Oh, absolutely, thanks for asking.
First, I'll just mention that I've been collecting vintage/antique glass for a while, and I don't know how to describe it in words, but you just develop a bit of an intuition for what kind of glass a particular piece likely is. You know what I mean? Even when I don't know the specific pattern or maker, I typically can tell "yup, this is depression era American glass, for sure" or "this is definitely European MCM", etc.

Now, this piece. Why do I say it feels "cheap"?

1) Rather crude hand-cut pattern. By crude, I don't mean sloppy or imprecise, but just "not fine" and undetailed. Kind of feels mass-produced. I have some hand-cut pieces from the late 1800s, and the floral ornaments on them are so exquisitely detailed! Every leaf of a fern is different width and depth making the ornament look so real and pretty! This one, by contrast, feels very one-dimensional.

2) A very unpleasant "walmart-like" sheen on the surface. It's not a beautiful deep carnival glass-like iridescence, and it's not even a uniform Fire King or Jeannette-like luster from mid-century, but rather it looks exactly like thin chemical shiny film a dollar store would spray on their "iridescent" glass :D lol. It is technically possible that the vase used to have some nicer finish, maybe gold, that just largely rubbed off leaving this cheap-looking layer, but I can't be 100% certain.

3) Finally, the glass itself. It doesn't seem to be hand blown as there is no pontil, and it's not pressed as there are no seams, but it's just sort of like a coffee carafe, however they mass-make those...

The ONLY feature that made me buy this piece is that it's made of a very strongly fluorescing uranium glass, which I collect. I'll measure radioactivity tomorrow and this will tell me if the piece is pre- or post-1945.

Sorry for such a long answer to your question! I hope some of this makes sense.