Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;SuperDave, post: 2444611, member: 1892&quot;]I&#039;ve never heard what I&#039;d consider a strong logical argument for the existence of the apparent commonality of &quot;cabinet friction,&quot; as it&#039;s defined. There weren&#039;t enough well-heeled collectors employing &quot;coin cabinets&quot; back in the day to create so many, and they&#039;d all have to have been constantly cycling coins in and out, and industriously opening and closing drawers all day to do so. If you love the coins enough to collect them in Mint State, are you gonna be rubbing them in your cabinets?</p><p><br /></p><p>And just how many of those well-heeled collectors - people whose interests ran to $20 gold coins and Crown sizes the average person rarely ever touched or owned - were willing to compromise to acquire coins which had circulated for a few months to acquire the bare beginnings of wear? And then (successfully) preserve them for a hundred years or more into our day?</p><p><br /></p><p>Frankly, the logical answer to me is that <b>everyone</b>, from the TPG&#039;s (particularly the TPG&#039;s) on down to random Internet speculators like myself, is employing insufficient granularity of thought to determine all the subtle ramifications of imperfect strikes and bag storage. Do we really think there were enough Morgans pulled from the barest amount of circulation to account for <i>seven thousand</i> Heritage auction results for AU58&#039;s, or 7500 Liberty Double Eagles?</p><p><br /></p><p>Yes, there are true AU58&#039;s and true &quot;cabinet wear&quot; (or some similar mechanism) coins. But not this many.[/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