Basilio Posted February 4, 2008 Report Share Posted February 4, 2008 here it is Item number: 320213162611 any ideas? IMHO - at least sterange piece.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grivna1726 Posted February 4, 2008 Report Share Posted February 4, 2008 here it is Item number: 320213162611 any ideas? IMHO - at least sterange piece.. I'm not sure but I think it might be engraved. The facial expression does look unusual to me. Compare with this coin (obviously different dies but essentially the same portrait type): Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nordic gold Posted February 4, 2008 Report Share Posted February 4, 2008 Re-engraved roubles do exist. Some are re-engraved in smaller areas, sometimes the wig or feathers of the eagle, sometimes the whole portrait - more or less skillfully. To me this 1734 rouble looks as if the portrait had been re-engraved or tooled otherwise, but the coin in itself is an original rouble illustrated by Diakov nr 20 (Uzd 0714) which is a real pity as the original as such is rare. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobh Posted February 4, 2008 Report Share Posted February 4, 2008 These areas look suspicious to me ... compare them with the acorresponding parts of grivna's coin: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BKB Posted February 4, 2008 Report Share Posted February 4, 2008 any ideas? IMHO - at least sterange piece.. Well, you have said it. Either a grossly reengraved original, or a fake. Could have been reengraved a long time ago and then polished, because it has a smooth look to it. Hard to tell from these photos, whether it is a fake or not. Dies match the plate coin from Bitkin (Bit 96) pretty accurately (except for assumingly reengraved details). Could be a cast fake, but I doubt that Goldbergs would miss something so obvious. (IMHO) This coin was not at the NY Show, thus I did not see it. Normally they display the material from the upcoming auction, but, I guess, this time they had nothing to show. Strange to see something like that at one of the major auctions... However, maybe a chance for someone to buy something pretty rare for less All in all, it is a shame that Goldbergs are doing a poor job in describing coins, but, isn't everyone nowdays... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BKB Posted February 4, 2008 Report Share Posted February 4, 2008 These areas look suspicious to me ... compare them with the acorresponding parts of grivna's coin 2 different coins. No reason to compare. The year 1734 produced a lot of major die variations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grivna1726 Posted February 4, 2008 Report Share Posted February 4, 2008 These areas look suspicious to me ... compare them with the acorresponding parts of grivna's coin: Sorry, I should have pointed out that's not my coin. It was just the closest example I could find of that particular portrait type after a quick search on the net. BKB is quite correct that there are many, many different die varieties for 1734, but the fact that he points this out tells me that I failed to make my point as clearly as I had hoped. What I was attempting to point out is that the expression on Anna's face is so very strange, especially the eyes, nose and lips, when compared to an apparently unaltered example representative of that portrait type. I can't recall ever seeing another Anna rouble (of any date) with similar facial details, either in real life or in pictures. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BKB Posted February 4, 2008 Report Share Posted February 4, 2008 What I was attempting to point out is that the expression on Anna's face is so very strange, especially the eyes, nose and lips, when compared to an apparently unaltered example representative of that portrait type. I can't recall ever seeing another Anna rouble (of any date) with similar facial details, either in real life or in pictures. Just a little facelift and a new haircut Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IgorS Posted February 6, 2008 Report Share Posted February 6, 2008 I wanted to bid on this coin in the last Goldberg's sale and asked them to inspect the coin for me. The opinion of someone I respect (I am not talking about Goldbergs) was that it did not look re-engraved. Oh well, even dealers with many years of experience make mistakes. In any case, I did not bid on it. This coin was sold and then returned back to the auction house. So now we have an opportunity to bid on it again. Who is first? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grivna1726 Posted February 6, 2008 Report Share Posted February 6, 2008 I wanted to bid on this coin in the last Goldberg's sale and asked them to inspect the coin for me. The opinion of someone I respect (I am not talking about Goldbergs) was that it did not look re-engraved. Oh well, even dealers with many years of experience make mistakes. In any case, I did not bid on it. This coin was sold and then returned back to the auction house. So now we have an opportunity to bid on it again. Who is first? It looks very odd to me and I do not trust it, so I will pass. The Dassier rouble being offered in an NGC "MS-64" holder (in Goldberg's Millenia sale) appears to be the Fuchs coin previously offered by Goldbergs in a PCGS holder as "MS-63": Presumably the bump in the grade on the slab will make the coin more valuable to slab buyers because it is now a better coin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RW Julian Posted February 6, 2008 Report Share Posted February 6, 2008 The Dassier rouble being offered in an NGC "MS-64" holder (in Goldberg's Millenia sale) appears to be the Fuchs coin previously offered by Goldbergs in a PCGS holder as "MS-63":Presumably the bump in the grade on the slab will make the coin more valuable to slab buyers because it is now a better coin. Yes, this is the Fuchs specimen. RWJ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
squirrel Posted February 6, 2008 Report Share Posted February 6, 2008 This may be a naive question, but is it common practice to have a coin re-graded to improve its perceived value, such as with this Dassier Ruble? Is this only possible by cracking the old slab, and sending the coin to DIFFERENT grader, and hoping for higher grade? What would happen if the coin came back lower... can you crack it open AGAIN and send it back to the first slabber, and get it re-slabbed at the old grade, since it was a recorded coin? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobh Posted February 6, 2008 Report Share Posted February 6, 2008 This may be a naive question, but is it common practice to have a coin re-graded to improve its perceived value, such as with this Dassier Ruble? Is this only possible by cracking the old slab, and sending the coin to DIFFERENT grader, and hoping for higher grade? What would happen if the coin came back lower... can you crack it open AGAIN and send it back to the first slabber, and get it re-slabbed at the old grade, since it was a recorded coin? From what I have read, I think it is very common. Some grading services used to be much stricter in the past; e.g. PCGS graded coins in the old green holders tend to grade higher if cracked out and resubmitted. However, this can be risky business ... once a coin has been removed from a holder, it is just a raw coin again. There is no "going back", AFAIK. If a coin has been overgraded and is submitted in the original holder, if the SAME grading service grades it lower, they will often give you the difference in price back. I'm not sure if both PCGS and NGC offer this, but I think they do. Don't know (and I don't really care) about any other grading services, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grivna1726 Posted February 6, 2008 Report Share Posted February 6, 2008 This may be a naive question, but is it common practice to have a coin re-graded to improve its perceived value, such as with this Dassier Ruble? Yes, it goes on all the time (especially in the US coin market) because if the number on the slab goes up by even one point, then the coin is magically worth more (sometimes a LOT more). Is this only possible by cracking the old slab, and sending the coin to DIFFERENT grader, and hoping for higher grade? No, it can be resubmitted many times over to the same grading company (or a different one) until the higher grade is finally achieved. I don't think it bothers the grading companies to have the repeat business. What would happen if the coin came back lower... Then it would magically be worth less than it was earlier because the number on the slab would be lower. can you crack it open AGAIN and send it back to the first slabber, and get it re-slabbed at the old grade, since it was a recorded coin? I doubt it, although I believe the grading company would be happy to collect the fee again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
squirrel Posted February 6, 2008 Report Share Posted February 6, 2008 Thanks for the replies. It seems slabbing can become quite a profitable game, if one chooses to play. Ill pass for now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.