Here's an embarrassing slab

[Conder101]

 

Now look at these images. Compare the right foot of T on LIBERTY and the position of the highest wave of hair below the R. On the reverse look at the position of the gap between the branches below the ES, and the berry to the right of the E in ONE.

 

Yep, they don't match. This 1804 large cent PCGS slab contains an 1803 S-260 with an altered date.

[MikeInFL]

Ouch!

 

At least this coin's current owner has a chance to be compensated by PCGS.

 

Bought raw like most large cents, this coin's current owner would be in a much tougher position....Mike

[Zoins]

Wow, great detective work and post!

[TomB]

This is spectacular.

[Conder101]

I can't take the credit for it, it was pointed out in this weeks EAC Region 8 email. It was sold on eBay last month and there is a fairly good chance that the new owner doesn't even know that he is holding a fake. There were 23 bidders and at least 6 of them were bidding in the $3,000 Plus range. They were bidding as if this coin was real. They trusted the slab.

 

I know they have a guarantee, but what is it we always hear about how people like buying slabs because at least they know the coin is authentic? Double check folks, because the big boys make mistakes too.

[Zoins]

Is it possible to contact and inform the winner and/or seller?

 

Just for posterity (after the eBay images go away), the cert number is: 10926690.

[Hoot]

This is spectacular.

 

 

I watched this coin as it was bid away and did not take the time (nor did I even care) to authenticate. A truly *spectacular* find. Congrats to H.T. Hettger for his detective work!

 

Hoot

[Conder101]

Yes it is possible but you run the risk of getting clobbered for auction interference. I doubt if the seller would care, he's been paid and has already left positive feedback. I did go ahead and sent this to the buyer.

 

I don't know if anyone has contacted you about the 1804 large cent you bought back on March 20th. But in case they haven't, compare it to the 1804 large cent on the Coinfacts website. Specificaly the gap between the branches below the ES and the berry to the right of the E in ONE.

 

I've tried to leave it as low key as possible and have tried not to give any indication that I would want it (no sour grapes over losing out) so he won't think I falsely badmouthing it.

[goose3]

That's just a "Mechanical Error"

 

 

What a Great catch by someone.

[Quizno-migration]

That's just a "Mechanical Error"

 

 

What a Great catch by someone.

 

The "mechanical error" excuse is a lame and oft-used one...fortunately it won't fly this time. I hope the buyer takes heed and ensures that PCGS makes it right.

[lkenefic]

Great catch!! Like you say...buy the coin...not the slab!!! BTW...is there no recourse against the eBay seller or is this solely a PCGS snafu?

 

Thanks for the schoolin'

 

Leo

[gmarguli]

The seller should take the coin back. Any honest seller would. However, it's probably easier to send the coin to PCGS. They are highly likely going to compensate the buyer fairly as they want this coin off the market ASAP.

[Zoins]

Don't some people purposely keep TPG mistakes to use as examples? Though perhaps not at the $3895 price this ended up selling for.

[gmarguli]

Yep. However, this is a rather expensive mistake to keep.

[WoodenJefferson]

It was the positioning of the berry on the reverse is what made it pretty conclusive this was not a 1804 as we know it...but what if PCGS determines that this is a new die marriage, sort of like a discovery coin? What then?

 

We will probably never know the out come of this senraio...but that was some great detective work done by some EAC'ers.

[Zoins]

It was the positioning of the berry on the reverse is what made it pretty conclusive this was not a 1804 as we know it...but what if PCGS determines that this is a new die marriage, sort of like a discovery coin? What then?

 

We will probably never know the out come of this senraio...but that was some great detective work done by some EAC'ers.

Ron Guth implied they'll buy the coin ATS. We just have to see if it's an altered coin or a discovery coin now

[gmarguli]

There should have never been any doubt that PCGS would take the coin off the market. This is a no brainer. $4,000 to take the coin off the market. $40,000,000 to refuse to take it off the market. They're not stupid.

[majorbigtime-migration]

Maybe now folks will understand why I have been carping about the PCGS so-called "Guarantee of Authenticity" for over a decade!!

[NoTwilight]

This is spectacular.

 

 

I watched this coin as it was bid away and did not take the time (nor did I even care) to authenticate. A truly *spectacular* find. Congrats to H.T. Hettger for his detective work!

 

Hoot

 

Hoot,

I did the same thing and didn't think a thing about it. However, If I had been interested in buying I would have tried to attribute it first from the photos. Since it wouldn't have matched up I would either have blown the whistle then or e-mailed you for help.

 

It's hard to believe that none of the bidders pulled out a large cent book and looked at the variety.

 

BTW, Ron Guth posted ATS a quick one liner indicating the PCGS is eager to get involved and straighten this out, anyway that's how I interpret it.

 

--Jerry

[mrearlygold]

Wow!