These aren't scary, they are replicas.
This brings up an interesting question. What, then, is the difference between a
replica and a
fake?
To me, a
replica is a coin which is
clearly marked as such on the body of the coin so that it can not be easily misrepresented as something it is not. It is sold as nothing more than a
replica.
A
fake, IMHO, is a coin which has no marking on it that would indicate it is not an authentic piece and, therefore, may be misrepresented as real. It may be sold as a
replica, but that intitial sale is only one step in its potential chain of ownership. The
quality of the coin is not paramount, since many
poor quality reproductions are routinely represented as authentic. You only have to look back at the flood of
cheap bronze
fakes that infiltrated lots of uncleaned coins a few years ago to see my point. Even these coins were not initially condemned as
fakes, as bad as they were. I know, because I posted several of these right here when they first hit the market and all were accepted as either ancient imitations or just oddly styled authentic coins.
These stamped (I think)
Bulgarian silver coins have no markings on them which would indicate they are copies. Their
style, while not perfect, especially in the lettering, is
good enough to fool many casual collectors. I've tested a couple, and they clean up just like real silver. If artificially worn and
toned, I believe it would be hard to
pick them up as copies. While these were sold as replicas, I would bet you that, with a liitle
work, I could list these on an
auction site as originals and generate a bidding frenzy. I won't, because it's unethical and fraudulent, but I wouldn't be surprised to see these
Bulgarian coins listed by some budding young
fake sellers in the near future.
Stan
Fake Coins and Notorious Fake Sellers
