Does this eagle look funny at all or am I just being paranoid?

TxCollector

I recently won this off of eBay a couple of days ago. The barcode scan turned up the correct coin but when I was looking at the font the 1908 on the obverse and ten dollars on the reverse looked off. I know that I definitely should have scrutinized before the auction ended but I've been caught up with work trying to get things taken care of before the holidays. Appreciate anyone's thoughts so that I can send it back if this looks suspicious to others. Thanks!

https://www.ebay.com/itm/275541135315?hash=item4027880fd3:g:2lwAAOSwhXBjc6UX&amdata=enc:AQAHAAAAsErmcwZyB9mOKTN4vYWPD9QP0T7bwmSFANuJ0Lcbh/Lfo4Und9NpJg87Zb2kvpGjPyrHwurTAsU48b8BuUUzA/mZUTFHxke7o9d45MtOhk1mzGGg70s44ZitioT8lneJgnLlY+JL0uomg6Y5Q1+o0j93UH9c2WHDkFTJ3I5KY9mEMsHmYc6abf2qc+8SdC1Y8/2k1YYNrKn487eKOmlQgdlzDKX1hGhSQ1FGiVo8Ilw|tkp:Bk9SR-71qLefYQ&nma=true&si=WBgBms3lxe6DXF5dURSl6EThXTo%3D&orig_cvip=true&nordt=true&rt=nc&_trksid=p2047675.l2557

PerryHall

Hard to tell from the seller's pics but I don't see anything that would raise a red flag. Once you get the coin, please post some better pics.

lilolme

The top one is from the pcgs museum of holders and the bottom is the eBay. I tried to get them the same size.

https://www.pcgs.com/holdermuseum/Gen4.0

.
Edit - I have several of these and there are some minor differences. This one is a little closer to the eBay.
.

TxCollector

Hmm, looking at the label itself that font looks slightly different. The 5s go straight across on the pic from the museum and the semi colon is different as well. When I originally mentioned the font, I was talking about on the coin itself and might have used the wrong terminology. I should get the coin in a few days and will post better pics of it.

TxCollector

Ah, seeing that second pic after the edit makes me feel better lol.

lilolme

@jeffas1974 said:
Ah, seeing that second pic after the edit makes me feel better lol.

Same thought I had when looking through the ones I have. I will check to see how many are like the one I took a picture of. I was also seeing the spacing between letter rows as different but then mine matched the eBay one better and not the museum.

PS - I understood your usage of font applying to the coin but just thought if the holder is no good, then... but looking better now.

Edit: I checked two boxes and had 7 of these and they all look like the one I took a picture of. Perhaps pcgs should change that museum of holder for this one. I will note that I have some with the bar code on the front but still has the series/coin and they have the other 5 and tighter spacing (due to bar code). So maybe the museum one is a very late one for the slab type.

ricko

Seems to be a legit coin..... Such a shame when we have to examine label font etc. in this time of prolific fakes. Cheers, RickO

LanceNewmanOCC

TxCollector

Thanks everyone for taking the time to provide your input.

TxCollector

I hope that everyone has had a good holidays so far. I just got back in the country yesterday so I had to put off receiving the UPS delivery until today. It sounded like most of you all thought that the coin was legit but I figured I'd close the loop and post pics since there were a couple of folks that thought it was a good idea to have better ones to look at than what the seller provided. I'm crossing my fingers that my not great picture taking skills offer some improvement over the seller pics. Thanks!

edit: after refreshing my memory by taking a glance at LanceNewmanOCC's pics that he pulled from eBay I don't think mine are much different lol.

LanceNewmanOCC

@jeffas1974 said:
I hope that everyone has had a good holidays so far. I just got back in the country yesterday so I had to put off receiving the UPS delivery until today. It sounded like most of you all thought that the coin was legit but I figured I'd close the loop and post pics since there were a couple of folks that thought it was a good idea to have better ones to look at than what the seller provided. I'm crossing my fingers that my not great picture taking skills offer some improvement over the seller pics. Thanks!
edit: after refreshing my memory by taking a glance at LanceNewmanOCC's pics that he pulled from eBay I don't think mine are much different lol.

there is SOME truth to that BUT you posted pics of the holder which counts for a lot.

gumby1234

I don't like the look of it.

Project Numismatics

Your pictures aren’t great, but I don’t immediately see anything that’s cause for concern. What specifically are you concerned about?

If you are still concerned, I recommend taking it with you to a large coin show and showing it to a major dealer or two and tell them your concern and see what they say. Sometimes PCGS has an expert on hand at major shows to provide free opinions (e.g. Chicago ANA).

spyglassdesign

From coinfacts:

Yours:

Coinfacts:

Yours:

spyglassdesign

Just based on those pictures I don't personally see anything off. Perhaps someone with more knowledge can see something.

Project Numismatics

@spyglassdesign said:
From coinfacts:

Yours:

Coinfacts:

Yours:

What is your point? The OP’s coin has a weak strike - and is graded commensurately. You’re showing a high grade example from CoinFacts.

spyglassdesign

@J2035 said:

@spyglassdesign said:
From coinfacts:

Yours:

Coinfacts:

Yours:

What is your point? The OP’s coin has a weak strike - and is graded commensurately. You’re showing a high grade example from CoinFacts.

He was concerned about the 'TEN DOLLARS' and '1908' in the op. I was pointing out that there doesn't appear to be any discrepancies I can see. I wasn't comparing them for strike or anything else.

BillJones

I have a standard rule for Internet coin purchases. If the photos are not good, I pass instantly.

In this case, the photos of the coin are very small and totally inadequate for making judgments about grade and authenticity. Usually when I see offerings like this, I am suspicious that the seller is hiding something.

Comparing your photos with piece from “Coin Facts,” I think you coin lacks the crispness that it should have. The fine details look fuzzy. That concerns me.

I have an NGC MS-66 graded example of this date. I’ll post pictures tomorrow to give you some more perspective.

Project Numismatics

@BillJones said:
I have a standard rule for Internet coin purchases. If the photos are not good, I pass instantly.

In this case, the photos of the coin are very small and totally inadequate for making judgments about grade and authenticity. Usually when I see offerings like this, I am suspicious that the seller is hiding something.

Comparing your photos with piece from “Coin Facts,” I think you coin lacks the crispness that it should have. The fine details look fuzzy. That concerns me.

I have an NGC MS-66 graded example of this date. I’ll post pictures tomorrow to give you some more perspective.

Do you suspect this is a fake coin in a real holder or a fake coin in a fake holder?

spyglassdesign

@BillJones said:

Comparing your photos with piece from “Coin Facts,” I think you coin lacks the crispness that it should have. The fine details look fuzzy. That concerns me.

I'd guess that has more to do with lighting and the camera more than the coin itself... Without better pictures the ops best bet is probably to compare to coinfacts photos (and yours when you post them). Ultimately he may have to send it to pcgs for validation...

PerryHall

@spyglassdesign You are comparing a No Motto 1908 $10 from Coin Facts to a With Motto 1908 $10. The design was modified between the two designs. The OP's coin shows nothing that would lead me to believe that it's not genuine but we need better pics to make a final judgement.

MFeld

While better images could help, I don’t see anything of concern in the ones provided.

TxCollector

I’ll see if I can take better pics with my actual camera when I get home from work today.

With regard to the seller, I’m not worried that they were trying to knowingly pass along a fake since I bought this from one of the weekly auctions that the state of Maryland sells from unclaimed safety deposit boxes. There’s always still the possibility that they unknowingly sold a fake that the former renter of the sdb didn’t realize was fake as well.

BillJones

There are some subtle differences between the 1907-8 No Motto and the 1908-33 With Motto gold eagles. Henry Herring, who was part of the Augustus St. Gaudens artists group, executed the 1907-8 design. The big difference is in the hair detail for Ms. Liberty. This coin is a PCGS MS-64, CAC.

Charles Barber executed the dies for the 1908-33 With Motto pieces. They have more and sharper detail.

NGC graded this coin MS-66. You coin, as an MS-62, will have more marks and perhaps less luster, but the basic design details should be the same.

Here is another take on the design. This 1913 dated piece is an NGC MS-63.

spyglassdesign

@PerryHall said:
@spyglassdesign You are comparing a No Motto 1908 $10 from Coin Facts to a With Motto 1908 $10. The design was modified between the two designs. The OP's coin shows nothing that would lead me to believe that it's not genuine but we need better pics to make a final judgement.

Yes I realized that after I posted, nonetheless the elements of ops concern, the date and ten dollars, appear unchanged regardless, and look the same to me in his pics and the ones I posted, and Bill's excellent pictures for that matter.

TxCollector

Ok, so I think that from reading the posts above and looking at the images provided by BillJones that my issue stemmed from comparing the lettering and date between a No Motto vs my Motto. Unfortunately, my picture taking skills need some work (perhaps a 2023 New Year's resolution upcoming) but here's the best of the bunch that I took which is of the reverse. Thanks again everyone for taking the time to provide opinions.