Exceptional experience with Berolami

A while back I posted a picture of an EL hekte from Cyzicus that I purchased through Bertolami. After receiving the coin, I sent it to NGC to have it graded and encapsulated. I know that some of you on CT frown on this practice, but I do it with my higher end coins if only for the peace of mind it gives me that I am fairly certain that a coin is genuine. Well, this one was not. It was returned in a soft plastic flip with the notation that it was "NOT GENUINE".



I immediately took a picture of the coin in the flip and contacted Bertolami asking for a refund and information about how to return the coin. I was contacted by Fabrizio Fazioli and was emailed a paid return label for DHL Express and an invoice to include with the return package and set a day and time for a DHL pick up. The return package went out on March 2nd, and I was notified by Fabrizio that he received it on the 4th!! I received the refund in my bank account today, the 8th, through Wise ( formally TransferWise ) where I also have an account. Is that good service or what?

I know past posts at CT have asked about what international auction houses you can trust, and I would like to say that this experience with Bertolami has really earned my complete trust. I also especially thank Fabrizio for the very professional way he handled this problem.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Great to hear that everything ended well for you!

 

At the same time, I wonder how many fakes were sold that weren't returned. Do you understand why your coin wasn't genuine?

Please "upload" the image so we can all see.

 

I tried to send the picture of the coin in the NGC flip, but it didn't come through. I'll try again.



Well, it worked this time. They didn't and don't give any explanation about why a coin is not genuine.

 

Well, no it didn't again. Here's the original from Bertolami.

 

Well, none of my images are going through. ?????

 

You're trying to link them from outlook, you need to download them and reupload them to cointalk itself

 

You have to use the "Upload a File" option...sometimes found under "More Options". It's a button at the bottom...between "Post Reply" or "Save Changes"...and "Cancel".

 

OK, I think I got it.

 

Curious and concerning to me why that was declared a fake, I don't like the look of the incuse but it's not immediately obvious to me...

 

Bertolami has had a lot of issues with fakes. I would be wary. I know many who will not bid on anything without a pedigree.

 

Was there no accompanying explanation? What is the composition supposed to be?

 

It is supposed to be electrum. I had it x-rayed before sending it to NGC, and it was 92.6% gold with the remainder being silver. I thought for sure it was good.

 

I think that all internet coin auctions will have their share of fakes. It is how they accept and handle the revelation that is important to me. This could not have been handled better by any auction house. But I do wish that NGC would give specifics of their evaluation.

 

IIRC that's too much gold; I remember reading some articles suggesting a number closer to 50% gold is expected

 

My understanding is that electrum is between 70% and 90% gold; this a little over that but not necessarily suspicious.

 

"In the case of a set of electrum coins of Cyzicus of various ages, I found the percentage of gold to vary from 58 to 33 per cent."
Excerpt from Gold Coinage of Asia before Alexander the Great, Page 8 (Gardner, 1908)

Though it follows up to provide a much greater variance for coins of other mints.

Some other books/articles I read about cyzicenes also mentioned gold percentage, but I don't recall at the moment where they were from

 

The term "electrum" does not make sense. I have seen Kashmir/ Kidarite Dinara having 5% gold and are called AV coins/ yet EL coinage from Kyzikos with 60+ % gold are categorized as electrum

I have a modern 1972 $20 from Jamaica. Its 50 gold/copper alloy yet it is listed as a gold coin type.

 

True, but they also have in person auctions and more than their fair share.

 

Found another much more modern source:

"The high gold content of the electrum is typical of the initial period of their circulation ca. 570/560-500 BC only; secondly, it was only within this early period the coins were struck in natural, alluvial white gold. [...] These data were confirmed by the analyses of S.A. Bulatovich on the 71 staters of the Orlovka Hoard which all date to the 5th and 4th centuries BC. [...]
1. No First Period coins (600-500 BC) were present in the Orlovka Hoard, so none could be analysed
2. The Second Period coins (500-460 BC) showed a gold content of 52.45%
3. The Third Period coins (460-400 BC) showed a gold content of 51.40%
4. The Fourth Period coins (400-330 BC) showed a gold content of 51.20%"

The first period coins were almost exclusively fish/tunny coinage, so your gold percentage would be much too high assuming the hektes follow the same pattern

I unfortunately do not seem to have access to the cited paper about the coins of the Orlovka hoard to look at the actual breakdown

SNR86 "Cyzicenes from the state historical museum, moscow and state hermitage collections, st. petersburgh", pages 6 and 7