VickySilver

Jerry, those are some eagle eyes of yours. I was at first prepared to accept it as gradeable but those do appear to be inches and old with some toning over them so that may be the case. Need to see this "in-hand". I also agree with the 2nd photo of the beading and the margin designs on the dress looking a bit off.

HI all on a happy Saturday. I was looking over the DNW coming up [again] and was [again] sadly disappointed by the cleaning on so many of the earlier Vicky half crowns and Gothic florins, not to mention Old Head Crowns. Can't take it back....I wish the collector hadn't as mostly I will pass.....

I have never seen a 1927 set in other than the cardboard. And I even have the set that was given to Derwent Wood's widow by the RM for his uniface reverse designs for the new coinage. The insert was black on that set. I also have a 1927 matte set that came from the Pretoria mint collection that similarly had a cardboard case. I would say that these would be somewhat exclusive, and yet no leather case.

I agree with that and wanted to look at my own proof half crowns - 2 only. Not a big series for sure. Interesting to speculate, and perhaps a bit more research would be nice. Rob, you said "not to mention any number of Una varieties". Does that mean you have multiple Unas? Yikes.

I agree, and think that there were not a lot of "marquee" top line coins to draw interest. I almost bid on the 1892 slabbed florin but left it alone and only went to 850 on the '75H penny as it would have taken at least 950 (prob. 1k) to take it which would have made it 1250 total or so - pass. I hope I am wrong but it seems that proof gold pre-decimal in "uber" condition have taken over as far as value and prices fetched. I just can not give them their due I guess, but they really are not too interesting - not that I would turn down an Una if given me!

I suppose that is possible however under magnification the surfaces just don't look prooflike, or at least like any I have seen as there is a roughness to the devices and fields that does not look prooflike, and of course the edges do not. I've a number of Vicky half crowns as you might guess and does not look prooflike. I have not held other 1839 currency specimens so can't speak for them though.

Many thanks, and truly one of my favourite coins of the collection. The problem with getting such coins is that you try mostly unsuccessfully to match it with others in the series.

I think those may have been die polish marks - the piece is graded PCGS 64 (may be under graded at that?) and very colourful with real and natural toning - not a coin I could touch nowadays. The apparent marks on the rim are from the original planchet. Colin Cooke very much was enthusiastic about the coin and I still am. These days I have to plan VERY carefully on purchases. This is coin # 121002 on the PCGS site.

I would say that I agree but have occasionally made exception(s). About 16+ years ago, I bought the superb and very rare currency 1839 Halfcrown from Glens that was sold as EF "with light hairlines and cleaned some time in the past". Because of rarity and having one Colin Cooke to look at it, I bought it with him as agent - this coin even under severe magnification and lighting showed no hairlines and nothing but original and pleasantly toned surfaces. I would imagine the coin would be likely as nice as one could ever find, including museums. Moral: you can luck up on occasion but do your research and if the coin is worthy do what you can to see it in hand or have someone trusted to have a good look.

I guess maybe if you are there in person and can see it "in hand". That is a nice price Peck...

Richard - his cleaning appears on the photos at least as rub, and with an abrasive cloth or some such. Spink had a sale about 4 years ago where many if not most of the coins were cleaned similarly BUT NOT MENTIONED! I purchased a few that I regret but not at high prices....

Or is that the evil eye? My main memory of those Italian museums as a boy were the outrageous bronzes that had phallus emerging from phallus and any other body part. Grandmother used a bit of Shakespeare (about other topics) something to the effect of: "Methinks he doth protest too much" . And I believe psychologists would have some interesting opinions about such....

Not a coin for me, but the point has been made before that on such a coin, that is IMO probably the "technical" grade - there is much lustre (original minted surface) showing on both obverse and reverse. The obverse is softly struck with some, but not a lot, wear. As I understand it, the grade then is based on the amount of wear and evidence or residual minted surfaces. So not a problem with the technical 50 grade in my book, but a problem aesthetically with the lack of detail - also for a coin of this date I question the slabbing. Price? Mehhhh....

Hmmm, I don't think that 13 of the bids would be won at maximum out of the 18. That doesn't compute well. Maybe three to five at most.

Hopefully not the 1551 version.

Wow, way too many gold and bullion recent issues. I just don't get the absolute madness over the rehashed Three Graces and Una. Would hate to be trapped into them for big money. Where are the numismatic issues? I saw precious little of currency Vicky silver of quality and actually "nada para me".

Hmmm, the perils of micro varietals.....

Three months later, not hide nor hair of the 1984 Jamaica uncirculated specimen set. I did however just purchase an hitherto unpublished but catalogued as existing 1976 (U) prooflike Guyana uncirculated Ten Dollars with hero Cuffy on the obverse. The coin appears to have come from a bag, and can only speculate as to its history. I think the original plan was to actually strike these prooflike coins for circulation. They also struck this coin in the Matte quality, and these were made as the "currency" counterpart for the moneymaker proof coins and sets. As best as I can put together, the original mintage struck by Franklin Mint was sent to the Central Bank of Guyana where in all probability they languished; in 1976 this very coin had the purchasing power of One USD and was 45 mm. Nowadays, the purchasing power is all of FIVE CENTS (USD). Strangely, the pot-metal value of the copper nickel alloy now likely exceeds the face value of the coin in Guyanese Dollars. I really wonder what happened to all of them. The 1976 matte coins are very scarce but the prooflike are probably very rare. These currency coins for Guyana and other countries struck by the Franklin Mint are quite a challenge and thankfully not pursued by many thus keeping them affordable. I found that I can post pictures off my iPhone and will try tomorrow if I get delivery of this coin by then.

Looks a bit like it could be a 3/3/3 with a broken 3 punch (at top right) as one of them.

As I watched the sale this morning, I must say I did get blown out on the two lots I wanted, the "1551" 3d and the 1853 proof groat with later bust that with commissions each went for well above 3k. I ended up getting just the 1853 3d. I noticed that with the blown up pictures of lots that IMO quite a number of the 1840s-1860s 3e (not all) were what has been termed as satin Maundy issue and not actual currency 3d.

Yes, just a standard one type only to the best of my knowledge. At one time there was rather a shortage of the 1915 in uncirculated (OK, GEF for the oldies) and it still IMO merits an "S" although some arguments for an "R". Not an R2 however. I really meant to get the latest Bull to see if he corrected some of the shortcomings, esp. the so-called VIP proofs of the 1920-1966 period; I had talked with Steve Hill and he was in agreement with some of my thoughts on these...

True. Maybe that will drive some bidders away?

Uggh, don't rat us low life out! Well there are a couple I will likely fight pretty hard for (whatever that means in today's inflationary times). I really like the 6d-florin silver a bit better, but there are a few I am obligated to go after.

Happy Easter! A very nice example

Uh, I will confess to getting the Adams 1860/59....And 1550 was the price on that as well.