it is a doubled die either. Keep up the hunt!
I'll say 215...thanks for the contest!
I think this one is struck through a deteriorating die cap...nice find! Keep up the hunt!
66 from my perspective.
Separate names with a comma.
