CROWNS

[Rob 3,152]

I have got almost no interest in modern commens (and hence have even forgotten about their existence earlier). I used the word "almost" as VIP proofs can be quite interesting but cost more than I would ever be prepared to pay. Why would anyone want to collect "coins" that are usually produced in huge numbers, often uninspiring in design and are always abundantly availabe in untouched condidtion? One of the first things I learnt as a kid was to never buy any Isle of man coins as they commenorated anything and everything.

Most VIP proofs wouldn't cost any more than a common uncirculated larger silver Victorian coin - say £500 to a couple £K, so we aren't talking megabucks here. In fact a lot of people are prepared to spend far more on currency coins than they would have to lay out for a VIP proof, particularly in the penny department.

[Peckris 579]

I have got almost no interest in modern commens (and hence have even forgotten about their existence earlier). I used the word "almost" as VIP proofs can be quite interesting but cost more than I would ever be prepared to pay. Why would anyone want to collect "coins" that are usually produced in huge numbers, often uninspiring in design and are always abundantly availabe in untouched condidtion? One of the first things I learnt as a kid was to never buy any Isle of man coins as they commenorated anything and everything.

Most VIP proofs wouldn't cost any more than a common uncirculated larger silver Victorian coin - say £500 to a couple £K, so we aren't talking megabucks here. In fact a lot of people are prepared to spend far more on currency coins than they would have to lay out for a VIP proof, particularly in the penny department.

I've occasionally thought about VIP proofs, but unless they are of an existing rarity (1949 3d, say), then I can't see the appeal - most post-1937 VIPs look no better than your average 1950 1951 or 1953 proof coin anyway. It's rarity appeal only, and as you say, much better to get a decent currency 18th or 19th Century coin instead.

[Sword 1,456]

I have got almost no interest in modern commens (and hence have even forgotten about their existence earlier). I used the word "almost" as VIP proofs can be quite interesting but cost more than I would ever be prepared to pay. Why would anyone want to collect "coins" that are usually produced in huge numbers, often uninspiring in design and are always abundantly availabe in untouched condidtion? One of the first things I learnt as a kid was to never buy any Isle of man coins as they commenorated anything and everything.

Most VIP proofs wouldn't cost any more than a common uncirculated larger silver Victorian coin - say £500 to a couple £K, so we aren't talking megabucks here. In fact a lot of people are prepared to spend far more on currency coins than they would have to lay out for a VIP proof, particularly in the penny department.

I've occasionally thought about VIP proofs, but unless they are of an existing rarity (1949 3d, say), then I can't see the appeal - most post-1937 VIPs look no better than your average 1950 1951 or 1953 proof coin anyway. It's rarity appeal only, and as you say, much better to get a decent currency 18th or 19th Century coin instead.

I think we all share the same opinion. I am not "prepared" to pay £500 for a VIP proof but am happy to pay more for a decent 19th / 18th century currency piece. Hence I only consider them to be "quite" interesting. Rarity certainly has some appeal but that alone is not enough for me to part with a lot of money.

[VickySilver 830]

The VIP record proofs of "non-standard" years are a bit more interesting, or can be. Not many left for me, so am a contender on occasion for the 19th C. copper and silver bits. I would not recommend playing any large premium for a VIP of a standard year - 1937, 1950, 1951, 1953, or even 1927. I have a rare pattern 1927 crown but is so similar to the final that there might not be much interest in it either but I do like it....

Still, was a shocking amount that the 1965 pattern "initialled" Churchill at some 3800 pounds went for - got blown out on that one...

BTW, JeffHouston has posted a picture of Churchill from a Satin Specimen on the PCGS forum & rather nice!

[Accumulator 52]

I have got almost no interest in modern commens (and hence have even forgotten about their existence earlier). I used the word "almost" as VIP proofs can be quite interesting but cost more than I would ever be prepared to pay. Why would anyone want to collect "coins" that are usually produced in huge numbers, often uninspiring in design and are always abundantly availabe in untouched condidtion? One of the first things I learnt as a kid was to never buy any Isle of man coins as they commenorated anything and everything.

Most VIP proofs wouldn't cost any more than a common uncirculated larger silver Victorian coin - say £500 to a couple £K, so we aren't talking megabucks here. In fact a lot of people are prepared to spend far more on currency coins than they would have to lay out for a VIP proof, particularly in the penny department.

When you say pennies, Rob, I can't think of any dates where a VIP proof would be worth less than a currency coin. Unless I'm misunderstanding you?

[Peckris 579]

I have got almost no interest in modern commens (and hence have even forgotten about their existence earlier). I used the word "almost" as VIP proofs can be quite interesting but cost more than I would ever be prepared to pay. Why would anyone want to collect "coins" that are usually produced in huge numbers, often uninspiring in design and are always abundantly availabe in untouched condidtion? One of the first things I learnt as a kid was to never buy any Isle of man coins as they commenorated anything and everything.

Most VIP proofs wouldn't cost any more than a common uncirculated larger silver Victorian coin - say £500 to a couple £K, so we aren't talking megabucks here. In fact a lot of people are prepared to spend far more on currency coins than they would have to lay out for a VIP proof, particularly in the penny department.

When you say pennies, Rob, I can't think of any dates where a VIP proof would be worth less than a currency coin. Unless I'm misunderstanding you?

I took Rob to mean that a high grade Victorian currency coin (e.g. large silver) would be more popular and collectable than a 20th Century VIP proof. And that people would rather spend out on a currency penny than a VIP proof (not the same date).

Edited December 9, 2012 by Peckris

[divemaster 11]

I like the VIP proof crowns, they are rare and hard to find, i aquired the 1965 and 1953 VIP crowns many years ago and they appear to have been good investments. Locating the others is proving quite hard.

[Rob 3,152]

I have got almost no interest in modern commens (and hence have even forgotten about their existence earlier). I used the word "almost" as VIP proofs can be quite interesting but cost more than I would ever be prepared to pay. Why would anyone want to collect "coins" that are usually produced in huge numbers, often uninspiring in design and are always abundantly availabe in untouched condidtion? One of the first things I learnt as a kid was to never buy any Isle of man coins as they commenorated anything and everything.

Most VIP proofs wouldn't cost any more than a common uncirculated larger silver Victorian coin - say £500 to a couple £K, so we aren't talking megabucks here. In fact a lot of people are prepared to spend far more on currency coins than they would have to lay out for a VIP proof, particularly in the penny department.

When you say pennies, Rob, I can't think of any dates where a VIP proof would be worth less than a currency coin. Unless I'm misunderstanding you?

I took Rob to mean that a high grade Victorian currency coin (e.g. large silver) would be more popular and collectable than a 20th Century VIP proof. And that people would rather spend out on a currency penny than a VIP proof (not the same date).

Correct

[VickySilver 830]

Divemaster (and to return the topic back to crowns!) - you said you have a VIP ?1965? Have you a picture. BTW, the Churchill thread on PCGS foreign threads has a picture of the central devices of my satin "Churchy" toward the end...

[divemaster 11]

VS, i dont have a picture to post (and woulnt know how to anyway) but the coin can be seen on the CGS website.

[divemaster 11]

VS, sorry ive done a typo, i have the 1960 and 1965 VIPs not the 1953 (thats on my wishlist)

[VickySilver 830]

Yikes, I tried to get on the CGS site and they sent me on a spin.....Hmmm, techno challenged!

Still would like to see the '65.

PS - My 1951 is suspect as VIP even though bought as such.

Edited December 10, 2012 by VickySilver

[Sword 1,456]

Yikes, I tried to get on the CGS site and they sent me on a spin.....Hmmm, techno challenged!

Still would like to see the '65.

PS - My 1951 is suspect as VIP even though bought as such.

Vicky, here are the photos of the '65 in question. Sorry the original photos are too big for posting and hence the small images.

(If you want the original images, then log on the cgs website. Type in "20205" in the UIN box. Then you get the images.)

[Coinery 1,147]

Yikes, I tried to get on the CGS site and they sent me on a spin.....Hmmm, techno challenged!

Still would like to see the '65.

PS - My 1951 is suspect as VIP even though bought as such.

Vicky, here are the photos of the '65 in question. Sorry the original photos are too big for posting and hence the small images.

(If you want the original images, then log on the cgs website. Type in "20205" in the UIN box. Then you get the images.)

It was worth a try I suppose!

Edited December 11, 2012 by Coinery

[Peckris 579]

Yikes, I tried to get on the CGS site and they sent me on a spin.....Hmmm, techno challenged!

Still would like to see the '65.

PS - My 1951 is suspect as VIP even though bought as such.

Vicky, here are the photos of the '65 in question. Sorry the original photos are too big for posting and hence the small images.

(If you want the original images, then log on the cgs website. Type in "20205" in the UIN box. Then you get the images.)

It was worth a try I suppose!

How is that any different from the normal issue?

[ski 1]

How is that any different from the normal issue?

assuming an ebay bin of 99p........................£999.01

ive never seen a satin finish coin.......maybe the pics arent good enough to show the finish.

Edited December 11, 2012 by ski

[divemaster 11]

VS, they have on the CGS website a picture of the 1951 VIP for clarification against yours. I think this 1951 type is on of the ones that is readily distinguishable, take a look at UIN 16000

[divemaster 11]

Doubting Thomases, when you put the 1965 VIP next to the other variants it stands out like a very sore thumb.

Even i have to say tho the photos dont do it justice.

[ski 1]

Doubting Thomases

no certainly not....as i said, pics dont reveal the finish.

[Nick 329]

Doubting Thomases

no certainly not....as i said, pics dont reveal the finish.

I think that CGS should try harder with their photography. In most cases their photographs don't allow the viewer to verify the grade or the variety, which given the nature of their business is a bit of a faux pas.

[Coinery 1,147]

Doubting Thomases

no certainly not....as i said, pics dont reveal the finish.

I think that CGS should try harder with their photography. In most cases their photographs don't allow the viewer to verify the grade or the variety, which given the nature of their business is a bit of a faux pas.

Couldn't agree more!

[VickySilver 830]

It does look to be a "Satin Specimen" as I like to call this issue. Definately more detail struck up although as has been pointed out the finish of the coin is not that obvious. I was curious in my previous response if it was some sort of different issue in proof or ?, now answered.

Nice piece, and I for one do like these.

[Peter 615]

Talking of photography a lot can be said of Heritage auctions handiwork.

[Nick 329]

Talking of photography a lot can be said of Heritage auctions handiwork.

Agreed. Their pictures are, by far, the best of all the auction sites.

Edited December 11, 2012 by Nick

[Coinery 1,147]

Talking of photography a lot can be said of Heritage auctions handiwork.

It annoys me above all things! I had absolutely no graphic/photography knowledge until I bought a camera and a piece of software at the start if this year. I'm absolutely no expert at all, I don't understand the functions on the camera, and I can do nothing other than pull my hair out if a computer does anything remotely unusual, yet, multi-million pound organisations can't even get their excrement together enoug to turn out a half-decent image for their customers!

I go on about it all the time...what's the point of a TPGS image that doesn't even allow you to ID the coin in hand! Absolutely rubbish, shocking service! Hmmmmph! There! Got that off my chest!