1893 cc /good buy?

indiananationals · March 23, 2010 9:15AM

i was offered this 1893cc for 1500 do u think it is a good buy it seems like a steal it books at like 9000

IRCWCoins · March 23, 2010 9:17AM

It looks like a fake PCGS holder. The coin looks like it could be fake also.

Shortgapbob · March 23, 2010 9:17AM

Looks like a counterfeit coin/holder situation to me. I would definitely pass.

Barndog · March 23, 2010 9:18AM

I know ZIPPO about Morgans, but I do know that if you are being offered a $4000 coin for $1500 you are likely dealing with an incredibly stupid seller, a thief, or someone who is knowingly offering you a counterfeit coin in a counterfeit slab, or all three combined.

49thStateofMind · March 23, 2010 9:21AM

If it's to good to be true...............you know the rest of the story

rld14 · March 23, 2010 9:21AM

Fake PCGS Holder, coin is almost certainly counterfeit as well. Holder is just wrong on so many levels.

Biggest red flag is the price, nobody would sell a legit MS62 93-CC for $1,500.

IRCWCoins · March 23, 2010 9:23AM

Here is a coin with the same Cert number that sold on heritage.

http://coins.ha.com/common/view_item.php?Sale_No=29082&Lot_No=23013

AUandAG · March 23, 2010 9:27AM

I don't know about the holder. But, that coin is not an MS62. Where's the chatter, luster breaks, etc ?
CC's were typically very well struck. Where are the breast feathers? Hair detail???

Those are far better fields than MS62.

Something sure smells like rotten fish.

bob

johnny9434 · March 23, 2010 9:30AM

the original pic looks to fake along with the back of the coin. id pass on that. ps i sure did learn alot here in the last few months. thanks all for the insights and education

anablep · March 23, 2010 9:30AM

I want to know who offered you $1500 for that "coin."

bigmansam88 · March 23, 2010 9:33AM

I'm no expert, but I'm almost 100% sure that it's fake (both the holder and the coin)

The weakness above the ear and the breast feathers on the reverse are similar in
appearance to the fakes from China that are sold on ebay.

pakasmom · March 23, 2010 9:33AM

Isn't this the second time we've seen dubious coin/holder from the OP?

AUandAG · March 23, 2010 9:33AM

<< I want to know who offered you $1500 for that "coin." >>

ME TOO, have your reported this to PCGS????

bob

pakasmom · March 23, 2010 9:35AM

<< 

<< I want to know who offered you $1500 for that "coin." >>

ME TOO, have your reported this to PCGS????

bob >>

The way I read it, he was offered the coin at that price, not the other way around.

lkeigwin · March 23, 2010 9:37AM

Fake coin, fake slab. "Out" the guy!
Lance.

AUandAG · March 23, 2010 9:46AM

<< 

<< 

<< I want to know who offered you $1500 for that "coin." >>

ME TOO, have your reported this to PCGS????

bob >>

The way I read it, he was offered the coin at that price, not the other way around. >>

You are right, but I just want to know who the culprit is!

Ahrensdad · March 23, 2010 10:33AM

The coin certainly doesn't look like a 62, but the slab sure looks convincing. What are the tell tale signs the slab is bad?

Barndog · March 23, 2010 10:51AM

<< The coin certainly doesn't look like a 62, but the slab sure looks convincing. What are the tell tale signs the slab is bad? >>

font doesn't look right to me

GoldenEyeNumismatics · March 23, 2010 10:57AM

that's a generally well made fake. IMO it would fool the average collector.

slipgate · March 23, 2010 11:02AM

Other than having no detail above the ear and a weak strike, that coin looks more like an MS67. Definately a fake for many reasons!

Wolf359 · March 23, 2010 11:07AM

You have a duty to reveal whoever offered you that POS.

InternetJunky · March 23, 2010 11:12AM

<< I know ZIPPO about Morgans, but I do know that if you are being offered a $4000 coin for $1500 you are likely dealing with an incredibly stupid seller, a thief, or someone who is knowingly offering you a counterfeit coin in a counterfeit slab, or all three combined. >>

I just hope the counterfeiters aren't using the forum as a research center on how to make them better.

TwoSides2aCoin · March 23, 2010 11:15AM

Not a good buy...

a GOOD BYE

Ibnemo · March 23, 2010 11:16AM

If you run the numbers at PCGS you come up with the same coin. You would think they would take a photo of the coin they certified as further reference to thwart this kind of BS. Maybe that’s going to be in the up and coming announcement. The Chinese are going to continue to improve; it would be wise for the TPGS to at least keep one step ahead.

pakasmom · March 23, 2010 11:21AM

<< If you run the numbers at PCGS you come up with the same coin. >>

You come up with the same coin as the OP posted? Or the same coin that sold at Heritage with the same cert #?

Ibnemo · March 23, 2010 11:26AM

Ok I’m easily confused. Would you please explain?

Ibnemo · March 23, 2010 11:27AM

<< 

<< If you run the numbers at PCGS you come up with the same coin. >>

You come up with the same coin as the OP posted? Or the same coin that sold at Heritage with the same cert #? >>

Ok I’m easily confused. Would you please explain? Sorry for the #$%#$

pakasmom · March 23, 2010 11:28AM

Ibnemo, Would you mind turning on your PM function, so we could "take this outside?

Placid · March 23, 2010 11:29AM

Pretty good fake

Looks like its from the same place the the one braddick posted.

Ibnemo · March 23, 2010 11:29AM

OK I'll try. Don't wait long!!

coinguy1 · March 23, 2010 11:32AM

<< Ok I’m easily confused. Would you please explain? >>

Whoever counterfeited the PCGS grading label used a real/correct PCGS ID number, which corresponds to an MS62 1893-CC Dollar. However, if you look at the image posted by IRCWCoins on the first page of this thread, it is of the real coin and holder of the same ID number. And that genuine coin (and holder) does not match the first one posted in this thread.

Ibnemo · March 23, 2010 11:38AM

<< 

<< Ok I’m easily confused. Would you please explain? >>

Whoever counterfeited the PCGS grading label used a real/correct PCGS ID number, which corresponds to an MS62 1893-CC Dollar. However, if you look at the image posted by IRCWCoins on the first page of this thread, it is of the real coin and holder of the same ID number. And that genuine coin (and holder) does not match the first one posted in this thread. >>

So who took the photo??

Ibnemo · March 23, 2010 11:42AM

<< 

<< 

<< Ok I’m easily confused. Would you please explain? >>

Whoever counterfeited the PCGS grading label used a real/correct PCGS ID number, which corresponds to an MS62 1893-CC Dollar. However, if you look at the image posted by IRCWCoins on the first page of this thread, it is of the real coin and holder of the same ID number. And that genuine coin (and holder) does not match the first one posted in this thread. >>

So who took the photo?? >>

Sorry for the abrupt question, I guess my question is did IRCWCoins take the photo.??

coinguy1 · March 23, 2010 11:43AM

<< 

<< 

<< Ok I’m easily confused. Would you please explain? >>

Whoever counterfeited the PCGS grading label used a real/correct PCGS ID number, which corresponds to an MS62 1893-CC Dollar. However, if you look at the image posted by IRCWCoins on the first page of this thread, it is of the real coin and holder of the same ID number. And that genuine coin (and holder) does not match the first one posted in this thread. >>

So who took the photo?? >>

I have no idea who took the images of the first coin - the counterfeit. However, I imagine they are from whoever had or has it for sale. The images of the second coin - the genuine one, are from the Heritage auction archives, from when it sold previously.

Ibnemo · March 23, 2010 11:45AM

<< 

<< 

<< 

<< Ok I’m easily confused. Would you please explain? >>

Whoever counterfeited the PCGS grading label used a real/correct PCGS ID number, which corresponds to an MS62 1893-CC Dollar. However, if you look at the image posted by IRCWCoins on the first page of this thread, it is of the real coin and holder of the same ID number. And that genuine coin (and holder) does not match the first one posted in this thread. >>

So who took the photo?? >>

I have no idea who took the images of the first coin - the counterfeit. However, I imagine they are from whoever had or has it for sale. The images of the second coin - the genuine one, are from the Heritage auction archives, from when it sold previously. >>

Thanks for taking the time. Appreciate the help.

AUandAG · March 23, 2010 1:19PM

I'm waiting for information on who offered you this coin.
Have your reported it to PCGS?
bob
If you don't want to post it here then PM me please.

pakasmom · March 24, 2010 3:19AM

<< You have a duty to reveal whoever offered you that POS. >>

Indiananationals, this is being repeated in case you missed it.

coinguy1 · March 24, 2010 3:26AM

<< You have a duty to reveal whoever offered you that POS. >>

While, out of ethical considerations, I certainly hope that he reveals the seller's identity, I am not aware of any actual duty he has to do so.

AUandAG · March 24, 2010 9:18AM

Still waiting. No PM. Nada

bob

TwoSides2aCoin · March 24, 2010 9:24AM

Imagine the swindling going on. It's a sad day in numismatics with ____ like this in the market.

Go ahead and fill in the blank but try to use NICE numismatic words.

DoubleEagle59 · March 24, 2010 9:37AM

the coin looks real, just an altered date/mintmark perhaps,

the coin looks like a typical ms64 "O" mintmark coin with the weak strike.

" run Forest run".

DennisH · March 24, 2010 10:58AM

Why has the OP not gotten back into this discussion?

AUandAG · March 24, 2010 11:14AM

<< Why has the OP not gotten back into this discussion? >>

You got me, he did show us his new purchases at a coin show. But, no response on this one. This is a forum
to discuss and learn. He should follow up asap.

bob

erickso1 · March 26, 2010 4:24AM

Did this ever get resolved?

AUandAG · March 26, 2010 5:36AM

<< Did this ever get resolved? >>

Not that I'm aware of. No PM.

bob

sinin1 · March 26, 2010 6:07AM

maybe he is still trying to find the guy and get his money back

1893 cc /good buy?

Comments

Leave a Comment