Auction returns?

I absolutely disagree that "the condition issues are subjective".

I can see obvious harsh cleaning marks in the OP's provided photo(the term 'smoothing' is being kind). Yes, in addition to obscuring the surface condition, the contrast of the auction house's photos also blend the edge-chip of the coin.

I am of the opinion that either the auction house did not do a thorough examination of the coin's condition and/or they failed to disclose what are obvious condition issues with the coin when viewed in hand.

I would protest, and not take a: 'chalk it up as a mistake, better luck next time' approach.

Knowing what the OP paid for the coin, and the range that it is likely actually worth (condition issues properly disclosed); the margin is significant enough to make a stink about it.

It is an unethical and/or a failure to do a proper condition disclosure on the part of the auction house. Their reputation is based on how they currently do business, not how they may have conducted business in the past.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Because the butcher owns the meat he sells, and bought it himself, and confirmed its quality.

The auctioneer doesnt own the coins and has only modest control over what he gets consigned (usually he either accepts a consignment as is, or rejects it, no cherry picking). He earns 20% or so, from which in addition to expensese and profit he has to reserve a small amount, perhaps a fraction of a percent on sales value, to returning money on fakes, which this coin isnt.

So the auctioneers margin is at most a few percent. No-one can operate a business of that nature and accept returns without reason esp as his consignor may have disappeared in the wind once he got his money

Retail is totally different. There the seller owns 100%

 

Doesn’t the auction house get about 20% seller’s fee and about 20% buyer’s fee?

 

The auction house's own stated 'Guarantee and Right to Return for Coins, Medals and Badges of Honor':

(I have underlined some key statements)


When you buy a coin, a medallion, a medal or another badge of honor from us, then you may rest assured: every item which we sell corresponds to its description and we guarantee its authenticity to the full price of purchase, with no time limit!

In order to offer you this security, we employ all of our attention to detail and our experience. Every coin and every medal is precisely and clearly described before its sale. The condition and degree of preservation of coins and medals are judged by these numismaticians according to strict and generally recognized criteria. In investigating authenticity, we work together with renowned scientific institutions and numismatic collections. Only in this way are we able to offer highly valuable and painstakingly inspected coins, medals and badges of honor.

Our [AUCTION HOUSE NAME REDACTED] Guarantee is based on these high standards in the appraisal of coins, medallions and medals which we offer for sale. For you, this means the highest standards in security and dependability when you buy – and we take great pleasure in bringing customers extraordinary satisfaction!

This is our promise: if you should ever be dissatisfied, you may rely on our fair and obliging attitude in response.

 

No, more like 5% seller and 15% buyer once tax on buyer commission, and often reduced seller commission negotiated for large consignments. It can be less with stories about auctioneers accepting zero or even negative commissions on large consignments. Cash advances to sellers sometimes happen and perhaps larger buyers get special terms such as delayed payment terms..all of which need to be financed. So the gross margin before any actual expenses might be only effectively 15%, and that on coins the auctioneer might not much like and perhaps had to take as part of a consignment.

No room for approval sales terms especially if a consignor was already given a cash advance or early payout and has zero interest in accepting his coin back.

 

Ahah! Taxes! I missed that.
Thanks Andrew!

 

Give me a break. The single auction that this coin was offered in totaled at over 9 million Euros. Even 3%(as you claim "a few at most"), comes out to €270,000. This particular auction house generates over 100 million dollars in sales annually.

Let's simply state that the principals at the auction house in question aren't exactly starving.

 

Valid points, although would not undisclosed smoothing be a reason? Auction houses employ numismatists for this reason, to ensure authenticity, and to accurately describe a coin and list all pieces of information relevant to the value. Mistakes happen, no one is perfect, no auction house will catch everything and that’s fine. But that’s just the cost of doing business. And it’s not like they can’t re-list the coin in the next auction noting the smoothing.

Editing to clarify: I say “undisclosed smoothing” not to imply the house knew and didn’t say, but that the smoothing existed and wasn’t caught. I do not mean to imply duplicity.

 

Of course auctioneers, bidding platform owners etc will invent rules that try to cover themselves from every possible situation. As far as I see reading this thread, there's a group of opinions saying you cannot and should not do anything; you should have used a representative. So on one hand you accept all dealers and auctioneers are trustworthy experts but at the same time advise to use an expert who is more expert and more ethical than the others.There's something rotten in the kingdom isn't there? Of course you can't expect an ethical expert (if you can find one) to be a traveling circus and visit 15 auctions per month all around the globe.

I was quite negatively surprised by the auctioneer's response. Why ask the coin to be removed from the slab? The moment it is removed thee ngc grading is not valid any more. The coin has a sizeable flan crack and an edge chip, so the slab can only protect it from further damage in the transportation. The auctioner can remove the slab themselves if they can't see the surface through the plastic, though I wouldn't expect this to be the case, they knew all the way about the issues.

It's not the first time I see auction photos creatively done to conceal defects. There's an auctioneer who systematically does it. I got 3 coins and all had issues. One I returned, the other I kept and the third I bought knowing the defect as it is very clear in the lockett catalog photographed and published 60 years ago. I probably overpaid to outbid someone who didn't know the provenance but didn't notice the nicely concealed edge cut either. I am not buying again from this auctioneer unless I get to examine the coin myself or find an earlier passing of the coin with an honest photo.

 

1000% - can’t agree more. Very, very well said!

 

Whole-heartedly agree. Thank you

 

Disagree with you here.

I did not need NGC to tell me what the surfaces were like. I paid for their opinion on a pricier coin I knew I probably would have a tough time returning just on my own word. Ie third party inspection

I understand the debate of slabbing in ancients, but let’s not defend poor selling ethics just out of hatred for TPGs.

Unfortunately, or fortunately, this is just a hobby for me. I am not in the position to hire people to travel around the world doing checks on auction houses’ listing accuracy (especially in a covid world who knows if this is an option). I have to trust that an auction house accurately advertises the coins they have, flaws or not, via description and pictures. No one should have to pay for a representative to fly around the world just to get transparency from an auction house. Why must one accept poor business practice and foot the bill?

When I sell coins online (not a full time dealer) I take the best pictures possible and even videos without being asked. I have done plenty of business and a lot of the people I do business with are repeat customers for my ethics.

On another note, the fissure/flan crack was noted by the auction house accurately, and is common for the type. I find it to be an attractive feature of this coin. I accept that “flaw”

I do not accept the wire brushed? surfaces that weren’t noted & shown clearly in the pictures. I understand the subjectivity concerning the edge chip, but the pics blended it in and shouldve been noted for accuracy. A simple “obverse edge chip possibly made during minting process noted for accuracy” would’ve sufficed.

 

I agree 100%. Something is truly wrong in the kingdom if collectors need to hire people to do checks on online listing accuracies.

This is just a fun hobby of mine. I try to collect the best based on what I can afford. For most, coin collecting is a hobby to escape from reality a bit & submerge into the history.

The “if you dont like it, hire a representative” is a ludicrous statement. How about we hold auction houses accountable and demand better? Imo, it’s laughable. Paying a finders fee for someone to look for particular coins for me at shows is one thing (I’ve done this often). Paying for someone to do a check on an auction listing’s accuracy is another (and is absurd imo).

If a seller is going to offer products online, they had better take the best quality pictures. If they insist on employing the same decades old photography methods (current iPhones & a few interns could do a heck of a better job for some auction houses imo), the cataloguers should be sure to accurately note conditions. All coins, and especially higher end coins should be properly described.

I did not need a phD with 60 years experience in the hobby to have seen those field abrasions in hand

 

+1. I acquired this Pius coin precisely because I liked the “fissuryness” of it. Adds a nice radiance to the coin.

 

I don't agree with you.

A coin must be accurately described and the surface can't be subjective. This is valid for a high budget coin like a low budget coin. If there are scratches, flan crack, tooling or smoothing averything must be reported. You can't say "view the pictures and decide" because we all know that often pictures are not like a coin appear. In addition sometime issues are not visible in pic.

Can't be compared coins taken on ebay with coins purchased on premium auction because i pay between 15% to more 20% of fees. So I expect a professional description like a professional service.

 

We have learned a lot from this thread. Wire brushing is now considered smoothing.

No one expects perfection from a 2100 year old coin. The discussion here is whether skillful photography and deceit are an acceptable part of the business.

Wire brushing that is obvious in the photo is pleasant. Got it!

All pigs are equal but standards for ethical conduct depends on whether you are a major auction house or not. We all have our friends and foes. We tolerate more from our friends.

In the end, we all decide whether we believe the auction house has the right to do anything they wish to pump up the realization. Those of us with large collections of great coins hope for a 'deal' on the commissions when we sell. Others may as well melt the junk and have it cast into an urn for our ashes. Business is business. This thread has not changed any of our minds about what we see. We might discuss terms like smoothing vs. scratches vs. harsh abrasion etc. but there will never be consensus on grading. Remember I am the one who thought NGC was too easy on the coin calling those marks 'smoothing'. I see nothing smooth here. Opinions are personal. So are lists of who we trust and who we see as players.

 

A little update, a fellow CT member with much better coin investigative skills than myself found this same coin in a past sale - with much better pictures. I guess because it is in German I never could find it. Thank you very much to that member!
https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=6292101
note the description - slightly tooled.

of note, hammered for less than a 1/3rd of the price that I paid, as I mentioned earlier in this thread (based on similar coins with similar conditions I made that assessment). Now that the exact coin has been found, I think that is more than sufficient proof. The issues do bring down the price that much.

Also, the auction house responded the below after my second email with better in hand pictures:

Thank you for your email with the pictures.
As already told, we are prepared to check the lot again for you, but we are sure that you will understand that, in order to be able to conduct further investigations, we will need the piece without the plastic holder.
Our address for the shipment is —


I don’t want to beat a dead horse, but I will be sending the coin back to them upon arrival. When I send them the tracking number, I will send them the link to this coin’s previous sale and note how it was described as tooled. I will include a printed copy of this auction with the coin out of the slab.

I think the lesson here, is to always check if a coin you’re buying has a previous sale online. Dont rely on an auction house to disclose all issues and take accurate pictures. Read the descriptions, compare pictures carefully. It can be difficult when the sales are in different languages, but do your best to navigate.
I am still of the opinion, if we pay 20% auction fees, we should be demanding better from auction houses

 

Wow, talk about an odyssey. Such a shame as the coin is quite pleasing, though how much of that is derived from these issues… I hope you achieve the desired result you’re aiming for here.

 

While I agree in general with most of your above post, this particular statement is, for me, not accurate.

The difference between the auction house's picture (top) and the Steelers72's picture (bottom) is eye-opening and completely changed my mind on the condition of the coin and the representation of the coin's reverse:





The clear abrasions/scratches on the reverse are so unlikely to be due to normal circulation wear and/or standard cleaning of denarii that they fundamentally change the condition of the coin.

The obverse portrait, centering, and reverse are still highly artistic and well struck, but neither the auction house's picture nor its description adequately or accurately represents the condition of the reverse field.

If I had won this coin based on only its picture, without viewing it or having a trusted individual review for me, my reaction would have likely been the same as Steelers72.

 

Coming back to this thread, I agree with this assessment as well: the scratches didn't look terrible in the original photo from the auction house when viewing this thread on a smartphone but the in-hand pictures tell a very different story. I was assuming NGC was complaining about the obverse cheek - the reverse is by far the larger issue and probably does indeed merit a 1/5 rating.

Again, it shows why in-hand inspections are critical and how COVID has added challenges at every layer throughout the coin industry.

The auction house is still not contractually obligated to accept a return based on condition but hopefully they'll recognize that they should have been more forthright with disclosing issues (or to use a better loupe when cataloging!)