This question may be geared to more of the TPG certified coins. But how strict of coin quality do you prefer for your collection. Do you rely on your own eye to determine quality or do you need professional validation. For you, is it okay for a coin to be "nice" or does it have to be superior to its grade?
In my TPG coins I am looking for something that looks very nice for the grade. Not necessarily for upgrading purposes, but rather because I want the best looking coin I can afford. Doesn't mean all my coins are real beauties, but they were the best looking coin that I had the money for when I made the purchase.
I am much stricter about eye appeal than I used to be. Note, however, that technical grade, and how strong a coin's merits for the grade are, is only one factor in eye appeal. It's an important factor, to be sure, but not the whole story. Lots of other factors like strike quality, luster, toning, style and design, etc., all factor into a coin's eye appeal for me. And I prefer to be my own judge, though the opinions of third-party grading companies count. I'm not usually interested in taking it as far as fourth-party verification from "stickering" companies like CAC or WINGS, but if I have one of their stickers on a slab, all the better. This. I try to buy the best I can afford. That's sound practice.
How strict are you with coin quality? For me, saying it depends was accurate but grossly understated. I guess that's because the only reason I ever bought coins was because I happened to like that specific coin - but often for several very, very, different reasons. Take these coins for example. The 1st was the finest known, it later sold for about $8,000. The second, also an excellent example, I paid almost $2,000 for it. But the next two, I paid less than $30 each for those. But I liked them all, and was quite proud to have each one in my collection. And that's kind of the thing, my collection contained many exemplary coins, coins that only the discriminating collector would own. But it also contained other coins that were anything but expensive, some were even damaged, but I still bought them because for one reason or another I liked them - specifically for what they were.
That gold coin is gorgeous but I have to wonder why he's riding the horse backwards, maybe makes it easier for him to swing the sword
Well, as to that question, look at his foot on the stirrup - which way is it pointing ? That said, if you had any idea of the history of that coin, the story for its very existence, you'd also realize there is an ironical element of truth to your comment
It was. One also has to remember that I sold my entire collection and completely quit collecting coins in 2006.
Oh and for the thread yeah I agree with this. Truly rare type coins I'll be way more lenient with than an 80-S Morgan which better absolutely knock my socks off since I can go to any coin site and find 100 examples that are all beautiful. Also in general, I value eye appeal and luster way more than strike or surface preservation. So I'd rather own a coin with gem luster and 63 surfaces than vice versa - or a SLQ with gem luster and no FH over a duller FH example. A few scattered hits that aren't distracting don't bother me at all if the coin is alive.
I remembered you mentioning that, but not how long ago it had been. What made you do it, yet still hang around the numismatic community? Was sifting through some archived CU threads yesterday and accidentally stumbled across some old posts of yours, but I don't think they were that old. Maybe 2010-ish.
The foot may be the only thing that looks like he's facing forward, everything else hips, shoulders, grip of the sword make it look backwards. What is the date period and country of it? Late 1700s would be my guess.
More examples what I mean by buying coins because I like them. The 1st, one of the earliest of the Spanish colonial coins, a high grade example 1542 4 reale struck in the actual home of Hernan Cortez. The 2nd, a high grade and what I thought was nicely toned example of a later 8 reales. The 3rd, a much more common 2 reale with a strike-through and corrosion damage. The 4th, a later 4 reale but with obvious damage. But the primary reason I bought all of these was because of my own personal connection, from my past history, to Spanish colonial coinage. I guess what I'm trying to get across is that for me money played a very, very minor part in my coin buying habits. I bought coins for what I considered to be much more important reasons - because for one reason or another I liked the coin
1364, France. That is Jean le Bon, John II of France, and the coin is the very first French franc, though it was struck in the mint of Count Louis De Male in Flanders - then under French control. The story behind the coin is that John was captured in battle by the Black Prince, taken to England and held for ransom. This coin and others like it were designed and struck for one specific reason - to pay the ransom for the French King. Once the first portion of the ransom was paid by the King's son, the English released the King and allowed him to return to France, with the promise of paying the rest of the ransom. But once there, the King's son refused to pay any more. So the King, being an honorable man, voluntarily returned to England where he later died in prison. And he knowingly did this for one reason only - to uphold his personal honor. There aren't a lot of coins that have a story like that behind them !
Wow that is in incredible condition for 1364, I can't believe how perfectly round it looks. I was off by 4 centuries. And yes some of the stories that go along with these old gems are awesome. So much to offer in the dark side can't believe more people don't venture that direction. The stories, design beauty, actual rarity and cheap price tags relatively speaking really they deserve much more attention.
It was graded MS64, back in the days when a 64 really was a 64. As I mentioned, it was the finest known, may still be.