***FINAL UPDATE/RESOLUTION*** Back From Grading - 1901S $10 Liberty - From An Estate
RichR
Posts: 3,881 ✭✭✭✭✭
Story to follow...thoughts?
Predictions?
0
RichR
Posts: 3,881 ✭✭✭✭✭
Comments
VF35
XF40. Not worth getting slabbed since it's essentially worth bullion value. If the coin has sentimental value, Capital Plastics make some very nice holders.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
Another thing to add...my father-in-law had it 50+ years...
Had it graded for estate valuation purposes.
If real, and not details looks VF35 at best.
VF30 Details
Dave
Agree with Dave 99B above. Coin looks cleaned.
"Seu cabra da peste,
"Sou Mangueira......."
OK...so here's the verdict..."NOT GENUINE"
So never having had this happen to a submission,,,is that the same as Counterfeit???
And should I also assume it contains no gold?
Never expected a 1901S to be manipulated...so I never gave it a second look!?!?
I know you're disappointed.
It probably is made of gold, if not the amount of purity used for a genuine coin.
peacockcoins
Dosn't look genuine to me anyway
I'm also surprised because like I said...it seems like a rather pedestrian coin/year to fake or manipulate
Choice VF
not genuine = counterfeit
it may be real gold. someone needs to xrf gun it
That's a fairly poor counterfeit.
In honor of the memory of Cpl. Michael E. Thompson
It may not, why use 90% gold to fake a common coin. What would be the upside.
For those who said it's counterfeit, as always, please explain to the rest of us what are the tells?
not necessarily 90%
dunno how old it is but some old, old counterfeits looking like collector's gold were sold abroad made from gold so people could essentially smuggle some gold home
dunno if that's a possibility here
stars on obverse and some letters in U S of A are "wonky" - last S is states // first A in america
more
pull up the 1901 S $10 in coinfacts and compare side by side with an eye for fine detail
https://www.pcgs.com/coinfacts/coin/1901-s-10/8749
This is one of those times when it's hard to point out one thing in particular to identify it as counterfeit, it just triggered my "spidey senses". If I had to choose one thing to compare to a genuine coin, it would be the lack of detail between the eagle's legs.
Young Numismatist • My Toned Coins
Life is roadblocks. Don't let nothing stop you, 'cause we ain't stopping. - DJ Khaled
big one!
Hopefully the chocolate part stood the test of time.
Sorry, couldn't help it. 😊
At least you know what ya got!
This item was in my father in law's possession for at least 60 or more years...so it's not new by any stretch.
I'm just intrigued by the fact that somebody produced a fake 1901-S $10?
I searched and I didn't really find any references to such an item out there. I have no doubt it's "not genuine" as indicated by the graders, but this took some effort for minimal gain (gold $30/ounce) back in the day.
git er gunned
Back around the late 1950s, early 1960s there were a huge amount of counterfeit gold coins made in Beirut Lebanon to be imported into the US to get around the laws of importing gold into the US. The exception in the law was you could import numismatic US gold coins. The gold content of these fake gold coins was very close to what real US gold were. Usually only common dates were made to avoid suspicion.
Life member of ANA
This is not that. This is a contemporary cft. in a base metal with a gold coating. It is often seen in lower grades exposing the copper content on the high points. a well known copy. J.P.
I think that it’s genuine, but at one of the last coin shows I attended a dealer was offering well circulated common dates like this for 99% of melt. It’s not worth it to have it graded.
For those saying this is "contemporary"...this came out of a safe deposit box after 50-60 years...from an estate.
Were base metal "copies" being cranked out that long ago?
And I do accept that it's "not genuine"...but this was absolutely not recently produced.
PS...I do plan to bring it in to a good jeweler sooner rather than later to be tested for gold content...and I'll let you know the verdict.
If it was a piece made of base metal that is plated I think that you would see the base metal showing. It doesn't. I don't see anything that says "1960s Middle East counterfeit" to me. Those pieces were almost always in better condition. It's not worth the grading fees, but even so, which the price of gold at $2,850 to $2,950, it's still worth over $1,100 easy.
Better lighting...better pics...with edges...no obvious plating wear...
Like I said previously...as it was to value an estate, I didn't give it a good second look before sending it off for grading.
My jaw actually hit the floor when the results came back.
it's not a recent counterfeit
@RichR
A "Contemporary Counterfeit" means it was made around the time that the actual coin was minted. So a 1901-S $10 gold Contemporary Counterfeit coin would have been made in the early 1900s.
Life member of ANA
...and fwiw some people collect contemporary counterfeits. I'm not one of them, so I can't tell you what this is worth as a counterfeit. More than $0, anyway.
Yes, base metal fakes were made. I would expect debased more than base, however.
Weight?
Thickness compared to a genuine $10 Lib?
Why is submission necessary to "value" the estate?
Well... If the coin comes back as counterfeit, that would surely affect the value.
That clearly wasn't what the OP had in mind... but in hindsight it really did make a difference.
It was probably part of the influx of counterfeit gold coins that flooded the country beginning in the 1950's. At the time, it was thought that most of these counterfeit coins were made in Lebanon but some came from Italy and Hong Kong. Most were made with the full weight and fineness of gold and the profit came from the numismatic premium these coins carried at the time. Even if the OP's coin was real, it would still only be worth melt value, so its authenticity doesn't really make too much of a difference as far as the value goes.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
The favorite of the 1950s and ‘60s counterfeiters was the gold dollar. The 1853, which is the most common date of all, was their most frequent choice. It made the real thing harder to sell. The gold dollar offered the biggest bang for the buck. It contained very little gold and much more relative numismatic value.
And whether it came back genuine or not, the value of the coin didn't change but the value of the estate dropped by the submission fees.
They also made a lot of counterfeit $3 gold coins. They concentrated on gold coins where the numismatic premium was high in relation to the melt value of the coin.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
And quarter eagles.
I recall Dave Bowers stating he completed a full date and mm set of fake Indian quarter eagles back in the 70’s when they were prevalent.
Mushy details, my first thought was also counterfeit
This is not a Beirut counterfeit. They had much better die quality, and are always correct weight and gold fineness (if not slightly over).
Again, this is a well known contemporary CFT. Not Genuine, Not 1950's-70's. These exist as circulated copies meaning made 1901-1920's. J.P.
Do you have any records as to weight and specific gravity?
Genuine or fake it has been very harshly cleaned.
No Tom I don't, I think I have one in my cft gold collection. Not immediately accessible. Michael Fahey that they are of
low grade 10% ish or copper with gold layer or hvy plate. Circulated coins show copper on high points. Given the same volume they should be light. Prob made from circ 01-S as none show great detail. Not really worthy of documenting S.G. J.P.
UPDATE...UPDATE...UPDATE
As per the comments of many on this thread...I brought this "item" into a large jewelry store...and was right up front about the "not genuine" TPG assessment.
The jeweler looked at it, weighted it, looked at it again...and then ran various tests on it.
The verdict: It's gold to the correct weight and worth approx. $1,500.
So whatever this is and who produced it, and why, and when???? A mystery.
Congrats on it being gold and correct weight. Many counterfeits were made of a composition very close to U.S. Mint specifications. I'd be ecstatic knowing its value is the same as if it were genuine.
As to how and why? There are numerous examples in the literature of contemporary counterfeits being made "to spec". Even common dates like this one. I'll let someone expand on that, someone who has the knowledge at-hand.
I am glad to hear that it is gold. Did he estimate a fineness?
I once saw a counterfeit Mexican 50 Pesos which was proper weight but only 18kt gold. It was set in an 18kt bezel on an 18kt chain. Obviously the jewelry maker who made all of it wanted the colors to match exactly.
Of course this meant that the coin was missing 0.18 ounces of gold, so there had to be a profit margin in there somewhere.
Here is a worn one from Coinfacts. Looks like all of the stars and devices, etc. are pretty much the same. Does that mean that it was considered to be a cast counterfeit? Like noted by one poster above, if you post it is an ‘obvious fake’ it would be good for you to explain why that is. Thanks in advance. DM