Sword

For me, they grade as "reject" and "reject". (I now like to employ Rob's method of grading). But to play your game, I would say the example on the left would grade (might be significantly) higher than the one on the right. The lack of detail on the left hand side coin is due in large part to weak striking rather than wear.

"been in a drawer since 1951 when I went to the Festival of Britain on a school trip". It's not likely they would have given a VIP proof to a school kid unless he happens to be Prince Charles. Perhaps VIP stands for vividly imaginative person.

Duplicate post

What grade do you think this one was given? It isn't even VF in my view. LCGS graded it as 55 or GVF. No, I can't see myself slabbing another coin with CGS. It's unlikely that I would now want to buy one either.

This one is in the current LCA auction catalogue. Supposedly graded at CGS65 and GEF. Lacks eye appeal for me and the obverse has many hairlines. Estimate of £500-£600 is completely OTT in my view.

I didn't know that coins were ever acid bathed to increase the surface percentage of silver but this does make sense chemistry wise. Were some 0.5 silver coins actually coated with a layer of pure silver to improve appearance?

The reverse lions in the top shield are exceptionally well struck!

"my cooking s were not yet graded"? What grade did they give you? Tasty or not tasty? Seriously, CGS is no more and so there is no point complaining about them. And there is hardly any point complaining about LCGS either as one shouldn't have pay the £99 annual membership unless one was fairly happy with the old CGS. (I personally will never pay the membership fee myself).

I brought a 1984-1987 piedfort £1 set a few years back for ca £60. It was the only occasion I brought anything decimal. I guess I brought them for sentimental reasons as I remember getting them for pocket money when I was a lad. The presentation case is also very nice too. It is a shame that the Royal Mint can't be bothered to make nice cases for similar sets later on.

No. NGC slabs are thicker, taller and narrower than CGS.

CGS storage box:

CGS used to send complimentary boxes to their customers. They also sold them on demand. It depends on how many slabs you have. I have one of these wooden boxes which houses 24 slabs in 3 tiers. (I am storing CGS and NGC slabs in it at the moment and I am almost certain that PGCS slabs will also fit). I think it is a lot classier than those horrid plastic boxes if you don't mind it taking up more space. https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B005VQS6M2/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o08_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1

It's only spam.

Probably doesn't matter if the coins are low grades and are of scrap value. But a cloth bag can be used instead. I would personally use coin holders if the coins are of collectable quality.

Iconic coin and very appealing design. I am hoping to get an 8 reales in high grade at some point.

It is nearly always best not to clean coins (esp if you have just started the hobby). If you have brought a good album from a reputable brand, then the coins shouldn't react with the plastic. (Cleaning is not going to stop any potential reaction anyway.) In theory, a gentle wipe with a lens cloth is fine if the cloth is very clean. However, if there is any grit on the cloth, then your coins will end up with hairlines (i.e. ruined). So just put them in the album and enjoy!

I recognise your Avatar newheart, it's King Arthur's Round Table inside the Great Hall in Winchester. I visited the town 6 years ago and took a photo of it.

Might translate to "It's not a fake. I'm a Portuguese [staying] with an English family. Please contact me If you want provenance of the product [coin]. Thank you. However, I am not at home at the moment." Anyone selling a fake which once belonged to his "grandfather" probably know what he is doing.

I agree with Ian. What sort of quality do you expect for £1.66 and free delivery? No doubt the plastic will split soon. The plastic might react with your coins too. The pockets are also so small and a coin bigger than a £2 won't fit. Would suggest buying a proper album of the trusted brand Lighthouse. It is worth spending a bit more than a tenner.

September LCA catalogue now out for those interested.

I am rather suspicious with it as the seller couldn't give a decent description. It's a Scotland Charles I 30 shillings, Falconer's issue. Instead it's described as a "17 century Great Britain half crown". Besides he has got three feedbacks from people complaining about fakes / possible fakes. I think the price of £390 is high even if the coin is genuine. This Falconer's issue was milled rather than hammered and so do generally show more details.

Looks like LCGS no longer believes in slabbing hammered coins. They are selling all their milled coins slabbed on their website but all the hammered are now sold raw. http://www.londoncoins.co.uk/?page=retail_coins&cat=7

I rather like this table as TPG (or FPG in the case of LCGS) tend to pretend their numbers convert to excessively high raw grades. As a minor point, I think MS67-70 merit a stronger adjective than "choice". MS64 or CGS82 for UNC sounds about right. CGS 80 can have a bit too much cabinet friction (aka wear) to be called UNC in strict grading in my view. (I would suggest CGS 80-78/75 as About UNC rather than just 80) MS60 = EF sounds about right too.

I cringed when I saw it for the first time. Then I decided it isn't so bad. The slightly bowed head, the rather shy demeanour, and big simile does remind one of Diana. I still don't like looking at it though.

Exactly and the art deco rocking horse crown is iconic. It is also very cheap compared to the earlier crowns. You can get a currency, specimen or a RE proof depending on your budget. Personally, I think a silver denomination set is just less exciting without the biggest coin.