Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Fakes

Expand Messages
  • Tom Bunch
    I still think Mike Diamond should write a book on error coins and how to spot a fake. I d be the first to buy one.
    Message 1 of 6 , May 30, 2005
      I still think Mike Diamond should write a book on error coins and how
      to spot a fake.
      I'd be the first to buy one.
    • benderbott
      ... I hope no one ever writes a book like that. It would make it easier for scammers to make high quality fakes. They might do it without having to go through
      Message 2 of 6 , May 30, 2005
        > ...write a book on error coins and how to spot a fake. >

        I hope no one ever writes a book like that. It would make it easier for
        scammers to make high quality fakes. They might do it without having to
        go through the trouble of learning about legitimate error coins. Seeing
        & learning what real errors look like is the best defence. -- JFK
      • Rafael Delgado
        Just a compilation of the articles he has written would make a best seller! What you d say, Mike? Rafael ... __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!?
        Message 3 of 6 , May 30, 2005
          Just a compilation of the articles he has written would
          make a best seller!
          What you'd say, Mike?
          Rafael

          --- Tom Bunch <goldpans@...> wrote:

          > I still think Mike Diamond should write a book on error
          > coins and how
          > to spot a fake.
          > I'd be the first to buy one.
          >
          >
          >




          __________________________________
          Do you Yahoo!?
          Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new Resources site
          http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/resources/
        • Mike Diamond
          Right now, I m too busy writing new articles to even consider compiling my old ones. One of these days, when the pace of discovery slows, I may collect my
          Message 4 of 6 , May 30, 2005
            Right now, I'm too busy writing new articles to even consider
            compiling my old ones. One of these days, when the pace of discovery
            slows, I may collect my thoughts and write a magnum opus.

            As to fakes, I'm still learning about them. I'm better at detecting
            them now than I was two years ago. Two years from now I'm sure I'll
            be better still. One thing I have learned, is that anybody can be
            fooled, at least once in a while.

            It also happens that one occasionally rejects an authentic error
            because it sets off too many alarm bells at the time.

            --- In errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com, Rafael Delgado
            <my_errors@y...> wrote:

            > Just a compilation of the articles he has written would
            > make a best seller!
            > What you'd say, Mike?
            > Rafael
            >
            > --- Tom Bunch <goldpans@i...> wrote:
            >
            > > I still think Mike Diamond should write a book on error
            > > coins and how
            > > to spot a fake.
            > > I'd be the first to buy one.
          • Steve Mills
            Just wondering - In my impossible attempt to create logical sets of error types, I have limited wrong stock types to one off - e.g. dime on quarter stock -
            Message 5 of 6 , May 31, 2005
              Just wondering -

              In my impossible attempt to create logical sets of error types, I have limited
              wrong stock types to one off - e.g. dime on quarter stock - quarter on half
              stock etc. and have ignored the possible obscure variations where stock
              thickness of another composition is involved - e.g. dime on cent thickness
              stock.

              What I have left out and not considered are stock errors that are "2 off" -
              e.g. half on dime thickness.

              Is anyone aware of "2 off" errors like this? Personally, I can't ever recall
              seeing this, but it may well be out there.


              Later.....
              Steve
            • Mike Diamond
              I have a 1965 half dollar on a planchet that weighs 7.46 grams, instead of the expected 11.5 grams. It was last slabbed by NGC as dime thickness stock .
              Message 6 of 6 , May 31, 2005
                I have a 1965 half dollar on a planchet that weighs 7.46 grams,
                instead of the expected 11.5 grams. It was last slabbed by NGC
                as "dime thickness stock". However, it is a few tenths of a gram too
                heavy for that designation and has a peculiarly low density of 9.1.
                It has other peculiarities besides this. So I doubt it's on
                conventional silver clad stock rolled to dime thickness. It's
                certainly not dime stock proper, as the copper core is not visible on
                the edge.

                I have not heard of any bona fide "2-off" wrong stock errors. There
                may be others, like mine, labeled and slabbed as such, but that
                doesn't mean they're the real thing.

                I find that, among underweight and overweight coins, there is a
                tendency among some dealers and some grading services to identify
                them as being struck on the nearest appropriate stock, whether or not
                the weight matches up. You yourself have seen numerous underweight
                silver quarters weighing between 4.9 and 5.4 grams slabbed as "dime
                stock", when they're too heavy for that.

                --- In errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com, "Steve Mills"
                <steve@m...> wrote:
                > Just wondering -
                >
                > In my impossible attempt to create logical sets of error types, I
                have limited
                > wrong stock types to one off - e.g. dime on quarter stock - quarter
                on half
                > stock etc. and have ignored the possible obscure variations where
                stock
                > thickness of another composition is involved - e.g. dime on cent
                thickness
                > stock.
                >
                > What I have left out and not considered are stock errors that
                are "2 off" -
                > e.g. half on dime thickness.
                >
                > Is anyone aware of "2 off" errors like this? Personally, I can't
                ever recall
                > seeing this, but it may well be out there.
                >
                >
                > Later.....
                > Steve
              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.