Which would you chose; common coin in EF or rare coin in mediocre

[cliff_marsland]

I normally don't do polls, or what would you do questions, but I was wondering what most people would do in a hypothetical situation.

At the same or similar price, would you choose a common coin in exceptional condition, for example a really nice silvered Probus, or a rare coin in cruddy condition (if it was really rare) or VG-F if it were scarce to rare?

I had a similar choice today; I went for the Nero As Perinthus mint.  Not terrible condition by any means, around FIne.

Usually, I'll choose the rarer coin in lesser condition.  In a recent Forum purchase, I chose a rough Galba Sestertius, because it was hard to find a not terrible Galba at that price.

[CzarMike]

Common in good condition, I am not really that crazy of rare coins, because they are a waste of money if you ask me, but that's because I am "po"

[romeo]

i went for the rare coin, but this question did make me think, do I (we) take the common coins for granted? Just because there are many about, why does this lower my opinion and desire to own one so much? They are after all maybe just as old, maybe just as interesting, and maybe more beautiful. I can only think it comes from the desire to own something that hardly anyone else will have.  A interesting and thought provoking topic. I shall have to put on my smoking gown and go sit by a water fall to contemplate this and other mysteries of life.

[Robert_Brenchley]

It would depend on the coins. I'd go for the one which interested me more.

[ecoli]

Depends on what "rare" means.




Which one would you chose?

[curtislclay]

One of the main goals of collecting, in my opinion, is to make other people envious of what you have. So your purchases have to be rare, or else extraordinarily fine, so that your competition can't easily match them!

[cliff_marsland]

Ok, well pretend one could choose from a Vitellius Sestertius in identifiable but cruddy condition or a fully silvered, exceptional,  Probus Ant, pretending that the price was $150.  Both are fictitious examples, as I would have purchased such a Vitellius if it were available!  That's along the lines I meant.

I generally go for the rarer coin given a choice, but there are exceptions, of course.

Another fictional example would be a Didius Julianus Sestertius in clean G-VG or say a Trajan As in XF with great patina for the fictional price of $450 (for the more expensive fictional example).  Again, it's fictional, as I'd be tempted by the Didius!

Generally, I'll treat myself to a $50-60 or under coin every pay period, and put away for a moderately expensive coin type.  I faced a lot of choices, but I ended up opting for a Nero Perinthus As with Altar reverse (which was actually the best one available of the less than a handful that were available.  My second choice was a Postumus or Trebonianus Sestertius/Double Sestertius.  I was somewhat tempted by some nice silvered Ants.

[Danny S. Jones]

I want each and every coin to be in FDC condition. Unfortunately, I don't have the means for that, so I have settled for many affordable examples of more expensive or rarer pieces that I would not have been able to purchase otherwise. These are "space fillers" I suppose. I have some rare coins that are in such horrible condition, I won't post their pictures online.

Generally, I'll treat myself to a $50-60 or under coin every pay period, and put away for a moderately expensive coin type. 

I do the same, getting as many nice inexpensive coins that I can, as often as I can. And then buy the occasional expensive one. The nice, common coins, I have or will obtain. The rare, inexpensive coins... I'll get those too. I don't guess I can vote for both, huh?

[ecoli]

not so fictional examples.

first one went for $236, second $280 a couple of years ago(same auction).  

I bought the first one.

[areich]

'Mediocre' to some might be pretty nice to me but if it's a condition that I truly don't like I'd probably
go with the common one. Then again if it was too common, say a Nicaea 3 tsandards reverse, the choice would not be too easy.
So I'll have to answer 'it depends'.

Now that I see Ecoli's post, that is exactly what I'm talking about. I consider this Pupienus a pretty good coin,
it might be mediocre but I like it a lot, there's nothing wrong with it in my opinion.

On the other hand, while I'm not by any stretch an expert on sestertii prices that Trajan also seems a pretty good
deal to me, if you could get it today for that price.

Andreas

[ancientdave]

This is a tough question, because every situation is different. Usually when I really like a coin it is for several converging reasons, ie. artistic beauty + historical relevance will get me everytime. Once you factor in patina, strike, and wear (IMO some wear can make certain coins more attractive), it can really get complicated and hard to define precisely. I also seem to be drawn to coins that leave me with unanswered questions upon which I can speculate and theorize. The only solid rule that I have is that I always reserve the right to break all of my unwritten little rules and follow my heart, collecting ancient coins for me is a journey of discovery, and there are always things that are simply not on the map.

[dougsmit]

My answer depends entirely on why the coin is rare.  I have no particular interest in an R5 or unlisted coin that exists commonly save for an officina letter or a dot placed somewhere out of the ordinary.  On the other hand, a coin that is wholly different for some more major reason can be high on the want list even if there are dozens of them known.   Another factor is whether the poor condition coin still shows the important feature that makes it special.  For example, call me crazy, I would not pay much for a Brutus EID MAR worn to the point that you could not read the reverse legend.

Another factor is where the coin stands in the census of conditions known for that rare type.  If there are several known of the coin and mine is the worst of the bunch at VF+, I'm not as proud as if my AF is better than the rest which are marginally identifiable.

My favorite 'test' of this question is to show  five (pick a number) coins and ask someone to select the one that is most special.  The selection will tell a lot about the selector.  That might make an interesting poll question. 

ecoli:  I'll take the Maximinus.  What is the legend at obverse left?

Now my test if anyone wants to play.  Which is the preferred coin?

[slokind]

I confess, probably to my shame, that I couldn't resist Redux with a square wheel combined with such a scraggly Septimius.
The third one is probably rare; I'd choose to have one of Doug's photos of it.  Its grade is aG.
For me Cliff's question, as stated, in unanswerable.
Pat L.

[Enodia]

i buy the coins i like in the best grade i can afford.
an ugly but rare Roman holds no appeal for me whatsoever, but a common Lucanian fraction in VF at an affordable price gives me palpitations! but that doen't mean i wouldn't LOVE to own a nice didrachm from Suessa Aurunca!

anyway, the jist of all this is that i could not vote in the poll.

~ Peter

[areich]

By the way, there are some 'defects' that can reduce the price of a coin drastically but which I don't mind much.
Some examples:

A damaged (but stable) edge:
https://www.forumancientcoins.com/gallery/displayimage.php?pos=-30094

holes that don't touch anything important:
https://www.forumancientcoins.com/gallery/displayimage.php?pos=-31583

unimportant parts of the coin are missing:
https://www.forumancientcoins.com/gallery/displayimage.php?pos=-43284

small nicks:
https://www.forumancientcoins.com/gallery/displayimage.php?pos=-26908

imperfect flans (click on 'Click to view full size image', for some reason the preview isn't displayed):
https://www.forumancientcoins.com/gallery/displayimage.php?pos=-37102

'honest' wear:
https://www.forumancientcoins.com/gallery/displayimage.php?pos=-38420

breaks in patina, while I don't like them they can make a coin affordable:
https://www.forumancientcoins.com/gallery/displayimage.php?pos=-32613

both the small flan defect and the 'grizzled' surface:
https://www.forumancientcoins.com/gallery/displayimage.php?pos=-32944

I could go on and on...

All these coins are probably 'mediocre' to someone but not to me and I wouldn't trade any of them for common as dirt
coin that may be EF but that is also boring.

Andreas

[SVLLAIMP]

Well, for the choice of the the three above, I'd go with the Pertinax.  But I find this question far too complex for such a simple answer.  I suppose, in short, I'd go with the more common coin in exceptional condition because it is far easier to share a beautiful than a rare coin with a non-collector.

[commodus]

It really depends upon what I like the best.
The majority of my collection is made up of coins which are not rare, though probably only half of these are what might be deemed truly "common."
It is the rarest of the rarities that I own, however, of which I am most proud!

[Robert_Brenchley]

If you choose something fairly obscure, you can have rarities in EF with no great expenditure. You just have to wait, and sooner or later you'll be the only one who recognises the coin for what it is.

[Rupert]

That depends on the individual case.
Sometimes you can fall in love with a common coin just for the combination of a beautiful style and beautiful condition, but I must admit that I'm a rarity hunter who can forgive a lot to a REALLY rare coin.

Rupert

[Rich Beale]

I think of viewing and purchasing ancient coins very much as a search for perfection. It is of course impossible to find an ancient coin that is truly 'perfect', but the ideal inspires the quest. It is a journey lined with exquisite beauty, if only you know where to look for it. A common LRB can be every bit as glorious as an Athenian tetradrachm - you just have to set aside your prejudice against 'common' coins.

For me, it's all about quality. A rare coin remains interesting even if it is in poor condition, but it will never drive me to part with my money quite as well as a well preserved piece, common though it may be.

Even a common coin that is exceptionally well preserved becomes by virtue of its condition very rare.

[Marsman]

I would with no doubt go for the common but beautiful coin.
My pleasure is in looking at coins. And for me it's simple. I'd rather look at a beautiful (and common) denarius than an ugly (scarce) one !

[commodus]

One of the crown jewels (in my opinion anyway) of my collection is my battered and corroded but clearly identifiable Circus Maximus sestertius of Trajan. Quality-wise it is one of the poorer coins of the collection but I rank it among the top five acquisitions of which I am most proud.

[Jochen]

May be it's philistine. But I too tend to the more beautiful coin. For me collecting ancient coins is not only an intellectual delight but not at least a sensual pleasure. These are two sides of the same medal. But like seeing a beautiful lady it's the first view which decides and not her intellectual ability. That is cruel and unfair but it is the truth. Take a look at the 'best of' in the member's galleries. There you can find the evidence. It's a different situation - for me at least - when I'm engaged in a special subject, a mythological theme f.e. Then sometimes I need a reference sample where the beauty alone doesn't count. So these two paradigmas change from time to time but the beauty is the more important criteria.

Best regards

[dougsmit]

If you choose something fairly obscure, you can have rarities in EF with no great expenditure. You just have to wait, and sooner or later you'll be the only one who recognises the coin for what it is.

Sometimes, yes, but in the real world rarities present themselves in whatever condition they choose and our decision is whether we buy them as-is or let them pass.  Rupert's Calliope is a perfect example.  I'd love to have that coin but I have seen three in better condition offered so the possibility exists that he can upgrade it if he waits another fifty years give or take.  I don't know how old the buyers is of the really nice Calliopes are but 50 years could cover it unless they are museums or have grandkids who care. 

My problem is more often finding a real rarity that is in too good condition and, therefore, gets priced out of my range.  A decade ago I  was outbid for a very special (to me) coin by a guy who had not noticed and did not care about the variety but was looking for a bold portrait for his one per emperor collection and was willing to pay any price for a perfectly round coin (we corresponded on the matter back when you could contact people on eBay - I suspected wrongly that someone knowing to outbid me on that coin might be someone I should know).   Once (before I retired from the active hobby) I held out hope of owning an 'Emesa' aureus of Septimius Severus.  The worst one I have seen offered was a nice EF.  I would prefer a holed Fine at a $5000 discount.   

For those condition lovers out there:  One way to own a 'best known example' is to buy the 'only known example'.  When that happens to be aG; tough.

[commodus]

The criteria do vary. In trtuh I must admit that of my five top coins four of them are EF at a minimum and are gorgeous. The only poor one is the aforementioned Trajan Circus Maximus setertius, which I prize because it is not only rare but because I find the subject matter it depicts particularly fascinating.
I have a particular provincial in my collection, a bronze from Zeugma, which is rather non-descript, even ugly, and is also unique (in the true sense -- it is the only one known). I am glad to possess it, but it doesn't rank among my favorites.
Jochen's analogy is actually pretty much spot on. As it is for me with women, so it is ultimately for coins: beauty will trump all else first.
I realize this contradicts my previous comment somewhat, but I got to thinking about it and I have to be truthful.