VickySilver

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.

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.

Will look this up on getting home. Do you have Bull (ESC)? How about the 2000 COincraft?

Ah, very good. I have both type of 1839 proof groats for reference.

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......

Only thing is that save for the 1888 "Colonial" issue, the last de facto circulating Britannia groat was 1855!

Is that Morse code?

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.

Yes, I would even though mine was cheap.

The USD 3k + commission seems a bit rich? Maybe not and just for me...

I don't either and the provenance section was possibly the very best part. Allegedly there is a pricing schema in the Cromwell full edition that is not in the Gothic one.

No idea but why the "superior" specimens were called just that, specimen and many were reluctant for many years to use the term "proof"

Yes, these in true proof are much scarcer than you might gather from sales such as this one or others with or without TPG-graded status. I actually started my later-decimal collection with Wreaths, including proofs, in the 1990s with the help of Mr. Steve Hill and Mark. R. I remember about 1994 spending quite a bit getting the 1932 and 1934 proofs off of Spink, and I assure you they DO NOT LOOK like these or many others offered for sale. At one junction I got an entire 1936 proof set with all coins of the same provenance. I have seen some graded "64" and higher that are not. IMHO, but backed by the two mentioned mentors will note that the proof Wreath crowns in the 1927-36 are really not of optimal proof quality but def. better than these.

Aha. It appears there are TWO types of 7th edition. One with Cromwell on the cover has supposedly 672 pages and a provenance section that either has or lists sources of pictures for scarcer types. The other (that I got) and more generally available has the Gothic Crown on the cover and has only 597 pages with no provenances. Crap, I wanted the more complete edition; I have NOT been able to find a different Library of Congress number...

BTW, an 1980 Bahamas $2 uncirculated in the "Birds" holder from the FM World Birds Collection (or some such name) just sold on ebay for USD 57 plus shipping and tax. That was IMHO a very good buy for a coin of mintage 75 pcs. Mine is not in a holder....

Ah even with shipping, tax, etc. it was USD 8.00 On a few listings they modified or added just a bit, as with the example of the controversial 1924 3d specimen satin coin. I know for a fact that a very prominent expert has been turned back by both NGC and PCGS. I gave support to no avail....

Sorry, that the book, not the coin, is legit or the real deal. Where or where is the provenance section and where the heck is page 657 when the book only goes up to page 597?

Well first let me say that there are no prices listed. IMHO the latest is not even as good as the 6th edition primarily because I have seen very little added and the loss of the provenance section. I hope someone else can confirm that their copy does not included the latter. Also some of the "varieties" may or not be agreed upon by others. BTW I got mine from Abe books as there was some kind of clearance and I got the book to the USA for about SIX POUNDS! I thought they had made an error and so jumped on it but it appears that the coin is legit. Not that I am counting (but I am), but the 7th edition has 597 pages and the 6th edition has 662 pages....

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...

Yea, definitely NOT proofs! I don't get it, maybe they have been watching the other TPGs. Ask Steve Hill or Mark R., I am sure they will agree.

Yes, I was trying to look into auction archives and was quite a mess & hope they finish or complete their site. Still not happy about the name change.

Yes, I have often wondered. In business over here in USA, such "enterprises" are labelled Loss Leaders - they serve as advertising for other high profit issues or are the backend of various contracts that must be fulfilled. These are opportunities for numismatists.

I do concur FWIW. Honestly, I have some OMS (off metal strikes) of 20th C. coins that are just that - significant and interesting to me but not deserving of being enumerated amongst the basic types.

According to personal communication, the uncirculated copper nickel $1 and $2 conch and flamingo coins of the following dates are quite rare evidently as the total struck coins (versus number authorised): One Dollar Conch: - 1989. 300 pcs in sets - 1991. 200 pcs in sets - 1992. 200 pcs in sets - 1996. still unknown, likely much less than 100 - 2000. still unknown, likely less than 50 Two Dollar Flamingos: - 1979 300 pcs -1980. 80 pcs - 1989 does not exist -1991. does not exist in CuNi uncirculated, but is known in silver uncirculated - mintage 600 pcs of the latter

I've a certified double reverse 1964 penny, but my 1970 proof double sided was deemed counterfeit by PCGS. I did not see anything obvious - can't remember as I think it came from DNW, er, Noo-nah's (I think that's it).