Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;Bruce Jonathan Fick, post: 2098162, member: 73845&quot;]The simulated coin has to seem way too nice to be a genuine MS 63. Think for a moment how these coins were made from 1878-1904. </p><p>They minted almost 1/2 BILLION Morgan dollar business strikes that </p><p>were unwanted, &amp; unneeded as a concession to the mining interests </p><p>in Colorado and Nevada. Can you say Govt subsidy ? They were 2 </p><p>beer dollars and got resewn into Mint bags after the banks sent them </p><p>back. They didn&#039;t want them either. It was only after the WW1 melts </p><p>that they appreciated in value. The artisanship that made them Silver engraved fine art on the dies got compromised when they were treated</p><p>like coarse gravel being dumped into $ 1,000 bags. So if this counter</p><p>feited simulation were a genuine 1901, chances are it would have scuff</p><p>marks, rim contact marks on the devices &amp; fields, abrasions of all sorts.</p><p>And hairlines incused. The American Numismatic Association recognizes</p><p>all that as the pattern of damage done to U.S. coins after minting but</p><p>before circulating. So after the Chinese counterfeiters make a replica</p><p>they have to judge how much simulated damage they must do to it to</p><p>palm it off as if it were a genuine to the unsuspecting. That&#039;s why it </p><p>looks so clean as if it rested on top of the 1,000 coin mint bag. NGC</p><p>has a section on counterfeits to link to to expand your knowledge base.[/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