| Author |
 Replies: 39 / Views: 4,455 |
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1534 Posts |
Definitely genuine. The scans show some kind of light cleaning though in my opinion.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
968 Posts |
Besides all the diagnostics fitting a 1917, the 6 looks wrong to me. A real 1916 has the top of the 6 curved to the point where the tip is pointing down. The one in that auction clearly points up at a ~45degree angle. By the way, I'm referring to the OPs post not the other ebay link (which I think looks genuine). Edited by Saruma
04/22/2010 9:16 pm
|
|
Rest in Peace
United States
4849 Posts |
Quote:
Definitely genuine. The scans show some kind of light cleaning though in my opinion. I think it looks genuine too, and that is about the grade that I want to eventually upgrade to. Even if it was lightly cleaned, it would still be worth the starting price if slabbed genuine; and I think it has a good shot at full VG-8. With that much money on the line, and the fact that the pics are low quality, no certification, and no return policy; I would be worried about a high quality die struck counterfeit made from the mold of a genuine 1916. With the high quality fake Trade dollars and everything else coming from China; it sure wouldn't surprise me if they had some high quality fake "circulated" 1916s. Why would someone sell a coin like that raw with those pictures? Even in a problem slab, I think it would do better than raw. I dont have 2.5 grand lying around, but I could get it together for the right coin if it came along. |
|
Valued Member
United States
161 Posts |
I believe the koin in the o.p. is a Chinese forgery. The devices appear to be pimply and uneven. The 'toning' is this sort of inky wash around the devices that mimics the circam look, but is commonly seen on Asian fakes.
The fields and flat areas look like someone smoothed out uneven transfer die surfaces. The slightly out of focus images just add to the charade. Just my opinion, of course.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1934 Posts |
TD; I agree with the toning assessment. I dont know enough about SLQ markers to determine fakes; but coins that old simply do not tone like that....too neatly antiqued.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1409 Posts |
The fraudulent coin is still listed. The auction ends tomorrow.
I didn't hear back from the seller, nor did I expect to. This auction is simply reinforcement for my buyer beware belief. If someone is uneducated enough to purchase the coin, they deserve what they get, because this is the most obvious sheep in wolves clothing I've seen on the Bay in a long time.
|
|
Valued Member
United States
161 Posts |
The Chinese forgers have hubs they use for all sorts of dates; they will leave off the last one or 2 digits on the hub, and when they make a working die will just finish the date then. I'm still leaning strongly towards forgery on this one, just can't be 100% sure without better images.
|
|
Rest in Peace
United States
4849 Posts |
If it's a forgery, which it may be; they must have used a transfer die from a 1917 type 1 host. It would have been much better executed if they actually used a 1916 as the host. This coin will not fool anyone who knows what a genuine 1916 looks like.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
968 Posts |
I don't think anyone is falling for it anyway (I'm saying this with one day to go...just incase I'm proven wrong tomorrow!). The highest bid is $28. There was even a bid of $100 that was canceled by the buyer. He probably figured out it was fake. I'm guessing the bids that have been placed are by people that either think it is probably a fake but aren't 100% sure and will take a chance on it. Or they want to try to resell it themselves and hope they can fool someone.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3283 Posts |
Quote:
This coin will not fool anyone who knows what a genuine 1916 looks like.
Well that leaves me out, I have no idea what is wrong with that coin. But, I would never buy it because the seller never bought or sold anything and he is overseas. Also if I was to buy a key coin or any nice piece for a collection, I would learn what to look for. I don't own a single standing liberty quarter  So besides the sellers obvious shortcomings, what is wrong with it that sticks out? |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
968 Posts |
Upstate,
Besides what wheatguy said, the 6 is totally wrong. I think people are overlooking this because they see the 1917 characteristics, but to me the 6 is the biggest giveaway. See my post about this above.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1534 Posts |
Good point Saruma. The 6 is definitely off now that I looked at several 1916's.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3283 Posts |
Well I've done some reading and the robe near the leg, and the beading near the head are easy to see in your examples. with the coin for sale (the fake) the robe tells, but the beading is difficult to see. No small coincidence the zoom feature was not offered.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3283 Posts |
Not to mention the awful 6, If I ever spend big money on a coin I'll definitely run it by you guys first. thanks for the information
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1409 Posts |
The seller emailed back. He told me he had it checked at Kensington and they told him it was legit. He states his father bought it in Boston several years ago.
BS. Total BS.
|
| |
Replies: 39 / Views: 4,455 |
First Page
Posted 04/22/2010 9:14 pm
