Typically, I expect my notices to go unheeded, especially on fake fractional gold. The temptation is to keep the high bids on replicas you can buy at the local coin shop for about $1 each. Authentic California fractional gold sells in the hundreds and even thousands of dollars.

The problem with these lots is multifold, and I have blogged and written about it extensively for Coin World. See this recent posting about fake gold flooding online auctions. For a longer Coin World article, click here.

To summarize, genuine California small denomination gold coins were struck from 1852 to 1882, typically in denominations of quarter dollar, half dollar and dollar. The reverse is the key. Authentic pieces have the inscription DOLLAR or abbreviation D. or DOL.

A second kind, California gold tokens, were privately minted on gold planchets until around 1871 and usually depict a miner or other Western scene on the reverse.

A third kind, California jeweler’s charms, are made of gold and were sold as souvenirs of the West typically in the 1930s.

Replica brass or plated disks are a fourth kind, depicted in the photo above. The disks, manufactured in China for the most part, do not carry the word COPY and are in violation of the Hobby Protection Act.

As soon as Gregory read my email, he wrote: “Thanks for the catch, I'll correct it and contact the bidders for bid retractions.”

This auctioneer did more than retract a lot. He established the kind of online trust that results in repeat business.

Online auctions should require sellers to list the “BG identification number” for small denomination gold coins. The “BG” refers to Walter Breen and Ron Gillio, authors of California Pioneer Fraction Gold. It’s a pricey book. An inexpensive and educational way to identify these coins is to refer to PCGS CoinFacts and wade through the hundreds of listings until you can identify the lot in question.  

Last year I blogged about being on the lookout for missing half dollars in Double Mint sets, which the U.S. Mint produced between 1947 and 1958. I reported how coins in those sets were housed in cardboard folders often with green flimsy paper that caused the coins inside to tone.

I also promised to write about other ethical issues concerning Double Mint sets at a later date. I will do that here, but want to summarize content about missing halves.

Some collectors remove one pair of half dollars without reporting that in descriptions, relying on the buyer to know what should be in original sets. That’s not as simple as it sounds. In 1955 and 1956, no half dollars were struck at Denver because of lack of demand for the denomination. The San Francisco Mint closed in 1955, reopening a decade later.

For these reasons, you will legitimately find only two half dollars in Double Mint sets from 1955 and 1956.

A bigger issue concerning Double Mint sets involves unscrupulous sellers removing toned half dollars and other coins from those sets and replacing them with dipped or lower grade ones minted in the same year. 

Often those suspect sets come with original U.S. Mint and U.S. Post Office envelopes, for which many hobbyists pay a premium. Those envelopes are no barrier to lesser value coins being inserted in the cardboard folders, fooling the inexperienced buyer.

True, all coins do not tone in Double Mint sets. But more often they do, because of the chemical interaction of the cardboard and paper. As these are pricey sets, often exceeding $1,000 for the years 1947 through 1952, you want to secure an unmistakably original, toned set.

Look at the photo above from 1948 sets.

One panel shows untoned coins and the other, toned ones. Each set was offered on eBay for $1,500+. If I wanted to buy such a set, I not only would go for the toned coins, I also would check recent prices on the Internet. PCGS Price Guide pegs the retail value of such a set at $1,300.

As always, be skeptical and buy cautiously when bidding online.

For example, an 1888-S coin with a mintage of only 657,000 is a semi-key in the series, with DMPLs going for about $1,000 in Mint State 63. An 1888 Proof coin graded PR-63 with a mintage of a mere 800 (and estimated survival rates of about 235 in all grades) goes for about $3,000, with cameo counterparts selling for thousands more.

In the past I have written about how to tell deep mirror from polished Morgans. A true DMPL coin is likely to have bag marks because they occur easily against the glasslike surface, whereas no such marks are evident on a polished coin. Also, DMPLs should have mirrors that reflect 6 inches or more on both sides of the coin.

Look at the 1888-S in the photo above in the National Numismatic Certification holder. It seems devoid of any mirrorlike effect, although the reverse of the coin might pass for prooflike, reflecting about two inches. Compare it to the Heritage coin in the PCGS holder. You can see the mirror in the latter but not in the NNC holder.

Admittedly, it is difficult to tell deep mirror coins in online auctions. But this particular Proxibid auctioneer, Weaver Signature Coin and Currency Auction, takes sharp photos that rank among the best on the portal. So I can judge the NNC coin lacks the required mirror qualities of a true DMPL.

Again we encounter the argument that grading is subjective. What passes for DMPL at one holdering company might fall short at another. That’s fine. However, if you choose to bid on a coin in a lesser-known holder, you should not value the coin at prices listed for PCGS, NGC, ANACS and ICG, generally considered to be the best grading companies.

PCGS- and NGC-graded coins often sell sight unseen because of the grading consistency and standards of those companies.

Bidding online is a risky venture, especially when consignors list raw coins as DMPL. If you are viewing inferior photos or have not dealt with the seller before, my advice is to go with major auction houses and bid in online auctions hosted by Heritage, Stacks Bowers, Legend, Goldberg and GreatCollections.

I’ll reference Brad again here because I asked a very specific question about the 1913 Buffalo nickel depicted above that had wonderful rainbow toning.

I put a circle around the spot on the coin, using Brad’s original Proxibid photo to the left of the PCGS TrueView photo.

You can see that Brad takes photos as sharp as the professional ones offered by PCGS.

I wanted to bid on this coin and slab it with TrueView and then consign the holdered coin to an eBay seller who specializes in rainbow lots. I do this occasionally to help fund my hobby, relying on my numismatic knowledge to win raw coins and place them with the right seller for a small profit.

I liked this nickel, but I was wary about that spot. So I wrote Brad and inquired about it.

This is the main point of this post. You should be able to ask questions and get truthful replies from your favorite sellers. That’s why you patronize them. If sellers refuse to answer your questions in online venues like eBay and Proxibid, drop them. If they don’t know coins, find ones who do.

“There's a dark spot between the braid and feather that looks like a minor gouge,” I emailed Brad. “Can you check? I'd like to get this slabbed if I win and worry that this is damage.”

Brad inspected the coin and verified that it was a carbon spot and not a gouge, which would have meant the coin would not earn a numerical grade at PCGS. A carbon spot, on the other hand, would lower the grade of the coin but not prevent it from earning one.

As you can see, Brad was correct. The 1913 Indian Head 5-cent coin in question is the Type I, with the bison on a raised mound, which had a large mintage of 30,992,000. Concerns about FIVE CENTS wearing off triggered a design alteration. So Type II was created with the denomination on a plain and recessed for added protection.

Generally, a Type II 1913 Buffalo nickel is rarer, especially in higher grades. But when it comes to toning, bidders look to the rainbow rather than the mintage.

This coin graded Mint State 64, worth $80 retail. I won the coin with a $45 bid. With slabbing fees and TrueView, my cost is about $65. I think it will sell on eBay for $100 or more.

One came up on auction from a seller I trusted, and so I placed a high bid, thinking no one would match it and I just might steal the coin in an online estate venue where many gold buyers treat collectible coins like bullion. They look up the bullion price and bid retail.

I admit I checked auction and eBay values for the coin pictured above and bid $2,250.

I made two errors. Gold does fluctuate in value, and you have to take that into account when checking sale prices on Coin Values or Heritage Archives. I admit, in this case, I didn’t do that. I just looked at retail value and did a quick check on eBay, seeing recent sales of the No Motto Wells Fargo Saint Gauden’s coin above $3,000. Here’s an example.

The 1908 No Motto Saint is a fairly common coin with a mintage of 4,271,551; but the Wells Fargo hoard provenance and the old green holder add a premium. The 9,900 coins found in one of the company’s Las Vegas banks were spectacular coins, with PCGS grading 101 of them as Mint State 68 and 10 at MS-69. See David Hall’s description in PCGS CoinFacts.

Here’s the second mistake: I didn’t check coin retailers like APMEX where a similar coin at the same grade in the coveted old green holder retailed at $2,295 (by check) and $2,390 (by PayPal).

Well, you guessed it. Someone at the online auction wanted the coin almost as much as I did and probably had the same strategy in mind, but I won it with my top bid. Now add the 18% buyer’s fee, and the price of my coin totals $2,655.

In other words, by not checking bulk and wholesale coin dealers before placing my bid, I lost $360.

This is what happens when you make a mistake (or two) in online bidding. Learn from mine. 

The only discoveries in this Proxibid auction, where this and other damaged coins appeared last month, were the incredibly exaggerated values written on stickers placed on self-slabs.

Proxibid does not allow sellers to list values in descriptions or titles of lots unless they are encapsulated by PCGS, NGC, ICG and ANACS. But photos often contain consignor values, such as that found on this coin.

You can find the same phenomenon on eBay, HiBid and other auction portals.

If you are an experienced coin enthusiast, you may find these embellishments humorous, but novice buyers (or family and friends purchasing items as gifts for hobbyists) often overpay, thinking they scored a bargain, only to be told the truth sooner or later.

Coin dealers go through these sad disclosures regularly and then are accused of trying to “steal” these sorry coins from duped owners.

The net result is that those who eventually realize that they overpaid for damaged coins inevitably lose interest in collecting.

Click here to see what an authentic 1896-O Morgan looks like. Compare to the damaged coin in the above photo.

A Mint State 64 1896-O Morgan dollar truly is worth about $42,000. PCGS has holdered only 29 of them, with another graded MS-65 and two as MS-66. It is very common in low grades but a condition rarity in any Mint State grade.

I won the 1901-S Morgan dollar coin pictured with a $410 bid plus 15 percent buyer’s fee, for a total price of $471.50. If I add my slabbing fees, the overall cost is about $500.

I sent it to PCGS and it graded Mint State 62, worth $725 retail. Recent auction prices at that grade are about $600-625, so the effort was worthwhile.

But what, specifically, does it take to win such a coin in online auctions?

First, you have to trust the seller. I won this in a Feb. 17, 2017, Hibid.com session conducted by Auctions by Wallace. Sheena Wallace is one of the best auctioneers in the business. I have been bidding in her auctions for several years and whenever I have a question about condition, she consults with a local numismatist and gets me an answer.

Second, you need to see clear photos. You can tell from the auction photo above that Ms. Wallace provides excellent pictures so you can identify any flaws.

Third, you must check auction prices for the coin on PCGS CoinFacts or other venue. You must never bid retail on a coin by guessing the grade, even when viewing clear photos of obverse and reverse. I bid $410 on this coin because that is what MS-60 coins go for in auctions on eBay, GreatCollections and Heritage.

I knew the coin was Mint State, but I also detected some marks along the chin. But I needed this coin for my collection, so I placed an informed bid and won it.

Uncirculated 1901-S Morgan dollars are rare finds in raw state. The mintage of 2,284,000 is low, making it a semi-key. Value rises dramatically in MS-64, with recent auction prices well above $1,500.

Whenever you see the same initials or user identification appearing alongside your bid, as in the photo above, you should be wary. Shill bidding—legal or illegal—may be occurring.

Shill bidding is a practice whereby the seller or seller’s agent bids up lots, possibly so that they reach an unnamed reserve, or just to encourage ever-higher bids.

Shill bidding is not allowed on eBay. It happens, though, easily enough, through different computers on different routers or Internet servers. (Shills don’t want to have the same IP address as the seller.) A friend, or even the seller, on one computer will bid up a lot to the point where he or she sees your maximum bid — then retracts — and then bids up again when you do.

This method sometimes fails when done too close to the end of an eBay auction, because eBay doesn’t allow retractions when a sale is closing. Essentially, when this happens, the seller has won back his or her own coin. Then, you as “under-bidder,” will get a message asking if you want “a second chance” to win the lot.

Keep in mind “second chance” offers on eBay are almost always legitimate; we’re talking about the few suspicious sellers here. Suspicions arise if you experience the same bidder always increasing his bids right after you do and then retracting, etc.

Proxibid demands that sellers post a notice if they see maximum bids or are bidding themselves. There is a law that allows this: UCC-3-228, from the Uniform Commercial Code. This law deals exclusively with auctions and auctioneering. Essentially, the law allows shill bidding if a notice is posted in the terms of service.

Sometimes a few sellers do not post the notice, but you’ll see the same initials or user ID bidding up your maximums. When I see this, I contact Proxibid, and the seller has to post the required notice in his or her terms.

Even if the law allows shill bidding, it is unethical to do so. Here are alternatives: Start with a high opening bid that covers the reserve, or simply list that the lot has a reserve.

Unfortunately, on HiBid.com, a popular auctioneer-centered platform, you may have to contact the seller if you suspect shill bidding. Unlike eBay and Proxibid, HiBid doesn’t have seller-buyer rules and regulations.

Take a look at the lot featured above in one of Lisembee’s upcoming auctions on Proxibid. He writes: “Brilliant and lustrous. Very choice to near-gem. This is a scarce variety. There were Type 2 reverses made from 1956 through 1964, and the Cherrypicker's Guide shows the 1963 as the most valuable ($150 in MS63 and $250 in MS65).”

He would give a numerical grade for this coin, but that goes against Proxibid rules for raw coins (which I applaud because of seller grade inflation). So Lisembee uses the correct terms “very choice to near gem” which would translate to Mint State 63 to MS-64. He notes this particular coin is a scarce variety and gives information from the Cherrypicker’s Guide, an essential book in every numismatist’s library. Then he cites values conservatively.

You don’t find this often on Proxibid or Hibid.com. In fact, most sellers there overlook flaws, varieties and accurate grading. (Because of Proxibid rules, hyped descriptions are not nearly as common anymore.)

Lisembee does much more than this numismatically. He is extraordinarily honest.

When he gets an estate collection, Lisembee uses his numismatic skills to decide which raw coins he will send to PCGS. Many sellers do this. But few write a description on the remaining coins—these in a Capital holder—like this lot:

“These are the coins that are left in the set that we did not send to PCGS. They are still nice uncs, housed in a nice Capital holder in the original box. Dates include: 1941, 1942, 1943, 1944, 1945, 1945-D, 1945-S, 1946, 1946-D, 1946-S, 1947, and 1947-D. Several are gem quality.”

Consider this lot on a key date 1938-D Walking Half Dollar. He writes: “VF, couple of thin obverse scratches.” Many sellers do not mention pin scratches and other flaws, such as cleaning or corrosion.

In the past I have had to return coins to grading companies because of errors on labels — typically a missing Mint mark — but this time, I’m happy to keep the 2000 cent with a “wide AM” reverse and an error on the label, because of the misspelled word.

As many viewers know, I also teach journalism at Iowa State University, and the word misspelled — which should be “separated”—is one of the most consistently misspelled words in news stories. In fact, the Telegraph reports a 2010 study that established the error’s frequency under a headline that reads “‘Separate’ is most commonly misspelt word.”

On a side note, you’ll notice that the British newspaper spells “misspelled” as “misspelt.” That’s because, while “misspelled” is the American preference, British English has the option to use either version of the word.

Back to coins: Each of the grading companies has procedures to return mislabeled coins at no charge for a new, accurate label. ICG specifically states that coins can be re-holdered for any reason with no charge for damaged slabs. Misspellings, of course, aren’t listed. 

The “wide AM reverse” cent at Mint State 67 red is worth between $50 and $70 according to various price guides, but don’t count on getting that in major auctions. Recent sale prices are at $25 or less.

But I’ll put this in an auction with a note to my seller asking him to showcase the misspelling “seperate.” There is a small but dedicated online market for mislabeled coins.

This one reminds us that labels come with errors and varieties, just like coins.