Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;Jack D. Young, post: 3130022, member: 93371&quot;]A new example not matching known genuine ones in circulation and surface marks is a good thing; if it does, then at least one of them is a fake. As far as the counterfeiters learning and improving their “product” going forward, I am sure you are correct, but they started masking marks and re-engraving their working dies well before we started publishing articles on the subject, but, there are other “tells” in the proper evaluation that is not shared in summaries like this and are known by specialists and clubs as I cited. <b>Join a club, gain the collective knowledge.</b></p><p><b><br /></b></p><p><b>&nbsp;</b>Quite honestly, in early copper many provenances are well established and expanded condition census examples imaged and documented, with even the best carrying identifying marks; the coin that will stand out and signal red flags is the “perfect” surfaced one resulting from trying to take out all of the existing marks!</p><p><br /></p><p>And, actually re-slabbing is a good thing- at least the coin is then<b> covered by the TPG’s guarantee of authenticity if proven a fake.</b></p><p><b><br /></b></p><p>My thought here is the Hobby has survived counterfeit attacks in the past; with knowledge and proper due diligence we can sort through these as well.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in