Possible proof Morgan?

logger7

This is an auction lot that looks to me as though it may be a proof.

Sanddollar

Not a proof as the rims tell the story.
On a curious side note: Why is this coin stapled to the sheet of paper?

logger7

It's damaged, not sure how.

DoubleEagle59

I don't think so.

ifthevamzarockin

I don't think it's a proof.

hummingbird_coins

Is that a die scratch or some sort of die testing mark? It looks like it could be raised.

gumby1234

Definitely not a proof. More likely a polished coin thats retoned.

logger7

The auctioneer described as proof-like, it somehow seemed more than that to me.

WinLoseWin

I'm not certain of it being genuine even aside from the raised line.

Enlarging the 2nd photo of reverse, there appear to be tiny raised dots on the wreath and some in the field between the wreath an AMERICA.

Also not fond of the leaf weakness merging with the field seen in the group above ON in ONE among some other places.

Could be real but would not trust it without seeing in person.

telephoto1

Asian fake that's been chemically toned.

conrad99

Why is this coin stapled to the sheet of paper?

So it doesn't roll off the table and give itself away with the wrong sort of 'ring' when it hits the floor...

Also not fond of the leaf weakness merging with the field seen in the group above ON in ONE among some other places.

Sharp eyes!

logger7

The cataloguer on this auction who is a dentist but moonlights in this line of work described the 1883" "...looks like a barely circulated frosted PL with toning".

cameonut2011

Not only do I not think it is a real proof, It looks like a counterfeit to me.

jmlanzaf

Not a proof. But horrible pictures. Doesn't even look PL.

I don't know what that staple looking thing on the reverse is.

Davidk7

@jmlanzaf said:
Not a proof. But horrible pictures. Doesn't even look PL.

I don't know what that staple looking thing on the reverse is.

it's probably a scratch that raised the metal. Do people on here actually believe that someone was able to staple a coin into place ? Lol

jesbroken

Is it possibly a strike thru? Doesn't look like a scratch to me. JMO
Jim

jmlanzaf

@Davidk7 said:

@jmlanzaf said:
Not a proof. But horrible pictures. Doesn't even look PL.

I don't know what that staple looking thing on the reverse is.

it's probably a scratch that raised the metal. Do people on here actually believe that someone was able to staple a coin into place ? Lol

No one thinks it's an actual staple. However it looks like a staple so we are referring to it that way. It does not look like a scratch. It looks more like a die gouge but it is quite prominent she would be a known VAM if it were. Hence the suggestion by some that the coin is fake.

jmlanzaf

@jesbroken said:
Is it possibly a strike thru? Doesn't look like a scratch to me. JMO
Jim

Looks raised??

jesbroken

Does to me. With the light on the breast, it appears to me to be a shadow to the left of the scratch. JMO
Jim

jmlanzaf

@jesbroken said:
Is it possibly a strike thru? Doesn't look like a scratch to me. JMO
Jim

Looks raised??> @jesbroken said:

Does to me. With the light on the breast, it appears to me to be a shadow to the left of the scratch. JMO
Jim

Yes. A strike through wouldn't be raised. It would have to be a die gouge, wouldn't it?

jesbroken

Yes, a die gouge would be raised, but then there should be more of these and a VAM would be evident. My thoughts. If a piece of wire was between the planchet and die, wouldn't it be raised to some extent? Not my area, so excuse any misguided thoughts.
Jim

FredWeinberg

That line on the reverse is a cut – not a struck through or any type of possible error

jesbroken

Thank you, Fred. Great to have your opinion. As I said, I'm not familiar with this area, so not very credible, but just with an uneducated guess. My bad.
Jim

JBK

@jesbroken said:
Yes, a die gouge would be raised, but then there should be more of these and a VAM would be evident. My thoughts. If a piece of wire was between the planchet and die, wouldn't it be raised to some extent? Not my area, so excuse any misguided thoughts.
Jim

Not possible. If it was raised then that means the die never made it down to the surface of the planchet, and no details would be struck up.

In order for the die's design to be struck into the surface, the foreign object would need to have been pushed into the surface of the planchet. The visible parts should be surface level.

Davidk7

@jesbroken @jmlanzaf Here's the same type of damage on a bust half I used to own.

jacrispies

I'll go out on a limb and say genuine proof. Those rims are way too square for a business strike. Additionally, it has the common look of a lightly circulated proof morgan with very little bag marks.

@Sanddollar said:
Not a proof as the rims tell the story.
On a curious side note: Why is this coin stapled to the sheet of paper?

@jmlanzaf said:

No one thinks it's an actual staple.

At least one person thinks it is a staple lol

jmlanzaf

@jacrispies said:
I'll go out on a limb and say genuine proof. Those rims are way too square for a business strike. Additionally, it has the common look of a lightly circulated proof morgan with very little bag marks.

@Sanddollar said:
Not a proof as the rims tell the story.
On a curious side note: Why is this coin stapled to the sheet of paper?

@jmlanzaf said:

No one thinks it's an actual staple.

At least one person thinks it is a staple lol

I'm pretty sure they were kidding

logger7

Curiously, the cataloguer didn't see any reason to mention the damage on the reverse, though saw it as prooflike and not a counterfeit.

Morgan13

@jacrispies said:
I'll go out on a limb and say genuine proof. Those rims are way too square for a business strike. Additionally, it has the common look of a lightly circulated proof morgan with very little bag marks.

Looks to be a wire rim too.
Might be worth a small wager but I wouldn't go overboard

Clackamas1

I think the coin has been whizzed.