It's back - eBay auction - massive clip on a 1922 Plain cent

seanq · January 20, 2011 1:25AM

Auction link

The images from that auction are below. My first reaction was "damaged / fake", but I don't see anything conclusive in the photos to back that up. The clip is a little too round but not impossibly so; there is no hint of Blakesley effect though on a large clip that alone is not damning evidence; the way the clip cuts across the design it's hard to see if there is any metal flow, but the top of the C in CENT and the bottom of the U in UNITED look right.

I guess I'm having a very hard time wrapping my mind around the possibility that this could be legit. I tlooks too good to be true, so it probably is... right? But then the alternative, that someone mangled a real AU 1922 plain, is equally mind-boggling. I guess it could be a very good counterfeit that someone clipped to keep it from being passed off as genuine? It is the kind of coin that TPGs were made for, and if I had a spare $2 grand around to gamble with I'd seriously consider taking a shot at it.

Sean Reynolds

mgoodm3 · January 20, 2011 1:35AM

The fact that the devices come up to the clip and stay sharp makes it suspect for me.

You're the expert...

sinin1 · January 20, 2011 1:35AM

my first reaction is fake coin that has been damaged

Alltheabove76 · January 20, 2011 1:36AM

<< Auction link

The images from that auction are below. My first reaction was "damaged / fake", but I don't see anything conclusive in the photos to back that up. The clip is a little too round but not impossibly so; there is no hint of Blakesley effect though on a large clip that alone is not damning evidence; the way the clip cuts across the design it's hard to see if there is any metal flow, but the top of the C in CENT and the bottom of the U in UNITED look right.

I guess I'm having a very hard time wrapping my mind around the possibility that this could be legit. I tlooks too good to be true, so it probably is... right? But then the alternative, that someone mangled a real AU 1922 plain, is equally mind-boggling. I guess it could be a very good counterfeit that someone clipped to keep it from being passed off as genuine? It is the kind of coin that TPGs were made for, and if I had a spare $2 grand around to gamble with I'd seriously consider taking a shot at it.

Sean Reynolds >>

I think (and I could be wrong) that a non-error version of that coin is more desirable than an a clipped one.

garrynot · January 20, 2011 1:38AM

Mr. Weinberg should comment. I think the date looks wrong for a '22 Plain. The obverse looks like it is too sharply struck for a '22 Plain also. JMHO.

kevinstang · January 20, 2011 1:44AM

Haven't the Chinese lately been offering more dramatic error coins-especially of key dates?

gonzer · January 20, 2011 1:57AM

Fake clip, no metal flow plus the extra metal along the "clip" edge. Not even a hint of the Blakesley Effect.

mgoodm3 · January 20, 2011 1:59AM

The edges of the clip looked raised in a couple of places.

291fifth · January 20, 2011 3:12AM

Why is a coin like that raw?

jonathanb · January 20, 2011 3:57AM

Wow. I agree that it "couldn't possibly" be real. But I don't see anything unquestionably un-real, either.

As Sean says, the lack of obvious Blakesley effect isn't necessarily a problem because large clips behave differently... and I do see some metal flow and broadening of the rim opposite the clip, even if not a lot.

Seller says "All coins are guaranteed to be authentic for life and may be returned anytime for a 100% refund."

I think that it might be worth snagging the coin and sending it to our hosts for their opinion. Probably would be considerate to let the seller know that you're doing so, and that the item will be returned under the authenticity guarantee in a few weeks if they come back negative. Seller has nearly 20,000 feedback, 99.7% positive. My guess is that they'd honor their guarantee. That means the real gamble is more like $100 for slabbing and postage, not $2000 for the BIN price.

I'd be interested in hearing Fred's opinion... but if he thinks it's likely good, then he might take the BIN himself...

seanq · January 20, 2011 4:12AM

I emailed Fred a link to this post, and he gave me permission to add his reply:

<< Sean,

Thanks for the link(s).

First thing I'd want to see is the 'inside' of the
clipped area, to be sure it has the proper
'cut and tear' marks.......

As you mentioned in the thread, sometimes
large clips like this do not show the Blakesley
Effect very well, or at all.

It's bothersome that there appears to be no
metal flow, and I would also at least question
the possibility that the coin itself is a Chinese
Fake.....

From just seeing the good scans, with the above
questions, I think the only way to authenticate
it is to verify the 'cut/tear' marks inside the clip......

(you're welcome to use the above reply in the
thread if you want - I'm busy doing PCGS Error
authentications, and I just took a short break after
the first three hours!)

Fred >>

I'm going to ask the seller for more pictures of the edge, I'll update the thread if I get a reply.

Sean Reynolds

seanq · January 20, 2011 4:30AM

Just to back up some of my observations, I found the image below on my server:

If you look at the reverse of the coin you won't see any hint of Blakesley effect, and while it is present on the obverse it is quite subtle. With a little circulation it would be almost indistinguishable. Also look at the first letter A of AMERICA, just a tiny point was struck, and compare it to the C of CENT and U of UNITED on the 1922 cent. Those similarities are part of my argument in favor of the coin.

Now step back and look at the overall shape of the clip. It shows better on the reverse picture, but the clip is not perfectly round. There are two causes for this: first the metal is under more effective pressure than a normal strike because there is less of it resisting the downward force of the dies. Second, where the clipped edge does not contact the collar the metal is able to flow between the dies as well as into the dies. As a result, at points where the struck coin would be thinnest (where the fields overlap front and back) the clipped edge tends to get slightly warped. This is a big strike against the 1922 being genuine.

Sean Reynolds

CaptHenway · January 20, 2011 4:48AM

Just got here.
I don't like it. Look at the reverse rim just in from the clip at either end. See the damage? That looks to me like the coin (most likely a Chinese counterfeit, but that is just a guess) was put under a planchet cutter and sheared downwards. The pressure of the cut damaged the rim.
TD

lkeigwin · January 20, 2011 4:52AM

Don't think it's a real '22 no-D or even a weak D.
Lance.

seanq · January 20, 2011 5:14AM

<< Just got here.
I don't like it. Look at the reverse rim just in from the clip at either end. See the damage? That looks to me like the coin (most likely a Chinese counterfeit, but that is just a guess) was put under a planchet cutter and sheared downwards. The pressure of the cut damaged the rim.
TD >>

You may be on to something. The rim at either side of the clip on the reverse looks slightly flattened as well, at first glance I think I took this for weakness but it does extend out into the fields at either end.

Now if the coin was cut after the strike from reverse to obverse, I'd expect to see some flash on the obverse at the edge of the clip. Sure enough, if you look at the edge of the clip behind the head there look like little parallel horizontal file marks where the flash was removed. Look closer to the neck/shoulder area and it looks like a small bit of raised metal is still there.

I'll tell you what, if this ends up a Chinese counterfeit, then they are getting scarily good. It was only the impossibility of the error that slowed me down to study it this hard. Had they aimed lower (i.e., if that was a 1922-D and the price $195), they might already have my money.

Sean Reynolds

Shamika · January 20, 2011 5:22AM

It's hard to imagine anyone taking a 1922-plain that looks to be AU (if not better) and then damaging it to give the illusion of being a clip.

silverpop · January 20, 2011 5:41AM

i'll say fake

TexasNationals · January 20, 2011 6:49AM

It is a 1922 Die 2, clip real or not, I feel it is a real coin. If it is fake, that is one good fake.

AngryTurtle · January 20, 2011 7:04AM

I had assumed that the Chinese fake errors were "factory" jobs, in other words for example purposely striking a clipped planchet, rather than striking a counterfeit non error, and then clipping. I guess for most error types a factory job is really the only way to do it, but an "aftermarket" clip on a counterfeit is a possibility. A "factory job" would be tougher to detect while authenticating.

Coin Finder · January 20, 2011 7:08AM

They cut off the word copy!

TennesseeDave · January 20, 2011 7:27AM

Bandsaw error

Russ · January 20, 2011 7:58AM

Fake or not, this is an excellent brain food thread.

Russ, NCNE

GrumpyEd · January 20, 2011 8:23AM

I can't find the thread but a long time ago there was a thread about an auction for an 1877 IHC, if I remember correctly it was a straight clip almost cutting the coin in half.

When I see key coins like this I wonder if they were real coins that might have been holed or damaged then given a fake clip because they had little to loose by trying it.

cmerlo1 · January 20, 2011 8:27AM

I believe the coin itself is authentic, but the clip doesn't look right (although you are the more knowledgeable one, Sean!). It also think it has had Deller's Darkener applied...

GrumpyEd · January 20, 2011 8:37AM

<< It also think it has had Deller's Darkener applied.. >>

It does have that look!

JRocco · January 20, 2011 12:22PM

One of the major diagnostics on the 22 plain is the word LIBERTY which is
conveniently ( ??? ) not there.

I don't like this one either Sean.

lordmarcovan · January 20, 2011 12:27PM

That scares the heck outta me on many different levels.

fcloud · January 20, 2011 12:40PM

I sure would like to see an edge image. It may shed more light on the clip.

GoldenEyeNumismatics · January 20, 2011 12:53PM

The coin likely had severe damage, and a way to remediate that was to clip off the damaged section.

goodmoney4badmoney · January 20, 2011 1:03PM

I would stay away, too many questions!

drwstr123 · January 20, 2011 1:09PM

I don't understand the quality of this pic compared to the other Lincoln pics. Why the difference???

TexasNationals · January 20, 2011 1:23PM

I don't need LIBERTY to tell you that is legit or the best freaking Lincoln counterfeit I have ever seen!

seanq · January 20, 2011 2:44PM

<< The coin likely had severe damage, and a way to remediate that was to clip off the damaged section. >>

I'm coming around to this way of thinking, if the coin was already ruined by a hole or other problem, why not try and turn it into something more interesting. I've requested edge pics, I'll update the post if I receive them.

Sean Reynolds

SullivanNumismatics · January 20, 2011 3:34PM

I'm not 100% sure, but I think that very probably that it is a fake. The primary reasons in my mind (other than being naturally suspicious because it's a '22 plain), are that there are some raised areas of metal along the edge of the clip, between "C" and "O" on the reverse, and also some raised metal between the wheat stalk and "N" of UNITED. Also, there are gouge-like marks on the rim next to the clip, above the "N" of "IN" on the obverse, and below the bust on the obverse.The same rim damage is visible on the opposite side of the coin as well, all of which would have been made when the fake clip was being produced.

Jon

GrumpyEd · January 20, 2011 3:43PM

I found the thread this reminded me of.

The 1877 IHC clipped in half:

thread with the 1877 clip

PerryHall · January 20, 2011 9:48PM

<< I would stay away, too many questions! >>

Yup. This is the type of coin that I would only buy in a NGC or PCGS slab.

CaptHenway · January 20, 2011 11:07PM

<< I'm not 100% sure, but I think that very probably that it is a fake. The primary reasons in my mind (other than being naturally suspicious because it's a '22 plain), are that there are some raised areas of metal along the edge of the clip, between "C" and "O" on the reverse, and also some raised metal between the wheat stalk and "N" of UNITED. Also, there are gouge-like marks on the rim next to the clip, above the "N" of "IN" on the obverse, and below the bust on the obverse.The same rim damage is visible on the opposite side of the coin as well, all of which would have been made when the fake clip was being produced.

Jon >>

The bit of raised metal between the bottom of the C and the O is the upper tip of the C. The bit of raised metal between the N and the wheat stalk is the bottom of the U of UNITED.

The rim damage, which is most damaging, I had previously mentioned.

TD

ambro51 · January 20, 2011 11:12PM

maybe its my eyes but the radius does not look correct toward the upper part of the clip.

a picture of the clip, from the side...would be helpful.

like others say....this needs an expert evaluation (PCGS NGC OR ANACS) and the fact that it does NOT have that....??????

Obiwancanoli · January 20, 2011 11:23PM

Perhaps it's my relative newness to the hobby, and my inexperience - especially with coins such as this one - with dmaged coins, but I noticed something I hadn't seen mentioned thus far...

First, the relatively even cuts just above the first "u" in Pluribus - could it be that someone was "testing" the cut before actually doing so?

Second, the clip itself appears fresher than the surface of the coin would suggest... notice how the edge of the clip - more prominent on the reverse - is lighter than the rest of the coin? If this were original, would not the surface color/wear/tone of the coin be relatively uniform throughout?

Alltheabove76 · January 20, 2011 11:41PM

I tried to email the seller to ask him for a pic of the clipped edge and the ebay form said that the seller doesnt take questions. WTH?

seanq · January 21, 2011 12:08AM

<< I tried to email the seller to ask him for a pic of the clipped edge and the ebay form said that the seller doesnt take questions. WTH? >>

I had no problem sending one yesterday and the form loaded up again just now. Are you clicking on the "Ask a question" link at the bottom of the auction or trying to go through his feedback profile, because the latter is no longer allowed unless you have an active transaction with the seller.

Either way, he lists his email address and phone number right in the listing. I encourage you to request the edge pics as well, maybe if enough people ask he'll respond.

Sean Reynolds

roadrunner · January 21, 2011 12:51AM

In reviewing hundreds of items of this seller's general on-line inventory it doesn't exactly exude great confidence. Most of what they have are common proof/mint sets and mostly cleaned-polished-damaged raw coins. Trying to find an uncleaned silver coin here would be like finding hen's teeth. Every bust half looks like it spent a few hours in the buffing machine. The only slab representative is an ICG 1893-s Morgan with VF details. A raw 1916-d dime makes one wonder why it's not certified, unless the seller is indeed an expert on these. If the 1922 cent was real, unplayed with, and original that would be an exception to the rule. Though I would add the seller spends a lot more time cleaning type coins than they do the Lincolns.

The 99.7% FB rating is astounding considering the quality level of coins here. The seller's 100% lifetime guarantee of authenticity is only as good as their coins.

seller's 16-d dime

With the mint mark on the 16-d so worn it's hard for me to tell if it's ok with the center not visible. The general shape, position, angle, etc. seems to fit the markers for a genuine piece.

roadrunner

CaptHenway · January 21, 2011 2:25AM

Any guesses as to that "thing" on the obverse rim at 3 o'clock? I can't tell if it is raised or depressed.

Also, what is that squiggle below "WE TR"?

TD

seanq · January 21, 2011 2:34AM

<< Any guesses as to that "thing" on the obverse rim at 3 o'clock? I can't tell if it is raised or depressed.

Also, what is that squiggle below "WE TR"?

TD >>

The thing at K-3 on the rim is raised, it looks like a large rim bump, which would be odd on a coin with so little circulation wear. The more I look, the more I see wrong with it - there is another flat spot on the rim near the top of the clip, above the IN, and one more near the other side of the clip under the bust. I'm about 98% convinced now that the clip is fake, and almost as convinced that the coin itself is real. What still has me at a loss is why someone would mangle a five-figure coin like that unless they were cutting off an area which was heavily damaged.

Sean Reynolds

CaptHenway · January 21, 2011 4:21AM

I still think that the damage on the rims on both sides condemns the clip as a fake.

Will await word from a major TPG as to whether or not the coin is a fake. Anybody who buys it without a TPG opinion is a gambler who would take the Cubbies to win the World Series straight up.........
MOO
TD

seanq · January 21, 2011 4:52AM

Tom, I agree with you, I'm reserving that last 2% for the edge photos.

Sean Reynolds

CaptHenway · January 25, 2011 2:30PM

Edge photos up (or is that a pork chop???)
TD

GrumpyEd · January 25, 2011 2:42PM

Yea a pork chop.
The edge photos are there but those pics don't help.

sinin1 · January 25, 2011 11:46PM

there seems to be obverse rim damage at 2, 6, 10 o'clock

the added edge view pics look off - edge does not seem to be 90 degrees or pinched

seanq · January 25, 2011 11:55PM

Thanks for updating this, the seller did not reply to my note directly to let me know he'd added the pictures.

The clip is 100% fake, and the edge pictures seal it. Any striations or flow lines should be vertical from face to face, in the images provided they are parallel to the face, meaning someone probably cleaned up the edge after the coin was cut. In addition there should be a transition line on the edge running parallel to the faces, smooth on one side and slightly granular on the other. This line is evidence of the transition from cutting to tearing when the planchet was originally punched. In the images the edge is perfectly uniform and smooth.

The only mystery now is why someone would mangle a genuine high-grade 1922 Plain. The only logical reason I can come up with is that the missing portion had suffered severe damage and someone thought removing it and passing the coin off as a planchet error was preferable to the damage.

Sean Reynolds

astrorat · January 25, 2011 11:57PM

Great discussion, Sean.

Lane

It's back - eBay auction - massive clip on a 1922 Plain cent

Comments

Leave a Comment