Sword

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

Woman joins handbag in X-ray machine ... http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-43057574

With marks at 3 and 9 o'clock, I would say ex brooch mount.

"Strike thru" or "strike through" occurs when an object comes between the die and blank. An outline of the object is then left on the coin surface after striking.

I think that is a Marquess' coronet (four strawberry leaves and four silver balls). A button is likely to be plain on one side. I guess it is some sort of token.

. But your explanation won't work for this 1953 QEII he is also now selling. https://simonwilliscoins.com/item/S4136/1953%20Cupro%20Nickel%20Crown%20FDC%20PF67%20CAM He is also describing it as a VIP even though PCGS has only designated it as an ordinary proof crown and Heritage has not mentioned VIP either. https://coins.ha.com/itm/great-britain/elizabeth-ii-proof-crown-1953-pr67-cameo-pcgs-/a/3063-35051.s?ic3=ViewItem-Auction-Archive-ThisAuction-120115 Heritage has indeed sold a VIP 1953 previously. https://coins.ha.com/itm/great-britain/great-britain-elizabeth-ii-vip-proof-crown-1953-pr65-cameo-pcgs-/a/3038-35191.s Note that "Frosted VIP" is written on the label of the slab unlike the one he is selling. I must leave this tread and move on. Having said that I really have learnt a thing or two here.

I think the opposite is true and many of us are just tired of disputing the "judgement" of TPGs. Discussions about CGS is now so boring as they don't deserve this level of interest in my view. It is a company that has gone out of business and has never been independent in the first place. LCGS is simply a department of London Coins and so it is a First Party Grader rather than than Third. Its interest is just to make a profit for London Coins. In the past, people can get hot under the collar with discussions regarding TPGs and so it's wise not to get involve too often.

Not as VIP as far as I can see. The description was: "George VI Proof Crown 1937 PR67 Cameo NGC, Royal mint, KM857. Tied with one other proof for finest known to date at NGC this lightly frosted crown is an exceptionally well defined with flawless fields. We anticipate spirited bidding for the lot. From the Cape Coral Collection of British Crowns" https://coins.ha.com/itm/great-britain/world-coins/great-britain-george-vi-proof-crown-1937-pr67-cameo-ngc-/a/3063-35044.s?ic4=GalleryView-ShortDescription-071515 He really needs to stop and reflect on what he is doing.

You have got to laugh. He is now selling another example as a VIP proof for £1625. No mention of VIP by NGC as far as I can tell. Hope he knows what he is doing this time. https://simonwilliscoins.com/item/S4079%20A/1937%20Silver%20Crown%20FDC%20PF67%20CAM

He has finally done the right thing and stopped describing the coin as a VIP proof on his website. I wonder if he has been reading the comments posted here.

I think the normal procedure is to artificially tone the coin afterwards. Obviously it is only worthwhile if the coin was valuable originally. I agree that on this occasion, it is best to leave the chain alone.

The metal alloy used for brazing has a melting point range of 618oC to 899oC. The melting point of pure silver is 962oC. Melting point of sterling would be lower and could be around 893oC . Hence I guess it can be done with care if one is lucky. Might be the restorers will only go up to a certain temperature like 750 or 800 oC and give up if the metal alloy does not start to melt? If the melting point of the metal alloy is very close to the melting point of sterling, then the coin surface underneath has probably already been damaged in the brazing process anyway. We have all seen photos of coins which have stuff successfully removed. But surely there must be a fair number of cases where restoration is impossible.

Since the melting point of silver is considerably higher than solder, I guess the obvious thing to do is to use high temperature to melt the solder and then remove the molten solder. Had a very quick look on the web and found two methods. One involve soaking up the molten solder using a desoldering wick. A desoldering wick is weaved from copper fibre and can soak up the molten solder by capillary action. The other way is to use a solder sucking device.

You are kidding about this specimen being in excellent preservation right? If I have to buy a satin Churchill, I won't buy one with so many marks even if it is cheap.

Warwick and Warwick has this example for sale in their next auction. Described as "satin finish VIP Specimen, about uncirculated, some scratches to field on obverse." with an estimate of £1800. Really a VIP satin? It sure looks very ugly!

"it had a very faint but rather dull patina, that did the coin,no justice at all,so I reluctantly took the decision to,give it a light polish,it turned out to be the right decision,as it has great eye appeal,and that ,will be enhanced even more in a few years time" I hate to think what he would call heavy polishing. https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/1849-Godless-Florin-superb-coin-great-eye-appeal/263463383277?hash=item3d57a430ed:g:qZ4AAOSwl2haGBGG

I am stunned... I don't think I am alone in saying that I certainly don't want to buy anything from anyone with this type of philosophy. Sure. I too will now leave this tread.

Exactly the point. If there is doubt about the coin's VIP status, he should have described it using caveats such as "possibly" or "could be" VIP. It was simply wrong not to do so. I doubt he made any apology as he is still listing the thing as a VIP proof.

A dealer is certainly at liberty to disagree with a TPG attribution. However, why has he reduced the price to only one sixth of the original amount (£475 from £2850) if he still believes the coin to be a VIP proof? No one would slash his price like that unless there is a very good reason. S4079 refers to both the normal proof and VIP proof. The PCGS population report was probably referring to the ordinary proof crowns. He has now removed the reference to ESC4022 which specifically refers to the VIP proof. He is now not mentioning only 6 pieces struck. The previous title was " George VI Silver Crown 1937 Coronation Frosted VIP Proof Crown S4079 FDC/PR65Cam". Now it is just "1937 Crown FDC / PR65 CAM". However, he is still using the phrase "Frosted VIP Proof Crown" in the description.

I have never had any dealings with the seller in question. However, I do think his behaviour on this occasion to be somewhat below the standard expected from a reputable dealer. He listed the coin on Ebay as a VIP proof crown with a price tag of well over £2K. He claimed it is of R5 rarity with only 6 minted and the coin was struck in “pure silver”. He did not reply to a negative feedback calling the coin a scam. Everyone have the right of silence but not responding to this sort of accusation might be interpreted as an admission of guilt. I was originally quite sympathetic as it could have been just an honest mistake and the manners of the buyer was unhelpful to put things mildly. He is now trying to sell the coin on his own website with a much reduced price of £450. He now states that PCGS has graded 23 examples above his PR65. However, he is still describing the coin as a VIP proof! He knows jolly well that this is not possible if it is of R5 rarity. https://simonwilliscoins.com/item/S4079/1937%20Silver%20Crown%20FDC%20/%20PR65%20CAM