I would sure love to know how something like that happened. I could tell that it was not torched because the cladding was in tact. However, I have no idea what would cause that reverse to look like that.
Thank you for teaching me something, Mespe ! I apologize for my misguided assumptions. Please stick with us here at CoinTalk.
Anyone have a link to the auction? Is it already over? Can't seem to find it when I search eBay. Such an interesting thread...
Here's the Reverse, yes the grading has been removed as the ANACs number Jhonn just browse error coins,,,
If you post the link to the website where you found the coin, I will apologize, unless of course it's your website.
Two things... Firstly, since the poster's coin is very likely from the same broken die as the ANACS coin on the Heritage site, I would see this as all the more reason to go ahead and pull the auction to have it certified, or work out some sort of deal with the winning bidder should they so choose. Secondly, I still can't find the coin on eBay. Direct link, anyone?
I have it stated in the us coins/error auction that if the final price of the coin achieves 4 times the cost of certification it will be certified for the buyer at my expense. Less then 4X buyers expense. If it fails to be certified Mint Error, I GIVE the coin to the highest bidder for free
OK I found his ebayauction for the coin. http://cgi.ebay.com/MINT-ERROR-COIN-lincoln-penny-rare-high-ridge-cent-cud_W0QQitemZ140169533042QQihZ004QQcategoryZ524QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem
Here is a close up of that coin. And, no, it is not from his web site. I have no idea why he does not want the web site link posted, but this should prove that it is a public web site. BTW it is 64RB.
Now this is interesting,,, My coin was minted After the other coin,,, here's how I know,,, Look at the "N" in "ONE" the NE corner is filled in on mine, while the NE corner is untouched in the other,,, that's gotta be worth atleast a couple bucks,,,:mouth:
Well, you conducted yourself in the manner of a guilty man, and the pictures were deceiving, but that's no excuse. I have betrayed my own principles, in my quest to only help fellow collectors. In this case, I have been nothing but a hindrance. It is quite apparent that I need to further my error coin education before dismissing other coins. I apologize for any inconvenience I have caused you, and I fully retract my past statements, and I acknowledge your coin as a genuine mint error. My apologies, again, go out to you.
I agree with BigH....this only goes to show how much more there is to learn about coins. Errors is a new area for me (as in the past 1 1/2 year) and I've enjoyed everthing I'ver learned so far and I'm looking forward to many more years of doing the same. This coin was a good learning time for many of us I think!! Same here---I removed it because he requested but as I told him---when selling a coin I think all of the info should be posted and shown that way the buyer can see all sides of the deal. maybe he will change his mind and post the link himself. Speedy
I'm still trying to figure out how this happened - not saying it didn't, just wondering how ? Think about it, not just 1 die had to break - both of them did - at the same time. And then there was apparently enough metal in the planchet to not only fill two very large cuds, there was enough to also create finning on the opposite side of the coin. And finning normally only occurs when a coin is struck with excessive pressure or a slightly over-thick planchet. But could it have been thick enough to have that much extra metal ? I dunno - I'm baffled
Doug, I know little about errors, but I am (or was anyway) a pretty good trouble shooter. He are my guesses. I don't think both dies broke. My guess is that there was something stuck on the observe die. That is why the reverse die broke. The observe is depressed, not convex like the reverse. That would also explain how the reverse design is full right into the "cud" in stead of weak nest to the break like most dies breaks I have seen.