Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;invictus, post: 272059, member: 9973&quot;]It&#039;s hard to separate the concepts of desirability and beauty as regards a coin. How desirable is an ugly coin? It needs a lot of compensating qualities.</p><p><br /></p><p>King of Coins is a broad assertion of superiority given all factors. I don&#039;t think a coin which is clearly king should require caveats. If the coin isn&#039;t in the top echelon of design, how can it be king?</p><p><br /></p><p>The Lincoln cent design is not only rather boring, but why not also dock its score for being relatively small and a lesser metal? Or that it&#039;s been produced for an excessively long period, to the detriment of what possible replacement&#039;s arrival? For people who find the subject President to be a major asset, how is the Lincoln Commemorative not superior? It&#039;s like a cent with some of a Morgan&#039;s better qualities hybridized into it.</p><p><br /></p><p>The Morgan has the brute forces of size, silver, and an earlier style that could be considered more evocative of the history which coins embody. But again, not a design which wildly outshines other US coins. Much of its historical basis is what, silver mining companies&#039; lobbying?&nbsp; It also suffers a perhaps unfair susceptibility to being the focus of hucksters out to BS their possible value to newbies.</p><p><br /></p><p>I&#039;m not here to crown a king myself nor teach a class on how to like what I like. But I&#039;ll play devil&#039;s advocate against these pretenders to the throne.[/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