IKE Errors on eBay

(Not my Auction)
I don't know about the rest of you but I have a standing search for Eisenhower Error Coins and an interesting one popped up this morning.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/253018347342?ul_noapp=true







This is labeled as Double Struck on a 2g aluminum planchet which, in all likelihood, is correct.

However, in the body of the text, the seller, sullivannumismatics, which I assume is Jon Sullivan of CONECA, states:

"Also, we believe the coin is a 1971, although enough of the last digit of the date is missing that it's hard to be 100% certain."

If folks look at the pictures of the coin, it is obvious that this is NOT a 1971-S but in all likelihood a 1974-S.

Why?

Simple.

That reverse design did not appear until 1973!

Obviously, that last digit is not a 3 which brings up the possibility that it could be either a 4, a 7, or an 8. (Remember, 1975 & 1976 were BiCentennial Years of different designs)

Is it a 3? I would expect to see some semblance of rounding on that last digit if it were either a 3 or an 8. That just does not exist.

Could it be a 7? I would expect that the last digit would be much broader, wider, if it were the top of a 7.

This only leaves the 4 and that last digit, IMO, is the very top of a 4!

The actual "tells" are the top of the 9 and the top of the 7 in the 2nd and 3rd digits of the date.

Thoughts?

Almost forgot, with absolutely no intention of disparaging or even attempting to disparage Sullivan Numismatics, I find it incredibly odd that this particular coin would even make it out of the San Francisco Facility.

Presumable, the coins, once struck, were loaded into Proof Set Lenses for distribution to the public. This coins was much smaller and obviously would not have been included in a proof set. Even if the coins were mechanically loaded, it's weight would have been an issue since the loader would have been expecting a 24.6 gram coin!

Soooo, how did it get out? Was it one of the "oil pan" coins? Was it intentionally manufactured after hours by an employee who knew it could be sold for well over proof coin value?

Ahh, to have been a fly on the wall in the San Francisco Mint during the 70's!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Cool coin. Thanks for sharing. I have to be honest and say that over the last couple of years, I've grown more disappointed in the mint errors I've seen. So many of these clearly got help from workers inside and I question their screening process for these guys as they left the building. Frankly, I think most of these should be confiscated and melted. They're not actually errors if they were intentionally created and/or brought out of the mint.

 

I'd say it's probably one of those 'assisted' mint errors from around that time period.

 

Hi, something is not right about his face. I wouldn't touch the coin. Compare a normal Ike with this "alleged" error and you'll see an alarming difference within the obverse side. As everyone knows, error coins can be easily counterfeited and nobody could ever say they're not errors because nobody can legally say they are or are not errors. It's like the Massachusetts Pine Tree Copper in which the Museum in Massachusetts "thinks" they have the only one. Legally, the Massachusetts Museum has no clue what happened in the 1800's never mind thinking they have the only Pine Tree Copper. We own two Pine Trees and for all legal and argumentative purposes, our Pine Trees are absolutely authentic. We also had our Pine Trees scanned with a Handheld XRF xray device. Our two Pine Trees are possibly worth upwards of $100 Million but we cannot get a grading company to authenticate them because they continue the grading industry corruption by refusing to acknowledge other Pine Trees exist. Search etsy for stamps and you will see, metal stamps can be customized and purchased and then used to alter a coin and make it look like an error. Be careful buying error coins. China continues to counterfeite everything from coins to antiques. We wish you the best in your search for errors. P. S. Ask the eBay seller how the coin was authenticated as a real error. Forget PCGS because PCGS has no clue if the Ike is a real error. So where does that leave everyone? Yes, a good guess is all that is needed but a guess does not make something legal or authentic.

 

The coin is genuine, it came out in the '70's when
lots of dramatic Proof error coins came out of the
SF Mint, and I bought many of them at the (then) Jack Tar
Coin Show in SF.

Also, about 15 years ago, I bought a very large group
of BU and Proof SF error coins that were in a SF Safe
Deposit Box.

This particular coin might be struck on an aluminum token;
it is currently being researched.

It is legal and authentic.

I authenticated it, and I have a bit of a clue.

 

Good to see you here Fred, It's always good to have experts around. What is your estimate on population and how/why were these made?

 

What? If you're a dealer, you should know how to authenticate your coins, determine if the surfaces have been altered and know if the color is correct. From the posts that I have read, you are having difficulties with these fundamental and basic skills. Please alert me to my error if I ever try to purchase anything from you. PCGS and NGC have a great market share because people generally trust and respect their opinion. If they were constantly wrong and scam artists as you have alleged, they would be quickly out of business just like the hundred or so other basement slabbers that have popped up over the years.

 

There's no 'pops' on things like this.

Although I've seen Proof Ike Dollar
Off Metals, and one or two others on
Aluminum, they're all unique unto themselves.


Many of the proof errors that have come out
of the SF Mint are normal minting errors that
were made in the normal course of Minting,
(yes, even for Proofs), and some have been
made on purpose, it appears.......

 

Hi,

Yes, I'm a real dealer in business for over 45 years. Sorry if the truth hurts about counterfeit coins but as always, I back up my posts with solid evidence. See one link herein of many more that are being concealed by the grading companies. https://www.google.com/amp/www.nbcn...ake-gold-silver-coins-flooding-market-n591201

I know exactly what I am talking about.

Cheers!

 

How would you price errors like these? What makes this coin valued in the 20k dollar range rather than 100k dollars like mules that we know pretty much had to be done on purpose?

This, to me, seems a little more unique than a mule.

 

Here you go... This article talks about the scam of grading coins and PCGS and NGC are implicated in the article, one of many articles being concealed by the grading companies.

http://www.cmi-gold-silver.com/article/pcgs-ngc-coins-grading-services/

Cheers!

 

Wow! Thanks for the response Fred!

Genuine or not was never a thought I entertained since I have a very strong gut feeling based on a LOT of evidence that there was somebody that worked within the San Francisco mint that was creating these on the sly and then shipping them out in the oil pan of a fork lift. At least, thats what I have read.

Regardless, if it is made on a US Mint press, using US Mint dies, at a US Mint Facility, then, IMO, it is a valid error. Manufactured or not, the coin should not exist and as such, having it in the public domain is the error.

 

How can the article be concealed if it's there, online?

 

The 'oil pan' story was from Arnie Margolis,
who heard it directly from an ex-employee.

There were other sources for SF Errors also.

 

It's almost as if the TPGs made it harder for them to talk up their coins to their clients..............

 

Well of course IKE's face looks weird! I would not expect it to NOT look weird given the fact that the coin was punched on a press intended for a considerably larger, heavier and probably thinker planchet.

Twice.

 

This article states nothing of what you speak; that they are somehow unable to authenticate a coin, or that they (intentionally) incorrectly mark a toned coin as questionable. It instead talks about the foolish market of buying stabbed bullion coins; to this point, I agree wholeheartedly. But where a market exists, there will be a person ready to earn a few bucks and in this case, a grading company ready to authenticate and assign a grade to a mint product. There's nothing wrong or scandalous with this practice as long as it is done fairly. Everyone seems to think that larger companies have this ability to assign their own grades and the TPGs will just do what they want, but have you ever considered the fact that maybe you don't see all of the coins that they have returned which do not have the expected grade? You only see what it put up for sale either through auctions or private treaty, but you don't see the mounds of coins that get sold through wholesale channels. The only advantage that large companies get over us lowly collectors is that they can submit tons of coins at a discounted rate.

 

Sorry, but that story says nothing to support your "error coin" theory as much as it addresses bullion coin counterfeits.

 

Sorry again but I read nothing in that article that referred to PCGS or NGC's "scam of coin grading".

 

Now, back to the IKE at hand and my. so far, solitary discussion regarding what year the coin might be?

You DID read that far into the post right?

If so, do you agree or disagree?

If you disagree then please explain why.