DWLange posted at the NGC forum that NGC knew for some time the 1896, 1900, and 1902 micro o morgans

PerryHall

He said when they were submitted they were returned as questionable authenticity. Also, they were publicized in the NGC newsletter as being fake. Very interesting.

Russ

I find the timing of this announcement to be very suspicious.

Russ, NCNE

greghansen

Shortly after the PCGS announcement came out, a fellow board member referred me to the Lange article, written about a year ago, when he did indicate his belief that the 'micro-O' coins were 'probably counterfeit'. I was suprised, because I had never heard that before, but it appears to be the case. I will try to find the article and post a link.

greghansen

O.K., yep, I found it. David Lange authored the article which appeared in May, 2004, where he states that the 1896, 1900 & 1902 'micro O' coins were 'circulating counterfeits'. Kind of sounds a lot like what PCGS is saying now. Kudos to David Lange IMO. Like I say, I was completely unaware of his opinion in this regard until Wolf359 brought it to my attention. Here is the link to the article Wolf359 made me aware of. Mr. Lange's comments about the coins are at the very bottom of the first column:

David Lange May 2004 article questioning authenticity of micro O coins

My apologies in advance to PCGS for linking an NGC article on these boards, but the substance of the article is highly relevant to this topic.

Russ

<< <i>The Micro O silver dollars of 1899 appear to have utilized an old dollar reverse from the early 1880s, while the similar but quite poorly made Micro O dollars of 1896, 1900 and 1902 are most likely circulating counterfeits for which genuine coins were used to create transfer dies. >>



You'd think something like that would deserve more than just a casual mention at the end of an article about mint marks.

Russ, NCNE

PerryHall

It must be embarassing to PCGS that their primary competator knew about this a year ago and published this information.

mrdq

Did NGC stop slabbing them then??

TonedPeaceNut

Now this is too funny!!!! Pass the cool-aid.

Well at least PCGS's statement got this issue to the forefront and made everyone and anyone aware of it.

I commend Lange for being the 1st, but PCGS for really hyping it and letting everyone know.


TPN

greghansen

When Lange set forth his opinion, nobody had sold well circulated examples for a couple grand each. Only when the roof blew off the prices on these, starting in November of last year @ the West Palm Beach auction, did people start thinking, 'hey, maybe I got something here'. Then when the sales prices were reiterated at the 2005 FUN show, I'm sure PCGS saw a huge surge of submissions from people wanting to cash in their lottery ticket. Of course this surge of submissions gave them the perfect opportunity to have a large number of samples available in one place at one time to do the die comparisons necessary to make a conclusive counterfeit call.