What happened to Gitbud Numismatik?

Really? Curtis Clay, Harlan Berk, Victor England, Kerry Watterstrom, etc are all inferior to Barry and David? If I want an opinion on Roman Egypt, I would take Kerry's word over most anyone. Same with Harlan on Byzantine, etc etc. No expert on ancient coins is the BEST expert on every series. All of them would tell you that.

I appreciate your confidence in NGC's staff, and I respect them as well, but think your post is overdone sir. Those two men simply cannot be the leading experts in every series, it is impossible.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

You had to name the cream of the crop to make your point. They, sir, are the exception rather than the rule when it comes to retail numismatics. The vast majority of dealers are not on that level.

 

I can sometimes ask dealers, or ANS academics, or members of my coin club, to look at something of mine, as a favor. Even if dealers are just as skilled as Barry and David, do you really want to show up at their place of business with a sack of treasure you bought elsewhere? Most people don't have access to Kerry's time. Some organizations, like the ANS, have a rule against curators authenticating for third parties.

(I would love to get better at authenticating my own purchases. I really want access to an XRF machine without buying one. I live in a big city but I don't even know who to ask.)

 

There are many more sir, especially authors of major corpus on series. My point of naming some off the top of my head was to refute your assertion that the two graders at NGC you trust "above all others". I was simply proving that was not really true, and a little of a stretch, or would you take someone over Catherine Lorber's opinion on Ptolemaic? Versus a run of the mill dealer? Yeah, I would agree.

 

I hadn't realised an opinion or a personal preference expressed on CT warranted such rigorous scrutiny.

 

And please do not forget: There seems to be some numismatic expertise in good old Europe, too!

 

Sorry if I offended you. Many people besides us read this, I simply wanted to clarify the NGC are great experts, but simply not the definitive answer for most series. They are fantastic generalists, and probably more reliable than many other dealers, yet at the end of the day they are not the world experts in most series, and they do not guarantee authenticity for even as good as their opinions may be. You can pay for their opinions, and they ARE good opinions, yet even then you are not GUARANTEED authenticity.

As much as we love our hobby, we simply have to accept we need to educate ourselves and know sometimes fakes will slip through.

 

Much sir. I am a lesser collector for not having the luxury of knowing the great experts in Europe. Fully agree. They were ancient coin experts there before we shot our first turkey.

 

That was my original point!

 

Coming back to the initial thread
The featured auction of Gitbud auctions
https://www.numisbids.com/n.php?p=sale&sid=1904

shows lot 61 - here discussed and definitely false
The same goes to lots 62, 64, 68 - just on first glance

And by the way
Even dealers can be fantastic generalists - meaning not only ancients!
You can learn a lot when looking around the corner

 

Can you point out some of the issues you have with my coin in question as to why it is definitely false?

 

I cannot give you a soundproof explanation here in this forum - but:
The overall appearance is way too soft
The "dirt" in the punches of 61, 62, 64, 68 looks the same
I saw a lot of these early coins in these days, knew some suppliers, and kept my hands off

Problem in these forgery-contaminated times is that a customer just has to trust his dealer to a certain degree. But no one wants to pay a dealer for his expertise.

 

Isn't that supposed to be (partially) what the buyers premium is for/why you buy from the firm? These aren't like, ebay buys

 

Perfectly correct. But that´s why I wrote "his dealer" and not "any dealer".
Nowadays you see a lot of so-called auctions where the auctioneer doesn't take any responsibility, sometimes you don´t even know any names or company details

The old saying "Know the coin or know the dealer" is definitely correct.

And coming back to the top of the thread.
Daniel Gitbud inherited at least part of the "Samel collection" of Jewish coin, auctioned a good year ago. So he should not be poor rightnow.

 

Since NGC didn't respond, I will provide my opinion. The coin is clearly a forgery. While I am not collecting this type, I have seen thousands of incuses punches and can immediately feel there is something wrong with it. There is actually no texture inside the punch. They tried to mimic the textures with some kind of substance that looks like deposits. Compare your coin with a genuine:





Why don't you ask Neumann for the contact details of Daniel Gitbud? They surely know his email address and phone number.

 

Kind of the reason I have always been hesitant on certain early items, like aes rude and the earliest electrum pieces. I prefer a little more formality in a coin, and get nervous with just a lump of metal how its verified.

 

Thanks, pprp, for the suggestion about contacting NN for information about Gitbud; but from an earlier response from Ed Snible, it seems Gitbud went out of business in February of this year. I have sent an email to the only Gitbud site I could find asking about their current business situation.

As far as the coin itself is concerned, I don't see the softness that Dwarf sees. Having the coin in hand, I do not see anything around the edges that would suggest it was cast. Also, before sending the coin in to NGC, I soaked it in distilled water and carefully brushed it with a toothbrush cleaning the punch somewhat. If it is not cast, it had to be punched, and the interior of the punch is not smooth. I don't know; I really don't believe it is a fake, but thanks to all who responded with an opinion.

 

Well even if the company closed, the owner still exists and I would advise that you at least try to ask for his contact details.

The punch in your coin reminded me of another forgery, you can notice how unnatural is the contour of the punch in both coins.

 

So how would this forgery have been made?

 

I found the relevant thread, it started with Lanz

I can't t tell from the photo, but if I need to guess I would say it's probably cast with intentional scratches.