Having a near-perfect counterfeit TPG slab and replacing an authentic, valuable coin with a counterfeit, re-using the original insert, and resealing the slab without any obvious tampering signs is a scary thought with these older slabs without a TrueView.
@UtahCoin said:
My final thoughts.
1. After studying the MM and coin edge under a microscope, I'm now certain (99% anyway) that the "artist" went through the edge of the coin and created the D from within the coin.
Where I went wrong.
1. Since the coin was apparently in a PCGS holder, I let my guard down and didn't even consider it might be altered/counterfeit.
An argument for having a CAC sticker? Even on a G06.
How likely If the 1916 D is so heavily counterfeited with an added mint mark would PCGS miss it. I would think the MM would be the first thing they would concentrate in the authenticity part of the grading
Reading through some of this and the switched label theory, I was wondering if this is something prevalent enough that pcgs should address with their development team. Perhaps a label that would be partially damaged if removed - hologram affixed to the slab. Maybe a 2 piece label with a hologram affixed to the inside of the slab and the paper label incomplete without a hologram. Just a couple of thoughts, should be better ones.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=2YNufnS_kf4 - Mama I'm coming home ...................................................................................................................................................................... RLJ 1958 - 2023
@DelawareDoons said:
After you get the shells all you need is a sonic sealer, and those are easy enough to acquire.
Actually, crazy glue would work well enough to fool most people.
Crazy glue is a non-starter for those who have access to a black light.
what does it show?
can crazy glue withstand a soaking in acetone?
Acetone will dissolve the plastic in a slab shell. Don't ever use it to clean a slab.
I was referring to raw coin .... but UtahCoin says it was not added but made from within. I wonder how they fixed the reeding?
Not feasible to emboss a mintmark on most coins. It works on the buffalo nickel because the rim is relatively thick and smooth and the mintmark is close to the edge.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
@DelawareDoons said:
After you get the shells all you need is a sonic sealer, and those are easy enough to acquire.
Actually, crazy glue would work well enough to fool most people.
Crazy glue is a non-starter for those who have access to a black light.
what does it show?
can crazy glue withstand a soaking in acetone?
Acetone will dissolve the plastic in a slab shell. Don't ever use it to clean a slab.
I was referring to raw coin .... but UtahCoin says it was not added but made from within. I wonder how they fixed the reeding?
Not feasible to emboss a mintmark on most coins. It works on the buffalo nickel because the rim is relatively thick and smooth and the mintmark is close to the edge.
People have even done it with Lincoln cents. Not easy. I couldn't do it. But it's been done.
Ouch! Thanks for posting this so the rest of us can learn. Strange that they called it a counterfeit. The coin itself is not a counterfeit. Adding a mintmark makes it an altered coin, not a counterfeit coin, at least in the definition I know. You can't be too careful. Even the best coin dealers can get taken, I don't know one that hasn't been taken in some way or another.
I wish this were an April 1 post not a May day post....
PCGS no doubt has information on who originally submitted the coin. Would the counterfeit be caught on a subsequent TV/shield submission? I'm sure whoever sold the coin after getting it back was in a hurry to sell it.
We had a coin club member who would add the "d" to 1916 Mercury dimes and the worst that would happen would be the buyer would come back for his money to be returned. He should have been cited by the state and law enforcement.
@logger7 said:
I wish this were an April 1 post not a May day post....
PCGS no doubt has information on who originally submitted the coin. Would the counterfeit be caught on a subsequent TV/shield submission? I'm sure whoever sold the coin after getting it back was in a hurry to sell it.
We had a coin club member who would add the "d" to 1916 Mercury dimes and the worst that would happen would be the buyer would come back for his money to be returned. He should have been cited by the state and law enforcement.
@logger7 said:
I wish this were an April 1 post not a May day post....
PCGS no doubt has information on who originally submitted the coin. Would the counterfeit be caught on a subsequent TV/shield submission? I'm sure whoever sold the coin after getting it back was in a hurry to sell it.
We had a coin club member who would add the "d" to 1916 Mercury dimes and the worst that would happen would be the buyer would come back for his money to be returned. He should have been cited by the state and law enforcement.
And your club allowed him to remain a member????
Unfortunately laissez faire ethics seems to operate in coin clubs, I have never known one to kick people out. Except maybe for actually raising ethical issues about a club--that will get you on a persona non grata list.
@DelawareDoons said:
After you get the shells all you need is a sonic sealer, and those are easy enough to acquire.
Actually, crazy glue would work well enough to fool most people.
Crazy glue is a non-starter for those who have access to a black light.
what does it show?
can crazy glue withstand a soaking in acetone?
Acetone will dissolve the plastic in a slab shell. Don't ever use it to clean a slab.
I was referring to raw coin .... but UtahCoin says it was not added but made from within. I wonder how they fixed the reeding?
Not feasible to emboss a mintmark on most coins. It works on the buffalo nickel because the rim is relatively thick and smooth and the mintmark is close to the edge.
People have even done it with Lincoln cents. Not easy. I couldn't do it. But it's been done.
Do either of you have photos of this type of alteration? It does not, in my mind, seem possible without also somehow damaging the opposite side of the coin in some way, not just the edge.
From NGC - https://www.ngccoin.com/news/article/5120/counterfeit-morgan-dollar/
.
Another type of added mintmark, known as embossing, can often be much more deceptive. In this case, a hole is drilled into the edge of a coin. A specialized tool, usually made from needle-nose pliers, is then inserted into this tiny hole until it is directly underneath the place where the mintmark should be. Then, the tool is closed, pushing metal up to form a mintmark on the surface of the coin. This often creates a very realistic looking mintmark.
Embossed mintmarks are most often found on Buffalo Nickels as they have a thick, smooth edge with a mintmark very close to the rim of the coin. The smooth edge leads to a much easier repair for the counterfeiter, and the short distance to the mintmark means less drilling as well. However, skilled forgers are now able to alter reeded edged coins as well. For example, the 1889-S Morgan Dollar below started its life as an 1889-P.
As you can see from the close-ups, the mintmark itself looks pretty decent. However, the edge is where you can see something is amiss. The dark spot right in the center of the image is the spot at which the forger drilled into the coin. Tool marks on the bottom edge of the rim help bring attention to the area as well. They were likely caused by the counterfeiter removing extra molten metal that had gotten on the edge.
@1630Boston said:
From NGC - https://www.ngccoin.com/news/article/5120/counterfeit-morgan-dollar/
.
Another type of added mintmark, known as embossing, can often be much more deceptive. In this case, a hole is drilled into the edge of a coin. A specialized tool, usually made from needle-nose pliers, is then inserted into this tiny hole until it is directly underneath the place where the mintmark should be. Then, the tool is closed, pushing metal up to form a mintmark on the surface of the coin. This often creates a very realistic looking mintmark.
Embossed mintmarks are most often found on Buffalo Nickels as they have a thick, smooth edge with a mintmark very close to the rim of the coin. The smooth edge leads to a much easier repair for the counterfeiter, and the short distance to the mintmark means less drilling as well. However, skilled forgers are now able to alter reeded edged coins as well. For example, the 1889-S Morgan Dollar below started its life as an 1889-P.
As you can see from the close-ups, the mintmark itself looks pretty decent. However, the edge is where you can see something is amiss. The dark spot right in the center of the image is the spot at which the forger drilled into the coin. Tool marks on the bottom edge of the rim help bring attention to the area as well. They were likely caused by the counterfeiter removing extra molten metal that had gotten on the edge.
I've seen that 89-S in hand, it's a very skilled alteration.
Professional Numismatist. "It's like God, Family, Country, except Sticker, Plastic, Coin."
@ifthevamzarockin
Boy that is a kick to the chin for sure
What I've read about the 16-D dime is its the second most counterfeited of all US coins with the 09SVDB King of Lincoln's holding the number one spot.
Not to long ago there was a graded genuine SVDB that circulated the forum (forum's) that was more than questionably genuine, but I don't think it was ever re-submitted to prove it.
Just think of how many of these phonies are put away in collections that no one ever questioned its authenticity, thousands upon thousands of them, what a shame.
"I Prefer Dangerous Freedom Over Peaceful Slavery"
Thomas Jefferson!
@UtahCoin said:
My final thoughts.
1. After studying the MM and coin edge under a microscope, I'm now certain (99% anyway) that the "artist" went through the edge of the coin and created the D from within the coin.
2. The original insert is genuine. The fonts, size and placement are right on.
3. The holder. This part is scary, there were no indications that the holder had been pried opened or resealed. Which leads me to the conclusion that the slab was a high grade counterfeit and sonically sealed.
Where I went wrong.
1. Since the coin was apparently in a PCGS holder, I let my guard down and didn't even consider it might be altered/counterfeit.
Final outcome.
1. Had I left the coin in the slab for a regrade, PCGS would probably have caught it and declared the slab counterfeit/altered.
2. The insert was 6 years old. This slab could have changed hands many times.
I'm just going to lick my wounds and move on, it's all I can do. It's not a total loss, still about a buck fifty worth of silver.
I am pretty sure it was glued on, but I could not say for sure without seeing it in hand.
Just remember, it is only money. Count your blessings, and be thankful we are on the right side of the grass.
TD
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
I know that this embossing has been found done on what I'll call "Big Silver" & Nickels, being these coins are so large and thick, but! I don't know (???) if any example of smaller coins like Dimes & Cents has ever been found with an embossed mint mark (to date anyway).
"I Prefer Dangerous Freedom Over Peaceful Slavery"
Thomas Jefferson!
I am pretty sure it was glued on, but I could not say for sure without seeing it in hand.
Acetone didn't effect the Mint Mark, and the only place the reeding appears disturbed is near the Mint Mark.
Solder maybe?
I used to be somebody, now I'm just a coin collector. Recipient of the coveted "You Suck" award, April 2009 for cherrypicking a 1833 CBHD LM-5, and April 2022 for a 1835 LM-12, and again in Aug 2012 for picking off a 1952 FS-902.
Firstly, we would like to thank you for being such an active member of our community and for raising an important topic. I would like to affirm that, should the coin have been submitted for reconsideration in-holder to allow for authentication of the original holder and the coin was then proven to have been inaccurately graded by our team, we would have fulfilled our commitment to our customers by honoring our guarantee.
However, without being able to confirm that this coin was purchased in an authentic holder, we are unable to verify the circumstances of this counterfeit.
Unfortunately, counterfeit holders do exist and we make every effort to improve our anti-counterfeiting technology year after year including the inclusion of NFC tags in every item graded by PCGS.
Should you have any questions or if there is further information I can provide, please feel free to reach out to me directly.
I am pretty sure it was glued on, but I could not say for sure without seeing it in hand.
Acetone didn't effect the Mint Mark, and the only place the reeding appears disturbed is near the Mint Mark.
Solder maybe?
I have heard that there are epoxy adhesives that will not be dissolved by acetone. No first hand knowledge of course.
I just don't think that a dime is thick enough to emboss a mint mark in.
TD
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
I have heard that there are epoxy adhesives that will not be dissolved by acetone. No first hand knowledge of course.
Appears there are products resistant to acetone
Kohesi Bond-product KB 1151 S-1. KB 1151 S-1 is a two-component, room temperature curing epoxy system. It offers superior resistance to various solvents, including acetone. It has been tested for immersion in various chemicals, such as toluene, gasoline, ethylene glycol and others for over a year without failure. The operating temperature ranges from -50°C to +150°C. Along with good chemical resistance, this product can quickly set-up at room temperature (~ 20 minutes). It offers excellent mechanical strength properties and dimensional stability. KB 1151 S-1 offers good flow properties. However, KB 1151 S-1 can be formulated in non-drip viscosity and also for higher temperature resistance. Our customer successfully tested KB 1151 S-1 in their application and got excellent results.
Utah, of all places. We have a niche of dedicated vaulters and a private coach/afficionado that has built a full Olympic vault facility in his backyard . . . . many of the local chix and guys practice part of the week there. Yup . . . . Runnercard has the data . . .he did it last week . . . beat the previous SR at 16'4" with a 16"6", then took it up to 16'9" . . . missed at 17'.
Utah, of all places. We have a niche of dedicated vaulters and a private coach/afficionado that has built a full Olympic vault facility in his backyard . . . . many of the local chix and guys practice part of the week there. Yup . . . . Runnercard has the data . . .he did it last week . . . beat the previous SR at 16'4" with a 16"6", then took it up to 16'9" . . . missed at 17'.
Drunner
We had the same sort of thing in Texas. Very cool.
I used to be somebody, now I'm just a coin collector. Recipient of the coveted "You Suck" award, April 2009 for cherrypicking a 1833 CBHD LM-5, and April 2022 for a 1835 LM-12, and again in Aug 2012 for picking off a 1952 FS-902.
Drunner - He should have his pick of colleges, although I'm sure his private coach, along with his HS coach will steer him to a
good program. BYU is obviously a great program. I was captain of my cross crountry and track team in college, and still
follow it closely (although more track events than field events).
@UtahCoin said:
My final thoughts.
1. After studying the MM and coin edge under a microscope, I'm now certain (99% anyway) that the "artist" went through the edge of the coin and created the D from within the coin.
2. The original insert is genuine. The fonts, size and placement are right on.
3. The holder. This part is scary, there were no indications that the holder had been pried opened or resealed. Which leads me to the conclusion that the slab was a high grade counterfeit and sonically sealed.
Where I went wrong.
1. Since the coin was apparently in a PCGS holder, I let my guard down and didn't even consider it might be altered/counterfeit.
Final outcome.
1. Had I left the coin in the slab for a regrade, PCGS would probably have caught it and declared the slab counterfeit/altered.
2. The insert was 6 years old. This slab could have changed hands many times.
I'm just going to lick my wounds and move on, it's all I can do. It's not a total loss, still about a buck fifty worth of silver.
Just making sure I am following this correctly...
You believe the insert was from a good slab and used with a fake one to holder this altered coin?
Did I miss an image of the reverse in the slab before you cracked it out? Just interested in that view as well.
You believe the insert was from a good slab and used with a fake one to holder this altered coin?
Yes.
Did I miss an image of the reverse in the slab before you cracked it out? Just interested in that view as well.
For insurance purposes, with slabbed coins, I just photograph the front of the slab.
I used to be somebody, now I'm just a coin collector. Recipient of the coveted "You Suck" award, April 2009 for cherrypicking a 1833 CBHD LM-5, and April 2022 for a 1835 LM-12, and again in Aug 2012 for picking off a 1952 FS-902.
I used to be somebody, now I'm just a coin collector. Recipient of the coveted "You Suck" award, April 2009 for cherrypicking a 1833 CBHD LM-5, and April 2022 for a 1835 LM-12, and again in Aug 2012 for picking off a 1952 FS-902.
@ricko said:
The policy is clear. If you crack out the coin, it is no longer a PCGS verified coin. Yes, they may have erred initially, but there is no longer verifiable evidence. Once out, all is lost. Sad, but the policy is clear. Cheers, RickO
Maybe this is a topic for another thread, but I would argue that PCGS needs to update this policy to not require it to be in the slab if the slab was a gold shield. They claim that any gold shield slabbed coin can be positively identified by scanning it, thus this policy should no longer be necessary to be in the slab if it was a gold shield slab. Although that wouldn't have helped here either since it wasn't a gold shield slab. But this would be a good way to show that they stand behind the scanning technology.
Wow, over 4,500 views. Now if we each just chipped in a dollar ....
If someone goes to the effort to set up a "Go Fund Me" site I would be happy to contribute. In fact I wouldn't be surprised if PCGS wouldn't be happy to anonymously contribute as well as it would be a way to see equity and fairness accomplished without jeopardizing their understandable policy.
Where and when did you buy the coin? Maybe some auctions a couple years prior to that time might have that coin.
I bought the coin last May from a very reputable dealer and long time friend. He believes he picked it up at a show. I checked several auction records and came up empty.
Someone pm’d me suggesting I return it to the dealer. I can’t in good conscious do that. I’m the one who bought it, and I have to take responsibility for my actions.
I used to be somebody, now I'm just a coin collector. Recipient of the coveted "You Suck" award, April 2009 for cherrypicking a 1833 CBHD LM-5, and April 2022 for a 1835 LM-12, and again in Aug 2012 for picking off a 1952 FS-902.
Where and when did you buy the coin? Maybe some auctions a couple years prior to that time might have that coin.
I bought the coin last May from a very reputable dealer and long time friend. He believes he picked it up at a show. I checked several auction records and came up empty.
Someone pm’d me suggesting I return it to the dealer. I can’t in good conscious do that. I’m the one who bought it, and I have to take responsibility for my actions.
I would let the dealer know so he could be wary of the individual who sold the coin to him.
@cameonut2011 said:
On an interesting note, it is ironic that PCGS calls an altered coin counterfeit. It slabs Cart’s work. Added dates would seem to be in the same vein as added mint mark. Fictitious dates change nothing unless we give the Chinese a free pass on some of their most “creative” works.
That is a very good point. An altered coin is not a counterfeit coin.
IS IT??
Pete
"I tell them there's no problems.....only solutions" - John Lennon
@AUandAG said:
There are two reasons I dip in Acetone every coin I get. One: fingerprints. Two: find added mintmarks.
I too, bought and expensive coin only to find out the mint marks were added (CC). It fooled me, and it's my series, but PCGS was not fooled. I think I sold it here on the board for my grading fees: $25 or so, for educational reasons.
bob
Good policy. But not foolproof. I imagine that anything we can do to protect ourselves is justified.
But the problem is, it's not a 100% protection. Acetone ain't gonna catch an embossed mintmark Buffalo.
Pete
"I tell them there's no problems.....only solutions" - John Lennon
@1630Boston said:
From NGC - https://www.ngccoin.com/news/article/5120/counterfeit-morgan-dollar/
.
Another type of added mintmark, known as embossing, can often be much more deceptive. In this case, a hole is drilled into the edge of a coin. A specialized tool, usually made from needle-nose pliers, is then inserted into this tiny hole until it is directly underneath the place where the mintmark should be. Then, the tool is closed, pushing metal up to form a mintmark on the surface of the coin. This often creates a very realistic looking mintmark.
Embossed mintmarks are most often found on Buffalo Nickels as they have a thick, smooth edge with a mintmark very close to the rim of the coin. The smooth edge leads to a much easier repair for the counterfeiter, and the short distance to the mintmark means less drilling as well. However, skilled forgers are now able to alter reeded edged coins as well. For example, the 1889-S Morgan Dollar below started its life as an 1889-P.
As you can see from the close-ups, the mintmark itself looks pretty decent. However, the edge is where you can see something is amiss. The dark spot right in the center of the image is the spot at which the forger drilled into the coin. Tool marks on the bottom edge of the rim help bring attention to the area as well. They were likely caused by the counterfeiter removing extra molten metal that had gotten on the edge.
I've seen that 89-S in hand, it's a very skilled alteration.
The reason embosses stuff gets through is because hardly anyone checks the edge.
That and the fact that if the coin is in a 2x2 that will hide the deception.
Pete
"I tell them there's no problems.....only solutions" - John Lennon
Comments
Having a near-perfect counterfeit TPG slab and replacing an authentic, valuable coin with a counterfeit, re-using the original insert, and resealing the slab without any obvious tampering signs is a scary thought with these older slabs without a TrueView.
Something like this???
Mike
My Indians
Danco Set
I was referring to raw coin .... but UtahCoin says it was not added but made from within. I wonder how they fixed the reeding?
LOL! That would be the easy part!
Remove the coin from the holder, all bets are off. Why would one do that?
Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.-Albert Einstein
Just put it in one of those Whitman folders and forget about it. Only other option is to introduce it to a chisel.
How likely If the 1916 D is so heavily counterfeited with an added mint mark would PCGS miss it. I would think the MM would be the first thing they would concentrate in the authenticity part of the grading
Reading through some of this and the switched label theory, I was wondering if this is something prevalent enough that pcgs should address with their development team. Perhaps a label that would be partially damaged if removed - hologram affixed to the slab. Maybe a 2 piece label with a hologram affixed to the inside of the slab and the paper label incomplete without a hologram. Just a couple of thoughts, should be better ones.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=2YNufnS_kf4 - Mama I'm coming home ...................................................................................................................................................................... RLJ 1958 - 2023
or quick scans of all coins slabbed without TruViews
Not feasible to emboss a mintmark on most coins. It works on the buffalo nickel because the rim is relatively thick and smooth and the mintmark is close to the edge.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
People have even done it with Lincoln cents. Not easy. I couldn't do it. But it's been done.
Ouch! Thanks for posting this so the rest of us can learn. Strange that they called it a counterfeit. The coin itself is not a counterfeit. Adding a mintmark makes it an altered coin, not a counterfeit coin, at least in the definition I know. You can't be too careful. Even the best coin dealers can get taken, I don't know one that hasn't been taken in some way or another.
I wish this were an April 1 post not a May day post....
PCGS no doubt has information on who originally submitted the coin. Would the counterfeit be caught on a subsequent TV/shield submission? I'm sure whoever sold the coin after getting it back was in a hurry to sell it.
We had a coin club member who would add the "d" to 1916 Mercury dimes and the worst that would happen would be the buyer would come back for his money to be returned. He should have been cited by the state and law enforcement.
And your club allowed him to remain a member????
Unfortunately laissez faire ethics seems to operate in coin clubs, I have never known one to kick people out. Except maybe for actually raising ethical issues about a club--that will get you on a persona non grata list.
The trust in PCGS..... however that's gauged by each individual.
Great transactions with oih82w8, JasonGaming, Moose1913.
Do either of you have photos of this type of alteration? It does not, in my mind, seem possible without also somehow damaging the opposite side of the coin in some way, not just the edge.
From NGC - https://www.ngccoin.com/news/article/5120/counterfeit-morgan-dollar/
.
Another type of added mintmark, known as embossing, can often be much more deceptive. In this case, a hole is drilled into the edge of a coin. A specialized tool, usually made from needle-nose pliers, is then inserted into this tiny hole until it is directly underneath the place where the mintmark should be. Then, the tool is closed, pushing metal up to form a mintmark on the surface of the coin. This often creates a very realistic looking mintmark.
Embossed mintmarks are most often found on Buffalo Nickels as they have a thick, smooth edge with a mintmark very close to the rim of the coin. The smooth edge leads to a much easier repair for the counterfeiter, and the short distance to the mintmark means less drilling as well. However, skilled forgers are now able to alter reeded edged coins as well. For example, the 1889-S Morgan Dollar below started its life as an 1889-P.
As you can see from the close-ups, the mintmark itself looks pretty decent. However, the edge is where you can see something is amiss. The dark spot right in the center of the image is the spot at which the forger drilled into the coin. Tool marks on the bottom edge of the rim help bring attention to the area as well. They were likely caused by the counterfeiter removing extra molten metal that had gotten on the edge.
Successful transactions with : MICHAELDIXON, Manorcourtman, Bochiman, bolivarshagnasty, AUandAG, onlyroosies, chumley, Weiss, jdimmick, BAJJERFAN, gene1978, TJM965, Smittys, GRANDAM, JTHawaii, mainejoe, softparade, derryb
Bad transactions with : nobody to date
I would resubmit probably get an upgrade next time....
We all know that game...
or send to NGC
I've seen that 89-S in hand, it's a very skilled alteration.
Professional Numismatist. "It's like God, Family, Country, except Sticker, Plastic, Coin."
@ifthevamzarockin
Boy that is a kick to the chin for sure
What I've read about the 16-D dime is its the second most counterfeited of all US coins with the 09SVDB King of Lincoln's holding the number one spot.
Not to long ago there was a graded genuine SVDB that circulated the forum (forum's) that was more than questionably genuine, but I don't think it was ever re-submitted to prove it.
Just think of how many of these phonies are put away in collections that no one ever questioned its authenticity, thousands upon thousands of them, what a shame.
"I Prefer Dangerous Freedom Over Peaceful Slavery"
Thomas Jefferson!
I am pretty sure it was glued on, but I could not say for sure without seeing it in hand.
Just remember, it is only money. Count your blessings, and be thankful we are on the right side of the grass.
TD
I know that this embossing has been found done on what I'll call "Big Silver" & Nickels, being these coins are so large and thick, but! I don't know (???) if any example of smaller coins like Dimes & Cents has ever been found with an embossed mint mark (to date anyway).
"I Prefer Dangerous Freedom Over Peaceful Slavery"
Thomas Jefferson!
By the way Utah . . . . .look at the men's HS PV results from last week on Runnercard. New State Record of 16'9" from one of our kids!
Drunner
DRUNNER...16'9" is HUGE for a HS pole vaulter....Which state?
Acetone didn't effect the Mint Mark, and the only place the reeding appears disturbed is near the Mint Mark.
Solder maybe?
Recipient of the coveted "You Suck" award, April 2009 for cherrypicking a 1833 CBHD LM-5, and April 2022 for a 1835 LM-12, and again in Aug 2012 for picking off a 1952 FS-902.
Hello @UtahCoin
Firstly, we would like to thank you for being such an active member of our community and for raising an important topic. I would like to affirm that, should the coin have been submitted for reconsideration in-holder to allow for authentication of the original holder and the coin was then proven to have been inaccurately graded by our team, we would have fulfilled our commitment to our customers by honoring our guarantee.
However, without being able to confirm that this coin was purchased in an authentic holder, we are unable to verify the circumstances of this counterfeit.
Unfortunately, counterfeit holders do exist and we make every effort to improve our anti-counterfeiting technology year after year including the inclusion of NFC tags in every item graded by PCGS.
Should you have any questions or if there is further information I can provide, please feel free to reach out to me directly.
Heather Boyd
PCGS Senior Director of Marketing
I have heard that there are epoxy adhesives that will not be dissolved by acetone. No first hand knowledge of course.
I just don't think that a dime is thick enough to emboss a mint mark in.
TD
Appears there are products resistant to acetone
Kohesi Bond-product KB 1151 S-1. KB 1151 S-1 is a two-component, room temperature curing epoxy system. It offers superior resistance to various solvents, including acetone. It has been tested for immersion in various chemicals, such as toluene, gasoline, ethylene glycol and others for over a year without failure. The operating temperature ranges from -50°C to +150°C. Along with good chemical resistance, this product can quickly set-up at room temperature (~ 20 minutes). It offers excellent mechanical strength properties and dimensional stability. KB 1151 S-1 offers good flow properties. However, KB 1151 S-1 can be formulated in non-drip viscosity and also for higher temperature resistance. Our customer successfully tested KB 1151 S-1 in their application and got excellent results.
Successful transactions with : MICHAELDIXON, Manorcourtman, Bochiman, bolivarshagnasty, AUandAG, onlyroosies, chumley, Weiss, jdimmick, BAJJERFAN, gene1978, TJM965, Smittys, GRANDAM, JTHawaii, mainejoe, softparade, derryb
Bad transactions with : nobody to date
Cnn . . . . .
Utah, of all places. We have a niche of dedicated vaulters and a private coach/afficionado that has built a full Olympic vault facility in his backyard . . . . many of the local chix and guys practice part of the week there. Yup . . . . Runnercard has the data . . .he did it last week . . . beat the previous SR at 16'4" with a 16"6", then took it up to 16'9" . . . missed at 17'.
Drunner
We had the same sort of thing in Texas. Very cool.
Recipient of the coveted "You Suck" award, April 2009 for cherrypicking a 1833 CBHD LM-5, and April 2022 for a 1835 LM-12, and again in Aug 2012 for picking off a 1952 FS-902.
Drunner - He should have his pick of colleges, although I'm sure his private coach, along with his HS coach will steer him to a
good program. BYU is obviously a great program. I was captain of my cross crountry and track team in college, and still
follow it closely (although more track events than field events).
Thank you for explaining and addressing this issue.
Really
?
I have seen a "couple"...
Just making sure I am following this correctly...
You believe the insert was from a good slab and used with a fake one to holder this altered coin?
Did I miss an image of the reverse in the slab before you cracked it out? Just interested in that view as well.
Yes.
For insurance purposes, with slabbed coins, I just photograph the front of the slab.
Recipient of the coveted "You Suck" award, April 2009 for cherrypicking a 1833 CBHD LM-5, and April 2022 for a 1835 LM-12, and again in Aug 2012 for picking off a 1952 FS-902.
Was this coin (or at least the insert) ever in a past auction? I looked for it on Heritage, not there.
Not that I’m aware of.
Recipient of the coveted "You Suck" award, April 2009 for cherrypicking a 1833 CBHD LM-5, and April 2022 for a 1835 LM-12, and again in Aug 2012 for picking off a 1952 FS-902.
Maybe this is a topic for another thread, but I would argue that PCGS needs to update this policy to not require it to be in the slab if the slab was a gold shield. They claim that any gold shield slabbed coin can be positively identified by scanning it, thus this policy should no longer be necessary to be in the slab if it was a gold shield slab. Although that wouldn't have helped here either since it wasn't a gold shield slab. But this would be a good way to show that they stand behind the scanning technology.
Wow, over 4,500 views. Now if we each just chipped in a dollar ....
If someone goes to the effort to set up a "Go Fund Me" site I would be happy to contribute. In fact I wouldn't be surprised if PCGS wouldn't be happy to anonymously contribute as well as it would be a way to see equity and fairness accomplished without jeopardizing their understandable policy.
Subject coin in the middle:
Where and when did you buy the coin? Maybe some auctions a couple years prior to that time might have that coin.
It's funny that the cert # is still valid on the web site
Successful transactions with : MICHAELDIXON, Manorcourtman, Bochiman, bolivarshagnasty, AUandAG, onlyroosies, chumley, Weiss, jdimmick, BAJJERFAN, gene1978, TJM965, Smittys, GRANDAM, JTHawaii, mainejoe, softparade, derryb
Bad transactions with : nobody to date
I bought the coin last May from a very reputable dealer and long time friend. He believes he picked it up at a show. I checked several auction records and came up empty.
Someone pm’d me suggesting I return it to the dealer. I can’t in good conscious do that. I’m the one who bought it, and I have to take responsibility for my actions.
Recipient of the coveted "You Suck" award, April 2009 for cherrypicking a 1833 CBHD LM-5, and April 2022 for a 1835 LM-12, and again in Aug 2012 for picking off a 1952 FS-902.
Class is in session. And your class is unmatched.
I would let the dealer know so he could be wary of the individual who sold the coin to him.
Edit: oops looks like you already did that.
That is a very good point. An altered coin is not a counterfeit coin.
IS IT??
Pete
Oof!
Good policy. But not foolproof. I imagine that anything we can do to protect ourselves is justified.
But the problem is, it's not a 100% protection. Acetone ain't gonna catch an embossed mintmark Buffalo.
Pete
The reason embosses stuff gets through is because hardly anyone checks the edge.
That and the fact that if the coin is in a 2x2 that will hide the deception.
Pete