VickySilver

I'll vote gVF for the obverse. Well centered, possibly not fully struck up to high points with just a bit of wear. Fields and rim look nice; has an "honest" feel to it and not like the hoards of specimens that seem to show up at auction over the years - many of these IMO seem to be struck and either sequestered at time, or possibly more likely restruck. I have always wondered if it was something of a cottage industry post facto O.C.'s passing....

Well, they certainly appear to have a different collecting "culture" and I know of the one crown collection held by family members as the original collector died. They hold to a price (VERY high) and will not budge, seeming not to care if the coin goes unsold. I often wonder what impact this has on the market - if, say, a very rare crown comes up that may be one of two or three known but is on offer for 10x catalogue, then what should the catalogue price be after such? Higher, same, or? Anyway, they have long been attracted to dominant women, so issues of Victoria popular. On a humorous note, some 10-12 years ago, there was a pole amongst Japanese men as to the sexiest woman in the world. The answer? Oh, get this.......... Janet Reno!!!! Yikes..

However, as a marketing ploy they (the PM) played many games. One year of the Viking on Horseback sovs, they gave a baby basinet (sp?) privy and then I believe used a ship or such...They also used to sell different one pound coins by varying the mint "officinae" - i.e. AA, AB, BB, AC, etc. IMO shameful tactics that ultimately probably led to their own downfall.

THere was an example of the 1846 pattern in the HEG Paget sale of 1950 that really did not look like the coin sold when I compared pictures. Also, in some of the angles it looked as though there was a faint design in the dress below the bodice on some of the sellers pictures (look at the second row of pictures). Also, the "wear" spots were a bit curious when you look at the different pictures - all a bit blurry at least on my computer. This coin needs to be seen in hand definately. I was scared to bid but put in a lesser one anyway which was blown out of the water.

Yes, quite right there Rob. I don't see a lot other than a narrower rim to the one and the specimen on Right having more sharply struck hair details. I must confess that other than checking the edge (incuse vs. raised or jumbled/missing) I might have passed that one by...

Rob's first figure a bit low as I would pop for that at 1k all day long even though I already have a specimen.... I do not think the 1300-1400 figure unreasonable for top range. I also have seen a number of 1936 florins struck well, will try to get a picture by the weekend of an actual 1936 proof 2/-

Not to mention the "crew" being occasionally a sensitive lot, not letting on as to what they might be up to! LOL! I have been rather glad to not have consistent competition on proofs and patterns in the 20 th C. silver series, but even these have been drawing some unwanted competition (read prices)... I think, as has been pointed out, that when the simple currency issues are not that interesting that there is a bit of a lean toward scarcer varietals. I like to think I DO NOT collect these, but that would be untrue as I got up in edge varietals on the crowns....Darn.. So are there are a couple of hundred out there collecting such, it would not surprise me...

Wow! I like it and don't care if its pot metal. PM me if you want to sell it.

Uggh, I am trying to develop the interest to look at my own two or three proof '53 2/6s and see if they are the rarer bit, but just can not manage the enthusiasm required to do so. And I collect milled 1838-1965! OK, I haven't looked at my '53 farthings either... But I am a real collector, so I profess! Point being, I guess these "hypervarietals" are for some, but not all of us. On the other hand if I was thinking about selling, then there would be incentive to check...

I had made a comment on this before: strangely in this "Kairos Collection"- which consisted of essentially all high grade (TPG) pieces - the scarcer bits have many times been relatively underpriced IMO. In the earlier sale, I managed to get an MS66 Small Head 1889 Shilling for under 1000 pounds that by far the nicest I have seen. Also a superb 1862 shilling was priced UNDER such as 1864, etc. So, whilst in the name of suppressing competition I ought not to report this, I would caution the browser to know their coins and that bargains are still present.

Very interesting strike as the mid portions of obv and rev not nicely struck, the crown details very well struck as is the lettering. Edge fairly sharp. There is a hit on the harp body that almost looks to be a mini-countermark. I would say the coin looks a bit better in hand, tried to take more pictures but they were dismal. The DNW 1863 got me to thinking about this one. That is a nicer bit strikewise but suffers from some obv. soft strike maladies... I had to look twice at that specimen as my ex-wife made off with my own specimen that was ex-Ramussen and hope that one day it will show again - I specifically had the judge to order it returned to me in my divorce "settlement" along with the DeSaulles pattern obverses from his own collection that I had framed up rather nicely...(sob, sob..)

OK, a bit OT but here is one for the graders in the crowd - sorry taken through perspex: And what would a CGS grade be? I have my opinion but up for grabs OK, horrible pictures. Actually the coin has residual lustre but is softly struck as officianados of this series may appreciate. Does the date catch a break? Not quite as nice as Platt's....

Well, this is NOT a popular topic! Will note that a 1996 Jamaica proof set just sold on US Ebay recently. Damn! Now I need that one as well. I wonder which other years might be out there? Still no confirmation of the 2002 set. Might a 1997 be out there as well?

Hi all, has anybody confirmation that Jamaica proof sets of 2002 exist? They are listed in Krause, but Bank of Jamaica and Royal Mint where they should have been struck do not offer information. I would be interested in information or even purchase.

Yes, they do exist. I have two 1967s, a 1966, and a 1965. Love them. Is yours for sale? Mine were struck on florin blanks except for two I believe... As you likely know, the mint was up to much "sport" in the 1960s with seemingly little quality control in effect on any of the denominations, what with off-metal strikes, multiple errors, etc. Some of this madness seems to be recurring if you read these boards as well. I also have an 1982 penny struck over a clearly dated 1953 sixpence, etc., etc. There were eve a couple of pennies and halfpennies struck in gold!

Uhhhhh, guilty.....Well, I did go to an English school in Nicosia and my mother is a retired English Literature Professor. Don't hit me too hard, not the enemy!

9k for an 1839 halfcrown? Surely you meant the crown? The currency 2/6 maybe?? I think the prices are set low supposedly to attract more bidder interest. I am not sure that is the case. I recently bought an item at DNW for 700 pounds hammer and the total price sent to the States was 899! OUCH! But I calculated they would perpetuate such and just make sure I really do want the lot at the eventual total price I might have to pay - much as young Rob has suggested on these boards before. Thankfully I am not trying to resell because I can not imagine trying to bet on making a profit after such "business".

Well, no, saving mine. Still like to see them hold their value...

Uh, well, that is their M.O. I have had to pay 500% of estimate for pieces before! I was hoping nobody spotted that 1863 florin - after my ex- wife left I discovered that the one I had bought from Mark Rasmussen about 7-8 years ago was GONE! Yikes, and that one was 2750. BTW, this is not that specimen but had to look (well pretty sure). Those Eddy 7 2/6s may be "bell weather" pieces.... No competition from me, so no worry; won't say why LOL!!

Sorry to bring up a dead horse, but I was thinking this morning that I do have a bit of a problem that CGS apparently grades ALL coins as though they were on the same scale (i.e. an 1838 shilling graded on same standards as a 1967), when in fact minting methods have changed drastically in the interim and they might require different approaches. What does the grade represent on a coin, numeric or not? Should a coin that is perfectly as it leaves the mint with NO post mint damage, handling, or marks be considered perfectly mint state - MS70 or 100? Technically, I think they must be. Aesthetically, the coin may be less than desirable. So a hammered coin may be quite ugly and mint state at the same time I would think. In fact a CGS78 coin, as I understand it, may be quite a gem uncirculated coin technically but then be a bit less than appealing for other reasons - this seems to lack a bit of sense IMO.

Rob, I think PCGS and NGC have largely now cured this malady if you check the mountings in the holders now...

BTW, it seem that if you look about that a PCGS 58 is valued by many more highly than a 60 as the former is usually a superior piece lightly circulated while the latter is heavily bag marked but not circulated and may not be as attractive.

Did anyone question the "mattieness" of the 1950 matte florin? It just did not look like the '51 or '53 mattes I've seen...I did not even bother to bid. 900 for the 1880 florin? Why? Must be a micro-varietal, is all I can figure. I love these florins but can not see that price at all.

I have one that has but a single letter "overstruck" on the edge though, so that is a bit odd. Also, the lettering order of the overstrike is not in order. So interesting problem here...

Yes, did however make a few steals the other way around as well. LOL.. Might come looking for me if I was to list them. I agree though, seldom do we find much in the way of bargains, even collectively, on ebay. As far as grading, I am going to try (heaven forbid!) to post another picture, this of a Gothic florin this week - let's play again the Guess the Grade again if I be successful with photography. Can you Senor Peck show us a picture of the '03 - I think you did before, but my memory seems to fade a bit here and there.