VickySilver

LOL, I was trying to go quiet on the 1869 6d. I have one in PCGS62 but don't really like it much. Yours is MUCH better!

Yikes, check the prices! Just shocking IMO, and not just Gold proofs, etc. but includes silver coins. Will be interested to see what the 1850 shilling goes for in the next 5-10 minutes...

Buon chance! Will follow yours...

That was my thought. I could be wrong but the lettering on the obverse appears different. As example each of the letters on pattern appears a bit taller. The upper serif on the first "S" of SHILLINGS besides being larger looks to be more pronounced. Look also on the serifs and general shape of the second "S" on that part of the legend, etc.

Yes, but a nice one that. And see my commentary on the above post as well....

The reason I posted the farthing above is that even though it is not "VIP" standard, I must say I do not understand the reason for crazy prices for the later. This one in hand is much better and is IMO properly graded as Proof Ultra-cameo 67*. I still paid about 200 prorated for it as I got it as a grouping with the penny and halfpenny, all of which were exceptional for lack of marks and cameo contrast - the larger two got Ultra-cameo 67 and are beautiful but not VIP either. IMO, standard year "VIP" proofs other than the special penny of 1953 are not: 1 - readily identified separate from "normal" exceptional coins, with the exception of the special penny noted 2 - most assuredly NOT worth a premium over excellent "normal" coins I may not agree with the identification in the upcoming LC sale with the crown as "VIP", if that matters. Many "normal" proof coins of this year have excellent strike, and extreme cameo effect on obverse and reverse. I would argue that even if specially prepared, any differences are negligible.

Yes, that is the one. I believe the lettering is slightly different in font and spacing. For whatever reason, I can't add the image after I compress it (of the reverse, that is).

It looks that a note or figure was removed from the fields to the right of George.

Here is an “ordinary” proof 1953 farthing although of decent quality:

Mine as well. Good to see you posting again.

LOL, must be bad weather up your way....I played with some nickel coins previously as there was some debate about the 1923 & 1924 pattern 3d and 1/- coins being only nickel (vs. copper-nickel) alloy. I suppose there is a threshold point as which increasing the copper in the alloy deters the magnetic property....

Quite, and this is the type of coin that is best appreciated by NOT being slabbed although the value might be hurt at sale. Glad to see Sword is evidently of similar opinion with regards to such.

Absolutely! I guess this apparently new influx of money and jamming prices for gold is something I hate seeing. But this type of activity is certainly seen in coins such as the 2019 Una and the Lion rehash and the current Alderney Three Graces

Yes, sorry about that...

And me as well. If this was priced as GVF, I would be a buyer for sure even though I don't generally go for the Younghead crowns & have made do with a cleaned AU 1847 only - which I would trade in a heartbeat. These are frequently not struck as well as we might like; I have elsewhere commented on the issue with incomplete strike and the problems of such large flans. The marks across the cheek and neck take it down IMO to the EF status but remind me of those found on Morgan dollars that were stored in bags with a thousand companions for many years and suffered such. The actual wear is not so bad, and of course magnified by the enlarged format.

Ok, but really which would you rather have - a top 1926ME with good lustre and strike or a "dotty"? Think I gave away my opinion on that last bit, LOL.

I think you might be right there, combined with a bit of pulling something out of the air....Please don't let those prices fool you. On occasion foreign used to go for a bit low but even that seems to be the rare case nowadays.

True, but plenty of lustre there in and about the letters and into the fields. Looks a soft strike to me, esp. as on the chest and gown area with a bit of rub on knee and biceps IMO. I would think that is in the AU55 range, possibly 58 - the reason I say the later is that I have noticed than when not fully stuck that the "high points" are of metal that seem to oxidize more readily making pictures look not as good as in-hand. Just vaguely in analogous fashion, we sometimes see even worse on the high obverse points of George V silver (I know a different metal) such as the cheek, hair and upper ear on the Wreath and Jub. crowns...

135 pounds for this unslabbed 1853 PT normal 5 from Goldberg’s. Looks better in hand, but if sent to TPG would prob only go 64 Brown The luster not captured . Point is, why submit? Maybe it would sell for multiples

Indeed, and my point is they ARE. Please note how the defect disappears into the lettering in the areas indicated and not THROUGH the lettering. If need be, then the specifics are within the valley of the "V" and and that on either side of the "V" truncation, more could be pointed out....

Here is mine:

Partially yes. The other mentioned locations mitigate against that, but also areas not fully struck up have different crystalline structure I am told and oxidize variably which can give a different appearance to the surrounding metal. Interestingly it also appears that planchets were not prepared very well and frequently were rather marked by scratches, poor finish even, and so when an area is not fully struck up, pre-strike planchet issues will remain and sometimes appear as "wear" to the coin when it appears it may not always be. An area famous for that is on the obverse cheek of George on your nomen Wreath. It took a long time to figure this out as marks here can be pre or post strike (or combos of the two). The ear on the OP coin fortunately does show this malady however, and I mentioned as a worse case scenario - I wonder what other series are affected in this manner as I have not seen a lot of discussion about this. I have a decent collection of pattern "MODEL" coins of the 20th century that demonstrate some of these planchet issues even on coins of specimen finish, and possibly could publish if I had more time.....

May I enter the fray as the loyal opposition? This coin has a very good strike both obverse and reverse. The rims show some sign of "bag handling" as do a few of the marks on the obverse - however, some of the apparent marks on the obverse are not. What do I mean? Look at the lines in and around the "V" in George's title; these look to be die scratches. There are some marks in the field to the left of George, but not severe. The only area that concerns me on the obverse is the field between George's bust and the "E" in the legend portion of "REX". G's cheek, nose, brow and beard excellent. IMO the area superior-most on his ear is simply not struck up all the way. Reverse as expected rather nice... Do post your pieces of 1923 superior to this at 75 quid. I will try to do so later.

Buried somewhere, will take a look in the AM if possible.