Do you have decrepit placeholders for rare/expensive types?

[Nerosmyfavorite68]

This topic could really be for any genre of coins.

I don't want to jinx it, but I recently bought an ugly VG denarius of T. Carisius (the sphinx reverse), as the throw-in with the main part of my current order.  There must have been a hoard, and there were a few decrepit examples of most of the Carisius types, but I chose the sphinx because it was both the clearest (it's ugly but the design is clearly there) and that type seems to be harder to get.  Decrepit coins are generally fairly harmless; one can usually get a better example later.

The sphinx/minting tools denarii don't seem to come up on vcoins all that often, and they're usually expensive examples.

https://www.vcoins.com/en/stores/cgb/38/product/carisia_rome_46_ac_175mm_401g_5h/1945151/Default.aspx

This wasn't the decrepit one, but is there anything going on with the obverse, i.e. the hair? It just kind of looks weird.  It could just be a crappy celator, though.  The AU grade is pretty amusing.

I would like to eventually get a decent example (especially the reverse) of this particular type.

Anyway, do you have any decrepit placeholders?

Edited October 25, 2024 by Nerosmyfavorite68

[traveler]

A collector once advised to buy the best example one can afford. I try and follow that advice, so no I don't have decrepit examples in my collection.

I do have a few slugs in my collection, they look like they've been zapped via electrolysis. But these were either gifts or they came as part of a group lot.

Yes, a decrepit coin is usually cheap, but why buy a coin which will be upgraded later? What will one do with the decrepit coin? And what if the decrepit coin makes one unhappy?

I don't quite get the reasoning behind adding coins to an order to "reduce" the shipping cost, unless there are coins which one already wants to purchase. The decrepit coins aren't free as I understand it.

[Nerosmyfavorite68]

That's generally good advice but a nice sphinx seems to be quite expensive.  There's an affordable one on ma-shops which is just okay, but it's in Hungary.  I'm kind of scared to order from there.  The MONETA issue seems to be more affordable, perhaps $250-300 for a halfway decent example.

The add-on sphinx wasn't done to reduce shipping costs.  I like to top up my orders. I had a certain budget for the buy, and this was an issue which I always wanted, so who cares if it's $70?  It doesn't break the bank, and it'll just hang around , forgotten in the collection if I find a better one.

The term decrepit covers a lot of ground.  Something with BD or a true wreck is something which I wouldn't like, but some of my favorite coins are inexpensive ones.  I still have one of my earliest coins, a 4/$20 Allen Berman junk box special Heraclius S805, on display.  It has a lot of sentimental value.

Something which is overly smoothed or tooled bothers me far more than an honest VG.

My low-grade examples usually don't bother me.  I only have three or so coins in my whole collection which actively bother me, and two of the three were over $200.  A $400 Trajan Decius really bothers me.  The $1.50 1990's Classical Cash bulk lot asses don't bother me.  They were actually generally quite decent for the price. 

I'm quite delighted with my heavily worn Justinian Ravenna follis. It was a bucket list coin to to obtain, and even the Sear plate coin is pretty decrepit.

I suppose it opens up a can of worms insofar as what decrepit entails.  Low-grade doesn't necessarily have to be awful.  A VG coin can potentially be fairly attractive, such as if it has a great patina.

[Mucius Scaevola]

I understand both sides. I‘m on the side where there are no placeholders. If I buy a coin, I have to be sure that it stays in my collection and I will not upgrade it. I restarted my collection for the 3rd time as I was really unhappy with some of the collected coins. Didn‘t think it was this important to me, but it is. Here‘s the worst coin in my collection, when it comes to shape. I really love the patina and the portrait style and it has not much wear, so this is still acceptable and I‘ll not have to replace it.

I get it if someone is a specialized collector and he has to buy worn rarities to complete the collection. But I collect portraits and there are some standards that make sure that I enjoy looking at coins (shape, style, etc). I‘m not rich, so I have to make some choices sometimes.

 

but as long as YOU enjoy your coins, you‘re doing it right.

Edited October 25, 2024 by Mucius Scaevola

[John Conduitt]

I don't follow the 'buy the best you can afford' advice. I don't really know what it means. I don't know what I can afford, since although obviously I know how much money I have, if I bought every coin I will ever want at the 'best you can afford right now' level I couldn't afford it. I also don't quite follow the logic. I can sell anything I don't want anymore. Indeed, despite buying the 'best I can afford right now' a better coin might come along that I can afford later, so I was wrong the first time. It's easy to sell cheap coins at the low price you paid for them - much more so than expensive ones.

There are benefits to buying worse coins. You find out whether you really need such a great, expensive coin or whether what you have satiates the need. I have this coin of Henry IV. It is ugly. But nice coins of his are exponentially more expensive and while I could afford one, it would stop me getting other coins. It's not as if they are artistically brilliant anyway. Now I have this, Henry IV is not on my list of coins to buy. I will probably upgrade it eventually. But maybe not. This coin enables me to buy better coins of the types that are worth it.

Henry IV Light Coinage Halfpenny, 1412-1413

Tower. Silver, 0.56g. Crowned bust facing, annulet either side in upper field; HENRIC REX ANGL. Long cross pattée with three pellets in each angle; CIVITAS LONDON (S 1737).

Edited October 25, 2024 by John Conduitt

[Mucius Scaevola]

I think that what he meant was that he buys coins that are in the best shape he can afford. Once I e.g. have a coin in my collection where I really enjoy the style and look, why should I replace it? I also don‘t buy coins as an investment, so I personally don‘t think if I would make a loss or not.

 

at the end it‘s all about understanding and respecting that not everyone has the same taste. 

[Amarmur]

I have a very poor Didius Julianus denarius. It's bent and it's reverse is obliterated but I probably won't have an opportunity to get another one without going over budget. It's okay I don't hate it I just never look at it and see it as a placeholder until I decide to win the lottery without playing.

[ominus1]

..i can answer the title question with 2 words.....HELL YEAH!...^^

[JAZ Numismatics]

I used to, but over time I found the coins disappointing and undesirable, and wound up selling them. Now I only buy coins in the best grades I can find.

[Croatian Coin Collector]

No, if I can't find a coin that is in an acceptable condition and has an acceptable price, I just give up on it and search for a different one.

[CPK]

"Placeholder" implies set collecting. I don't collect sets, really. I just buy coins that appeal to me - whether for their artistry, excellent condition, historicity, rarity, etc. In this sense I don't have any placeholders, even if some of my coins could be described as decrepit.

[Nerosmyfavorite68]

5 hours ago, JAZ Numismatics said:

I used to, but over time I found the coins disappointing and undesirable, and wound up selling them. Now I only buy coins in the best grades I can find.

I generally agree, but in the sphinx's case, that was what I could afford.  They rarely seem to appear on vcoins, and when they do, they're generally $1,000.  What would a decent T. Carisius sphinx in Fine run?  The ma-shops Hungarian option is about $200, but I'd have to risk ordering from Hungary, which might be just fine, or it might be a disaster. I'm too much of a chicken to risk it.

[red_spork]

My VB half victoriatus fits the bill I think. It was misattributed and quite cheap. I hope one day I have the $5k to spare for a better one but until then I am very happy to have any example of this rare denomination in my trays. I am happy to buy coins like this when a better example is otherwise unattainable or just so expensive that the opportunity cost would outweigh the value to my collection.


Roman Republic AR Half Victoriatus(13.5 mm, 1.45g). Anonymous("VB" series). ca. 211-208 B.C. Uncertain mint(traditionally, Vibo Valentium). Laureate head of Jupiter right. Bead and reel border / Victory standing right, crowning trophy with wreath; VB ligate on exergue between; S to right. ROMA in exergue. Line border. Crawford 95/2

Edited October 25, 2024 by red_spork

[Nerosmyfavorite68]

13 hours ago, Mucius Scaevola said:

 

I get it if someone is a specialized collector and he has to buy worn rarities to complete the collection. But I collect portraits and there are some standards that make sure that I enjoy looking at coins (shape, style, etc). I‘m not rich, so I have to make some choices sometimes.

 

but as long as YOU enjoy your coins, you‘re doing it right.

That's certainly on the high end of decrepit.  I really wouldn't consider that to be a decrepit coin.  I'd be quite delighted with it.

 

Would this coin be considered decrepit?  It's certainly not a memorable coin,b ut the great patina made it a pleasing $35 order-topper.

The above is decrepit as gold coins go, but at the price gold is, it's what I could afford, and was a decent placeholder for an emperor whom I didn't really care about. It was much preferable to the wretched AE4 which I had.

Here's a no-doubter decrepit coin.  The only reason I threw it into the order was that it was 25 grams in weight, a curiosity. I don't enjoy stripped coins and this one is well, yuck.

This has such a different patina, and the Baranowsky tag added interest.

As with the Leo example here's an example of a normally expensive type.  While it's less unattractive in person, it's still a historical and expensive type. It was what I could afford of what was available.

The 'zombie' Trajan Decius Double Sestertius does bother me.  It wasn't just a throwaway $70 piece. It cost $400, and that was in 2014.  I'd rather have honest wear, which wouldn't bother me as much. The unfortunate placement of where corrosion was removed made it a regrettable piece.  Tooling or certain types of damage really bother me.

The Gordy below is just a hideous coin.  I don't even know why I added it to the order.  I don't really miss the purchase price, but one can get a better Gordian and at the same price, one could have found a better one.  I ordered it because I don't like to order just one coin, and I've never purchased a Gordy Ant. I've had a decent one for many years, but I wanted to break the 30 year drought.

The spirit of my topic deals mostly with decrepit placeholders for types which one wouldn't otherwise be able to afford or obtain.

One could also go in the weeds and say that 80% of Byzantine AE's were decrepit, even on day one.  My mother calls them 'slag heaps.' However, I've also been a long-time Byzantine collector.

Edited October 25, 2024 by Nerosmyfavorite68

[Nerosmyfavorite68]

10 hours ago, Mucius Scaevola said:

I think that what he meant was that he buys coins that are in the best shape he can afford. Once I e.g. have a coin in my collection where I really enjoy the style and look, why should I replace it? I also don‘t buy coins as an investment, so I personally don‘t think if I would make a loss or not.

 

at the end it‘s all about understanding and respecting that not everyone has the same taste. 

Well said.  I also like John Conduitt's take.

I've generally been going after coins like this of late, nice, toned (or patinated) examples of common types.  However, this isn't always possible with expensive types.

 

This Trajan sestertius is decrepit by any standards, and is really too decrepit even for my low-standards.  However, it was a harmless order-topper and we had a lot of fun by creating a storytime contest.  The extreme wear even added some interest.

 

[JAZ Numismatics]

44 minutes ago, Nerosmyfavorite68 said:

I generally agree, but in the sphinx's case, that was what I could afford.  They rarely seem to appear on vcoins, and when they do, they're generally $1,000.  What would a decent T. Carisius sphinx in Fine run?  The ma-shops Hungarian option is about $200, but I'd have to risk ordering from Hungary, which might be just fine, or it might be a disaster. I'm too much of a chicken to risk it.

I've never had any problems with shipments to and from Hungary. It's a well-run country overall. That doesn't mean a package couldn't get lost, but the mail to Hungary is as solid as anywhere in Europe in my opinion.

[Nerosmyfavorite68]

Thanks!  Do I have to worry about any onerous permits?

[JAZ Numismatics]

9 minutes ago, Nerosmyfavorite68 said:

Thanks!  Do I have to worry about any onerous permits?

I don't think so, but it's been a while since I shipped out there. I've had more orders from Romania recently, of all places. Thracian coins returning to their homeland.

[traveler]

14 hours ago, Mucius Scaevola said:

I think that what he meant was that he buys coins that are in the best shape he can afford. Once I e.g. have a coin in my collection where I really enjoy the style and look, why should I replace it? I also don‘t buy coins as an investment, so I personally don‘t think if I would make a loss or not.

 

at the end it‘s all about understanding and respecting that not everyone has the same taste. 

Yes, I agree. That is a very good point.

I do apologise if my first post caused any offence.

[Nerosmyfavorite68]

No offense taken. It is generally wise advice to purchase the best example which one can afford, although in this case it was one of the only sub $1,000 example being offered on the venues which I frequent.

It appears that perhaps I should have taken the advice.  The ugly sphinx is part of the package which is currently part of the woes I'm having with FedEx.  The other coin is inexpensive but rather charming.

[Finn235]

I love a beautiful coin as much as the next collector, but I left modern coin collecting because I care about the stories and the "personality" of coins that were engraved and struck by hands thousands of years ago. Being decrepit doesn't detract from either. Sometimes it adds to the interest.

Julius Caesar coins are neither particularly scarce, nor are they ever cheap. This came from a CNG lot for about $200 after I sold the other 3 Caesar denarii in the lot. It's one of the uglier examples that's been posted on here, but I liked not having to blow 1/4 to 1/2 a year's coin budget on an XF DICT PERPETVO type.

I had figured that eventually I would just unceremoniously sell this one when the time came that I could afford a $2k-5k Caesar denarius - but then I got to thinking... It's cool that this coin was minted in Feb/Mar 44 BC while Caesar was still alive. It kind of stinks that "CAESAR" is off flan and most of the reverse is rubbed away. BUT, it's also cool to imagine what happened after this coin was struck. This is the equivalent of IMO a minimum of 40-50 years of continual use; it was certainly in circulation for the entirety of the ensuing Civil Wars, and then likely at least 10-20 years into the reign of Augustus. Perhaps it was circulated more intermittently - was it last used during the reign of Tiberius? Nero? Trajan? Who used it, and what did it buy?

There's a lot more to coins than just condition and value.

[Nerosmyfavorite68]

Well said. The obverse is also pretty clear.

I had a lot of fun with the Trajan slug. I wouldn't have purchased it if it had been a VG grade. The unusually worn condition and the $10 or so price tag added interest.  What did the coin go through?

One doesn't usually see really worn Diocletianic-era nummi. It sometimes adds interest when there's an outlier.

[maridvnvm]

I have more than my fair share of "decrepit" coins. This one is probably the defintion of the description.

Obv:– IMP C PROBVS AVG, Radiate cuirassed bust left with spear over right shoulder
Rev:– TEMPOR FELICIT, Felicitas standing right, holding caduceus and cornucopiae
Minted in Lugdunum (II in exe) Emission 8 Officina 2. Autumn to Late A.D. 281
Reference:– Cohen -. Bastien -. RIC 108 (Rare)
Obverse die match to the plate coin in RIC

Weight 3.81g. 22.50mm. 0 degrees

Bastien didn't find any when creating his catalog depite there being an example in the BM and being the plate coin in RIC. I am aware on one other in the G. Braun collection. This one is a placeholder and is comfortably the worst of the 3 known examples of this coin.

decrepit - TICK

placeholder - TICK

in my collection - TICK

The 3rd? best example of the type? - TICK

Edited October 27, 2024 by maridvnvm

[Sulla80]

Crawford 528/3 one of a whole collection of coins from the triumvirs where type & historical interest are more important to me than condition - this one perhaps interesting to speculate that someone in antiquity highlighted the demise of Mark Antony with a slit to the throat.

Marcus Antonius & C. Caesar Octavianus, AR Denarius, mint moving with M. Antonius 41 probably in the east (Syria?), AR 22 mm, 2.4g.

Obv: M·ANTON·IMP·AVG·III·VIR·R·P·C AVG Head of M. Antonius r.

Rev: CAESAR·IMP·III·VIR·R·P·C Head of Octavianus r., slightly bearded.

Ref: Babelon Antonia 40. C 2. Sydenham 1194. Sear Imperators 261a. RBW –. Crawford 528/3.

Edited October 27, 2024 by Sulla80

[AncientJoe]

There is an upcoming auction with some incredible Greek types in poor condition which I just can't get myself to bid on as they'd be too distracting for me. I'm generally okay with a placeholder but if it's a bit too far-gone, I really shouldn't accept it. But, it sure is tempting as a "nice enough" coin would be 20x more expensive and only comes around once every 10+ years... it's not a cut-and-dry decision.