wybrit

Wrong die #, and the B altered to a D is pretty obvious. The date is altered as well. Link

If it was MS65, it was not one of the two major American grading companies that slabbed it. PCGS only has one - AU55BN NGC has 4: one each at XF40, AU58BN, MS62BN and MS63BN

Well Colin, you suckered me to look! Of course, if you had been the first to spot a real one, you would be showing us that in the coin acquisition thread.

Hi Wybrit Have you a link for the counterfeiting? Thanks Hi Peter, no, unfortunately. The coins in question were sold on ebay first by UK sellers as copies (at least they didn't mislead). Pretty soon they migrated over to other sellers, including in the US, many times ignorantly portrayed as real. I have not seen any offered in a while, but the dates that have been faked are 1848, 1851 and, of course, 1860. All of them were obvious fakes, luckily.

There are some real bad apples in coin collecting, but there are also a lot of upstanding coin sellers. I would trust many of the contributors over on the CU forum to sell me a good coin - and they have. The same thing applies to the mainstream dealers on your side of the pond - I have found many a coin from many different places in the UK, both via internet sales and in person.

I would say the answer to the question is "it is inevitable." The Chinese and greater east Asian cultures excel at continuous process improvement, and coin forgery (and slab forgery, for that matter) will only get better - especially when the government there does little or nothing about it. The recent rash and subsequent prolifertion of fake copper Victorian halfpennies with scarce and rare dates (all with the exact same worn reverse) should be a warning to everyone.

Thanks for your comments. I've looked at my Obv 11 1875 halfpenny and the 1874H in this posting and I'm not convinced that the 1874 is Obv 11. The features of the '74H and '74 are so close but the 1875 is different. Perhaps you can take the pictures and draw where you see the distinctions.

I don't have the coin in hand now (in safekeeping), but I checked it out under a 30X scope view and saw nothing suspicious about that area.

Thanks folks! Nice overlay Gary.

The first coin is slabbed (NGC), so the rim is partially encased.

Comparison #2: 1874 Halfpenny, 9 + I

Comparison #1: 1874H Halfpenny (10 + J)

I recently purchased an 1874 (no H) halfpenny and, comparing it to my 1874H halfpenny (Freeman 10+J), see exactly the same obverse and virtually the same reverse. There is absolutely no sign of H removal on the coin, even under 30X microscope. The 1874 obverse can not be 7, does not appear to be 8 (which is similar to 4) and is different from 9. Please review and comment. 1874 Halfpenny, 10 + J?

Another fake 1860 copper halfpenny This guy has the audacity to say "This Victorian halfpenny is one of the coins from a collection which I recently purchased from the estate of a coin collector and head of a Numismatic Society. It is not suprising therefore that this collection is in perfect condition. This is an uncirculated coin which has passed from collector to collector spanning its lifetime. It probably came straight from the mint int (sic) a Numismatic Society Collection." Well, this fake certainly never circulated, I suppose. Unbelievable.

Here is the link to the one on the CC site: 1860 copper halfpenny I don't think there is any doubt it's a fake. Worn coin, clear date like it was added yesterday (as it probably was) in numerals that look thicker than normal. Looking at the hair detail, much lustre presumably refers to the quality polishing that has most likely occured. I have no doubt it's a fake now. Compare it to this 1848 Halfpenny for sale by the same seller. The reverses are effectively identical, meaning it was created by the same "die." Almost looks like the same coin but for the date. The seller has a 100 percent ebay feedback rating! I know a lot of "copies" of both these dates (as well as 1851) have been up for sale on ebay in the last 1-2 years. It was only a matter of time before they would be offered up as real pieces.

Here is the link to the one on the CC site: 1860 copper halfpenny I don't think there is any doubt it's a fake. Worn coin, clear date like it was added yesterday (as it probably was) in numerals that look thicker than normal. Looking at the hair detail, much lustre presumably refers to the quality polishing that has most likely occured. I have no doubt it's a fake now. Compare it to this 1848 Halfpenny for sale by the same seller. The reverses are effectively identical, meaning it was created by the same "die."

1860 Copper Halfpenny, probably a fake if you compare it to the picture on Colin Cooke's site.

Although not quite as ridiculous as the Heritage auction price, a 1901 NGC MS65RD penny just fetched US$400 on ebay Sunday (Feb 21). The buyer was Aspen Park Rare Coins. Can these silly prices sustain themselves?

That's £20 face value if my maths is right. Weight would be 0.5kg. My brother is a bank manager I'll ask him if it is possible to get that nummer of one type. Gary

The hard bit would be getting all post 2008. If you just wanted 20p peices a trip to a UK bank would get you all that you could want, the problem is though they would be mixed, unless you could find some bags ready to be issued. How many is this guy looking for? You should be able to pick them up for face value plus postage to the States. The teacher just got back to me and said he needed 100 pieces of the new design.

Hi folks, long time no post. There's a teacher here in the US looking for a large quantity of the new design 20p (not necessarily the mule piece). Is there anyone selling decimal pieces in bulk that I can refer him to? Thanks!

Interesting late comments about the 1860 penny. The more I have studied this, the more I lean towards it being genuine. It's a shame that the pictures aren't better, as that will cost the seller some revenue IMO. According to a poster over at CU, the seller has been contacted by several people, and better pictures have been sent out to all who have requested them. I'm not a penny collector anymore, haing sold most of my Vicky material, but I if was, I just might consider bidding after all (not advice, just my opinion).

The pictures aren't the best, but I don't see any telltale signs of fakery. Only by having the coin in hand will one know for certain.

Two conclusions : 1. That incomplete 6 is a known flaw on 1860/59 pennies 2. The person responsible saw the CC coin and 'doctored' another date to look similar Like everyone who has posted here, I am not convinced that this is a genuine article and would not entertain a bid. That said, I have yet to see anyone definitively prove to me that this piece is not what it says it is. I can see things in the pictures that I want to see (ie tampering). Or it might just be a poor picture of a real piece. All of the conclusions thus far are merely speculative. I don't think this is as "cut and dry" as that 1905 shilling was. Real items do pop up in this fashion from time to time. Earlier this year I took a gamble and bought a raw 1871 halfpenny on ebay, bad washed-out picture and all, for a price that was "too good to be true." It turned out to be genuine, uncleaned and mint state (probably gEF by Brit standards).

I'd be more apt to pass judgment if the coin didn't look somewhat like this one (from CC):