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.

VickySilver

Coin Hoarder
  • Content Count

    3,548
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    59

Everything posted by VickySilver

  1. More disappointment there for me at least.... Love the Einstein quote & sometimes find myself questioning my coin sanity!
  2. Thanks! I will take a look as well...
  3. VickySilver

    Ebay's BEST Offerings

    Yea, the 1918H trails a bit, although in my experience in being VERY picky the 1919H struck in good metal, of good colour and excellent strike is harder than any of the others. If not as choosy and going down to the gVF sort of category, then I might agree with the above schema. Again, I seem to have found more than my share of KNs of both dates - they IMHO tend to be much better struck than the "H crew". The strike of Mike's 19H is really lovely. The TPGs are willing to technically grade softly struck pieces into the 63-65 range - so they may technically be close to as struck but just too soft and sometimes the metal being of poor colour. I suspect that a 19H if well struck and of the best quality could bring a big price, unfortunately moreso if slabbed high.
  4. No doubt. But I really have been unhappy with the quality of the coins on sale of late as so many have been cleaned, wiped, etc. I really used to get so excited at every publication of the SNC and their auctions (I remember paying at the time what I thought were fancy prices and only wish those times could be had again).
  5. VickySilver

    Ebay's BEST Offerings

    Very nice there Sir. The real bugaboo is the 19H, which is rarely found with anywhere near decent strike as you well know.
  6. I believe it was actually FM struck with supposed mintage of 11 as stated from the FM source. Don't know if I believe that or not. Interesting that you bring up the point as was discussing just this with another forum member. A certain dealer in the mid-Atlantic USA (initials LH) got hold of dies from the US mint and the FM (somehow). He may have been the source of a number of OMS strike Panama coins like the somewhat famous 1947 [150] Balboas gold coin and the 1953 and later silver and gold struck coins. Also the (in)famous 1982 piefort 0.400 fine gold strikes Also, even I got from his widow some US Mint and FM dies that were NOT cancelled (and some that were) which I have tried to save as well as possible. Some have blush of different colours in the device areas that look rather gold to my eyes. We were wondering if he had these struck...I would imagine quite a bit of money may have been made. It would be conspiracy talk but am of the belief that the late collector Richard Stuart may have known (LOL) something of this but he is now gone.
  7. VickySilver

    DNW changing names.....?

    Glad that someone else has an interest in these. What you have doubtlessly seen cited in many sources is that mint workers were displeased by the dull appearance of the 1902 mattes just after striking and so sought to improve appearances by a swipe on the mint apron (I really have no idea of the veracity of this, but does somewhat explain the appearance of many hairlines 1902 mattes of all denominations). This seems to imply that the matte surface was due to planchet and/or die prep PRIOR to striking. Quite a few of the matte proofs struck AFTER 1902 have evidence of "sandblasting" post minting.Somewhere I have I believe it is the 1951 2/6 matte with residual blasting medium adherent to the devices and lettering on the reverse especially. The 1924 silver satin/matte specimens seem to be unique, and Steve Hill agrees, in that a plating was applied to the planchets PRIOR to striking (evidently some of the surface delaminating prior to and then subsequent to also minting & thus appearing a bit rude with commiserate low grades). Thus they really should probably not be considered matte, and making them quite different than the satin specimen 1965 Churchill Crowns, whose appearance IMHO is likely due to pre strike planchet preparation and likely die prep also. I tend to agree by most peoples' definitions that the 1935 Jubilee medals in large and small format would be considered matte proofs. I have not seen any crowns of that year of similar appearance - I am sure if found that they would go for a fancy sum. I have probably forgotten most of what I used to know about the mattes. Not that it matters but I do not believe the TPGs really care or understand any of this and have grades that are a bit willy-nilly. This would not matter except the prices fetched are very much driven by the grade on label which drives me up a tree. They are completely unamenable to any discussions and the graders remain anonymous.
  8. VickySilver

    DNW changing names.....?

    Well, "matte" is generally attached as descriptor to a proof coin. However I can think of a couple of instances where it IS attached to specimen - although it is used in that instance somewhat interchangeably with "satin". These would be the 1920 satin specimen/proof (and sometimes then also termed "matte") shilling, florin and half crown - there are presumably but unseen 3d and 6d and have usually been also described as presenting with ducktail milling. 1922/1924 satin specimen/proof coins (sometimes called "matte") 1/4d through half crown with only the penny dated 1922 & the rest 1924 1942-1945 threepence through half crown silver - called (satin) specimen but not usually "matte" 1965 Churchill satin specimen crown (this is usually NOT referred to as "matte") As far as difference between specimen and proof, well, there seems to be changes in definition over time and differences between cataloguers and individuals but has always been my understanding much as Peck outlined; to the best of my knowledge there are no die studies linking the proof to specimen crowns of 1935. No known matte proofs of the crown, specimen or proof (the 1935 Jubilee medal DOES come in "matte" however). The 1902 set of coins have been termed "matte" and usually then described as proof, but at one time as "specimen".
  9. VickySilver

    DNW changing names.....?

    Sword - not aware of a matte 1935??
  10. VickySilver

    DNW changing names.....?

    Ah, grasshopper, none more truly spoke. Unfortunately, we have seen the market go crazy and lets not even go there with high grade specimens!
  11. Looks like the wife or relative is still there? I know how much you love Numistacker....LOL
  12. Nice then! My own is still in a 2x2 mylar as I got it from Baldwin in the good ole days. Maybe a 65 or? Bronzed.
  13. I used to look but haven't seen anything for quite a bit so honestly didn't even glance. Glad at your success though; care to share?
  14. Well, regardless, I love these Britannia groats. Sad to say I missed the 1837 that sold a while ago..... How late was the last run of 1839 sets? Yikes, I seem to have recalled they did some in the 1880s or so...... Well, Rob has answered to some degree.. Now Mr. T looks to be throwing a maths problem at us - LOL
  15. VickySilver

    1953 Farthing

    I have an "ordinary" 1953 farthing but obviously has had special care and probably accurately graded as [Pf 67* RD Cameo] and it hits from across the room almost literally. However Obv. 2 Rev A As a collector of 20th century mainly silver VIP record proofs, I have learned possibly a couple of things, and one is that designation as VIP and/or Record Proof status is not at all a crystal clear proposition. Will not go there with the Wreaths as I am worn out on the topic but a reasonable working knowledge of these in the 1920-1966 range.
  16. OK, I just got my 7th Edition ESC (2020) and have looked at it for a bit. Not sure if I agree with all of the designations and have found more deficits in the proof and pattern section of the 20th C. pre-decimal series. One thing I notice is a referral to "page 657" in several places and note that the volume ends at page 597, or at least in this copy. Also I noticed that there is not the reference section related to Provenance the way there was in 6th Edition pp. 583-647. That was hugely helpful, does anyone know if this was somehow left out or just what happened? Maybe my edition is somehow short of this...
  17. I had to laugh at an example listing in Bull: ESC(Bull) 2736 - 1853 Proof Halfcrown. R3 ESC(Bull) 2738 - 1862 Proof Halfcrown, Plain edge. R2 That is pure craziness as the latter coin is likely an R4 and the former an R2. I pointed out the example as there are some listings where he has me a bit irritated.....His 20th century listings are IMHO a bit off as well and will just leave it at that.
  18. VickySilver

    Proof Halfcrown

    Will look this up on getting home. Do you have Bull (ESC)? How about the 2000 COincraft?
  19. Ah, very good. I have both type of 1839 proof groats for reference.
  20. Well, regardless, I love these Britannia groats. Sad to say I missed the 1837 that sold a while ago..... How late was the last run of 1839 sets? Yikes, I seem to have recalled they did some in the 1880s or so......
  21. Hopefully these posts keep interests of the readers but one of the few areas I have bought in on occasion: The Royal Mint from about 1980 for about 25 years and more struck some scarcities as far as sets and individual coins that some may be aware of. The Bahamas had struck for them souvenir sets in several years (1989, 1991, 1992, 1996) and the year 2000. These came in the 5 coin format and then a very few in the 7 coin format. For the year 2000, the former 5 coin sets were struck in reasonable numbers but although the coins in these cardboard and plastic sets were of excellent prooflike quality, were of normal 1c through 25c denominations that were struck for, and served as circulation coins. BUT, the 7 coin sets were struck in much fewer numbers and included examples of the nicely designed and somewhat famous 50 cents Marlin coin, and the more well-known One Dollar conch coin - both of these had been struck since the inaugural 1966 coins and sets. For year 2000 these were not struck for circulation so the only way to get them is in the 7 coin sets. The 5 coin sets usually sell on ebay for about 8-20 pounds plus shipping, but had not seen a 7 coin set for nearly a decade, and so despite constant searching there and other venues had not found one until just a couple of weeks ago when one popped up at a starting price of USD 9.95. I watched it for 9 days and it stayed at that price so I put out a "nuclear" bid of multiples of that, and low and behold, got it at USD 10.50 plus another 6 in shipping and taxes. Very thrilled with this, and have been informed that the 7 coin set mintage may be about 50 in all with there being some attractive coins included and all basically at the price of a nice Starbucks coffee! I will see if Richard may post pictures of the dollar coin from the set and others if readers are interested. BTW, some other RM rarities include the 1996 Bahamas 7 coin specimen set and the 2004 Falklands specimen set (and proof set which also seems to have a 50 set mintage and coins of copper nickel). The RAM Australian Mint has made some scarcities during these years as well but some of the rarities remain a bit obscure - Mister T knows far more than I about these .....
  22. Only thing is that save for the 1888 "Colonial" issue, the last de facto circulating Britannia groat was 1855!
  23. I don' t think we will be able to conclude who "dunnit". Wow, 65, seems a bit strong especially given what appears a bit of a rub to the central reverse device (Britannia) and the scoring. If I could post I would put up my 1853, 1857 and 1862s but none have scoring of this nature.
  24. Yes, I would even though mine was cheap.
×