Tio be honest, I am in a distress! This morning I
had an intention tio say: "Folks, I should appologise to be the devil's advocate not thoroughly expecting the information availlable. I looked through the Monneron's coins, of
his recent posts - they are
fakes, flats, uninspired, probably, mechanically reproduced ". Moreover, accepting the point of view of BenB and others I even persuaded myself in an engineering solution, how the
fakes coulld be created: using a kind of computer-driven pantograph which engraves a line design (say, from a
catalogue) an smaller
scale 9note that Monneron's product contain rarirtes of the level R5 but no unlisted varieties) . This techniques may explain that dies have no particular value, except, probably, especially
convincing: the machine can do a new one. It seems that this is feasible in the world of microtechiniques.
Now I am not so sure: between bidders of
his coins are quite a number of
members of this board.
No one contest that Joe has an excellent feeling for
fakes and
his opinion in this case
is firm and clear: "If you categorize them, I believe you will only be categorizing between the damn
good fakes and the too damn
good fakes. Take that as "hard data point.""
Again cgb is a very suspicious
French enterprise. In
France one can find ``escrocs" even between top names. Did you ever consulted prices of CGB? They sell scrap and ask for this 10 times as much as a current level in the world market. It is really shameful! And now this story with Monneron's
fakes.... O-la-la!