Breaking (Coin) News: Counterfeit (altered date) 1804 large cent found in PCGS slab

RYK · April 16, 2007 5:37AM

Read about it ATS

I have reposted this thread because I believe a lot of interested collectors may have missed the the prior thread.

tradedollarnut · April 16, 2007 5:40AM

Perhaps its just semantics, but isn't there a difference between a 'counterfeit' coin and an 'altered date' coin?

silverpop · April 16, 2007 5:40AM

Ouch

I gather that PCGS will step up to the plate and buy the coin back from the person since they did slab the coin

how did PCGS miss that?

Russ · April 16, 2007 5:41AM

<< I gather that PCGS will step up to the plate and buy the coin back >>

Of course they will.

Russ, NCNE

Zoins · April 16, 2007 5:45AM

<< Perhaps its just semantics, but isn't there a difference between a 'counterfeit' coin and an 'altered date' coin?

>>

There is no legal distinction under the Hobby Protection Act. The law deals with "imitation numismatic items" which covers both counterfeits and altered coins. Both are required to have COPY on them, unless they can be considered exempt some how.

I wonder if you can take a seller to court for selling an altered date coin under the HPA.

Thanks for the repost RYK. I didn't realize how much of a difference the thread title makes here. I'll do better next time

ziggy29 · April 16, 2007 5:48AM

This is why people buy the keys slabbed. Someone would be seriously SOL and likely without recourse if they bought it raw from some fly-by-nighter on eBay.

As critical as I am of how plastic distorts the market where grading is concerned, the major TPGs are an unqualified blessing to the hobby where authentication is concerned.

tradedollarnut · April 16, 2007 5:49AM

Yes, they are equally as bad as far as being in a slab. However, I think it's a bit misleading to state a counterfeit coin is in a PCGS slab when that is not really the case here.

Not defending the mistake on PCGS's part - it's just that it's not a counterfeit coin ... it's an altered date coin. There's a distinct difference.

Zoins · April 16, 2007 5:52AM

Can an altered date 1803 also be considered a counterfeit 1804?

The important aspect of this coin is the date, and isn't the date (at least the 4) counterfeit?

mozeppa · April 16, 2007 5:54AM

this is why i'm against the 6 second grading.

ccmorgan · April 16, 2007 5:55AM

Has PCGS verified this?

itsnotjustme · April 16, 2007 5:56AM

I will point out it is jumping to conclusions to assume that this is PCGS' error. Has anyone examined the slab to be sure it is not a counterfeit and has not been tampered with?

PerryHall · April 16, 2007 5:59AM

<< this is why i'm against the 6 second grading.

>>

You're thinking of morgans and state quarters. With early rare coins such as this one, they spend at least 10 seconds.

commoncents05 · April 16, 2007 5:59AM

<< Has anyone examined the slab to be sure it is not a counterfeit and has not been tampered with? >>

My thoughts as well. The photos aren't great for examining the edges, but there aren't any big red flags.

-Paul

numisma · April 16, 2007 6:02AM

Is it one of only two known.

RareBronzeCollector · April 16, 2007 6:03AM

Another reason to look at, study, and buy the COIN.........

RYK · April 16, 2007 6:09AM

<< Yes, they are equally as bad as far as being in a slab. However, I think it's a bit misleading to state a counterfeit coin is in a PCGS slab when that is not really the case here.

Not defending the mistake on PCGS's part - it's just that it's not a counterfeit coin ... it's an altered date coin. There's a distinct difference. >>

I'll compromise and put both in the title.

BigE · April 16, 2007 6:18AM

<< Is it one of only two known.

>>

-----------BigE (now its unique)

GoldenEyeNumismatics · April 16, 2007 6:37AM

Although I do like PCGS, it's good to see them get something flat-out wrong. It helps to revive that feeling that they are not perfect!

dbldie55 · April 16, 2007 6:37AM

Was this an altered date or a restrike? Not sure from all I have seen (but I did not see the original email)

PerryHall · April 16, 2007 6:38AM

Once PCGS buys it back, I wonder what will happen to it. They'll probably kept it in their counterfeit reference library

PerryHall · April 16, 2007 7:03AM

<< Although I do like PCGS, it's good to see them get something flat-out wrong. It helps to revive that feeling that they are not perfect! >>

Who ever thought they were perfect?

joecopper · April 16, 2007 9:30AM

PCGS does not have to verify it -- they are wrong, period.
They can acknowledge their error!!!

mozeppa · April 16, 2007 9:33AM

<< 

<< Although I do like PCGS, it's good to see them get something flat-out wrong. It helps to revive that feeling that they are not perfect! >>

Who ever thought they were perfect?

>>

have you ever called them and asked if they make mistakes?

JRocco · April 16, 2007 9:49AM

It's those darn human graders again.....

Hey----poo poo happens. I am sure they will honor their mistake.

Shortgapbob · April 16, 2007 9:50AM

<< Was this an altered date or a restrike? Not sure from all I have seen (but I did not see the original email) >>

It is definitely not the restrike of 1860, as that restrike has an 1820 reverse on it. This coin does not have the 1820 reverse.

CoinKing · April 16, 2007 10:11AM

Of course we will.

tjkillian · April 16, 2007 10:13AM

Whether PCGS is wrong or right, they will still need to examine the coin and its holder. Then, at that time, they will make their decision on what to do.

I'm quite sure they will do the right thing. It is "ONLY" a couple of thousand dollars. Not like the micro-O issue with Morgan dollars.

Russ · April 16, 2007 10:13AM

<< Of course we will. >>

Hey! I already said that.

Russ, NCNE

RYK · April 17, 2007 12:26AM

How much will/should PCGS pay to take that one back?

Longacre · April 17, 2007 12:34AM

There is a brief discussion of this in the EAC Region 8 newsletter.

Rob85635 · April 17, 2007 1:00AM

Almost no way the slab has been counterfeited or tampered with. Only two are known and the cert number does verify Cert number. What this means is there are only two ways a counterfeit slab could be made.

1. The original slab would have to have been cut up and a new slab made with the insert from the real one and the fake coin (leaving the real 1804 unslabbed). This would imply that either the owner of the original was up to no good or the coin was stolen. I know this cannot be true.

2. The cert number on the auction has been used to fake an additional insert for a slab. Meaning you would have two slabs out there with the original valid and real graded coin from pcgs and another someone faked with the altered coin in it. If that was the case it would mean there are three known. Two real and a fake. If there are two known and one fake, I am sure whoever owns the real one would be upset once he/she caught wind of this (highly unlikely) and would step up with their real example.

With the pop like it is, no way (imho) there is a tampering, counterfeiting or altering of the slab.

I know PCGS' reputation and all will be made well. No one is perfect and it seems a genuine grading mistake. Must be a really slick altered coing to get past them.

Can anyone think of any other posibilities or ways a slab could be altered/forged to make it appear genuine in the case of this coin? I think I am covering the only two (HIGHLY UNLIKELY) scenarios but being new I might be missing something.

dorkkarl · April 17, 2007 1:02AM

will it cross to ngc?

K S

RYK · April 17, 2007 1:06AM

<< will it cross to ngc?

K S >>

That is a fantastic idea!

PCGS buys the coin, crosses it to NGC (where it upgrades

), drops it unceremoniously in a FUN auction, profits on the transaction, and raises the quarterly dividend. Sound like a plan!

ColonialCoinUnion · April 17, 2007 1:07AM

<< Only two are known >>

Wrong terminology.

mrearlygold · April 17, 2007 1:19AM

<< will it cross to ngc?

K S >>

slipgate · April 17, 2007 1:20AM

I see 109 for that series (1504), 2 for 1505...

1504 1804 1C MSBN 18 22 23 4 4 1 2 1 1 109
1505 1804 1C MSRB 1 2

RichieURich · April 17, 2007 2:49AM

<< 

<< Only two are known >>

Wrong terminology. >>

Only two IS known???

hookooekoo · April 17, 2007 3:13AM

<< How much will/should PCGS pay to take that one back? >>

Well PCGS has an online price guide, and the How To Use page includes the words The PCGS Price Guide is a guide to assist the coin buying public in determining values for all significant United States rare coins.

Trying to follow various links on this subject, the coin in question appears to be slabbed as 1804 Large Cent graded F12.

Since PCGS seems to be telling the public this coin is valued at $4,750, I think the owner deserves $4,750.

Zoins · April 17, 2007 3:17AM

<< 

<< How much will/should PCGS pay to take that one back? >>

Well PCGS has an online price guide, and the How To Use page includes the words

<< The PCGS Price Guide is a guide to assist the coin buying public in determining values for all significant United States rare coins. >>

Trying to follow various links on this subject, the coin in question appears to be slabbed as 1804 Large Cent graded F12.

Since PCGS seems to be telling the public this coin is valued at $4,750, I think the owner deserves $4,750. >>

In the past, PCGS used what they determine to be market price for grade guarantees, not necessarily what's listed in the Price Guide. You should find this if you do some searches.

hookooekoo · April 17, 2007 1:19PM

<< 

<< 

<< How much will/should PCGS pay to take that one back? >>

Well PCGS has an online price guide, and the How To Use page includes the words

<< The PCGS Price Guide is a guide to assist the coin buying public in determining values for all significant United States rare coins. >>

Trying to follow various links on this subject, the coin in question appears to be slabbed as 1804 Large Cent graded F12.

Since PCGS seems to be telling the public this coin is valued at $4,750, I think the owner deserves $4,750. >>

In the past, PCGS used what they determine to be market price for grade guarantees, not necessarily what's listed in the Price Guide. You should find this if you do some searches. >>

I didn't expect the owner to get what the PCGS Price Guide lists.

While I know I'd get something of a "marketing" or "political" answer, I'd like to see someone try to justify publishing a "Price Guide", but then turn around and not honor their own guide.

secondrepublic · April 17, 2007 1:38PM

The fact that this is such rare news - out of the millions of coins certified by PCGS - is itself a credit to the company.

PerryHall · April 17, 2007 4:26PM

It would be interesting to see if Coin World does an article on this event.

Michigan · April 17, 2007 10:52PM

<< It would be interesting to see if Coin World does an article on this event.

>>

CW does not like to report things that make the coin business look bad, they dragged their feet a long time on the Tom Noe story
but finally had to acknowledge that the situation was taking place when the mainstream media picked up on it.

tahoe98 · April 18, 2007 1:27AM

<< Ouch

I gather that PCGS will step up to the plate and buy the coin back from the person since they did slab the coin

how did PCGS miss that? >>

must have been closing time on a friday.

Breaking (Coin) News: Counterfeit (altered date) 1804 large cent found in PCGS slab

Comments

Leave a Comment