Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;Loong Siew, post: 2239404, member: 75799&quot;]Gary.</p><p><br /></p><p>Very well. The auction house is noble numismatics from Australia. The largest there and member of IAPN. They are the equivalent of Heritage Auctions of the US or Spinks UK. </p><p><br /></p><p>Secondly, please observe this picture. It is from a numismatic book published from Chong Jing and is titled: Qiang Tong 钱通。For your information, they listed 3. I need not show pictures of the other 2 because they match Hartill&#039;s book.</p><p><br /></p><p>[ATTACH=full]441457[/ATTACH]</p><p>Fourthly, I know who MA Ding Xiang is. And you sent a picture of one of his pieces auction in China which I do not doubt fetched an incredible price. I do not doubt his piece so no point quoting his or others&#039; stuff.</p><p><br /></p><p>Fifth, I am not here to sell you or anyone anything. As for my conversations or discussions with anyone for that matter, I do not need to show you private conversations or interactions between us as I do not think we are leaning towards an interrogation or appraisal session where I need to show evidence to prove myself. That defeats the purpose of info sharing and not subject myself for unnecessary interrogation. But as for those who know me outside of this forum, they know the circles I mix and liaise with.</p><p><br /></p><p>Sixth, no doubt you were careful with your reply but you merely quoted Hartill&#039;s Chinese Cast Coins page 426. I too quoted links to other sources as to the patination and material of other specimens. The MA Dingxiang you showed looks better than then first 2 you shown. But look closet and you can see slight variations in the calligraphy quality. </p><p><br /></p><p>As for your assumption that 1 size fits all, observe the following 2. These are 2 Qing Dynasty Yong Zheng 雍正 issues. I believe you should also be able to notice the differences I believe in color, patination and to some degree the calligraphy. Can you use just 1 to expect a similar patination and copy of the other? I hope not if you look more into the nature of patination, wear and use. </p><p><br /></p><p>Finally as per your &quot;red flags&quot;:</p><p><br /></p><p>1) I agree that the 通 is of a different calligraphy from the one you posted. But I showed there are other variants as per another numismatic source which matched. </p><p><br /></p><p>2) Metal is wrong? Patination and build is wrong? My explanation and example of another specimen shown since my previous post as well as illustration of the minting techniques and materials used during the time should address this. Please note if you opened a link i provided in the previous post to another specimen different from yours which has an obviously different patination, style and &quot;make&quot; than yours. It was sourced from a newspaper article. I further reiterated above so no point recycling over this point regarding 1 size fits all. </p><p><br /></p><p>In summary: I have provided in my opinion sufficient support not on my claim but rather in addition to the professional appraisal done by the experts at Noble Numismatics pty Ltd, Australia (ABC 21 001 352 969). Ultimately it doesn&#039;t matter what you think whether it is fake or otherwise but let&#039;s say isaying the remote likelihood that they could have made a mistake due to their lack of experience compared to you, there is no loss as I have a guarantee for life from an assurance backed by a prestigious firm.</p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>[ATTACH=full]441460[/ATTACH] </p><p>&nbsp;</p><p><br /></p><p>[ATTACH=full]441461[/ATTACH][/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in