HD Rauch auctioning a Philip II tetradrachm with a repaired test cut that was originally from a 2022 Leu auction

[filolif]

7 hours ago, Pellinore said:

Very interesting case. I’m curious about the firm’s answer. It could be the game of one consignor with a mind to gamble, an able tooler and money to spend. 
Curious also that these are all the same type. Did they fetch high prices at Leu’s, and is it possible to find out the buyer’s paddle number? Then you know where to find more tooled coins.

Hammers were around $1000 at Leu if I recall. I have a feeling they may not make their money back on these coins and that will be a lesson in itself. Ridiculous starting prices (probably requested by the consigner). 

Edited June 6, 2023 by filolif

[robinjojo]

16 hours ago, filolif said:

I ran out of acsearch image credits before I could confirm, but it seems that there are more coins with repaired test cuts that Rauch is selling.
Rauch 116 Lot 47:

Leu Web Auction 24 Lot 1019 (March 2022):

 

Rauch 116 Lot 49 (this one is really ugly and obvious):



Leu Web Auction 24 Lot 1021 (March 2022):

 

There may be others. I'll keep looking. Whoever is "repairing" these coins really is misguided.

Amazing and even more disturbing.

Were it not for the angular nature of the test cut on the first coin, I would have speculated that the the depressed area was likely caused by a lamination, a flaking or chipping away of metal during the minting process, circulation or environmental factors during burial.  The metal exposed is very smooth, convex and not granular, as would be expected of metal not subjected to the pressure of the striking die.  

Another guess is perhaps this area was partially repaired initially and then completely restored for this auction.  Very strange, very strange. 

Whatever the cause of the initial damage, subsequent restoration without disclosure by the auction house is, at a minimum unethical and at a maximum fraudulent if they are aware of the alterations.  If they are unaware of the alterations, they are committing misfeasance and failing in their responsibility of due diligence as an auction house.  Any way you slice it the buyers will be the losers.

[John Conduitt]

7 hours ago, filolif said:

This is the fourth coin (seemingly from the same consigner):

I assume it has also been manipulated but I'm not sure how as I can't find the before photo. Perhaps on the obverse by the neck?

The Rauch auction entry now says "Slight traces of processing [on reverse] and edge notch (repaired test cut)".

Also on lot 47: "Traces of processing in Rv. (repaired test cut)."

And lot 49.

They obviously didn't know what was repaired before, only that it had been, but have now said so.

Edited June 6, 2023 by John Conduitt

[DonnaML]

9 minutes ago, John Conduitt said:

The Rauch auction entry now says "Slight traces of processing [on reverse] and edge notch (repaired test cut)".

Also on lot 47: "Traces of processing in Rv. (repaired test cut)."

And lot 49.

They obviously didn't know what was repaired before, only that it had been, but have now said so.

I don't consider that a proper disclosure. The repairs are way more than "slight"!

[robinjojo]

The Rauch auction entry now says "Slight traces of processing [on reverse] and edge notch (repaired test cut)".

Also on lot 47: "Traces of processing in Rv. (repaired test cut)."

And lot 49.

They obviously didn't know what was repaired before, only that it had been, but have now said so.

Hmmmm.  That sounds vague.  Is the information within the parenthesis also included?  Even if it is, I think a more detailed description was needed, such as extensive restoration of former test cut areas on reverse.  Repair of a test cut can range from crude attempts to simply fill the cuts with metal, which is quite obvious in most cases, to filling the cuts and recreating the design elements professionally - an altered coin by any other name.

Edited June 6, 2023 by robinjojo

[DonnaML]

5 minutes ago, robinjojo said:

The Rauch auction entry now says "Slight traces of processing [on reverse] and edge notch (repaired test cut)".

Also on lot 47: "Traces of processing in Rv. (repaired test cut)."

And lot 49.

They obviously didn't know what was repaired before, only that it had been, but have now said so.

Hmmmm.  That sounds vague.  Is the information within the parenthesis also included?  Even if it is, I think a more detailed description was needed, such as extensive restoration of former test cut areas on reverse.  Repair of a test cut can range from crude attempts to simply fill the cuts with metal, which is quite obvious in most cases, to filling the cuts and recreating the design elements professionally - an altered coin by any other name.

I should have added that to describe them as merely "traces" of processing implies that the "processing" -- now revealed as repaired test cuts -- was minor. It was major and, as you say, involved way more than just filling in.

By the way, the relevant Leu Auction, Web Auction 24, took place on 3-6 Dec. 2022, not in March 2022 as indicated above.

Edited June 6, 2023 by DonnaML

[Rand]

1 hour ago, robinjojo said:

"Slight traces of processing [on reverse] and edge notch (repaired test cut)".

As for me, this is enough. It is tooled so firmly out of the bidding list. Very likely, NCG would not grade them.

Edited June 6, 2023 by Rand

[DonnaML]

1 minute ago, Rand said:

As for me, this is enough. It is tooled so firmly out of the bidding list. Very likely, NCG would not grade as tooled.

Are you saying that you consider this enough of a disclosure to meet ethical standards, or enough to cause you not to want to bid if you were otherwise so inclined?

[John Conduitt]

According to the OP, it used to say "Traces of processing in Rv." as on this link.

Now it says "Traces of processing in Rv. (repaired test cut)."

In other words, they saw there was a problem before and described what they could see as "traces of processing". But they have since been told it was a test cut and added this in brackets.

However, the original German is 'Bearbeitungsspuren'. On its own (out of context) Google translates this as "machining marks". That's somewhat harsher than Google's nuanced attempt "traces of processing". "Machining marks - repaired test cut", which is probably more like "Tooled - repaired test cut", is surely enough.

Edited June 6, 2023 by John Conduitt

[Rand]

15 minutes ago, DonnaML said:

Are you saying that you consider this enough of a disclosure to meet ethical standards, or enough to cause you not to want to bid if you were otherwise so inclined?

Apologies, I keep editing my statement as it still does not read very clearly.

Their information is sufficient for me to decide not to bid on these coins. 

Also, the repairs are not 'minor' from my point of view.

Edited June 6, 2023 by Rand

[Edessa]

Thanks for posting. I first visited Rauch back in 1996 and have always considered them a reputable firm, although they have gone through a period where they did not hold many auctions with Ancients and I have not been paying them as much attention as previously. I am happy that they have adequately modified the coin descriptions, but I personally don't think that is enough. They should pull all of this consigner's items and ban him/her permanently from their auctions. 

The only positive that I can see is that the altered regions seem to have a bit of discoloration, which I assume is from some type of heat treating. Something to look out for with a sharper eye in the future.

 

 

[Pellinore]

I'm very curious to know more about the consignor. What's his plan? He (assuming it's a he) doesn't tool out of love for the coins, but because he hopes to makes money from it (what else?). Would these coins fetch more than about a thousand euros now? The consignor risks his reputation, now the tooling has been exposed. The auctioneer's reputation is at risk, too. If I were H.D. Rauch, I would pull the coins from the auction and wave goodbye to the consignor. 

Also, Leu is in Switzerland, but Rauch is in Austria, Europe. There's a tax to be paid when coins change hands over these borders. You have to win more than 20% to make up for this, or you should have a cunning plan. 

[Väinämöinen]

1 hour ago, DonnaML said:

I should have added that to describe them as merely "traces" of processing implies that the "processing" -- now revealed as repaired test cuts -- was minor. It was major and, as you say, involved way more than just filling in.

Do note that (if I've understood correctly) this is translated from German. When I translate the same word to my native language it translates into "machining marks", which is already a much stronger description. I don't understand German well enough to confidently declare what the nuance here is.

Regardless, I do think the correct path forward would be to pull the items from this auction. If it's apparent that the consignor has intended to mislead both the auction house and the bidders, I would also ban them from selling with the company in the future. I wouldn't see an issue if the consignor was unaware themselves or disclosed having done such drastic work on the items. 

Edited June 6, 2023 by Väinämöinen

[Topcat7]

When I began buying (and collecting) coins the advice I received from other collectors was to buy from a reputable auction house, as 'eBay' was very risky.

I have made purchases from a few of the 'recognized' auction houses, however it appears that even doing that does not guarantee that you are going to get what you think that you are buying.

(I am not keen on the 21st Century - 'Do unto others as you would have them do unto you' appears to have been replaced with 'Do unto others BEFORE they do unto you.')

[Pellinore]

To me it seems that Rauch is reputable enough. They have a not very user-friendly website, but they are also on Numisbids where you can search for the German word "Bearbeitungsspuren" = traces of tooling, that is the word they are using in the case of the four Philippus II tetradrachms (and two other ancients). There are about two hundred ancient coins in this catalog, and nr. 91 as well as 128 and 148 have "[minimale] Reinigungsspuren" or [minimal] traces of cleaning, an expression that would incite a sense of reluctancy in me. There are 8 ancient coins using this term. So, if you want to do some more detective work, investigate the coins with "Bearbeitungsspuren" and "Reinigungsspuren". 

[KenDorney]

I think the real problem here is the overall implications of this.  If one does not completely research a coin and its online and photographic history many of us would miss some of these repairs, many of which are not obvious from the photos.  Rauch may or may not be aware of the repairs illustrated here but it illustrates that in this day and age we may need to start taking much more care than we now do when considering bidding or buying any particular coin.  I am honestly fairly happy that I am at the end of my collecting and dealing career.  Things are getting complicated.

[Rand]

I wonder if accurate detection and description of coin manipulations are within the expertise of many dealers.

I went through Russian coins last night, looking into the latest Roma offering. Very few early silvers are free of tooling/repair … when coins are NGC graded. 

I do not like NGC slabs, bulky and ugly. However, I would prefer any coin sold for $5K+ to be independently graded - not for the sake of a super high grade, but to know the coins are in their original state. I admit I cannot decide what cleaning level is acceptable for bronze coins. This is easier for gold and silver.

[DonnaML]

It seems that of the four coins at issue, two sold yesterday for the minimum bid of $1,000, and two went unsold. Considering that the consignor (presumably) bought the four coins at Leu last December for hammer prices of $950 or $1,000, plus buyer's fees of around 20%, and has to pay a seller's commission to Rauch for the two sold coins, and -- unless the consignor did the tooling himself or herself -- had to pay someone for that work to be done, the consignor is definitely losing money on the overall transaction. God knows what the consignor will do with the two unsold coins. Probably try to peddle them somewhere else. Maybe he or she will learn the lesson that this kind of crookedness doesn't always pay! Serves them right.