I'm upside down? I'm definitely all for humor for sure. To think all this started just because I asked a simple question and to define the difference between a common struck through grease error and the one I have. I was always told the rarity matters, grease errors are very common, the various missing letters and numbers I thought would make a different, apparently I was wrong.
@JBK said:
I would have thought "fake". There are infinitely more fake 1943 bronze cents then there are real ones.
It is not a coin that I would ever remotely consider buying raw. Of course, I wouldn't be able to afford a slabbed one. So, I guess that means I would never buy one,
unless I knowingly bought a fake one for little money as a novelty.
Ok I gotcha I didn't pay a lot but I received this one, blatantly a different coin.
I'm not sure it is a different coin. The specks (spots? Scratches?) I'm front of Lincoln's portrait seem to be the same on both coins.
The photo that makes the coin look bronze might just have been altered or taken in such a way as to give a false impression of what the coin looked like in person. Definitely misleading at best.
@JBK said:
I would have thought "fake". There are infinitely more fake 1943 bronze cents then there are real ones.
It is not a coin that I would ever remotely consider buying raw. Of course, I wouldn't be able to afford a slabbed one. So, I guess that means I would never buy one,
unless I knowingly bought a fake one for little money as a novelty.
Ok I gotcha I didn't pay a lot but I received this one, blatantly a different coin.
Actually, that looks to be exactly the same coin. Look at the wear pattern. The photo appears to have the white balance off, either intentionally or accidentally. Was it advertised as copper?
I'm upside down? I'm definitely all for humor for sure. To think all this started just because I asked a simple question and to define the difference between a common struck through grease error and the one I have. I was always told the rarity matters, grease errors are very common, the various missing letters and numbers I thought would make a different, apparently I was wrong.
I wasn't about you. Just forget it. It was an inside joke with long term members here.
Disclaimer: I'm not a dealer, trader, grader, investor or professional numismatist. I'm just a hobbyist. (To protect me but mostly you! 🤣 )
@jmlanzaf said:
Actually, that looks to be exactly the same coin. Look at the wear pattern. The photo appears to have the white balance off, either intentionally or accidentally.
Agree, definitely the same coin. And even more definitely that the original pictures were messed with. There are so many ways to make deceptive pictures. That original pic was obviously bad, at the level of "I have a bridge to sell you"
I will never learn. I had adopted a policy of not engaging with newbies because they too often did up criticizing the people who are trying help them. For some reason I stupidly keep violating my own policy.
@JBK said:
I will never learn. I had adopted a policy of not engaging with newbies because they too often did up criticizing the people who are trying help them. For some reason I stupidly keep violating my own policy.
Well if you're trying to help, this sure is a funny and confusing way to do it. 90% of the comments were unnecessary, idc if people pick, have fun, or criticize, criticism is important. This my good man was not criticism or help for me, this was just plain ridiculous. Accusing me of scamming people, spamming this forum, etc., I simply wanted to know a possible value and why a common grease strike through would be considered the same as mine, I thought it was what was missing from the coin that was the important part, not the generalized error. Boy I was wrong and all of you guys consider a commonly found "In God We Rust" error the same as an entire state and date not being struck on the coin? I was always told rarity of what is missing or added on the coin makes value, you can see how this is very confusing for myself.
@Kwhopper said:
Awesome I'm glad you are all here to help, thank you. Shows a lot about people today and reflects terribly on PCGS.
None of us work for PCGS. So it only reflects on us individually.
Most of us having been trying to answer your question and be helpful. I'm not exactly sure what you expected us to say. One of the unpaid public services we do is to report fakes and scans on ebay. You did trigger a few people with your listings. Didn't we do exactly what you wanted someone to do? We raised objections to objectionable listings.
@JBK said:
I will never learn. I had adopted a policy of not engaging with newbies because they too often did up criticizing the people who are trying help them. For some reason I stupidly keep violating my own policy.
Well if you're trying to help, this sure is a funny and confusing way to do it. 90% of the comments were unnecessary, idc if people pick, have fun, or criticize, criticism is important. This my good man was not criticism or help for me, this was just plain ridiculous. Accusing me of scamming people, spamming this forum, etc., I simply wanted to know a possible value and why a common grease strike through would be considered the same as mine, I thought it was what was missing from the coin that was the important part, not the generalized error. Boy I was wrong and all of you guys consider a commonly found "In God We Rust" error the same as an entire state and date not being struck on the coin? I was always told rarity of what is missing or added on the coin makes value, you can see how this is very confusing for myself.
I don't think anyone said they were exactly the same. And you're the one who brought "Rust" into the discussion. Yours would sell for more than a "cod" or "rust" error which most of us suggested with the price estimates.
It's not our fault that you had those ebay listings and we found them.
Absolutely i do see your side on that, however I am truly not intending to scam, hurt, belittle, insult, etc., anyone here or anywhere. I can appreciate reporting ebay scammers and fakes absolutely. I truly just wanted to know why, my coin having the things missing it does, is less or more valuable;desire, than a more common grease error, i.e. In God We Rust.
@JBK said:
I will never learn. I had adopted a policy of not engaging with newbies because they too often did up criticizing the people who are trying help them. For some reason I stupidly keep violating my own policy.
Well if you're trying to help, this sure is a funny and confusing way to do it. 90% of the comments were unnecessary, idc if people pick, have fun, or criticize, criticism is important. This my good man was not criticism or help for me, this was just plain ridiculous. Accusing me of scamming people, spamming this forum, etc., I simply wanted to know a possible value and why a common grease strike through would be considered the same as mine, I thought it was what was missing from the coin that was the important part, not the generalized error. Boy I was wrong and all of you guys consider a commonly found "In God We Rust" error the same as an entire state and date not being struck on the coin? I was always told rarity of what is missing or added on the coin makes value, you can see how this is very confusing for myself.
I don't think anyone said they were exactly the same. And you're the one who brought "Rust" into the discussion. Yours would sell for more than a "cod" or "rust" error which most of us suggested with the price estimates.
It's not our fault that you had those ebay listings and we found them.
Ok now I'm getting the answer I was looking for, it would sell for more, possibly. Thank you, what would be a reasonable and fair offer to accept? These were my two main questions from the beginning. Look let's start over, like this is my first question?
@JBK said:
I will never learn. I had adopted a policy of not engaging with newbies because they too often did up criticizing the people who are trying help them. For some reason I stupidly keep violating my own policy.
Well if you're trying to help, this sure is a funny and confusing way to do it. 90% of the comments were unnecessary, idc if people pick, have fun, or criticize, criticism is important. This my good man was not criticism or help for me, this was just plain ridiculous. Accusing me of scamming people, spamming this forum, etc., I simply wanted to know a possible value and why a common grease strike through would be considered the same as mine, I thought it was what was missing from the coin that was the important part, not the generalized error. Boy I was wrong and all of you guys consider a commonly found "In God We Rust" error the same as an entire state and date not being struck on the coin? I was always told rarity of what is missing or added on the coin makes value, you can see how this is very confusing for myself.
I don't think anyone said they were exactly the same. And you're the one who brought "Rust" into the discussion. Yours would sell for more than a "cod" or "rust" error which most of us suggested with the price estimates.
It's not our fault that you had those ebay listings and we found them.
Ok now I'm getting the answer I was looking for, it would sell for more, possibly. Thank you, what would be a reasonable and fair offer to accept? These were my two main questions from the beginning. Look let's start over, like this is my first question?
I already suggested $50 or so. It might get to $100 if you find the right person as someone else suggested. But errors are tricky to price. There's no real price guide, there are just ranges based on types which is why we grouped it with other grease errors. But pricing is always speculative.
If you go back to the first page of responses before we got off the rails, most people were in the same ballpark.
@JBK said:
I will never learn. I had adopted a policy of not engaging with newbies because they too often did up criticizing the people who are trying help them. For some reason I stupidly keep violating my own policy.
Well if you're trying to help, this sure is a funny and confusing way to do it. 90% of the comments were unnecessary, idc if people pick, have fun, or criticize, criticism is important. This my good man was not criticism or help for me, this was just plain ridiculous. Accusing me of scamming people, spamming this forum, etc., I simply wanted to know a possible value and why a common grease strike through would be considered the same as mine, I thought it was what was missing from the coin that was the important part, not the generalized error. Boy I was wrong and all of you guys consider a commonly found "In God We Rust" error the same as an entire state and date not being struck on the coin? I was always told rarity of what is missing or added on the coin makes value, you can see how this is very confusing for myself.
I don't think anyone said they were exactly the same. And you're the one who brought "Rust" into the discussion. Yours would sell for more than a "cod" or "rust" error which most of us suggested with the price estimates.
It's not our fault that you had those ebay listings and we found them.
Ok now I'm getting the answer I was looking for, it would sell for more, possibly. Thank you, what would be a reasonable and fair offer to accept? These were my two main questions from the beginning. Look let's start over, like this is my first question?
I already suggested $50 or so. It might get to $100 if you find the right person as someone else suggested. But errors are tricky to price. There's no real price guide, there are just ranges based on types which is why we grouped it with other grease errors. But pricing is always speculative.
Ok, thank you truly, thank you. Now this gives me a point to work from and move forward. I really and sincerely thank you for your help. Now everyone have a great night and take it easy on me next time. I'm tender and fat. Lol
@JBK said:
I will never learn. I had adopted a policy of not engaging with newbies because they too often did up criticizing the people who are trying help them. For some reason I stupidly keep violating my own policy.
Well if you're trying to help, this sure is a funny and confusing way to do it. 90% of the comments were unnecessary, idc if people pick, have fun, or criticize, criticism is important. This my good man was not criticism or help for me, this was just plain ridiculous. Accusing me of scamming people, spamming this forum, etc., I simply wanted to know a possible value and why a common grease strike through would be considered the same as mine, I thought it was what was missing from the coin that was the important part, not the generalized error. Boy I was wrong and all of you guys consider a commonly found "In God We Rust" error the same as an entire state and date not being struck on the coin? I was always told rarity of what is missing or added on the coin makes value, you can see how this is very confusing for myself.
I don't think anyone said they were exactly the same. And you're the one who brought "Rust" into the discussion. Yours would sell for more than a "cod" or "rust" error which most of us suggested with the price estimates.
It's not our fault that you had those ebay listings and we found them.
Ok now I'm getting the answer I was looking for, it would sell for more, possibly. Thank you, what would be a reasonable and fair offer to accept? These were my two main questions from the beginning. Look let's start over, like this is my first question?
I already suggested $50 or so. It might get to $100 if you find the right person as someone else suggested. But errors are tricky to price. There's no real price guide, there are just ranges based on types which is why we grouped it with other grease errors. But pricing is always speculative.
Ok, thank you truly, thank you. Now this gives me a point to work from and move forward. I really and sincerely thank you for your help. Now everyone have a great night and take it easy on me next time. I'm tender and fat. Lol
Now I know we are supposed to create a new post for each coin but I have everyone here. I was going through this roll of 1964 1C I have and I have a legitimate question regarding the attached photo. Am I seeing doubling here or is this just machine doubling?
kwhopper, your coin sure has in interesting look. I agree with what others have said, just because the population of certified coins is low, does not make it valuable. Here is a link to an action that closed with similar grease but on the obverse.
@davewesen said:
kwhopper, your coin sure has in interesting look. I agree with what others have said, just because the population of certified coins is low, does not make it valuable. Here is a link to an action that closed with similar grease but on the obverse.
Ok yes that works, thank you, I've come to realize that coins are only worth what someone's willing to pay really but this one I am completely unfamiliar with. But I appreciate the link for reference.
Condition aside, grease filled dies are worth most when the filling is extensive and clean. For this one, lots of lettering is filled (extensive) and every filled letter is completely missing as if it were never there (clean). Half-filled or blotchy appearance isn't worth as much. Nevertheless, I don't see this coin being worth what it probably cost to holder it.
"Nevertheless, I don't see this coin being worth what it probably cost to holder it."
This^^^^: Regarding the quarter. Now, if you had a cud it might be a different story.
In the end it is all about marketing. Lots of ignorant people with lots of money out there. It is better for savvy people to have money than it is for ignorant people to have money.
Regarding that 1964 cent: All you got is [typical for the 60's] die deterioration doubling from over-used dies.
Thanks everyone, I kind of figured that it was typical die deterioration but I wanted to check. And as far as the quarter, I'm gonna just see what happens. Thank you all very much, have a good night.
Comments
Forget it @Kwhopper, it was a bad joke.
Disclaimer: I'm not a dealer, trader, grader, investor or professional numismatist. I'm just a hobbyist. (To protect me but mostly you! 🤣 )
I'm upside down? I'm definitely all for humor for sure. To think all this started just because I asked a simple question and to define the difference between a common struck through grease error and the one I have. I was always told the rarity matters, grease errors are very common, the various missing letters and numbers I thought would make a different, apparently I was wrong.
Kwhopper
I'm not sure it is a different coin. The specks (spots? Scratches?) I'm front of Lincoln's portrait seem to be the same on both coins.
The photo that makes the coin look bronze might just have been altered or taken in such a way as to give a false impression of what the coin looked like in person. Definitely misleading at best.
.
Actually, that looks to be exactly the same coin. Look at the wear pattern. The photo appears to have the white balance off, either intentionally or accidentally. Was it advertised as copper?
I wasn't about you. Just forget it. It was an inside joke with long term members here.
Disclaimer: I'm not a dealer, trader, grader, investor or professional numismatist. I'm just a hobbyist. (To protect me but mostly you! 🤣 )
Agree, definitely the same coin. And even more definitely that the original pictures were messed with. There are so many ways to make deceptive pictures. That original pic was obviously bad, at the level of "I have a bridge to sell you"
@Kwhopper
I corrected your original photo; it only took a few seconds and I didn't have to create any overpriced eBay listings to do it.
Awesome I'm glad you are all here to help, thank you. Shows a lot about people today and reflects terribly on PCGS.
Kwhopper
Seeing that 43-S reminded me of this one.
Disclaimer: I'm not a dealer, trader, grader, investor or professional numismatist. I'm just a hobbyist. (To protect me but mostly you! 🤣 )
I will never learn. I had adopted a policy of not engaging with newbies because they too often did up criticizing the people who are trying help them. For some reason I stupidly keep violating my own policy.
Well if you're trying to help, this sure is a funny and confusing way to do it. 90% of the comments were unnecessary, idc if people pick, have fun, or criticize, criticism is important. This my good man was not criticism or help for me, this was just plain ridiculous. Accusing me of scamming people, spamming this forum, etc., I simply wanted to know a possible value and why a common grease strike through would be considered the same as mine, I thought it was what was missing from the coin that was the important part, not the generalized error. Boy I was wrong and all of you guys consider a commonly found "In God We Rust" error the same as an entire state and date not being struck on the coin? I was always told rarity of what is missing or added on the coin makes value, you can see how this is very confusing for myself.
Kwhopper
None of us work for PCGS. So it only reflects on us individually.
Most of us having been trying to answer your question and be helpful. I'm not exactly sure what you expected us to say. One of the unpaid public services we do is to report fakes and scans on ebay. You did trigger a few people with your listings. Didn't we do exactly what you wanted someone to do? We raised objections to objectionable listings.
Let us know if we can help with anything else!
I don't think anyone said they were exactly the same. And you're the one who brought "Rust" into the discussion. Yours would sell for more than a "cod" or "rust" error which most of us suggested with the price estimates.
It's not our fault that you had those ebay listings and we found them.
It's an inside forum joke based on a frequent poster. Paging @emeraldATV
Absolutely i do see your side on that, however I am truly not intending to scam, hurt, belittle, insult, etc., anyone here or anywhere. I can appreciate reporting ebay scammers and fakes absolutely. I truly just wanted to know why, my coin having the things missing it does, is less or more valuable;desire, than a more common grease error, i.e. In God We Rust.
Kwhopper
Ok now I'm getting the answer I was looking for, it would sell for more, possibly. Thank you, what would be a reasonable and fair offer to accept? These were my two main questions from the beginning. Look let's start over, like this is my first question?
Kwhopper
I already suggested $50 or so. It might get to $100 if you find the right person as someone else suggested. But errors are tricky to price. There's no real price guide, there are just ranges based on types which is why we grouped it with other grease errors. But pricing is always speculative.
If you go back to the first page of responses before we got off the rails, most people were in the same ballpark.
Ok, thank you truly, thank you. Now this gives me a point to work from and move forward. I really and sincerely thank you for your help. Now everyone have a great night and take it easy on me next time. I'm tender and fat. Lol
Kwhopper
No problem. Good luck
Now I know we are supposed to create a new post for each coin but I have everyone here. I was going through this roll of 1964 1C I have and I have a legitimate question regarding the attached photo. Am I seeing doubling here or is this just machine doubling?
Kwhopper
kwhopper, your coin sure has in interesting look. I agree with what others have said, just because the population of certified coins is low, does not make it valuable. Here is a link to an action that closed with similar grease but on the obverse.
https://ebay.com/itm/126703322077?_skw=grease+filled+quarter&itmmeta=01JCCJC8XH0KSDGCZ621SPSAX3&hash=item1d801b43dd:g:MlwAAOSwt-tmz6bJ&itmprp=enc%3AAQAJAAAA0HoV3kP08IDx%2BKZ9MfhVJKm0OZkXFL4rTxJ9jlcSQUWvn%2FohBgNNyQaVOtBjbhmNw9sbAD7A38aw0dZ5qbexxClR0OqJUuQ2scrFiEkxiz%2FNI4hcW%2FY0VcaUVUKfnEMlXv75NX1znN4jEfIAL4w5UEgG7mAXPpi48z9py%2B5XokH1cMewVdjp89fhemuzccEso8sPIBEYK4c5uxNpltZMq%2F1GXTAikNLk33Ald51IAI10aVDFJLaXpy3dwbGMbG%2FJDlpN8c2JImTVvYIRTPBrpPs%3D%7Ctkp%3ABk9SR-yOsZLjZA
Ok yes that works, thank you, I've come to realize that coins are only worth what someone's willing to pay really but this one I am completely unfamiliar with. But I appreciate the link for reference.
Kwhopper
Condition aside, grease filled dies are worth most when the filling is extensive and clean. For this one, lots of lettering is filled (extensive) and every filled letter is completely missing as if it were never there (clean). Half-filled or blotchy appearance isn't worth as much. Nevertheless, I don't see this coin being worth what it probably cost to holder it.
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution
"Nevertheless, I don't see this coin being worth what it probably cost to holder it."
This^^^^: Regarding the quarter. Now, if you had a cud it might be a different story.
In the end it is all about marketing. Lots of ignorant people with lots of money out there. It is better for savvy people to have money than it is for ignorant people to have money.
Regarding that 1964 cent: All you got is [typical for the 60's] die deterioration doubling from over-used dies.
I did not produce the image, but have posted it dozens of times when folks ask about doubled dies-
In honor of the memory of Cpl. Michael E. Thompson
Thanks everyone, I kind of figured that it was typical die deterioration but I wanted to check. And as far as the quarter, I'm gonna just see what happens. Thank you all very much, have a good night.
Kwhopper