ozjohn

Again a comment on a familiar topic. Attached are two PCGS photographs from their PGCS's verification web site, both 1933 half crowns. Coin # 37007246 is a coin I own, while coin# 45189418 is a coin I saw on Ebay that has been graded by PCGS. On looking at both coin's photographs on the PCGS verification site IMO coin # 3700246 is a better coin although being graded by PCGS as MS 62 as against MS64 for coin #45189418. I understand that the coins were submitted at different times but the whole idea of professional coin grading is to provide a consistent result that collectors and investors can rely upon. Have PCGS grading standards fakken? To digress some coins submitted to NGC and PCGS are declared as cleaned and described as AU features etc. with out citing any examples it can be hard to se why they have made this opinion while other coins that seem to have obvious cleaning marks on them indicating some form of cleaning seem to receive a grading while coins submitted PCGS that have been dipped are deemed by PCGS as not cleaned Your comments are invited

Had another look at both coins on PCGS verification. For the first coin on the obverse there is damage to the King's forehead and a scratch on the King's neck extending into the adjacent field. Also the strike is weaker and the hint of wear on the Kings beard on the side of the face Scuffing perhaps some wear extends up the King's neck and on the eyebrow. As for the reverse it is a good strike with luster. However there is a disfiguring mark in the field above the top RHS of the shield. The second coin, the one I have. The obverse is a good strike with the King's ear fully struck. On the king's neck there is a little scuffing near the point of the truncation and several small scratches in the field behind the King's neck. For the reverse again a good strike and toned. Regarding the luster the coin in hand has good luster

I'll take another look.

Toning? Not sure if your comments account for a MS 64 for the top coin as against a MS 62 for the bottom coin. The one thing required of a grading service is consistency.

If you are looking for a spreadsheet it's hard to go past OpenOffice. It's virtually the same as Excel and costs nothing also runs on Win10/11.

The attached photo shows a coin graded NGC MS 64. I have no issue with the grading other than the coin has been damaged with digs around the King's effigy from the forehead to the tip of the King's nose. I get the feeling that these digs occurred during the minting process but it is hard to be sure. The question is should a coin be judged as MS if the damage happened at the mint or should be noted on the grading as PCGS does with cleaned coins or should the coin be downgraded if judged as post mint damage? In any case it would be a better coin without any damage. Any thoughts.

Another coin I noticed with the pattern struck in line. This time an 1899 florin CGS 60. As remarked before this damage has been noticed before on other coins from Victoria to George VI.

Only ever brought the silver proof versions and not many of those either.

Xmas day forecast for Brisbane, 30 deg. C and sunny.

Merry Christmas to one and all from Australia. May your collections grow in 2025.

Just reached Alotau, PNG on a cruise from Brisbane. Very hot and humid. Back in Brisbane 5/12.

Saw the coins on Google headlines. An impressive hoard.

Another coin with similar damage. They seem to come in single marks and twos or threes in a line and are far too regular for bag damage. I've seen these marks on both George V and VI coins and as far as I can remember on the obverse. This example was dated 1924.

Another coin with similar damage. on the king's forehead. From what I have noticed the marks come in 3s approximately in line.

I think this one is a bit more than bag damage more like a metal flaw or intentional damage on the reverse by the A in half-crown. Probably down graded due to this but still attracted a fairly high grade from NGC along with PGCS who seem fairly tolerant to damage. To be honest I probably wouldn't brought the coin If I had noticed it earlier.

Exactly. However I've seen marks similar the ones described on several coins over the years and I think they are a bit more than bag marks. caused by coins knocking together. I was looking about cleaning on the PCGS site the other day and it seems that they do not consider dipping as cleaning.

After photographing some half crowns graded by PCGS and NGC I've noticed the reverse of the coin in the holder seems orientated with the shield turned to the right. Probably because they align the obverse when placing the coin in the holder. However, CGS seem to get the right orientation. A minor irritation I know but it would be better if they got it right.

Cattleya Mossiae recently flowering in my court yard.

Cup of gold photos taken at Brisbane Roma St Gardens today. I was just passing the plant and thought you may be interested to see it in situ. As you can see it has a large yellow flower growing on a rampant vine. I think it flowers late winter/ early spring.

Common name is cup of gold a very vigorous climber of the tomato tobacco family Solanaceae. I haven't room for it although you can buy the plants in Brisbane and I grew one at my last place. It's a very hardy plant. Flowering at the moment is Angel's trumpet, brugmansia suaveolens another in the Solanaceae family.

A 1911 proof coin I have. In hand it looks good but the photo I took shows evidence of much cleaning. Just goes to show how you can be deceived. The coin didn't cost a lot that probably reflects its condition. Caveat Emptor.

Very good Goddards seems to work in a similar way with a different process to the Al foil process. I think Swords observation is true leave coin alone if possible. I do find it difficult to to believe that a 100 year old high grade coin can remain untarnished when left undisturbed in a draw or similar for most of that time as the other silver items I have start to tarnish after 3 months of so unless wrapped in sulfur free tissue paper.

The Al foil and Sodium carbonate/Bicarbonate convert the toning, mainly silver sulfide, back to metallic silver .Whereas Goddards' probably etches the surface to remove the silver sulfide. Personally given the chemistry I prefer the Sodium carbonate/ Al foil method as despite the people who like toned coins the truth is toning is corrosion is damage to the surface of the coin whereas the the sodium carbonate / Al foil is returning the silver to the coin's surface.

Link may be of interest https://weeds.brisbane.qld.gov.au/weeds I think Hedychium Gardnerianum is listed somewhere in it. Nevertheless it is still grown in Brisbane gardens as it is an attractive plant but can be invasive if not controlled.

I've noticed that the online shop of jncoins seems to be closed although they seem to be still trading on Ebay. Does anyone know if they are going to reopen as buying via Ebay from Australia is expensive. The shipping charges are exorbitant and 10% GST is levied. However if buying direct from a UK dealer from Australia the shipping charge is considerably less and items less than $AU 800 in value do not attract GST. This makes Ebay uncompetitive thanks to Australian retailers lobbying the government on online purchases via Ebay Amazon etc. It would have to be something very special to tempt me to buy via Ebay and normally I buy direct from dealers such as GB Classic coins, and again jncoins in the past