How would you grade this Morgan?

At least I could see that one better than the "coin"...

Seriously though, other than uploading the image from your device, I'm not sure how one posts to the site. If I recall correctly @green18 once wrote of how it works, but I could be wrong. Guess we'll find out...

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

How big is the file you're trying to upload?

 

51kb
Ive shrunk them down and still get an error.
I don't have this problem on another site that I post to.
Upload limits:
Size: 75000 Bytes (75 KB)
Width: 500 Pixels (images only)
Height: 700 Pixels (images only)
Valid File Types: .doc .gif .jpg .pdf .png .rtf .txt

My computer must not like "Coin Talk".

 

I could tell the coin in the OP was fake immediately.

To those who didn't, and gave it a grade.... might be time to look at some more genuine examples...

 

What was the tells other than the key date?

 

The key date isn't a tell. There are plenty of raw key date coins. Just because it is a key date means absolutely nothing.

There are about a dozen tells. Compare that coin to a genuine coin, and it will be immediately obvious.

 

If you have the time would you educate me and the rest of us that may have been fooled?

 

Sure. But first, compare the coin in the OP to this genuine example (graded 63, from the Heritage archives, sold for $282k), and tell me what differences YOU see:

 

You shouldn't have any trouble uploading such a small file. I routinely upload files as large as 2.5 MB........maybe you should post your problems over on support and feedback........https://www.cointalk.com/forums/support/

 

I can't really tell from the two photos. From a casual look I would have been fooled. In hand there would be noticeable differences I think.
The wheat ears look a little different and the arrow flechings look different.

 

I'll do that. Thanks for the reply.

 

Good start. Look also at: the date, the headband, the hair details, the dentils, all lettering, the stars, the eagle's head, the eagle's wings, the eagle's feathers, the leaves of the wreath, the mintmark, and the surfaces of the coin. None of them look right.

 

I see what you are saying. Some on the this thread had questions about its authenticity but some like myself would have been fooled.

Thanks for your time.

 

Anybody fooled by that alleged 1893s should not be collecting coins. That was a really silly piece of numismatic fraud.

 

Really

 

Yup. First of all, who is going to be gullible enough to buy an uncertified 1893s on eBay? lol. If they did, they would deserve what they got. I have oft times said to be careful with key coins, and raw Morgans in general, when one is not familiar with the series.

 

This coin was a magic trick coin. Known from the beginning was fake. And photos only can be misleading. There are many more trick coins and not all are key date.
I have reported two fake Seated Dollars to Ebay and eventually got them removed.

My favorite is the Seated Dollars, Half Dollars, Bust Half Dollars, and Quarters. I am no means and expert. But I know more about them than when I started.

My original post was meant to be educational in nature and not real.

 

ebay is full of bidiots that snatch this stuff up thinking they scored a key date at an incredible price.

 

There are eight uncertified 1893-s Morgans on EBay this morning. One has 40 bids.

 

Most of them don't seem to have the time. Here's the coin in question (it's not difficult to link from Photobucket):



Even in this image the date location is a killer tell. Only one obverse die was used for 1893-S, and it's a Far Date. This coin has a Normal date location. It's fake.