1896-o, 1900-o and 1902-o micros

coinkat

Some collectors here have commented on the future of those graded by PCGS... I believe the current number is 96 and I am curious as to when the last one was submitted and certified and which date it was. Is there a way to find out? I guess I am curious if these were graded through the date of the release or if there was a cut off before then.

Has anyone thought about other MICRO o's in ANACS holders and what the total population is for those? What about ICG, PCI and SEGS?

NGC stopped grading these earlier, but how many still exist in the other grading company slabs and what will become of these? Any thoughts?

MrEureka

It would be a shame if the TPG's don't continue to grade these, designated as contemporary counterfeits. There's just too much interest in the coins to ignore them!

Ditto for the Red Book.

Besides, if the coins are not widely published as contemporary fakes, the problems with previously slabbed coins will be compounded.

LanLord

Just because there are some conterfeits, doesn't mean that every coin out there is counterfeit. Obviously the current counterfeits came from authentic coins that were copied.

I agree with Andy, it would be quite a shame if TPGs stop all together in their authentication of these coins.

MrEureka

Obviously the current counterfeits came from authentic coins that were copied.

Yes, probably, but the reverse could have been copied from a real 99-O micro.

CarlWohlforth

It is an interesting question. PCGS would save themselves money if they grade them contemporary counterfeits. They would not have to buy back coins. But then again, they couldn't say they guarantee their holders don't cointain counterfeits...

coinkat

PCGS believes all came from the same reverse... mostlikely the 1899-o VAM4 or 6... the same reverse was used for both of these. The 1880-o micro is possible, but the degree of the tilted o leads me to think that is not likely. As I said in anothere thread, the picture in Fey's book looks as if the tilted o is different in the 1900-o than the others.

Conder101

But if they slabbed these contemporary counterfeits, how could they justify not slabbing other contemporary counterfeits?

PerryHall

They already do slab counterfeits so there is a precedent. I'm thinking of the machin mills coins and the Jefferson head large cent which is thought to be a non-mint prodect.

Conder101

I don't believe PCGS slabs Machins Mills pieces. I don't know if they have slabbed a Jefferson head or not, and even if they did it is not considered to be a counterfeit but rather a piece struck for the congress as a private coinage proposal and the government paid for the materials and dies. So it may not be a US Mint product bu I'm not sure I'd call it a counterfeit.

PerryHall

Conder---How about the so called New Haven restrike fugio cent? This is a counterfeit and PCGS slabs them. How about the Brasher Lima doubloon? At the time of issue, this was a privately issued coin in imitation of the coin of another country. My point is that it wouldn't be that far fetched for PCGS to slab these micro o coins as a "Contemporary private issue" (I don't like putting "counterfeit" on the slab label even though that is was they relly are). These coins are of high quality, full silver content, and a has a history of being collected and prized by the numismatic community.

MrEureka

But if they slabbed these contemporary counterfeits, how could they justify not slabbing other contemporary counterfeits?

No need to justify it. PCGS would be authenticating the pieces as what they are. Besides, there's already a market for these coins. Why not serve it?

My point is that it wouldn't be that far fetched for PCGS to slab these micro o coins as a "Contemporary private issue" (I don't like putting "counterfeit" on the slab label even though that is was they relly are).

"Private issue" would be misleading. Private issues, e.g., Civil War Tokens, circulated honestly. Counterfeits are passed dishonestly, as something that they are not.