|
|
The current range of books. Click the image above to see them on Amazon (printed and Kindle format). More info on coinpublications.com |
|
|
Coinpublications.com
Predecimal.com
VickySilver
-
Content Count
3,656 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
65
Everything posted by VickySilver
-
How scarce are GB 1925 & 1926 halfcrowns?
VickySilver replied to OldCurrencyExchange's topic in Free for all
Well, those were selected out as "rarities" and likely preferential saving to other dates. The 1925 becomes scarce to rare in high grades with totally unbagmarked specimens to my knowledge unknown - although there are a few out there that are quite choice. -
Baldwins new list
VickySilver replied to PWA 1967's topic in British Coin Related Discussions & Enquiries
I remember Baldwin trotting out this concept some years ago & believe they would bid on coins in their own auction for this fund - which at th time seemed a conflict of interest. Do people in any numbers invest their money this way? Can you post images of the offering literature Pete? -
Possibly Overgraded halfcrown?
VickySilver replied to Conor44's topic in British Coin Related Discussions & Enquiries
Really don't want to belabour it, but the edge pinch, the milling and rim as MH said. And at least I am not talking about whether the coin has tone or not as that does not enter into it IMO (except that too much dipping is a bad thing). Also, the bust device simply has more wear than an EF. -
Possibly Overgraded halfcrown?
VickySilver replied to Conor44's topic in British Coin Related Discussions & Enquiries
No extra marks for a coin of this vintage, at least as far as that goes. VF with issues is as far as I would go. -
Sovereign mint lustre
VickySilver replied to Conor44's topic in British Coin Related Discussions & Enquiries
Apparently better lustre on the first specimen. Deeper engraved hair on the second with better obverse strike. I think the first has LESS actual wear than the first. Please see the brilliance of the field on the obverse and areas such as the lateral terminus of the brow ridge that appear to show less wear, although it may have been dipped on some occasion. IMO, engraving in the 1870s was not what it was in the 1840s and this is readily seen on the silver series as well. From the somewhat less-than-satisfactory images I would vote an EF on the first. -
Sovereign mint lustre
VickySilver replied to Conor44's topic in British Coin Related Discussions & Enquiries
Yes, this is a common emote. I am more technical in grading, wear vs. weak strike are different entities IMO. Of course, all of us would rather have a fully struck pristine example but such pieces command very stiff premiums. I think this can be taken of advantage of buying weak strike technically uncirculated specimens and getting them slabbed by American TPG companies and then sold at Heritage or Stacks or the like (this really holds for rare dates). -
Sovereign mint lustre
VickySilver replied to Conor44's topic in British Coin Related Discussions & Enquiries
This is quite often the case. Also, the hair esp. is not well struck up (versus actual wear) which is frequently the case. I'd not be surprised if this has been dipped as even that last bit of alloy will colour with oxidation over time. Still a nice piece, and depending on in-hand examination if without rub might still rate as unc. Meaning bag marks, but not wear from circulation. -
Possibly Overgraded halfcrown?
VickySilver replied to Conor44's topic in British Coin Related Discussions & Enquiries
Ouch! Yes, agreed on that as well. I mean a Glens half crown in the "good ole days" at GVF would still have lustre and NO problems, probably on order of a 50-55 at PCGS or NGC. -
Possibly Overgraded halfcrown?
VickySilver replied to Conor44's topic in British Coin Related Discussions & Enquiries
Then you go with the lower grade. But this is generally the case with these G4 half crowns. I think the coin genuine with an unfortunate edge "pinch" that further detracts from grade and value & do not believe on what we see that it is plated. VF money would be generous and I would be just as happy (or happier) to return that bit. -
Royal mint commemoratives
VickySilver replied to azda's topic in British Coin Related Discussions & Enquiries
Ouch! Yes, I agree with the gist of it - is can not be called Legal Tender if it is NOT! Wasn't it Cook Islands or some such that reversed legality on their collector coins 20 or more years ago? Are we in the same league as them? I guess so.... -
LCA September
VickySilver replied to PWA 1967's topic in British Coin Related Discussions & Enquiries
Looks like nada for me....Not IMO an inspiring listing. -
From the pictures which are not quite as resolved as we might like, it is hard to tell. The "plating" or layering appears to be quite flush to the surface of the coin & it really can not be told. Many years ago, I used to try to save silver coins by wrapping them in aluminium foil (which BTW did NOT work as it set up a battery) and really could not adhere to the surface. I have some post-decimal pennies bought as part of larger lots that have plating that also does not appear as your 5p does. Is it possible to email higher resolution quality pictures through the PM contact function?
-
Baldwins new list
VickySilver replied to PWA 1967's topic in British Coin Related Discussions & Enquiries
Certainly agreed on that! I used to always find a couple of bits I had to have at what were even then moderately highly priced. I am overall worried for Baldwin as with the departure of Steve, they seem to be following in some of the steps of Spink who in an associated sense was degraded much after losing him also and the departure of Mark Rasmussen - but perhaps for different reasons. Gibbons seem the corporate monster that inhaled the smaller Baldwin's & I no longer see the latter as a somewhat maverick independent (which it is not of course). -
However, this one seems to show up pretty frequently - I wonder if some were minted in 1829 or later and not included? Please do not leave out the following 19th C. coins - groat: 1847/6 in top condition (because this is the "1847 coin in the series), 1853 currency which is a BEAR to find sixpence: 1848 is likely the 2nd toughest after the 1854 in top condition, top-notch '93 Jub is a "name your price" coin probably shilling: 1848 in mint is very tough, 1850 is as well (not publicised: I think top 1848s are the second toughest in the Vick shilling series and def. harder than the 1854) ,1851 pretty scarce in top condition florin: the 1854 in EF and above is well-nigh impossible, 1863 in better preserved states is very rare half crown: the true currency 1839 is perhaps top of the heap, although the 54 florin in the running. the 1841 mentioned & the 1843,1848s are nothing to sneeze at, please don't forget the proof-only 1862 and 1864 in plain and milled edge iterations PS - left out all the patterns & all as I tried to keep out overdates. The 3d series is rife with scarcities but because of the continuing Maundy issues, would leave them out. If true currency: 1841, 1842, 1847, 1848, 1852, 1853, (cheating with the 1868 RRITANNIAR)
-
Exactly, I like OMS like the 1946 copper nickel 6d, shillings through halfcrown and the Nicholson nickel 1920 1/2d - those are relatively big money items.
-
Wow, that could be almost anything, and not necessarily intended (i.e. Die chip, etc.)
-
What would you do ?.
VickySilver replied to PWA 1967's topic in British Coin Related Discussions & Enquiries
Reminds me of what they like to say in auto racing circles: "how fast do you want to go" when they really mean "how much money do you want to spend"? Why not do all of the above? Some of us, well me, don't have to much to sort out in our series so find other bits and bobs to collect.... -
1934 Wreath Crown Fake or Genuine
VickySilver replied to 1934 Wreath Crown's topic in British Coin Related Discussions & Enquiries
I think his response is rather a good one - not to advertise for Coin Talk. I likewise would not be at peace with NGC's own evaluation of how they did unless specifics were given, and that he is correct in stating they (NGC) should specifically address points brought up by him there and a few here as well as running down the basics. I like him (the poster on CoinTalk) referencing the resubmission to NGC and asking them to assess their own assessment as there would naturally tend to be a bit of bias on their part as some have previously said here - a bit hollow like his own mother or sister praising his school recital. Smacks a bit of drinking the Koolaide as I have seen them say on the PCGS boards. Possibly insulting someone is not so brilliant a move. Understandable if you have parted with your monies for such a coin & nobody likes to be challenged. However, he did discuss what research should be done and there so far is no evidence that it was. That last bit you tossed in there was likely not called for. Further, I had suggested you consider an alternate authentication to NGC as well and doubt a commercially-driven enterprise of their likes would "find" against themselves either. -
I do agree with Rob as I got a jobber lot from London Coins that included about 30 major errors - including Off metal strikes, multiple clips, both of the 3ds that I mentioned above for about 100 quid.
-
Which according to my research should put the planchet at about 3.25 gm? Please check. The ordinary Brit 3d is about 6.6; however, the RM was fast and furious with planchet production on these and I have near piefort examples approaching 9 gm down to about 4 gm by recollection. Nice bit there, but don't get overexcited.
-
The Elusive 2002 Jamaica Proof Set Remains So
VickySilver replied to VickySilver's topic in Enquiries about Non British coins
I don't know why they are so circumspect. The Cayman sets of 1986-88 are about 60% of reported "authorised" mintages 310-320 sets (vs. 500). As I've said some of the Jamaica sets are MUCH scarcer than the authorised mintages would seem to imply. I would say to keep an eye out for all 1996-2002 and myself would tender a very decent offer on the '02. -
Let's See Your Toned English Milled Silver!
VickySilver replied to Paulus's topic in British Coin Related Discussions & Enquiries
The '52 2/- is rubbed a bit with retone, not so crazy about it. The '00 a bit finer of course with what look to be only a trace of rub in obv. field to right. BRG as usual with very beautiful bits... -
The 1918 KN was "boddybagged" by PCGS for colour! IMO this is not altered. The '18H does not come off as well in photos as in hand as it is very well struck indeed.
-
The Elusive 2002 Jamaica Proof Set Remains So
VickySilver replied to VickySilver's topic in Enquiries about Non British coins
And silly me tried contacting them twice through Facebook with no response. I still think it interesting and that even though people may not care, there may be some true rarities, not just Jamaica struck by the Royal Mint in the mid-80s to mid-90s period. There would be authorised mintages but then, at least at times, many fewer actually struck and released to collectors (key word "and" since they may have struck more than actually released. Unfortunately, so many bits are now struck that nobody may care about a coin with actual release numbers 100 or less. One example is a more blatant so-called "hockey puck" of Alderney, the 2005 kilo coin (forget the denomination) with authorised 200 mintage & only 45 actually struck. -
Many times not struck up, this does not mean the coin is actually worn - at least to that level. I would not quite give an American MS, but rather AU55-8. Still lovely though.
