They appear to have all been cleaned pushing them into the "cull" category unless there is something special about any one of them and the 1880's don't appear to be double strikes. That puts them at spot plus a bit.
I am sorry, I am not the seller but just find it funny what some people will post. You are calling these coins culls? You really just must want them cheaper.http://www.acoin.com/answerwizard/answerwizardcull.html
Coins that technically grade above Good by wear, but have a big problem can also be considered cull coins. Big problem is somewhat subjective, but might include the following:
No I said it pushes toward culls or basically melt value for most of these. Per the Big Red Book on Coins
"Slightly worn coins ("sliders) that have been cleaned and conditioned ("whizzed") to simulate Uncirculated luster are worth considerably
less than perfect pieces."
For these coins and the 2010 book the prices are (sorry on formatting, tried to put in table and it looked worse):
Coin VF-20 EF-40 AU-50
1880 22 25 30
1882 22 25 30
1883-O 33 25 30
1891-O 25 30 50
1921-S 20 21 22
So we need to take each coin down one grade more or less based on what looks like coins that have been cleaned. Only the 1921 IMHO could be AU, one of the 1880's is probably EF, the other 1880, 1882, 1883, 1891 probably in the VF range and the 1882 not rated. That said and I am not a professional grader and can't see the reverse you have no coins that meet AU grade due to the cleaning and the EF's get downgraded as well. There are times cleaning does not take away that much value but thats when you have to have a coin professionally graded. So IMHO not one of these counts are worth more than their melt, melt today is $26.04
I'm not complaining about the coins or the seller. I'd buy these at melt plus some for trouble but not at $30 plus shipping of $2, that's roughly 30% over spot at my door. Again I think I mentioned buying with BTC should add some to the cost as well probably since it's not a cash in hand exchange.