Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;IdesOfMarch01, post: 7552908, member: 39084&quot;]While I agree in general with most of your above post, this particular statement is, for me, not accurate.</p><p><br /></p><p>The difference between the auction house&#039;s picture (top) and the Steelers72&#039;s picture (bottom) is eye-opening and completely changed my mind on the condition of the coin and the representation of the coin&#039;s reverse:</p><p><br /></p><p>[ATTACH=full]1302917[/ATTACH] </p><p><br /></p><p>[ATTACH=full]1302918[/ATTACH] </p><p><br /></p><p>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.&nbsp; </p><p><br /></p><p>The obverse portrait, centering, and reverse are still highly artistic and well struck, but neither the auction house&#039;s picture nor its description adequately or accurately represents the condition of the reverse field.</p><p><br /></p><p>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.[/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