1916 d - real or fake?

I agree

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

The reason the SEGS slab came back as non valid could be because a couple years ago SEGS reorganized as an LLC and took the position that that made them a completely new company and they dropped their guarantee from coins slabbed before the reorganization date.

 

Just happened to get an email back from them today saying they are updating their database.

 

I don't think the details grade is going to hurt it that much, not with the competitive level of bidding this super-duper key is likely to attract.

 

Not out of the realm of possibility, with that date. I would see what PCGS or NGC says.

 

I feel like agreeing with you just on the grounds of the really low mintage and the attrition rate over the years, I mean there must be less than 10K of them left by now graded or raw. Details usually hurts but what's left of them might make that less painful.

 

At this point it was sent in by the OP to anacs raw and this is how it came back. I don't see the need to send it to PCGS or NGC except for wanting it in one of those slabs which could lower the grade but may help the sale price... if sent to one of those I'd send it to PCGS just because NGC would take it in their registry sets and PCGS will too of course. PCGS won't take NGC slabbed coins in their registry sets, that would likely help it sell for more in an auction over NGC or being in the ANACS slab. It's got decent value so it wouldn't hurt to send it to PCGS and paying the additional fees to have it slabbed by them knowing it's genuine already anyways. They might drop it to AU50 detailsthough.

 

Yeah, it works that way. That said, though, John, I don't think I'd be chasing after it, not with all those scratches. But all it takes is two bidders wanting to fill that hole to see it otherwise and there she blows.

 

ANACS is the better attribution for my money.

 

Just to let y'all know, I bought this for cheap(ish) knowing it would be a risky investment. Based on previous sales of cleaned in this grade, it was worth the risk and I'm glad I did it. My kids have really gotten into collecting the basic sets so this will go to fund that for a good while.

I do appreciate the time y'all took to provide input.

 

True, absolutely, but authenticity? That is the issue here.

 

I am sorry. Don't read me wrong. I don't mean to rain on the parade. If ANACS graded authentic, sure, I would take it too. If I were in the market for a '16 D, I would be suspect at this one. That mint mark looks wrong and I do not like the surrounding field. It looks almost welded or glued on the surface. When asking the question of, "Is it or not?" as collectors we have to rely on the top tier grading services, but I still question based on the mint mark styling and surrounding area. Still, great thread and interesting read.

 

I'm not following you. They're standing behind it as genuine.