Reply to Thread

Message:: [QUOTE="johnmilton, post: 3465149, member: 101855"]I am going to ask you for a favor, [USER=59115]@40_mila_kokkina[/USER]. Please don't make blanket statements that condemn other people’s holdings, which many collectors find acceptable. Are ATTRACTIVE original surface coins that have never been dipped better? Yes, but the key word is ATTRACTIVE. Some coins have been dipped because the toning they had was ugly. Chances are you won't buy an original coin that's ugly just because it has original surfaces, and I most certainly won't buy them. When you collect scarcer, early material, which I have done for many years, the vast majority of coins that you see have had something done to them at one time or another. Many early copper coins have had something done to them because copper is a reactive coinage metal. The EAC collectors understand that and accept the fact that they won't be able to get totally orginal coins in all cases. Maybe so, but you have kept pushing it. Please don't make this into another CAC. CAC has driven me out of the U.S. coin maket, and I am not the only one. I understand the originality issue, but it's not the basis to go after other people. When you make statements like this: That's exactly what you are doing. Dipped is NOT CLEANED. You should acknowledge the difference.[/QUOTE]