zookeeperz

Ah I am with you now

I am still confused. Looking at those 2 pictures I assume are the same obverse 2's can you explain to me why the colon alignments after F:D: are different> as in the Jelida's pic the top colon is pointing to the gap and the bottom to the tooth. In santa's pic it is the other way around also the last A in victoria Jelida's points to a gap and santa's points to the tooth?

Hi guys further to my story posted somewhere about my dealings with the CGS team. I was prob one of the first batch to be graded back in 2007 when their opinion on what is a variety and what was not was personal and not factual. After a few emails back and forth I was glad to see that they agreed with me it is not their job to say if a coin is worthy of being a variety. (back then they recognised already known varieties only). They graded £500 worth of coins and I was less than happy as the coins that were in today's grading would only be details grade were specifically sent for variety attribute only as they were unrecorded. Needless to say they bodybagged them sent them back with no attribution other than (ungraded porosity). Forget the fact that it was 1675/3 farthing o/o sideways. Also the coins they did grade also had no variety attached to them as in their opinion it would add little to the value (really in what century do you inhabit). So basically I got stiffed for a monkey by three monkey's Here is one I still have that they would attribute the correct grade initially. Although after my heated emails they did offer to regrade all the coins I questioned. But I didn't take up the offer as I was so angry. Here is 1856 01 standard shilling. As you can see it is far from it. first 5 is small 5 over large 5 and last 6 is over 5. I even had the impression that the 1 was struck over a roman I but as it is in the slab I cannot get clear enough pic to confirm and 10 years ago I forgotten what I put on the ticket.

Well I doubt they would of kept records of ungraded coins back in 2007 as they were returned with a standard comment like porosity or verdigris spot . This was before they did details grading. Which was my argument to start with. Not that it made a lot of difference in the end as all were sold on but it aids a sale if it more than just my opinion on what is on the coin. Some variety types esp overdates can be so subtle even the best picture cannot show what the eye and a loupe can unless you are fortunate enough to own a stereoscope. I would Imagine there are probably only 4 from the original batch that are still on the site.

0003797-SH.V1.1856.01 if you see the pic it also is the conjoined A type which is variety 04 if I remember but as it stands a mis attributed unlisted variety. Kind of annoying when you shell out that amount of money and not get what you ask for.

Well yes true it is a bit of a what you see is what it is kind of coin but to me the line is straight and doesn't dive up at the left end but as it is so worn i cannot see if there is a sig below the foot either. If anything it would have to be E as there isn't a 1860 with rev G

is that not obverse 3 bust looks much closer to the border than the picture of obverse 2 with the gap? or is it a trick of the light ?

Anyone know die pairings on this. I am assuming it is 2+D ?. Thanks

That's what I was trying to describe see the ribbons where they leave the bow obverse 2 are very close and the gap is very small. obverse 5 has that loop looking gap distinctly wider distance from ribbon to ribbon

Looks like a bit of silver dipping went array. They must of fell asleep and left in there overnight lol

the ribbon ties on obverse 2 are almost touching. Obverse 5 shows that characteristic loop shaped gap between the ties as on the coin above

That is if I am not mistaken the scarcer type Obverse 5 with reverse G R18 F-28. Nice find

Also nearly all obverse 6's have a die flaw behind the top colon closest to the bust just on the linear circle giving it a look of three stops

when you put the text in the box you will get a formatting pop up. remove the formatting and it will just post as normal text. Also the seller has no dealings with shipping charges to the shipping center as in the one ebay uses. The seller posts the item as he would any other item of post. So if it were me using them which I used to it would cost me £1 for 1st class post or £2.08 signed for which I do religiously. Sorry but I don't believe hard luck stories :). The rest of the cost to the buyer is dealt with ebay alone and you don't even get to see what they charge for postage. Although on ebay.com it does show the total payable and no other charges will have to be paid I.E customs. Think the standard is around $14 depending on a Coin or multiples obviously being more costly. Now $14 I can bear that for peace of mind but when you see $60 international postage and still you may get stuffed for customs I cannot see the sense in even trying to sell the item. Only a real nugget would cough that amount up

Perhaps he read it as George VIP lol

GVF+ IMO lot of wear on the front lace more than the coin above

Also they postage charges from the states are phone book numbers. I mean I can send to any country in the world £500 insured signed for for £10 max. Where do they get these $20-$60 postage costs from? A jamboree bag?

I like to refer to Spinks as the Insurance Man's price index . As in the prices quoted are what you are likely to receive from an insurance claim should a coin get lost or stolen. As for market prices it all depends on supply and demand. You never can tell with the sort after coins they will always defy any catalogue pricing weather it be well over or well under. You know it is all down to how many are bidding and who wants it the most. But for the general prices they are usually ok as a starting point but remember with spinks UNC is MS65 or UNC 82 and unblemished. Prices between UNC 80 and 82 are worlds apart obviously because we all want the best we can afford or the best grade damn the expense . This is where the crossover from US grading and UK grading causes pricing issues. The US think XF-40 is the same as our EF and price it according to our EF catalogue listings. Absolute nonsense really because whilst they may be correct in the grade of XF-40 it is only VF in UK and nobody but a complete muppet would pay EF price for VF coins although many have and all part of the learning curve. If you are a seller you will always quote Spinks cat prices. If you are a buyer you will quote any other catalogue as they have the more sensible pricing . It's finding the middle ground that's a minor issue. But if you have done your homework and can show other examples even if they are by links to auction sites you would be surprised that even the most negative response to a lower offer can normally be adjusted to suit both parties. Ok waffled too long . Myself personally and I am sure the rest of the brother/sisterhood would have a clutch of different price catalogues. The more you have the easier it is to place a coin in a price range you can work with.

You should be able to see raised hairlines on the satin specimens which are incuse on the die. Speculation about the total produced from original 3-4 Max to now 8 known specimens 4 by CGS 3 by PCGS and 1 by NGC. LCA 2013 Sold 1 Satin proof for £1700. Nice if you can get the work

You think he will be coronated? . Long time ago it was foretold (don't ask me how they worked out it was charles lol) Charles will never reign as king . So begs the question pop down to ladbrokes and see what odds they give on William

I think it is a no brainer for 5 or 6 known they would all I assume come with provenance . Saying something and being something are worlds apart. 95% of us if we believed we had something of potential value would get it checked by knowledgeable people . If it was my coin I would of sent it insured to the royal Mint. No better place to enquire after all they struck it. He is probably miffed that he more than likely paid well over the odds and I am edging the £475 is what he paid for it thinking he got a great deal on a VIP proof. Only to find it is worth half that. Although a sad tale it should be as he well knows being a reputable dealer move on and take it on the chin . It will not be the first or last sale to have a questionable item and it's rarity debated. Most are not what they appear at first glance. That is why they are rare after all

Premium Sellers have negative feedback removed by ebay part of the service. Crooks nothing more. They really and truthfully should be shut down.

Yes lo0oks like a hungarian denar but the mint mark Should be K-B . I can't find any with K-G if that is a G? But only had a quick swizz through

I think it's a case of something there so safer to call it a 1. Myself it looks more like it could of been an upside down 3 ?