VickySilver

Yes, the 1847 and 1848 especially IMO were NOT currency. I have posted several times about the variances in Maundy strikes and also have had lengthy conversations with none other than Steve Hill who agrees. I do not recall the others. Also, the RM seems to have been fast and furious with dies in those days (1840s through at least 1860s) so there was mix and match, satin finish, PL finish, some dies with "proofy" characteristics, overstruck die lettering/legend issues, etc....

Yes, a bit scarce and have been on the rise on ebay amongst other august (LOL) sources. There are two 8 coin sets In proof for 1984: One is all coins in sterling silver the other has only the larger $10 in silver, the rest in lesser metals. The specimen set is very rare on the ground and have not seen before. An interesting but subtle sign of the distress in producing such is in the accompanying information card on my new set - it looks like it was printed at the corner High Street print shop compared to the very professionally done in earlier years. Also the plastic case not shown is a generic mint set case in use since 1980 and before. As was stated above, even bank personnel that usually have NO interest in numismatic issues knew at the time of issue that it was very scarce & the uncirculated set was NEVER to my knowledge advertised in all of the media outlets. Readers will excuse me for still being excited I hope, but the seller was so flaky that even the small parts of the story were entertaining. Ah, the things we do for our collections! My friend was literally at the departure gate when he delivered, and this was after I was sure it was a lost enterprise.

Obverses

Bad picture:

Agreed, the thing is that they get these days 0% of my money as I don't even bid anymore...Not that I have been overly thrilled with offerings of late.

Methinks that they would turn back the hands of time to the Iron Age..... Beyond me that they have not gotten their act together enough to have on-line bidding. Also the pictures are somewhat inadequate, and at times even moreso.

I am still bothered by the designation of those 3d bits, esp. the 1840s and the "proofs" that IMO were not and was agreed to by none other that Steve Hill.

I am not aware of any and this is right up my alley as I like metal OMS strikes and variants. In halfcrowns the weight of 0.500 and 0.925 are both 14.14 gms. When circulated the difference is obvious as the later coins have a kind of dirty yellowish and unpleasant colour even when oxidized. Also, some of the blanks on the 0.500 coins through 1922 were pickled in acid to make the surface technically of higher silver than the "under" deeper layers, so appearance on minty specimens can be deceiving.

Update: NONE. LOL Some of these issues are near to impossible as they were NOT sold by FM directly to collectors the way they did with proof sets and gold proofs, etc. In the earlier years the FM used to release uncirculated quality specimen sets - 1970 through 1983. The next year (1984) the specimen sets were diverted to the Central Banks for dispersal and this seem to include Belize, Jamaica and Trinidad with no other nations confirmed that I am aware of & if they had a FM direct release, news of it must have been rather sparse as I NEVER saw any for sale in the States. Other than the matte quality specimen sets for 1970-1974, I can not find nor have I EVER seen a matte specimen set from the FM. Some 12 years ago or so I got a 1975 FM matte Barbados set but this was in a Capitol holder and best guess is that someone at the Central bank saved out one of each denomination. The rest of the mattes of other years seem to have gone to the Central Banks. Examples of them are the 1975 & 1976 FM matte unc coins of Belize, and the 1975-76 FM matte coins of Trinidad as well as the aforementioned Barbados set; sprinkled in are the occasional matte issues of Jamaica Mintages such as listed at Krause and even Schon are VERY misleading as far as survival or how many were released by them to the Central Banks, and then of course how many were "paid out" by the Central Banks. These are occasionally seen on the secondary market, but are very much a hit and miss affair. I am not at all sure the FM sent or in any form released 1975 matte coins to Malta, but seem to have sent a scant few to the Central Bank - I have seen only one each of the larger 25c and 50c matte pieces of 1976 year and these were listed at mintage of 300 and 150 pieces, respectively. What is good about them is that evidently NO specimen sets of that year were released so they are only supplemented by proof coins from the sets & I would rate as RARE. I bought my coins from a Said - but can't remember the name of his shop in Valetta. I think I will make a separate post about uncirculated dollar through 10 dollar coins of Bahamas post 1974 if any are interested...

The lines through the devices (ie Vicky bust and head) extend through from the fields. This IMHO ought to be environmental in that the coin may have been either fingered or exposed to surface contaminants, or even other substances intentionally applied - these then oxidized with the residuals as seen. It is possible that there is no actual wear other than bag marks despite these issues. Also, as a collector of such, this coin has near to zero appeal and is quite unsightly.

Very disappointed..

I am not at all sure about this and only quoted it - the humidity - as I know that old junkyard cars in inland California and Arizona are prized because of the preserving qualities of very low humidity which can go VERY low (ie 8-20%).

I have seen quoted (eg NGC) that 37-40% at 75 degrees F. ideal. Do not forget the temperature element of the equation.

Thanks fellas! Personally I don't get too bent out of shape or size of datals/date, and other bits such as dentil shape and regularity - that is unless they are severely out of line. The OP coin does not match digits in coins I am familiar with but must confess that unless remarkable just don't get too excited by them. You will notice that the datals on mine vary from the OP and that posted by Sword. The rest of the coin looks acceptable for a somewhat worn specimen, and I like the 1879 date for some reason which is possibly because there were some silver of that date which are a bit scarcer (ie shillings).

Another “typical”:

Yes, he beat me to the punch! I concur on the rusted die as cause and is certainly seen on occasion, though usually on older bits. Thanks, Rob, your energy astounds.... At first I didn't know what the reference to "pearls" was as I'd never heard that one.

Nice job. Certainly much nicer than my doggy 1827!

I just made a fairly interesting buy off of ebay. As readers know I like to collect coins of the British Colonial Caribbean and related as a sideline to my late pre-decimal GB series. As I have nearly finished the FM series of mint set and currency unc. coins, I turned to those coins later struck (post-1985) by the Royal Mint and taking up the earlier designs struck by the FM. Anyway, it is very difficult if not possible to locate some of the dollar and 2 dollar coins struck in unc. and copper nickel content - some were not truly known or published to my knowledge. I got the 1996 Bahamas 7 coin mint set struck by the RM lately and this is apparently very scarce. I then wanted to fill in a 1992 Bahamas 7 coin set and these evidently came in a pack with envelope commemorating the Quincentennial (1492-1992). I found one at a good price and as I opened it today, instead of the expected 1992 coins I had a 7 coin set ALL dated 1991! These are not supposed to be in such packaging and not even really known to exist. The dollar coins all have the conch on the reverse and QE II on the obverse. I have seen no other sets with the 1991 dated coins and all others dated 1992. Now, I am NOT having luck with the $2 flamingo coins in uncirculated (with the proofs being somewhat available) as these were not in the sets and I have not seen them singly. Here is what I have seen after a careful look, and varies from Krause and NGC and even varies from Schon and en.numista: Dollars (conch): 1989, 1991 (now confirmed), 1992, 1996, 2000 Two Dollars (flamingos): 1989 (not confirmed), 1991 silver (not confirmed in Copper Nickel), (1992, 1996, 2000 all not confirmed) In addition the following Franklin Mint matte unc. coins are quite rare I would surmise: Dollars Conch (all matte): 1975 (not seen), 1976, 1977 (probably more rare than suggested mintage) Two Dollars Flamingos (all matte): 1975, 1976, 1977 (all very scarce and IMO difficult) These are not valuable but fun for me at least to collect. Do let me know if you have a line to any of the individual coins or sets that may include any of the coins not confirmed or noted dates.

LOL. Yes, that is true. Another thing is that decent GB coins in my area are crazily priced these days and so nice to get less expensive bits.

Ah, not to divert but I was in Nicosia in 67-68 Sleepy and went to the Nicosia Middle School near Makarios' palace. That is why I keep a sometime interest in Cypriot coins prior to 1963 - can't afford many but do have a very choice 1907 9P. The bronze is just too crazy....

This auction posted today (and I was late since I was at work). I had wanted to bid on the Spink-acquired date sets that were graded, esp. the 1930 and 1935 sets that had some very highly graded material: These posted as follows NOT including the commissions, etc.: 1930 set in silver NOT including crown: 2500 USD. !!!! 1935 set in silver with 1935 CURRENCY crown: 800 USD !!!! IMO these were big prices that I believe the grading/slabbing affected.

I will look and see. That was a purchase from the "real" Spink in the '90s. That will be in the Safe Deposit so perhaps Saturday. For many years it was the only graded at PCGS, but there is now another as well.

Well, I thought the auction was to begin at 1 PM EST. Where I got that I don't know....I think I remember when Spink offered these year sets and seem to recall them going for a bit above market but that they were overall superior sets. I agree with the above that the 1/2 C. drove the 1930 set, although more than I paid for the very scarce proof of that year. I must say that 2500 IMO is over the top. I might have gone 1500-1800 range. On the 1935, that was an exceptional crown but max value should likely have been in the 600-800 range, with the others of negligible value. So I would not have been there above 800 whatsoever in any case. I must stress that the currency crown without wear is quite rare (as an example, one key area just as with the Wreaths is the cheekbone of George and also his brow, mustache, jaw and ear; also for some reason there seems to be a large field area on the reverse that takes hits as does St. George's shield and sword, etc.). Good on you that won lots!

You may not have to pay any commission at all - IMO tell them you are trying to find the right venue & can they give you either no commission or, say a - 5% or so - I have gotten this on some better lots before at "big" auction houses (on this side of the Atlantic).

Certainly circumstance motive difficult to ascertain at this point; not always clear what the RM is up to even 140 years later!