Opinions on these 1/2 sovereigns

Just got these in the mail today. I've looked at a few pics of other coins online and the detail on the back of these doesn't seem to match up. I don't have any experience with these so I was hoping for some opinions. Sorry about the horrible pics.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

That is a counterfeit. Might not even be gold... Or it could be a lesser quality of gold. Do you have a return privilege?

 

I immediately felt something was off just because the coins were from the same year. I doubt I can return them unless the seller steps up. I trusted the seller because they are a member here and actually a supporter of the site. They have sold quite a few things in the classifieds section here. They have great ratings on their ebay store. I sent them a pm. I am hoping it was an honest mistake and they will make it right. Not out a ton of money but pretty frustrated. The money went through PayPal but I was dumb and sent it as a gift. I am wondering if I could go through my bank to try to get the money back?
These were supposed to be a Christmas gift for my son that is just getting into coins. Guess l can't give him these now.

 

Those look terrible and undoubtedly fake. That's the pitts!! Those are definitely not half sovereigns!! Get your money back!!

 

You have nothing to worry about. In regards to getting your money back.

 

They scanned gold. Not sure what happened, ill have to return them when i get them back.

 

I appreciate it. I did not think you were trying to scam me or anything. I see that you have great feedback on ebay.

 

bkozak is a great dealer. I can vouch for him here. best service and fast shipping.

 

Same. He'll make it right. You don't have anything to worry about.

 

Ditto. Good seller and he will make you whole.

 

Completely wrong, probably not even GOLD

 

@bkozak33 - You sold, packaged, and sent these coins without any idea they were some of the worst fakes ever produced? Hmm. You say you scanned them, I am assuming to test their gold content, but, your eyeballs did not alert your brain to the play-doh looking reverses?

Noted.

 

I have no doubt they are high purity gold. Jewelry and necessity copies (often made in the Middle East) of British sovereign coins are somewhat common. They always do something slightly different to differentiate them, such as a makers stamp or, in this case, obvious difference in details. The necessity pieces are usually 22 carat gold or very near to it, jewelry versions often lower purity.

P.S. "necessity copy" refers to the fact that they were in high demand in that region, but the British had influence and were not happy about exact replicas of their calling cards to the world of global trade.

He never claimed to have expertise in this series, he seems to be primarily involved with US coins. If you know a coin is supposed to be gold, but are not familiar with the series, testing if it is really gold is a sensible thing to do.

 

I never knew about the necessity copies. Very interesting, thank you.

 

Looks like everything will be taken care of today. I appreciate the help. Definitely just an honest mistake.

 

Expert in the series? When did I say he claimed to be an expert in the series? I think a more relevant point would be that a self proclaimed dealer cannot tell that a coin is perversely fake. Not even close to being a genuine example. How many others were sold, by PayPal gift, and not caught?

For what it is worth, I do not, and have never owned a single sovereign. A basic background in, interest in, and involvement in numismatics was what ignited my alarm when seeing these "coins".

 

Sir, I saw Brian's ad. In it he specifically said it tested good for gold. That is what he sells in those ads, basically just charges gold price. So, to the extent these are gold like Numismat explained, a buyer could have gotten exactly what they wanted, gold. If someone wanted a numismatic sovereign, then maybe they would be disappointed, but not everyone is worried about their gold being a coin.

Because of that, I do not think Brian was trying to mislead anyone, and I believe by his actions here of refunding the buyers money he is again proving he is a good dealer.

 

Should be 3.99 gramseach

 

Never said a thing about intentional deception. More along the lines of competency. If you bought a used car from someone and found out that the (blank, insert random car part) was being held together by duct tape, one would probably be a little peeved. The fact that the used car salesman had to honor the lemon law doesn't make him a good used car salesman. The truth, and I am confused as to why you feel you need to defend this gentleman against an argument I am not even making, is that these gold pieces scream fake, and that is to an untrained sovereign buying eye (mine).

My point, however misinterpreted it has become to this point, is that the dealer did not catch a fake he was selling. Honoring a return isn't going above and beyond; it is actually required by the payment method accepted. Bare minimum. Look at it from the buyers perspective, who I personally think is being too nice; he has lost time now, and a gift idea for his child is most likely ruined due to timing, and at the least, is now stressed to make it by the holiday.

To date, I have purchased one fake coin. It was a SLQ that was in a roll of silver quarters I purchased as part of a collection, which I did not find until I opened the rolls roughly a week later. I immediately threw it into my "to be melted down" pile as it tested positive for silver. I am by no means a SLQ expert. But the mushy details, strange fields, chunky date, etc, all screamed "fake". I do not consider myself to be a dealer as I secure my income from my businesses in other industries, however, I feel I did the hobby a "solid" by removing the coin from inexperienced hands in the future. So, with that in mind, myself, by no means a "dealer", caught a fake, and removed it from circulation. Is it POSSIBLE that I have purchased and resold a fake in my years involved in the coin world? Sure, anything is possible if that is the argument one wants to make.

Would I buy from a dealer who owned these gold coins, who must have at one point looked at each coin individually as he "tested" them for gold content? No. And here is why; before I pass my money across the table to purchase something, the ultimate responsibility of knowing what one is buying falls on me. But don't we all want to try and limit the number of occurrences where this could happen? I do. Therefore I would refrain from browsing this dealers inventory. Again, nothing intentional in the deception, simply just a question of his competency. If hearing my argument (and solely my opinion) is going to start a frenzy, I don't know what to tell you. Sure, I am new to the forum and this dealer is, cough, well established, so I guess the value of my opinion plummets in comparison. Meanwhile, my method leaves me less exposed than those that don't see this transaction the same way I do, and that is fine.

 

Your opinion is no less valuable by being a new member than mine is higher by being here longer. Yes, I agree maybe the seller should have researched these further and if he found out from Numismat these were contemporary counterfeits of good gold quality listed them as such. I will not disagree with that. My only point sir is this dealer has sold items just for gold content before, and as such there is absolutely nothing wrong with these items if bought that way.

So, maybe he should not have used the word sovereign in advertising them. But, there is a very good chance they ARE gold, and there was a very good chance the buyer only really wanted gold. To assume the only thing a buyer would want is a numismatic coin containing gold is a stretch sir. A lot of gold that I buy is in the form of SE Asian gold jewelry. In fact, most of my gold coins have little in common with melt value.