Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
TM Coin Club Thread
#41
who'd be generally regarded as the top grader in NZ (excluding ones self from the reckoning!)?
Reply
#42
Pass :-)
Reply
#43
According to Bertrand definition, an uncirculated coin is one in mint condition, put aside at the time of issue. With this definition in mind I am puzzling over the question: why would there be fewer uncirculated 1936 florins, compared to 1933, 1934, 1935 or 1937? If some people back then were inclined to put aside an uncirculated florin, why would the propensity to do so be so much less for 1936? Could it be that a "genuinely" uncirculated 1936 florin is not significantly more rare than a "genuinely" uncirculated florin from any of those other years, but because so many lightly circulated coins are now also called uncirculated (and actually swamping the genuinely uncirculated in terms of numbers) the rarity of an uncirculated coin is determined by the number of lightly circulated that are called uncirculated, of which there are more in years 1933, 1933, 1935, 1937 compared to 1936?
Reply
#44
(04-04-2022, 11:33 AM)Dean Wrote: who'd be generally regarded as the top grader in NZ (excluding ones self from the reckoning!)?

(06-04-2022, 05:39 PM)Dean Wrote: According to Bertrand definition, an uncirculated coin is one in mint condition, put aside at the time of issue. With this definition in mind I am puzzling over the question: why would there be fewer uncirculated 1936 florins, compared to 1933, 1934, 1935 or 1937? If some people back then were inclined to put aside an uncirculated florin, why would the propensity to do so be so much less for 1936? Could it be that a "genuinely" uncirculated 1936 florin is not significantly more rare than a "genuinely" uncirculated florin from any of those other years, but because so many lightly circulated coins are now also called uncirculated (and actually swamping the genuinely uncirculated in terms of numbers) the rarity of an uncirculated coin is determined by the number of lightly circulated that are called uncirculated, of which there are more in years 1933, 1933, 1935, 1937 compared to 1936?

It's a pretty good theory.  Such a strict definition would be hard to prove unless an item were wrapped in tissue or cotton on the day of issue and locked in a vault with some kind of affidavit certifying the date of deposit.  Otherwise distinguishing the two options as per your post would be difficult, possibly impossible.  
Bill Lampard used to say - in line with that definition - that UNC wasn't a condition but a state, i.e. never circulated.  But then if you took your "never circulated" coin and left it in a jar to rattle around with other coins, it would still technically be in a state of never having circulated, while potentially exhibiting severe wear.  That's probably where the compromise definition comes in.
I was once offered a sovereign that had supposedly - we need to assume honesty for the sake of argument - been put aside fresh from the bank and kept in a purse for something like 70 years; unfortunately it had rubbed against a lot of change during that time and was far from pristine.  Assuming the story to be correct, it had never been used in trade and was thus in a state of being uncirculated, but based on the amount of wear it exhibited I'd have struggled to call lit VF.
If you look at older British coin books they avoided "uncirculated" entirely, which was considered a new, "American" concept.  EF was as high as you got with any issued coins, with FDC reserved for proofs and, presumably, those few items that had been put aside as above.  The definition I read somewhere in the 1970s of "Extremely Fine" as denoting an "extremely fine" amount of wear and no more, tallies with that approach.  Back to Bill Lampard - his take was that once a coin was issued, it could be no better than EF accordingly.  I'd like to see a return to that, but it isn't going to happen.
Reply
#45
Yes uncirculated could be both a condition and sate, but I think it would be reasonably easy, armed with magnifier and suitable lighting, to differentiate a genuinely uncirculated coin (one that has also been well looked after) from a coin that has seen some, even very light circulation.

In contrast to British grading in the older Bertrands (from 1993 for example) they don't actually have AU as a condition, it goes straight from EF to UNC! I suspect the addition of AU as a state was to up the price of the better EFs!

Interestingly back then a 1940 and 1936 florin were quite close in price (1200 cf 1400 in UNC condition).

a nice obverse to this 1936 florin, very detailed beard detail. I'm surprised it didn't go for more, but I did my best!

https://www.trademe.co.nz/a/marketplace/...f=ggNgMHhk

compare beard detail on this one

https://www.trademe.co.nz/a/marketplace/...f=FpNOsDzC
Reply
#46
If only Stephen Eccles had mentioned the lustrous satiny surface, hints of a graphite patina and overall attractive light golden sheen when it was up for auction first time. I might've bid more!

Now it's way out of my price range!
(another missed opportunity!)


https://www.trademe.co.nz/a/marketplace/...f=9d2F3pbH
Reply
#47
Here's a tip for Trade Me bid war warriors. It might seem that you have won the bidding war, the countdown has gone to zero and it says the listing is closing. But don't begin your celebrations too hastily! Refresh the page to make sure you really have won, because there seems to be a glitch in Trade Me that when some sneaky bastard manages to put in a last second bid the listing appears to initially close before resetting the countdown again. So keep this in mind and don't let any sneaky bastards get the better of you!
Reply
#48
Wellington Antique Bottle and Collectables Club is holding a Collector's Fair on Sunday 29 May 2022 at Expressions Whirinaki, 836 Fergusson Drive, Upper Hutt.
Reply
#49
Bought

https://www.trademe.co.nz/a/marketplace/...f=liEsoSbk

and sold!

https://www.trademe.co.nz/a/marketplace/...f=1ZdDbhM2


Now, I don't usually like to criticise, but it does seem like a lot of effort to make a measly $77 profit! 
(actually a lot less once TM take their cut!)

Maybe if they had let me win it in the first auction, everyone would be happier. They wouldn't have wasted so much effort, and a very deserving collector, one who would actually appreciate it, would have a coin at a much cheaper price!
Reply
#50
But both $1 reserve so people can just bid what they want? It could just as easily resold for less.
Reply
#51
REAL RARE SILVER ANCIENT Roman coin Listing # 3600950696 . A junk metal reproduction of a Bithynian coin.
Real SILVER ancient Roman coin Listing # 3600953346 A junk metal reproduction of Arsinoe II circa 200 BC.
A genuine specimen would be up in the four figures
Traders like ~carloj1~ get away with this because both Labour and National have ensured that the country has deliberately deficient legislation that does not protect people. As previously stated (on former TM community) Trade Me facilitates fraud by its absence of action.

(16-05-2022, 10:24 AM)Dean Wrote: Bought

https://www.trademe.co.nz/a/marketplace/...f=liEsoSbk

and sold!

https://www.trademe.co.nz/a/marketplace/...f=1ZdDbhM2


Now, I don't usually like to criticise, but it does seem like a lot of effort to make a measly $77 profit! 
(actually a lot less once TM take their cut!)

Maybe if they had let me win it in the first auction, everyone would be happier. They wouldn't have wasted so much effort, and a very deserving collector, one who would actually appreciate it, would have a coin at a much cheaper price!

Actually Aventine did one hell of a lot better on the worn and battered CLEOPATRA VII Æ 80 DRACHMAE that he won on collectorseller's TM auction. He sold it on his own website for $3,000.00 NZD so about 6 times what he paid!!!

The seller has responded to your question about 'Real SILVER ancient Roman coin'.

You should stop trying to defraud people. It is not silver; it is not roman; it is a Junky REPLICA that should be listed under reproduction coins!

Really? Why say that? I'm not sure I agree looks and feels pretty real to me and has had 50/50 reviews from professional appraisals expert's so u maybe right u maybe wrong how are u so sure???
posted by: carloj1 (221 ) Address Verified 2018-10-30T03:13:36.970 9:19 , Thu 19 May

Wonder who these "experts" are?
Reply
#52
(19-05-2022, 10:51 AM)Saw your comment under another of the seller\s listings.  He has two off the same HK fakes board.  Wonder if we'll see more.alpha111 Wrote: REAL RARE SILVER ANCIENT Roman coin Listing # 3600950696 . A junk metal reproduction of a Bithynian coin.
Real SILVER ancient Roman coin Listing # 3600953346 A junk metal reproduction of Arsinoe II circa 200 BC.
A genuine specimen would be up in the four figures
Traders like ~carloj1~ get away with this because both Labour and National have  ensured that the country has deliberately deficient legislation that does not protect people. As previously stated (on former TM community) Trade Me facilitates fraud by its absence of action.

The seller has responded to your question about 'Real SILVER ancient Roman coin'.

You should stop trying to defraud people. It is not silver; it is not roman; it is a Junky REPLICA that should be listed under reproduction coins!

Really? Why say that? I'm not sure I agree looks and feels pretty real to me and has had 50/50 reviews from professional appraisals expert's so u maybe right u maybe wrong how are u so sure???
posted by:    carloj1 (221 ) Address Verified 2018-10-30T03:13:36.970  9:19 , Thu 19 May

Wonder who these "experts" are?
Reply
#53
ok which one of you rick pricks  purchased this!

https://www.trademe.co.nz/a/marketplace/...f=HDoQQuPB
Reply
#54
(05-06-2022, 07:56 PM)Dean Wrote: ok which one of you rick pricks  purchased this!

https://www.trademe.co.nz/a/marketplace/...f=HDoQQuPB

Frustrating they don't show the buyer's ID for Buy-Nows.  Nice looking note, but does it look like it's been trimmed across the to to you?
Reply
#55
reckon we should have a whip round see if we can muster up enough of the reddies to get this to NZ?
(I bags first to touch it!)

https://www.noble.com.au/auctions/lot?id=447986
Reply
#56
(13-06-2022, 02:24 PM)Dean Wrote: reckon we should have a whip round see if we can muster up enough of the reddies to get this to NZ?
(I bags first to touch it!)

https://www.noble.com.au/auctions/lot?id=447986



Well, there was a 1937 Ed VIII penny a while back that was being sold in shares - we could get a consortium of 650 people to put in a grand each to own a piece of this item likewise (bags storage rights!)
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)