VickySilver

Thanks Bernie for your input; I would very much like to have seen the entire 1933 proof set intact and any paperwork or circumstances that accompanied it.

Exactly on the last two. I really love pursuing a rare coin, even if perhaps in an undercontested series but let alone in the series like the penny. No need to beat the chest but such coins really enhance and in some fashion "make" a collection. The stories behind getting these for some of us that are not "checkbook collectors" are of personal satisfaction and sometimes interesting even to others that we might share these stories with. Also, as Richard says, we do have photographic records and even write articles on occasion using these coins. To be honest, I look at my better coins about as frequently as those that are just filling an "open" space in a series run.

That is a really wonderful and sharply struck coin, hard to see it as currency. This was such a dream coin - the 1933 penny - for me and so many others, sadly never to be. Interesting to see if any of the surge in values for coins will catch up with this coin or not. 20th century Brit bronze have not IMHO seen much rise in the last 5-6 years.

I don't have issue with where the estimate is, and as you've said, who really cares. And bidding can begin at, above or below this number. What I don't understand the start below reserve since it is not a "real" auction IMHO & the wall bouncing idea is likely poor as evidenced in this auction.

I really don't get the aggravating philosophy of having a starting bid less than the minimum bid. It IMHO does NOT generate bidding frenzies or increase of actual buying interest.

You know I have looked at this sale for a while and didn't say anything but feel the Emperor's New Clothes syndrome setting in with me. What I have to say is: "what on Earth?".. I have issues with the first 1853 groat listed as currency (IMHO not at all), and then the "currency" 3ds from earlier Victoria: Not inclusive but the key dates of 1846, 1847, 1848, 1852 and 1853 NOT in my opinion currency despite their being graded as such. These coins all have the classic Maundy appearance with typical strikes and appearance as such and not even the occasional tricky satin format that they will occasionally appear as. I do not know the consignor and bear him/her no ill will unless they were witting in the sale of same. And also shame on NGC for their designations. Without digressing too far, clearly many of the early Victorian Maundy are not ideal representations of the genre, though I have seen some superb strikes, and so occasionally central details like Victoria's hair, etc. may come flat and ill-defined, the denticles may be a bit mushy and strike perhaps a bit uneven. However the strikes have a fairly typical appearance despite all that, and the difference perhaps a bit more clear when compared to clear currency pieces not worn. Obviously worn pieces are more difficult to discriminate, but these obviously not. It is my humble opinion that with such coins it likely best to assume Maundy status on the 3d and then if possible PROVE that it is currency. The same is analogously true for the 1853 groat that is prohibitively rare in true currency and not proof status although even in proof is cerainly scarce; (incidentally, the recent proof offered by Colin Cooke designated as such is of a rare later obverse type). What do readers think?

I was also surprised at the results for the 1850s 3ds, which are indeed scarcer. Prices seem to have advanced quite a bit in the last several years as I got a number of them from either DNW or Baldwin's (1855-1859, 1862, 1863) at mere fractions. Nice to see there is a bit of interest.

Begins lot 428 on page 11. Can't link tho...

That is a nice coin and worlds better than the two at Noonan's as all three are proofs, though of different subtype as you've pointed out. Question is, what price will the two Noonan's 1853s reach on sale, and how about the other "tiddlers" (3ds).

Yes, but 1918 H are still better than the REALLY sorrowful 1919 H coins...I will try to post my own & as above appreciate the lovely colour of coins such as above but admit to personally resisting to buy lesser struck coins. With regards to the 19 H, I did a bit better over time but was never truly satisfied by a coin of good to great strike AND decent metal mix - the "woodgrain" toning is generally a euphemism in my view....

Yes, beautiful colour there!

It was on their new listing for the month. Unfortunately I am so limited that I can send email of pictures but have real problems getting images down to low enough resolution from laptop. I will PM you my email, not that it is all that private, LOL.... Have to say that I was most disappointed that realistically I do NOT have a currency 1853 but rather two of the proof milled edge.

Ah, thanks and sorry for the terrible quality. It is in fact the PCGS coin; I have one raw as well and looks possibly a bit more like an "over 6". These do seem to have some residual of possible upper loop of the 8 the right of the 7 at the top (well not 100%) on that. I have a couple of the other overdates if you are ever interested but as with Richard I am happy to send emails since my posting capacity on photos is abysmal. Did you see the 1853 groat proof ?pattern? that was sold out of Colin Cooke just the other day? Later bust type of Vicky on the obverse.....

A day late and a dollar short on the 1847/6(or 8)

Uh, may I have an 1839 Proof Crown at that price (360 pounds)?

Indeed, I will try to post a picture tomorrow of what may actually be an 1847/6 groat that looks different than my two 1847/8 coins. I think there may also be the 1848/7 as I have some that appear that way to me. I have a feeling that this consignor got many of these en bloc and was soLd many of these as currency. Note that Maundy come as proof like; satin, currency-appearing and probable proofs just to confuse even more.

I had another look. IMHO I would have to call both proof based on fields and type of toning especially on the first, and the way the devices and rim are struck. Also semi condemned as Maundy would likely be the 3 pence coins of the dates 1847, 1848, 1852 and several others. These IMO have again the fields and strike presentation of Maundy - and this would be again the strike and fields. the 1847/6 groat looks nice but still stuck on iPad so can’t see for sure if the under digit is 6 or 8. Also I need a better look at the 1853 3d, which in currency and not Maundy is rather scarce. I will look again tomorrow at these.

Hard to tell on this date as so few were struck - even currency many times are quite prooflike. ESC/Bull really IMHO falls apart and gives R2 rating for the 1853/2. This in currency and even proof is a rare coin. Proofs come with plain and milled edges as well. Will look later on laptop.

In the US, occasionally, as many times they have nought & a bit like #3 on the list with vastly less stock though: stacksbowers.com goldbergcoins.com

Ah, wish I had an extra....Part of the set and so am keeping it together until my wheels fall off. LOL

Better get ready to cut some big checks for a couple. I have only the matte, and will have to check the type and an exceptional 2 + A proof that was as stated graded Proof 67* Red Cameo. The latter is not considered VIP Record, but picked it out based on its superior appearance and not sure I would exclude it despite the type. I have to say it swayed me strongly and got it along with a wonderful proof halfpenny of same date that graded similarly.

Okay, I know the usual caveats of holding coin in hand and quality of photos, blah, blah, blah. HOWEVER (and I know I may be biased but have NO axe to grind), I wonder what readers think of at least three of the coins on sale: - the two specimens of 1839 Halfcrown proof - the 1893 crown proof - the 1902 florin matte proof (in 67 no less) I was completely flabbergasted and am not necessarily a conspiracy person, but I can't help but believe that these grades are inflated. Now whether that is due to the source of the consignor, I can't say - but certainly must wonder. There were numerous other examples that IMHO had "blown up" grades as well.

Uh, yes that would be correct. However, if it puts money in your pocket then I guess sometimes you sell out. Circumstances dictated and I sold a nicer coin through Stacks about 4 years ago and indeed got the 105%, and I had it slabbed myself (whereas I should have had them do it as Rob suggests). Actually it is the full story and I have no connections to any of these US companies although when I did have more money in my pocket got on well with some of the Brit principles; interestingly and despite this I some years ago sold through Spink a few and was very disappointed.

Yikes! PLEASE do not let that happen.