Fake 1895-O Barber Dime Sold For $766 Ebay

..and that's why NumismaticExpert is apparently a NumismaticExpert and I'm not.

My next question: How did redshed acquire the coin and did he get ripped-off if in fact it's a fake?

Decided to make this side by side graphic as perhaps a visual representation might better illustrate my prior post.




Again, look at the final S of States and the leaf below it.

Does the coin in question have a Type 1 hub or Type 2 hub?

My eye says Type 2 obverse hub which introduced around 1900/1901. An authentic 1895 dated coin cannot have die characteristics that were introduced 5-6 years later.

CoinFrog does this persuade you into the fake camp?

-MV

This seller is obviously an honorable man. Note that he offers a 30 day return which is, to my experience, a generous time frame. Any buyer thus has plenty of time to closely evaluate his purchase. Also to this seller's credit, he took the time and effort to address this forum and consider the possibility that the coin may not be genuine. If one takes the time to assess this seller's offerings, there are many choice and rare coins in his inventory. All things considered, he deserves our respect.

In my 60+ years of collecting, I've made a great many dealer friends. Thinking back, I can't recall ever hearing one of them say that they NEVER purchased a counterfeit coin by accident. Indeed, one dealer friend of mine who got fooled on a $2,700 gold coin said, "If I don't make a mistake like this every now and then, I'm not doing enough business." Before buying that gold piece, he sought opinions on it from other dealers on the show floor.

One question I have regards the weight of the "1895-O." Here are pics of a fake "1894-S" that weighs in at 2.3 grams, being about 10% underweight. It has a similarly mushy appearance to the subject piece. I've included a few close-up pics for comparison ....

In addition to the detailed analysis from MV, the coin generally has several features common among fakes, namely its "mushy" detail and very poor relief of devices, that cannot be explained by normal wear for the condition. Second, it has an unnatural uneven black toning around the devices that is applied to fakes to make them appear aged. Finally, the rim and denticles appear too thin and/or irregular compared to a genuine coin.

While none of these observations are as definitive as comparison of hub/die features, the coin has other aspects that suggest it's fake.

Really? One out of 10785?!? I would say that's a pretty good record. You're being a little tough on the guy, don't you think?

Well he has had only ONE negative feedback in a year BUT trying to sell a highly polished 1879 Morgan as a proof doesn't speak to well of his coin knowledge.

What else does he have in the line of counterfiets?

That's one negative for 499 positives in a year. Do you sell on ebay, @ NumismaticExpert?

I hope you can back up your username, but going into attack mode so soon won't help.




Sell all of us the bridge, Expert. You never mentioned any specific reason you thought it to be fake. It may be, but pics are deceptive (and can be very deceptive) and the burden of proof lies on you. The seller has been accommodating and I hope to hear about the results from that investigation.




...




Please point out all of the other counterfeits this seller has listed. Just the ebay Item # is good.