http://www.ebay.com/itm/2-Verry-Rare-Morgans-1889-CC-MS-condition-1882-CC-GSA-MS64-/260928079541?pt=Coins_US_Individual&hash=item3cc08686b5 There's not much to explain... :rollling: I've gotta admit though, the counterfeit is one of the better one's I've seen lately. Almost wouldn't have caught it if I hadn't looked closely. I also got a pretty good chuckle outta reading the description. Numerous typos and "...and could be worth as much as $350,000". :too-funny: -Brian
The coin in the GSA holder looks ok. But thats not the same coin pictured in the close-ups, which looks like a replica to me. Guy
The close ups are of the 89-CC cole. A raw coin also being sold in the auction. The 89-CC is the rarest and most desirable of the CC Morgans. This coin doesn't look counterfeit as much as it looks "thumbed" to me. For him to call it MS+++++ is a joke IMHO. I am curious as to why you think it's a fake, Brian. I am not saying that it isn't, I just wanted to know your rationale. Oh, and I love how he says that it's a rare fiend instead of find. Maybe his "Freudian slip" is showing! LOL
Yes, the GSA-holdered Morgan is fine, but I'm disregarding that. I'm only focused on shutting down this listing due to the highly-questionable 1889-CC. Sorry if I didn't make that clear in the OP. -Brian
that 1889 looks suspect to me....enough that I wouldn't be comfortable bidding on it, but not enough to report it as a fake.
The details of the major design elements (bust's hairlines, eagles feathers, ect.) aren't sharp enough for me to begin to believe the coin is authentic. Not that this is a factor in authenticating a Morgan Dollar, but the surfaces show a certain satiny luster typically seen with Chinese cast/counterfeits. Surprisingly, the serifs are dead on, and the mintmark looks correct. I can understand why you'd believe the coin is genuine... And who knows, it may be. I just find that the coin is suspicious enough for me (and possibly others) to report. I am also taking into consideration that the seller is allowing "No Returns" on what he believes will be a $350,000 sale... -Brian PS: I'm now a Coin Show Radio follower via Facebook! :hail: Really enjoy listening to what you guys put together. I learn something new with each episode. Keep it up!
the details are correct and that leans towards authentic. The luster problem that you describe is typical of a coin that has been "thumbed". The high points have been rubbed to conceal the hairlines from a harsh cleaning or wear. I really don't think that the coin is counterfeit but I do believe that the seller is trying to misrepresent the coin when he publishes any claims of uncirculated condition. Unfortunately, I don't think it's enough to make eBay pull the auction, but I'd love to personally warn each and every one of the potential bidders.
Either that or the seller caught wind that he was being called a cheat and decided to pull the sale. Either way, it's a non-issue now. Time to look for another cheat, or so-called cheat. Easy on ebay.
This listing (260928079541) has been removed, or this item is not available. If the seller had ended it it would say this has ended.
No... Sorry. I had a tab open of the listing, but as soon as I clicked my mouse, I was redirected to "PAGE INVALID". :headbang: Darn technology! :computer: -Brian
Here's a suggestion for all Ebay Fake threads, so we can all learn, The OP can post the image here on cointalk, AND the link. It'll make everything so much easier so us YNs can learn. With that 1877 IHC thread, I was wanting to see some pictures and the auction was pulled and I didn't get to get a good look at it.
I saw it before eBay took it down, and it did look suspect to me. The frost on the devices didn't look right, it's possible it was thumbed like Mike suggested, but I was leaning towards it being artificially applied. The mint mark didn't seem to match any of the genuine examples either, the serifs were too short.
