thanasis

@Petra Sure!
1) First of all, the dates 1916 (London mint - no mint mark) and 1911-C are quite scarce, so when you see them come up you should be wary and examine if they are fake. Of course it could be a batch of hoarded sovereigns which are genuine, although there is a very low possibility of that happening.
2) You can notice that some of them have a date of 1919 with no mint mark, therefore London mint. That can't be correct, since London sovereigns weren't minted that year.
3) On some of the coins there seems to be an "B.B.P." instead of "B.P.".
4) Details on the coins. Some examples are:
     a) 1st photo, 1st row, 1st coin from the left: The sword and leg of St. George lack detail and seems to be "integrated" into the body of the horse. There should have been clear lines and details on both the aforementioned parts.
     b) 1st photo, 2nd row, 2nd coin from the right: Details are all wrong, although I would say that the leg and hair streamer of St. George seem to stand out.
     c) 1st photo, 2nd row, 3rd coin from the right: Details are absent and also the date "1916" looks like it was vertically "squeezed".
     d) 1st photo, 3rd row, 3rd coin from the right: Again the details are all wrong, of which the belly of St. George and also the details on the dragon stand out. Plus, under the dragon there is a "canyon", which shouldn't be there.
     These are some of the many wrong things that I can tell you on the spot. Using a photo of an original sovereign will help you greatly in comparing and identifying the wrong thing you see.
     Cheers!
 
 

@Petra Sure!
1) First of all, the dates 1916 (London mint - no mint mark) and 1911-C are quite scarce, so when you see them come up you should be wary and examine if they are fake. Of course it could be a batch of hoarded sovereigns which are genuine, although there is a very low possibility of that happening.
2) You can notice that some of them have a date of 1919 with no mint mark, therefore London mint. That can't be correct, since London sovereigns weren't minted that year.
3) On some of the coins there seems to be an "B.B.P." instead of "B.P.".
4) Details on the coins. Some examples are:
     a) 1st photo, 1st row, 1st coin from the left: The sword and leg of St. George lack detail and seems to be "integrated" into the body of the horse. There should have been clear lines and details on both the aforementioned parts.
     b) 1st photo, 2nd row, 2nd coin from the right: Details are all wrong, although I would say that the leg and hair streamer of St. George seem to stand out.
     c) 1st photo, 2nd row, 3rd coin from the right: Details are absent and also the date "1916" looks like it was vertically "squeezed".
     d) 1st photo, 3rd row, 3rd coin from the right: Again the details are all wrong, of which the belly of St. George and also the details on the dragon stand out. Plus, under the dragon there is a "canyon", which shouldn't be there.
     These are some of the many wrong things that I can tell you on the spot. Using a photo of an original sovereign will help you greatly in comparing and identifying the wrong thing you see.
     Cheers!
 
 

@Petra Sure!
1) First of all, the dates 1916 (London mint - no mint mark) and 1911-C are quite scarce, so when you see them come up you should be wary and examine if they are fake. Of course it could be a batch of hoarded sovereigns which are genuine, although there is a very low possibility of that happening.
2) You can notice that some of them have a date of 1919 with no mint mark, therefore London mint. That can't be correct, since London sovereigns weren't minted that year.
3) On some of the coins there seems to be an "B.B.P." instead of "B.P.".
4) Details on the coins. Some examples are:
     a) 1st photo, 1st row, 1st coin from the left: The sword and leg of St. George lack detail and seems to be "integrated" into the body of the horse. There should have been clear lines and details on both the aforementioned parts.
     b) 1st photo, 2nd row, 2nd coin from the right: Details are all wrong, although I would say that the leg and hair streamer of St. George seem to stand out.
     c) 1st photo, 2nd row, 3rd coin from the right: Details are absent and also the date "1916" looks like it was vertically "squeezed".
     d) 1st photo, 3rd row, 3rd coin from the right: Again the details are all wrong, of which the belly of St. George and also the details on the dragon stand out. Plus, under the dragon there is a "canyon", which shouldn't be there.
     These are some of the many wrong things that I can tell you on the spot. Using a photo of an original sovereign will help you greatly in comparing and identifying the wrong thing you see.
     Cheers!
 
 

@Petra Sure!
1) First of all, the dates 1916 (London mint - no mint mark) and 1911-C are quite scarce, so when you see them come up you should be wary and examine if they are fake. Of course it could be a batch of hoarded sovereigns which are genuine, although there is a very low possibility of that happening.
2) You can notice that some of them have a date of 1919 with no mint mark, therefore London mint. That can't be correct, since London sovereigns weren't minted that year.
3) On some of the coins there seems to be an "B.B.P." instead of "B.P.".
4) Details on the coins. Some examples are:
     a) 1st photo, 1st row, 1st coin from the left: The sword and leg of St. George lack detail and seems to be "integrated" into the body of the horse. There should have been clear lines and details on both the aforementioned parts.
     b) 1st photo, 2nd row, 2nd coin from the right: Details are all wrong, although I would say that the leg and hair streamer of St. George seem to stand out.
     c) 1st photo, 2nd row, 3rd coin from the right: Details are absent and also the date "1916" looks like it was vertically "squeezed".
     d) 1st photo, 3rd row, 3rd coin from the right: Again the details are all wrong, of which the belly of St. George and also the details on the dragon stand out. Plus, under the dragon there is a "canyon", which shouldn't be there.
     These are some of the many wrong things that I can tell you on the spot. Using a photo of an original sovereign will help you greatly in comparing and identifying the wrong thing you see.
     Cheers!
 
 

Hello forum!
Today I would like to share some photos from 2 auction lots I found some time ago. The lots consist only of sovereigns, and in my opinion the vast majority of them (if not all!) are counterfeit. Since most members here on the forum collect/stack them, I would like to add some more pictures on the "fake sovereign" database, so that people may get more information of what's out there.
Enjoy the photos!

@Petra Sure!
1) First of all, the dates 1916 (London mint - no mint mark) and 1911-C are quite scarce, so when you see them come up you should be wary and examine if they are fake. Of course it could be a batch of hoarded sovereigns which are genuine, although there is a very low possibility of that happening.
2) You can notice that some of them have a date of 1919 with no mint mark, therefore London mint. That can't be correct, since London sovereigns weren't minted that year.
3) On some of the coins there seems to be an "B.B.P." instead of "B.P.".
4) Details on the coins. Some examples are:
     a) 1st photo, 1st row, 1st coin from the left: The sword and leg of St. George lack detail and seems to be "integrated" into the body of the horse. There should have been clear lines and details on both the aforementioned parts.
     b) 1st photo, 2nd row, 2nd coin from the right: Details are all wrong, although I would say that the leg and hair streamer of St. George seem to stand out.
     c) 1st photo, 2nd row, 3rd coin from the right: Details are absent and also the date "1916" looks like it was vertically "squeezed".
     d) 1st photo, 3rd row, 3rd coin from the right: Again the details are all wrong, of which the belly of St. George and also the details on the dragon stand out. Plus, under the dragon there is a "canyon", which shouldn't be there.
     These are some of the many wrong things that I can tell you on the spot. Using a photo of an original sovereign will help you greatly in comparing and identifying the wrong thing you see.
     Cheers!
 
 

@Petra Sure!
1) First of all, the dates 1916 (London mint - no mint mark) and 1911-C are quite scarce, so when you see them come up you should be wary and examine if they are fake. Of course it could be a batch of hoarded sovereigns which are genuine, although there is a very low possibility of that happening.
2) You can notice that some of them have a date of 1919 with no mint mark, therefore London mint. That can't be correct, since London sovereigns weren't minted that year.
3) On some of the coins there seems to be an "B.B.P." instead of "B.P.".
4) Details on the coins. Some examples are:
     a) 1st photo, 1st row, 1st coin from the left: The sword and leg of St. George lack detail and seems to be "integrated" into the body of the horse. There should have been clear lines and details on both the aforementioned parts.
     b) 1st photo, 2nd row, 2nd coin from the right: Details are all wrong, although I would say that the leg and hair streamer of St. George seem to stand out.
     c) 1st photo, 2nd row, 3rd coin from the right: Details are absent and also the date "1916" looks like it was vertically "squeezed".
     d) 1st photo, 3rd row, 3rd coin from the right: Again the details are all wrong, of which the belly of St. George and also the details on the dragon stand out. Plus, under the dragon there is a "canyon", which shouldn't be there.
     These are some of the many wrong things that I can tell you on the spot. Using a photo of an original sovereign will help you greatly in comparing and identifying the wrong thing you see.
     Cheers!
 
 

@Petra Sure!
1) First of all, the dates 1916 (London mint - no mint mark) and 1911-C are quite scarce, so when you see them come up you should be wary and examine if they are fake. Of course it could be a batch of hoarded sovereigns which are genuine, although there is a very low possibility of that happening.
2) You can notice that some of them have a date of 1919 with no mint mark, therefore London mint. That can't be correct, since London sovereigns weren't minted that year.
3) On some of the coins there seems to be an "B.B.P." instead of "B.P.".
4) Details on the coins. Some examples are:
     a) 1st photo, 1st row, 1st coin from the left: The sword and leg of St. George lack detail and seems to be "integrated" into the body of the horse. There should have been clear lines and details on both the aforementioned parts.
     b) 1st photo, 2nd row, 2nd coin from the right: Details are all wrong, although I would say that the leg and hair streamer of St. George seem to stand out.
     c) 1st photo, 2nd row, 3rd coin from the right: Details are absent and also the date "1916" looks like it was vertically "squeezed".
     d) 1st photo, 3rd row, 3rd coin from the right: Again the details are all wrong, of which the belly of St. George and also the details on the dragon stand out. Plus, under the dragon there is a "canyon", which shouldn't be there.
     These are some of the many wrong things that I can tell you on the spot. Using a photo of an original sovereign will help you greatly in comparing and identifying the wrong thing you see.
     Cheers!
 
 

@Petra Sure!
1) First of all, the dates 1916 (London mint - no mint mark) and 1911-C are quite scarce, so when you see them come up you should be wary and examine if they are fake. Of course it could be a batch of hoarded sovereigns which are genuine, although there is a very low possibility of that happening.
2) You can notice that some of them have a date of 1919 with no mint mark, therefore London mint. That can't be correct, since London sovereigns weren't minted that year.
3) On some of the coins there seems to be an "B.B.P." instead of "B.P.".
4) Details on the coins. Some examples are:
     a) 1st photo, 1st row, 1st coin from the left: The sword and leg of St. George lack detail and seems to be "integrated" into the body of the horse. There should have been clear lines and details on both the aforementioned parts.
     b) 1st photo, 2nd row, 2nd coin from the right: Details are all wrong, although I would say that the leg and hair streamer of St. George seem to stand out.
     c) 1st photo, 2nd row, 3rd coin from the right: Details are absent and also the date "1916" looks like it was vertically "squeezed".
     d) 1st photo, 3rd row, 3rd coin from the right: Again the details are all wrong, of which the belly of St. George and also the details on the dragon stand out. Plus, under the dragon there is a "canyon", which shouldn't be there.
     These are some of the many wrong things that I can tell you on the spot. Using a photo of an original sovereign will help you greatly in comparing and identifying the wrong thing you see.
     Cheers!
 
 

Hello forum!
Today I would like to share some photos from 2 auction lots I found some time ago. The lots consist only of sovereigns, and in my opinion the vast majority of them (if not all!) are counterfeit. Since most members here on the forum collect/stack them, I would like to add some more pictures on the "fake sovereign" database, so that people may get more information of what's out there.
Enjoy the photos!

@Petra Sure!
1) First of all, the dates 1916 (London mint - no mint mark) and 1911-C are quite scarce, so when you see them come up you should be wary and examine if they are fake. Of course it could be a batch of hoarded sovereigns which are genuine, although there is a very low possibility of that happening.
2) You can notice that some of them have a date of 1919 with no mint mark, therefore London mint. That can't be correct, since London sovereigns weren't minted that year.
3) On some of the coins there seems to be an "B.B.P." instead of "B.P.".
4) Details on the coins. Some examples are:
     a) 1st photo, 1st row, 1st coin from the left: The sword and leg of St. George lack detail and seems to be "integrated" into the body of the horse. There should have been clear lines and details on both the aforementioned parts.
     b) 1st photo, 2nd row, 2nd coin from the right: Details are all wrong, although I would say that the leg and hair streamer of St. George seem to stand out.
     c) 1st photo, 2nd row, 3rd coin from the right: Details are absent and also the date "1916" looks like it was vertically "squeezed".
     d) 1st photo, 3rd row, 3rd coin from the right: Again the details are all wrong, of which the belly of St. George and also the details on the dragon stand out. Plus, under the dragon there is a "canyon", which shouldn't be there.
     These are some of the many wrong things that I can tell you on the spot. Using a photo of an original sovereign will help you greatly in comparing and identifying the wrong thing you see.
     Cheers!
 
 

@Petra Sure!
1) First of all, the dates 1916 (London mint - no mint mark) and 1911-C are quite scarce, so when you see them come up you should be wary and examine if they are fake. Of course it could be a batch of hoarded sovereigns which are genuine, although there is a very low possibility of that happening.
2) You can notice that some of them have a date of 1919 with no mint mark, therefore London mint. That can't be correct, since London sovereigns weren't minted that year.
3) On some of the coins there seems to be an "B.B.P." instead of "B.P.".
4) Details on the coins. Some examples are:
     a) 1st photo, 1st row, 1st coin from the left: The sword and leg of St. George lack detail and seems to be "integrated" into the body of the horse. There should have been clear lines and details on both the aforementioned parts.
     b) 1st photo, 2nd row, 2nd coin from the right: Details are all wrong, although I would say that the leg and hair streamer of St. George seem to stand out.
     c) 1st photo, 2nd row, 3rd coin from the right: Details are absent and also the date "1916" looks like it was vertically "squeezed".
     d) 1st photo, 3rd row, 3rd coin from the right: Again the details are all wrong, of which the belly of St. George and also the details on the dragon stand out. Plus, under the dragon there is a "canyon", which shouldn't be there.
     These are some of the many wrong things that I can tell you on the spot. Using a photo of an original sovereign will help you greatly in comparing and identifying the wrong thing you see.
     Cheers!
 
 

@Petra Sure!
1) First of all, the dates 1916 (London mint - no mint mark) and 1911-C are quite scarce, so when you see them come up you should be wary and examine if they are fake. Of course it could be a batch of hoarded sovereigns which are genuine, although there is a very low possibility of that happening.
2) You can notice that some of them have a date of 1919 with no mint mark, therefore London mint. That can't be correct, since London sovereigns weren't minted that year.
3) On some of the coins there seems to be an "B.B.P." instead of "B.P.".
4) Details on the coins. Some examples are:
     a) 1st photo, 1st row, 1st coin from the left: The sword and leg of St. George lack detail and seems to be "integrated" into the body of the horse. There should have been clear lines and details on both the aforementioned parts.
     b) 1st photo, 2nd row, 2nd coin from the right: Details are all wrong, although I would say that the leg and hair streamer of St. George seem to stand out.
     c) 1st photo, 2nd row, 3rd coin from the right: Details are absent and also the date "1916" looks like it was vertically "squeezed".
     d) 1st photo, 3rd row, 3rd coin from the right: Again the details are all wrong, of which the belly of St. George and also the details on the dragon stand out. Plus, under the dragon there is a "canyon", which shouldn't be there.
     These are some of the many wrong things that I can tell you on the spot. Using a photo of an original sovereign will help you greatly in comparing and identifying the wrong thing you see.
     Cheers!
 
 

Hello forum!
Today I would like to share some photos from 2 auction lots I found some time ago. The lots consist only of sovereigns, and in my opinion the vast majority of them (if not all!) are counterfeit. Since most members here on the forum collect/stack them, I would like to add some more pictures on the "fake sovereign" database, so that people may get more information of what's out there.
Enjoy the photos!

Hello forum!
Today I would like to share some photos from 2 auction lots I found some time ago. The lots consist only of sovereigns, and in my opinion the vast majority of them (if not all!) are counterfeit. Since most members here on the forum collect/stack them, I would like to add some more pictures on the "fake sovereign" database, so that people may get more information of what's out there.
Enjoy the photos!

A fake is still a fake even if it has the correct gold content.
But of course, if the gold content is wrong, then it makes for an easy identification.

Well, he had it checked and it seems that it is a FAKE, so.....😭

I call FAKE!
The first two pictures are the coin the seller is probably(?) advertising.
The other two I have seen on the site of @Allgoldcoins with the following URL:
https://www.allgoldcoins.co.uk/products/1845-queen-victoria-shield-reverse-sovereign?_pos=1&_sid=373c9493c&_ss=r
It seems to be the exact same item.
I also don't know if there are any copyright issues, but apart from that, using photos of items that don't belong to you seems fishy.

First image appears to be a fake. Fonts are wrong - flat tops to the D & C + plus inconsistent wear. Looks like a few deliberate dints in the neck area to age it, in an otherwise clean image. However image three is genuine IMO. Just examined 15 shield-backs to get a sense of normality. There are 5 varieties of the 1845 mostly R+ Unfortunately I don't have any of them! 

Obviously I closed the non pg tabs before screen shot 🤣

Well, he had it checked and it seems that it is a FAKE, so.....😭

Well, he had it checked and it seems that it is a FAKE, so.....😭

Also consider where it has come from… do they know it’s origins, been in the family years etc. 

Weight to .00 grams and dimensions as accurately as possible is a good start, see if your relative can do that or give it to you to measure. Stick a magnet on it too for a laugh.
It looks genuine as far as the photos allow.

Not sure, but in the photos both coins seem to have a "pimple" between the horse's front legs in the exact same location, which could indicate a concern. There may be other similarities as well, a bit hard to see.