Greetings Numismates,
I have recently stumbled upon this coin. I identified this as the 5 Fen - Puyi (Kangde ) coin, and according to the comment of the year 12 (1945), this coin was scarce. Here is the link: https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces22470.html
Checking the Krause catalogue, if I am not mistaken; it would be worth $125; however, looking at various websites selling this coin, the price is clearly below that.
What is an accurate price valuation for this coin?
I cannot thank you more for assisting me.
Best regards,
SRL
P.S. Feel free to use Chinese whenever applicable. I appreciate all help.
I asked myself the same, I see far too many of those to call them scarce/rare, but it could also be that the comment in Krause is very old and since then more got available to the marked be it through discovery or fakes being made.
Either way I left the comment for now.
20-40$ is the most common prices I see them going for.
Citeer: "Idolenz"
20-40$ is the most common prices I see them going for.
Based on personal experience, I think even that price range is way over the top. I've seen the Manchukuo 1 and 5 Fens in red fibre in varying conditions in junk bins enough times; I have one I got for 10€ only. They're only barely less common than the 1930s Manchukuo issues; either that or I'm just really lucky.
As for Krause, they're a worthwhile gander if you're not sure of something, but bear in mind they can also be way off the mark. That's the same reason I never include Krause comments like "rare" on year lines, as a referee.
Oh, well that solves SRL's question then; the coin is neither rare nor expensive, at least not nearly as much as Krause supposes.
About his coin's value, I'd say around 10-15 USD tops; I don't know much about grading red fibre coins, but given the second-from-the-right character (德) is almost invisible, I wouldn't call it UNC exactly.
I bought a lot of 10 of these coins from a stock image online. I received 12 by mistake, and the breakdown was 9 year 12 and 3 year 11. So it does seem that the scarce label is incorrect.
