Well, it is "certified"- 1796 2.5 gold

A friend had this one come across his counter and was asked to make an offer; he posted it and the consensus is fake.

Some thought it may be contemporary but others a worn down banged up GM piece.

Images of the "coin" in question:








Reverse compared to a genuine example (courtesy PCGS CoinFacts):



And a GM from a set sold on Heritage; comparison images to the subject example:





Reverse reminded me of my "Kettle" 1803:

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I have to agree, just by the numerals in the date would be enough to say: It ain't real.

 

Umm, Nu(mistrust)? Why not a more trusted TPG?

 

Yikes. Someone went to a lot of trouble to make that piece look worn, but worn in a crazy, unlikely way.

Steve

 

Man!
I could take my glasses off and see the vast differences.

 

Anyone care to enlighten me about the acronym or abbreviation "GM?" Tried to find a definition online but couldn't.

Steve

 

Thanks Steve. I was too embarrassed to ask.

 

GM = Gallery Mint

Gallery Mint was a private firm that made copies of U.S. coins using the same minting methods with a screw press that were used at the first U.S. Mint. Gallery Mint did strike and market a copy of the 1796 No Stars Quarter Eagle. I don't have a picture of it, so I can't say if this is a worn down example of it.

There is only one known obverse for the 1796 No Stars Quarter Eagle. Clearly this one does not match up. The date is way off as are the remaining details visible on the profile of Ms. Liberty.



The reverse is off too. Note the "skinny clouds" under "STATES OF."



"Nuistrust Corporation" was a "not ready for prime time" grading service that was around when I was a dealer. According to the book by @Conder101, it was founded in 2001 and run as an "in-house" service by a Florida coin dealer. It has since gotten new ownership.

Whatever it is, they missed the boat on this piece. It's not real.

 

Steve, my extremely unprofessional, inexperienced opinion of the subject coins worn grade is thus. When counterfeiting a coin in BU grade the markers are visible clear and easy to discern. Now counterfeit the same coin in worn G-AG grade and those markers become much more difficult to identify. I believe counterfeiting a valuable coin in low grade makes it easier to pass as authentic to a lesser trained eye.

JMO, YMMV

 

The "wear" gives the counterfeiter the ability to remove some of the problems with his fake that can make it easier to pass. A great many of the fakes that I have seen in NGC and PCGS holders were in "details holders." The "problems" like cleaning and scrapes were put there to remove the chucks of metal and other problems with the counterfeit piece that would have made it easier to spot.

 

By unlikely wear I was thinking of the clear, almost crisp date, but almost worn away devices.

Steve

 

The flying chicken on the reverse is a tell.

 

Gold medallion/Gold medal. Gold metal.

 

Coin Week article...

https://coinweek.com/counterfeits/f...counterfeit-gold-no-stars-1796-quarter-eagle/

 

Congrats on the publication Jack.

 

Nice write up, thanks for posting.

 

I, too, think it's a possible GMM (Gallery Mint Museum) piece ground down. Ron put COPY stamps on either the obverse or reverse as requested, and the obverse looks like it was most likely the home of the counterstamp. Unfortunately, I never bought any of the GMM gold pieces, so I don't have one to compare it to. I wish I'd had the money at the time, but I didn't.

 

This is positively a worked-down GMM piece. I have never heard of 'Numistrust' as a TPG, but this should VASTLY discredit their credibility.

 

What stood out to me was the eagle looking like a Thanksgiving turkey. LOL
Thanks for the post.