VickySilver

I am not particularly concerned about SG on this coin as IMO it fails on other merits. I think it might actually be die struck but the counterfeit dies created by something similar to spark discharge - might be possible by computer guided laser?? There are many other details that are all wrong that I left out. If you enlarge the photo at all, you can see the roughness to the fields and devices and as mentioned the loss of critical detail in many areas.... In any case, although I love my Gothic florins would sadly have to reject this one. I was trying to be polite, so please excuse if I am not quite so.

Yes, good point. I am not sure established rarity scales of times past apply to top grade coins nowadays...This would be pennies as well as the silver series of Victoria. As far as the 1856 penny, I am not sure if I would rate either type as significantly scarcer as I have seen "streaks" of appearances of both.

I love a great Victorian florin as you may guess, but with all due respect that one looks a bit off. The surfaces, especially in the fields not quite right, nor are the decorations at the neck and shoulder margins of the gown. Hair detail also not quite correct IMO. The usual caveats apply, and we sorry viewers do not have the coin in hand. I. am quite suspect despite the weight. I would have it checked in hand by a local expert.

I know Ive heard a limerick with mancus before.....

Keep up the search; I am, but just can not find either this or the 1984FM Specimen Set.... I would say that I would extend to ALL Franklin Mint 1984 uncirculated coins in sets or not, with the exception of the 1984 FM Jamaica 20c, 25c, 50c which are available in the cobbled up Coins of the World cardboard sets that were part of a multi-national issuance by the Franklin Mint - most of those were from mints other than the Franklin Mint with Jamaica being an exception as stated. To any reading this with questions or coins possibly for sale, do contact me.

Yes, I haven't been too excited by the offerings either...

Craigy - is this yours? I also am a bit taken aback by the "newness" appearance.

No real update to speak of - I searched for coin shops and clubs in Jamaica and to no avail. If there are collectors down in Jamaica (Jammy) they are pretty quiet and understandably so. Not always the safest of places when money/coins/related are mentioned....No facebook groups there related to coins that I could find.

I do hope they will carry on with the auctions!

Yes, I think they did and always irritated me just a bit as it was nonsense.

Well, kind of.....LOL

Yes, quite average. I do like the English Lion and not the Scots one of this vintage shilling. Scots looking to be taking a dump or some such....

Uggh, sold it on to Steve Hill when he was at Spink: 1838 proof milled edge sovereign in about 2002 for 1250 pounds & traded it on for a bit more...

Maybe all the would-be paramours didn't wear glasses, or ?skills? Oops, that is damn near sacrilegious....LOL

I skipped the whole business even though there were some lots of interest.......

I will check mine later today for comparison Richard, just to see if it is the same. Many thanks!

Richard, can you post a picture of your matte farthing for a comparo?

Other than the penny, please elucidate and especially with regards to the crown. My concern is that these markers are not widely recognized and certainly I would not want to see any of these markers on non-"VIP" specimens; so to postulate such it would not be enough to see a marker on a purported "VIP" specimen and not on another non-such, as there will be natural die variability & there would have to be an extended study that demonstrated applicability over numerous specimens. The reason that I threw a bit of shade is that with regards to crowns at least, is if the Royal Mint does not recognize differences and from my numerous conversations with Steve Hill amongst others that there are not clear differences. So that there is a spectrum or continuity in what is a proof. BTW, for a fact Bull is wrong with regards to his artificial designations of proof and his "VIP proof" coins of non-standard years. The use of "VIP" has many issues and I do not necessarily agree on its usage on technical terms. BTW, please see my original response to the OP....

Hmmm, I kind of doubt your acquaintance's story. The RM is not aware, even if they are not the end-all. I rather fancy myself to have some knowledge of 20th C proof coins and am not aware of any such "markers".

Yes, I agree, and about the OP coin as well. You can find another, slabbed or not, that will be nicer. Good.

I have a number of MODEL obverse and reverse patterns of the 1920-37 era, and the MODEL side show VERY POOR planchet prep, and this on matte proof presentation pieces. I may have to dig but will have a look at the non-matte silver proofs possibly later today. LOL, John - possibly a bit unfair to lump the OP coin with your example....I still don't see a lot to object to technically, the worst bit IMO may be an horizontal scratch at the right base of neck.

At first I was inclined to agree but have looked at this piece some more. It actually might be a 66, and here's why: - the striations about the bust in the field are likely hairlines from die prep - the apparent abrasions in around hair, neck, brow, cheekbone which used to bother me with these later silver larger denominations florin, HC, and crown are actually in many instances planchet defects that were not fully struck out (planchets/flans are usually only very crudely finished and replete with many marks, abrasions, gouges, etc.) . There was an excellent recent writeup of this, but sadly I can not remember where it was & then I got to thinking and appreciate the veracity of it. - technical grade may well be a "66" However, the aesthetics are not there IMO for these or even other reasons, and so the coin ought to be relegated down a bit by "market grading".

There is what appears on the photo to me at least a bit of haze, almost a green tinge (but not as bad as early very), almost like a light PVC which is oil based. I have sometimes seen this on copper that seemed to have hand or finger oils on them (lightly). If present, and I don't have this coin in hand, the metallic surface but NOT the natural oxidation is preserved but the oil removed with the mentioned technique.

Love those 26MEs...Dare I say that from the photo, a quick acetone treatment might get rid of some of the superficial schmutz - almost a bit of light PVC/finger oil, or??

IMO that verdigris has attacked well into the coin & if successful removal were somehow managed that there would be a lunar sized divot on coin service.