quadriga tetradrachm

I agree these are last ones are fakes. I must be missing something about the first coin shown. Am I correct that the only thing you have seen is the online listing - not the coin? We are shown a scale with an obverse up coin and a reverse of a completely different coin but you assume that the seller has a single coin combining those sides??? There is no evidence of the weight of the quadriga coin. Look at the fabric texture on the two photos. Are they the same scale or does the fabric count suggest the quadriga coin was shot closer making the fabric texture larger? Whether this was an honest mistake or an attempt to make the coin look like a rare offering, there is no coin that produced both those photos.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

No I'm not german, just enjoy some daily observation of amish activities

Should these coins turned out to be fakes, I would think the buyers' are somewhat protected by ebay/paypal, so there really isn't much misfortune. Not to mention their low(er) values. Would had added some excitements to my day had been thousand dollar sales.

 

Honestly, that didn't come across my mind, daugsmit, and that's an excellent point.
Although, I'm under the impression that showing fractions from multiple objects and calling it one piece is a nono for Ebay, since item not matching description is an automatic flag.

Did notice that all the seller's photos were taken at angles, but not everyone has one of those telescopic boomarms so that probably isn't a big deal.

I'm going to post these images on forum and see if we can get more affirming opinions.

 

I am pretty sure that you are looking at the obverse and reverse of two entirely separate and distinct coins, both of which appear to be genuine.

 

I just sent a message to the seller asking him to check that coin and photographs. As Doug pointed out, the fabric grain is larger in the reverse photo, so the obverse and reverse images can't be the same coin.

Ardatirion's opinion on authenticity is reassuring, brassnautilus, because Ardy does this for a living .

 

I'd also note that the flan splits evident on the reverse are not at all present on the obverse.

 

not only they were from 2 specimens, you think they were both genuine? That was definitely unexpected, Ardatirion!
Now that's excitement! I wouldn't had thought that was the case in my wildest dream.

What about the augustus?

 

The seller replied. Here's the conversation:

Hmm. The listing was unsold, "reserve not met". I guess he found a buyer elsewhere?

 

This does not pass the smell test!

 

He was very quick to response, and emailed me these 2 photos

 

Well, that certainly looks much better. However, does it not make you wonder about this seller?

 

I also asked to see the obverse of the republic denarius, he said he couldn't find the item listing, kinda disappointed
That's what I had been interested since the beginning. First time seeing that coin you post Bing, and the quadriga definitely featured a different and distinct style.

 

Not really. It's easy to make mistakes on eBay, especially if you're uploading a bunch of auctions at once. In fact, it's very easy to mix images up if you're not careful.

 

I could understand if the coins were both Republican or both Greek, etc. But these were so different, I cannot give this guy a pass on it. Like I said, in my mind, something does not smell right with this particular seller.

 

I'm not defending the seller - I've had no dealings with him. But it does point out that if you're not very careful about your listings, you arouse suspicion. When buyers start to think something doesn't "smell right," you've got a problem, even though you may be completely legit. I see quite a few very sloppy auctions on eBay - bad pics, misattributions, bad grammar and spelling. It's a wonder some of these folks sell anything.

 

in other report
They said on forum that the 2 augustus were from 2 different years, year 26 and 27.
Seemed to have same monograms, so they could be from 2 dies fashioned by the same institution and personnel? Perhaps that would explain their similarities and my suspicion was unfounded.

I would agree with John. it would be unfair to say the seller was untrustworthy given his only proven mistake was mixing up 2 photos.

Actually, I wouldn't be surprised if the augustus turned out to be genuine. It would seem a stupid move to list 2 related fakes together no?

While refused to show me obverse of the other coin, he did say he would be listing more soon. Hopefully that includes the quadriga denarius, and I for one certainly am interested.

 

I hate to disagree, Bing, but I suspect that a relatively high percentage of people who own, say, 100 ancients would not look at that chariot reverse and ID it as Republican rather than Greek. I know two people who have things they would like to sell on eBay (not coins) but have been telling me about the stuff they inherited long enough that they could have become past masters by now. Neither has found time and both think what they have is valuable. I have offered to help but I'm not doing it for them and I have never sold (buyer for a very long time). They will be shocked when they discover that their stuff, like many of our coins, may not pay enough to cover eBay fees and the attendant hassle.

 

I've seen it all as well. Bad pics, misattributions, bad grammar and poor spelling are things to be overlooked. But how do you overlook something this egregious? And then refuse to show the obverse of one of the coins?

I suppose you all are correct, but being OCD and a lifetime member of the Clean Desk Club, I find this hard to comprehend. I would think that if I'm selling one or several hundred Ancients, I would know which images go with which listing. Just too sloppy for me.

I still do not trust this seller. Either he tried to deceive or he is incompetent in my mind. I think I would look elsewhere for this Republican. But then, I've been told I'm a hard man. Just ask all the soldiers who once worked under my critical eye.

 

Excrement occureth. I have screwed up much bigger before, with coins that were much different. It might seem obvious to you that lot 739 is a bronze follis and lot 740 is a gold solidus, but when you're in a rush it's real easy to put the wrong coin in the wrong spot.

 

You mean OCD was a vice Bing?
Virtue or not, if James Clerk Maxwell was OCD, then his boundary equations wouldn't had been published, and we all be counting beans under whale oil lamps.

Ebay charges 12.8% (including paypal fee), and certification costs $30, so that leaves a region where that $35 accounts for a significant % of total.
I guess that's where it can get murky. Sellers didn't want to jack prices up by $35 (and make their item less attractive by 15 or 20%) , while buyers wouldn't feel comfortable enough with just words of guarantee.

10% is where I draw the line. If cert cost was less than 10% of total value, then I'd rather pay that to get a peace of mind. Lower than that then I'd rather go without a cert, and wait for it to pop on forvm's listings.

I'd go as far as giving benefit of the doubt to sellers that had occasionally passed a fake trajan or c.fabius, so long as majority of their offerings were genuine. They take so little profit from those, could had be an innocent case of overlooking things?