How much does a hole detract?

Here is a Procopius (365-366 AD) AE3 of Nicomedia. Procopius was formerly rare (R2 or rarer in RIC, published long ago), but is at most scarce now, although he still is expensive in nice condition. Many are on ragged, crowded, or corroded flans. Search your favorite site to see how true this is. This coin is type 7 on this site:
http://esty.ancients.info/ricix/type7.html
This is pretty nice example, but it has a hole through it and a scrape on the reverse. I think that without the flaws it would be a $150 coin. However, I got it on eBay recently for $30, shipping included. The hole must have been a huge deterrent to other bidders.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

A hole lot

Don't actually know, just wanted to make a pun.

 

yes it detracts too much,, i bought a 1948 canadian dollar with a hole below kings bust for 260 normaly this coin sells for a few thousand in mint condition ,so damage on any coin can reduce price significantly ...cheers

 

I disagree. The hole is not a detractor for me. Especially in this case, but many other coins as well. This coin is in wonderful condition and Procopius coins are not easy to find in any condition. I do believe $30 was a steal.

I have an Antoninianus of Quintillus with a hole clean through. Perhaps it is just my imagination running wild, but the shape of the hole always makes me think of an ancient nail having punched through. I envision this particular coin being hung on a door jam or some such thing.

QUINTILLUS Antoninianus
OBVERSE: IMP CM AVR CL QVINTILLVS AVG, radiate, draped, cuirassed bust right
REVERSE: PAX AVGVSTI, Pax standing left, holding olive branch and transverse sceptre, A in left field
Struck at Rome, 270 AD
2.2g, 20mm
RIC 26

So, as far as I'm concerned the hole in your Procopius is highly collectable.

 

Hmmm, yah I'm not a big fan of holes in coins ...

=> it makes me think of some hard-up Roman dude deciding to make a few bucks by selling tacky coin-jewelry to the tourists ... not super cool

Ummm, perhaps if it was a very rare coin and I really had an itch to "fill a hole" in my collection, then I "might" cave and buy a coin with a hole in it, but that day has not yet arrived ...

 

On modern coins, a hole typically detracts 75% of the value. I don't know about ancient coins, though.

The hole in Valentinian's coin of Procopius is not all that bad or noticeable, especially when compared to the one in Bing's coin.

 

Like too many other things there is no simple answer and no two of us will agree anyway. To me, $30 is enough for that coin because the coin does not have redeeming values that make me want to overlook the hole. I can afford a Procopius without the hole. I'd prefer a coin with better mintmark (SMNA?). I prefer ancient holes (this may be but it is hard to tell). Finally, I prefer a hole which tells a tale or makes me wonder why it it there. The OP coin has strange placement. If you were to place a hole in a coin, why there?

I have bought coins because of their holes - not in spite of them. I like the hole in the coin below but I wish the guy with the hammer had taken one less swipe so he didn't smash in the face. Compared to that, the hole and its remaining nail seems like a bonus.


If one hole reduces the price by 75% the how much do I have to pay you to take a triple?


I could not buy it but the best hole I have seen IMHO was years ago when I saw a LRB (Constantine???) with a square central hole and gear teeth neatly cut around the edge. I assume a farmer needed a part to fix his machine and picked up this round piece of metal out in his field. The rest is history.

 

hmmm...I don't usually like holes either. but the OP coin is attractive in spite of the hole. I just need a Procopius box checker, and I'd take that one for 30 bucks.

but sometimes the holes are interesting. bing, you showed me a coin with a square nail hole and a chunk of the nail still in it (like DS first coin), and I thought it was very cool.

 

I like the coin too.

 

It does depend on the hole. And while some collectors will object more than others, what probably can't be argued is that a hole adversely impacts the price and desirability for most.

I've only ever bought one holed coin, a common Aurelian Concordia militvm ant. It's currently suffering the indignity of hanging from my keychain. I guess I wanted it more as a keychain adornment than a coin .

 

Coins pierced in antiquity don't bother me at all. Nice Procopius! Like Bing said, I too imagine these coins being used as an adornment of some sort.

 

I have never bought a holed coin but I have purchased a casino chip that way. This was a practice casino's used to void obsolete chips. In my case the chip is worth only 1% of its listed value, which is $2000.

 

Obviously, not all holed coins are created equally.

I heard that it was once a custom to nail a pine tree shilling over your door to ward-off evil (witches?).

Holes are often added to allow for stringing the coins. I found this one in a dealer's junk box at a FUN show:


CoinTalk's member "Cave Troll" has a wonderful Dansco 7070 album filled with coins having contemporary holes. This is one CT link where it was discussed https://www.cointalk.com/threads/holes-in-coins.20329/


This Greenland coin had the hole added in order to differentiate it from a Danish coin of the same size.

 

The hole doesnt bother me either. I'd take it for $30. Nice find.

 

I would take the one Valentinian got for $30 as well if I were in a market for this emperor. That hole is not a distraction. Its hard for me to explain, but in my mind if the hole is not the primary focus of the coin I do not mind them, but if its the first thing you notice about a coin I really do not want them regardless of price, (a shocker, I know, coming from a hoarder). I would rather have a VG or G than a VF with a hole if the hole is a major distraction to the coin. As an illustration, (and not picking on anyone's coin), when I first glance at Valentinain's coin I notice the portrait and reverse first, then I see there is something going on behind his head. With Bing's coin, the very first thing I see is the hole, and only notice the rest of the coin later. That is my definition of "acceptable" versus "nonacceptable" holes in coins. If the hole is the first thing I see when I pick up the coin in the dealer's tray, it will be the first thing I see every single time I ever pick it up, and I simply do not want that.

 

I knew there was a thread around here somewhere for me to stick this... .

It has a big hole in it, but it is not disproportionate to the coin, a sestertius of Claudius. Beyond the hole, the coin is also in indisputable junk grade, but I still like it a lot... it's a monstro-sized 35mm chunk of 1st century orichalcum goodness with an excellent portrait of Claudius. Pity about the condition of the reverse, which could have better shown the debut of Spes (everyone's favorite skirt-hitching, flower-bearing goddess of hope) on coinage of the Empire.


CLAUDIUS
Orichalcum Sestertius
26.2g, 35.4mm
Rome mint, AD 50-54
RIC 115
O: TI CLAVDIVS CAESAR AVG P M TR P IMP P P, laureate head right.
R: SPES AVGVSTA, Spes, draped, advancing left, holding flower in right hand and raising skirt with left; S C below.

I know this thread is old, but anyone else have a new holed coin to show?

 

My favorite piece of jewelry has a hole in it! Without the hole, it would have cost about 5 times as much.

963-969 AD
Nikiphoros II
AR Miliaresion 3.06 gm - 22 mm

 

I like when the hole does not obstruct the design.



I also like when a hole is plugged in antiquity to revalue/ add value to the coin.

 

This last one is not a 'hole' defect but a coin that involved a hole/plug as part of its production. That is not a fault it is just coooool!

I'm still pretty much onboard with the 1/5 of regular value number BUT holes placed through important features (portrait) are worth less. Holes made in antiquity are not as detracting as modern holes. Holes made for a good reason are not defects. My example of that is the gouged out countermark on this Stratonicea AE35. To me the coin is worth more than the same coin would be in normal state but equally bad condition.


My other recent hole is an Anonymous A2 Byzantine which has a hole stretched out. I decided it was a coin I wanted but I'm not sure I'd pay 5x for it hole free except for the real reason I bought it which had nothing to do with the hole. I liked the form of the A's used on the reverse.



Also, when a coin is fourree and holed and worn, you can't take off for each problem separately. The hole on the Michael IV solidus below was $3 in 1990. The coin was free but I did have to buy the hole. Today I'd pay every bit of that for the coin....and more. The seller could not understand why anyone would buy it so I bought it.

 

hmmm? ... I'm still not a fan of "coin" holes ...

However, I suppose it is a chance for a desperate collector to fill a hole (I guess if a sweet Vitellius-coin-with-a-hole came-up I might take a look, right?)

... man, I like coins!! (they're very cool) ... great hole coins, fellas!! (now I kinda want one!!)