Bronze & Copper Collector

If the seller and the "Expert knowledgeable specialist" were both dealers there might be more at stake. Some ramifications might (although doubtfully) on a criminal level, however if the seller belongs to a professional numismatic dealer organization they might probably be subject to some sort of censure, especially if there was a history of this type of activity. If the seller was someone who does not make their living selling coins, I'm sure there would be leniency or call it giving the seller the benefit of the doubt. A significant issue is the same as with which we contend with ebay, the ignorance of the subject and lack of consulting experts by the entity in authority. Plus of course, relative to ebay specifically, is being in the position of biting the hand that feeds you. It does make for interesting conjecture though....

Much as the banks doing away with terrestrial and installing more ATM's, and then charging you for using them... Or retsil shops with self checkout, where they save on payroll, you get less service, and you still pay the same prices. ... In the same category as those businesses that tell you the information is on the Internet. Not everyone has a computer or is computer savvy. My dad is 98, my mom is 94, neither knows how to use a computer nor cell phone.... I sometimes find it overwhelming when they ask me for information about a company or potential purchase. They think you can browse online like a print catalog. I'll acknowledge that it is a but easier on an actual computer, if you can open multiple pages, but on a cellphone or tablet, especially in an app, you can't do that. Another peeve is one relating to those businesses that ONLY have a Facebook presence... I do not have access to them, inasmuch as I am not on Facebook. ... Just venting....

I wonder what the legal ramifications would be if a dealer/seller sells a item that they know, by being informed by knowledgeable specialists, is not what it purports to be. Fraud possibly, with damages. More possibly if a member of a numismatic organization. Probably even more if it can be documented that said seller has a history of mis-attributed items for sale. Academic musings inasmuch as this could apply to a few sellers....

No images of the other side of the coin, nor a close-up of the date/overdate...

Sorry Rob, my comment was made "Tongue in cheek" inasmuch as so much merchandise (of all sorts) seems to have higher prices and inferior quality. As one gets older, nothing seems as it was. "What we had when we were younger, was always better made and less expensive." Agreed with your assessment of Fleabay. And I know the forum members, especially regarding coins, know that to get true quality, you have to pay more.

Isn't QUALITY 'INVERSELY PROPORTIONAL' to the PRICE??

Actually it is $50 not 50 cent, the seller got the denomination correct, however it is a 2000 millennium coin, not a 2002 as he has it listed.....

Magnificent, Spectacular, Stunning, choose your own superlative..

Nothing to do with "slavish", but I just 'love' (said sarcastically) when HIGHLY TECHNICAL terms are used to explain a merely TECHNICAL term, which in itself may have used to explain something merely SIMPLE. I've lost track of how many times I've had to look up an explanation of a definition or something else of that ilk.... Gobbledygook begets more gobbledygook. Probably makes the user feel superior in some inferior way. PS: Spellcheckers don't help without proper proofreading either.......

I shall presume that you will research it's definition and usage "slavishly".

Glad to help.... An error that is simple to make, inasmuch as the H & J key are adjacent to each other on the keyboard..... Spell checkers are good to a degree, but you still can't beat old fashioned proof reading for the finer details... And a knowledge of the subject at hand.....

I had made that correction to J# in my collection and notes after checking with him....... and confirming that H was only used in 1862...

Without examining the coin firsthand, I can certainly see why you would think it was a 1698. I thought the same upon looking at the image. Suggestions that the apparent 8 is a 6 over a higher 6, a 6 over upside down 6, etc. all bear merit. However, barring the discovery of a significantly higher grade example to study, it is all speculation and conjecture, and the truth may never be known conclusively. All that being said, it DOES look like an 8.

That would make it 3 die letter A's to the LEFT of the lighthouse, and 1 die letter A to the RIGHT of the lighthouse....

I have 2 with the A on the left of the lighthouse. One is closer to the rim, the other closer to the lighthouse...

I'd love to hear what your hypotheses/musings/speculations are on what the B & C are commemorating. .....

I'm fairly sure that the A's are unbarred. My A specimens are not high enough grade to show, but if I remember correctly, those better condition examples that I have seen were all unbarred.

I took it to mean, as others have in the past, merely that aside from from it being a fake, that there was still an intrinsic (albeit debased) gold value to the piece as it was not made from some base metal. I did not presume it to mean that it was acceptable to use in place of a genuine coin in a collection.....

Well stated and wisely....... I concur completely. ....

It could possibly be something in the adhesive. The cardboard 2x2's that I use (when I do use them), are those that are sealed with staples. The caveat with those are that you have to be careful not to staple the coin.... or damage the coin with the stapler, etc......

I shall presume that it is NOT your birth year.... BTW, Nice coin.... congratulations. ...

See my posts on the previous page with close-ups, full reverse images, and additional die information.....

Excellent !!! How could I forget " WHATEVER" ???

TOTALLY.... YOUR AWESOME.....