Numismatic posts about grading, identifying, buying, selling and bidding on coins
Category Archives: Jack D. Young Reports
These post are written by expert numismatist and counterfeit detective Jack D. Young. He reports in an investigative manner on how to detect fake coins. See his posts to learn how to authenticate coins.
Today’s report is about a recent eBay interaction concerning a counterfeit 1881-CC “Morgan” Morgan dollar.
Recent eBay listing
When I checked, already there was a bid of $585.00 on a “fake in a fake”! And should you not know what I mean by that phrase, see my Live Coin Q&A podcast with numismatist Paula Schommer-Bluhm on this current CN family of fakes:
This particular coin cert has a PCGS TrueView image as well as images in the genuine slab available from a past listed auction as indicated on the PCGS website:
Obviously not a match; so I posted about it in a Facebook Group as Paula did as well, and we both reached out to the seller. My note, images and response as follows:
Kind of a “where’s Waldo” of bad marks, I highlighted each one for the seller in RED.
Counterfeit, left; genuine, right (image courtesy Heritage Auctions)
Paula sent him a link to our joint podcast, and as I didn’t hear back from him initially, I also went through the motions of “reporting’ it to eBay. Recent reports to eBay have been futile, but I tried anyway:
And I received a quick response:
So, the “BayBots” like it–pretty sad for an obvious fake in a fake! But the silver lining was the seller did respond after reviewing the video and pulled both this and his bad 1883-CC Morgan listings.
So, my lesson here is forget eBay. Continuing with education is the best defense against these for buyers and sellers alike, which is why I do this, and forums like Proxiblog are gaining viewership as we try to continue to “get the word out”!
PS: After the fact, eBay removed the cancelled listing.
If you like posts like this, please go to Jack Young’s page on Proxiblog. Also, please subscribe so you can be informed whenever there is a new article or column.
Proxiblog also has thousands of followers on Facebook Coin Groups, YouTube and social media. To get the latest discussion and commentary, be sure to friend us by clicking here.
You can find more information about errors and varieties as well as buying and bidding on coins in Coin News Updated: The Essential Guide to Online Bidding. Please consider purchasing the work for yourself or a friend, as it underwrites this hobbyist website. Thank you.
Proxiblog has encountered several fake 1916-D Mercury Dimes on eBay and elsewhere and asked our counterfeit expert, Jack D. Young, to share his lengthy file of bad examples.
Jack begins by stating NGC lists the 1916-D as the No. 2 most counterfeited coin in their top 50 U.S. coins, just behind No. 1, the 1909-S VDB!
From NGC’s web site- Counterfeit Detection
One of my first articles for Proxiblog was on counterfeiters using Great Collection’s auction labels to add credibility to their bad coins. A counterfeit 1916-D Mercury Dime in a fake PCGS holder is shown with a GC label from a genuine 1926-D dime auction. The same “coin” was also the subject of a Coin Week article I had previously written so a good choice to show in this article. The original eBay listing as follows:
A rather poor choice for the counterfeiters, the PCGS cert # used shows a link to the genuine example sold in a past Heritage auction:
PCGS on-line certification site
Comparison images of this listed example and the genuine one show this as a bad miss (or mess)! And you can see the stuck-on GC label on the counterfeit (note: genuine on the right):
So, we can see pretty quickly the bad slab coin is suspect, but what about the “coin” itself?
I cut the reverse image from the listing and reoriented it for a better comparison view:
Reverse image of the subject slabbed example
As I always say when reviewing a subject coin, ATTRIBUTION is the key! And with help from a few friends I pulled this template together of the 4 known reverses/mint-mark positions and shapes for use in evaluation of the 1916-D. I have added this example in the middle of the template for a good comparison of good versus bad.
Template of four good mintmark positions and bad one in the middle.
And at a glance this one is confirmed not good; eBay actually removed this listing at the time as bad as well.
OK, so a current counterfeit coin in a current counterfeit TPG holder and a stuck-on GC label, pretty much all the bells and whistles on this one, so what next?
How about an actual replica! And a note, I know (and am occasionally guilty of) the word “counterfeit” is used on various nefarious bad coins so excuse me if I refer to this next one as counterfeit as well. Language in US counterfeit law speaks to “intent” to defraud and this one appears to have been altered (removed “COPY”) in an attempt to meet that criteria!
Maybe a little pricy for a raw example, certainly too much for this one!
I notified both the Bay and the seller; can’t speak to what he was thinking–“electron microscope,” maybe?
eBay listing images
OK, so on to another “type”! This one is a genuine coin, but NOT a genuine 1916-D Mercury Dime.
A friend purchased this one knowing what it is and posted in one of the FB Groups I am a member.
Not a very convincing altered date!
And the last “type” for discussion, the dreaded “added mintmark.”
Bay seller knew what he had and in hindsight I wish I had purchased it myself!
Bay listing
Seller’s description
And his images:
Bay listing images
And how does the mintmark look in my template? Kind of like a blob!
Template comparison
And the TPG didn’t like it:
TPG evaluation
So ends the latest journey of more “Fun with Fakes” (FwF) and Proxiblog. It is getting really hard to keep up with all the ways scammers and their ilk continue to challenge the hobby.
If you like posts like this, please go to our counterfeit archive with reports from Jack Riley, Jack D. Young, John Lorenzo and Michael Bugeja. Also, please subscribe so you can be informed whenever there is a new article or column.
Proxiblog also has thousands of followers on Facebook Coin Group, YouTube and social media. To get the latest discussion and commentary, be sure to friend us by clicking here.
You can find more information about errors and varieties as well as buying and bidding on coins in Coin News Updated: The Essential Guide to Online Bidding. Please consider purchasing the work for yourself or a friend, as it underwrites this hobbyist website. Thank you.
In my normal dumpster diving on the internet I ran into a rather nasty counterfeit on Etsy.
Just looked off to my “fake” eye, I started my usual due diligence starting with the PCGS cert look up. The image of the genuine one does NOT match which then lead me to the slab and inserts themselves.
Etsy listed example on the left, Genuine certed example on the right
PCGS on-line cert with image
Bar code scans of the Etsy example- as usual the front barcode read an entirely different cert #. In fact it doesn’t even exist in the PCGS on-line data base!
And the reverse–typical read for these fake holders, the QR code scans as the correct Cert number but for the “CN” (Chinese) PCGS site!
On-line bar code reader image of the reverse QR code
So, I sent the seller a note; that went well.
Back and forth messages with the seller
So now what? Well I remembered that “Report this item to Etsy” link on the listing and took that approach.
Reported through their process
Really no way to know if this would get any interest at Etsy. I waited and continued to check the site for this item and seller. But the seller appeared to just add more bad items to his listings.
Only $599.99 for the Walton 1913 Liberty nickel!!! But I also noticed he now started to hide the cert number with his new 1883-CC listing.
OK, let’s try this again.
Reporting process for Etsy
Just a note, “Counterfeit” is a reportable violation on Etsy unlike AliExpress!
And another report through their process
At this point I decided to let PCGS know about these. I contacted my contact there as well as posted on their CU Forum. Like many of my posts there I don’t appear to get much traction although someone did alert the Mod there to my post.
My post on PCGS’ CU Forum
I also notified some friends involved in counterfeit reporting as well, and then waited. I even considered purchasing one of these to see what I actually would receive, had it in my cart but couldn’t pull the trigger. Didn’t want to aid the seller with no assurance I would get my price of admission back…
I did take another shot at reporting through Etsy on his bad Trade Dollar.
Bad Trade form the same seller; now he tried to partially block “PCGS”
Waiting, checking and then this!
Really? Success? And how or why may always escape me but the seller is GONE. I looked up my saved links for his bad wares and all are now gone.
So, I tried to message the seller, and guess what? He’s GONE as well; hopefully in a cell block somewhere!
Persistence or stubbornness? Not sure, but I’ll keep on keeping on as the Beatles said “with a little help from my Friends”!
If you like posts like this, please subscribe so you can be informed whenever there is a new article or column.
Proxiblog also has thousands of followers on Facebook Coin Groups, YouTube and social media. To get the latest discussion and commentaries, click here.
You can find more information about errors and varieties as well as buying and bidding on coins in Coin News Updated: The Essential Guide to Online Bidding. Please consider purchasing the work for yourself or a friend, as it underwrites this hobbyist website. Thank you.
In my previous Proxiblog article “Don’t Judge a Book by its Cover: 2 TPG Certified ‘Coins,’” I reported that we no longer can rely on the “sacred cow” of trusting the slab, as there not only are many counterfeit coins in counterfeit holders, but on occasion a counterfeit in a genuine TPG holder.
“This is what keeps me up at night,” I wrote.
Well, disclosures in this article add to the insomnia.
Since my 2017 Coin Week article on the deceptive 1807 draped bust dime counterfeits, I have documented 2 more TPG certified examples. Of the now 8 appearances I have boiled down the “known” examples to five, as one example is only known by the on-line cert (no TPG images) and 2 pairs match for toning and other unique marks. And as in my previous articles on these deceptive counterfeits I start with a timeline of imaged examples like this:
The known five start with the damaged source example from a 2013 eBay listing.
2013 eBay holed genuine “source” coin
The resulting repairs do not match a genuine example in the following areas but do match the next 4 following distinct examples along with other common marks!
Images from my previous Coin Week article
The “famous four”:
NGC “Plugged XF Details slabbed example sold Dec 2015 eBay
NGC “Plugged XF Details 2nd image
And the updated cert:
NGC 2657329-011 “QUESTIONABLE AUTHENTICITY” from initial bad submission of known sellers including several early coppers (Fall of 2015)- high res images courtesy NGC:
NGC “Questionable Authenticity; not slabbed
This one from the known bad sellers in Texas; sold Dec 2016 on the Bay raw.
The next one surfaced from a friend after my article was published; it was returned in 2017 to the TPG on their guarantee and as far as I know is still there.
PCGS certified and returned back for review
Owner’s images as listed on eBay of the same example
The next one just surfaced; a gentleman from a major auction house received it as a consignment for an upcoming auction and was concerned when he reviewed it. He cited my CW article and sent me a message about his concerns.
TPG certified example circa 2015, submitted as an auction consignment
Note from the auction house:
I did make a bid to purchase this latest example, but it appears PCGS wants it back more.
And the example PCGS bought back originally? I found my archives and it appears they determined it to be the genuine example:
I would expect the genuine one to have the correct edge!
So, that means at least 3 of the 4 are very deceptive counterfeits!
If you like posts like this, please subscribe so you can be informed whenever there is a new article or column.
Proxiblog also has thousands of followers on Facebook Coin Groups, YouTube and social media. To get the latest discussion and commentaries, click here.
You can find more information about errors and varieties as well as buying and bidding on coins in Coin News Updated: The Essential Guide to Online Bidding. Please consider purchasing the work for yourself or a friend, as it underwrites this hobbyist website. Thank you.
Both of these “coins” were certified as genuine by the noted third party grading company, so they have to be genuine, right?
Authors images of both obverse slabs
Not so fast! Look up the cert on the PCGS example, you get a clue. The IGC cert is apparently still active.
TPG’s on-line cert verification
Both TPGs are aware these are “not-genuine” and both noted similar timelines for submission. Both indicated these were submitted in the 2008-2009 time period. Additional images of both:
So, what ties these 2 together? Went to my low-cost microscope to see and after scanning closeup sections of both I developed these combination images; the effort here is to determine if there are any common “circulation” marks:
Circulation marks in the same area of the 2 different coins
I have circled in red obvious common markers between these two different dated coins starting with the reverse at UNITED. As I move on to other areas you will note I start running out of red ink! And again, the significance of this is these are not die state markers of a genuine die/ coin, they are circulation marks, dings, dents, scratches that should only be on one genuine coin. NOT 2, and certainly NOT 2 different dates!
I continue now with 3 other areas of the reverse.
Highlighted common circulation marks around the “R”
Highlighted common circulation marks around the DOLLAR
And some pretty significant ones around the eagle’s head:
Highlighted common circulation marks around the eagle’s head
Many of these marks are visible to the naked eye or with a light glass. They were obvious to my friends at my local Coin Shop, where they both tested 90% silver.
And what about the obverses? Well, my images aren’t great, and my microscope scan didn’t show any notable common marks, but the strike comparison is apparent even in these images:
The two subject coins obverses
As one of my TPG contacts stated, “the obverse rim looks wider on the left than on the right. This is a characteristic found on fakes.”
This is my 2nd Proxiblog article on bad Trade Dollars, one of the historically most counterfeited coins in the US series. Not only should collectors know the series should they collect them but also keep a keen eye out for the many fakes out there.
Finally, we can’t rely on the “sacred cow” of trusting the slab, as there not only are many counterfeit coins in counterfeit holders, but on occasion a counterfeit in a genuine TPG holder certified as genuine.
This is what keeps me up at night.
If you like posts like this, please subscribe so you can be informed whenever there is a new article or column.
Proxiblog also has hundreds of followers on Facebook Coin Groups. To get the latest discussion and commentaries, click here.
You can find more information about errors and varieties as well as buying and bidding on coins in Coin News Updated: The Essential Guide to Online Bidding. Please consider purchasing the work for yourself or a friend, as it underwrites this hobbyist website. Thank you.
The U.S. Mint manufactured trade dollars to promote silver mines in America and to compete with large silver coins used in trade in Asia.
The diameter of these dollars is 38.1 mm (1.5 in) 90% silver, 10% copper weighing 27.2 grams with a reeded edge, produced between 1873-85.
They are so much in demand, especially in higher grades bringing hundreds and thousands of dollars, that China–which originally inspired the manufacturing of this coin–exports thousands of fakes to America.
The first image here is of one of the bad not-PCGS slabbed examples from my collection; both the coin and the slab are fakes. The second shows the common reverse I nicknamed the “dotted N.”
Counterfeit coin and fake “PCGS” slab; image courtesy author
The obverse had several marks I noted in white circles and was used early on but seemed to be abandoned for a different die going forward.
eBay listing example
Some of the obvious features are the “die chip” over the “N” of UNITED, the long “spaghetti hair,” a dent at the top of the “A” of TRADE, a common “CC” not attributable to a genuine example, and a couple others that may or may not show in all of the images.
And a simple attribution note about the reverse type for a particular date Trade dollar, I use this image as reference:
This common “dotted N” reverse is Type 1 and should NOT be seen on any coins dated 1877 and later.
In my regular eBay coin listing review I found the next example:
Reviewing the images I found this common reverse; I notified the seller, and he pulled the listing. After more discussion, he alerted me to this follow-up listing, which I “won”:
eBay listings of this 1875 “dotted N” reverse Trade Dollar
Having this example in hand afforded the opportunity to take some higher resolution images of the main counterfeit attribution points.
”Dotted N” image of author’s 1875-CC example
”Dented A” image of author’s 1875-CC example
Another of what I term “family counterfeits” is included here with images of other dates I have documented so far–including a bizarre “1791”!
As I often do during the research phase of an article, I post in several forums I frequent for other hobbyist’s opinions.
The following image was a response to my post in PCGS’ CU forum; The poster stated the image goes back to February 2023. It appears to be the same (common) reverse.
Image (used by permission) from the PCGS CU Forum OP
The next group of images are for other dates that would have genuine examples with the Type 1 reverse, but of course not this one!
And a date that should only have the type 2 reverse:
eBay listed 1877-CC “Dotted N” example
Interestingly, I do not have images of an 1878 dated example.
But the counterfeiters continue to create improbable examples like this “P” (no mint mark) 1877 with the otherwise common reverse:
eBay listed “Dotted N” non-CC mintmark example
Continuing with their improbable “numismatic creations” is this “1791” Trade with the “dotted N” reverse! The image isn’t great, but the dotted feature is plain enough.
eBay listed 1791 “Dotted N” counterfeit Trade Dollar
We have documented several different “families” of current counterfeits based on reuse of the same reverse die with different dated obverses. They continue to use these, often creating improbable die varieties that collectors experienced with the series can flush out.
But that takes experience and learning over time. Articles like this are intended to alert collectors about the current counterfeit threat of these coveted, historical coins.
If you like posts like this, please subscribe so you can get our weekly newsletter and be informed whenever there is a new article or column.
Proxiblog also has hundreds of followers on Facebook Coin Groups. To get the latest discussion and commentaries, click here.
You can find more information about errors and varieties as well as buying and bidding on coins in Coin News Updated: The Essential Guide to Online Bidding. Please consider purchasing the work for yourself or a friend, as it underwrites this hobbyist website. Thank you.
It’s bad enough there are so many counterfeits in the marketplace but now you have to be on the lookout for stolen and/or photoshopped images as well–basically, these are “virtual counterfeits”!
The bad 1928 Peace dollars continue to hit listings, with my previous Proxiblog article on these published this past week. One of the sellers using photoshopped images for a 1928-S listing had these three listed in her selling history:
3 Past eBay listings of PCGS Gold Buffalos
A friend who helps me report bad eBay listings for removal often talks about “fake sales”–sales shown to make the seller appear more successful or “trustworthy” than they may actually be. These can be done by friends and/or the same seller under a different seller ID. Often the same item shown sold then shows “relisted.”…
So, starting with the 2017, it shows sold twice but with a relist, so who knows? May have been the only bid the 1st time. Images used originally came from the Heritage auction listed on the PCGS online cert.
PCGS online cert; no TrueView image but lists auction appearance
The Bay seller’s 2nd listing used the same images as well; no way to know what actually sold, as the seller stated she was “selling them for a friend.”…
Some additional searching found an AliExpress example for sale:
AliExpress listing for the 2017 Buff using Heritages auction images
Both “sellers” are using Heritage’s images without authorization, and I did notify my contact there. Ali description is clearly not of a genuine coin, so again who knows what one is buying!
And then the 2018; this one just looks bad! I would guess the Bay lister photoshopped a genuine coin into the bad slab/ label. The reverse image used is of the previous Heritage 2017 example!
eBay listed “2018 PCGS” gold Buff; same reverse as “2017” above
The PCGS online cert has an image of the genuine coin but not one in the slab; it certainly doesn’t look like this one. …
PCGS on-line cert and TrueView image
Comparison image of the Bay listed example obverse to the genuine example from the PCGS cert shows the Bay example image is not a good choice:
Bad Bay example on the left, genuine example on the right
And I also found the Ali offering for this one!
AliExpress listing for the 2018 Buff using their images
Looks like the AliExpress 2018 Buff is the only listed example here that a buyer would actually receive. …
I did check the seller’s feedback and she had received 1 for the three “sold” Buffs:
Seller Feedback for the “2018” gold buffalo listing
I was curious about the note “verified purchase” and looked it up. Per eBay, “We’ve added this text to remove any doubt that the person leaving the feedback was involved in the transaction.”
Wow! The coin imaged in the positive feedback doesn’t look anything like the seller’s listing image, so “verified” obviously didn’t mean what I initially thought!
eBay feedback image of the coin received?
Love the little dog, the “coin” not so much, as I have seen a number of fakes like this in fake NGC holders. Image isn’t clear enough to check the cert, but clear enough to see it isn’t the PCGS one!
It is getting harder to keep up with all the ways scammers and the like are challenging collectors and the Hobby.
If you like posts like this, please subscribe so you can be informed whenever there is a new article or column.
Proxiblog also has thousands of followers on Facebook Coin Groups, YouTube and social media. To get the latest discussion and commentaries, click here.
You can find more information about errors and varieties as well as buying and bidding on coins in Coin News Updated: The Essential Guide to Online Bidding. Please consider purchasing the work for yourself or a friend, as it underwrites this hobbyist website. Thank you.
Proxiblog.org, a free educational coin site, features one of the most comprehensive illustrated encyclopedias of numismatic terms with more than 225 entries. Learn to spot cuds, die breaks, split dies, machine doubling, double dies, mules, patina, lamination and so much more! This video describes the basic and most used terms, using the Lincoln Memorial Cent with history of each term in the left-corner quote box. Subscribe and get a free newsletter with top reports about coin identification, holdering, bidding, buying, selling and detecting counterfeits. Operated by Michael Bugeja, one of the top numismatists in the country, who wrote for Coin World, Coin Update News, Greysheet and was a past member of the Citizens Coinage Advisory Committee of the U.S. Mint.
If you like posts like this, please subscribe so you can get our weekly newsletter and be informed whenever there is a new article or column.
Proxiblog also has hundreds of followers on Facebook Coin Groups. To get the latest discussion and commentaries, click here.
You can find more information about errors and varieties as well as buying and bidding on coins in Coin News Updated: The Essential Guide to Online Bidding. Please consider purchasing the work for yourself or a friend, as it underwrites this hobbyist website. Thank you.
We have discussed and documented a large number of counterfeits for sale in various venues since I started this journey of writing attribution articles on them! And in this latest installment for Proxiblog, we have a couple of unusual twists and turns starting as usual with an interesting eBay listing.
A friend posted the suspect coin recently listed on the Bay on the MyCollect forum. Although he didn’t save a screenshot of the seller’s listing, he did save images of the coin, a 1928 PCGS MS65 Peace dollar.
eBay imaged suspect example (call it “2255” from cert)
What made it especially interesting was the label cert number brought up an on-line PCGS cert of a different coin! Scanning the front barcode with my on-line software resulted in a “no scan,” but the reverse QR code read the correct cert number but directed to the “CN” PCGS site. We have seen this before with fake coins in counterfeit holders, but this one seemed different. Even though it doesn’t match the actual certed example there was nothing that stood out as counterfeit on the listed “coin.”
Online PCGS cert verification and image for noted cert #
QR code scan for the suspect example “2255”
Doing my standard deep dive of the internet for more information I found the same coin had been posted in another forum and the OP saved an image of his report of the listing; it did show the seller’s ID. After the listing was removed the seller went “no longer a registered user.”
Initial Bay lister of “2255”
The first twist came when I found a similar imaged PCGS slab and coin on AliExpress; the difference was the label and cert # were different, but everything else appeared to be the same image including the reverse toning spots on both. This cert led to a genuine example and matching images from a past Heritage auction noted on the PCGS online cert.
Ali listing of “9808”
Online PCGS cert verification and image for the 2nd noted cert # “9808”
So the seller on Ali is inappropriately using Heritage’s images to sell “something.”
Continued dumpster diving led to a new seller listing one like the first example; listing was reported and was removed. Seller seems to have gone dormant since this listing but is one to continue to watch.
2nd eBay listing of the “2255” example
So, to sum it up at this point there appears to be two scams here:
First, photoshopped images using a genuine coin but wrong cert # (“2255” example) to sell “something” on the Bay.
Second, images of the same genuine one with correct cert # (“9809” example) to sell “something” direct from AliExpress. I suspect they are connected somehow.
And then another major twist when I performed my daily Bay brouse and found this gem from a brand-new seller (member since 10-21-24):
10-22-24 Bay listing of apparent counterfeit 1928 Peace dollar and slab
10-22-24 Bay listing (on the left) PhotoShopped label/ “2255” example (on right)
10-22-24 Bay listing (on the left) photoshopped label/ “2255” example (on right)
The “coin” is obviously not the same as the genuine one, but the counterfeiters tried to misorient it (rotate it in the holder) to look like the genuine example. The gasket fit is poor, another tell-tale sign of a bad holder and again the reverse QR code scans to the “CN” PCGS site.
This listing was also removed; seller stated he could go down to $500 for it.
So, how could this get worse (or more confusing) you may ask! Well, the AliExpress listing updated their image to a different genuine coin, another with similar coin orientation in the holder and sold in a 2021 Heritage auction.
Latest AliExpress listing
Heritage listing for this cert number (“4678”)
Definitely a different coin; one has to wonder where this will stop!
Heritage images of “4678”
So, more Heritage stolen images for an AliExpress listing for “something.”
And maybe the final twist: I decided to find out what one actually receives when buying the Ali “9088” listed version!
And I received this 11-05-24 in a package marked “Storage box” for US Customs:
Package received
And the “coin”! Advertised off Ali’s site on the top, received on the bottom:
Advertised (top) received (bottom) See any differences?
I have started the return/ refund process; but, from a previous article I wrote about reporting bad coins listed on Ali through their process I have little confidence much will come of it.
I did determine “counterfeit” is not an acceptable reportable topic there.
So ends another journey; it is getting really hard to keep up with all the ways scammers and the like are challenging the Hobby.
If you like posts like this, subscribe so you can be informed whenever there is a new article or column.
Proxiblog also has hundreds of followers on Facebook Coin Groups. To get the latest discussion and commentary, be sure to friend us by clicking here.
You can find more information about types, varieties, errors, grading, bidding and buying in Coin News Updated: The Essential Guide to Online Bidding. Please consider buying or gifting the work for a friend, as it underwrites this hobbyist blog. Thank you.
I recently wrote an article on a counterfeit 1916-D Merc dime in a fake PCGS holder but with a new twist! Love the twists, this one apparently used a Great Collections sticker from a different coin and slapped it on the fake to add credibility to theirs…
The image of the GC “stickered” coin follows:
Past eBay listing images: counterfeit coin, “PCGS” slab /GC label
The QR coded stick-on label looks like this for the actual coin sold, and was for a 1926-D Merc:
Genuine Great Collections QR coded auction lot label
So on to the main subject of this article, this rather common counterfeit 1881-CC Morgan in a fake “PCGS” slab and the original Bay listing:
eBay listed counterfeit 1881-CC Morgan and fake “PCGS” holder.
Interesting that it was listed on the Bay under “China Empire.”
Label font and barcode immediately look off, and the barcode did not scan; the reverse QR code is interesting, as it appears to be a GreatCollections tag but scans as many of these fakes to the PCGS “CN” site:
The PCGS online cert shows an image of the genuine coin as well as a past auction listing:
PCGS online cert for the genuine certified example
Image comparisons of the subject example as follows:
Subject example (left) to the genuine one (right)
Subject example (left) to the genuine one (right)
So, the counterfeiters have progressed to also faking a Great Collections auction label, although they didn’t use the genuine QR code at this time.
Counterfeit GC label (left) versus genuine one (right)
Again, the counterfeit QR code takes one to China, the GC one to their actual auction listing for the genuine coin.
Current Great Collections auction for the genuine coin
And the counterfeiters are doing this one “real time” and turning out a revised/ updated counterfeit product while the latest auction is still running!
I posted this one on PCGS’ CU forum and received this response:
Having trouble keeping up? Don’t feel lonely! The counterfeiters and scam artists keep evolving and we need to work even harder to try to at least keep even with them unfortunately.
My Group and I will continue to work to spot and document these mounting threats to the Hobby, as education appears to be our lone weapon in this fight; it is unfortunate that there appears to be little being done to actually curb the tide of bad entering the marketplace…
But I am encouraged contributing future articles on Proxiblog as an expanded means to get the word out!
If you like posts like this, subscribe so you can be informed whenever there is a new article or column.
Proxiblog also has thousands of followers on Facebook Coin Groups, YouTube and social media. To get the latest discussion and commentary, be sure to friend us by clicking here.
You can find more information about types, varieties, errors, grading, bidding and buying in Coin News Updated: The Essential Guide to Online Bidding. Please consider buying or gifting the work for a friend, as it underwrites this hobbyist blog. Thank you.
