This Looks Suspicious To Me.

Check the closeup pics of this Morgan. Something doesn't look right in my eyes. Maybe it's all the little "pimple" spots on a lot of the surfaces. Or it's been cleaned badly.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/1884-CC-Mor...775?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item3aab69d08f

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Not an expert on fakes but the date and mint mark looks funny.

 

Looks like it's been polished. Funny......the reverse eagle almost looks 'etched' the way the US Mint does their current proofs.

 

Looks like a legit coin to me . VAM-10 I believe.

 

Looks fake to me, I'm not a Morgan collector but the Eagle looks wrong to me. Liberty don't look that good either.

 

Looks like a bad picture, so it is hard to tell. Looks pretty lusterless to me.

 

The illustration in the Red Book shows the F of OF much closer to the extended wing (but that doesn't allow for VAM's). Still, I think it's fake.

In addition, the fields are too proof-like to match the rest of the coin.

 

I don't know if it's legit either, but the eagle's high areas do seem sort of "casty" don't they? What's that business around the second "S" of States?

I had written the above before seeing the seller's explanation of the "S". You know, after reviewing his feedback and pictures of past dollars that he's sold, I'm starting to get more comfortable with this one. Starting to lean to the real side. I think that it's possible that the pic is just a lousy one.

 

It's suspicious looking for sure. I'm not a Morgan expert but my gut doesnt like that coin.

 

CC = California Chrome?

 

All observations aside,
did anyone look at the MM?

The second C looks very strange, die crack? Or what ever

 

The 2nd "C" in the mint mark does look odd, and I agree with Green that it almost looks like it's been laser-frosted like some of the modern proofs...

 

Could be the camera. The spots at the top appear to be reflective to me. I could be wrong. Ask for additional pictures? Really nice mirrored surfaces, could be cleaned or it could be a very nice PL. I'm NOT an expert, and I am willing to give you 100% refund on the price you paid for this opinion.

 

going back to the MM....

 

The flowers and leaves in the hair also look different when comparing to the 1884-CC on NGC's site. Could be my eyes or photos but just looking randomly at lesser viewed detail areas.

 

Here is why I think it is legit & a VAM-10.

 

I agree that it looks like VAM 10. It also looks like it has been futzed with. Do not want.

 

It looks like it came hot off the press yesterday or the day before. That's either because it did (in Beijing), or the surfaces have been seriously messed with. I would avoid it like the plague.

 

Possibilities I see (in order of likelihood):

1. Puttied and whizzed
2. Die struck fake, dies created from genuine 1884CC VAM 10, early die state
3. Misleading picture of genuine 1884 CC
4. Genuine PL 1884 CC

And, of course, the one that is on this list in a theoretical sense only:

5. Genuine 1884 CC proof. (Such a thing does exist, but it so rare it shouldn't be considered a possibility without having certified the coin. Besides, the rims don't look quite right.)

The slightly funky MM supports theories 1 and 2 (possibly 3). Weird surfaces support #1, #3 and possibly 2.

 

I think it is legit, but polished or whizzed also. Plus that reverse scratch. I would not bid on it period. Plus the disclaimers - just all say pass on the coin. Just my opinion.