Leaderboard

Agreed - after all these years the tone hopefully adds to these sets in a possative way and becomes part of the set . Same cannot be said for the cased 70's sets in their plastic holders

I have always enjoyed looking at Brockages and coins with errors. Within my collection I have only 5 and I have attached photos. The copper coloured disc is actually or would have been an English 2p I look forward to seeing yours.

Your only regret neads to be that its not a 1951 as that has the crown in it and is a real stunner

Thanks to everyone who has read and replied to this post. I feel a lot happier with my purchase, knowing the ribbon toning is normal. I will need to get my head around this loading photos witchcraft. There are a few coins I own, that I would love to get an opinion on. Cheers, everyone.

£85 for a 1950 set - absolute bargain. Given the age, some degree of toning, however slight, is almost inevitable. In this case from the ribbon.

Perhaps you could email pictures to one of us? Might be VERY nice, especially if cameo. Actually the boxes fair poorly as well, and would give a bit of premium. I take some and SEPARATELY store them in a zip-lock "baggie".

Splashed out on the 1642 Oxford crown, which although I thought a little worse than the advertised VF is still much better than mine, only 3 to go now to get every crown up to AF-F (1665, 1675 and 1678).

Agreed again, toning is Part of the ageing process of these sets, if you look for The 1911 silver proof sets you'll see that a majority of these Sets have a heavy Blue tone, obviously the die of the velvet is reacting to The silver. I'd be more worried if they didn't have some form of tone to them......

Actually, both the above ticked boxes. The first as an example of a double obverse, and the second as an example of a George II coin. Notwithstanding that, I have gone overboard keeping the first issue G2 halfpennies with both silver and copper proofs and 1732/1 all falling into the too nice to sell category, a GEOGIVS because I've had it for ages though is only EF, and the 1734/3 retained simply because I have only seen three with the next best only in the good fine ballpark. The 1738 appears to be the second best of seven I've noted so far. There will be more unaccounted for, but it's not that common because I sub-conciously look for them as the variety is clear down to below fine grade. The 1738 in the April 1986 sale at Glens looks to be better from the description with lustre as well. For a change, George I. 1719 first issue halfpenny.

Make a mistake in the title of a new post and you're buggered! 'You' to 'Your' please @Nordle11!