1898-O "Micro O" Barber Half UPDATE
Cratylus
Posts: 871 ✭
Firstly, let me get my greetings to everyone out of the way. Special hellos go out to Tyler Child and Mike Hayes. It's been a LONG time since I've been around here. I took an extended break from coin collecting and have just gotten back into it in the last few weeks. So, you should see me around a lot more now. Okay, time to shut up and get to why you are all here...
As I mentioned, I took a long break from coin collecting and recently decided to venture back into it. I decided to go to the bank vault and check on my stuff (and to get the Barber fervor back... not that it ever really went away completely!). As I leafed through my coin flips, I came to the one holding my 1898-O Micro O Barber Half. I picked it up and looked at it fondly... but when I turned the flip over to look at the reverse, something was horribly wrong. The "O" was completely missing! I mean GONE! As I pulled the flip closer to my eye to make sure I wasn't seeing things, I noticed a small fleck of metal that had settled into the base of the flip. It was the "O"! It had "fallen" off the coin! I couldn't believe what I was seeing!
Frantically I opened the flip, took out the coin, and carefully dumped the "O" into my hand. I could feel beads of sweat forming on my forehead as my throat tightened. I took out my loupe and examined the spot on the reverse of the coin where the O had been. There appeared to be (it's very hard to tell) a tiny, tiny spot of glue or epoxy or solder or something similar where the O was attached. I can only guess that the dealer I bought it from (or somebody who orignally sold it to him) had created a forgery and I had been fooled by it. I let out a huge sigh of disappointment and actually started to cry.
After I gathered a few things, I put the coin back into the flip, placed it back in the deposit box, and left the bank feeling as heartcrushed as I ever have in my life. The girl who opened the safe for me even stopped me as I was leaving to ask if everything was OK. I am still distraught over it.
What makes things even worse is knowing that this whole time there has been a small "buzz" circulating through a tiny portion of the numismatic community over this coin... and now knowing that the whole time it was for nothing! I feel like I've "let people down". And I feel absolutely embarrassed that this has happened to me. I don't know if any of you can imagine the breadth of pain and emotion I'm feeling over this whole thing.
I felt it was my responsibility to let everyone here know about what happened so the "myth" of my coin wouldn't continue.
Like I said, I'll be lurking around the forums here as I attempt to get back into collecting. So if anyone wants to offer any words of encouragement, believe me I'm all ears. I've already tried to ease my pain by buying some new pieces for my Barber Half Collection. Having them arrive this morning has helped, but I think it's going to take a while to get over this one.
To Tyler, Mike, Dr. Pete, Tom (IvyLeague Coin), and to everyone else who was excited about my "find"... my sincerest and heartfelt apologies to you all.
As I mentioned, I took a long break from coin collecting and recently decided to venture back into it. I decided to go to the bank vault and check on my stuff (and to get the Barber fervor back... not that it ever really went away completely!). As I leafed through my coin flips, I came to the one holding my 1898-O Micro O Barber Half. I picked it up and looked at it fondly... but when I turned the flip over to look at the reverse, something was horribly wrong. The "O" was completely missing! I mean GONE! As I pulled the flip closer to my eye to make sure I wasn't seeing things, I noticed a small fleck of metal that had settled into the base of the flip. It was the "O"! It had "fallen" off the coin! I couldn't believe what I was seeing!
Frantically I opened the flip, took out the coin, and carefully dumped the "O" into my hand. I could feel beads of sweat forming on my forehead as my throat tightened. I took out my loupe and examined the spot on the reverse of the coin where the O had been. There appeared to be (it's very hard to tell) a tiny, tiny spot of glue or epoxy or solder or something similar where the O was attached. I can only guess that the dealer I bought it from (or somebody who orignally sold it to him) had created a forgery and I had been fooled by it. I let out a huge sigh of disappointment and actually started to cry.
After I gathered a few things, I put the coin back into the flip, placed it back in the deposit box, and left the bank feeling as heartcrushed as I ever have in my life. The girl who opened the safe for me even stopped me as I was leaving to ask if everything was OK. I am still distraught over it.
What makes things even worse is knowing that this whole time there has been a small "buzz" circulating through a tiny portion of the numismatic community over this coin... and now knowing that the whole time it was for nothing! I feel like I've "let people down". And I feel absolutely embarrassed that this has happened to me. I don't know if any of you can imagine the breadth of pain and emotion I'm feeling over this whole thing.
I felt it was my responsibility to let everyone here know about what happened so the "myth" of my coin wouldn't continue.
Like I said, I'll be lurking around the forums here as I attempt to get back into collecting. So if anyone wants to offer any words of encouragement, believe me I'm all ears. I've already tried to ease my pain by buying some new pieces for my Barber Half Collection. Having them arrive this morning has helped, but I think it's going to take a while to get over this one.
To Tyler, Mike, Dr. Pete, Tom (IvyLeague Coin), and to everyone else who was excited about my "find"... my sincerest and heartfelt apologies to you all.
0
Comments
Oh that really SUCKS! My heartfelt condolences on the loss of the little "O".
All of us collectively continue our never-ending search to find an example.
Mike has come closest with the Revier coin, but it didn't make it either.
I hope this does not stop your collecting interest.
1) The store is no longer in business.
2) Even if it were in business, it would be the store's word against mine because I didn't save my receipt.
Do you think that a genuine 98 micro O exists?
I firmly believe in numismatics as the world's greatest hobby, but recognize that this is a luxury and without collectors, we can all spend/melt our collections/inventories.
eBaystore
I didn't say anything and this post will not be edited.
<< <i>I don't know if it matters but do you know who you bought it from? Contact them? When PCGS declared the 02Micro O Morgans counterfeit the dealer from who I bought mine from gave me my $$ back. Sorry to hear of your loss. >>
Whaaaaat? You sold a 1902-o in a PCGS holder back to a dealer?? You missed the boat on that one. If that coin is in a PCGS holder it would bring stupid money today from VAM collectors. And it would even sell for crazy money in VF or better if raw!!
"Everything is on its way to somewhere. Everything." - George Malley, Phenomenon
http://www.american-legacy-coins.com
Hope to see you posting here a lot Cary,
Tyler.
P.S. I still remember that awesome, totally original XF40 1901-S Barber half you sold on Ebay years ago. I still kick myself today for not buying it.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
Welcome home anyway, Cary. Sorry it had to begin with a sad story like this.
I know I've bought a few really nice halves from you in the past. I better go check the mintmarks!
Dave
<< <i>P.S. I still remember that awesome, totally original XF40 1901-S Barber half you sold on Ebay years ago. I still kick myself today for not buying it. >>
You must be thinking of somebody else. If I had that coin I would have kept it! I've been "saddled" with the same VF25 example of that date for a long time until I recently came across this decent example:
It's helping me forget the pain of the Micro O.
I suppose that it could have been worse. You could have sold the coin to another collector for $20,000, only to have them cry foul when the "O" fell off it years later. Then you would be coughing up $20k plus interest in order to save your reputation- if you didn't spend it on something else already.
If it is any consolation, your report of discovering this coin has helped me make friendships with several other Barber collectors.
By the way, the VF-30 1910 half you sold me three years ago is still one of the best in my #1 Barber half album.
Greg Hansen, Melbourne, FL Click here for any current EBAY auctions Multiple "Circle of Trust" transactions over 14 years on forum
I do believe though, you should keep looking for another. If they do exist, may the finest known end up in your collection.
Free Trial
It was fun to follow along with the older thread (when it got bumped two years ago, i wasn't hear when it was first started) and sorry this happened. At least it was a cherrypick and you didn't get totally burned.
In honor of the memory of Cpl. Michael E. Thompson
The 98 micro "O" has been on alot of Barber Half collector's mind's since your original post. Since that time, I must have viewed hundreds of 98-O's, always hoping to find the elusive micro "O". Maybe there's still one out there, who knows. Anyway, I share in your extreme dissapointment, but I'm happy to see that you're back on the boards. After all, it was from you that I made my very first Barber half purchase. The date, a beautiful NGC graded, AU-58, 1901-S Barber half, that ultimately turned me on to the series. Thanks!
Connor Numismatics Website
TomB jogged my memory and gave me an idea:
May I request, if you are able, to post some close-up photos of the mint-mark area? Or send the now-determined-to-be-not-so-rare-coin to ARCO to take some of his impeccable scans, so that we can learn what to avoid in possible counterfeit coins?
I have never run into any Barber halves with removed or altered mintmarks, and this is another nice feature of the series, i.e. some sort of security taken for granted perhaps. Since these boards have been a wonderful source of education for me and others, would you consider taking time out to post again & see if any here can help determine the apparent mechanism of deception?
For those who never got to see the coin in question, I was able to dig it up from my Barber Archives:
Thanks in advance!
A counterfeit would not need to be a micro O nor would it need a smaller O mint mark, so some of my notion doesn't make complete sense, but it would explain that someone saw such a coin but none are now known to exist.
Some of these speculations could be the subject of some research or a short story.
<< <i>I have never run into any Barber halves with removed or altered mintmarks, and this is another nice feature of the series, i.e. some sort of security taken for granted perhaps. >>
I ran into a collection with all three of the late Philly coins - - 1913, 1914, and 1915 - - ALL having removed mintmarks. The 1915 was fairly sloppy as some of the S was still visible, the 1913 and 1914 were not so sloppy but the buffing in the mintmark area was obvious once I looked for it. All 3 coins were VF, what a shame!
Edited to add: I'm sorry your 1898-o micro o turned out to be a mirage. It was a really cool looking coin!
An authorized PCGS dealer, and a contributor to the Red Book.
I believe it is mentioned way back in Beistle (sp?) too. I had the opportunity to buy a copy of that book, but decided not to.
Don
As Cary can attest to, a few years ago I mentioned to him that the one coin I've been hunting for was the 1898-O Micro O. When he mentioned that he bought one at a local show - he mentioned that his hand trembled - and was speachless for a few seconds - or he stopped breathing for a few moments. Can't remember specifically now.
The fact that he located one - and from the image - it was decidedly a micro O mint mark - made me all the more enthusiastic about locating one myself. Hence my purchase of the Jules Reiver example in an NGC 30 holder. This coin was at NGC for six months last year [ from the January FUN show to late June, 2007 ] and it underwent Presidential Review with Mark Saltzman. Harry Laibstain and I compared it to other 1898-O coins in his inventory - and the Reiver coin's MM was substantially different that the others.
NGC did not attribute my coin as a Micro O. I also showed the coin to David Hall this January while at the PCGS luncheon. He mentioned that he wasn't that good with varieties and suggested that I show the coin to Jack Beymer; which I did. Jack mentioned that he and Jules were friends and I explained the background of my coin, he examined it for several minutes - along side another 1898-O in PCGS 20. He said that the Reiver coin was not a Micro O.
My contention was that the mint-mark-punch on the 1892-O Micro O was the quarter punch; the size was identical to the one Cary showed me, however I was determined to examine Cary's coin; to no avail.
The mint-mark-punch on the Reiver coin is closer to the dime mint-mark-punch.
Comparing the 1892-O Micro O and the 1898-O Micro O is like comparing apples with oranges.
Here's the reverse of my Reiver coin. If I have other images of 98-O's - I know I have my MS 64 to show - I'll attach them as well.
Cary - I know exactly how you feel. If you had only listened to my advise three years ago, you would have realized what you had - or not. Regardless of what you think of TPG's - they serve a purpose. Authenticity being one reason to use them.
I apologise for the next image...its too small to really see the mint mark...
Here's my MS 64 that I bought from Harry Laibstain while we were examining my Reiver coin.
The image doesn't truly portray the Mint Mark - it looks weak - and may cause some confusion with
those reading this. I can assure you that the MS 64's MM is considerably larger than the Reiver coin.
As a side note, the PCGS 20 coin has the same size MM as the Reiver coin. Both have a bit smaller MM
than all other 1898-O's I have seen.
Cary, again, I'm glad you're back. I enjoyed our conversations. I still love the 1893-S half you sold me...
or should I say that I coerced out of you.
Dan, every time you talk about the NGC 58 - 1901-S you bought from Cary, I get faint.
Long story short: Cary listed a wonderful 1901-S in an NGC 58 holder on eBay with a BIN of $1800 or so
a few years ago. It was a touch higher than I thought it should be - at that time - and decided that I would buy it when I returned from a company cook-out one fateful Sunday; I felt very confidant that the coin would still be available when I returned a few hours before the listing expired as there were no bids on the coin and I thought it languished due to its " high " ask price. I was dumbfounded when I saw the coin had sold to some unknown collector [ at least at that time, to me ]. Now Dan tells me that coin is going with him to the grave. [ I have my shovel at the ready ! ] I have since purchased another 01-S from Dan in PCGS 53...its the colsolation prize.
Here's my better 1898-O half - sorry for the side track:
~~~~~~~~~~~~
Coin collecting is not a hobby, it's an obsession !
New Barber Purchases
Beistle, Lawrence, and Breen all mention its existence, so I suppose that bodes well.
Maybe and maybe not--perhaps they were relying on the word of one another-Breen has been proven wrong many times and was known to make assumptions rather than find out the facts.
Until a genuine micro-O 1898-O half appears, i am of the opinion that they do not exist-BUT-i will certainly keep looking for one.
I do not think that the coin itself is counterfiet as some have mentioned--It is an altered genuine 1908 P mint half the the O added. JMHO. Bob
<< <i>Wow that really sucks !! Reminds me of a dealer who was looking at a 1909-S VDB lincoln cent that somebody wanted to sell him-When he was examining it, the "s" fell off, right then and there.
Beistle, Lawrence, and Breen all mention its existence, so I suppose that bodes well.
Maybe and maybe not--perhaps they were relying on the word of one another-Breen has been proven wrong many times and was known to make assumptions rather than find out the facts.
Until a genuine micro-O 1898-O half appears, i am of the opinion that they do not exist-BUT-i will certainly keep looking for one.
I do not think that the coin itself is counterfiet as some have mentioned--It is an altered genuine 1908 P mint half the the O added. JMHO. Bob >>
In this case both Feigenbaum and Breen would have to be taking the word of Beistle who published his work in 1929, a full generation ahead of Breen.
In honor of the memory of Cpl. Michael E. Thompson
Check out my current listings: https://ebay.com/sch/khunt/m.html?_ipg=200&_sop=12&_rdc=1
This still does not rule out a contemporary counterfeit, but the reasons for doing so would be worthy of a story. It still makes no sense about the micro O morgan dollar counterfeits.
It is amazing that so many of us barber fanatics looking at so many 1898-O halves that no micro O has been found.
In the past 10 years I am aware of two newly found 1892-O micro O halves, in fact, I found one of them and got it slabbed PCGS AG3, now long sold.
www.brunkauctions.com
<< <i>I don't even see a price listing for an 1898-O Micro O in the PCGS price guides. >>
There is no mention of the 1898-O Micro O in any price book as none have been confirmed.
My NGC 30 - ex: Reiver example - is as close to a "Micro O" as I have seen. I believe - as do
a couple Barber collectors - that a Dime "O" Punch was used on the 1898-O Micro O - and NOT
the Quarter "O" Punch.
A well known Barber collector had offered $25K for the one that Cary had "if any TPG would
designate it as such, a Micro O".
I believe I mentioned that my Reiver coin was at NGC for six months - and they could not make
a determination - "as they did not have another copy to compare it to." Ummm... its unique at
the moment...
EDIT : I believe I had the Reiver coin reimaged recently... let's see if I can locate it...
As you can see - there really isn't a lot of difference between the NGC 30 - and - the PCGS 64.
Its a fraction off - but none the less - it is different.
Re-Edit: My photographer feels that the Reiver coin's MM is the same as the PCGS 64 coin's.
He fells as though the die polish lines are the same - so there can't be a difference in size.
I disagree - as I have studied both coins at liberty for a couple of years. I've compared all
known die punches for Dimes, Quarters and Halves. There is a small difference - albiet infantisimile.
One has to keep in mind that the coin that Cary found raw with a "Micro O" mint mark was a forgery;
the perpetrator of this deception had never seen an 1898-O Micro O either.
~~~~~~~~~~~~
Coin collecting is not a hobby, it's an obsession !
New Barber Purchases
I pulled out my Beistle (probably should sell since it hasn't been opened in over 25 years) and he lists the 1898-O as 2B. low date; Rev B. high and very small mint O. Personally, I have never seen one.
_______________
Craig