Would you add damaged coins to your collection?
Göttinger
Posts: 19 ✭
For many of us our collecting hobby is a window into history.
And since often the age of our coins exceeds the length of a human lifetime by far, there is a good chance that many of the remaining coins got damaged at some point of time.
Do you collect such damaged coins, wether it should be environmental damage, heat damage, saltwater damage, cleaned/ polished, holed, clipped or mounted coins?
Or are you always looking to get undamaged coins in as high as possible grades for your collection?
I usually prefere high grades if the coin types are plentiful and cheap, medium grades if the coins are a little bit more rare and / or pricy and if the coins are very rare I pretty much collect every coin I can get my hands on, no matter the condition.
I'm looking forward to read your opinions on this topic.
Best regards, Göttinger
Comments
Most of the coins I buy I send them to be graded.
I try not to, even with as much as I looked at a coin on the available images, still on some end up getting coins with details after sending them to be graded, but I do my best to avoid them.
As a relative newbie compared to most people here, I was more okay with damaged coins until I tried to sell a few and found that others did not like them as much as I did! Now I avoid them unless I think a much better one will be prohibitively expensive or won't show up for several more years.
Yes, at lest in terms of "environmental damage" and "cleaned". Mainly because my collecting includes ancients, and every single ancient coin on the market today has been cleaned at some point because every single such coin has been buried in the ground for most of its history. Copper coins, in particular, usually come up out of the ground looking like little green rocks, and it takes artistic skill not unlike that of a fossil extractor to restore the coin to something like a "coin" again. And even then, copper coins are usually solid green in colour, which on a modern coin would be classified as "severe environmental damage".
"Clipped" would be a yes for me too, because I also collect mediaeval coins, and most mediaeval coins were clipped.
"Holed" I accept with reluctance. I once saw a two nice mediaeval Georgian coins on a dealer's tray, side by side, identical in every respect except one was holed and one not. The holed one was for sale for $25, the unholed one for $75. I bought the holed one, and have mildly regretted this decision since - though it does give me the chance to talk about me owning a hole that's worth negative $50.
I would draw the line at "mounted", either ex-mount or (even worse) still attached to something. Such objects are, in my eyes, "no longer coins", worthy of collecting by an antiquities collector, sure, but not by me. I do have a couple of ex-mount coins in my collection, and I don't like them - I usually didn't notice the mount marks when I bought them - and will replace them as soon as I find an unmounted example of such.
Roman emperor Marcus Aurelius, "Meditations"
Apparently I have been awarded one DPOTD.
Only if rare and to costly otherwise for US coins. As for Latin American coins many of us are just happy to own an example since there are so many very rare coins.
Coin collecting interests: Latin America
Sports: NFL & NHL
Hell no !
I give away money. I collect money.
I don’t love money . I do love the Lord God.
Generally not, as there are enough coins to buy without dealing with problem coins. In fact, I even try not to buy non-mint state coins or medals.
But I have done so for very special coins in exceptional cases.
I collect for the historical value and for the artistic depiction on the planchet. If such things are not compromised, I am happy to collect it.
DPOTD
One of the best coins in my collection. Holed. And I love it. There are only a very few known. As rare a Mexican coin as it gets.
Another one damaged, a couple known. And would not let it go for all the money...
Therefore, yes, I do collect damages coins. And there is a good change I'll get more in the future if need be.
Dang, Abuelo. Now that is a coin that I would take in any state! Had to look that up and saw it on Heritage.
Below is a damaged coin I couldn't turn down recently, way more common than yours lol, but I haven't seen many out there, especially with the inverted S, so picked it up.
Same here I would never sell my 1752 1 real Peru would be next to impossible to find another it is not the value it is not expensive.
Coin collecting interests: Latin America
Sports: NFL & NHL
What about coins you need that simply do not exist in mint state? You are OK with never owning an example? How can you complete a series that way?
I guess to each their own.
Coin collecting interests: Latin America
Sports: NFL & NHL
Yes. There are some very rare varieties in my area of interest that I have only encountered damaged or chopped.
8 Reales Madness Collection
It depends on the coin in my opinion. As I prefer Non-damaged coins but some times that is just not an option. So when it come to a rare or normally expensive coins I don't mind if it has been cleaned or artificial toned as these coins are mostly over looked by collectors.
For my US collection, noted in my signature line, I avoid all damaged coins. I don't even include non CAC approved coins in my $2.50 set.
My secondary "28 Centuries" set includes ancients, medieval and early modern coins, mostly in NGC coins. I avoid any coins with extra phrases like clipped, brushed, bent, grafitti, marks, wrinkled, etc. Instead I hold out for coins with no extra phrases on the holders.
https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/gold/liberty-head-2-1-gold-major-sets/liberty-head-2-1-gold-basic-set-circulation-strikes-1840-1907-cac/alltimeset/268163
TPGs have a lot to answer for. Damage is fine. It should make a coin proportionately cheaper, of course. But it's not the binary nonsense the TPGs instill in moderns collectors.
Yes, I will usually go first for a coin that isn't damaged. But a collection of perfect coins would cost more than I will ever have. If a coin is damaged, my preference is for 'natural' damage (environmental, wear, knocks, corrosion, saltwater) or damage caused during the coin's use (countermarks, peck marks, test cuts, clipping). Holes may or may not be ok depending how I think they got there. In fact, I have specifically bought coins with peck marks, test cuts and holes, as well as shipwreck coins, because of their historical significance over less 'damaged' coins.
Cleaning is fine too, to a certain extent (especially with hammered coins). I'm not hugely worried about ex-mounted. The bottom of the list are tooled coins, which I will usually never buy, but there may be some combination of rarity and price that tempts me.
Yes, for an extremely rare acquisition, I would consider a coin in almost any condition, as long as it has identifiable features.
For damaged coins, I would be considering coins with less than 10 examples in private hands. I just might not see another available for sale for 10 years or more.
I have a couple rare coins with holes because the holes are old and the coins are still charming somehow, and I have some medieval and ancient coins that have been worked on, but usually I prefer the combination of rarity, high grade and eye appeal
Yes
I'm BACK!!! Used to be Billet7 on the old forum.
One of two that I’m aware of. I would pay up for any of these that come to market.
I'm BACK!!! Used to be Billet7 on the old forum.
Never write never as there can be reasonable exceptions on a case by case basis.
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
I usually avoid damaged or "details" graded coins. I have a few. Most of them are hammered British pieces which have been clipped. Dishonest individuals clipped coins and then passed them for their full weight.
This Alfred the Great penny (ruled 871 to 899 AD) was clipped, but all of the wording is readable. These coins are not easy to find these days, and get really expensive when they don't have some problem.
This Aethelstan (ruled 924 to 939) portrait penny was clipped, but once again all of the wording is readable. Portrait pennies from this era are wicked expensive and hard to find. This one, which is certified, was not cheap at auction.
I buy them intact when I can. Here is a Eadwig penny which is very hard to find. This guy, who was a "black sheep of the family" ruled only from 955 to 959.
Why was he a "black sheep?" At his coronation feast, he slipping out to have a menage a trois with a maiden named Aelfgifu and her mother, Aethelgifu. That was not a way to begin in your reign as the King of England!
No.
My entire collection is 'damaged'. It's quite freeing not to worry about plastic and grades.
The answer, in my case, is yes: If it is a coin I want, and I can only find it or afford it if it is damaged or cleaned or holed, I will buy it - no question.
I collect coins for their history, and also for their scarcity - I do not collect grades.
Here is an example - this 8E from the Santiago mint was salvaged from the wreck of the Nuestra Senora de La Luz, which sank in a storm off Montevideo in the early 1750's.
Buyers were given the option to have their purchases delivered either as they were found, or, cleaned/restored. I chose to have my example remain uncleaned, exactly as it was found with marine crud and sediment. It also shows signs of damage likely incurred while in brief circulation in Chile or Argentina, during transport by mule over the Andes, or while in contact with many other coins in the hold, or as the ship went down. History speaks to me thru this coin.
Ditto. Hey, you and I should chat sometime, see if our interests are aligned in any way.
It depends on the coin type in question. I have several that only exist as a single known item that happens to be damaged. Hobson's Choice makes such a coin grade as acceptable. Sure I'll choose a nice one over one with defects, so with common coins I prefer to wait for something decent, but have no qualms going after things the number chasers avoid if needs must. My two point grading system of acceptable or not allows me to buy what I like and not what I'm told I should be collecting.
Only if it’s chopmarked or counterstamped
so here's another old lump of coal I was foolish enough to actually pay real money for recently, and it fits into this conversation... it's a 46mm 68g copper ishcal minted in Kaffa/Feodosia, Crimea in about 1782. It's a rare coin in any grade, and they usually come with bad planchets and weak strikes. An extraordinarily nice one, the DuPont/Michailovich coin looks like this... https://www.si.edu/object/1-ischal-crimea-1780-1781:nmah_1164100 though it's a different variety. This one was special to me because it has the more floral design and it's unusually well struck, so while I'll keep my eyes open for different varieties and better grades, I'll probably keep this one even if I find another I like.
My guess is this is why I found many of these with rim damage…found these at local thrift store. “Two for one day” @ $1.50
Damaged or not could not pass up .