Reply to Thread

Message:: [QUOTE="-jeffB, post: 3528161, member: 27832"]People will still pay a significant premium for a restored key-date Buffalo nickel, and TPGs will even slab them as damaged but genuine. So I've always thought the lack of date-restored SLQs in the market proves that it can't be done. <a href="https://www.cointalk.com/threads/found-a-1923s-slq-in-a-cull-bag-a-cool-and-kinda-sad-story.332756/" class="internalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="https://www.cointalk.com/threads/found-a-1923s-slq-in-a-cull-bag-a-cool-and-kinda-sad-story.332756/">This other thread</a> may provide a counter-argument. The poster shows pictures of a date-restored 1923-S SLQ, and eventually sent it in to ICG. ICG refused to slab it, presumably because they weren't convinced it was genuine. (It's easy to be skeptical; of all the dateless SLQs out there, what are the odds that the first one you chose to experiment on would be the big key date? "Non-zero", of course, but still.) The problem: it's possible to selectively protect areas from etching, which means you could presumably paint on any date you like and "raise" it with etching. This is true for Buffalo nickels as well. So perhaps the real question should be, not "why aren't there restored-date quarters on the market", but "why is there any market at all for restored Buffaloes?" I don't know the answer, except "there are always lots of people who don't know any better"...[/QUOTE]