Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;dougsmit, post: 1377385, member: 19463&quot;]What appears to be an extra line on the edge struck me as something that could be caused by shining too much light on that edge when photographing.&nbsp; I have added suspicious looking artifacts to the edges of photos before (accidentally) and would hold open the possibility that some of the oddity here could be the photo.&nbsp; The criticism that can not be explained away is tenacious&#039; observation that the two sides do not match up in terms of style.&nbsp; I suppose that could point to an ancient hybrid counterfeit of some factor that a non-specialist collector like me is not prepared to address.&nbsp; Someone who owns Price could research the coin to be sure that this is correct but that takes us back to the fact that the coin is not in a condition that would make me want it enough to do the work and run the risk of it being good by any definition of the word.&nbsp; </p><p>&nbsp;Is this coin an example of what you mean by &#039;extra lip&#039;?&nbsp; I see it as possible when striking deep dies on a flan a bit wider than what fits and a line is made by the die edge.&nbsp; Such a line does not scream &#039;cast&#039; to me.&nbsp; </p><p>[ATTACH]163054.vB[/ATTACH]</p><p><br /></p><p>Below is an example of a thick and shiny coin with too much light directed on the bottom edge making a dark shadow looking like a recess that is not on the coin.&nbsp; It is a poor photo but the coin is not cast.&nbsp; I am no Alexander expert so my statement was that it is not a coin I would want to bet on.&nbsp; I hate to condemn good coins which suffered bad things (cleaning or photography) and am not 100% sure this is modern but what I see would cause me to pass on it for my collection whether due to its appearance or its questionability.</p><p>[ATTACH]163071.vB[/ATTACH][/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