CBC

These should be a pretty obvious “no” to any collector, even a novice. What really should be on a “Wall of Shame” are the ones that sell Chinese fakes that they claim they “inherited from Grandpa” or sell altered coins like 1894-S Morgans with the mintmark removed, then both the seller and ebay refuse to take down the auction when confronted.

Four unopened Mint $25.00 bags of SC and NC statehood quarters. - 2000-P SC - box has been opened, bag is still sealed - 2000-D SC - box has never been opened, sealed bag is inside - 2001-P NC - box has never been opened, sealed bag is inside - 2001-D NC - box has never been opened, sealed bag is inside $30.00 each, $110.00 for all. Shipping is not included but will be at actual cost.

I have several original Mint packages for Proof Eagles. No coins included. 2006 20th Anniversary Set - with capsules - $15.00 2011 25th Anniversary Set - with capsules - $25.00 Silver Eagles: 1991, 1992, 1993 (2 of these), 1994, 1996, 1998, 2010, 2011, 2016, 2020 V75, 2021W Type 1, and 2021W Type 2. The 2021W T2 includes the capsule, the others do not. Total of 13 single Silver Eagle packages - $40.00, or single ones at $5.00 each. 1987 1oz Gold Eagle - $5.00 Shipping is not included - but will be at actual cost. Buy them all for $75.00 and shipping is free.

2021 W Type1 and 2021 S Type 2 silver eagles, both graded Reverse Proof 69 First Releases by NGC. 35th Anniversary labels. Mint packaging included (minus the capsules). $225.00 for the pair, includes Priority Mail shipping to US addresses. Paypal preferred, message me for other options.

Two more raw 1894-P (?) Morgans just sold on ebay in the last few days. Maybe I’m looking too hard at the mintmark area, but both look like there is evidence of a ghostly “S” in the right position. Sellers were asked about them, and in both cases said they looked legit and completed the auctions.

I am only considering buying a NGC or PCGS example, possibly an ANACS for crossover if it looks good and is priced right. My searches pull up raw coins also, and this one looked too obvious to me. 18 bidders already with several days left to go, but the seller and the auction venue seem to have no hesitation about selling a fake.

This is offered for sale as a 1894-P Morgan dollar, which would be worth $1,000+ if genuine, but it looks to me like an “S” mintmark has been removed. I asked the seller about it, his response was that I “have no idea what I’m talking about”. What do you think?

This has been offered to me as a 1894-P Morgan dollar. The area between the D and O looks like an “S” mintmark has been removed. Am I correct in being (highly) suspicious? When I questioned this, the seller’s response was “you have no idea what you’re looking at”.

My 2011 NGC MS67 Sacagawea flls the slot in my Basic US Type Set No Gold (7070) but comes up as Not Eligible For Slot in my Basic US Type Set With Gold (7070 + Page 5). Can you fix this?

Unless the Mint sets a very low mintage limit, it’s usually better to wait a while. The V75 silver eagles had a low mintage limit and have held their value so far. Most everything else with limits over 100,000 drops in value not long after issue. In many cases you can get a NGC 70 for less than the Mint’s original issue price if you’re patient. I’ll wait a while on these coins.

The slab appeared to be a NGC edge-view or very close approximation of one, containing a rare date VG or so Morgan dollar with a realistic-looking NGC label and MS-68 grade, but no hologram on the back.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/294160256671?hash=item447d514e9f:g:mboAAOSwXi1gkjjZ Does NGC go after the marketers of fakes like this one on ebay?

A circulated1958-D Lincoln cent is now “rare” and worth a $1,425.00 bid

You can limit bidding to only established ebay users who have more than X number of positive feedbacks as a buyer. That won’t reduce your risk to zero but at least makes the scammer invest significant effort in creating a history of positive transactions.

Congratulations on a #1 set! And congratulations on getting NGC to create a basic set that does NOT include unintended varieties. It has irritated me for a long time that a “basic” Morgan dollar set includes such unintended errors as the 1882-O/S, 1887/6, 1887/6-O and 1900-O/CC. Basic sets should include only those coins that were intentionally released as designed from the Mint.

Thanks for sharing this. I don’t collect foreign coins but anything with a direct connection to James Watt would definately catch my interest (I’m a retired Mechanical Engineer).

Thanks, but I’m only looking for a 45-P in an older slab in trade for mine.

OK, I’ll try one. I have a 1945-P Jefferson nickel, NGC MS-67 in a recent edge-view slab. It is the only regular issue coin in my War Mickel set that is in an edge-view, so I would like to swap it for a 1945-P, NGC MS-67 in an older, non- edge view holder. Any interest?

I always look at the header to see who is listing on Marketplace. If it’s this character (which it is, usually several times a week) I ignore it. Spam it is.

Also look out for nickels dated 1942 through 1945. Those with a large mint mark on the reverse above Monticello are a silver alloy and worth way more than a nickel.

1) Maybe the guy was just having a bad day. 2) Or maybe he’s just a total jerk. My bet is on #2. Hope your day improved from there.

My “first gold” coin is nothing special numismatically but means a lot to me. It was 1965, I was 13 and had saved up $25 from allowance and grass mowing jobs. My coin collection at the time consisted of what was in circulation at the time, up through quarters (you hardly ever saw half dollars then), but I wanted something old and unusual. I used that $25 to buy a circulated 1852 quarter eagle - 100 years older than I was. I still have it, or should say my wife has it, mounted in a bezel on a gold chain. I added a few more over the years but that 1852 is still the oldest gold coin I have.

If the owner has it included in his #1 Registry set, he should remove it from the set. I guess he could keep it or send it back to NGC for correction, but scoring Registry points for it is flagrant cheating. Labeling errors happen. I once bought what was described and labeled as a 1952-S FBL Franklin, based on a good price and some fuzzy photos. When it arrived, it was a 1952-D with a 1952-S label. I returned it to the seller.

Sold

Still available, price reduced to $575.