Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;IdesOfMarch01, post: 8294798, member: 39084&quot;]While there are a lot of interesting viewpoints and insights in this thread, it appears to be fundamentally about &quot;overpaying&quot; for ancient coins in public auctions.</p><p><br /></p><p>Yet nowhere does anyone posit a mutually agreeable definition of &quot;overpaying&quot; in the context of ancient coin auctions.&nbsp; I challenge anyone here to attempt such a definition <i>that does not assume the conclusion that the poster wants to prove</i>. </p><p><br /></p><p>Many of the posts appear to argue that the winner of a coin in an auction overpaid because that individual paid more than the <i>poster</i> thought was a rational hammer price, or more than <i>other bidders</i> were willing to pay at that time, for that coin, at that auction.&nbsp; Neither of these definitions seems particularly objective, at least to me.</p><p><br /></p><p>The problem of defining &quot;overpaying&quot; is compounded by the fact that no two ancient coins are truly alike, and small variations might make a material difference to bidders.&nbsp; While modern coins can be generally graded on well-defined criteria, establishing and applying similar criteria for ancient coins is much, much more difficult and ultimately somewhat subjective.</p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>I couldn&#039;t agree more strongly with this observation.&nbsp; Regardless of one&#039;s definition of &quot;overpaying,&quot; that definition shouldn&#039;t assume that everyone has exactly the same information and is acting rationally.[/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