Options
For those new to collecting, examples of what NOT to purchase, unless you're into counterfeits.
morgansforever
Posts: 8,501 ✭✭✭✭✭
The 1st example may in fact be a genuine Morgan, but that isn't a genuine MM for sure.
The second, the 2 of the date is NOT a genuine Mint digit, even with a blurry image and annilized by a dealer in business for 30 years, sure..............
The 3rd, already created a post about it, that MM was NOT used in 1878, no questions asked. Not to mention the date and the overall cast look.
World coins FSHO Hundreds of successful BST transactions U.S. coins FSHO
1
Comments
Thanks .... this could definitely help collectors... Cheers, RickO
Here are a few fake golds I've been saving pictures of the last few months when I see them:
Years ago, I viewed a fake 1862-S $2.50 in MS62 or so that was so well-made that I could not distinguish it from a real one. 1862-S is a rare date that would be worth a large sum, if real. This coin turned up in the 1990s in a local shop in NY. All of the local dealers viewed it, and none of them could say why it was not real. I could not find anything about it whatsoever that made me suspicious. The weight was correct. There were no raised bumps. It was well struck. The style of numbers and letters was correct. The surfaces looked like a U.S. mint product should. It had a bit of old gold patina over its surfaces.
ANACS and PCGS both found a reason to call it Not Genuine. It must have been a very old counterfeit of a rare date. I would imagine the graders were familiar with the striking characteristics and diagnostics of that particular issue, and the rest of us were not. Last time I saw it, a pawn shop owner was carrying it around in his wallet to wear it down to AU, hopefully erasing the diagnostics.
This coin was a key learning experience for me, as it told me that raw gold is just not something I should buy, even after inspecting the coin in person.
Good thread!
My YouTube Channel
Response from the seller of the 78CC, "I don't think it is but if you feel that then you can send it back for a full refund sorry please give me a explanation so I can see to thanks ron". Replied that is a no questions asked counterfeit. It's not the MM used in 78.
Response from the seller of the 89CC, "How can you tell, because we had a collector in here today that inspected it really good and he says it is authentic. We have also had 3 other people look at it before we listed to be sure". It may be a genuine 1889 Morgan, but the MM is NOT legit, not a leg to stand on.
https://cointalk.com/threads/how-do-you-spot-fake-trade-dollars-anyway.63695/
Got this one recently:
So irritated these are still listed, these are slam dunk fakes. I believe the 89CC is a genuine harshly cleaned 89P with an added MM, no question about it. Is it time for PCGS to have a counterfeit section? I hardly collect anymore, spend most of my free time trying to terminate counterfeit listings.
Neat one, I collect them
BHNC #203
Although in poor condition, it is still a nice find for me:
1834 Obv. 1 Rev. A Davignon 1/A.
Thanks to Louis Scuderi for the ID
BHNC #203