coinkat

By US standards, this has the details of an EF45 minimum. If the surfaces are not hairlines or negatively impacted from an enhancement, it should straight grade. Good luck if you submit it and if you choose to do so, post the grade so we can see how this turned out.

The Churchill double die is worthy of interest. It might be one of the best mid century UK varieties...

Not an attractive look... While modernism has a place in numismatics, this misses the mark.

Though to tell from the image... I assume it's not a raised line. I would be curious if there are other reported examples that have the same characteristics as yours.

Clearly the first coin is superior and has a very compelling strike with decent surfaces. I suppose what I find the most disappointing is that this coin was graded a 70 on a 100 point scale with the AU range (and please correct me if I am wrong) that can go to 78 if the Uncirculated range starts at 80. Seriously... How can it be a 70 which is not at the higher end of the AU spectrum? Seems a 75 is warranted or possibly 78 unless there are concerns not adequately captured in the image. While I would like to offer a plausible explanation such as the state of the dies with the first coin and that coin being struck early in the production and the second coin was likely struck from either separate dies or die parings altogether but still likely struck later in the life cycle of those dies which accounts for weakness and not actual wear from circulation. While the explanation might make some sense, the grade of 70 for both coins really fails to pass the straight face test.

A cameo designation is not a variety but used solely to modify a proof or proof like coin grade to call attention to what should be a sharp contrast in the portrait and center design focal points of the coin and the fields. Cameos usually will bring a reasonable to significant premium depending on the coin series and the depth of the contrast.

This is a very weakly struck example. In terms of actual wear from circulation, it might very well be worthy of a US grade at EF40 or even 45 after an in hand review to look at the fields and surfaces for signs of remaining lustre. But even if 40 or 45 is reasonable as a grade, the valuation would not be close to £3000 under any circumstances.

Keep in mind that we are evaluating the grade of both coins based on an image and not an in hand review. Tilting these coins and giving them both a worthy look in hand may lead one to a different conclusion. While I tend to agree that the second coin looks better in the battle of the images, it may have a different appearance not captured that explains a 62 grade. The take away is to see coins in hand prior to bidding or buying. Obviously and unfortunately, that is often not possible.

Looks okay in terms of being genuine. I would not attempt to improve this coin based on its appearance. It looks original and will have greater appeal if it remains that way. The M C was engraved possibly as a gift to someone. Interesting . Value is a bit of a question mark because of the engraving. I suspect there are still some collectors that would be willing to pay a fair price for this- just not sure what the range would be... Perhaps £75-100?

Not so sure there is a satisfying answer to a variety type set. As for an Edward VII type set, I would include a Maundy Set and an example of each denomination ending with a Sovereign. I do see date sets as a worthy challenge... Especially the Florin which I view as the most attractive 20th Century British coin.

Terrific coins. It seems the images may favor some over others. Just curious... Did you have the Capitol plastic holder custom made or do they actually make this for the series? And I suppose the question whether you contemplate ever submitting them for grading at either PCGS or NGC is worthy of asking...

Same question asked for Victorian shillings... How many here are seeking to complete a date set, excluding varieties? And what is the minimum grade or overall look of a coin within the series that you find acceptable? I am asking this in part because I hear and read collecting British pennies by date is a thing of the past. I suppose I am currently unwilling to accept that notion... Is collecting by date obsolete "Across the Pond"?

Just curious... How many here are attemping a date set excluding varieties? And what is the minimum grade or even look of the coin that you seek or find acceptable? I asking in part because it seems some attractive circulated examples can be found for what I consider inexpensive for the overall look of the coin. So my point is simply that maybe the goal of putting a set together is not unreasonable.

Demand created in part by the perception of rarity shapes the range in value for coins. And rarity is often misunderstood because collectors often look at mintage figures instead of evaluating surviving populations. Then we have condition rarity which is also misunderstood because quality does not always mean the highest grade which seems to capture the egos of some collectors that throw money at coins seeking the so-called finest known examples. Understanding this is problematic mainly because trying to explain the rationale for market dynamics can defy common sense.

Grading is subjective... Not a math problem that produces a quantifiable answer. There are overgraded and undergraded coins and that will not change. There are coins that are high end and low end for the grade. The lower end coins within that grade can effect the perceived value which is a drain on the better examples. Basically the quality of the coin should dictate the value instead of the plastic and it often does which is why auction records often have a spread.

Collecting has evolved in that there are less date collectors within a series and more type collectors that are seeking the highest graded coin within their budget. With this in mind, it does beg the question whether true rarity trumps condition rarity. My goal is to buy quality for the grade. And I would rather own rarity over condition rarity. There are factors that obviously come into play such as supply and demand including whether a certain coin can be promoted. So rarity can be promoted in either sense leading to prices that will in part be determined by those collectors active in the chase.

There is the Silver 10 pound 5 oncer in the Stacks Bowers that close on 1-18 for those of you keeping score

The Sheldon scale has a VF range that extends from VF20 to VF35

That is a great question. I think clean examples are tough. It's just that this example has hay marking that is severe that adds to factors to consider with grading and even more importantly impacts eye appeal

Better pictures are required

I would wait for a better example especially if this is priced at AEF money.

Die polish should involve raised lines and should not be confused with tooling. I am not seeing anything from the image that would lead me to conclude that tooling was an issue. This is one of those slabbed coins that is the poster child for why an explanation for a tools designation is required if it is going to be utilized.

Unfortunately varieties are not a strength for TPG... They are better with wear and strike characteristics and identifying the distinction with their grade. However, the Sheldon scale is different. A lot has been written about trying to assign Sheldon numbers to the traditional British grading standard. I am not impressed with how this has been expressed. There are clear differences and one needs to look at the coin. And that grading evaluation and comparison between standards has to be done on a coin by coin basis. As for the mint wiped 1902 matte proofs, these will likely grade in the PR61 to PR62 range.

Edward VII -sorry for the typo

Unfortunately there is no short answer. I see differences based on Monarchs and denominations. Edward VIII shillings and half crowns can be tough and inconsistent. And that inconsistency in part is based on the range in quality for both of these series. I will just suggest that it is more about the coin and appreciating which TPG will grade it most appropriately-not always an easy proposition.