Reply to Thread

Message:: [QUOTE="Troodon, post: 457304, member: 4626"]I retract my statement of this possibly being an honest mistake... I think it's very clear that Abon/SGS clearly intended to get someone to believe it was a 1913... they just used the word "potential" so when the sucker who buys it complains it's not a 1913, they can say "We never said it was, we just said it potentially was." I am also now convinced that the person who submitted it to NGC as a "potential" 1913 is probably someone at SGS themselves.  They just wanted the piece of paper from NGC saying "We can't tell what this is."  Somehow that is supposed to show some legitimacy... I suppose the logic is something like "NGC didn't say it was fake, and they didn't say it wasn't a 1913, so that proves it could be..." (A classic logical fallacy is to assume that something that has not been disproven is therefore proven.) Anyone who would bid on this would have to know how rare a genuine 1913 would be right?  It's a pretty well known fact that only 5 are known to exist.  I don't get how someone could be educated enough to know how rare this is and yet be so gullible as to think a genuine one would ever be listed on eBay, espeically if it's a confirmed genuine 6th find of a coin that for years only 5 have ever been known.  The odds of coming out ahead in such a deal are rediculously astronomical; you have better odds gambling your money at Vegas.[/QUOTE]