Sword

Younger people are so precise with their age ... 🙂 (Not that I am much older) Hey, you weren't quite telling the truth with the second sentence. I have just checked and it was Stuart (Coinery) who replied to your first post. Peter was second. By coincidence, it was Peter who replied to my first post and Stuart being the second. I even naively mentioned that I had slabbed a few coins with CGS in that post... but Peter was surprisingly OK with that.

I think you are just being diplomatic and I think the word is "won't" rather than "might". Any toning on bronze and copper coins is considered by collectors to be negative, and an untoned example with full lustre is much more desirable and expensive. Let's use the 1970 proof set as an example. They have gone up quite a bit in price during the last few years and are now selling for £15+. I have finally got round to buying one quite recently and it was difficult finding one with untoned bronze. Once a set is opened, it will start to tone for certain. Proof coins can easily lose their brilliance and appear misted. Don't get me wrong. I like love coins with eye catching toning. But great toning can take decades to form and it's much more likely to happen in the original case or in a cabinet than in a plastic flip. Our ideas of what good toning looks like do change as we become more experienced. From a money view point, it doesn't matter much if you do split a 1970 set. (But it would be a real shame to split one with untoned bronze!). Lots of them got split and are sold separately anyway. There is no shortage of 1970 proof set for sale on eBay. 129 are on offer now.

I meant it lack the intricacies of the traditional designs which we admire. It doesn't come across as cutting edge or innovative like a good modern design should be. The reverse is a poor rip off of the William IV half crown. The obverse is a rip off of the 1977 silver jubilee crown. I won't pay spot for it either. In fact I would much rather own a bullion bar than that coin.

Doesn't do it for me. I think the design has somewhat fallen between too stools, and is not particularly inspiring. It doesn't look traditional or modern.

I think it is best to store proofs in an air tight system to maintain lustre. 2x2 self adhesive coin holders appear safe to me. Many 1927 sets have been split already. If stored properly, I don't think there is any great risk.

I had a quick look at the lots and quite a few has been "wiped" in addition to a those more harshly "cleaned". I can understand your frustration . One thing which has always surprised me is that Davies (English Silver Coinage) mentions that "surface grime can be removed with a clean piled cloth, gently rotating the coin between the cloth and fingers until the original toning is reached". This is something I have no inclination to try.

They are on sale on etsy or eBay for a few pounds. But that doesn't stop some from trying.

I have never found their preview to be helpful as it normally only contain a few (random) lots. DNW's approach of showing the catalogue in progress gives a much better indication of what will be coming up.

I thought so when you said Cromwell coinage would have been your preferred choice. One doesn't need any excuse to go for Charles I coins!

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-wales-59772837

I agree that the reverse is much less appealing. The weak striking (esp the date, top shield and centre) has really reduced the eye appeal for me, and has no doubt affected the hammered price. (The technical grade of the reverse is still rather high as reflected by details such as the interlocking Cs). Having said that, the obverse always has significantly more weight than the reverse for early millled coins. I do like the coin in the OP. Well balanced coins without weak patches appeal to me. At the end of the day, the grade assigned by a dealer or auction house is not the main issue. It is whether the coin has good eye appeal to the individual and is at the right price. This is rephrasing Rob's opinion that there are often only two grades: acceptable and non acceptable.

Quite. But Churchill crowns would have considerable potential if a proof was issued in silver with a mintage of less than 50,000. I personally think the portrait is OK if it wasn't for the tasteless and in your face CHURCHILL legend. It would be nice if the Royal Mint would consider making a better attempt instead of making more coins on rabbits, diasaours and Gruffaloes.

Nice coin Chris. Is it yours?

30p in 1971 is only £4.33 in 2020 and so not nearly so bad. Modern currency sets (particularly in bad packaging) have no hope in ever becoming collector's items.

Yes, there are many varieties in the series. You will enjoy seeing them once you have received your copy of ESC. I also agree it is the 3rd bust.

I am shocked. £10 in 1969 is £168 in 2020 when inflation adjusted. It's hard to believe anyone would want to pay so much for a Ni-Cu currency set in a plastic case.

Good choice of series! Charles II is a fascinating period in history. Type III has short hair ties and Type IV has longer ties. Type IV: This is explained in the ESC (English silver coinage since 1649) Yours is a good looking example too. I would grade it as a bold fine (but I am not experienced with this series)

The Royal Mint (thankfully) didn't gold plate coins in those days. The gold and silver versions was issued in capsules in fitted cases. Nice to get a coin that has been kept for you for over 30 years!

True, but not nearly as nice as the 1834 halfcrown design though. The Alexander Graham Bell two pound looks quite good.

I think it would be very difficult finding an original empty 1887 RM case. Perhaps a contemporary 1887 case is a more realistic target?

I think this is it. http://www.ginbai.com/1887.html

I agree. If it was intended as a protest, then two marks making a cross over the face would seem more likely.

DNW described this as the original case for the 1887 proof set. https://www.dnw.co.uk/auction-archive/lot-archive/lot.php?lot_uid=388253 I imagine the case for the silver set would be similar.

I couldn't resist posting photos on one more church I visited when in holiday in Rome. It's the church of the Jesuits. I was walking back to the hotel in the dark and decided to drop in for a quick look. Was taken back by the beauty, splendour and size of the interior.