DAJ Posted July 2, 2009 Report Share Posted July 2, 2009 http://www.sixbid.com/nav.php?p=viewlot&am...01&lot=1110 An unexpected turn of events. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
one-kuna Posted July 2, 2009 Report Share Posted July 2, 2009 An unexpected turn of events. F details, scratched, mount removed - estimate 2000 ??? unsold !!! Among my friends-collectors no one ever would bid on this one with above problems; so my question is what is so unexpected?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DAJ Posted July 2, 2009 Author Report Share Posted July 2, 2009 F details, scratched, mount removed - estimate 2000 ??? unsold !!! Among my friends-collectors no one ever would bid on this one with above problems; so my question is what is so unexpected?? None of this was in the listing or discussions prior to the purchase. I would not have purchased it either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
one-kuna Posted July 2, 2009 Report Share Posted July 2, 2009 None of this was in the listing or discussions prior to the purchase. I would not have purchased it either. so what was <<<An unexpected turn of events>>> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DAJ Posted July 2, 2009 Author Report Share Posted July 2, 2009 so what was <<<An unexpected turn of events>>> The coin did not sell during the auction. I purchsed it through an intermediary from Baldwin after the sale. What was unexpected is that NGC rejected it for reasons of having been scratched and mounted (!). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
one-kuna Posted July 2, 2009 Report Share Posted July 2, 2009 The coin did not sell during the auction. I purchsed it through an intermediary from Baldwin after the sale. What was unexpected is that NGC rejected it for reasons of having been scratched and mounted (!). I believe everyone is familiar with policies/procedures of NGC once submited your coins to them - of course it was not graded by NGC for scratches and being mounted !!! it was expected and reasonable rejected !!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marv Posted July 2, 2009 Report Share Posted July 2, 2009 The coin did not sell during the auction. I purchsed it through an intermediary from Baldwin after the sale. What was unexpected is that NGC rejected it for reasons of having been scratched and mounted (!). You take your chances when you purchase a coin sight unseen. If your intermediary was an expert in Russian coins, then why didn't he/she fully describe the coin to you? Or if the intermediary didn't see the coin in hand first, then you still are purchasing it sight unseen. And auction houses rarely take back a coin purchased sight unseen unless there are verifiable questions about authenticity or some other defect that would reasonably be expected to lower its value and which was not described. This coin appears to be genuine, so it seems to me that you have may have learned an expensive lesson. If you're not able to view the coin yourself prior to the auction, then you better have a knowledgeable representative view it for you and be able to describe it completely or don't buy it. Since it was mounted and not described as such, you "might" have a chance to get the auction house to take it back since mounting typically imparts some damage to the coin, not caused by normal wear and tear (like scratches). I would try. Marv Finnley Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DAJ Posted July 2, 2009 Author Report Share Posted July 2, 2009 You take your chances when you purchase a coin sight unseen. If your intermediary was an expert in Russian coins, then why didn't he/she fully describe the coin to you? Or if the intermediary didn't see the coin in hand first, then you still are purchasing it sight unseen. And auction houses rarely take back a coin purchased sight unseen unless there are verifiable questions about authenticity or some other defect that would reasonably be expected to lower its value and which was not described. This coin appears to be genuine, so it seems to me that you have may have learned an expensive lesson. If you're not able to view the coin yourself prior to the auction, then you better have a knowledgeable representative view it for you and be able to describe it completely or don't buy it. Since it was mounted and not described as such, you "might" have a chance to get the auction house to take it back since mounting typically imparts some damage to the coin, not caused by normal wear and tear (like scratches). I would try. Marv Finnley You are right. Neither scratches nor mount are at all obvious, so that was a big surprise. Distinguished intermediary saw it before forwarding and thought is was excellent. He learned from the auction house that the person selling the coin thru the auction house had $2500 in the coin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
one-kuna Posted July 2, 2009 Report Share Posted July 2, 2009 You are right. Neither scratches nor mount are at all obvious, so that was a big surprise. Distinguished intermediary saw it before forwarding and thought is was excellent. He learned from the auction house that the person selling the coin thru the auction house had $2500 in the coin. when a temptation is great - there is always something Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
squirrel Posted July 2, 2009 Report Share Posted July 2, 2009 An unfortunate situation. This is still a desirable, collectible rare russian coin. It just got caught up in the great "russian coin arms race" of late. Markov should have caught the mount trace. Perhaps it is not a definitive trace, such as a metal flaw that could be mistaken for a mount removed. I will not be the first to say TPG services do not accurately grade russian coins, in proper context. I viewed markovs trays in march, but dont recall seeing this one. he had most of the unsold lots from that sale, and all appeared to be what you fussy collectors call "problem" coins. He did not seem very happy that day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DAJ Posted July 2, 2009 Author Report Share Posted July 2, 2009 An unfortunate situation. This is still a desirable, collectible rare russian coin. It just got caught up in the great "russian coin arms race" of late. Markov should have caught the mount trace. Perhaps it is not a definitive trace, such as a metal flaw that could be mistaken for a mount removed. I will not be the first to say TPG services do not accurately grade russian coins, in proper context. I viewed markovs trays in march, but dont recall seeing this one. he had most of the unsold lots from that sale, and all appeared to be what you fussy collectors call "problem" coins. He did not seem very happy that day. This was purchased directly from Baldwin in February. That it was unsold in January in part was a reflection of the particularly dismal economic outlook then. The F grading is on target and the scratches small but visible in the on-line photo. But there is something especially distasteful about mounted coins. Usually such a coin shows marks prominently and is in better shape than this coin. If there are any marks for mouting, the marks would show on the reverse here. To me, this does have a unique and very attractive patina. Thanks much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
squirrel Posted July 2, 2009 Report Share Posted July 2, 2009 Is one allowed to send a slabbed coin back to the grader for a second opinion, and edge photography? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grivna1726 Posted July 2, 2009 Report Share Posted July 2, 2009 ...But there is something especially distasteful about mounted coins. Usually such a coin shows marks prominently and is in better shape than this coin. If there are any marks for mouting, the marks would show on the reverse here. It is hard to tell from the photo, but if it was mounted, then the mount has been expertly removed. I think I see (or it is just my imagination?) some disturbance at around 12 o'clock but from the pictures it is not at all obvious. What do you see when you look at the coin in hand? Is there obvious evidence of mount removal & repair, or does it look more or less normal to you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DAJ Posted July 2, 2009 Author Report Share Posted July 2, 2009 It is hard to tell from the photo, but if it was mounted, then the mount has been expertly removed. I think I see (or it is just my imagination?) some disturbance at around 12 o'clock but from the pictures it is not at all obvious. What do you see when you look at the coin in hand? Is there obvious evidence of mount removal & repair, or does it look more or less normal to you? This is a good looking coin with nothing evident about removal or repair. There could be a light disturbance above the 6, maybe at about 4 o'clock - if one is really looking for something. It would take quite a bit of expertise to remove a mount, I would think. Thanks much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DAJ Posted July 2, 2009 Author Report Share Posted July 2, 2009 Is one allowed to send a slabbed coin back to the grader for a second opinion, and edge photography? You probably could do that. Maybe that is what we are missing now. Or try another grader, which one sometimes does not have the real determination to do. It seems odd though that a coin with what would seem to be such an obvious problem, sold by a distinguished house, reviewed by a distinguished intermediary, and that the last owner paid $2500 for would have such a defect. Many thanks for thoughts and observations. It is an interesting and costly circumstance. Best - Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
one-kuna Posted July 2, 2009 Report Share Posted July 2, 2009 The coin did not sell during the auction. I purchsed it through an intermediary from Baldwin after the sale. What was unexpected is that NGC rejected it for reasons of having been scratched and mounted (!). first, coin was restored before an auction and artificially toned/patined like the majority coins from sale XXI (*), then unsold at auction, then cleaned, then again profesionally lightly restored and sent to NGC, rejected, and graded by NCS, finally found its buyer... *some sample of legends from sale XXI related to coin description: nice old collection toning attractively toned lightly toned over full mint luster nicely toned over many contact marks attractivelly toned over prooflike surfaces deep old toning over lustrous surfaces toned over some old nicks and scratches etc., Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loyal Citizen Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 I know this coin personally. In addition to Sale XXI it was also sold at Sale XVIII in 2008 http://www.sixbid.com/nav.php?lot=1148&...wlot&sid=15 The coin is not mounted at all but does have scratches to the left of the prortrait. Overall, it is a very decent coin in my mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grivna1726 Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 I know this coin personally. In addition to Sale XXI it was also sold at Sale XVIII in 2008 http://www.sixbid.com/nav.php?lot=1148&...wlot&sid=15 The coin is not mounted at all but does have scratches to the left of the prortrait. Overall, it is a very decent coin in my mind. It certainly looks like a nice coin to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loyal Citizen Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 It certainly looks like a nice coin to me. It is nice. Someone just had it toned between Jan 2008 and Jan 2009 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ippocampos Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 first, coin was restored before an auction and artificially toned/patined like the majority coins from sale XXI (*), then unsold at auction, then cleaned, then again profesionally lightly restored and sent to NGC, rejected, and graded by NCS, finally found its buyer... *some sample of legends from sale XXI related to coin description: nice old collection toning attractively toned lightly toned over full mint luster nicely toned over many contact marks attractivelly toned over prooflike surfaces deep old toning over lustrous surfaces toned over some old nicks and scratches etc., "like the majority coins from sale XXI" I disagree! I had many pieces on sale at the auction and they were not artificially toned.. but in my collection for over 20 years and in my cabinet.. some from older collections, whilst I agree that the descriptions on many items leave alot to the imagination.. gun metal blue etc... I do not think that the items were bad quality.. I had a 1762 PIII rouble that was sold (not this piece!) to a 3rd party as it was unsold.. and I have to say it left for nothing.. I do not mind at the end of the day as whoever got it knew what they were doing I just hope that they were collectors like me. If anything, this auction marked the temporary pause of the Russian coins arms race and I think that there were many opportunities to be had.. Does anyone in the forum see coins going cheaper nowadays (other than maybe ebay) I certainly don't! If you do please let me know.. Let us not forget Russian coins are still in my mind the epitomy of numismatic artistry post ancient Greece ! Whilst nit picking on details on a coin by coin basis let us take a step back and see the bigger picture. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
one-kuna Posted July 4, 2009 Report Share Posted July 4, 2009 "like the majority coins from sale XXI" I disagree! I had many pieces on sale at the auction and they were not artificially toned.. but in my collection for over 20 years and in my cabinet.. some from older collections, whilst I agree that the descriptions on many items leave alot to the imagination.. gun metal blue etc... I do not think that the items were bad quality.. I had a 1762 PIII rouble that was sold (not this piece!) to a 3rd party as it was unsold.. and I have to say it left for nothing.. I do not mind at the end of the day as whoever got it knew what they were doing I just hope that they were collectors like me. If anything, this auction marked the temporary pause of the Russian coins arms race and I think that there were many opportunities to be had.. Does anyone in the forum see coins going cheaper nowadays (other than maybe ebay) I certainly don't! If you do please let me know.. Let us not forget Russian coins are still in my mind the epitomy of numismatic artistry post ancient Greece ! Whilst nit picking on details on a coin by coin basis let us take a step back and see the bigger picture. what you wrote here does not make any sence; it also shows that you a little bit behind a modern professional restoration process; i do not want to promote this sale anymore but if you reasonably respond - i will give you few arguments on modern toning... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
one-kuna Posted July 4, 2009 Report Share Posted July 4, 2009 It is nice. Someone just had it toned between Jan 2008 and Jan 2009 from NGC guide when coins being rejected<<<<<artificial toning can be extremely difficult to detect, and even harder to explain once discovered>>>>> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loyal Citizen Posted July 4, 2009 Report Share Posted July 4, 2009 from NGC guide when coins being rejected<<<<<artificial toning can be extremely difficult to detect, and even harder to explain once discovered>>>>> Well, I know for sure , this coin was retoned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
one-kuna Posted July 4, 2009 Report Share Posted July 4, 2009 Well, I know for sure , this coin was retoned. OK, so you know why - to hide defects that would be detected ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DAJ Posted July 4, 2009 Author Report Share Posted July 4, 2009 http://www.sixbid.com/nav.php?p=viewlot&am...01&lot=1110 An unexpected turn of events. LOL. If it is not one thing, it is another. Loyal Citizen adds a much appreciated twist by identifying this coin at this January 2008 NY sale: http://www.sixbid.com/nav.php?lot=1148&...wlot&sid=15 He says the coin was not mounted, but has been toned during the last year - and I respect his take on things. Whew. Anybody got the werewithal to comment on toning? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.