The New York International Coin Show

I don't collect mint state coins so indeed that's a difference. And mint state milled coins are easily damaged by thumb prints. Once EF is ones goal, the coins have already been handled dozens of times. There's a reason I don't collect minty coins aside from resources. I actually find the patina from a little handling to be very pleasant and attractive. Moreover certain patinas indicate old collection coins with old provenances which are important to me. Absence of mintiness often signals that some 18th century collector was also handling my coins and I often find a terrific string of provenances going back a century or more.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Thanks Joe! This coin is perfect condition for me (see prior post) and apparently has a 1973 Spink provenance too. I will be letting go of a more minty example in its favour. Matter of taste. This is wonderful.

The undersaturated photos from CNG in my current (ongoing) consigned group made me rather unhappy. It's impossible to convey to collectors with words alone that my bronzes are beautiful shades of green, red, blue and brown when they come out monochrome. I really hope people took the opportunity to handle them during NYINC and appreciate their beauty, as I suggested.

 

My understanding of FDC is a term applied to a more or less perfect coin. A newly minted ancient coin is not automatically categorized as such just because it has no wear. Offstruck, poor flan, or any other "defects" automatically disqualify it as being called an FDC.

 

I absolutely agree with you on this @panzerman. I think such coins should be protected and not touched with bare hands. There are relatively few Ancient coins in such a superb state of preservation (ones like you, IOM, Ancient Joe, Al Kowsky, et al often post - sorry if I missed anyone) and I applaud everyone who own and post such gems. I deliberately do not own such coins - I prefer coins that have been circulated and show the wear and tear of everyday use - but well struck with complete and readable inscriptions. As I have mentioned previously, I do handle such coins without trepidation - as always, it comes down what you like (and often times what you can afford).

 

You are also my kind of collector @red_spork !

 

I agree. FDC literally means a flower of a coin. An FDC coin must be a perfectly centered strike of the finest style with perfect surfaces and toning. It doesn't have to be, and usually isn't, mint state. The average mint state coin is sharp but is not perfectly centered, is not of the finest style engraving and may not have perfect surfaces. Maybe 5% of mint state coins are capable of being FDC. Some EF coins may be considered FDC if they are of the finest style, perfect strikes and perfect surfaces and toning, especially if mint state coins aren't available with these characteristics. FDC means a perfect coin. 90% of mint state coins are far from perfect and some EF coins may be perfect (especially if mint state examples with perfect surfaces centering and style just don't exist)

 

Yes, but when you check with coin grading standards/ esp. the Europeans/ Brits/ Japanese, they do not agree with the US version of MS coin grades. They look at
MS-60-62 as EF/ Vorzg./ Supberbe/ Splendide/ EBC
Ms-63-64 as AU/ Fast St./ EBC+/ qFDC
MS-65/66 as MS/ St./ SC/
MS-67-70 as FDC
This coin I got from 2005 Tkalec Auction was FDC, but it not perfectly centered.

 

That's not an FDC coin if better centred examples exist. It's mint state but not Fleur de Coin. FDC coins have to be flawless as regards strike surfaces and style.

It's still a lovely coin, but FDC is a measure of beauty (relative to the best known examples) not a measure of condition.

 

I also tend to measure FDC based on theoretical examples, potentially meaning that the "finest known" example of an issue is still not FDC, especially if the majority of the population of a type is plagued by die breaks or other manufacturer-originated issues.

Perhaps I'm being unfair but while a few collections have used the title "Perfectionist Collection", a true perfectionist would likely never be able to buy a single coin.

 

I tend to think of how an 18th century collector would consider FDC. Finest possible condition style strike and surfaces. But an 18th century collector would without hesitation classify a simply beautiful coin whose beauty could not be exceeded as FDC even if it has a little wear. FDC is not a condition or state of wear. It's a measure of absolute beauty for a specific coin issue. I've a reasonable number of coins from a collection of 800-900 that I'd classify as FDC. Finest possible considering all aspects. Some have a very little wear.

Every collector of modern coins knows about condition of wear. An amazingly high proportion don't recognize anything about style of die engraving. That requires an artistic sensibility. No coin from badly styled dies (relative to how good dies cam get) can ever be considered FDC. In my collecting area, Roman Republican, there is often a "best die" or "masterpiece die" for a given issue. A master often engraved only a few dies, and lower skilled engravers then engraved larger numbers in worse style. So to understand what FDC means one needs to understand the artistry of a specific coin issue. A beautiful coin from the best style engraver and well centered and with perfect patina and a little wear can be a Fleur de Coin. FDC is a connoisseurship category. It's not a grade in my view.

 

Sigh.
Just looking through the sold prices from this auction. I put a hail mary bid (aka stink bid) on this coin, turns out it sold for just over 50% of estimate and I missed it by about 35 bucks =/
Wowza I would have been shocked to have won it.. well out of my price range

 

Just 35 bucks. When that happens to me I kick myself for not going the little extra on my bids. But hey, if you select your highest bid, it doesn't do to keep going once the price goes past that amount. There will be others to come along.

 

Surely there will be and you are right. To bid at all was a stretch..

 

The winning bidder may have also been willing to go much higher - there's no way to know. As @Bing said, you'll find another.

There is a bit of an art to bid timing and increments. Normally it is not wise to put an online bid ahead of the auction as it shows your hand but I've been successful at it when there are coins that I absolutely do not want to spend more than $X. For most auctions, the first bid received at a duplicate level wins, so, if you want to pay only $X, there is some value in placing a bid earlier than the live sale to avoid being off-increment when your bid comes up.

 

Yes. It's an art. Sometimes a two stage process works for me. Pre bid right at rhe outset to a reasonable level. Let the challengers climb above your bid in advance of the auction. Many weaker challengers then don't look at the auction again once they are in front and the price is reasonable. Then stage 2, go all in at last moment or live. The advantages of the two stage bid is that 'your' coin doesn't look cheap to all those non assertive bidders that challenged in the early stages, so they just don't turn up on the final day. Final snipes of course work well but you want the fewest possible participants for that final snipe session. But one can't really tell. It's Black Magic.

 

Ancient Joe is absolutely correct. This happened to me three times in recent Heritage auction. Three coins all had 320/275/325 as highest bid. So during live event...the $320 coin went for $1100/ I then let that bidder have it. Second coin, at 1300 I decided to end my attempt to get it. Third one, I bid it up to 950, and my opponent bowed out. But then in Steve Album auction, I ended up winning a super rare MS 100 Piastres 1876 Murad V (ruled for 3 months) way under estimate for 350. Heritage had sold an EF ex. in previous auction for 1300. It pays to know your stuff.
John

 

That’s the first I have heard of that criterion.

But does splitting hairs over the grade really matter for ancients? It apparently does for moderns, and you can see how well that turned out.

 

I have always understood FDC to be a perfect coin, with no flaws, no wear and generally of superior style. Most of what are seen are either "mint state" or "as struck". I suspect that some series of coins may not have a FDC but might have the "finest known".

 

I joined up just to quote this post.....I wish I was you!!

 

I live in Australia, so have no chance of inspecting coins before purchase. Have bought most of my coins, (Ancient Greeks), from CNG, and have noticed they always look much nicer in hand than their photos, which appear quite dark by comparison. I take that into account when making my decisions, but it would be great to actually handle the coin before purchase.

Australia isn't the best place to live for a collector of ancient coins.