Help with Identification

Let's post some Nero's while Bing sorts this out! My one and only.
Nero (54-68 AD)
AE Dupondius, 28mm, 11.41g
Lugduum mint
Obv: IMP NERO CAESAR AVG P MAX [TR P P P], laureate bust of Nero right
Rev: SECVRITAS AVGVSTI-S-C, Securitas seated right on throne holding a short scepter, before her a lighted & garlanded alter, lighted torch and bucranium before

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Wow, JBG => that's the spirit => kick him when he's down!!

=> hey Bing, here's what you could have had!!






... just jokes (I love ya, brother) ... we're all feeling lousy for ya (nobody likes seeing fakes floating around our hobby, right?)

Cheers

However, my coin is so smokin' hot that I couldn't resist posting it!!

 

Hey Bing => as you know, you're not the only dude to get stung by David Sear's sharp-eye ...

Remember this sweet ol' fake? (if ya "click on Sear's write-up" it jumps to life!!)



=> "STING"



yup .... it's like a fricken gut-shot!! (I feel your pain, bro)

 

Why don't ya'll just stone me while you're at it.

OK, well, here are some real Nero's (I think)
:

 

FAKES!!!!

 

SMART ARSE

 

Bing,
When I started collecting coins again after a 40 year hiatus I promptly went out and bought an old fake thinking I had scored a great find. After the disappointment in finding out what it really was I decided to keep it as a reminder to be more careful.
Sometimes knowledge hurts.

 

Actually, I thought this may be a fake when I bought it, but decided to take the chance. It was kinda like betting the horses or some such thing. I lost. Just like the last time I played the slots in Vegas. But I do appreciate your thoughts on the matter. I will keep the coin. At the moment it is sitting prominently in the middle of my desk just to remind me.

 

Really sad to see the coin didn't pass inspection. Maybe another like it will appear on the market one day that's authentic.

But then, who can say every coin that they own is 100% authentic. Sometimes I wonder, but I'm pretty sure I've done a good job in picking my coins.

 

An interesting development. I wrote the seller to tell him of David Sear's conclusion. He immediately refunded my money and told me he did not want the Nero coin returned. Easy as writing a note to this seller which makes me believe he knew all along the coin was fake.

 

Since we're all posting Neros, my only one: a worn "Temple of Janus" as. Unpublished(As far as I can tell) variant with "SC" in exergue instead of fields.

 

Not unlisted:
http://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=447728
While SC is under, the special thing to me is the temple faces left rather than the usual right. There are left facers with SC flanking also.

Really rare with SC under a facing temple:
http://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=1608587
This pose is common on the gold.

 

I bet you are right. I'm glad you got your money back.

 

I doubt he knew. The last thing a dealer wants is a public stink over a coin David Sear condemned. This is doubly so if he is vCoins or at all jealous of his reputation. We pay these guys good money based on our trust in their professionalism. Professionals are embarrassed when they foul up. Returning the coin would make you suspicious he was going to sell it to someone else. It belongs where it is with its Sear paper attached.

 

Good and Bad news jw, not as bad of a sting to get your money back...

 

That is a bummer Bing but sometimes it is better to know than not.

To me that is the mark of a good seller. Refunding despite the 14 days or 30 days or whatever has passed with no questions asked once the coin was found fake.

 

It was more like 6 weeks. But perhaps I would have been more inquisitive if someone said I sold them a fake or I would perhaps want the fake back. But not a word. Just the refund. I can't help but be skeptical. It's my nature.

 

Did David Sear ever explain how he came to the conclusion? Or which type of casting it was? Or was it something can only be seen under electronic microscope?

On your second set of pictures, the couple "holes" looked rather round and had sharper "walls". I'm wondering if those were bubbles from casting, since evenly distributed surface tension from bubbles tend to create more rounded contours, and they might had looked different from those resulted from natural corrosion.

I just wished he would explain his examination and verification process in better details so we could all learn something from the result, and not just the result itself.

 

=> I'm "assuming" his comments are similar in detail to the comments that he wrote on my Claudius forgery report? ... correct, Bing? (or were they more or less detailed?)

Awesome result though => for $50 you've got a great forgery (it fooled a lot of fairly experienced folks) ... oh, and you also have a sweet Sear write-up!! (it's "almost" money well spent in the end, eh? ... kinda)

congrats => I know you and your wallet (you must be very happy with the end-result)

 

Actually I have to agree with Steve on this point. Most of us have wasted $50 without getting anything in return and we get back to that matter of what education you can get for $50 at the local community college. We'll still have to stick in that "almost" but this is not a total loss either. The group of us here might have been able to come to a conclusion if we each had the coin in hand but that would have cost $50 in postage. We do what we can and we are glad to have Mr. Sear as a fall back plan.