Sword

I agree with you Azda, if CGS is really an "independent TPG service", then submissions from London Coins shouldn't always be given immediate priority over other customers. Something that I have never understood is why wear is treated more harshly than bag marks when grading. For example, a coin with a trace of wear is no longer described as "mint state" or unc if one is strict. The damage to the coin's surface might only be as little 1 percent. (i.e. only 1% of the coin's surface has suffered slight flattening and loss of lustre). However, a coin with a number of bag marks would have suffered a higher percentage of surface damage but such coins are graded as MS or even unc. For some reason, the "quote" button is no longer working for me. Does anyone know how I can fix it? Thanks

According to the LC website " London coins LTD is part of the London Coins (Holdings) Group LTD which owns London Coins LTD and has 51% ownership of CGS". So London Coins has control of CGS in any case. I am still waiting for a coin which was submitted in early September. Looks like they won't even make the 90 days turnaround and so I am not very pleased with them at the moment.

If he is grading a coin "slightly" better than VF as VF-EF, then he ought to, by the same logic, grade a coin slightly less than VF as F-VF. He is certainly not doing that and uses terms such as aVF and aEF on his webpage.

The photo in the hard copy of the catalogue is not great but I had a look at the auction photo on their website last night. (The website photo has now been removed as the auction is over). It must surely be the same coin. One can still see from the catalogue photo the spot under the V, the distinctive scratch on the head, the scratch in front of the mouth, on the neck, and on the C.

I wonder if anyone noticed that this crown was on sale in the recent London Coins Auction (lot 2740)? It was on Ebay until 31st July and the seller was Bucks. Do auction houses have special arrangements with regard to commission with some dealers? Otherwise one would surely make a big loss buying from and then reselling with the same auction within such a short period of time. Also the grading was somewhat cheeky. It was graded as nEF when they thought it was a fake last year. Bucks then graded it as aEF. It was then graded as EF in this auction.

Thanks Benny. Mine only have the missing serif but the C of DECUS is not double struck. (For some reason, the "quote" button is no longer working for me. I have just replaced my computer and need to adjust a setting somewhere I guess)

Very nice crowns Benny and Paulus. I think the recut letters make them a lot of interesting. I particularly like the large S on Benny's and the Y (large Y over small Y I assume) on Paulus. I have an 1818 (with right serif of 1 missing) but no recut letters unfortunately. Do these recut letters make much difference to value? As to the discussion of cloths, I think it is a more likely that foreign particles on the cloth or the coin itself that are guilty of causing hairlines than the cloth itself.

When I first started coin collecting, I brought a crown described by W&W as "1902, about UNC" at what I thought was a good price. When I got more experience later on, I realised that it is (or was) actually a matt proof that has been cleaned (and not just be dipping either). I have left it on the window sill (loosely covered by the lid of a coin capsule and on the top of a piece of dark cloth) for a few years now in an attempt to retone it. It is developing an OK grey tone but I will have to wait until my retirement before it is toned all over.

I particuarly like the story about the godless florin (not that I believe many people actually blamed the omission of DG for the cholera outbreak). Hmm, the coins issued in the colonies don't have DG on them either. Could this be the reason for the end of the British Empire?

One went for 5k and one went for 6k and so Accumulator guessed correctly. (But it is not a coin I would ever want to collect). It is interesting that they have changed the original auction description from "Fifty Pence 2012 Olympics velodrome cyclists Gold Piedfort 31 grams S 4961 one of only 2 minted the other in the Royal Mint Museum so this the only example available to commerce, proof or prooflke Unc with some contact marks. Seldom does an opportunity arise to aquire a coin of such low mintage, and thus must have a fantastic investment potential." to "Fifty Pence 2012 Olympics velodrome cyclists Gold Piedfort 31 grams S 4961 one of only 2 minted the other in the Royal Mint Museum so this the only example available to commerce, proof or prooflike Unc with some contact marks. Seldom does an opportunity arise to acquire a coin of such low mintage, so perhaps a fantastic investment potential."

Just an Idle thought. When the 2012 50pence coins were made, 2 examples of each design (29 designs in total) were produced in gold. One was given to the artist and the other to the Royal Mint museum. In the not so long future, they will surely come onto the market. How much do you think each coin will sell for? For me, the insane number of commenorative coins produced by the Royal Mint in the last 2 decades has put me right off in collecting anything recent. I don't find the idea of owning a gold 2012 50pence exciting even if it is the only example available to the public. Still, I am sure some collectors will love the idea of owning a practically unique coin!

Nice coin.

I came across a good story about them: "Until about a month ago when a guy came in with a NNC MS68 1932 D Washington quarter... He stated he got it off Ebay for 3500 dollars, and wanted to get my opinion and try to make some fast cash. Now I have to say this, the coin was AMAZING, which is why it caught my eye. I mean full cartwheel, solid unmarked fields, and a luster that would make you cry for this coin... IT GLEAMED. So I examined it under my scope, and sure enough, the d was real, the field were immaculate, and the coin was breathtaking. BUT......... Being in the buisness, I know one thing.. NEVER BUY CRAP you cant fully see from these companies. So I made a deal with the guy, he has been a customer for about 3 years, that I would send it in to PCGS for regrade and reholder at my expense, and pay the agreed price upon return of the coins authenication. He agreed and off the coin went. Low and behold, my intuitions were right, The coin was a fake.. The coin had a 1932 face, and another D minted reverse.. Some mackinist had literally sawed the coin in half, and bound to different sided together. and of course in the NNC holder, you couldnt see the seem. I contacted the owner, and he spoke to the PCGS rep, and the coin was sent back. Upon recieving it, I got to see the seem, and man was if OBVIOUS.... Someone had done a good job to be honest, but it was very evident the edge of the quarter was tampered with."

I had a look at the website and was rather amused to read their t & c Condition 8 "EXCLUSION AND LIMITATION OF WARRANTIES, EXCEPT AS OTHERWISE EXPRESSLY SET FORTH HEREIN, NNC DISCLAIMS (a) ALL WARRANTIES, STATUTORY OR OTHERWISE, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, ( ALL OTHER REPRESENTATIONS MADE BY THE UNDERSIGNED AND © ALL OTHER OBLIGATIONS OR LIABILITIES WITH RESPECT TO ITS GRADING SERVICE. IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABLITY AND FITNESS ARE EXPRESSLY EXCLUDED AND DISCLAIMED. THERE ARE NO WARRANTIES WHICH EXTEND BEYOND THE FACE HEREOF." I have never heard of anyone trying to disclaim a "statutory" warranty. Part of condition 9: "PLEASE NOTE: We are no longer accepting submissions from Singapore due to the large number of counterfeit coins coming from there." Well, is not really an issue if they can tell a counterfeit coin from the real thing. Their prices: 1 – 10 coins: $10.00 ea 11 – 49 coins: $9.00 ea 50 – 100 coins: $8.00 ea I guess you get what you pay for!

It's a nice coin. The only drawbacks I can see are a slight flattening starting on the hair and top of the ear. Thanks Peck. The flattening on the top of ear is rather more obvious to me than that on the hair.

I brought one some months ago and paid unc money for it. I agree that the 1911 strike is relative poor compared to the 1902.

At the moment that is not really an option, I wont be getting any more coins for a while. Hence the question. I'm leaning towards the 2nd one for now I would choose the second one over the first without a doubt. That spot is really off putting.

There will be one for sale in the next London Coins Auction. Description "Fifty Pence 2012 Olympics velodrome cyclists Gold Piedfort 31 grams S 4961 one of only 2 minted the other in the Royal Mint Museum so this the only example available to commerce, proof or prooflke Unc with some contact marks. Seldom does an opportunity arise to aquire a coin of such low mintage, and thus must have a fantastic investment potential." Estimate £1.5k to £3k.

I have had coins rotate in the holder from shipping alone. NGC images every coin it holders before it is shipped (a simple scan). So, it was easy to tell that it rotated after they put it in the mail, and it was fine before that. But, my earlier statement still holds -- I'm not sure what it really matters if the coin rotates a little in the holder. It's still the same coin, and it's protected in the plastic (which is the point of the slab). I will agree with you that a much bigger issue is when foreign materials are encased in the slab with the coin. Even scratched holders, while annoying, are just doing their job -- protecting the coin...and it's usually not the TPGs that scratch holders, it's the irresponsible dealers and collectors. The CGS holder uses a plastic washer which grips the coin tight. Hence I don't think a coin can rotate in that type of holder. The last coin I got back diretly from CGS was also in a scatched holder with a small crack. My point is that sloppiness in the slabbing process doesn't inspire confidence in grading or on the handling of coins by a TPG. How can one be certain that a prized coin sent for slabbing will not result in a fingerprint or a carbon spot appearing a year or two in the future?

The UIN number shows that the coin was only encapsulated recently and it won't even have the time to rotate. I think the CGS slabbing process can be sloppy and they need to be more careful with regard to slabbing in dust, foreign objects, scratching holders ...

Thanks for pointing that out Shagreen. My mistake. I now remember the golden jubliee medals of the queen shows her wearing two such badges on ribbons. One must be the order of the Crown of India and the other is the Royal Family Order. The single badge she is wearing on the jubliee coin shows the letters VRI and is therefore the India Order.

It's strange, but for some reason coin and banknote collectors seem to be entirely different species. Not sure why, but I've never considered collecting notes. Yet Coin News features them. I don't think it's right to say none of us is ever tempted to have a few notes? I've got the 'lion and key / Britannia' fiver (very handsome), plus a ten bob, a few one pounds, and a few blue fivers including a replacement note - and I'd sooner have those than medieval hammered!! I actually do have a couple of old ten bob and pound notes too, though I've never really considered them part of any collection. They certainly bring back memories of the 'good old days'! I don't collect notes but brought an error £20 a few years back out of curiosity. The front design (queen) is also printed over the reverse. I have it framed up and it is a nice talking point with visitors. The said £50 has got a very nice design. Is it the first time that 2 people are commenorated on the same note? £50 note is a strange denomination and I don't believe I have spent one in the last 10 years. The denomination is a bit too big for everyday transactions and we all use plastics for big purchases. However, with the impact of inflation, it might be in common use before long!

A thought has just come to me. The 1936 coinage Offenses act prohibited the defacement of "current" coins. I have read somewhere that the defacement of any coin has been legal since 1981 when a new act came into force (Forgery and Counterfeiting Act). Hence you see notices next to machines which allow you to press pennies into souvenirs saying that the practice is legal. The guidelines issued by the HM Treasury merely says that it is not legal to "melt" or "break up" coins that were legal tender after 1969. How about if you were to hammer them into "tokens" first? Then they would be coins no longer, and hence would they then be legal to melt?

Had a quick look on the web. The medal on the silk bow is the badge of the Royal Family Order and is only worn by female members of the royal family. She is wearing the sovereign badge of the order.

London Coins used to offer the option of slabbing coins assigned to their auctions for £10 each. Not certain if they still give this special rate to sellers.