LCA catalogue now online

[Sword 1,447]

The latest LCA catalogue is now online. 

https://www.londoncoins.co.uk/?category=9.1&page=Catalogue&searchtype=3&viewrange=0

I noticed that under certified coins, there are six wreath crowns on sale. All have been graded as proof crowns by CGS. Quite surprisingly, LCA does not totally stand by the CGS attributions but merely describe them as just "Proof or Prooflike". 

Edited May 11, 2022 by Sword

[Peckris 2 2,119]

3 hours ago, Sword said:

The latest LCA catalogue is now online. 

https://www.londoncoins.co.uk/?category=9.1&page=Catalogue&searchtype=3&viewrange=0

I noticed that under certified coins, there are six wreath crowns on sale. All have been graded as proof crowns by CGS. Quite surprisingly, LCA does not totally stand by the CGS attributions but merely describe them as just "Proof or Prooflike". 

In one sense, all wreath crowns - like George III crowns - could be considered 'proofs', being very limited issues struck on special dies for collectors. No-one has defined officially whether 1951 crowns are proofs, or 'prooflike'. I don't think those few wreaths for sale are any different from UNC specimens.

[VickySilver 826]

Yea, definitely NOT proofs! I don't get it, maybe they have been watching the other TPGs. Ask Steve Hill or Mark R., I am sure they will agree.

[rpeddie 119]

i havent kept up with LCA, do they have live bidding yet or are they still stuck in the stone age?

[1949threepence 3,367]

17 minutes ago, rpeddie said:

i havent kept up with LCA, do they have live bidding yet or are they still stuck in the stone age?

No live bidding yet, but on the plus side they do still only have 17% buyer's premium. 

[secret santa 2,305]

Not even room bidding now - postal bids only, maybe telephone ?

[Sword 1,447]

On 5/11/2022 at 10:55 PM, Peckris 2 said:

In one sense, all wreath crowns - like George III crowns - could be considered 'proofs', being very limited issues struck on special dies for collectors. No-one has defined officially whether 1951 crowns are proofs, or 'prooflike'. I don't think those few wreaths for sale are any different from UNC specimens.

Although wreath crowns were struck in very limited quantities each year I don't think they can all be regarded as proofs. It's widely accepted that only a very small number of proofs were struck presumably using special flans resulting in sharper edges. One would expect that proofs were struck multiple times. The Royal Mint are selling 1951 crowns (at inflated prices) and does not describe them as proofs. As far as I know, they are described as specimen by respectable dealers as the consensus is that they were struck to below proof standard. 

[Peckris 2 2,119]

2 hours ago, Sword said:

Although wreath crowns were struck in very limited quantities each year I don't think they can all be regarded as proofs. It's widely accepted that only a very small number of proofs were struck presumably using special flans resulting in sharper edges. One would expect that proofs were struck multiple times. The Royal Mint are selling 1951 crowns (at inflated prices) and does not describe them as proofs. As far as I know, they are described as specimen by respectable dealers as the consensus is that they were struck to below proof standard. 

That's the point I was making: either wreath crowns should be regarded as proofs, or - as generally accepted - NOT proofs. In other words, describing certain examples as proofs is not valid IMO. There may be a few VIP wreaths as you say but I don't think those for sale are.

1951 Crowns from the proof sets are not noticeably different to those issued in cardboard boxes, which have often been described as 'prooflike'. It's something of a grey area when you have proofs and specimens which can not really be separated as such.

[VickySilver 826]

Yes, these in true proof are much scarcer than you might gather from sales such as this one or others with or without TPG-graded status. I actually started my later-decimal collection with Wreaths, including proofs, in the 1990s with the help of Mr. Steve Hill and Mark. R. I remember about 1994 spending quite a bit getting the 1932 and 1934 proofs off of Spink, and I assure you they DO NOT LOOK like these or many others offered for sale. At one junction I got an entire 1936 proof set with all coins of the same provenance. 

I have seen some graded "64" and higher that are not. IMHO, but backed by the two mentioned mentors will note that the proof Wreath crowns in the 1927-36 are really not of optimal proof quality but def. better than these.

[Sword 1,447]

10 hours ago, VickySilver said:

IMHO, but backed by the two mentioned mentors will note that the proof Wreath crowns in the 1927-36 are really not of optimal proof quality but def. better than these.

Any idea why that might be the case? The wreath proofs don't have the same standard of mirror image of earlier 1911 proof coins or the slightly later 1935 RE proof. There is no frosting either. Compared to other proofs, they are somewhat below par. 

[Diaconis 707]

On 5/13/2022 at 5:38 PM, secret santa said:

Not even room bidding now - postal bids only, maybe telephone ?

-- --- .-. ... . / -.-. --- -.. . / ..--..

 

[VickySilver 826]

No idea but why the "superior" specimens were called just that, specimen and many were reluctant for many years to use the term "proof"

[Peckris 2 2,119]

7 hours ago, Diaconis said:

-- --- .-. ... . / -.-. --- -.. . / ..--.. 

Oh no, I just accidentally bid £10,000 on a 1902 halfcrown    ... --- ... / ... --- ... / ... --- ...

[VickySilver 826]

Is that Morse code?

[Old Money 34]

8 hours ago, VickySilver said:

Is that Morse code?

.. ...  - .... .- -  -- --- .-. ... .  -.-. --- -.. . ..--..  -.-- . ...