PCGS certifies fake 1804 Dollar in "Genuine" slab

I guess as long as it's "said to be" made at the mint, that makes it
OK?


http://www.indiancent.com/images/1804_1.jpg

On Aug 19, 11:27*pm, Steve Spradlin wrote:
I guess as long as it's "said to be" made at the mint, that makes it
OK?

http://www.indiancent.com/images/1804_1.jpg

Methinks that this is well within the rules of the game & hardly
deceptive.

Not as deceptive as your topic headline, for that matter.

In the 19th Century, casts and copies of all forms of art and
artifacts were more readily accepted in schools and homes and
collections than today. There was no way for many people to ever see
the "originals", or even a good photograph of the originals.

John Milton Gregory, the fellow who got the University of Illinois up
and running (about 1867), spent lots of money on copies of artwork and
plaster sculpture and even electrotypes of ancient coins. That was
how you brought culture to the prairie way back in that day. I know
that lots of this stuff still exists in the nooks and crannies of
Chambana.

oly

On Saturday, August 20, 2011 5:59:05 AM UTC-4, oly wrote:

Methinks that this is well within the rules of the game & hardly
deceptive.

Not as deceptive as your topic headline, for that matter.

Is disagree, that isn't a genuine example of the type specified. Looking up the number on the coin (http://www.pcgs.com/pcgsnolookup/Detail.aspx?c=23) the type is Variety: Original - Class I, and that doesn't apply.

On the other hand, when I type 25561598 into http://www.pcgs.com/Cert/ I'm told the Cert Number can not be found. Did I type the number incorrectly or is that not a valid slab?

B.J. wrote:
On Saturday, August 20, 2011 5:59:05 AM UTC-4, oly wrote:

Methinks that this is well within the rules of the game & hardly
deceptive.

Not as deceptive as your topic headline, for that matter.

Is disagree, that isn't a genuine example of the type specified.
Looking up the number on the coin
(http://www.pcgs.com/pcgsnolookup/Detail.aspx?c=23) the type is
Variety: Original - Class I, and that doesn't apply.

On the other hand, when I type 25561598 into
http://www.pcgs.com/Cert/ I'm told the Cert Number can not be found.
Did I type the number incorrectly or is that not a valid slab?

Came up with 'genuine 1804 dollar' when I typed it in - nothing about an
electrotype

--
Tony Clayton

On Aug 26, 6:51*am, "Tony Clayton" wrote:
B.J. wrote:
On Saturday, August 20, 2011 5:59:05 AM UTC-4, oly wrote:

Methinks that this is well within the rules of the game & hardly
deceptive.

Not as deceptive as your topic headline, for that matter.

Is disagree, that isn't a genuine example of the type specified.
Looking up the number on the coin
(http://www.pcgs.com/pcgsnolookup/Detail.aspx?c=23) the type is
Variety: Original - Class I, and that doesn't apply.

On the other hand, when I type 25561598 into
http://www.pcgs.com/Cert/I'm told the Cert Number can not be found.
Did I type the number incorrectly or is that not a valid slab?

Came up with 'genuine 1804 dollar' when I typed it in - nothing about an
electrotype

--
Tony Clayton
- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Probably a "tight" computer field for the description, couldn't type
in more information.

Again electrotypes were well within the 19th century educational
experience. The British Museum, hardly a fly-by-night institution
(especially compared to all of the johnny-come-lately slabbers), made
many many electrotypes and a lot of people would collect these
whenever they become available.

Obviously, nobody is going to pay the same money for this copy as a
"Genuine" 1804 U.S. dollar (apparently none of which were made before
the 1830s, themselves).

If some people feel that the slabbers debase their franchise by
pulling a stunt of this nature, I don't have much care one way or
another. Let them debase their business and a pox on their houses.

oly