Reply to Thread

Message:: [QUOTE="BooksB4Coins, post: 1828852, member: 36230"]OP, The photos make it tougher than necessary to reasonably judge the coin based only on images, but... 1. The date position appears to be correct for the 93-S. 2. Even with the angled and in-holder image, the mintmark position looks reasonable, as does the style, considering condition and judging from what I can see. Had you been able to take a straight on shot without the glaring, the position would have been much easier to verify; unlike other dates, it is not as if there are many to compare. 3. Unfortunately, other useful identification markers cannot be seen in the photos, but this doesn't mean they are not there; even with the overall poor condition, it is likely that remnants would still have been visible. As others have mentioned, the coin's appearance may be somewhat questionable, but were this a common date I doubt there are many who would have given it a second thought and/or have concerns with it being counterfeit. Beyond the obvious fakes, none of the little clues and/or differences one would expect to see on an altered or counterfeit example jump out. While I would not say either way based on this little evidence, and would want to examine the coin in-hand before giving an opinion, I do believe there is a fair chance that it is a genuine yet clearly problem specimen.[/QUOTE]