Think about it, what would it be struck through that covers the entire coin, both sides? I would have to agree with damage, either corrosion...
Yours isn't missing the mint mark, it is not supposed to have one. Philadelphia minted dimes did not carry a mint mark until 1980 or so. San...
Some of them look like they have been harshly cleaned which hurts the value. I would keep them as coins regardless, I can't think of any...
They are easily altered/made larger diameter without distorting the image. By pounding as previously stated and it can be done with heat as well.
No error, just damage.
No way are they selling them for that. While they may be asking those prices, they will not get it.
Lower grade like that one are only worth a few cents. Higher grade coins of course go for more, but they are easily available.
Nice coin for it's age. Probably an XF or AU, might be worth 25 cents or so.
I've gotten some good deals at coin shows. Sometimes on the second day of a two day show dealers will be more flexible on price.
Normal 1982 D large date, worth face value only.
Right, he was King in 1948, he is supposed to be on the coin.
That is just from die deterioration. The coin was struck from a die that was beginning to "sink" causing the raised area around the outer area of...
Need more information, it is impossible to see the dates in the picture. Most cents were bronze from 1864 until 1962.
Sorry, not a mint error and only worth one cent. That is a zinc blister where the zinc is rotting underneath the copper plating. The copper...
That is a corroded large cent, not a Scott restrike.
Just a plating blister, common problem with the copper coated zinc cents.
It is just a horribly damaged cent, no way to say exactly how it got that way.
What about the coin do you feel is an error?
Definitely just a damaged quarter.
Just damaged, somebody machined the reverse down.
Separate names with a comma.
