AUTHENTICATE this COACH

TPF may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, and others

Status
Not open for further replies.
#4,022
emmychi said:
I learned that that target like circle means it was bought from the coach outlet and that's how they authenticate the bags being sold from their outlet.
Click to expand...

Having an outlet stamp like on the bag I talked about doesn't prove anything. Outlet stamps can be faked just like creed stamps or serial numbers. If you had read my post and looked carefully at the photo you might figure out why the creed stamp itself was fake and why a fake outlet stamp was used to cover the fact.

Please don't EVER try to authenticate a Coach based on the nonsense and LIES that are in most "authenticity guides" like the one you probably read that said an outlet stamp proves something is real. JUST LIKE WITH FAKE YKK ZIPPERS, WHAT'S SO HARD ABOUT MAKING AND USING A FAKE OUTLET STAMP?

I don't know why people accept the kinds of statements in those guides as facts - why don't they ask themselves WHY something that's so easy to copy could ever prove something is real? It's like saying that a receipt or "authenticity card" proves a Coach is genuine. Why don't people just ask "what's so hard about printing a fake piece of paper"?

THERE'S NO ONE OR TWO OR THREE THINGS THAT CAN EVER PROVE A COACH IS GENUINE. ANYTHING A REAL MAKER CAN MAKE, A FAKER CAN FAKE.
 
#4,023
emmychi said:
On the creed, usually I see the phrase "COACH" pushed outwards not inward like the writing underneath it. (when I say the writing I mean the message that starts out saying "THIS IS A COACH BAG......
Click to expand...

I think that is just an illusion of the photograph. On the bag, that part is nearly smooth like it is worn away.

emmychi said:
Yes, that is true. Usually they put it on the side in a blank area. And yes, I am no expert. But Im just trying to help. I know I always appreciate ALL feedback. I like to converse and analyze things with others. That's how I learn new things. Also, since you know better than I do, can you please look at the bag Im interested in buying and give me your opinion on the authenticity?
Click to expand...

I don't see any problems with the spotlight you are interested in. I didn't offer an opinion before because I don't own one to compare it to.
 
#4,024
whateve said:
Hyacinth, I am worried about the city bag that was previously authenticated. Here is the link to the auction: http://www.ebay.com/itm/Coach-purse...WjNhcesd6BT8YDs+HbdME0s=&orig_cvip=true&rt=nc

There are a few things that seem off: the zipper pull and the shape of the rings attaching the straps on the sides. The length and shape of the leather piece attaching the rings is slightly different on each side of the bag: 2 inches to 2 1/8 inches. Plus one of the rings has a silver tinge, like the brass was just painted on. The last two pictures are of the left side of the bag with the ring turned differently. It is round on two sides and flat on the other two sides.
Click to expand...

WHATEVE, I can't find the post where that bag was authenticated, can you post the link? And where did you find the other photos - the ones in this post?
http://forum.purseblog.com/coach-shopping/authenticate-this-coach-763164-268.html#post23317884

The bag with the J9H- creed and super-large inside zipper pull is definitely fake - the serial numbers are too big and the entire serial number is all one unit - but I don't remember ever seeing those photos before. And the brass rings holding the straps are always squared on a City Bag.

I can see it's the same bag as the one in listing 251173330186
 
Last edited:
#4,026
whateve said:
http://forum.purseblog.com/coach-shopping/authenticate-this-coach-763164-231.html#post23173513

I purchased the bag. I took those photos myself.
Click to expand...

Ok, I found the original listing. I am REALLY sorry, I should have looked closer at that serial number stamp. It's not so obvious in the seller's photos but in the one you took it's definitely wrong and so are the other problems we both mentioned like the inside zipper pull and the O-rings. It's the first J9H- fake prefix I've seen too. Send it back and insist on a refund.

Wonder if the seller knew exactly which areas to NOT take a picture of?
 
Last edited:
#4,027
Hyacinth said:
Ok, I found the original listing. I am REALLY sorry, I should have looked closer at that serial number stamp. It's not so obvious in the seller's photos but in the one you took it's definitely wrong and so are the other problems we both mentioned. Send it back and insist on a refund.

Wonder if the seller knew exactly which areas to NOT take a picture of?
Click to expand...

Thanks. That is what I'm wondering too. She acted like she didn't know anything about Coach. I had my misgivings about the serial stamp. Usually I just avoid anything with a J8H or J9H and I wasn't comfortable with that font. She doesn't take returns but I have contacted her. Hopefully, she will be courteous.
 
#4,028
whateve said:
Thanks. That is what I'm wondering too. She acted like she didn't know anything about Coach. I had my misgivings about the serial stamp. Usually I just avoid anything with a J8H or J9H and I wasn't comfortable with that font. She doesn't take returns but I have contacted her. Hopefully, she will be courteous.
Click to expand...

I'm starting to think that avoiding ANY style from the 1990s where the serial number starts with a J might be a good idea. Lately it seems like the fakes and questionable ones outnumber the real ones by a pretty wide margin. :sad:

So far we've had bunches of fakes using:
J4D-
J6D-
J8H-
J8D-
J8Y-
J9H-
and probably a few more I can't remember right now. The "8" year code used to be the most popular but lately the crooks have been branching out. Or maybe we're just getting better at spotting them. Again, I'm really sorry.
 
#4,030
Pursanista said:
Measurements: Length is 10" on the bottom and widens to 12" on the top; 4" deep and 8 1/2" high.

photo24_zpsbaa4b169.jpg


photo25_zps3bf55ecb.jpg


photo27_zpsc0948ecc.jpg


photo22_zps993d93e4.jpg


photo21_zpsafc0e0de.jpg


This is the backside of one of the inside zip pockets.
photo26_zps825e2027.jpg


photo21_zpsafc0e0de.jpg


photo16_zps3dc21ec2.jpg


aa_zpsf1ced7c9.jpg
Click to expand...

It looks like a Brighton Bag style 9895 from 1991-92, but neither of the catalogs I found mention an open inside pocket along with the zipped one. That might have been a temporary addition or maybe the catalog description just wasn't complete.

BTW< PLEASE disregard the "fake" comment made by another poster, there's nothing wrong with it other than an "extra" pocket:
http://forum.purseblog.com/coach-shopping/authenticate-this-coach-763164-268.html#post23317998
 
Last edited:
#4,031
sunshinedays said:
Can someone please authenticate this for me? Thank you!

Item: Classic Vintage Coach Dirty Green Leather CrossBody Messager Bag Handbag Purse
Listing number: 107370538
Seller: petitecute
Link: http://www.etsy.com/listing/107370538/classic-vintage-coach-dirty-green
Comments: Also can anyone take a guess as to when this could have been made?

Thanks again!
Click to expand...

whateve said:
This appears to be a city bag from sometime before 1994. This style was introduced in 1987 but I don't know what year they made a green one. Hyacinth might know.
Click to expand...

There's no way to date it exactly, just late 80s or very early 1990s. Serial numbers from that period could use either the 3+4 or the 4+3 serial number format, there was no across-the-board change from one format to another. And I don't know exactly what colors were used in which years.
 
Last edited:
#4,032
whateve said:
Yes, it is true the bullseye indicates it was sold in the outlet. It isn't used for authentication though. Her problem is where they put it, like they were trying to obscure an error in the creed. Coach usually puts it on a blank part of the leather.

BTW, it is nice that you are trying to help but there are experts that handle the authentication requests.
Click to expand...

Yes that was what I meant :)
I was trying to figure out if it was just a mistake at the point where it was stamped, or if they were actually trying to hide something by stamping where they did, which seems to be the case.
It's gone off ebay now anyway so I can keep looking...One day I will find an authentic one for a good price!
 
#4,033
Originally Posted by Hyacinth
It seems ok when compared to the other ones on Ebay.

Can you compare it to the ones listed on Ebay and tell me what differences there are that you're worried about? Thanks!
http://www.ebay.com/dsc/Clothing-Sho...n_kw=1&_ex_kw=

emmychi said:
The creed looks black instead of that metallic color. Also, the stitching in the lining Of the purse looks white instead of red. I was thinking maybe the creed is actually metallic also but the flash and the lighting made it look black.(and maybe made the stitching look white also). But the first listing (the one for 799)is REAL for sure. You can see the detail in the lining and how it's all red(quality). Do you agree?
Click to expand...

Metallic creeds can look very different depending on the lighting and what other colors are being reflected off them. As for the stitching, without knowing which color was actually used by Coach I'm not going to guess. Maybe you should ask at Ebay:
http://forums.ebay.com/db2/forum/Shoes-Purses-And/1000000009
 
#4,035
Hyacinth said:
I'm starting to think that avoiding ANY style from the 1990s where the serial number starts with a J might be a good idea. Lately it seems like the fakes and questionable ones outnumber the real ones by a pretty wide margin. :sad:

So far we've had bunches of fakes using:
J4D-
J6D-
J8H-
J8D-
J8Y-
J9H-
and probably a few more I can't remember right now. The "8" year code used to be the most popular but lately the crooks have been branching out. Or maybe we're just getting better at spotting them. Again, I'm really sorry.
Click to expand...

It's fine. You have helped me and countless others immeasurably with a service that you provide for free. I think you are entitled to a few mistakes.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top