I don't know , but it doesn't look to be a match to this one thats PCGS certified.
The OP coin does not match at all to the PCGS cert 50053333 1795 BD-1 because it was struck from different obverse and reverse working dies.
The OP coin appears to match 1795 BD-4 $10, which could be validated with an overlay. That would still not verify authenticity, as it could be a well-made cast fake or transfer die fake, although certain attributes of the VLDS would be difficult to transfer to a fake as I stated in an earlier post. Both cast and transfer die fakes would have edge differences to the Taraszka eagle edge study which require in-hand inspection.
Robert Scot: Engraving Liberty - biography of US Mint's first chief engraver
The NGC and the Bass sites (hbrf.org) both have excellent photo libraries of early gold die varieties. As the OP says, if it is real, it is BD-4. Here are some photos of the date. It would be nice if the photo of the coin in question was higher resolution. To illustrate how hard it is to authenticate by photo, the 5s don’t quite seem to quite match up on the NGC and Bass coins! (and the OP differs a bit as well)
The fact that a new member to a facebook group is quickly trying to flip a rare gold coin raises too many red flags for me. People who don't think those are red flags have not done much buying and selling on social media before
The coin may be genuine but stolen.
It may be someone else's picture of a genuine coin.
I think the odds are higher that the transaction will result in a scam than that the coin is not genuine.
IMO Fake! Not an expert whatsoever. In comparison to the real coin, the Obverse, star touching Liberty's cap and reverse, wreath's leaves and the lettering aren't lining up and neither is the branch to the second "A" in America. Many, thing appear to be off.
@MonsterCoinz said:
The fact that a new member to a facebook group is quickly trying to flip a rare gold coin raises too many red flags for me. People who don't think those are red flags have not done much buying and selling on social media before
The coin may be genuine but stolen.
It may be someone else's picture of a genuine coin.
I think the odds are higher that the transaction will result in a scam than that the coin is not genuine.
I think you may have misunderstood, there is no transaction and no one was trying to flip the coin or sell the coin, it was a post asking for opinions and I've since gotten the backstory that does check out. If the coin was offered for sale by a new member with no references, the seller would have been heavily scrutinized and I probably would have removed the post from the group, I am an admin there.
@MonsterCoinz said:
The fact that a new member to a facebook group is quickly trying to flip a rare gold coin raises too many red flags for me. People who don't think those are red flags have not done much buying and selling on social media before
The coin may be genuine but stolen.
It may be someone else's picture of a genuine coin.
I think the odds are higher that the transaction will result in a scam than that the coin is not genuine.
I don’t remember seeing any indication that the person was “quickly trying to flip” the coin.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
@Tramp said:
IMO Fake! Not am expert whatsoever. In comparison to the real coin, the Obverse, star touching Liberty's cap and reverse, wreath's leaves and the lettering aren't lining up and neither is the branch to the second "A" in America. Many, thing appear to be off.
@Tramp said:
IMO Fake! Not am expert whatsoever. In comparison to the real coin, the Obverse, star touching Liberty's cap and reverse, wreath's leaves and the lettering aren't lining up and neither is the branch to the second "A" in America. Many, thing appear to be off.
BD-4
Gotcha!
Was comparing wrong image. This should be the correct one to compare to.
@Cladiator said:
Like @Meltdown I also don't know jack but I'm always suspicious of early American gold of this caliber that is raw.
Why? There is no law that says every expensive coin has to be slabbed.
Did you see my thread the other day about dinner with friends? The Octagonal Pan-Pac was not the rarest item viewed that evening. Everything was raw. The collector who own that particular piece, who is older and wiser than I am, prefers them that way.
Because suspicion is healthy when warranted and when dealing with high dollar amounts, it certainly is warranted.
I would be suspicious of a raw Octo Pan-Pac as well. In the case of your friend my suspicion would have been alleviated when I was able to meet to the owner, see he is an old and wise collector and he explained the valid reason the coin was raw. Valid facts presented, suspicion eliminated.
It's due diligence to be suspicious and investigate to ensure things are what they are being represented as. To not be suspicious and investigate would be foolhardy. Suspicion is not a statement that something is counterfeit, modified, bad, being sold as something it's not. Suspicion is simply not knowing the pertinent facts and wondering what those facts are and why they have not been presented.
There is an old saying: "Trust everyone, but cut the cards."
I interpret this as meaning "Give everybody the benefit of the doubt, but at the same time avail yourself of every reasonable means to protect yourself." If you shuffle the cards and I cut them, that does not mean that I suspect you of cheating. If I offer you a raw $100,000 coin and you request that it be slabbed by a third party before the deal goes through, that is a reasonable request.
However, I am very uncomfortable with the negative connotations of the word "suspicious." To me, "suspicious" means "guilty until proven innocent." Let me relate a personal story. Ten years ago I married the second love of my life, a career Foreign Service Diplomat who had, as a single mother, adopted four beautiful girls from Central and South America. After we married and had settled into a house of our own, one of the older girls was giving one of the younger girls a driving lesson in our new neighborhood, slowly driving up and down the streets in an obvious Mom-mobile, when one of the new neighbors waved them over and started yelling at them "I'm a member of the Neighborhood Watch! We keep an eye out for suspicious people! You don't belong here!" I can only assume that she did this because of the color of their skin.
If you want to say that it is "Curious" that an expensive coin has not been slabbed, then I would have no problem with that. However, I ask that you not condemn it with faint damns by saying that it is "suspicious."
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.
In my opinion two young girls driving around slowly in a neighborhood they are not recognized in is suspicious behavior regardless of their skin color or the type of vehicle. It's apparent you and I have different connotations of the word. And that's ok.
From OP first post:
“The person who inquired about this coin said they bought it and "didnt know much about the coin" and have begun to do their research now, lol.”
I think the injection of a personal racial incident on this topic is an inappropriate comparison. No one objected to the personal attributes of the owner of the coin, only the aggregate that it was quite rare, unslabbed, and a novice “bought” it and now wants to know if it is genuine.
There is another saying, “Go with your gut.”
Assuming it is genuine, color me suspicious that it is a stolen coin until proven otherwise.
To the point of the coin being raw, it is always a personal choice for the owner. However, it doesn't seem reasonable that such an owner would then try to sell that quite expensive coin on a social media platform while it's still raw. It is also "suspicious" that someone would buy that coin absent any knowledge about its legitimacy and then announce that they were going to "research" it.
The whole story sounds more "suspicious" than "curious" no matter how you choose to interpret those words.
As for the coin, I'm a total novice in this realm and the actual number of these I've held in my hand is zero! That said, I can still compare images and looking at the analysis that @burfle23 and others have done, it looks like an authentic BD-4. Either it's a fantastic copy of an original (which brings up other issues) or it's genuine.
If genuine, this begs the question of why someone would plunk down a significant amount of cash for a coin they know nothing about. As I said earlier, there are plenty of people with more money than sense but I take this to be more the exception than the rule. Also, the collector base for this material is extremely thin... if this coin had previously been certified and then stolen/cracked, wouldn't there be an insurance claim? This of course assumes that the owner has knowledge of a theft. If it's some little old lady liquidating her late husband's assets then she may not know what she had. Of course, this is a lot of assumptions... and we all know what happens when we "assume"...
Collecting: Dansco 7070; Middle Date Large Cents (VF-AU); Box of 20;
@Maywood said:
To the point of the coin being raw, it is always a personal choice for the owner. However, it doesn't seem reasonable that such an owner would then try to sell that quite expensive coin on a social media platform while it's still raw. It is also "suspicious" that someone would buy that coin absent any knowledge about its legitimacy and then announce that they were going to "research" it.
The whole story sounds more "suspicious" than "curious" no matter how you choose to interpret those words.
As I posted previously, I haven’t read anything indicating that the person was trying to sell the coin.
In fact, in reply to another poster, @DeplorableDan (the OP) posted “I think you may have misunderstood, there is no transaction and no one was trying to flip the coin or sell the coin, it was a post asking for opinions and I've since gotten the backstory that does check out.”
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Comments
@gumby1234 said:
The OP coin does not match at all to the PCGS cert 50053333 1795 BD-1 because it was struck from different obverse and reverse working dies.
The OP coin appears to match 1795 BD-4 $10, which could be validated with an overlay. That would still not verify authenticity, as it could be a well-made cast fake or transfer die fake, although certain attributes of the VLDS would be difficult to transfer to a fake as I stated in an earlier post. Both cast and transfer die fakes would have edge differences to the Taraszka eagle edge study which require in-hand inspection.
The NGC and the Bass sites (hbrf.org) both have excellent photo libraries of early gold die varieties. As the OP says, if it is real, it is BD-4. Here are some photos of the date. It would be nice if the photo of the coin in question was higher resolution. To illustrate how hard it is to authenticate by photo, the 5s don’t quite seem to quite match up on the NGC and Bass coins! (and the OP differs a bit as well)
(NGC, Bass, OP):
Inconclusive.
Images to a known one:
But based on the images, the coin looks genuine.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
The fact that a new member to a facebook group is quickly trying to flip a rare gold coin raises too many red flags for me. People who don't think those are red flags have not done much buying and selling on social media before
The coin may be genuine but stolen.
It may be someone else's picture of a genuine coin.
I think the odds are higher that the transaction will result in a scam than that the coin is not genuine.
Check out my iPhone app SlabReader!
IMO Fake! Not an expert whatsoever. In comparison to the real coin, the Obverse, star touching Liberty's cap and reverse, wreath's leaves and the lettering aren't lining up and neither is the branch to the second "A" in America. Many, thing appear to be off.
USAF (Ret.) 1985 - 2005. E-4B Aircraft Maintenance Crew Chief and Contracting Officer.
My current Registry sets:
✓ Everyman Mint State Carson City Morgan Dollars (1878 – 1893)
✓ Everyman Mint State Lincoln Cents (1909 – 1958)
✓ Morgan Dollar GSA Hoard (1878 – 1891)
I think you may have misunderstood, there is no transaction and no one was trying to flip the coin or sell the coin, it was a post asking for opinions and I've since gotten the backstory that does check out. If the coin was offered for sale by a new member with no references, the seller would have been heavily scrutinized and I probably would have removed the post from the group, I am an admin there.
Founder- Peak Rarities
Website
Instagram
Facebook
I don’t remember seeing any indication that the person was “quickly trying to flip” the coin.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
BD-4
Founder- Peak Rarities
Website
Instagram
Facebook
@DeplorableDan said:
Gotcha!
Was comparing wrong image. This should be the correct one to compare to.
USAF (Ret.) 1985 - 2005. E-4B Aircraft Maintenance Crew Chief and Contracting Officer.
My current Registry sets:
✓ Everyman Mint State Carson City Morgan Dollars (1878 – 1893)
✓ Everyman Mint State Lincoln Cents (1909 – 1958)
✓ Morgan Dollar GSA Hoard (1878 – 1891)
So is the comparison I did...
There is an old saying: "Trust everyone, but cut the cards."
I interpret this as meaning "Give everybody the benefit of the doubt, but at the same time avail yourself of every reasonable means to protect yourself." If you shuffle the cards and I cut them, that does not mean that I suspect you of cheating. If I offer you a raw $100,000 coin and you request that it be slabbed by a third party before the deal goes through, that is a reasonable request.
However, I am very uncomfortable with the negative connotations of the word "suspicious." To me, "suspicious" means "guilty until proven innocent." Let me relate a personal story. Ten years ago I married the second love of my life, a career Foreign Service Diplomat who had, as a single mother, adopted four beautiful girls from Central and South America. After we married and had settled into a house of our own, one of the older girls was giving one of the younger girls a driving lesson in our new neighborhood, slowly driving up and down the streets in an obvious Mom-mobile, when one of the new neighbors waved them over and started yelling at them "I'm a member of the Neighborhood Watch! We keep an eye out for suspicious people! You don't belong here!" I can only assume that she did this because of the color of their skin.
If you want to say that it is "Curious" that an expensive coin has not been slabbed, then I would have no problem with that. However, I ask that you not condemn it with faint damns by saying that it is "suspicious."
In my opinion two young girls driving around slowly in a neighborhood they are not recognized in is suspicious behavior regardless of their skin color or the type of vehicle. It's apparent you and I have different connotations of the word. And that's ok.
From OP first post:
“The person who inquired about this coin said they bought it and "didnt know much about the coin" and have begun to do their research now, lol.”
I think the injection of a personal racial incident on this topic is an inappropriate comparison. No one objected to the personal attributes of the owner of the coin, only the aggregate that it was quite rare, unslabbed, and a novice “bought” it and now wants to know if it is genuine.
There is another saying, “Go with your gut.”
Assuming it is genuine, color me suspicious that it is a stolen coin until proven otherwise.
Looks good to me, too.
Surface, luster and "fabric" look genuine as do the slight adjustment marks near the rims.
But always best to make such determinations with coin in hand. First thing that I'd do then was weigh it.
To the point of the coin being raw, it is always a personal choice for the owner. However, it doesn't seem reasonable that such an owner would then try to sell that quite expensive coin on a social media platform while it's still raw. It is also "suspicious" that someone would buy that coin absent any knowledge about its legitimacy and then announce that they were going to "research" it.
The whole story sounds more "suspicious" than "curious" no matter how you choose to interpret those words.
As for the coin, I'm a total novice in this realm and the actual number of these I've held in my hand is zero! That said, I can still compare images and looking at the analysis that @burfle23 and others have done, it looks like an authentic BD-4. Either it's a fantastic copy of an original (which brings up other issues) or it's genuine.
If genuine, this begs the question of why someone would plunk down a significant amount of cash for a coin they know nothing about. As I said earlier, there are plenty of people with more money than sense but I take this to be more the exception than the rule. Also, the collector base for this material is extremely thin... if this coin had previously been certified and then stolen/cracked, wouldn't there be an insurance claim? This of course assumes that the owner has knowledge of a theft. If it's some little old lady liquidating her late husband's assets then she may not know what she had. Of course, this is a lot of assumptions... and we all know what happens when we "assume"...
Successful BST transactions with: SilverEagles92; Ahrensdad; Smitty; GregHansen; Lablade; Mercury10c; copperflopper; whatsup; KISHU1; scrapman1077, crispy, canadanz, smallchange, robkool, Mission16, ranshdow, ibzman350, Fallguy, Collectorcoins, SurfinxHI, jwitten, Walkerguy21D, dsessom.
As I posted previously, I haven’t read anything indicating that the person was trying to sell the coin.
In fact, in reply to another poster, @DeplorableDan (the OP) posted “I think you may have misunderstood, there is no transaction and no one was trying to flip the coin or sell the coin, it was a post asking for opinions and I've since gotten the backstory that does check out.”
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.