Sword

Don't forget one needs to pay £99 to be a LCGS member in order to get CGS photos. And it is quite hard to claim it is graded as fine when the label gives a different grade.

Sorry, didn't meant to post it in the penny tread ...

Picked up another George V shilling.

Might be a lot of people collect crowns and so a frosted crown can sell for a decent price? Hence it might be worth breaking up a set if a the crown is nicely cameo?

Might be you should tell him not to handle proof coins like that. Could be a good idea if you think you might want to buy from him again in the future.

Nice coin. But it is a bit off putting to see a proof coin being handled like that.

But then they were cousins.

As you say, you are not a collector or expert and so it is probably wise not to insist so strongly on what it is worth. You don’t have to worry about anyone here trying to get you to reduce your price with the intention of picking it up on the cheap. Your coin would not appeal even to a budget collector. The coin you mentioned http://www.predecimal.com/florin-1862-good-rare-p-22431.html is in fact a very rare date. Have a look at the prices this date fetched at auction: http://www.londoncoins.co.uk/?page=Pastresults&searchterm=Florin+1862&category=9&searchtype=1 Your coin is of a very common date. Have a look at the auction prices this date fetched in the past: http://www.londoncoins.co.uk/?page=Pastresults&searchterm=Florin+1872&searchtype=1 Also have a look at this one which is a better date than yours and is of the same variety. It is not a matter of the cleaning removing the “patina”. If you understand coins, the harsh cleaning have left hairlines on the coin making it very uncollectable. Getting it to tone for 25 years won’t make much difference. The hairlines will not go away and will still be obvious to a collector. Finally, I am not certain if you know what 3 of 3 actually means. This mean that yours is the worse example of the three that CGS has graded. The second example 2 of 2 that London Coins was trying to sell was probably CGS grade 75 or 78 (UNC) and cannot be compared to yours. And the £600 was only the asking price and might not be the price achieved.

The crown and double florin looks OK. The black patch on the observe of half crown does look bad. The florin black spots are not quite as bad. If it were me, I would just sell off those two and buy better replacements. Dipping is an option but might or might not work and you will end up with two white coins at best. I suppose acetone is quite harmless but might not work on those spots. If the spots weren't there initially, then I would suggest that the box you used might be somewhat suspect and as those spots are not natural toning. If it is one of those modern "1887 specimen boxes", then I would take the coins out and store them in quadrums / 2x2 / cabinet etc. The felt used in the box might be some inferior material or has some contaminants.

Great to hear that your Mum's doing well

Don't encourage fraud guys. Some dumb kid might take this seriously and get himself arrested as a result ...

"Im not a coin collector ... i dont know anything about coins ..." translates to FAKE FAKE FAKE!

I think it's "safe" if it is from a poster you are familiar with. I won't even open an e-mail if the title looks dodgy let, alone clicking on any spurious links within.

What a delightful little coin. A find like that makes all those wet and cold days of detecting worthwhile.

As has been said several times before, that table (produced by London Coins) is considered by many to be biased in favour of the CGS scale. E.g. I don't think CGS 80 is generally choice UNC or is really equivalent to PCGS / NCG MS64.

It's interesting that Latin inscriptions were used for some commonwealth countries like Canada or Australia but English inscriptions were always used for certain colonies like Hong Kong and India.

Not quite English though.

I agree that no sensible collector can possibly be fooled. It's more likely to trap a non-coinie wanting to buy a present for someone.

Annual membership is £99. Members also receive two vouchers each for £50 one is redeemable of any one off purchase above £50 in the London Coins Auction. The other is redeemable off any purchase from their website where the ticket price is £250 or more. Judging by the inflated prices they charge, the second voucher is worth less than a piece of tissue unfortunately.

I am rather inclined to think LCGS might not body bag it especially if it is own of their own coins. I am not taking a cheap shot at LCGS but I think one can justify giving a numeric grade in this case. The placement of the mark is very important in my view. A smaller mark on a focal area like the cheek is a lot more distracting than this one which is in the field near the edge.

He has now added "it's a copy" in the description. Nevertheless, it is still not good enough in my view as he is calling it a "Silver" Coin Elizabeth 1st Sixpence 1562 AD in the title and left the price unchanged.

Even the seller is calling the coins "possible" mint errors despite authentication by LCGS. Look at his other "possible" mint errors. https://www.ebay.co.uk/sch/gleskee0/m.html?item=152911895884&ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT&rt=nc&_trksid=p2047675.l2562 Not certain if LCGS still guarantee to repay full market values for the fakes they slab. If they do and the coins are proven fakes, the compensation could be just ... £1 each.

PCGS even let Heritage have a page on their website. That's pretty close relationship. https://www.pcgs.com/heritage

Let's keep the 666 going a bit longer A loyal CGS supporter does appear like a devil's advocate at times

It makes sense for them to be close. E.g. https://www.ngccoin.com/news/article/6193/heritage-london-ccg/ https://www.ngccoin.com/news/article/6089/heritage-auctions-august-2017/ etc etc