Home World & Ancient Coins Forum

PCGS Questionable Authenticity Questions

I purchased two very nice 1849 Great Britain Godless Florins on EBAY and submitted them to PCGS for grading.
Both were returned and body-bagged as Questionable Authenticity? I am sure that this issue has come up before
with some of you? The sellers will take back the coins - thats not the problem. What do i do next?
No other comments were provided by PCGS. Do they know what they are talking about - should i send them to NGC?
It is odd that two different Florins purchased from separate sellers were both returned?
Need help on this and what information is available on counterfeit Florins.

molto thanks

Robert

Comments

  • DoogyDoogy Posts: 4,508
    it doesn't mean they are fake necessarily, just questionable enough that they don't want to take the liability to slab them. They may have obvious diagnostics that give them away, or it may be something more slight.

    If you're really curious, and don't mind spending a few bucks to have someone else look at them, send them to Robert Matthews. He has forgotten more about counterfeit British coins, then PCGS or NGC has ever known.

    click here
  • wybritwybrit Posts: 6,952 ✭✭✭
    That stinks.

    The 1849 "Godless" seems an odd one to fake when just about every Gothic Florin in the subsequent series is worth more. I would agree with the advice above - get a second opinion. Our own MacCrimmon has handled a few of these and might be of help as well.

    Do you have any pictures of these pieces?
    Former owner, Cambridge Gate collection.
  • CIVITASCIVITAS Posts: 2,256 ✭✭✭
    I also would be curious to see photos of these florins of "Questionable Authenticity."

    image
    https://www.civitasgalleries.com

    New coins listed monthly!

    Josh Moran

    CIVITAS Galleries, Ltd.
  • 7Jaguars7Jaguars Posts: 7,228 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Yes, I also may be able to help if I at least see some decent pictures and may just know a bit about this series.
    Love that Milled British (1830-1960)
    Well, just Love coins, period.
  • MacCrimmonMacCrimmon Posts: 7,051 ✭✭✭
    Maybe the smaller Godless diameter confused them. Your Godless should have a diameter of 28mm. But yes, we'd need to at least see some clear, focused images.
  • wybritwybrit Posts: 6,952 ✭✭✭
    Maybe the smaller Godless diameter confused them.

    PCGS has certified a bunch of these pieces, that can't be the reason IMO.
    Former owner, Cambridge Gate collection.
  • I thought that might be the case as well. They would know that the diameter was smaller for the 1849 Florin?
    The problem that i have is that it would be highly unlikely (odds) to have both coins graded as questionable?
    One Florin came from the US and the other Great Britain. I have pictures but have had trouble posting them
    on this site due to the complexity required to link the images to this site! I know i am a MAC guy but this is
    just a very poor interface for posting images.
    The feedback has been great and very useful.
  • image
    I have finally figured it out. Here is the obverse of one of the 1849 Florins that was returned from PCGS.
    They really need to provided a detailed explanation as to why this coin is a forgery!
  • image
    Here is the reverse. Many thanks for all of your feedback!
  • 1jester1jester Posts: 8,638 ✭✭✭
    I'm sorry this happened to you, but it has happened to me a few times as well. Sometimes TPGs simply don't know what they're talking about and body bag a legitimate coin because they aren't competent enough to authenticate it. But in your case it seems strange because they have authenticated coins of that series. I personally don't know about your coins, and hope someone more knowledgeable is able to shed some light on the issue. But I'd suggest you send it in to NGC and/or ANACS. If it gets slabbed at one of these services, you might try sending it back to PCGS in the slab for them to cross over. Good luck.

    imageimageimage
    .....GOD
    image

    "Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you." -Luke 11:9

    "Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD: And thou shalt love the LORD thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might." -Deut. 6:4-5

    "For the LORD is our judge, the LORD is our lawgiver, the LORD is our king; He will save us." -Isaiah 33:22


  • << <i>But I'd suggest you send it in to NGC and/or ANACS. If it gets slabbed at one of these services, you might try sending it back to PCGS in the slab for them to cross over. Good luck.

    imageimageimage >>



    So, pay once to have it bodybagged, then pay again to try NGC or ANACS, then pay PCGS again to have it cross (maybe).

    Sounds time-consuming and expensive.image
    "Think of the Press as a great keyboard on which the Government can play" – Joseph Goebbels

    "The Central Intelligence Agency owns everyone of any significance in the major media" - William Colby, former CIA director
  • wybritwybrit Posts: 6,952 ✭✭✭
    I have two examples of the 1849, with W.W. I inspected both of them and also looked at ebay, Northeast and recent Goldberg listings of the same date and variety.

    * Most of the pieces I saw had well formed peripheral beads all the way around the coin. They were round and uniformly sized. Your piece has some beads looking more like teeth, particularly between 6 o'clock and 9 o'clock. The beads also look somewhat nonuniform. That said, a couple of the listings I saw had some similar bead anomalies as well.

    * It may be just the fuzziness of the picture, but the obverse lettering on your coin looks a bit weak. Most of the examples I saw had very sharp lettering all the way around.

    Otherwise, I don't see any real alarm bells. I'd have to see the coin in hand to go any further. There is speculation that this particular date was minted in 1849, 1850 and maybe even 1851, so variations in quality are likely to be plentiful.

    What I would do:

    * Post a picture of the other example.

    * Test the coins for a silver "ring." A silver coin should have a long a pleasant ringing sound when gently struck while in the air.

    * Don't bother sending it to another TPG or resubmitting. You're just throwing away good money. This coin does not appear to be mint state. If you slab an 1849 florin that is short of MS, you'll find it to be a losing proposition some day when it's time to sell. Keep in mind that there are a lot of 1849 florins out there, small mintage be hanged.

    * Since the seller is allowing you a return, I wouldn't hesitate to return the coin pictured.

    * Furthermore, I'd hold out for a certified UNC example or a raw UNC from a highly reputable dealer. Northeast has a nice PCGS MS64 one for sale right now, for example (and they are accepting offers for it).

    * If you have your heart set on keeping one of these, send them to an expert for examination. There are many people here I would trust with such a request and have had good experiences with in past dealings.

    For comparison's sake, below are obverse shots of my two examples and a resized (and sharpened) picture of your piece.

    image
    image
    image
    Former owner, Cambridge Gate collection.
  • 7Jaguars7Jaguars Posts: 7,228 ✭✭✭✭✭
    I concur about the beading and would also note that especially on the reverse between 2 and 5 o'clock the beads are somewhat doubled. The rest of the devices obverse and reverse appear pretty good.

    At first I thought the beading appearance was an optical illusion with the coin being slightly angled for the photographs but clearly this is not the case, so these weaknesses are real. I am inclined to thing the piece shown to be authentic but can not say I have complete confidence in that, and beg off by stating that it would best be seen in hand. If not to wiped out by the day I will have a closer look at my own & I have two examples but mine both have the sharp beading, and no doubling or mushiness.

    I must confess to not liking this date as well as the dates from the 1850s and 1860s, and do prefer the Roman numeral dating. I guess keeping these is somewhat price-dependent, although you are now out the additional grading fees. Sorry about that. I just left mine in 2x2s as the coin is not so valuable in a relative sense.
    Love that Milled British (1830-1960)
    Well, just Love coins, period.
  • 1jester1jester Posts: 8,638 ✭✭✭


    << <i>

    << <i>But I'd suggest you send it in to NGC and/or ANACS. If it gets slabbed at one of these services, you might try sending it back to PCGS in the slab for them to cross over. Good luck.

    imageimageimage >>



    So, pay once to have it bodybagged, then pay again to try NGC or ANACS, then pay PCGS again to have it cross (maybe).

    Sounds time-consuming and expensive.image >>



    Of course you're right, and I should have qualified my statement (though I thought it was understood) that if the OP wishes to have it slabbed, then that's one way to play the slab game.

    imageimageimage
    .....GOD
    image

    "Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you." -Luke 11:9

    "Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD: And thou shalt love the LORD thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might." -Deut. 6:4-5

    "For the LORD is our judge, the LORD is our lawgiver, the LORD is our king; He will save us." -Isaiah 33:22
  • JCMhoustonJCMhouston Posts: 5,306 ✭✭✭
    Here are images of mine also for comparison:

    image
    image

    This is 64 also and exhibits sharp lettering, the beads on the reverse however are not as well formed as Wybrits examples.
  • coinpicturescoinpictures Posts: 5,345 ✭✭✭
    Looking at JCMhouston's example, apparently the beads cannot be the determining factor.

    PCGS may have decided to err on the side of caution. If it is a fake, it's frighteningly good. However, I'd be curious to get NGC's opinion on the piece, as they do far more Darkside material than PCGS. One data point doth not conclusive make.

    Regardless, I think PCGS owes the submitter more information than just "we don't think it's authentic."
  • MacCrimmonMacCrimmon Posts: 7,051 ✭✭✭
    Well, the only real way to make a determination would be an examination in-hand. However, I do find the pitting on the reverse rim to be a bit odd looking. That may be what put PCGS off on the genuineness of the piece. Also, the obverse looks to be a little too semi-PL. The examples I've seen have either had Morgan-like cartwheel luster (think 1881-S), or an even satiny luster. That said, I know of two 1852 Gothics which are PL gems (NEN recently sold one of them).

    Also, the "wear" or strike on the rev. crowns of your example looks to be somewhat indistinct. This could just be wear or maybe it is this way from being a cast piece. Definitely 'ring' the piece as Wybrit suggested.
  • It would be an extreme understatement to say I'm no expert on these, but looking at the photos, the OPs coin seems to have a different "9" in the date (flatter sides). The others seem to be more rounded.

    I'm not sure what that means. Just an observation.
  • farthingfarthing Posts: 3,294 ✭✭✭
    My 1849 florin for comparison:

    image
    R.I.P. Wayne, Brad
    Collecting:
    Conder tokens
    19th & 20th Century coins from Great Britain and the Realm
  • lordmarcovanlordmarcovan Posts: 43,194 ✭✭✭✭✭
    I do think this issue is one that has been a target for the ever-increasingly clever Chinese counterfeiters, but I sure wouldn't be qualified to say yea or nay one way or the other on the coins mentioned here. If they're fake, it sure would've fooled me, and were they mine, I would certainly be asking hard questions why, as well.

    Explore collections of lordmarcovan on CollecOnline, management, safe-keeping, sharing and valuation solution for art piece and collectibles.
Sign In or Register to comment.