Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;Volodya, post: 3535302, member: 19615&quot;]Pointing out a handful of fakes that slipped by out of tens of thousands of NGC submissions doesn&#039;t really tell us very much. Barry &amp; David have never claimed to be infallible in detecting forgeries. No one is. Of course it&#039;s possible to find examples like those you cite. I&#039;ve known them both for decades though and there is no one in whom I have more confidence.</p><p><br /></p><p>I&#039;d be more interested in seeing examples of the opposite sort of &quot;mistake&quot;: coins that the current principals at NGC ancients have condemned that have eventually been conclusively shown to be genuine. I&#039;m not aware of <i>any </i>cases like that, but of course I don&#039;t see everything. It&#039;s one thing to suggest that they occasionally are overcautious in declining to certify certain problem coins. That&#039;s a reasonable position to take. (I had a long discussion with David Vagi several years ago about a worn Lepidus aureus that he declined to certify, which I&#039;m still convinced is genuine.) That&#039;s unfortunate but honestly, not that big a deal in my opinion. In their position I also would err on the side of caution. I think it would be much much worse if NGC is outright condemning genuine coins, but I don&#039;t think that&#039;s happening; certainly not often and probably not at all.</p><p><br /></p><p>Phil Davis[/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