AussieCollector

Looks fine in the photos, but can you provide an edge shot?

Yes. This sums it up.

Congrats on the coin! I love ERE coins, mainly for what they represent in history. Re your coin, it is either a splendid Germanic imitation or a good example of falling standards.

I disagree with you, but cannot be bothered arguing anymore. It matters little anyway. See it as you wish to, and I will do the same. Edit: Actually, I have decided to expand on my thinking on this so you can better understand my position. Let's step this through. Imagine you have one unintentional scratch on a coin. Is it still a genuine coin? Yes, of course. But what if that exact same scratch is intentional? Is it still genuine? Yes, but we call it graffiti. Now, what if there are hundreds of unintentional scratches? Is the coin still genuine? Yes, but we'd give it an F grade or worse. What if those exact same hundreds of scratches are intentional? Does that make a difference? Exact same damage on the coin, but with a different intent. You'd say it probably doesn't make a difference to whether the coin is genuine, right? But we've just changed thr majority of the surface of the coin, with intent. And then we get to intentional smoothing. Why is that different to intentional scratches? Because now the intent is to improve the look of the coin. Is the coin still genuine? It was intentional. Most would still say yes. But then we intentionally carve into the coin, improve designs etc.... say around 20% of the surface. Is it still genuine then? I believe most would still say yes, but it is tooled. But then we change 50% of the surface? What then? Is this suddenly where we draw the line, and say it's a fake? Or at 51%? Or 49%? Or do we have to go up to 90%? What percentage of the original surface is required for it to still be genuine? And why is this different to intentional scratches that also changed the majority of the surface? Because the aim was to improve the surface? Ridiculous thinking. It's all subjective. Or do you have to make it look like a different coin for it to be a fake? How faithful, or not, do you have to be to the original design to make it a fake? What arbitrary line shall we draw? Because it is an arbitrary line that has to be drawn with this kind of thinking. The only objective line that can be drawn is that it is still a genuine coin, with a surface that has been changed (whatever term you might use there).

So in the case of a modern fake die (B) overstruck on an original ancient flan (A), the original coin (A) is in fact still a genuine coin - albeit defaced with a modern fake (B) die. It is a fake B, but it is not a fake A - just a defaced A. Again, I come back to it - any other definition is just subjective.

Not the age of the flan, but the fact it was minted as a nickel on a specific year. It is a genuinely defaced nickel of a certain year. In my view, you would need to melt it down and re-hammer for it to not be genuine anymore.

Yes, it is a defaced nickel. How could it not be?

I am not making comment on the value of this coin specifically, and I have no doubt that there are more extreme examples. What I'm saying is that I don't value tooled coins in the same way as other coins. For me, a tooled coin is the value of a origin example, plus a small premium for people who like that sort of thing. Clearly I am not the intended market for this coin.

Thanks for the breakdown. To be clear, I wasn't talking about becoming a seller. I was talking about learning how to tool so that I can.... 'restore' coins with an excessive markup.

I mean, yea.... ditto to full disclosure etc. But how can there be that sort of asking price for something heavily cleaned and tooled?! Again... I mean... yea... free market and all. But I just can't get over the asking price, given the description. Edit: I have decided I should change careers

I have, on two occasions, bid in a Leu Auction beyond a medium or "low ball" bid. On both occasions, when I really wanted the coin, I did a max bid at the last moment which was the equivalent of what the top of the market would be, plus a premium. On both occasions, within the last 3 seconds, other bids came through within 20 CHF of my bid - but not beyond. Both. Times. Decide for yourself what happened. As for me, I will never bid on a high cost coin at Leu again.

Hahahaha. Greece will have to slug it out with Italy.

I take points on proof re illegally obtaines, and I think that's right. But the argument that they're low grade doesn't stand up. If they were illegally obtained they were illegally obtained (noting we don't know either way).

We have to remember that the history books about Phocas are written by those who overthrew him. There can be no doubt that they are significantly biased. That said, the proof is in the pudding. There can also be no doubt that, at the very least, he was woefully incompetent. Anyway, he was my first ERE Emperor. Behold, my Phocas - the first ancient gold coin I bought. Solidus, Constantinople 602-610 AD. Emperor Phocas 22mm, 4.48g

8 Reales Potosi, (1)666, Pillar and Waves type 8 Reales Potosi (1)704 Pillar and Waves type 8 Reales Mexico (171(0)(J)