Austria Maria Theiresia Thaler Contemporary Replica

The photos make it hard to make out detail. It looks like a contemporary counterfeit ( I think replica is too gentle in this case). I have one very much like it.. from memory I paid about US$10.00 for it( and that included postage). I wanted mine for research purposes, I don't think it has any collecting value.

I also think this is a contemporary counterfeit, but I think it's more interesting than the genuine coin. I also think it's worth much more than $10, but this is highly subjective.

I'd love to have such a piece, but so far I only own re-strikes.

Here are two original strikes Not restrikes First one is a Gunzburg mint strike. One of only three coins known to exist... cost me €1550.00, Second highest bidder was Walter Hafner the guy who wrote the catalog. He has asked me three times to sell him this coin:



This next one is a little more common ( about 5 coins are known to exist) it was a little cheaper at €1200.00. It was struck by the Vienna mint. Most people can't tell the difference between the re strikes and originals....Have a close look at both you will find both have very unique identifiers.





I think both these coins a phenomenally more interesting than a very low grade contemporary counterfeit. I would really doubt the counterfeit pictured is worth more than US$10.00 in that condition. My example of that same counterfeit is XF.

realeswatcher:




Do you mean 1780 dated re-strike? There are 20th century restrike MTT that are worth many 100's to ( I am thinking of a particularly rare Netherlands strike) thousands of dollars. Given that there are over 90 varieties of the 1780 re-strike exactly which ubiquitous 1780 re-strike do you mean?

Exactly how is that worn Contemporary counterfeit more interesting? You appear to have failed to failed to read my posts in this thread properly So please take note: I have that exact same variety of contemporary counterfeit in XF condition: its made of a white metal much like pewter( I haven't had it analyzed to know what the metal is) I paid just on US$10.00 for it and that included postage. So given I have the same variety of fake in my collection and it is in a higher grade there is no way the coin shown at the start of the thread was made that way as you have stated! I have reported the current market value which is about US$10.00 for that counterfeit variety. It is certainly not worth more that a 21st century Vienna mint struck example( Silver value), particularly in that very poor grade.

Lets put the comment in context: You would be horrified if someone said a contemporary counterfeit of a Morgan dollar was more interesting than the real thing. To emphasize the point further: The Morgan dollar is much more ubiquitous than the MTT. ( I bet Morgan dollar collectors are rankling at that comment, I assume they now understand how I reacted to it). The Morgan dollar total mintage is 600,000,000. MTT total mintage is 400,000,000. The Morgan dollar is much more common than the MTT!

I have said this before and will say it many times again:

MTT should carry a health warning sign. words to the effect: "this coin can damage numismatic brain cells". The reason I say this is that far to often coin collectors see an MTT and stop thinking, and then go on to make comments that they would never ever make in regards to other coins.

I would take a piece that presents as a legitimately contemporary counterfeit of a Morgan, in decent condition, any day over a widget AU/low-end UNC $30 common-date Morgan... I might not be able to sell it as immediately, but it's infinitely "rarer" and more interesting to the right collector...



Well... that might be because, speaking of the modern clone restrikes as a group... they're simply not "real coins" (sneezecoughmoderncr^pcough)

A lot of these points could be discussed/countered/looked at differently... I don't want to spend the time to organize that perfectly coherently. So, I'll just spit what comes to mind:

-- 90 different... incredibly miniscule varieties of what are essentially round bullion ingots with some long-lost descendancy from actual coins... that all bear the same date. I kind of agree about Morgans (and I shake my head at the ultra-pedantic VAM collecting), but at least they have obviously different dates/mintmarks.

-- Yes, some people do care about the differences in one 1960s bullion round vs. another... most don't. And, maybe a different "most" likewise doesn't care about an old fake like this coin here (especially in this apparent lowball grade).. and that's why you were able to get your much nicer specimen for $10 on a given day.

However, just like there are some who care about obscure varieties of the modern restrikes, there are collectors who will find CCs like this interesting, even in this low grade....

-- Note that a CC like this is obviously, palpably "different"... whereas you have to look reeeeeally closely past that monotonous new coin shine to find the variety in the modern MTT pieces.

-- Long story short, I could def. see this piece, even in this lowball grade, bringing, say, $30, to the right person on ebay... whereas I can easily nab a modern mint fresh MTT for $20 or even a buck or two less.

No, the market is not a liquid... but those people are out there.

georok I have a question - did you post the picture of the reverse correctly? It appears to be reversed. The legends appear on the wrong parts of the reverse.

Also I note that the spelling AUST appears on the counterfeit not the later form AVST, that the brooch with the pearls appears to be round not oval and that many other features point to an early "restrike" of the MTT being used as a model.

To me it looks like an old interesting contemporary counterfeit.

I would prefer to have an XF for $10 (but had I seen one for auction I would have likely gone to $50 or more to get it). I see the coin as well worth $10 or even $20 as is. Put it on ebay and see what you get would be my advice.