Why Do You Like Defective Coins?

Defective coins, those with counterstamps in particular, often have a story to tell, and I love a good mystery. Then too, coins having more defects than I possess tend to raise my self esteem ... Case in point:

With regards to early copper & colonials, sometimes the only way to acquire very scarce to rare varieties (R6 or higher) without being a millionaire is to settle for very worn, damaged, or otherwise low grade examples.

In addition, with early copper, being net graded, defects are accounted for while maintaining an actual grade, instead of the TPG's method of just labelling such coins "DETAILS."

Certain damage, such as cleaning or heavy rim bangs, that would make coins "DETAILS" can still look attractive in Dansco albums & these coins provide a less expensive way to get high wear grade examples of type coins into holes. For instance, I'd rather have a wiped/cleaned AU details Seated Liberty dollar in such an album than a problem-free VG.

Mint errors such as die cracks, clashed dies, etc. are okay with me, they are interesting and historical.

That being said, I avoid PMD - post mint damage - on coins whenever possible.

Just to clarify, by "Defective" are you referring to mint defects like die variety "errors" such as a doubled die and manufacturing errors life double strikes, or post mint damage like cleanings, scratches, and smashed on the railroad tracks? There are avid collectors or the die varieties and manufacturing mint errors. For damaged coins, collectors often don't really seek these out and take these when it is the only financially feasible option or unique situations like the ancient Chinese coins that TypeCoin971793 referenced or counterstamps ./ chopmarks that notate a certain history for the coin.

Chinese chop marks are one of my favorite coins to add to my collection because I lived in China for a couple years and that these also circulated there makes them more personal to me. For me, I enjoy the nuances that make a die variety different than the average coin of the date/type and the errors because they can be rather unique in their own way. I avoid other damaged coins; its not worth the money to me.

I have to agree, actually.

I collect coins that were used as money. Coins that someone actually carried in their pocket and spent to buy something. Circulation flaws like scratches and rim dings are just fine.

I think VF is the ultimate grade. They still have most of the details but saw a lot of use.

To answer a question... I am not talking about major die errors (i.e., 1955 DDO - that is not a defect, just a major screw up by mint employees)), I am talking about coins with defects, like laminations (defective planchets), or struck through (faulty cleaning of the die before striking coins). Those coins are just faulty. I can see the interest in an off-metal coin or an off-center strike.

Although I like coins with die cracks, that too is the result of overworking the die and not stopping using it. I don't consider that a defective coin.

I appreciate the answers received so far, and it seems to come down to price, rather than the desire to have a worn or "bad" coin.