It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
TurtleCat said:I like descriptions that aren’t basically poetic descriptions of positive attributes in overly flowery terms.
I like descriptions that aren’t basically poetic descriptions of positive attributes in overly flowery terms.
Coinstein said:I find it quite ironic that she is on the list as a CACG supporter, and most likely a founder/investor, and yet is banned from speaking her mind on this forum. Many are not willing to hear what people really think. I guess you can always ban yourself and not say a word....
I find it quite ironic that she is on the list as a CACG supporter, and most likely a founder/investor, and yet is banned from speaking her mind on this forum. Many are not willing to hear what people really think. I guess you can always ban yourself and not say a word....
TheCoinHound said:With third party grading, good pics and, whenever possible, in person viewing, descriptions of a coin's appearance are rarely of much use. On the other hand, information about a coin's rarity, provenance and importance is far more useful, especially to someone who might otherwise have never considered bidding on the coin.
With third party grading, good pics and, whenever possible, in person viewing, descriptions of a coin's appearance are rarely of much use. On the other hand, information about a coin's rarity, provenance and importance is far more useful, especially to someone who might otherwise have never considered bidding on the coin.
And what's even worse is how cataloguers treat coins that perhaps they don't regularly follow. It often seems with moderns that they say something like "with a mintage of xxx it's surprising that.." They are basically insulting the collectors of these coins and it's not "surprising" to any of us that regularly search for and submit these coins. Do you remember the estimates SB gave for the Pogue Washington Quarters? The estimates were insane, like 10x too low or even 30x in some cases. Any knowledgable Washington Quarter collector knew this. Was it gross incompetence or some hidden agenda? Either way that is really really bad.
Some auction descriptions positively describe the coin to a point of being too positive, which means they need to be taken with a grain of salt.
Heritage does do a great description.
I think that some descriptions could help the seller or the buyer one way or another. Example; if a coin has a small scratch or a rim ding, or if it is just a beautiful coin. The description could bring these to our attention.
My serious answer is I do appreciate auction descriptions but don't avoid auctions without descriptions.
Saying WOW multiple times in a description helps no one. If GC did this, considering their return policy, their return rate would skyrocket. It’s bad for business. If there is no return policy, future bidders will believe nothing that is said and they will bid accordingly. Trying to compare coins with much higher end examples and saying they are close with the hopes of driving up bids is not a good honest strategy. I have seen this as well.
As mentioned above, the descriptions written by Heritage on ultra rarities are very interesting. Reading the history is neat. On coins where they are low five figure or less, descriptions should be much simpler. Honesty should rule the day, not WOW WOW WOW Flowery this and that. Coins have flaws. I would prefer that someone honestly mention them but I haven’t seen much honesty in the industry lately.
When photos are provided, that’s a great step up. If it’s a true high resolution photo, like those provided by DLRC, that’s even better. But auction house photos vary. While I buy many coins from GC, I’m not thrilled with their photos. So to address the question asked (finally, lol), there’s no doubt to me that written descriptions are a benefit to buyers, and for eye appealing coins, a benefit to the consignor too.
Despite today’s technology, it’s very difficult to capture luster in a two dimensional photo (that’s why nu-tilt is much better).
The more information a bidder has, the better. So there’s absolutely no doubt having written descriptions is better. Having detailed written descriptions is great, and having pop and recent sales data provided saves us all research time. That’s why I like the listings of Heritage, Legend, Stacks, etc.
As noted above, I do buy a lot of coins from GC. But in my opinion, they would serve their clients better (both buyers, and consignors of eye appealing coins) with written descriptions and data.
Since there’s no additional charge to me for taking up more space, I’ll throw in a final, but very important tidbit: despite photos and written descriptions, there’s no comparison to seeing a coin in hand. Since I rarely go to a show where lot viewing is available, I do the next best thing - I call the auction house. Heritage, Legend, GC, Stacks, and DLRC each provide at no charge the ability to have one of their numismatists look at the lot in hand, and provide an unbiased assessment. While I utilize that service, despite the photos looking good to me, the majority of the time I’m told to pass. That unbiased advice is invaluable, and over the years has saved me a ton of money by keeping me from buying coins that would turn out to be mistakes!
. The better-date 1857 is scarcer than implied by its mintage of 94,000 pieces. Of the two business die varieties, most examples are OC-2. OC-1 is rare, with only about 45 survivors according to Dannreuther. It is readily distinguished from OC-2 by the date location, and the presence of bold diagonal die lines within the lower portion of the eagle's shield. The present Borderline Uncirculated representative is semiprooflike. The devices are frosty, and the borders display medium tan-brown toning. The reverse field shows scattered minor marks.
Look like this????
I'm OK with the coin for the price I paid, but I was really disappointed overall. It's not a bad coin and is hinting at being PL(why taking pictures is challenging), but the coin should be described as all but white! The reverse is the same as the obv. which shows how challenging coins like this are to picture. My Obv. and Rev. pics were taken in the exact same conditions within a minute of each other! The Obv. picture is the in hand look of the coin color wise.
It’s hard to disagree with the concept of the more information one has, the better.