| Author |
 Replies: 13 / Views: 2,030 |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
979 Posts |
Why do the grading companies have no problem grading the 1913 V nickels but will not touch the only known 1959 Wheat cent. The 1913 V nickels should not have been made but they have no problem grading them so they can not use that excuse for the Wheat cent. As far as can be told the Wheat cent is one coin and is not two coins combined and not an altered coin at all. So why are they so afraid of grading it. I would figure that they would be falling over themselves just so they can say that they have graded such a rare coin. *** Moved by Staff to a more appropriate forum. *** |
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
7620 Posts |
Bottom line is that the 1959 Wheat cent has questionable authenticity and no legitimate grading service wants to be on the hook for a guarantee of that magnitude. I've always heard that Utah forgery expert (and convicted murderer) Mark Hofmann was the source of this coin. |
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
94367 Posts |
Sky says it well. The authenticity of the nickels is not in question, not so with the cent.
|
|
Moderator
 United States
54282 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Australia
852 Posts |
The link suggests that it is unlikely that only a single example has been found when presses strike many coins at high speed (making it likely that many examples should exist). That overlooks the common reality of mint goofs where a bunch are struck from mismatched dies and once the error is realised the batch is scrapped; however one or more examples escape destruction by either intent or accident. An accident might be a mule getting caught in the system when the others are scrapped and the intentional examples may be a sly staff member pilfering an error coin (1933 Double Eagle getting out from the mint is an example of dishonest mint staff) or an example taken for examination by management and then thoughtlessly not returned for destruction (the unique in circulation Australian 1937 threepence was probably released by some silly official who had examined it) .
So is there any proof that it isn't authentic? Not that I'm aware of.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
17884 Posts |
Simple answer is the grading services believe the 1913 V nickel was made in the US mint with US dies even if it was made unofficially. They do not believe the 1959 Wheat cent came from the US mint. |
|
Pillar of the Community
Australia
852 Posts |
But on what exact basis did they come to that belief? Because only one is known Because a known forger spun a yarn claiming he made it Because one TPG wasn't sure so they all stuck together to avoid embarrassment (or a hefty payout) And is it a case they BELIEVE it to be fake (perhaps based on a dubious surface that suggests spark erosion dies) or is it a case of THEY DON'T KNOW. Lots of coins fall into the don't know category yet the TPGs still grade some of them (like the Aussie 1922/21 threepence is graded by the TPGs even when the Canberra mint master said they don't exist). |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
9792 Posts |
It's their prerogative to not authenticate any coin that they must then guarantee with money on the line, a coin worth likely millions of dollars is going to get a lot more scrutiny than an average coin worth a few hundred or even thousands. Since all the major TPGs have a buy back guarantee at market price, the only market price for a single unique coin would be the price that it sold for. I wouldn't take that bet either on a questionable coin like the 1959 Wheat cent, especially when a known convicted counterfeiter has claimed he made the coin. Being that the coin still sold twice for about $50K seems to me that the buyer wasn't completely convinced it was real either, if it was positively real it should be a minimum million or multi million dollar coin, IMO. "Buy the Book Before You Buy the Coin" - Aaron R. Feldman - "And read it" - Me 2013! ANA Life Member #3288 in good standing since 1981, ANS, Early American Coppers Member (EAC), Colonial Coin Collectors Club member (C4), Conder Token Collector Club member (CTCC), Civil War Token Society (CWTS) member, Liberty Seated Collectors Club (LSCC) & Numismatic Bibliomania Society member (NBS), USMex, Member in good standing, 2˘ variety collector. See my want page: http://goccf.com/t/140440 |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
789 Posts |
Quote:
It's their prerogative to not authenticate any coin that they must then guarantee with money on the line,... I know that TPG's will encapsulate some coins as authentic but not graded. Perhaps they could encapsulate some coins as graded but not authenticated? Or do they already do so? |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
7620 Posts |
 .... as far as I'm concerned. It will not get slabbed anytime soon, if ever. |
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
17884 Posts |
Quote:
But on what exact basis did they come to that belief? You would have to ask them what their reason is. Quote:
Because only one is known That would not stop them from grading and slabbing a coin. There are other unique coins. Quote:
Because a known forger spun a yarn claiming he made it That would not affect their opinion. Quote:Because one TPG wasn't sure so they all stuck together to avoid embarrassment (or a hefty payout) the TPG's disagree with each other all the time. Quote:
And is it a case they BELIEVE it to be fake (perhaps based on a dubious surface that suggests spark erosion dies) or is it a case of THEY DON'T KNOW. Lots of coins fall into the don't know category yet the TPGs still grade some of them (like the Aussie 1922/21 threepence is graded by the TPGs even when the Canberra mint master said they don't exist). Whether they believe it to be fake, or they don't know, either way they wouldn't grade or slab it. And just because a mint says a coin doesn't exist doesn't mean it really doesn't exist. There are other coins that exist of which there are no records, and for a long time the US mint denied the existence of copper 1943 cents. |
|
Bedrock of the Community
13014 Posts |
Quote:
Perhaps they could encapsulate some coins as graded but not authenticated? Or do they already do so? That would be a slippery slope and really not a good idea. The closest thing to that currently (likely as close as we will get) is from ICG who will slab fakes in an "educational" slab clearly stating that it is fake. Those don't come with a grade though |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
789 Posts |
Quote:
That would be a slippery slope and really not a good idea... How so? If a "coin" is identified as fake in a sealed tamper proof slab, nobody could sell it as genuine. |
|
Bedrock of the Community
13014 Posts |
Quote:
How so? If a "coin" is identified as fake in a sealed tamper proof slab, nobody could sell it as genuine. I'm not against the idea of slabbing fakes as such, but I had read your comment about just grading as them slabbing things with just a grade and nothing about authenticity which would be a really bad idea. If they want to slab fakes as fakes I don't have an issue with that and the contemporary ones that are very collectable I think that could be a good idea. For modern ones though if they're going to do it I think it's best to just have it say fake or whatever and leave it at that |
| |
Replies: 13 / Views: 2,030 |
|
Posted 07/07/2019 09:37 am
