What about this 09-S VDB in a SEGS MS-65 Holder?

Shortgapbob · July 19, 2007 12:39PM

What do you guys have to say about this Lincoln?

1909-S VDB on eBay

Edited to fix link.

millennium · July 19, 2007 12:42PM

__

tightbudget · July 19, 2007 12:42PM

Ugly, RB and no better than a 62 or 63 IMO.

OneCent · July 19, 2007 12:42PM

63RB tops...maybe 62.

I have my doubts regarding the authenticity as the mintmark placement doesn't look right.

I'd pass.

TheRegulator · July 19, 2007 12:45PM

I just saw that auction a little bit ago and thought the mintmark looked rather queer.

ziggy29 · July 19, 2007 12:46PM

Need a better closeup of the mintmark. Normally SEGS is decent at authentication (not top tier but much better than the crap slabbers), and this does look like a somewhat woodgrained planchet common to early S-mint cents, but I'm not sure I recall seeing an SVDB with the mintmark here.

As for the grade, assuming it's real, I'd go 63RB max.

OneCent · July 19, 2007 12:48PM

I'd say it is fake.

DRUNNER · July 19, 2007 1:09PM

I usually go straight to the "Counterfeit Detection--Reprint from the Numismatist--Volume II". Great section of S-VDBs on pages 37-44. Still without equal in numismatic press as far as I am concerned.

According to this (and some experience I have as well), you are looking at Position III on the mintmark (slightly tilting to the right and position is dead-on for III with "top of 'S' even with bottom of the '9s' in date).

Not sure why people would call this a counterfeit . . . it matches perfectly. Perhaps because it is in a SEGS holder and we automatically suspect it?

Grade . . I concur. I'd buy it as a 63RB.

Always hard to grade from pix . . .but it is the best we can do from what is supplied . .

Drunner

CaptainRon · July 19, 2007 1:20PM

Being an IHC collector instead of a Lincoln Collector I'm surprised with grades being given. If a 1909 S IHC had this same look, and was as spot free as this coin, I would call it at least a 64RB all day.

fc · July 19, 2007 1:28PM

so who will step up and place a bid of 1000? not me :-)

DJCoinz · July 19, 2007 1:58PM

IMO it's an added MM.

jobiwan115 · July 19, 2007 2:11PM

<< I usually go straight to the "Counterfeit Detection--Reprint from the Numismatist--Volume II". Great section of S-VDBs on pages 37-44. Still without equal in numismatic press as far as I am concerned.

According to this (and some experience I have as well), you are looking at Position III on the mintmark (slightly tilting to the right and position is dead-on for III with "top of 'S' even with bottom of the '9s' in date).

Not sure why people would call this a counterfeit . . . it matches perfectly. Perhaps because it is in a SEGS holder and we automatically suspect it?

Grade . . I concur. I'd buy it as a 63RB.

Always hard to grade from pix . . .but it is the best we can do from what is supplied . .

Drunner >>

Jeff, you seem to be quite confident in your assessment. None of the scoffers are being very specific about what they don't like about.

My first impression of this coin was it looks rather nice, though I'm not sure it's a 65. SEGS is a decent grading company, better than the 3rd rate companies. If coins like this were my thing, I'd take a shot at it.

fullerfun4 · July 19, 2007 2:24PM

What do you think about the color? I'm always dubious when not naturally toned as one would expect copper to do and is in a lower tier holder. What say you?
Regards
Gary

CaptainRon · July 19, 2007 2:49PM

It looks like common woodgrain toning that I see often on 09S IHC's, I would think it would be common on the Lincolns as well, but I don't know really follow Lincolns, so I can't say for sure.

clackamas · July 19, 2007 3:02PM

64RB

Paleodale · July 19, 2007 3:12PM

Welp,, looks to me like ole abe's head is screwed on backwards,, I'd say if anyone had a coin installed in anything other than a pcgs holder,, it has to be FAKE,!!!!!!!!!...

koynekwest · July 19, 2007 3:44PM

Larry Briggs has been in this business for a very long time. I'm sure he wouldn't slab a non-genuine S-VDB.

Shortgapbob · July 19, 2007 3:46PM

<< I usually go straight to the "Counterfeit Detection--Reprint from the Numismatist--Volume II". Great section of S-VDBs on pages 37-44. Still without equal in numismatic press as far as I am concerned.

According to this (and some experience I have as well), you are looking at Position III on the mintmark (slightly tilting to the right and position is dead-on for III with "top of 'S' even with bottom of the '9s' in date).

Not sure why people would call this a counterfeit . . . it matches perfectly. Perhaps because it is in a SEGS holder and we automatically suspect it?

Grade . . I concur. I'd buy it as a 63RB.

Always hard to grade from pix . . .but it is the best we can do from what is supplied . .

Drunner >>

Funny because the first thing I did was open up the same reprint from the Numismatist. The mintmark is definition in the exact area for Position III. However, the bottom of the mintmark didn't look correct to me. I also wasn't convinced that the color on the cent was original. Although these are often woodgrained, something about the color with the woodgraining just seemed off to me.

zkcoins · July 19, 2007 8:49PM

Idk why all the clout about it being a fake. Looks good to me and I would go 64rb. The toning looks fine to me. In fact I almost pulled the trigger on a similar '09 S VDB that had wonderful colors, but the same wood grain look to it and it was $3500.

TorinoCobra71 · July 19, 2007 8:54PM

<< 63RB tops...maybe 62.

I have my doubts regarding the authenticity as the mintmark placement doesn't look right.

I'd pass.

>>

TorinoCobra71

UtahCoin · July 19, 2007 9:54PM

The coin appears genuine, however the color looks off. Based on the photo, it looks recolored. I concur that Larry Briggs would not slab a phony 09-S VDB.

slipgate · July 19, 2007 10:11PM

Not likely it will sell - most coins with reserves do not. The reserve is probably the PCGS priceguide price for the same.

millennium · July 19, 2007 11:06PM

<< Not sure why people would call this a counterfeit . . . >>

Because, if you hang here very long, you'll find out a lot here feel that if it isn't slabbed in a PCGS holder, it has to be fake. I lot of people here "think" they know more than they do....

BobaFett72 · July 19, 2007 11:21PM

that coin is downright FUGLY.

However with a Consortium sticker it would be worth millions

LOL.

mozeppa · July 19, 2007 11:55PM

okay...i'll tell you why its in a segs holder...

look at lincolns fore head and face...see how it kinda has that look ...like it "glows"

then just a bit farther out it gets dark?

its a "old time" cleaning. case solved.

segs will holder problem coins....pcgs will not holder that one.

AUandAG · July 20, 2007 12:27AM

Ok, it's early here on the west coast. First thing I saw was the mm placement: ok by me.
Second was the mm shape: well, almost ok.
Third I looked at old Abe and I saw wear on the cheek and beard: NOT ok.
Hmmmmmm, maybe that's why I've never owned one!

My final analysis is that it's been circulated and cleaned. AU58.

bob

RedneckHB · July 20, 2007 12:33AM

<< okay...i'll tell you why its in a segs holder...

look at lincolns fore head and face...see how it kinda has that look ...like it "glows"

then just a bit farther out it gets dark?

its a "old time" cleaning. case solved.

segs will holder problem coins....pcgs will not holder that one. >>

Agreed. Still worth about $1000, IMHO.

What about this 09-S VDB in a SEGS MS-65 Holder?

Comments

Leave a Comment