VickySilver

Deinatey no pat or stock answers as has been elucidated. You really just have to know your coins if you get into esoterica. Another example are the 1887 and 1893 5 sov pieces that have market prices everywhere (including outrageously high for slabbed "wondergrades"). What is the value of an uncirculated 1934 Wreath to bring it back to the OP? Well, depends on where sold, when sold, slabbed and by whom?, individual factors such as the usual lustre and strike and wear and tone, etc. Ouch, it can get a bit complicated. I know that I have on occasion paid prices looked at as very high by outsiders and then have the coin double or treble even on the wholesale side within 5 or so years, and some I could really name my price on...(and then of course, the odd loser that just stagnates or never does catch fire ). Collect what you can afford but study, study, take a few lumps, win a few, etc. I would not, in returning to OP, pay huge prices even for a "certain" proof Wreath of a non-1927 year. There just is not the demand, and the presentation not all that special compared to the currency bits. Also, very difficult to pin exactly what price should be paid. Having said that, I really did stretch for a "certain" 1936 proof some 10 or 12 years ago....Uggh, well, it's not for sale regardless.

Yes, my feeling as well. Perhaps the overdate a bit under graded? Nice date of shilling almost on par with the 1854 florin IMO.

Despite my nomen, and having a bit of experience in the field, I must confess to not ever seeing or knowing certainly of this coin. I am lucky to have the proof, but have never seen this coin. It reminds me a bit of the 1854 half sovereign. The 1853 currency 3d is quite rare and almost always available from Maundy sets and NOT currency.

But may trash your liver. Seriously...

Yikes, we have gotten away from the OP a bit! But, on a slightly related topic to that just broached, I think it interesting how little interest seems to be displayed in Regnal years for the Widow Head series. The 1893 LVII is fairly scarce to rare in GEF and above as an example.

That makes them a challenge, since they are not all that attractive and they need to lose the patriots theme, just like the USA needs to change IMO. Well, I will be a buyer for the 91 or 02 sets. BTW, PM me for a few other dates of sets that I have doubles of...

Ah, Peck, as they say, "My Bad"....I meant that in my estimate these should be R4 or so, more rare than ESC indicates...

Yes, that jibes with my knowledge. Not clear if they are out there or not. Not many, not much demand. That makes them interesting. Do you collect these? I need the 1991 as well, and missed the one on ebay not so long ago...

Amen. One can fluff on the ownership of an ESC R5 but a grain of salt best be swallowed. An example of this type of thing in the opposite : rarity of the 1862 & 1864 2/6s are much scarcer with relatively fewer in private hands.

IMO, this coin is GEF and the softness at the front paw, nose, and G5's hair is strike softness. Technically probably mint state and been in a bag for a while.

Hi all, has anybody confirmation that Jamaica proof sets of 2002 exist? They are listed in Krause, but Bank of Jamaica and Royal Mint where they should have been struck do not offer information. I would be interested in information or even purchase.

Cataloguers are not as zealous as we can be. I (re)discovered the 1937 Norweb matte proof crown that was a part of their set about two years ago....By "A Tokyo Collection" standard that is maybe now a 20-30 coin based on what they have been asking for their other matte proofs!

I agree, very hard to introduce the type of objectivity that we would like into it; for me at least, I would like to know more of this type of thing rather than if there is a varietal micro-shift in date position. I generally have an idea of scarcity of most 1838-1952 pieces in copper and silver (brings to mind the crazy prices fetched for gold 2 & 5 pound 1887 & 1893 currency and proof - these things are out there!). The problem with adding PCGS, CGS, and NGC populations is that on the scarcer bits many have been resubmitted for either a possible higher grade or uniformity of slabbing in a collection. USA collectors, at least some talk about "top pop" coins - those that have the highest certified number grade - and I notice that London Coins does this with CGS in their auctions as well. There also is a competition (not sure of the prize awarded if there is one) for the highest registered set for particular series. Coincraft have an anecdotal note on finding an error edge specimen of 1935 crown in a noted dealer's trays....

Yes, Gary, Good job on the currency especially. I can not get myself to go for a VF - I want Unc/mint but such is not available in my experience....

You know a price I have been trying to calculate would be that of the 1922 rev. 1927 specimen of which there are only two supposedly known? I agree 30k is huge, it may only go 25! LOL....

Please do report. I bid "live" and got beaten down on 7 coins. Might have been the reserves buying back. I did manage to get some of the ex=Pretoria mint pieces there some years ago - not cheaply.

Yes, love these crowns but as they are not a lot of them, branched out to other silver and copper 19th and 20th C. Gary did indeed get pretty good prices IMO. \\\ The gold is coming up in the DNW sale if you have a spare 30k lying around!!! Check auctions part of www.dnw.co.uk I still have not found the LA Lawrence catalogue.

PS - In trying to find some info, I saw that the Capt. HEG Paget Sale and Glendinings, 1946, had an error edge proof for sale...Also, arguably the Incuse edge proof 1935 Crown is more important and these are out there is [possibly 0.500 and 0.925] form, as this would be the virtual "have to have " coin in a run of George V VIP Record proofs. I have reviewed in this last week a collection complete IMO of both first quality currency PL strikes, and of probably Record proofs. In the run of the latter the 1936 is a bit more "proofy" in that it has more of the device contrast as well as being slightly better struck up. The 1934s, two currency, and one proof are VERY similar but slightly better mirror in the field and possibly slightly more detail in the mustache, beard, ear, stamens, and cross (or "T") within the orb - as opposed to the cross above the orb - and the edge. I might add the latter was purchased from Spink some 15 or more years ago, as was the 1932 proof. The 1936 came from a Noble Australia Sale not long after was recounted to me. I saw the other PCGS 1934 graded proof 1934 and doubt it as a proof. As footnotes, I think they (PCGS) are quite patchy in their grading. Not trying to be overly critical, but I do have some differences with their grading. I will not single them out as I have seen severe errors with NGC and CGS as well, but although I can not prove it and am not privy to their grading room, have the distinct impression of favoritism extended to major dealers/sellers/etc. and have seen easily 2 or 3 points difference between theirs and my assessments. I can think of the Millennium Sale as an example... The Spencer article is : December 1983 of the Numismatist entitled: Proof-Record Coins Struck by the Royal Mint 1922-64. He interestingly feels that the 1927 proof is a specimen... Spink Norweb sales of the mid-80s do not have much information with relatively poor pictures. Well, I will keep my eyes open for more...

More power to those pursuing such! I lump them in with the "narrow date" buns. Nice if people are interested, significant? Not in my opinion and just goes to show how absolutely looney those hypervarietal collectors are when here is a legitimate (also IMO) variety that gets no notoriety, or prices.... Ooops, let out my pet peeve on those buns.

I essentially agree with Peck about this coin price wise and most of his commentary, but would suggest a milder treatment should you purchase it such as trying acetone first. IMO, this is also not an investment grade, but think that the higher grade E7 pieces may have some room for upward growth ('03-'05 2/6, '08 2/6, '03-'05 2/-, '05 1/-).

They have been at Spink many times with the odd one in a DNW or Baldwin Sale. Many do have homes, and I suspect there are some still sitting in their red boxes as yet undiscovered. Price: the proofs I have seen in the 1800 to 2.5k pounds range. The currency with partial edge lettering 400-600 - although I do not recall seeing above EF on this one. Rare, yes. Unloved yes. Maybe/ probably some still undiscovered as well, so maybe not as rare as many think. How many ALWAYS check their edges?

OK, I must confess that I have not located my sources yet as I have a three year old to contend with, who regularly emulates Attila the Hun by tearing up my office... Error edge? I assume you mean the jumbled edge. I have two of these and have seen any number for sale on fixed lists and at auction sales. My estimate is more like 30, but can not offer proof other than my experience.

OK, I confess to looking back at this post. What craziness! This would be poor quality even for the Chinese of some years ago... Well, a bit of fun on a Sunday is always good. Manganese is a metal that to my knowledge is essentially NEVER found alloyed with silver. Also, this coin at 28.2 +/- gms is an avoirdupois ounce of 50%. This looks like a transfer die made from the possible Aussie obv. and GB rev. Letters typically become sloppy and detail mushes just as is seen on this piece. 17.3 gms makes it possibly white metal or??

=BAD Counterfeit to my eyes, and poorly done with mushiness to devices and lettering, edges, denticles, etc.

Rims look good, mild chatter about the cheek and brow. American standards MS62, GEF on the RIght side of the Pond. Probably mainly bag marks. I have found the rims very good to look at, esp. the outside edge for any contact and how smooth is it for marks across it. The vulnerable areas were described. As per usual the reverse is relatively proof-like with field mirroring and a bit of detail contrast.