What would you bid on this damaged 1909-S VDB cent?

AMEN.

Decades ago, all that was needed to authenticate US coins was a fluorescent light and a stereo microscope.

Now I'm telling on myself. To the best of my knowledge (based on "returns for authentication mistakes") on coins I personally examined from 1972 to 1985, I only made two extremely bad errors - both out of complacency! I missed an embossed mintmark on a Buffalo - once. And the first time the 1959 "Mule" was seen at the service, it was sent out as a normal 1959 cent! Due to familiarity, it never dawned on us that it was special. That is until a news reporter called the office. I like to tell the story of this coin in each authentication seminar to stress the need to be alert. Every coin is sent in for a reason.

Now to Jack's point. As soon as TPGS had to make decisions on coins that were corroded, damaged, and had highly altered surfaces, authentication became much harder. Combine that with the highly deceptive fakes of today it is even harder. Now, throw in ancients and foreign coins that most professionals are less familiar with and forgetaboutit. The job is really hard today and we don't have the option of holding coins until we reach a decision. Furthermore, I cannot imagine how anyone who has not been examining the microscopic surfaces of coins for decades can even do it to a high percentage (99%) of accuracy!

Thankfully, TPGS have always had help from consultants and collectors like Jack and his group to help get it right in the end.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Oops