PCGS slabs contemporary counterfeits! Thanks PCGS!

Zoins

I was looking over this great looking error for a long time, admiring how interesting it looked before realizing it was a PCGS slabbed contemporary counterfeit!

There's been some talk asking PCGS to slab contemporary counterfeits in the past and this is the first one I've seen. Time to send them in for slabbing?

Thanks to @indeetlib for the large photos below.

Thanks to @PCGSPhoto for the CoinFacts TrueView images below!

I've generally been a big fan of PCGS expanding what they slab including:

• HK-Unlisted So-Called Dollars
• Heraldic Art Medals

COINS MAKE CENTS

That's very interesting!

Zoins

@RogerB said:
Is anyone working on a detailed treatment of counterfeit US coins from the 1800-1950 period? This seems like an interesting and potentially useful field of study.

The above is from a different thread.

If you do write a book @RogerB, this looks like a great one to include!

ChopmarkedTrades

I'd be interested to know to what extent PCGS is slabbing contemporary counterfeits as well. Will it extend to world coins?

Hemispherical

Thanks @Zoins and you have very informative links, too.

jgenn

@ChopmarkedTrades said:
I'd be interested to know to what extent PCGS is slabbing contemporary counterfeits as well. Will it extend to world coins?

They do slab CC 8 reales accidentally. I hope PCGS learns to detect these and properly attribute them.

messydesk

Interested to know if this means the contemporary counterfeit Morgans in the "Micro O Family" are back in play.

MrEureka

Interesting how so many of the 1848 Small Dates are major errors.

Timbuk3

Interesting, pretty cool !!!

ricko

That is an interesting area of coin collecting. Of course, collecting them would appear to encourage counterfeiting, there is no doubt that the practice dates to the introduction of coinage itself. Some, such as the Omega, the micro O, the Henning nickel, the racketeer nickel and a few others have gained a following. It seems as if authentic - if that term can be used to describe a counterfeit - and successful efforts command some respect. Cheers, RickO

jerseycat101

I am not opposed to holdering contemporary counterfeits. But it does set a precedent.

lkenefic

Wouldn't that be a good way to get them off the regular market and identify them as counterfeit? ... until someone cracks it out anyway...

ifthevamzarockin

PCGS recognizes Red Book listings. Could that be why it made it into a holder?

Zoins

@ifthevamzarockin said:
PCGS recognizes Red Book listings. Could that be why it made it into a holder?

Potentially, however, while they recognize references, they do make exceptions for what they won’t slab. For example, they recognize Krause listings but haven’t slabbed the Moonlight Mint 1964 Peace Dollar yet which is listed in the reference.

messydesk

With the impending publication of @stoneman 's book on contemporary counterfeits, I wonder if that will be the reference necessary for our hosts to take this up again.

johnny9434

that sure is fugly but I do like it. thanks pcgs for doing that

RogerB

Certainly hope they have done their homework. (See the thread on overweight 1879 cents for a detail or two.)

PerryHall

According to that slab label that coin is a "Genuine" "Counterfeit".

CaptHenway

Slabbing counterfeits is a very bad idea, in my opinion.

ReadyFireAim

@PerryHall said:
According to that slab label that coin is a "Genuine" "Counterfeit".

I keep thinking about a "genuine" omega.

Some collect doilies, OGH, stickers or pedigree so....

DIMEMAN

Wow...that is one messed up coin!

1775

What about Electros?

kbbpll

@PerryHall said:
According to that slab label that coin is a "Genuine" "Counterfeit".

"Questionable Authenticity" would be awesome.

Zoins

@kbbpll said:

@PerryHall said:
According to that slab label that coin is a "Genuine" "Counterfeit".

"Questionable Authenticity" would be awesome.

Well, it’s not really questionable if it’s a known counterfeit

kbbpll

@Zoins said:

@kbbpll said:

@PerryHall said:
According to that slab label that coin is a "Genuine" "Counterfeit".

"Questionable Authenticity" would be awesome.

Well, it’s not really questionable if it’s a known counterfeit

My quirky sense of humor, I guess. I immediately imagined Chinese counterfeit contemporary counterfeits, and a grader unable to determine whether it's a real fake or a fake fake.

Maybe it sounds stupid, but some of these are worth more than their real counterparts. Has anybody seen a fake counterfeit yet?

Zoins

@DIMEMAN said:
Wow...that is one messed up coin!

That's part of what I love about it. There's a lot going on and quite a bit of info on the insert!

kbbpll

It is quite possibly the most interesting label ever. "Mint Error"!

Zoins

@kbbpll said:
It is quite possibly the most interesting label ever. "Mint Error"!

Agree. I wonder if any other insert has as much going on!

MWallace

What's next? CACed Counterfeit "Omegas"?

Zoins

@MWallace said:
What's next? CACed Counterfeit "Omegas"?

A CACed Genuine Omega might be plausible. A Counterfeit Omega, or a counterfeit of a counterfeit, would be jumping the shark

3keepSECRETif2rDEAD

...this thread is cool...all I can add is that it tastes way better with peanut M&Ms when you eat them using a three-staged attack...first you suck the candy coating off gently without cracking it...then when the candied layer is compromised you use your tongue to separate the milk chocolate from the peanut...stash the peanut somewhere in your cheek like a hamster while you patiently wait for all of the milk chocolate goodness to melt away...just after that happens then it’s time for the protein crunch...again with your tounge, find the peanut and crunch away...repeat...and when your a pro 3 at a time is the max to ensure you get your monies worth...it takes me 17 min to rip through a king sized...slow your roll and Enjoy Life fellas

MWallace

@3keepSECRETif2rDEAD said:
...this thread is cool...all I can add is that it tastes way better with peanut M&Ms when you eat them using a three-staged attack...first you suck the candy coating off gently without cracking it...then when the candied layer is compromised you use your tongue to separate the milk chocolate from the peanut...stash the peanut somewhere in your cheek like a hamster while you patiently wait for all of the milk chocolate goodness to melt away...just after that happens then it’s time for the protein crunch...again with your tounge, find the peanut and crunch away...repeat...and when your a pro 3 at a time is the max to ensure you get your monies worth...it takes me 17 min to rip through a king sized...slow your roll and Enjoy Life fellas

LOL!! This may be a bit TMI, but sounds like you have it down to a science.

Zoins

@MrEureka said:
Interesting how so many of the 1848 Small Dates are major errors.

Here's another 1848 Small Date which is an off center broad strike on a clipped planchet. This is a CoinFacts TrueView photo.

This specimen is graded PCGS AU53BN and pedigreed to Dan Holmes.

Of note, PCGS calls this one a "Fantasy".

https://www.pcgs.com/cert/14300242

keets

According to that slab label that coin is a "Genuine" "Counterfeit"

that reminds me of an old Info-mercial I saw late one night where they advertised "Genuine Faux Pearls" among other things.

as for the OP coin, all I can say is "Slippery Slope" in regards to PCGS encapsulating them, and for the OP's desire to have PCGS start to encapsulate other things --- there is already a service(s) that does that, puts anything in a holder. I always felt the lack of that was part of what separated PCGS from the rest of the pack. maybe I was wrong.

MrEureka

What was “melt” on Large Cents in 1848?

PerryHall

The major grading services grade and slab the so-called New Haven restrike Fugio Cents which are not restrikes since they didn't use original dies and are counterfeits. In the future, perhaps PCGS should label them as genuine counterfeits to be consistent.

astrorat

@jerseycat101 said:
I am not opposed to holdering contemporary counterfeits. But it does set a precedent.

Perhaps a precedent for PCGS, but ICG has been slabbing counterfeits and NGC has been slabbing ancient counterfeits for a while.

Image from eBay auction

CaptHenway

"Oh what tangled webs we weave, when first we practice to deceive!"

Zoins

@astrorat said:

@jerseycat101 said:

Image from eBay auction

Wow! 600-550 BC or over 2600 years ago. Is this the oldest slabbed contemporary counterfeit?

I guess counterfeiting may be as old as coins themselves!

CascadeChris

@messydesk said:
Interested to know if this means the contemporary counterfeit Morgans in the "Micro O Family" are back in play.

You read my mind..

Zoins

@PerryHall said:
The major grading services grade and slab the so-called New Haven restrike Fugio Cents which are not restrikes since they didn't use original dies and are counterfeits. In the future, perhaps PCGS should label them as genuine counterfeits to be consistent.

Don't forget that they also aren't related to New Haven which should be changed too.

The Red Book still calls these New Haven Restrikes. Any idea if the Red Book will change?

Were these passed as originals when issued?

https://www.whitman.com/redbook/488

Insider2

In the "old days" when a counterfeit was discovered that had fooled everyone (including expert professional dealers) for awhile, they were taken off the market. They were melted or put in C/F reference collections. Back then these fakes were treated just as the crude Chinese junk is today.

Now things are different. IMO this new craze, accepting fakes in the marketplace (Example: Assigning VAM numbers to fakes and selling them as desirable varieties) and pushing them out at high dollar values began with the "Micro O" dollars. These fakes had been passed as genuine, cataloged, published in the major reference, and slabbed as genuine by every major TPGS. So many individuals, companies, etc were "invested" in these coins that an exception was made. Some folks returned the coins back for refunds but many more kept them and their prices did not crash.

IMO, Machin Mills, old electros, evasion tokens, etc and even "Micro O's have a place in numismatic history and in counterfeit collections/teaching sets...BUT

Zoins

@Insider2 said:
In the "old days" when a counterfeit was discovered that had fooled everyone (including expert professional dealers) for awhile, they were taken off the market. They were melted or put in C/F reference collections. Back then these fakes were treated just as the crude Chinese junk is today.

Now things are different. IMO this new craze, accepting fakes in the marketplace (Example: Assigning VAM numbers to fakes and selling them as desirable varieties) and pushing them out at high dollar values began with the "Micro O" dollars. These fakes had been passed as genuine, cataloged, published in the major reference, and slabbed as genuine by every major TPGS. So many individuals, companies, etc were "invested" in these coins that an exception was made. Some folks returned the coins back for refunds but many more kept them and their prices did not crash.

IMO, Machin Mills, old electros, evasion tokens, etc and even "Micro O's have a place in numismatic history and in counterfeit collections/teaching sets...BUT

I wonder if the crude Chinese junk of today will be collectible tomorrow. It seems there are collectors for so many known counterfeits now that one has to wonder. The assignment of VAM numbers to fakes is an interesting development.

jwitten

I would love to get my Omega TrueViewed and in PCGS plastic. Actually, there are already PCGS pics of it, I believe... they just are not released.

Insider2

@Zoins said:

@Insider2 said:
In the "old days" when a counterfeit was discovered that had fooled everyone (including expert professional dealers) for awhile, they were taken off the market. They were melted or put in C/F reference collections. Back then these fakes were treated just as the crude Chinese junk is today.

Now things are different. IMO this new craze, accepting fakes in the marketplace (Example: Assigning VAM numbers to fakes and selling them as desirable varieties) and pushing them out at high dollar values began with the "Micro O" dollars. These fakes had been passed as genuine, cataloged, published in the major reference, and slabbed as genuine by every major TPGS. So many individuals, companies, etc were "invested" in these coins that an exception was made. Some folks returned the coins back for refunds but many more kept them and their prices did not crash.

IMO, Machin Mills, old electros, evasion tokens, etc and even "Micro O's have a place in numismatic history and in counterfeit collections/teaching sets...BUT

I wonder if the crude Chinese junk of today will be collectible tomorrow. It seems so many counterfeits are collectible now that one has to wonder. The assignment of VAM numbers to fakes is an interesting development.

There are at least four levels of Chinese fakes.

1. real crap
2. crap
3. decent fakes
4. State-of-the-Art counterfeits that have been/are being slabbed by our best and brightest authenticators. These coins are avidly collected and they are EXPENSIVE because they easily pass as genuine and the folks who got stuck with them don't give them away cheaply!

Trade, Bust, and Flowing Hair dollars, colonials plus Half and Large cents are eagerly collected - and expensive.

Zoins

@Insider2 said:

@Zoins said:

@Insider2 said:
In the "old days" when a counterfeit was discovered that had fooled everyone (including expert professional dealers) for awhile, they were taken off the market. They were melted or put in C/F reference collections. Back then these fakes were treated just as the crude Chinese junk is today.

Now things are different. IMO this new craze, accepting fakes in the marketplace (Example: Assigning VAM numbers to fakes and selling them as desirable varieties) and pushing them out at high dollar values began with the "Micro O" dollars. These fakes had been passed as genuine, cataloged, published in the major reference, and slabbed as genuine by every major TPGS. So many individuals, companies, etc were "invested" in these coins that an exception was made. Some folks returned the coins back for refunds but many more kept them and their prices did not crash.

IMO, Machin Mills, old electros, evasion tokens, etc and even "Micro O's have a place in numismatic history and in counterfeit collections/teaching sets...BUT

I wonder if the crude Chinese junk of today will be collectible tomorrow. It seems so many counterfeits are collectible now that one has to wonder. The assignment of VAM numbers to fakes is an interesting development.

There are at least fore levels of Chinese fakes.

1. real crap
2. crap
3. decent fakes
4. State-of-the-Art counterfeits that have been/are being slabbed by our best and brightest authenticators. These coins are avidly collected and they are EXPENSIVE because they easily pass as genuine and the folks who got stuck with them don't give them away cheaply!

Trade, Bust, and Flowing Hair dollars, colonials plus Half and Large cents are eagerly collected - and expensive.

Are there any photos of the state-of-the-art ones? It's interesting that Chinese fakes are valued and collected at that level.

CaptHenway

The state of the art, virtually undetectable counterfeits first appeared around 1981. At the time we speculated that they were coming from Switzerland or Germany, but we never established a source. The first good Chinese counterfeit I ever saw was at the end of 2007.

CaptHenway

The Micro o dollar counterfeits were given VAM numbers long before they were detected as counterfeits.

Zoins

@CaptHenway said:
The state of the art, virtually undetectable counterfeits first appeared around 1981. At the time we speculated that they were coming from Switzerland or Germany, but we never established a source. The first good Chinese counterfeit I ever saw was at the end of 2007.

Interesting, I didn't know about the Swiss / German theories. China certainly wasn't a major player in world commerce back in 1981.

Insider2

@Zoins said:

@Insider2 said:

@Zoins said:

@Insider2 said:
In the "old days" when a counterfeit was discovered that had fooled everyone (including expert professional dealers) for awhile, they were taken off the market. They were melted or put in C/F reference collections. Back then these fakes were treated just as the crude Chinese junk is today.

Now things are different. IMO this new craze, accepting fakes in the marketplace (Example: Assigning VAM numbers to fakes and selling them as desirable varieties) and pushing them out at high dollar values began with the "Micro O" dollars. These fakes had been passed as genuine, cataloged, published in the major reference, and slabbed as genuine by every major TPGS. So many individuals, companies, etc were "invested" in these coins that an exception was made. Some folks returned the coins back for refunds but many more kept them and their prices did not crash.

IMO, Machin Mills, old electros, evasion tokens, etc and even "Micro O's have a place in numismatic history and in counterfeit collections/teaching sets...BUT

I wonder if the crude Chinese junk of today will be collectible tomorrow. It seems so many counterfeits are collectible now that one has to wonder. The assignment of VAM numbers to fakes is an interesting development.

There are at least fore levels of Chinese fakes.

1. real crap
2. crap
3. decent fakes
4. State-of-the-Art counterfeits that have been/are being slabbed by our best and brightest authenticators. These coins are avidly collected and they are EXPENSIVE because they easily pass as genuine and the folks who got stuck with them don't give them away cheaply!

Trade, Bust, and Flowing Hair dollars, colonials plus Half and Large cents are eagerly collected - and expensive.

Are there any photos of the state-of-the-art ones? It's interesting that Chinese fakes are valued and collected at that level.

They have been posted here and on other forms by Jack Young.

Zoins

@Insider2 said:

@Zoins said:

@Insider2 said:

@Zoins said:

@Insider2 said:
In the "old days" when a counterfeit was discovered that had fooled everyone (including expert professional dealers) for awhile, they were taken off the market. They were melted or put in C/F reference collections. Back then these fakes were treated just as the crude Chinese junk is today.

Now things are different. IMO this new craze, accepting fakes in the marketplace (Example: Assigning VAM numbers to fakes and selling them as desirable varieties) and pushing them out at high dollar values began with the "Micro O" dollars. These fakes had been passed as genuine, cataloged, published in the major reference, and slabbed as genuine by every major TPGS. So many individuals, companies, etc were "invested" in these coins that an exception was made. Some folks returned the coins back for refunds but many more kept them and their prices did not crash.

IMO, Machin Mills, old electros, evasion tokens, etc and even "Micro O's have a place in numismatic history and in counterfeit collections/teaching sets...BUT

I wonder if the crude Chinese junk of today will be collectible tomorrow. It seems so many counterfeits are collectible now that one has to wonder. The assignment of VAM numbers to fakes is an interesting development.

There are at least fore levels of Chinese fakes.

1. real crap
2. crap
3. decent fakes
4. State-of-the-Art counterfeits that have been/are being slabbed by our best and brightest authenticators. These coins are avidly collected and they are EXPENSIVE because they easily pass as genuine and the folks who got stuck with them don't give them away cheaply!

Trade, Bust, and Flowing Hair dollars, colonials plus Half and Large cents are eagerly collected - and expensive.

Are there any photos of the state-of-the-art ones? It's interesting that Chinese fakes are valued and collected at that level.

They have been posted here and on other forms by Jack Young.

Are they the ones made from real coins?