Scarce Liz II Silver

[sound 25]

When Dave raised the question about good grade Liz silver on another thread it got me thinking about scarcity.

Why is that the 1959, 1958,1957 & 1954 Florins, in high grade, are so scarce? The same could be said about the 1959, 1958, 1954 Half-crown's.

Obviously lower mintages are a factor but its hardly as if only a few thousand were struck. There were over 33,000,000 of the 1957 Florins.

Thoughts?

Mark

[copper123 1,352]

The reason is that simply few people kept these coins as investments/keepsakes/collectors items one of the reasons being that a florin or a halfcrown was probably an half an hours wage for most people .

Coins were only seriously hoarded from 1961 onwards as people got richer and had more money to spend on hobbies anyway.

A raft of books on coins also helped including the check your change series and cw pecks bmc on coper tin and bronze coins which had few fans before his book was published.

[Peckris 579]

There's probably more than one reason.

1) People were generally less than thrilled about the change from silver to cupro-nickel - it was only imminent decimalisation that changed that.

2) The first decade of Liz II is often poorly struck, with shallow designs that wore quickly

3) By the time that people were pulling stuff from change (late 60s), those earlier coins had already had a good deal of circulation

The big question is : why are some 50s dates so much harder than others? My own theory is that some years were minted but not fully issued, so Mint bags got distributed to banks significantly after the date on the coins.

You also spoke of the 1958 and 1959 halfcrowns - it's worth pointing out that the 1960 is criminally underrated; in fact, only 1966 and 1967 are common in genuine BU.

[Peter 615]

Liz 11 coins don't float my boat...OK a 1954 1d might.

In my dealer hat on period I bought 40 1959 Scottish shillings.

My attempt at selling them on Ebay was a disaster.

I recall Declan got one for 99p.

[Nicholas 51]

Large mintages and scarcity. In some ways it seems rarity is perhaps somewhat relative...

Especially when you think that if every 1934 crown was placed neatly on a table in a square, it would only measure 1m x 1m. Size of a small table top. That's really rare to me for a modern coin

Edited October 2, 2014 by Nicholas

[sound 25]

I think the thing about rare/scarce Liz Cupro-nickel is that it's not finding the coins but getting them in genuinely high grade. Hence the point of the thread.

The point is made by comparing the prices of the scarcer high grade coins with EF, huge disparity.

M

[Peckris 579]

I think the thing about rare/scarce Liz Cupro-nickel is that it's not finding the coins but getting them in genuinely high grade. Hence the point of the thread.

The point is made by comparing the prices of the scarcer high grade coins with EF, huge disparity.

M

Yes, that's the whole point. Even AUNC is much easier than fully UNC. Those 50s CuNi's just had to plop out of the press and they began to wear...

[Varietalis 20]

Even though I was born in 1969 I do seem to recall that shillings and two shillings were still to be found in change in the 1970s and even into the '80s. They were accepted as being 5 and 10 pence pieces. I dare say the banks weeded them out over time but to the general public I think that they were seen as legitimate tender. My point is that shillings and florins were often spent in shops and handed out as change long, long after decimalisation. This maybe a factor as to why there are fewer BU specimens than may otherwise be expected.

[ozjohn 552]

Large mintages, indifferent designs and no proof sets save 1953 and 1970 do not stir the imagination. In addition the move from soft silver alloys to CuNi did nothing for the appearance of the coin. They do not wear gracefully either. Any careful examination of the surface of a modern "UNC" CuNi coin reveals a multitude of surface marks from the minting process let alone from any circulation. For me my interest in UK coins ended in 1946 the year I was born.

[Peckris 579]

Even though I was born in 1969 I do seem to recall that shillings and two shillings were still to be found in change in the 1970s and even into the '80s. They were accepted as being 5 and 10 pence pieces. I dare say the banks weeded them out over time but to the general public I think that they were seen as legitimate tender. My point is that shillings and florins were often spent in shops and handed out as change long, long after decimalisation. This maybe a factor as to why there are fewer BU specimens than may otherwise be expected.

Those 5p and 10p pieces lasted until 1990 and 1992 respectively. Before then, it was still possible to find the occasional pre-47 silver coin in your change. This explanation doesn't explain why some halfcrown dates - demonetised in 1969 - are also so hard? Yer 1954 halfcrown had a maximum 15 years in circulation; compare that with up to 38 years for the equivalent florin.

I think ozjohn makes a good point about how quick they wore. Add to that the abysmally shallow designs of the larger denominations.

[sound 25]

Ozjohn,

For the reasons you state I think they are becoming increasingly interesting from a collectors point of view. They are relatively hard in high grade. Mind you we have seen that before, what was considered uncollectable by contemporaries, only to be sought after in a later period.

M

[sound 25]

Peck,

With regard to the 'criminally underrated' 1960 2/6. Do you think its as rare as the 1958 and 1959?

M

[Peter 615]

I cannot remember the last time I looked at my Liz 11 half crowns.

[ozjohn 552]

Sound,

When I was a kid in England I grew up with the Betty 11 2/6, 2/- etc. I guess familiarity breeds contempt however at the time there were plenty of George V & Vi 50% silver coins in circulation with the pre 1920

ones becoming rarer. Sometimes I would get a GBP bag of "silver" coins from the bank and sort out the silver ones, some that I have to this day. Even then silver was about 15/- an oz. while 6/- of 50% was half an oz. therefore still worth hoarding.

[Peckris 579]

With regard to the 'criminally underrated' 1960 2/6. Do you think its as rare as the 1958 and 1959?

No, not as scarce, but then I don't think the 1958 and 1959 halfcrowns are anything like as rare in AUNC+ than the equivalent florins. It's all relative, but I think the steady price hike for the 1960 over the years proves it's elusive (CCGB has it 2x the value of 1961 and 1964 in BU which seems possibly about right).

For the reasons you state I think they are becoming increasingly interesting from a collectors point of view. They are relatively hard in high grade. Mind you we have seen that before, what was considered uncollectable by contemporaries, only to be sought after in a later period.

I think the late 60s is 'the exception that proves the rule' - some modern coins went from 'uncollectable' to hyped-up 'super rare in BU' almost overnight. Now the market has got a truer perspective and prices are more realistic. For example, Liz II 50s florins are much more difficult than halfcrowns and this has been recognised for quite some time now.

Edited October 3, 2014 by Peckris

[sound 25]

I cannot remember the last time I looked at my Liz 11 half crowns.

Peter,

You need to get out more. Theres life outside copper and bronze. LOL

Mark

Edited October 3, 2014 by sound

[ozjohn 552]

GBP bag of silver should be a 5 pound bag of silver.

[DaveG38 385]

Well, I've just received my 1961 florin from Mark and very nice it is too. I have had a bit of luck lately, when I managed to pick up 1959, 1958, 1957 and 1954 florins in damn near UNC for just £1 each. Certainly the 1958 and 1957 are UNC, whereas the other two are a touch under this - an extremely good extremely fine grade. They are certainly good enough for me and my 20thC upgrades. Not now worth spending considerable sums on trying to achieve perfect BU specimens for these dates.

[Peckris 579]

Well, I've just received my 1961 florin from Mark and very nice it is too. I have had a bit of luck lately, when I managed to pick up 1959, 1958, 1957 and 1954 florins in damn near UNC for just £1 each. Certainly the 1958 and 1957 are UNC, whereas the other two are a touch under this - an extremely good extremely fine grade. They are certainly good enough for me and my 20thC upgrades. Not now worth spending considerable sums on trying to achieve perfect BU specimens for these dates.

That's a bargain and a half Dave! Even 20 years ago, my UNC-and-very-nearly-BU 1954 and 1959 halfcrowns cost me £4 apiece. I agree with you about "not worth spending the money" on absolutely perfect specimens of them.

[DaveG38 385]

Well, I've just received my 1961 florin from Mark and very nice it is too. I have had a bit of luck lately, when I managed to pick up 1959, 1958, 1957 and 1954 florins in damn near UNC for just £1 each. Certainly the 1958 and 1957 are UNC, whereas the other two are a touch under this - an extremely good extremely fine grade. They are certainly good enough for me and my 20thC upgrades. Not now worth spending considerable sums on trying to achieve perfect BU specimens for these dates.

That's a bargain and a half Dave! Even 20 years ago, my UNC-and-very-nearly-BU 1954 and 1959 halfcrowns cost me £4 apiece. I agree with you about "not worth spending the money" on absolutely perfect specimens of them.

My general approach has been to try and upgrade to GEF to UNC where I can, but without breaking the bank. As I work backwards, I'm often finding that I'm dropping to EF (and for the 1905 halfcrown I'll probably stick with my own fine specimen) and that's OK with me. The only exception I make is that within a date run, I like to ensure I have at least one coin which is in UNC condition. In that way, if I ever go to type collecting I will have a good basis to start from.

[Paulus 1,942]

Well, I've just received my 1961 florin from Mark and very nice it is too. I have had a bit of luck lately, when I managed to pick up 1959, 1958, 1957 and 1954 florins in damn near UNC for just £1 each. Certainly the 1958 and 1957 are UNC, whereas the other two are a touch under this - an extremely good extremely fine grade. They are certainly good enough for me and my 20thC upgrades. Not now worth spending considerable sums on trying to achieve perfect BU specimens for these dates.

That's a bargain and a half Dave! Even 20 years ago, my UNC-and-very-nearly-BU 1954 and 1959 halfcrowns cost me £4 apiece. I agree with you about "not worth spending the money" on absolutely perfect specimens of them.

My general approach has been to try and upgrade to GEF to UNC where I can, but without breaking the bank. As I work backwards, I'm often finding that I'm dropping to EF (and for the 1905 halfcrown I'll probably stick with my own fine specimen) and that's OK with me. The only exception I make is that within a date run, I like to ensure I have at least one coin which is in UNC condition. In that way, if I ever go to type collecting I will have a good basis to start from.

I think that's a good point. There are several reasons why I switched to type collecting, one of the main ones being that once I had some high grade examples with eye appeal I completely lost interest in looking at (even owning) the lower grade coins, and there was no way I was ever going to afford a high grade example of every date. Much happier striving for 1 cracking example from each series

[davidrj 194]

I think that's a good point. There are several reasons why I switched to type collecting, one of the main ones being that once I had some high grade examples with eye appeal I completely lost interest in looking at (even owning) the lower grade coins, and there was no way I was ever going to afford a high grade example of every date. Much happier striving for 1 cracking example from each series

Exactly where I got to with bronze pennies

[sound 25]

I think that's a good point. There are several reasons why I switched to type collecting, one of the main ones being that once I had some high grade examples with eye appeal I completely lost interest in looking at (even owning) the lower grade coins, and there was no way I was ever going to afford a high grade example of every date. Much happier striving for 1 cracking example from each series

[DaveG38 385]

Well, I've just received my 1961 florin from Mark and very nice it is too. I have had a bit of luck lately, when I managed to pick up 1959, 1958, 1957 and 1954 florins in damn near UNC for just £1 each. Certainly the 1958 and 1957 are UNC, whereas the other two are a touch under this - an extremely good extremely fine grade. They are certainly good enough for me and my 20thC upgrades. Not now worth spending considerable sums on trying to achieve perfect BU specimens for these dates.

That's a bargain and a half Dave! Even 20 years ago, my UNC-and-very-nearly-BU 1954 and 1959 halfcrowns cost me £4 apiece. I agree with you about "not worth spending the money" on absolutely perfect specimens of them.

My general approach has been to try and upgrade to GEF to UNC where I can, but without breaking the bank. As I work backwards, I'm often finding that I'm dropping to EF (and for the 1905 halfcrown I'll probably stick with my own fine specimen) and that's OK with me. The only exception I make is that within a date run, I like to ensure I have at least one coin which is in UNC condition. In that way, if I ever go to type collecting I will have a good basis to start from.

I think that's a good point. There are several reasons why I switched to type collecting, one of the main ones being that once I had some high grade examples with eye appeal I completely lost interest in looking at (even owning) the lower grade coins, and there was no way I was ever going to afford a high grade example of every date. Much happier striving for 1 cracking example from each series

Unfortunately, I'm a completist, at least as far as dates go. I think it goes back to when I was a child and I used to collect Brooke Bond Tea cards. The aim was always to get the set and stick them all in the album, and an album with one missing was a no-no for me. It's the same with coins. I need to complete the date runs, even if they aren't all in top condition. Some, of course almost never will be. For instance my 1854 sixpence is fine at best as is my 1893 Jub Head one. The likelihood of finding, let alone affording a EF one of either is quite low, and so I have to accept lower grades to fill that itchy gap.

Of course, it does make for mixed grades in a series, but in some ways that can be instructive as it does show the effects of wear if I have pretty much all grades represented. The real problems come with the rarities. I don't yet have a 1841 halfcrown, and so I'm interested in the one mentioned on another thread on here. It will cost me though if I can secure it through an auction, but its the only way to fill that gap. I managed an 1839 halfcrown a while ago. It's absolutely horrible, but still cost a fair sum, but more importantly it filled one more gap. Similarly, I've just bought a 1703 plain halfcrown in around VF for £1850. Pricey enough for me, but it does finish my date run of Queen Anne halfcrowns. Completism can be a bit of an obsession!!!

[sound 25]

"Completist can be a bit of an obsession!!!"

Dave, every collector should frame that. LOL. Let's face it, it's a nurdy hobby/obsession. But then so is soccer.

By the way anybody collect 'flags of the world' or 'American civil war cards' when they were a kid?

M