Jump to content
British Coin Forum - Predecimal.com

50 Years of RotographicCoinpublications.com A Rotographic Imprint. Price guide reference book publishers since 1959. Lots of books on coins, banknotes and medals. Please visit and like Coin Publications on Facebook for offers and updates.

Coin Publications on Facebook

   Rotographic    

The current range of books. Click the image above to see them on Amazon (printed and Kindle format). More info on coinpublications.com

predecimal.comPredecimal.com. One of the most popular websites on British pre-decimal coins, with hundreds of coins for sale, advice for beginners and interesting information.

Sign in to follow this  
craigy

PCGS DCAM64 1953 crown EBAY

Recommended Posts

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/1953-Queen-Elizabeth-II-Great-Britain-Proof-Crown-PCGS-PR64-DCAM/392017734475?hash=item5b4613eb4b:g:RlIAAOSwTMxazmfB  

 

not sure thats really a deep cameo though 

 

need to get my cameo crown slabbed me thinks, mine is much better than that one , 

 

 

image001.jpg

image003.jpg

Edited by craigy
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If it looks as black as that in the field in the hand and its not a trick of the light then it is a DCAM . But I have seen these look like that in a photo and end up like the half crown top right when you receive them :)

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is my DCAM but its silver so it should look like that. Lovely big hunk of a thing :) all the cloudy areas are just shadow its immaculate. 

 

1977vipproofobv-horz.jpg

Edited by zookeeperz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, zookeeperz said:

This is my DCAM but its silver so it should look like that. Lovely big hunk of a thing :) all the cloudy areas are just shadow its immaculate. 

 

1977vipproofobv-horz.jpg

have a couple of them, amazing how little you can pick them up, not sure if mine are deep cam though, yes you can make them look better by tilting the camera ever so slightly 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, craigy said:

have a couple of them, amazing how little you can pick them up, not sure if mine are deep cam though, yes you can make them look better by tilting the camera ever so slightly 

£15 I think I paid for it about a year ago inc postage. I'd snap em all up at that price. :)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, zookeeperz said:

£15 I think I paid for it about a year ago inc postage. I'd snap em all up at that price. :)

 

so they did a deep cameo and the standard proof in the 77 ? i was on about the standard silver proof, ? or were some just more cameo than others ? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All those discussion we have had on vip proof strikings and frosted cameo are here in a Baldwin sale scroll down and you will see them inc 1951 V.I.P crown 1960 V.I.P crown 1977 V.I.P Crown Very interesting and you can see quite clearly the difference. :)

 

http://www.baldwin.co.uk/media/cms/fixedpricelist/FPLsummer2016/pdfs/06%20BALDWINS%202016%20Summer%20FIXED%20PRICE%20LIST%20-%2004%20-%20BRITISH%20COINS.pdf

 

Apparently the 1977 V.I.P Frosted proof is heavier than the normal silver proof. They surmise although not tested that the crown is made of pure silver. Which would account for the weight difference. Very interesting a little more light now is shed on these elusive coins. :)

 

Edited by zookeeperz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also I noticed the description of the 1951 Cupro festival V.I.P crown. As opposed to the 1977 which came in red leatherite case with silk inlay that coin didn't and had a ticket from a previous owner and from a 1992 collection stating possible specimen or early strike So is it really a V.I.P or just a nice first strike proof?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't like maybes. So much speculation. It shouldn't be beyond the capabilities of anyone who thinks they have a heavily frosted 1977 proof to test the silver content against the regular one. Nobody can use the excuse that the regulars are hard to come by, and there is no shortage of microscopes fitted with EDX. BM, RM, the local uni,...

I'm not sure why people are so exercised over this naming, other than the smell of filthy lucre. Heaven forbid you get one that looks like a 'VIP' but isn't accorded the title. The world will end.

Edited by Rob
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Going back to the 1953 Crown that Jon blyth is selling......... its at £135 with a day left and could buy two full sets for that or there abouts.

Why are people prepared to pay so much.......

I just cant understand these commom proof prices for one coin as although it may look nicer than some ..........plenty to choose from :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I, for one do like the better specimens of coins. I don't think they are worth the premium in many cases. The problem with the 1951 and 1953 crowns is that I believe much as has been stated above, that I can pluck a specimen from a set that is an early and apparently "more special" strike and this to be virtually indistinguishable from some offered as "VIP". This is true in a slightly different way with the 1928-36 specimen Wreath crowns. IMO the TPGs and many others don't get it right.

Caveat emptor!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The 1953 set above described as "DCAM" is barely frosted at all - it looks like a perfectly average specimen of the set.

As for 1977 crowns, there are two proofs: one is the CuNi from the standard year set, and isn't frosted. The other is the silver proof, sold separately in their own cases, and all have a virtually identical degree of frosting; 'CAM' I would say, but if others wish to say DCAM... [shrugs] ... won't affect the price, which has barely moved in 40 years. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I said. The TPGs have introduced another designation to get the financial juices flowing. I can see that a Cameo attribution can reasonably be claimed for a frosted bust, but to subdivide this without making some objective measurement is just a marketing ploy to expand the number chasers' remit.

Given the TPGs don't address this issue in any scientific way, it would help if people stopped being obsessed with something to which there is no correct answer. The RM don't recognise the term 'VIP'. This whole issue is being driven by people who want to capitalise big time on the better frosted examples of common sets. Rhetorical question possibly, but why aren't there many people claiming the same 'VIP' attribution for all denominations? I can probably find half a dozen frosted bust 1953 proof halfpennies for example, all of which are now unquestionably VIPs and worth a million quid in consequence. 

When these common year examples are selling for the same price as the non-set years, which might only have one or two known and only rarely into double figures, then we can safely say the market has lost the plot and someone will shortly be burnt. It's a circus.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Rob said:

As I said. The TPGs have introduced another designation to get the financial juices flowing. I can see that a Cameo attribution can reasonably be claimed for a frosted bust, but to subdivide this without making some objective measurement is just a marketing ploy to expand the number chasers' remit.

Given the TPGs don't address this issue in any scientific way, it would help if people stopped being obsessed with something to which there is no correct answer. The RM don't recognise the term 'VIP'. This whole issue is being driven by people who want to capitalise big time on the better frosted examples of common sets. Rhetorical question possibly, but why aren't there many people claiming the same 'VIP' attribution for all denominations? I can probably find half a dozen frosted bust 1953 proof halfpennies for example, all of which are now unquestionably VIPs and worth a million quid in consequence. 

When these common year examples are selling for the same price as the non-set years, which might only have one or two known and only rarely into double figures, then we can safely say the market has lost the plot and someone will shortly be burnt. It's a circus.

Actually that isn't entirely true. the RM lead you to believe they don't know anything about the V.I.P tag and claim it is entirely invented by dealers. Yet on their own website they advertise a 1953 V.I.P penny. I believe there may well have been special coins struck for whatever reason and someone made the biggest cock up in the history of the royal mint and these coins ended up where they shouldn't of. Would they admit it? No they never do unless someone calls them out with proof. I have browsed lots of the 1953 proof sets and all look the same and this is by different sellers many of them with different cameras and ways of taking pictures. Yet 1 comes along and that coin looks so far from the rest it is obvious it shouldn't be in that set . Why did they RM and other mints start to divide the field from the subject matter in such a way to produce a cameo finish or further to that point a frosted cameo finish which is a special finish added to a proof coin? The RM know more than they let on. But I totally agree It was done for profit to maximise the income and add micro varieties to their listings but they will never admit they are having us over now would they?  And according to baldwins there are 3 types of 1977 25 pence issues this is taken from the sale  I omitted the pictures .

Elizabeth II, Silver Proof Decimal Crown (pure silver?), 1977, of Twenty-Five Pence, silver Jubilee issue, Queen on horseback left, legend surrounding, date below, rev struck en médaille, ampulla and anointing spoon in crowned linear circle, floral border surrounding, edge milled, 28.54g (S.4227). Mottled tone especially around rim each side, housed in original Royal Mint red presentation box, Royal Mint crest in silk lid lining, black pad interior, the only one we have ever seen of this ilk, extremely rare, sold with an example of the regular sterling silver proof crown weighing 27.93g and the regular cupro-nickel Crown weighing 28.15g, all in as issued condition. (3) £1,000

This Crown is heavier than the regular sterling silver proof and has much more of a contrast in colour, brilliance and frosting between the raised design, lettering and fields. Based on the heavier weight, we suspect this special presentation piece is pure silver but test need to be conducted. The coins is sold with the regular sterling proof silver version and the currency cupro-nickel piece for comparison. There is a good provenance with this piece which we are able to reveal to the eventual buyer

So unless it comes with provenance it is just a nice looking coin  is my point. :)

 

Edited by zookeeperz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, zookeeperz said:

Actually that isn't entirely true. the RM lead you to believe they don't know anything about the V.I.P tag and claim it is entirely invented by dealers. Yet on their own website they advertise a 1953 V.I.P penny. I believe there may well have been special coins struck for whatever reason and someone made the biggest cock up in the history of the royal mint and these coins ended up where they shouldn't of.

 

Elizabeth II, Silver Proof Decimal Crown (pure silver?), 1977, of Twenty-Five Pence, silver Jubilee issue, Queen on horseback left, legend surrounding, date below, rev struck en médaille, ampulla and anointing spoon in crowned linear circle, floral border surrounding, edge milled, 28.54g (S.4227). Mottled tone especially around rim each side, housed in original Royal Mint red presentation box, Royal Mint crest in silk lid lining, black pad interior, the only one we have ever seen of this ilk, extremely rare, sold with an example of the regular sterling silver proof crown weighing 27.93g and the regular cupro-nickel Crown weighing 28.15g, all in as issued condition. (3) £1,000

This Crown is heavier than the regular sterling silver proof and has much more of a contrast in colour, brilliance and frosting between the raised design, lettering and fields. Based on the heavier weight, we suspect this special presentation piece is pure silver but test need to be conducted. The coins is sold with the regular sterling proof silver version and the currency cupro-nickel piece for comparison. There is a good provenance with this piece which we are able to reveal to the eventual buyer

1. The term VIP - as I understand it - ONLY applies to proofs struck by the Mint in years where there wasn't a regular proof issue. They were, I understand, presented to VIP visitors to the Mint and are very rare. The term therefore applies to the reason for striking, not the coin itself.

2. That special issue of 1977 crown may well be the exception to the above - a genuine VIP issue of a coin that was issued in large quantities, and with a special case, greater weight. (The case on its own proves nothing, but the greater weight is notable). More provenance would be desirable, but that would probably ensure the coin sold for more than £1000, especially if it was issued to a minor Royal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Peckris said:

1. The term VIP - as I understand it - ONLY applies to proofs struck by the Mint in years where there wasn't a regular proof issue. They were, I understand, presented to VIP visitors to the Mint and are very rare. The term therefore applies to the reason for striking, not the coin itself.

2. That special issue of 1977 crown may well be the exception to the above - a genuine VIP issue of a coin that was issued in large quantities, and with a special case, greater weight. (The case on its own proves nothing, but the greater weight is notable). More provenance would be desirable, but that would probably ensure the coin sold for more than £1000, especially if it was issued to a minor Royal.

It would be incredibly useful if the Royal Mint would make a list of these. No names, no pack drill, but just a summary of which denominations in which year, for actual VIP's. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, 1949threepence said:

It would be incredibly useful if the Royal Mint would make a list of these. No names, no pack drill, but just a summary of which denominations in which year, for actual VIP's. 

This might just be possible under an FOI request, as could a list of recipients. There aren't any security and minimal commercial confidentiality reasons to deny producing such a list - unless of course, there isn't one. They might not wish to reveal the identity of foreign governments using the mint's services.

I was brought up on the understanding as Peck says, i.e. that the non-set years were called VIP proofs because their restricted numbers dictated a very restricted number of recipients. These people may or may not have been VIPs (whatever that actually means), but clearly were not given to all and sundry. Suitable candidates for receiving proofs would be certain cabinet politicians such as those directly responsible for the coinage; the designers, though clearly they wouldn't need subsequent examples to the first set received; the Royal collection; foreign dignitaries or anyone of similar stature you could think of. The list is not very long.

A politician or former politician with an interest in coins might be able to shed some light on this. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×