| Author |
 Replies: 34 / Views: 4,337 |
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
5683 Posts |
I'm still not convinced about authenticity. Here's a comparison of the date of the OP's coin and the graded one from Heritage. The numbers in the top coin just look too thick. Look at the openings of the 9 and 6. If it's genuine, I would agree with a grade of VG-10. If it's counterfeit, it's a really good one, down to the diagnostic die crack. Obviously needs to be authenticated in hand.  |
|
New Member
 Netherlands
14 Posts |
According to stacks and bowers, near the 1/2 mark. They were the only ones who noticed it as well and it does seem to be accurate.
|
|
New Member
Netherlands
14 Posts |
The auction houses think it's authentic but has an old cleaning. It wore down the silver which is why it looks thicker. If you follow the outlines of the little rivets on the side (not sure if those are called rivets?) they line up really well with the coin from heritage.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
Australia
21788 Posts |
If it has been holed and plugged, it may not even get a grading.
Nevertheless, it would be nice if the TPGrader offers an opinion that it is authentic.
Ask them to at least do that much.
|
|
New Member
Netherlands
14 Posts |
Why would it not get a grading when it's holed and plugged? I've seen a few coins like this at auction that were graded and holed and plugged.
|
|
New Member
Netherlands
14 Posts |
Ohhh I see now. It would just be listed as genuine and will get no grading. New to the Coin World so I didn't know. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
5683 Posts |
The closer I look at this, the more I think it's a very good counterfeit. Here is a comparison of the lower reverse with the OP's coin on the upper left. The other three coins are genuine 1796 16-star halves of similar grade from Heritage past sales. The 1 is too thick, and the shape of the 2 is incorrect on the OP's coin. With those subtle discrepancies, along with the small size of the loops in the date, in my opinion it's doubtful this will come back genuine. But given the high stakes, of course you'll need to send it in anyway.  |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4470 Posts |
The numbers one issue that would give me concern is the lack of spacing between the denticles on the OP coin. The lack of spacing does appear to be from wear. Please keep us informed on the TPG results. |
|
New Member
Netherlands
14 Posts |
I see that too, and stacks and bowers noted that was from being holed and plugged there, so part of the 1/2 and the bow was restored. I'm curious too and will definitely send it in. Heritage said they are 95% sure it's genuine so fingers crossed! I'll definitely update when I find out. Does anyone know how long it takes to grade?
|
|
New Member
Netherlands
14 Posts |
Just thought I'd let you all know it got a PCGS genuine VG details grading!  |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
5683 Posts |
Congrats, an excellent result. It had me completely fooled. It's a great looking coin with an expert repair job.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
8939 Posts |
Wow. Nice. I was in wrong camp on this one.
|
|
Valued Member
Canada
314 Posts |
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
Australia
21788 Posts |
I am a bit more confident in identifying fakes an offering an opinion from pictures, but I refrained from offering an opinion in this case. I wasn't confident enough. However, I am very happy to see it come back slabbed, and declared as genuine. My forte is better, when it comes to ancients. Even with the plug, I would be very happy to include this coin in my collection !  I would think that there are only a very few members, here in the CCF, that are fortunate enough to have a very early product of the U.S. Mint in their collection. |
|
Pillar of the Community
Germany
1852 Posts |
Congratulations! that is a scarce coin. PCGS says the estimated population for the 1796 16-Star is 40.
You say you intend to sell it?
If it was mine I would keep it, if at all possible.
|
| |
Replies: 34 / Views: 4,337 |
First Page
Posted 09/20/2019 01:11 am
