coinkat

Just curious about the mintage and surviving population for this coin... I have not been able to locate separate mintage figures for the Laureate Head 6d. So my question is more about the surviving population, interest, rarity and valuation for this coin. Please share your thoughts

AU is not without controversy - I see your point.

It was graded MS64 by PCGS

https:///coinimages/2026/04100933/05728398_large.1698.jpg?v=1549156610276

https:///TrueView/28436102_800x600.jpg And this is my 1701-

I just posted my 1689 half crown- it is a 53 graded by PCGS

I consider the 1698 to be the most available date of the series. Your example looks well struck. My concern is over the quality of the fields and that could be just in the image and not the coin. I would not be in the MS camp- the thread captures the problems of trying to grade from an image

As for the 1689 - if that was graded by NGC, I suspect it may grade 50- possibly 53 given the detail in Mary's hair- Again, lustre would be critical with this coin as well.

The Sheldon scale and American grading in general is set to a different standard than UK grading. Lustre is a critical factor in terms of establishing a grade above EF45. Lustre is not just measured by reflectivity but the actual quality of the surfaces - especially the fields. There are pick up points to determine wear from circulation over that of a weak strike. Further, understanding dies varieties and determining whether a coin is a early or late die state example helps assessing a grade. There are mint state coins with less than satisfactory strikes- but that is how they were made. Perhaps the better and more satisfying term should be "as struck"- that seems to be used by some of the UK auction houses. Not all coins within the same series or even within the same grade are created equal. The coin should tell the story.

Thanks Nick... That's about what I thought

The grade will depend on Lustre. From the image, the lustre is difficult to determine. Based on some of the gold colour in the protected areas, the lustre could be decent but does it extend into the fields? The portrait looks pretty good. If there is lustre, NGC will likely grade it within the AU spectrum. If lustre is absent, then EF40-45. Best of luck with the submission.

There are many different things to consider here and there is just no simple answer... -Auction participation... The right collectors need to participate if auction results are going to be used as a market indicator -Demographics... Varieties are not common knowledge to common collectors. Further, there are fewer younger people that seem to connect with history, art and design and how that is memorialized on coinage. This is unfortunate. -Availability... How often do certain rarities appear on the market and think how condition plays a role in determining the hammer price. I suspect the overall copper market is okay but certain rare varieties will fluctuate given demand.

The earlier George II shillings, especially those through 1729 are tougher to find in higher grades than those minted 10 years later. I have enjoyed collecting this series. My 1727 was bought about 12 years raw and submitted to NGC and it graded AU53. It has an original look and I am pleased with it. I don't recall seeing a GEM Unc. I don't think the series is overpriced for coins in the GVF and higher grade range.

Good to read that there has been a vibrant discussion. As for the 1912 1/2 crown, the question of a possible strike thru was raised given the size and sharpness. I suppose it could be bag mark. It is not an MS coin so a 58 is the best day at a TPG and on the NGC side of the pond. The 1957 1/2 crown does show evidence of die clashing at the lower area that was circled. The area around the ear looks to be a lamination issue and the area below the eye is either a bag mark or some type of post mint hit from another object. The Victorian copper is die clashing... Nice looking obverse.

Does anyone think that what is next to A in HALF is a strike thru? It just looks too clean to be a gouge.

Colin88- Just for fun, what coins did you submit? Your post reads as if you were surprised with the PCGS grades. What might help facilitate explanations to the difference in UK and US grading extends beyond comparing the Sheldon scale to either a 100 point scale or the traditional UK grades. Start by appreciating the differences in what US TPG and UK graders look for. The strike carries so much more weight in the UK. That is the standard and the expectation is that a complete or near complete strike is required for a MS grade. There are numerous UK coin series that UK collectors are reluctant to call MS because a coin may not have have a complete or near complete strike. In contrast, the focal point of US grading centers on lustre and how that translates into eye appeal. While the strike of a coin is not overlooked, there seems to be an appreciation that not all coins within a series are created equal. I suspect the strike of the coins that you submitted is part of the difference in your grade and the PCGS grade. Best wishes in connection with your future submissions.

A start in trying to quantify subjectivity. And it does not pass the straight face test as subjectivity cannot be eliminated in the evaluation of selecting numbers for these categories especially eye appeal. Grading is just simply not absolute.

Grading is subjective and that is not going to change. Some opinions are better than others when it comes to grading. For those that treat grading as a math calculation in that there is an absolute answer are going to be disappointed. The expectation that all the major TPG graders will see a coin in the same way seems unrealistic given the inherent subjectivity associated with eye appeal. While I do not participate here that often, I do not see those that participate more as being shy to express their thoughts as to TPG. Seems the majority here still have doubts about TPG and part of that doubt relates not to just the question of consistency, but the perception of what is lost from collecting from the coin being in a "coffin". I stand by my prior observations and advice. I do not see my response as dodging or evading a question, but rather a blunt reminder as to what is truly important. And that would be the coin and not what I see as the temporary housing the coin currently resides in. The grade on the slab was the TPG opinion at the time of submission... Just resubmitting a coin is in essence is expressing disagreement with TPG.

Nice coin

I am not a believer in making the statement that if coin A grades X in the US that automatically it grades Y in the UK. The best strategy in buying quality coins is understanding the series, the strike characteristics, lustre and originality with the goal of buying the coin that represents quality for the grade that is affordable. A coin really cannot change unless it is enhanced. And most often that is done with the intent of getting a higher grade from TPG. An opinion of a coin can change given that grading is merely an opinion. So my point is do not lose sight of the coin and it's characteristics, how it compares to other examples within the series and how available the coin is based on its state of preservation. There is a condition rarity factor that should be factored into buying.

My sincere apologies for missing the date on a post and basically wishing someone well.

Just came across a 1911 penny... Nothing to write home about in terms of the condition, but it does have an unusual die break that extends through the date. It is fairly dramatic... Anyone know of this as a variety?

Hey Wybrit... Hope All is well

The biggest challenge is determining what British rarities and/or condition rarities will capture interest that will translate into increased demand and higher valuations. Good luck in your endeavors