VickySilver

Yes, good show and please do report on results. I recently went to first ammonia and then to the reduction method on a Liberia 1965 30 dollar proof coin with great results... Please do rinse the funk of liberally...

Please note the vast difference in the type of hairlines from the OP to the last cited....

Well, there certainly can be planchet prep but generally what would be on the lookout for is DIE PREP and if that was the case the lines you see would be raised, or in relief. Many planchets, and even those destined for special proofs or patterns were NOT treated well and these can be seen in perusal of the coin....

This is one area that they are pretty consistent (re: hairlines). I would see this as a 62 at NGC and probably cameo, not quite Deep Cameo. These look fairly obvious to be post strike as many could not resist the odd swipe at the coin's surface. I have seen many graded and have a couple of 63 Cameos that are just a bit better. I really like the nice clean cheek on George as usually this is besought with some issues, though less so on the Jub. proof. The real treasure is to find one on the currency - that is with a nice clean cheek and high point bony structures. For some reason the sword shaft seems to find more than its share of marks (on currency).

A couple of comments, obviously from my perspective (but then again I probably had way too much chemistry, pharmacology, etc.): Pure acetone not generally a problem and not nearly as toxic as many may lead readers to believe. In the States, we get it at Home Depot for about $8 per quart and that is quite a quantity. It will react on long exposure to copper surfaces. I recommend it applied with the aforementioned soaked cotton buds or "Q-tips" as we call them on this side of the Pond. Please do not scrub surfaces, and I suggest tamping the surfaces or worst case very light circular strokes sans pressure applied. The cotton on these buds is sometimes not cotton or is of tight wound fibers that are possibly more likely to damage coin surface. Even after acetone treatment, I wash thoroughly with tap water then apply WITH MY FINGERS and rub into the surface mild dish detergent. I then rinse even more thoroughly and then tamp dry with a high nap white cotton towel. My favorite solvent, and not just for organics, is the aforementioned ammonia which should be without colorizers or additives if possible. I then do soaks for varying period and use the soaked cotton buds to again work the surfaces in like manner to the acetone. This will reduce some oxidants and not damage the metal on silver, gold or copper nickel but can not guarantee copper and would therefore probably not use it on copper... There are also the redox tricks which will pull away generally more problematic surface oxidants. Many ways to do it, and experimentation is suggested on lesser coins. One method is to microwave vinegar for 2-3 minutes and then throw in a thin sheet of aluminium, and then baking soda in modest amounts (such as 5 ml/one teaspoon), and then the coin. This one is more fun than the others but have to take care. This REALLY works well on gold coins with those infernal red copper spot oxidations... Blah, blah, blah,,,,,,Anyway, just a couple of points....

Surprise! Uh, no. Nice!

How about one of the major driving forces behind this "pop top" business? Registry sets! Yikes. The TPGs rate people's submitted sets but note that all coins must be from that TPG and no others included. I probably let my pride get the better of me, but thrice with regards to sixpences and shillings (Victoria and George V) and Victoria half sovereigns, I suggested to each poster on one of the chat rooms that possibly I might blow their set(s) out of the water but chose not to party at their end of the pool & of course they took exception. I guess my real point is that there are many coins that are not slabbed or not entered into registry set competition.

Wow, that looks to be of shallow relief - is that to relieve us of the sight of the [still] Dumbo ears and goofy visage? The commem version above looks to have the ears toned down a bit and the more vacuous appearance of the 5 pound coin? Also, thee appears to be a square ear type of rendition on the commem.

I have seen none other than "46" in 30+ years of collecting......Hypervarietals are not my forte but even I pay attention to this.

As has always been the case, their whole M.O. really escapes me. It could be just me but I can not but believe that they would bring in more bids and money by going "standard" with their auctions. Not that anyone probably cares much, but there is really not a lot (ie. near to nothing) of interest to me. A lot of miscellaneous sovereigns, with a few good ones thrown in, and tons of later commem. gold schlock is my general impression.

IMHO, likely will be a bloodbath on that one Sir....Good Luck to ya...

Well, naturally one would adjust bid to the premium BUT there is a tendency at least when on-line bidding at premium auction to forget just a little bit. Also, ahead of time I just don't engage in the auction at all on some and especially if there is a starting bid that appears to high. I suppose this has been studied, but I wonder if a coin goes for an increment or two less if auction houses don't occasionally take a loss when premiums are raised.

Hmm, I am here in Maryland in the States so might be different but have not had exactly that yet to happen. I usually snipe at about 4 seconds and there is enough time to submit a "response" bid of one, two, or three increments at that level. Maybe they can elucidate? Good luck as they are not that accessible. I have only had issue unrelated when purchasing bullion even though I have NEVER had a credit issue and have a 100.0 rating. If I don't check ahead of time the system rejects my bid.

I bring this up from time to time, as I have only seen the individual crown on ebay a single time (2002 $25 With the World Junior Track and Field Female Runner). I admit to being a collector of these somewhat hideous "National Hero" series of coins in the minor denominations but have never seen the set or any direct evidence & the Royal Mint and Bank of Jamaica (BoJ) don't seem to want or be able to help. I'd like to see some confirmation of witness, a picture, or best case an actual set for sale.

Update? NONE. These 2002 Jamaica proof sets must be extremely rare with suggested original mintage of sets I have now heard was 50 (perhaps fewer). As there is a modicum of a collector base for such; I wish I could confirm. Other new: well I recently purchased a 1976 Cook Islands 100 dollars in true matte uncirculated(before they started selling all the schlock). This coin did have mintage of 50 but evidently all were sent "down there" and many were scratched up. I bought mine at bullion and yet there is one on sale, if you can call it that, on ebay at 2337 USD!

Good point about fairs and money - but you should see the membership at "coin clubs" - NO younger people and this with free memberships! Locally BTW the Baltimore show or fair is entirely free to all with scads of "Young Numismatist" meetings, giveaways, etc. One time I dragged my son and they gave him loads of dollar coin commems, quarters, halves, books, stickers, bags, cell phone covers - brought back an entire bag of schlock.....

Of course that is basically my slant - it doesn't by and large seem to be there, but can't help but try really - or at least that is my thought.

I'm on the fence on this topic as I have a near-14 year old son, and neither he nor his friends nor classmates for love or money can be stimulated to find interest in coins, and this is despite my best efforts over the last 10 years. Moreover I am a solo-practice physician in the US and even give away coins with some "pep talk" to young folk coming to the office - this to essentially NO effect despite picking buffalo nickels, new and old types, and the latest in commem quarter dollars. Many collectors, but especially dealers here crow about how many young numismatists they see - well while there are a COUPLE, there actually are relatively precious few and I mean few at ANY venues including small, medium and large shows and coin shops. This is true on up through young men and ladies in their early 30s as well. I have looked for signs of life (collecting or interest in coins) in younger generations and they are hard to find....

Ah, nicely put and couldn't agree more. I pulled out some very nice coins that I use as reference and then just had a look and answer a few questions I had come up with. Looked at two, and then had a look at a broader range. Very enjoyable and that bit cost nought.

Thanks Bernie for your input; I would very much like to have seen the entire 1933 proof set intact and any paperwork or circumstances that accompanied it.

Exactly on the last two. I really love pursuing a rare coin, even if perhaps in an undercontested series but let alone in the series like the penny. No need to beat the chest but such coins really enhance and in some fashion "make" a collection. The stories behind getting these for some of us that are not "checkbook collectors" are of personal satisfaction and sometimes interesting even to others that we might share these stories with. Also, as Richard says, we do have photographic records and even write articles on occasion using these coins. To be honest, I look at my better coins about as frequently as those that are just filling an "open" space in a series run.

That is a really wonderful and sharply struck coin, hard to see it as currency. This was such a dream coin - the 1933 penny - for me and so many others, sadly never to be. Interesting to see if any of the surge in values for coins will catch up with this coin or not. 20th century Brit bronze have not IMHO seen much rise in the last 5-6 years.

I don't have issue with where the estimate is, and as you've said, who really cares. And bidding can begin at, above or below this number. What I don't understand the start below reserve since it is not a "real" auction IMHO & the wall bouncing idea is likely poor as evidenced in this auction.

I really don't get the aggravating philosophy of having a starting bid less than the minimum bid. It IMHO does NOT generate bidding frenzies or increase of actual buying interest.