CGS and Verd...Sorry!

[Coinery 1,153]

OK, here is a CGS verd for you!

Guess the grade??

Wait till you see the two comparos I promised, and then decide which specimen is "best for grade" - will post separately hopefully tomorrow on those...

Oh dear, oh, dear! That can only have developed in the slab if it's CGS! You're going to have to crack it out to arrest it surely? From some of the previous statements made in the other CGS thread, I'm assuming if you return it to CGS you'll get compensation (not!) but, at the very least, you'd think they'd be happy to re-slab for free and cover your postage costs, once you've neutralised the verd?

Re the grade, at that end of the scale you really do need some serious close-ups. I did mention in another thread about the buckles on the side of the boot, are they still proud/struck-up? Or have they been pushed back into the seam?

Actually, I'm really looking forward to a major close-up on the boot of Dave's proof, must remember to ask him!

[Gary D 76]

So how did this one get slabbed. Apart from the low grade it looks as if some has tried to remove the mint tning

link

[Nick 329]

OK, here is a CGS verd for you!

Guess the grade??

Wait till you see the two comparos I promised, and then decide which specimen is "best for grade" - will post separately hopefully tomorrow on those...

Oh dear, oh, dear! That can only have developed in the slab if it's CGS! You're going to have to crack it out to arrest it surely? From some of the previous statements made in the other CGS thread, I'm assuming if you return it to CGS you'll get compensation (not!) but, at the very least, you'd think they'd be happy to re-slab for free and cover your postage costs, once you've neutralised the verd?

Re the grade, at that end of the scale you really do need some serious close-ups. I did mention in another thread about the buckles on the side of the boot, are they still proud/struck-up? Or have they been pushed back into the seam?

Actually, I'm really looking forward to a major close-up on the boot of Dave's proof, must remember to ask him!

I'm certain that CGS don't pay compensation for any deterioration in the slab. They only pay market value if you can prove that it's a fake, and even then you have to be the original submitter and also prove it's fake without removing it or tampering with the slab - so you have zero chance of that.

Surely, they would refuse to re-slab after removing the 'green' as it has been cleaned.

[VickySilver 830]

So, any last guesses? Hint: its a specimen and grade number higher than guessed so far....Will try for closeup later today. I too have a proof infuse edge tho not sure if .500 or .925.

I've been wondering about cracking it out and what to do, the verd almost looks as though a particle is in the slab and then began the spots.

[TomGoodheart 400]

So how did this one get slabbed. Apart from the low grade it looks as if some has tried to remove the mint tning

link

I find it annoying you have to register with CGS to see verification information (or any other info at all for that matter). PCGS you just put in the number and it brings up the record.

[Paulus 1,975]

So, any last guesses? Hint: its a specimen and grade number higher than guessed so far....Will try for closeup later today. I too have a proof infuse edge tho not sure if .500 or .925.

I've been wondering about cracking it out and what to do, the verd almost looks as though a particle is in the slab and then began the spots.

Well it doesn't seem to deserve it (obviously I'm ignoring the verd) but I will guess at EF63?

[TomGoodheart 400]

So, any last guesses? Hint: its a specimen and grade number higher than guessed so far....Will try for closeup later today. I too have a proof infuse edge tho not sure if .500 or .925.

I've been wondering about cracking it out and what to do, the verd almost looks as though a particle is in the slab and then began the spots.

The face, leg detail and blanket binding all looks less than perfect to me. Not that I know anything about milled coin grading , but VF ish? Whatever average number that might be. High 50s?

Now here's a nice one:

[Nick 329]

OK, here is a CGS verd for you!

Guess the grade??

Wait till you see the two comparos I promised, and then decide which specimen is "best for grade" - will post separately hopefully tomorrow on those...

It's really difficult to tell a grade from the picture, but I'll take a stab at UNC82.

[Nick 329]

So, any last guesses? Hint: its a specimen and grade number higher than guessed so far....Will try for closeup later today. I too have a proof infuse edge tho not sure if .500 or .925.

I've been wondering about cracking it out and what to do, the verd almost looks as though a particle is in the slab and then began the spots.

The face, leg detail and blanket binding all looks less than perfect to me. Not that I know anything about milled coin grading , but VF ish? Whatever average number that might be. High 50s?

Now here's a nice one:

Nice. But that's a proper proof, rather than a proof-like specimen.

[VickySilver 830]

Uggh, let me try this detail blowup again...

Edited March 3, 2013 by VickySilver

[VickySilver 830]

Yikes, sorry for the quality - handheld I-phone.

This coin is way up the CGS numerical scale.....

Hint: If I was them, I'd buy this one back.

Edited March 3, 2013 by VickySilver

[pies 33]

I'll go for UNC 85

[Sword 1,471]

OK, here is a CGS verd for you!

Guess the grade??

Wait till you see the two comparos I promised, and then decide which specimen is "best for grade" - will post separately hopefully tomorrow on those...

Oh dear, oh, dear! That can only have developed in the slab if it's CGS! You're going to have to crack it out to arrest it surely? From some of the previous statements made in the other CGS thread, I'm assuming if you return it to CGS you'll get compensation (not!) but, at the very least, you'd think they'd be happy to re-slab for free and cover your postage costs, once you've neutralised the verd?

Re the grade, at that end of the scale you really do need some serious close-ups. I did mention in another thread about the buckles on the side of the boot, are they still proud/struck-up? Or have they been pushed back into the seam?

Actually, I'm really looking forward to a major close-up on the boot of Dave's proof, must remember to ask him!

I'm certain that CGS don't pay compensation for any deterioration in the slab. They only pay market value if you can prove that it's a fake, and even then you have to be the original submitter and also prove it's fake without removing it or tampering with the slab - so you have zero chance of that.

Surely, they would refuse to re-slab after removing the 'green' as it has been cleaned.

I agree with Nick. Quoting their website: "In fact we guarantee to pay the submitter the full market value of any non genuine English Milled coin that we may encapsulate.". Hence there is no compensation even if it is a non-English fake or an English hammered fake. They would probably only reslab it with a yellow label.

[Coinery 1,153]

So, any last guesses? Hint: its a specimen and grade number higher than guessed so far....Will try for closeup later today. I too have a proof infuse edge tho not sure if .500 or .925.

I've been wondering about cracking it out and what to do, the verd almost looks as though a particle is in the slab and then began the spots.

Looks like a bit of the encapsulator's ear wax! Can't be St George's because it doesn't look in the photo as if he has one!

[Coinery 1,153]

Surely, they would refuse to re-slab after removing the 'green' as it has been cleaned.

[Coinery 1,153]

So, any last guesses? Hint: its a specimen and grade number higher than guessed so far....Will try for closeup later today. I too have a proof infuse edge tho not sure if .500 or .925.

I've been wondering about cracking it out and what to do, the verd almost looks as though a particle is in the slab and then began the spots.

The face, leg detail and blanket binding all looks less than perfect to me. Not that I know anything about milled coin grading , but VF ish? Whatever average number that might be. High 50s?

Now here's a nice one:

You can definitely buckle THAT boot up! Where's that one for sale, see if I can't beat Dave in the CGS League Tables?

[Coinery 1,153]

Uggh, let me try this detail blowup again...

Looking at the boot (?ear) and the obverse generally, I'd really struggle to part with NEF money. It going to be off the scale, isn't it!

[Nick 329]

So, any last guesses? Hint: its a specimen and grade number higher than guessed so far....Will try for closeup later today. I too have a proof infuse edge tho not sure if .500 or .925.

I've been wondering about cracking it out and what to do, the verd almost looks as though a particle is in the slab and then began the spots.

The face, leg detail and blanket binding all looks less than perfect to me. Not that I know anything about milled coin grading , but VF ish? Whatever average number that might be. High 50s?

You can definitely buckle THAT boot up! Where's that one for sale, see if I can't beat Dave in the CGS League Tables?

It went for $3000 at Heritage a couple of months ago. It's also supposedly one of the .925 silver proofs. Funny, I thought all the raised edge proofs were .925 silver.

Edited March 3, 2013 by Nick

[Coinery 1,153]

OK, here is a CGS verd for you!

Guess the grade??

Wait till you see the two comparos I promised, and then decide which specimen is "best for grade" - will post separately hopefully tomorrow on those...

Oh dear, oh, dear! That can only have developed in the slab if it's CGS! You're going to have to crack it out to arrest it surely? From some of the previous statements made in the other CGS thread, I'm assuming if you return it to CGS you'll get compensation (not!) but, at the very least, you'd think they'd be happy to re-slab for free and cover your postage costs, once you've neutralised the verd?

Re the grade, at that end of the scale you really do need some serious close-ups. I did mention in another thread about the buckles on the side of the boot, are they still proud/struck-up? Or have they been pushed back into the seam?

Actually, I'm really looking forward to a major close-up on the boot of Dave's proof, must remember to ask him!

I'm certain that CGS don't pay compensation for any deterioration in the slab. They only pay market value if you can prove that it's a fake, and even then you have to be the original submitter and also prove it's fake without removing it or tampering with the slab - so you have zero chance of that.

Surely, they would refuse to re-slab after removing the 'green' as it has been cleaned.

I agree with Nick. Quoting their website: "In fact we guarantee to pay the submitter the full market value of any non genuine English Milled coin that we may encapsulate.". Hence there is no compensation even if it is a non-English fake or an English hammered fake. They would probably only reslab it with a yellow label.

I absolutely agree with Nick too! I was referring to an overzealous remark made by Bill (I think), who highlighted a 'bad in the slab' guarantee that CGS were offering (which I didn't think for a minute they were, of course)!

[VickySilver 830]

Yes, I think the proof .925 proof offered for sale was the INCUSE type (which in my experience though clearly proof have a different surface). I can not tell by inspection an incuse proof o.500 vs. an incuse proof o.925 - not that there is a large pop.

OK, this coin is slabbed NORTH of 80 though; I am serious the Public Relations value of having this coin OFF the market would be of value to them. Actually my other three specimens, including NGC and PCGS are much better and deserving IMO of their grades.

PS - did I mention I kind of like this design?

If anybody has a lead on currency edge varieties (no edge lettering or "dropped" collar with 1/3 missing) do let me know as I would purchase.

Edited March 3, 2013 by VickySilver

[VickySilver 830]

OK.....

The coin is slabbed as an 85, so the winner is....

drumroll.....

Pies!

Sorry, no giveaway though.

Going to try to photo the other three specimens.

Edited March 3, 2013 by VickySilver

[Nick 329]

Yes, I think the proof .925 proof offered for sale was the INCUSE type (which in my experience though clearly proof have a different surface). I can not tell by inspection an incuse proof o.500 vs. an incuse proof o.925 - not that there is a large pop.

OK, this coin is slabbed NORTH of 80 though; I am serious the Public Relations value of having this coin OFF the market would be of value to them. Actually my other three specimens, including NGC and PCGS are much better and deserving IMO of their grades.

PS - did I mention I kind of like this design?

If anybody has a lead on currency edge varieties (no edge lettering or "dropped" collar with 1/3 missing) do let me know as I would purchase.

I do too, but not quite as much as I do the 2005 sovereign design.

[Coinery 1,153]

The coin is slabbed as an 85

WOW! That's the end of blind-buying CGS too! As the Big 'O' once cried.......'it's over'!

I'm so very glad the two CGS threads have happened these last weeks, it's really resolved a lot of nagging issues for me. I kind of feel at peace with it all, which is great!

[Peckris 579]

So how did this one get slabbed. Apart from the low grade it looks as if some has tried to remove the mint tning

link

I guess because its owner either had more money than sense, or more hope than expectation? Do CGS ever turn down a request except where it's counterfeit or cleaned or verd?

As for the "lustre", I've seen any number of Eddy farthings which have been artificially lustred at some point, presumably to pass it off as a half sov?

Uggh, let me try this detail blowup again...

I can't see any wear on the reverse, but the hair looks somewhat weak. I'll guess at EF+ but with a lowish number for that grade.

[VickySilver 830]

some more to follow

I rotated them but are not rotated on the download...

Top is raised edge proof from original silver 6 piece 1935 proof set

Edited March 3, 2013 by VickySilver