Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;dougsmit, post: 4855025, member: 19463&quot;]My two wins arrived yesterday.&nbsp; Both included a level of disappointment but not a level that would result in a return.&nbsp; I believe it is just plain wrong to look at any auction including Frank&#039;s as &#039;approvals&#039;.&nbsp; You are agreeing to buy the coins.&nbsp; Frank owns the coins he auctions rather than taking consignments and can sell returns for poor reasons to someone else.&nbsp; It is not like many auctions who have consignors awaiting payment.&nbsp; In the past 30 years, I recall a couple instances when I was offered a coin on which I was underbidder but I do not know if those were returns or coins never paid when won by people not trusted with his early shipment practice.&nbsp; We all make mistakes and there will always be differences in opinions.&nbsp; My coins this time were one of each.</p><p><br /></p><p>The mistake (actually two mistakes) was lot 185, a Livia, dupondius. The original listing said the coin was the Restitution by &quot;Vespasian&quot;.&nbsp; When I bid (very early) I told Frank to look again and he agreed that it was a Titus.&nbsp; The printed list still shows the error but Frank corrected the one online. There are no coins of this type by Vespasian and this one does show the T.&nbsp; When the coin (beneath the notice of those of you who will not touch a Fine) arrived it was housed in a flip from Asta (83,323) in San Marino identifying it as the original Drusus issue.&nbsp; That is a much more embarrassing error to be made by a seller claiming to deserve a high buyer&#039;s premium.&nbsp; I do note that I paid a lot more for the coin than it was sold for by Asta but I do not know if Frank made that profit or if it passed through several hands between the two sales.&nbsp; I paid too much but that is the only way we buy things at auction.&nbsp; I like the concept of the later restitution coins and did not have this type either original or restored.&nbsp; Sure, I would rather have a prettier one but this is what it is and was accurately shown in the photo. </p><p>PIETAS / IMP T CAES DIVI VESP F AVG RESTIT - SC</p><p>[ATTACH=full]1172329[/ATTACH] </p><p><br /></p><p>The difference of opinion was lot 396, a Sasanian drachm of Peroz.&nbsp; It was listed as a clear mintmark of Gor mint.&nbsp; Frank uses a difference resource for Sasanian ID&#039;s than I do and I failed to double check the listing.&nbsp; It is a nice coin and upgrades my previous one that I had identified as AT mint.&nbsp; That means I have another duplicate for disposal.&nbsp; Interestingly Frank graded his coin as Choice AEF while my other one was ex. Triskles (January 2018) as EF.&nbsp; That, folks, is why I spend a lot more on FSR sales than on Triskles.&nbsp; As usual with Frank, this Sasanian came in a hard plastic round.&nbsp; Some Sasanians are thin and could break in the mail.&nbsp; I assume Frank has had a problem with that in the past.&nbsp; Peroz is not from the fragile period but there is nothing wrong with being careful.</p><p><br /></p><p>FSR AEF (my new one) - weaker reverse but better portrait[ATTACH=full]1172334[/ATTACH]</p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>Triskles EF (my old one) - You might argue it has less wear but that striking void across the face does not support EF IMHO.&nbsp; Obviously, the reason I won the coin was other bidders were more careful and did not bid on it.&nbsp; I would appreciate it if any of our Sasanian experts disagrees with my feeling the two are the same type/mint or could see any reason to keep both.&nbsp; The old one is not a bad coin but the new one is better.</p><p>[ATTACH=full]1172331[/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