Based in part on the impossibly well struck 1918-S nickel that I saw which came from Prague, and which came with other typical ones and a very believable back story, I am not ready to call this 33-S fake. It may very well be a special strike.
Andy Lustig
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
The United States recognized the Soviet Union in November of 1933. The negotiatons took place in Washington DC. FDR appointed William Bullit as the first US Ambassador. The US was the the last world power to recognize the Soviet government since it consolidated power and formed in 1922. I have not done any research into whether any type of presentation coins were used as gifts for this significant event. Given the status of gold and US coin production, seems the choices were rather limited. Seems this is at a minimum a possibility... Even if it is a remote possibility.
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
It's great to read that you were able to conclude this coin is counterfeit without an in hand review or without a review of whatever documentation the auction house may have been provided by the consignor.
Too many funny things can happen with photography do definitively determine this to be a counterfeit. IMHO. There does appear to be something very unusual (suspicious) about it, however. It does look almost like a matte proof, but that makes no sense from San Francisco. On the other hand, given that there are no Philadelphia issues in that year, if someone wanted a presentation piece could they not have used S-mint dies?
While I believe any final determination needs to be done with coin in hand, I will say, it appears to be counterfeit... the right arm is suspiciously flat compared to known authentic coins. The shoe detail - both - are different from a known authentic coin... other points mentioned above... I would love to see this coin submitted to PCGS. Cheers, RickO
First thing I noticed, after the right arm, was the right foot / shoe. Didn't look proper.
Comparing the sun's rays to another genuine coin really closed the book on my opinion that this is a counterfeit.
RE: "Too many funny things can happen with photography do definitively determine this to be a counterfeit."
Unfortunately for the buyer, this is not one of those situations. There are far too many discrepancies, differences and errors to attribute them to the vagaries of photography. The item is a counterfeit 1933-S half dollar made with false dies.
The strike is fantastic, the color/toning gorgeous. The coin makes me salivate. Not 10K salivate, but if it were a series I collected, I would not sleep for a few nights knowing I missed it. However, a 10K coin should, would, absolutely would be in a holder...so, I would already suspect something fishy.
Edited, after reading more of the posts, and then studying the pics more, the arm looks funky. Still, counterfeit or not, coin looks fabulous. Would rather pay a couple hundred bucks than 10K.
The more I look at it, the more I think it might be genuine. I can think of one plausible reason for a 1933-S to look like this. I am consulting with a few people about it.
For right now, no call one way or the other.
TD
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
Walker Proof Digital Album Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
@coinkat said:
The United States recognized the Soviet Union in November of 1933. The negotiatos took place in Washington DC. FDR appointed William Bullit as the first US Ambassador. The US was the the last world power to recognize the Soviet government since it consolidated power and formed in 1922. I have not done any research into whether any type of presentation coins were used as gifts for this significant event. Given the status of gold and US coin production, seems the choices were rather limited. Seems this is at a minimum a possibility... Even if it is a remote possibility.
It would be interesting if this turned out to be a Soviet Union presentation piece.
I updated the image to show the price including 17% BP - €8,424.
Before we rush to judgment, let's at a minimum see if we can get more information. I would like to know the weight of the coin. Further, seems reasonable to ask if the winning bid went to the floor which would be a reflection as to whether the winner saw the coin in hand before bidding.
It would also be interesting to know what Katz was provided in terms of the history behind the coin. It may also help to get SF mint records from 1933 as to production numbers for the WLH. The total mintage is not that low, but it still begs the question about when the final mintage concluded. I suspect this would be tall order. Seems there would have several dies used in connection with this date... Could there be something out of the ordinary not previously discovered or brought to the mainstream of numismatics? All I can write is much stranger things have happened.
The OP coin is on the verge of being tried and convicted in the Court of public opinion as being a counterfeit based on a photograph and a comparison to one other coin from archives from a major auction house. I think we can do better than that.
Could this 1933-s be a counterfeit? The answer is yes
Has a reasonable and appropriate investigation been completed to make that determination?
The answer is No... We're not even close or in the same ball park.
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
Zoins... Just to be clear, I am not saying that it definitely is but simply writing that it cannot be ruled out... At least not yet. While a Peace Dollar would have been possible... Perhaps a date of 1922 would have been possible and an easy thing to do, but it would highlight the 11 year lapse in the US recognition of the Soviet Government. I doubt that was considered viable at the time.
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
Just the fact that there is disagreement is enough to tell me to stay away.
I may have missed a prior detail, but how does a Czech auction imply that this could be a Soviet presentation piece? They were two entirely different countries.
If there are ANY anomolies, especially with a high end coin, then it must be proven authentic, not proven fake, to settle the issue. "Guilty until proven innocent."
The Soviet presentation piece started only as a possible theory... Mainly because the coin has the appearance of a some type of presentation piece or possibly a pattern. As I wrote, no research that has been undertaken to establish this. The location of the auction company was not a factor. I think we all know that the Czechoslovakia is a separate country.
In this instance, I am unable to agree to the proposition that a coin such as this is essentially counterfeit until proven that it is authentic.
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
In this instance, I am unable to agree to the proposition that a coin such as this is essentially counterfeit until proven that it is authentic.
work in reverse and consider what JBK posted. instead of pointing out why you don't think it's a counterfeit tell us all the reasons why you believe it is genuine, all the similar traits and characteristics it shares with other Walkers and other 1933-S high grade Walkers.
@keets said: In this instance, I am unable to agree to the proposition that a coin such as this is essentially counterfeit until proven that it is authentic.
work in reverse and consider what JBK posted. instead of pointing out why you don't think it's a counterfeit tell us all the reasons why you believe it is genuine, all the similar traits and characteristics it shares with other Walkers and other 1933-S high grade Walkers.
Maybe just a little humility. TWO people saw it and believed it with $10K. I'm staring at a bad picture and I know better?
Maybe just a little humility. TWO people saw it and believed it with $10K. I'm staring at a bad picture and I know better?
and we know this because?? we know absolutely NOTHING about this coin except for the link provided and the interpretive analysis of an online picture by member Numismatists who are better than fair when it comes to this type of stuff. for my own part I have said essentially two things: based on the picture the coin doesn't appear to be real and that an overlay might help sort things out.
the coin may be Genuine and that may be revealed. however, if it turns out to be a counterfeit it will probably never be revealed.
since you want us to believe that you know more than what the link provides, please tell us.
@keets said: Maybe just a little humility. TWO people saw it and believed it with $10K. I'm staring at a bad picture and I know better?
and we know this because?? we know absolutely NOTHING about this coin except for the link provided and the interpretive analysis of an online picture by member Numismatists who are better than fair when it comes to this type of stuff. for my own part I have said essentially two things: based on the picture the coin doesn't appear to be real and that an overlay might help sort things out.
the coin may be Genuine and that may be revealed. however, if it turns out to be a counterfeit it will probably never be revealed.
since you want us to believe that you know more than what the link provides, please tell us.
I KNOW two people bid the coin up to 7200 euros because that's how auctions work. The coin didn't magically levitate to that lofty height on its own. Greysheet bid for a 1933-S in 66 is $4500 and in 67 is $12k. So, either 2 people think that coin is Real and a 67 or they think it is matte proof or something unusual. But there must be 2 people who felt that way.
Could it be counterfeit? Yes. But, again, we are going by a poor photograph and I don't really see any glaring indicators that couldn't be artifacts of lighting, hue and angle.
And, I NEVER suggested I know more than you or anyone else. In fact, I said almost the opposite: I cannot presume to know more than the two people (or more) who bid the coin up to $10k.
@davewesen said:
maybe it was touched-up with an expert engraver
If it was touched up by an "expert" engraver I don't think we would be having a debate on if it is counterfeit or not.
IMO, the differences are more than touched up areas. As I enlarged the photos yesterday on my I pad, there were a number of differences in the detail that couldn't be explained by someone re-engraving. Besides all of those mentioned, I would point out the lack of detail in the tiny area between the breasts on the OP's example. The tiny horseshoe area contains detail on the known 33-S and is just a blob on the possible counterfeit coin. Keep in mind I am blowing these up the size of a hockey puck.
Why would the mint start from scratch and re engrave an entire master die, for a presentation piece to Russia. Seems much more likely they would have used the master, produced a striking die from it, and sent the presentation piece on.
I'm in the counterfeit camp at this point, but what a scary thought that someone possessed the skill to get a die that close to the real deal.
While a counterfeit is very possible, this level of detail is way above what you would expect from our oriental friends. Reading the comments, it looks like something new and (so far) unique, which is also not usually something you'd expect from a counterfeit designed for mass production. Could be a numismatic forgery, specific to collectors, but why go with that date / mint where MS examples are easily available?
In my series, performing XRF to determine metal composition and look at trace elements specific to that particular mint / time period would be the next step. Without knowing how US mints sourced their silver for blanks, I'm not sure if this is something useful in this case.
@davewesen said:
maybe it was touched-up with an expert engraver
If it was touched up by an "expert" engraver I don't think we would be having a debate on if it is counterfeit or not.
IMO, the differences are more than touched up areas. As I enlarged the photos yesterday on my I pad, there were a number of differences in the detail that couldn't be explained by someone re-engraving. Besides all of those mentioned, I would point out the lack of detail in the tiny area between the breasts on the OP's example. The tiny horseshoe area contains detail on the known 33-S and is just a blob on the possible counterfeit coin. Keep in mind I am blowing these up the size of a hockey puck.
Why would the mint start from scratch and re engrave an entire master die, for a presentation piece to Russia. Seems much more likely they would have used the master, produced a striking die from it, and sent the presentation piece on.
I'm in the counterfeit camp at this point, but what a scary thought that someone possessed the skill to get a die that close to the real deal.
I'm not sure the previous exceptions hold up. The shoes look the same to me except for the more detailed latticework on the sandals on the OP coin. The sun's rays that look wider on the second coin are NOT that wide on the coin in my hand, that is an artifact of the photo. Blowing up an image to hockey puck sized pixels inherently creates distortions. You are comparing a grey image (possibly enhanced by the auction company?) to a blast white image.
I really don't see anything definitive in the two images. I wouldn't bid $10k on the image, by the way, but I wouldn't do that on any raw coin based on an internet image alone. I once saw an expert photographer use directed lighting to make an XF large cent look Unc.
One other note, not necessarily specific to this coin: high quality forgeries are known to have been produced in this part of the world - coins and banknotes. We always think of China but the former "Eastern European" countries also had/have some master forgers. In one or more of these countries the laws were such that counterfeiting was not an outright crime absent fraudulent distribution (not sure about the current legal situation).
why does someone not call the auctioneer instead of guessing back and forth? just to hear his story.
I know, he does speak a reasonable English. personally I do not think that he is aware there might be an issue with that coin. Although, the high price should raise some questions.
I had several dealings with him and I have to say that he is very fair.
here is his info:
Mark Katz
011.420. 223 002 522
katzcoins@gmail.com
Comments
Based in part on the impossibly well struck 1918-S nickel that I saw which came from Prague, and which came with other typical ones and a very believable back story, I am not ready to call this 33-S fake. It may very well be a special strike.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
Yup flag stars are way off, first thing I noticed after the flat arm and tennis shoes. Not even a good fake but did apparently fool the "experts" lol
the second image in this thread shows the 7200 foreign currency. i presume someone did the conversion and it is about $10k.
.
7,200 Euro, or about $8,850.00
and then add Buyers Premium
Anyone know what their Buyers Premium is?
General comission is 17%
Got it. Just saw it in the T&Cs.
It sure doesn't look right. It will be interesting to see what PCGS says if it is sent in.
Looks very suspicious. I am going to drink a Pilsner urquell and be glad that I am not the winner.
Sometimes, it’s better to be LUCKY than good. 🍀 🍺👍
My Full Walker Registry Set (1916-1947):
https://www.ngccoin.com/registry/competitive-sets/16292/
The United States recognized the Soviet Union in November of 1933. The negotiatons took place in Washington DC. FDR appointed William Bullit as the first US Ambassador. The US was the the last world power to recognize the Soviet government since it consolidated power and formed in 1922. I have not done any research into whether any type of presentation coins were used as gifts for this significant event. Given the status of gold and US coin production, seems the choices were rather limited. Seems this is at a minimum a possibility... Even if it is a remote possibility.
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
Too many funny things can happen with photography do definitively determine this to be a counterfeit. IMHO. There does appear to be something very unusual (suspicious) about it, however. It does look almost like a matte proof, but that makes no sense from San Francisco. On the other hand, given that there are no Philadelphia issues in that year, if someone wanted a presentation piece could they not have used S-mint dies?
Or, it's counterfeit..
Is there a description in the catalog that maybe someone could translate?
Never mind. I found the catalog, which says pretty much nothing but "Solid Unc", mintage of 1,800,000.
Keep in mind that there are TWO people, at least, who thought it was something special. The rest of the U.S. results around it look pretty normal.
Ockhams Razor should apply here.
While I believe any final determination needs to be done with coin in hand, I will say, it appears to be counterfeit... the right arm is suspiciously flat compared to known authentic coins. The shoe detail - both - are different from a known authentic coin... other points mentioned above... I would love to see this coin submitted to PCGS. Cheers, RickO
Counterfeit!!
RFR!!
"“Those who sacrifice liberty for security/safety deserve neither.“(Benjamin Franklin)
"I only golf on days that end in 'Y'" (DE59)
Wow am I late to the BBQ / roast!
First thing I noticed, after the right arm, was the right foot / shoe. Didn't look proper.
Comparing the sun's rays to another genuine coin really closed the book on my opinion that this is a counterfeit.
Insert witicism here. [ xxx ]
RE: "Too many funny things can happen with photography do definitively determine this to be a counterfeit."
Unfortunately for the buyer, this is not one of those situations. There are far too many discrepancies, differences and errors to attribute them to the vagaries of photography. The item is a counterfeit 1933-S half dollar made with false dies.
The strike is fantastic, the color/toning gorgeous. The coin makes me salivate. Not 10K salivate, but if it were a series I collected, I would not sleep for a few nights knowing I missed it. However, a 10K coin should, would, absolutely would be in a holder...so, I would already suspect something fishy.
Edited, after reading more of the posts, and then studying the pics more, the arm looks funky. Still, counterfeit or not, coin looks fabulous. Would rather pay a couple hundred bucks than 10K.
The more I look at it, the more I think it might be genuine. I can think of one plausible reason for a 1933-S to look like this. I am consulting with a few people about it.
For right now, no call one way or the other.
TD
I’m of the opinion this is not a counterfeit
mark
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
It would be interesting if this turned out to be a Soviet Union presentation piece.
I updated the image to show the price including 17% BP - €8,424.
Before we rush to judgment, let's at a minimum see if we can get more information. I would like to know the weight of the coin. Further, seems reasonable to ask if the winning bid went to the floor which would be a reflection as to whether the winner saw the coin in hand before bidding.
It would also be interesting to know what Katz was provided in terms of the history behind the coin. It may also help to get SF mint records from 1933 as to production numbers for the WLH. The total mintage is not that low, but it still begs the question about when the final mintage concluded. I suspect this would be tall order. Seems there would have several dies used in connection with this date... Could there be something out of the ordinary not previously discovered or brought to the mainstream of numismatics? All I can write is much stranger things have happened.
The OP coin is on the verge of being tried and convicted in the Court of public opinion as being a counterfeit based on a photograph and a comparison to one other coin from archives from a major auction house. I think we can do better than that.
Could this 1933-s be a counterfeit? The answer is yes
Has a reasonable and appropriate investigation been completed to make that determination?
The answer is No... We're not even close or in the same ball park.
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
Zoins... Just to be clear, I am not saying that it definitely is but simply writing that it cannot be ruled out... At least not yet. While a Peace Dollar would have been possible... Perhaps a date of 1922 would have been possible and an easy thing to do, but it would highlight the 11 year lapse in the US recognition of the Soviet Government. I doubt that was considered viable at the time.
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
maybe it was touched-up with an expert engraver
I think if someone can do an overlay the right arm and the right hand/fingers will tell a lot.
When the "experts" can no longer detect a counterfeit we must call it authentic. 6 seconds is a lifetime to examine a coin.
With some counterfeits, the only way experts could tell was to see more than one.
JDLR (what security says when something in the casino looks off) .
Just curious... How many who have commented here on this thread have looked at their 1933-s WLH since the thread appeared?
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
If the buyer of the coin reads sees this, please send me a PM. I may be able to help.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
The outstretched arm and fingers do look weird.
Also look at the shape of the face, especially the forehead and the nose, as you compare the two.
Just the fact that there is disagreement is enough to tell me to stay away.
I may have missed a prior detail, but how does a Czech auction imply that this could be a Soviet presentation piece? They were two entirely different countries.
If there are ANY anomolies, especially with a high end coin, then it must be proven authentic, not proven fake, to settle the issue. "Guilty until proven innocent."
The Soviet presentation piece started only as a possible theory... Mainly because the coin has the appearance of a some type of presentation piece or possibly a pattern. As I wrote, no research that has been undertaken to establish this. The location of the auction company was not a factor. I think we all know that the Czechoslovakia is a separate country.
In this instance, I am unable to agree to the proposition that a coin such as this is essentially counterfeit until proven that it is authentic.
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
In this instance, I am unable to agree to the proposition that a coin such as this is essentially counterfeit until proven that it is authentic.
work in reverse and consider what JBK posted. instead of pointing out why you don't think it's a counterfeit tell us all the reasons why you believe it is genuine, all the similar traits and characteristics it shares with other Walkers and other 1933-S high grade Walkers.
Maybe just a little humility. TWO people saw it and believed it with $10K. I'm staring at a bad picture and I know better?
That can't be real
BHNC #203
Maybe just a little humility. TWO people saw it and believed it with $10K. I'm staring at a bad picture and I know better?
and we know this because?? we know absolutely NOTHING about this coin except for the link provided and the interpretive analysis of an online picture by member Numismatists who are better than fair when it comes to this type of stuff. for my own part I have said essentially two things: based on the picture the coin doesn't appear to be real and that an overlay might help sort things out.
the coin may be Genuine and that may be revealed. however, if it turns out to be a counterfeit it will probably never be revealed.
since you want us to believe that you know more than what the link provides, please tell us.
If it was touched up by an "expert" engraver I don't think we would be having a debate on if it is counterfeit or not.
I KNOW two people bid the coin up to 7200 euros because that's how auctions work. The coin didn't magically levitate to that lofty height on its own. Greysheet bid for a 1933-S in 66 is $4500 and in 67 is $12k. So, either 2 people think that coin is Real and a 67 or they think it is matte proof or something unusual. But there must be 2 people who felt that way.
Could it be counterfeit? Yes. But, again, we are going by a poor photograph and I don't really see any glaring indicators that couldn't be artifacts of lighting, hue and angle.
And, I NEVER suggested I know more than you or anyone else. In fact, I said almost the opposite: I cannot presume to know more than the two people (or more) who bid the coin up to $10k.
IMO, the differences are more than touched up areas. As I enlarged the photos yesterday on my I pad, there were a number of differences in the detail that couldn't be explained by someone re-engraving. Besides all of those mentioned, I would point out the lack of detail in the tiny area between the breasts on the OP's example. The tiny horseshoe area contains detail on the known 33-S and is just a blob on the possible counterfeit coin. Keep in mind I am blowing these up the size of a hockey puck. Why would the mint start from scratch and re engrave an entire master die, for a presentation piece to Russia. Seems much more likely they would have used the master, produced a striking die from it, and sent the presentation piece on. I'm in the counterfeit camp at this point, but what a scary thought that someone possessed the skill to get a die that close to the real deal.While a counterfeit is very possible, this level of detail is way above what you would expect from our oriental friends. Reading the comments, it looks like something new and (so far) unique, which is also not usually something you'd expect from a counterfeit designed for mass production. Could be a numismatic forgery, specific to collectors, but why go with that date / mint where MS examples are easily available?
In my series, performing XRF to determine metal composition and look at trace elements specific to that particular mint / time period would be the next step. Without knowing how US mints sourced their silver for blanks, I'm not sure if this is something useful in this case.
8 Reales Madness Collection
Double post.
8 Reales Madness Collection
In any case, this is pretty exciting and I hope we find answers.
8 Reales Madness Collection
I'm not sure the previous exceptions hold up. The shoes look the same to me except for the more detailed latticework on the sandals on the OP coin. The sun's rays that look wider on the second coin are NOT that wide on the coin in my hand, that is an artifact of the photo. Blowing up an image to hockey puck sized pixels inherently creates distortions. You are comparing a grey image (possibly enhanced by the auction company?) to a blast white image.
I really don't see anything definitive in the two images. I wouldn't bid $10k on the image, by the way, but I wouldn't do that on any raw coin based on an internet image alone. I once saw an expert photographer use directed lighting to make an XF large cent look Unc.
Known example from earlier post
Katz example
One other note, not necessarily specific to this coin: high quality forgeries are known to have been produced in this part of the world - coins and banknotes. We always think of China but the former "Eastern European" countries also had/have some master forgers. In one or more of these countries the laws were such that counterfeiting was not an outright crime absent fraudulent distribution (not sure about the current legal situation).
It's hammered. This is one of the reasons dealers get hammered, too.
why does someone not call the auctioneer instead of guessing back and forth? just to hear his story.
I know, he does speak a reasonable English. personally I do not think that he is aware there might be an issue with that coin. Although, the high price should raise some questions.
I had several dealings with him and I have to say that he is very fair.
here is his info:
Mark Katz
011.420. 223 002 522
katzcoins@gmail.com