Pcgs rattler holder with barcode? Slab experts please chime in!

I cant seem to match this slab up to any of the known slabs styles online. Is this a fake, a new discovery or am I mistaken??
A big thanks to all who chime in.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

That sure doesn't look like a PCGS slab to me, but what do I know!

@conder will probably know.

Chris

 

Oh and if this is a clue, under 10x you can see green dots on the label FWIW

 

Real or not, it seems accurately graded. But I'm pretty sure that I've had a few that looked like this over the years. My gut says that it is a real slab.

 

That's the ultra rare edition slab. They're worth more than the coin.

 

Yes, that is the second generation slab. This one came right after the rattler.

For more info, read Conder's post here: http://forums.collectors.com/messageview.cfm?catid=26&threadid=222533

 

I just checked the PCGS verification tool and it's in there.. no picture though
(This image is from the PCGS website)

 

It's what they used to use before they found they could make more money with fancier labels.

 

It looks like an 63 coin to me, plus I don't think somebody is gonna do a "fake slab" to an inexpensive coin.

 

The most profitable counterfeits are the ones which go unnoticed. If they could create a fake this good - I feel the slab presented here is righteous - they can create them by the hundreds with equal accuracy. Best to fill them with coins nobody will question, and sell 100 @ $10 profit apiece than risk it all on one $1000 coin which every expert will scrutinize.

 

Have you ever seen any fake (correctly graded) $35 coin in a PCGS slab?

 

They look the same but mine appears to be smaller than pcgs 2. Note that it says 2 piece shell, mine is a 1 piece shell like pcgs 1.I should have mentioned this i suppose.
If the slabs were side by side you would see what i mean. (I think)

 

Nope. Not yet. I have seen genuine coins in counterfeit holders with higher grades - a certain 1887-S Morgan comes to mind. However, I've seen plenty of fakes of common issues raw, and my personal experience is no proof that they don't exist. You have to do the due diligence on *every* coin these days.

 

Jason, what bothers me is that the insert looks like it was printed by a dot matrix printer. I don't see that on Conder's examples.

Chris

 

Considering the Gen2 slab dates to 1989, one would expect less-sophisticated printing methodology. The Gen2 1921 linked from Conder looks (to me) to be either a good dot-matrix job or a very early inkjet effort (which fits the timeframe). Either could be expected to show pixelization if the print was less than perfect. This is conjecture, though.

 

If you read Conder's description, he says this:

That matches what the OP says *perfectly*

 

It's probably a Gen 3.

Those were introduced after the counterfeits that Conder calls gen 2.5 appeared.

In order to secure the slab they were made with a separate outer ring. If the ring is broken off and discarded you have what you see.

 

Burton i see what u r saying, theres another difference i forgot to mention. My slab has a seam or a notch, at the top and bottom center of the slab. Conders examples of gen 2-3 show a smooth seamless top/bottom.
Idk if this proves your theory wrong or it supports your theory FWIW

 

Gen 3 is the doily (teach me to rely on, what's it called? oh, yeah, memory...)

Gen 4 is the 1st of the green label slabs.

The two-piece slab within a ring is Gen 2. Your label is a match (Gen 4 has "PCGS" in small letters at the very top). Conder calls it:

"PCGS 2 This was the first attempt by PCGS to increase the security of their slabs. This is a two piece slab. The center part is the same small "rattler" shell seen on PCGS 1 (note the four alignment pins in the corners around the coin). The second part is a plastic border thatwraps around the edge of the slab and forms the raised lip that now lets the slabs stack and interlock. Other security measures taken were the addition of a barcode to the front label and a hologram to the back label. This was also the last variety that did not have the companies initials on the front label. The front label is off white with a green tinge to it. This faint green is formed by thousands of tiny green dots that are only visible under magnification. This variety was used in Oct and Nov of 1989."

See http://forums.collectors.com/messageview.cfm?catid=26&threadid=222533

 

There have been known counterfeiters that have choosen to the path of copying less valuable specimens. Take Henning for instance who only counterfeited nickels. The idea is that the piece will be less scrutnized. The downside to this approach is that in order to make a lot of money one has to produce large quantities of the counterfeit. Unless they're not greedy and content with making a little.

EDIT: I'd like to add that if this is a fake slab, maybe the counterfeiter's strategy is to have the older slab be the money maker, and not the coin. We have seen how there is a premium for these early generation slabs.