Mint Error: Counterfeit Coin on Nail--It's "Certified"
SullivanNumismatics
Posts: 848 ✭✭✭✭
Although there are a few genuine examples out there, recently there have been a lot of counterfeit coins struck on nails showing up on eBay lately. Here's a new take on them--a quarter on a nail which comes with a "certificate of collection" (whatever that means), which is obviously meant to imply it is authentic.
Unfortunately, no doubt people will be taken in by this coin as they have been by the other coins on nails being sold on eBay.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Certif...7e5:g:AEsAAOSwdU1W9~fT
Unfortunately, no doubt people will be taken in by this coin as they have been by the other coins on nails being sold on eBay.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Certif...7e5:g:AEsAAOSwdU1W9~fT
www.sullivannumismatics.com Dealer in Mint Error Coins.
0
Comments
Item condition:
--not specified
“manufactured by Marcus Jacob Company London”
'Limited to 5000 Units.'
OMG.....you have got to be kidding
https://imdb.com/name/nm1835107/
obverse is the LEFT side of Washington's portrait.
the reverse is the RIGHT side of the eagle.
That's just LAZY!
..............................................this is getting nuts
https://imdb.com/name/nm1835107/
Jade Rare Coin eBay Listings
Its struck on an undersized planchet , your normal 25 penny nail is much bigger than that.
How the board sees most of the reproductions depends on who produces them, if they are produced in China or London they are bad. If produced in Florida or Colorado they are just fine. I don't mean to overly generalize, as many on this board are consistent in their response to reproductions.
Join the fight against Minnesota's unjust coin dealer tax law.
Ike Specialist
Finest Toned Ike I've Ever Seen, been looking since 1986
This is a reproduction and is clearly meant to be one. While I hate this kind of reproduction, and believe it is illegal under the HPA. I have seen many threads that defend them.
How the board sees most of the reproductions depends on who produces them, if they are produced in China or London they are bad. If produced in Florida or Colorado they are just fine. I don't mean to overly generalize, as many on this board are consistent in their response to reproductions.
For the record, I do not condone making something like that which is not readily identifiable as a fantasy (due to having a clear fantasy date).
I've been shown coins struck on nails numerous times by people wondering if they're genuine, and once so far a customer who bought one for several hundred dollars thinking it was real (fortunately they got their money back via eBay, but once these enter the off-eBay market, that wont be the case.)
This is a reproduction and is clearly meant to be one. While I hate this kind of reproduction, and believe it is illegal under the HPA. I have seen many threads that defend them.
How the board sees most of the reproductions depends on who produces them, if they are produced in China or London they are bad. If produced in Florida or Colorado they are just fine. I don't mean to overly generalize, as many on this board are consistent in their response to reproductions.
For the record, I do not condone making something like that which is not readily identifiable as a fantasy (due to having a clear fantasy date).
Would you find it OK if the struck on nail reproduction had a clearly visible date of say a 1975 quarter?
I understand we have a difference of opinion on where the line should be, but I am asking to try and understand your perspective.
Join the fight against Minnesota's unjust coin dealer tax law.
This is a reproduction and is clearly meant to be one. While I hate this kind of reproduction, and believe it is illegal under the HPA. I have seen many threads that defend them.
How the board sees most of the reproductions depends on who produces them, if they are produced in China or London they are bad. If produced in Florida or Colorado they are just fine. I don't mean to overly generalize, as many on this board are consistent in their response to reproductions.
For the record, I do not condone making something like that which is not readily identifiable as a fantasy (due to having a clear fantasy date).
Would you find it OK if the struck on nail reproduction had a clearly visible date of say a 1975 quarter?
I understand we have a difference of opinion on where the line should be, but I am asking to try and understand your perspective.
It would be better if it showed a "1975" date (for example) because that would make it readily identifiable as a "fantasy".
But I personally wouldn't make a fantasy-date strike on a nail. I only sell fantasy-date items that are over-struck on legal-tender coins of the same design type.
It would be better if it showed a "1975" date (for example) because that would make it readily identifiable as a "fantasy".
just curious how having a date of 1975 (1976, 1986 etc would make it an obvious fantasy piece?
not piling on; just curious.
.
It would be better if it showed a "1975" date (for example) because that would make it readily identifiable as a "fantasy".
just curious how having a date of 1975 (1976, 1986 etc would make it an obvious fantasy piece?
not piling on; just curious.
.
Even a future date, like Zombucks, would only be considered a fantasy piece until that year rolled around.
And unless the Zombie Apocalypse occurs next year, the future date will occur.
But maybe the real issue is that there is a TPG certified nail.