frosted proof

[Rob 3,000]

What you see is what you get. Images that are small relative to the overall canvas are usually designed to hide all the warts. It applies to eBay and just about every scenario I can think of. If you want to sell something, the best way is to give an accurate description and a quality picture. It is something a lot of people don't seem to consider, things like 'half guineas' in gold cunningly disguised as 4.4g of worn tat in a shilling's clothing spring to mind. The detail isn't clear for a bloody good reason. If in doubt, leave it out. You can never get more than about 78% of a square box filled with one side of a coin, so it isn't unreasonable to expect say 65% or better coverage with the useful bits.

[PWA 1967 1,841]

On 10/6/2017 at 10:30 PM, craigy said:

this is the problem i had with ingram coins, with the 53 halfcrown, tight git stripped me up for £190 quid in the end, had no choice short of going down to southampton to get money back there was nothing i could do, although he did call the police when i said i was gonna come down and get it back, lol, sent him proof etc about what he had sold me,  but wasnt interested, very pushy dealer, not a member of the btna either if that means anything, trusted him as a dealer to price his coins according tot here rarity etc, dont think he has much knowledge in this area, i didn't but i do now, knowledge is power lol

As you had only had the coin a couple of days why would they not just let you return it ?.

[craigy 362]

6 minutes ago, PWA 1967 said:

As you had only had the coin a couple of days why would they not just let you return it ?.

On 10/11/2017 at 9:32 PM, 1949threepence said:

Which one did you deal with, Michael, or his son Rendell? Not keen on either of them. In my opinion, their stock is overpriced.  

Although I did get a nice F26 from them, about a year ago. That was a bit overpriced, but a very nice coin, so was willing to splash out on it.    

   

was away when it turned up so just under 3 weeks in the end after his not replying for a week or bit more, my own fault, hadnt researched the coin properly, bought one the same frosted even more for 7 quid, and a heavy deep cameo set for 100, all the silvers were deep cameo not so much the bronzes,  showed him ones on ebay that had sold for 80p in the states, described exactly what it was siting the books, davies etc, but he based it on one that sold slabbed in 2014 at the london coin thing,  na he called the police on me when i said i was coming down to Southampton, not much you can do with people like that,  the son also admitted it had a massive mark up, was nothing i could do, buyer beware never more appropriate, just didnt like the attitude they had, tough shit basically

Edited October 14, 2017 by craigy

[PWA 1967 1,841]

Well i think or should i say know i would of done something out of principal.

You were sold something not as described and he told you he had received it back and didnt say the coin was received damaged etc.

Dont know what the guy was getting the police involved for (they would of been on your side) and he should of just refunded you.

I agree you should be able to trust dealers or have some trust in people in general.........It was not your own fault.

More the fact the dealer was bang out of order if what you have typed is true.

Plenty people you can trust but obviously he /they are the small percentage.

I need to stop typing now as its annoying me 

[craigy 362]

it was described as what it was, thats the trouble, the rare one is the frosted proof that is found in the plastic set, I of gratia pointing to bead and all that, which i told him,     only problem was his massive large mark up and me not knowing, other than that his description was accurate of what coin it was, i placed too much trust, there was issue with a price he offered for my coins i swapped in for credit, it  changed to what he was suggesting by a lot once he got hold of them, not due too wear cause he knew what he was getting, he got nearly 400 olympic 50p;s and £2 coins 50p's for about 20 quid in the end, basically 20 quid over face value, we did a deal for 600, chose that and a 1951 proof penny at 50 quid, felt really pressured , so i wanted my 550 back and him to take the coin back, in the end i asked what he paid for it £190 and took that from 550 leaving me £360, there was nothing i could do, so i had to cut my losses and learn a lesson, lucky it was now and not 20 years time eh , well you obviosly dont want angry people banging on your door,  didnt know what else to say to him, was getting nothing, they offered to get it slabbed but london coins wouldnt for some reason, so dunno what happened, sorry episode really

Edited October 14, 2017 by craigy

[PWA 1967 1,841]

Its not about £ notes there are billions of them its about the fact you were not happy.

I hope the hundreds of people reading this ask him questions should they wish to buy off him in the future.

If you had just paid any postage costs they incurred that should of been the end of it and nobody worse off.

[argentumandcoins 70]

As a dealer you have 2 ways you can go.

1) keep the cash and lose a customer or 20.

2) give a refund, take a hit and keep your reputation intact.

No-brainer really (unless you've got no brain).

It would be remiss of me to pass judgement on a fellow dealer........

[Rob 3,000]

I would question why he had paid £190 for it? That was the starting point for what is a massive pile of c**p

[Bronze & Copper Collector 401]

13 hours ago, craigy said:

i think i shouted at hem both down the phone at some point after many ignored emails lol    the stock they have and they still felt happy with fleecing me out of £190 quid, ok i should have been aware of what i was buying but i trusted them, my fault really,  they still keep sending me catalogs and emails when i asked them not too, would never buy from them again, or recommend, always something a little wrong with the coins they sell, little digs, corrosion, unsightly toning, i know a coin cannot be perfect. but you know what i mean 

Agreed as to overgrading and overpricing..

Also leave something to be desired as to attribution...

Purchased 3 coins at various times (Before they offered images).

ALL misattributed. Kept 2 as it was cheaper to keep them than return them.

3rd one I returned as it was a more expensive variety (turns out it wasn't ). And wasn't going to eat that one.

Haven't puchased from them in more than a decade....

 

[craigy 362]

On 10/15/2017 at 8:03 AM, Bronze & Copper Collector said:

Agreed as to overgrading and overpricing..

Also leave something to be desired as to attribution...

Purchased 3 coins at various times (Before they offered images).

ALL misattributed. Kept 2 as it was cheaper to keep them than return them.

3rd one I returned as it was a more expensive variety (turns out it wasn't ). And wasn't going to eat that one.

Haven't puchased from them in more than a decade....

 

i wont be anymore, nor recommend to anyone, they dont have good reviews on google either lol

[zookeeperz 470]

41 minutes ago, craigy said:

i wont be anymore, nor recommend to anyone, they dont have good reviews on google either lol

It is a shame as the good guys and we have prob all of them on here get judged from afar with the same mistrust  that old saying " all the bloody same" which couldn't be further from the truth. However I think the good guys are in the minority when it comes to dealers. M.A.Coins and V.coins should show you that. I don't know how many there are between the two outlets but it must be hundreds. All Crooks. All can't grade and all overprice and never mention any faults on the coins. How did it get so bad? I'll pay for a coin whatever the value should be but when your faced with x2 to x5 book value. I wonder how they pay their bills? Everyone and his dog knows that spink UNC coins especially the Bronze and copper issues are for RED FDC coins not Brown AUNC coins or even Brown UNC. My take was whatever the EF price was, is the non red colour prices. I have seen some of the websites from guys here and they are the only ones who have credibility IMHO and tbh you're too generous with your undergrading. But like myself I know why you do it. And its kudos to the dealer that looks at a possible AEF and calls it VF. Not many will  

[Bronze & Copper Collector 401]

2 dealers that come to mind immediately, that I had never been disappointed with, are Michael Gouby and the late Laurie Bamford.

 

[Guest 1937 VIP Crown]

If you read the ESC extract from the listing you will see it does say that in the Lingford sale they say that 'special proof with more frosting in the arms on reverse, only about six struck. Brilliant'

Three Glendinings sales mention it as possibly in fine silver and refer to ESC ref 393A

 

Compare this coin to another PR65CAM from PCGS and it is clear that there is indeed more frosting on the reverse, it stands out when having the coins in the hand but not so much in images.

I only know as I bought this and have another to compare it to.

[Guest 1937 VIP Crown]

The English Proof and Pattern Crown size Pieces 1658-1960 n by H W A Linecar and A G Stone published by Spink in 1968 mentions only 6. It and out of date reference so it may be incorrect. However it is generally its a good reference point.

The normal proof not struck in pure silver and without the frosting are Old ESC 393 new ESC 4021 - this is probably where the population of 59 comes from.

The coin you have purchased is Old ESC 393A New ESC 4022 has more frosting on the portrait compared to normal proofs and were mentioned as being struck in pure silver and not 50% silver content. They also have more frosting in the royal arms on the reverse hence the CAM. Lincar & Stone provide a population of 5 to 6 hence the rarity R5.

[craigy 362]

On 10/15/2017 at 8:03 AM, Bronze & Copper Collector said:

 

 

25 minutes ago, Guest 1937 VIP Crown said:

The English Proof and Pattern Crown size Pieces 1658-1960 n by H W A Linecar and A G Stone published by Spink in 1968 mentions only 6. It and out of date reference so it may be incorrect. However it is generally its a good reference point.

The normal proof not struck in pure silver and without the frosting are Old ESC 393 new ESC 4021 - this is probably where the population of 59 comes from.

The coin you have purchased is Old ESC 393A New ESC 4022 has more frosting on the portrait compared to normal proofs and were mentioned as being struck in pure silver and not 50% silver content. They also have more frosting in the royal arms on the reverse hence the CAM. Lincar & Stone provide a population of 5 to 6 hence the rarity R5.

are you referring to this coin ?  there are only 5 or 6 ?

[Guest 1937 Crown]

No thats not a VIP Proof, there is little or no frosting to the reverse.

VERY hard to tell from photos, in the hand its much easier and becomes obvious that the VIP coins are different. As I said I have the VIP and the PF65CAM, both PCGS slabbed, and the difference is clear in the hand but not in images.

Hence it can lead to a lot of confusion when comparing images.

[VickySilver 775]

Yikes, this bit about frosting is always disconcerting and repeated on these Boards ad infinitum. I think it arbitrary but convenient to define ex post facto what is and is not "VIP (Record)". The 1937 Crown is particularly problematic if one lets it bother him/herself. I am fine with a nice mark free 65 proof in Cam or DCam as a decent proof, and save the arguments for when there is little else to do. Frosting on a particular coin is a function of so many processes, and many were not always fastidiously employed and so hate to use that as a sole criteria. I like metal and strike quality as well, and though I admit some pieces are a bit better than even a 65Cam (not sure if that is so with a DCam though), can not fathom a huge price differential.

I'll be impressed when somebody shows me an XRF done on a specimen that shows sterling rather than 0.500 content. Proofs are quite something in the silver/CuNi series from Vicky to E2 as quality is all over. I think I have shown before my 1839 half crown that is much finer in presentation than proofs struck 125 years later, but coins such as the Wreaths that are almost always better described as "Specimen" IMO than proof leave much to be desired. This VIP status thing has its limits.

I might also add that I have had some discussion with Steve Hill about the Bull apparent attempt at dividing "regular" from "VIP version" proofs of G6, particular to the non-standard year proofs of the 1940s, and we are both of the opinion that the latter is not a separate category and is erroneous as his are listings for many coins from the 1940s that are listed as mattes but yet to be confirmed...

Edited November 13, 2017 by VickySilver

[craigy 362]

On 11/11/2017 at 11:29 PM, Guest 1937 Crown said:

No thats not a VIP Proof, there is little or no frosting to the reverse.

VERY hard to tell from photos, in the hand its much easier and becomes obvious that the VIP coins are different. As I said I have the VIP and the PF65CAM, both PCGS slabbed, and the difference is clear in the hand but not in images.

Hence it can lead to a lot of confusion when comparing images.

can we see some pictures of yours