The Newer Fake PCGS holders are one of the latest Hobby Threats...

burfle23

It doesn't help that they target good certs with no on-line images.

The latest deceptions hitting collectors and Dealers alike are under-graded genuine coins in counterfeit PCGS holders. Without getting into the specific "tells" here I will show images of a particular recent high priced example compared to the researched genuine one sold in a 2020 GC auction.

The lower grade coin in bad holder:

The genuine holder/ graded example:

The slabbed comparisons:

And the labels:

More comparisons:

There have been others posted in this forum- it is truly a jungle out there ...

Best, Jack.

FlyingAl

Ok, that one is good. No doubt about that.

Kliao

Just by glancing at it, I would have thought it was real. Wow.

Zoins

Thanks for the post @burfle23. I'm disappointed, but unfortunately not surprised.

Makes me feel better about prioritizing coins with TrueViews, even common ones like this MS64 I picked up. Lack of a TrueView is a big negative for me.

1madman

The fake one looks more like a ms63

WilliamF

@Kliao said:
Just by glancing at it, I would have thought it was real. Wow.

I think it is a genuine example but not the one that was originally in that holder, with the right/wrong coin this could completely compromise the respectable TPG's reputation for quality control... scary!

@burfle23 said:
The latest deceptions hitting collectors and Dealers alike are under-graded genuine coins in counterfeit PCGS holders.

lilolme

For those interested here is a link to the previous thread discussing a similar holder.

https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/1077075/i-felt-obligated-to-warn-the-coin-collectors

DelawareDoons

It was just a matter of time before they cleaned up the font and placement issues. There's yet another reason why I prefer old holders, and will only buy new PCGS holders with TV's. I can pick out fake coins easy, but real coins in a high quality fake holder? Eh...

NGC's slab shots may suck in terms of sharable quality, but they're better than nothing security-wise.

Zoins

It would be great for TPGs to have both glamour and slab shots on cert verification.

MS66

@DelawareDoons said:
It was just a matter of time before they cleaned up the font and placement issues. There's yet another reason why I prefer old holders, and will only buy new PCGS holders with TV's. I can pick out fake coins easy, but real coins in a high quality fake holder? Eh...

I've begun to wonder how many fake slabs are in my collection. But I don't want to look. This is one more reason to stop buying coins. Or is it?

alaura22

@MS66 said:

@DelawareDoons said:
It was just a matter of time before they cleaned up the font and placement issues. There's yet another reason why I prefer old holders, and will only buy new PCGS holders with TV's. I can pick out fake coins easy, but real coins in a high quality fake holder? Eh...

I've begun to wonder how many fake slabs are in my collection. But I don't want to look. This is one more reason to stop buying coins. Or is it?

Or
Just another reason to buy CAC stickered coins!

thefinn

@alaura22 said:

@MS66 said:

@DelawareDoons said:
It was just a matter of time before they cleaned up the font and placement issues. There's yet another reason why I prefer old holders, and will only buy new PCGS holders with TV's. I can pick out fake coins easy, but real coins in a high quality fake holder? Eh...

I've begun to wonder how many fake slabs are in my collection. But I don't want to look. This is one more reason to stop buying coins. Or is it?

Or
Just another reason to buy CAC stickered coins!

If they can counterfeit a slab, they can counterfeit a sticker.

alaura22

@thefinn said:

@alaura22 said:

@MS66 said:

@DelawareDoons said:
It was just a matter of time before they cleaned up the font and placement issues. There's yet another reason why I prefer old holders, and will only buy new PCGS holders with TV's. I can pick out fake coins easy, but real coins in a high quality fake holder? Eh...

I've begun to wonder how many fake slabs are in my collection. But I don't want to look. This is one more reason to stop buying coins. Or is it?

Or
Just another reason to buy CAC stickered coins!

If they can counterfeit a slab, they can counterfeit a sticker.

I guess but now they have two things they have to deal with

burfle23

Sorry, wrong images...

P0CKETCHANGE

@burfle23 said:

@alaura22 said:

@MS66 said:

@DelawareDoons said:
It was just a matter of time before they cleaned up the font and placement issues. There's yet another reason why I prefer old holders, and will only buy new PCGS holders with TV's. I can pick out fake coins easy, but real coins in a high quality fake holder? Eh...

I've begun to wonder how many fake slabs are in my collection. But I don't want to look. This is one more reason to stop buying coins. Or is it?

Or
Just another reason to buy CAC stickered coins!

These are both the same coin, as far as I can tell. Are you suggesting that they aren’t?

burfle23

Sorry for any confusion- same coin thought to be an overgraded example in a counterfeit holder sold by the same group of sellers (example on the right).

ricko

Wow.... Getting really tough out there.... @burfle23 Thanks for the comparative pictures. Could you PM me all the PUP's? Cheers, RickO

JBN

That holder looks new enough to have the etched six character code. Perhaps PCGS could add a 'holder verification' entry field on the cert verification page, where a user could enter the code from the holder.
Earlier holders don't have the code. PCGS could offer a 'coding service' where they could etch the characters on the older holder.

Zoins

@burfle23 said:
Sorry for any confusion- same coin thought to be an overgraded example in a counterfeit holder sold by the same group of sellers (example on the right).

Is the seller the only indication that this might be a overgraded coin?

Some sellers mix up good and bad coins in their inventory to throw people off.

slider23

It appears that this counterfeiter may also be making the CAC sticker.

Sticker from 1951 S Franklin

Sticker from Genuine PCGS Holder

DelawareDoons

Yes, there are 100% fake CAC stickers out there. I let them know about it a couple months ago.

They use low feedback ebay accounts, very similar lighting, and a fake PCGS holder with possibly a fake CAC sticker.

They're probably reading this thread at some point, for what it is worth.

More stuff, same MO;

https://www.ebay.com/itm/334471646587

https://www.ebay.com/itm/384941110119

I have this pic saved because its particularly egregious... This is how they started, common dates, inflated grades, fake CAC stickers... Now they've moved onto better dates it seems.

slider23

There must be hundreds of these fakes sold. Here is another on for seller gradecoin99:

GC sold Genuine. Nice Example

gradecoin99 Fake

slider23

The font on the fake CAC stickers are the same on the 1901 O Morgan and 1951 S Franklin.

DelawareDoons

PCGS really should start imaging all slabs immediately like NGC does. This is one of the very few places where NGC certainly foresaw things better than PCGS.

thefinn

Looks like knowing how to grade is a useful skill to develop.

DelawareDoons

Low res but here's another.

Might date back to this;

https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/1049030/this-is-the-first-counterfeit-slab-with-cac-sticker-i-have-seen

lilolme

I wonder what happened to this:

https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/comment/13265434/#Comment_13265434

P0CKETCHANGE

This is definitely concerning and a reminder that—where there is a big market with money to be made—counterfeiting will happen (coins, sports cards, luxury fashion, etc.).

IMO, there is responsibility on all parties when transacting in the marketplace. “Caveat emptor” to the buyer, being educated and buying the coin and not the holder. The dealer community to be aware and vigilant of counterfeit slabs. Our hosts to innovate, as they have with Gold Shield, TrueViews, RFIDs, etc. Law enforcement to investigate fraudulent activity.

Be careful out there folks.

DelawareDoons

An example account so you can see the MO:

https://www.ebay.com/sch/gerdur57/m.html?item=394081571304&LH_Complete=1&LH_Sold=1&rt=nc&_trksid=p2046732.m1684

DelawareDoons

One thing I'll say about all this; the coins aren't really close to the assigned grades.

BUY THE COIN NOT THE HOLDER!

DelawareDoons

basetsb

Deleted.

DelawareDoons

This account was NARU'ed and the listings are gone but still show up in search.

DelawareDoons

Here's what I'd do; Exactly what PCGS already does with European-submitted Secure coins.

EuroViews!

UpGrayedd

Wow, that's some pretty troubling stuff right there. Thanks @burfle23 for sounding the alarm.

I agree with @DelawareDoons, it would be very helpful if PCGS would start imaging all slabs moving forward.

Elcontador1

In no particular order:
Look up the slab # and see if it's the same coin
Know how to grade
Only deal with people you believe to be reputable

Aercus

It would be nice if pcgs would let us look up the hidden alphanumeric on the side of the holder and verify whether it is correct (kind of like how a checksum works). Yes it would only work after you buy the coin, if we’re taking online, but it would still be helpful.

privatecoin

Question is are they working on counterfeiting the chip yet.

lilolme

@Aercus said:
It would be nice if pcgs would let us look up the hidden alphanumeric on the side of the holder and verify whether it is correct (kind of like how a checksum works). Yes it would only work after you buy the coin, if we’re taking online, but it would still be helpful.

As I recall pcgs has commented that this number is a manufactures number and not part of pcgs.
.
.
Edit: To correct my comment above as my memory failed me (again). Here are the previous threads and pcgs did not comment about the slab numbers which appear to be lot numbers (either mfg or pcgs).

https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/1055671/so-what-s-the-serial-type-number-etched-onto-the-bottom-of-slabs-mean

https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/1009420/interesting-alpha-code-on-slab-edge#latest
.
.
.

@privatecoin said:
Question is are they working on counterfeiting the chip yet.

In the previous thread pcgs claimed that the chip can not be counterfeited.

https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/comment/13265188/#Comment_13265188

However, there are millions of non-chip holders in the market place to counterfeit.

dcarr

@DelawareDoons said:

Something immediately didn't look right to me on this coin. And now I am sure.
The obverse looks like a genuine 1904 Morgan Dollar, but the subtle nuances of it look like a New Orleans product. Still, that is not proof of anything. The reverse is definitely a genuine San Francisco Mint Morgan Dollar.

But these two could not possibly exist together. The reason is that for San Francisco Morgan Dollars, there was a change in the reverse hub type in 1901. The coin pictured above has the reverse hub type of 1879-1901.

The C3 reverse hub was used from 1878-1900 (for Philadelphia Mint coins), and from 1879-1901 (for New Orleans and San Francisco Mint coins). The C4 reverse was used from 1900-1904 (on Philadelphia Mint coins), and from 1901-1904 (on New Orleans and San Francisco Mint coins).

The C3 reverse has a narrow gap between the Eagle's neck and wing. The C4 reverse has a wider gap. This page shows a side-by-side comparison: moonlightmint.com/VAM_privately_made/09.htm .

So the coin pictured above must be a "sandwich" (altered) coin made using the obverse of a 1904 (probably New Orleans) coin, artificially mated to the reverse of a common 1879-1901 San Francisco coin (probably an 1879, 1880, or 1881).

.

This next coin (an apparent 1880-O) has an 1880 obverse (probably from San Francisco) mated to a C4 New Orleans reverse from 1901-1904:

.

And one more example. The coin on the right is a genuine 1901-[P]. It has the typical "look" for genuine specimens of this date and mint. The coin on the right has overall details which are too bold for a 1901 Philadelphia. It has a 1901 obverse (probably from New Orleans) , but the reverse is a C3 Philadelphia from 1878-1900 (all genuine 1901-[P] Morgan Dollars have the C4 reverse):

.

So the rare dates are being faked by either "photoshop" image tricks, or by sandwiching different coins together (I assume the latter).

.

Aercus

@lilolme said:

@Aercus said:
It would be nice if pcgs would let us look up the hidden alphanumeric on the side of the holder and verify whether it is correct (kind of like how a checksum works). Yes it would only work after you buy the coin, if we’re taking online, but it would still be helpful.

As I recall pcgs has commented that this number is a manufactures number and not part of pcgs.

@privatecoin said:
Question is are they working on counterfeiting the chip yet.

In the previous thread pcgs claimed that the chip can not be counterfeited.

https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/comment/13265188/#Comment_13265188

However, there are millions of non-chip holders in the market place to counterfeit.

@lilolme said:

@Aercus said:
It would be nice if pcgs would let us look up the hidden alphanumeric on the side of the holder and verify whether it is correct (kind of like how a checksum works). Yes it would only work after you buy the coin, if we’re taking online, but it would still be helpful.

As I recall pcgs has commented that this number is a manufactures number and not part of pcgs.

Was not aware of that. Unfortunate! Appreciate the info

Relaxn

Masseto wines... Ornellaia has been taking anti counterfeiting measures for a long time.
Maybe PCGS can take a page from this book.
https://www.thedrinksbusiness.com/2010/03/super-tuscan-turns-to-anti-counterfeiting-technology/

PerryHall

@dcarr said:

So the rare dates are being faked by either "photoshop" image tricks, or by sandwiching different coins together (I assume the latter).

"Sandwiching" different coins together is nothing new. In the pre-third-party grading service era, a coin dealer tried to sell me a mid-circulated grade 1916-D dime in a Capital Plastic Coin Holder. I insisted on taking the holder apart. There was a 1916 dime with a 1941-D dime behind it. The dealer looked surprised. LOL.

lilolme

@PerryHall said:

@dcarr said:

So the rare dates are being faked by either "photoshop" image tricks, or by sandwiching different coins together (I assume the latter).

"Sandwiching" different coins together is nothing new. In the pre-third-party grading service era, a coin dealer tried to sell me a mid-circulated grade 1916-D dime in a Capital Plastic Coin Holder. I insisted on taking the holder apart. There was a 1916 dime with a 1941-D dime behind it. The dealer looked surprised. LOL.

This is the same 'technique' identified by @ifthevamzarockin in the previous thread. A little bit of a pattern.

https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/comment/13265681/#Comment_13265681

Edit:
@Aercus
I found this thread on it but I see pcgs didn't comment on this one.

https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/1055671/so-what-s-the-serial-type-number-etched-onto-the-bottom-of-slabs-mean

lilolme

@dcarr said:

@DelawareDoons said:

The C3 reverse hub was used from 1878-1900 (for Philadelphia Mint coins), and from 1879-1901 (for New Orleans and San Francisco Mint coins). The C4 reverse was used from 1900-1904 (on Philadelphia Mint coins), and from 1901-1904 (on New Orleans and San Francisco Mint coins).

According to my book and VAM World website:

The SF mint produce both C3 and C4 reverses for the years 1900 and 1901.
Here is the VAM source for the 1900 S.
http://www.vamworld.com/wiki/1900-S_VAMs
And one 1900 S VAM with C4
http://www.vamworld.com/wiki/1900-S_VAM-18

The Philadelphia mint produce both C3 and C4 reverses for the years 1900 and 1901.
http://www.vamworld.com/wiki/1901-P_VAMs
And one 1901 P VAM with C3
http://www.vamworld.com/wiki/1901-P_VAM-1

The New Orleans mint is a little tricky. While they are not all technically fully C4 for 1902 they do appear to all have the noted C4 wing gap. (So to me a C4). However, they identify a C4/C3 where the difference is a C4 reverse but with two berries like a C3. (Again to me a C4.)
http://www.vamworld.com/wiki/1902-O_VAMs
And the page for the C4 versus C4/C3 versus C3
http://www.vamworld.com/wiki/C4-C4C3-C3_Comps

retirednow

@Relaxn said:
Masseto wines... Ornellaia has been taking anti counterfeiting measures for a long time.
Maybe PCGS can take a page from this book.
https://www.thedrinksbusiness.com/2010/03/super-tuscan-turns-to-anti-counterfeiting-technology/

I thought that is what PCGS has done with their secure holder ?
https://www.pcgs.com/security

dcarr

@lilolme said:

@dcarr said:

@DelawareDoons said:

The C3 reverse hub was used from 1878-1900 (for Philadelphia Mint coins), and from 1879-1901 (for New Orleans and San Francisco Mint coins). The C4 reverse was used from 1900-1904 (on Philadelphia Mint coins), and from 1901-1904 (on New Orleans and San Francisco Mint coins).

According to my book and VAM World website:

The SF mint produce both C3 and C4 reverses for the years 1900 and 1901.
Here is the VAM source for the 1900 S.
http://www.vamworld.com/wiki/1900-S_VAMs
And one 1900 S VAM with C4
http://www.vamworld.com/wiki/1900-S_VAM-18

The Philadelphia mint produce both C3 and C4 reverses for the years 1900 and 1901.
http://www.vamworld.com/wiki/1901-P_VAMs
And one 1901 P VAM with C3
http://www.vamworld.com/wiki/1901-P_VAM-1

The New Orleans mint is a little tricky. While they are not all technically fully C4 for 1902 they do appear to all have the noted C4 wing gap. (So to me a C4). However, they identify a C4/C3 where the difference is a C4 reverse but with two berries like a C3. (Again to me a C4.)
http://www.vamworld.com/wiki/1902-O_VAMs
And the page for the C4 versus C4/C3 versus C3
http://www.vamworld.com/wiki/C4-C4C3-C3_Comps

Yes, some of those called "C4" are actually "C4" hubbed over "C3", but I consider those to be a C4 classification since they exhibit the wide neck-wing gap.

Also, I referred to the slated arrow feather and narrow neck-wing gap as "C3", but technically this group is comprised of "C1", "C2", and "C3" (all are similar and have the narrow neck-wing gap).

I was not aware of the (apparently rare) 1901-[P] with narrow neck-wing gap ("C3" hub type).
I was also not aware of the (apparently scarce) 1900-S with wide neck-wing gap ("C4" hub type).

Thanks for the information. I have corrected my reverse hub chart:
moonlightmint.com/VAM_privately_made/11.htm

Catbert

@burfle23 said:
It doesn't help that they target good certs with no on-line images.

The latest deceptions hitting collectors and Dealers alike are under-graded genuine coins in counterfeit PCGS holders. Without getting into the specific "tells" here I will show images of a particular recent high priced example compared to the researched genuine one sold in a 2020 GC auction.

The lower grade coin in bad holder:

The genuine holder/ graded example:

The slabbed comparisons:

And the labels:

More comparisons:

There have been others posted in this forum- it is truly a jungle out there ...

Best, Jack.

The bar code was printed askance as well.

yosclimber

The bar code looks like a pretty good match on this example.
On others we have discussed the bar code is often way off.

The coin in the bad holder could be one of the Chinese fakes, struck with an inappropriate reverse die.

burfle23

Another unfortunately purchased by my same dealer friend; he did get authorization to return this one...

Zoins

@burfle23 said:
Another unfortunately purchased by my same dealer friend; he did get authorization to return this one...

Good to know.

It has a sticker too.

We’re looking at silver here but I wonder how many gold coins are like this.