You know that feeling when you buy a coin, and the only thing Krause says is "Rare." Yeah, I love that feeling. I haven't bought too many coins this year, but one of them I did get was this little piece. It is from Morocco, and is called a "Benduqi". It is gold, and is about the size of a US dime. Everyone I've ever seen is crudely struck, and dates from the 1240's and 1250's are much more common. This one is from 1277 AH (which translates to 1860 AD). The only thing Krause has to say about this coin is that it is rare.
And some may actually be but I wonder at times. I've found too many cases where catalogs and even specialized coin books say a given coin is rare - when it isn't. As well as cases where coins are not listed anyplace as being rare but they actually are - it's just that nobody knows it. Examples of both of these things turned out to be true when I was helping to write the book Gold Ducats of the Netherlands.
That is a good point, GD. However, I have spent a lot of time studying the coinage of Morocco. I have searched auction records, and I've seen 2 other examples of this date. Krause usually has at least some mintage data - but in this case it doesn't. If there has been a couple of sales in the last few decades, Krause will extrapolate a value - but in this case it doesn't. I put a lot of research into it before I bought it, and came up with a whole lotta not much. I would expect a specialist book such as yours to have a much better idea of the facts. However, I'm not sure what the most accurate reference is for this series. I have a couple of specialist references for more modern Moroccan pieces, but this area seems to be rather under-written. I'm familiar with the US coin collectors perspective of "rare" - 1909S VDB, 1916D, 1955 DDO...... those aren't rare. In this case, however, it seems like the coin is actually rare.
Though I didn't explain it outright, but implied, in my original comments you've done what everybody should make an effort to do - your own research. And when you do, it is not uncommon to find the same thing you did - "a whole lot of not much". There's been a great deal written about the coins of some countries, others very little to almost nothing at all. What I was really trying to get across though was for other folks, not so much you. And that is for folks not to trust Krause too much. Their books are a wonderful resource and most of us would be lost without them, but they are also full of glaring mistakes, particularly in regard to value and or scarcity. At the same time I also realize that when it comes to scarcity their information is usually based on whatever has been written before by others. And if those authors made mistakes well it is understandable for those same mistakes to be copied by subsequent authors for that is the nature of most numismatic books - they rehash what has come previously. In other words, secondary research as opposed to primary research. As for the values issue, I believe more people are aware of that and do what they can to determine values on their own. And I also sympathize with Krause for updating values for that many coins even every few years would be a monumental task that boggles the mind. And it would also be an enormously expensive undertaking. But boy, wouldn't it be something if it ever happened !
You make a good point about Krause, and one that bears repeating. Krause, like the Red Book, is a general guide: it is not, and is not intended to be, a complete and exhaustive reference. You use the guide to get a general sense of things, and then you dive deeper with a more specialized book.
You always have to independently verify when Krause lists something as rare or very expensive. Take for example Hungary 50 Fillér 1948 Aluminum KM-536. Krause lists this coin at over $200 in XF40, but it had a high mintage and is a common coin. You can find MS64-65 slabbed examples around $50-60, and raw MS63-64 examples around $30-40 without much trouble, yet I always see slabbed MS63s in dealer cases for $300-400 and it gives me a good chuckle. If they looked at other sources that don't use Krause data, they will see it's really not even a coin that's worth slabbing.
In my experience many dealers will ask whichever the higher value is, market or catalog, despite knowing both. They ask the higher one because eventually a customer who doesn't know better will come along and base their decision from just looking it up in Krause or other catalogs. Not going to get into the ethical/responsible issues from both seller and buyer's end, but simply wanted to point out that in many (though of course not all) cases these dealers aren't overpricing because they simply don't know better.
Another thing I've wondered about... it doesn't seem Krause has updated the "rare" or "x number of pieces known to exist" attribution to reflect numismatics in the internet age. As far as I can tell these haven't changed for many coins since at least the early 2000's editions. Case and point ... 1829 Estado de Guatemala 1 real. Every edition up to the most current says 4 known and no prices given. Between mine, others that have been posted on forums and auction records I can account for about 2 dozen individual examples. And those auction records are consistent enough and going back far enough that there is no sensible reason why it remains un-priced. Just one of many examples of this oversight
I do not rely on Krause for valuations and/or estimations of number of examples extant. In my experience it too general, or outdated. For the series that I collect (German States, Latin American Colonial and Republican) you have to resort to especialized literature, and also long-term archives like ACsearch. Too many examples to cite, but one interesting one is a Doppelgulden from Hessen-Darmstadt where Krause for years just said "RARE" or Scarce, with (as I recall) a valuation about 2x that of a common year. In fact, only two examples are known, and when it has been auctioned, then at many multiples of a common years (as it should be).
I have found Krauss to be very receptive to feedback. If you provide them evidence, they will update their listings. I have done this on several occasions.
For anyone curious... I submitted this coin to NGC and it came back as XF-45. I had it graded at EF-40, so I'm well pleased.
