Your point is duly noted. He just would not entertain any possibility that it could be fake when I spoke to him about it over the phone. I do not know for sure he will resell it, thats just the impression I got.
FWIW, (and though I seldom disagree with mrpotatohead or Lance,) - I think it would be "good business" to offer to reimburse the grading fees if it's determined to be a fake. Surely, the dealers' reputation is more important than $50....
<< <i>Your point is duly noted. He just would not entertain any possibility that it could be fake when I spoke to him about it over the phone. I do not know for sure he will resell it, thats just the impression I got. >>
What did you pay for that coin raw?
I manage money. I earn money. I save money . I give away money. I collect money. I don’t love money . I do love the Lord God.
<< <i>FWIW, (and though I seldom disagree with mrpotatohead or Lance,).... >>
Thanks for the vote of confidence, but still...
1) Nobody is an expert on everything, and everybody can make a mistake.
and
2) If you want a slabbed coin, you should buy one already in a slab and not assume the seller will cover your cost if things don't turn out how you'd like when you submit the raw coin you bought from him.
Suppose the coin, instead of having come back described as counterfeit, had been identified as a rare varietry for the date. What would most buyers do- insist on returning it as it was not as described by the seller, or keep it and post here about the cherrypick, looking for a "You suck"?
Lot #8001. MEXICO. 8 Reales, 1736-MF. Auction Information: Ponterio & Associates, Inc. The 2010 N.Y.I.N.C. Auction - 1/8/2010 View all lots in this auction
Lot Information KM-103; FC-8a; El-11; Gil-M-8-8. Nice strike, toned. EXTREMELY FINE.
Estimate $200-$300
This one went for $675 raw. I could not get the pic from the archives....
I manage money. I earn money. I save money . I give away money. I collect money. I don’t love money . I do love the Lord God.
<< <i>2) If you want a slabbed coin, you should buy one already in a slab and not assume the seller will cover your cost if things don't turn out how you'd like when you submit the raw coin you bought from him. >>
I fully concur with this if we're talking about a grade designation. But I stand by my contention of it being "good business" in any case of accidently selling a fake.
I'm not a dealer basher... Some of my best friends are dealers.
<< <i>But I stand by my contention of it being "good business" in any case of accidently selling a fake. >>
Fair enough. Maybe he (the seller) did get several opinions before offering the coin for sale- maybe not. But nobody here knows for sure, do they?
Either way, I'm going to stand by my contention that if you want a coin authenticated by "XYZ Grading Company", you should either buy one already authenticated or arrange with the seller before ageeing to purchase the coin what will happen should the coin be determined to be counterfeit after you submit it.
Actually, it seems to me the best way to approach the issue would be to ask the seller to submit the coin himself and agree that you'll buy the coin and pay the authentication fee if it comes back "genuine".
Thats not a bad idea. I may propose that to Mr. Weiss.
I would never expect a refund if a TPG didnt grade a coin a grade a dealer graded it. But, when the coin is fake, thats a bit different. I tried my best to figure out if it were real before he left town, but as you can see from the differnce of opinions there was just no clear consensus at all so I didnt pull the plug. It has been a learning experience that is for sure.
I found this on another dealer's site, also raw, being sold as genuine, and seemingly struck from the exact same dies with the bulge at the lower obverse and, curiously, the same series of what appear to be adjustment marks at the top of the reverse shield:
For starters, I don't like the loss of detail at the X of "REX". It's as if there was pitting on the real coin that was transferred to copy dies.
Also, check out the apparent repeating mark below the center of the MO mintmark on the right side of the coin.
And the mark before the second I of "PHILIP".
Finally, check out the adjustment mark (?) at the top center of the shield.
If these aren't the same coin - and they certainly are not the same coin - at least one of them is a fake. But more likely, both are fake. (Most likely, hundreds of fakes were made from the copy dies. What are the odds that one of these two is the original?)
(EDITED ONE LAST TIME to say that the OP's coin is 100% fake. If it had been the original coin from which the copy dies were made, all other pieces from these dies would exhibit the same apparent flatness of strike. And the coin that CCU posted does not.)
BTW, I could not have told you from just the OP images that the coin is fake.
Andy Lustig
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
This has much more finite features and not sloppy.
As someone mentioned earlier the "o" over m for Mexico City is much more consistent
The continents on the two globes is more defined
There are accurate dentils
The lions & castles in the crest are refined, etc. etc.
This is an AU55, NGC, sold for around $1,200
The 4 petal rosettes are all evenly worn, but defined
One thing I've noticed about the fake is that the lettering around the rim is farther from the devices than with an original, where the letters are close to the crown, etc.
<< <i>I think it was great of the OP to clarify that...
FWIW, (and though I seldom disagree with mrpotatohead or Lance,) - I think it would be "good business" to offer to reimburse the grading fees if it's determined to be a fake. Surely, the dealers' reputation is more important than $50.... >>
I too think it would be good business to offer to reimburse the fees. I would, if I were in his position. I just don't feel it's required or should be expected. (I never disagree with Gayla. Or my wife. Being wrong a lot has its advantages.)
edited to say: CCU, have you considered directing dealer #2's attention to this thread? I think Andy is spot-on and both coins are fake. Lance.
<< <i>This has much more finite features and not sloppy.
As someone mentioned earlier the "o" over m for Mexico City is much more consistent
The continents on the two globes is more defined
There are accurate dentils
The lions & castles in the crest are refined, etc. etc.
This is an AU55, NGC, sold for around $1,200
The 4 petal rosettes are all evenly worn, but defined
One thing I've noticed about the fake is that the lettering around the rim is farther from the devices than with an original, where the letters are close to the crown, etc. >>
Were genuine 1734 Pillar 8 Reales from Mexico City struck from only one set of dies?
<< <i>This has much more finite features and not sloppy.
As someone mentioned earlier the "o" over m for Mexico City is much more consistent
The continents on the two globes is more defined
There are accurate dentils
The lions & castles in the crest are refined, etc. etc.
This is an AU55, NGC, sold for around $1,200
The 4 petal rosettes are all evenly worn, but defined
One thing I've noticed about the fake is that the lettering around the rim is farther from the devices than with an original, where the letters are close to the crown, etc. >>
Were genuine 1734 Pillar 8 Reales from Mexico City struck from only one set of dies? >>
In 1732 the Mexico mint went to using consistent sized round planchets & started production on more modern screw presses. Other Spanish mints did not do this until mid century. The standardization was an attempt to eliminate the problem of edge clipping which changed the value of the coin. This is when they also went to the tulip design edge. I would assume they had more than one set of dies, as they were producing thousands of pieces for world trade, use in the Americas, as well as use in Spain.
This is not my line of interest and it would be nice if some of the darkside folks would join in.
I too think it would be good business to offer to reimburse the fees. I would, if I were in his position. I just don't feel it's required or should be expected.
I agree, but don't forget that the seller still thinks the coin is real. I'd encourage him to read this thread.
Andy Lustig
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
Comments
My Early Large Cents
FWIW, (and though I seldom disagree with mrpotatohead or Lance,) - I think it would be "good business" to offer to reimburse the grading fees if it's determined to be a fake.
Surely, the dealers' reputation is more important than $50....
<< <i>Your point is duly noted. He just would not entertain any possibility that it could be fake when I spoke to him about it over the phone. I do not know for sure he will resell it, thats just the impression I got. >>
What did you pay for that coin raw?
I give away money. I collect money.
I don’t love money . I do love the Lord God.
<< <i>FWIW, (and though I seldom disagree with mrpotatohead or Lance,).... >>
Thanks for the vote of confidence, but still...
1) Nobody is an expert on everything, and everybody can make a mistake.
and
2) If you want a slabbed coin, you should buy one already in a slab and not assume the seller will cover your cost if things don't turn out how you'd like when you submit the raw coin you bought from him.
Suppose the coin, instead of having come back described as counterfeit, had been identified as a rare varietry for the date. What would most buyers do- insist on returning it as it was not as described by the seller, or keep it and post here about the cherrypick, looking for a "You suck"?
Auction Information: Ponterio & Associates, Inc. The 2010 N.Y.I.N.C. Auction - 1/8/2010
View all lots in this auction
Lot Information
KM-103; FC-8a; El-11; Gil-M-8-8. Nice strike, toned. EXTREMELY FINE.
Estimate $200-$300
This one went for $675 raw. I could not get the pic from the archives....
I give away money. I collect money.
I don’t love money . I do love the Lord God.
My Early Large Cents
<< <i>2) If you want a slabbed coin, you should buy one already in a slab and not assume the seller will cover your cost if things don't turn out how you'd like when you submit the raw coin you bought from him. >>
I fully concur with this if we're talking about a grade designation. But I stand by my contention of it being "good business" in any case of accidently selling a fake.
I'm not a dealer basher... Some of my best friends are dealers.
I agree as well he should repay your submission fee. And apologize to you too.
I give away money. I collect money.
I don’t love money . I do love the Lord God.
<< <i>But I stand by my contention of it being "good business" in any case of accidently selling a fake. >>
Fair enough. Maybe he (the seller) did get several opinions before offering the coin for sale- maybe not. But nobody here knows for sure, do they?
Either way, I'm going to stand by my contention that if you want a coin authenticated by "XYZ Grading Company", you should either buy one already authenticated or arrange with the seller before ageeing to purchase the coin what will happen should the coin be determined to be counterfeit after you submit it.
Actually, it seems to me the best way to approach the issue would be to ask the seller to submit the coin himself and agree that you'll buy the coin and pay the authentication fee if it comes back "genuine".
I would never expect a refund if a TPG didnt grade a coin a grade a dealer graded it. But, when the coin is fake, thats a bit different. I tried my best to figure out if it were real before he left town, but as you can see from the differnce of opinions there was just no clear consensus at all so I didnt pull the plug. It has been a learning experience that is for sure.
My Early Large Cents
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
Also, check out the apparent repeating mark below the center of the MO mintmark on the right side of the coin.
And the mark before the second I of "PHILIP".
Finally, check out the adjustment mark (?) at the top center of the shield.
If these aren't the same coin - and they certainly are not the same coin - at least one of them is a fake. But more likely, both are fake. (Most likely, hundreds of fakes were made from the copy dies. What are the odds that one of these two is the original?)
(EDITED ONE LAST TIME to say that the OP's coin is 100% fake. If it had been the original coin from which the copy dies were made, all other pieces from these dies would exhibit the same apparent flatness of strike. And the coin that CCU posted does not.)
BTW, I could not have told you from just the OP images that the coin is fake.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
Can someone post the pic?
I give away money. I collect money.
I don’t love money . I do love the Lord God.
<< <i>Lot 22480 of 2010 world signature coin auction in Jan of this year had a ngc 55 1734 date
Can someone post the pic? >>
This looks like a real one, but still good to compare with.
R.I.P. Bear
As someone mentioned earlier the "o" over m for Mexico City is much more consistent
The continents on the two globes is more defined
There are accurate dentils
The lions & castles in the crest are refined, etc. etc.
This is an AU55, NGC, sold for around $1,200
The 4 petal rosettes are all evenly worn, but defined
One thing I've noticed about the fake is that the lettering around the rim is farther
from the devices than with an original, where the letters are close to the crown, etc.
R.I.P. Bear
<< <i>I think it was great of the OP to clarify that...
FWIW, (and though I seldom disagree with mrpotatohead or Lance,) - I think it would be "good business" to offer to reimburse the grading fees if it's determined to be a fake.
Surely, the dealers' reputation is more important than $50.... >>
I too think it would be good business to offer to reimburse the fees. I would, if I were in his position. I just don't feel it's required or should be expected. (I never disagree with Gayla. Or my wife. Being wrong a lot has its advantages.)
edited to say:
CCU, have you considered directing dealer #2's attention to this thread? I think Andy is spot-on and both coins are fake.
Lance.
<< <i>This has much more finite features and not sloppy.
As someone mentioned earlier the "o" over m for Mexico City is much more consistent
The continents on the two globes is more defined
There are accurate dentils
The lions & castles in the crest are refined, etc. etc.
This is an AU55, NGC, sold for around $1,200
The 4 petal rosettes are all evenly worn, but defined
One thing I've noticed about the fake is that the lettering around the rim is farther
from the devices than with an original, where the letters are close to the crown, etc. >>
Were genuine 1734 Pillar 8 Reales from Mexico City struck from only one set of dies?
<< <i>
<< <i>This has much more finite features and not sloppy.
As someone mentioned earlier the "o" over m for Mexico City is much more consistent
The continents on the two globes is more defined
There are accurate dentils
The lions & castles in the crest are refined, etc. etc.
This is an AU55, NGC, sold for around $1,200
The 4 petal rosettes are all evenly worn, but defined
One thing I've noticed about the fake is that the lettering around the rim is farther
from the devices than with an original, where the letters are close to the crown, etc. >>
Were genuine 1734 Pillar 8 Reales from Mexico City struck from only one set of dies? >>
Don't know, I wasn't there!
R.I.P. Bear
screw presses. Other Spanish mints did not do this until mid century. The standardization was an attempt to
eliminate the problem of edge clipping which changed the value of the coin. This is when they also went
to the tulip design edge.
I would assume they had more than one set of dies, as they were producing thousands of pieces for world
trade, use in the Americas, as well as use in Spain.
This is not my line of interest and it would be nice if some of the darkside folks would join in.
R.I.P. Bear
I agree, but don't forget that the seller still thinks the coin is real. I'd encourage him to read this thread.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.