Other than rim nick.......?
0

35 posts in this topic

1,168 posts

My collecting buddy bought this coin at local B&M.   He's aware of the rim nick and the price he paid was considerably lower than problem free examples.  Any opinion on this coin?

1481327184_174[1].jpg

1481327184_147[1].jpg

Edited by toyonakataro

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24,957 posts

A coin with little to no wear should have luster still left in the fields, I see very little to none, course it could be the photo hiding it, but this coin has had a bath in it's past and made it a dull , lifeless entity. Note: I do see some luster between the letters on the motto on the reverse.

That is some intricate labeling on the holder, I'd leave that alone as it adds to the coin. I have no idea what it says, just that it's a 1871

Edited by WoodenJefferson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24,957 posts

I would not pay more that AU-58 raw money for this example, meaning it would never get into the MS category price range.

 

Course, I have no idea what US coins are selling for in the world market.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
397 posts

In an AU range, slabbed 1871 dollars are trading between $600-1500.  This one has at least one major issue, but even at a discount I'd be nervous buying it raw.  As has been said, maybe it's just the photo, but it looks lifeless and dull.  If you've already decided that you're OK with a "details" coin, why not get a nice one?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,168 posts

The collettor paid about $200 for this coin.

As for what's written on the holder, please see below. 

無題.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
524 posts

No one is concerned it might be fake?  That would explain the good deal and the absence of luster.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,631 posts
51 minutes ago, david3142 said:

No one is concerned it might be fake?  That would explain the good deal and the absence of luster.

That was my first thought as well but I dont know Seated Dollars to be able to comment. I do believe in the old adage "if its too good to be true."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24,957 posts
2 hours ago, david3142 said:

No one is concerned it might be fake?  That would explain the good deal and the absence of luster.

The dentils are too intricate for it to be a counterfeit...unless the counterfeiters are getting better, this to me looks like a US minted coin. Course, could be wrong, have been before.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14,787 posts
3 hours ago, david3142 said:

No one is concerned it might be fake?  That would explain the good deal and the absence of luster.

 

1 hour ago, WoodenJefferson said:

The dentils are too intricate for it to be a counterfeit...unless the counterfeiters are getting better, this to me looks like a US minted coin. Course, could be wrong, have been before.

Yes, I am definitely concerned that this is a fake. The counterfeits have been getting better, but the reverse appears mushy. The surfaces are strange. I haven't compared it to genuine examples to be sure, but my very first reaction to this coin was that something is off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,299 posts

Not a "nick" but damage.  Hopefully the authentication experts could make a determination.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
772 posts

Rim damage too severe but if its real just the fact that it is a 'Seated Dollar' gives it some numismatic value. Not for me though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14,787 posts

The more I look at this coin, the more I don't like it. 

While Woody is calling the dentils good, I really don't think they are. The closer I look at the reverse dentils, the more problems I see.

Tell your friend to return this coin if possible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24,957 posts

Jason is onto something here...notice the missing detail above the eagles right claw. Problem...the lower coin is a AU-58 HA archive coin.

1871 rev op.JPG

1871 rev.JPG

Edited by WoodenJefferson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,944 posts

toyo1_zpsxjdocj4v.jpgtoyo_zpsn7uiqczb.jpg

Edited by rrantique
I agree Woody and Jason.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,168 posts

My collecting buddy says that he sees the sign of polishing on the surface of the coin whitch might account for the price.

When I first saw the image, I felt something odd about this coin whitch made me decide to post on this forum,  but if it's polished, then I can understand why I felt strange.

Even if it's polished, I think $200 is too cheap, but another collecting buddy bought a holed draped bust $ with AG details for just ove $9 from a different local dealer a few years ago, whitch was eventually certified as genuine by NGC, so what do I know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12,647 posts
4 hours ago, toyonakataro said:

My collecting buddy says that he sees the sign of polishing on the surface of the coin whitch might account for the price.

When I first saw the image, I felt something odd about this coin whitch made me decide to post on this forum,  but if it's polished, then I can understand why I felt strange.

Even if it's polished, I think $200 is too cheap, but another collecting buddy bought a holed draped bust $ with AG details for just ove $9 from a different local dealer a few years ago, whitch was eventually certified as genuine by NGC, so what do I know.

I think it's a counterfeit. For a coin that looks to be in the condition it's in, some areas are lacking sufficient detail, compared to that seen on genuine examples.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,168 posts
14 hours ago, MarkFeld said:

I think it's a counterfeit. For a coin that looks to be in the condition it's in, some areas are lacking sufficient detail, compared to that seen on genuine examples.

I'll tell him that members on this board tend to question the authenticity of this coin, then. But he seems to be quite happy with the coin, so I'm not really sure if it's the right thing to do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12,647 posts
4 hours ago, toyonakataro said:

I'll tell him that members on this board tend to question the authenticity of this coin, then. But he seems to be quite happy with the coin, so I'm not really sure if it's the right thing to do.

Taro, sharing opinions and information is probably a good thing to do, whether your friend is happy with the coin or not. I don't see anything wrong with letting him know some people are uncertain about the coin's authenticity. It could help him in the future.

Edited by MarkFeld

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,168 posts
1 minute ago, MarkFeld said:

Taro, sharing opinions and information is probably a good thing to do, whether your friend is happy with the coin or not. I don't see anything wrong with letting him know some people are uncertain certain about the coin's authenticity. It could help him in the future.

Mark, I actually forwarded this link to him.

He said he's aware of the risk of buying raw coins and is planning to send it to NGC along with other raw coins he owns. He bought the seated dollar from a major dealer in our country, so I guess the dealer will take care if the coin comes back from NGC as not genuine.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,299 posts

Some type of Chinese characters on the dealer 2x2, translation?  Another Chinese fake?  The guy probably got it very cheap.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,168 posts
2 hours ago, physics-fan3.14 said:

@toyonakataro, do you know what is written on the 2x2? You are in Japan, correct? Could you translate the characters on the holder for us? 

Please scroll up this thread. I posted a pic with translation. Nothing signicicant is written, just like "seated liberty" "later type" "year 1871"

and I think the current owner wrote them on the holder

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,168 posts

I was offered another images of this coin.

Although, surface is altered, second images suggest the coin has better strike than the initial images suggest.

I think it has a better chance to settle in NGC's genuine holder, but do you still think it's not genuine?

 

12445192_2248743571_104large.jpg

12445192_2248744604_72large.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,168 posts
53 minutes ago, MarkFeld said:

Whether genuine or counterfeit, it looks polished.

I agree with you, and the owner also agrees on this point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,168 posts

The submission result is in. I'm glad it was genuine anyway.

http://www.pcgs.com/cert/80721211

PCGS certified it as genuine XF details with graffiti.

Here's another image by the owner.

He sees something like squiggle on the surface of the coin.

12445192_2258974989_203large[1].jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
332 posts

weigh 'em.. they're not genuine
look at the "reeding"... they're not genuine

don't care if it's in a holder; I would really like to see another example with the damaged reverse die

Edited by allmine

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14,787 posts

Well, good for your friend. I didn't see the second set of images until just now, but it definitely looks genuine in that second set. 

Goes to show you how tricky it can be to get info from a single set of pictures! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
0