Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by marv

  1. I don't know Bob. I assume that the central shield is the highest point of the design, and it didn't look like there was any wear on it, or at least I couldn't see, from the image, that there was wear on it. Admittedly, some of the detail in the crown and wing tips was lacking, but that could be striking weakness rather than wear. One would have to have the coin in hand to observe whether there was any luster in those areas. But if the shield is the highest point, and it does not show any wear, and there is luster on the weak areas, then the graders would have given it an unc designation. Hard
  2. When I buy a coin, I want to be able to enjoy looking at it, not just enjoy having it. For me, appreciation of a coin's design and eye appeal are paramount. I don't buy circulated coins or uncirculated coins that have evident defects, such as excessive hairlines, bag marks, etc. That way I know that, when I get ready to sell, someone else will desire the coin as much as I do. This philosophy means that I don't buy lots of coins, but those that I do buy are very desirable, and I have slowly acquired a nice variety over the years working with a few dealers who know my preferences. I would rather
  3. What was worth $35000 on the 1889 rouble? Or was that SFr 35000? Marv
  4. I'll try MS63. There are a couple of marks on it, so I don't think it's a 68.
  5. Looks like he ended the sale with no bids. I reported him as well as emailing him about this.
  6. Of course I'm not an expert, but the coin doesn't look like any of the Uzdenikov types for 1726. In particular, the portrait of Catherine seems too pudgy. The coin in Uzd. shows a pupil in the eye I think, but there is none on your coin; the curlyque on the on the bottom of the letter "tz" in "Imperitritza" seems to go the wrong way based on Uzd. Her cheek jowl seems to have a longer outline in Uzd. than your coin. Her expression just seems a bit bloated compared to the Group V-B picture in Uzd. Plus, Uzd. says the edge either slants to the left or right, not straight across. Bitkin might be a
  7. Whoa! That one's worse than the 1826. I wonder just who was doing the proof dies? You're right that both the 1826 and the 1830 exhibit poor reverses but fine obverses. That's really weird. I hope that Bob Julian can chime in on this thread with some wisdom. Why would proof dies be much worse than circulation dies? Doesn't make sense (to me at least). You know, now I'm wondering whether these are novodels and made around the same time? With a novodel, they would, perhaps, not be as careful with something that wouldn't have to endure the scrutiny of a mint official? Or, possibly, they are no
  8. Now that I look at this proof again, I think I know the answer: too much vodka.
  9. It's all about risk mitigation. The more risk, i.e., the more money you pay for something, the more you need to worry about mitigating any potential risk, i.e., knowledge, reputable dealers who will allow returns, and third party grading. Even if you are buying inexpensive, low grade coins in slabs, I would wonder why someone would spend the money to encapsulate a coin worth less than $100 when the cost to slab is a significant fraction of the cost of the coin. So I would be suspicious of cheap coins in PCGS/NGC slabs. But in the end, knowledge and a good dealer with whom you have a relati
  10. Since I own what I believe to be the finest known circulation strike 1826 Wings Up rouble, I'm always on the lookout for this type and date. In the forthcoming Heritage NYINC auction, there is an 1826 proof in a PCGS PF64 holder. Comparing that coin to mine points up what I think is a very interesting situation: the reverse punching has been done in a very sloppy manner on the proof with the individual letters punched in at different angles and even the "2" and "1" in 21 Dolya using very different sized fonts. One would think that extra care would be taken with the proof die versus a regular c
  11. Just got the PR for Jim's latest World-wide Coins of California auction (no buyer's premium). Some very strong prices were achieved for high-quality coins or ultra rare coins with no serious defects. Lesser quality coins generally came in at or slightly under estimate. High quality coins were at multiples of the estimates. Jim's estimates are usually conservative. (elmen@sonic.net) Some standouts (estimates in brackets): POLAND 10 ZLOTYCH 1820 Proof-like EF+ Dav. 248 (very rare): $18,000 [$3,000] Rouble 1743 MMD Dav. 1678 about EF struck over Ivan III rouble - light scratch on obverse
  12. Just make sure you can get it back once you ship it to Russia.
  13. Coin prices, even for Russian coins which now are very popular, are very condition sensative. Even a very rare coin will bring a higher price in a high state of preservation versus a well-worn condition. That of course presumes that the coin is genuine, and, to be sure of your coin, you might want to send it to a reputable third party grading (TPG) company such as NGC (www.ngccoin.com) or PCGS (www.pcgs.com). For a fee, they will render opinions about authenticity and grade. However, this service costs money, and if the coin is not worth very much, it might not make sense to avail yourself
  14. Think of it this way: if it weren't for the scratches, you might have had to pay a lot more for the coin.
  15. For low grade or inexpensive coins, I agree with you that slabs are a waste. However for expensive coins, where the slightest mark can mean a loss of hundreds or thousands of dollars on resale, I think slabs (the "right" slabs) are cheap protection, affording an expert opinion of genuiness as well as protection and helping future buyers (you won't have it forever) have confidence to pay what it's really worth. I hope you're not keeping your gem proof Nicholas II rouble bare in your wooden tray or in a pvc 2x2 or passing it bare around to your friends to have a look. Marv Finnley
  16. Anybody want to hazard a guess (or informed opinion) as to why this lot in the September Coin Galleries auction achieved almost 100 times estimate? Here is the link: http://www.stacks.com/lotdetail.aspx?lsid=...lrid=AN00105301 I don't have my references handy, but Stacks seemed to think this was only worth $175! Marv Finnley
  17. I'm always surprised that the so called "Pugachev" rouble brings high prices since it is a total fabrication whereas the copper rouble was really a government plan which didn't work. Even though all the available copper roubles are novodels, at least they represent originals that do exist in the Hermitage. So, in my opinion, the "Pugachev" rouble really isn't a novodel at all; it's a "mint sport" piece, strictly an oddity. Marv Finnley
  18. It is a proof. PP means polierte platte or polished planchet. It also says "stark berieben" or heavily rubbed. Amazing that such a coin would go for well over $100,000 (unless that price is a mistake).
  19. $22,000 for an AU 1886 Rouble?? (lot 8842)
  20. Remember, it just takes TWO people who have lots of money and really want something to drive the price up; OR it could be a seller's "representative" who is covering the coins at the auction. 99% of the people at the auction may not want the coin at those prices, but if only two do, you will have very strong prices, and with nice material, it's apparent, after looking at the Maison Palombo auction, that there are still at least two rich collectors who want nice coins and can afford it. When there are no longer two people, then prices will come down. My guess is, that time will not come for
  21. Looked at the Künker auction; anything a bit nice sold for between three and 10 times estimates. The Swedish Avesta mint 5k went for EU115,000!!! Must be a record for a copper coin. There weren't a lot of super coins in the auction, but the nicest coins went for almost 10 times the estimate, so it looks like there are still some folks with money looking for Russian coins. Marv Finnley
  22. Perhaps some inexperienced collectors think, that because high-end Russian coins are experiencing huge run-ups, that lower-end coins will have the same increase. I'm not sure that applies. In the US market, while some high-end coins have shown spectacular increases, many of the lower end, more common coins haven't done much in years. I have some US coins that I collected in the 50's that aren't worth much more than they were then. Of course, although in percentage terms, going from $1.00 to $5.00 is a huge increase, inflation over 50-odd years has negated much of that. Marv Finnley
  23. I know they're different dates, and perhaps the central shield relief was reduced a bit to "shield" it, so one would have to judge by luster on the high points and fields and marks. Dies could get severly worn with the large mintages of the later dates of the rouble wings down series. I don't know how often they created new dies. There was an article in the JRNS about rouble die life during this time where the writer drew conclusions based on US die life during the same time period. I'll have to try to find it. Since I own an 1826, I tend to focus on that date. I'm trying to draw some conc
  • Create New...