Coin Community Family of Web Sites
Like us on Facebook! Subscribe to our Youtube Channel! Check out our Twitter! Check out our Pinterest!
Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?


Welcome Guest! Need help? Got a question? Inherit some coins?
Our coin forum is completely free! Register Now!

1793 1c Chain Cent Ameri. - Sheldon 1

First page | Previous Page | Next Page | Last 15 Replies
 
To participate in the forum you must log in or register.
Author Previous TopicReplies: 112 / Views: 3,913Next Topic
Page: of 8
Pillar of the Community
Germany
1603 Posts
 Posted 10/17/2021  05:18 am  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add GERMANICVS to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply
Breen describes in his book that "obverse 1 (used in S-1) is always weaker that on variety 2, most of all at the date".
Whomever did this was probably not aware of this feature, (or of what S-1 is supposed to look like), and proceeded to enhance the '3' such that it no longer resembles the '3' in S-1.
It is probably recommendable to check and compare with other coins of the same variety, specially when dealing with early copper due to the multitude of varieties.
Edited by GERMANICVS
10/17/2021 05:26 am
Bedrock of the Community
Learn More...
United States
62916 Posts
 Posted 10/17/2021  10:49 am  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add Coinfrog to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply
Agree this deserves media exposure.
Pillar of the Community
United States
3479 Posts
 Posted 10/17/2021  10:52 am  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add Zurie to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply
Wow, that is an amazing bit of restoration on that coin. Regarding the restored 3 in the date, not only is the shape slightly off, but the distance between the 9 and 3 is different than in the known example. Still, pretty remarkable that they were able to get it by the graders at PCGS.
Pillar of the Community
United States
8554 Posts
 Posted 10/17/2021  10:57 am  Show Profile   Check westcoin's eBay Listings Bookmark this reply Add westcoin to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply
I'm sure it will happen, our own CCF Jack Young is now on the case, word is out at with more of the big copper collectors, that are even more knowledgeable than I am.

Jack just posted a link to his first 1793 S-5 fake in a PCGS holder

https://coinweek.com/counterfeits/c...ution-guide/

I'd love to be able to clearly see the edge on this S-1 as that is possibly the key to is it all fake, all real, partially fake? I still am holding out hope it's all good but had surgery, though if that is the case then that says there is someone able to move metal (a lot of metal) using techniques that don't show any metal moved, that scares me. But as I mentioned, new technologies, lasers, able to lock down the source and use computer controlled tools, lasers, water jets, etc. to move things around at a micron level is at least alarming.
"Buy the Book Before You Buy the Coin" - Aaron R. Feldman - "And read it" - Me 2013!
ANA Life Member #3288 in good standing since 1982, EAC Member #6202, NBS Member, 2 variety collector.

See my want page: http://goccf.com/t/140440
Edited by westcoin
10/17/2021 10:59 am
Pillar of the Community
Learn More...
United States
3305 Posts
 Posted 10/17/2021  11:33 am  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add Ty2020b to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply

Quote:
Whomever did this was probably not aware of this feature, (or of what S-1 is supposed to look like), and proceeded to enhance the '3' such that it no longer resembles the '3' in S-1.


Exactly! And then some. In hindsight, looking at that 3, it appears quite obviously off. Point being, it's slipped past PCGS, and it shouldn't have. Yes, mistakes happen, but on an example like this, you'd think an expert or experts, with ample time/research should not miss something like this.

Curious to see how this plays out

Edit: grammar
Edited by Ty2020b
10/17/2021 4:30 pm
Pillar of the Community
United States
1996 Posts
 Posted 10/17/2021  1:35 pm  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add kbbpll to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply
There appears to be significant tooling around the L and a couple of new deep marks left of it - was metal harvested here? They also made a deep gouge in the I disappear. I like playing "image sleuth" I guess.


The Jack Young article - could this be the same doctor? The article seems to say that an original 1793 was doctored, counterfeit dies were made, counterfeits were made, and meanwhile the original coin was passed around to TPGs trying to get it into a legit holder. I suppose we should be on alert that the same thing happened with the OP coin.
Pillar of the Community
United States
6129 Posts
 Posted 10/17/2021  3:31 pm  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add westernsky to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply
Frightening scenario . Just in time for Halloween!
Pillar of the Community
United States
3254 Posts
 Posted 10/17/2021  5:24 pm  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add Slider23 to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply

Quote:
The Jack Young article - could this be the same doctor? The article seems to say that an original 1793 was doctored, counterfeit dies were made, counterfeits were made, and meanwhile the original coin was passed around to TPGs trying to get it into a legit holder. I suppose we should be on alert that the same thing happened with the OP coin.


I am wondering if the coin in the PCGS holder could be a fake as there so many alterations. If someone was going to tool the NGC coin, the goal would be to get the coin into a straight holder with as little tooling as possible. The mount marks were making the NGC coin grade details, and to get the coin into a straight holder the 3, L, or I does not need to be changed. There are pit marks, raised bumps, scratches that are different between the NGC and PCGS coins.
Bedrock of the Community
Learn More...
United States
62916 Posts
 Posted 10/17/2021  5:42 pm  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add Coinfrog to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply
With respect to @numismatic student's knowledge and scholarship, this is not a coin I would want to own at the imagined price.
Pillar of the Community
United States
1996 Posts
 Posted 10/17/2021  6:35 pm  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add kbbpll to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply
I'm curious how the PCGS guarantee works in this scenario. If the coin is genuine, would they reslab it with the correct details grade and reimburse a price difference, or do you have to surrender the coin in exchange for full price paid, or what? If OP gets to keep the coin plus some cash, that could be a winning situation.
Bedrock of the Community
Learn More...
United States
62916 Posts
 Posted 10/17/2021  6:39 pm  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add Coinfrog to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply
That a good question.
Valued Member
United States
86 Posts
 Posted 10/17/2021  7:08 pm  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add apcol258 to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply
Despite OP being happy with the coin, I think the right thing to do is to send it back to PCGS for reexamination. If genuine, I'm sure they would be happy to get it in the appropriate details holder for no charge. If counterfeit they can body bag it, note it as such for their records and send it back to him unholdered, again probably for free. In the current holder this coin only has the potential to eventually deceive someone else in the future.
Bedrock of the Community
Learn More...
United States
62916 Posts
 Posted 10/17/2021  7:36 pm  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add Coinfrog to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply
The question is not what PCGS would charge for reholdering or return postage. The question is their potential liability for misjudging the authenticity of a very expensive coin.
Pillar of the Community
United States
4197 Posts
 Posted 10/17/2021  8:20 pm  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add jimbucks to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply
Assuming the coin was tooled, no doubt the "doctor" is doing this with other high value coins. Whoever it is needs to be exposed, and appropriate action taken against others in on the fraud. Since PCGS has a vested interest in this, if they were smart they might take note of the coins submitted as part of this submission as well as all coins submitted by the submitter within several months. Common sense, says the submitter of this coin is likely part of the fraud.
Edited by jimbucks
10/17/2021 8:25 pm
Bedrock of the Community
Learn More...
United States
62916 Posts
 Posted 10/17/2021  8:39 pm  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add Coinfrog to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply
Pretty safe assumption.
Edited by Coinfrog
10/17/2021 8:43 pm
Page: of 8 Previous TopicReplies: 112 / Views: 3,913Next Topic  
 
To participate in the forum you must log in or register.





Disclaimer: While a tremendous amount of effort goes into ensuring the accuracy of the information contained in this site, Coin Community assumes no liability for errors. Copyright 2005 - 2021 Coin Community Family- all rights reserved worldwide. Use of any images or content on this website without prior written permission of Coin Community or the original lender is strictly prohibited.
Contact Us  |  Advertise Here  |  Privacy Policy / Terms of Use

Coin Community Forum © 2005 - 2021 Coin Community Forums
It took 0.35 seconds to rattle this change. Powered By: